Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00073)

The way I see it, if you have fleas in your bed you never have to be 
alone again.

Unless you just want to.

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
theosophy@a...> wrote:
> Hallo Paul and all of you,
> 
> My views are:
> 
> Yes.
> The truth about it all seems on one level to be floating along the 
levels of
> Floodlights and Science.
> On another level we are talking about reading the Akasha or the non-
physical
> libraries.
> 
> The first level is pictured by the following little story.
> I admit, that it is maybe not good enough as what you would call a 
required
> refutation.
> Nevertheless to some of us it is quite sufficient.
> 
> Floodlights and Science
> 
> There is this analogy about a man who had fleas in his bed.
> He first put out the light, so that the insects could not see to
> bite. This man was making assumptions which were logical
> enough, but which did not work since he did not know how
> to structure his experience. When someone told him that
> fleas could bite in the dark, he still couldn't learn. He installed
> floodlights to blind the fleas. This seemes to work, wonder of
> wonders; but presently he found that he could feel them biting
> again.
> How did the floodlights 'work'? The fact is, of course, that
> the light so dazzled - him, that his attention was drawn from the
> fleas, giving him the impression that they were not biting him
> any longer. When he got used to the brightness, he begab to feel
> the fleas again.
> He still feels, we are told, that the success lies somewhere along
> the road of floodlights. And he prizes his few brief hours of
> freedom from bites.
> 
> My question is now if you are only collection physical scholary
> "refutations",
> so to make the true "fleas" go away ?
> 
> On the other level the Akasha.
> We talk about time, place and people.
> We talk about that one shall know people on their fruits.
> We also talk about other issues. Some of them without form and 
oridnary
> linear thought-patterns.
> 
> *******
> 
> Allright.
> First refutation: Some books (and therefore also websites) act as 
deliberate
> spiritual 'decoys'. (taken from Idries Shah "Learning how to 
learn".)
> Is that not enough ?
> I have more...
> 
> 
> 
> from
> M. Sufilight with peace and love...
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@y...>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 4:08 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Clearly false claims, invalid sources, etc.
> 
> 
> > Dear Sufilight,
> >
> > You wrote:
> > >
> > > My views are:
> > >
> > > I just came across the following.
> > > I think the following - clearly false claims
> >
> > Clearly? That's one of those words like `obvious' and `self-
> > evident' that people use as if they were objective perceptions but
> > often/usually are really descriptive of subjective judgments.
> >
> > - about Idries Shah shows all of us, why Wikipedia is not a valid
> > tool to use.
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idries_Shah
> > >
> > I've read all of Shah's works and met his most eminent critic 
James
> > Moore. The fact that the article shows `clearly' *to you* that
> > Wikipedia is "not a valid" tool hardly implies that "all of us" 
are
> > convinced by *your* certainty and clarity that Shah was not an
> > impostor.
> >
> > > If Theosophy should be examined by the same superficial method -
> > it wouldn't look good.
> > >
> > > Madame Blavatsky can be compared here:
> > > http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madame_Blavatsky
> > >
> > > I think you have gotten the culturally colored picture by now.
> > >
> > One thing I notice among religious believers as well as political
> > partisans, but never cease to be amazed by it. Somehow, people
> > imagine that calling a book or article or author "culturally
> > colored" or "biased" etc. refutes their facts and interpretations
> > thereof. But there are no books, authors, or articles which are
> > *not* culturally colored, biased, etc. So it would serve just as
> > well as a one-size-fits-all refutation if we were to say "this was
> > written by a human being."
> >
> > It would be interesting to see a correction of any of the facts
> > about Shah presented in the article. No matter how biased the
> > source and how culturally colored, the facts remain and it would 
be
> > preferable (to me at least) to see the facts corrected and 
explained
> > rather than see the source smeared without any evidence.
> >
> > (Lest you assume otherwise, I actually like many of Shah's books.)
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > theos-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >