Theos-Talk Archives (February 2008 Message tt00332)

IMO you're right Nigel concerning the information age, which I wasn't thinking of at the time. Wasn't it in 1975 that Bill Gates registered Microsoft.  
  Cass

nhcareyta <nhcareyta@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
          Dear Cass

Points well made.

In addition have we thought much about the dawning 
of the "information age" with computers and the 
internet. 

Was this part of their "effort?"

On the jnana path, information leads to knowledge; 
and knowledge to awakening.

And what would be the need for a messiah figure with 
all this information extant, other than to relieve the 
burdensome task of thinking and doing the work for 
ourselves?

Kind regards
Nigel 

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@...> wrote:
>
> Perhaps the problem is that Theosophists are looking for a new 
Blavatsky. As she said, lesser messengers will come with their 
contribution to spritual wakefullness. I think we can see this in 
the West with the acceptance of eastern methodolgies, e.g. yoga, 
reiki, tai-chi,healers, all practices contribute to an overall 
awareness that we are not just the body!
> 
> Cass
> 
> Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
> To all readers
> 
> My views are:
> 
> There is - one more - quote from HPB about what will happen in the 
years after 1975.
> I think with an organisation awaiting his arrival as HPB puts it in 
the below, - one will have to stop believeing it to be the fact, that 
the number of persons involved in this are more than a few science 
intellectuals:
> 
> "...that during the last quarter of every hundred years an attempt 
is made by those "Masters," of whom I have spoken, to help on the 
spiritual progress of Humanity in a marked and definite way. Towards 
the close of each century you will invariably find that an outpouring 
or upheaval of spirituality -- or call it mysticism if you prefer -- 
has taken place. Some one or more persons have appeared in the world 
as their agents, and a greater or less amount of occult knowledge and 
teaching has been given out. If you care to do so, you can trace 
these movements back, century by century, as far as our detailed 
historical records extend...If the present attempt, in the form of 
our Society, succeeds better than its predecessors have done, then it 
will be in existence as an organized, living and healthy body when 
the time 307 comes for the effort of the XXth century. The general 
condition of men's minds and hearts will have been improved and 
purified by the spread of its teachings,
> and, as I have said, their prejudices and dogmatic illusions will 
have been, to some extent at least, removed. Not only so, but besides 
a large and accessible literature ready to men's hands, the next 
impulse will find a numerous and united body of people ready to 
welcome the new torch-bearer of Truth. He will find the minds of men 
prepared for his message, a language ready for him in which to clothe 
the new truths he brings, an organization awaiting his arrival, which 
will remove the merely mechanical, material obstacles and 
difficulties from his path. Think how much one, to whom such an 
opportunity is given, could accomplish. Measure it by comparison with 
what the Theosophical Society actually has achieved in the last 
fourteen years, without any of these advantages and surrounded by 
hosts of hindrances which would not hamper the new leader. Consider 
all this, and then tell me whether I am too sanguine when I say that 
if the Theosophical Society survives and lives true to
> its mission, to its original impulses through the next hundred 
years? Tell me, I say, if I go too far in asserting that earth will 
be a heaven in the twenty-first century in comparison with what it is 
now! 
> (H. P. Blavatsky's book "Key to Theosophy", s. 306-7. English 
edition, Italics added.)
> 
> So HPB said in the above: "Think how much one, to whom such an 
opportunity is given, could accomplish. Measure it by comparison with 
what the Theosophical Society actually has achieved in the last 
fourteen years, without any of these advantages and surrounded by 
hosts of hindrances which would not hamper the new leader."
> 
> So I guess I will just have to disagree with you about the 
importance of the numbers who receives the message Frank. I think it 
is not just me, who talk about it. As we can see HPB also did it. A 
high initiate will exactly be able to deliver a message about truth 
and theosophy, and will be able to reach thousands and tens of 
thousands with the proper message.
> 
> But of course if you are right a spiritual outpouring coming from 
the Masters will only affect a very few persons.
> Some how I find my self disagreeing with this view.
> 
> Frank wrote:
> "You stick to much in forms rather than ideas."
> 
> I am afraid you misunderstand, what I am talking about.
> I am exactly sticking to "ideas" or rather what we call "spiritual 
impact".
> The level of "spiritual impact" are always related to the number of 
persons affected by the impact.
> 
> M. Sufilight
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Frank Reitemeyer 
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 10:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World - Fools rush in
> 
> Morten,
> I will not disturb your comfort and your conviction that you are 
right, but 
> to answer your additional question:
> We do not talk about for how many persons the ultimate proofs were 
given.
> It's just you. To me it's not important. HPB did not write about 
quantities.
> Important is that this proofs were given.
> I believe this predicted proofs are connected with the 
guruparampara, which 
> was launched by HPB.
> You may consider the first aim of the TS: To form a nucleus, not to 
form a 
> crowd as much as possible.
> 
> As to the intellectual and spiritual level: This group of persons 
obviously 
> cannot be very big, because most people were not fit.
> Not even in the broad Theosophical Movement many theosophists were 
(and so 
> until today) ready.
> There are lineages within the TM which would even reject that there 
were 
> other messengers than HPB.
> Most people - including theosophical circles - do not even 
understand the 
> newspaper.
> 
> So what would they gain when they would hear of a knowledge far 
advanced 
> from their own point of view?
> So, logically, it could only be few. Even HPB's last book of the 
Golden 
> rules is dedicated to the few.
> What then about teachings which go beyond that book?
> What does it matter, to how many people the proofs were given?
> I think you simply did not understand my opinion about the Masters 
plan.
> 
> You stick to much in forms rather than ideas.
> 
> Although only few theosophists may be ready, there may be probably 
some out 
> there who think about 2075.
> Best
> Frank
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Morten Nymann Olesen
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:56 PM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World - Fools rush in
> 
> I understand, that I was to be given such an answer to my questions.
> I will rest in comfort, that my views are most likely true.
> 
> You could consider the following questions and then consider why I 
answered 
> like I did:
> If one is to give others irrefutable proof of Gupta Vidya, who 
would they 
> be?
> How many persons are we at least talking about? And what kind of 
proof would 
> be required so we could call it irrefutable?
> 
> M. Sufilight
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Frank Reitemeyer
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 9:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Theos-World - Fools rush in
> 
> 1.
> Frank wrote:
> "So, from the logic point of view, HPB was refering to her occult 
successor
> in the Tibeto-Dzyan-transmission line."
> 
> That is not logic. That was not what H. P. Blavatsky said.
> H. P. Blavatsky said: "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"
> 
> That is "irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called 
Gupta-Vidya".
> This proof would be given by a disciple more informed and far 
better fitted,
> than who? Logically a person more informed and better fitted Than 
H. P.
> Blavatsky herself. And that is why such a person much likely would 
be known
> to the public, and not a person whom only a very few would learn 
about!
> This is a more likely view than the one you prefer to emphasise.
> What "irrefutable proofs that there exists a Science called Gupta-
Vidya" are
> better than to show people it all through action and to be an 
example to
> tohers?
> 
> -------------------------------
> 
> Morten,
> yes, the disciple would be more informed and better fitted than 
Blavatsky,
> therefore she could have been meant the 1975 messenger, but rather 
a chela
> in the gurparampara.
> As you can see, you have missed be point, for I was refering to 
that logic
> before, the logic which you reject and at the same time you admit 
it.
> 
> But HPB never said, that and how much this disciple which would be 
send to
> the West, would be known to the public. That is but your - unbased -
> interpretation, not HPB's meaning.
> 
> She also says nothing about the quantity of people who could learn 
from it.
> That is your - unbased - interpretation, too.
> 
> And I am sorry to say, that HPB does not say anything about the 
time frame
> she had in mind. It can be relatively few people from the time of 
getting
> started, but in the course of time - and Masters think in 
centuries, a
> mantra GdeP always used - after decades or centuries the quantity 
could grow
> much from such a nucleus. So, it's but your interpretation, too.
> 
> HPB writes only that this proofs will be given, she gives no time 
line for
> publication. She hints rather to a time capsule.
> 
> -------------------------------
> 
> 2.
> Frank wrote:
> "Sai Baba may be a fine teacher for some people, but he is 
certainly not
> trained in the Dzyan school and therefore no messenger of the Dzyan 
and
> Masters and Wisdom and Peace."
> 
> You claim a lot here. Do you know who Sathya Sai Baba is?
> What are you basing your views in the above on?
> Why should your view be given any validity at all?
> -------------------------------
> 
> I claim nothing. I just share my opinion with you.
> My view has only the validity someone gives.
> You are free to believe what you want.
> I do the same.
> 
> Best
> Frank
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



                         

       
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.

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