Theos-Talk Archives (March 2005 Message tt00663)

So it happened again. Another premature accidental mailing. Hopefully, this 
time I can at least get to my spell checker. (Or, maybe I should 
troubleshoot my computer before I start over, or take a shot of Vodka to calm my 
nerves... I hate computers that think for themselves. :-)
So, save this one for the archives and throw out the first two versions. 
-------------------------------
Sorry about accidental mailing of unfinished version. LM
-------------------------------------------------------

Hi Morton and all,

I appreciate your defense of the Sufi way of Idries Shah. I believe he is 
entirely right in his observations and his teachings. However, you may have 
misinterpreted my views on the study and comprehension of the theosophical 
metaphysical truths, by relating them to the seeking of psychic powers. I had no 
such intention, nor do I believe that such knowledge leads to such powers (or 
that it doesn't), nor prevents one from following the practical Sufi (or any 
other) path of learning that leads to self realization and spiritual living under 
the theosophical values of the so called "Heart Doctrine." 

My only purposes in presenting further clarification of these fundamental 
metaphysical truths in the scientific terms of this age -- demonstrably offering 
logical proof of the reality of both karma and reincarnation -- is for those 
of such a bent of mind that they need such knowledge in order to transform 
their current false scientific or materialistic beliefs... And, so that they can 
accept the Heart Doctrine teachings as an essential necessity in maintaining 
the harmony of the natural order of fundamental reality -- which puts 
consciousness before mind, and mind over matter. To know the rules of these 
interrelationships and the laws that govern them, can ultimately empower one with the 
self confidence and ability to control one's own fate -- while "appearing as 
nothing in the eyes of men," as an ancient teacher advised.

However, there are certain points in your arguments below that I do not 
entirely agree with, and which, apparently, denigrates the need for these teachings 
for those who require them as an essential basis in order to accept the path 
of practical theosophical living as presented by Idries Shah and others of 
like mind.

I'll try to keep my comments short, although you'll have to wade through your 
long letter to find them. 

In a message dated 03/27/05 11:32:19 AM, global-theosophy@stofanet.dk writes:


Hallo Leon and all,


It is a bit long...but..that is how it is.


My views are:


A.


Leon wrote:


"As for Nasrudin, while his humorous stories are a fine way (for some) of

transmitting his wisdom, one would have to read them all a thousand times 

and still would only gain a smidgen of the full extent of Gupta Vidya -- 
which, from my point of view, includes both "Wisdom" AND "Knowledge" -- 
including that of both cause and effect and the physical and metaphysical 
realities of both one and many, emptiness and fullness (from the zero-point 
to infinity :-). In other words, how the universe and everything within it 
really is and works."


My answer:


As HPB said in The Secret Doctrine:


"The reader has to bear in mind that the Stanzas given treat only of the 

Cosmogony of our own planetary System and what is visible around it, after a 

Solar Pralaya. The secret teachings with regard to the Evolution of the 

Universal Kosmos cannot be given, since they could not be understood by the 

highest minds in this age, and there seem to be very few Initiates, even 

among the greatest, who are allowed to speculate upon this subject. Moreover 

the Teachers say openly that not even the highest Dhyani-Chohans have ever 

penetrated the mysteries beyond those boundaries that separate the milliards 

of Solar systems from the "Central Sun," as it is called. Therefore, that 

which is given, relates only to our visible Kosmos, after a "Night of 

Brahma."

"

(Vol. 1, Page 13 THE SECRET DOCTRINE.)
===================================

[LM] 
To interpret this properly (and not in its dead letter sense) -- one must 
realize that HPB also taught that "everything" in the Cosmos can be understood by 
"analogy and correspondence," that "the microcosm is the mirror of the 
macrocosm," and that "as above, so below." Therefore, in the Stanzas, we can see 
that -- in spite of HPB's focussing of them on the "visible Kosmos" -- what is 
beyond that (the invisible Cosmos) can be "speculated on" under such premises. 
In fact, IMO -- it should be able to be actually determined (with respect to 
a full understanding of the fundamental laws inherent in Absolute space). Of 
course, no Master could be able to explain that back in the 1880's before 
Einstein gave us relativity, and qauntum physics gave us the unexplained "fully 
energetic " vacuum between the zero-point and the smallest possible physical 
particle. Today, these sciences are beginning to recognize their shortcomings 
and disagreements which their consolidation in string theory is bringing closer 
and closer to their eventual self-proof of the theosophical metaphysically 
rooted multidimensional physical reality.

In addition, none of what she says applies to what I am attempting to clarify 
in the Book of Dzyan -- by offering a consistent model of the "globular" 
Cosmos (and everything both within and beyond it) in accordance with the 
fundamental formula "The three the one the four the one the five, the twice seven the 
sum total." This formula would apply with respect to the origin and genesis of 
our Solar System as well as to all other Solar Systems, Galaxies, Galactic 
Clusters, etc., up to the entire Parabrahm and beyond, until we reach Absolute 
space itself that is the rootles root of ALL reality... Since, logically and 
mathematically, there can be infinite infinities of Absolute zero-points, and 
there can be infinite infinities of infinities... Any part or all of which 
(being the nature of both "emptiness" and "fullness" taken to their ultimate 
extremes) could be assumed to obey the same fundamental laws of abstract motion, 
symmetry, conservation, emanation, radiation, involution and evolution... This 
would apply on all levels of absolute and relative existence described by the 
fundamental teachings of theosophy -- and as understood by the "intuitive 
student" who can read "in and around the words and between the lines." So, a book 
can speak silently of much deeper truths than are evident by the simple 
reading of its words. And, sometimes, those words, if written by a master 
occultist, can speak much louder and penetrate much deeper than the spoken words of 
many self professed guru/interpreters -- who are focussed solely on the needs of 
their particular congregation.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Shah states something like, that - when reading is unimportant to the 

Seeker - then the Teacher arrives or has arrived.


One will easily realise that Idries Shah's teachings is not only concerned 

with his own books - and writings as such - but also with teachings on 
higher levels and spiritual excercises - without the use of books.


He explains this issue at many places from different angles in his writings.


Gupta Vidya is NOT to merely have read methaphysical teachings.


Merely reading do not necessarily make you develop very far. It is the 

impact - of what you read, that is important.
======================================

[LM] Yes, this is what HPB meant by how the "intuitive student" must, as 
explained above, comprehend what is read -- which could take you as far as you 
want to develop yourself without any such teacher in the flesh -- whom you could 
wait for to arrive, forever. The "impact " of the teaching one reads and 
also "hears" is what comes from that comprehension. (That's why I recommend 
"chanting" the Secret Doctrine out loud. :-) Sometimes it pays to talk to 
yourself... (A hint to the wise being sufficient in itself, as the Master would say.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

And later it is the meeting with Teacher and the teaching given, that is 

important. Not physical books or writings.

=======================================

[LM] Yes, but without the books and the knowledge of the realities that a 
true teacher must know (and have gotten, incidentally, previously for himself 
from books) -- how much faster would that student learn in order to eventually 
become a teacher himself, if he didn't first read and comprehend the books his 
teacher read, or others that tell the same story? 

----------------------------------------------------------------


And not all of Idries Shah's literary outlets are short stories. He actually 

also wrote what we call real books.


More so Idries Shah said, that some stories or spiritual allegories as such

are active for years and will sometimes only sprout after perhaps two or 

three years - or even later.


Because then suddenly in a flash you will understand the deeper impact they 

have.


The same can be said about the content of The Secret Doctrine.


The last I think be both will agree upon.


http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/sufi-shah.html


We can agree upon that some needs the scientific approach to theosophy or 

the path of divine wisdom.


But I think we also can agree, that mere methaphysical intellectualism 

will - quite often - only lead you to the doorstep of the esoteric teachings 
of the 
intuition - the buddhic level or higher.


That was also why Blavatsky in The Secret Doctrine forwarded the importance 

of allegorical teachings as important to reveal higher teachings - also 
methaphysical teachings. That was why the Stanzas was and is allegorical.

===================================================

[LM] Here, I'd like to examine the possibility that the Book of Dzyan cannot 
be entirely "allegorical," since it gave out specific and exact numerological 
equations. (Although we might consider such equations as symbolic and 
therefore allegorical.) However, if we mean by allegorical that the characters and 
events stand for abstract ideas, principles, or forces, so that the literal 
sense has or suggests a parallel, deeper symbolic meaning -- I entirely agree. 

Therefore, the Book of Dzyan, can refer, as I said before, to realities of 
existence's beyond this Solar system... In site of HPB's "blinds" to the 
contrary. (Of course, this was for the purpose of preventing beginning students from 
wandering too far afield and getting caught up in mysticism, magic, or belief 
in personal gods or extraterrestrials tooling around in flying saucers, and 
other such unreasonableness. :-) 

As, for an understanding of the teachings beyond the Buddhic level or 
higher... Once that level is reached, and one can examine in depth the knowledge 
gained and test it subjectively, what more can any "teacher" give such a student 
-- other than the ways to practically apply such knowledge to his/her day to 
day existence? In this sense, I agree it is important for the student to have 
a live teacher who can help him learn these ways-of-the-world based on the 
teacher's (or mentor's to put it in modern terms) greater experience. (But, this 
might not be necessary for all of us... Since, some of us may have already 
been through that mill in their past lives. :-)

Thus, rather than call the metaphysical teachings, "mere" -- I think we can 
put equal weight on both the book learning and the teacher behind the book. 
Even Nasruden can only give us his teachings through the medium of books. Does 
that not also lead to the higher knowledge though our "intellectualization" of 
his teachings, as we think about them (albeit on a different level of 
practicality than the metaphysical understandings that HPB was and I and am trying to 
transmit through our writings)? How all of these teachings are interpreted 
and understood by each student, of course, is strictly up to them -- depending 
on their needs as well as their individual bend of mind -- along with the 
efforts they take to study, understand, and use them in their daily yoga practices 
or modes of living. For example, the bubble within bubble form of the 
involved coenergetic fields of the ABC model is the perfect basis of the "form" used 
in the Tai Chi Chuan yoga that is both a martial art and a form of self 
healing of both mind and body. To practice such a yoga without an understanding of 
the metaphysical philosophy behind it is next to useless (except, possibly, 
as a mild physical exercise :-).

---------------------------------------------------------


When I refer to Idries Shah as an exponent who has enhanced the 
Theosophical teachings as they are mostly known - I do so with regard 
to the area of "Spiritual Organisations and their mode of operating"

and especially also the differences between these groups and Theosophy - 

also known as the path to divine wisdom.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


B. The Theoosphical Society defines itself with its three or four objects 

as we known them.



The Original Programme of The Theosophical Society


http://www.katinkahesselink.net/origin.htm or

http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/theos/th-origp.htm


In the above versions we find - following vital excerpt:


"In order to leave no room for equivocation, the members of the T. S. have 

to be reminded of the origin of the Society in 1875. Sent to the U.S. of 

America in 1873 for the purpose of organizing a group of workers on a 

psychic plane, two years later the writer received orders from her Master 

and Teacher to form the nucleus of a regular Society whose objects were 

broadly stated as follows:


1. Universal Brotherhood;


2. No distinction to be made by the member between races, creeds, or social 

positions, but every member had to be judged and dealt by on his personal 

merits;


3. To study the philosophies of the East -- those of India chiefly, 

presenting them gradually to the public in various works that would 

interpret exoteric religions in the light of esoteric teachings;


4. To oppose materialism and theological dogmatism in every possible way, by 

demonstrating the existence of occult forces unknown to science, in nature, 

and the presence of psychic and spiritual powers in man; trying, at the same 

time to enlarge the views of the Spiritualists by showing them that there 

are other, many other agencies at work in the production of phenomena 

besides the "Spirits" of the dead. Superstition had to be exposed and 

avoided; and occult forces, beneficent and maleficent -- ever surrounding us 

and manifesting their presence in various ways -- demonstrated to the best 

of our ability.


Such was the programme in its broad features. The two chief Founders were 

not told what they had to do, how they had to bring about and quicken the 

growth of the Society and results desired; nor had they any definite ideas 

given them concerning its outward organization all this being left entirely 

with themselves. Thus, as the undersigned had no capacity for such work as 

the mechanical formation and administration of a Society, the management of 

the latter was left in the hands of Col. H. S. Olcott, then and there 

elected by the primitive founders and members --President for life. But if 

the two Founders were not told what they had to do, they were distinctly 

instructed about what they should never do, what they had to avoid, and what 

the Society should never become. Church organizations, Christian and 

Spiritual sects were shown as the future contrasts to our Society. "


And there is more... in that link.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


And Leon:

To - me - the programe as a whole is the fundament upon which The 

Theoosphical Society rests. Later revisions of this text/programe in the 

above are possibly a deviation from the true programe. What was good and 

helpful back in the old days - is most certainly not always that healthy 

these days. Let us remember that.


And it is - the THIRD object, which has occupied the mind of Idries Shah 

more than any other exponent of what we can call theosophical teachings - or 

similar teachings.

This I find to be of importance today 2005.



=> My problem is how does HPB or the founders define the word "sect" or 

"sects" in the above excerpt?

I think this is a central issue, because we today have so many secterian 

groups or organisations

all of them claiming to be theosophical - and many of them are wellmeaning 

in doing so - even if they are not theosophical. And to understand this 

fully - one will often have to read the above text and programe carefully a 

number of times.

That is why I point my fingers towards the writings of Idries Shah because 

there is the key if any to be found in writings of today - to solve the 

present states of affairs between the various theosophical groups and their 

organisational modes of operation.

That is - how one as a theosophical Seeker - can learn to distinguish 

between a theosophical sect and a genuine group of theosophical seekers.


In the above we also have "but every member had to be judged and dealt by on 

his personal merits".

=> The question is who is "dealing" with who and who is "judging" who?

Is it Only the founders? If not, why not? (Read footnote 1 by HPB)

And are those "dealers" and "judges" not gone now - since none can be said - 

officially - to be in contact with the Masters?

And where does that leave us all, the Society and the Mahatmas known as 

Morya and K.H. (or their replacements)?


=> What geographical area was back then covering the word "India"? And what 

area does it cover today?

(Do you see the need to reformulate the Theosophical teachings from back 

then in 1886? They are just too old now. But that does not imply, that 

various theoosphical sects of today - should have the right to claim, that 

they alone know it all - and have the new teaching with a true Messenger in 

their hands - M. Sufilight included. I hope you understand this.)


My views on Idries Shah is not forwarded with the claim that I Know that 

Idries Shah is the candidate whom Blavatsky talked about.


While referring to the above text by Blavatsky I would say:

The only manner in which one group can avoid becoming a sect - is to AVOID 

IT.

Do you not agree?

That is why I recommend Idries Shah's writings, so that we can sort out 

these problems - or call it what you like - we all as theosophists are 

facing.

Whether he is a candidate to be the 1975 Messenger is for those to decide 

who actually knows how to judge about it.


Idries Shah made it clear in his writings, that the real Theosophical 

Society is not a publicly known group or organisation -

and that it also at least in part is a non-physical one. They have meetings 

of a quite different kind, than the average TS center has any idea about.

Idries Shah state somthing similar to this:

Nearly all the publicly known groups and organisations of theosophy and new 

age are secterian in nature or excercises conditioning - (ie. thereby 

creating a socalled karmic circle).


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


C. Another excerpt from the already mentioned link - so to relate it with 

your own teachings

http://www.katinkahesselink.net/origin.htm :


"Hall: Sufis also seem to take extra-sensory perception as a matter of 

course and as not very interesting.


Shah: Not interesting at all. It is no more than a by-product. Let me give 

you a banal analogy. If I were training to be a runner and went out every 

day to run, I would get faster and faster and be able to run farther and 

farther with less fatigue. Now, I also find that I have a better complexion, 

my blood supply is better, and my digestion has improved. These things don't 

interest me; they are only by-products of my running. I have another 

objective. When people I am associated with become overwhelmed by ESP 

phenomena, I always insist that they stop it, because their objective is 

elsewhere.


Hall: They are supposed to be developing their potential; not attempting to 

read minds or move objects around. Do you think that researchers will one 

day explain the physical basis of ESP or do you think it will always elude 

them?


Shah: If I say it will elude the scientists, it will annoy the people who 

are able to get enormous grants for research into ESP. But I think, yes, a 

great deal more can be discovered providing the scientists are prepared to 

be good scientists. And by that I mean that they are prepared to structure 

their experiments successively in accordance with their discoveries. They 

must be ready to follow and not hew doggedly to their original working 

hypothesis. And they will certainly have to give up their concept of the 

observer being outside of the experiment, which has been their dearest pet 

for many years.


And another thing, as we find constantly in metaphysics, people who are 

likely to be able to understand and develop capacities for ESP are more 

likely to be found among people who are not interested in the subject.


Hall: Is that because disinterest is necessary to approach the subject 

properly?


Shah: Something like that. Being disinterested, you can approach ESP more 

coolly and calmly. The Sufis say: "You will be able to exercise these 

supernatural powers when you can put out your hand and get a wild dove to 

land on it." But the other reason why the people who are fascinated by ESP 

or metaphysics or magic are the last who should study it is that they are 

interested in it for the wrong reasons. It may be compensation. They are not 

equipped to study ESP.


They are equipped for something else: fear, greed, hate, or love of 

humanity.


Hall: Often they have a desperate wish to prove that ESP is either true or 

false.


Shah: Yes that's what I call heroism. But it's not professionalism and 

that's what the job calls for."


>>>>>>>> later in the same text <<<<<<<<<<<<<


"Hall: That's not exactly what the contemporary devotees of witchcraft and 

magic are up to.


Shah: No. My work has no relevance to the current interest whatever. Oh, it 

makes my books sell, but they were written for cool-headed people and there 

aren't many of those around."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Meaning, that Idries Shah's outlets were (mainly) written to true and honest 

Theosophical students and similar - and not to New Agers calling themselves 

theosophists, and who likes to dive deep into the jungles of ESP and 
clairvoyant 
fumes, - while they fanatically seek world teachers, fuss and fancies a la 
tantra 

while they teach children.


As they say: If the shoe fits wear it.

=============================

[LM] Just as my ABC model of the metaphysical teachings outlined in the SD 
is written for the true theosophist whose interest lies in becoming a practical 
chela of the masters and using such scientifically correlative metaphysical 
knowledge, hopefully, as the basis of their work as "effective" (creative) 
Bodhisattvas in their next self chosen lifetimes. Since such chelas are so few 
and far between, however, it seems pointless to put ABC in paper book form -- 
when, in this age, it is so easy to post it on the web and scatter it in letters 
among the archives of theosophical, philosophical and scientific on line 
forums, and let them search for it on google, or join those forums. :-) In this 
light, I'll have to admit that Idries Shah might have a much larger audience to 
reach, some of whom may or may not be interested in the deeper metaphysical 
teachings. However, for those that do, there is always the SD to refer to, 
suppemented by my ABC theory. And, for those that don't... Let them wear the 
shoe that fits, and hope that it doesn't pinch their toes. 


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


D.


On ULT. I was only referring to - CERTAIN - ULT's not the group a such.


And I think that I agree with you - IF what you say about the ULT's in 

general is true.


Well only IF...

==========================================

[LM] Too much discrimination there for my taste. There is no such thing as 
"CERTAiN - ULT's, it's like saying certain "Negroes" or certain "Jews" or 
certain "Americans." ULT is NOT an organization, and cannot be described by 
referring to any member of it, since each is totally independent of any other, or of 
any organizations or religions they might otherwise belong to or subscribe 
to. 

As for all the above in relation the organized theosophical societies... I, 
for one -- as an "independent" freemason and theosophist who "belongs to no 
cult or sect, yet belongs to each and all" -- have no interest in them or how 
they run their organizations. My interest is only in individual theosophists who 
are interested in what knowledge I have that might be useful to them, or in 
passing on what knowledge they have that might be useful to me or others -- 
each on our own individual path. However, when the circumstances arise and we 
are destined to come together for some greater theosophical purpose -- we will.

Therefore, I respect everything that Idries Shah teaches that might help 
those who find his teachings appropriate to their individual needs. 

As for any group of theosophists that might come together to perform useful 
work in helping and forwarding the theosophical movement in any aspect of it 
three objects -- I would like to stay open to accept or reject association with 
them as my own higher Self may determine.

-------------------------------------------------

E.


Leon wrote:


" I don't see the connection of Sufism, as an "experience of life" with the

metaphysical teachings in the Secret Doctrine, that are the sole basis of 

real Theosophy -- purely as a "Synthesis of Science, Religion, and 
Philosophy."


"

There is teaching - and there is the one being taught who is experiencing 

something - perhaps something formless.


There is study and the one who studies - and experiences something.


To say that the "metaphysical teachings in the Secret Doctrine, that are the 

sole basis of real Theosophy" is a false statement - and I think you know 
that Leon.

================

[LM] Again, you misinterpret my meaning. I was referring to the 
metaphysical teachings that serve as the sole underlying basis of ALL the laws of nature, 
including those that contribute to karma and reincarnation as well as the 
causes and effects of our actions and reactions that we experience from day to 
day and must learn how to deal with. This doesn't mean that there is not 
anything further to learn of a practical or psychological nature. However, for 
those intending to become an Adept Bodhisattva, with sufficient knowledge to be 
"better able to help and teach others" -- such fundamental metaphysical 
knowledge is essential. Not to say that one can't be a Bodhisattva, and practice 
compassion and altruism without such knowledge. But, When I say such teaching is 
essential, I am speaking for true chela's whose aim is to ultimately attain 
adeptship in this or any subsequent lifetime. In this sense, the learning and 
understanding of the fundamental metaphysical realities are absolutely 
paramount. No one can proceed on such a path unless they have completely accepted 
those truths and proved their validity for themselves. No direct teacher can give 
one this knowledge or proof, no matter how long a time they give their 
attention to the chela. Therefore, each must do it for themselves. And this comes 
about when one can speak directly to and ask the advice of the "Master" within 
oneself based on the same level of metaphysical knowledge that He has. 

----------------------------------------------------


The question is - what one defines as being the "metaphysical teachings" of 

theosophy?

And HPB also said that, the Secret Doctrine was not without faults. It only 

uses three or four out of the seven keys in the Mystery Language, (vol 2.- 

p. 797)

"Thus far have proceeded the rough outlines of the beliefs and tenets of the 

archaic, earliest Races contained in their hitherto secret Scriptural 

records. But our explanations are by no means complete, nor do they pretend 

to give out the full text, or to have been read by the help of more than 

three or four keys out of the sevenfold bunch of esoteric interpretation, 

and even this has only been partially accomplished. The work is too gigantic 

for any one person to undertake, far more to accomplish. Our main concern 

was simply to prepare the soil." (vol 2.- p. 797)

What is the "Psychological key" to The Secret Doctrine?

===========================================

[LM] These quotes of HPB refer solely to the "evolutionary history" of the 
descent of consciousness through the Globes of both Cosmogenesis and 
Anthropogenesis. And is not pertinent to her explanations of the fundamental principles, 
or to the understanding of the metaphysical laws that underlay the initial 
higher order involution's -- which are the basis of every level of Absolute or 
relative existence... And, thus, such laws are the basis of such evolution's. 

Therefore, In that statement, HPB does not deny the reality of the 
fundamental truths that underlie all seven keys. She even states in the Proem to the SD 
that these three fundamental truths underlie all subsequent metaphysical 
processes that such "evolutionary history" she later described, rests on. Without 
the fundamental metaphysics leading to the "coadunate but not consubstantial" 
fields of consciousness -- such evolution (particular to this Solar System) 
could not occur. 

My interest (from a teaching point of view) lies in arriving at a full 
understanding of the five keys fully encompassed within those three propositions. F
our of which keys HPB attempted to outline in the SD based on and limited by 
the level of knowledge of science available at that time. The fifth, of course, 
purposefully left to our own mental intuition and imagination to decipher... 
But, nevertheless, telegraphed, through the hidden code of symbology (both 
oral and graphic) disguised by the emphatic nature of her writings... Something, 
later teachers of pseudo-theosophy couldn't see, blinded by the glare of 
their preconceptions and religious biases, and which caused confusion among casual 
readers of HPB's complex symbologies. 

The ABC model attempts to cut through all that with a simple geophysical 
interpretation that, through visual graphic symbology, can lead to an intuitive 
grasp of the ultimate truth from a different, but highly controlled and 
concentrated direction of thought. 

Since the "Psychological key" depends on that "Evolutionary key" describing 
the process that leads to sentient beings and subsequently, human beings -- it 
can only be "hidden" within ourselves and our individual relationships with 
the outer world. That is why, HPB left it out of the Secret Doctrine... Mainly, 
because it can only be handled effectively by direct contact between teacher 
and student -- or through the long process of painful trial and error and 
possibly endless incarnations without such a teacher. It is this part of the 
Gupta-Vidya that Idries Shah deals with. 

In that sense -- for those people who need such psychological knowledge -- 
then, Idries Shah is their "new messenger" that HPB spoke about. (But, there 
are other senses and other yoga's that are also necessary to be clarified for 
those on other paths... By other "messengers" who can speak to them directly on 
their own levels of intellect, intelligence and intuition.) 

Thus, for some of us needing other parts of the Gupta Vidya, including the 
other four keys (leaving out the "Magic" key) -- other Messengers may be 
required. 

But, for those needing the understandable geophysical "proof" of the "Metaphy
sical key" -- that "messenger" is the one I was speaking about. All, I am 
trying to do is translate into "the language of this age" (through my geophysical 
ABC model) the "message" he gave me orally about how to link up the 
unchanging and complete theosophical metaphysics with the formerly ever changing and 
incomplete scientific understandings of physics... i.e. How to clarify the 
fundamental relationship and common origin of both consciousness and matter, that 
may ultimately allow science to arrive at a Unified field theory of everything 
which, once and for all, can proove the absolute truth of all theosophical 
teachings... From the metaphysics of our origin, through the physical/mental 
evolution and biophysics of our being, to the psychological basis of our 
individual relationship with our inner selves as well as with the outer world -- that 
is governed by both metaphysical and physical processes -- which we all can 
understand. 

---------------------------------------------------


from


M. Sufilight with peace and love...







----- Original Message ----- 

From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>

To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:43 PM

Subject: Re: Theos-World HPB's article entitled KARMIC VISIONS & Frank's 

relevant comments