Theos-Talk Archives (July 2003 Message tt00039)

Hi Wry and all of you,

My views are only views - and that is a fact:

My view is, that as long as you are personally oriented towards me and as
long as your focus is'nt on the teaching, and what you can learn by it, -
then you are not quite ready to learn anything.
There are other teachings - like the Bhagavad Gita for instance. Subba T.
Row has made an excellent commentary on it. It is online to read. Maybe you
like this much better ?

You can email me privately if you want to make any critisism about me
personally. In that manner we do'nt interfer with the readers at Theos-Talk
and their interests.
(If you do'nt email me privately - you may ask your self why ?)
Others may of course do the same.

I politely ask:
What is your background and motivations by being here ?


Allegorical teachings are not for everyone to benefit from at anytime.
Some persons are too emotional or they do'nt teach when they aught to
or...etc...

The story about the "Two Swords" was about this.



Feel free to do something GOOD...

from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "wry" <wry1111@earthlink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 7:34 PM
Subject: Theos-World To Morton


> Hi Morton. I have read your recent email to me. I will comment the best
can, You are trying to present certain material, which you perceive to be
important, to some theosophists. You are saying that first they need to know
how to learn. when to learn, and what to learn, and apparently you are not
lumping yourself in with this bunch.The way I see it, learning is an
individual matter. It starts with an inner question, or at least with an
open curiosity, even if it is only a five year old with a receptivity to the
alphabet. The mind is fresh and there are no preconceptions. To present new
material to people whose minds are made up is very difficult. Why would a
person want to do this when there are so many places on the internet where
minds are not made up and people are more open and curious? My guess is that
you (or I or whoever) have a vested interest. If it involves a conscious
aim, it is between each person and his "God," but if it is a matter of
personality, this is something, admittedly very hard to see, which we need
to look at. I have learned a lot from attempting to communicate on here.
One thing I have learned about myself is that I am a person who tends to
idealize people and situations. It is a form of optimism that is not always
reality based in that it is a movement away from grieving.
>
> Quite honestly, though you have some good ideas, I cannot relate to your
material. It is too confusing. I do not think you yourself know , as you
have put it, "how to learn, when to learn, and what to learn." Of course
this is just one person's opinion. I do not believe you understand how to
present new material in such a way that it can be appropriately assimilated
or even know enough to know which material to present and when, and all of
this is assuming that you know something important that others on here do
not. Personally I have seen no evidence of this. In any case, when you tell
people they do not know how to learn, I have no evidence that this helps
them learn. For instance, when I tell you that what you said applies to
yourself, what do you learn from this?
>
> Where there is learning, there is inspiration. Is there inspiration on
theos-talk? Yes there is, as I personally, at times, am an inspired human
being, and I believe that at times for fractions of a second, or seconds,
there are others. (This makes me w want to investigate why I am only
inspired on rare occasion and the prospect of following this question to the
end fills me with great joy). My sense is, though, that nothing we say or do
on this list is going to have that much effect on theosophists as a whole,
but maybe it will effect a few who will go on and do interesting work. .
>
> Re a few questions and comments in your message: I was referring to the
second article you gave a link to. Re Katinka, she was doing a form of
cross-talking, which is not that great, though we all do it on occasion, but
since she was saying something favorable about Bart, it was no big deal and
not the way you painted it. Bart is a straight forward person with his feet
on the ground, who is not going to go floating up in the clouds or get lost
there and is also not going to make false accusations against people. There
is a tone of grandiosity to your messages, in my opinion, and he pointed
this out to you. If you put NEW material into what you write, in such a way
that people's curiosity is stimulated and real learning begins to occur,
people will be too interested to criticize you, in that they will not care
if you sound like a mahatma or not.
>
> One last comment on your writings on the two links you posted. To my mind,
they are very mixed up and you should erase them. If I had time, I would
criticize them point by point, but I do not. I am trying to write emails on
here that can in some way be beneficial to a whole bunch of people. To
conclude, you have some good ideas, but you do not, in my opinion, know how
to present them. In general, your "knowledge" is immature and ridiculously
incomplete. You are prone to floating away into intoxicating states, not bad
in itself, if your feet could stay connected to the ground, but they cannot
and do not and you end up floating away into the nether and taking others
with you. Because of you, I may have to leave this list for a while, as this
is turning out to be a waste of time. Sincerely, Wry
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>