Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00386)

Hi.
----- Original Message -----
From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World To Leon (bulletin boards)


> Wow. I guess I got what I asked for. I've been waiting for someone to
> declare he was the "New Messenger" HPB said would appear. Is it another
> coincidence (or fortuitous karma:-) that I sent out my post about Einstein
> and the new "psi/religion" before I read this? But, at least, we now have
> something interesting to talk about other than politics and history of the
> movement. Should be loads of fun. More comments below.
>
> In a message dated 12/11/02 2:26:37 PM, wry1111@earthlink.net writes:
>
> >Hi.
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
> >To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 1:23 AM
> >Subject: Re: Theos-World Salting Gurdjieff
> >
> >
> >"> Huh? You talk to much."
> >
> >Wry: I have been leaving a lot of messages recently, but usually I do
not.
>
> So, why now?

Wry: A sort of a vent opened, and it seemed a good opportunity to "layer"
some material into my messages and plant some seeds. Plus part of it was
maybe a reaction, but I got more out of the whole thing than you could
possibly imagine. To me it wasn't quibbling. There were ideas in it, though
mainly my own, not Terrii's. It was exciting verbalizing certain material
(the glue passage). It has been enriching and was also necessary. Anyone who
ever starts on "fourth-way" stuff with me, will get more than they ever
expected or wished for or dreamed of. I guess it was partly because I knew
that if things got too stupid, which they seemed to be getting, I would have
to leave and I wanted to stay here.
>
> >LHM: "Attack is always a good defense."
> >
> >Wry: Defense for what? Anyway, I like Terrie. She is precious and
knowing
> >her is a precious opportunity.
>
> (And you are even more precious for saying it. ;-) In defense for what
> Terrie justifiably commented about your gratuitous message to her, I
assume.

Wry: My messages to Terri were wonderful.
>
> >>LHM: " Why don't you practice what you preach?"
> >
> >Wry: What do I preach? Not to waste precious time and a precious
> >opportunity?
>
> For what? Sounds more like you might be thinking you are the new messiah
> that is going to correct us all, and lead us into a new cause.

Wry: No. Just a "bee." But that is saying a lot.

As HPB said
> (as well as the Mayan Calendar) time is really running out, and getting
kind
> of "precious." So, why don't we get down to cooked beans and hear what
you
> have to say that will prevent the next coming "million year setback in
human
> evolution" -- if, as theosophists, we don't do what we gotta do to prevent
> it? (BTW, I hope that that's what you are talking about.) I've been
trying
> to get these dodo's to think about that for the past 5 years or so. ;-)
> >

Wry: Just read what I have already written. That is plenty. Material is
layered into it.


> >LHM: "I heard you say you were "not a theosophist."
> >
> >Wry: Maybe I am starting to be one.
>
> Well, that's somewhat enlightening, and gratifying... Especially to some
of
> the people on this list who I'm sure know they have been theosophists
since
> long before Plotinus invented the word. :-)
> >
> >>"So, why are you here?"
> >
> >Many reasons, most of which are between me and my "God."
>
> We're happy to know you are keeping the "secrets" of your God
confidential.
> Be interested, however, to know which "God" it is that is you are speaking
> for?
> >

Wry: Not the primal cause one. Something to do with conscience.

> > " Is it just to tell us how wise you are?"
> >
> >Wry: What do you think?
>
> That remains to be seen. I've already read most of your posts to the
various
> forums you have recently entered, and the Jury is still out.
> >
> >
> >>LHM: "I can't wait to hear. :-)"
> >
> >Wry: When I am having a reaction, time seems different, and everything
gets
> >distorted. Maybe it is the same with you. My messages are not as prolific
> >and as lengthy as you may be perceiving, and maybe they are balancing
some
> >of the trivial small talk on here.
>
> Speak for yourself, Alfy. I don't "react" -- unless there is instant
danger.
> My comment was in response to all your e-list posts. It isn't the length
of
> your messages I was referring to, but their content, the manner they are
> presented, and the intent behind them. I'll leave you to figure out what
I
> mean -- which requires some introspection -- or practicing what you
preach.

Wry: You are starting to lose me. If I told you what I really think about
some stuff, you would be shocked. I have been tempering my responses more
than you realize. As far as my intent, I never let the left hand know what
the right is doing.
>
> The trivial small talk in here has been going on since its inception many
> years ago, and some of us don't mind -- since it helps tone down the
pompous
> asses and know it alls that sometimes show up. (Present company excepted,
of
> course. ;-)

Wry: I may be on the wrong list. I like deep thinking, though the chicken
jokes were funny.

> >
> > I know my message to Terrie may have seemed a little harsh to you, but
> >my sense of Terri is that she is able to take care of herself, and if
not, I
> >wish that for her. Behind every beautiful day that everyone is supposed
> >to be having are dynamics such as this. Look at the way it has gone on
this
> >list ever since I have been here, but not, you must honestly acknowledge,
> >because I am on here, as this has been going on long before anyone ever
> >heard of me.
>
> I didn't respond because of what you might have done to Terrie, since I'm
> sure she could defend herself, but to the way you say it, and the
> presumptions you make in all your posts. It's also interesting that you
> assume the credit for the way this is going based on your unfounded
> assumption that you know how it has gone long before. Well, you don't
know
> -- since what you stumbled into was just a small blip in a long and
sometimes
> very productive association that may have taught us something new about
> theosophy we didn't know before. So, that's what was meant by "talking
too
> much"... Meaning, keeping one's mouth shut with pompous pronouncements and
> personal judgments before one has thoroughly studied the archives, and
knows
> who everyone is and what they are talking about. Your attempts to dominate
> this list (and some others I know you are on) seems to me to be a lot of
> hubristic whistling in the wind.

Wry: Then don't worry about it.
> >
> >If you are a true theosophist, whatever that means, maybe you can tell me
> >more about this. You should," in my opinion" (Hi Bill), be thanking me
for
> >the work I am doing on this list, not that I want or need to be thanked,
but
> >this would be the appropriate behavior on your part. Different people
have
> >different perceptions of physical reality. For instance, I believe that
myou
> >have left me this message because you want me to talk more out here
rather
> >than less, and that you want to communicate with me. I have been meaning
> >to get back to you about "point zero," which I find very interesting and
have
> >pondered about and am still pondering. I was going to leave Bill a
message
> >about angels, but now this will have to be delayed.
>
> What kind of work do you think you are doing on this list that requires my
> gratitude? So, far all I have seen is gratuitous criticism and correction
of
> individuals --

Wry: I hear you saying this is all you have seen.

which could just as well be done, if justifiable at all, in
> private conversation. (This is not to mention the "bombs" you have
dropped
> into a consciousness study online forum -- that I am still following some
of
> the personal arguments they have generated -- and am reserving my comments
> on, if any.)
>
> I appreciate your interest in my "point zero" as you call it. However, it
is
> not mine but belongs to everyone. In any event, I certainly would be
> interested in hearing what you have to say about the theory of ABC...
Since,
> it is the result of a collaborative 30 year reverse engineering study of
the
> origin and construction of the Cosmos from a modern
scientific/technological
> point of view, that turned out to be in close conformance with
theosophical
> Cosmogenesis as presented by HPB.
>
> Therefore, I am neither an Idealist, Buddhist, or a Materialist (as I
assume
> you are the latter two from your writings) but see their tri-unity (or
> trinity) in intimate phenomenal relationship, both relative and absolute,
as
> well as in conjunction with reference to universal religious principles
> represented by certain aspects of "Buddhism" as well as other true "Wisdom
> teachings."

Wry: Leon, I think you are an interesting person. In the future I will try
to leave more generic messages that do not get people so upset. Someday when
I get time I will try to have a discussion with you about the "absolute" if
you are interested. About being a representative of Madame Blavatsky, I
meant not that I am channeling her, but more that we are from the same
society, the honey-makers, but she is dead and I am alive. Forget about
channeling. It is not necessary, as everything is much simpler than that.
It is more about the organization of information than the information
itself. Gotta go now. Wry
> >
> >If Terrie is reading this: Hi Terrie. If you did get anything out of my
> >message, please let me know. This is the single best message I have left
> >the whole time I have been on this list. You have helped me to verbalize
> >something very important about discrimination.
> >
> >Some people on here already know this, but I am a list specialist (in my
> >own imagination, at least). My special subject of study is bulletin
boards,
> >of which an email list such as this is a prime example. I am possibly the
> only
> >person on earth who has deliberately studied this medium of
communication,
> >to the extent I have, and my guess is that no one have ever studied it at
> >all. This makes me a person of great power, whether anyone likes it or
not.
> >(but fear not. I am a Buddhist aspiring to enter the mahayana path, and I
> >have taken vows.). I am not using this list for a study, as my studies
have
> >gone on for many years and have been completed before I came here. The
> >reason I am saying this is to point out that very unusual, even
incredible
> >opportunities can exist on a list like this, of which most people are
> >unaware, to do extraordinary good for multitudes of people, without
really
> >hurting anyone, except possibly a few peoples' feelings. In this respect,
it
> >is very important to receive the messages on this list by individual
e-mail
> >and not by digest or on the list page, as in this way, it is more of a
> >true bulletin board.
>
> What has your self professed expertise in bulletin boards have to do with
> this list and the decisions people make to receive it's mail the way they
> choose? As for being such an expert, I doubt if you have been on the BBS
as
> long as I have, or even my daughter who is one of the founders of the Fido
> net. Note that my ABC theory was published and distributed over the BBS
> almost ten years ago through Baphonet and other linkage, and I was one of
the
> pioneers in Internet communication on the scientific level, as well as a
> pioneer in high end computer graphics animation development long before
the
> PC came on the scene. (But, I don't use that information to qualify my
> expertise in anything theosophical. :-)
>
> >I may not be a theosophist, whatever that is to you, but I am here as a
> >representative of Madame Blavatsky, as she and I are from the
honey-makers,
> >and this is a fact of physical reality, whether you like it or not. I am
in
> >the process of choosing which lists to devote my time to, and I am not
sure,
> >as you suggest, that this is the appropriate place for me. I will decide
in
> >the weeks to come, and of course it is ultimately up to Eldon. What I
will
> >be doing is leaving some more general messages that are less likely to
get
> >people riled up, and maybe I will also share some of the extraordinary
data
> >I have gathered about using bulletin boards as a learning tool, which
some
> >of you may find most exciting and interesting. Thanks again to Terri.
> >Sincerely, Wry
>
> Well, now we have it. Are you really channeling HPB? That's interesting.
> Now, let's start hearing what's new she has to say that will add to our
> theosophical knowledge and wisdom. What theosophy is to me is exactly how
HPB
> defined it.
>
> Afraid, I don't know what your "honey makers" refers to. Unless you think
you
> are the "new messenger" who is going to fertilize us theosophical flowers
> with a new wisdom, and put us all on the right track? Well, I'm sure
> everyone here is waiting to hear about it with bated breath. ;-)
>
> As for your suggestion to make this into a bulletin board, I don't see as
how
> this forum is very far from one now. Anyone can go into the archives and
> read whatever comments and teachings have been posted on any subject. The
> only thing an actual bulletin board might do, if it were possible to turn
the
> present groups system at Yahoo into one, would be to give certain
aggressive
> people an opportunity to dominate it as "moderator" or self professed
Guru.
> I don't think Eldon should be influenced to do that, since his way works
fine
> for him, and one of the reason's some of us are in this forum, is it's
> relative openness. My suggestion is, if that's your goal, to form your
own
> mail list group linked to an online publication that contains your new
> teaching, and set it up exactly as you want to run it. Remember that HPB
> published her own magazine. On another note, there are many theosophical
> study groups that, if you really spoke for HPB, and could add to her
original
> teachings, you could make worthwhile contributions to.
>
> LHM
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>