Re: Theos-World Doubt and new beliefs, Daniel Caldwell, David Green, etc.
Feb 13, 2006 01:28 PM
by M. Sufilight
Hallo all,
Here is a little something, that might help Avatarhood
sprout in your bodies...
:-)
USEFUL KNOWLEDGE
A scholar being ferried by Nasrudin across a body of water chided
Nasrudin for his ungrammatical language as well as the badly translated copy
of The Voice of Silence
he was carrying with him, and while also hearing he did not learn in school
he said:
"What? half of your life has been wasted!"
Shortly afterwards, Nasrudin asked him: "Did you learn to swim?"
"No I did not," replied the scholar.
"Well, in this case seems all your life has been wasted ... we are sinking,"
said Nasrudin.
Interpretation
1.. Learning from books is only so much learning.
2.. Practical wisdom is important too.
3.. Priority - some knowledge is more important than others.
4.. Interpreting this story is a waste of life.
(About Nasrudin see this source from which the above
is taken http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Nasrudin)
*******
And about "Swimmers" (ie. "Seekers" - almost Harry-Potter-like),
how to learn to Swim, and also Swimming madness
we have the following from the Sufi Archives...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/13178 (Part 1)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/13179 (Part 2)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/13180 (Part 3)
An excerpt from the end of Part 3 rewritten a bit:
Here and there a candidate still presented himself to a swimming
instructor, to make his bargain. Usually what amounted to a stereotyped
conversation took place:
"I want to learn to swim."
"Do you want to make a bargain about it?"
"No. I only have to take my ton of cabbage."
"What cabbage?"
"The food which I will need on the other island."
"There is better food there."
"I don't know what you mean. I cannot be sure. I must take
my cabbage."
"You cannot swim, for one thing with a ton of cabbage."
"Then I cannot go. You call it a load. I call it my essential
nutrition."
"Suppose, as an allegory, we say 'not cabbage,' but
'doubts', 'assumptions,' or 'destructive ideas'?"
"I am going to take my cabbage to some instructor who understand
my needs."
*******
from
M. Sufilight with a huge smile...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Bruce MacDonald" <robert.b.macdonald@hotmail.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:11 PM
Subject: Theos-World Doubt and new beliefs, Daniel Caldwell, David Green,
etc.
I am kicking myself for getting drawn back into this, but I think it's
important. I want to introduce the topic of doubt into this discussion
and
how it might play a role. To begin with HPB makes the following comment
on
doubt in "From Keshub to Maestro Wagner":
"If we are answered-as many a time we have been answered-that
notwithstanding all, the Salvationists as well as the New Dispensationists
are doing good, since they help to kindle the fast extinguishing fires of
spirituality in man's heart, we shall answer that it is not by fencing and
dancing in grotesque attire, that this spirituality can ever be preserved;
nor is it by thrusting one's own special belief down a neighbour's throat
that he can ever be convinced of its truth. Smoke also can dim the solar
rays, and it is well known that the most worthless materials, boldly
kindled
and energetically stirred, often throw out the densest masses of murky
vapour. Doubt is inseparable from the constitution of man's reasoning
powers, and few are the men who have never doubted, whatever their
sectarian
belief; a good proof that few are quite satisfied-say what they may to the
contrary-that it is their creed and not that of their brother which has
got
the whole truth. "
Doubt is the natural ally of reason. The inadequacy of a position will in
time be understood by reason and this will lead to doubt. The secret is
to
foster that doubt so that the doubter will seek for new answers. HPB
points
out that you do not change people's minds by ramming your own beliefs down
their throats. Does Daniel realize that his style of flooding leads to a
polarization of positions in his various antagonists over-riding any
feelings of doubt they might have? This stops the natural progression of
growth that was initiated by them bringing the topic up in the first
place.
Interfering in people's growth and understanding is what the priest-caste
do. HPB writes further on in the paragraph:
"Men have done their best to veil every beam and to replace it with the
false glare of error and fiction; none more so than bigoted, narrow-minded
theologians and priests of every faith, casuists and perverters through
selfishness. It is against them, never against any religion, or the
sincere
belief of any man in whatsoever he chooses, that we have and do protest."
By cornering opponents and throwing everything he has at them, Daniel
polarizes his opponents into a particular position thereby making them
unwilling to consider other points. This clouding of the air is exactly
what the priest-cast do with the dogmas they dress their respective
religions in. Instead of being able to progress to loftier and more
universal beliefs within his own religion, he is forced to leave that
community altogether if he has the courage to do so.
The Mahatmas also write on doubt. In ML 129 we read:
'My good friend - Shakespeare said truly that "our doubts are
traitors." Why should you
doubt or create in your mind ever growing monsters?'
Sometimes doubt betrays us. This type of doubt is usually a trust issue.
Universal Brotherhood is very difficult to practice, it is easy to doubt
the
sincerity of others. This was the problem between Judge and Besant.
Besant
began to doubt Judge, no doubt with the help of Olcott, and the rest as
they
say is history. Regrettably, Besant was in a position of Occult
responsibility, so her fall was particularly hard. Again, Daniel's style
is
one where the lack of trust between the various Societies is preyed upon
in
order to ensure that there never is established a foundation of trust upon
which to build consensus. At the risk of sounding extreme, does Daniel
realize this is a Jesuitical tactic, keep the various groups separate and
fighting among themselves?
When writing to Sinnett about his upcoming book and its effects on the
Spiritualists, the Master writes (ML 17):
"They will begin by rejecting - nay - vilifying it; but, it will
find its faithful twelve and - the seed thrown by your hand into the soil
of
speculation will not grow up as a weed. So far may be promised. You are
oft
too cautious. You remind too often the reader of your ignorance; and
presenting but as a modest theory that which at the bottom of your heart
you
know and feel to be an axiom, a primary truth - instead of helping, you
but
perplex him and - create doubt."
Now this is a very telling statement. Sinnett is being counselled that in
presenting his arguments in his book, that he should be forceful like he
has
full confidence in what he is saying. The doubting Spiritualist who picks
up the book and finds what appears to be some doubt in the writer, will
naturally be unpersuaded ultimately by the argument. Why should he move
from one doubtful position to another. Does Daniel realize that this is
the
effect his books and his website have on the seeker? Remember, people
seeking have to wade through a lot of different systems of thought. If
they
stop at Theosophy and read a book of letters that councils people it is
okay
to torture cats to death in the name of occult science, what are they to
think? Or if they read a book on a grand occultist whose author is so
unsure of her that he has to insert a few caveats where people argue for a
completely different picture of HPB then it is likely they will move on.
That is not to say that Daniel shouldn't deal with the allegations against
HPB, but there is a place for that. He can present papers at Theosophical
History conferences, etc. that prove the allegations to be false, which
seems to be what he believes.
Again we read ML 117:
"I highly approve of his coming to India, but disapprove as highly
his fancy of bringing Mr.
C.C. Massey here. The result of the latter would be to injure the cause
among Englishmen.
Distrust and prejudice are contagious."
Does Daniel realize that distrust is contagious? Who do you trust on this
site? If you say anything controversial, you are crucified. I don't
think
anyone is here to be attacked, they are here to find a secure environment
of
like minded individuals where they can discuss things openly and honestly.
If you are afraid to bring up certain topics, then already we've lost. We
should not doubt and distrust the other members of this site, especially
if
we want it to work. Make a place where people want to come and comment.
If I wanted to create an agent provocateur against theosophy, I would
create
someone who fostered distrust among current members and who had a weak
enough position to foster doubt in new members. This would effectively
freeze any further progress along the lines of brotherhood.
Perhaps such an agent would create cynical aliases to further stir things
up. Is this what is happening here? I hope not, but if it walks like a
duck . . . , what are we to think?
Daniel, perhaps it is time to tell us what you know about Green and
Hobbes?
I am sure that you would not be betraying any trust in simply providing
evidence of their existence?
Sincerely, Bruce
_________________________________________________________________
Scan and help eliminate destructive viruses from your inbound and outbound
e-mail and attachments.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Start enjoying all the benefits of MSNŽ Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
