Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00370)

Dear Hauw,

I will take your question -- of fundamental importance.

As true and patient scholars investigate  the theosophical movement and its 
Philososophy, they will help many sincere theosophists to understand two 
basic things:

1) The presentation of theosophical teachings made by Annie Besant, C. W. 
Leadbeater and
those under their influence is mayavic, or illusory and therefor cannot 
last;

2) The original teachings of H.P.B., William Judge  and other therosophical 
authors are  not easy to understand in every detail;   but they enlighten 
human affairs and evolution;  and they put it into a broader context and 
perspective which lead the student  to the perception that Universal 
Brotherhood is a law of evolution; that Brotherhood is  connected to the Law 
of Karma; that it is connected  to the fact of Reincarnation.

Theosophy was once called by a Mahatma -- "the Asiatic Psychology". It can 
also be called
"Esoteric Philosophy".  It is a multidimensional, intuitive and rational 
knowledge. It can obtained gradually.

True scholars do not cease dialogue because of fear or anger.

They constantly doubt, re-examine and improve the PREMISES of their work.


Peace to all beings, Carlos.




> From: "T. H. Hauw" <hauwquek@starhub.net.sg>
> Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Salience, valence, HPB, and scholars
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:22:06 +0800
>
>
> Hello Paul,
>
> In your post of Feb 15, you said, "If HPB's Masters are acknowledged by
> scholars to have been real, then the contrast with
> CWL's imaginary ones becomes all too glaring." Can you or someone explain
> the background to this statement please?
>
> Thanks
> Hauw
> New student of Theosophy
> ________________________________________________________________________
> >________________________________________________________________________
> >
> >Message: 3            Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:37:35 -0000
> >   From: "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@yahoo.com>
> >Subject: Salience, valence, HPB, and scholars
> >
> >Here von Egmond is implying, correctly in my view that the
> >previous attitude toward HPB among scholars had generally been
> >that the Masters were figments of fantasy and that therefore HPB
> >herself did not deserve serious attention in terms of studying her
> >sources.  Why would Adyar not welcome this?  It undermines the
> >unassailable CWL, for one thing.  If HPB's Masters are
> >acknowledged by scholars to have been real, then the contrast with
> >CWL's imaginary ones becomes all too glaring.
> >
> >Paul
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This email has been scanned for viruses by StarHub e.Scan.
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
_________________________________________________________________
Copa 2006: Juiz @#$%*&!? e mais frases para seu MSN Messenger 
http://copa.br.msn.com/extra/frases/