Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00096)

In a message dated 12/29/02 1:25:38 PM, mhart@idirect.ca writes:

>Leon wrote, in part: << It either is or it isn't. If it isn't, prove
>it 
>with rigorous logic -- or get off the potty. >>
>
>Yes, Leon, comparative realities tend to be (are?) either 
>apparent/real, or not apparent/real, (I tend to agree with 
>you about that), but I've been speculating that some 
>people out there might have some interest in the kind of 
>thought processes that might be seen as associated with 
>preparations to transcend mainstream, mayavic, dualistic, 
>exoteric views ... True, such "preparations," themselves, 
>(no matter what form they may take), are exoteric, 
>but/"but" .... So, what can I say ... Sorry to hear you 
>don't care for my preparations. I've been trying to offer a 
>somewhat broader perspective, as I tend to see it. Not 
>that I have anything against your preparations. 

Never said I "didn't care for your preparations." I just implied that your 
tendency to speculate, ramblingly and incoherently, using logically or 
rationally undefined words that have many variable religious, scientific and 
psychological meanings (depending on context) -- does nothing but confuse our 
understanding of the universal "realities" that theosophists, and other 
"people out there" (including scientists and philosophers) should be 
interested in talking and learning more about. 

Your speculations, rather than offer a "broader perspective," actually lead 
to a complete misunderstanding of the "synthetic" (which implies the 
"broadest") nature of the theosophical view -- that includes the correct 
views of all religions and philosophies and entirely eliminates the wrong 
views. Once you understand that, there should be no further need for 
speculation... Just careful study of the SD (or any other source of the true 
occult synthesis) along with silent contemplation -- should be all that's 
necessary for you or any other serious seeker of truth to arrive at a 
comprehensive knowledge of the ultimate nature of reality... No questions, no 
equivocations, no speculations necessary for the truly "intuitive" student 
(although some others might find it necessary to ask questions). Maybe my 
post immediately preceding this one might better explain what I mean. 

Best wishes,

LHM

P.S. It would be helpful if you would refrain from putting personal names in 
the subject line of your message, and just sticking with an impersonal 
subject title that might be of interest to the bulk of subscribers to this 
forum. 

>Speculatively,
>Mauri