Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00086)

Hi Dallas and all,

My views are here presented:
Thanks Dallas.
Your mail clairified some issues.
And your views are yours, and that seems to clearly be allright.

A sentence below made me write some more...

Dallas wrote:
"You are correct is saying that H.P.Blavatsky is one of the sources --
> yes, the most recent of the known messengers."

My Sufilight answer and questions:
Well, here we go again.
This claim of yours above is not easy to prove. Right ?
I could ask to your remark above: Known by who ? With what right ?
And should we just look at the word "Theosophy" as a dead-letter when
debating,
who the most recent messenger was or is ?
I think there are a number of people who with good reason could claim
that their favorite person or writer is the last messenger, - while escaping
the use of dead-letter
Theosophy.
The teaching of dead-letter theosophy was a teaching Blavatsky didn't
favorize. (The Secret Doctrine vol.1, p. 305, 318, 337; vol.2, p. 305,
797 - there are more if neeeded...)

I will now use some quotes from Blavatsky, so to make it clear, that none
has patent on - who the last messenger was within Theosophy - or the maybe
better pronounced --- the wisdom tradition . There is NO shreed of proof,
that Blavatsky has been the last one !!!
But I will not point my fingers at anyone particular later messenger myself.
But, I am willing to discuss, those which could candidate for being such a
later messenger. Blavtsky said, that such a messenger would come past 1975
(- not likely a dead-letter year or ? Do you know if it should be read using
the dead-letter ?). Maybe the messenger has been on the stage somewhere...?
Anyone ?
(It is quite funny to experience the - great silence, which emanates when
this question is asked here at Theos-Talk).

*******
(The Secret Doctrine vol.1, p. 305)
"This every scholar now knows. The able lectures of Mr. G. Massey alone are
sufficient in themselves to convince any fair-minded Christian that to
accept the dead-letter of the Bible is equivalent to falling into a grosser
error and superstition than any hitherto evolved by the brain of the savage
South Sea Islander. But the point to which even the most truth-loving and
truth-searching Orientalists -- whether Aryanists or Egyptologists -- seem
to remain blind, is the fact that every symbol in papyrus or olla is a
many-faced diamond, each of whose facets not merely bears several
interpretations, but relates likewise to several sciences. This is instanced
in the just quoted interpretation of the moon symbolized by the cat -- an
example of sidero-terrestrial imagery; the moon bearing many other meanings
besides this with other nations."

(The Secret Doctrine vol.1, p. 318)
"But while supposing that the whole cycle of the universal mystery language
will not be mastered for whole centuries to come, even that which has been
hitherto discovered in the Bible by some scholars is quite sufficient to
demonstrate the claim -- mathematically. Judaism having availed itself of
two keys out of the seven, and these two keys having been now rediscovered,
it becomes no longer a matter of individual speculation and hypothesis,
least of all of "coincidence," but one of a correct reading of the Bible
texts, as anyone acquainted with arithmetic reads and verifies an addition
or total.* A few years longer and this system will kill the dead letter of
the Bible, as it will that of all the other exoteric faiths, by showing the
dogmas in their real, naked meaning."

(The Secret Doctrine vol.1, p. 337)
"Or, in plainer and stronger language, there is as much esoteric wisdom in
some portions of the exoteric Puranas and Pentateuch, as there is of
nonsense and of designed childish fancy in it, when read only in the
dead-letter murderous interpretations of great dogmatic religions, and
especially of sects."

(The Secret Doctrine vol.2, p. 305)
"The untiring researches of Western, and especially German, symbologists,
during the last and the present centuries, have brought every Occultist and
most unprejudiced persons to see that without the help of symbology (with
its seven departments, of which the moderns know nothing) no ancient
Scripture can ever be correctly understood. Symbology must be studied from
every one of its aspects, for each nation had its own peculiar methods of
expression. In short, no Egyptian papyrus, no Indian tolla, no Assyrian
tile, or Hebrew scroll, should be read and accepted literally.

This every scholar now knows. The able lectures of Mr. G. Massey alone are
sufficient in themselves to convince any fair-minded Christian that to
accept the dead-letter of the Bible is equivalent to falling into a grosser
error and superstition than any hitherto evolved by the brain of the savage
South Sea Islander. But the point to which even the most truth-loving and
truth-searching Orientalists -- whether Aryanists or Egyptologists -- seem
to remain blind, is the fact that every symbol in papyrus or olla is a
many-faced diamond, each of whose facets not merely bears several
interpretations, but relates likewise to several sciences. This is instanced
in the just quoted interpretation of the moon symbolized by the cat -- an
example of sidero-terrestrial imagery; the moon bearing many other meanings
besides this with other nations."

(The Secret Doctrine vol.2, p. 797)
"Thus far have proceeded the rough outlines of the beliefs and tenets of the
archaic, earliest Races contained in their hitherto secret Scriptural
records. But our explanations are by no means complete, nor do they pretend
to give out the full text, or to have been read by the help of more than
three or four keys out of the sevenfold bunch of esoteric interpretation,
and even this has only been partially accomplished. The work is too gigantic
for any one person to undertake, far more to accomplish. Our main concern
was simply to prepare the soil. This, we trust we have done. "

*******
So the physical written teachings of Theosophy or any book of wisdom should
not be read using the dead-letter key alone of the 7 keys. (The Secret
Doctrine vol.2, p. 305)
I hope this are clairifying the situation, on WHO the last messenger is or
has been, on, what some dare to call "Theosophy", while they from time to
time use the dead-letter meaning of the word.
Certainly - Theosophy is more than "Theosophy" in a dead-letter sense, with
its theosophical writer HPB, and for some also Judge, Besant, Purucker,
Bailey, etc... There are of course different levels of teachings. But who
knows more than 2 or 3 of the 7 keys, - I claim only a few. Because the
author(s) (- one wonders how much the Masters helped Blavatsky -) of Secret
Doctrine do'nt even claim to posses all of the 7 keys !!!
Do the readers agree on this ?

What to me makes Blavatskys writings special compared with a number of other
writers is her teaching on the 7 keys, and the rejection of the dead-letter
"Bibles" from different religious teachings, and not only the Christian
religion, but also later interpretations of her writings and teachings.
But let us remember that the use of words in the writings and scriptures of
Blavatsky are old, which some of the above quotes already should have shown
the reader.

One could ask why I use up my time with such an email.
But the present day circumstances makes me do it. I have this stranges
opinion, that makes me seek to create peace on this planet. And peace can
sometimes come, when people understands, that - using the dead-letter is of
no good.
I think as some recently wrote here at Theos-talk. One should know them on
their fruits ! I agree.
What are or has been the fruits of Theosophy ?
What are or has been the fruits of H. P. Blavatsky ?
What are or has been the fruits of Mahatma Ghandi ?
What are or has been the fruits of Mother Teresa ?
What are or has been the fruits of Martin Luther King Jr. ?
What are or has been the fruits of Gurdjieff ?
What are or has been the fruits of Lady Diana ?
What are or has been the fruits of Annie Besant ?
What are or has been the fruits of Sathya Sai Baba ?
What are or has been the fruits of L. Ron Hubbard ?
What are or has been the fruits of Rudolf Steiner ?
What are or has been the fruits of O. T. O.
What are or has been the fruits of The Realians (cloning) ?
What are or has been the fruits of Vivekananda ?
What are or has been the fruits of RamaKrishna ?
What are or has been the fruits of Rama Maharishi ?
What are or has been the fruits of Aurobindo ?
What are or has been the fruits of Ibn El Arabi ?
What are or has been the fruits of Idries Shah ?
What are or has been the fruits of Hazrat Inyat Khan ?
What are or has been the fruits of various newer Indian pundits and Rishis
?
What are or has been the fruits of newer politicians ?
What are or has been the fruits of religious heads like the Pope, Dalai
Lama etc...
What are or has been the fruits of ---- etc...
What are or has your own fruits been ?


These were my views.
Feeel free to comment or do your best...



from
M. Sufilight with a happy smile...and not even standing on his toes...>:-)


----- Original Message -----
From: <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: "AA-B-Study" <study@blavatsky.net>
Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 9:42 AM
Subject: Theos-World RE: on our toes What is THEOSOPHY


> Jan 6 2003
>
> Dear friend:
>
> As far as I can determine the two statements are congruent.
>
> I can only writ for myself, as I understand it. and of course my
> statements may not agree with the views of others. But, then I am
> content to let them determine what is correct or valid by means of the
> same kind of study which all good students pursue. I can only speak
> of what I have found.
>
> Theosophy is a name currently given to a universal system of thought
> and the use (thinking) that is made about it. Theosophy (to me) is a
> synonym of wisdom. You are correct that Theosophy will be found
> everywhere. It is therefore designated a synthesis of religion,
> philosophy and science. These three are inseparable.
>
> If it is agreed that it is universal and eternal, then it underlies
> all expressions and names given to it at any time or anywhere.
>
> So if you please there are two THEOSOPHIES.
>
> 1. The eternal -- as an expression of LAW UNIVERSAL. and
>
> 2. The temporary -- as the current name given to Mme. H P
> Blavatsky's system -- which she claimed was NOT hers, but came through
> her, as a messenger of the Masters of Wisdom.
>
> The distinction is made plain in the opening pages of the KEY TO
> THEOSOPHY (HPB)
>
> As to the nature of the Masters -- this is covered in a number of
> articles and in the first pages of both ISIS UNVEILED and The SECRET
> DOCTRINE
>
> In speaking of Theosophy, I write concerning the universal system of
> which the book The SECRET DOCTRINE is an epitome. It describes the
> rules, ethics and laws of the Universe.
>
> In speaking of the Masters I speak of those ancient and deathless
> GNYANIS (or DHYANIS) who are knowers and preservers of this system --
> which they periodically disseminate among mankind so that a knowledge
> of it is ever present. A record of this past wok is made available t
> us to scrutinize in ISIS UNVEILED and The SECRET DOCTRINE
>
> You are correct is saying that H.P.Blavatsky is one of the sources --
> yes, the most recent of the known messengers.
>
> I hope that this makes my position clearer.
>
> Dallas
>
> =================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morten
> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 5:55 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: on our toes
>
> Hi Dallas and all of you,
>
> Salaam Aleikum,
>
>
> My views are presented in the below:
>
> Thanks for the good words.
> I agree a lot with them.
>
> But Dallas, what strikes me in the below writing of yours is this:
>
> A:
> Dallas wrote:
>
>
> "All that we know of Theosophy has come though H P B as Their
> Messenger. But, we cannot adopt any specific attitude unless we,
> through study, are prepared to explain this fully."
>
> B:
> Dallas wrote:
>
>
> "They, the MASTERS, are Universal. And "They" are the "property" of
> no
> creed or sect.
>
> The (or any) THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, if it claims to be the sole channel
> to the Masters, is in error. No one who proclaims this can prove it."
>
>
> My Sufilight answer:
>
>
> Dallas how can you combine these two statements of yours A and B ?
>
>
> Who do you define Theosophy, literally or in broad terms ?
>
>
> To me your - A - statement is false.
>
>
> My view is. Theosophy is more than HPB, and one can freely chose HPB
> as ones
> main source to learn from...or another one.
>
>
> But wisdom is wisdom.
>
>
> And HPB was actually the first real source literally speaking on
> Theosophy
> (by the use of the word) since 1875.
>
>
> Dallas wrote:
>
>
> "Theosophy makes only one claim and that is: it presents in a
> condensed form the HISTORY of evolution and of the qualities and
> potentials that underlie this continuing event."
>
> My Sufilight answer:
>
>
> Yes and condensed it really is !
>
>
> Else I agree a lot with you Dallas.
>
> I think this one from you Dallas is especially good and I support it,
> if
> Theosophy - has the meaning "a part of the wisdom tradition of all
> ages" :
>
> "If you take my assurance as correct, then you can be making the error
> of choosing me as an :"authority." I am not. I merely say you can
> find out for yourself. Then, you become the authority for what you
> know or have reasoned out. Truth is a common factor, and is shared
> and participated in by all -- no exclusions. None of us are in any
> better position by mere membership.."
>
> Theosophy is self-proving, and the Masters demonstrate this in
> everything they have written."
>
>
>
> Feel free to comment or do your best...
>
> from
> M. Sufilight with peace...
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>