Theos-Talk Archives (July 2006 Message tt00431)

Dallas, Friends, 

HPB, "a woman of very limited insight"?  Not at all. But every Initiate will act as a MIRROR to the Uninitiate...

Carlos. 



De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theosophia@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Wed, 19 Jul 2006 08:28:36 -0700

Assunto:[Spam] Theos-World RE: [theosophia] Statements on Blavatsky

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: teos9@aol.com
> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 
> To: 
> Subject: 
> 
> Re: Statements on Blavatsky
> 
> Sir,
>  
> If after living with, and thoroughly reading the collected works of HPB, or
> even a thorough reading  of just the Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled, one
> can still say that she was a women of "limited" insight, I would conclude a
> massive inability to understand any subject matter, on the part of the
> reader. That said, the only other conclusion one can come to is a failure to
> read the stated material, at all, coupled with the audacity to comment, on
> that, which remains unexperienced. 
>  
> Louis
> 
> =============================
> 
> 
> 7/19/2006 
> 
> Friends:
> 
> Allow me to ask”
> 
> I quote:
>  
> “In a message dated 7/16/2006 8:55:09 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> ebionite@brotherofyeshua.com writes:
> 
> 
> I find Blavatsky a woman of very limited insight.   She made some really
> foolish assertions about both Christianity and Judaism.  
> 
> DTB WHERE ? HOW ?
> 
> -------------------------------------------------
> 
> Her solution was that everyone should convert to Hinduism.   
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
>  DTB I do not see this. In any case “Hinduism” is as diverse in
> sects and precepts as is “Christianity” and “Protestantism.” 
> 
> How many Hindu “sacred texts” are you really familiar with? 
> 
> How about the increasing scrutiny being now given to the original sources of
> buiblical material? Has this some relevance?
> 
> -----------------------------
>  
> 
>   And with respect to that ONE TRUTH, she lacked the necessary focus
> or awareness of the primary objectives of life.   
> 
> 
> DTB WHAT IS YOUR BASIS ?
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------
> 
> And while she was more enlightened than the Christians she disparaged and
> attacked, her own judgments and failure to comprehend the reasons for the
> differences in the various religions, inhibited her own spiritual
> advancement.
> 
> DTB HOW DO YOU ARRIVE AT THAT CONCLUSION? 
> 
> I found that she emphasized the SIMILARITIES in all religions: Example
> 
> 
> -------------------------------- QUOTE
> -------------------------------------
> 
> 
> RELIGION & REFORM – THEOSOPHICALLY
> 
> 
> TWO great shadowy shapes remain fixed in the attention of the mind of the
> day, threatening to become in the twentieth century more formidable and
> engrossing than ever. They are religion and reform, and in their sweep they
> include every question of pressing human need; for this first arises through
> the introspective experience of the race out of its aspirations toward the
> unknown and the ever present desire to solve the questions whence and why?
> while the second has its birth in the conditions surrounding the bodies of
> the questioners of fate who struggle helplessly in the ocean of material
> existence.
> 
> Many men wielding small or weighty pens have wrestled with these questions,
> attacking them in ways as various as the minds of those who have taken them
> up for consideration, but it still remains for the theosophist to bring
> forward his views and obtain a hearing. This he should always do as a matter
> of duty, and not from the pride of fame or the self-assertion which would
> see itself proclaimed before men. For he knows that, even if he should not
> speak or could not get a hearing, the march of that evolution in which he
> thoroughly believes will force these views upon humanity, even if that has
> to be accomplished by suffering endured by every human unit.
> 
> The theosophist can see no possibility of reform in existing abuses, in
> politics or social relations, unless the plan of reform is one which grows
> out of a true religion, and he does not think that any of the prevailing
> religions of the Occident are true or adequate. They do not go to the root
> of the evil which causes the pain and sorrow that call for reform or
> alleviation. And in his opinion theosophy--the essence or concentrated
> virtue of every religion alone has power to offer and effect the cure.
> None of the present attempts at reform will meet success so long as they are
> devoid of the true doctrine as to man, his nature and destiny, and
> respecting the universe, its origin and future course. Every one of these
> essays leaves man where it finds him, neglecting the lessons to be drawn
> from the cycles in their never-ceasing revolution. 
> 
> While efforts are made to meliorate his mere physical condition, the real
> mover, the man within, is left without a guide, and is therefore certain to
> produce from no matter how good a system the same evils which are designed
> to be destroyed. At every change he once more proceeds to vitiate the effect
> of any new regimen by the very defects in human nature that cannot be
> reached by legislation or by dogmatic creeds and impossible hells, because
> they are beyond the reach of everything except the power of his own thought.
> 
> 
> Nationalism, Socialism, Liberalism, Conservatism, Communism, and Anarchism
> are each and all ineffective in the end. The beautiful dream depicted by
> Nationalism cannot be made a physical fact, since it has no binding inward
> sanction; Communism could not stand, because in time the Communist would
> react back into the holder of individual rights and protector of property
> which his human nature would demand ought not to be dissipated among others
> less worthy. And the continuance of the present system, in which the amasser
> of wealth is allowed to retain and dispose of what he has acquired, will, in
> the end, result in the very riot and bloodshed which legislation is meant to
> prevent and suppress.
> Indeed, the great popular right of universal suffrage, instead of bringing
> about the true reign of liberty and law, will be the very engine through
> which the crash will come, unless with it the Theosophic doctrines are
> inculcated. 
> 
> We have seen the suffrage gradually extended so as to be universal in the
> United States, but the people are used by the demagogues and the suffrage is
> put to waste. Meanwhile, the struggle between capital and labor grows more
> intense, and in time will rage with such fury that the poor and unlearned,
> feeling the goad of poverty strike deeper, will cast their votes for
> measures respecting property in land or chattels, so revolutionary that
> capital will combine to right the supposed invasion by sword and bullet.
> This is the end toward which it is all tending, and none of the reforms so
> sincerely put forward will avert it for one hour after the causes have been
> sufficiently fixed and crystallized. This final formation of the efficient
> causes is not yet complete, but is rapidly approaching the point where no
> cure will be possible.
> 
> The cold acquirements of science give us, it is true, magnificent physical
> results, but fail like creeds and reforms by legislative acts in the end.
> Using her own methods and instruments, she fails to find the soul and denies
> its existence; while the churches assert a soul but cannot explain it, and
> at the same time shock human reason by postulating the incineration by
> material fire of that which they admit is immortal. As a means of escape
> from this dilemma nothing is offered save a vicarious atonement and a
> retreat behind a blind acceptance of incongruities and injustice in a God
> who is supposed by all to be infinitely merciful and just.
> 
> Thus, on the one hand, science has no terrors and no reformatory force for
> the wicked and the selfish; on the other, the creeds, losing their hold in
> consequence of the inroads of knowledge, grow less and less useful and
> respected every year. The people seem to be approaching an era of wild
> unbelief. Just such a state of thought prevailed before the French
> revolution of 1793.
> 
> Theosophy here suggests the reconciliation of science and religion by
> showing that there is a common foundation for all religions and that the
> soul exists with all the psychic forces proceeding therefrom. As to the
> universe, Theosophy teaches a never-ending evolution and involution. 
> 
> Evolution begins when the Great Breath--Herbert Spencers "Unknowable" which
> manifests as universal energy--goes forth, and involution, or the
> disappearance of the universe, obtains when the same breath returns to
> itself. 
> 
> This coming forth lasts millions upon millions of years, and involution
> prevails for an equal length of time. 
> 
> As soon as the breath goes forth, [BIG BANG ? ] universal mind together with
> universal basic matter appears. In the ancient system this mind is called
> Mahat, and matter Prakriti. Mahat has the plan of evolution which it
> impresses upon Prakriti, causing it to ceaselessly proceed with the
> evolution of forms and the perfecting of the units composing the cosmos. The
> crown of this perfection is man, and he contains in himself the whole plan
> of the universe copied in miniature but universally potential.
> 
> This brings us to ourselves, surrounded as we are by an environment that
> appears to us to cause pain and sorrow, no matter where we turn. But as the
> immutable laws of cause and effect brought about our own evolution, the same
> laws become our saviors from the miseries of existence. 
> 
> The two great laws postulated by Theosophy for the world's reform are those
> of Karma and Reincarnation. 
> 
> Karma is the law of action which decrees that man must suffer and enjoy
> solely through his own thoughts and acts. His thoughts, being the smaller
> copy of the universal mind, lie at the root of every act and constitute the
> force that brings about the particular body he may inhabit. 
> 
> So Reincarnation in an earthly body is as necessary for him as the ceaseless
> reincarnation of the universal mind in evolution after evolution is needful
> for it. And as no man is a unit separate from the others in the Cosmos, he
> must think and act in such a way that no discord is produced by him in the
> great universal stream of evolution. It is the disturbance of this harmony
> which alone brings on the miseries of life, whether that be of a single man
> or of the whole nation. As he has acted in his last life or lives, so will
> he be acted upon in succeeding ones. This is why the rich are often
> unworthy, and the worthy so frequently poor and afflicted. All appeals to
> force are useless, as they only create new causes sure to react upon us in
> future lives as well as in the present. But if all men believed in this just
> and comprehensive law of Karma, knowing well that whatever they do will be
> punished or rewarded in this or other new lives, the evils of existence
> would begin to disappear. The rich would know that they are only trustees
> for the wealth they have and are bound to use it for the good of their
> fellows, and the poor, satisfied that their lot is the just desert for prior
> acts and aided by the more fortunate, would work out old bad Karma and sow
> the seeds of only that which is good and harmonious.
> 
> National misery, such as that of Whitechapel in London (to be imitated ere
> long in New York), is the result of national Karma, which in its turn is
> composed of the aggregation of not only the Karma of the individuals
> concerned but also of that belonging to the rest of the nation. Ordinary
> reforms, whether by law or otherwise, will not compass the end in view. 
> 
> This is demonstrated by experience. But given that the ruling and richer
> classes believe in Karma and Reincarnation, a universal widespread effort
> would at once be made by those favorites of fortune toward not only present
> alleviation of miserable conditions, but also in the line of educating the
> vulgar who now consider themselves oppressed as well by their superiors as
> by fate. 
> 
> The opposite is now the case, for we cannot call individual sporadic or
> sectarian efforts of beneficence a national or universal attempt. Just now
> we have the General of the Salvation Army proposing a huge scheme of
> colonization which is denounced by a master of science, Prof. Huxley, as
> utopian, inefficient, and full of menace for the future. And he, in the
> course of his comment, candidly admits the great danger to be feared from
> the criminal and dissatisfied classes. 
> 
> But if the poorer and less discriminating see the richer and the learned
> offering physical assistance and intelligent explanations of the apparent
> injustice of life which can be found only in Theosophy there would soon
> arise a possibility of making effective the fine laws and regulations which
> many are ready to add to those already proposed. Without such Theosophic
> philosophy and religion, the constantly increasing concessions made to the
> clamor of the uneducated democracy's demands will only end in inflating the
> actual majority with an undue sense of their real power, and thus
> precipitate the convulsion which might he averted by the other course.
> 
> This is a general statement of the only panacea, for if once believed in
> even from a selfish motive it will compel, by a force that works from within
> all men, the endeavor to escape from future unhappiness which is inevitable
> if they violate the laws inhering in the universal mind.
> 
> By William Q. Judge, F.T.S.
> 
> THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
> New York, March 12, 1891 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------- 
> 
> 
> POINTS OF AGREEMENT IN ALL RELIGIONS
> 
> ... Let me read you a few verses from some of the ancient
> Scriptures of the world, from the old Indian books held sacred by the
> Brahmans of Hindustan.(1)
> 
> 
> “What room for doubt and what room for sorrow is there in him who
> knows that all spiritual beings are the same in kind and only differ from
> each other in degree?
> 
> The sun does not shine there, nor the moon and the stars, nor these
> lightnings and much less this fire. When He shines, everything shines after
> Him; by His light all this is lighted.
> 
> Lead me from the unreal to the real!
> Lead me from darkness to light!
> Lead me from death to immortality!
> 
> 
> Seeking for refuge, I go to that God who is the light of His own
> thoughts; He who first creates Brahman and delivers the Vedas to him; who is
> without parts, without actions, tranquil, without fault, the highest bridge
> to immortality, like a fire that has consumed its fuel.” - Mundaka
> Upanishad.
> Such are some of the verses, out of many thousands, which are enshrined in
> the ancient Hindu Vedas beloved by those we have called "heathen"; those are
> the sentiments of the people we have called idolaters only.
> 
> As the representative of the Theosophical movement I am glad to be here, and
> to be assigned to speak on what are the points of agreement in all
> religions. I am glad because Theosophy is to be found in all religions and
> all sciences. 
> 
> We, as members of the Theosophical Society, endorse to the fullest extent
> those remarks of your chairman in opening, when he said, in effect, that a
> theology which stayed in one spot without advancing was not a true theology,
> but that we had advanced to where theology should include a study of man.
> Such a study must embrace his various religions, both dead and living. 
> 
> And pushing that study into those regions we must conclude that man is
> greatly his own reveler, has revealed religion to himself, and therefore
> that all religions must include and contain truth; that no one religion is
> entitled to a patent or exclusive claim upon truth or revelation, or is the
> only one that God has given to man, or the only road along which man can
> walk to salvation. If this be not true, then your Religious Parliament is no
> Parliament, but only a body of men admiring themselves and their religion. 
> But the very existence of this Parliament proclaims the truth of what I have
> said, and shows the need which the Theosophical Society has for nineteen
> years been asserting, of a dutiful, careful, and brotherly inquiry into all
> the religions of the world, for the purpose of discovering what the central
> truths are upon which each and every religion rests, and what the original
> fountain from which they have come. 
> 
> This careful and tolerant inquiry is what we are here for today; for that
> the Theosophical Society stands and has stood: for toleration, for unity,
> for the final and irrevocable death of all dogmatism.
> But if you say that religion must have been revealed, then surely God did
> not wait for several millions of years before giving it to those poor beings
> called men. He did not, surely, wait until He found one poor Semitic tribe
> to whom He might give it late in the life of the race? Hence He must have
> given it in the very beginning, and therefore all present religions must
> arise from one fount.
> 
> What are the great religions of the world and from whence have they come?
> They are Christianity, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Judaism,
> Zoroastrianism, and Mohammedanism. The first named is the youngest, with all
> its warring sects, with Mormonism as an offshoot and with Roman Catholicism
> boldly claiming sole precedence and truth.
> 
> Brahmanism is the old and hoary religion of India, a grown-up,
> fully-developed system long before either Buddhism or Christianity was born.
> It extends back to the night of time, and throws the history of religion
> far, far beyond any place where modern investigators were once willing to
> place even the beginning of religious thought. Almost the ancient of
> ancients, it stands in far-off India, holding its holy Vedas in its hands,
> calmly waiting until the newer West shall find time out of the pursuit of
> material wealth to examine the treasures it contains.
> 
> Buddhism, the religion of Ceylon, of parts of China, of Burmah and Japan and
> Tibet, comes after its parent Brahmanism. It is historically older than
> Christianity and contains the same ethics as the latter, the same laws and
> the same examples, similar saints and identical fables and tales relating to
> Lord Buddha, the Saviour of Men. It embraces today, after some twenty-five
> hundred years of life, more people than any other religion, for two-thirds
> of the human family profess it.
> 
> Zoroastrianism also fades into the darkness of the past. It too teaches
> ethics such as we know. Much of its ritual and philosophy is not understood,
> but the law of brotherly love is not absent from it; it teaches justice and
> truth, charity and faith in God, together with immortality. In these it
> agrees with all, but it differs from Christianity in not admitting a
> vicarious salvation, which it says is not possible.
> 
> Christianity of today is modern Judaism, but the Christianity of Jesus is
> something different. He taught forgiveness, Moses taught retaliation, and
> that is the law today in Christian State and Church. "An eye for an eye, and
> a tooth for a tooth" is still the recognized rule, but Jesus taught the
> opposite. He fully agreed with Buddha, who, preaching 500 years before the
> birth of the Jewish reformer, said we must love one another and forgive our
> enemies. So modern Christianity is not the religion of Jesus, but Buddhism
> and the religion of Jesus accord with one another in calling for charity,
> complete tolerance, perfect non-resistance, absolute self-abnegation.
> 
> If we compare Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism together on the points of
> ritual, dogmas, and doctrines, we find not only agreement but a marvellous
> similarity as well, which looks like an imitation on the part of the younger
> Christianity. Did the more modern copy the ancient? It would seem probable.
> And some of the early Christian Fathers were in the habit of saying, as we
> find in their writings, that Christianity brought nothing new into the
> world, that it existed from all time.
> 
> If we turn to ritual, so fully exemplified in the Roman Catholic Church, we
> find the same practices and even similar clothing and altar arrangements in
> Buddhism, while many of the prescribed rules for the altar and approaching
> or leaving it are mentioned very plainly in far more ancient directions
> governing the Brahman when acting as priest. This similarity was so
> wonderful in the truthful account given by the Catholic priest Abbé Huc that
> the alarmed Church first explained that the devil, knowing that Christianity
> was coming, went ahead and invented the whole thing for the Buddhists by a
> species of ante facto copying, so as to confound innocent Catholics
> therewith; and then they burned poor Abbé Huc's book. 
> 
> As to stations of the cross, now well known to us, or the rosary,
> confession, convents, and the like, all these are in the older religion. The
> rosary was long and anciently used in Japan, where they had over one hundred
> and seventy-two sorts. And an examination of the mummies of old Egypt
> reveals rosaries placed with them in the grave, many varieties being used.
> Some of these I have seen. Could we call up the shades of Babylon's priests,
> we should doubtless find the same rituals there.
> 
> Turning to doctrines, that of salvation by faith is well known in
> Christianity. It was the cause of a stormy controversy in the time of St.
> James. But very strangely, perhaps, for many Christians, the doctrine is a
> very old Brahmanical one. They call it "The Bridge Doctrine," as it is the
> great Bridge. But with them it does not mean a faith in some particular
> emanation of God, but God is its aim. 
> God is the means and the way, and God the end of the faith; by complete
> faith in God, without an intermediary, God will save you. They also have a
> doctrine of salvation by faith in those great sons of God, Krishna, Rama,
> and others; complete faith in either of those is for them a way to heaven, a
> bridge for the crossing over all sins. Even those who were killed by
> Krishna, in the great war detailed in the Ramayana, went straight to heaven
> because they looked at him, as the thief on the cross looking at Jesus went
> to Paradise. 
> 
> In Buddhism is the same doctrine of faith. The twelve great sects of
> Buddhism in Japan have one called the Sect of the Pure Land. This teaches
> that Amitabha vowed that any one who calls three times on his name would be
> born into his pure Land of Bliss. He held that some men may be strong enough
> to prevail against the enemy, but that most men are not, and need some help
> from another. This help is found in the power of the vow of Amita Buddha,
> who will help all those who call on his name. The doctrine is a modified
> form of vicarious atonement, but it does not exclude the salvation by works
> which the Christian St. James gives out.
> 
> Heaven and Hell are also common to Christianity, Buddhism, and Brahmanism.
> The Brahman calls it Swarga; the Buddhist, Devachan; and we, Heaven. Its
> opposite is Naraka and Avitchi. But names apart, the descriptions are the
> same. Indeed, the hells of the Buddhists are very terrible, long in duration
> and awful in effect. The difference is that the heaven and hell of the
> Christian are eternal, while the others are not. The others come to an end
> when the forces which cause them are exhausted. In teaching of more than one
> heaven there is the same likeness, for St. Paul spoke of more than a single
> heaven to one of which he was rapt away, and the Buddhist tells of many,
> each being a grade above or below some other. 
> 
> Brahman and Buddhist agree in saying that when heaven or hell is ended for
> the soul, it descends again to rebirth. And that was taught by the Jews.
> They held that the soul was originally pure, but sinned and had to wander
> through rebirth until purified and fit to return to its source.
> 
> In priesthood and priestcraft there is a perfect agreement among all
> religions, save that the Brahman instead of being ordained a priest is so by
> birth. Buddha's priesthood began with those who were his friends and
> disciples. After his death they met in council, and subsequently many
> councils were held, all being attended by priests. Similar questions arose
> among them as with the Christians, and identical splits occurred, so that
> now there are Northern and southern Buddhism and the twelve sects of Japan.
> During the life of Buddha the old query of admitting women arose and caused
> much discussion. The power of the Brahman and Buddhist priests is
> considerable, and they demand as great privileges and rights as the
> Christian ones.
> 
> Hence we are bound to conclude that dogmatically and theologically these
> religions all agree. Christianity stands out, however, as peculiarly
> intolerant - and in using the word "intolerant" I but quote from some
> priestly utterances regarding the World's Fair parliament - for it claims to
> be the only true religion that God has seen fit to reveal to man.
> 
> The great doctrine of a Savior who is the son of God - God himself - is not
> an original one with Christianity. It is the same as the extremely ancient
> one of the Hindus called the doctrine of the Avatar. An Avatar is one who
> comes down to earth to save man. He is God incarnate. Such was Krishna, and
> such even the Hindus admit was Buddha, for he is one of the great ten
> Avatars. 
> 
> The similarity between Krishna or Cristna and Christ has been very often
> remarked. He came 5,000 years ago to save and benefit man, and his birth was
> in India, his teaching being Brahmanical. He, like Jesus, was hated by the
> ruler, Kansa, who desired to destroy him in advance, and who destroyed many
> sons of families in order to accomplish his end, but failed. Krishna warred
> with the powers of darkness in his battles with Ravana, whom he finally
> killed. 
> 
> The belief about him was that he was the incarnation of God. This is in
> accord with the ancient doctrine that periodically the Great Being assumes
> the form of man for the preservation of the just, the establishment of
> virtue and order, and the punishment of the wicked. Millions of man and
> women read every day of Krishna in the Ramayana of Tulsi Das. His praises
> are sung each day and reiterated at their festivals. Certainly it seems
> rather narrow and bigoted to assume that but one tribe and one people are
> favored by the appearance among them of an incarnation in greater measure of
> God.
> 
> Jesus taught a secret doctrine to his disciples. He said to them that he
> taught the common people in stories of a simple sort, but that the disciples
> could learn of the mysteries. And in the early age of Christianity that
> secret teaching was known. In Buddhism is the same thing, for Buddha began
> with one vehicle or doctrine, proceeded after to two, and then to a third. 
> 
> He also taught a secret doctrine that doubtless agreed with the Brahmans who
> had taught him at his father's court. He gave up the world, and later gave
> up eternal peace in Nirvana, so that he might save men. In this the story
> agrees with that of Jesus. And Buddha also resisted Mara, or the Devil, in
> the wilderness. 
> Jesus teaches that we must be as perfect as the Father, and that the kingdom
> of heaven is within each. To be perfect as the Father we must be equal with
> him, and hence here we have the ancient doctrine taught of old by the
> Brahmins that each man is God and a part of God. This supports the unity of
> humanity as a spiritual whole, one of the greatest doctrines of the time
> prior to Christianity, and now also believed in Brahmanism.
> 
> That the universe is spiritual in essence, that man is a spirit and
> immortal, and that man may rise to perfection, are universal doctrines. Even
> particular doctrines are common to all the religions. Reincarnation is not
> alone in Hinduism or Buddhism. It was believed by the Jews, and not only
> believed by Jesus but he also taught it. For he said that John the Baptist
> was the reincarnation of Elias "who was for to come." Being a Jew he must
> have had the doctrines of the Jews, and this was one of them. 
> And in Revelations we find the writer says: "Him that overcometh I will make
> a pillar in the house of my God, and he shall go out no more." The words "no
> more" infer a prior time of going out.
> 
> The perfectibility of man destroys the doctrine of original sin, and it was
> taught by Jesus, as I said. Reincarnation is a necessity for the evolution
> of this perfection, and through it at last are produced those Saviors of the
> race of whom Jesus was one. He did not deny similar privileges to others,
> but said to his disciples that they could do even greater works than he did.
> So we find these great Sages and Saviors in all religions. 
> 
> There are Moses and Abraham and Solomon, all Sages. And we are bound to
> accept the Jewish idea that Moses and the rest were the reincarnations of
> former persons. Moses was in their opinion Abel the son of Adam; and their
> Messiah was to be a reincarnation of Adam himself who had already come the
> second time in the person of David. We take the Messiah and trace him up to
> David, but refuse, improperly, to accept the remainder of their theory.
> 
> Descending to every-day-life doctrines, we find that of Karma, or that we
> must account and receive for every act. This is the great explainer of human
> life. It was taught by Jesus and Matthew and St. Paul. The latter explicitly
> said:
> 
> "Brethren, be not deceived; God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man
> soweth, that also shall he reap."
> 
> This is Karma of the Brahman and Buddhist, which teaches that each life is
> the outcome of a former life or lives, and that every man in his rebirths
> will have to account for every thought and receive measure for the measure
> given by him before.
> 
> In ethics all these religions are the same, and no new ethic is given by
> any. Jesus was the same as his predecessor, Buddha, and both taught the law
> of love and forgiveness. A consideration of the religions of the past and
> today from a Theosophical standpoint will support and confirm ethics. 
> 
> We therefore cannot introduce a new code, but we strive by looking into all
> religions to find a firm basis, not due to fear, favor, or injustice, for
> the ethics common to all. This is what Theosophy is for and what it will do.
> It is the reformer of religion, the unifier of diverse systems, the restorer
> of justice to our theory of the universe. It is our past, our present, and
> our future; it is our life, our death, and our immortality.
> 
> W Q Judge Path, July, 1894
> 
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> 
> Dallas 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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=1,1153324981.814412.20007.mindelo.hst.terra.com.br,33511,20031127114101,20031127114101
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 18/07/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4809
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> 


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