Theos-Talk Archives (December 2003 Message tt00023)

Hallo Dallas and all of you,

My views are:

Time is valuable.
Maybe TIME is even too valuable to use up by emailing !

There are appeantly two views on the issue.
1. There the - "bact to the past" theosophists.
2. And there are "Back tot he future" theosophists.
(The pro-Baileys like to pride themselves in being a member of the last
category.)

There are of course also some persons in between these views.
There are also those who think that BOTH views are important
to promote - and they in fact DO that. (The Boston Theosophists are one such
group I think - although they are maybe only on the Bailey-level of the
past).

I think there is a saying:
It is bad to be a young fool.
But it is much worse to be an old one !

This is said in a polite manner - please do not misunderstand it negatively.
The idea is to develop us all.

The people of the "past" so to speak will have and already has many
difficulties in explaining why the --- so very old theosophical texts --- 
absolutely has to be interpreted in the manner they themselves think is
important to promote.
Their conscience tells them, that their use of anicent texts are only
secondhand - and that their INTERPRETATIONS are only of the past.

And let us remember that Bailey's book A Treatise on Cosmic Fire was a as it
is said a Masters (5th initiates) INTERPRETATION of a MahaChohan's(6th
initiates) writing --- namely The Secret Doctrine !!!
--- Is it not quite silly ? ---

A few days back I wrote á series of 3 emails called
THE ISLANDERS part 1-3. Maybe they aught to be examined one more time - by
the use of analogy.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/13178


I do care, and I write this so that we all may learn.


from
M. Sufilight with peace nad love...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@earthlink.net>
To: "AA-BN--Study" <study@blavatsky.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 1:02 PM
Subject: Theos-World RE: Physical Phenomena at a Seance (3 of 3)


> Dec 3 2003
>
> Dear friend:
>
>
> Serious or amused -- time passes by all of us.
>
> Smile and the world smiles with you. Frown and you are suddenly alone.
>
> Isn't there in each of us a duality? And is that interaction not of the
> nature of a conflict?
>
> We have interiorly in our psychological makeup : MIND -- the Thinking
> power, and, we have Emotion -- feelings and desires, etc... (All quite
> transitory and when grasped they dissipate in value.) Now who remembers
> all our desires, even of yesterday? Contrast: Who forgets how to
> think?
>
> I have often wondered, how do we learn to think? What is thinking?
>
> What we do with our time is significant in the long run, isn't it? How
> long is that? Our bodies die eventually. What about the Soul (the
> THINKER)? What is its age? What is its value, of any?
>
> What is the age of TRUTH?
>
> Is truth of any value?
>
> There is also a statement: "Old is gold." It may be that it is
> time-tested?
>
> Of what value is novelty -- if it is untested -- if it is fanciful and
> inaccurate? Don't we have to find out? Does it matter?
>
> Wisdom is for those who seek, and not an amusement, or a pastime; I
> think it is vital for all of us -- to at least know what are its bases.
> What would you say they are ?
>
> Which has the most value? Reality -- or -- the passing show?
>
> Dal
>
> ============================
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morten Nymann Olesen [mailto:global-theosophy@adslhome.dk]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 3:40 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re:: Physical Phenomena at a Seance (3 of 3)
>
> Hallo Dallas and all of you,
>
> My views are:
>
> Now I say this politely and friendly:
>
> --- No wonder Dallas why some readers call your version of Theosophy
> back to
> antiquity and not "Back to the Future". (smile...) ---
>
> Do you really not understand this ?
> I think some of the newcomers does.
>
> from
> M. Sufilight with peace and love...
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@earthlink.net>
> To: "AA-BN--Study" <study@blavatsky.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 12:17 PM
> Subject:: Physical Phenomena at a Seance (3 of 3)
>
>
> > Dec. 3 2003
> >
> > Dear Dennis:
> >
> > Your observations are helpful. Thank you. But I fear you tend to
> place
> > THEOSOPHY in an obsolescent context. I do not think that can be done.
> >
> > No, the information offered by THEOSOPHY is not time barred, nor are
> > the discoveries since then in Science and Psychology discounted.
> >
> > Our present science is in continuity with older discoveries; and as
> our
> > instrumentation is further refined, we find that those theories
> evolved
> > in the past are themselves refined, adapted and altered. But
> basically
> > the older discoveries and conclusions still stand as an important
> > historical basis and cannot be dismissed because of relative age
> alone.
> >
> > Both Mme. Blavatsky and Mr. Judge reflected to the scientific world of
> > their day the age-old wisdom of THEOSOPHY which deals with and
> > integrates moral states along with the physical and theoretical ones.
> >
> > They offered evidence to show that the moral, psychological,
> biological
> > and biophysical, chemical and physical states had to be considered and
> > integrated.
> > This has not yet been brought up to date with the evidence that
> > THEOSOPHY has offered concerning the astral plane, the psychic world,
> > and many planes of intelligence and thought.
> >
> > One of the basic concepts -- the immortality of the human intellect
> > (MIND) -- is still unresolved although advances in research continue
> to
> > reinforce the observations made over 100 years ago by THEOSOPHY .
> >
> > Additionally the purpose of evolution, the causes thereof, were dealt
> > with in detail, I am sure you have read the SECRET DOCTRINE carefully.
> > Both Cosmogenesis and anthropogenesis are significant, it seems to me.
> >
> > You have encountered there the teachings about the indestructible,
> > immortal "MONADS. Those provide identity to those immaterial fields
> of
> > intelligent thought force (the psychological concept of "I") that mold
> > the "vehicles" of matter used by them, and are the cause of evolution.
> > There is an analogetic pattern between the Universe and its well
> > integrated plans and patterns, and those of a human being, taken as a
> > mind (thought, memory, anticipation, logic, etc.) and a psychic nature
> > (desires, emotions, passions, urges, etc.) enclosed in a form of well
> > organized animal physical matter.
> >
> > It is their progress, and its many stages (including our present) that
> > THEOSOPHY integrates with the physical sciences and the theoretical
> > concepts that have been made prominent since the 1890s.
> >
> > It can be traced that every great scientist since those days has made
> > use of theosophical ideas to bring out their own ideas and proofs of
> the
> > great integrated wholeness of a living universe. Every part of it
> > plays a necessary part.
> >
> > I think it might be helpful if we make up a list of more modern
> > discoveries and theories that will show how the two are actually
> closely
> > interrelated. How, for instance, are cosmology and astrophysics
> related
> > to particulate physics and sub-atomic forces? Why is there
> > indeterminacy? Does "String theory" answer the causal basis for
> > universal manifestation and causality? Does it explain the curiously
> > inquisitive nature of human research into his nature and powers?
> >
> > Has a "theory of Everything" been finally evolved, or are patches
> still
> > left to be settled?
> >
> > Are physical measurements the sole criteria of significance? What are
> > "soul-powers?" What is the Mind? What in us "chooses?" What are the
> > areas of choice we can lay out for general consideration? How are
> they
> > inter-related? What about psycho-somatic relationships? How do these
> > related to our study?
> >
> > One thing jumps to mind, and that is: NATURE (the UNIVERSE) was here
> > before we were born. It has been around a long time. It seems very
> > well organized and in spite of our fragmentary analyses, it continues
> > its own patterned work, and, we are included in that. Nature really
> pays
> > little attention to us, but we ought to pay a great deal of attention
> to
> > it.
> >
> > These questions have puzzled me for over 65 years, and In enjoy
> > observing the changes in science that have occurred during that time.
> >
> > But I would like my friend Leon Maurer who is a scientist, to respond
> > to some of your comments as his knowledge will show how THEOSOPHY and
> > modern Science, in its advances continue to dovetail.
> >
> > You may have noticed that the basis for occult science offered by H P
> B
> > as THEOSOPHY does not seem to be fully taken advantage of nor studied
> > in depth. It is for this latter reason that it is continued to be
> > referred to today.
> >
> > Physical science limits itself to physical conditions and
> interactions,
> > but their CAUSES appear to be based on some finer relations: just as
> > cell studies are based on molecular and chemical partners and
> > components. So physical structures are declared by THEOSOPHY to be
> based
> > upon the force-fields present in "astral matter." We see evidence of
> > this cropping up almost daily in scientific research.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Dallas
> >
> > cc. Mr. L. Maurer
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>