Theos-Talk Archives (June 2003 Message tt00244)

Hi Bart and all of you,

Thanks for answering.

My views are only views and nothing else:

Yes your flag-answer, was in a certain sense expected. (And was received
with a honest and friendly smile.)

Some of my answers and views are in the below using ******* encapsulated.


And let us remember Bart, that you in this email CHANGES the subject
discussed from - wheather I used a vocabulary pointing towards - the issue -
as if what I wrote was the "final truth" (I quote you Bart).

I questioned in what manner this took place.
Bart wrote:
"Heavy use of phrases such as "the TRUE Theosophist KNOWS" (emphasis
> mine) do a lot in that direction."

Now in the below - you shift tatics and instead attack me with:
" In your case, the terminology you are using, regardless of your real
> opinions, makes you appear haughty and egotistical. "

Now the agenda is on wheather I am "haughty and egotistical" in my manner of
writing.


Bart please be honest about what you are doing.
You are not helping anyone - by shifting agenda and continously
attacking me in this manner.


I will have to terminate answering you if you continue
your "needle in the haystak hunt" by shifting subject and not answering
my answering emailed questions, which I am confronting you with.
I suggest, that you stick to the subject - or changes the email subject
line -
and makes a new email if you want your 'new hunt' to lead anywhere.
But there are certainly limits to this "needle in the haystak hunt" you are
doing in.
This debate is about to be terminated by me.

Be aware, that God - ParaBrahman is omnipresent.

Bart, - why do'nt you teach us all instead of this 'hunt for the needle in
the haystak' ?
What kind of altruism are you supporting ?
How do you learn others to learn ?
Please reconsider wheather your "email exchanging policy" are altruistic.

Please answer the questions Bart.
Or at least consider them.


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

from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...and Khizr with his funny Turban...




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bart Lidofsky" <bartl@sprynet.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Recruitment and education...


> Morten Nymann Olesen wrote:
> > 1.
> > > Bart wrote:
> > > "The following will almost only interest the more earnest students of
> > >Theosophy."
> > >
> > > That doesn't sound the least bit haughty or pretentious to you?
>
> > My Sufilight answer and views:
> > No ! You can ASSUME that I have some haughty or pretentious motives.
> > But is
> > this
> > a theosophical behavior to CLAIM, that I have such motives?
> > Is it Bart ? (Please answer.)
>
> I never claimed you had such motives. I said that your messages give the
> APPEARANCE that you have such motives, and, as such, overpower whatever
> else you're saying.
*******
My views are:
So I have to understand you so far as, that this sentence --- 
"I said that your messages give the APPEARANCE that you have such motives,
and, as such, overpower whatever else you're saying.",
--- which you wrote is NOT claiming anything ???

I disagree, so very much Bart.
If you say that something gives an appearance....- then you are claiming
that it is so and that it 'absolutely' gives such an appearance !
Is this not true Bart ?
Of course if you happend to be ironic - why did'nt you tell me and other
readers that from the beginning of this "needle in the haystak hunt" of
yours ?
Please do'nt waste our time.

I care.
If am wrong - then please be informative.

*******

>
> A prominent Theosophical speaker once pointed out to me that there are
> terms which he calls "red flags", because using those terms is like the
> proverbial waving a red flag in front of a bull; once those terms are
> used, they create such a strong negative emotional reaction that
> anything else in the message is lost.
>
> For example, I once reported at a TS meeting that, in scientific
> experiments, those who claimed to be able to travel astrally were not
> able to accurately describe the places where they visited, at least when
> the descriptions could be confirmed. Now, I pointed out, this either
> means that astral travel does not exist, or that the sense being
> interpreted as sight is an entirely difference sense being interpreted
> as sight, and therefore much gets misinterpreted. Therefore, clairvoyant
> visions may be real and highly inaccurate at the same time, due to the
> level of interpretation the viewer puts into it.
>
> What happened was that several members didn't listen to a word I said
> past "does not exist", and started yelling at me as if I had said that
> it doesn't exist, talking about all their favorite holy people who
> claimed to travel astrally. The phrase "astral travel does not exist"
> was a red flag to them; after they heard that, the rest was ignored,
> even though the rest was an attempt to reconcile their points of view
> with the results of experiments.
*******
My view are:
Yes. Interesting. And you say you yourself hav'nt got any red flags (at
home) ?
>:-) Smile.
*******
>
> In your case, the terminology you are using, regardless of your real
> opinions, makes you appear haughty and egotistical.

*******
My views are:
Well, yes Bart - so far according to nobody else but you.
But according to others on the list - is it then true ?
I will question that.
To others it may make me appear different than you can imagine !
Could this be true Bart ?
Anyone ?
What my imagination tells me, is that the little ego-fragment in lower
right corner of the aura - got triggered within some of the readers here at
Theos-Talk.
>:-) Please I do care.

My emails were - among other things - designed to do exactly that, when we -
among others - are talking about a special bread of Theosophists or
co-called Theosophist.
When some readers discover, that they infact are only refined Babarians -
who
are involved in some sort of ritual-tribalism, where in fact Emotions and
certain Beliefs is considered to be KNOWLEDGE or even WISDOM - then they
sometimes get embarrased (and their heads sometimes get very red) - and
sometimes a sharp tounged email gets thrown at me or others.

*******

Yes, H. P. Blavatsky
> used similar language sometimes, but the occasions were few and far
> between, and, to a certain extent, she had the right to say them,
> because she was starting the movement. And, to a certain extent, she
> turned off a lot of potential students by using them, as well.
>
> Bart
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>