Theos-Talk Archives (July 2007 Message tt00222)

Pablo, you have understood my position well.

The teachings from Besant and Leadbeater that differ from HPB, are wrong as they are a human mind creation and are in conflict with the original teachings of the Dzyan school.
The teachings of Purucker that differ from HPB, are right, as they are no human mind creation, but come from the same source, the Dzyan school.
Purucker's teachings have the proof in it, because by logic combined with intuition they proof themselves.
I find it very much intelligent.

Otherwise, it could be that we have also a different interpretation of the term "intelligent".
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Pablo Sender 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 2:00 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Pablo AND Frank on discrepancies between Purucker & Blavatsky


I just want to say I don't "reject all teachings which are not 
expressed in "The Secret Doctrine" I think that's clear enough. I'm 
just saying: You say AB and Leadbeater said different things from 
HPB's teachings. So GdeP did. But of course, in the former case it is 
pseudo theosophy, in the latter a deepening of it. That is what I 
find "non-intelligent".

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Reitemeyer" <dzyan@...> 
wrote:
>
> Daniel,
> in regard to myself I can agree with all reserves you mention.
> I think it is a healthy sign to have too much reservations against 
the own
> position or "occult standing" as to have too less of them.
> 
> Speaking for myself, I am as a lay not in a position to give 
authoritative
> doctrinal statements, but just my own understanding and meaning on 
request
> of Pablo.
> Until know I have not fully understood Pablo's intention and see 
not the
> doctrinal differences between Purucker and Blavatsky as to their 
> presentation
> of the dogmas of theosophy.
> 
> My intermediate result of my discourse with Pablo is, that he 
sticks on
> words and catches not the sense. Usually this lack of understanding 
is a
> lack of discriminition power (buddhi-manas), which is a sine qua 
non in the
> occult realm, don't?
> 
> When Pablo rejects all teachings which are not expressed in "The 
Secret
> Doctrine" (although one can find hints to them), then logically he 
must be
> convinced that only one globe exists as the SD concerns mainly with 
the 4th
> globe, ergo: The first three globes must be a blind, there is only 
one
> globe!! Judeo-Christian talmudic dead-letter!
> 
> But, Daniel, as you write:
> 
> =>I personally have preferred to focus my attention, time and study 
on
> the teachings as first given out by H.P.B. and in the Mahatma 
Letters.
> 
> ... I have to object this, because it was and is not the intention 
of both
> HPB as of her teachers to focus the attention that way.
> That would make a museum out of Theosophy, a dead thing, a kind of 
new
> Vatican (only will a better "bible").
> 
> We are now in danger to fall into the old trodden astral tracks of 
some
> 2,000 years ago and repeat the deadly mistakes as reincarnated 
Christians.
> We must not repeat and repeat endless the old scenes like Phil 
Connors
> (again a "Co"...:-))) in Griondhog Day...:-)))
> 
> Your position reminds me of the fundamentalist position of the ULT, 
those
> people who obviously believe that after HPB's and/or Judge's death 
the
> occult machines have stopped and no further advancement was 
possible and no
> new teachings were given out.
> 
> GdeP declared half-publicly that he was sent my the Masters of 
Wisdom to
> give out NEW teachings, which the three messengers preceding him in 
the
> guruparampara were not allowed, because the time was not reap.
> 
> Real theosophy is a living thing and living things must not locked 
up. To
> stick on HPB and ML would lead to crystallized, bigot and 
regressing 
> behaviour.
> It is against all written and unwritten teeachings we have from HPB 
and her
> teachers.
> 
> She herself directed us, the theosophists of the future, to follow 
her (in
> spirit, not in dead letter) and keep the link unbroken and 
therefore make 
> her last incarnation not a failure.
> That were her last words before changing the stage and that was 
also her 
> last
> symbol on her last photo to us.
> 
> "It is needless to explain that this book is not the Secret 
Doctrine in its
> entirety, but a select number of fragments of its fundamental 
tenets,
> special attention being paid to some facts which have been seized 
upon by
> various writers, and distorted out of all resemblance to the truth."
> http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-0-co.htm#preface
> 
> "But these two volumes had to serve as a PROLOGUE, and prepare the 
reader's
> mind for those which shall now follow. [...]"
> "These two volumes only constitute the work of a pioneer who has 
forced his
> way into the well-nigh impenetrable jungle of the virgin forests of 
the Land
> of the Occult. A commencement has been made to fell and uproot the 
deadly
> upas trees of superstition, prejudice, and conceited ignorance, so 
that
> these two volumes should form for the student a fitting prelude for 
Volumes
> III. and IV. Until the rubbish of the ages is cleared away from the 
minds of
> the Theosophists to whom these volumes are dedicated, it is 
impossible that
> the more practical teaching contained in the Third Volume should be
> understood. Consequently, it entirely depends upon the reception 
with which
> Volumes I. and II. will meet at the hands of Theosophists and 
Mystics,
> whether these last two volumes will ever be published, though they 
are
> almost completed.
> 
> http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd2-3-09.htm
> 
> "One turn of the key, and no more, was given in "Isis." Much more is
> explained in these volumes. In those days the writer hardly knew the
> language in which the work was written, and the disclosure of many 
things,
> freely spoken about now, was forbidden. In Century the Twentieth 
some
> disciple more informed, and far better fitted, may be sent by the 
Masters of
> Wisdom to give final and irrefutable proofs that there exists a 
Science
> called Gupta-Vidya; and that, like the once-mysterious sources of 
the Nile,
> the source of all religions and philosophies now known to the world 
has been
> for many ages forgotten and lost to men, but is at last found."
> http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-0-in.htm
> 
> Judge confirms HPB's prediction, that in the 20th century a "more 
informed
> disciple" will come "to give and irrefutable proofs that there 
exists a
> Science called Gupta-Vidya", cp. his "Echoes of the orient", Vol. 
I, p. 283.
> 
> WHO WAS IT??? DID HE COME OR DID HE/SHE/IT NOT COME?
> 
> Elsewhere K.H. states that the TS is but the pioneer for greater 
things to
> come in the next centuries. From the Mahatma's point of view, from 
a full 
> human
> or superhuman view, it would look quite idiotic to asume that the 
esoteric
> world stopped with the passing of HPB or someone else. From that 
point of
> view even the erratic und lunatic position of a Besant is much 
closer to the
> truth!!!
> 
> So, if you say: It does not concern me, what HPB's successors in 
the Tibetan
> transmission line said, I have enough to read with the SD and ML 
(and I
> agree, it's a full time and life life time job!) is the same as to 
say that
> high schools and universities must be closed, because in the 
primary school
> is so much to learn and that is enough and even most of the adults 
will not
> understand all the stuff of a primary school if you would ask on 
the street!
> 
> Or take the Amish people. They say: We need no tv, no phone, no 
electricity,
> no automobiles, horses and candelars are enough!!!
> 
> As the Christians perverse their Jesus, above all the "Jesuits", the
> Theosophists pervert the Theosophy of HPB.
> 
> From now on I speak of those anti-Blavatskian Blavatsky-
"Theosophist" not as
> pseudo-theosophists, but as Amish-theosophists!!!
> 
> Frank
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: danielhcaldwell
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 8:17 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Pablo AND Frank on discrepancies between 
Purucker &
> Blavatsky
> 
> 
> Pablo AND Frank
> on discrepancies between Purucker & Blavatsky
> 
> Well, after reading both Pablo's and Frank's postings
> on the above issue, I would say that neither writer
> has presented a good case....at least so far.
> 
> But setting aside both Frank's and Pablo's views, the basic problem
> would appear to be as follows:
> 
> What student of Theosophy has actually carefully read and studied
> H.P.B.'s writings in enough depth and detail to be in
> a position to say this is what H.P.B. teaches on [NAME THE SUBJECT,
> in this case on the Kumaras]??
> 
> Then has that same student then gone and carefully
> read and studied all of G. de Purucker's writings
> in enough depth, etc. to understand what he is teaching on this
> or that subject???
> 
> And then, who has taken the additional time and effort
> to compare and contrast the teachings of Blavatsky and
> Purucker in enough depth, etc. so that one is in a good position
> to know if there are actually such real discrepancies or not???
> 
> The above study would take probably years to adequately do!
> 
> Over the years I have known students on both sides of the fence.
> 
> For example, the late Walter Carrithers, Jr. and Leona Sterba had
> some serious reservations about some of G. de Purucker's teachings.
> Especially Mr. Carrithers. Others pesons could be mentioned.
> 
> On the other hand, there are many students who are very impressed
> with Purucker's teachings. The late John Cooper, Jerry Hejka-Edkins,
> Elton Tucker, to just name a few!
> 
> I personally have preferred to focus my attention, time and study on
> the teachings as first given out by H.P.B. and in the Mahatma 
Letters.
> 
> Why?
> 
> Well, for one reason, there is more than 10,000 pages of H.P.B. and
> the Mahatmas' writings. That's alot of pages! Just to read! not
> counting the time to actually study and ... maybe understand!
> 
> I personally find SO MUCH MATERIAL here in this Blavatsky corpus of
> writings that is more than enough to try to read, study and .....
> understand.
> 
> I'm afraid that in many cases I've only skimmed the surface of some
> of this Blavatsy/Mahatma literature.
> 
> Maybe I have a small brain capacity....
> 
> Now don't get me wrong, I have also read some of the books by 
Besant,
> Judge, Leadbeater, Purucker, etc. etc. All of these books that I
> have read contain food for thought, if nothing else.
> 
> But I have focused primarily on the Blavatsky material simply 
because
> at some point, one must ask oneself: how many books by all these
> different authors do I want to read? And what is to be accomplished
> by reading more and more....
> 
> So I have returned time and time again to the Blavastky
> writings ...those 10,000 plus pages...and I find myself amazed at 
the
> profundity and depth there....
> 
> I sometimes grin to myself when I hear writers say: Well, you know
> that H.P.B. only presented a "fragment" of the real Theosophical
> teachings. No doubt, No doubt, I reply. But what a fragment! What
> a HUGE fragment!
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>



 

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