|
|
| [MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |
| [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Dec 20, 2005 10:21 AM
by Iain
Iain and all
You can only help a person if he expects, wishes, to be helped.
People are moved by different reasons, from beliefs brought by education to
adverse mental conditions.
Iainīs idea of suggesting or influencing people whoīd be nearer him to
support some personal help is good but we here, with all this trade of
emails cannot even make him see an inch further, we donīt even know if he
reads these comments.
In the path we find all kinds of people, those who are prepared for it and
those who are not, and the only secure thing that we can do to change the
world is to change ourselves first.
The great amount of emails that Anand has received up to now seems not to
have changed a little bit in his comments and irony against HPB.
Who can change his mind if not himself?
Ho cannot halp him if not himself or the possibility of someone very
conscious that be near him?
What does he think in his intimate now when reading these emails?
How does his mind work? How does his physical and chemical brain work?
What environmental or psychological conditions built up all these prejudices
and stereotyped visions against HPB and against everyone that shows
affection toward her works?
The subject is deeper than what it seems.
Maybe his presence here is disturbing something inside of us that is not
well worked yet or his behaviour is trying to teach us something.
Life teach us in strange ways sometimes...
Just ideas...
Krishtar
----- Original Message ----- From: "Iain" <ibse03888@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky's writing was the cause of . . . the TS
(that's the truth)
Lenny,
I feel sorry for Annand, and his inability to learn or to see beyond
what passes as his point of view. Who taught him? and why ? This is
perhaps
the danger with cults or cult-like groups,who is controlling who?AND FOR
WHAT PURPOSE? He does himself no favours nor Theosophy by his
statements,but
when he makes them they have to be challenged which exposes his flawed
point
of view and the more he labours the point the weaker his argument becomes
and so dissipates its effect. It was George Bernard Shaw who once said of
a
critic " He has lost the art of conversation, but, unfortunatly not the
power of speech!"
A sentiment that would apply in this case.I think I will contact someone
at
Aydar who will review these postings and activities, and hopefully have
"a
quiet word" and hopefully send him in the right direction.The Objects of
Theosophy are clearly not understood by Annand. Let us hope he will
reflect on the path he is taken, lets us hope he can read the sign posts.
We must be patient with him, and show him kindness, from that he will
learn
to understand. It is our duty to make him a Theosophist.
cheers Iain
----- Original Message ----- From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 12:59 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky's writing was the cause of . . . the TS
(that's the truth)
Anand,
Why would Blavatsky (if she could even have such control after death --
which
she denied was possible) have played into your hands and allowed you to
send
that inflammatory subject line more than one time?
Wouldn't it be more likely that it's your own Blavatsky-hating inner self
that is pushing your send button?
If so, your multiple posting and your apology appears to be another sly
propaganda* ploy designed to cause dissension among theosophists and pit
brother
against brother. When are you going to stop this nonsense? By now, you
have
lost all your credibility and cannot convince any sincere theosophy
students
that anything you say is the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Leonardo
*Adolph Hitler's propagandist, Joseph Goebbels said, "To make people
believe
a lie all you have to do is repeat it over and over again." Another of his
tricks was to "imply a lie by telling the truth." It's the truth that
since HPB
was the founding cause of the TS, every future action of it could be
attributed to that cause, even though no such action was intended by the
founder. To
the discerning reader, the wording of the original subject line assertion
gives the lie away and exposes the evil intent. An intent of which the
author
reverses by accusing others of the same crime, i.e., that all students of
HPB
hate AB and CWL along with their pseudo theosophy. (Q.E.D.)
In a message dated 12/19/05 5:59:46 AM, AnandGholap@AnandGholap.org
writes:
I am sorry. Reply was not going, so I pressed button many times. It appears that it sent same post many times. Blavatsky might have done something. Anand Gholap --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand Gholap" <AnandGholap@A..> wrote: >> Cass, > > > To look outside of Leadbeater and Besant into other cults, > >suggests that your spiritual needs are not being met by theformer. > > Cass > > I read some books of Rajnish before I even heard of TS and > Theosophy. > But philosophy of many other organizations did not satisfy me. > Later, I somehow came across Theosophical lodge. Then I read many > books of Besant, Leadbeater, Clara Codd and some other authors, they > completely satisfied me. So now I am happy. > > Anand Gholap > > > > > > > Anand Gholap <AnandGholap@A...> wrote: Bart, > > In the city where HQ of Rajnish is located, he is not criticized > > much and they still have large number of followers. But as you > said, > > Osho Rajnish might still be criticized in some other parts of the > > world. Around 15 years back I bought and read some of his books, > but > > somehow I could not appreciate that much. > > Even if I don't accept philosophy of some of other organizations > > including that of Rajnish, I generally avoid to attack them. > > > > Anand Gholap > > > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > > > Anand Gholap wrote: > > > > Many educated people follow Osho. He is no more criticized > much. > > > > > > If you educate a donkey, you still have a donkey. And he is > > certainly > > > criticized. He was a rapist and a CONVICTED bioterrorist. > > > > > > Bart[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links Yahoo! Groups LinksYahoo! Groups Links