Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00287)

Hallo Leon and all,

My views are:

Thanks for this reply of yours.
I think it is much better than the previous one.
>:-)

1.
a)
My problem is when the "fundamental principles" are being turned into
dead-letter or literal teachings and then labelled as theosophical - or in
accrodance with the Wisdom Tradition or Wisdom Religion. That was what I was
seeking to avoid in our little exchange of words.

Some people keep saying to me, that there are no real methods of spiritual
development
and no real methods on how to open and purify your Spiritual Heart.
Some even go so far as to say, that there is only ONE method the
THEOSOPHICAL one, - and that it is their own version which is the one. A
version which they value by the use of dead-letter or literal teachings.
They are in the same breath eagerly clinging to words like "Theosophy",
"theosophical", "HPB" in a very dogmatic and almost Bible-like manner, and
rejects without hesitation anything else or what they havn't heard of
before, and anything which in a literal manner omits the sacred words
"theosophy", "theosophical", "Blavatsky" and similar.

I think the quite opposite, that there in fact are plenty of methods, and
quite IMPORTANT that even HPB said that her self - and that the Seekers
OFTEN are slow learners or digesters. (Else read the below story about "HOW
CAN ONE METHOD BE AS GOOD AS ANOTHER?". That should amswer many of your
questions.)

What I am saying is, that there are more than ONE single method of teaching
within theosophy or the Wisdom Tradition or Wisdom Religion.

b)
Leon wrote that:
"very few might be able to gain such Wisdom and Knowledge by means of direct
spiritual as well as life experiences -- without need of books or teachers.
But, for the bulk of us that aren't so endowed with
such higher powers of discernment (or direct access to God:-)... The method
of
study offered by HPB and the Masters, along with practices pointed to in
such
books as the Voice of the Silence and Patanjali's yoga aphorisms, reinforced
by the teachings of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita -- is, IMO, the fastest and
best method for Western thinkers (educated and living in this contemporary
world that is rooted in materialism, selfishness and greed) that will enable
them
to know how to change the ideas of the wrong headed materialists (after we
have changed ourselves).

Do you see that that's the real purpose of the Theosophical Movement, and
understand why it is so necessary to follow its three objects and comprehend
and
conquer the theosophical teachings at its deepest level -- before one can be
so empowered to form that "Nucleus of Universal Brotherhood" it demands of
all
TRUE theosophists?"


Answer:
That is pure Nonesense Leon.
I disagree very much.

I disagree with the words "very few". This just shows me that you are
ignorant about the real facts - about how theosophical teachings operates.

First. I did not rule out the use of Teachers did I?
So why these claims?
Secondly. The whole WORLD is your teacher and God is within. Please wake up
Leon and stop being such a bookworm.
God is love and sexual intercourse is not a filthy issue - one just like
that can wash away in front of the eyes of theosophical newcomers - even
though many theosophical leaders have done a pretty good job about it since
the days of the Leadbeater scandal and even since the days of Blavatsky.
Because I hold Blavatsky partly responsible for the present lack of
understanding of the theosophical teachings on sexuality and sexual
intercourse, event though that part will be a minor one due to the times she
lived in. However if it can be proven and emphasised (even if is a bit late
to do so), that Blavatsky OR her teachings had strong ties to the
contemporary initiate Sir Richard Burton and his tantric and sufic
teachings, this would be quite elevating to the theosophical cause.

You also forget what the wise ones says about spiritual teachings:
"So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to
support a thoughtsystem or a system which is viewed in a limited manner.
This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements - like TheosophicalSociety and other similar ones. This
seems important to understand and know about. "



2.
About "REAL theosophists".
I thought my wellmeant ironi was clear. So many theosophists think
themselves to be "REAL theosophists", when they in fact are not.
They are only theosophists to a lesser degree.


3.
-------
It is said:
If you want to learn theosophy, you must follow the Theosophical path.
If you just want - information - about why you should follow the
Theosophical path,
you must apply to someone who is not teaching, but who is giving out
scholary
opinions about the relative merits of various paths.

Spiritual humility:
Spiritual humility is the acceptance of the truth, about the truth, from the
truth.
There is a difference about saying - that one learns OF the Theosophical
method or
learns IN the Theosophical method.


-------
4.
I will throw in a short story, which Idries Shah offers in his book
"Learning how to Learn".
I have made few minor change to it.


HOW CAN ONE METHOD BE AS GOOD AS ANOTHER?

Q: What you have said about the same person, or the same group of people,
being
able to employ entirely different techniques to achive the same object
interests me. But how
can one method be as good as another?

A: Let us think analogically. If a house is on fire, two ladders may be
propped against
one window. Both lead to the ground. The different colours of the paint on
them may obscure the fact that they are ladders.

Q: But how do we know that EITHER is a ladder (= a method)?

A: You know by learning to recognise a ladder when you see one.

Q: How is that done?

A: By familiarising yourself with ladders.

Q: And climbing ladders?

A: While you are learning recognition, climb them as a part of it.

Q: But some people insist that there only is one ladder, their own.

A: They are right, if they are only saying that to focus attention on a
specific escape-ladder
as an instrument. If it works, it is equivalent to being the only true one.
For practical purposes, it is.

Q: Are they right under any other circumstances?

A: Seldom, because if they really were right they would teach
not "There is only this ladder", but "Look at all these ladders; they can -
or could - work.
Ours, however, is applicable to you and to me." Failure to do this reveals
ignorance.
Remark: But they are short of time.
Comment: So is everybody.

Q: Are some ladders too short?

A: Ladders are in all conditions: new, old, rotten, short, long, blue,
green, weak, strong,
available, in use elsewhere, and all the rest of the possibilities.

Q: What should one do about all this?

A: Try to conceive that the house is on fire. If you can do so
without becoming obsessed or irrational about it, particularly
without becoming suggestible through dwelling on this idea, you
may get out. But while you are full of hope and fear, of sentiment
or desire for social activity or personal prominence or even regocnition,
you will not be able to use the ladder, you may not be able to recognise
one,
certainly you should be spending your energies in Circles which abound for
the
purpose of welcoming such tendencies.
People learn by methods which correspond with the kind and extent of their
aspiration:
this is a constant established Theosophical teaching.

Equally, of course, there are many people who cannot learn
something at a given time, because they have some other expectation,
some preoccupation, probably an emotional one.
Reflect on this news item:
"More than 3.000 worshippers fled in near-panic from the
famous Church of the Blessed Mary of the Rosary at Pompeii on
Saturday night, when a bottle of Coca Cola exploded."
(Daily Telegraph, London - Monday, 9 may 1977, p.6, col. 8)


-------

Leon, I do Hope this was as helpful to you as it was to me.



from
M. Sufilight



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <leonmaurer@a...>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World What is Theosophy...another angle


> Morton,
>
> In my view "Fundamental Principles" ARE the "Truth and Wisdom" that
"Seekers"
> -- to become "REAL theosophists" -- need to verify for themselves, through
> their own "individual self devised and self determined efforts" of study
and
> practice.
>
> Actually, I didn't ask you -- but, since those "Fundamentals" are the
> axiomatic basis of all reality and existence, as well as the entire
support upon
> which the metaphysical and spiritual teachings of theosophy rests -- what
make you
> feel they have a "bad ring"? Do you deny the value of knowing them and
> following the teachings of theosophy based on them -- so as to prove them
for
> oneself and be able to teach them to others? Or, are you saying that you
believe
> only one's own personal enlightenment is the goal of theosophy?
>
> All well and good that some very few might be able to gain such Wisdom and
> Knowledge by means of direct spiritual as well as life experiences -- 
without
> need of books or teachers. But, for the bulk of us that aren't so endowed
with
> such higher powers of discernment (or direct access to God:-)... The
method of
> study offered by HPB and the Masters, along with practices pointed to in
such
> books as the Voice of the Silence and Patanjali's yoga aphorisms,
reinforced
> by the teachings of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita -- is, IMO, the fastest
and
> best method for Western thinkers (educated and living in this contemporary
> world that is rooted in materialism, selfishness and greed) that will
enable them
> to know how to change the ideas of the wrong headed materialists (after we
> have changed ourselves).
>
> Do you see that that's the real purpose of the Theosophical Movement, and
> understand why it is so necessary to follow its three objects and
comprehend and
> conquer the theosophical teachings at its deepest level -- before one can
be
> so empowered to form that "Nucleus of Universal Brotherhood" it demands of
all
> TRUE theosophists?
>
> No great spiritual teacher, or any of their disciples, has ever been able
to
> accomplish their spiritual work effectively, unless they have first
learned
> the mysteries through the words, whether orally or through the books of
their
> Master's teachers who instructed them in the Gupta Vidya, and pointed out
to
> them the meditative practices necessary to attain Moksha and become
Bodhisattvah.
> Vide; Moses, Buddha, Jesus, et al. (including HPB, WQJ and several other
> REAL theosophists, passed or present, that I know:-).
>
> BTW, it would be interesting if you could tell us how the words
"fundamental
> principles" are misunderstood by the "Seekers" today? It would also help
to
> understand what you mean by "REAL" theosophists? I thought that
"theosophy"
> (as outlined in the Secret Doctrine) is a body of teachings concerning the
> origins, laws, and evolution of the Universe and Mankind that have been in
> existence since the earliest "thinking beings" appeared on this planet...
And, that
> anyone who studies them and benefits by the spiritual knowledge and wisdom
they
> help attain -- "so as to be better able to help and teach others" -- are
the
> only "REAL theosophists."
>
> What have "organizations" and "groups" to do with all that?
>
> Leonardo
>
> In a message dated 09/06/04 4:42:56 AM, global-theosophy@a... the
> best and most direct way to attain writes:
>
> >Hallo Leon and all,
> >
> >My views are:
> >
> >Well...I do not actually disagree that much with what you say.
> >The problem is however as I see it the words "fundamental principles".
> >It has a no good ring to it, that is if you ask me.
> >
> >Such "fundamental principles" are NOT what all Seekers after Truth and
> >Wisdom
> >spiritually Needs to learn from a book or by a teacher.
> >Sometimes they learn it by spiritual experiences and by other means
through
> >what they experience in their lives. And then the words and the teaching
> >content within "fundamental principles" are perhaps not misunderstood as
> >much as it is by many of the Seekers today.
> >This also in part explains something about why many REAL theosophists
have
> >never heard of any of the Theosophical groups or organisations or do not
> >know (much) about their teachings.
> >Well you can call that a view.
> >
> >from
> >
> >M. Sufilight with peace and love...
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>
> From: <leonmaurer@a...>
>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
>
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 9:43 AM
>
> Subject: Re: Theos-World What is Theosophy...another angle
>
>
>
> >
>
> > In a message dated 09/03/04 11:50:11 AM, global-theosophy@a...
>
> writes:
>
> >
>
> > >What is Theosophy actually?
>
> > >
>
> > >A possible answer:
>
> > >
>
> > >The most obvious question of all is for us the most difficult
>
> > >question. But I'll try to answer. Theosophy is experience of life
>
> > >through a method of dealing with life and human relations. This
>
> > >method is based on an understanding of man, which places at one's
>
> > >disposal the means to organize one's relationships and one's learning
>
> > >systems. So instead of saying that Theosophy is a body of thought in
>
> > >which you believe certain things and don't believe other things, we
>
> > >say that the Theosophical experience has to be provoked in a person.
>
> > >Once provoked, it becomes his own property, rather as a person
>
> > >masters an art.
>
> >
>
> > Yes, but theosophy is also a "body of thought" based on ideas and
>
> fundamental
>
> > principles concerning the origin and genesis of both the Cosmos and its
>
> > reflection in the evolution of humanity and the nature of being in
>
> general -- that
>
> > doesn't have to be "believed" without thought, but that can be verified
>
> > through one's looking within and by study and practice empowered by
one's
>
> individual
>
> > self devised and self determined efforts... And, thereby, finding and
>
> > following one's true Master and teacher of all the "arts" -- of both
>
> living and
>
> > being. One can spend one's whole life following the directions of many
>
> gurus and
>
> > doing all sorts of good works -- only to find in the end that the real
>
> teacher
>
> > is that Master within.
>
> >
>
> > It's obvious that the "theosophical experience" which leads to an
>
> > understanding of Universal Brotherhood and its expression in one's
>
> relationship to others
>
> > can only come about in that manner. That's the only "learning system"
>
> that
>
> > can have any value in the long run. "Theosophy is as theosophy does" and
>
> > "Physician, heal thyself" perfectly reflects this.
>
> >
>
> > >So what er the various theosophical groups provoking
>
> > >in the our theosophical age of Idolatry?
>
> >
>
> > What difference does it make? "Theosophy" per se has no relationship to
>
> > organized groups or the idolatry they might or might not promote...
Since
>
> > theosophy is directed solely to the self within each of us -- for the
sole
>
> purpose of
>
> > attaining our individual self realization or enlightenment -- that has
no
>
> > dependence on authority, beliefs, rituals, or "faith" in idols or
>
> teachers.
>
> >
>
> > Leonardo
>
> >
>
> > >M. Sufilight
>
> >
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>