Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00260)

Thanks again Mauri. Clearly, I feel some degree of comfort in our
discussions. Probably because our definitions of "reasonably well-behaved"
may be similar. In my last post comparing/confusing theosophical masters
and the christian god, I was, I think, probing for that boundary between the
"essence" of theosophy and those other places that our mind takes us which
might be labeled "non-essence" or non-essential(?).

As I see it developing here, a group of "believes-in-masters" people, led by
Daniel and some others, (although they will most likely claim they are being
led by HPB and the Masters) (and maybe they are) is excited by the prospect
of proving yet another group of "believes-in-personal-god" people wrong.
The first volley of Words has already been launched. I wonder if Words
from the Theosophical Masters go as far in proving the existence of such
Masters as Words from God go in proving the existence of God?

I should like to meet a master I think. (or a personal god, for that
matter) I would try to be reasonably well-behaved, maybe. I wonder if I
would be allowed to ask questions, or speculate, or wonder?


thanks Mauri,
Bill



----- Original Message -----
From: "Mauri" <mhart@idirect.ca>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 3:58 PM
Subject: Theos-World re re contrasts, Bill, BAG, "broader perspectives"? and
...


> Bill wrote: <<I began to think that perhaps I might be
> perceived on this list as advocating for the existence of a
> personal god as described by exoteric christianity.
> Nothing could be further from my mind. Such a being is
> said to favor one group over another even dismissing some
> to the outer darkness forever. Such a being is said to
> participate in dialogue with some individuals about the
> worthiness and lack thereof of others. Such a being
> is said to use miracles as demonstrations of both existence
> and power. Such a being is said to act from a human-like
> mindset with human-like emotions including love and
> anger. Such a being is said to reward loyalty and
> obedience and play favorites and do good things for those
> individuals in whom favor is found, while the others may
> generally be referred to as "idiots"......no....er.....uh....I've
> confused the personal christian god with the theosophical
> masters. Yikes!!! I guess I'll be going now. :)>>
>
> Seems like a relevant comparison, (in a way?), by which
> one might bring up a relevant issue? The following
> might've occurred to you (?): Seems as if such as
> "Theosophic masters" might be kind of limited to ways
> and means of communicating that us non-masters (or
> "average people") might find
> "understandable/sensible/relevant-enough"? True, those
> attempts to communicate on the part of those Theosophic
> masters (and even on the part of Theosophic speculators,
> like me, I'm guessing?) could often be misinterpreted in a
> variety of ways, but ... And, similarly, it would seem to me
> that students and leaders of various religions, sophies, and
> whatever might often be misinterpreted in a variety of
> ways. So when we're sort of "faced with each others' and
> our own karma," maybe we can at least try to be
> reasonably well bahaved toward each other and ourselves,
> while telling each other about our opinions, beliefs,
> feelings ... Then again, of course my idea of "reasonably
> well behaved" might not be your idea of "reasonably well
> behaved," so ... hmm ...
>
> Speculatively,
> Mauri
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>