Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00017)

Hi all of you,
Shanti,

Dear BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI,

Here are my views:

Thanks for your enlightening email.
When emailing me, you are totally free to use caps and the like >:-)


B. A. GOSWAMI wrote:
"MR OLESON, WOULD YOU KINDLY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY YOU HAVE MENTIONED
> ME IN THE CONTEXT OF DUGPA AS DEFINED ABOVE ?"

My Sufilight answer:
I will do my very best. But please remember, that I am NOT saying and have
NOT said that you are a Dugpa.
(Try eventually rereading my last email to you and Theos-Talk on the
matter).
But, I can only encourage you to keep your critisism of Theosophy away from
websites as the one referred to in the below. (i.e.
http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/invhindbuddh.html )
You wrote below: "I AM NOT THEM OR RELATED TO THEM IN ANY WAY. I AM MERELY
A PERSON
> WHO SENT SOME LETTERS TO THE SITE, IN RESPONSE TO A NUMBER OF THE
> POSTINGS THERE. "

And just to let you know: I don't care what people EAT, DRINK and even
INHALE. If they do Gods - Parabrahmans will, that is what matters for me.
But of course some 'intakings' ought to be avoided.

B. A. GOSWAMI wrote:
"I WILL 'DEBATE' ANYONE ANYTIME IF
> THERE SEEMS TO BE ENOUGH VALUE IN IT. I HAVE ONLY POSTED MY
> CREDENTIALS HERE SO THAT "....

My Sufilight answer:
Okay, I was wrong. Your position is noted.


Allow me a question:
Dear B. A. Goswami, do you think, that serious Theosophists are Dugpas ?

And this one too:
Quoting from the site:
"BA G: The Masters as extra-"ordinary" beings is asserted here. One
could
reject the fictitious claims made for the Masters and still accept
that in
mortal human terms, HPB's human prototypes for the Masters WERE
extra-ordinary people. They were uniquely privileged and intelligent
persons
strategically located in time and place to create a unique synthesis
of some
Eastern and Western thought systems. The problem is not in
acknowledging the
giftedness of HPB and her Masters, it is in being required to accept
the
whole fictional package that they have been wrapped in. The problem
is the
basic lack of honesty and forth-rightness that pervades the entire
Theosophical enterprise. However this can be understood as a pathology
common to all secret societies and "occult" brotherhoods that normally
function under the cover of various forms of purposeful obscuration
and
deceit.

Internal discussion of falsified Mahatma Letters runs throughout the
early
Theosophical Society documents. A lot of expert sophistry and word-
jugglery
is used to euphemize the obvious lying, cheating and deception that
was
going on in the organization. "
http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/respbag.html

My Sufilight answer:
Is the above quote false ?
What are your views on the below answer...?
None is required to accept anything as stated above. But one is
certainly encouraged to THINK or something like that. The use of the
word "required" in the above is clearly false and NOT Theosophical teaching.
If the "wrapping of the package" is fictional or not, or partly so is
of less importance; - i.e. misunderstandings can always occur on a
dualistic level. The core teachings of Theosophy is the key to it all.
Let us learn to use the "7 keys" as mentioned by Blavatsky - and seek avoid
oneway dead-letter thinking and reading.


As I see it: There are - at least two positions - when reading Blavatskys
scriptures. There are those who read the scriptures - and relate them to the
time they were written in, - and then understands their value.
Secondly there are those who read Blavatkys scriptures - and relate them to
the present time of ours year 2003, - and because of the difference in time
between writing and today, people often gets quite a distorted picture of
what Blavatasky really meant.
According to me - some skills are required, when evaluating spiritual
scriptures of the past and relating them properly to the present day of the
hour.
Of course there are other positions.


ParaBrahman has secrets, not known to the ignorant.


from
M. Sufilight with peace on Earth...



















----- Original Message -----
From: <bhakti.eohn@verizon.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:42 AM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Bhakti Ananda Goswami on the "Esoteric and Science
News" website


> RESPONSE FROM BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI AT >>>
> PLEASE EXCUSE THE CAPS, I AM NOT SHOUTING...
>
> Message 10142
> From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-theosophy@a...>
> Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 12:16 pm
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Bhakti Ananda Goswami on the "Esoteric and
> Science News" website
>
>
>
>
> I am back - all of you,
>
> My views are given in the below:
> Just read the below from D. Caldwell.
> And I have to say, that if B. A. Goswami support the following link, -
> then - the issue of "Dugpaship" comes to my mind. Truth is truth.
> http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/invhindbuddh.html
>
> On what "Dugpas" are - try this:
> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/occult.htm (Blavatsky article)
> and this
> http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/ctg/dn-dz.htm (COLLATION OF
> THEOSOPHICAL
> GLOSSARIES)
>
>
> >>>HERE ARE SOME OF THE DUGPA REFERENCES MENTIONED ABOVE
>
> One could even dispense with any lofty standard of morality. In the
> last case, of course, ten to one the student would blossom into a
> very decent kind of sorcerer, and tumble down headlong into black
> magic. But what can this matter? The Voodoos and the Dugpas eat,
> drink and are merry over heca-tombs of victims of their infernal
> arts. And so do the amiable gentlemen vivisectionists and the diploma-
> ed "Hypnotizers" of the Faculties of Medicine; tube only difference
> between the two classes being that the Voodoos and Dugpas are
> conscious, and the Charcot-Richet crew unconscious, Sorcerers. Thus,
> since both have to reap the fruits of their labours and achievements
> in the black art, the Western practitioners should not have the
> punishment and reputation without the profits and enjoyments they may
> get therefrom. For we say it again, hypnotism and vivisection as
> practiced in such schools, are schools, are Sorcery pure and simple,
> minus a knowledge that the Voodoos and Dugpas enjoy, and which no
> Charcot-Richet can procure for himself in fifty years of hard study
> and experimental observation. Let then those who will dabble in
> magic, whether they understand its nature or not, but who find the
> rules imposed upon students too hard, and who, therefore lay Atma-
> Vidya or Occultism aside--go without it. Let them become magicians by
> all means, even though they do become Voodoos and Dugpas for the next
> ten incarnations.
>
> **********************************************************************
> **********************************************************************
> **********************
>
> TG Dugpas (Tib.). Lit., "Red Caps," a sect in Tibet. Before the
> advent of Tsong-ka-pa in the fourteenth century, the Tibetans, whose
> Buddhism had deteriorated and been dreadfully adulterated with the
> tenets of the old Bhon religion, -- were all Dugpas. From that
> century, however, and after the rigid laws imposed upon the Gelukpas
> (yellow caps) and the general reform and purification of Buddhism (or
> Lamaism), the Dugpas have given themselves over more than ever to
> sorcery, immorality, and drunkenness. Since then the word Dugpa has
> become a synonym of "sorcerer", "adept of black magic" and everything
> vile. There are few, if any, Dugpas in Eastern Tibet, but they
> congregate in Bhutan, Sikkim, and the borderlands generally.
> Europeans not being permitted to penetrate further than those
> borders, the Orientalists never having studied Buddho-Lamaism in
> Tibet proper, but judging of it on hearsay and from what Cosmo di
> Koros, Schlagintweit, and a few others have learnt of it from Dugpas,
> confuse both religions and bring then) under one head. They thus give
> out to the public pure Dugpaism instead of Buddho-Lamaism. In short
> Northern Buddhism in its purified, metaphysical form is almost
> entirely unknown.
> VS dread Dad-Dugpa clan (III 11) [[p. 51]] The Bhons or Dugpas, the
> sect of the "Red Caps," are regarded as the most versed in sorcery.
> They inhabit Western and little Tibet and Bhutan. They are all
> Tantrikas. It is quite ridiculous to find Orientalists who have
> visited the borderlands of Tibet, such as Schlagintweit and others,
> confusing the rites and disgusting practices of these with the
> religious beliefs of the Eastern Lamas, the "Yellow Caps," and their
> Narjols or holy men. The following is an instance.
>
> FY Dugpas, the "Red Caps," evil magicians, belonging to the left-hand
> path of occultism, so called in Tibet.
>
> WG Dugpa (Thibetan), a sorcerer or "red-cap" of Bhootan. (See
> Gelupa.)
>
> SD INDEX Dugpa(s) (Tib). See also Sorcerers
>
> power of II 221n
> swastika on idols of II 586
>
> >>>MR OLESON, WOULD YOU KINDLY EXPLAIN TO ME WHY YOU HAVE MENTIONED
> ME IN THE CONTEXT OF DUGPA AS DEFINED ABOVE ?
>
> >>>I HAVE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED MY RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS AND LINEAGE,
> AND HAVE PROVIDED EVIDENCE OF THE SAME. (SEE MY AFFILIATION WITH THE
> WORLD VAISHNAVA ASSOCIATION.) I AM A RESPECTED SANNYASI OF THE
> BRAHMA-MADHVA GAUDIYA LINEAGE OF VAISHNAVISM. THIS IS AN EXTREMELY
> SATTVIC (HOLY, ASCETIC OR PIETISTIC) TRADITION. IF YOU DO NOT KNOW
> WHAT THAT MEANS, ALLOW ME TO TELL YOU. I AM STRICTLY CELIBATE AND
> CHASTE AND HAVE NOT EATEN ANY FLESH INCLUDING FOWL, FISH OR EGGS FOR
> OVER 30 YEARS. I PRACTICE NO MAGIC OR ANIMAL SACRIFICES. NOT ONLY
> AM I NOT A DRUNK. BUT FOR OVER 30 YEARS I HAVE NOT BEEN A DRINKER OF
> ALCOHOL OR EVEN COLA OR COFFEE. I HAVE NOT SMOKED TOBACCO, MARIJUANA
> OR TAKEN ANY OTHER KINDS OF INTOXICANTS. THUS I PRACTICE THE SATTVIC
> VOWS OF AHIMSA (NON VIOLENCE) , DHIRA (SOBRIETY), SATYA (TRUTH) AND
> BRAHMACARYA (CHASTITY, PLUS MANY OTHER VOWS, SUCH AS VOLUNTARY
> SIMPLICITY ('POVERTY'), CONTROL OF AND PURITY OF SPEACH, DEDICATION
> TO THE MENIAL PHYSICAL SERVICE TO OTHERS, DAILY SHASTRIC STUDY,
> OFFERING ALL MY 'MERIT' FOR THE SALVATION OF OTHERS, AND A MINIMUM OF
> 6 HOURS OF INTERCESSORY PRAYER A DAY.
>
> >>>THIS HARDLY QUALIFIES ME TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THE LEFT-HAND
> TANTRIKA DUGPA SECT. IN FACT I HAVE SPENT MY LIFE OPPOSING THE EVILS
> OF SUCH TAMASIC RELIGIONS, AND HAVE ACTUALLY RESCUED, BY THE GRACE OF
> GOD, SOME POOR SOULS FROM THE BONDAGE OF FLESH EATING, INTOXICATION,
> ILLICIT SEX AND LYING.
>
>
> I quote this:
> "Editor: Since the group of 170 scholars from the various neo-
> theosophical
> groups and organisations has yielded so few responses that were able
> to
> match the scholarship of BA G, I have invited Eric Wynants (an expert
> on
> the history of esoteric movements worldwide) and an Indologist
> specialized
> in Buddhism who will due to his academic position participate under
> the name
> Kela. "
> http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/invhindbuddh.html
>
> My Sufilight answer:
> Well, but B. A. Goswami has as I understand it - more than one time
> here at
> Theos-Talk stated, that debates with non-scholars are out of the
> question.
> Right ?
>
> >>> WHAT IS THIS A REFERENCE TO ? I WILL 'DEBATE' ANYONE ANYTIME IF
> THERE SEEMS TO BE ENOUGH VALUE IN IT. I HAVE ONLY POSTED MY
> CREDENTIALS HERE SO THAT OTHERS MAY KNOW 'WHERE I AM COMING FROM'.
> I AM FROM THE SCHOOL THAT SAYS ONE'S TRAINING AND QUALIFICATION IS
> IMPORTANT. WHILE IT IS SAFE TO ASSUME THAT DANIEL IS AN EXPERT ON
> THEOSOPHY, DUE TO HIS WELL-KNOWN POSITION, NO ONE HERE KNEW WHAT MY
> QUALIFICATION WAS TO SPEAK ON THE VEDAS OR PURANAS IN RELATION TO THE
> WRITINGS OF HPB AND HER MAHATMAS. SO I PROVIDE MY INFORMATION.
>
> >>>I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE EDITOR(S) OF THE ESOTERIC NEWS SITE, AND
> AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO SPEAK FOR OR IDENTIFY OR DEFEND HIM, HER OR
> THEM.
>
> >>>I AM NOT THEM OR RELATED TO THEM IN ANY WAY. I AM MERELY A PERSON
> WHO SENT SOME LETTERS TO THE SITE, IN RESPONSE TO A NUMBER OF THE
> POSTINGS THERE.
>
> >>>I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE SITE'S EDITORS' MOTIVES HAVE BEEN OR ARE.
> I AM SIMPLY CONTRIBUTING MY OPINIONS ON A NUMBER OF SUBJECTS TO SOME
> PUBLIC EXCHANGES.
>
> >>>WHEN I INITIALLY WROTE TO THE ESOTERIC NEWS SITE I GAVE BLANKET
> PERMISSION TO USE ANY INFORMATION FROM MY LETTERS. THAT IS HOW SOME
> OF MY WRITINGS ENDED UP HERE. WHEN I WAS INFORMED ABOUT THIS SITE, I
> CAME HERE AND IDENTIFIED MYSELF. AS A RESULT, I WAS ACCUSED OF LYING
> ABOUT MY IDENTITY AND BEING SOMEONE ELSE. TWICE MY GALVA BIOGRAPHY
> AND ARTICLE LINK HAS BEEN POSTED HERE, WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH
> ANYTHING ON THIS SITE. INSTEAD OF BEING OFFENED THAT THE QUESTION OF
> MY GENDER WAS INTRODUCED HERE, I SIMPLY TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO TEACH
> THE READERS HERE ABOUT THE REALITY AND SUFFERINGS OF SEX AND GENDER
> DIFFERENT PEOPLE. THEN I DID NOT RAISE THE ISSUE OF HPB BEING
> AN "HERMAPHRODITE". I VOICED MY OPINION ON THIS SUBJECT BECAUSE I
> WAS ASKED IT. THEN I WAS ASSOCIATED (BY CONTEXT OF STATEMENT) WITH
> THE CATHOLIC AND HINDU MAL-TREATMENT OF WOMEN, AND NOW I HAVE AGAIN
> BEEN ASSOCIATED IN YOUR ABOVE STATEMENT WITH SOMETHING THAT I HAVE
> SPENT A LIFETIME BEING OPPOSED TO. I AM OPPOSED TO SEXISM AND ALL
> THE EVILS OF LEFT-HAND TANTRISM.
>
> >>>I HAVE LIVED A LIFE OF COMMITTMENT TO HOLINESS AND HUMBLE SERVICE
> TO OTHERS. HOW CAN ONE WHO HAS VOWED THEIR SOUL FOR THE SALVATION
> OF THE "LAST HUNGRY GHOST" IN THE UNIVERSE BE MOTIVATED BY HATE FOR
> ANY BEING ? IT SEEMS THAT YOU HAVE ASSUMED THAT I HATE HPB, BECAUSE
> I HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT HER LACK OF HONESTY. IT IS OUT OF LOVE THAT I
> HAVE TAKEN THE CONSIDERABLE EFFORT TO WRITE ANYTHING AT ALL ON THE
> SUBJECT OF HPB AND THEOSOPHY. TO HAVE MY MOTIVES SO ATTACKED HERE,
> SAYS SOMETHING VERY SAD ABOUT THE ATTACKERS.
>
> >>>I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYONE ELSE'S MOTIVES, ONLY FOR MY OWN,
> AND MY MOTIVE HERE HAS BEEN ONE OF LOVE.
>
> >>>WISHING YOU ALL WELL, AND WEARY OF BEING ABUSED HERE,
>
> >>>SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI,
>
> >>>BHAKTI ANANDA GOSWAMI
>
> So what is this above socalled "Editor"s motives ?
> I think that this Editor is wrong and lies.
>
> And this one too:
> Quoting from the site:
> "BA G: The Masters as extra-"ordinary" beings is asserted here. One
> could
> reject the fictitious claims made for the Masters and still accept
> that in
> mortal human terms, HPB's human prototypes for the Masters WERE
> extra-ordinary people. They were uniquely privileged and intelligent
> persons
> strategically located in time and place to create a unique synthesis
> of some
> Eastern and Western thought systems. The problem is not in
> acknowledging the
> giftedness of HPB and her Masters, it is in being required to accept
> the
> whole fictional package that they have been wrapped in. The problem
> is the
> basic lack of honesty and forth-rightness that pervades the entire
> Theosophical enterprise. However this can be understood as a pathology
> common to all secret societies and "occult" brotherhoods that normally
> function under the cover of various forms of purposeful obscuration
> and
> deceit.
>
> Internal discussion of falsified Mahatma Letters runs throughout the
> early
> Theosophical Society documents. A lot of expert sophistry and word-
> jugglery
> is used to euphemize the obvious lying, cheating and deception that
> was
> going on in the organization. "
> http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/respbag.html
>
> My Sufilight answer:
> None is required to accept anything as stated above. But one is
> certainly
> encouraged to THINK or something like that. The use of the
> word "required"
> in the above is clearly false and NOT Theosophical teaching.
> If the "wrapping of the package" is fictional or not, or partly so is
> of
> less importance; - i.e. misunderstandings can always occur on a
> dualistic
> level. The core teachings of Theosophy is the key to it all.
> Learn to use the "7 keys" as mentioned by Blavatsky - and seek avoid
> oneway
> dead-letter thinking and reading.
>
> And a distastefull quote still runs the frontpage of an almost similar
> website -
> at http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/%7Emuehleb9/ :
> "This expose begins with one of the most totalizing of modern myths:
> Theosophy. Privileged spokespersons present themselves as the sole
> legitimate conduits of ancient wisdom. Contenders are ruthlessly
> fought with
> an array of verbal arguments as well as practical measures."
>
> The above is a clear lie. And there is no need to clarify that !
>
>
>
> Martin Luther King Jr. two excerpts:
>
> A:
> "I think the first reason that we should love our enemies, and I
> think this
> is at the very center of Jesus' thinking, is this: that hate for hate
> only
> intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. If I hit
> you and
> you hit me and I hit you back and you hit me back and go on, you see,
> that
> goes on ad infinitum. It just never ends. Somewhere somebody must
> have a
> little sense, and that's the strong person. The strong person is the
> person
> who can cut off the chain of hate, the chain of evil. And that is the
> tragedy of hate, that it doesn't cut it off. It only intensifies the
> existence of hate and evil in the universe. Somebody must have
> religion
> enough and morality enough to cut it off, and inject within the very
> structure of the universe that strong and powerful element of love."
>
> Excerpted from "Loving Your Enemies", a sermon delivered on 17
> November 1957
> at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Ala. (full text)
>
> B:
> "Now let me suggest first that if we are to have peace on earth, our
> loyalties must become ecumenical rather that sectional. Our loyalties
> must
> transcend our race, our tribe, our class, and our nation; and this
> means we
> must develop a world perspective. No individual can live alone; no
> nation
> can live alone, and as long as we try, the more we are going to have
> war in
> this world. Now the judgement of God is upon us, and we must either
> learn to
> live together as brothers or we are all going to perish together as
> fools."
>
> Excerpted from "A Christmas Sermon on Peace", delivered on 24
> December 1967
> at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Ga.
>
> Well perish, yes - but maybe only due to Karma...>:-)
>
>
> C:
> Attraction of Celebrities
> A man who is being delivered frim the danger of a fierce lion deos not
> object, wheather this service is performed by an unknown or by an
> illustrious individual. Why, therefore, do people seek knowledge from
> celebrities ?
>
> D:
> I think it was the sufi El-Ghazali (d.1111) who said something like
> the
> following:
> The disticntion between opinion and knowledge is something, which can
> easily
> be lost. When this happens,
> it is incumbent upon those who know the difference to make it plain
> as far
> as they are able.
> This habit of confusing opinion with knowledge is almost a epidemic
> disease
> these days.
> Well, that was years ago, but this issue seems to be a disease even
> today.
>
> E:
> It is allright that some people have authorities. But they have to be
> constructive. If the authority is
> destructive, then I won't be good and have to be stopped.
> I could ask if any has an opinion on wheather any authorities today
> are good
> or bad, and I would probably get a lot of hands.
> But if I ask about if any have the needed spiritual knowledge to
> judged
> wheather it is true, - I bet near all the hands will fall down - if
> the
> truth was to be presented.
>
>
> Please rethink your positions...
>
>
> from
> M. sufilight with peace...peace...peace...
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <info@b...>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 5:07 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Bhakti Ananda Goswami on the "Esoteric and
> Science
> News" website
>
>
> > Dear Bhakti Ananda Goswami,
> >
> > Since you are announcing on Theos-Talk an article about HPB
> published
> > on the "Esoteric and Science News" website at
> > <http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/> ,
> > can you tell us who is the CURRENT editor of that website?
> >
> > In early to mid Nov. 2002, the editor of that site was still Brian
> > Muehlebach, who had mysteriously taken over the editorship from
> > Brigitte Muehlegger in Aug. 2002.
> >
> > But soon after Eldon Tucker "booted" Brian from Theos-Talk in the
> > latter part of Nov., Brian's name as editor disappeared COMPLETELY
> > from that website and Raphael Vishanu (Gregory Tillett should
> > remember that name) became the editor.
> >
> > Go to the very bottom of the page at
> > <http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/>
> > and see the link to "Editor". This link goes to
> > http://mailbox.univie.ac.at/~muehleb9/pic.html
> >
> > A week ago this link gave pictures apparently of R.V. Now the link
> > is dead. But notice the pictures and the caption right above
> > this "Editor" link. The caption reads:
> >
> > "This morning yours editor went out at six in the morning Dec. 24,
> > 2002, and while my two children were putting rice in the monk's
> bowls
> > that they carry each morning from/to their monasteries, I took a few
> > pictures for you. This is near the border of Burma/Thailand where we
> > live surrounded by more than 100 acres of rice field (that are
> worked
> > entirely by hand). Picture to the left is when the light was just
> > rising."
> >
> > Thailand??
> >
> > Also I do not as of this morning see Raphael Vishanu's name listed
> as
> > editor anywhere on this homepage. In December his name as editor was
> > on the homepage of the website.
> >
> > OBTW, I see a "mirror" site of "Esoteric and Science News" at:
> >
> > http://www.raphaelvishanu-world.at/
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>