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

Re: Theos-World Wry speaks to Leon. Part Two

Feb 21, 2003 10:33 AM
by wry

Hi Leon. I have just finished reading your reply to me. It was very long,
and I believe your are ranting and raving to a ridiculous degree. I can
almost see the foam. If I were to respond to everything in your message,
point by point, I do not believe most people would read it, nor do I believe
it is even necessary to counter your ridiculous points, as you do not have
much of a grasp of how to put material together in such a way that it can be
actively assimilated, so, generally speaking, all of this crap that you are
insinuating about me is also going to go in one ear and out the other and
therefore not affect anyones opinion about me to any degree that is
significant. If you ever want to really communicate with me (or anyone), I
suggest you stick to one or two simple points at a time.

So, because you have raved so much it would take up too much time to answer
you, I will comment on my own message, which you have criticized. See

----- Original Message -----
From: "wry" <>
To: <>
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 10:52 AM
Subject: Theos-World Wry speaks to Leon. Part One

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 4:22 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: re (The Grinch Revisited) or Practical Theosophy
> 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.

This is re. your comment that an element cannot be broken apart: This was a
wrong choice of words, and thanks for pointiong it out. I should have
said-- mechanically formed sets in which certain concepts or relationships
are erroneously linked together by the emotions, or by extrapolation onto a
continuum on an intellectually erroneous preconclusion-- or something like
that. An example would be, if someone has an unpleasant experience with
someone of a certain race and gets very angry and than forever afterwards
responds to everyone from that race with a stereotyped reaction. I am not
saying you are a racist, but your thinking is permeated by this kind of
emotional generalization and intellectual preconclusions with an emotional
flavor behind them.

> 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 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 write
> this group and broader humanity, as well as for myself and not just
> reactively to release pressure.

You have asked me to explain the above, which is one real question you have
asked. The above is the key to everything I am saying and doing. Actually I
have recently been going into this subject on another list we are on,
(something about brain cells in the stomach), but will approach it
differently here, little by little and at my own speed and in my own way, if
I even continue.

> A "sangha" in the Buddhist sense is a spiritual community that is
> 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
> this term here, is a community in which each member not only works for
> himself, but for the good of the whole group.

It is true that I am trying to use this list in a way that is meaningful to
me. In my opinion, everyone should try to shape an environment in a way that
it will be better, not only for himself, but for everyone else. This is
where individual discrimination comes in. Different people will have
different ideas about what is "good."

> If you think I am "taking over this group," that is a big compliment, but
> 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-being of this group in mind and enough simple wisdom to
> 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
> 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
> can do to stop it, except to commit a sin that is unforgivable, to use
> Christian terminology.

What you say is true. There is an suble suggestion that I am "the cream,"
but I was also thinking of some other members when I wrote this. Maybe, if
find the cream within ourselves and bring it to the top in a certain way,
things will connect differently, and everything will make sense very easily.

> 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
> mantras, and symbolic or spiritualistic ritual magic," and all the rest
> say below, which I hope everyone will read, this is not only not me, but
> 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
> which ultimately, if it is extended into GREATER DOING means simply
> other human beings to be more conscious.

You did suggest in your message that somone was attempting to use "ritual
magic" on this list. Who were you referring to? Please answer.

Re. Sangha, you have misunderstood me. It has an inner as well as an outer
meaning. You will need to figure it out for yourself, if you ever can. I do
not advocate the practice of any organized religion, though I am not against
any individual doing it if it is meaningful to himself, nor do I believe in
the perpetration of authority, though there is what has been called "a
natural authority." Again, as I have previously suggested, the cream always
rises to the top, unless it is unnaturally supressed. Let's hope that is the
case here. Let's get it on the record that I am NOT trying to undermine the
teaching of Madame Blavatsky, but it is important to examine carefully what
she is saying and how she has set it up, and I believe she would expect
people to do this. I will get more specific, little by little. I work very
slowly. As far as her teaching continuing to be time appropriate, this is
never the case with any teaching. It is always designed for specific people
at a specific time and with a specific aim and purpose in mind. It is
conceivable, but highly unlikely, that a teaching could be designed that has
within it a cleansing or self-correcting factor, but I have not seen this
yet, but it would have to do with the development of human CONSCIENCE, as
everything hinges on that. Sincerely, Wry
p.s. You have suggested on a few occasions that you might consider yourself
to be a certain kind of cream, but let's remember, the proof is in the
pudding. We would want to look for a certain consistency and texture, as
well as quality of freshness and flavor, wouldn't we, for a certain kind of
really good pudding.

> 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.
> 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
> to the simple earth, which is the basis for the great Work. This message
> made in the spirit of love and is not intended to harm you. Sincerely,
> > 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
> to
> > form their own personally led, personality promoting "Sanghas" or
> "organized
> > brotherhoods" centered around a charismatic leader -- by infiltrating
> > taking over theosophy mailing lists with "hidden agendas" that use
> > words, ad hominem arguments, hypnotic mantras, and symbolic or
> spiritualistic
> > ritual magic, or proselytizing personal God and messiah oriented
> > 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
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >
> >
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

[Back to Top]

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