Theos-Talk Archives (February 2003 Message tt00268)

I suppose, Wry, I should thank you for all your past and present reverse 
compliments that are "made in the spirit of love and is not intended to 
harm." At least, it might justify whatever response I might make in kind. 
(But, at best, I'll try to be polite, and stay away from ad hominem personal 
name calling and put downs -- which you are so deft at using to make a point. 
:-)

While I may disagree with your motives, methods and interpretations of 
theosophy, I don't think that is sufficient reason to kick you off this list. 
But, for you to complain that this list had too much contention and 
arguments, and then turn around and criticize everyone and everything, 
including HPB, as well as her teachings, using snide personal ad hominem digs 
and hubristic know-it-all self promotion, coupled with sycophantic baby talk 
flattery, is the height of hypocrisy. 

So, if this current letter of yours isn't (like most of your previous 
postings) a self serving ad hominem diatribe that also reflects whatever I 
rhetorically and suppositionally questioned about your use of obscure 
mystical terms that sound profound but say nothing substantial or useful -- I 
don't know what is. 

I also wonder why it was necessary to make such a protracted, self promoting 
and self defensive counterattack? Since, what I said below (taken out of 
context of what it referred to in my previous correspondence with Mauri) was 
not pointed at anyone in particular, but was designed as a generic warning 
for those students of theosophy who might not be clear about what HPB meant 
by the "Universal Brotherhood of Humanity" and the distinction between it and 
forming a "Nucleus" of such a brotherhood -- as well as giving them food for 
thought about what slippery verbal tricks might be used (and why) by those 
intending to discredit current student/teachers of theosophy as well as HPB's 
methods and practices necessary to arrive at such conditions. In addition, 
my responses to your letters were solely to defend those respected teachers 
against your continued attacks and innuendoes. 

In my view, HPB's methods as well as her metaphysical and coordinated 
spiritual teachings that were designed for individual students (not Sanghas) 
to study and practice through their own "self devised and self determined 
efforts" -- in order to arrive at "self realization" so as to become "better 
able to help and teach others" -- are in complete conformance with the three 
objects of the Theosophical Movement and perfectly consistent with ancient 
theosophical and occult fundamental principles. Also, they are completely 
"time appropriate" for the purposes that they were given out for. As far as 
I'm concerned, you can take this or leave it. Although, its quite apparent, 
judging from your previous comments, that HPB's and your supposedly "time 
appropriate" "hidden agenda" version of neo-theosophy are at completely 
opposite poles... Even though your ideas superficially appear, like the 
pseudo theosophy of AAB, AB and CWL, to have similar humanity unifying aims. 
The difference being that you insist on using non theosophical charismatic 
group organizational and messianic leadership techniques, and scrapping the 
theosophical teachings and plan, and for some obscure reasons seem to be 
tearing down, with an unholy vehemence, the credibility of the current 
advanced student/teachers of pure theosophy -- and particularly, the male 
ones. Might we not expect on this go around, then, that the new messiah you 
seem to be setting the stage for, might appear in the robe and shoes of Kwan 
Yin? I wonder who might be thinking about wearing them? But, if the shoe 
fits... well (as Mauri would say)... whatever... ^:-)

Apparently, since you said that whatever I say "goes in one ear and out the 
other" -- wouldn't it be reasonable for us to assume, then, that such a 
remark relates also to how you receive the teachings given out by both HPB 
and WQJ -- about what it means and how to become an individual "nucleus of 
universal brotherhood" -- that do not agree with your ideas? (Although, I 
explained them thoroughly in one of my posts -- which, of course, you 
couldn't hear, or even think about -- as, judging by your oh so clever 
remark, you have an empty space between your ears :-). 

Wouldn't you also agree that sounding off half cocked and criticizing HPB 
(and along with her, WQJ) without understanding even the basic fundamentals 
of their complementary theosophical teachings (which you contradictorily say 
is easy to understand by reading the letters on this forum written by those 
you denigrate as ignorant fools) -- is kind of ludicrous -- if not hubristic 
hypocrisy that takes all of us on this list for fools?

In this sense, it might be safe for us to say, because of how little you seem 
to know about its teachings, methods of practice, or purposes -- that 
everything you say about theosophy, the means you propose to set up your 
Sangha to attain your version of universal brotherhood, and the group 
oriented mind controlling Mesmeric methods that you appear to be using -- is 
in direct contradiction of the original teachings? (Although, I'm sure none 
of us question those aspects of your motives or actions that superficially 
appear to be altruistic.) So, pardon me for disagreeing with your other 
motives, salamander-like back door approaches, and ostensibly salubrious 
methods of trying to make this list a wryly monitored "Bulletin Board" for 
your own personal "hidden agenda." If that makes me "ignorant," "half crazy," 
and "one track minded" in your eyes -- then, so be it. I can live with such 
labels -- since they only reflect back on the ones who apply them. :-)

Since I (and, I assume, others you have had disagreeable dialogues with on 
this list) do not question your intelligence or your character, there is no 
reason to take anything we say personally -- which you apparently do -- since 
you always come back with name calling, character assassination, ad hominem 
responses whenever you disagree with our understandings of theosophy, or we 
disagree with yours, question your knowledge and motives, and defend against 
your unfounded criticisms of HPB and her teachings. 

In any event, it's not my intention to compete with anyone about who has the 
qualifications to represent the teachings of HPB. You're the one who keeps 
bringing that up. So, if you say you are the one, I guess we'll just have to 
let the real student/chelas of HPB listen to what you have to say, and decide 
for themselves. To make specific the statement of the Master I quoted below 
(and you agreed was valid) -- "They will know you by your fruits"... Which 
"fruits," to me so far, strikes no chord that sounds like the HPB I know (as 
a very close friend who I've had many disagreements with that were ultimately 
resolved, without rancor, to both our satisfaction :-). Of course, I 
understand, that would make no sense to you -- since, with your materialistic 
ideas about the mystical science, you think HPB is dead. What a shame (for 
you). But, he would roar with laughter to hear that. 

Although, admittedly, I did write the below addendum (to my previous 
discussion about how a practical Universal Brotherhood might be formed in the 
real world) a bit bombastically, as well as rhetorically... It actually 
refers to several other critics of theosophy and the way HPB presented it, or 
how we interpret it -- some of whom have been in and out of this list over 
the past several years, even before the trolls Brian, BAG and you appeared. 
But, nevertheless, I did feel that some of the methods you used to call 
attention to yourself, and your possible motives were questionable enough to 
be included in my "foaming at the mouth." The fact that it did, as expected, 
draw an ill considered defensive response from you, is all well and good -- 
since it gives everyone here that you have criticized or argued with, as well 
as others interested in theosophy, a chance to get to know you a bit better. 
So we'll just let the reflections from the below letter and all your previous 
letters to this forum speak for themselves. 

By the way, what makes you think that this mailing list is intended to or 
even desires to be a "group" that acts like a Sangha? I thought it was just 
an open forum, with no agenda, where people can independently and freely 
discuss, teach, or learn theosophy on whatever level, or from whatever point 
of view, they feel is appropriate. I certainly don't expect everyone to 
agree with my point of view or accept the teachings I give out (although I 
already know that there are many here who do -- in spite of your opinions 
about my "ignorance" :-). But, I have no expectation of trying to brainwash 
them into grouping up to achieve anything that I think "is for their own 
good." I also think that if anyone wants to do that, they should open their 
own dedicated list and invite anyone on this and any other theosophical list 
who wants to follow them, to go there. As far as I'm concerned you are also 
welcome to teach whatever you please on this forum -- so long as you keep 
your own council and are willing to accept questions and disagreements, no 
matter how strongly presented -- without personality bashing. 

In any event, nothing personal was intended in my posts. (In your case, that 
is, although I can't claim the same in the case of the Jew hater you 
mentioned.) BTW, to make me the "fanatic" and "over emotional," "mentally 
unstable" "generalizer" (wow) in his case, and comparing that with your case, 
is carrying your ad hominem, counter claims a bit far, don't you think? I 
wonder who is using "rhetoric" here? However, if my intentional 
provocation's to expose what appear to be your secretive, overly mystical and 
obscure methods of infiltration and mind control, your ad hominem criticisms 
and arguments, and your personal motives prove to be wrong, I'll gladly 
apologize. 

LHM 

(P.S. Some additional comments are also below in your letter. And, I have 
also included all of my original correspondence you quoted from out of 
context -- for the benefit of others who might be interested in this dialog.)


In a message dated 02/18/03 3:21:55 PM, wry1111@earthlink.net writes:
>
>Hi. The way you talk below is the same kind of rhetoric that. for example.
>someone else is using on here when he downgrades the "Jews." To me this
>kind of over-emotional generalization is a sign of fanaticism and mental
>instability, in that you are unable to BREAK THE ELEMENTS APART. You are
>doing more damage to theosophy than I could ever do, in that you are a
>FANATIC and it does not look good.

Well, these illogical and emotional judgments, analogies, presumptions, and 
acrimonious remarks is about par for your course. And, since I suspected and 
even predicted this kind of projective ad homonym response, it looks pretty 
good to me. 

By the way, ELEMENTS, by definition are "irreducible," and cannot be "broken 
apart." That kind of dissembling rhetoric really doesn't look too good on 
you. Also, I wonder why you assume that anyone thinks you are doing damage 
to theosophy? That, of course, may be what you are trying to do (otherwise 
you couldn't make such a comparison) -- but there's no way in hell you or 
anyone else could damage theosophy. Theosophy stands like the rock of ages... 
Since, there's no religion higher than truth. (And, I can't see much of that 
in your religion that you are trying to palm off here.) 

>About grip. Unless the simple principle of GRIP is understood, a universal
>brotherhood will never be established, as this grip will connect human
>beings to CONSCIENCE. It is also the understanding of the principle of
>interconnected densities of material that will lead to the formation of a
>mature and fully developed human soul, as, without a certain grip, the
>astral body cannot manifest in such a way that the other bodies can
>also, simultaneously, be manifested. Your words are ravings that go in one
>ear and out the other, but my words have a different quality, as I wrtie
>for this group and broader humanity, as well as for myself and not just
>reactively to release pressure.

Now explain to us what relationship "GRIP" has with "universal brotherhood" 
and "CONSCIENCE"? And, then define those words, as well as the meaning of 
the "principle of interconnected densities of material" and how that leads to 
the manifesting of all those "bodies"? What have you said, in all that 
mystical sounding but empty of nourishment word salad, that teaches us to 
"understand" what you are talking about? (This is a perfect example of 
exactly what I have been "raving" about. :-) Sister, you're really the 
"precious" one. In all my experience with undercover agents, I have never 
met one who could better twist words in such a manner as to make non 
discerning people think that they know what they are talking about. But, I 
don't think the people on this list are that dumb. When anyone tackles 
theosophy here with such apparently erudite nonsense, they better know what 
they are talking about. In your case, the "different quality" of your words 
don't seem to hold much water so far.
>
>A "sangha" in the Buddhist sense is a spiritual community that is organized
>around a religious hierachy, but this is not how I am using this term on
>this list, as I have already explained. A spiritual community, as I am using
>this term here, is a community in which each member not only works for
>himself, but for the good of the whole group.

Thank you for that information. You've now partially confirmed (my suspicion) 
that you were using well defined religious and mystical, Buddhist related 
words, in slyly secretive and subliminal contexts in order to make us believe 
you had Buddha's and HPB's views in mind. This also goes with your use of 
alchemical words in the same manner to engender a belief that you are a 
knowledgeable occultist. 

Whether or not that is the case, what makes you think this list of individual 
correspondents is a "group" or "spiritual community." I don't remember 
joining any "group" with any kind of "group agenda" when I signed up to be 
able to read and post letters here. "Methinks thou presumest too much, 
m'lady." (F.B.W. Shakespear)

>If you think I am "taking over this group," that is a big compliment, but
>it is not that easy to do, if I would even want to, as I have literally no
>power on here, zero power, to stop anyone from sending any kind of email
>they so desire, plus it is my desire and my personal pleasure to work on a
>team with others who are on a level similar to my own and also with anyone
>who has the well-0being of this group in mind and enough simple wisdom to 
>be classified in the catagory of having common sense, which you apparently 
>do not, and I am already working, in the spirit of cooperation, with many on
>this list. The cream, whatever or whoever that is, always rises to the top,
>isn't it true, if the circumstances are not so abnormal and involutionary
>that this is artifically kept from happening, and there is nothing you
>or I can do to stop it, except to commit a sin that is unforgivable, to use
>Christian terminology.

I said, "Trying to take over." That is only a supposition, and a lot 
different from acknowledging that you have "taken over." So, here's another 
confirmation of my speculation about your self congratulatory and self 
promoting hubris -- starting from the moment you splashed down in this list 
(and a couple of other lists I see you poking around in and irritating some 
few people). 

So, how can you find a "team" to work with that presumedly is on a level with 
you, when you keep insulting everyone whom others (who could be on your 
level) might think are on a much higher (or I might say, "deeper") level? 

And, why should anyone be concerned about the "well being" of this non 
"group" that can never be a "team" of anything? To me it is just a place to 
meet and talk with other people interested in theosophy -- whether for 
learning, teaching, or just ranting about whatever might be related to it. 

If you have a method or a teaching that might help people on this list help 
each other achieve spiritual enlightenment, why don't you just spill it out, 
instead of constantly beating about the bush about what you are going to 
"talk about later" (but never do)? Or, are you just a lot of hot air, with a 
"secret" egotistical personal agenda that you dare not disclose lest you blow 
away all your self proclaimed credibility as a guru on a par with HPB? 

When the cream rises to the top we'll know it by how rich it tastes when 
compared to the milk. Since all your metaphors seem to imply that you 
consider yourself as the cream of this crop of apparent theosophists, I 
eagerly await the tasting of it. So, far, all we seem to have gotten is a 
waft of sour milk. Of, course, who am I to say -- since I haven't got any 
"common sense." So, I guess I won't be welcome even if I wanted to join all 
the others in this "group" of yours that you say you are working with. (BTW, 
how come we haven't seen any of their letters to you on this list, confirming 
their membership in your "group"?) 

And, so (speaking impersonally -- except about my own flaws pointed out by a 
wry person we both know :-) I expect to forever remain unenlightened by any 
such self styled guru who denies using any magic but is very adept at 
manipulating the mantras (words that say one thing and mean another), as well 
as banning anyone from joining her "group" of compassionate brothers -- who 
doesn't agree with her motives, her teachings or her mystical methods, or 
wish to help in fulfilling her "desires and personal pleasures." Besides, 
why would anyone want to join? What kind of a "nucleus of Universal 
Brotherhood" could that restrictive and mterialistic community be? I always 
thought that devout Buddhists and theosophists were beyond such hedonistic, 
lower nature practices that are the antipathy of spiritual enlightenment and 
self realization. Am I wrong? Could my lack of "common sense" and 
"fanaticism," you labeled me with, blind me from seeing through all the 
slipping and gripping contradictions you keep throwing out to "capture" this 
list as your own private self indulgent and self fulfilling "Sangha"? I feel 
for your loneliness or lack of self understanding -- if that's what's driving 
you to such extremes. But, then, I'm too ignorant to be of much help. 

I also thought you said you were in the same category of occult wisdom as 
HPB, who was very adept at using such "glamour" magic (in fact she wrote 
articles on how it was done, and how some people can be unconscious mediums) 
-- but she never dared to use such "glamour" to control the minds of her 
"simple" minded or "common sensible" followers for her own "personal 
pleasure." As far as we (independent students) know her through her writing, 
HPB taught occult truths straight out, directly to everyone, and never used 
such ego based implications of what she was going to teach and then not do it 
(like you do) just to gather a Sangha. So, as far as theosophy is concerned, 
whatever anyone does for their own personal pleasure, or to gather a Sangha 
around them by touting their own wisdom, and by putting down or banning from 
their group everyone else who disagree with them -- is not a theosophist -- 
and could never be a Bodhisattva like HPB. 

So, who are you kidding? "Physician, heal thyself before trying to heal 
others" was the word of the Master Hermes Trismagistus that was relayed by 
Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim Paracelsus (Both of 
whom, along with HPB, are my mentors and at least one of them is the father 
of my "bombastic" argumentativeness against all the half baked reductive 
scientists and theosophical pretenders who think they know more about the 
truth nature of reality than the Ancient Masters of Wisdom. Maybe you should 
listen to these Master's advice. Then, you can finish your Mahayana Buddhist 
and theosophical paths and know yourself... And, maybe, after that, with the 
knowledge gained of the true occult path and plan, you can come back here, 
and teach us something useful that might lead to our own enlightenment and 
give us the means to become an effective "nucleus of Universal Brotherhood."

>As far as using "ad hominem arguments, YOU are doing this, not I (See your
>own words below and this will be quite clear). And as far as using "hypnotic
>mantras, and symbolic or spiritualistic ritual magic," and all the rest you
>say below, which I hope everyone will read, this is not only not me, but it
>is also not anyone. I personally am not attracted to magic, either "black"
>or "white." both of which not only repulse me, but only in conscious doing,
>which ultimately, if it is extended into GREATER DOING means simply helping
>other human beings to be more conscious.

Well, saying so doesn't make it so. Your actions do not follow your words. 
I did not accuse anyone of being "stupid," or use any other pejorative or "ad 
hominem" personal remarks in my comments -- as anyone can see who reads what 
I said below. Apparently, since you think I was referring to you with my 
suppositions of slippery grippery obfuscation, I guess, judging by all the 
overly self defensive and self promoting ad hominem counter attacks in your 
letters, that the shoe must fit. 

So, when you can thoroughly explain what you mean by "conscious doing" 
(although, I suspect its nothing more than Zen practice similar to the 
consciousness practices of WQJ as taught in his "Letters That Have Helped Me" 
and in his article "Culture of Consciousness" and other articles on the 
subject) and also explain what you mean by the "Greater Work" (which I 
suspect is nothing different than the practices of meditation given us in the 
Voice of the Silence and Patanjali's Yoga Aphorisms, as transliterated and 
notated by HPB and WQJ, that must be seen in conjunction with the 
instructions given out and Jnana yoga paths laid down by HPB on how to 
achieve the three objects of the TM leading to a Universal Brotherhood of ALL 
humanity) -- we might then believe you know what you are talking about and, 
possibly, learn something useful -- instead of trying to interpret your 
pointless jabbering, while defending HPB, ourselves and others from your 
sneering, non-logical and irrational knee jerk put downs and defamations of 
character. 

>It is true, as you say, that "those who have eyes to see and ears to hear
>willl know them by their fruits." And by the fruits of my activities,
>people will come to know me.

I can hardly wait for those fruitful activities. Although, so far, your 
fruits still appear to be what I surmised. When you show us differently, 
I'll apologize. 

>Finally, I do believe that in making this email, you are attempting to
>elicit a response from me, as I have not been on this list for a few days,
>and in this you have succeeded. Whether you like it or not, I am more
>capable and qualified of representling Madame Blavatsky and her teachings
>than are you, but of course this is a matter of opinion. If you stick to
>simple ideas and do not get so emotional that you are foaming at the mouth
>without really saying anything, you will have a better chance of connecting
>to the simple earth, which is the basis for the great Work. This message
>is made in the spirit of love and is not intended to harm you. Sincerely,

Again, whatever you say about yourself with relation to HPB and her teachings 
have yet to remain to be seen. There's no question of what I like or not. (I 
left such mundane things behind long ago.) And, when did I ever claim to 
represent HPB? That kind of hubris I never had. (Although, so far, I seem 
to have a much better handle on her Master's teachings than you seem to have 
-- if that means anything.:-) 

So, I'm eagerly awaiting proof of your claim. When you show you understand 
what "The Great work" is that you speak of so glibly, I'll stop "foaming at 
the mouth" and being so "emotional." (Ha, Ha) Besides, for us initiated 
Chohans (Kohanes, Khans, or "Lords" kabbalistically) who know the secrets of 
"creation" (having gotten them mouth to ear through the long lineage of their 
father's Fathers) -- only uninitiated women are emotional. Uninitiated men 
can only be "half crazy," and that's only when they think and act like women. 
;-) In the meantime, I know what I know, and will teach what I teach, and 
whoever gets it or not -- well, "the devil take the hindmost." (That's an 
occult Masonic metaphor, in case you didn't know. :-) 

So, lighten up kid. Universal Brotherhood can't be enforced. Each of us, 
alone, must practice it through our own individual actions in accord with our 
individual karma, duty, and circumstance. In theosophy, that's called 
"Living the Life." 

This materialistic world is going to hell in a hand basket no matter what you 
or I do. You can't build a new world, until the old one comes tumbling down. 
All we can do is learn and educate -- and hope for the best. In any event, 
when the materials are in place, the magician will appear. So, speaking for 
all true theosophists, if you don't stop us from doing our thing, we won't 
stop you from doing yours... So long as you don't step on our toes -- which 
happen to be tiptoeing through HPB's garden without trampling on any of her 
flowers. (All true theosophists who have studied the SD in depth, following 
the "lines laid down" by the Master, will know what I mean.) If you don't, I 
suggest you begin working on it.

LHM 

>Wry
>>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
>To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 4:22 PM
>Subject: Theos-World Re: re (The Grinch Revisited) or Practical Theosophy

>In a message dated 02/17/03 10:26:33 AM, mhart@idirect.ca writes:

(Referring to a previous post on this thread offering a practical path to 
universal brotherhood in a world based on property and govened by corporate 
enterprise, that actually might work -- suggested by Thomas Jefferson, an 
adept [according to HPB] founder of the USA) 

>>Sounds like a sampling of Theosophy in practice. If enough people
>>thought that way, who knows ...
>
>Thanks, Mauri. Yes, that's the kind of practical theosophy in "real world"
>action that might make the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity a practical
>reality someday. In my view it's the only way a "nucleus" (which is a
>central "point source" of attraction) can assemble around it a seed, which
>grows into a tree, and all the trees, together, produce the forest that
>can generate its own seedlings by affinity, reflection and emulation. 
>
>It's too bad my corporations never grew near the size of a Microsoft. 
>If they had, the world might have become a much different place today.
> But, then, karma works in strange ways. Now, all I can do is point out
>the way -- for others, hopefully, to carry out the practice. 
>
>Isn't it obvious that a true and lasting Universal Brotherhood can only
>come about when the public and private corporate vehicles of economic,
>cultural, social, and governmental support become "humanized" by giving
>them the conscience of their employees -- working together as mutually
>supportive brothers and brotherhoods of true compassion and practical 
altruism?
> Groups of theosophical students or members of any theosophical society,
>working for their own self realization, can accomplish nothing along those
>lines. Were each of those theosophists, however, to change the mind of
>one corporate owner into teaching and using the "employee ownership" and
>"multiple management" systems based on theosophical principles -- a real
>"Universal Brotherhood" could be turned into a fact practically overnight.
>
>That's what HPB and WQJ meant by "practical idealism" -- which is the 
>application of all the theosophical teachings that are necessary to fulfill 
the 
>three objects of the Theosophical Movement (now in its last and final 100 
>year cycle). The teachings are all out there. Now is the time to put them
>into practical use in the real world that we, all our children (and all
>their children) have to live in. 
>
>> (quoted by Wry.)
>> So, tell that to all the other bleeding heart dreamers and self centered
>> ego trippers who insist on bypassing and downgrading the teachings of
>> theosophy and its objects (that offers a solid foundation for such 
practical
>> application) to "feed" their own personal development, and/or who attempt
>> to form their own personally led, personality promoting "Sanghas" or
>> "organized brotherhoods" centered around a charismatic leader -- by 
>> infiltrating and taking over theosophy mailing lists with "hidden agendas" 
>> that use secret words, ad hominem arguments, hypnotic mantras, and 
>> symbolic or spiritualistic ritual magic, or proselytizing personal God and 
>> messiah oriented vicarious atonement, through blind beliefs and 
ritualistic 
>> practices that deny all the fundamental principles of theosophy, including 
>> the laws of karma and reincarnation. These are the "false prophets"
>> with their slippery grippery, mentally obfuscating babble that all the 
great 
>> Masters of Wisdom from Krishna to the Mahatmas have continually 
>> warned us about listening to or following. Those who have eyes to see, 
>> and ears to hear will know them by their fruits.
>>
>> So, maybe this is the place to "talk about such things"
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> LHM