Theos-Talk Archives (November 2008 Message tt00352)

Dear Anand and all readers

My views are:

Anand wrote about Mahatma Letter 10:
"Notice the words 'there is no God APART FROM himself'. This statements
accepts existence of God. And yet other statement in Pseudo-letter
says 'There is no God, either personal or impersonal'"


My answer:
I just saw your e-mail.

I see your problem much better now.
But, try to understand. There is in reality no male creator "God" apart from us humans in any dogmatic Christian sense of the word as given by the Christian leaders. 
This God of theirs, It is an imaginary nightmare created by power-greedy persons. There is therefore no personal God. There is no impersonal God either. - Because the highest "God" you can mention is Parabrahm, and ParaBrahm cannot be conditioned within thought, and and we call "it" - not this, not that (neti, neti). ParaBrahm is always within you as indescribable Sat Chit Ananda, as Neti Neti. Because Parabrahm is neither something or nothing, and also both at the same time. 

Any talk about "God" or ParaBrahm will always refer to the fact that Parabrahm is within your very own self, it is your inner Self so to speak. It is really there, I am not trying to trick you. I know what I am talking about. And H. P. Blavatsky, Master KH and Morya does as well.

When you are one with Parabrahm you have transcended time and space. You are one with the universal force og cosmos. It is this force one aught to be one with and not the one, which divides and leads to greed for power, to thoughts of demons and the devil.
Good and bad is two things, which might be the opposite depending on the receiver.
The mother and father are bad - in the childs eyes - if the child does not get what it wants.
In the Mother and Fathers eyes, they are good because they save money, and do not need to buy the most expensive toy in the world.

When Master KH talk about that the Adwaitee finds that there is no God apart from himself, Master KH is clearly referring to the fact, that God, which always is Parabrahm to the Adwaitee, is within the Adwaitee, and that the Adwaitee know this to be a fact.

So Master KH is perhaps unprecise because he use the word "God" when talking about that God is not apart from the Adwaitee. The word ParaBrahm would have been more correct. But I bet, that Master KH also did this to make persons from Christian cultures reflect on what he said. - I think it is a question about who receives the letter and reads it, and a question about when to use dead-letter reading and writing and not to.

Do you understand it much better now?

Within your own self is a higher self. The highest one. This is a strange fact.
This potential self within your own self is already a divine Christ Conscious Avatar in the future. Because so is the Law of the Manvantaras. Some incarnated beings experience this always or partially, others know about it, and others use it as a hypothesis and a lifestyle to follow.

These are my views, knowledge and experience.


M. Sufilight


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Anand 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 5:09 AM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Looking more closely at Anand's comments on "God"


  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell"
  <danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
  >
  > Anand,
  > 
  > You write:
  > ----------------------------------------------------------
  > "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. "
  > Let us see meaning of this statement in PL 10 (Pseudo-Letter 10)
  > Dictionary meaning of 'keep to" is "to adhere without deviation'
  > and meaning of misnomer is 'calling something by wrong name'.
  > If we paraphrase above statement, it becomes
  > "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
  > adhere to one more wrong name. "
  > It means according to PL 10 "accepting idea of One Life as God" is
  > wrong. Therefore, according to this PL 10, one should not call God as
  > One Life.
  > This contradicts with many spiritual classics which tell God as Life
  > or source of Life.
  > ----------------------------------------------------------
  > 
  > But Anand look at your KH quote. There is a significant sentence JUST
  > BEFORE the sentence you quote and IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING your quoted
  > sentence there is another significant statement.
  -------------------------
  --------------------------------------
  That means one statement in Pseudo-letter 10 contradicts with another
  statement just before it in the same letter !
  Daniel, you might try to justify Pseudo-letters by bringing some
  sentences which suit your explanation. But I have seen many people who
  studied Pseudo-letters for years and interpret them differently. 
  Above given is not just one incidence. There are many other misleading
  statements in Pseudo-letters. 

  > ----------------------------------------------------------
  > . . . We are not Adwaitees, but our teaching respecting the ONE LIFE
  > is identical with that of the Adwaitee with regard to Parabrahm. And
  > 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. 
  ----------------
  Notice the words 'there is no God APART FROM himself'. This statements
  accepts existence of God. And yet other statement in Pseudo-letter
  says 'There is no God, either personal or impersonal'



   

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