Theos-Talk Archives (April 2003 Message tt00034)

Hi. This is a great message (for me to reply to,. mainly because it is short
and cuts the grease in a way that I can cut the grease further, at the same
time as making this into a bridge. Remember, everyone, one of the main ways
I communicate, is by a technique I have named "layering." The stronger the
contrast between a so-called "negative" and a "positive", the stronger a
chord can be manifested from the middle, which something from the outside is
consciously using external circumstances to cup around in such a way that
the essential is conveyed, not by telling but by showing, This is intended
to be an act of love, but is it received as such? I believe so. as there is
a quality of inspiration which cannot manifest its oppoisite. If my messages
cause you discomfort or pain, I am sorry, as they are not intended to.
Please bear in mind that your messages are not causing me pain, though
sometimes they are saddening.

See below for further comments.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bart Lidofsky" <bartl@sprynet.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Re: [bn-study]MAY THE "LIST" CONTINUE: lesson 1


> leonmaurer@aol.com wrote:
> > 1. What theosophist or group of theosophists ever claimed that it was
> > an "object" of the Theosophical Movement to "form a Universal
> > Brotherhood"?

Wry: Seems to me I have heard this on theosophy lists many times, but maybe
I got it wrong. Who even cares. Go by your conscience and make each deed
count. I will ask, though, did Madame Blavatsky say, "Man should
aim"................." "finally and chiefly, to aid in the institutuion of
a Brotherhood of Humanity, wherein all good and pure men, of every race,
shall recognize each other as the equal effects (upon this planet) of one
Uncreate, Universal, Infinite and Everlasting Cause?" (I got this quote of
Madame Blavatsky from Dallas.) (Some) of you people are too much into
definitions and labels and carrying images of yourselves as "theosophists"
or whatever, in my opinion, but maybe I do this, too, in my own way.
>
> None, I believe. The Objects assume the Universal Brotherhood already
> exists, and does not need to be formed (by the way, I have pointed out
> that there IS a required belief in the Theosophical Society; in order to
> form a nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, one must
> believe that the Brotherhood already exists).

Wry: This is problematic and a good subject for further enquiry. A belief is
like dog s--t. Smear it on an act of "love" nd it will be contaminated. But
maybe I am wrong about this. If so, explain why and how. For instance, when
you love someone, is it more about seeing them, as they are, in all their
unique preciousness, or believing they are precious? When you love your cat
or your child, when there is a moment of pure and profound beauty, is it
attatched to belief?
>
> > 2. If someone doesn't accept the "Three Fundamental Principles" as
> > being absolutely valid and immutable propositions, can he/she call
> > him/herself a "theosophist"?

Wry: You are lost in the wrong details. I AM a theosophist, and we (or at
least EYE) should be going back to the words of Madame Blavatsky, and
examining them, under a finely tuned microscope. I Am capable of doing this
and will, when and if I get around to it, if not here, someplace else,
where there an even larger audience, though I would be perfectly happy to do
it here. I will be doing this because I conceive it to be my duty. (But I
have other duties, so do not be impatient).
>
> The Theosophical Society onnly requires that one agrees with the 3
> Objects; agreement with the Three Fundamental Principles is totally
> unnecessary. Even the Mahatmas did not claim that there was no chance of
> them being wrong, only that they, themselves, were convinced that they
> were right.
>
> > 3. How can anyone learn anything when they talk too much, prejudge
> > everything, waffle in the negatives, and say nothing positive?
>
> They can learn what it is to be obnoxious and disliked.

Wry: If you are talking about me, what is this I feel flowing in my
direction? It is love, coming from many people on theosophy lists. I
perceive myself to be the object of great affection.. This is the mystery
and the blessing of being pretty much free of negative emotions. The few
residues I am not free from, you will assist in setting up conditions for
the purification of
>
> > 4. For such persons -- what would be their intents and purposes in
> > haranguing a group of serious theosophists (among other students
> > listening in) who are discussing theosophy as the synthesis of
> > science, religion, and philosophy, along with its practical
> > applications in every field on all planes of reality?

Wry: It is shifted. I have explained about adjusting the tempo of the
functions, both on here, and especially on theos-talk. This is the single
most important topic, in my humble opinion, that anyone could possibly
broach to you. You do not yet grasp the profound implication and
significance of this and the time-appropriate gift of it. But that is just
you. Others on here may be more interested in seizing the bull by its horns
and even riding it.
>
> Beats the hell out of me. I can make guesses; perhaps they have been
> hurt badly by a person or group who called him/her/themselve/s
> Theosophical, and this is their way of getting revenge.

Wry: Well, this is, at least, an attempt at compassion. This so-called
"revenge" is a blessing. You just do not see it, but some do. Some people
are able to receive what others are not yet able to. Try to increase your
window of opportunity by looking at things from a different angle. Then
there will be "", and a different kind of breadth and depth to the ordinary
such that the ordinary will be transformed.. Perhaps I have a conscious use
for you, just as (I hope) you have a conscious use for me. Everything is to
be used. The beginning of creative love is learning how to use your
remainder as fertilizer for a garden. Are three hundred people reading this,
as Dallas has suggested? I doubt it, but sure do hope so. Go back over this
message if you think I am saying nothing. Sincerely, Wry
>
> Bart
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>