Theos-Talk Archives (August 2008 Message tt00073)

To all readers

My views are:

I will do an attempt to get an answer from the followers of the teachings given by C. W. Leadbeater, Annie Besant as well as Alice A. Bailey.


Pedro said:
"Above all let us remember that in this present life, the HIGH
THEORETICAL QUESTIONS of Personal, Impersonal, and No-God, are of less
concern to us than OUR OWN EVERYDAY LIFE ABOUT THE RIGHT CONDUCT of
which no similar difficulties exist."


I will have to say that I disagree with this view.
I would say, that ABOVE ALL, the use of the word "God" as the most highest Deity and calling it a gigantic MALE is vital to oppose, because the opposition - the Jesuits use it happily.

I find i distasteful, when someone call themselves Theosophists and promote something the Masters and H. P. Blavatsky was dead against.

I disgree, because you cannot live a healthy life day out and day in promoting a false non-theosophical teaching on a MALE God instead of the theosophical definition on the opposite: a denial of such a teological MALE "God" as being the most highest Deity. One cannot do that because logically such a promotion is not theosophical teaching as it were given by H. P. Blavatsky. And by doing it one will be living on a lie when calling oneself a theosophist. I would like to know if Pedro has another view?

Let us remember, that words have vibrations and when read and taught, they create various impacts. To use words like "God" and calling "God" a MALE, while emphasising it through out ones teachings falsely leads the Seekers astray in their daily lives. 

TO WATER DOWN THE IMPORTANCE OF the NEAGTIVE effects of C. W. Leadbeaters and Annie Besants, as well as Alice A. Baileys excessive use of Christian pronounciations and use of the word "God" and calling "God" a gigantic MALE is plainly the same as promoting a Jesuit teaching and nothing else. Persons taught like this will often be kept in a teological strait-jacket view about life, because their highest Deity is a teological and Jesuit one. So I disagree very much, that we should relax and go on wiht business-as-usual, hoping that the annoying truth about this false teaching will go away.

I would like to know if Pedro promotes the view, that Business-as-usual in TS Adyar will solve the problem about this distasteful false teaching given by Annie Besant, C. W. Leadbeater, and also Alice A. Bailey and also the same on the use of the word "God" about the most highest Deity and calling this "God" a gigantic MALE???




filight


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: danielhcaldwell 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 12:20 AM
  Subject: Theos-World To Pedro: Concerning the quote about THEORETICAL QUESTIONS, etc.


  Pedro,

  Good to know that you are still reading postings on Theos-Talk!

  There are a number of your comments and observations that I would 
  like to respond to. To do justice to the issues you raise I would 
  have to write at least several pages on each point and unfortunately, 
  I do not have time today or in the immediate future to spend the 
  hours it would take to adequately comment on what you have said.

  But I will take a "jab" at addressing one point in your posting.

  You give a quote of which I give only one extract:

  "Above all let us remember that in this present life, the HIGH
  THEORETICAL QUESTIONS of Personal, Impersonal, and No-God, are of less
  concern to us than OUR OWN EVERYDAY LIFE ABOUT THE RIGHT CONDUCT of
  which no similar difficulties exist." Caps added.

  The writer may be trying to get several points across. Maybe not.

  But I will focus on a point that comes to my mind upon reading this 
  statement.

  I can understand quite well the view that concerning such THEORETICAL 
  QUESTIONS the average person is simply not in a good position to know 
  the real truth of whether "God" is personal or impersonal or perhaps 
  whether there is any kind of God..period.

  Yes, such issues can and indeed may take our focus off EVERYDAY LIFE 
  and actually living life.

  For example, I have a friend whom I have known for 26 years as of 
  2008. All this time his basic view has been that of a materialist 
  and atheist. He is totally convinced that there is ONLY a physical 
  world. Humans do not have some sort of soul or spirit that is non-
  physical or superphysical or however one might word it. He tells me 
  that each person is simply a biological entity who is born and when 
  that physical entity dies there is no survival of personality or of 
  consciousness or of soul. When the physical body and brain dies, 
  whatever we consider to be our personality, our consciousness dies 
  (ceases to exist) just as the physical body just dies and returns one 
  way or the other to the environment from which it came. 

  He doesn't believe in any kind of God whether it is personal or 
  impersonal or however you might describe it. He thinks what HPB 
  writes about the Absolute is just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo. --- mere 
  words. But all theologians of ALL religions and cults write just 
  mumbo-jumbo, he would add!

  Now my friend is a nice guy, friendly, sociable. He loves his wife, 
  his son. He's kindhearted, a giving person. He tries to be honest, 
  etc. etc. He's doesn't claim to be perfect or a saint. He is just a 
  good guy trying to live EVERY MINUTE OF HIS LIFE. 

  He simply doesn't believe that all these "THEORETICAL QUESTIONS" 
  of "god", life after death , Masters, auras, the paranormal in 
  general, even religion in general, really mean anything and in fact 
  from his perspective none of it is REAL or TRUE. Empty beliefs.

  Now I haven't asked him about this today but I believe he probably 
  would say yes the focus should be on:

  OUR OWN EVERYDAY LIFE and RIGHT CONDUCT.

  My friend I think tries to live everyday life to the fullest and he 
  certainly tries to follow the path of RIGHT CONDUCT. 

  So I ask you: what is there found in the writings of either C.W. 
  Leadbeater or in the writings of H.P. Blavatsky which doesn't go in 
  the category of THEORETICAL QUESTIONS?????? Yes, they may teach some 
  ethical precepts. But other than that, what is not in the realm of 
  the debatable, in the category of theoretical questions?

  I dare say that there is NOT one theosophical or occult teachings in 
  either Leadbeater or Blavatsky's writings that is not debateable. I 
  would think that there are a wide variety of views on any of these 
  Theosophical teachings. And I'm not just talking about the "views" 
  of the limited audience of Theosophical students but the much much 
  wider audience of what we might call the "public marketplace of 
  ideas" that is out there on the world stage.

  What I'm attempting to say is:

  what is not a THEORETICAL QUESTION concerning any of these 
  Theosophical teachings?

  Does it really matter whether one believes in the Masters or in life 
  after death or in planes or .. ???

  To make it more personable, let us suppose that you Pedro discovered 
  tomorrow that all your views and beliefs about reality were just 
  wrong and false. 

  Would that really change how you LIVE THIS life? Would you become a 
  different person or act somehow differently if all your beliefs were 
  total nonsense?

  Would you be less kind or generous or giving towards your family, 
  your friends, your community, etc.?

  I'm not trying to put you on the spot but I am in effect asking every 
  reader of this posting (all 4 of them!) to ask yourself these 
  questions.. at least in the privacy of your own thoughts..

  Take another example...

  My mother who recently died lived a long life. She actually lived 
  more than twice as long as my older sister.

  Now what did my mother believe about the ultimate meaning and purpose 
  of life?

  Well I will say she believed in what I would call a version 
  of "orthodox Christianity".

  That was her belief system and whatever she believed she was a 
  wonderful loving person. Sorry. I'm prejudiced.

  Now over the years it is true that I sometimes talked to her about 
  Blavatsky and Theosophy but never in any depth at all. She only knew 
  I was intrigued with that strange Russian lady!!

  I remember just a few months before she died, when I was visiting her 
  in an adult care home, she all of a sudden asked me: "What do you 
  think happens after death?" "What do you think happened to my sister 
  who had already died?"

  Well, I was sorta taken aback by these questions. Paused and 
  wondered to myself what I should say. I finally said something 
  like: "Well, mother, what do you think happens?"

  I have no idea to this very day what I should have said to her.

  Reflecting upon this since then, I realized that we (or at least I) 
  may really KNOW next to nothing about any of these THEORETICAL 
  QUESTIONS. We have beliefs, sometimes strong beliefs, maybe well 
  thought out "answers," but how many of us really KNOW and does it 
  really matter what we believe in such matters and if it does matter, 
  how?? why??

  Take another example from my own life.

  I have a friend who is a mystic and once he was in Eckankar. He 
  would get out of his body and see the various Eck Masters, go to the 
  various Eck temples on the inner planes, and would even see while 
  wide awake the Eck Master Rebazar Tarz in his own living room!

  Pretty real and vivid experiences yet he no longer believes those 
  experiences about the Eck Masters were really real --- having read, 
  for example, David Lane's critical book on Eckankar.

  See the online edition of Lane's book at:

  http://www.geocities.com/eckcult/

  To this day my friend does NOT deny that he had these very "real" 
  experiences even while wide awake but his interpretation of some of 
  them is quite different than what it was back then!!!!!

  So when people have experiences with the dead or near death 
  experiences or out of body experiences, encounters with Masters or 
  angels, or WITH GOD, etc. no doubt they probably have such 
  experiences but how do you explain the experience? What really is 
  going on in each of these experiences?

  Aren't we once again confronted here with those THEORETICAL QUESTIONS 
  from the quote you gave?

  Now my mystic friend is still convinced that there are dimensions 
  beyond the physical, that our "consciousness" survives the death of 
  the physical body, based primarily upon what he has experienced 
  when "out of the body", etc.

  But he is not so sure that those Eckankar Masters really exist!!

  And my other friend, the highly skeptical materialist and atheist, 
  thinks my mystic friend is simply a victim of hallucinations 
  generated in the brain!

  Again we come up against THEORETICAL QUESTIONS.

  But both of them are good people, kind hearted, etc. etc. They try 
  to help other people, etc. etc.

  So concerning OUR OWN EVERYDAY LIFE and even when we consider RIGHT 
  CONDUCT (whatever that may be referring to), does it really matter 
  what they or we believe or disbelieve or think they or we know?

  I have pondered a great deal about this.

  But to end this rather long rambling posting, I will mention that I 
  have another friend who has no interest whatsoever in believing or 
  disbelieving any of this stuff we have been discussing. And he is 
  happy, etc.etc. Also a nice guy but just has no interest in anything 
  mystical or paranormal or religious. But he also would at the same 
  time have no interest either in embracing materialism or atheism like 
  my one friend does. This third friend is interested in sports, 
  movies, rock music, etc. and is totally UNAWARE that there are 
  THEORETICAL QUESTIONS!!!! He accepts life the way it is and lives it 
  to his fullest ---as far as I can tell! Again he is kind, loves 
  animals, is good to his family and friends, helps in the community, 
  has helped the homeless, gives to the community food bank, etc.. 

  So in the end --- does it really matter what beliefs or disbeliefs we 
  have about life, death, etc.? Cannot all of "this" be relegated to 
  the realm of THEORETICAL QUESTIONS???

  Food for thought..

  Daniel
  http://hpb.cc



   

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