Theos-Talk Archives (October 2010 Message tt00063)

Smile.
I would say: Not stolen, but more precisely distorted.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: charles cosimano 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2010 8:03 PM
  Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: Aurobindo's madman?


    
  I think the key came in an brief exchange in the Olcott Library many years ago. An elderly lady was staying at Olcott for a short time, doing something Theosophical, and she came into the library walked into the stacks and asked why the writings of Alice Bailey were there, not because of any objection to what they said, but because, as she said, they were all stolen from the Esoteric Section teachings.

  That alone would send them up the walls and over the battlements.

  Chuck the Heretic

  http://www.charlescosimano.com


  -----Original Message-----
  From: kpauljohnson <kpauljohnson@pabwhZsQhApycVDQIcQhTsFuTZyM-hzBhsNIr7t-K755OcS7ljbWCmB7ugOqYqWpaHX4UCoRcjybwzRc_kb6.yahoo.invalid>
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Sat, Oct 9, 2010 6:21 am
  Subject: theos-talk Re: Aurobindo's madman?

  This was a very contemporary article to have been written a hundred years ago! As for the "dethroning of popes" that still is the main thing needed IMO. But now in addition to an authoritarian mindset on behalf of the current leadership, the popes of 100 years ago are untouchable, beyond criticism, still enthroned even though long dead. 

  I would think that Morten and I agree about the relative value of the writings of Leadbeater and Bailey compared to those of HPB. I'd be equally disinclined to spend time on either one, but if others in a group wanted to study them would not object, just skip those classes. But the difference in the TS is that nothing negative can ever said about the former, nothing positive about the latter, without making The Powers That Be extremely uncomfortable. What is it about Bailey in particular that creates such a paranoid atmosphere throughout the TS?

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Duane Carpenter <monad_monad_monad@...> wrote:
  >
  > Great Article Jim
  > This extracted section of the article really gave important insights.
  > 
  > Aurobindo: Claims of Theosophy
  > 
  > 
  > "If Theosophy is to survive, it must first change itself. It must learn that 
  > mental rectitude to which it is now a stranger and improve its moral basis. It 
  > must become clear, straightforward, rigidly self-searching, sceptical in the 
  > nobler sense of the word. It must keep the Mahatmas in the background and put 
  > God and Truth in the front. Its Popes must dethrone themselves and enthrone the 
  > intellectual conscience of mankind. If they wish to be mystic and secret like 
  > our Yogins, then they must like our Yogins assert only to the initiate and the 
  > trained; but if they come out into the world to proclaim their mystic truths 
  > aloud and seek power, credit and influence on the strength of their assertions, 
  > then they must prove. It need not and ought not to be suddenly or by miracles; 
  > but there must be a scientific development, we must be able to lay hold on the 
  > rationale and watch the process of the truths they proclaim." 
  > 
  > Circa 1910/12
  > 
  > 
  > ________________________________
  > From: jamesbergh <jamesbergh@...>
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
  > Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 7:12:33 PM
  > Subject: theos-talk Aurobindo's madman?
  > 
  > Ã 
  > I was reading an article by Aurobindo, Claims of Theosophy at:
  > www.aurobindo.ru/workings/sa/17/0015_e.htm
  > 
  > He wrote in 1910/12: ...The only member of the Theosophical Society who could 
  > give me any spiritual help I could not better by my unaided faculties, was one 
  > excluded from the esoteric section because of his rare and potent experiences 
  > were unintelligible to Theosophical guides... one who meddled not in 
  > organizations and election cabals but lived like a madman, unmattavat."
  > 
  > Could have been some other Chuck, but I wonder who this soul may have been.
  > 
  > Any ideas?
  > 
  > Jim
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [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]