Theos-Talk Archives (May 2003 Message tt00070)

Daniel wrote: <<Jerome's labelling of Johnson as a 
"fraudulent historian" and Steve's reference to 
Johnson's "dishonest and untalented detractors" only 
DISTRACT readers and inquirers from exploring the 
REAL historical issues and problems surrounding 
what Johnson has written about Blavatsky's Masters 
and what some of Johnson's critics have written in 
rebuttal. >>

Seems to me that there might be a somewhat general 
tendency out there, in general, to define "real" in 
somewhat various ways, even in Theosophical matters, 
apparently ... So if "relative reality" is relative with 
respect to ... If Theosophists know about the "reality 
basics" of this plane in terms of karma/maya, what 
could be the problem, unless ... Or is it that there 
might be a somewhat general tendency among humans 
to allow karma/maya to dictate the terms of reality 
above all else ... If so, if "reality" and "karma" are, in 
effect, One, wouldn't that still leave some room for 
"Higher Self," or something like that, maybe, in some 
cases ... Not that "Higher Self" can't have a karmic 
aspect, necessarily, in a sense, on this plane, 
but/"but"... Seeing as the Esoteric Tradition goes on 
about Liberation and Enlightenment, seems to me that 
there might be some ways of transcending not only the 
dictatorship of karma/maya, but, (or am I dreaming, 
again ...) I wonder if there might be some ways of 
transcending (even?) some of the squables among 
some Theosophical types, maybe, to some extent ... 
Not that some squables aren't particularly "useful" as 
"learning experiences," and whatever, but/"but"... 

Speculatively,
Mauri