Theos-Talk Archives (June 2011 Message tt00017)

Morten, 
Interesting question lol! Hmmm, didnt Blavatsky as a young juvenile sit cross legged with her playmates and tell amazing tales to them and perform amazing paranormal phenomena for them? I don't exactly recall where I read that but I seem to remember how impressed, intrigued and enthralled I was to read about her amazing capacities as a young girl. 
John 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@5BGx_5QG-T0Sh_SYSiVuXbWMTKrPaYoydMWtVdIhltugMpglt7rc_1c7MMUJJRhNx5ot77GH1TSZc9IwMEt-Sr7arA.yahoo.invalid> 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2011 9:34:57 PM 
Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 






Thanks. 
So it is not necessarily important to giggle, when H. P. Blavatsky is sitting cross-legged? 
(smile.)Â 

One might perhaps add: Do not even believe in yourself.....Well as long as it is ignorant. 

M. Sufilight 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cass Silva 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 3:48 AM 
Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 

First, rely on the spirit and meaning of the teachings, 
not on the words; 

Second, rely on the teachings, 
not on the personality of the teacher; 

Third, rely on real wisdom, 
not superficial interpretation; 

And fourth, rely on the essence of your pure Wisdom Mind, 
not on judgmental perceptions. 

Traditional Buddhist teaching 

Believe nothing on the faith of traditions, 
even though they have been held in honor 
for many generations and in diverse places. 
Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it. 
Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past. 
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined, 
persuading yourself that a God inspires you. 
Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests. 
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested 
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto. 

>________________________________ 
>From: M. Sufilight < global-theosophy@5BGx_5QG-T0Sh_SYSiVuXbWMTKrPaYoydMWtVdIhltugMpglt7rc_1c7MMUJJRhNx5ot77GH1TSZc9IwMEt-Sr7arA.yahoo.invalid > 
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2011 3:34 PM 
>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
> 
> 
> 
>Dear Cass 
> 
>My views are: 
> 
>H. P. Blavatsky cross-legged? Smile. 
>When she materialized in my appartment a few years ago, she was quite thin and semi-transparent (smile.). So it seems that she has lost some weight since she lived in the physical. So I guess she only operate as chubby when in need so to make people giggle. 
> 
>According to my views, there is one central purpose to meditation and that is: 
>Altruism or rather Heart-Wisdom. 
>Life is about learning. The purpose of life is to remove ignorance. And removal of ignorance occurs continously to all humans. Removal of ignorance about the difference between good and evil, which result in Heart-Wisdom, (and eventually going beyond human thought and the limited experience of existence in time and causality). The truth about why this happen, in the world, and why we not already years ago as humans had arrived at a complete removal of ignorance - is - hidden in wisdom or heart-wisdom. Ignorant humans do not understand. Therefore seek wisdom and especially heart-wisdom. 
> 
>Where your thoughts are your energy also are. And where your thoughts are is where your awareness is, and where your awareness is, is where you will be sooner or later. 
> 
>M. Sufilight 
> 
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: Cass Silva 
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 7:18 AM 
>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
> 
>Depends what you mean by meditative, most people think of sitting cross legged focusing on not focusing. Somehow imagining HPB in this position brings a smile to my face. I believe their are many levels of meditation, one being to totally focus on what one is doing by directing focus solely on one particular event, hence why Einstein and others totally forgot about eating and sleeping while focusing on a particular idea. 
> 
>Meditation nowadays seem to be concerned only with calming one's self to lessen stress levels brought about by day to day living. Gurdgieff Krishnamurti and all the great teachers did not seem to have any time for this pastime. They were too focused on the real issues revolving around what it means to be human. 
> 
>Perhaps you can explain to me the purpose of meditation? 
> 
>Cass 
> 
>>________________________________ 
>>From: M. Sufilight < global-theosophy@5BGx_5QG-T0Sh_SYSiVuXbWMTKrPaYoydMWtVdIhltugMpglt7rc_1c7MMUJJRhNx5ot77GH1TSZc9IwMEt-Sr7arA.yahoo.invalid > 
>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2011 2:57 PM 
>>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>Dear Cass and friends 
>> 
>>My views are: 
>> 
>>I suggest, that we remain calm. 
>> 
>>Cass wrote: 
>>"as theosophists, we are advocating that to solve the problems of the world requires only a contemplative state under a buddhi tree! How much time did Blavatsky spend on contemplative meditation when having to expose the catholic church and the spiritualists?" 
>> 
>>M. Sufilight says: 
>>Every person living, or almost every person living are able to go to sleep nearly every day. 
>>If, so then a half hour meditation is not impossible. And the theory given H. P. Blavatsky is that action is important. Inaction is less. Do you not think so Cass? 
>>Later the ernest Seeker will learn to meditate while acting in the physical. 
>> 
>>I do not know how much time Blavatsky spend with contemplative meditation. 
>>But I do rather know, that she was meditating nearly all the time, if not alle the time. Because the higher Self was acting through her. And she also stated this to other theosophists in letters. 
>>( See "Two Persons in Madame Blavatsky" - http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/whitelotus2000.htm ) 
>> 
>>H. P. Blavatsky in fact said in her book the Key to Theosophy, p. 66-67: 
>>"IS IT NECESSARY TO PRAY? 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We act, instead of talking. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. You do not offer prayers even to the Absolute Principle? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Why should we? Being well-occupied people, we can hardly afford to lose time in addressing verbal prayers to a pure abstraction. The Unknowable is capable of relations only in its parts to each other, but is non-existent as regards any finite relations. The visible universe depends for its existence and phenomena on its mutually acting forms and their laws, not on prayer or prayers. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Do you not believe at all in the efficacy of prayer? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Not in prayer taught in so many words and repeated externally, if by prayer you mean the outward petition to an unknown God as the addressee, which was inaugurated by the Jews and popularised by the Pharisees. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Is there any other kind of prayer? 
>> 
>>67 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Most decidedly; we call it WILL-PRAYER, and it is rather an internal command than a petition. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. To whom, then, do you pray when you do so? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. To "our Father in heaven" â in its esoteric meaning. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Is that different from the one given to it in theology? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Entirely so. An Occultist or a Theosophist addresses his prayer to his Father which is in secret (read, and try to understand, ch. vi. v. 6, Matthew), not to an extra-cosmic and therefore finite God; and that "Father" is in man himself. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Then you make of man a God? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Please say "God" and not a God. In our sense, the inner man is the only God we can have cognizance of. And how can this be otherwise? Grant us our postulate that God is a universally diffused, infinite principle, and how can man alone escape from being soaked through by, and in, the Deity? We call our "Father in heaven" that deific essence of which we are cognizant within us, in our heart and spiritual consciousness, and which has nothing to do with the anthropomorphic conception we may form of it in our physical brain or its fancy: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit of (the absolute) God dwelleth in you?"* Yet," 
>> http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm 
>> 
>>H. P. Blavatsky in fact said in her book the Key to Theosophy, p. 52-53: 
>>"ON SELF-IMPROVEMENT 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. Is moral elevation, then, the principal thing insisted upon in your Society? 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Undoubtedly! He who would be a true Theosophist must bring himself to live as one. 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. If so, then, as I remarked before, the behaviour of some members strangely belies this fundamental rule. 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Indeed it does. But this cannot be helped among us, any more than amongst those who call themselves Christians and act like fiends. This is no fault of our statutes and rules, but that of human nature. Even in some exoteric public branches, the members pledge themselves on their "Higher Self" to live the life prescribed by Theosophy. They have to bring their Divine Self to guide their every thought and action, every day and at every moment of their lives. A true Theosophist ought "to deal justly and walk humbly." 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. What do you mean by this? 
>> 
>>53 
>> 
>>THEOSOPHIST. Simply this: the one self has to forget itself for the many selves. Let me answer you in the words of a true Philaletheian, an F. T. S., who has beautifully expressed it in the Theosophist: "What every man needs first is to find himself, and then take an honest inventory of his subjective possessions, and, bad or bankrupt as it may be, it is not beyond redemption if we set about it in earnest." But how many do? All are willing to work for their own development and progress; very few for those of others. To quote the same writer again: "Men have been deceived and deluded long enough; they must break their idols, put away their shams, and go to work for themselves â nay, there is one little word too much or too many, for he who works for himself had better not work at all; rather let him work himself for others, for all. For every flower of love and charity he plants in his neighbour's garden, a loathsome weed will disappear from his own, 
>and so this garden of the gods â Humanity â shall blossom as a rose. In all Bibles, all religions, this is plainly set forth â but designing men have at first misinterpreted and finally emasculated, materialised, besotted them. It does not require a new revelation. Let every man be a revelation unto himself. Let once man's immortal spirit take possession of the temple of his body, drive out the money-changers and every unclean thing, and his own divine humanity will redeem him, for when he is thus at one with himself he will know the 'builder of the Temple.'" 
>> 
>>ENQUIRER. This is pure Altruism, I confess. " 
>> http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm 
>> 
>>So I do certainly not find, that H. P. Blavatsky offered what you are insinuating in your below mail Cass. 
>>Or am I mistaken? 
>> 
>>M. Sufilight 
>> 
>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>From: Cass Silva 
>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 2:36 AM 
>>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>> 
>>Meditation and concentration are luxuries that only the aristocracy can afford to play with. The world is becoming more and more savage,people are finding it harder and harder to feel secure, and as theosophists, we are advocating that to solve the problems of the world requires only a contemplative state under a buddhi tree! How much time did Blavatsky spend on contemplative meditation when having to expose the catholic church and the spiritualists? 
>> 
>>Cass 
>> 
>>>________________________________ 
>>>From: M. Sufilight < global-theosophy@5BGx_5QG-T0Sh_SYSiVuXbWMTKrPaYoydMWtVdIhltugMpglt7rc_1c7MMUJJRhNx5ot77GH1TSZc9IwMEt-Sr7arA.yahoo.invalid > 
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>>Sent: Wednesday, 1 June 2011 2:30 AM 
>>>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>Dear John 
>>> 
>>>My views are: 
>>> 
>>>Yes. 
>>>The following has to do with this to a certain degree... 
>>> 
>>>Master K.H. on Concentration 
>>>and Union with the Higher Self 
>>>[Collated, abridged and edited by Daniel H. Caldwell 
>>>from several variant copies of Master K.H.'s comments.] 
>>> http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/khconcentration.htm 
>>> 
>>>There are of course also the Gelugps teachings given by the Prasangika or Prasanga on meditation and other esoteric teachings, or teachings claimed to be esoteric. 
>>> 
>>>A FEW MORE MISCONCEPTIONS CORRECTED (by H. P. Blavatsky) 
>>>"The Prasanga school obtained its name from the peculiar mode which it adopted of deducing the absurdity and erroneousness of every esoteric opinion. * 
>>> 
>>>Correct interpretations of Buddhist Philosophy are crowned by that gloss on a thesis from the Prasanga School, that 
>>> 
>>>Even an Arhat goes to hell in case he doubt anything,â 
>>> 
>>>thus making of the most free-thinking religion in the world a blind-faith system. The âthreatâ refers simply to the well-known law that even an Initiate may fail, and thus have his object utterly ruined, if he doubt for one moment the efficacy of his psychic powersâthe alphabet of Occultism, as every Kabalist well knows. 
>>>The Tibetan sect of the Ngo-vo-nyid-med par Mraba (âthey who deny existence,â or âregard nature as MÃyÃâ)â can never be contrasted for one moment with some of the nihilistic or materialistic schools of India, such as the ChÃrvÃka. They are pure VedÃntinsâif anythingâin their views. And if the Yoga-charyÃs may be compared with, or called the Tibetan ViÅishËadvaitÃs, the Prasanga School is surely the Advaita Philosophy of the land. It was divided into two: one was originally founded by BhÃvaviveka, the SvÃtantrika MÃdhyamika School, and the other by BuddhapÃlita; both have their exoteric and esoteric divisions. It is necessary to belong to the latter to know anything of the esoteric doctrines of that sect, the most metaphysical and philosophical of all. Chandrakirti (Dava Dagpa) wrote his commentaries on the Prasanga doctrines and taught publicly; and he expressly states that there are two ways of entering the âPathâ to 
>>NirvÃna. Any virtuous man can reach by Naljor-ngonsum (âmeditation by self-perceptionâ), the intuitive comprehension of the four Truths, without either âââââ 
>>>* Ibid. 
>>>â Buddhism in Tibet, p. 44. 
>>>â They maintain also the existence of One Absolute pure Nature, Parabrahman; the illusion of everything outside of it; the leading of the individual Soulâa Ray of the âUniversalââinto the true nature of existence and things by Yoga alone. 
>>>âââââ 
>>> 
>>>Page 439 
>>> 
>>>belonging to a monastic order or having been initiated. In this case it was considered as a heresy to maintain that the visions which may arise in consequence of such meditation, or VijÃÃna (internal knowledge)*, are not susceptible of errors (Namtog or false visions), for they are. "....and further....."Whatever is not known to our geographers seems to be a non-existent locality. Thus: 
>>>Mysticism . . . is reported to have originated in the fabulous country Sambhala."....and so on....and reading further also about the Kalachakra Tantra....."âItâ meaning the âDus-kyi Khorlo,â or Tibetan Mysticism. A system as old as man, known in India and practised before Europe had become a continent, âWas first known,â we are told, only nine or ten centuries ago! The text of its books in its present form may have âoriginatedâ even later, for there are numerous such texts that have been tampered with by sects to suit the fancies of each. But who has read the original book on Dus-Kyi Khorlo, re-written by Tsong-kha-pa, with his Commentaries? Considering that this grand Reformer burnt every book on Sorcery on which he could lay his hands in 1387, and that he has left a whole library of his own worksânot a tenth part of which has ever been made knownâsuch statements as those above quoted are, to say the least, premature." 
>>> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v14/mb_010.htm 
>>>(Dus-Kyi Khorlo is the Kalachakra Tantra) 
>>> 
>>>Some persons have been saying that the esoteric doctrine on the Kalachakra given by Tsong Khapa was taught in Tibet (Ganden is mentioned) in the 1930'ties and likely until the Chinese arrvied in Tibet in 1959, and maybe, it still is, somewhere in the region, although more withdrawn it seems. And maybe there in reality are genuine copies of Tsong-Khapa's Kalachakra doctrine in existence today. But they are not given out openly to the public for various reasons it seems. Karma being one of them. - And what requires a strong effort to learn and know about, yields a better spiritual fruit it seems. 
>>>And H. P. Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine and a great number of her articles and letters in fact contain a whole lot for any serious beginner student (the non-lazy of them, I think). These are however just my views. And there are in our time not many officially available books and scriptures in English or just translations to other languages, which deal with the Kalachakra teachings on the same level, and with a clear reference to the seven keys to the mystery language, and the ancient mutual truths found in the mythological teachings (and importantly cross cultures) on our globe. If I am mistaken, I will gladly like to learn about it. 
>>> 
>>>- - - 
>>>Maybe one aught to upload the original version given by Buddhapalita and Chandrakirti (Dava Dagpa) - both in english and sanskrit (or tibetan)? (But most translations in English etc. seem to cost money these days.) 
>>>But "Ocean of Nectar: The True Nature of All Things" by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Geshe Kelsang Gyatso's "Spiritual Father" was the great Gelugpa Master Kyabje Trijang Dorjechang (1900-1981 CE),[14] who was at one time the Throne Holder (or Ganden Tripa) of Je Tsongkhapaâs tradition - says Wikipedia) 
>>>is for instance quite cheap - and sell for about only 20$ or less. 
>>> 
>>>Buddhapalita's "BuddhapÄlitaâs Commentary to the Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way" (Translated and edited by Ian Coghlan, 2010, is online here in one version, --- a draft translation: 
>>> http://buddhapalitavrtti.com/BUDDHAPALITAVRITTI_CHAPTERS_1_%20AND_2.pdf 
>>> 
>>>Also "Ocean of Reasoning -- Tsong Khapa's Great Commentary on Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika" by Jay L. Garfield and Geshe Ngawang Samten (2006) first official english translation it seems - could also be interesting in a free version and perhaps in another translation. 
>>> 
>>>Perhaps also "The Theory of Two Truths in India First published Thu Feb 17, 2011" by Thakchoe, Sonam. 
>>>(The not unimportant differences between Prasangika and Svatantrika are highlighted on one level of understanding): 
>>>CONCLUSION 
>>>"To sum up, though this entry provides just an overview of the theory of the two truths in Indian Buddhism discussed overview, it nevertheless offers us enough reasons to believe that there is no single theory of the two truths in Indian Buddhism. As we have seen there are many such competing theories, some of which are highly complex and sophisticated. The essay clearly shows, however, that except for the PrÄsaágika's theory of the two truths, which unconditionally rejects all forms of foundationalism both conventionally and ultimately, all other theories of the two truths, while rejecting some forms of foundationalism, embrace another form of foundationalism. The Sarvastivadin (or Vaibhasika) theory rejects the substance-metaphysics of the Brahmanical schools, yet it claims the irreducible spatial units (e.g., atoms of the material category) and irreducible temporal units (e.g., point-instant consciousnesses) of the five basic categories as 
>>ultimate truths, which ground conventional truth, which is comprised of only reducible spatial wholes or temporal continua. Based on the same metaphysical assumption and although with modified definitions, the Sautrantika argues that the unique particulars (svalaksana) which, they say, are ultimately causally efficient, are ultimately real; whereas the universals (samanyalaksana) which are only conceptually constructed, are only conventionally real. Rejecting the Abhidharmika realism, the Yogacara proposes a form of idealism in which which it is argued that only mental impressions are conventionally real and nondual perfect nature is the ultimately real. The Svatantrika Madhyamaka, however, rejects both the Abhidharmika realism and the Yogacara idealism as philosophically incoherent. It argues that things are only intrinsically real, conventionally, for this ensures their causal efficiency, things do not need to be ultimately intrinsically real. 
>>Therefore it proposes the theory which states that conventionally all phenomena are intrinsically real (svabhavatah) whereas ultimately all phenomena are intrinsically unreal (nihsvabhavatah). Finally, the Prasangika Madhyamaka rejects all the theories of the two truths including the one advanced by its Madhyamaka counterpart, namely, Svatantrika, on the ground that all the theories are metaphysically too stringent, and they do not provide the ontological malleability necessary for the ontological identity of conventional truth (dependent arising) and ultimate truth (emptiness). It therefore proposes the theory of the two truths in which the notion of intrinsic reality is categorically denied. It argues that only when conventional truth and ultimate truth are both conventionally and ultimately non-intrinsic, can they be causally effective. " 
>>> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/twotruths-india/ 
>>> 
>>>My view is to add to the Prsangika version in the above: Yet, absolute negation, cannot be such alone, (a theory), because all theories are denied, and denials as well as non-denials also, when one consider Prasanga or Prasangika teachings. 
>>> 
>>>- - - 
>>>Yet some translators are more able than others no doubt (smile.) 
>>> 
>>>Just a few views of mine... 
>>> 
>>>M. Sufilight 
>>> 
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: Augoeides-222@uqa0ltjAvcI7ggMiy2yxFQq6coF8VOpJ0eSbUmb_4tCYCv-G0r3H9mybd8tpQ4vw20VsXus45NPqWnLhSBfxLPo.yahoo.invalid 
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>>Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:58 PM 
>>>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>>> 
>>>Morten, 
>>>When I read Daniel's nice post I recalled the Mahayana standard of walking, standing, sitting and reclining in regard to mindful awareness and meditation. 
>>>John 
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: "M. Sufilight" < global-theosophy@5BGx_5QG-T0Sh_SYSiVuXbWMTKrPaYoydMWtVdIhltugMpglt7rc_1c7MMUJJRhNx5ot77GH1TSZc9IwMEt-Sr7arA.yahoo.invalid > 
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>>Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 10:03:21 AM 
>>>Subject: Re: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>>> 
>>>Beautiful! 
>>>Thank you very much for quoting these words Daniel. 
>>> 
>>>- - - 
>>>A request: 
>>>Are there a few hans who are able to upload the - FIRST EDITIONS - of the Alice A. Bailey book: "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire" (1925), - and perhaps more secondary also the first editions of "Initiation - Human and Solar" (1922), "Letters on Occult Meditation" (1922), "A Treatise on White Magic" (1934), "Esoteric Psychology I" (1936), The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali (1927). 
>>> 
>>>If uploading C. W. Leadbeaters books as well as Annie Besants are important - then I find "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire" by Alice A. Bailey important as well. I was once told that some of the footnotes was missing in the first edition of this book "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire" (1925). Are anyone able to confirm this? 
>>> 
>>>- - - 
>>>Comparative studying seem still important to some seekers. Other seekers are carefully avoiding it. 
>>> 
>>>M. Sufilight 
>>> 
>>>----- Original Message ----- 
>>>From: Daniel 
>>>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
>>>Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 6:25 PM 
>>>Subject: theos-talk The Mahatmas on "a calm, even contemplative state of mind" 
>>> 
>>>The Mahatmas gave the following advice: 
>>> 
>>>"Knowledge for the mind, like food for the body, is intended to feed and help to growth, but it requires to be well digested and the more thoroughly and slowly the process is carried out the better both for body and mind." 
>>> 
>>>"For a clearer comprehension of the extremely abstruse and at first incomprehensible theories of our occult doctrine never allow the serenity of your mind to be disturbed during your hours of literary labour, nor before you set to work. It is upon the serene and placid surface of the unruffled mind that the visions gathered from the invisible find a representation in the visible world. Otherwise you would vainly seek those visions, those flashes of sudden light . . . which alone can bring the truth before the eye of the soul. It is with jealous care that we have to guard our mind-plane from all the adverse influences which daily arise in our passage through earth-life." 
>>> 
>>>"On close observation, you will find that it was never the intention of the Occultists really to conceal what they had been writing from the earnest determined students, but rather to lock up their information for safety-sake, in a secure safe-box, the key to which is - intuition. The degree of diligence and zeal with which the hidden meaning is sought by the student, is generally the test - how far he is entitled to the possession of the so buried treasure." 
>>> 
>>>"The lake in the mountain heights of your being is one day a tossing waste of waters, as the gust of caprice or temper sweeps through your soul; the next a mirror as they subside and peace reigns in the 'house of life.' One day you win a step forward; the next you fall two back. Chelaship admits none of these transitions; its prime and constant qualification is a calm, even contemplative state of mind (not the mediumistic passivity) fitted to receive psychic impressions from without, and to transmit one's own from within. The mind can be made to work with electric swiftness in a high excitement; but the Buddhi - never. To its clear region, calm must ever reign." 
>>> 
>>>Daniel 
>>>Blavatsky Study Center / Blavatsky Archives 
>>> http://blavatskyarchives.com 
>>> http://blavatskystudycenter.com 
>>> 
>>>[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] 
>> 
>>[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] 

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




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