Theos-Talk Archives (August 2008 Message tt00037)

Daniel,
If Blavatsky rejected path of devotion altogether, is she saying that
Jesus made huge philosophical problems by spreading the path of
devotion ? Is Hinduism wrong ? Was Krishna wrong when he taught one
path of reaching God is devotion ? 
It appears that if somebody takes Blavatsky's writing as authority, he
finds himself in many philosophical problems. If you look at world,
billions of people follow teachings of Jesus and Krishna, whereas
there are not more than few thousands in the world who consider
Blavatsky's writing as good philosophy.  So if somebody says Blavatsky
is authority, he is in strange position that most other great teachers
were wrong and only Blavatsky was  right. 
Best
Anand Gholap



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> In his book "THE COSMIC WOMB: An Interpretation
> of Man's Relationship to the Infinite," the
> metaphysican Arthur W. Osborn writes:
> 
> "Images of the Supreme, although taken for
> the Ultimate by some simple devotees, are more
> readily explicable as projections, either
> individual or communal, of doctrinal beliefs
> concerning Krishna, Christ, Kali or other
> personalized aspects of Deity. We
> say 'communal' projections because any
> religious symbol, which perhaps for centuries
> has become a focus for devotion, could assume
> concrete reality. Occultism provides some
> striking instances of the power of group thinking
> to create 'thought forms' of sufficient
> intensity to become 'objects' of perception.
> Centers of energy would seem to have been formed
> on some superphysical plane capable of
> exercising influence in physical affairs. . . ." p. 59
> 
> Now compare this statement by Mr. Osborn with the following excerpts 
> from THE MAHATMA LETTERS.
> 
> Excerpt 1:
> 
> ". . . every thought of man upon being evolved passes into the inner
> world and becomes an active entity by associating itself -
> coalescing, we might term it -- with an elemental; that is to say
> with one of the semi-intelligent forces of the kingdoms. It survives
> as an active intelligence, a creature of the mind's begetting, for a
> longer or shorter period proportionate with the original intensity of
> the cerebral action which generated it. Thus, a good thought is
> perpetuated as an active beneficent power; an evil one as a
> maleficent demon. And so man is continually peopling his current in
> space with a world of his own, crowded with the offsprings of his
> fancies, desires, impulses, and passions. . . ." Koot Hoomi
> 
> Excerpt 2:
> 
> "Faith in the Gods and God, and other superstitions attracts
> millions of foreign influences, living entities and powerful agents
> [elementals] around ...[the devotees of various religions]. . . .
> The unprogressed Planetaries [elementals]. . . delight in
> personating gods and sometimes well known characters who have lived
> on earth. There are Dhyan-Chohans and 'Chohans of Darkness,' not what
> they term devils but imperfect 'Intelligences' who have never been
> born on this or any other earth or sphere no more than the 'Dhyan
> Chohans' have and who will never belong to the 'builders of the
> Universe,' the pure Planetary Intelligences, who preside at every
> Manvantara while the Dark Chohans preside at the Pralayas. . . . As
> all in this universe is contrast . . . so the light of the Dhyan
> Chohans and their pure intelligence is contrasted by the 'Ma-Mo
> Chohans' -- and their destructive intelligence. These are the gods
> the Hindus and Christians and Mahomed and all others of bigoted
> religions and sects worship. . . . " Morya
> 
> Excerpt 3:
> 
> "Vainly do your modern seers and their prophetesses, creep into every
> cleft and crevice without outlet or continuity they chance to see;
> and still more vainly, when once within do they lift up their voices
> and loudly cry: 'Eureka! We have gotten a Revelation from the Lord!' -
> - for verily have they nothing of the kind. They have disturbed but
> bats [elementals, unprogressed Planetaries], less blind than their
> intruders; who, feeling them flying about, mistake them as often for
> angels -- as they too, have wings! Doubt not, my friend: it is but
> from the very top of those 'adamantine rocks' of ours, not at their
> foot, that one is ever enabled to perceive the whole Truth, by
> embracing the whole limitless horizon." Koot Hoomi
> 
> Excerpt 4:
> 
> Stainton Moses, a "seer" and medium of the 1880s, wrote:
> 
> ". . . my inner spirit-sense is opened. Only yesterday . . . 
> [Imperator, my spirit guide] . . . was clearly visible and audible to 
> me. . . . "
> 
> To this comment by Stainton Moses [S.M.], Koot Hoomi wrote:
> 
> ". . . So is Jesus and John the Baptist [clearly visible and audible]
> to Edward Maitland; [who is] as true and as honest and sincere as
> S.M. . . . And does not E. Maitland see Hermes the first and second
> and Elijah, etc. Finally does not Mrs. [Anna] Kingsford feel as sure
> as S.M. with regard to . . . [Imperator] that she saw and conversed 
> with God!! . . . And who purer or more truthful than that woman or
> Maitland! Mystery, mystery will you exclaim. IGNORANCE we answer; the
> creation of that we believe in and want to see. . . . "
> 
> Some food for thought.
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>