Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00010)

Feb 1 2005

You are right -- sometimes in writing there is too much of a "tone of
settled conviction." I suffer from that I am afraid and try to tone it
down. Must admit I am pretty convinced of the reasonableness of the
presentation. And try to convey that. 

However, if you study THEOSOPHY well, you may come to grasp how it merely
describes and outlines the outlines of facts about our world, our life and
the Universe. The details and complexities derived from and such perception
and a specialized scientific examination of any set of correlative details
-- are vast. 

Some of are eager to find those who will take a hold and verify our
findings. Asking questions is fine providing they are made strong building
blocks for logical efforts that can be continued and which offer a
reasonable approach to science, law and potential aims and goals --
impersonally and universally for all.

It then begins to suggest (if we mentally are able to review and gather
together all that is said) ways and means for self-improvement. 

Dallas
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mauri 
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 6:23 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: re Hinayanists and Mahayanists

I wonder if some or lots of people (even 
students of Theosophy ...) might tend to 
habitually express themselves as if 
"they know," in general, as if there 
might be a point at which one's very 
sanity/worldview might be more or less 
directly related to their 
habituated/monopolizing "knowing," in 
general. While various kinds of 
"knowings" might often be found to be 
necessary for the maintenance of a 
working model or worldview (obviuously 
enough ...), surely that doesn't 
necessarily have to mean that one should 
always approach life as if one were 
totally monopolized by "knowing" in 
terms of a particular worldview or 
model, as if nothing else might exist 
that might be "relevant" in some sense 
(exoterically or esoterically) ... To 
me, the study of Theosophy is like an 
invitation towards speculating about 
"possible aspects of knowing" because, 
as I tend to see it, unless such an 
approach is taken, to some extent, seems 
to me as if one might,
at certain key stages, get somewhat 
stuck at certain "too literal" 
interpretations ... For me, speculation 
seems to have function as a special sort 
of lubricant in my Theosophical studies.

Speculatively,
Mauri

PS Besides, unlike Gerald's occasional 
"soap box" stance that, in turn, might 
occasionally tend to make him feel as if 
he might have to go "stand in the 
proverbial corner," (to quote Gerald), 
my "speculating" seems to make feel as 
if the worst that might happen might be 
if/when I might decide, for whater 
reason, that I might've fallen off my 
speculating box, and so might have to go 
stand in my speculating corner. Aren't 
speculating corners preferable to 
proverbial corners, in a sense, up to a 
point ... ^:-/ ... Not that some 
proverbial corners might not be seen to 
make sense in some sense/context but, in 
my case, as far as I can figure, since 
my "knowings" in general seem to be kind 
of speculative particularly in 
Theosophical matters (in contrast to, 
say, "more experiential/exoteric 
knowings"), what can I say ...