Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00046)

Hi. Before I begin part three, I would like to mention there is some interesting work on here right now, which is actually sort of fascinating to me, but I wonder if posters ever consider the amount of material people are or are not able to assimilate, and how to present it in such a way that they have a chance to do so.

O.K. So here is part three of my explanation. Below is a link to an essay by Max Muller. I came to suspect that Bridgitte's name, as well as Brian's, was a word play on the name of this famous historian. It is now obvious to me that at least one person who is connected to Brian, Bag, has much expertise in the subject of word roots, so maybe Brian/Bridgitte did also. Unless you have studied word roots and understand how certain people use them as a means of covert communication, this line of thought will seem far-fetched, (though from ancient times to this day, this communication device is very common, and you will find it in many if not all ancient religious and alchemical texts, western and eastern, as well as a few modern spiritual writings. Usually one would expect to see mainly Gurdjieff people using this device, as Gurdjieff tried to train people to understand word roots (though I'm not sure how many of them ever learned), In any case, why would someone take it upon himself to "bridge" the work of Max Muller and how could this relate to theosophy? You will have to speculate on this in your own time. Someone tried to express himself, and identified his aim, for anyone who could see it, through the use of a skillfully chosen alias, and when that identity had to be changed, could not bear to give up the alias completely, as it was of great significance.

I have thought of sharing my understanding of word roots with the people of this list, some of whom have expressed an interest in learning the language of the ancients or whatever, but there is too much confusion, small talk and infighting here for me to do this right now. 

I no longer believe Paul is Brian/Bridgitte, but at the time, I made an assumption, for many reasons, one being the understanding, by certain students of the teaching of Gurdjieff, of word roots as a communication device I believe it is likely, though, that some Gurdjieffians have become involved in the modern theosophy movement, and if so, have risen to the top of the bottle, very easily, just like cream, but I will cover this in a future message. I will acknowledge that I jumped to a lot of conclusions, and I take responsibility for having done so, but an interconnected factor is that the situation on this list was inherently at least a little paranoia producing, if not more then a little and in most paranoia a seed of truth, if not even many seeds, can be found. So see link below. This message is part three and should get even more interesting with parts four and five. See link below. I'm not sure, but soon I may put out a second link to Max Muller, to give this an even rounder perspective. Sincerely, Wry p.s. Why were the letters eh added to the presumed alias of Bridgitte Muehlegger (and Brian Muehlbach)? One reason was to separate the second part, legger, which probably has a significance of its own (easy enough to figure out in the context of the whole name and its very probably intended meaning). Maybe this will at least get one or two persons started on word roots, the study of which has been one of the most productive of my life.

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/muller1.htm


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]