Theos-Talk Archives (May 2003 Message tt00244)

Hi Everyone. Where I come from, everyone is an idiot. Again, I hope I am
a -- unique idiot--.

I love this list and hope I never get kicked off of here. If I do, I will
start my own theosophy list with open archives, but, do not worry. If this
ever happens, I am not an enemy of theosophy, and no harm will come of it.
If anyone on here has gotten anything out of my messages, the best is yet to
come. I personally have had a lot of reactions when people were having
political arguments and there were thirty or more messages a day, seven or
so being from Dallas, not counting his cross postings from other lists, and
also at a few other times, and quite frankly have been quite identified on
occasion. I cannot honestly say that an impartial camera was recording these
reactions most of these times. Saying this out here gives me great joy in
that it encourages me to approach my day, today. now, with a little bit more
intent.

Quite a while back Paul posted a message on here which I never responded to,
but was quite good, in which he said that great teachers were also imperfect
human beings, as no one is perfect (these were not his exact words. I am
paraphrasing). I believe it is important to realize and understand the
important concept of any good teachings being time-appropriate, and
therefore, in a sense, experimental. (Ordinary I would only touch on this
once, but in this particular group, it is extremely important to keep
hammering this point home until people understand it. Much benefit, and no
harm of any kind, will come from understanding this. It is always trial and
error, to a certain degree. Even with people who have greater knowledge,
there is a continuous adjustment and fine tuning of ones approach. Sometimes
entire avenues are abruptly abandoned, gears are shifted, alliances broken
or whatever. It is very common, and there are reasons for this. Nothing is
fixed in stone (except sleeping people). Teachers do the best they can in
this respect, not being perfect. This includes, in my opinion, all the great
spiritual teachers of humanity. If anyone thinks Madame Blavatsky was
perfect or presented her material perfectly, this is, in my opinion, an
idealization that is in contradiction to her own professed aim and purpose,
and is actually quite insidious. And my guess is that an idealist could not
establish any kind of universal brotherhood, as he would invariably handle
material in a way that is so broad that he would miss the specifics of how
to do accomplish anything significant.

II would also like to take this opportunity to comment on the formation of
sangha, as I have been accused of trying to form a "sangha" out here of
which I will be the so called leader. The material I put out here about
sangha, as I have mentioned before, was intended to have an allegorical
content. Sometimes it is very obvious that certain material is allegorical.
At other times it is so subtle that one is almost bound to miss it. I will
have more to say in the future on this subject. Sometimes in oral Buddhist
teachings, a teacher will code you in with a certain seemingly obscure
comment, or even a gesture, such as touching the ear. I have seen it time
and time again, and people who have been studying Buddhism for many years
invariably miss it. Sometimes, most of the time, I do not believe anyone
gets it. This, in itself, is most amazing and even extraordinary, in that
the teacher never quits presenting material in this format. Am I the only
person on the internet who is writing messages regarding the understanding
of allegorical material? This may seem far fetched, but sometimes life is
funny. Anyone who may appreciate my presence on here, remember, any of us
may be leaving at any time.

I have much to say on the subject of "being-bodies," this being my special
subject of interest. I actually became a student of Tibetan Buddhism only
for the reason that I wanted to find out more about this. It is hard to
believe, but I attended teaching for more than ten years before I began to
receive even a glimmering of understanding of this subject. I may not be
able to spend as much time on here as I am starting a learning center, but I
will make as many messages as I can, and if there is ever a good enquiry, I
will be back. Sincerely, Wry


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Meredith" <bill_meredith@earthlink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2003 11:13 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: [bn-study] RE: REINCARNATION SUPPORTED -- Ocean
Ch. .10


> If Wry really is an idiot, then, on these forums, she is harmless enough.
> Why then do we respond to the idiot at all? On the other hand, if Wry's
> comments make us uncomfortable by calling into question the very pillars
of
> our accepted spiritual understanding (belief system) and we respond by
> declaring that an idiot is among us, perhaps we are nearer the truth than
we
> dare to accept.
>
> I have learned much by watching myself react to Wry's writings. For that
> opportunity to see myself, I am thankful.
>
> Bill
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Maynard Smith" <may74nard@yahoo.com>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 8:25 PM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: [bn-study] RE: REINCARNATION SUPPORTED --
Ocean
> Ch. .10
>
>
> >
> > --- wry <wry1111@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > Because of
> > > me more new people will be coming to theosophy and >
> > staying here.
> >
> > Paranoid may be the wrong word but delusional
> > certainly is not. Wry, you are an idiot.
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>