Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00550)

Hi.
----- Original Message -----
From: <stevestubbs@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 11:33 AM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Wry's explanation part 2


> A few years ago Theosophy had about 5,000 adherents in the US, a
> country with 270,000,000 people in it. It may have declined since
> then. Some of its followers have delusions of grandeur, but the
> statistical facts are as stated. I think it is very unfortuhate, but
> the fact is Theosophy is not a major force in the world, or even a
> minor one. Between now and mid-century we will be in that portion of
> the cycle in which groups like Theosophy tend to decline and
> orthodocies of various sorts tend to rise.

Wry. Even one person with real knowledge, in the right time and the right
place can do a lot, if he knows exactly what to do and is able to carry it
out. It is always about doing. But first a person needs to gather a body of
data that is not contaminated by his previous conditioning, or it is never
original, but only like coming out of like which perpetrates like. If people
are not as attracted to theosophy, perhaps it is because this teaching IN
THIS FORM has already served its purpose and is no longer time-appropriate.
For a person in present time who knows who is here, where he is and what he
can do, cycles do not matter, as this is already factored into LOCATION. It
is all about position, like in a dance. If something does not chart the
dancer, he will be unable to correlate the next movement.

>
> As for Freud, that humbug is in decline and is expected by those who
> predict trends in the world psychological to become more and more
> irrelevant as time goes on. Having met several peopple who have been
> defrauded by psychoanalysts, I consider the demise of their
> profession to be an excellent outcome.

Wry: It is in decline, but the situation is worse than we may realize, as
psychoanalysis has greatly affected the consciousness of humanity in a way
that is most la-la and quite detrimental. Maybe I will write more about this
later. and I have already written something. See message 8040 (from Mesmer
to Freud).

Anway, a little of people who are interested in spiritual development and
(are supposed to) have open minds are on here. Because an email list is a
bulletin board, it has great potential. If Krishnamurti could emerge out of
theTheosophy movement, that alone makes it an extraordinary movement, so who
knows what else could happen. I do not know if anything else can happen,
but if it does, I personally, will be instrumental in its occurance. I know
that to some, this may sound grandiose and ego-maniacal, but I would not be
on here unless I had a good reason. Since, in the case of actually doing
anything significant rather than just spinning wheels in the mud, slower is
faster, IF I decide to stay on here and IF I am not kicked off, any such
project will take several years. Sincerely, Wry


>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "wry" <wry1111@e...> wrote:
> > This is part two of my explanation. Paul has said, "it does not
> appear that anyone is interested enough in Theosophy to want to take
> it over, undermine it, infiltrate it, etc." I would agree with this,
> except possibly with the undermine it part, and also with some other
> comments in your message, along the same line. Brian was interested.
> Sometimes people get caught up in material and sucked into it. In the
> bulletin board format, which is my special subject of study,
> everything can become greatly exaggerated, for several different
> reasons, which I will go into sometime, maybe. If you are on a list
> writing messages everyday about a subject and defending your position
> etc., it can sort of take on a life of its own. (By the way, has it
> ever occurred to you that this is what happened with people accusing
> you, it sort of took on a life of its own, not as with Brian, who was
> probably psychologically identified, but in a physical sense,and
> though this idea may seem far fetched, there is a certain interesting
> biologist (ask Leon) who has presented a theory called "morphic
> resonance" which may in some ways support this idea).
> >
> > To continue, if you will read post 9581. by Bhakti, written on
> December 10th, you will find, nine paragraphs from the end, certain
> material, which indicates that one person, at least, and actually
> two, if we include Brian, who brought Bhakti to these boards, believe
> that Theosophy has had an extremely detrimental effect on western
> society. I have already replied to this message in post 9590 ("To
> Bhakti"). He makes an interesting case for his hypothesis, and I
> would even agree, but it is all skewed, as I said in my message, as
> he does not mention the beneficial effects of the influence of
> Krishnamurti, which also came out of this. I also suggested that "the
> die is cast" regarding Theosophy and that is is probably a movement
> that has already fruited. It is sort of poring from the empty into
> the void to try to undermine it now. In other instances, such as
> Jeffrey Masson, a Gurdjieffian named Peter Swales and many others
> attempting to strike a blow to Freudian Psychology, it is an entirely
> different story, as Freudian (and Jungian) psychology is continuing
> to have a pervasive and negative influence upon society, and this
> would be an interesting subject for someone to write a book about, as
> ultimately, the models of psychology are both authoritarian and
> IDEALISTIC, and will not lead to the solving of the problems of
> humanity, but are making things much worse than they already are.
> >
> > Anyway, if someone, such as Brian/Bridgitte (because he is so
> identified) perceives that the movement is at present time much more
> influential than it actually is, he would have a legitimate reason to
> try to undermine it. And now we come to Bridgitte's pseudonym, which
> is very interesting, and is a little bit of the circumstantial
> evidence, which will begin to explain how I came to make the error I
> did about you, Paul, which I hope you will forgive me for. I will
> continue this in part 3. Sincerely, Wry
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>