Theos-Talk Archives (May 2003 Message tt00110)

Hi Dallas and all of you,

Thanks for answering.
My views and answer to your email Dallas:

1.
Now I have mailed you at least two times. And two times you, as I see it,
have refused
to give a clear answer to my questions. I wonder why ?

If this email is not answering my previously put questions - or others
are mailing their views, - then I will terminate this debate on my part for
a while.
Such kind emailing should not continue.

2.
Instead, you have tried to as one quite clearly can see
to insinuate, that I have some strange motives with my emails:
* As if I thought of Theosophy containing "stifle thinking".
* As if I were in doubt about whether Theosophy was worth while studying.
* As if I didn't think, that everone has a "free-will", although limited by
their ignorance.
* As if I didn't think, that "There are many ways and approaches to study
and learning."

And let us remember, that we have emailed with each other before, - and more
than just a few times .
At least I have.

Even so we agree on this:
* And, through brotherhood we try to assist each other.
* "One of our problems is language -- as sometimes the necessary
definitions of analogies are not easily available, or if available, are not
always understood at first reading."
* "Everyone is free to consider and decide, and determine if what is offered
is wrong or delusive. "
* "It might be good to hear from others on this subject."

3.
And inspite of this, you now think that I am about to seek to obstruct
others
in their endeavours.

Dallas YOU wrote:
"The question really is: Ought any one obstruct others in their
endeavours to secure, check, verify, confer, present, or discuss information
as to what THEOSOPHY TEACHES?"

My answer:
Mybe it is just me. But, I think it is sadening to see such a remark coming
from a long-time student
as you Dallas. You are accusing me of obstructing members on this list
called Thes-Talk ! Get real Dallas.
I have clearly only questioned the readers.
I have through the last 2-3 emails pointed out by questioning, whether
the teaching method of "UNENDING crossreferencing and
indexing"
--- really IS --- 
"what a true Theosophist and a initiate would call proper, spiritually
adequate when
talking about place, time, the people involved, the teaching, the students,
the teacher(s), the surroundings etc.. ?"

I questioned whether it not would be more advaisable or clever (by some
members at Theos-Talk) to put more emphasis on other teaching methods, and
promote within the readers here at Theos-Talk
emailing skills, which to a higher degree involved themselves formulating
with their own words,
what they thought, intuitively perceived etc... ?

4.
I did certainly NOT tell you or anyone by dictate, what to do.
I offered simply a view and asked some question and made some statements.

5.
Dallas YOU wrote:
"This is a list named " blavatsky.net-STUDY," "THEOS-TALK" and
"THEOS-WORLD," etc...
Each gives subscribers the freedom to read, and the study of
theosophy is implied and given here.
Need more be said?"

My answer:
Yes of course Dallas have ANYONE said anything else ?
I just question whether is it allright (spiritually) to continue DAY after
DAY to act in a manner, which clearly
with commen reason could be questioned to be DUBIOUS AT BEST :
I.e. the use of extreme emphasis on - UNENDING crossreferencing and
indexing etc. etc... ?
Well, if the readers want "scholarship", then that is certainly what they
will
get - by using only this teaching method. But will it develop the "inner
organ" -
will there be clear spiritual progress - or just another Scholar created -
making more or less lenghty scholary emails etc. etc. ???
The answer blows in the Karma wind.

6.
Yes. FOHAT has to do with - change and Karma.
The oneness between the Master and the disciple is
NOT total. They are working on the issue so to speak.

7.
And then you, as I see it, continue your email in the below with some
funny noise about computers etc..- and avoid
by all means possible to answer the questions I
did serve in the 2 past emails. And then the "7 planes" are presented
and a finishing story about a "Disc" etc..

So the question is: What some members here at Theos-Talk call harmony in the
below "Disc" version, - is it
just NOT another word for - being limited,
and unwilling to change ?

Because to me "HARMONY" involves the
capeability to change and adapt to - (and yes - guess what ! ) - the time,
persons involved,
the students, the teacher(s), the situation, the teaching, the surroundings
etc...
AND this involves according to me the capeability to
use the proper teaching methods, when needed here at Theos-Talk and
elsewhere.
And Dallas, that will be a spiritual one - not doing mere scholarship !

Come on Dallas >:-)

Feel absolutely free to comment or do your best...


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...









----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: "AA-BN--Study" <study@blavatsky.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 3:20 AM
Subject: Theos-World RE: Cross-referencing and the like...


> Saturday, May 10, 2003
>
> RE: Cross-referencing and the like...
>
> Dear M, and friends:
>
>
> THEOSOPHY has been defined as "synonymous with ETERNAL TRUTH."
> That makes it old. In India it is referred to as the "Eternal
> Doctrine," SANATANA DHARMA.
>
> Everyone is free to read, or not read; to use, or not use; to
> think, or not to think.
>
> The question really is: Ought any one obstruct others in their
> endeavours to secure, check, verify, confer, present, or discuss
> information as to what THEOSOPHY TEACHES?
>
> This is a list named " blavatsky.net-STUDY," "THEOS-TALK" and
> "THEOS-WORLD," etc...
>
> Each gives subscribers the freedom to read, and the study of
> theosophy is implied and given here.
>
> Need more be said?
>
> Any student scholar (Master or chela) of THEOSOPHY knows that
> "Parabrahm" is a Sanskrit word used in Hindu philosophy as the
> source of the modern expression: the ABSOLUTENESS -- the eternal
> and inscrutable background of all.
>
> FOHAT or DAIVIPRAKRITI, is that aspect of the ABSOLUTE which we
> know of as KARMA -- the great universal and Intelligent Law --
> that animates ( by Jivatma ) all things, and sets disharmonies
> into accord. It is, one might surmise, the CAUSELESS CAUSE. Its
> function is to ceaselessly destroy old and used forms, and
> simultaneously, it is recreates (by recombination of the same
> component, eternal elements) those new forms needed for the
> continuous development of all Spirit-Beings. Nothing in the
> entire Universe escapes its vigilance and compassionate
> attention. We, humans are specially included in this effort.
>
> In this fashion the whole Universe is endlessly cross-indexing
> itself in matter and the directions come from the world and plane
> of the One Spirit that animates all from within each.
>
> The "Master" and the "disciple" are alike ONE with EACH OTHER,
> and with ALL ELSE.
>
> It is our psychic and personal self that erects barriers against
> this inner LIGHT. As I see it, our present task is to define and
> eliminate those obstructions. The fight is within.
>
> We need to periodically remind ourselves that in our ESSENTIAL
> NATURE the HIGHER SELF of each one of us is ATMA -- a "Ray" of
> the universal SPIRIT (AIN-SOPH).
>
> This is a brotherhood of cooperation.
>
> As to analogies:
>
> May I offer the following to show how pervasive and essential LAW
> is?
>
>
> 1
>
> THE COMPUTER AND INTERNET
>
>
> Consider our use of computers and the facility of the INTERNET.
>
> In all aspects it is based on a single factor: The exactitude in
> mathematics as in physical construction of the components needed
> in the apparatus, and the method of transmitting information of
> whatever kind.
>
> Mathematics is a limited expression of the ABSTRACT LAW of
> Justice and exactitude in to me and space.
>
> Perfect manufacture of physical apparatus demands purity of
> materials and an absolutely rigid adherence of all components and
> respondents to the standards adopted and used universally.
>
> This is obedience to the UNIVERSAL LAW of computing and of
> MESSAGE TRANSMISSION.
>
> Intelligent inter-action can only be assured in its accuracy and
> integrity by such conditions.
>
> Do we object to them? No, we understand, respect, adopt and use
> them deliberately.
>
>
>
> Here is another interesting fact:
>
>
> 2
>
> SEVEN PLANES OF BEING and SEVEN PRINCIPLES
>
>
>
> Take as an example a glass of pure water.
>
> Let this represent SPACE
>
> Let the water be here the representative of the ONE SPIRIT
>
> We can change its heat.
>
> We can alter its color with dye.
>
> We can alter its taste, say with the addition of salt,
>
> We can make it opaque by adding some impurity that blocks light.
>
> It is transparent to sound and will transmit all frequencies
>
> It is transparent to electro-magnetic radiation. All frequencies
> are transmitted.
>
> It permits "Cosmic Rays" to traverse it.
>
>
> Here are 7 ways to look at the water and its serving (as SPACE
> does) without itself hindering l these 7 influences from
> operating simultaneously. And, as water, it contains all of
> these and does not limit them in their own activities.
>
>
> A third example:
>
>
> 3
>
> DISC of the THREE QUALITIES OF NATURE
>
>
> Take a picture of a disc and place it on a sheet of paper.
>
> Divide it into three equal parts.
>
> Name them as follows:
>
> SPIRIT (Life, Consciousness) --
>
> ACTION (Mind and will) --
>
> INERTIA (Substances and forms of Matter)
>
>
> For any kind of life or progress, all three have to be brought
> into a functioning harmony [see how BHAGAVAD GITA , Chapters 14
> and 17 explains this]
>
> Any one is aways equipoised by the other two.
>
> Spirit is recognized by contrast with Matter (inertia). The Mind
> serves as via media.
>
> Action is produced when Spirit animates Matter.
>
> Inertia (Matter) is used as a base by Spiritual Action -- (Mind
> and Will)
>
>
> Perhaps these are not the best illustrations, but I find (for me)
> that they have use in almost all discussions.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dallas
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> as always,
>
> Dallas
>
> =====================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morten
> Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 1:01 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Cross referencing and the like...
>
> Hi Dallas and all of you,
>
> Some views:
> It seems, that you have still not have quite understood, what I
> am referring
> to.
>
> Of course each of us has a free will to decide.
> I did NOT say that Theosophy has anything to do about "stifle
> thinking".
> But, I questioned whether using only UNENDING crossreferencing
> and indexing
> would
> actually help the readers here at Theos-Talk developing their
> "inner organ",
> i.e. their understanding of the words ParaBrahman and Fohat - and
> how
> closely related to their
> OWN consciousness and conscience they really are ?
>
> To Dallas and the readers: What is your answer to the above ?
> I often find timely put allegories and other teachings much
> better.
>
> CUT
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>