Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00401)

Dear Alex

My views are:

I write these words out of compassion seeking to be of service.
Criticism of our theosophical doctrines will as far as I and others are concerned always be allowed within the theosophical teachings. At least until the level of thought begins its Pralaya in this Manvantara.

People will never learn if they agree all the time.
And that is not good if they in fact spiritually speaking need to learn.


Alex wrote:
"but it's quite 
another to have a person who is consistently spreading foolish and 
misleading vibes with full knowledge."

M. Sufilight says:
You claim he has "full knowledge". Do you, yourself, have enough knowledge to forward this claim?
We never seek to turn our back on anyone, who honestly claim to be a Seeker after Truth. We know and recognise that all human beings are important and deserves help and not the opposite.


Alex wrote:
"because you are not considering the many faces he has 
turned away from Theosophy by just him being here. "

M. Sufilight says:
Perhaps not. How many do you - actually - know of?


Alex wrote:
"I would have never allowed this disrespect to go on for a decade, his 
every post leaves a bad aftertaste."

M. Sufilight says:
Do you have some examples on this "bad aftertaste"?


I suggest: Let us not as theosophists Demonize anyone.

- - - 
Yet, I will agree, that this place is not - that - attractive to what we call thin-skinned Seekers after Truth.

So - I have just created a Theos-Talk-Heart ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk-heart ) forum. And you are welcome to invite all the members you claim, have been turned away.
I will moderate it, seeking more Heart. No Chuck personalities and similar "villains" will be allowed. - Allright?
:-)
Let us all do an effort.



M. Sufilight




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: alex 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 4:37 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: "...we have to preach and popularise a knowledge of theosophy."


  Morten, I do not find those views to be irrelevant for Theos-talk, I 
  just think that this case is something different.

  It's one thing to try and help ignorant people, have healthy debates, 
  question everything we read, hear and believe in etc., but it's quite 
  another to have a person who is consistently spreading foolish and 
  misleading vibes with full knowledge. 

  So I'm not sure what good help is possible, in my view what you call 
  compassion and theosophical could just be a form of foolishness and 
  selfishness because you are not considering the many faces he has 
  turned away from Theosophy by just him being here. 
  I would have never allowed this disrespect to go on for a decade, his 
  every post leaves a bad aftertaste. 

  It's like one of us joining Demonosophy World to preach and 
  popularise the knowledge of Theosophy. Weird. 

  Alex the Heretic 

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear Alex
  > 
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > 
  > I find your intentions to be good, but not quite compassionate. 
  > And the view you are offering are not really quite theosophical 
  teaching.
  > 
  > Try the below from H. P: Blavatsky.We often divide members at 
  Theos-talk into thin-skinned or thick-skinnedog various degree's.
  > 
  > Blavatsky said:
  > "He who objects to having his views controverted and criticized 
  must not write for Lucifer. " ..."Moreover, we have given good proofs 
  of our impartiality. We published articles and letters criticizing 
  not alone our personal theosophical and philosophical views, but 
  discussing on subjects directly concerned with our personal honour 
  and reputation; reviving the infamous calumnies in which not simple 
  doubts, but distinctly formulated charges of dishonesty were cast 
  into our teeth and our private character was torn to shreds (Vide "A 
  Glance at Theosophy from the Outside", Lucifer for October, 1888). 
  And if the editor will never shrink from what she considers her duty 
  to her readers, and that she is prepared to throw every possible 
  light upon mooted questions in order that truth should shine bright 
  and hideous lies and superstitions be shown under their true colours -
  why should our contributors prove themselves so thin-skinned?"
  > ( IS DENUNCIATION A DUTY? by H. P. Blavatsky - Lucifer Magazine 
  1888)
  > 
  > So I will have to disagree a bit with your ideas. I would rather 
  recommend, that the members at this place learn to control their 
  emotions. Individuals and ideas are all part of our life. Everything 
  is ParaBrahman - as neti, neti - (ie. not this, not that).
  > I do also know, that some persons are not fond of all what H. P. 
  Blavatsky did and said.
  > If you find H. P. Blavatsky's above views irrelevant to use at 
  Theos-talk I would like to know why.
  > Do you have any ideas?
  > May I ask:If you only help your friends and only talk to your 
  friends, what good do you do?M. Sufilight
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: alex 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 5:50 PM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: "...we have to preach and popularise a 
  knowledge of theosophy."
  > 
  > 
  > Hi Morten good to see you here, and thank you for those Sufi 
  stories.
  > 
  > I agree with you and I think that's what I've done, I confronted 
  him.
  > My English may not be the smoothest but you don't have to worry 
  about 
  > me, things don't really bother me anymore. 
  > I'm surprised no one has noticed but there is a dugpa in the 
  center 
  > of our living room who makes fun of and opposes everything we 
  live 
  > and breathe for (or at least try to). This is not just about me 
  and 
  > those who have passively settled for this circus here. Sure, I 
  can 
  > clear my inbox in seconds from all this `theos-talk', read only 
  from 
  > some and go do something more useful. But imagine what a newbie 
  to 
  > theosophy would think of the people in here letting this person 
  run 
  > wild like this, worse than that mistake him for an aspiring 
  > Theosophist?
  > 
  > I will show you a recent example of what goes on: 
  > (I don't know if this person visited this group or not)
  > 
  > "Blavatsky & all her cohorts are simply 'Satanists' whether 
  they're 
  > aware of it or not.
  > the occult is from the pit of Hell.
  > Blavatsky was just another demon possessed lost soul who led & 
  leads 
  > many other lost souls to their damnation." 
  > 
  > If I was the moderator I wouldn't think twice of removing a 
  > distracting cancer from the body.
  > 
  > Alex
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  > theosophy@> wrote:
  > >
  > > 
  > > Dear Alex
  > > 
  > > I am not the moderator on this list.
  > > But, I agree, that this joke from Chuck went too far. Do you 
  not 
  > agree on that Chuck?
  > > 
  > > Yet, it is also true, to some of us, that a number of Chuck's e-
  > mails are in fact quite theosophical in content. If you can - 
  not - 
  > find any of his e-mails to be theosophical in content, please let 
  me 
  > know.
  > > 
  > > The fact that is that you tell me and others, that you grow 
  > impatient, because you completely disagree with all Chuck writes 
  in 
  > his e-mails - and you therefore need to delete them.
  > > 
  > > I will tell you, that If I had to delete all those e-mails I 
  > thought to be - no good, I would problably be very busy. :-) 
  > Therefore try to read the story THE REMEDY in the below. 
  > > 
  > > May I ask: Why do you not talk with Chuck about his behaviour 
  > instead. That is a more theosophical and altruistic idea. Do you 
  not 
  > agree?
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Here are two Sufi stories for you to consider.......
  > > I do hope, that you will calm down a bit after reading it.
  > > 
  > > - - - - - - -
  > > 
  > > 1.
  > > THE REMEDY
  > > Some say that Nasrudin lived in the time of the great conqueror 
  > Tamerlane, and was one of his advisers.
  > > 
  > > One day, so goes the tale, Timur the Lame called the Mulla and 
  said:
  > > 'Nasrudin, the Empire is full of slanderers. How can we stop 
  their 
  > evil work?'
  > > 'You can never stop crime unless you punish all the criminals,' 
  > said Nasrudin.
  > > 'You mean the slanderers?'
  > > 'And their accomplices - those who listen to them,' the Mulla 
  > reminded him
  > > 
  > > - - - - - - -
  > > 
  > > 2.
  > > WHOM TO BELIEVE
  > > Mulla Nasrudin had an insatiable craving for knowledge, but did 
  not 
  > seem to know what knowledge was. As a result he asked a local 
  wise 
  > man the stupidest questions, always based upon random assumptions
  > > One day the Mull a noticed that his donkey was Inissing. He ran 
  to 
  > the wise man 5 house.
  > > 'Well, Mulla, what is it this time?'
  > > 'My donkey is gone! Where can I find it?'
  > > The wise man was quite fed up with the Mulla. 'Nasrudin,' he 
  > said, 'the donkey has run off, turned into a man and been ap-
  pointed 
  > the magistrate in the next town.'
  > > Thanking the wise man for his information, the Mulla trudged to 
  the 
  > court. There sat the magistrate, and Nasrudin shook his fist at 
  him:
  > > 'Come home at once, you foolish animal!'
  > > The magistrate was furious. 'Who are you and how dare you talk 
  to 
  > me like that? I'll have you sent to the cells!'
  > > 'I'm the well-known Mulla Nasrudin, and I have it on the best 
  > authority that you are my donkey.'
  > > 'That's ridiculous. Nobody in his right senses would credit 
  such a 
  > thing!'
  > > Nasrudin drew himself up to his full height. 'Say what you like 
  he 
  > said, 'I prefer to believe the statement of a wise man rather 
  than 
  > that of a donkey.'
  > > Wisdom, according to the Sufis, can only be acquired when one 
  is 
  > ready for it: though people insist on seeking enlightenment as 
  and 
  > when they want it. The Sufi's task, however, includes trying to 
  > impart knowledge in the right way, at the right time, to the 
  people 
  > who are able to receive it:
  > > 
  > > - - - - - - -
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > M. Sufilight
  > > (Who saw HPB materialise in front of him year 2008.)
  > > 
  > > 
  > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > From: alex 
  > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 2:28 PM
  > > Subject: Theos-World Re: "...we have to preach and popularise a 
  > knowledge of theosophy."
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Is this funny for everyone here? 
  > > I'm not sure why the moderator is passively ok with this and 
  even 
  > > allows you to showoff your website. Is he still alive? I don't 
  > know 
  > > about others but I'm starting to get tired of deleting your 
  > messages 
  > > from my inbox.
  > > This crap is not Theosophy, this is just bored goofing around 
  > that 
  > > spoils things for others, and makes the new comer puke on the 
  > whole 
  > > group and leave. 
  > > The Unity of Mind is lacking in here already, I don't think we 
  > need 
  > > to see this nonsense anymore.
  > > 
  > > Chuck, why don't you try to be like Milarepa and turn things 
  > around, 
  > > become the first Enlightened man in modern times to abandon the 
  > path 
  > > of sorcery and black magic? 
  > > Think about it Chuck, you will increase the membership, peoples 
  > > participation and get all our votes if you choose to run and 
  > > promulgate the DOCTRINE of the Buddhas! 
  > > What do you think? :)
  > > 
  > > Alex
  > > 
  > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Drpsionic@ wrote:
  > > >
  > > > Ok, the very first thing we have to do is get rid of those 
  > obsolete 
  > > ideas of 
  > > > purity, self-denial, charity, etc and concentrate on finding 
  > what 
  > > really is 
  > > > going on.
  > > > 
  > > > Chuck the heretic
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > In a message dated 10/11/2008 4:06:19 P.M. Central Daylight 
  > Time, 
  > > > danielhcaldwell@ writes:
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > "For our doctrines to practically react on the so called 
  moral 
  > code
  > > > or the ideas of truthfulness, purity, self-denial, charity, 
  > etc., 
  > > we
  > > > have to preach and popularise a knowledge of theosophy."
  > > > 
  > > > Quoted from a letter from the Chohan
  > > > _http://www.theosocihttp://www.theoshttp://wwhttp://www._ 
  > > > (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-choh.htm) 
  > > > 
  > > > So exactly what do we preach and popularise?
  > > > 
  > > > Are there certain teachings that constitute this "theosophy"? 
  > And 
  > > if
  > > > so, what are these teachings?
  > > > 
  > > > And where do we find these teachings?
  > > > 
  > > > And how do we learn about them and study them so that in turn 
  we
  > > > can "preach and popularise" them?
  > > > 
  > > > And who is "we"? The leaders of the TS? Elected officials of 
  the
  > > > TS? Any member of the TS?
  > > > 
  > > > And remember there is more than one TS or theosophical 
  > organization
  > > > or association.
  > > > 
  > > > Can non-members preach and popularise this theosophy?
  > > > 
  > > > And in this same letter, the Chohan tells us:
  > > > 
  > > > -------------------------------------------------
  > > > The doctrine we promulgate being the only true one, must, --
  > > > supported by such evidence as we are preparing to give become
  > > > ultimately triumphant as every other truth. Yet it is 
  absolutely
  > > > necessary to inculcate it gradually enforcing its theories,
  > > > unimpeachable facts for those who know, with direct inferences
  > > > deducted from and corroborated by the evidence furnished by 
  > modern
  > > > exact science.... Theos-sophia, Divine Wisdom...is a synonym 
  of
  > > > truth....
  > > > -------------------------------------------------
  > > > 
  > > > This is quite a CLAIM.
  > > > 
  > > > "The doctrine we promulgate being the only true one...."
  > > > 
  > > > So what is this DOCTRINE that is "the ONLY true one" and 
  where 
  > can 
  > > we
  > > > find an exposition of this teaching?
  > > > 
  > > > Is it to be found in THE SECRET DOCTRINE written by H.P. 
  > Blavatsky?
  > > > 
  > > > Or can it be found in C.W. Leadbeater's and Annie 
  Besant's "Man,
  > > > Whence, How, and Whither: A Record of Clairvoyant 
  > Investigation"W
  > > > 
  > > > Or in a book by Alice Bailey? or....in a book by Elizabeth 
  > Claire
  > > > Prophet?
  > > > 
  > > > If "we" are to popularise a knowledge of Theosophy, what 
  > exactly do
  > > > we popularise?
  > > > 
  > > > Is reincarnation part of this DOCTRINE?
  > > > 
  > > > What if I start popularising the teaching of reincarnation 
  that
  > > > includes the provision that humans can sometimes be reborn as
  > > > animals?
  > > > 
  > > > Am I faithfully transmitting the DOCTRINE?
  > > > 
  > > > And who is to say that I am faithfully or not transmitting the
  > > > DOCTRINE?
  > > > 
  > > > In other words, who is to say what the REAL, TRUE "doctrine" 
  is?
  > > > 
  > > > The objects of the TS doesn't tell us what the DOCTRINE is 
  all 
  > > about,
  > > > so where and how does one [an inquirer, a newcomer] discover 
  > what 
  > > the
  > > > DOCTRINE is that the Chohan seems to hold in SUCH high regard?
  > > > 
  > > > Daniel
  > > > _http://hpb.cc_ (http://hpb.cc/) 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > **************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at 
  your 
  > > destination. 
  > > > Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out 
  > > > (http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > >
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > >
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



   

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