Theos-Talk Archives (August 2003 Message tt00128)

Sorry I don't recognize the reference. What articles? Whose
?Best wishes,

Dallas

===========================

-----Original Message-----
From: Bambang Budihardja [mailto:bambvx@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2003 6:40 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Theos-World Past issues

Dear Dallas,

Sometimes ago you mention that the articles are
archived under master list ? where can I find it ?
Please advise.

Regards

Bambang B

--- dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:
> Aug 22 2003
>
>
> Dear Joe
>
>
> This morning I have sent in some answers on similar
> questions.
> Did you see them? They were strongly worded.
>
> "Leadership" in Theosophy does not exist regardless
> of titles and
> officer-ships or any other thing. There are none
> among us that
> are not students and owe our knowledge to the gifts
> made by
> others who have "gone before." We might recognize
> in some the
> result of great study, and they may have unseen
> faults we know
> nothing of. But learning alone does not constitute
> leadership.
> We are on our own all the time and Karma sees to it.
> The coming
> together of those who are truly interested in
> studying Theosophy
> is because several heads, studying together
> generally leads to better results for all. Small
> groups of
> students are generally the order of the day. But no
> one may
> pretend to "lead" the rest. Theosophy alone ought
> to lead us all
> to assist one another.
>
> The VEHICLE for Theosophical doctrines (books,
> lettres,
> associations, etc...) and truths is not the basis
> and fact of
> THEOSOPHY. The two are to be plainly distinguished.
>
> The basis and theorems of geometry exist regardless
> of the abuses
> made by users and students. An exact analogy.
>
> The vicissitudes and errors or successes of various
> individuals
> who have associated themselves with the modern
> THEOSOPHICAL
> MOVEMENT may be read about and catalogued as we
> please. It is
> the history of personal struggle by our
> predecessors, and ought
> to lead us to learn from what has already happened.
>
> But the history of those individuals working as such
> in the TM is
> not a criterion for the judging of THEOSOPHY. That
> judgment is
> obtained by our devotion to study and to leaning
> what it actually
> is and how we can use it..
>
> THEOSOPHY IS NOT A RELIGION nor does it proselyte
> for adherents.
> It is an age old PHILOSOPHY which has for basis only
> the
> impartial and universal LAWS of all Nature -- which
> is considered
> to be GOD - DEITY - in the highest and truest
> sense.
>
> Mathematicians and Physicists do to establish
> schools. They are
> employed to teach laws of Nature -- impartial and
> universal. So
> Theosophy does not establish schools I would say
> that our
> present environment is this "THE SCHOOL" -- and we
> are all in
> it. That is, if we accept the idea that our world
> and universe
> are Lawful -- it has always existed (though under
> other names).
>
> How does one go about to argue concerning arithmetic
> or
> astronomy? Or Chemistry ? Experimental results can
> be
> challenged and experiments repeated with great care.
> But the
> fundaments and basis don't change. We learn greater
> detail of
> the operations of Nature down to the vanishing point
> of our
> ability to record changes in energy and still it
> runs UNDER LAWS.
> Expanding our view of the UNIVERSE (we have such
> marvelous new
> telescopes) we find the same thing -- law and
> harmony. Why
> should humanity be suddenly excluded ?
>
> Why do we doubt that, that does not also pertain to
> human
> psychology and spiritual progress ?Why doe we doubt
> the SPIRIT in
> Man and are daily confronted with his THINKING and
> his WILL to
> make changes ? How this independence? What causes
> it? Where
> does it lead us ?
>
> The various Messages (and letters or words, from
> whatever source)
> have all to be taken in that sole context. The
> opinions of
> persons are still opinions -- Knowledge and facts
> are for the
> recipients and the senders to determine, not us. Ow
> as an
> instance: How many are presently STUDYING the
> MAHATMA LETTERS ?
> Who knows those marvelous letter well ? Who is
> studying The
> SECRET DOCTRINE ? How many are conversant with its
> contents and
> methodology of instruction ? Reading once of twice
> is no basis
> for decision making. Are we to follow the
> semi-literate? If so
> what do we gain? Are not to study for ourselves?
>
> Ask yourself how many "Christians" really know their
> BIBLE ? I
> don't take the OLD TESTAMENT of the Jews into
> account. But just
> what Jesus taught ? Who honors Him with applying
> his philosophy
> ? Are we sailing under "false colors?"
>
> Under those terms only the MASTERS are true
> THEOSOPHISTS, the
> rest of us are STUDENTS, each in our own degree of
> advance.
> Making comparisons is therefore quite impossible.
> All that any
> of us can do is to show others what they have
> studied, and
> encourage them to do their own studying. The errors
> of our world
> are universally the result of laziness and seeking
> for someone
> who will: "TELL US WHAT TO DO." We have to learn
> to think and
> act on our own. We are no loner children.
>
> Theosophy is obviously also RAJA-YOGA. But we don't
> have the
> ability to determine the least degree of value in
> statements made
> to others. We can look at H P B's definitions and
> articles and
> select for ourselves some (or all) of the criteria
> -- and then
> seek to understand and apply them.
>
> We have to impersonalize our efforts, and this is
> done by
> observing carefully the injunction: we have to try
> our best to
> serve others -- brotherhood -- is inclusive and not
> divisive.
>
> Of course thee are only my views as culled from a
> study of
> Theosophy. Others may see things differently. But,
> what are
> their bases ? Can they explain as theosophy does ?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Dallas
>
> ============================
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 3:22 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Theosophical leadership
>
> Dallas,
>
> Verily a paradox we have here now. A movement which
> is supposed
> to
> be creedless, and with the objects (VERY loosely
> stated) of a)
> Promoting Universal Brotherhood, b) encouraging
> study of
>
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/