Theos-Talk Archives (October 2003 Message tt00145)

Hi Mauri,
Here is Krishtar.
Thank you for your comments.
First of all, i think everybody understands what kind of respect i quoted in my last message.
It is the respect and consideration regards to differences in opinions.
I gess were all in this planet to learn the more we can, so internet e-groups are excellent for this purpose.
Secondly, I meant avatar as a Teacher, a Bhagavan, a "God incarnated" not potencially, which is very implicit in Theosophy.
I gess all these dictionary meanings and senses are not necessary here, andwe cannot always depend on dictionary and glossary consulting because I think we must learn to think theosophically, although my question is the avatarhood such as Lord Krishna or Jesus Christ´s.
I am so sorry for the situation on contemporary India, so many " Babas" and" Babajis" here and there...some living in palaces and mandirs, proclaiming supersticious beliefs, far away from the Upanishads and puranas true meanings, while the poor devotees are sometimes exploited in their goodwiling beliefs.
If we take a look at the spiritual situation of whe World we all can see that technology also brought, next to facilities of communication, a sort of sluggishness, an indolence, to reach the real meaning of the need the spirituality.
I see churches preaching a God that doen´t exist, an antropomorphism according to men´s needs and inclinations , just as i was done centuries ago.
A God outside the Nature.
How can theosophy´s purposed Brotherhood be applied in a world where one person still offends and also kills the other for differences in their beliefs?
My strongest opinion is that if Church had introduced the belief of reincarnation and the law of Karma in the entire world such as It did with the belief that of Christ´s Blood can save everybody no matter what he has done before - which tries to nullify the continuation of life and Karma - the world would be a better place to live.
IIf everybody in the world could preceive the truth on the belief that everything is alive, that animals and and plants are our fellows in the path toevolution, what a wonderful world it would be.
Utopia?

Krishtar

.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Mauri 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 11:54 AM
Subject: Theos-World re Avatars



Krishtara A. wrote: <<I can see there is a 
lot of discussion here and that is good, as 
long as respect is held..>>

I looked up the word "respect" in the 
dictionary, looking for more info or clues 
about what might be referred to, by some, as 
a more comprehensive definition of "respect," 
but then it occurred to me that "Theosophy 
itself" (wording that somebody brought out on 
another list) might be seen, by some, to 
offer some kind of clues and info about 
"respect" in a 
Theosophical/more-comprehensive sense.

<<A new question for the group: are there any 
Avatars in this world?>>

One might wonder how "Avatar" might be 
defined in whatever "more comprehensive" 
sense/context ... In other words, while 
"Avatar" may be seen, optionally, to be "more 
comprehensively" defined, eg, in a 
Theosophical glossary, I suspect that such 
defining would still leave room for various 
individual interpretations, interpretive 
tendencies, so, in practice, one person's 
"Avatar" could be, (possibly, I'm guessing), 
another person's ... whatever ... not that 
that state of things is anything new, but ...

So what if Theosophy were to be seen (or is 
it already?) as basically, (potentially?), 
offering the view that all humans are, in a 
sense, "potential Avatars" or "more-advanced 
types if only they could wake up to such 
realization," at any rate; and that, in order 
for one to appreciate such "advancement," in 
whatever general/particular interpretive 
sense, or in order for one to appreciate 
something about comparisons, or 
comparativity/relativity, (in whatever 
"exoteric" sense, at any rate), what if one 
(ie, "one" in a broader, general context?) 
were to, say, take up some form of, eg, 
"study of Theosophy" as a means of, say, 
(among other things!), gaining some kind of 
sense about "more comprehensive" ways of 
defning (however "exoterically" by 
"necessity") about various kinds of daily 
issues, which kind of "study" (per whatever 
karmic route) might, at some point, in some 
cases, (possibly, I suspect), lead to 
whatever forms of "recognition" or 
interpretiveness re such as "Avatars," even, 
in whatever "more comprehensive" sense, maybe 
(even though "presently"... whatever) ...

Speculatively,
Mauri

PS Incidentally, my quotes are often a 
replacement for "preferred" italics, in that 
there are people on these lists, apparently, 
who prefer to receive "plain text," meaning 
that, with such email settings, italics (eg) 
are (generally, in most cases?) automatically 
ironed out (I suspect, at any rate). In 
other words, I often use quotes in my posts 
in reference to "intended/additional 
meanings" that, I suspect, exoteric, or 
"regular," unmodified words might fail to 
convey, in some cases, occasionally, possibly 
... Not that my selective use of quotes 
necesSArily makes for some kind of "more 
comprehensive" interpetations at the 
receiving end, in some cases, I tend to 
suspect, but/"but" ...











   

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





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]