Theos-Talk Archives (November 2008 Message tt00201)

Anand,

You wrote:

> You brought the passages which were convenient to you, and you deleted
> sentences which are problematic. Here I am giving those sentences.
> "Neither our philosophy nor ourselves believe in a God"
>  "we deny God both as philosophers and as Buddhists."
> "we know there is in our system no such thing as God, either personal
> or impersonal."

Anand,  I was not ignoring these passages by not quoting them.  I was 
simply offering you KEY statements by the Masters which I believe give 
a good insight to what they are teaching.

Do you understand the quotes I gave?  Do you agree or disagree with 
them?  And if you disagree with them can you tell us why?

I ask you to grapple with these ideas and try to understand them.  
Maybe you already understand them but that is certainly not clear to me.

Again you write:
 
> It is not clear why brought Arthur W. Osborn. I was not discussing his
> philosophy. I was commenting on so called Mahatma Letters. 

I gave Mr. Osborn's quote because I believe he deals with one of the 
IDEAS presented in the statements of the Masters.

We should be concerned with THE IDEAS presented and first try to 
understand them whether the statement is given by the Master or as in 
this case by Mr. Osborn.

I also hope you will comment on what you said about Jnaneshwar at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/47296

To repeat again:  I am not at all certain that I understand what you 
object to in what the Mahatmas teach about "God".

Take just one of the quotes I gave previously:

---------------------------------------------------------------
Pantheistic we may be called -- agnostic NEVER. If people are willing
to accept and to regard as God our ONE LIFE immutable and unconscious
in its eternity they may do so and thus keep to one more gigantic
misnomer. But then they will have to say with Spinoza that there is
not and that we cannot conceive any other substance than God; or as
that famous and unfortunate philosopher says in his fourteenth
proposition, "praeter Deum nulla dari neque concepi potest
substantia" -- and thus become Pantheists . . . .
---------------------------------------------------------------

Do you object to the idea of "pantheism"?

Do you agree or disagree with the idea that:

"there is not...any other substance than God."

If "God" is everywhere, is in fact universal, is all things, then there 
is nothing "outside" of God.  You and I are soaked thru and thru 
with "God".  We are not separate from "God", "he" is not separate from 
you or me...

There is no "separation"...You and I don't 
really "exist"....as "separate entities"...all such distinctions are 
mayavic, illusionary....

You yourself said:

----------------------------------------------------------
St. Jnaneshwar writes in it that it is sin to consider ourselves
separate from God. He wrote that God is the only one who exists, all
forms which we see with senses are maya or illusion.
-----------------------------------------------------------

Anand, notice your words that "God is the ONLY ONE who exists, all 
forms [INCLUDING YOU AND I!!!!] are maya or illusion."  We are 
not "separate from God." 

THERE IS ONLY ONE SELF whether we call it God, the SELF, the Universal 
Buddha, the Cosmic Christ, the Krishna within, or simply NIRVANA.

Again KH taught:

--------------------------------------------------------------
no true philosophically trained Adwaitee will ever call himself an
agnostic, for he knows that he is Parabrahm and identical in every
respect with the universal life and soul -- the macrocosm is the
microcosm and he knows that there is no God apart from himself, no
creator as no being....
--------------------------------------------------------------

He knows that he is .... identical with the UNIVERSAL LIFE AND SOUL.

He is not [to use your own words] SEPARATE FROM GOD.

or as KH writes.  There is no God APART [that is, SEPARATE] from 
himself....

So tell us Anand if you object to what is taught in these KH quotes 
which can be found at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/47293

and tell us if you think Jnaneshwar's views agree or disagree with the 
views of the Masters.  See the quotes I am referring to at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/47293

Hoping you will grapple with these ideas and tell us what you are 
thinking....

Daniel
http://hpb.cc