[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Wry on Blavatsky Part Eight (to Morton and Daniel)

Feb 12, 2003 12:00 PM
by wry

Hi. Morton, Daniel and Everyone. The previous message on Devachans is meant
to be "Wry on Blavatsky-part seven." This is in response to your message,
Morton. I am
still going to respond to the material about the Lucis Trust when I get a
chance, but here is a brief comment in relationship to that. The right way
to approach a problem is at the entrance point where the problem itself can
incorporated into the solution in such a way that the effort of trying to
solve the
problem does not create an antithesis which will support the continued
existence of the problem. (For anyone reading this, if you want a good
ponder, what I have just said is seemingly oppositional to something I have
written to this in a previous message on the Devachans, which was intened to
be "Wry on Blavatsky part seven. Can this seeming contradiction be looked
at in such a way that it makes sense? Maybe we can think on this for a
while. I personally have long been interested in this subject.)

To continue. There are many reasons for keeping certain material secret, and
maybe we can go into this more in the future, as it is fascinating, but one
reason I would like to mention which is particularly interesting is that
once the cat is
let out of the bag, it can never be put back in again. This is
actually even mentioned in a certain kabalist text I have in have in my
but I cannot remember which one.

Speaking of "cat," I believe you are from a Scandinavian country, if I am
mistaken, and may therefore not be familiar with the very well known English
nursery rhyme "High diddle diddle. The cat and the fiddle. The cow jumped
over the moon. The little dog laughed to see such craft, and the dish ran
away with the spoon." One of my special interests is deciphering allegory
in rugs, ancient art, dance, spiritual writing, and folk literature ect. and
the English nursery rhymes are one of my favorites. I have spent many
hours actively pondering this one piece of material. I
put it out here because it not only contains a cat, but also "the little
dog" (an interesting reference which is seemingly meant to be silly, but
which I take as serious.) I do not expect anyone who has not had a lot of
practice with this sort of material to be able to make heads or tails of it,
but it is worth a try.

Finally, I would like to point out that all knowledge, as I understand it,
relates to the conscious use , or at the very least the optimum functioning,
of the physical body as an instrument. It is a
shame ancient texts have been lost, but worse could be yet to come unless we
start to focus more actively on the here and now. I agree to an extent with
Madame Blavatsky said, but it is worth noting that she takes a point and
keeps expanding on it, while being at the same time unspecific, and quite
honestly, this results in the creation of a certain affect which can, under
the wrong conditions, lead to certain end results that are not that
desirable, as people who are working with this material are not learning how
to hone in, and maybe this has led to results such as the Lucis Trust. I am
not trying
to take anything away from anyone. It is not necessarily bad or good to
create a strong affect (guess it depends on what the aim is of the person
doing it), but if this is what is happening, it surely cannot hurt us to be
aware that this is going on. In this way perhaps we can take a big leap. It
must be remember that at the original time she was writing her material was
IMBUED WITH A GREAT FRICTION which must have balanced and counteracted, to
an EXTENT the mesmerizing quality therein, as she was publicly criticizing
the Christian religion in a way which at that time must have been most
controversial and most disturbing to many.

To finish, here is a comment to Daniel re a message you posted on 2/8 at
8:34 a.m. The way you have put this material together is most fascinating
indeed, and it has made a strong impression upon me (the way you have put it
together and presented it), but remember, the artist's palette is unlimited
and all and any material is grist for the mill and available to design with.
The key for me is to never expect anyone to correlate to my material, but
always correlate my material to their material in such a way that they can
receive it. It is hard to give such a gift, and I am just a beginner and
maybe have messed up on this list, but personally, my material must retain
certain quality of grip or it will lose its force and then there would be no
reason for me to be here as I might as well be watching t.v. or reading a
magazine. It is important if not even key to realize that a certain quality
of grip can exist without having a certain kind of knowledge, and a certain
kind of knowledge can exist without having a certain kind of grip, but when
the two are actively combined, they interact and support each other in such
a way that something can be born or generated out of this combination.

I know this message sounds disjointed, but read it as a whole to receive the
full nuance. Sincerely, Wry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Morten Nymann Olesen" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:48 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Wry on Blavatsky: Part Four

> HI Wry and Dallas and all of you,
> The below are only views:
> I can only agree with Wry on the below.
> The use of "we" by Dallas in the below shows an attitude, which is not
> proper to Theosophy.
> And SECRETS was also something Blavatsky supported in The Secret Doctrine.
> The following is from her Introduction to the same book. I can only
> emphasize the word "keys" in the below, and have done so :
> "This statement is rendered more credible by a consideration of the
> following facts: the tradition of the thousands of ancient parchments
> when the Alexandrian library was destroyed; the thousands of Sanskrit
> which disappeared in India in the reign of Akbar; the universal tradition
> China and Japan that the true old texts with the commentaries, which alone
> make them comprehensible -- amounting to many thousands of volumes -- have
> long passed out of the reach of profane hands; the disappearance of the
> sacred and occult literature of Babylon; the loss of those KEYS which
> could solve the thousand riddles of the Egyptian hieroglyphic records; the
> tradition in India that the real secret commentaries which alone make the
> Veda intelligible, though no longer visible to profane eyes, still remain
> for the initiate, hidden in secret caves and crypts; and an identical
> among the Buddhists, with regard to their secret books.
> The Occultists assert that all these exist, safe from Western spoliating
> hands, to re-appear in some more enlightened age, for which in the words
> the late Swami Dayanand Sarasvati, "the Mlechchhas (outcasts, savages,
> beyond the pale of Aryan civilization) will have to wait."
> For it is not the fault of the initiates that these documents are now
> to the profane; nor was their policy dictated by selfishness, or
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [[Vol. 1, Page]] xxxv INTRODUCTORY.
> any desire to monopolise the life-giving sacred lore. There were portions
> the Secret Science that for incalculable ages had to remain concealed from
> the profane gaze. But this was because to impart to the unprepared
> secrets of such tremendous importance, was equivalent to giving a child a
> lighted candle in a powder magazine.
> The answer to a question which has frequently arisen in the minds of
> students, when meeting with statements such as this, may be outlined here.
> "We can understand," they say, "the necessity for concealing from the herd
> such secrets as the Vril, or the rock-destroying force, discovered by J.
> Keely, of Philadelphia, but we cannot understand how any danger could
> from the revelation of such a purely philosophic doctrine, as, e.g., the
> evolution of the planetary chains."
> The danger was this: Doctrines such as the planetary chain, or the seven
> races, at once give a clue to the seven-fold nature of man, for each
> principle is correlated to a plane, a planet, and a race; and the human
> principles are, on every plane, correlated to seven-fold occult forces --
> those of the higher planes being of tremendous power. So that any
> division at once gives a clue to tremendous occult powers, the abuse of
> which would cause incalculable evil to humanity. A clue, which is,
> no clue to the present generation -- especially the Westerns -- protected
> they are by their very blindness and ignorant materialistic disbelief in
> occult; but a clue which would, nevertheless, have been very real in the
> early centuries of the Christian era, to people fully convinced of the
> reality of occultism, and entering a cycle of degradation, which made them
> rife for abuse of occult powers and sorcery of the worst description."
> ("The Secret Doctrine" written by H. P. Blavatsky [[Vol. 1, Page]] xxxiv
> What have happend since 1888 when Blavatsky wrote the above book ?:
> Today year february 2003 we have an - extremely - westernized version of
> Theosophy (the Bailey-version) being involved - certainly at high levels -
> with the policy of The United Nations.
> A. On Lucis Trust and pro-Baileys involvement with The United Nations:
> B. Several Religions at work around The United Nations:
> This article is a little old though.
> Rober Muller was behind United Religions Initiative !
> C. The United Nations - manner of keeping the peace:
> Maurice Strong ( ,
> ,
> ,
> ) into New Age - or - is he a real
> Master, and a comming UN general Secretary? He has ties with Gore and
> Bush. He just recently meet with Northkorea officials as a representative
> The United Nations. New Age at The United Nations, what is next ?)
> I am not claiming that all written in the above links are true. But some
> it are for sure.
> I do honestly hope this will help the learned Dallas with his 60 years of
> Theosophical studies...
> Feel free to comment or do your best...
> from
> M. Sufilight with peace...on Earth...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "wry" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 7:24 AM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Wry on Blavatsky: Part Four
> >
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application