Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00527)

Hello Wry,

Your message below leaves me very confused. Please tell me where
Blavatsky claimed to be a Mahayana Buddhist. I'm aware that she did
take pansal in Ceylon. I suppose one could conclude from that act that
she is a Theravada Buddhist. But that is not the same as Mahayana, nor
would I take it to mean that her writings were ever intended to be
representative of Buddhism in any form. Also, why do you believe that a
Buddhist of either school would consider the statement below to be one
of ignorance, and one that perpetuates suffering?

Thanks
--j



-----Original Message-----
From: wry [mailto:wry1111@earthlink.net] 
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 7:28 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re[6]: Essential Unity--and Bailey on
Mohammedanism

HI. Did Alice Bailey say the below? Madame Blavatsky claimed to be a
Mahayana Buddhist. If you stretch it really far, you could perhaps
possibly
fit her into this category, at least as a person aspiring to be one, but
the
person who said the below is no Buddhist, Mahayana or otherwise. Period.
There is no way to fit her into this category. So this is one noticeable
difference between the two. People on here might not think it
significant,
but a Buddhist would consider her not only to be ignorant, but to be
perpetrating human suffering. Sincerely, Wry p.s. This message has
nothing
to do with people in the United Nations, whoever they are. I will
comment on
this later, but if you want to change the world, learn how to do
consciously. This is what real knowledge of scales (seven) can be used
for.

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Davis" <james@bookreader.org>
To: "Morten Nymann Olesen" <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 6:38 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re[6]: Essential Unity--and Bailey on
Mohammedanism:
>

> In every land down the ages men have sought to foist their personal,
> religious interpretations of truth, of [126] the Scriptures and of
> God upon the mass of men. They have taken the Bibles of the world and
> have attempted to explain them, passing the ideas they find through
> the filter of their own minds and brains and in the process inevitably
> stepping down the meaning. Not content with this, their followers have
> forced these man-evolved interpretations upon the unthinking and the
> ignorant. Every religion - Buddhism, Hinduism in its many aspects,
> Mohammedanism and Christianity - has produced a flock of outstanding
> minds who have sought (usually quite sincerely) to understand what
> God is supposed to have said, who have formulated doctrines and dogmas
> on this basis of what they thought God meant and their words and
> ideas have, therefore, become religious law and the irrefutable
> truths of countless millions. In the last analysis, what have you?
> The ideas of some human mind - interpreted in terms of his period,
> tradition and background - about what God said in some Scripture which
> has been subjected during the centuries to the difficulties and the
> mistakes incident to constant translation - a translation often based
> on oral teaching.
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/