Theos-Talk Archives (June 2006 Message tt00033)

Leon,

Still loosing your  time with it? 

Carlos






De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Fri, 2 Jun 2006 02:55:33 EDT

Assunto:[Spam] Re: Theos-World To Leon on Personalities

> Dear Senhor Aveline,
> 
> Better then if you just ignored it, rather than publicly admit by your 
> refusal to deal with the issues of theosophical teachings that I pointed out below 
> to Carlos Paterson (and others who read these public letters) -- along with 
> your continued hypocrisy concerning your own activities along the same lines that 
> you criticize in others -- that you really have no idea what "discussing 
> theosophy" in open forum really means. 
> 
> Please note that I have no need to discuss theosophy with you (unless you 
> have legitimate question in my own area of such study I can answer)... And, since 
> all your letters (other than those with my name in the subject line) are now 
> automatically trashed by my mail system, I cannot respond to any of your posts.
> 
> 
> Leon Maurer
> http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
> 
> In a message dated 6/1/06 10:01:02 AM, carlosaveline@terra.com.br writes:
> 
> 
> > Dear Leon,
> > 
> > 
> > I do not have the time to read your message below, but I sense it it some 
> > kind of personal discussion.
> > 
> > I will be available to discuss Theosophy with you, Cass and everyone.
> > 
> > 
> > Carlos.
> > 
> > 
> > De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > 
> > Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > 
> > Cópia:
> > 
> > Data:Wed, 31 May 2006 17:05:35 EDT
> > 
> > Assunto:[Spam] Re: Theos-World To Leon on Personalities
> > 
> > > Carlos (Aveline),
> > >
> > > Sorry that you took what I wrote directly to Carlos Paterson so personally 
> > --
> > > as if it were written to you. Methinks you protest too much. Could it be
> > > that its because you have been the worst offender in personality attacks 
> > since
> > > you came onto this forum, and therefore jumped in so quick and cleverly to
> > > defend yourself -- by reversal (the kettle calling the pot black) -- using 
> > the
> > > same method you are criticizing? It's no wonder that you had nothing to 
> > say
> > > about the content of my letter that had a direct connection with the 
> > theosophy
> > > you pride yourself in being so knowledgeable about... Or, is Cass the only 
> > one
> > > around here who really does what you say you do?
> > >
> > > Therefore, in my view your comments below are just a crock of self serving
> > > nonsense.
> > >
> > > But, since the shoe fits, and you stuck your foot in it publicly, I guess
> > > you'll just have to wear it -- and bear it. ;-)
> > >
> > > I suggest you reread my letter to Carlos P., and ask yourself if what you
> > > criticized is an accurate assessment of what it was all about? As HPB (and
> > > Master JC) pointed out, its better to look into your own faults before 
> > criticizing
> > > others by assuming they have the same faults. Yours is the perfect example
> > > of an emotional projection that reflects one's inner character for all to 
> > see.
> > > (So, I guess this verifies everything I pointed out in response to your ad
> > > hominem letters viciously attacking Daniel and others when you first 
> > showed up
> > > here.)
> > >
> > > If you had read it a bit more carefully -- you'd have seen that my letter 
> > to
> > > Carlos Paterson was not a personality attack... Since it dealt directly 
> > with
> > > his statements that indicated his ignorance of the true purpose of 
> > theosophy as
> > > well as a knowledge of what was taught in the Secret Doctrine, or that the
> > > later teachings of the pseudo theosophists (AB, CWL, AAB, etc.) were in 
> > direct
> > > opposition to the original theosophical teachings -- that were known as 
> > far
> > > back as ancient Greece, if not thousands of years earlier.
> > >
> > > In fact, my letter was a necessary criticism of the wrong views of the
> > > student (not him, personally) by pointing out the correct view for the 
> > benefit of
> > > both him and all other beginning students of theosophy who might be 
> > listening
> > > in to our dialogues. This also would include old students, who still are
> > > unable to comprehend the deeper teachings, purposes and scope of theosophy 
> > as
> > > originally given out by the Masters... That certainly wasn't intended by 
> > them to
> > > be a pecking ground for those more interested in historical accuracy and
> > > personal beliefs, than understanding of the fundamental theosophical 
> > truths and
> > > their application.
> > >
> > > In any event, I'm sure Carlos is capable of responding to my letter in
> > > response to his -- for himself.
> > >
> > > Therefore, if there is anyone on this forum who speaks directly toward
> > > clarifying the truths of theosophical metaphysics, and exchanging views on
> > > theosophy, philosophy and their relationship to modern science that 
> > currently opposes
> > > them all (although not for long, as I see it) -- it's certainly not you. 
> > Should
> > > anyone be interested in verifying this -- we'll let the record speak for
> > > itself.
> > >
> > > In conclusion, I suggest you start thinking about what you say before you 
> > say
> > > it, speak to the issue and not to the personality, and begin practicing 
> > what
> > > you preach.
> > >
> > > Leon Maurer
> > >
> > > In a message dated 5/31/06 11:11:22 AM, carlosaveline@terra.com.br writes:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dear Leon,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I see two main things in what you write below:
> > > >
> > > > 1) You are indulging in discussing people, personalities, not the 
> > content of
> > > > the earch for truth.
> > > >
> > > > 2) You are being judgmental of other people, people about whom you have
> > > > scarce information.
> > > >
> > > > If I remember it right, the goal of Theos-talk is not to discuss
> > > > personalities, and that is why I feel at home here, since, better than 
> > gossips or
> > > > personal accusations,  I prefer exchanging views of Philosophy and 
> > Theosophy.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,   Carlos Cardoso Aveline.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > >
> > > > Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > >
> > > > Cópia:
> > > >
> > > > Data:Wed, 31 May 2006 01:16:52 EDT
> > > >
> > > > Assunto:[Spam] Re: Theos-World THEOSOPHY - Is it possible?
> > > >
> > > > > Carlos,
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think you have really understood theosophy and why it was 
> > given
> > > > out
> > > > > when it was. Judging from your commentaries, I doubt that you have 
> > even
> > > > > studied any of the inner (occult) truths hidden in the secret Doctrine 
> > --
> > > > for
> > > > > "intuitive students" to dig out for themselves. If you had, you could
> > > > never say
> > > > > any of the things you did about Blavatsky, the Secret Doctrine, or the
> > > > > fundamental theosophy it teaches. So, from my point of view, it's 
> > apparent
> > > > that
> > > > > everything you did say is based solely on ignorance of those truths. 
> > But
> > > > then,
> > > > > it's understandable, since all newbees think they know enough to make
> > > > judgments
> > > > > about things they know very little of. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > So, all you need to quaff your "thirst for more and more" is just to 
> > dig a
> > > > > little deeper -- which might (if you can handle it) take several years 
> > of
> > > > > serious study of all the Secret Doctrine's inner depths along with all 
> > its
> > > > > references to the ancient wisdom -- that hasn't changed one bit in 
> > more
> > > > than 5,000
> > > > > years. All you need is your own intuition awakened through a proper
> > > > practice of
> > > > > Rajah Yoga meditation.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, then, like most people today, you might want it all spoon fed to 
> > you.
> > > > > But that isn't going to happen... Since theosophy is only for those
> > > > willing to
> > > > > study it through "their own self devised and self determined efforts." 
> > The
> > > > > goal, of course, being; to attain individual "'self realization' so as 
> > to
> > > > be
> > > > > better able to help and teach others."
> > > > >
> > > > > For one thing, theosophy has nothing to say about the world we 
> > experience
> > > > > outside of ourselves. And this includes all the miseries of our 
> > material
> > > > world
> > > > > brought on by ignorance of the fundamental principles and of the inner
> > > > truths
> > > > > of Cosmogenesis and its metaphysics and evolution, along with the 
> > truths
> > > > of
> > > > > reincarnation and karma.
> > > > >
> > > > > The theosophical teachings are timeless, and have never been concerned
> > > > with
> > > > > the state of the world during this period of Kali Yuga that has to
> > > > inevitably
> > > > > run it's course... But, is concerned only with our inner spiritual 
> > life
> > > > and
> > > > > our becoming a "nuclius of universal brotherhood."
> > > > >
> > > > > What has that to do with crop circles, UFO's, and other world changes 
> > that
> > > > > are purely material phenomena that are constantly changing and have no
> > > > real
> > > > > relationship to the infinite inner life theosophy teaches us about 
> > (with
> > > > the help
> > > > > of the Voice of the Silence, The Bhagavad Gita, and Patanjali's Yoga
> > > > > Aphorisms)? What more of a "revelation" do we want or need to become a
> > > > true
> > > > > theosophist?
> > > > >
> > > > > As for enlarging theosophy, how can a knowledge of "Portals" or the 
> > "Mayan
> > > > > calendar" have anything to do with its fundamental teachings? Anything 
> > one
> > > > > needs to know about those other things (we call them "side issues") 
> > are
> > > > well
> > > > > covered in many other "Mystery Schools" that can easily be found on 
> > the
> > > > Internet.
> > > > > But, why waste your time, when everything taught by those other
> > > > > "revelations" are all in the Secret doctrine, its references, and 
> > other
> > > > writings of HPB,
> > > > > WQJ and some of their direct students like Perucker, Farthing, etc. --
> > > > whom I
> > > > > suggest you also study before thinking you know anything about true
> > > > theosophy.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The real "duty" of theosophists isn't in "enlarging it's scope" -- but 
> > in
> > > > > practicing its teachings of altruism and universal brotherhood, and 
> > spread
> > > > > broadcasting it to the outer world by the example of our own 
> > individual
> > > > and group
> > > > > actions. Anything else is just adding onto the mistakes and 
> > distortions
> > > > given
> > > > > to it by the later pseudo theosophists who came after Blavatsky -- 
> > from
> > > > Annie
> > > > > Besant, through Charles Leadbeater, to Alice Bailey... All of whom 
> > tried
> > > > to
> > > > > turn it into another religion no better than all those that already 
> > exists
> > > > and
> > > > > that have, if not led, not been able to prevent the world from 
> > following
> > > > its
> > > > > present materialistic path to near destruction (which, incidentally, 
> > is
> > > > > absolutely necessary before the phoenix of a truer theosophical world 
> > can
> > > > rise out of
> > > > > its ashes).
> > > > >
> > > > > What makes you think that adding or enlarging theosophy, and turning 
> > it
> > > > into
> > > > > a new religion with new revelations (that only a Master can give) can 
> > do
> > > > any
> > > > > better? Besides, those revelations can only add to and further clarify
> > > > what
> > > > > is already hidden under the intentionally "blinded" dead letter gloss 
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > Secret doctrine. Better now to prepare ourselves with what is already
> > > > > available so as to be able to assist the new 6th sub-racers coming in 
> > this
> > > > Aquarian
> > > > > age -- so they don't get caught up in the materialism of the past
> > > > Millennium.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason HPB said the SD was only "fragments of the Secret 
> > doctrine",
> > > > was
> > > > > that the Masters intentionally (and rightly so) held back the bulk of 
> > the
> > > > > occult teachings (such as those related to the "correlation of forces" 
> > and
> > > > so
> > > > > called "magic") that would give terrible power to the majority of this
> > > > world
> > > > > steeped in untrammeled greed and selfishness -- that no amount of
> > > > spiritual teaching
> > > > > could change. In fact all the "new spiritual movements" have added 
> > nothing
> > > > > to the teachings of theosophy -- except, perhaps, to distort them 
> > beyond
> > > > all
> > > > > recognition. Also, any sort of psychic teachings for purposes of 
> > attaining
> > > > > individual "powers" have nothing to do with theosophy -- which teaches
> > > > only a
> > > > > Rajah-Jnana yoga leading to enlightenment or self realization. How 
> > anyone
> > > > > could call that "obsolete" is beyond all comprehension. Especially 
> > coming
> > > > from a
> > > > > Brazilian -- where the Aquarian age children have been appearing since 
> > the
> > > > > beginning of the new theosophical cycle in the last quarter of the 
> > 20th
> > > > century.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since true theosophy, no matter when it originates, has no "dogma" (as 
> > it
> > > > is
> > > > > not and could never be an "organized religion") -- any additions to 
> > its
> > > > > fundamental teachings by ignorant students, or those not yet initiated 
> > by
> > > > a Master,
> > > > > could only make things worse for the world and the coming "indigo"
> > > > children.
> > > > >
> > > > > Therefore, the best advice I can give you, would be to seriously study
> > > > > theosophy and its ageless wisdom from its original sources -- before 
> > even
> > > > thinking
> > > > > of changing it into another hierarchical organizational entity 
> > concerned
> > > > only
> > > > > with the state or conditions of the present world around us. Anyone 
> > who
> > > > wants
> > > > > to know about any of that can easily find it on Google -- without 
> > trying
> > > > to
> > > > > make theosophy into something it was never intended by the Masters to
> > > > become.
> > > > >
> > > > > Incidentally (for those ready and perceptive enough to see it) the 
> > Masters
> > > > > are still here... And if they wanted to add some new teaching to bring
> > > > theosophy
> > > > > up to date in the 21st century, they would give it out to a chosen
> > > > messenger
> > > > > -- like they've already done several times in this new cycle of the
> > > > > theosophical movement since 1975. So, there already are "new 
> > theosophical
> > > > teachings"
> > > > > that go beyond the basic outline in the secret Doctrine -- without in 
> > any
> > > > way
> > > > > making those fundamental teachings less valuable or obsolete.
> > > > >
> > > > > Go look, and you'll find.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best wishes,
> > > > >
> > > > > Leon Maurer
> > > > > http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
> > > > > 
> > http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
> > > > >
> > > > > In a message dated 5/30/06 10:14:50 AM, carlos.paterson@gmail.com 
> > writes:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Congratulations by the answer...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is habitual to hear people saying that Blavatsky presented a
> > > > "profound"
> > > > > > working, a "vast" one. I commonly see people saying that her writings
> > 
> > > > were not
> > > > > > developed for the time she lived, but for the future one, for the 
> > future
> > > > > > generation: and only this "future generation" would be capable of
> > > > understanding
> > > > > > her discourse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But, there´s something strange...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When I read affirmations like these:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (1) "THEOSOPHY offers fundamental principles to help us understand 
> > our
> > > > > > world..." http://www.theosophysandiego.org/index.htm
> > > > > > (2) "...These fundamental principles of theosophy have now taken 
> > their
> > > > place
> > > > > > and are demanding attention on the world stage."
> > > > > > http://www.theosophysandiego.org/index.htm
> > > > > > (3) "Theosophy embodies a view of the universe, including theories 
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > origin and mysteries ofthe universe."
> > > > > > http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/lessons01.htm
> > > > > > (4) "Theosophy is a collection of religious and philosophical 
> > teachings
> > > > that
> > > > > > view humanity as constantly evolving to a higher level."
> > > > > > http://www3.igalaxy.net/~nick/theosophy/lessons01.htm
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see a certain kind of "fanaticism" (sorry for the sincerity - it 
> > is
> > > > only
> > > > > > my opinion), as "nothing new" is viewed in the current Theosophical
> > > > > > Literature. What I perceive is a literature that is a "repetitive
> > > > discourse".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The impression is that the theosophical writings stopped in time, at 
> > the
> > > > > > time of Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891) and at the "New (?)
> > > > Theosophy",
> > > > > > with Charles Webster Leadbeater (1847-1934) and Annie Besant
> > > > (1847-1933).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No person appears to review something new or actual, something that
> > > > really
> > > > > > approaches of themes like "Crop Circles", the "actual moment, as a
> > > > transition
> > > > > > one", the "UFO phenomena" and so on... and there´s much more. And I
> > > > think:
> > > > > > Where are the "fundamental principles" capable of treating subjects 
> > like
> > > > these,
> > > > > > helping us to understand our world, our MODERN one?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My and our world is now and here! It didn´t stop (1831 - 1933), but
> > > > flows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, the affirmations (1) and (2), in my point of view is a fallacy, 
> > as
> > > > my
> > > > > > and our world is not being treated as it must be.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Related to the (3) affirmation, there´s a simple and direct 
> > question:
> > > > What
> > > > > > Misteries? The same and old discourses that we see at any corner, at 
> > any
> > > > book?
> > > > > > I woud advise to not waste paper with a old fashioned talking!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Finally, related to the (4) affirmation, I ask:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does Theosophy, as has been presented, really see humanity as 
> > constanly
> > > > > > evolving to a higher level? What level? At a level that stopped in 
> > 1934
> > > > and is
> > > > > > now being called "New Theosophy", with all its contradictions?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry, friends, for that aggressive disembosom. But I am tired and
> > > > > > disappointed!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to see a "Lively Theosophy", not a New Theosophy!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A Theosophy dealing with our modern world, with all its stress, 
> > water´s
> > > > > > disappearance, homosexuality, species´s extinction, growing
> > > > catastrophes,
> > > > > > forthcoming of new diseases, the reason of the growing usage of 
> > drugs,
> > > > the
> > > > > > Anti-Christ´s controversy, the UFO and so forth! These are the marks 
> > of
> > > > our world and
> > > > > > is a pity that the great part of people is talking about a dead 
> > world, a
> > > > > > world of "letters" and about and unreal "Tibet".
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you know that Tibet is disappearing (perhaps disappeared), with 
> > the
> > > > > > chinese destroying its traditions? This is our world!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is the esoteric meaning of this fact? Would be the "transition" 
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > spirituality to the South America?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you known that this is a normal converse at the new spiritual
> > > > movement!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Have you listened about Portals or Maya´s calendar yet? What 
> > Theosophy
> > > > has
> > > > > > to talk about it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello, we are in 2006!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately, I see the Thesophy dying... dying in an out-of-date
> > > > > > literature, holding itself in a dogmatism like the Church and 
> > Vatican.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don´t think that Blavatsky, Leadbeater, Annie Besant and others 
> > have
> > > > > > failed. On the contrary, I see them as a "start point" and is our 
> > duty
> > > > to enlarge
> > > > > > its frontiers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Blavatsky said:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "It is needless to explain that this book is not the Secret Doctrine 
> > in
> > > > its
> > > > > > entirety, but a select number of fragments.."
> > > > > > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-0-co.htm#preface
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I see people looking for the Secret Doctrine (the "fragments") 
> > as
> > > > the
> > > > > > Final Revelation! No! It is just "fragments"!
> > > > > >
> > >
> > > > > > It is just 1%... and this undermost quantity of water is not capable 
> > to
> > > > > > avert our thirst! It is necessary more, much more...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see Blavatsky as one who dropped water in our lips, in our thirsty
> > > > lips -
> > > > > > as a stimulus! She didn´t wish to avoid our thirst, but increase it; 
> > so
> > > > that
> > > > > > we can understand that Water (The Truth) exists, is real and is the 
> > only
> > > > one
> > > > > > capable to satisfy our necessities.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is important to see that she didn´t reveal the river, so don´t be 
> > a
> > > > > > fanatic!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Finding out the river is a task that she has given to us... and
> > > > certainly we
> > > > > > will find it when our thirst be unsupportable!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And the most important:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The River must be full of life, pure and sunny... not a stagnant 
> > one, a
> > > > > > prisoner of time and dogmatism.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Whe must BE FREE! And at this point, Blavatsky was unique example!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Carlos Paterson
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1149231409.606238.2538.tulear.hst.terra.com.br,24451,20031127114101,20031127114101
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 01/06/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4775
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]