Theos-Talk Archives (June 2003 Message tt00235)

Hi Katinka and all of you,

Allright.
I conclude that we agree on your remarks in the below.

from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@katinkahesselink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 6:09 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Mahatma letters


> Hi Sufilight,
>
> First: You can't expect me to know which mails you are responding
> too, if you don't give a hint in the mail in question.
>
> Second: I am not ignoring you, obviously, so who is this mail
> adressed to?
>
> Third: I agree the Mahatma Letters aren't for everybody. Is that all
> you were trying to say? You have an awfully complicated way of saying
> it.
>
> Fourth: I think the Mahatma Letters should be taken as a whole. The
> Mahatmas corrected mistakes from previous letters, for instance. So
> that all in all they form a very interesting body of material. As I
> think HPB said: occultists will usually be right in generalities,
> while in details they may be wrong. Read from that perspective, I
> think these letters can be highly interesting. Still, as HPB also
> said:
>
> >> Collected Writings VOLUME XI, p. 466, October, 1889
> >> I speak "with absolute certainty" only so far as my own personal
> belief is concerned. Those who have not the same warrant for their
> belief as I have, would be very credulous and foolish to accept it on
> blind faith. Nor does the writer believe any more than her
> correspondent and his friends in any "authority" let alone "divine
> revelation"! >>
>
> Which means that to take anything on faith only is foolish (her
> words). Theosophists usually try to avoid this, though of course,
> individual people have their blind spots. Speaking for myself here
> (usually a wise course) I think the literature from the Mahatmas and
> Blavatsky is highly interesting. Where I don't know they're right, I
> let it drop into my consciousness as a question, not an answer.
>
> As in: HPB says this and that, now what does she mean, what truth
> does she hint at, is there anything behind it, is it important? (if
> it isn't important I don't bother with it, for instance the Atlantis
> and Lemuria questions)
>
> Katinka
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
> theosophy@a...> wrote:
> > Hi Katinka and all of you,
> >
> > My views in the below.
> >
> > Katinka wrote:
> > "You talk a lot about true theosophists - your version of them
> doesn't
> > seem quite human."
> >
> > My Sufilight answer:
> > And why does'nt it - seem - so?
> > And where does your word - "seem" - lead you?
> > It leads to assumptions, and that is just not Knowledge.
> > It is better to state that, - to some people - my version of "true
> > Theosophy" - makes them
> > embarrassingly aware of some of their own faults OR makes them
> ignore me.
> > And others
> > think that the words are allright...or something else. People are
> different.
> >
> > Katinka wrote:
> > "If a mahatma writes about their
> > own work that it should not be studied, that is quite a different
> > matter than somebody else saying: this shouldn't be studied. "
> >
> > My Sufilight answer:
> > I have one question: Who said, that the Mahatma Letters at all cost
> > should'nt be studied ?
> > I did certainly NOT. So why did you reach such a conclusion? I
> answered your
> > question from an earliere email about something quite different.
> > But if - as a fact and not as a belief - 80% of the readers here at
> > Theos-Talk would waste their time reading all of the Mahatma
> Letters - then
> > one aught to rethink encouraging them to do so ! Even so if you -
> your self
> > (or anybody else) think that they are - just so extremly good - and
> written
> > with high leveled Wisdom.
> > I encourage people to think on various levels. I am against
> encouraging
> > people to have a fanatical attitude when looking at the Mahatma
> Letters or
> > talking about them. Who knows which one of them is false ?
> > And maybe one or more of them are ! Well maybe...
> > And maybe one or more are true ! Well maybe...
> > But will it help anyone to claim that - xx - of them are allright
> and - yy -
> > are bad.
> > I do'nt think so, that is - unless you want to encourage fanatical
> > behaviour.
> > It is allright, that some want others to respect teachers - in a
> balanced
> > manner. But stupidity should'nt be encouraged. But this is just my
> view -
> > remember.
> >
> >
> > Katinka wrote:
> > "I think
> > it is far more reasonable to say: study and find out for yourself. "
> >
> > My Sufilight answer:
> > "Yes exactly. But one could consider, what I have suggested in my
> previous
> > emails on this matter. That would'nt hurt anyone interested -
> except those
> > who cling to dead-letter Theosophy or who think that Belief is the
> same as
> > Knowledge (or even Wisdom) and a few others here at Theos-Talk.
> > With other words - think about HOW you study. Do not fool your small
> > ignorant selves
> > into thinking that the Mahatma Letters actually serves EVERYONE
> anything
> > good, - because that will most certainly be a Theosophical lie.
> > Important is, that Time and place for reading, - and the same on
> > sorroundings, people, teacher(s) and pupil(s), - should rather be in
> > harmony - than not.
> > If you aught to help a friend of yours which you know are in need, -
> you
> > do'nt start
> > of by reading the Mahatma Letters if that goes against this most
> highest
> > priority of helping
> > your friend. Everything in due time - and even sometimes NEVER."
> >
> >
> >
> > And I can only hope that this helped the readers.
> > Feel free to comment or do your best...
> >
> > from
> > M. Sufilight with peace and love...
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>