Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01788)

To Niki and others on this thread.

Whether or not I am interested in what Dionne taught you is irrelevant. 
Also, what you implied by "scripture" has nothing to do with what's true or not.

I was referring to reading responses to previous correspondence that does not 
quote what the writer is referring to, answering letters out of context, 
changing subject lines in midstream, or just plain nonsense comments, unfounded 
assertions, or personal remarks directed to particular individuals. Unless one 
quotes the entire dialogue in any thread, this is not the way an open and 
unmoderated topical discussion forum should work. 

But since you asked -- I am not particularly interested in anybody's personal 
experiences based on any sort of contact with the dead (other than to refute 
it as being of no value at all in increasing anyones knowledge of theosophy) 
... Since, my own knowledge and experience of occultism and mental or psychic 
phenomena coupled with metaphysics and science goes deep enough to know that 
much of such stuff referring to visions of the afterlife and seeing and talking 
to the dead, are self delusional, strictly personal wishful thinking, or 
chemically induced hallucinations (either through brain or gland dysfunction's or 
ingestion of certain drugs) -- that doesn't help anyone else in understanding 
the true nature of reality or attaining their own self realization or 
enlightenment -- which depends solely on their own particular karma, and has nothing to 
do with anyone else's karma or their imaginations or fantasies... That should 
be kept strictly to themselves. 

But you can keep on writing all you want about it, and if I find it 
theosophically interesting, I'll read some more. If not, I will ignore it. 

(The above was written more than a week ago.) 

Now that I've read some more about your imaginary experiences and what was 
taught to you (which may or may not be true, wherever it came from) I can put it 
in the same category of other spiritualists' delusions (as HPB did) -- that, 
along with private chats and meaningless one line comments, has cluttered my 
mailbox with almost 1000 letters having little of value in most of them (as I 
presume from all the random reading of the past month)... And proceed to ignore 
your letters along with all the other babblers using this theosophical 
discussion forum as a personal, ego washing chat room. (Unless they are directed to, 
or sent by me. :-) 

While I may disagree with your ideas and lack interest in your personal chats 
with or about either living or dead lovers or your personal sexual 
preferences or other physical needs, desires, or whatever -- no personal disparagement 
is intended. :-)

(For you and others reading this) 
So, since I can never catch up with my e-mail, I have decided to trash all 
mail received from this forum, without opening... Except, possibly, letters from 
a few theosophists that I am interested in, those with specific questions 
directed to me in the subject line, or thread lines I have started or replied to. 


>From now on, if anyone want's to talk with me about theosophical metaphysics, 
yoga, science, philosophy, or any other topic of common interest, please 
write me directly. (I'll decide whether or not such correspondences are worth 
public posting.) However, if you want me to read your letter to this forum, please 
put my name on the subject line.

In the meantime -- since I am moving over to other monitored forums where I 
can reasonably discuss theosophy and scientific metaphysics in some depth -- 
you may hear from me occasionally if I start a thread here or someone asks me a 
question. </:-)>

Best wishes,

Leon Maurer




In a message dated 04/18/05 4:04:56 AM, nikidurand@yahoo.com writes:

>Hi Leon-
>
>So does that mean my experience with my recently
>deceased mate, Dionne, since it isn't scripture, is
>"off-topic"?
>
>Or would you be interested in what she's taught me
>since she died?
>
>Curiously, 
>
>Niki
>
>
>--- leonmaurer@aol.com wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> In a message dated 04/17/05 1:57:06 PM,
>> bartl@sprynet.com writes:
>> 
>> >
>> >Mark Hamilton Jr. wrote:
>> >> Theosophy teaches that there are actually not
>> one, but seven parts of
>> >> man and some of them separate at death.
>> >
>> > Any statement which starts out with "Theosophy
>> teaches" is going to 
>> >turn off a good portion of your audience. In
>> addition, you are ignoring
>> >the first principle of THE SECRET DOCTRINE.
>> >
>> > Bart
>> 
>> Would you mind explaining that? What's the
>> relevance of your first remark? 
>> What is the principle Mark is ignoring? How? 
>> 
>> Since this is an e-mail forum supposedly talking
>> about theosophical subjects, 
>> and not a chat room where anything goes, I get
>> "turned off" by such out of 
>> context and out of continuity remarks that have no
>> relevance to the thread of 
>> the subject line. 
>> LM 
>