From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 09:05:30 1998 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 09:55:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: HPB a forbidden topic? Message-Id: <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199805301400.JAA04156@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at May 30, 98 09:00:06 am According to owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com: > from Dallas: > > I did not challenge Johnson I asked for sources or proof that HPB > spoke or wrote "untruths." Dallas, I think the verdict would be unanimous that the tone you adopted and continue to adopt when addressing (?) me is not one of simple "asking" but indeed of "challenging" me to provide sources, proof, etc. Which you can't even bring yourself to do directly. For some reason you can only talk to me in the third person. Why is that? He made the allegation. He offered > no proof. The allegation was not, in that case, that HPB was guilty of untruths, but rather that the subject of whether or not she was could not be raised for calm, fraternal discussion because someone would freak out. I was thinking of you when I wrote that. > > I protested on HPB's behalf -- since she is "dead," and unable to > respond, or explain. Nothing like that ought to be allowed to > pass, in my esteem, by any decent person. So every decent person is morally obliged to freak out any time any living person makes some reference to a dead person having not always told the truth? That would make the work of historians and biographers pretty unpleasant! Silence is consent. I > do not consent. It is not yours to consent to my thoughts or expression thereof, any more than it is mine to consent to yours. There's some stupendous arrogance behind your role of "thought police" on this list. > > I will respect anything which carries sources which can be > verified by any one of us, -- so we can make up our own minds. I > object to being told I should accept anything which is not > explained (with adequate referencing) from the start. Who on this list told you what you should accept? There's only one person around here who seems to be in that sort of mode of thinking. > > I do not intend to engage in argument or controversy. But you are one of the leading persons making this list an argumentative and controversial place. Precisely because you have this amazing assumption that it is up to you to decide what is and is not allowable for others to think or write. > > I am interested solely in the study of, practice and promulgation > of "original" Theosophy that she brought for us to study. I > regard Mme. H.P.Blavatsky as my teacher, and intend to protest > unverified attacks on her integrity. You use the word "attacks." But others would see the things you freak out about as simply "inquiries," or "discussions," or "speculations" concerning the subject. Your adrenaline starts racing the minute anyone challenges your belief system, and you get into this mindset of "I'm being attacked, I must attack in return." You obviosuly identify with HPB. You see HPB as your teacher, you think the world should share your exact vision of her, and even a fellow Theosophist who has a more critical view of her is seen as "attacking" both her and you for simply raising obvious questions that have been raised many times before. > > Let any one challenge Theosophy, if that can be done. But, > taking advantage of the "dead," who cannot respond is What do you mean by "taking advantage of?" I presume every historian, every biographer, every John Q. Public who ever thinks or writes of *any* historical figure that "X didn't always tell the truth" would be subject to this kind of accusation from you. -- I leave > it to you to qualify. > > I hope that my position in this matter is clear. Dallas > TenBroeck > > Theosophy is a subject for debate, if anyone wishes to try it. > > H.P.Blavatsky is not subject to debate, On whose authority do you state this? On what authority do you presume to squelch discussions which are on subjects that displease you? as none of us are > undertakers, bior dare we impute motives to one who is unable to > answer or explain. Not sure about "bior" but any effort to understand a historical figure *requires* that we impute motives to one who is unable to answer or explain. What's to freak out about? > > To me the proposition is a simple and direct one. > Dallas As is, apparently, the proposition that you have the right and obligation to attempt to control what others can think and say and discuss, which has to meet your requirements before being "permissible." That's worth rethinking. Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 11:09:35 1998 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 11:56:14 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Egregores and HPB Message-Id: <199806011556.LAA22842@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Following up Pam's comments, it seems to me that there are multiple HPBs up there in egregoreland, being fed by people with quite different approaches. I speak from personal acquaintance with several of them. Each of the Theosophical groups has constructed its own version of HPB, and is now sustained by psychic interaction with their self-constructed simulacrum rather than with the real woman. Indeed, if the real woman turns out to conflict with the favored egregore, she will be vigorously rejected by some adherents of the latter. Starting out with the ULT version of HPB, I would say she is a stern, judgmental, authoritarian figure filled with righteous indignation. The TSA version is quite different, a broadly tolerant, fun-loving adventurous type full of hope and inspiration. The Pasadena HPB is rather more scholarly and less adventuresome than the Adyar version, but not quite the rigidly orthodox figure of ULT perception. In short, it seems to me that the same is true of HPB as of Jesus. Each group or generation comes up with a version that reflects its own character. That worked OK in the days when Theosophists were quite segregated. But now, with networking and cyberspace, we have all these competing HPBs slugging it out in various ways, exacerbated by historical perspectives that produce several new HPBs: my version, Godwin's, Washington's, Carlson's all showing up in this decade. Rather comparable to all the competing versions of Jesus found in the new literature about his historical identity, added to all the existing Jesuses of the churches or other belief systems. The healthy adaptation to this situation would be an open acceptance of diversity and a commitment to civil, indeed cordial discourse within and beyond the Theosophical movement. But these do not seem to be times in which healthy adaptation to the contemporary situation is in the cards. Maybe next millennium? Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 11:38:44 1998 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 07:24:41 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: ISIS UNVEILED, Vol. 2, p. iii "Preface to Part II" Need some help / info. Message-ID: <000a01bd8d7a$36303f20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 1st 1998 Dallas asks if anyone has information about: Peter Cooper, Elizabeth Thompson -- America; Baroness Angela Burdett-Coutts -- England HPB speaks of their benevolence, which must have been well known in 1875/77 Help ! Help ! Dallas ==================================== From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 14:50:29 1998 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 15:31:29 -0400 From: "Phillips Spencer" Subject: Re: Pope to condemn HPB and the Masters Message-ID: Importance: high I have prepared my Self for this event for some time. The Vatican is not the Holy Roman Church or the only voice on the teachings of Christ or the Principle of Christo, So to all my brothers "Be more charitable for others than for yourself, and more severe on yourself than on others. As for the Vatican "forgive them for they know not what that do". H.P.B did not invent Theosophy, She was only " H.P.B. the MAHATMAS ADEPT " [Phillips Spencer] > ----Original Message----- > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 10:59 AM > Subject: Pope to condemn HPB and the Masters > > The following article by the Vatican correspondent to THE WANDER, a > national > Catholic weekly newspaper appeared in the May 21 issue. I thought it may > be of > some interest to those on this List. Here it is: > > ENCYCLICAL ON THE NEW AGE MIGHT BE COMING SOON by Farley Clinton > > Vatican City. The long-expected encyclical from Pope John Paul II about > the > problem of the New Age movement today may appear fairly soon, as a serious > article in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO on May 7th reflects a desire to instruct > the > faithful clearly regarding this subject. > > It points out five central Christian beliefs that are strongly denied and > attacked in the propaganda of the fashionable books inspired by this > movement: > > 1) The existence of a Creator > 2) The reality of prayer to God, a meeting of two persons, which should > have > the character of adoration, of petition, of thanksgiving offered by the > creature to the Creator, and is certainly not mere self-discovery. > 3) The reality of human sin and the need of a Redeemer. > 4) The significance of suffering and of death > 5) The necessity of love and of work, not mere thought, to change the > world. > > Contradicting Christian belief, the New Age literature tends more or less > to > identify God with the world, or to make the world a necessary emanation > from > God, not His free creation. It knows nothing of the prayer of a creature > and a > sinner. It proposes "meditation" that is a totally alien kind, not > reconcilable with Christian faith. > > Christians believe in original sin and in the sinfulness of all of us, > consequently they cannot share in the New Age hope that some sort of > technique, or concentration, or union of millions of consciousnesses, can > save > man. They believe in the one Way of salvation, Christ the Son of God made > man > and introduced into history in order to save man. > > The followers of the New Age are led not to accept suffering and death but > to > place their hopes in expanding consciousness, in rebirth, and in > techniques > believed to achieve these goals, while Christians believe in the power of > suffering in union with Jesus Christ crucified. For Christians, death is a > unique event, not an entry to one of a series of reincarnations or > spiritual > journeys but the necessary step to enter eternal life. > > The article in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, written by Teresa Osorio Goncalves, > traces the origins of this popularization of old Oriental religions to the > work of occultists in Europe and America in the last century. Madame > Blavatsky > and her Theosophical Society, founded in New York with the aid of a > spiritualist in 1875, have had great influence in leading persons from > Christian countries to reject the Gospels entirely in favor of some > approach > to Hinduism, Buddhism, or another heathen religion. > > The rejection of God is central to the movement. Madame Blavatsky > especially > rejected God whom she called the "masculine" God, of Israel, of > Christianity, > and of the Muslims. > > "She proposed a return to Hinduism with its cult of a mother goddess and > its > practice of feminine virtues. Feminists action was to be continued in the > Theosophical Society under the guidance of Annie Besant, a figure in the > forefront of the feminist movement." > > This modern occultism is difficult to pin down to definite beliefs since > it > expresses itself in many different movements. But according to Goncalves, > there are six teachings encountered constantly, as they are the central > belief > of the movement. > > 1) The world is seen as one organic whole. > 2) But it is animated by an Energy which is more or less like God. > 3) There are spiritual entities acting as mediators to man. > 4) Man by spiritual exercises can control his life beyond death. > 5) There is a "perennial wisdom" which precedes every religion and every > culture and is superior to every religion. > 6) There are "enlightened" spiritual masters one should follow. > > The encyclical in preparation will probably be the first, certainly the > most > thorough, major document from the Church to address the thirst, or the > craze, > for Eastern spirituality, although the phenomenon is almost 125 years old > in > New York. > > But false spiritualities linked to the heresies of Quietism and Jansenism > flourished a century or more before being censured in Rome, as was the > case > with other errors. > > > > > > > > > > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 17:02:19 1998 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 16:49:51 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Pope to condemn HPB and the Masters Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980601164951.00970320@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: Vatican is doing a favor to theosophy/new age. Several decades ago, when a theosophical lecturer was in S. America, on a Sunday, the local Bishop or Cardinal told the church audience not to attend the lecture by the theosophist. Just imagine what was the result. There was an overflowing crowd who wanted to find out what was going on. We will see. At 03:31 PM 6/1/1998 -0400, you wrote: >I have prepared my Self for this event for some time. The Vatican is not the >Holy Roman Church or the only voice on the teachings of Christ or the >Principle of Christo, So to all my brothers "Be more charitable for others >than for yourself, and more severe on yourself than on others. As for the >Vatican "forgive them for they know not what that do". >H.P.B did not invent Theosophy, She was only " H.P.B. the MAHATMAS ADEPT " >[Phillips Spencer] >> ----Original Message----- >> From: "Marshall Hemingway III" >> Sent: Friday, May 29, 1998 10:59 AM >> Subject: Pope to condemn HPB and the Masters >> >> The following article by the Vatican correspondent to THE WANDER, a >> national >> Catholic weekly newspaper appeared in the May 21 issue. I thought it may >> be of >> some interest to those on this List. Here it is: >> >> ENCYCLICAL ON THE NEW AGE MIGHT BE COMING SOON by Farley Clinton >> >> Vatican City. The long-expected encyclical from Pope John Paul II about >> the >> problem of the New Age movement today may appear fairly soon, as a serious >> article in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO on May 7th reflects a desire to instruct >> the >> faithful clearly regarding this subject. >> >> It points out five central Christian beliefs that are strongly denied and >> attacked in the propaganda of the fashionable books inspired by this >> movement: >> >> 1) The existence of a Creator >> 2) The reality of prayer to God, a meeting of two persons, which should >> have >> the character of adoration, of petition, of thanksgiving offered by the >> creature to the Creator, and is certainly not mere self-discovery. >> 3) The reality of human sin and the need of a Redeemer. >> 4) The significance of suffering and of death >> 5) The necessity of love and of work, not mere thought, to change the >> world. >> >> Contradicting Christian belief, the New Age literature tends more or less >> to >> identify God with the world, or to make the world a necessary emanation >> from >> God, not His free creation. It knows nothing of the prayer of a creature >> and a >> sinner. It proposes "meditation" that is a totally alien kind, not >> reconcilable with Christian faith. >> >> Christians believe in original sin and in the sinfulness of all of us, >> consequently they cannot share in the New Age hope that some sort of >> technique, or concentration, or union of millions of consciousnesses, can >> save >> man. They believe in the one Way of salvation, Christ the Son of God made >> man >> and introduced into history in order to save man. >> >> The followers of the New Age are led not to accept suffering and death but >> to >> place their hopes in expanding consciousness, in rebirth, and in >> techniques >> believed to achieve these goals, while Christians believe in the power of >> suffering in union with Jesus Christ crucified. For Christians, death is a >> unique event, not an entry to one of a series of reincarnations or >> spiritual >> journeys but the necessary step to enter eternal life. >> >> The article in L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, written by Teresa Osorio Goncalves, >> traces the origins of this popularization of old Oriental religions to the >> work of occultists in Europe and America in the last century. Madame >> Blavatsky >> and her Theosophical Society, founded in New York with the aid of a >> spiritualist in 1875, have had great influence in leading persons from >> Christian countries to reject the Gospels entirely in favor of some >> approach >> to Hinduism, Buddhism, or another heathen religion. >> >> The rejection of God is central to the movement. Madame Blavatsky >> especially >> rejected God whom she called the "masculine" God, of Israel, of >> Christianity, >> and of the Muslims. >> >> "She proposed a return to Hinduism with its cult of a mother goddess and >> its >> practice of feminine virtues. Feminists action was to be continued in the >> Theosophical Society under the guidance of Annie Besant, a figure in the >> forefront of the feminist movement." >> >> This modern occultism is difficult to pin down to definite beliefs since >> it >> expresses itself in many different movements. But according to Goncalves, >> there are six teachings encountered constantly, as they are the central >> belief >> of the movement. >> >> 1) The world is seen as one organic whole. >> 2) But it is animated by an Energy which is more or less like God. >> 3) There are spiritual entities acting as mediators to man. >> 4) Man by spiritual exercises can control his life beyond death. >> 5) There is a "perennial wisdom" which precedes every religion and every >> culture and is superior to every religion. >> 6) There are "enlightened" spiritual masters one should follow. >> >> The encyclical in preparation will probably be the first, certainly the >> most >> thorough, major document from the Church to address the thirst, or the >> craze, >> for Eastern spirituality, although the phenomenon is almost 125 years old >> in >> New York. >> >> But false spiritualities linked to the heresies of Quietism and Jansenism >> flourished a century or more before being censured in Rome, as was the >> case >> with other errors. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 17:47:18 1998 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:43:25 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Pope to condemn HPB and the Masters Message-ID: <35732E8D.D8A87C54@sprynet.com> References: Phillips Spencer wrote: > > I have prepared my Self for this event for some time. The Vatican is not the > Holy Roman Church or the only voice on the teachings of Christ or the Why was this message of "highest" priority? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 20:17:20 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:23:50 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson quotes Dallas: >> Theosophy is a subject for debate, if anyone wishes to try it. Of course. >> >> H.P.Blavatsky is not subject to debate, Why not? HPB is a historical figure. You might just as easily say Jesus is not subject to debate, or C.W.Leadbeater is not subject to debate. Or Dallas. Or Alan. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 20:32:21 1998 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 18:06:38 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? Message-Id: <199806020102.UAA26002@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199805301400.JAA04156@proteus.imagiware.com> At 09:55 AM 6/1/98 -0400, you wrote: >According to owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com: >> >from Dallas: >> >> I did not challenge Johnson I asked for sources or proof that HPB >> spoke or wrote "untruths." Dallas, I think she was untruthful when she said there would be a third volume of the SD with biographies of the lives of adepts in it. However, she also says this on p. 483 Vol. II SD, "Once landed on, and having touched this planet of dense matter, no snow-white wings of the highest angel can remain immaculate, or the AVATARA (or incarnation) be perfect, as every such Avatara is the fall of a God into generation. Nowhere is the metaphysical truth more clear, when explained estoerically, or more hidden from the average comprehension of those who instead of appreciating the sublimity of the idea can only degrade, than in the UPANISHADS, the esoteric glossaries of the VEDAS." So, her picture of reality, Dallas, is not quite like yours. (even though I didn't read the message referred to.) Brenda From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 20:37:37 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:46:43 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Past Life memory Message-ID: Dear Thoa (and all): The folowing post, while disappearing into devachan, was also copied to Chicago (a bit closer), and thus I am able to repost: ------- I recently offered to post a genuine past life memory, with comments. In view of a comment by Bart, I though now must be the time, so here it is. For many years I earned my living, or part of it, by playing the piano accordion or the piano, mainstream jazz in my early days (Django kind of stuff) and popular tunes of the day, and more importantly, past days. I discovered, over a period, that the songs of the First World War evoked an emotion in me that was out of proportion to the quality of the song as a song, and one night I was playing in a village pub on November 11th, when we remember Armistice Day of W.W.I. There were a lot of old soldiers there still gong strong from that time, and their singing along and remembering all the words moved me a great deal. Note the above date - it's important to what follows. To avoid too much waffle, I had studied occult ideas for some years by then, and was inclined to accept reincarnation as a fact. About a year or two later, recalling that night, I wondered if I was so strongly affected because I had be incarnated during that war, and following what might be called third object disciplines, attempted to discover if there was any substance to this, as by this time I had received enough occult training to be able to do so. So I went in, so to speak. The brief result was as follows: I was in an airplane [biplane, with a machine gun mounted forward] flying over a battlefield. It was raining, and had been for some days. The ground below was a sea of mud. Suddenly, I received a blow in the chest, as if a shot had been fired from the ground (I was close enough). As things faded, there were other memories appropriate to the period - farmhouses, and a double decker milk wagon pulled by a single horse. I came back to normal wakefulness, and, as I knew how, went back in to obtain more info, on the basis that if true, my memory would also have info about the circumstances of the event, which was so. On going back in for more details I wanted certain information, as the event did not tell me much in itself. The procedure is rather like question and answer, which is why it is useful to come out and then go back in again, so as to formulate useful, rather than "curious" questions. Age? 18 Name? John [Big deal!] Place? Ypres Date? December 1918. Remember the date - November 11th? This didn't fit, because as we were all taught at school, the signing of the Armistice was the end of the war. I nearly didn't bother to follow this up, as I was convinced this could not be correct, but some impulse led me to the public library to find out what I could of the historical record. I had no knowledge or information about the battle of Ypres prior to this except that there had been one! It appeared, as I read, that although the armistice had been signed, the speed of communication in W.W.I not being very good, the folks at Ypres didn't know the war was over, and were still fighting. The battle took place in *December* 1918, as I had been told. Aircraft were not used very seriously except for reconnaissance [sp?] during W.W.I, and only began to be more useful towards the end of the war. Many of the pilots, who were members of the army's Royal Flying Corps, were young men, mostly around 18 to 20. The weather during the battle was atrocious, and fitted exactly the conditions I had seen. Ground fire at aircraft was most often from rifles shooting directly at the pilot when he flew low to see what was happening. Another book gave me a picture - almost a replica - of the milk wagon and the type of farm I had recalled. I could hardly believe my eyes, and was amazed at what I had read. The memory and the answers were true, though I could not verify the name [surprise!]. At the time I put the experience down to a genuine remembrance of a past life of my own, which maybe it was. But the pilot of that plane was *not* the same person I am in *this* life. I concluded that in all probability I acquired a new persona, or even "soul" for this life. Later I saw only two possibilities to explain my experience. 1. I *had* inhabited the body of "John" who was shot down over Ypres, and had inherited some of the emotion and feeling that went with his short existence when I reincarnated. 2. I had *remembered* "John's" experience due to some affinity between myself and him, so that we were linked outside of time as we ordinarily understand it. I am inclined, so far as this experience goes, to suspect that 1. was the most likely, but in another post I will recount another such experience where I suspect that 2. was more likely - and that there is also a "3." Watch this space! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 21:22:26 1998 Date: Mon, 1 Jun 1998 19:08:15 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: : HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: <001001bd8dcb$9db05b20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 1st 1998 Dear Alan: I am apparently violating some tacit basis for the handling of history. It seems immunity is granted to those who dare or desire to ventilate their opinions. So I make mine known. How can you or I "debate" HPB ?" We can not. She is herself, as you are, or I am--each one an individual Self. We are not subject to being debated. Someone may say they don't like something about us, what we wear, what we eat, how we speak, what we do, etc. Yes, HPB is a historical figure. If she is to be described, then let it be an honest description. I do not care to hear (and I said this it plainly) about her, or anyone else, evil inferred. I have always thought when I hear or read things of that nature that somehow the author, or the person repeating something that cannot be gainsaid by the person concerned is taking advantage of their absence and of the public's avidity for slander, and ill speaking -- always the attempt to reduce a person to a lower level, morally. No thank you. Not for me. None of us is fit to do that in my esteem, whether it is HPB or anyone else. When we have written a Secret Doctrine and secured the backing of the Mahatmas, we may be able to debate WITH her. But in her absence, no. As I said before, everyone of us who use, or work with Theosophy, are her pupils and owe her a debt of gratitude. I do not consider it honorable or respectful to try to demean her. I would say about Jesus the same thing. About C W L -- well there are court judgments. If we are going to debate his character, we will have to give both sides. He has done some good, and he had great potential, as one of the Masters' early letters of encouragement to him reveals. That would have to be mentioned. Same would be for anyone whose past is under review or characterization. To speak ill of the dead is cowardly I would say. If HPB were here she could handle the matter herself. As she is not, I pick up the cudgels ! Is that so strange ? Somewhere I must be missing a clue. That in my seem is an example of why history is not a science. It does not deal in facts anymore, but in selected opinions. If it is a matter of opinions then I voice mine. And I have done so. I hope this helps explain my position. Dallas > Date: Monday, June 01, 1998 6:44 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? >K. Paul Johnson quotes Dallas: >>> Theosophy is a subject for debate, if anyone wishes to try it. > >Of course. >>> >>> H.P.Blavatsky is not subject to debate, > >Why not? HPB is a historical figure. You might just as easily say Jesus >is not subject to debate, or C.W.Leadbeater is not subject to debate. > >Or Dallas. Or Alan. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 21:38:06 1998 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 22:30:47 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Past Life memory Message-ID: <357363D7.1FC@globalserve.net> References: Dear Alan: Thanks for sharing. I have been watching and waiting for your promised recounting of your experience. I have a couple of questions for my own interest only: You say: > and following what might > be called third object disciplines, attempted to discover if there was any > substance to this, as by this time I had received enough occult training to > be able to do so. > > So I went in, so to speak. What do you mean by "third object disciplines", please? I would like to try "past life regression" to see if anything I deal with currently is as a result of past lives, but would rather do it alone than "under guidance of a regressor". It there's nothing there, I can trust myself not to invent something, but cannot necessarily trust someone who is being paid to "produce a result". I like your process of analysis in considering all possibilities. Most interpretations state that we completely forget past lives before choosing this one and I could never get into that, because, if the theory is that we reincarnate to work out Karma and reach for perfection, but we have no memory of what we did before, how can we know we are doing it any better this time around? > Watch this space! Watching, watching Cheers Annette From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 22:22:41 1998 Date: Mon, 01 Jun 1998 20:20:02 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Subject : Holograms and Egregores Message-ID: <19980602032004.26612.qmail@hotmail.com> There has been a fascinating and very valuable set of expositions, from the scientific and theosophical point of view, of these two subjects; which have been inter-related and with advantage could be further correlated. Thank all of you for the excellent contributions HOLOGRAMS. Having made a study of this some years back, there just occurs to me to add a point to what has already been stated. Three laser cameras "photograph" an object or subject from differing angles. When these laser "photographs" are projected into space at a given focal length, the wavelengths of the laser beams strike each other causing interference. This interference causes the reappearance in that spacial area of a replica of the original object, not in hard matter, but as a perceivable three dimensional image that observers can walk around and view from all angles. Museums, instead of sending with all the expense involved pieces of their collections for display to other museums and parts of the world for exhibition purposes, need only send the holographic images. These can be exhibited and visitors see three dimensional art pieces, or paintings. This is going to be a great saving financially, and obviating the cost of the insurance, and great expense of Security. This apart, the important aspect of the Holograph is what many of you have already accentuated. That each section of the interfering laser beams, at each point provide a miniature of the WHOLE OF THE OBJECT. Each spot of space is a replica of the original. It reminds one of what HPB says, about the Circle's Circumference and its Centre, in relations to the Kosmos-(and to the Cosmos) : HPB says its CENTRE EVERYWHERE AND IT'S CIRCUMFERENCE AND NOWHERE. Another author to be studied with those already mentioned is Lyall Watson, the biologist looking for life, who wrote "Romeo Error," "Supernature" and "Life Tide," and one more book. (Two of these named books are duplicates of each other, one is the English title and the other the American one, I am sorry I have forgotten which is which.) He spoke of LIFE FIELDS-again this can be linked to the proofs of KIRLIAN PHOTOGRAPHY-which act as a back ground to the formation of blue prints for animate things. He brings this in as if he was speaking of the astral model (in Sanskrit "linga Sarira") of plants and animals, of which theosophy also speaks. Going on to develop this theme further he starts writing of THOUGHT FIELDS. Before Leadbeater and Annie Besant came up with the phrase "thought field," Mme Blavatsky had already spoken of the images of the gods (of any of the world's pantheons, whether so-called Hindu, Buddhist, Greek, Roman, Egyptian etc., (or any of the various tribal and nature spirit worshipers) in the Astral Light would be found decaying and falling apart, as people had gradually decreased worshipping and having belief in them. Here again we get the picture that in the Astral light are to be found HOLOGRAPHIC IMAGES created by man's thought power, and systems of belief-whether rational or irrational, it makes no difference. AND each one of us being a part of the Universal HOLOGRAM, in each atom, cell and organ of our body, and especially in our brain, and above that in the power of the mind, HAVE ACCESS TO THE ENTIRE HOLOGRAM OF THE UNIVERSE. IF, WE WILL. One way of learning is through - Analogy and Correspondence -- on which HPB lays great stress, as a way of developing intuition and widening our acquirment of KNOWLEDGE, and beyond that WISDOM or TRUTH, about which also discussions keep cropping up on these lists. Using therefore Analogy and Correspondence, therefore it would be worth each one's interlinking what is said about HOLOGRAMS, Egregores, to the Universal Mind, "thought constructs," and other similar subjects. HPB in The Voice speaks of the mind needing "…breadth and depth, and points to draw it towards the Diamond Soul." Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Mon Jun 1 23:37:23 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 13:55:40 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980602135540.007186c0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806020102.UAA26002@proteus.imagiware.com> References: <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <199805301400.JAA04156@proteus.imagiware.com> Brenda Said: >I think she was untruthful when she said there would be a third volume of >the SD with biographies of the lives of adepts in it. I recently downloaded the Kessinger Books mail order catalogue - there was this entry: Blavatsky, H.P., Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion and Philosophy VOL. 3 OCCULTISM (1897), This rare third volume of the Secret Doctrine (virtually impossible to find) completes the papers left by H. P. B. It is a complete course on Occultism! Nothing is left out. Almost 100 chapters. Partial contents: One Key to all Sacred Books; The ABC of Magic; Chaldean Oracles; The Book of Hermes; Three Ways Open to the Adept; Names are Symbols; Characters of the Bible; The Book of Enoch; Hermetic and Kabalistic Doctrines; Numbers and Magic; Occult Weapons; The Duty of the True Occultist; Two Eternal Principles; St. Paul the real founder of Christianity; Apollonius no Fiction; Biographies of Initiates; Kabalistic Readings of Gospels; Magic in Antioch; The Septenary Sephira; Seven Keys to all Allegories; The Mystery of the Sun; Magical Statutes; Masonry and Jesuits; Mysteries and Masonry; Egyptian Initiation; Root of Races; Celestial Wheels; Christian Star Worship; Defense of Astrology; The Seven Rays; Secret Books; Tibetan Prophecies; Swedenborg; Occult Secrecy; and much more! Blavatsky was an occult master. If you are a serious mystical student, you'll need this rare and illuminating book. ISBN 1-56459-415-7, 618 pages, $49.95 i was told by my local TS that it is not in fact a seperate vol3 - But HPB surely mentions a vol 3 under way at the end of Anthropegenesis. " These two volumes only constitute the work of a pioneer who has forced his (sic) way into the well-nigh inpenetrable jungle of the virgin forests of the Land of the Occult. A commencement has been made to fell and uproot the deadly upas tree of superstition, prejudice, and conceited arrogance, so that these two volumes should form for the student a fitting prelude for Volumes III and IV. Until the rubbish of the ages is cleared away from the minds of the Theosophists to whom these volumes are dedicated, it is impossible that the more practical teaching contained in the Third Volume should be understood. Consequently, it entirely depends at the hands of Theosophists and Mystics, whether these last two volumes will ever be published, though they are almost completed" - SD vol II, Anthropogenesis, pp 797-798, facsimile edition. Can anyone elaborate further? Namaste, Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 03:02:19 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 01:56:43 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #165 Message-Id: <199806020756.BAA14389@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote: >AS I UNDERSTAND IT, JUDGE WAS TRYING TO SAY "EMULATE" --TO PUT >INTO ACTION THE HIGHEST MORAL QULITIES AND THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF >THOUGHT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO DO AS "imitations." Some of you gentlemen on this list sure yell alot. And, ok, if Judge was "trying" to say something different than what he wrote - so be it. But then, we are now allowed to apply that standard to every writer in Theosophy. > I neve liked sitting >"opposite"anyone. Sitting opposite someone requires one to look the other in the face. It is a scary prospect; focus on your feet - that helps. >Who can pretend to be a "teacher ?" No one can "pretend" - we are all 'genuine' teachers. Someone learns something from us every day - be the lesson helpful or inhibiting. We need to get it together regarding our 'lesson plan.' >Seeking to know the ins and outs of another's psyche sounds kind >of sneaky to me. Possibly manipulative. Hello? Dallas? Are you there? How did you manage to get out of my saying that we need not treat humans as machines as "seeking to know the ins and outs of another's psyche?" To be just a plain ole' compassionate person, one must, as I said previously, handle or include the sentiments of others. If a person is so grief-stricken as to desire to commit suicide, one better know how to handle that person's particular sentiments or have knowledge of human psychology so to help aid the suffering person. You term this "manipulative?" So, when your mother or a friend comforted you and knew what things to say to you to help you when you were sad or in pain, it was just a manipulative ploy on their part? Ok, well. . .hmmmm. . .what to do here? >And, no selection of quotes is of more value >than to the one who makes that selection. I can't guarantee that >anyone else will enjoy them as I did, But we can all wonder why >they were phrased the way they are. And indeed we did! Hence, you deciding (and I agree) that Judge meant "emulate" rather than "imitate." And you know what, Dallas? This is one of the reasons why we need to re-vamp the writings - clarify the writings. >One of the things that I try to keep in mind is: all are capable >of thinking and making independent decisions as I can, and so I >try to respect their integrity. No, this is a cop-out. You and I know good and well there are those out there who are skilled in areas other than deciphering occultism. There are people who are caring, compassionate, earnest, and who yearn to know other 'things' - but due to a lack of opportunities in education, they are required to gravitate toward ideas which they feel they can readily understand (hence, the groundswell of Christianity, Islam, and pop New Age ideas). If Theosophical writings were made clearer (as Annie Besant attemped to do - applause to her), there would be MORE people who then "are capable of thinking and making independent decisions as [you] can." Too many people are forced to make decisions about "the meaning of life" based on too little information. >I am aware of "gender sensitivity. For me the use of gender is >annoying, since what I am trying to say is something to the >soul/mind. And I do not believe that it has a "gender." Ok, but that does not explain why those who claim "it" has no gender insist on calling "it" him or he, rather than one or it. >So >excuse me if I hit a sore spot -- not intentional. You've done remarkably well on this post. . and now that I know you can. . .any trip-up will be met most harshly. >Wish I could emulate some of those characteristics if possible. Ooooh, clever! >Also I prefer "The >Tempest" Of course, Dallas, of course. I say "tomato," you say "tomatoe." Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 04:02:17 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:54:39 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #168 Message-Id: <199806020854.CAA14998@mailmx.micron.net> Paul wrote to Dallas: >You see HPB as >your teacher, you think the world should share your exact vision >of her, and even a fellow Theosophist who has a more critical >view of her is seen as "attacking" both her and you for simply >raising obvious questions that have been raised many times >before. There does seem to be some kind of "army of HPB" or "soldiers of HPB's truth" ideology on this list. This type of feeling is also present in other types of organized dogma - it can vary from bombastry to bombings. Kym (bombastry: grand words with little meaning) From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 06:20:34 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 03:34:47 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: -- HPB REFERENCES TO SD Vols 2 and 3 Message-ID: <000201bd8e18$49b686a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 2nd 1998 Dallas TenBroeck offers: Before anyone sets themselves up to criticize HPB and her writing, one ought to, at least, fully acquaint themselves with the scope as well as the details of her writing. Much of this will be found in the magazines LUCIFER, PATH, and the THEOSOPHIST in articles contemporary to those writings. In addition there are many more references to the S D in letters HPB and others wrote concerning the S D -- one ought to be familiar with those. In the S D, HPB makes several references to what is INTENDED to be printed in Vols. 2 and 3. Some of the references to Vols. 2 and 3 that HPB makes are to be found in SD I vii, xl, 11 ; S D II 437, 798; In "The Negators of Science" [ LUCIFER, April 1891, Part 1, ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 2, p. 80-1) ] HPB gives a survey of what was intended in Vol. 3. [ HPB was evidently not able to complete this as she died May 8th, 1891, shortly after this article was issued. Because she foresaw this, is the probable reason, I think, for the destruction of the manuscripts making up the 3rd and part of the 4th Volumes of the S D -- as she could not edit them for publication. I was given to understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley and G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and ready. She then said that she had received "instructions" to have them destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This is a reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent verification of this statement made to me.] In the issue of Lucifer, for May 1891 will be found her last article "MY BOOKS," and attached to this article in LUCIFER, is an APPENDIX signed by 12 of the most intimate assistants and friends of HPB in London. It is important to refer to this as an independent assessment of the value of HPB's writings. [ See ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 1, p. 475. ] In the magazine THE PATH, Vol.2, p. 354-5 (February 1888) will be found a request to HPB to continue and complete the writing of the SECRET DOCTRINE. This is also of great importance. It is signed by 20 of the most active members of the T S in America. Apparently Mr. Sinnett had offered HPB to write the "Preface" to the S D for her and the Masters. She declined. [ HPB to APS, p. 88 ] ] Annie Besant, after Mr. Judge's death in 1896, issued in 1897 a "Third Volume of the S D;" and the material included there seems to be some of the unedited Manuscripts HPB was working on at the time of her death. In H.P.B.'s LETTERS TO A.P.SINNETT will be found several references to the writing of the S D [ see pp.87-9, 172, 178 194-5; see also 64,131, 133, 135, 157-8, 182, 194, 222, 225, 241-5, 253, 268, 282; ] All are valuable as they give us a view of the difficulties under which she labored. [ "The Letters of H.P.Blavatsky to A.P.Sinnett and other Miscellaneous Letters" -- Transcribed by A. T. Barker, FREDERICK A. STOKES Co. New York, 1925 ] Let these speak for HPB and her intentions. Dallas P S Dear Brenda: I think that no one's "picture of reality" ever entirely coincides with anyone else's. But as a substitute, one has to be as far acquainted as one can be, with those sources that reveal (at least partly) the sequence of events -- and in doing this, one has to be generous and allow the others the benefit of the doubt. But when a categorical statement is made, then the one responsible for it ought to be able to back it up with "chapter and verse." In matters of "history" opinions arise. History is largely conclusions and opinions. It is not an exact science. History is largely, a group of opinions that are generally based ( if they are fair) on documents or artifacts. The "sequence of events" will be more accurate, as it presents documents and the observatons of contemporaries to the reader, so that the whole picture is revealed as far as those limitations can make it. Once that is made plain, the responsibility of the "historian" is over. Anyone who offers opinions, ought to be able to substantiate them, or their credibility is at stake. Conclusions or theories drawn, ought to be carefully labeled, since additional material may arise, or be found, after publication which forces the alteration of those earlier made conclusions or theories. To be fair, we ought to leave this fact clear and open -- so that the reader is made to realize that what is said or written is tentative and based on existing evidence consulted. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Monday, June 01, 1998 6:57 PM > From: "Brenda S Tucker" > Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? >At 09:55 AM 6/1/98 -0400, you wrote: >>According to owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com: >>> >>from Dallas: >>> >>> I did not challenge Johnson I asked for sources or proof that HPB spoke or wrote "untruths." > >Dallas, > >I think she was untruthful when she said there would be a third volume of the SD with biographies of the lives of adepts in it. > >However, she also says this on p. 483 Vol. II SD, "Once landed on, and having touched this planet of dense matter, no snow-white wings of the highest angel can remain immaculate, or the AVATARA (or incarnation) be perfect, as every such Avatara is the fall of a God into generation. Nowhere is the metaphysical truth more clear, when explained estoerically, or more hidden from the average comprehension of those who instead of appreciating the sublimity of the idea can only degrade, than in the UPANISHADS, the esoteric glossaries of the VEDAS." > >So, her picture of reality, Dallas, is not quite like yours. (even though I didn't read the message referred to.) > >Brenda ============================================== From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 08:05:27 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:58:57 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters Message-ID: <19980602131554487.AAC125@pgiese> ---------- > From: "Mark Kusek" > Jung has much to say about the projective phenomenon and how it operates > in our psyche and our relationships. It is amazing to do research in > this area because you begin to see just how much our perception of > "reality" is of our own making. In "Shambala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior", Chogyam Trungpa addresses the issue of a perceived reality versus physical/historical fact in his discussion of whether or not the Kingdom of Shambala does exist or ever existed with all the trappings accorded to it in mythology. [I'd like to get quotes, but I've only got this on audio.] His endpoint is that since the Kingdom of Shambala can only be recognized by one on the path, one needs to embrace the path and the kingdom will be revealed. I've been noticing how some Jung's theories on projective phenomenon have been finding their way into the field of Information Theory. Both Edward Tufte ("Visual Explanations", "Envisioning Information") and Thomas Davenport ("Information Ecology") expose the idea of how cognitive environments are created and constrained(for most people) by the graphics and systems available. Thus systems can be heaven or hell and "users" frame their percieved environments within them.....Speaking of creating heaven or hell for users, I'm off to work... Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 08:23:07 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 07:46:39 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Past Life memory Message-ID: <19980602131554487.AAB125@pgiese> > From: "Annette Rivington" > Dear Alan: > Thanks for sharing. I have been watching and waiting for your promised > recounting of your experience. Yes, Alan. Thanks. > I would like to try "past life regression" to see if anything I deal > with currently is as a result of past lives, but would rather do it > alone than "under guidance of a regressor". It there's nothing there, I > can trust myself not to invent something, but cannot necessarily trust > someone who is being paid to "produce a result". I agree with Annette here. If you're able to get at the memory yourself, you can operate at a state beyond the conscious mind, and not be confined by the need to verbalize nor by the regressor's "guidance". I've found that working with a regressor can be disappointing because the regressor's image/direction frequently doesn't correspond with the experiential memory environment. When this disjunct occurs, the memory trail can be disrupted and the conscious minds starts filling the gap with fantasy. Now the are people who need a guide to cross the barriers of consciousness, and that's fine. But it sound like you've been doing well on your own. If you feel like you need to get deeper, maybe try some sort of aid: candle, light-reflecting objects, shamanic drumbeat tapes, or even a metronome. > I like your process of analysis in considering all possibilities. Most > interpretations state that we completely forget past lives before > choosing this one and I could never get into that, because, if the > theory is that we reincarnate to work out Karma and reach for > perfection, but we have no memory of what we did before, how can we know > we are doing it any better this time around? > I've always read not "that we completely forget past lives" but that our higher self chooses not to remember past lives in this one because the memories of past lives interfere with the mission/goals of this life. If we could remember past lives, the allure might be too overwhelming and we'd find ourselves searching for lost loves and trying to attone for previous injuries. So each new incarnation, we start with anew, but the our history is still within us. In "Venus on a Half-Clam", Kurt Vonnegurt has a short story about a planet where each of the inhabitant's past lives come to consciousness for a brief period each day. The result is so much time is spent with the past that there is no time for the present. After having passed through a major life trauma and spiritual awakening, I've found that I've become more and more aware of past life memories and current relationships that have past life connections. Sometimes this is actually disturbing. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 08:36:14 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 06:29:13 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Vol. 3 of Secret Doctrine Message-ID: <3573FE29.172F@azstarnet.com> References: <000201bd8e18$49b686a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> TO Darren, Dallas, Brenda, Alan Bain and other interested people: Concerning the question of Vol. 3 of THE SECRET DOCTRINE, please read my article titled "The Myth of the 'Missing' Third Volume of The Secret Doctrine" on the World Wide Web at: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm In this paper, I go over the primary source materials in great detail. My conclusion is: "I am inclined to believe that pages 1-430 of Volume III of The Secret Doctrine published in 1897 was the real third volume intended by HPB." I'd appreciate people's feedback. Daniel Caldwell From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 10:05:40 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 08:03:59 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <3574145F.404F@azstarnet.com> References: <000201bd8e18$49b686a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote on Theos-Talk: > In "The Negators of Science" [ LUCIFER, April 1891, Part 1, > ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 2, p. 80-1) ] HPB gives a > survey of what was intended in Vol. 3. [ HPB was evidently not > able to complete this as she died May 8th, 1891, shortly after > this article was issued. Because she foresaw this, is the > probable reason, I think, for the destruction of the manuscripts > making up the 3rd and part of the 4th Volumes of the S D -- as > she could not edit them for publication. I was given to > understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very > shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley and > G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th > Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and ready. > She then said that she had received "instructions" to have them > destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This is a > reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent > verification of this statement made to me.] Then a few paragraphs later Dallas wrote: > Annie Besant, after Mr. Judge's death in 1896, issued in 1897 a > "Third Volume of the S D;" and the material included there seems > to be some of the unedited Manuscripts HPB was working on at the > time of her death. Daniel Caldwell replies: Dallas, in the latter paragragh, you write of "some of the unedited Manuscripts." Which ones?? SD manuscripts? The destroyed ones? Dallas, please tell me what MSS you are speaking about? Dallas, reread what you just wrote concerning Archibald Keightley and G.R.S. Mead. Then COMPARE that with what they ACTUALLY WROTE in the following: "October 29, 1891---Dr. Archibald Keightley wrote in a letter to Bertram Keightley (cited by C. Jinarajadasa in "Dr. Besant and Mutilation of the Secret Doctrine," Messenger, January 1926, 166): 'There is some talk of entirely reprinting Secret Doctrine [Volumes I and II] and of correcting errors when the Third Volume is issued.' " Why would Archibald write this on Oct. 29, 1891, if he knew firsthand that HPB, Mead and he had already destroyed the Mss of vol. III???!!! Concerning Mead, Robert Gilbert writes the following with a quote by Mead: "Many years later there were persistent allegations that the supposed third and fourth volumes had been suppressed by vested interests within the Society. The evidence for this was simply Madame Blavatsky's claims at various times to have completed, or nearly completed, the extra volumes - but no-one ever saw any finished text and none was ever found. Mead's comment on the allegations was uncompromising: 'On H.P.B.'s decease there remained over no manuscript or typescript S.D. material other than is now found in Vol. III. These pieces, or chapters, were omitted from the two volumes of the first edition, either because they were thought, by Mme. Blavatsky herself, not good enough or not sufficiently appropriate to be included.' Notice Mead's own words. Mead's words contradict this annoynmous story that HPB, Archibald K. and Mead had destroyed the SD III MSS. Note: In what was quoted above by Gilbert, he makes a statement which is misleading: ". . . no-one ever saw any finished text and none was ever found. . . ." FINISHED text?? What does Gilbert mean by "finished"? "No-one every saw." When? Before HPB's death? After her death? COMPARE what Gilbert wrote with what Annie Besant testified to on May 4, 1891: "There is one other work of hers [HPB's], which I have seen in manuscript, still unpublished; a third volume of "The Secret Doctrine" which is now being got ready for the press under my own eyes." This is the manuscript HPB writes about in "The Negators of Science", LUCIFER, April 1891. Was the manuscript "finished" or "completed" at this time-period? Here is what I wrote in my paper concerning Boris de Zirkoff's comments on a "completed" SD Vol III manuscript: ". . . . it is difficult to understand what Boris de Zirkoff meant when he wrote (in SD Intro., 71) that 'no outright positive or negative answer can be made to the oft-repeated question whether a completed Manuscript of Volumes III and IV ever existed.' " "Setting aside de Zirkoff's reference to Volume IV, there is no reason to doubt that a manuscript of Volume III existed during the last years of HPB's life. Furthermore, had she lived, HPB would probably have added and deleted material from the manuscript; she would probably have rewritten and reedited the material even more. But at the time of her death, this manuscript was as 'complete' as HPB could make it. What more could be expected?" And Annie Besant testifies BEFORE HPB'S DEATH that she had SEEN this manuscript. Does anyone ever consult and compare original sources of information? Dallas, who was this "old student of HPB"? Who told him/her this story about HPB, Keightley and Mead destroying the MSS of Volume III SD? Was it HPB or Keightley or Mead who told him/her the story? Did he/she get the story 2nd hand or even 3rd hand? I prefer to consult the original source materials of which we have an abundance INCLUDING THE ORIGINAL WURZBURG MSS. The contents of the Wurzburg mss should be compared with the contents of Vol III. See my article on third volume of SD at http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm for more details. From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 11:00:16 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:51:50 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Statute of limitations Message-Id: <199806021551.LAA24221@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> It's actually over seven years since my hypotheses about HPB and the Masters first were printed. Although the interest of some people in denouncing and/or trying to refute them appears undiminished, my own interest in the subject is much reduced. In the past month I've been allowing myself to get dragged back into disputes with Theosophical fundamentalism, but that's not really a suitable channel for anyone's energy. Although it can be gratifying to "win" in the estimation of onlookers, one can very rarely win with fundamentalists of any kind in the deeper sense of getting them to reexamine their belief system. As the publication of the Cayce book approaches, it's time to focus on that rather than past writings and reactions to them. So I won't be publicly debating about the Masters or HPB on the theos lists or anywhere else henceforth. If anyone wants information or opinions from me on that score, I'll be glad to oblige by private email, however. And will stay on the lists to comment occasionally on other things. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 12:02:51 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 11:47:43 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Statute of limitations Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980602114743.010f8380@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199806021551.LAA24221@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> At 11:51 AM 6/2/1998 -0400, you wrote: >a suitable channel for anyone's energy. Although it can be gratifying >to "win" in the estimation of onlookers, one can very rarely win with >fundamentalists of any kind in the deeper sense of getting them >to reexamine their belief system. > Giving a brutal examination of one's own beliefs is the most difficult thing. >So I won't be publicly debating about the Masters or HPB on the theos >lists or anywhere else henceforth. If anyone wants information >or opinions from me on that score, I'll be glad to oblige by >private email, however. > >And will stay on the lists to comment occasionally on other >things. > >Cheers, >Paul I think you have made a very wise decision. I always cherish many exchanges we had both on these lists and in private e-mail and you are in my short list of even handed fairminded persons with whom one can always interact no matter whether we are in agreement or non-agreement on any issue. I am stating this openly because I want everyone to know what my feedback is. mkr From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 12:14:45 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 09:56:37 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: <35742EC5.30E3@azstarnet.com> References: <001001bd8dcb$9db05b20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > I am apparently violating some tacit basis for the handling of > history. > It seems immunity is granted to those who dare or desire to > ventilate their opinions. So I make mine known. > > How can you or I "debate" HPB ?" We can not. > > She is herself, as you are, or I am--each one an individual Self. > We are not subject to being debated. Someone may say they don't > like something about us, what we wear, what we eat, how we speak, > what we do, etc. > > Yes, HPB is a historical figure. If she is to be described, then > let it be an honest description. I do not care to hear (and I > said this it plainly) about her, or anyone else, evil inferred. > > I have always thought when I hear or read things of that nature > that somehow the author, or the person repeating something that > cannot be gainsaid by the person concerned is taking advantage of > their absence and of the public's avidity for slander, and ill > speaking -- always the attempt to reduce a person to a lower > level, morally. No thank you. Not for me. > > None of us is fit to do that in my esteem, whether it is HPB or > anyone else. When we have written a Secret Doctrine and secured > the backing of the Mahatmas, we may be able to debate WITH her. > But in her absence, no. As I said before, everyone of us who > use, or work with Theosophy, are her pupils and owe her a debt of > gratitude. I do not consider it honorable or respectful to try > to demean her. > > I would say about Jesus the same thing. > > About C W L -- well there are court judgments. If we are going > to debate his character, we will have to give both sides. He has > done some good, and he had great potential, as one of the > Masters' early letters of encouragement to him reveals. That > would have to be mentioned. Same would be for anyone whose past > is under review or characterization. > > To speak ill of the dead is cowardly I would say. If HPB were > here she could handle the matter herself. As she is not, I pick > up the cudgels ! Is that so strange ? > > Somewhere I must be missing a clue. > > That in my seem is an example of why history is not a science. > It does not deal in facts anymore, but in selected opinions. If > it is a matter of opinions then I voice mine. And I have done > so. > > I hope this helps explain my position. Dallas Daniel Caldwell replies: I have been reading the back and forth between Dallas, Paul, Alan and Jerry HE. I'll add my 2 cents worth. Dallas, I believe I somewhat understand your position in what you write above. But I don't really understand your statement when you write: "To speak ill of the dead is cowardly I would say." I guess I would need to know what you mean by "ill", but even HP Blavatsky in her writings says "negative" things about dead people. Should she be censored for such remarks? The only question to be answered is: Are HPB's remarks true or not? If we go by your "standard", we would have to forget writing history/biography, etc. What is your definition of "ill"? > Yes, HPB is a historical figure. If she is to be described, then > let it be an honest description. I do not care to hear (and I > said this it plainly) about her, or anyone else, evil inferred. What's your definition of "evil" in this quote? Let us not forget that H P Blavatsky came onto the public scene from 1874 to 1891. She criticized the science of her day, orthodox Christian religion, some of the claims of Spiritualism, etc. It was only natural that she would make enemies. But she also made some very BIG CLAIMS. No one in their right mind should accept her claims at face value without investigating and studying them. Also alot of "negative", "evil", "ill" reports about her were made by Emma Coulomb, Richard Hodgson, V. Soloyvov, etc. One who knows little if any thing about these accusations won't be in position to know whether they are true or not. I wonder how many theosophists and Blavatsky students have actually taken the time to read and study the three books by Coulomb, Hodgson and Soloyvov? There are many frauds in the world and HP Blavatsky *might be* one of them. Starting 30 years ago I started collecting everything "negative" (as well as everything else) written about HPB. I wanted to read the first hand accounts myself and try (if possible) to determine what was and was not true. I also started studying her writings and collecting material that would help elucidate her writings/teachings. Along the way I ran into much unpublished material including unpublished HPB writings & unpublished Mahatma Letters. I say QUESTION Mme. Blavatsky, but ALSO question her critics and detractors. Question even the Mahatmas (they say as much in their own letters). Ask for evidence. Demand "chapter and verse". But all of this applies as much to theosophists as to non-theosophists. I for one am still appalled by the lack of good research on HPB's life and writings. Some people are so careless when writing on Madame Blavatsky. I fault theosophical writers as well as "hostile detractors" of HPB. The only writer who is almost "faultless" on HPB is Michael Gomes. But he has taken the time and effort to dig out the original material and then has also taken the time to study these sources and think through the issues. John Cooper was also another careful student of both HPB's life and writings. But alas John is no longer with us to share his remarkable knowledge and insights. I spoke to him just the day before he died of a heart attack. Why can't HPB, her life, her writings, her claims, her teachings be "debated"? Or at least "discussed"? I believe that Paul Johnson has asked some good questions and brought up some good points. Why can't the points be dealt with instead of all this "going round in circles". For all the protesting in defense of HPB, no one has yet sent me (to post on my site) rebuttals, etc. in response to the three points made by Paul Johnson and Jerry Schueler. The address is: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/untruths.htm Folks, we need facts, details, specifics, not some generalized defense. I repeat below Paul Johnson's #3 "Untruths" from my web site. Will someone answer it in public? If Paul is "defaming" HPB's good name, then someone please show with reason, commonsense, facts, evidence----the truth of this matter. Alleged "Untruth" #3 by K. Paul Johnson Should we assume that all stories told about Morya are in fact about the same person? In fact, this is logically impossible, as shown in this passage from The Masters Revealed: HPB told at least four distinct versions of her acquaintance with the Master she met in her youth in London. In Caves and Jungles of Hindustan he is "Gulab-Singh," the Hindu ruler of a small Central Indian state. According to this version, her first contact with him after their London meeting was through a letter he sent her in New York over twenty years later. The most frequently repeated story was that M. was a Buddhist living in Tibet where she studied with him for a long period in the late 1860s. But in yet another variation, she wrote to Prince Dondukov-Korsakov that her first contact with him after their London meeting was a letter he sent her in Odessa many years later, directing her to go to India. In this version, she never once saw the Master although he directed her itinerary by mail for more than two years. They were reunited at last in Yokahama, Japan, where he had summoned her from New York. Finally, HPB wrote to her Aunt Nadyezhda that her Master was a Nepalese Buddhist living in Ceylon, with whom she had renewed acquaintance via a letter he wrote her in New York. With four mutually contradictory versions of the same character, all that can be concluded is that most if not all of HPB's stories about him were false. It would be more accurate to say that the conflicting Morya stories cannot be true and about the same person, although they may contain true bits and pieces about several. But Mr. Caldwell, Dr. Algeo and other Theosophical critics seem quite unwilling to face the obvious and undeniable truth revealed by the above passage. Either HPB manufactured most of these stories about Morya, allegedly her personal Master, out of whole cloth, or she combined stories about several different prototypes in different versions to different people. . . . [Extracted from Johnson's Strain at a Gnat, Swallow a Camel, ( http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane/pjimp.html)] From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 12:29:40 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 13:30:20 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Statute of limitations Message-ID: <357436AC.8B@globalserve.net> References: <199806021551.LAA24221@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Excellent attitude, Paul. Good example of leadership by example and of the natural order of things. Best Wishes in your current endeavour. Annette From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 12:44:40 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 10:21:22 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Statute of limitations Message-ID: <35743492.DE3@azstarnet.com> References: <199806021551.LAA24221@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > It's actually over seven years since my hypotheses about HPB and > the Masters first were printed. Although the interest of some > people in denouncing and/or trying to refute them appears > undiminished, my own interest in the subject is much reduced. In > the past month I've been allowing myself to get dragged back into > disputes with Theosophical fundamentalism, but that's not really > a suitable channel for anyone's energy. Although it can be gratifying > to "win" in the estimation of onlookers, one can very rarely win with > fundamentalists of any kind in the deeper sense of getting them > to reexamine their belief system. > > As the publication of the Cayce book approaches, it's time to > focus on that rather than past writings and reactions to them. > So I won't be publicly debating about the Masters or HPB on the theos > lists or anywhere else henceforth. If anyone wants information > or opinions from me on that score, I'll be glad to oblige by > private email, however. > > And will stay on the lists to comment occasionally on other > things. > > Cheers, > Paul Daniel Caldwell replies: Let me know when I can get a copy of the Cayce book. Paul, it's too bad that you won't be commenting publicly on these issues. I was hoping Blavatsky students would deal DIRECTLY with the 3 alleged "untruths" by you and Jerry S. Instead of that, Dallas and Jerry HE beat round the bush and deal with everything but these three items! I am still hoping that theosophical/Blavatsky students will try their hand at dealing *specifically* with these three "untruths". If somebody does, I hope you and Jerry S will likewise respond. I promise to post all responses, etc. on the web site so others may read and possibly LEARN something from such give and take. Again here is the information about the web site: BLAVATSKY'S ALLEGED "UNTRUTHS" http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/untruths.htm From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 14:21:54 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 15:15:40 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Belonging Message-Id: <199806021915.PAA20280@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Lately I've been thinking about several senses of the term "belonging" and the relationships among them. This is inspired by my Theosophical karma, Kym's recent comments about it, and the impending publication of the Cayce book. The literal sense of "belonging" is simply membership in a group. But behind that is the figurative meaning of "having a sense of belonging." That implies being welcome, at home, among friends, secure. The worst part of certain reactions to my books about HPB was the implicit message of "You don't belong." Meaning, from the POV of the person expressing rejection and hostility, "You are not welcome here, this movement is not your home, you are not among friends." Even though the deliverers of this message were not the ones who had ever given me a sense of belonging in the first place, it was still wearing after a while to get such regular doses of unbrotherly sentiment. Particularly since the better part of 20 years has been spent with Theosophy as my primary nexus for a sense of belonging. Behind that positive psychological sense of what it means to "belong" is the dark side. That is "to be owned by." While most people would indignantly deny that they yield their independence to conform to a group's pressures, we all do so in different ways. These are usually invisible, with people not seeing what they're giving up in autonomy. The people who take the most pleasure in "belonging" to a group are also those most likely to yield autonomy, to have their values and principles determined by group norms. It's only when a person stops belonging in that sense-- stops thinking the way "all x are supposed to think," that the dark side of belonging manifests. It's as if the moment one clearly expresses "You don't own my conscience" to a group and its leaders, one is also saying "I don't belong to you." And that quickly can merge into the other meanings; figuratively, when such mental independence brings about an unwelcoming, rejecting reaction from the group, and sometimes literally when "heresy" leads to formal expulsion. It therefore seems to me advisable to seek groups in which the senses of belonging are not so intertwined. Where being welcome, at home, and among friends does not require conformity to a belief system or behavioral code. This is an ideal type, not perfectly manifested in any concrete example. But the ideal is one that the TS Founders clearly held, and one to which the various Theosophical groups give lip service. Cheers, PJ From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 14:31:52 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 12:28:26 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Mondrian Message-Id: Hi all, I've been discussing off and on for the last few months with Eiichi Tosaki, who is doing research on Mondrian. I am reposting my last couple posts on theos-talk with the hope that someone could add some more interpretation to Mondrian's idea of rhythm. Thanks. ********************************* Hi Eiichi, Congratulations on your conversion to Ph.D! I'm sorry it took me so long to get back to you. I had a mental block at the thought of having to figure out where my sources are, and using quotations. It's easier to dig through my mental file than to dig through the library. Also, it's much more fun to go off on a tangent in my mind rather than follow by the book. I'm going to back far away from Hegel. Both you and I seemed to have gotten caught up in the Hegel virus and away from the main topic of Mondrian's idea of rhythm. I'm going to focus mostly on Mondrian and theosophical sources. To continue our discussion this time with sources... To understand Mondrian's rhythm, I'm going to first briefly discuss the theosophical idea of duality, which can be found in the Stanzas of the Secret Doctrine I. Stanza I and II describes the unmanifestation and potential of all things. The Eternal Parent lies asleep, containing within the origin of all things. "The last vibration of the seventh eternity thrills through infinitude", and an awakening occurs.1 Separation takes place, Mother-Father, Subjectivity-Objectivity, Chaos-Order. From the stress of being pulled apart against their mutual desire for each other, the Son is born. It can be said that the Son is the psychic projection of the tension of the Cosmic Mind. When the internal tension is great, it results in outside projection. This separation is only illusory, and this outside projection is still the Mother-Father duality. The "outsideness" is illusory. Hence the frequent referral to the process as the "dreaming." >From a book that I find useful in interpreting the Stanzas, several conclusions make sense to me. In Stanza III, 4, "the three (triangle) fall into the four (quaternary)..." The triangle is the Mother, Father, and their relationship. The fourth is the Son, the mayavic construct, the illusion of external reality. Note that throughout the Stanzas, the emphasis on duality (the relationship) is important. It is through relationship or to be more precise, interrelatedness, that manifestation occurs. This link is the cause of all external manifestation, of the maya of externality and separation. Thus our whole external and internal experience is the result of the "radiant essence becom(ing) seven inside, seven outside." The "seven inside" (our inner environment) and the "seven outside" (our outside environment) is the interplay of the "three" and the "four." This will help you to understand Mondrian's idea of duality and relationship, and their relation to universality.2 According to the Random House College Dictionary, revised 1980, rhythm is the "movement or procedure with uniform or patterned recurrence of a beat, accent, or the like." This is natural rhythm, rhythm familiar to our mayavic world. This suggests symmetry, which suggests separation. In some cases, this also suggests time. Separation and time are illusions. To Mondrian, rhythm should be an internal rhythm and not the natural repetition that we are familiar with. "Individuality typically manifests the law of repetition, which is nature's rhythm, as law characterized by symmetry. Symmetry or regularity emphasizes the separateness of things and therefore has no place in the plastic expression of the universal as universal." Naturalistic art emphasizes this rhythm. To counteract this, Mondrian composed his paintings in ways that would ultimately destroy naturalistic rhythm. He changed this symmetry to equilibrium, by using the relationship of duality. He wants to express "relationships that change each opposite into the other." How do opposites change into each other? Because they are known through each other. Just as everything is created through a duality, nothing exists without its opposite. Mondrian expressed this in his paintings through opposition of "position and size," and other pure opposites. "(I)t is no longer a sequence but is plastic unity. Thus it renders more strongly the cosmic rhythm that flows through all things." This is the unity of opposites and of interrelatedness. Pure opposites cancel each other out. Thus, the expiring of natural form, and the birth of the spirit. This is the destruction of the mayavic manifestation, the cancelling of opposites into the Universal.3 I could add more about rhythm, but that would be outside the bounds of sticking with Mondrian's writing. This is a very interesting topic, and we could have many more offshoots, as you have already discovered based on my past talks regarding laya centers and planes. Namaste, Thoa :o) P.S. The reason why you were not able to find the Mondrian quotations in my last post was that it came from another book. Mondrian: Natural Reality and Abstract Reality. Translated by Martin S. James. 1 The Secret Doctrine I, p.62, Stanza III. Helena Blavatsky, verbatim with the original edition, 1888. Theosophical University Press. 2 Man, the Measure of All Things, p. 119. Sri Krishna Prem and Sri Madhava Ashish. Theosophical Publishing House. SBN: 8356-0006-8 3 The New Art-The New Life, The Collected Writings of Piet Mondrian. The New Plastic in Painting (1917), p.40. Da Capo Press, NY. ISBN 0-306-80508-1. From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 14:48:23 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:35:40 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Mondrian #2 Message-Id: Hi Eiichi, Now that I've read Mondrian's writing, I find that his theories are classic theosophy in combination with art theories of the time. My posts before my last post were done before his complete work was available to me, and was inspired by secondary writings. Mondrian's writing is a whole lot simpler than all the analysis of his writings! I would consider my last post to be most to the point in relation to Mondrian's writing. However, in some of the conclusions of my other posts, I was delving into the mechanics of Mondrian's equilibrium. The mechanics is not covered in Mondrians' writing, but can be inferred from it. I'm resposting some of the thoughts. Perhaps with the last post, in combination with this one, you can get a better idea of theosophy and some of the mechanics. I'm going to add notes here and there to better connect the thoughts with my last post. These will have asterisks in front of them. ******************* You can find what Mondrian is referring to (no-time, non-repetition) in ideas older than the Secret Doctrine, in Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact, it's pretty basic Yoga. As far as I can see, there are no direct references to rhythm indexed in the major works by Blavatsky that we have. *Mondrian's rhythm is in the Secret Doctrine I and II, in passages of the Stanzas of Dzyan and discussions of various forces of duality. The core of his theory is in the idea of the rhythm of duality, of extreme opposites canceling each other out to equilibrium. I highly recommend reading the Secret Doctrines (Doctrine I especially) with an eye toward discussions on duality. However, the idea of rhythm expressed by Mondrian in your quote is not rhythm as we generally know it, but rhythm in terms of finding the stillness of equilibrium to liberate ourselves from Maya. *Goes with my past post on using the duality of pure opposites to come into equilibrium. It is a way to come back into the Oneness. Not a bad deduction, considering that I did not read his complete work. You can call me Ms. Holmes. When the Secret Doctrine discusses about Pralaya, Laya centers, cycles, and illusion, there are plenty of ideas from which to build such a theory. In the Stanzas of the Secret Doctrine, you can see references to time and space being illusion, and how we evolve to free ourselves from Maya. From that, you can see where Alice Bailey got her ideas about rhythm. For example, in Yogic and Buddhic meditation, the purpose is to still the vibrations of the senses, the emotions, and the lower mind. By doing that, you can find the Laya center, and slip through to experience the higher nature. *This is the mechanics of equilibrium. Think of Mondrian's visual process of equilibrium as a visual version of stilling the vibrations of the senses. Mondrian was trying to express that in terms of art. I think that is what he meant by "point of perfect balance and of equilibrium." Having rhythm in a "no-time and non-repetition basis" is holding the stillness. Thus, he was creating symbols of Laya centers in his art and was quite Yogic in his approach to art, whether he knew it or not. *Rhythm that is non-symmetrical and non-time! I won't state Mondrian's work too much in detail because you probably studied it in more detail than I did. *I'm catching up. Now I can quote Mondrian! Mondrian stated that "(p)lastic art affirms that equilibrium can only be established through the balance of unequal but equivalent oppositions" and compared that with human life, that although we are in "disequilibrium", we are "based on equilibrium." *He was basically saying that we have the spiritual in us, which is "based on equilibrium." Our "disequilibrium" resulted from our being out of sync with our spiritual nature. His "balance of unequal but equivalent oppositions" means that the "unequal" is the pure opposites of each other, and the "equivalent oppositions" is the interrelatedness of the pure opposites. Being pure opposites, they change into the other, thereby creating equilibrium. Let me give an example of the theosophical idea of duality. Think of several dualities, life-death, chaos-order, male-female, good-evil. These are pure opposites. They are defined by the other. They cannot exist without the other. They have to interrelate. When these opposites cancel each other out, you have the pure state of Oneness, the place of no separation. This Oneness, which is the truth as opposed to the maya of separateness and opposition, is what is actually the state of all existence, you and me and the trees. This is Mondrian's equilibrium. Mondrian's later works is reminiscent of an asymmetrical mandala. The composition is off-balance and yet it is very static, a "dynamic equilibrium". He used his limited expressions of colors, tones and lines to express universality. He believed that art, like the process of exercises such as meditation, should be a path of speedier evolution for the artist. He wants "(t)he subjectivization of the universal in art (to) bring the universal downward on the one hand, while on the other it helps raise the individual toward the universal." (His writings quoted by Lipsey.) *I would suggest rereading his article The New Plastic in Painting. In it, he gave detailed accounts of how he would place lines, colors, etc., to create equilibrium. His work is like an asymmetrical mandala. His "subjectivization" is bringing the spiritual down to the individual, who can never truly comprehend the mystery of the elusive One. This "subjectivization" takes place through the concrete, practical, and material nature of painting. Although this is a material vehicle, through the process of equilibrium, he hopes to help raise the individual, clouded with the maya of separateness, to go toward the Universal, to the realization of the interconnectedness of all. Before we go on, let's define Laya-Center. 1. According to G. de Purucker's Occult Glossary: A laya-center is the mystical point where a thing disappears from one plane and passes onward to reappear on another plane. There is more definition, but that is the gist of it. To visualize it, think in terms of a sine wave that extends from highest spirit (where it vibrates very quickly) to densest matter (where it vibrates imperceptibly slow), and the laya centers between planes are located on a straight line that passes through the center. The center of the sine wave is the point of equilibrium. By quieting the vibrations of the body, the emotions, and the lower mind, the Yogi is able to go to the laya center to experience the higher nature. The laya center contains the potential of all frequencies. Think of that metaphorical image of the sine wave again. Suppose you were to look at the sine wave from one of its ends, like looking into a cone, you would see a line with a point in the center of it (the laya center, center of equilibrium). That's the center to all frequencies, a common point for all the planes of existence (physical, astral, mental, etc.). Since this is a point of stasis, it is a common doorway to all the planes. Which plane you try to reach depends on your ability to attune to its frequency. By creating ways to find a point of equilibrium, Mondrian was making doorways through which the transcendant universal can come through. This is a glimpse at the theory of the occult art and science of mandala making. It is ritual art making at it's best and has been practiced by aspirants for centuries. We say asymmetrical mandalas because traditionally mandalas have taken on forms of bilateral symmetry (i.e. Tibetan Buddhist, tantric or Native American religious paintings). While functionally the same, Mondrian chose to express the theme of a laya center through asymmetric means. As you well know, he did that through his arrangements of colors, tones, and lines. *Mechanics of equilibrium, laya centers and planes. The bulk of the Secret Doctrine is on evolution, and evolution through different planes of existence. We can get into detailed discussion of the evolution of the Monad (the immortal part of us which reincarnates), but that would be doing a book report on the Secret Doctrine. I don't think you want to do that. Basically, by helping individuals contact their spiritual, Mondrian will also be helping them to evolve to higher planes of existence in the long run, and ultimately to Nirvana. You may also want to look up books on mandalas. There is one, Mystery of Mandalas by Heita Copony, The Theosophical Publishing House, ISBN 0-8356-0649-X. Let me quote what is written on p.3 and you can see the relation to Mondrian's work: "The mandala in its entire expression refers to dimensions beyond outer appearances. Here human experience of being and intuition come together and something unspeakable is expressed in an image that can be perceived by the senses. We may also understand the mandala as a model of principles of reality, of which humanity is a part, of an order of the cosmos projected into three-dimensional space. Just as unimaginable worlds of other dimensions unfold beyond the world of space and time in which we mortals live, so the mandala's statement and levels of meaning are multidimensional and often full of paradox. On one hand, for example, the mandala is an image of humans in the limitations of space and time. On the other hand, it leads from the human realm to the cosmic and spiritual and joins the two levels. So it is personal and suprapersonal at the same time-microcosm and macrocosm, spirit and matter, the finite and the infinite pervading each other." Now, to me, that seems a whole lot like what Mondrian was trying to do. In studying mandalas, you can see that Mondrian's work is basically an asymmetrical modernist mandala. *I hope this helps clarify our discussion on Mondrian. I think this is a much better take than our digressing to Hegel. Hegel may have influenced theosophical thought, but Mondrian is more a theosophist than a Hegelian. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 16:16:53 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 17:14:20 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-02 13:20:12 EDT, you write: << I ran into much unpublished material including unpublished HPB writings & unpublished Mahatma Letters. >> I thought all the Mahatma Letters (compiled by A.T. Barker) had been published and that everything HPB wrote was in the 15 volume Collected Writings Series ( compiled by Boris de Zirkoff. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 16:32:59 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 17:17:09 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: > Date: 98-06-02 17:14:20 EDT > Subj: Re: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck > From: Lmhem111 In a message dated 98-06-02 13:20:12 EDT, you write: << I ran into much unpublished material including unpublished HPB writings & unpublished Mahatma Letters. >> I thought all the Mahatma Letters (compiled by A.T. Barker) had been published and that everything HPB wrote was in the 15 volume Collected Writings Series ( compiled by Boris de Zirkoff. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 16:46:48 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 14:46:22 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Belonging as Religion (to bind or to join) Message-Id: <199806022142.QAA24213@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806021915.PAA20280@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Paul writes: >It therefore seems to me advisable to seek groups in which the >senses of belonging are not so intertwined. Where being welcome, >at home, and among friends does not require conformity to a belief >system or behavioral code. This is an ideal type, not >perfectly manifested in any concrete example. But the ideal is >one that the TS Founders clearly held, and one to which the >various Theosophical groups give lip service. I've been meaning to reply to the post from Lmhem111 re: the Pope's New Age Letter because of what I've been reading in the SD, but I think I'll just put a short response here instead of go to all of that work when it isn't needed. I'm reading Section XVIII, Volume II, p.475-505 and I was completely struck (again) by Blavatsky's work regarding our concept of good and evil. I think the 5 central Christian beliefs as listed: 1) The existence of a Creator 2) The reality of prayer to God, a meeting of two persons, etc. ... not mere self-discovery. 3) The reality of human sin and the need of a Redeemer 4) The significance of suffering and death 5) The necessity of love and of work, not mere thought, to change the world. are WONDERFUL. If we look at our condition, we RARELY see ourselves as creators, but HPB did and even says Man IS the Third Logos. Perhaps the expected disdain for new age relates to the beginning students who regularly are ENTICED by the six teachings: 1) The world as one whole. 2) Energy animates the world in a fashion to God. 3) Spiritual Entities intercept man's attempts to contact the furthest reaches of himself. 4) Man exerts control over his future. 5) Perennial wisdom is one teaching behind all religions 6) Spiritual Masters can enlighten us. We do love these ideas, and are attracted to simple concepts that exalt us and give us self esteem. I'm sorry to repeat myself here, but I have had a complete transformation since I began studying theosophy 20 years ago. I know this seems repetitive, but I see myself as the Evil in the duality of Good and Evil. This is not a continuous event, because due to my understanding of the Seven Races, I was the Good side of the coin on the descent into matter, Races 1-3. I can understand HPB NOW totally different than I did before (and something whispers to me that this may also be totally different than anyone else here currently). Anyway, the first five beliefs are really RIGHT ON to me. 1) The existence of a Creator Elohim create man as each race, differently, so creation is going on all the time. We are collectively residing within the body of the Elohim. We are our Creators, but not totally. They manifest a better man through our cooperation with them. 2) The reality of prayer to God, a meeting of two persons, etc. ... not mere self-discovery. I'm so impressed that God can and does take human form. Kumaras, Dhyanis, Planetary Spirits becoming embodied occasionally in a human form is OUT OF SIGHT. 3) The reality of human sin and the need of a Redeemer. Since I am a newly-perceived evil being, I'm trying to get used to the idea, how to phrase it, how to treat myself, and how to help others (including good beings) treat me. I can't accept allowing evil to exist in this world, so I'm all for methods of preventing evil, including allowing "good" beings, adepts, free reign in my body, mind, and feeling world, as well as putting them into direct contact with the other material states on earth. 4) The significance of suffering and death For this, refer to p. 484. HPB says, "Worse than all, they [the Fall, Atonment, and Crucifixion] led it [Western Humanity] to believe in the dogma of the evil spirit distinct from the spirit of all good, whereas the former lives in all matter and pre-eminently in man. Finally it created the God-slandering dogma of Hell and eternal perdition; it spread a thick film between the higher intuitions of man and divine verities; and, most pernicious result of all, it made people remain ignorant of the fact that there were no fiends, no dark demons in the Universe before man's own appearance on this, and probably on other earths." This to me, means that even though we consider ourselves to be the evil side of the coin in races 5, 6, and 7, we should continue with the thought of oneness because the spirit of God resides with us, in us, and through us. We are not alone. We have adepts and their streams of enlightening energy pouring through us and strengthening us. It is like cutting man in two at the waist and feeling as if we are everything below the waist, and yet, it is the upper portion of our being which directs, radiates, loves, carries on most of life's functions. I'm so grateful they are here. I just want to praise, thank, and love them for everything they do. The reason I went into this concept is so that we can accept ourselves as the evil force in the world. When we do this, we resign ourselves to 1) assistance, 2) a need for suffering, 3) methods of fair exchange between the two. On p. 484 again, HPB writes, "The philosophy of that law in Nature, which implants in man as well as in every beast a passionate, inherent, and instinctive desire for freedom and self-guidance, pertains to psychology and cannot be touched on now." This is something we achieve when we take a material form, but also something we feel when we ascend into the spiritual world, because in both conditions we are either immensely hampered (by dinosaurs) or immensely helped (by adepts.) HPB then phrases in a similar, but less definite manner, that this same "feeling" can be found and dissected in "higher Intelligences," the adepts, the next kingdom. She quotes Milton's PARADISE LOST: "Here we may reign secure; and in my choice To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell: Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heav'n." She says, "Better be man, the crown of terrestrial production and king over its opus operatum, than be lost among the will-less spiritual Hosts in Heaven." 5) The necessity of love and of work, not mere thought, to change the world. So what is my point to Paul? It is that the "binding" and "joining" in Religion is the joining of the good with the evil (man) and by doing this we are 1) preventing wrong, 2) permitting a glimpse into higher life, 3) you name it. If you feel comfortable being with friends (who are inherently evil) think how much better you will feel being with Good Beings - the next kingdom of nature descending through and into our world. Any comments? Brenda From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 17:01:48 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 11:24:35 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <000201bd8e71$b640f180$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 2nd 1998 Dear Daniel: As usual your sources are impeccable. In answer to your questions, allow me to present in more detail what I said. Some of your questions may then be answered insofar as I am able. I am as puzzled as you are about the conflicting stories and my own "reminiscences." I narrated them as I was made aware of them. I recognize the conflicts you write so accurately about. After comparing the "3rd and REVISED Edition(1893) of the (First 2 Volumes of S D)" with the original (1888), I have often wondered how many "changes" were introduced into those manuscripts that were assembled and printed as the "THIRD VOLUME OF THE S D " by Annie Besant in 1897. Surmise again. >From HPB's original typed drafts, uncorrected for printing, to what we now have printed (as the THIRD VOLUME) -- how many changes that we know nothing about ? Also, I bear in mind that as proofs came back from the printers for correction, HPB had the habit of adding and changing many phrases. We lack those in this case. This is of course entirely speculative on my part. As a matter of private speculation I have also wondered what would have happened had the "Judge Case" never arisen, and whether the "THIRD VOLUME S D" would have the same appearance had Judge collaborated with A B in its production. But that is all unanswered conjecture. At least we have the first 2 volumes SD in their original. Let me observe here that while it is very interesting to trace the many ways in which these books and writings have been handled, historically, we loose valuable time that could be spent in studying what Theosophy teaches. I know that I do. Fortunately, starting from about 18, I began to make notes that I could go back to, even today, on what I read and studied. But, one learns new things every day. To me the philosophy is of more value than any amount of historicity. My reminiscence about the author of those statements concerning the fate, just before HPB's death, of the typed manuscripts destined for Volumes 3 and 4 of the S D is quite unclear. Let me add that in Bombay, when I was a lad (from age 14 on) I lived in the same house as Mr. B. P. Wadia did and saw him almost daily. [ "Aryasangha," 22 Narayan Dabholkar Rd., Bombay. ] A stream of visitors of distinction, old Theosophists, etc., came by, and we were often invited to "come upstairs," meet them after dinner, and listen to what they had to say about the times when they knew and met HPB or Mr. Judge, and others of the Inner Group around HPB. As I said I cannot now recall who said that, but the saying remains imprinted in my mind. I cannot substantiate it with a name, It might have been Alice Cleather, or old John Watkins, or someone else. As to Annie Besant having some of the manuscripts, it seems to me that several of those were published as articles in LUCIFER after HPB's death, as they were also being considered for use in the magazine. I assume that A B had copies as co-editor, and may have taken some more from HPB's desk when she arrived in London very shortly after HPB's death ( A B was on ship-board on the Atlantic when HPB died, returning to London after visiting the Annual Convention of the American Section at the end of April in 1891, where, as HPB's representative, she delivered HPB's "last two messages" ) -- or something like that. And those are just my surmises. As to the Wurzburg MSS, was that not what Countess Wachmeister copied of the early pages (the first draft of the S D) and sent to Adyar for Subba Row to edit or comment on ? And is it not that which so upset S. Row that he refused to go any further. see what HPB writes to Sinnett (p. 172 , HPB Letters to APS) about the revealing of certain ancient Mysteries, held sacred by Brahmin Initiates, See also the restrictions under which HPB was placed, herself, on p. 103-6,of the same book ]. In MAHATMA LETTERS there are correlating references (to me) to be read on pp. 203, 263, 310-17 466 top concerning HPB's work and position vis-a-vis the Mahatmas. Well, I don't think this will settle much, but here goes. Best wishes, Dallas. > Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 8:33 AM > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Subject: More on SD Vol. 3 >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote on Theos-Talk: > >> In "The Negators of Science" [ LUCIFER, April 1891, Part 1, >> ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 2, p. 80-1) ] HPB gives a >> survey of what was intended in Vol. 3. [ HPB was evidently not >> able to complete this as she died May 8th, 1891, shortly after >> this article was issued. Because she foresaw this, is the >> probable reason, I think, for the destruction of the manuscripts >> making up the 3rd and part of the 4th Volumes of the S D -- as >> she could not edit them for publication. I was given to >> understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very >> shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley and >> G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th >> Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and ready. >> She then said that she had received "instructions" to have them >> destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This is a >> reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent >> verification of this statement made to me.] > >Then a few paragraphs later Dallas wrote: > >> Annie Besant, after Mr. Judge's death in 1896, issued in 1897 a >> "Third Volume of the S D;" and the material included there seems >> to be some of the unedited Manuscripts HPB was working on at the time of her death. > > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > >Dallas, in the latter paragragh, you write of "some of the unedited >Manuscripts." Which ones?? SD manuscripts? The destroyed ones? Dallas, please tell me what MSS you are speaking about? ========================================== DALLAS: SD manuscripts -- may have been several copies -- some with A B, and the est with A K and G R S M. What happened to the hand written MSS ? ========================================== > >Dallas, reread what you just wrote concerning Archibald Keightley >and G.R.S. Mead. > >Then COMPARE that with what they ACTUALLY WROTE in the following: > >"October 29, 1891---Dr. Archibald Keightley wrote in a >letter to Bertram Keightley (cited by C. Jinarajadasa >in "Dr. Besant and Mutilation of the Secret Doctrine," >Messenger, January 1926, 166): > >'There is some talk of entirely reprinting Secret Doctrine >[Volumes I and II] and of correcting errors >when the Third Volume is issued.' " > >Why would Archibald write this on Oct. 29, 1891, >if he knew firsthand that >HPB, Mead and he had already destroyed the Mss of >vol. III???!!! > ============================================ DALLAS I do not know how to answer this, as I said there are too many blanks and surmises. =========================================== >Concerning Mead, Robert Gilbert writes the following >with a quote by Mead: > >"Many years later there were persistent allegations that the > supposed third and fourth volumes had been suppressed by vested > interests within the Society. The evidence for this was simply > Madame Blavatsky's claims at various times to have completed, or > nearly completed, the extra volumes - but no-one ever saw any > finished text and none was ever found. Mead's comment on the > allegations was uncompromising: 'On H.P.B.'s decease there > remained over no manuscript or typescript S.D. material other > than is now found in Vol. III. These pieces, or chapters, were > omitted from the two volumes of the first edition, either > because they were thought, by Mme. Blavatsky herself, not good > enough or not sufficiently appropriate to be included.' > >Notice Mead's own words. Mead's words contradict this >annoynmous story that HPB, Archibald K. and Mead had destroyed >the SD III MSS. > >Note: In what was quoted above by Gilbert, he makes a statement >which is misleading: ". . . no-one ever saw any finished text >and none was ever found. . . ." > >FINISHED text?? What does Gilbert mean by "finished"? "No-one >every saw." When? Before HPB's death? After her death? ========================================= DALLAS: Another blank space -- surmises ? Conflict of views. =========================================== > >COMPARE what Gilbert wrote with what Annie Besant testified to >on May 4, 1891: > >"There is one other work of hers [HPB's], which I have seen in >manuscript, >still unpublished; a third volume of "The Secret Doctrine" which is now >being got ready for the press under my own eyes." > >This is the manuscript HPB writes about in "The Negators of Science", >LUCIFER, April 1891. > >Was the manuscript "finished" or "completed" at this time-period? > ============================================== DALLAS Again -- a blank - a surmise situation -- conflict in views ======================================== >Here is what I wrote in my paper concerning Boris de Zirkoff's comments >on >a "completed" SD Vol III manuscript: > >". . . . it is difficult to understand what Boris >de Zirkoff meant when he wrote (in SD Intro., 71) >that 'no outright positive or negative answer can be made to >the oft-repeated question whether a completed Manuscript >of Volumes III and IV ever existed.' " > >"Setting aside de Zirkoff's reference to Volume IV, there >is no reason to doubt that a manuscript of Volume III existed >during the last years of HPB's life. Furthermore, had she >lived, HPB would probably have added and deleted material >from the manuscript; she would probably have rewritten >and reedited the material even more. But at the time of her >death, this manuscript was as 'complete' as HPB could make it. >What more could be expected?" > >And Annie Besant testifies BEFORE HPB'S DEATH that she had >SEEN this manuscript. > >Does anyone ever consult and compare original sources of information? > >Dallas, who was this "old student of HPB"? Who told him/her this >story about HPB, Keightley and Mead destroying the MSS of Volume III SD? Was it HPB or Keightley or Mead who told him/her the story? Did he/she get the story 2nd hand or even 3rd hand? > ============================================= DALLAS : >From the way in which it was related to us, it appeared to me to be most probably "2nd hand" -- but it was also apparently well known in the "household" around HPB. Or so I gathered. I do not recall that any questions as to authenticity were made. Time of event I would place between 1937 / 1939, before W W II. ============================================ >I prefer to consult the original source materials of which we have >an abundance INCLUDING THE ORIGINAL WURZBURG MSS. The contents of the >Wurzburg mss should be compared with the contents of Vol III. > >See my article on third volume of SD at >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm for more details. > ================================================== From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 18:35:05 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 16:32:59 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <35748BAB.6268@azstarnet.com> References: <000201bd8e71$b640f180$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Thanks Dallas for your comments. In a later posting I will attempt to comment on a few of your statements. At this point I would like to simply say that we need Ariadne's thread to rescue us from the "Labyrinth" of conflicting testimony. And I believe that Ariadne's thread in this case is the thread of historical events. HPB wrote the Secret Doctrine. . . .one day at a time. . . . a series of days, etc. . . .a series of historical events. This "chronological" key or thread can lead to a better understanding of what *really* happened regarding volume III of the SD. I would ask you to please read my paper titled "The Myth of the 'Missing' Third Volume of The Secret Doctrine". The 2nd edition of this paper is on the WWW at: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm Once you have read this paper then some of my future comments may make more sense. I suspect I know the possible source for the reminiscences of the old student from 1937-1939. Will write more when I look up several documents. Daniel W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 2nd 1998 > > Dear Daniel: > > As usual your sources are impeccable. In answer to your > questions, allow me to present in more detail what I said. Some > of your questions may then be answered insofar as I am able. > > I am as puzzled as you are about the conflicting stories and my > own "reminiscences." I narrated them as I was made aware of > them. I recognize the conflicts you write so accurately about. > > After comparing the "3rd and REVISED Edition(1893) of the (First > 2 Volumes of S D)" with the original (1888), I have often > wondered how many "changes" were introduced into those > manuscripts that were assembled and printed as the "THIRD VOLUME > OF THE S D " by Annie Besant in 1897. Surmise again. > > >From HPB's original typed drafts, uncorrected for printing, to > what we now have printed (as the THIRD VOLUME) -- how many > changes that we know nothing about ? Also, I bear in mind that > as proofs came back from the printers for correction, HPB had the > habit of adding and changing many phrases. We lack those in this > case. This is of course entirely speculative on my part. > > As a matter of private speculation I have also wondered what > would have happened had the "Judge Case" never arisen, and > whether the "THIRD VOLUME S D" would have the same appearance had > Judge collaborated with A B in its production. But that is all > unanswered conjecture. At least we have the first 2 volumes SD > in their original. > > Let me observe here that while it is very interesting to trace > the many ways in which these books and writings have been > handled, historically, we loose valuable time that could be spent > in studying what Theosophy teaches. I know that I do. > Fortunately, starting from about 18, I began to make notes that I > could go back to, even today, on what I read and studied. But, > one learns new things every day. To me the philosophy is of more > value than any amount of historicity. > > My reminiscence about the author of those statements concerning > the fate, just before HPB's death, of the typed manuscripts > destined for Volumes 3 and 4 of the S D is quite unclear. Let me > add that in Bombay, when I was a lad (from age 14 on) I lived in > the same house as Mr. B. P. Wadia did and saw him almost daily. > [ "Aryasangha," 22 Narayan Dabholkar Rd., Bombay. ] A stream of > visitors of distinction, old Theosophists, etc., came by, and we > were often invited to "come upstairs," meet them after dinner, > and listen to what they had to say about the times when they knew > and met HPB or Mr. Judge, and others of the Inner Group around > HPB. As I said I cannot now recall who said that, but the saying > remains imprinted in my mind. I cannot substantiate it with a > name, It might have been Alice Cleather, or old John Watkins, or > someone else. > > As to Annie Besant having some of the manuscripts, it seems to me > that several of those were published as articles in LUCIFER after > HPB's death, as they were also being considered for use in the > magazine. I assume that A B had copies as co-editor, and may > have taken some more from HPB's desk when she arrived in London > very shortly after HPB's death ( A B was on ship-board on the > Atlantic when HPB died, returning to London after visiting the > Annual Convention of the American Section at the end of April in > 1891, where, as HPB's representative, she delivered HPB's "last > two messages" ) -- or something like that. And those are just my > surmises. > > As to the Wurzburg MSS, was that not what Countess Wachmeister > copied of the early pages (the first draft of the S D) and sent > to Adyar for Subba Row to edit or comment on ? And is it not > that which so upset S. Row that he refused to go any further. > see what HPB writes to Sinnett (p. 172 , HPB Letters to APS) > about the revealing of certain ancient Mysteries, held sacred by > Brahmin Initiates, See also the restrictions under which HPB was > placed, herself, on p. 103-6,of the same book ]. In MAHATMA > LETTERS there are correlating references (to me) to be read on > pp. 203, 263, 310-17 466 top concerning HPB's work and position > vis-a-vis the Mahatmas. > > Well, I don't think this will settle much, but here goes. > > Best wishes, Dallas. > > ============================================ > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 8:33 AM > Subject: More on SD Vol. 3 > > >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote on Theos-Talk: > > > >> In "The Negators of Science" [ LUCIFER, April 1891, Part 1, > >> ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 2, p. 80-1) ] HPB gives a > >> survey of what was intended in Vol. 3. [ HPB was evidently > not > >> able to complete this as she died May 8th, 1891, shortly after > >> this article was issued. Because she foresaw this, is the > >> probable reason, I think, for the destruction of the > manuscripts > >> making up the 3rd and part of the 4th Volumes of the S D -- as > >> she could not edit them for publication. I was given to > >> understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very > >> shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley > and > >> G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th > >> Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and > ready. > >> She then said that she had received "instructions" to have > them > >> destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This > is a > >> reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent > >> verification of this statement made to me.] > > > >Then a few paragraphs later Dallas wrote: > > > >> Annie Besant, after Mr. Judge's death in 1896, issued in 1897 > a > >> "Third Volume of the S D;" and the material included there > seems > >> to be some of the unedited Manuscripts HPB was working on at > the time of her death. > > > > > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > > > >Dallas, in the latter paragragh, you write of "some of the > unedited > >Manuscripts." Which ones?? SD manuscripts? The destroyed > ones? Dallas, please tell me what MSS you are speaking about? > > ========================================== > DALLAS: > > SD manuscripts -- may have been several copies -- some with A B, > and the est with A K and G R S M. What happened to the hand > written MSS ? > > ========================================== > > > >Dallas, reread what you just wrote concerning Archibald > Keightley > >and G.R.S. Mead. > > > >Then COMPARE that with what they ACTUALLY WROTE in the > following: > > > >"October 29, 1891---Dr. Archibald Keightley wrote in a > >letter to Bertram Keightley (cited by C. Jinarajadasa > >in "Dr. Besant and Mutilation of the Secret Doctrine," > >Messenger, January 1926, 166): > > > >'There is some talk of entirely reprinting Secret Doctrine > >[Volumes I and II] and of correcting errors > >when the Third Volume is issued.' " > > > >Why would Archibald write this on Oct. 29, 1891, > >if he knew firsthand that > >HPB, Mead and he had already destroyed the Mss of > >vol. III???!!! > > > ============================================ > DALLAS > > I do not know how to answer this, as I said there are too many > blanks and surmises. > > =========================================== > > >Concerning Mead, Robert Gilbert writes the following > >with a quote by Mead: > > > >"Many years later there were persistent allegations that the > > supposed third and fourth volumes had been suppressed by > vested > > interests within the Society. The evidence for this was > simply > > Madame Blavatsky's claims at various times to have completed, > or > > nearly completed, the extra volumes - but no-one ever saw any > > finished text and none was ever found. Mead's comment on the > > allegations was uncompromising: 'On H.P.B.'s decease there > > remained over no manuscript or typescript S.D. material other > > than is now found in Vol. III. These pieces, or chapters, > were > > omitted from the two volumes of the first edition, either > > because they were thought, by Mme. Blavatsky herself, not > good > > enough or not sufficiently appropriate to be included.' > > > >Notice Mead's own words. Mead's words contradict this > >annoynmous story that HPB, Archibald K. and Mead had destroyed > >the SD III MSS. > > > >Note: In what was quoted above by Gilbert, he makes a statement > >which is misleading: ". . . no-one ever saw any finished text > >and none was ever found. . . ." > > > >FINISHED text?? What does Gilbert mean by "finished"? "No-one > >every saw." When? Before HPB's death? After her death? > > ========================================= > DALLAS: > > Another blank space -- surmises ? Conflict of views. > > =========================================== > > > >COMPARE what Gilbert wrote with what Annie Besant testified to > >on May 4, 1891: > > > >"There is one other work of hers [HPB's], which I have seen in > >manuscript, > >still unpublished; a third volume of "The Secret Doctrine" which > is now > >being got ready for the press under my own eyes." > > > >This is the manuscript HPB writes about in "The Negators of > Science", > >LUCIFER, April 1891. > > > >Was the manuscript "finished" or "completed" at this > time-period? > > > ============================================== > DALLAS > > Again -- a blank - a surmise situation -- conflict in views > > ======================================== > > >Here is what I wrote in my paper concerning Boris de Zirkoff's > comments > >on > >a "completed" SD Vol III manuscript: > > > >". . . . it is difficult to understand what Boris > >de Zirkoff meant when he wrote (in SD Intro., 71) > >that 'no outright positive or negative answer can be made to > >the oft-repeated question whether a completed Manuscript > >of Volumes III and IV ever existed.' " > > > >"Setting aside de Zirkoff's reference to Volume IV, there > >is no reason to doubt that a manuscript of Volume III existed > >during the last years of HPB's life. Furthermore, had she > >lived, HPB would probably have added and deleted material > >from the manuscript; she would probably have rewritten > >and reedited the material even more. But at the time of her > >death, this manuscript was as 'complete' as HPB could make it. > >What more could be expected?" > > > >And Annie Besant testifies BEFORE HPB'S DEATH that she had > >SEEN this manuscript. > > > >Does anyone ever consult and compare original sources of > information? > > > >Dallas, who was this "old student of HPB"? Who told him/her > this > >story about HPB, Keightley and Mead destroying the MSS of Volume > III SD? Was it HPB or Keightley or Mead who told him/her the > story? Did he/she get the story 2nd hand or even 3rd hand? > > > ============================================= > DALLAS : > > >From the way in which it was related to us, it appeared to me to > be most probably "2nd hand" -- but it was also apparently well > known in the "household" around HPB. Or so I gathered. I do not > recall that any questions as to authenticity were made. Time of > event I would place between 1937 / 1939, before W W II. > > ============================================ > > >I prefer to consult the original source materials of which we > have > >an abundance INCLUDING THE ORIGINAL WURZBURG MSS. The contents > of the > >Wurzburg mss should be compared with the contents of Vol III. > > > >See my article on third volume of SD at > >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm for more > details. > > > ================================================== > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 20:01:04 1998 Date: Tue, 02 Jun 1998 17:56:14 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden III volume? Message-Id: <199806030052.TAA08718@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980602135540.007186c0@ozemail.com.au> References: <199806020102.UAA26002@proteus.imagiware.com> <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <199805301400.JAA04156@proteus.imagiware.com> At 01:55 PM 6/2/98 +0900, you wrote: >Brenda Said: > >>I think she was untruthful when she said there would be a third volume of >>the SD with biographies of the lives of adepts in it. > >I recently downloaded the Kessinger Books mail order catalogue - there was >this entry: > >Blavatsky, H.P., Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion and >Philosophy VOL. 3 OCCULTISM (1897), This rare third volume of the Secret >Doctrine (virtually impossible to find) completes the papers left by H. P. >B. It is a complete course on Occultism! Nothing is left out. Almost 100 >chapters. Partial contents: One Key to all Sacred Books; The ABC of Magic; >Chaldean Oracles; The Book of Hermes; Three Ways Open to the Adept; Names >are Symbols; Characters of the Bible; The Book of Enoch; Hermetic and >Kabalistic Doctrines; Numbers and Magic; Occult Weapons; The Duty of the >True Occultist; Two Eternal Principles; St. Paul the real founder of >Christianity; Apollonius no Fiction; Biographies of Initiates; Kabalistic >Readings of Gospels; Magic in Antioch; The Septenary Sephira; Seven Keys to >all Allegories; The Mystery of the Sun; Magical Statutes; Masonry and >Jesuits; Mysteries and Masonry; Egyptian Initiation; Root of Races; >Celestial Wheels; Christian Star Worship; Defense of Astrology; The Seven >Rays; Secret Books; Tibetan Prophecies; Swedenborg; Occult Secrecy; and >much more! Blavatsky was an occult master. If you are a serious mystical >student, you'll need this rare and illuminating book. ISBN 1-56459-415-7, >618 pages, $49.95 > >i was told by my local TS that it is not in fact a seperate vol3 - But HPB >surely mentions a vol 3 under way at the end of Anthropegenesis. >Can anyone elaborate further? Dear Darren, There is an article called "THE SECRET DOCTRINE - VOLUME III" As Published in 1897 A Survey of its Contents and Authenticity. Boris de Zirkoff" in the Introduction of Volume XIV of the Collected Writings. It says that HPB sent some of her SD manuscript to Adyar to Subba Row for his suggestions. Subba Row refused to collaborate with her, so HPB made changes and alterations herself. Then when we compare the original manuscript with her own edited version we find 68 pages which were not printed in Volume I. These 68 pages make up many of the pages in the Volume III in question above, up to page 335. (The article gives specifics.) The total volume is 594 pages (I think.) and of these 102 pages were identified. What of the remaining 3/4 of the work? A 56 page section of this is "The Mystery of the Buddha." The next section(s) constitute 238 pages. They cover a variety of subjects. Then the author breaks to a story from the past where Keightley says he (Bertram) and Archibald Keightley typed out all of the words and arranged it. (Referring to the arrangement of Volumes I and II.) HPB accepted the rough plan and went to work on the arrangement and gave Keightleys a "mosaic" made with pen, scissors, and paste. It was so complicated that when the typed up Volumes I and II (which were sent to the printer) there was still quite a bit left over which they could find no suitable place for or weren't in top shape condition. HPB put the leftovers in her drawer and said she would make it into a third Volume. SO these pages (as many as they could) are what they think got published as Volume III, even if there were some pages that "needed complete and extensive revision and rewriting." This Volume is just pages inferior to the SD. Mead says in 1897 that he had seen before pages 433-594. So does this provide you with a further glimpse into what the Volume III contains? Brenda From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 20:45:05 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:35:05 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Vol. 3 of Secret Doctrine Message-ID: <01bd8e8f$d5c27380$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> >In this paper, I go over the primary source >materials in great detail. My conclusion is: > >"I am inclined to believe that pages 1-430 >of Volume III of The Secret Doctrine published >in 1897 was the real third volume intended by HPB." > >I'd appreciate people's feedback. > >Daniel Caldwell > I personally don't think so. As far as I know, the whole Pasadena TS also does not think so. There is a little too much of AB in it and I think it lacks HPBs general style and insight in parts. It could be partially HPB mixed with AB (?) I don't know. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 20:54:30 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:45:28 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: -- HPB REFERENCES TO SD Vols 2 and 3 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000201bd8e18$49b686a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Conclusions or theories drawn, ought to be carefully labeled, >since additional material may arise, or be found, after >publication which forces the alteration of those earlier made >conclusions or theories. To be fair, we ought to leave this fact >clear and open -- so that the reader is made to realize that what >is said or written is tentative and based on existing evidence >consulted. .... all of which applies to the writings of HPB. Why? HPB presents the Secret Doctrine as occult history and commentary, which she did, to the best of her ability, carefully label. Since then, other evidence and other sources have been found of which she had no information - the Dead Sea Scrolls is one example, the Nag Hammadi Library another. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 20:59:17 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:38:20 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden topic? Message-ID: <7eDDcQA8rJd1Ewyb@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980602135540.007186c0@ozemail.com.au> Darren: Most of these writings I have read somehere - maybe in the six-volume Adyar edition (which I no longer have, but they were in volume five (six being the index)). Much of what I found written there fits in with my own study and experience - whether HPB wrote it doesn't seem to be the most important factor, however, but whether what was written has any substance in fact. IMO, some of it does. Darren writes >Blavatsky, H.P., Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion and >Philosophy VOL. 3 OCCULTISM (1897), This rare third volume of the Secret >Doctrine (virtually impossible to find) completes the papers left by H. P. >B. It is a complete course on Occultism! Nothing is left out. Almost 100 >chapters. Partial contents: One Key to all Sacred Books; The ABC of Magic; >Chaldean Oracles; The Book of Hermes; Three Ways Open to the Adept; >Names >are Symbols; Characters of the Bible; The Book of Enoch; Hermetic and >Kabalistic Doctrines; Numbers and Magic; Occult Weapons; The Duty of the >True Occultist; Two Eternal Principles; St. Paul the real founder of >Christianity; Apollonius no Fiction; Biographies of Initiates; Kabalistic >Readings of Gospels; Magic in Antioch; The Septenary Sephira; Seven Keys to >all Allegories; The Mystery of the Sun; Magical Statutes; Masonry and >Jesuits; Mysteries and Masonry; Egyptian Initiation; Root of Races; >Celestial Wheels; Christian Star Worship; Defense of Astrology; The Seven >Rays; Secret Books; Tibetan Prophecies; Swedenborg; Occult Secrecy; and >much more! Blavatsky was an occult master. If you are a serious mystical >student, you'll need this rare and illuminating book. ISBN 1-56459-415-7, >618 pages, $49.95 ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 21:03:38 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:54:02 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> Dan, What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have less than two years. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 21:07:25 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 01:31:15 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: : HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001001bd8dcb$9db05b20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 1st 1998 > >Dear Alan: > >I am apparently violating some tacit basis for the handling of >history. >It seems immunity is granted to those who dare or desire to >ventilate their opinions. So I make mine known. > >How can you or I "debate" HPB ?" We can not. Clearly (to most of us I think) the concept of "debating HPB" or anyone else is the colloquial use of a person's name as a means of defining them as a historical figure complete with character, personality, soul, etc., so that when we "debate" a "person" we are actually discussing their nature and character as it appears to us on the basis of the evidence available to us. > >She is herself, as you are, or I am--each one an individual Self. >We are not subject to being debated. Someone may say they don't >like something about us, what we wear, what we eat, how we speak, >what we do, etc. > >Yes, HPB is a historical figure. If she is to be described, then >let it be an honest description. I do not care to hear (and I >said this it plainly) about her, or anyone else, evil inferred. How are we to define an honest description? Sometimes, with some historical, or even living people, evil may be infered because evil is perceived to be apparent. > >I have always thought when I hear or read things of that nature >that somehow the author, or the person repeating something that >cannot be gainsaid by the person concerned is taking advantage of >their absence and of the public's avidity for slander, and ill >speaking -- always the attempt to reduce a person to a lower >level, morally. No thank you. Not for me. Is there no room in your world then for Biography? Many TS fans applaud the Sylvia Cranston biography, others regard it with less esteem. Personally I have not read it. Your post suggests that HPB is in some way "absent" simply because she has passed from this plane. Have you looked at the next plane and observed she is not there? Perhaps (even quite likely) she is more than aware that attacks upon her integrity take place now, *just as they did when she was here*. > >None of us is fit to do that in my esteem, whether it is HPB or >anyone else. How are you qualified to make such a statement? > When we have written a Secret Doctrine and secured >the backing of the Mahatmas, we may be able to debate WITH her. >But in her absence, no. As the existence of the Mahatmas and their precise identities has long been a matter of dispute in itself, I am quite sure that if HPB has something to say to us *today* in real earth time, she will get the message through somehow. You cannot prove her absence except in visual terms relating to the body she occupied until the time of her "death" - but there is no death, so because you cannot see her, it doesn't mean she isn't there. > As I said before, everyone of us who >use, or work with Theosophy, are her pupils and owe her a debt of >gratitude. Agreed 100% > I do not consider it honorable or respectful to try >to demean her. It is neither of these things to try to demean anyone with malicious intent, but criticism of a person's character or work is always legitimate - and HPB was very good at it herself. She did so with regard to both the living and the dead! > >I would say about Jesus the same thing. Jesus said some pretty cruel and unfriendly things. To these I object, supposing him to have been correctly quoted. There are plenty of people who would seek to "demean" myself because I have concluded that the evidence I have had available to me concerning him - which is a great deal more than a great deal! - shows quite cearly that the equation Jesus = God is false. > >About C W L -- well there are court judgments. If we are going >to debate his character, we will have to give both sides. He has >done some good, and he had great potential, as one of the >Masters' early letters of encouragement to him reveals. That >would have to be mentioned. Same would be for anyone whose past >is under review or characterization. > >To speak ill of the dead is cowardly I would say. If HPB were >here she could handle the matter herself. As she is not, I pick >up the cudgels ! Is that so strange ? Hitler is dead. Hitler was evil. His deeds demonstrate the fact. I am cowardly to say this? > >Somewhere I must be missing a clue. I fear you are correct here. > >That in my seem is an example of why history is not a science. >It does not deal in facts anymore, but in selected opinions. If >it is a matter of opinions then I voice mine. And I have done >so. "History" has never dealt in facts alone, and historians are selective in the facts they use. What we call "history" is indeed the opinions of contemporary writers (of whatever era) regarding the interpretation of the facts. None of us is obliged to accept any particular historian's interpretation. History may, for example, repeat the writings of a person, but rarely records how many drinks thay had when writing it, nor how many times they farted. We all fart. > >I hope this helps explain my position. Dallas > To a degree, but I suspect that to many of us it comes across as heroine-worship, and that you *might* have elevated HPB to the status of a deity. Sorry to say this, but much of what you write gives this kind of impression - not least including your present post. In sincerity and fellowship, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 22:03:19 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 22:51:54 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <6de3510.3574ba4b@aol.com> in a message dated 98-06-02 18:07:32 EDT, Dallas writes: << in Bombay, when I was a lad (from age 14 on) I lived in the same house as Mr. B. P. Wadia did and saw him almost daily. ["Aryasangha," 22 Narayan Dabholkar Rd., Bombay.] A stream of visitors of distinction, old Theosophists, etc., came by, and we were often invited to "come upstairs," meet them after dinner, and listen to what they had to say about the times when they knew and met HPB or Mr. Judge, and others of the Inner Group around HPB. As I said I cannot now recall who said that, but the saying remains imprinted in my mind. I cannot substantiate it with a name, It might have been Alice Cleather, or old John Watkins, or someone else. >> You have had an interesting life, Dallas. You should write down your recollections sometime and share them with us. Best Wishes Lmhem111 From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 22:16:07 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:06:08 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Belonging as Religion (to bind or to join) Message-ID: <771a43e0.3574bda1@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-02 17:53:29 EDT, Brenda writes: << Anyway, the first five beliefs are really RIGHT ON to me. >> You have redefined the five tenants of Christian belief according to the perennial wisdom of theosophy, giving them a universal meaning and application. The question is will the Pope do as well? Lmhem111 From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 22:20:20 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 21:55:33 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Belonging Message-ID: <19980603031234541.AAA219@pgiese> Paul: Your post sent me running for an old issue of Parabola (Summer 1995). Here's the cover page quote from Satish Kumar: "When you accept the state of being a stranger, you are no longer a stranger. I have been an exile when everything around me seemed strange and everybody was a stranger. Once I accepted that I didn't have to belong and I didn't have to be part of the world, then I was free to be part of it. There was a paradoxical release of the spirit. The world became mine when I was no longer holding on to it." Finding that ideal group is like finding the ideal mate--some will swear that it's happened for them, others are convinced that it's just around the corner (or up in the Himalayans), and the rest of us scoff it off as just a romantic notion. Like relationships, our expectations of groups can be too high: passionate discussion without negative emotions; hotly defended arguments without judgements or slurs. Groups get disfunctional just like relationships and damaged groups, like relationships, can be salvaged with work and love. my $.02 Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." > From: "K Paul Johnson" > Subject: Belonging > Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 2:15 PM > > Lately I've been thinking about several senses of the term > "belonging" and the relationships among them. This is inspired by > my Theosophical karma, Kym's recent comments about it, and the > impending publication of the Cayce book. > > The literal sense of "belonging" is simply membership in a group. > But behind that is the figurative meaning of "having a sense of > belonging." That implies being welcome, at home, among friends, > secure. The worst part of certain reactions to my books about > HPB was the implicit message of "You don't belong." Meaning, > from the POV of the person expressing rejection and hostility, > "You are not welcome here, this movement is not your home, you > are not among friends." Even though the deliverers of this > message were not the ones who had ever given me a sense of > belonging in the first place, it was still wearing after a > while to get such regular doses of unbrotherly sentiment. > Particularly since the better part of 20 years has been spent with > Theosophy as my primary nexus for a sense of belonging. > > Behind that positive psychological sense of what it means to "belong" > is the dark side. That is "to be owned by." While most people > would indignantly deny that they yield their independence to > conform to a group's pressures, we all do so in different ways. > These are usually invisible, with people not seeing what they're > giving up in autonomy. The people who take the most pleasure in > "belonging" to a group are also those most likely to yield > autonomy, to have their values and principles determined by group > norms. It's only when a person stops belonging in that sense-- > stops thinking the way "all x are supposed to think," that the > dark side of belonging manifests. It's as if the moment one > clearly expresses "You don't own my conscience" to a group and > its leaders, one is also saying "I don't belong to you." And > that quickly can merge into the other meanings; figuratively, when > such mental independence brings about an unwelcoming, rejecting > reaction from the group, and sometimes literally when "heresy" > leads to formal expulsion. > > It therefore seems to me advisable to seek groups in which the > senses of belonging are not so intertwined. Where being welcome, > at home, and among friends does not require conformity to a belief > system or behavioral code. This is an ideal type, not > perfectly manifested in any concrete example. But the ideal is > one that the TS Founders clearly held, and one to which the > various Theosophical groups give lip service. > > Cheers, > PJ From ???@??? Tue Jun 2 22:30:05 1998 Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 23:01:22 -0400 From: "Phillips Spencer" Subject: Re: A New Web Site: Blavatsky's Alleged "Untruths" Message-ID: Importance: high > -----Original Message----- > From: Phillips Spencer > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 1998 10:14 AM > Subject: Re: A New Web Site: Blavatsky's Alleged > "Untruths" > > "The foolish man reviles the teachings of the holy ones, the noble and > the virtuous; he follows flase doctrines which bear fruit to his own > destruction, even like the fruit of the Katthaka reed." > The Dhammapada > > -----Original Message----- > > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 1998 3:47 PM > > Subject: A New Web Site: Blavatsky's Alleged > > "Untruths" > > > > ANNOUNCING A NEW WEB SITE AT > > > > http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/untruths.htm > > > > BLAVATSKY'S ALLEGED "UNTRUTHS" > > There is no religion, belief or opinion higher than the truth. > > > > A number of Theosophical students as well as other individuals have > > claimed that H.P. Blavatsky made various statements > > which could be called "untruths". K. Paul Johnson in his various > > books > > deals with some of these "untruths." Other individuals have > > also brought forth examples of what they consider "untruths" on the > > part > > of Madame Blavatsky. Dallas TenBroeck, a longtime student > > of Madame Blavatsky's life and works, has objected to these claims of > > "untruths." I quote a statement below from Mr. TenBroeck on > > this subject. This web page has been created with the specific aim of > > dealing in a fair and open way with the alleged "untruths" and > > their rebuttals or confirmations (if there are any). We encourage > > people interested in this subject to submit to this Web Site > > examples/confirmations/rebuttals of these alleged "untruths." Please > > send relevant items to blafoun@azstarnet.com Please sign your > > full name. All items including names of writers will be posted > > whether > > positive, negative or neutral. Also please post items to > > theos-talk@theosophy.com [If you are not a subscriber to Theos-Talk, > > send a message consisting of "subscribe" to > > theos-talk-request@theosophy.com] > > > > No controversy surrounding H.P. Blavatsky is considered "off limits" > > to > > this list. However, all contributors should document > > their assertions and be willing to share in some detail their > > reasoning > > and understanding for the various statements made. Serious and > > indepth discussion is desired; heated argument and name calling are > > discouraged. Please share what you know about these > > controversies with others. All participants are encouraged to make > > regular contributions to this forum. > > > > Table of Contents (to date) > > > > A Fair Kind of Questioning by Dallas TenBroeck > > Alleged "Untruth" #1 > > Responses to Alleged "Untruth" #1 > > Alleged "Untruth" # 2 > > Responses to Alleged "Untruth" #2 > > Alleged "Untruth" #3 > > Responses to Alleged "Untruth" #3 > > > > > > NOTE: To Dallas T., Jerry S. and Paul Johnson > > > > I have taken some of what each of you have written on Theos-Talk and > > put > > on the web site. Jerry S., I have collated some of your various > > comments on the Trikaya and entered it as one contribution. Feel > > free, > > Jerry, to rewrite and add to this "contribution". I hope I haven't > > distorted any of your views. > > > > If any of you want this material deleted from the new Web site, please > > email me and it will be immediately done. > > > > > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 01:03:03 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 10:56:30 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters Message-ID: <35758E4C.88F@withoutwalls.com> References: <19980602131554487.AAC125@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > >.....Speaking of creating > heaven or hell for users, I'm off to work... Boy, can I relate to that! > In "Shambala: The Sacred Path of the Warrior", Chogyam Trungpa addresses > the issue of a perceived reality versus physical/historical fact in his > discussion of whether or not the Kingdom of Shambala does exist or ever > existed with all the trappings accorded to it in mythology. [I'd like to > get quotes, but I've only got this on audio.] His endpoint is that since > the Kingdom of Shambala can only be recognized by one on the path, one > needs to embrace the path and the kingdom will be revealed. Image = (I)eye magic. Imagination = (I)eye magic in action The Science of the "Immaculate Concept" is seeing: the "Image of God" where YOU ARE, where I AM. "The kingdom of Heaven is all around them... but they do not see it." > I've been noticing how some of Jung's theories on projective phenomenon have > been finding their way into the field of Information Theory. Both Edward > Tufte ("Visual Explanations", "Envisioning Information") and Thomas > Davenport ("Information Ecology") expose the idea of how cognitive > environments are created and constrained (for most people) by the graphics > and systems available. Thus systems can be heaven or hell and "users" > frame their perceived environments within them. I just saw Tufte lecture on Information Design and wholeheartedly agree with you. It is amazing what exterior and interior images do to construct "the world." It is a function that we all too often unconsciously accept without really noticing or questioning. What responsibility does that knowledge place on artists, designers and imagineers of good conscience? I am currently reading a wonderful book called "The Artful Universe - An Introduction to the Vedic Religious Imagination" by William Mahony (©1998 SUNY Press. ISBN 0-7914-3580-6. >From the introduction: "Engagingly written and based on traditional as well as modern Vedic scholarship, the book introduces Vedic ideas regarding the nature of divinity, the structure of the sacred universe, the process of revelation, the function of ritual as hallowed activity, and the realizations lying behind the practice of meditation. As a way to link these diverse aspects of Vedic religion, Mahoney identifies and highlights the important role of the divine and human imagination in the formation, revelation, and reformation of a meaningful world." Too good. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 01:20:50 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 11:04:44 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <35759039.6536@withoutwalls.com> References: <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> Jerry Schueler wrote: > > What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger > appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have > less than two years. Its got to be Dallas, Darren or Alexis, no? Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 01:31:05 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 11:22:17 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Belonging Message-ID: <35759455.4C17@withoutwalls.com> References: <19980603031234541.AAA219@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > > Once I accepted that I didn't have to belong and I didn't have to > be part of the world, then I was free to be part of it. There was a > paradoxical release of the spirit. The world became mine when I was no > longer holding on to it." "You can love an artist's work, but that doesn't mean you have to paint like them." Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 02:46:37 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:38:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-Id: Alan: >they farted. We all fart. It's curious, but since I purchased Sainthood, mine smell like roses. >To a degree, but I suspect that to many of us it comes across as >heroine-worship, Or heroin-worship, in Darren's case. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 03:01:38 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 00:58:29 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Belonging Message-Id: Pam: >Paul: >Your post sent me running for an old issue of Parabola (Summer 1995). >Here's the cover page quote from Satish Kumar: > >"When you accept the state of being a stranger, you are no longer a >stranger. >I have been an exile when everything around me seemed strange and everybody >was a stranger. Once I accepted that I didn't have to belong and I didn't >have to >be part of the world, then I was free to be part of it. There was a >paradoxical release of the spirit. The world became mine when I was no >longer holding on to it." > >Finding that ideal group is like finding the ideal mate--some will swear >that it's happened for them, others are convinced that it's just around the >corner (or up in the Himalayans), and the rest of us scoff it off as just a >romantic notion. Like relationships, our expectations of groups can be too >high: passionate discussion without negative emotions; hotly defended >arguments without judgements or slurs. Groups get disfunctional just like >relationships and damaged groups, like relationships, can be salvaged with >work and love. > >my $.02 Bingo! I wanted to respond to Paul's post but was short on time. I just came to that realization myself. I had to do some soul searching these last few months. Here I am, in the golden position of not having to deal with a boss or a corporate institution, and I chose to be in a martial arts program that is rigid and traditional. I pay someone to make me feel like a kid. I quit two months ago and am now taking Muay Thai boxing. The atmosphere is relaxed. The schedule is variable, so that I can attend whenever I want. I was ecstatic. I am also reevaluating having to be in any theosophical societies. Just seeing how people love to tell other people what to do on this list, condemning others, and basically not respecting their interests, I decided to put wanting to belong to a physical group out of my mind. If I want to be of service, I can do so without all the other SHOULDS associated with such a group. If I want to be scholarly, I don't have people telling me I should be of service. As if being scholarly means you won't be of service. I can use big words, little words, and nonsense jokes. I can chose to eat or not eat meat. Why would anyone want to be in a group that does not respect a person's freedom to choose? Hasn't anyone heard of the trend of positive affirmations? Anyone who tried to say positive affirmations to themselves should also realize that they should positively affirm someone else. YOU ARE ALRIGHT! Try to be free, it feels great! Anyhoow, I'll stay on the theosophical lists because I am into theosophy and the three objects. I also made some good friends with like minds. To Paul: You belong to yourself. Enjoy your freedom. Anytime you're miserable about something, it could be that something or someone is not respecting you. If that is the case, do whatever you feel like, or get away from the oppressive environment. In a country in which nobody's holding a gun to your head (generally), you are the creator of your own prison. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 05:31:38 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 04:21:21 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Holy folk on a mountain Message-Id: <199806031021.EAA09239@mailmx.micron.net> To those of you who agree with Judge in saying we should "imitate" (emulate, says Dallas) the Masters - I am still curious on just what that means. For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion about who and what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday situations? What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death? What would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a homeless family? What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 05:46:38 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 04:21:23 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Evil = humanity? Message-Id: <199806031021.EAA09242@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >So what is my point to Paul? It is that the "binding" and "joining" in >Religion is the joining of the good with the evil (man) and by doing this >we are 1) preventing wrong, 2) permitting a glimpse into higher life, 3) >you name it. If you feel comfortable being with friends (who are >inherently evil) think how much better you will feel being with Good Beings >- - the next kingdom of nature descending through and into our world. > >Any comments? Uh, yeah. Firstly, this sounds to me more like fundamental Christianity than Theosophy. Secondly, your "3)" - what do you mean "you name it?" I mean, is your "3)" the neat-o freebie it appears to be? Thirdly, I am a friend of Paul's and do not consider myself "inherently evil." However, feel free to dog on your friends if you feel the need. Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 07:46:43 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 08:41:44 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Belonging Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-02 23:24:53 EDT, Pam writes: <> Would that were the case here !!! <> I give you two thumbs up on the analysis, Pam, as well as on the solution. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 08:46:40 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 06:29:16 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-ID: <003701bd8ef3$d5cfbb80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 3rd. Dallas offers: Dear Kym: If we apply the Theosophical 7-fold division of Principles, the highest is THE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT (Yes, I am "shouting," but this is only apparent, owing to the limits of this Internet connection that does not allow for italics or bold type--I use capitals for emphasis only.) -- in this we all ultimately share and therefore the idea of universal Brotherhood emerges. Consider with me that the mind is the active agent in each of us -- it is "Me, myself." But we have lived a long time and have stored in memory the epitome of the experiences of our life its ups and downs, its fine results and its snubs. Does this not jump to mind when we mentally propose (to ourselves and the inner "review board") an action to be done, or a word to be uttered ? Such consideration can be almost instantaneous. Theosophy says that between the Mind and the ALL-SPIRIT (of which we have a resident "Ray" within/above/around us) there is a "principle" named of old: "Buddhi," or "wisdom." This is distinct from both mind and Spirit, and bridges the gulf. If Spirit gives us immortality in essence, then the Buddhi serves as the memory bank (it accesses the "Akasa") and is the eternal repository of all the results of our immemorial actions, etc.. for many, many lives. Its purpose then is admonitory and it speaks as the "Voice of Conscience" -- the voice of past experience, warning us of danger and potential pain and suffering if we implement an action, or say something that will only hurt us in the long run. The Mind hearing this, either pays attention, or disregards it. [ Buddhi has no power whatever to compel the Mind to do or, not do what it decides.] . I hope this is clear, and gives the Theosophical explanation accurately. It also shows that in reality we have 2 Egos in each human -- the "Higher" and the "lower." Their relation is as Mother/daughter, or Father/son. So from one point of view the "Master" (which is ATMA-BUDDHI conjoined, interior to each of us -- the inner "Christ" if you please ) is with us all the time. It represents to us the whole Universe to which we are conjoined, and its Wisdom. Mind [Manas] allied to our passions, desires and "personality" gives us our freedom, or independence. It is the base for our sense of personal ego. In effect it is the "pupil" that we really are, in the universal school of living -- that involves far more that ourselves as a personal being. Theosophy claims that we cannot really isolate ourselves. We depend for our personal life (food, water, air) on Nature around us, and in turn we always contribute something to that same surrounding nature -- (our bodies are said my medical science to change to the extent of 98 % every year -- so physically we look the same, but the components have been replaced AND WE ARE NOT AWARE OF THE CONTINUOUS TRANSITION -- how is it possible that we are unable to monitor all that goes on within ? We are in effect, tenants in a self-running and very efficient and utterly intelligent (on its own level) living machine-shop. I rather like the idea that when it dies from long use, or abuse, it is replaced, and, that my "mind/egoity" finds another dwelling to continue living in. Reincarnation very much appeals to me as a valuable concept. Why then, should I not try to make for my future "house" as good a place as I would desire to be living in ? I also happen to like the (to me reasonable) idea of Karma -- of being personally responsible for my actions and thoughts -- I can't just shove them away and say to myself -- its someone else's problem. Not. It is mine ! So the "Master: is inescapably within (according to this reasoning of mine). If we can see that, even as a potentially accurate situation, then we can bend our attention on the Personal being that we are and ask ourselves, candidly and honestly, if we are the best that we can be. Such questioning and answering can only be done in private, and the answer, if we dare to know, leads us to see what potentials are truly ours to aspire to, and to apply for, if we so determine. Each is on his own in this matter. So that is why Mr. Judge used the term and phrase, as I understand it. I hope this is of help. Dallas > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 3:53 AM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: Holy folk on a mountain >To those of you who agree with Judge in saying we should "imitate" (emulate, >says Dallas) the Masters - I am still curious on just what that means. > >For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion about who and >what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday situations? >What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to >someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death? What >would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a >homeless family? What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly >and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" > > > >Kym > > > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 09:01:42 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 05:51:20 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: : HPB ==A Protest by Dallas -- Some further thoughts Message-ID: <003601bd8ef3$d23dbb20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 3rd 1998 "I think he doth protest too much !" -- Shakespeare. Dear Alan: Apparently we are as friends agreeing to disagree in opinion, interpretation, etc. regarding HPB as a person. and also as an "individuality". Looking through Cranston's Biography of HPB would help. I think, as it draws together all the information that has been written on -- about her and her work. Hero-worship ! Why not ? To me she is one of the Great Heroes of the world. Both her writings and work show that. I am not going to debate on the latitudes that historians or biographers allow themselves in the world of "book-writing," and "book-selling." The "lower-mind" is a very clever lawyer and we all have one. I am trying to write and think from the basis of that morality which tries to look into the Karma of any motive, action, thought, etc. that anyone of us can generate. Of course if one does not think that the Universe is based on justice and fairness, and that one's integrity vanishes at the death of the mere physical body, then there is no use in further speech. But I do not credit you with that. Of course HPB is alive and awake on the "inner planes" that are so far inaccessible to us, but for which we have ample evidence of their presence. I have no doubt she sees all this quite well. But there must be some law of nature that prevents Her from taking tangible action. I suspect that the law is one that tests the integrity of the followers and disciples of every great teacher. Having learned, are they able to dare to apply ? -- I also suspect that everyone who assumes the position of a "priest" of whatever denomination, takes to some extent advantage of this law. That they will not be contravened or contradicted by the Originator and the Reformer -- the Prophet, the Reformer. Hence, they begin to distort (either in ignorance, or deliberately) the doctrines and ideas that the said Prophet came to deliver, so that the masses could benefit from them. Look at what we have left of "The Sermon on the Mount." Could modern Christianity in all its many sects and variations thereof, exist for a day under the application of the laws of benevolence, non-violence charity and tolerance suggested there ? Nations, legislatures, businesses, etc... would crumble -- and that is the kind of change that as a mass, we cannot envisage or tolerate. Individually we can do it, and it has to be done individually and little by little. Who, today has the force of character of a Jesus, or a Gandhi, or a "Mother Theresa," or an HPB ?" And to some extent the fate of the honest "follower," or "disciple" is analogous to that of the prophet whose teachings he continues to proclaim. No. We find all kinds of "reasons" why it would be better not to adopt for personal (and especially not for public) use the "Sermon of the Mount." But, we also do not want to abandon the idea that we can be "personally saved" if we loudly claim we "believe in Jesus, the Christ, the Redeemer" while we deny and repudiate Him at every step of our daily lives. If there is any dichotomy present in life it is right there -- and as a result hypocrisy flourishes. None of us is entirely free of that. I say anyone, using the Theosophical seven-fold definition of the "principles" that are innate to any human being, has at one end a link to the Absolute--the DIVINITY, and at the other a link to the physical personal. In the center are the "growing" and "changing" active principles of the mind and the emotions (Manas and Kama). I do not think that anyone of us can deny that the struggle for self-knowledge goes on intensely right there, within the two poles of our own consciousness. In fact much of the KEY TO THEOSOPHY that HPB wrote deals with this. I think it is quite crucial to our "progress." And perhaps it is a kind of "self-initiation" that goes on all the time. It does help if we know better what Theosophy actually teaches. But perhaps many feel that it is benevolent and that we can guess at it, and get away with the warm feeling that we are "theosophists." But what have we really gained ? We may be sympathetic to the ideals and objectives of Theosophy as framed. But, here we have a detailed and explicit set of propositions. They draw together the wisdom of the world and its past experiences. Are we to remain ignorant of them? Is entertainment more important that acquiring wisdom ? Each alone can answer that to themselves. In an article "Leo Tolstoy and Christianity" [ Lucifer, September 1890; ULT Edition of HPB Articles, Vol. 3, p. 114 ] HPB wrote: "The personal life, that which recognizes and wills only one's own "I," is the animal life; the life of reason is the human, the existence proper to man according to his nature as man...from the remotest times onwards, Humanity has ever been conscious of the torturing inner contradiction, wherein all who seek after personal well-being find themselves. As, unfortunately, there is no other solution of this contradiction except to transfer the center of attraction of one's existence from the personality, which can never be saved from destruction, to the everlasting All, it is intelligible that all the sages of the past, and with them also the greatest thinkers of later centuries, have established doctrines and moral laws identical in their general meaning because they saw more or less clearly than other men both the contradiction and its solution." [ The article continues in this general vein. ] "With the awakening of the reasoning consciousness, which must occur sooner or later in every man, he becomes conscious of the gulf between the animal and the human life; he realizes this more and more fully, till at last--on the highest plane of consciousness--the fundamental contradiction of life is recognized as only an 'apparent' contradiction pertaining solely to the sphere of animal existence, and the meaning of life, after which the personal man seeks in vain, is at last discovered . It is not discovered by logical deduction, but intuitively. The spiritually regenerate man suddenly finds himself transported into the eternal, timeless condition of the life of pure "Reason," (Meaning Plato's "Noetic Life.") in which can be no more illusions, contradictions, riddles, ... The life of reason is, as the original and only true life, also the 'normal' life of man: and man as such can only be called "living" is so far as he subdues the animal in him, under the law of organic life ... there is nothing super-human in following the 'natural' law of human life and both regarding and using as a 'tool' what is a mere tool, of the true life--the personality ... to 'use' a tool as a tool is not to 'deny' it, but simply to make it serve its proper purpose, i.e., Reason. -- This is Tolstoy's philosophy of life, identical in its basis with that of Theosophy." I have quoted this at length because it seems to me to be the crux of our divergence of views, as Tolstoy (quoted by HPB) applied to this. Yes, unequivocally, I would demand for anyone who is considered retrospectively in biography or in history the same equity of regard as one would accord in the present: a balance between that which can be looked at in their natures and work. An unguarded writer (out on a slender branch) makes declarations that, on contradiction, leaves him no support but the empty air and gravitation -- he falls. A guarded writer clothes his opinions and identifies them with the "escape words" "seems, perhaps, appears, etc... indicating that there may be a lack of evidence -- which, should it emerge, would change the opinion currently being offered. And that is all I am after. But such a "guard" does little to bolster the "authority" idea that many think is valuable to their self-esteem, especially, if "They" issue it. Although we are agreed that Hitler served as a focus for a monstrous force, he was not alone as those who supported and carried out his decrees are culpable of connivance. But taking the case of HPB, who did she subvert ? Take any of her writings, does she not inevitably respect the individual liberty of those to whom she offers her wisdom to ? There is a vast difference between compulsion and acceptance, and service, and adoption of views, as a fresh basis for consideration. The first closes doors to charity, freedom and to tolerance, the latter opens those and adopts them as primaries. Is that so wrong ? Should nobility of purpose and execution be derided ? And what is it in anyone that does the deriding ? What aspect of the personal nature feels offended at the teachings (however perverted by interested translators) of a Jesus, a Krishna, a Buddha, or a Lao Tse? That is a question which self-inventory alone allows us to answer to ourselves. Refusing to compare the ideas of these four, is evidence of some degree of self-imposed limits. Why ? Enough along these lines. I think best left alone at this point. Best wishes, Dallas. > Date: Tuesday, June 02, 1998 7:26 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: : HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>June 1st 1998 >> >>Dear Alan: >> >>I am apparently violating some tacit basis for the handling of >>history. >>It seems immunity is granted to those who dare or desire to >>ventilate their opinions. So I make mine known. >> >>How can you or I "debate" HPB ?" We can not. > >Clearly (to most of us I think) the concept of "debating HPB" or >anyone else is the colloquial use of a person's name as a means of >defining them as a historical figure complete with character, personality, >soul, etc., so that when we "debate" a "person" we are actually >discussing their nature and character as it appears to us on the basis of >the evidence available to us. >> >>She is herself, as you are, or I am--each one an individual Self. >>We are not subject to being debated. Someone may say they don't >>like something about us, what we wear, what we eat, how we speak, >>what we do, etc. >> >>Yes, HPB is a historical figure. If she is to be described, then >>let it be an honest description. I do not care to hear (and I >>said this it plainly) about her, or anyone else, evil inferred. > >How are we to define an honest description? Sometimes, with some >historical, or even living people, evil may be infered because evil is >perceived to be apparent. >> >>I have always thought when I hear or read things of that nature >>that somehow the author, or the person repeating something that >>cannot be gainsaid by the person concerned is taking advantage of >>their absence and of the public's avidity for slander, and ill >>speaking -- always the attempt to reduce a person to a lower >>level, morally. No thank you. Not for me. > >Is there no room in your world then for Biography? Many TS fans >applaud the Sylvia Cranston biography, others regard it with less >esteem. Personally I have not read it. Your post suggests that HPB is >in some way "absent" simply because she has passed from this plane. >Have you looked at the next plane and observed she is not there? >Perhaps (even quite likely) she is more than aware that attacks upon her >integrity take place now, *just as they did when she was here*. >> >>None of us is fit to do that in my esteem, whether it is HPB or >>anyone else. > >How are you qualified to make such a statement? > >> When we have written a Secret Doctrine and secured >>the backing of the Mahatmas, we may be able to debate WITH her. >>But in her absence, no. > >As the existence of the Mahatmas and their precise identities has long >been a matter of dispute in itself, I am quite sure that if HPB has >something to say to us *today* in real earth time, she will get the >message through somehow. You cannot prove her absence except in >visual terms relating to the body she occupied until the time of her >"death" - but there is no death, so because you cannot see her, it >doesn't mean she isn't there. > >> As I said before, everyone of us who >>use, or work with Theosophy, are her pupils and owe her a debt of >>gratitude. > >Agreed 100% > >> I do not consider it honorable or respectful to try >>to demean her. > >It is neither of these things to try to demean anyone with malicious >intent, but criticism of a person's character or work is always legitimate >- and HPB was very good at it herself. She did so with regard to both >the living and the dead! >> >>I would say about Jesus the same thing. > >Jesus said some pretty cruel and unfriendly things. To these I object, >supposing him to have been correctly quoted. There are plenty of >people who would seek to "demean" myself because I have concluded >that the evidence I have had available to me concerning him - which is a >great deal more than a great deal! - shows quite cearly that the equation >Jesus = God is false. >> >>About C W L -- well there are court judgments. If we are going >>to debate his character, we will have to give both sides. He has >>done some good, and he had great potential, as one of the >>Masters' early letters of encouragement to him reveals. That >>would have to be mentioned. Same would be for anyone whose past >>is under review or characterization. >> >>To speak ill of the dead is cowardly I would say. If HPB were >>here she could handle the matter herself. As she is not, I pick >>up the cudgels ! Is that so strange ? > >Hitler is dead. Hitler was evil. His deeds demonstrate the fact. I am >cowardly to say this? >> >>Somewhere I must be missing a clue. > >I fear you are correct here. >> >>That in my seem is an example of why history is not a science. >>It does not deal in facts anymore, but in selected opinions. If >>it is a matter of opinions then I voice mine. And I have done >>so. > >"History" has never dealt in facts alone, and historians are selective in >the facts they use. What we call "history" is indeed the opinions of >contemporary writers (of whatever era) regarding the interpretation of >the facts. None of us is obliged to accept any particular historian's >interpretation. > >History may, for example, repeat the writings of a person, but rarely >records how many drinks thay had when writing it, nor how many times >they farted. We all fart. >> >>I hope this helps explain my position. Dallas >> >To a degree, but I suspect that to many of us it comes across as >heroine-worship, and that you *might* have elevated HPB to the status >of a deity. Sorry to say this, but much of what you write gives this kind >of impression - not least including your present post. > >In sincerity and fellowship, > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 09:01:39 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:35:22 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980603233522.00706320@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <35759039.6536@withoutwalls.com> References: <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> At 11:04 AM 6/3/98 -0700, you wrote: >Jerry Schueler wrote: >> >> What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger >> appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have >> less than two years. > >Its got to be Dallas, Darren or Alexis, no? > >Mark Maybe we should ask Benjamin Creme? Before I discovered HPB and the SD I was in India learning with Deepak Chopra and he said to realise who the GURU was, just spell it out loud. Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 09:11:15 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:35:29 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980603233529.00721f78@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: Thoa, Now really. I no this is intended as a joke but i actually feel that Heroin is one of the few drugs that offers no spiritual insight and should really only serve medical purposes. i don't advocate the use of every drug, just the useful ones. Namaste Darren Thoa wrote: > > >Or heroin-worship, in Darren's case. > >Thoa :o) > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 09:16:37 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 23:35:45 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: HPB a forbidden III volume? Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980603233545.00707850@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806030052.TAA08718@proteus.imagiware.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980602135540.007186c0@ozemail.com.au> <199806020102.UAA26002@proteus.imagiware.com> <199806011355.JAA09570@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <199805301400.JAA04156@proteus.imagiware.com> Dear Brenda, Thankyou for your response. i happened to take a visit to the lodge library today and compared the Adyar 6 volume set with my facsimile edition. The contents of the Vol 3 as listed in the Kessinger catalogue matched vol 5 of the Adyar edition. Thankyou for elaborating on its history, the preface to the SD Abridged version also deals with this. Darren >Dear Darren, > >There is an article called "THE SECRET DOCTRINE - VOLUME III" As Published >in 1897 A Survey of its Contents and Authenticity. Boris de Zirkoff" in the >Introduction of Volume XIV of the Collected Writings. It says that HPB >sent some of her SD manuscript to Adyar to Subba Row for his suggestions. >Subba Row refused to collaborate with her, so HPB made changes and >alterations herself. Then when we compare the original manuscript with her >own edited version we find 68 pages which were not printed in Volume I. >These 68 pages make up many of the pages in the Volume III in question >above, up to page 335. (The article gives specifics.) The total volume is >594 pages (I think.) and of these 102 pages were identified. What of the >remaining 3/4 of the work? A 56 page section of this is "The Mystery of >the Buddha." The next section(s) constitute 238 pages. They cover a >variety of subjects. Then the author breaks to a story from the past where >Keightley says he (Bertram) and Archibald Keightley typed out all of the >words and arranged it. (Referring to the arrangement of Volumes I and II.) >HPB accepted the rough plan and went to work on the arrangement and gave >Keightleys a "mosaic" made with pen, scissors, and paste. It was so >complicated that when the typed up Volumes I and II (which were sent to the >printer) there was still quite a bit left over which they could find no >suitable place for or weren't in top shape condition. HPB put the leftovers >in her drawer and said she would make it into a third Volume. SO these >pages (as many as they could) are what they think got published as Volume >III, even if there were some pages that "needed complete and extensive >revision and rewriting." This Volume is just pages inferior to the SD. > >Mead says in 1897 that he had seen before pages 433-594. > >So does this provide you with a further glimpse into what the Volume III >contains? > >Brenda > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 09:35:49 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 10:00:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: More on belonging Message-Id: <199806031400.KAA21645@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806031031.FAA10540@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 3, 98 05:31:46 am Thanks, Pam and Thoa, for quote and comments. The passage about accepting being a stranger is *exactly* what I've been thinking about. It seemed as if once I let go of thinking of myself as a Theosophist (under mucho pressure) the world came rushing at me with all kinds of other ways of belonging. And when I look back on my attitudes in the late 70s/early 80s when I was first discovering Theosophy, it appears that the urge to belong to the Theosophists blinded me to all the other ways of belonging, which somehow didn't "count" much. As for finding an ideal group, I think I've done that many times on the local level. Baha'i communities in my teens, Theosophical branches since then, Search for God groups, an Integral Yoga Satsang, all have been the kind of supportive, non-coercive environment that approaches the ideal of which we're speaking. Right now I feel that way about my SFG group and the Charlotte Study Center of the TSA. Generous, open spiritual communion with folks who haven't a trace of interest in "laying their trip" on anyone. The problem is that such qualities can thrive at the local level but when things go a step "higher" to national or international organizations there seems to be an inevitable decline. The higher people are in the organizations the more likely to have rigid ideas, to want to promote their own specific agenda rather than support others, to be paranoid about anyone who thinks independently, etc. Some sense of responsibility for making the members think and do what they're supposed to prevails, and it makes people behave in a much less pleasant way than local group members do. That's why I mentioned these thoughts in relation to the ARE. In a couple weeks the annual congress will take place in Virginia Beach. And even though I've had many years of entirely pleasant and positive interactions in local groups, *and* have found the organization's leadership to be far more openminded and supportive than others... there's still this anxiety. An anxiety that tells me that whenever you get a hundred or so people together on the basis of a shared belief system, a fair number of them will think they have the one true way of seeing things. And a fair number of those will seek to argue with or put down anyone who doesn't see things that way. As someone who is known to have a book coming out about Cayce, I'll be a target for people who will interrogate me about my views to see if they're sufficiently orthodox. And once they find out they're not, they'll warn others not to read the book, or say mean and cutting things, etc. Now it will be marvellous if no such thing happens, and not impossible-- online ARE folks are about 1% as likely to behave this way as Theosophists. But for me the struggle is a) not to be naively optimistic about how these people are going to be; while at the same time b) not to allow my past painful experiences to so color my expectations that I attract repeat performances. Tricky, huh? Thoa, you're right about freedom, and in this case I'm not miserable about anything other than the prospect of bashing by a new kind of fundamentalists, which might not even happen. But when you say "you're the creator of your own prison" I can't help thinking that anyone who writes about a subject that some people hold sacred is thereby creating a kind of prison for him/herself, IF s/he has any interest in "belonging" to that group. The very people you most want to accept and appreciate your work are the most likely to throw it in your face and call it crap, unless it conforms 100% to their belief system. This anxiety is not just free-floating, BTW, but related to the upcoming transit of Saturn to my midheaven (good, a peak of accomplishment) and moon (bad, a sense of isolation, rejection, and deprivation) which peaks the weekend that Congress starts. Yikes! What to expect? Thanks, y'all, Paul From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 10:16:42 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 08:16:29 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: spelling GURU Message-Id: <199806031513.KAA29389@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980603233522.00706320@ozemail.com.au> References: <35759039.6536@withoutwalls.com> <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> Darrin: >Before I discovered HPB and the SD I was in India learning with Deepak >Chopra and he said to realize who the GURU was, just spell it out loud. That's good -- it spells "Gee, you are you." Never thought of that before. Of course, there's more to it than that, but unusual mental images are useful in picturing different aspects of life in a fresh and new way, without the baggage of all the old connotations that existing words, terms, figures of speech carry. That's why new language evolves, with words falling into disuse and new words being coined to say the same thing. A dead language, not in popular use, used only by scholars and priests, like perhaps Latin or Sanskrit, doesn't carry the baggage of connotations and shifting meanings found in modern languages. In a sense, it preserves its freshness and can therefore retain a relatively timeless quality. It's not burdened with the shifting meanings given its terms from popular usage. It isn't quite that simple, of course ... There are perhaps two aspects of the philosophy. One part is like popular music. We hear it and are touched, it moves us, it sweeps us up with its power. But after many times hearing the same song, it loses some of its power, and some new song comes along that takes its place. This part relates to the dynamic, at-the-moment, enjoyment-of-life, desire/enjoyment side of life. The second part is like the learning of mathematical formulas, the study of physics, the learning of how to type. We learn how something works, or acquire a specific skill, and have grown and bettered ourselves. The learning or skill is specific, not subject to interpretation, not something that quickly goes stale and needs freshening, and is as useful now, perhaps, as it was 25 years ago or 25 years hence. In the first case, we're keeping open a fresh stream of creative energies flowing though us into the world. In the second case, we're building ourselves, growing, becoming more skilled, intelligent, capable, useful in the world. Our study of Theosophy has these two aspects. We seek to keep the creative energies flowing, to be alive, dynamic, vibrant, shining in our experience and sharing of it. And we seek to learn, know more, become more familiar with the great thought available to us from the people we meet and the vast libraries at our disposal. Both aspects are important. With just the first, we become a creative fool, entertaining perhaps, but with nothing of weight to offer, perhaps limited to playing a clown or trickster. With just the second, we become a dried-up-old bookworm, a lifeless sap, a cold, unexpressive recounter of the words of others, with nothing of our own heartlife to give value or meaning to our words. Astrologically, the first might relate to the expansive energies of Jupiter, and the second to the structure, accumulation, growth of Saturn. How we balance these two forces in our spiritual life and our studies/explorations determines our ability to progress. If we neglect either, we can only go so far, then life becomes unbalanced, we get stuck, and our lives darken. -- Eldon From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 11:04:35 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 11:53:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Jupiter/Saturn and weeding Message-Id: <199806031553.LAA05781@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806031516.KAA29739@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 3, 98 10:16:51 am Eldon, your comments tie into a current task of mine. We're on a computer circulation system, and at five year intervals I've gone through the collection (the whole staff has, I do adult nonfiction) with a list of books no one has checked out in five years. Most of these get "weeded" and end up in the book sale. The Jupiterian, expansive energy is the new books (and ideas in them) that continually come into the library. But if there's no complementary removal of outdated material, we would quickly reach the limits of our shelving capacity. So Saturn requires the process of judgment, contraction, removal of what's no longer relevant to people's interests. We withdraw about 5% of the collection every five years, averaging thus 1% per year. Addition of new materials is commensurate. Now, looking at Theosophy or any body of teachings as analogous to a library, there are some aspects that are fresh, new currents flowing in. There are other aspects that are stale, worn, unwanted, which should be flowing out. And of course there are "classics" that will remain permanently. A healthy spiritual organization will be cognizant of the ever-changing needs and interests of its "readers," and will ensure a supply of fresh new perspectives. It will also recognize the outdated elements and remove them to make space for newer ideas. But a cult says "this library as it was constituted at its founding contains all the information anyone could possibly want or need. Anything new is superfluous if not downright wicked, and nothing old is outdated. All change is wrong." Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 12:43:30 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 13:43:41 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <35758B4D.47EB6D28@sprynet.com> References: <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> Jerry Schueler wrote: > > Dan, > > What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger > appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have > less than two years. Probably come and gone. In the Jewish tradition, in every generation there is a person capable of being the Messiah; but the person will become the Messiah only when the world is ready for it. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 12:58:29 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 13:54:33 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-ID: <35758DD9.4E8AFFF5@sprynet.com> References: <199806031021.EAA09239@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion about who and > what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday situations? > What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to > someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death? What > would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a > homeless family? What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly > and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" The Mahatma would examine the karma, and choose from those actions/inactions that would create no personal karma, choosing the one s/he believes will further the evolution of humanity the most. Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution of the human race the most, based on your interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 13:28:29 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:25:33 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: More on belonging Message-Id: Paul: >Thoa, you're right about freedom, and in this case I'm not >miserable about anything other than the prospect of bashing by a >new kind of fundamentalists, which might not even happen. But >when you say "you're the creator of your own prison" I can't help >thinking that anyone who writes about a subject that some people >hold sacred is thereby creating a kind of prison for >him/herself, IF s/he has any interest in "belonging" to that >group. The very people you most want to accept and appreciate your work >are the most likely to throw it in your face and call it crap, >unless it conforms 100% to their belief system. That's so true! The people or group you want to belong to the most is also your jailer. I'm very good at detecting jailers and their manipulative methods. This came from my experiences with parents, educational institutions, spiritual groups, martial arts groups, and corporations. They all have their standards by which to measure you by. They all have their traditions by which they demand you follow by. They all oppose you when you decided to do things differently. And they all tell you that the opposition is for YOUR welfare. Well, you know what? I tried to do things differently, and the world didn't crumble. Chin up, Paul. Everything's going to be A-okay. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 13:40:13 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:27:36 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: GURU Message-Id: Eldon: >There are perhaps two aspects of the philosophy. One part is like >popular music. We hear it and are touched, it moves us, it sweeps >us up with its power. But after many times hearing the same song, >it loses some of its power, and some new song comes along that >takes its place. This part relates to the dynamic, at-the-moment, >enjoyment-of-life, desire/enjoyment side of life. > >The second part is like the learning of mathematical formulas, >the study of physics, the learning of how to type. We learn >how something works, or acquire a specific skill, and have grown >and bettered ourselves. The learning or skill is specific, not >subject to interpretation, not something that quickly goes stale >and needs freshening, and is as useful now, perhaps, as it was >25 years ago or 25 years hence. > >In the first case, we're keeping open a fresh stream of >creative energies flowing though us into the world. In the >second case, we're building ourselves, growing, becoming more >skilled, intelligent, capable, useful in the world. > >Our study of Theosophy has these two aspects. We seek to >keep the creative energies flowing, to be alive, dynamic, >vibrant, shining in our experience and sharing of it. And >we seek to learn, know more, become more familiar with the >great thought available to us from the people we meet and >the vast libraries at our disposal. > >Both aspects are important. With just the first, we become >a creative fool, entertaining perhaps, but with nothing of >weight to offer, perhaps limited to playing a clown or >trickster. With just the second, we become a dried-up-old >bookworm, a lifeless sap, a cold, unexpressive recounter >of the words of others, with nothing of our own heartlife >to give value or meaning to our words. I absolutely agree with this statement. To understand the dynamics of the world, I like to travel in different areas. With each area I travel into, the fog becomes a little clearer. Being a creative scholar fool is fun! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 13:44:42 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:34:35 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: RHPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-Id: Ever tried chocolate, Darren? Now, if that isn't some sort of a secret anti-human plot by UFOs to control us earthlings, I don't know what is. Namaste, too Thoa :o) >Thoa, > >Now really. I no this is intended as a joke but i actually feel that Heroin >is one of the few drugs that offers no spiritual insight and should really >only serve medical purposes. i don't advocate the use of every drug, just >the useful ones. > > >Namaste > >Darren > >Thoa wrote: >> >> >>Or heroin-worship, in Darren's case. >> >>Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 13:53:57 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:23:32 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Holy folk on a mountain Message-Id: Kym wrote: >To those of you who agree with Judge in saying we should "imitate" (emulate, >says Dallas) the Masters - I am still curious on just what that means. > >For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion about who and >what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday situations? >What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to >someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death? What >would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a >homeless family? What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly >and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" Dallas responded: >If we apply the Theosophical 7-fold division of Principles, the >highest is THE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT (Yes, I am "shouting," but this >is only apparent, owing to the limits of this Internet connection >that does not allow for italics or bold type--I use capitals for >emphasis only.) -- in this we all ultimately share and therefore >the idea of universal Brotherhood emerges. Dallas, you are highlighting Kym's point. It's too easy to get involve in convoluted conceptual thinking and not see the point. Granted, I believe in conceptual thinking to analyze things through, but when it comes to action, all that thinking turns into one concentrated and wise action. That's why I logged onto the theosophy lists, to think through all the concepts so that my actions will be from a wiser stand point. In a dire situation, do the Masters teach you to forget about the Masters and focus on the person in front of you? I could answer Kym's questions based on the compassionate instinct in me, but that is due to my life experience and what is in me. Does any theosophical teachings show you how to do that? Can compassion be offered more than as a concept? I can give you a hint to all those questions: Focus on the person in front of you and figure out what s/he needs. On the other hand, Kym, your logic could be applied to Science, Philosophy, the Arts, and all other things the world would be greatly lacking without. They all contribute to our learning. They don't right out and tell you how to solve problems involving your fellow man. But in some subtle ways they contribute to the wholeness of your being and help you stronger in your contact with that compassionate and seeing part of you. The part that connects with other beings. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 14:31:37 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 12:28:05 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Evil = humanity? Message-Id: <199806031924.OAA24180@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806031021.EAA09242@mailmx.micron.net> Kym writes: >Uh, yeah. > >Firstly, this sounds to me more like fundamental Christianity than Theosophy. > >Secondly, your "3)" - what do you mean "you name it?" I mean, is your "3)" >the neat-o freebie it appears to be? > >Thirdly, I am a friend of Paul's and do not consider myself "inherently >evil." However, feel free to dog on your friends if you feel the need. What do yo mean you're a friend? Are you living in the same locality? Do you spend time together regularly? Those quotes are right from THE SECRET DOCTRINE. You have to admit that many people don't really know what theosophy is. When I wrote three it was left open because it is still such a new concept to me that I am sure there are ideas that I will someday get from others on how to handle this new situation I find myself in. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 16:51:49 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 15:51:40 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: RSVP, SWAK, GURU Message-Id: <199806032151.PAA19153@mailmx.micron.net> Darren wrote: >Before I discovered HPB and the SD I was in India learning with Deepak >Chopra and he said to realise who the GURU was, just spell it out loud. Why do we let so-called "enlightened ones" get away with such drivel. Deepak can be admired for being able to coin a witty sound-bite - but his advice leaves me, well, ticked off. I bet some people walked away, after paying mega-bucks, thinking they had just recieved a profound truth. Without the "Gee" - URU would qualify, in philosophical terms, as a tautology. And as that guy with the real, long last name which starts with a "W" (Wittgenstein, or something like that) said: "tautologies say nothing" and "they give no news." Ok, "you are you" - and "red is red" - and "gas is gas." Whoopie-doo. I think we allow "enlightened ones" to get away with polishing their nails while on the job. And with insulting us. Although Eldon (in his post) sees "an unusual mental image" in the spelling-out of GURU, I am afraid that I pretty much see zip. Eldon went on to say it is much more than that - I agree. Good luck to you, Darren. Deepak to HPB, eh? - if you manage to leave this world without a drool problem, my hat will be off to you. Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 17:24:54 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 15:17:58 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <35758DD9.4E8AFFF5@sprynet.com> References: <199806031021.EAA09239@mailmx.micron.net> >kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > >> For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion about who and >> what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday situations? >> What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to >> someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death? What >> would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a >> homeless family? What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly >> and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" > > The Mahatma would examine the karma, and choose from those >actions/inactions that would create no personal karma, choosing the one >s/he believes will further the evolution of humanity the most. > > Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as >possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution >of the human race the most, based on your >interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that >have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. > > Bart Lidofsky I agree more with Bart and disagree with Dallas and somewhat with Troa, although I like th way Troa put it. Dallas' answer is too strictly "old theosophy." Dallas is right in one respect though. He depends on the accumulated "radiation" of a person who is opening themselves up to the higher life. Simply by being in our presence, life returns to its correct path. This idea is found when we think of all we contact being healed, or when we stream through a crowd, all energy is "treated" by the love of God or a holy name, such as Elohim. I think the I AM Temple teaches wonderful ways of calling for the adepts in situations. The temple decrees instruct us to start in simple ways. First, why is it that some phrases remind us of something a master would do and say and some don't? For instance, my best and most frequent response when asked how a master would act is to think HE WOULD FORGIVE IT. The masters would forgive wrong actions and by doing so would remove the wrong from existing. Other favorites are: Remove all wrong from the being and world of the party jumping, the homeless family, or the critical passerby. By removing the wrong we set the persons free. When they are free, they can take a second look at their lives and live without what was bothering them and causing them to do wrong. I AM uses the violet flame to "consume" the wrong so that it is returned to the universal and then the exercise we use is one of replacing wrong activity with LIGHT SUBSTANCE from the Ascended Master Octave. This gives the injured a new outlook and a new world in which to "struggle." But then this struggle becomes consumed, too, because we no longer learn to rebel against conditions, but we learn how to practice the "consuming" of the condition, setting ourselves and others free, and returning us to love for God in our lives. Love for God is the right way and it doesn't fail us. There is so much accumulated distress and discord in some places that the Violet Flame can be applied continuously until the Victory is achieved. Especially noteworthy is the call for the beings of the elements and the powers of nature to be "purified and cleansed" because when they receive our help, they turn around and thank us for it. The simplest way to perceive this is by looking at the wealth they provide us with. Just holding a picture of the Ascended Master Jesus or St. Germain or whoever your favorite adept is over the discordant condition can work miracles in returning us to RIGHT ACTION, because remember it is the Masters themselves who are working to contact man and not just our empty attempt at being great, so they and their angels are awaiting opportunities where mankind calls to them. When they act, we know miracles can occur. I think you, too, must know which are Ascended Master Powers. What, for instance, rings true and eternal? Who do you hear when the words, "Turn the other cheeck." are spoken? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 18:06:38 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:33:26 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Belonging as Religion (to bind or to join) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <771a43e0.3574bda1@aol.com> Lmhem111@aol.com writes >You have redefined the five tenants of Christian belief Do they pay rent? :-) I suspect you meant to say "tenets". Regards, Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 18:21:39 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:48:11 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: : HPB ==A Protest by Dallas -- Some further thoughts Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <003601bd8ef3$d23dbb20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes > >"I think he doth protest too much !" -- Shakespeare. Presumably this is repartee? I think it of thee, and thee of mee? > >Dear Alan: > >Apparently we are as friends agreeing to disagree in opinion, >interpretation, etc. regarding HPB as a person. and also as an >"individuality". I like that, and agree, as you say at the end of your post, "Enough"! Best wishes, Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 18:51:38 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:07:46 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35758DD9.4E8AFFF5@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes > Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >karma. I must be one of the lucky ones. In this incarnation my karma is such that I believe in neither the Theosophical concept of karma, nor the Theosophical concept of reincarnation. Oh well, we all have our dharma to bear! [Just having a bit of fun, but hoping to get people thinking as well] Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 19:05:31 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:12:35 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: RSVP, SWAK, GURU Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806032151.PAA19153@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes > Ok, "you are you" - and "red is red" - and "gas is >gas." > >Whoopie-doo. "Whoopie-doo" - no doubt enlightenment code for some great mystery, for as we all should know, mystery is mystery in various shades of Gertrude Stein. > >I think we allow "enlightened ones" to get away with polishing their nails >while on the job. Of course. We must respect their wishes as holy ones. Just so long as they respect ours. Alan the naughty. ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 19:06:42 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 00:21:27 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Messiah [Heb] Christos [Greek] Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35758B4D.47EB6D28@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes and quotes >Jerry Schueler wrote: >> >> Dan, >> >> What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger >> appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have >> less than two years. > > Probably come and gone. In the Jewish tradition, in every generation >there is a person capable of being the Messiah; but the person will >become the Messiah only when the world is ready for it. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the conjuction of the seven planets of the ancients in Feb 1962 heralded the birth of this generation's Messiah? The Messiah would be 36 years old right now, and who would take notice of her/him/it? Suppose again, for the sake of argument, that the Christian claim that Jesus the Nazarene was the Messiah for that generation were true? If true, no one took him seriously *at the time* and Christianity as a religion didn't really get off the ground for *at least* 100 years *after* his death. So, Bart, maybe come and gone, but also maybe come and still here - being ignored. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 19:21:20 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 07:30:09 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <000801bd8f4a$6a38c860$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 3rd. Darren: you're "nuts!" Nice, but NUTS. Dallas. PS We all have the same One INNER MASTER -- IT is our own HIGHER SELF. It is the "ray" from and one with the Universal ABSOLUTE from which we are derived, and in which "we live, and breathe and have our being." The real problem is that as the elements of "matter" emerge and begin to "return to the Source," they have to do it intelligently and on their own, independently -- no crutches -- no Prophet ever saved anyone ! -- they, *the prophets," all told man to save himself. Tough teachings. But also TRUE. We have to seek the Master inside ? Questions: Why should HPB or any other "Master" arrive on our doorsteps if we have not yet either studied or tried to apply Theosophy ? Read SD I pp 298-9 for one answer. Dal. > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 7:17 AM > From: "Darren Porter" > Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 >At 11:04 AM 6/3/98 -0700, you wrote: >>Jerry Schueler wrote: >>> >>> What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger >>> appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have >>> less than two years. >> >>Its got to be Dallas, Darren or Alexis, no? >> >>Mark > >Maybe we should ask Benjamin Creme? > >Before I discovered HPB and the SD I was in India learning with Deepak >Chopra and he said to realise who the GURU was, just spell it out loud. > >Darren >* Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: >http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or,* Send me >E-mail Express directly to my computer screen >12448929@pager.mirabilis.comFor downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/For >adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: >http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html > > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 20:54:47 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 11:12:07 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: RHPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980604111207.0070d844@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: Thoa, Did you know that chocoloate has cannibinoids (ie same as Marijuana). You would however have to consume one fifth of your body weight to get any psychic effect. You would be sick a long way before that. It is also impossible to OD on Marijuana for much the same reason, you can't physically consume any more after a certain point, which is well below the toxicity level. Every drug is a poison - the effects are just determined by dose. The only group of drugs in our whole pharmicopea that have no real physical side effects are the psychadelics (not all of course). >From the bottom of the world, Darren At 11:34 PM 6/3/98 -0700, you wrote: >Ever tried chocolate, Darren? Now, if that isn't some sort of a secret >anti-human plot by UFOs to control us earthlings, I don't know what is. > >Namaste, too >Thoa :o) > >>Thoa, >> >>Now really. I no this is intended as a joke but i actually feel that Heroin >>is one of the few drugs that offers no spiritual insight and should really >>only serve medical purposes. i don't advocate the use of every drug, just >>the useful ones. >> >> >>Namaste >> >>Darren >> >>Thoa wrote: >>> >>> >>>Or heroin-worship, in Darren's case. >>> >>>Thoa :o) > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 21:05:43 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 11:27:01 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980604112701.00708568@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <000801bd8f4a$6a38c860$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas, You wrote: >Darren: >you're "nuts!" Nice, but NUTS. Dallas. I'm sorry i don't know what you are referring to. Yes i am nuts, but accidental initiation will do that to you. You wrote: >We all have the same One INNER MASTER -- IT is our own HIGHER >SELF. It is the "ray" from and one with the Universal ABSOLUTE >from which we are derived, and in which "we live, and breathe and >have our being." >The real problem is that as the elements of "matter" emerge and >begin to "return to the Source," they have to do it intelligently >and on their own, independently -- no crutches -- no Prophet ever >saved anyone ! -- they, *the prophets," all told man to save >himself. Tough teachings. But also TRUE. This is the fundamental difference between Christianity with it's Doctrine of Atonement and Theosophy with its 'boot-strap' philosophy. If i'm in the TS which one do you think I believe? Or have you confused someone else posting with mine? >We have to seek the Master inside ? Are you asking me? I'm nuts. >Questions: Why should HPB or any other "Master" arrive on our >doorsteps if we have not yet either studied or tried to apply >Theosophy ? Read SD I pp 298-9 for one answer. I don't expect any master to arrive on my doorstep. I'm not going to tread on the toes of the Master worshippers though. I did read the SD reference and once again I don't really understand what point your trying to make. BTW, is HPB a Master? Mistress? "To be shaken out of the ruts of ordinary perception, to be shown for a few timeless hours the outer and inner world, not as they appear to an animal obsessed with survival or to a human being obsessed with words and notions, but as they are apprehended, directly and unconditionally, by Mind at Large -- this is an experience of inestimable value to everyone and especially to the intellectual." - Aldous Huxley, "The Doors of Preception" Regards All Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 21:14:58 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 11:10:33 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: RSVP, SWAK, GURU Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980604111033.00708b68@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806032151.PAA19153@mailmx.micron.net> Kym Wrote: >Why do we let so-called "enlightened ones" get away with such drivel. >Deepak can be admired for being able to coin a witty sound-bite - but his >advice leaves me, well, ticked off. I bet some people walked away, after >paying mega-bucks, thinking they had just recieved a profound truth. Deepak receives a lot of bad press, not least of all on this group. But to people who may be just begining the path his works are a great introduction to eastern philosophy. Of course he doesn't have the depth of HPB or many of the TS works, but that isn't his purpose. He sees himself as a stepping stone on the path. He expects you to move on. If you have read his book The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success and met him you would see he lives his life by these principals. He welcomes abundance in his life as part of the cycle - that is he gives unselfishly and just happens to be successful because of it. Three years ago I was training to be an Air Traffic Controller and had planned my trip to India to coincide with the end of the course break. I made the bookings and paid for everything (over $12,000 for Helen, my wife and I) three months before and confirmed it with my work. Two weeks before the end of the course I was told that I would have to commence field training the same week I was to be India. They would not backdown and I was forced to quit. In India our travel arrangements were ruined (as many that have traveled in India can testify) and we had to make our own way from Madras (Chennai) to Goa, east to west coast. We spent 30 hours non-stop in a taxi with no air conditioning and to make matters worse my wife was pregnant with Maya. (As an aside to the main point - we were ambushed by bandits twice and honestly experienced telepathy). We arrived late, got food poisoning, fell asleep during every group meditation etc It was looking really bad and to make matters worse I did feel like I was getting ripped off due to the fact that the first two days teachings were mainly covered in Deepaks weekend seminars which I had already attended. At breakfast on the third day I sat with Deepaks right hand man, Dr David Simon whom i managed to regale with my tale of hardship. He told me to get it off my chest by writing a letter to Deepak. I took his advice and later the next day was called aside to speak with Deepak privately. We had a long talk which concluded with him offering me a complete refund - which I received later back in Australia. The rest of the week turned out fantastic and funnily enough I met many ex-theosophists who found the SD 'incomprehensible'. Deepak taught many theosophical principles including the septenary division, inherent unity, levels of consciousness etc but with an obvious Hindu rather than Buddhist leaning. Glib statements like Gee, you are you, are only bandied around during general discussion times. >Without the "Gee" - URU would qualify, in philosophical terms, as a >tautology. And as that guy with the real, long last name which starts with >a "W" (Wittgenstein, or something like that) said: "tautologies say nothing" >and "they give no news." Ok, "you are you" - and "red is red" - and "gas is >gas." > >Whoopie-doo. he obviously means that the true master is within. >I think we allow "enlightened ones" to get away with polishing their nails >while on the job. And with insulting us. > >Although Eldon (in his post) sees "an unusual mental image" in the >spelling-out of GURU, I am afraid that I pretty much see zip. Eldon went on >to say it is much more than that - I agree. I agree as well. >Good luck to you, Darren. Deepak to HPB, eh? - if you manage to leave this >world without a drool problem, my hat will be off to you. We all need to start the path somewhere. The indicator of our spiritual progress is when we realise it is time to move on. My path began at Uni with my rejection of established scientific and religious views and also as a side effect of my search for a cure to my migraines. Many of my friends began by reading The Celestine Prophecy. The point is it doesn't matter how people get on the path because once on it, it is a continuning journey. I see the TS as a stepping stone as well, one that I will stay at for a long time, but a stepping stone nevertheless. Drooling? Kym, this sarcasm doesn't become you. >From the Shadow, Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 21:21:35 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 02:17:25 +0100 From: "Einar Adalsteinsson" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-ID: <001f01bd8f56$88f5a000$0b6d9d9d@default> Hi folks. Being relatively new here - been lurking in the background for few days - I am ready to take the risk of putting in few words into this learned discussion. Kym wrote: "To those of you who agree with Judge in saying we should "imitate" (emulate, says Dallas) the Masters - I am still curious on just what that means." Einar: Why on earth should we want to imitate or even emulate the Masters? I have always thought that becoming 'spiritual' (or shouldn't we rather say 'more enlightened'?) would rather consist in being more creative, more spontaneous, and yes, a little bit Wiser perhaps. And by what I have heard, wisdom is born out of seeing clearer and being more tolerant toward our brothers and sisters, i.e. out of understanding and love, and least out of knowledge or imitating what we imagine others to do. In my experience those who see a little clearer than the average are less predictable and much more likely to surprise you in everyday actions and attitude. They are simply impossible to imitate. Kym: "What would a Master (based on the available information) do or/and say to someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her death?" Einar: Well. I don't know what I would do or say, standing suddenly and unprepared against such a situation. Would you? One can only theorize about such things, and I can assure you that if you think that you can prepare for such situation by thinking it all out in advance and trying to memorize all the possible answers, then you are out for a BIG surprise. Of course we all have confronted or will confront some situation where the life of others may seem to depend on us (and I can positively assure you that you will not be thinking about karmic relations). Such situations need our unattended attention and full creativity, neither pre-thought or after-thoughts, because what you do or say will be irreversible. Kym: "What would a Master do or/and say (based on the available information) to a homeless family?" Einar: Again. What does it matter what the master does or/and says to a homeless family? What matters is of course: "What do we - I and you - do and/or say about all the millions of homeless families in the world?" I wonder just how many they are. Do I conceive even vaguely what it feels to be a family without a home - or do I only speculate on what others may think? Kym: "What would a Master do/say if someone said "You're ugly and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?" Einar: Aha!!! - Big laugh!! (I think) :-) Love and light. Einar. http://www.itn.is/~theosoph/ http://rvik.ismennt.is/~annasb/ ICQ: 10684770 From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 21:51:38 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 22:41:50 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Belonging as Religion (to bind or to join) Message-ID: <17b6cdad.3576096f@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-03 19:11:46 EDT, you write: << I suspect you meant to say "tenets". >> You're right. However, there are some who are so attached to the tenets of a particular philosophy/religion, that they can be said to "tenants", so to speak, (or perhaps even prisoners) in that particular thought-form. Did I cleverly wiggle my way out of that one ??? Lmhem111 From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 22:06:35 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:00:06 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: RSVP, SWAK, GURU Message-ID: <9c591d37.35760db7@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-03 22:19:47 EDT, Darren writes: << He sees himself as a stepping stone on the path. He expects you to move on. If you have read his book The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success and met him you would see he lives his life by these principals. He welcomes abundance in his life as part of the cycle - that is he gives unselfishly and just happens to be successful because of it. >> Deepak Chopra's approach reminds me quite a bit of the Unity School of Christianity and the New Thought Movement in general. Positive thoughts, Mind/Body Well Being and Affirmations. Nothing wrong with that. Deepak Chopra Home Page http://www.chopra.com/ Best Wishes Lmhem111 From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 22:11:47 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 22:39:14 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Re: Messiah [Heb] Christos [Greek] Message-ID: <357608D1.5305E7C@sprynet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Bart Lidofsky writes and quotes > >Jerry Schueler wrote: > >> > >> Dan, > >> > >> What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger > >> appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have > >> less than two years. > > > > Probably come and gone. In the Jewish tradition, in every generation > >there is a person capable of being the Messiah; but the person will > >become the Messiah only when the world is ready for it. > > Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the conjuction of the seven > planets of the ancients in Feb 1962 heralded the birth of this > generation's Messiah? The Messiah would be 36 years old right now, > and who would take notice of her/him/it? > > Suppose again, for the sake of argument, that the Christian claim that > Jesus the Nazarene was the Messiah for that generation were true? If > true, no one took him seriously *at the time* and Christianity as a > religion didn't really get off the ground for *at least* 100 years *after* > his death. > > So, Bart, maybe come and gone, but also maybe come and still here - > being ignored. I would be foolish to discount that possibility. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 22:21:35 1998 Date: Wed, 03 Jun 1998 20:24:07 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <35761357.F75@azstarnet.com> References: <35759039.6536@withoutwalls.com> <01bd8e92$7bbb8c20$0b7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> <199806031513.KAA29389@proteus.imagiware.com> Dallas wrote >I was given to > understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very > shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley and > G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th > Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and ready. > She then said that she had received "instructions" to have them > destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This is a > reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent > verification of this statement made to me. Dallas, "Shortly before her death"?? Are we talking about a few days or a few weeks at the most? Archibald Keightley left England in October, (sometime after Oct. 10th) 1890 and did NOT return to England till after HPB died. See THE PATH, Dec. 1890, p. 295 where Claude Falls Wright in his "London Letter" writes: "Dr. Keightley leaves us in a few days for New Zealand. . . ." This document is dated Oct. 1890. Also see other issues of THE PATH, first six months of 1891. Then in another "London Letter" dated January 7, 1891, Claude Wright writes: "H.P.B. has WITHIN THE LAST WEEK OR SO begun to get together the M.S.S. (long ago written) for the third volume of the SECRET DOCTRINE; it will, however, take a good twelve months to prepare for publication." >From the above we see that more than 2 months after A. Keightley had left English soil, Claude Wright reports that H.P.B. was working on the 3rd volume MSS. H.P.B. lived 4 more months after this report. In light of the above how could Archibald have been involved in the alleged destruction of the SD III MSS "shortly before HPB's death"?! Basil Crump (close friend and associate of Alice Cleather) wrote in the April, 1939 issue of THE CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST about an "elderly gentleman. . . who knew Mr. Thomas Green, . . . [Green had] helped with the printing at the H.P.B. Press in London. . . . Before he died Mr. Green told this gentleman. . . that he. . . was paid to set up the type of vol. III and part of Vol. IV of THE SECRET DOCTRINE. The proofs of vol. III were passed by H.P.B. shortly before her death and Mr. Green was just going to press with them when he received orders from her to break up the type. . . .That she gave orders for the type to be broken up makes it practically certain that she also destroyed the MSS. . . ." In the May, 1939 issue of the same magazine, James Pryse (well-know theosophist of the early days who lived at London Headquarters during the last 8 or 9 months of HPB's life) demolishs this "story". Mr. Pryse was the printer who had come from New York to help HPB and her group in setting up the H.P.B. Press in London. Pryse writes: "Mr. Green was not a printer, did not learn to set type. . . . He had no part in the management, and never handled any 'copy' as that was always given to me as manager. He had nothing to do with the printing until I took him in as my assistant when the printing plant was enlarged, quite a while AFTER H.P.B. discarded her wornout body. . . ." Pryse gives other good reasons for discounting the story of the anonymous "elderly gentleman" who related this story about Thomas Green to Basil Crump and his associates. This "story" may be related to your "story". The time period 1939 is close to your estimate 1937-1939. Dallas, I find it somewhat strange that in commenting on the testimonies of Annie Besant, Archibald Keightley and G.R.S. Mead that I quoted in a previous post, you repeatedly wrote: "A blank---a surmise situation---conflict in views." Taking such a "skeptical" point of view one could dismiss most of the positive testimony concerning HPB's life. And many "skeptics" do! Please, Dallas, read my paper on the origin and authenticity of Vol. III at http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm The quoted testimony of Besant, A. Keightley and Mead conform to what other eyewitnesses said at the same time. Read my timeline and look for Ariadne's thread. *It is there* from 1885 through 1897. Again I invite you to compare the contents of the Wurzburg MSS with the contents of Vol. III (of course excluding the esoteric papers). Again read what Bertram Keightley said about the original Volume I (1886) becoming Volume III (1887). This is confirmed by Archibald Keightley and HPB herself. Toward the end of my paper, I deal with the "conflicting views" issue. Please see that section for relevant remarks. Daniel Caldwell From ???@??? Wed Jun 3 23:51:35 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 22:50:49 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #178 Message-Id: <199806040450.WAA22722@mailmx.micron.net> Darren wrote: >We spent 30 hours non-stop in a taxi with no air conditioning and to make >matters worse my wife was pregnant with Maya. (As an aside to the main >point - we were ambushed by bandits twice and honestly experienced >telepathy). We arrived late, got food poisoning, fell asleep during every >group meditation [snip] >I took his advice and later >the next day was called aside to speak with Deepak privately. We had a long >talk which concluded with him offering me a complete refund - which I >received later back in Australia. Well, after hearing a harrowing tale such as yours, I think the Devil would have given you a refund. But, in seriousness - if you think, after meeting Deepak, that he is a sincere and compassionate man, then he just may be. I've only seen his televised seminars - which didn't really move me, but did genuinely seem to move others (to where, I have no idea). However, if someone manages to make even one person look upward and inward - well, I guess that someone can't be all that. . .horrifying. >Drooling? Kym, this sarcasm doesn't become you. !snickers mixed with snorts! Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 00:18:30 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 22:56:39 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-Id: <199806040456.WAA23310@mailmx.micron.net> Bart wrote: > Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as >possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution >of the human race the most, based on your >interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that >have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark food by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 00:33:30 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:13:40 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-Id: <199806040513.XAA24539@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >What do yo mean you're a friend? Are you living in the same locality? Do >you spend time together regularly? What?! What does this have to do with having a friendship? I've dear friends who don't live near me and I've dear friends who do - whether or not Paul and I schmooze in the flesh or in the mind has little to do with the validity or depth of our friendship. My point was: you may consider people "inherently evil" - but that doesn't mean it is true nor that others will take kindly to being referred to as "inherently evil." >Those quotes are right from THE SECRET DOCTRINE. You have to admit that >many people don't really know what theosophy is. It's NOT the QUOTES I'm dickering with here - it's *your interpretation* of them. *Your interpretation* smacks of fundie language to me. I've never walked away from a book of theosophical writings believing that it meant to say humans are "inherently evil." Humans may have created or contributed to 'evil' or 'evil-doings' - but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and prickly-bushes are not, in themselves, 'evil.' >When I wrote three it was left open because it is still such a new concept >to me that I am sure there are ideas that I will someday get from others on >how to handle this new situation I find myself in. It is wise to provide for oneself some wiggle room. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 01:36:33 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 23:31:35 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Deepak Message-Id: Kym to Darren: >But, in seriousness - if you think, after meeting Deepak, that he is a >sincere and compassionate man, then he just may be. I've only seen his >televised seminars - which didn't really move me, but did genuinely seem to >move others (to where, I have no idea). I know a woman who knows Deepak Chopra, and he is complicated and very human. I won't post what it is and start a nasty gossip. Thus, if there's any one of us who beat ourselves up over our failings, think of Deepak, or HPB, or Leadbeater, or... Their complicated imperfect personalities did not prevent them from doing what they need to do spiritually. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 03:01:47 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 12:45:52 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: RSVP, SWAK, GURU Message-ID: <3576F96E.46D4@withoutwalls.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980604111033.00708b68@ozemail.com.au> Darren wrote: > > My path began at Uni with my rejection of established scientific > and religious views and also as a side effect of my search for a > cure to my migraines. Darren, I suffer from migraines also, have for years. They are troubling and often debilitating at the most inopportune times. Have you had any success finding relief from them? Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 03:16:08 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 12:55:54 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain Message-ID: <3576FBC7.3FE7@withoutwalls.com> References: <001f01bd8f56$88f5a000$0b6d9d9d@default> > Einar wrote: > > Why on earth should we want to imitate or even emulate the Masters? I have > always thought that becoming 'spiritual' (or shouldn't we rather say 'more > enlightened'?) would rather consist in being more creative, more > spontaneous, and yes, a little bit Wiser perhaps. Seems like that would constitute a form of imitation/emulation to me. Not so much the outer form (i.e., don't go around wearing a turban if you don't already!), but the inner spirit. Activate your intuition. If you want clues, try reading Thomas A Kempis' "The Imitation of Christ." Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 03:31:05 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 13:15:33 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Deepak Message-ID: <3577005F.3981@withoutwalls.com> References: Thoa wrote: > > Their complicated imperfect personalities did > not prevent them from doing what they need to do spiritually. All too often forgotten. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 03:46:31 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 13:14:24 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-ID: <3577001A.4B6B@withoutwalls.com> References: <199806040513.XAA24539@mailmx.micron.net> > Kym wrote, answering Brenda: > > Humans may have created or contributed to 'evil' or 'evil-doings' > but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and prickly-bushes > are not, in themselves, 'evil.' Dinosaurs are evil. (Satanasaurus, Demonicus Rex, Pterrordactyl, Tridentitops, Barney, etc.) Mark ---------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 05:16:07 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 14:57:23 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Some Buddhist questions Message-ID: <35771836.30D6@withoutwalls.com> Jerry (and anyone else who'd care to chime in), I've been reading some books on Buddhism and trying to delve in a little deeper. Some questions arose in the course of my study that I wanted to ask you about, if you don't mind. You seem somewhat informed about Buddhism, so I wanted to ask you these questions both with a view towards understanding traditional views as well as a comparison vis-a-vis theosophy. The first concerns developing Bodhichitta. One of the assumptions that are proposed in the Buddhist effort toward development of Bodhicitta is the thought that all sentient life was at one time your mother, therefore it is recommended to think of that in an effort to arouse equanimous affection and then compassion toward all people and other forms of life. It got me to thinking. That is a pretty steep assumption to accept as true except on faith. It can't be proven by the student. If the view of all sentient life as your mother holds true, it seems reasonable that it would also be true of fathers, sisters, brothers, spouses, friends, enemies, intimates, acquaintances, and people generally considered in the abstract as "all the rest of mankind," (the great masses who you know are 'out there' but never actually interact with in a direct personal way). This would result in a scale of intimacy of relations which is directly contrary to the objective of developing bodichitta in the first place, The traditional teaching posits the "uncertainty of relations" in an effort to develop equanimity toward all. This reasoning kind of blows the value of the assumption apart, IMO. Why concentrate on mothers only, and why devalue the current relationships in favor of an idealized mother if all possible relationships can be equally posited? Why not just deal with the current relationships as you find them? Why the mental gymnastics? Also, this seems to assume that in addition to having had all sentient life as your mother, in one or another of the countless incarnations of the past, all sentient life (including yourself) were also all animals, plants, minerals, protomatter, etc at one time or another. Does this same view hold true going backward even farther? Can one assume that owing to a cyclic progression that in some remote past, all life has also already been bodhisattvas and buddhas, earning their liberation from the cycle of necessity, and saving all the sentient life of endless remote cycles over and over? If so, why incarnate again, at all? Why another universe? If everyone "made it" to liberation, why the mayavic charade? Is it "creative play?" What is the root cause that set the karmic wheel in motion? What does buddhist tradition say about that? Does Buddhism teach progressive evolution as theosophy (manvantaras and pralayas) does? If so, what besides the karma of individuals (or skandas) is said to cause the continual manifestation of a new universe? Does theosophy teach that all life has already been buddhas and bodhisattvas over and over again in a beginningless and endless cyclically manifesting existence? The Buddhist books I'm reading seem to suggest a beginningless past, but not a continual cyclic one that posits liberation to involution/ensnarement/evolution to liberation, etc. Do you know of any traditional Buddhist source literature that supports or refutes this? I hope I'm being clear. Another question I have is about attachment. I've found suggested injunctions against creating and enjoying sensory images, sounds, drama, etc. (i.e., forms of culture), because it causes ensnarement in maya and breeds samsaric karma. Islam also has a tint of this attitude . Yet, by contrast, I think of all of the art that was devotedly (and ritually) created in the Buddhist traditions (and other religious traditions as well) and how much it acts as a vehicle for conveying dharma in culture, even to the degree of writing the teachings down. It seems to me that if these injunctions are to be taken seriously, you'd also have to view any and all sensory, emotional, mental, and aesthetic experience in much the same way. Then I ask, OK, well if that's so, (and especially if we have all progressively been buddhas and bodhisattvas before) why is sentient experience the way it is? Life may be suffering, but it is also enjoyment. Does cessation of one also yield cessation of the other? The middle way seems to suggest that we should be nonattached to both pleasure and pain, good and bad, etc. The last question: If all manifestation and awareness of a "self" is mayavic and illusory, how can "sentient being," worthy of saving be defined? How is one to consider "sentient life" (including your own) as a valuable thing if it's ultimately illusory? Why did the Buddha get up from the Bodhi tree? If all is void, and his enlightenment enabled him to be nonattached, why did he value sentient beings enough to care, teach, etc.? I'd appreciate any insight you or others might provide. Thanks, Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 06:53:11 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 06:48:13 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Deepak Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980604064813.012d4250@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: About a year ago, there was a well-researched article on Deepak in Time magazine. It may still be available in the on-line edition of Time. Anyone interested may want to look it up. mkr At 11:31 PM 6/3/1998 -0700, you wrote: >Kym to Darren: > >>But, in seriousness - if you think, after meeting Deepak, that he is a >>sincere and compassionate man, then he just may be. I've only seen his >>televised seminars - which didn't really move me, but did genuinely seem to >>move others (to where, I have no idea). > > >I know a woman who knows Deepak Chopra, and he is complicated and very >human. I won't post what it is and start a nasty gossip. Thus, if there's >any one of us who beat ourselves up over our failings, think of Deepak, or >HPB, or Leadbeater, or... Their complicated imperfect personalities did >not prevent them from doing what they need to do spiritually. > >Thoa :o) > > > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 08:03:29 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:49:13 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <01bd8fb7$2d4c3c80$267d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> In a sense, Dallas, I agree with you about the importance of the inner guru. However, I also agree with the Tibetan tradition (and most other countries as well) that an enlightened external guru/teacher is essential to point us in the right direction and to give us the necessary assurance that such a thing is even possible. Jerry S. [Dallas}> >We all have the same One INNER MASTER -- IT is our own HIGHER >SELF. It is the "ray" from and one with the Universal ABSOLUTE >from which we are derived, and in which "we live, and breathe and >have our being." > >The real problem is that as the elements of "matter" emerge and >begin to "return to the Source," they have to do it intelligently >and on their own, independently -- no crutches -- no Prophet ever >saved anyone ! -- they, *the prophets," all told man to save >himself. Tough teachings. But also TRUE. > >We have to seek the Master inside ? > >Questions: Why should HPB or any other "Master" arrive on our >doorsteps if we have not yet either studied or tried to apply >Theosophy ? Read SD I pp 298-9 for one answer. > >Dal. > >======================================= > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Darren Porter" >Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 7:17 AM >Subject: Re: Re: More on SD Vol. 3 > > >>At 11:04 AM 6/3/98 -0700, you wrote: >>>Jerry Schueler wrote: >>>> >>>> What about HPB's promist/prophecy of a new Messenger >>>> appearing during the last quarter of this century? We have >>>> less than two years. >>> >>>Its got to be Dallas, Darren or Alexis, no? >>> >>>Mark >> >>Maybe we should ask Benjamin Creme? >> >>Before I discovered HPB and the SD I was in India learning with >Deepak >>Chopra and he said to realise who the GURU was, just spell it >out loud. >> >>Darren >>* Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: >>http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or,* >Send me >>E-mail Express directly to my computer screen >>12448929@pager.mirabilis.comFor downloading ICQ at >http://www.icq.com/For >>adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: >>http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 08:18:28 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:03:17 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters Message-ID: <19980604132032531.AAA193@pgiese> > From: "Mark Kusek" > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 12:56 PM > Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters "The kingdom of Heaven is all around them... but they do not see it." > I've been noticing how some of Jung's theories on projective phenomenon have > been finding their way into the field of Information Theory. Both Edward > Tufte ("Visual Explanations", "Envisioning Information") and Thomas > Davenport ("Information Ecology") expose the idea of how cognitive > environments are created and constrained (for most people) by the graphics > and systems available. Thus systems can be heaven or hell and "users" > frame their perceived environments within them. I just saw Tufte lecture on Information Design and wholeheartedly agree with you. It is amazing what exterior and interior images do to construct "the world." It is a function that we all too often unconsciously accept without really noticing or questioning. What responsibility does that knowledge place on artists, designers and imagineers of good conscience? from Pam: I think "responsibility" is a key word. The designer has a responsibility to communicate ideas, not just display data. Too often, as designers, we think we're done once we've "fulfilled requirements" and presented data --we need to make sure that we have suceeded in our communication, turned data into information, given the user something that can enlarge their understanding. To the old adage "you can lead a horse to water, but can't make him drink", Tufte would add "no, but you can shove his nose in the trough!" [I saw him lecture in Chicago, last April...great!] To communicate, we need to allow ourselves to try to enter the interior whole of the recipient. The more we can drop our own ego and see through another's eyes, the better the construct we can create. When I am working with users on getting requirements for new software systems, I like to take time, get away from the specific requirements, and ask the users to share their "vision" of how they think the system should work --to describe how they will do their work, what insights will they gain. I find that by letting a user group do this, we can create a share vision, a thought form of what the system will be like. Good design recognizes that cognition takes place on levels beyond the surface, verbal intellect. I read pages and pages of poems by Rumi. If that's all I do, what do I have? Nothing except to be able to say I've read Rumi. I can analyze each poem using academic texts of the meaning of Sufi symbology, Islamic metaphor, and historical references. What do I have? Just a mechanical analysis of words on a page. To really know the poems of Rumi, I have to read the words and let them play with my inner being, let the images and the feelings they produce seep deep into the pit of my stomach, and allow them time to digest, unhurried by my intellect's desire to get to the next page. As designers, we need to make sure that the vision, the requirements of the creation has time to be absorbed, time to be cultured, like cells in a petri dish. How do we know when this has happened? When do we know that we've thoroughly communicated, that a shared vision exists? This is we a developed sense of intuition comes in --you speak with users and "feel" whether or not it is there. In her guidelines for becoming a chela HPB lists the need to have developed a sense of intuitive understanding of certain principles. Developing this sense is key to art and awareness. Crowley openly declared that there were lies in his writing to force his students to rely on and develop their own sense of intellect rather than be a sheep and passively accept whatever he put on the page. This is a common practice amoung occult writers. That's why it amuses that this list spends so much time bickering about HPB "untruths". From the Crowley perspective, if the student can't intuitively recognize a human truth from a human lie, what chance to they have finding their way around other planes! Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 08:35:34 1998 Date: Wed, 3 Jun 1998 18:58:01 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain -- IS THAT LOCATION AVAILABLE ? Message-ID: <000201bd8fb8$2f5e3720$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 3rd 1998 Dear Brenda and friends: You've got me beat and guessing. What is "old Theosophy ?" I always knew that it was the record of the ages -- but that's already old -- so where and how the addition ? If you mean last Manvantara, then I think that's included -- at least the S D would tend to make me think so. I bet the Cosmocratores knew and used it as the laws of emergence, then of consolidation, and then finally of residence and resurrection. The alchemists speak of condensation, precipitation, amalgamation and sublimation -- so that could be applied to the Kosmos, the "cosmos" our world, and finally to ourselves ? I think that would be pretty "old." But we are all Methuselahs in fact, even when we return as babies. I always thought Theosophy was a series of propositions for us to consider and adopt if we found that they were reasonable. Something like: Every one of us is an Immortal -- the body is assumed employed, deployed and finally consummated. The Spiritual Self oversees constantly the process of mental and moral improvement. Morals have a basis in Law and in fact. Moral Law is Natural Law. Evolution makes for Universal Rightness as well as Righteousness. The "Fundamental unity of all Souls with the Universal Oversoul" makes moral contagion possible through the subtle psychic medium that we all share in. The Spiritual Identity of all Beings makes Universal Brotherhood the only possible path for a truth-seeking man or woman. Sentiment often fails. Most religions fail in it. Our Modern Civilization frustrates it. Emotionalism is no basis for the Will, which can abolish all "temptations of the flesh," and, finally, it is the Faith that can move any mountain, given time, the necessity, and the Wisdom to do so. "Self-confidence" is the first step to that kind of Will. [ That is confidence in the SELF of ALL. ] Theosophy teaches the scientific aspect and importance of recognizing "sin." Universal Law is a fact, it works in every department of the Universe and of ourselves, and rigidly opposes and avenges the commission of any "sin." It shows that the free-will of 'man' is counterbalanced by the declaration of Nature: "Vengeance is mine, saith the LAW; I will repay." No man is a "tool: of the Law's vengeance.' To assume so is a sin worse than ambition and self-righteousness. "Blessed be the peacemakers!" The awful responsibility of the true Occultist extends down to the last atom of substance. It has never forbidden the asking of the question: "Am I my Brother's keeper ?" And our brotherhood demands that we assist and serve as best we can. A brotherhood of humanity was established as a nucleus, to which could accrete all those who desired to learn truth, about themselves and about Nature. It was established to make away with every vestige of those dogmatic religions that are founded on dead-letter interpretations and to teach people to believe in One impersonal God; to rely on his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only Saviour; to learn the infinitude of occult psychological powers hidden within his own physical body; to develop these powers with understanding; and to give the assurance of the immortality of his divine Spirit, and the survival of his Soul -- to make everyone regard every other human regardless of creed, color, race, or religion as a brother, and to prove that the supreme Truths known to superior men (not gods) are contained in the Wisdom of Antiquity. Finally, to demonstrate that there are no miracles, and never have been any; that there can be nothing 'supernatural' in the Law-run Universe, and that the only "god" on earth is man himself. Justice is the Law, with a mighty sweep of never erring action. Discrimination comes with Wisdom and that is both Mercy and Compassion. Finally that "the pure in heart see "God." And this is a fact, made possible through spiritual laws working in and through matter, the psychic and the spiritual nature, when all are united -- and in this vision our courage reaches beyond the utmost stars. Progress is made step by step and each step is gained by heroic efforts. 'Try' is the battle cry taught by the Teacher to every pupil. He who does his best does all that can be asked. These are some brief ideas culled from "old theosophy." But to me they seem quite new and very usable. Dallas ========================================= From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 08:37:01 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 09:34:28 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-ID: <3576A264.CC4D7F89@sprynet.com> References: <199806040456.WAA23310@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > Bart wrote: > > > Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive > >karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as > >possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution > >of the human race the most, based on your > >interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that > >have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. > > Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you > suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark food > by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." So you take your chances. Also, once you get into the habit, the thought process becomes fsster and faster. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 09:09:52 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:00:06 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: headache Message-ID: <2716e82b.3576a867@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-04 09:31:43 EDT, Mark writes: << I suffer from migraines also, have for years. They are troubling and often debilitating at the most inopportune times. Have you had any success finding relief from them?>> Some years ago, Manly Palmer Hall published a booklet on migraine headaches relating them to psychic ability, in fact, it may have been called just that - MIGRAINE HEADACHES AND PSYCHIC ABILITY. You can inquire at the Philosophical Research Society http://www.prs.org/manly.htm E-Mail: info@prs.org A friend of mine, who is also a psychic counselor, has suffered from migraines all her life, searching here and there for cures and finding little relief I'm sorry to say. I don't know what solutions MPH offers in his booklet since it's been sometime since I read it. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 09:52:04 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 07:45:24 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-Id: <199806041441.JAA03304@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806022142.QAA24213@proteus.imagiware.com> References: <199806021915.PAA20280@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> >Brenda wrote: > > >>What do yo mean you're a friend? Are you living in the same locality? Do >>you spend time together regularly? > >What?! What does this have to do with having a friendship? I've dear >friends who don't live near me and I've dear friends who do - whether or not >Paul and I schmooze in the flesh or in the mind has little to do with the >validity or depth of our friendship. The simple statement by you that you are someone's friend doesn't necessarily make it true in my mind. >My point was: you may consider people "inherently evil" - but that doesn't >mean it is true nor that others will take kindly to being referred to as >"inherently evil." No, it doesn't. So I suppose we should just KEEP THE SECRET DOCTRINE secret. >>Those quotes are right from THE SECRET DOCTRINE. You have to admit that >>many people don't really know what theosophy is. > >It's NOT the QUOTES I'm dickering with here - it's *your interpretation* of >them. *Your interpretation* smacks of fundie language to me. I've never >walked away from a book of theosophical writings believing that it meant to >say humans are "inherently evil." Humans may have created or contributed to >'evil' or 'evil-doings' - but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and >prickly-bushes are not, in themselves, 'evil.' When HPB says evil didn't exist on the earth until humans got here, how do you interpret this? Evil is in our mental constitution. It is a construct which humans use, but perhaps one which is not used by the animal kingdom or the adept (our next) kingdom of nature. Evil wasn't here until there was a mind to possess it. When I arrived, if it was as I think, with the human race, our superior stature threw a shadow on the inferior animal kingdom. Thereby, "evil" was created. There were now two kingdoms existing side by side. Now that ascended masters are here (in their first race perhaps), evil takes on a new appearance. It isn't the animals (which have long since moved on to their next globe in the chain) and it isn't present in man's actions as we would interpret evil to exist independently of another being. Instead evil is the shadow thrown on us by the ascended masters. It is found when the removal of human conditions is attained by beings of light. Why is this so offensive to you that you have to look for a "friend" to stand by you? Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 10:09:58 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 07:59:14 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Paul Johnson's New book on Edgar Cayce Message-ID: <3576B642.6CDB@azstarnet.com> References: <35771836.30D6@withoutwalls.com> Paul Johnson's new book on Edgar Cayce. Here are the links to Amazon.com information about the paperback and hardbound editions of Paul's new book on "the sleeping prophet." http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0791439062/002-8586837-6627461 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0791439054/002-8586837-6627461 From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 12:21:39 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 10:09:54 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters Message-ID: <3576D4E1.398A@withoutwalls.com> References: <19980604132032531.AAA193@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > > As designers, we need to make sure that the vision, the requirements of > the creation have time to be absorbed, time to be cultured, like cells in a > petri dish. How do we know when this has happened? When do we know that > we've thoroughly communicated, that a shared vision exists? It's unfortunate that often, in the reality of commerce, you have to balance the desire for the ideal against the business needs of the client to get their product to market. It reminds me of a catchphrase "There is never time to do it right the first time, but always time to do it again!" All too true. Thanks for sharing, Pam. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 13:58:51 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 11:41:53 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-Id: <199806041838.NAA08603@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806040456.WAA23310@mailmx.micron.net> At 10:56 PM 6/3/98 -0600, you wrote: >Bart wrote: > >> Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >>karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as >>possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution >>of the human race the most, based on your >>interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that >>have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. > >Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you >suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark food >by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." > >Kym Dear Kym, And try to think of the favor you would have done the world if the "person" turned out to be the next Unibomber or another Terry Nichols. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 14:08:40 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:03:18 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Egregores and Masters Message-Id: Pam: >In her guidelines for becoming a chela HPB lists the need to have developed >a sense of intuitive understanding of certain principles. Developing this >sense is key to art and awareness. Crowley openly declared that there were >lies in his writing to force his students to rely on and develop their own >sense of intellect rather than be a sheep and passively accept whatever he >put on the page. This is a common practice amoung occult writers. That's >why it amuses that this list spends so much time bickering about HPB >"untruths". From the Crowley perspective, if the student can't intuitively >recognize a human truth from a human lie, what chance to they have finding >their way around other planes! B-I-N-G-O again! When words are given me by people I love and trust, I still try to see whether it's true or has to be so. When words are given me by people I was given a bad impression of, I try to quiet my prejudice so that I could hear them, and hear whether what they say is true. My prejudices of Crowley came from his reputation. I had to quiet down my prejudices in order to hear some of what he had to say. I came to the same conclusion as you. I believe that in the theosophical societies, the three objects were put there for a reason. All theosophists should recite it as a mantra every day. When you fail in any of those three, you have failed in some way as a theosophist. One of the biggest failure that I see is not respecting other's interests. Because of the nature of theosophical teaching, that only creates separation among theosophists, and the downward spiral in membership. When an institution is set up with a set of ideas (the three objects), and the ideas are not followed by the membership, then the purpose of the institution is lost, and the institution will fail. We can argue back and forth about what HPB, the Masters, Leadbeater, or Krinasmurti said, and we can have differing translations, but what is unchangeable is the three objects. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 14:12:33 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:08:42 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: thought or intuition? Message-Id: Bart: >kymsmith@micron.net wrote: >> >> Bart wrote: >> >> > Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >> >karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as >> >possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution >> >of the human race the most, based on your >> >interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that >> >have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. >> >> Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you >> suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark food >> by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." > > So you take your chances. Also, once you get into the habit, the >thought process becomes fsster and faster. > > Bart Lidofsky That could work if you have the time to think it through. But in an emergency situation, or when you are face-to-face with someone seeking advice, the intuition has to kick in, and guide the thought and action. Knowledge before hand is necessary, but instinct has to take over when it comes time for action. You can think everything out as much as you want, but until you get the experience on the battlefield, you won't know how to let your instinct guide you. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 14:51:33 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 15:41:34 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <3576F86E.7C5C44EA@sprynet.com> References: Thoa Tran wrote: > > So you take your chances. Also, once you get into the habit, the > >thought process becomes fsster and faster. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > That could work if you have the time to think it through. But in an > emergency situation, or when you are face-to-face with someone seeking > advice, the intuition has to kick in, and guide the thought and action. > Knowledge before hand is necessary, but instinct has to take over when it > comes time for action. You can think everything out as much as you want, > but until you get the experience on the battlefield, you won't know how to > let your instinct guide you. What is intuition? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 15:07:51 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 16:04:52 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Atonement vs. Bootstraps Message-Id: <199806042004.QAA11519@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806040321.WAA01549@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 3, 98 10:21:44 pm Darren referred, in a post about Chopra, to the difference between the Christian view of atonement and the Theosophical view of pulling oneself up by one's own bootstraps. This reminds me of what I thought when Lmhem111 posted the Catholic points of true Christian belief vs. the New Age heresies: all these things can be reconciled by taking them at different levels. I'm just feeling my way in all this, led by Cayce and by all the new research on the historical Jesus. But here's one way to see the atonement that does not conflict with the doctrine of karma. In the case of Jesus, he was in a very clearcut manner an advocate of *individual* freedom and judgment as opposed to group norms. The parable of the Good Samaritan, the comment about plucking corn on the sabbath, the habit of public meals with all sorts of "inappropriate" people-- etc. etc., all show him to be saying in essence *your personal relationship with the Father in heaven does not need to be mediated through all these collective behavioral norms and thought patterns. You can be directly connected to the Father, as I am.* All that stuff about the lilies of the field, and so on, urged people to liberate themselves from conformity to manmade precepts, etc. Jesus was the first person in history that I know of who so publicly and emphatically championed individuality vs. the collective, and when he raised a ruckus in the Temple at Passover he knew very well he'd die for it. But perhaps he also knew that he was leaving a lasting testimony made much stronger by his martyrdom, and that religious and political power structures would forevermore be a bit more suspect in people's eyes after what they did to him. So "Jesus dying for our sins" means, in my opinion, that he did take on, and help toward overcoming, the major evil confronting humanity, by the manner of his life and death. The belief that religious and state authority can dictate every detail of what we should think and do, and have the right to take our lives if we don't conform, was virtually unanimous in the ancient world. Jesus was an exemplar of liberation and enlightenment, his life and death a gift which still has the power to lift people above the evil that always threatens to destroy humanity. None of that means that accepting his gift removes our personal responsibility for our actions. Thinking out loud, Paul From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 17:07:28 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 15:06:05 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Re: Statute of limitations Message-ID: <35771A4D.BE14CF87@netfeed.com> References: <199806021551.LAA24221@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <35743492.DE3@azstarnet.com> Dan, it amazes me how a simple statement on my part has become so consistently misunderstood and misrepresented by you and Paul. I simply raised an issue of fairness, and now you are saying that I "beat around the bush and deal with everything but these three" [untruths]. Dan, I haven't been following this string close enough to even know what these alleged "three untruths" are that appear to be so controversial to you--therefore how could I have "beat around the bush"? When you earlier tried to goat me into looking into Paul's assertions, I wrote that I didn't have the time nor the interest in the issue to do that kind of research right now. But you keep insisting. Why are you putting pressure on Dallas and I to take time to research and address Paul's latest allegations when you have the resources, the ability, and evidently plenty of time to do this on your own? I asked you this question before, and I'm yet to see you answer. Are you missing some resources? If, so then I will be happy to send you a copy of whatever you need, providing I have it to give. Further, what do you think will be accomplished by all of this? If I were to document as an absolute certainty that Paul's assertions are correct or incorrect, who is it going to help? Not HPB--she is dead. Not those who are vested in HPB's veracity as a matter of faith. They will not be moved by any information that contradicts that faith anyway. Not the academic community. This is the wrong forum for that. Further, even if my researching into this issue by some miracle resolves the matter, does this mean that every time someone says something you don't like about HPB, I have some obligation to drop everything to research an issue that you are perfectly capable of researching for yourself? Sounds like you are trying to lead me into a black hole. Dan, the allegation that HPB was a liar and a fraud is not only practically a universally held opinion in academic circles, it is treated as a given that requires no supporting evidence. If Paul is trying to make the point that HPB is a liar, then he is not saying anything different than what almost everyone else in the academic community has been already saying for over a century. So what is the big deal? Further, it takes five seconds for someone to write a factually incorrect statement in an academic work. It then requires someone else to write an entire paper, or sometimes even a book to show that the off handed statement is wrong. I think even HPB realized this problem when she commented that "error moves on an inclined plane." IMO, the effort required to correct every factually incorrect statement about HPB is beyond what anyone could do in a lifetime. So, the question is: *if* Paul's assertions are incorrect (as I believe you assume they are), is it really worth the time and energy it would take to correct them? I don't believe so. Can you give me any reasons that may convince me otherwise? If it is worth the time, then what am I going to accomplish here? As I wrote before, a discussion about truth, lies, deceptions and people's motivations for them would IMO, be far more fruitful then to merely determine whether or not HPB was telling the truth, in some given instance. Other than a tiny group of devotees who treat HPB as an icon on the one hand, and an even smaller group of students on the other, who do make an honest effort to study her writings, who really gives a rat's ass about whether HPB told a so called "untruth" (whatever that is)? jhe Caldwell/Graye wrote: > Daniel Caldwell replies: > > Paul, it's too bad that you won't be commenting publicly on these > issues. > I was hoping Blavatsky students would deal DIRECTLY > with the 3 alleged "untruths" by you and Jerry S. > > Instead of that, Dallas and Jerry HE beat round the bush and deal > with everything but these three items! I am still hoping that > theosophical/Blavatsky students will try their hand at dealing > *specifically* with these three "untruths". From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 18:21:44 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 16:20:13 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: HPB and her MASTERS Message-ID: <19980604232021.5102.qmail@hotmail.com> There has been a great deal of discussion regarding HPB's "THEOSOPHICAL MAHATMAS." Though reference has been made to the section she devotes to this in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, pp.286-301 be read. It may be that some would find it easier to find it quoted here in Theos-talk. So I have made the effort of quoting most of what she says in the next to last chapter of the KEY. Expressing her regrets that their Sacred names have become household ones and "…fervently wishes that they had been kept secret within a small circle of trusted and devoted friends." It is likely that H. P. Blavatsky's own words will carry to a greater extent the energy and clarity of intent than any used by students of her doctrine. I have taken the liberty of CAPITALISING certain portions of this quotation for those-who might be, in too much of a hurry or require a quick reference and do not like to read long quotations. "XIV. THE "THEOSOPHICAL MAHATMAS" _________ ARE THEY "SPIRITS OF LIGHT " OR "GOBLINS DAMN'D" ? ENQ. Who are they, finally, those whom you call your "Masters" ? Some say they are "Spirits," or some other kind of supernatural beings, while others call them "myths." THEO. They are neither. I once heard one outsider say to another that they were a sort of male mermaids, whatever such a creature may be. BUT IF YOU LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY, YOU WILL NEVER HAVE A TRUE CONCEPTION OF THEM. IN THE FIRST PLACE THEY ARE LIVING MEN, BORN AS WE ARE BORN, AND DOOMED TO DIE LIKE EVERY OTHER MORTAL. ENQ. Yes, but it is rumoured that some of them are a thousand years old. Is this true ? THEO. As true as the miraculous growth of hair on the head of Meredith's Shagpat. Truly, like the "Identical," no Theosophical shaving has hitherto been able to crop it. THE MORE WE DENY THEM, THE MORE WE TRY TO SET PEOPLE RIGHT, THE MORE ABSURD DO THE INVENTIONS BECOME. I have heard of Methuselah being 969 years old; but, not being forced to believe in it, have laughed at the statement, for which I was forthwith regarded by many as a blasphemous heretic. ENQ. Seriously, though they outlive the ordinary age of men ? THEO. What do you call the ordinary age ? I remember reading in the Lancet of a Mexican who was almost 190 years old ; BUT I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF MORTAL MAN, LAYMAN, OR ADEPT, WHO COULD LIVE EVEN HALF THE YEARS ALLOTTED TO METHUSELAH. SOME ADEPTS DO EXCEED, BY A GOOD DEAL, WHAT YOU WOULD CALL THE ORDINARY AGE ; YET THERE IS NOTHING MIRACULOUS IN IT, AND VERY FEW OF THEM CARE TO LIVE VERY LONG. ENQ. But what does the word "MAHATMA" really mean ? THEO. SIMPLY A "GREAT SOUL," GREAT THROUGH MORAL ELEVATION AND INTELLECTUAL ATTAINMENT. If the title of great is given to a drunken soldier like Alexander, WHY SHOULD WE NOT CALL THOSE "GREAT" WHO HAVE ACHIEVED FAR GREATER CONQUESTS IN NATURE'S SECRETS, than Alexander ever did on the field of battle ? Besides, the term is an Indian and a very old word. ENQ. And why do you call them "Masters" ? THEO. WE CALL THEM "MASTERS" BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR TEACHERS; AND BECAUSE FROM THEM WE HAVE DERIVED ALL THE THEOSOPHICAL TRUTHS, HOWEVER INADEQUATELY SOME OF US MAY HAVE EXPRESSED, AND OTHERS UNDERSTOOD, THEM. THEY ARE MEN OF GREAT LEARNING, WHOM WE TERM INITIATES, AND STILL GREATER HOLINESS OF LIFE. THEY ARE NOT ASCETICS IN THE ORDINARY SENSE, THOUGH THEY CERTAINLY REMAIN APART FROM THE TURMOIL AND STRIFE OF YOUR WESTERN WORLD. ENQ. But is it not selfish thus to isolate themselves ? THEO. Where is the selfishness ? DOES NOT THE FATE OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY SUFFICIENTLY PROVE THAT THE WORLD IS NEITHER READY TO RECOGNISE THEM NOR TO PROFIT BY THEIR TEACHING ? Of what use would Professor Clerk Maxwell have been to instruct a class of little boys in their multiplication-table ? Besides, they isolate themselves only from the West. In their own country they go about as publicly as other people do. ENQ. Don't you ascribe to them supernatural powers ? THEO. We believe in nothing supernatural, as I have told you already. Had Edison lived and invented his phonograph two hundred years ago, he would most probably have been burnt along with it, and the whole attributed to the devil. THE POWERS WHICH THEY EXERCISE ARE SIMPLY THE DEVELOPMENT OF POTENCIES LYING LATENT IN EVERY MAN AND WOMEN, AND THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH EVEN OFFICIAL SCIENCE BEGINS TO RECOGNISE. ENQ. Is it true that these men inspire some of your writers, and that many, if not all, of your Theosophical works were written under their dictation ? THEO. SOME HAVE. THERE ARE PASSAGES ENTIRELY DICTATED BY THEM AND VERBATIM, BUT IN MOST CASES THEY ONLY INSPIRE THE IDEAS AND LEAVE THE LITERARY FORM TO THE WRITERS. ENQ. But this in itself is miraculous ; is, in fact, a miracle. How can they do it ? THEO. My dear Sir, you are labouring under a great mistake, and it is science itself that will refute your argument at no distant day. Why should it be a "miracle," as you call it ? A miracle is supposed to mean some operation which is supernatural, whereas there is really nothing above or beyond NATURE and Nature's laws. Among the many forms of the "miracle" which have come under modern scientific recognition, there is Hypnotism, and one phase of its power is known as "Suggestion," a form of thought transference, which has been successfully used in combating particular physical diseases, etc. THE TIME IS NOT FAR DISTANT WHEN THE WORLD OF SCIENCE WILL BE FORCED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE EXISTS AS MUCH INTERACTION BETWEEN ONE MIND AND ANOTHER, NO MATTER AT WHAT DISTANCE, AS BETWEEN ONE BODY AND ANOTHER IN CLOSEST CONTACT. WHEN TWO MINDS ARE SYMPATHETICALLY RELATED, AND THE INSTRUMENTS THROUGH WHICH THEY FUNCTION ARE TUNED TO RESPOND MAGNETICALLY AND ELECTRICALLY TO ONE ANOTHER, THERE IS NOTHING WHICH WILL PREVENT THE TRANSMISSION OF THOUGHTS FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, AT WILL ; FOR SINCE THE MIND IS NOT OF A TANGIBLE NATURE, THAT DISTANCE CAN DIVIDE IT FROM THE SUBJECT OF ITS CONTEMPLATION, IT FOLLOWS THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT CAN EXIST BETWEEN TWO MINDS IS A DIFFERENCE OF STATE. SO IF THIS LATER HINDRANCE IS OVERCOME, WHERE IS THE "MIRACLE" OF THOUGHT TRANSFERENCE, AT WHATEVER DISTANCE ? ENQ. But you will admit the Hypnotism does nothing so miraculous or wonderful as that ? THEO. On the contrary, it is a well-established fact that a Hypnotist can affect the brain of his subject so far as to produce an expression of his own thoughts, and even his words, through the organism of his subject ; and although the phenomena attaching to this method of actual thought transference are as yet few in number, no one, I presume, will undertake to say how far their action may extend in the future, when the laws that govern their production are more scientifically established. And so, if such results can be produced by the knowledge of the mere rudiments of Hypnotism, WHAT CAN PREVENT THE ADEPT IN PSYCHIC AND SPIRITUAL POWERS FROM PRODUCING RESULTS WHICH WITH YOUR PRESENT LIMITED KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR LAWS, YOU ARE INCLINED TO CALL "MIRACULOUS"? ENQ. Then why do not our physicians experiment and try if they could not do as much ? * * Such, for instance, as Prof. Bernheim and Dr. C. Lloyd Tuckey, of England ; Professors Beaunis and Liégeois, of Nancy ; Delbśuf of Liege ; Burot and Bourru, of Rochefort ; Fontain and Sigard, of Bordeaux ; Forel, of Zurich ; and Drs. Despine, of Marseilles ; Van Renterghem and Van Eeden, of Amsterdam ; Wetterstrand, of Stockholm ; Schrenck-Notzing, of Leipzig, and many other physicians and writers of eminence. THEO. Because, first of all, they are not Adepts with a thorough understanding of the secrets and laws of psychic and spiritual realms, but materialists, afraid to step outside the narrow groove of matter ; and, secondly, because they must fail at present, and indeed until they are brought to acknowledge such powers are attainable. ENQ. And could they be taught ? THEO. Not unless they were first of all prepared, by having the materialistic dross they have accumulated in their brains swept away to the very last atom. ENQ. This is very interesting. Tell me, have THE ADEPTS THUS INSPIRED OR DICTATED TO MANY OF YOUR THEOSOPHISTS ? THEO. NO, ON THE CONTRARY, TO VERY FEW. SUCH OPERATIONS REQUIRE SPECIAL CONDITIONS. An unscrupulous but skilled Adept of the Black Brotherhood ("Brothers of the Shadow," and Dugpas, we call them ) has far less difficulties to labour under. For, having no laws of the Spiritual kind to trammel his actions, such a Dugpa "sorcerer" will most unceremoniously obtain control over any mind, and subject it entirely to his evil powers. BUT OUR MASTERS WILL NEVER DO THAT. THEY HAVE NO RIGHT, EXCEPT BY FALLING INTO BLACK MAGIC, TO OBTAIN FULL MASTERY OVER ANYONE'S IMMORTAL EGO, AND CAN THEREFORE ACT ONLY ON THE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHIC NATURE OF THE SUBJECT, LEAVING THEREBY THE FREE WILL OF THE LATTER WHOLLY UNDISTURBED. Hence, unless A PERSON HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO PSYCHIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THE MASTERS, AND IS ASSISTED BY VIRTUE OF HIS FULL FAITH IN, AND DEVOTION TO, HIS TEACHERS, THE LATTER, WHENEVER TRANSMITTING THEIR THOUGHTS TO ONE WITH WHOM THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FULFILLED, EXPERIENCE GREAT DIFFICULTIES IN PENETRATING INTO THE CLOUDY CHAOS OF THAT PERSON'S SPHERE. But this is no place to treat of a subject of this nature. SUFFICE IT TO SAY, THAT IF THE POWER EXISTS THEN THERE ARE INTELLIGENCES (EMBODIED OR DISEMBODIED) WHICH GUIDE THIS POWER, AND LIVING CONSCIOUS INSTRUMENTS THROUGH WHOM IT IS TRANSMITTED AND BY WHOM IT IS RECEIVED. We have only to beware of black magic. ENQ. But what do you really mean by "black magic" ? THEO. Simply abuse of psychic powers, or of any secret of nature ; the fact of applying to selfish and sinful ends the powers of Occultism. A hypnotiser, who, taking advantage of his powers of "suggestion," forces a subject to steal or murder, would be called a black magician by us. The famous "rejuvenating system" of Dr. Brown-Sequard, of Paris, through a loathsome animal injection into human blood-a discovery all the medical papers of Europe are now discussing-if true, is unconscious black magic. ENQ. But this is medićval belief in witchcraft and sorcery ! Even Law itself has ceased to believe in such things ? THEO. So much the worse for law, as it has been led, through such a lack of discrimination, into committing more than one judiciary mistake and crime. It is the term alone that frightens you with its "superstitious" ring in it. Would not law punish an abuse of hypnotic powers, as I just mentioned ? Nay, it has so punished it already in France and Germany ; yet it would indignantly deny that it applied punishment to a crime of evident sorcery. You cannot believe in the efficacy and reality of the powers of suggestion by physicians and mesmerisers ( or hypnotisers ), and then refuse to believe in the same powers when used for evil motives. And if you do, then you believe in Sorcery. You can- not believe in good and disbelieve in evil, accept genuine money and refuse to credit such a thing as false coin. Nothing can exist without its contrast, and no day, no light, no good could have any representation as such in your consciousness, were there no night, darkness nor evil to offset and contrast them. ENQ. Indeed, I have known men, who, while thoroughly believing in that which you call great psychic, or magic powers, laughed at the very mention of Witchcraft and Sorcery. THEO. What does it prove ? Simply that they are illogical. So much the worse for them again. And we, knowing AS WE DO OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOOD AND HOLY ADEPTS, BELIEVE AS THOROUGHLY IN THE EXISTENCE OF BAD AND UNHOLY ADEPTS, OR-DUGPAS. ENQ. But if the Masters exist, why don't they come out before all men and refute once for all the many charges which are made against Mdme. Blavatsky and the Society ? THEO. What charges ? ENQ. THAT THEY DO NOT EXIST, AND THAT SHE HAS INVENTED THEM. That they are men of straw, "Mahatmas of muslin and bladders." Does not all this injure her reputation ? THEO. In what way can such an accusation injure her in reality ? Did she ever make money on their presumed existence, or derive benefit, or fame, therefrom ? I ANSWER THAT SHE HAS GAINED ONLY INSULTS, ABUSE, AND CALUMNIES, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY PAINFUL HAD SHE NOT LEARNED LONG AGO TO REMAIN PERFECTLY INDIFFERENT TO SUCH FALSE CHARGES. For what does it amount to, after all ? Why, TO AN IMPLIED COMPLIMENT, WHICH, IF THE FOOLS, HER ACCUSERS, WERE NOT CARRIED AWAY BY THEIR BLIND HATRED THEY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT TWICE BEFORE UTTERING. TO SAY THAT SHE HAS INVENTED THE MASTERS COMES TO THIS : SHE MUST HAVE INVENTED EVERY BIT OF PHILOSOPHY THAT HAS EVER BEEN GIVEN OUT IN THEOSOPHICAL LITERATURE. SHE MUST BE THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS FROM WHICH "ESOTERIC BUDDHISM" WAS WRITTEN ; THE SOLE INVENTOR OF EVERY TENET FOUND IN THE "SECRET DOCTRINE," WHICH, IF THE WORLD WERE JUST, WOULD BE RECOGNISED AS SUPPLYING MANY OF THE MISSING LINKS OF SCIENCE, AS WILL BE, DISCOVERED A HUNDRED YEARS HENCE. BY SAYING WHAT THEY DO, THEY ARE ALSO GIVING HER THE CREDIT OF BEING FAR CLEVERER THAN THE HUNDREDS OF MEN, (MANY VERY CLEVER AND NOT A FEW SCIENTIFIC MEN,) WHO BELIEVE IN WHAT SHE SAYS-INASMUCH AS SHE MUST HAVE FOOLED THEM ALL ! IF THEY SPEAK THE TRUTH, THEN SHE MUST BE SEVERAL MAHATMAS ROLLED INTO ONE like a nest of Chinese boxes ; since among the SO-CALLED "MAHATMA LETTERS" ARE MANY IN TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT STYLES, ALL OF WHICH HER ACCUSERS DECLARE THAT SHE HAS WRITTEN. ENQ. It is just what they say. BUT IS IT NOT VERY PAINFUL TO HER TO BE PUBLICLY DENOUNCED AS "THE MOST ACCOMPLISHED IMPOSTOR OF THE AGE, whose name deserves to pass to posterity," as is done in the Report of the "Society for Psychical Research" ? THEO. It might be painful if it were true, or came from people less rabidly materialistic and prejudiced. As it is, PERSONALLY SHE TREATS THE WHOLE MATTER WITH CONTEMPT, WHILE THE MAHATMAS SIMPLY LAUGH AT IT. IN TRUTH, IT IS THE GREATEST COMPLIMENT THAT COULD BE PAID TO HER. I SAY SO, AGAIN. ENQ. But her enemies claim to have proved their case. THEO. Aye, it is easy enough to make such a claim when you have constituted yourself judge, jury, and prosecuting counsel at once, as they did. But who, except their direct followers and our enemies, believe in it ? ENQ. But they sent a representative to India to investigate the matter, didn't they ? THEO. They did, and their final conclusion rests entirely on the unchecked statements and unverified assertions of this young gentleman. A lawyer who read through his report told a friend of mine that in all his experience he had never seen "such a ridiculous and self-condemnatory document." It was found to be full of suppositions and "working hypotheses" which mutually destroyed each other. Is this a serious charge ? ENQ. Yet it has done the Society a great harm. Why, then, did she not vindicate her own character, at least, before a Court of Law ? THEO. Firstly, because as a Theosophist, it IS HER DUTY TO LEAVE UNHEEDED ALL PERSONAL INSULTS. Secondly, because neither the Society nor Mdme. Blavatsky had any money to waste over such a law-suit. And lastly, because it would have been ridiculous for both to be untrue to their principles, because of an attack made on them by a flock of stupid old British wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over frolicsome lambkin from Australia. ENQ. This is complimentary. But do you not think that it would have done real good to the cause of Theosophy, if she had authoritatively disproved the whole thing once for all ? THEO. Perhaps. But do you believe that any English jury or judge would have ever admitted the reality of psychic phenomena, even if entirely unprejudiced beforehand ? And when you remember that they would have been set against us already by the "Russian Spy" scare, the charge of Atheism and infidelity, and all the other calumnies that have been circulated against us, you cannot fail to see that such an attempt to obtain justice in a Court of Law would have been worse than fruitless ! All this the Psychic Researchers knew well, and they took a base and mean advantage of their position to raise themselves above our heads and save themselves at our expense. ENQ. The S. P. R. Now denies completely the existence of the Mahatmas. They say that from beginning to end they were a romance which Madame Blavatsky has woven from her own brain ? THEO. Well, she might have done many things less clever than this. At any rate, we have not the slightest objection to this theory. AS SHE ALWAYS SAYS NOW, SHE ALMOST PREFERS THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BELIEVE IN THE MASTERS. SHE DECLARES OPENLY THAT SHE WOULD RATHER PEOPLE SHOULD SERIOUSLY THINK THAT THE ONLY MAHATMALAND IS THE GREY MATTER OF HER BRAIN, AND THAT, IN SHORT, SHE HAS EVOLVED THEM OUT OF THE DEPTHS OF HER OWN INNER CONSCIOUSNESS THAN THAT THEIR NAMES AND GRAND IDEAL SHOULD BE SO INFAMOUSLY DESECRATED AS THEY ARE AT PRESENT. AT FIRST SHE USED TO PROTEST INDIGNANTLY AGAINST ANY DOUBTS AS TO THEIR EXISTENCE. NOW SHE NEVER GOES OUT OF HER WAY TO PROVE OR DISPROVE IT. LET PEOPLE THINK WHAT THEY LIKE. ENQ. But, of course, these Masters do exist ? THEO. WE AFFIRM THEY DO. Nevertheless, this does not help much. Many people, even some Theosophists and ex-Theosophists, say that they have never had any proof of their existence. Very well ; then Mme. Blavatsky replies with this alternative : - IF SHE HAS INVENTED THEM, THEN SHE HAS ALSO INVENTED THEIR PHILOSOPHY AND THE PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE WHICH SOME FEW HAVE ACQUIRED ; AND IF SO, WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHETHER THEY DO EXIST OR NOT, SINCE SHE HERSELF IS HERE, AND HER OWN EXISTENCE, AT ANY RATE, CAN HARDLY BE DENIED ? IF THE KNOWLEDGE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IMPARTED BY THEM IS GOOD INTRINSICALLY, AND IT IS ACCEPTED AS SUCH BY MANY PERSONS OF MORE THAN AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE, WHY SHOULD THERE BE SUCH A HULLABALOO MADE OVER THAT QUESTION ? The fact of her being an impostor has never been proved, and will always remain sub judice ; whereas it is a certain and UNDENIABLE FACT THAT, BY WHOMSOEVER INVENTED, THE PHILOSOPHY PREACHED BY THE "MASTERS" IS ONE OF THE GRANDEST AND MOST BENEFICENT PHILOSOPHIES ONCE IT IS PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD. Thus the slanderers, while moved by the lowest and meanest feeling-those of hatred, revenge, malice, wounded vanity, or disappointed ambition, - seem quite unaware that they are paying the greatest tribute to her intellectual powers. So be it, if the poor fools will have it so. REALLY, MME. BLAVATSKY HAS NOT THE SLIGHTEST OBJECTION TO BEING REPRESENTED BY HER ENEMIES AS A TRIPLE ADEPT, AND A "MAHATMA" TO BOOT. IT IS ONLY HER UNWILLINGNESS TO POSE IN HER OWN SIGHT AS A CROW PARADING IN PEACOCK'S FEATHERS THAT COMPELS HER TO THIS DAY TO INSIST UPON THE TRUTH. ENQ. But if you have such wise and good men to guide the Society, how is it that so many mistakes have been made ? THEO. THE MASTERS DO NOT GUIDE THE SOCIETY, NOT EVEN THE FOUNDERS ; and no one has ever asserted that they did : they only WATCH OVER, AND PROTECT IT. This is amply proved by the fact that no mistakes have been able to cripple it, and no scandals from within, nor the most damaging attacks from without, have been able to overthrow it. The Masters look at the future, not at the present, and every mistake is so much more accumulated wisdom for days to come. The other "Master who sent the man with the five talents did not tell him how to double them, nor did he prevent the foolish servant from burying his one talent in the earth. Each must acquire wisdom by his own experience and merits. The Christian Churches, who claim a far higher "Master," the very Holy Ghost itself, have ever been and are still guilty not only of "mistakes," but of a series of bloody crimes throughout the ages. Yet, no Christian would deny, for all that, his belief in that "Master," I suppose ? although his existence is far more hypothetical than that of the Mahatmas ; as no one has ever seen the Holy Ghost, and his guidance of the Church, moreover, their own ecclesiastical history distinctly contradicts. Errare humanum est. Let us return to our subject. THE ABUSE OF SACRED NAMES AND TERMS. ENQ. Then, what I have heard, namely, that many of your Theosophical writers claim to have been inspired by these Masters, or to have seen and conversed with them, is not true ? THEO. It may or it may not be true. How can I tell ? The burden of proof rests with them. Some of them, a few-very few, indeed-have distinctly either lied or were hallucinated when boasting of such inspiration ; OTHERS WERE TRULY INSPIRED BY GREAT ADEPTS. THE TREE IS KNOWN BY ITS FRUITS ; and as all Theosophists have to be judged by their deeds and not by what they write or say, SO ALL THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS MUST BE ACCEPTED ON THEIR MERITS, AND NOT ACCORDING TO ANY CLAIM TO AUTHORITY WHICH THEY MAY PUT FORWARD. ENQ. But would MDME. BLAVATSKY APPLY THIS TO HER OWN WORKS-THE SECRET DOCTRINE, FOR INSTANCE ? THEO. CERTAINLY ; SHE SAYS EXPRESSLY IN THE PREFACE THAT SHE GIVES OUT THE DOCTRINES THAT SHE HAS LEARNT FROM THE MASTERS, but claims no inspiration whatever for what she has lately written. As for our best Theosophists, THEY WOULD ALSO IN THIS CASE FAR RATHER THAT THE NAMES OF THE MASTERS HAD NEVER BEEN MIXED UP WITH OUR BOOKS IN ANY WAY. With few exceptions, most of such works are not only imperfect, but positively erroneous and misleading. GREAT ARE THE DESECRATIONS TO WHICH THE NAME OF TWO OF THE MASTERS HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED. There is hardly a medium who has not claimed to have seen them. Every bogus swindling Society, for commercial purposes, now claims to be guided and directed by "Masters," often supposed to be far higher than ours ! Many and heavy are the sins of those who advanced these claims, prompted either by desire for lucre, vanity, or irresponsible mediumship. Many persons have been plundered of their money by such societies, which offer to sell the secrets of power, knowledge, and spiritual truth for worthless gold. WORST OF ALL, THE SACRED NAMES OF OCCULTISM AND THE HOLY KEEPERS THEREOF HAVE BEEN DRAGGED IN THIS FILTHY MIRE, POLLUTED BY BEING ASSOCIATED WITH SORDID MOTIVES AND IMMORAL PRACTICES, WHILE THOUSANDS OF MEN HAVE BEEN HELD BACK FROM THE PATH OF TRUTH AND LIGHT THROUGH THE DISCREDIT AND EVIL REPORT WHICH SUCH SHAMS, SWINDLES, AND FRAUDS HAVE BROUGHT UPON THE WHOLE SUBJECT. I SAY AGAIN, EVERY EARNEST THEOSOPHISTS REGRETS TO-DAY, FROM THE BOTTOM OF HIS HEART, THAT THESE SACRED NAMES AND THINGS HAVE EVER BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE THE PUBLIC, AND FERVENTLY WISHES THAT THEY HAD BEEN KEPT SECRET WITHIN A SMALL CIRCLE OF TRUSTED AND DEVOTED FRIENDS. ENQ. The names certainly do occur very frequently now-a-days, and I never remember hearing of such persons as "Masters" till quite recently. THEO. It is so ; and HAD WE ACTED ON THE WISE PRINCIPLE OF SILENCE, INSTEAD OF RUSHING INTO NOTORIETY AND PUBLISHING ALL WE KNEW AND HEARD, SUCH DESECRATION WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED. BEHOLD, ONLY FOURTEEN YEARS AGO, BEFORE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY WAS FOUNDED, ALL THE TALK WAS OF "SPIRITS." THEY WERE EVERYWHERE, IN EVERYONE'S MOUTH ; AND NO ONE BY ANY CHANCE EVEN DREAMT OF TALKING ABOUT LIVING "ADEPTS," "MAHATMAS," OR "MASTERS." ONE HARDLY HEARD EVEN THE NAME OF THE ROSICRUCIANS, WHILE THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A THING AS "OCCULTISM" WAS SUSPECTED EVEN BUT BY VERY FEW. NOW ALL THAT IS CHANGED. WE THEOSOPHISTS WERE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE FIRST TO TALK OF THESE THINGS, TO MAKE THE FACT OF THE EXISTENCE IN THE EAST OF "ADEPTS" AND "MASTERS" AND OCCULT KNOWLEDGE KNOWN ; AND NOW THE NAME HAS BECOME COMMON PROPERTY. IT IS ON US, NOW, THAT THE KARMA, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RESULTING DESECRATION OF HOLY NAMES AND THINGS, HAS FALLEN. ALL THAT YOU NOW FIND ABOUT SUCH MATTERS IN CURRENT LITERATURE-AND THERE IS NOT A LITTLE OF IT-ALL IS TO BE TRACED BACK TO THE IMPULSE GIVEN IN THIS DIRECTION BY THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY AND ITS FOUNDERS. Our enemies profit to this day by our mistake. The most recent book directed against our teachings is alleged to have been written by an Adept of twenty years' standing. Now, it is a palpable lie. We know the amanuensis and his inspirers (as he is himself too ignorant to have written anything of the sort ). These "inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and unscrupulous in proportion to their intellectual powers ; and these bogus Adepts are not one, but several. The cycle of "Adepts," used as sledge-hammers to break the theosophical heads with, began twelve years ago, with Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and Ghost-Land, and now ends with the "Adept" and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a work written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings. BUT IT IS USELESS TO GRIEVE OVER WHAT IS DONE, AND WE CAN ONLY SUFFER IN THE HOPE THAT OUR INDISCRETIONS MAY HAVE MADE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR OTHERS TO FIND THE WAY TO THESE MASTERS, WHOSE NAMES ARE NOW EVERYWHERE TAKEN IN VAIN, AND UNDER COVER OF WHICH SO MANY INIQUITIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN PERPETRATED. ENQ. Do you reject "Louise" as an Adept ? THEO. WE DENOUNCE NO ONE, LEAVING THIS NOBLE TASK TO OUR ENEMIES. The spiritualistic author of Art Magic, etc., may or may not have been acquainted with such an Adept-and saying this, I say far less than what that lady has said and written about us and Theosophy for the last several years-that is her own business. Only when, in a solemn scene of mystic vision, an alleged "Adept" sees "spirits" presumably at Greenwich England, through Lord Rosse's telescope, which was built in, and never moved from Parsonstown, Ireland, * I may well be permitted to wonder at the ignorance of that "Adept" in matters of science. This beats all the mistakes and blunder committed at times by the chelas of our Teachers ! And it is this "Adept" that is used now to break the teachings of our masters! -------------------------------------------------------------------- * Vide "Ghost Land," Part I., p. 133, et seq. -------------------------------------------------------------------- ENQ. I quite understand your feeling in this matter, and think it only natural. And now, in view of all that you have said and explained to me, there is one subject on which I should like to ask you a few questions. THEO. If I can answer them I will. What is that ? [Next chapter] END -------------------------- Once HPB, herself has copitalized the word "NATURE" -this is not my capitalization. In a few places HPB has italied titles of books, and a few other things, which I have not been able to do, because my e-mail does not take italics. I hope I have made no typographical mistakes to inconvenience and delude readers. Please, correct any mistakes found in future communications to Theos-talk. Sophia From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 18:40:08 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 16:27:07 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Theos. World. Websites--Correction Message-ID: <19980604232707.9537.qmail@hotmail.com> It was said that I recommended the site -- hptt://www.integralscience.org This was in fact recommended by Bjorn Roxendal in his communication of 6th March '98. Just for accuracy. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 18:50:13 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:00:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <004501bd9010$904724e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 4th 1998 Reminiscence concerning the manuscript for SD Vol. 3 and 4. Dear Daniel: I was careful in what I said. It is a reminiscence, and also, being nearly 60 years old, is therefore even in my mind, subject to inaccuracies of memory as I said. Had I been able to refine it further I would have done so. You are quite correct in quoting the material for which you have reports, dates, etc. I am also aware of the conflicts involved and the resulting surmises as to accuracy. I am sorry indeed that I cannot lay any of those surmises at rest, and, perhaps I ought not to have mentioned what I heard, inasmuch as I have nothing but memory to go on. The information came to me as I said at least "second hand." At the time I had no reason to doubt it. Yours as always, Dallas > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 8:51 PM > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Subject: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 >Dallas wrote > >>I was given to >> understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very >> shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley and >> G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th >> Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and ready. >> She then said that she had received "instructions" to have them >> destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This is a >> reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent >> verification of this statement made to me. > >Dallas, > >"Shortly before her death"?? Are we talking >about a few days or a few weeks at the most? > >Archibald Keightley left England in October, >(sometime after Oct. 10th) 1890 and did NOT >return to England till after HPB died. >See THE PATH, Dec. 1890, p. 295 where >Claude Falls Wright in his "London Letter" >writes: "Dr. Keightley leaves us in a few >days for New Zealand. . . ." This document >is dated Oct. 1890. Also see other issues of >THE PATH, first six months of 1891. > > >Then in another "London Letter" dated >January 7, 1891, Claude Wright writes: >"H.P.B. has WITHIN THE LAST WEEK OR SO >begun to get together the M.S.S. (long >ago written) for the third volume of the >SECRET DOCTRINE; it will, however, take >a good twelve months to prepare for >publication." > >>From the above we see that more than >2 months after A. Keightley had left >English soil, Claude Wright reports >that H.P.B. was working on the >3rd volume MSS. H.P.B. lived 4 more >months after this report. > >In light of the above how could Archibald >have been involved in the alleged >destruction of the SD III MSS "shortly >before HPB's death"?! > >Basil Crump (close friend and associate >of Alice Cleather) wrote in the April, 1939 >issue of THE CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST about >an "elderly gentleman. . . who knew Mr. >Thomas Green, . . . [Green had] helped with the >printing at the H.P.B. Press in London. . . . >Before he died Mr. Green told this gentleman. . . >that he. . . was paid to set up the type >of vol. III and part of Vol. IV of THE SECRET >DOCTRINE. The proofs of vol. III were >passed by H.P.B. shortly before her death >and Mr. Green was just going to press with them >when he received orders from her to break up the >type. . . .That she gave orders for the type >to be broken up makes it practically >certain that she also destroyed the MSS. . . ." > >In the May, 1939 issue of the same magazine, >James Pryse (well-know theosophist of the >early days who lived at London Headquarters >during the last 8 or 9 months of HPB's life) >demolishs this "story". Mr. Pryse was the printer >who had come from New York to help HPB and her >group in setting up the H.P.B. Press in London. > >Pryse writes: >"Mr. Green was not a printer, did not learn to >set type. . . . He had no part in the management, >and never handled any 'copy' as that was always >given to me as manager. He had nothing to do >with the printing until I took him in as my >assistant when the printing plant was enlarged, >quite a while AFTER H.P.B. discarded her wornout >body. . . ." Pryse gives other good reasons >for discounting the story of the anonymous >"elderly gentleman" who related this story >about Thomas Green to Basil Crump and his >associates. > >This "story" may be related to your >"story". The time period 1939 is close to >your estimate 1937-1939. > >Dallas, I find it somewhat strange that in commenting >on the testimonies of Annie Besant, Archibald >Keightley and G.R.S. Mead that I quoted in a >previous post, you repeatedly wrote: > >"A blank---a surmise situation---conflict in >views." > >Taking such a "skeptical" point of view one >could dismiss most of the positive testimony concerning >HPB's life. And many "skeptics" do! > >Please, Dallas, read my paper on the origin >and authenticity of Vol. III at >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm > >The quoted testimony of Besant, A. Keightley and >Mead conform to what other eyewitnesses said at the >same time. Read my timeline and look for >Ariadne's thread. *It is there* from 1885 through >1897. > >Again I invite you to compare the contents of the >Wurzburg MSS with the contents of Vol. III (of course >excluding the esoteric papers). Again read what Bertram >Keightley said about the original Volume I (1886) becoming >Volume III (1887). This is confirmed by Archibald >Keightley and HPB herself. > >Toward the end of my paper, I deal with the >"conflicting views" issue. Please see that section >for relevant remarks. > >Daniel Caldwell > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 19:24:50 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 20:14:41 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Atonement, headache, blinds Message-Id: <199806050014.UAA02066@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806042321.SAA04688@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 4, 98 06:21:59 pm Some of these digests are just jam packed with interesting stuff that stimulate the mind and heart. Others awaken mostly negative emotions. But today's was juicy in the positive way, and I have several comments. First, about evil and atonement. I think in a way it is more dangerous to project all evil onto the Other, and imagine oneself to be inerrantly good, than vice versa. But I still think there is something projective about saying humanity is evil and the Masters are good, like a mirror image of the former kind of projection. Both are unbalanced and therefore misleading. The alleged goodness of the Masters would not be perceptible unless there was goodness within us that resonates to it. I happen to have started today reading American Originals: Homemade Varieties of Christianity, by Paul Conkin (UNC Press 1997.) Its intro discusses atonement and the varieties of Catholic, Calvinist and Arminian approaches to it. At the beginning of this section, Conkin sketches what all these have in common: "Humans in their natural capacity are so alienated from their personal and masculine god, so full of pride and ego, that they are incapable of giving their full consent or love to him. They are sinful...they cannot so act as to further the will and purpose of God. They are therefore doomed to life apart from God, to some type of hell, unless God is merciful to them. Only he can choose to save humans. His chosen means of salvation is the atoning Christ. Through the sacrifice of the Christ and through the continuing agency of the Holy Spirit, God has provided, at least for some people, a pathway back to reconciliation, even though no one deserves such salvation."(p. xi) This is the gist of what the Catholic Church is upholding in the forthcoming encyclical, and what it opposes to New Age (i.e. theosophical) beliefs. But if for "humans in their natural capacity" we substitute "humans who are unconscious of their spiritual oneness with humanity, all life, and the cosmos," and substitute "the divine essence" for "their personal and masculine god" then the first statement above makes perfect sense. And only the divine essence can save us, through the atoning Christ (buddhi) which is a universal pathway back to reconciliation with the source. I think Christianity ultimately will be heading to precisely this sort of understanding of *Christ* as atoning savior. The relationship of Jesus to that Christ will of course continue forever to be a subject of debate and discussion. But his proclamation of the Kingdom, and his elliptical portrayal of it, make it seem to me that such reconciliation is an interior process for which he saw himself as a wayshower, not a unique exemplar. About migraines: Cayce says that better elimination can help, and recommends laxatives or natural changes in diet. Don't know if there's anything to this, though. Yes, Kym and I are definitely friends, despite not having met in this life on the physical. Finally, Pam, your comments about HPB and Crowley remind me of another who was even more explicit about his teachings being a mixture of truth and fiction-- Gurdjieff. He made it clear that this was deliberate, and when he was writing Beelzebub's Tales would have it read aloud by students in his presence, who then discussed it with him. If the meaning was too obvious, he made it harder to grasp, saying "Must dig dog deeper." The very process of sifting through the material was awakening of discrimination, which can never be awakened by promotion of material as 100% true and accurate. HPB, of course, never claimed any such thing for herself, although others in her wake have no problem doing so on her behalf. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 20:07:50 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:42:32 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: 900 year old people Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980605104232.00711520@ozemail.com.au> When one travels at the speed of light or close to it, time is dilated. So lets say that Jehovah comes down in his fiery wheel (UFO) speaks to some Israelites, leaves them a magnificent chlorophyll generator/weapon (ark), then takes off back to sirius or wherever. After 20 years of space flight he returns to earth but alas 800 years have passed. To the people on earth he seems 800 odd years old but is in fact only 20 years older. This could explain some of the biblical ages - The sumerian king list also shows the SAME king at different historical periods. That is to say for eg, there may have been an Enoch II who ruled from some given time and then left in his UFO. In the meantime, an Enoch III gains the thrown for some period of time , then 300-400 years later we see the re-appearance of Enoch II on the king list. If it was a new Enoch he should IV not II. Just an Idea Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 20:24:46 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:48:03 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <004501bd9010$904724e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Daniel, I checked out your essay on vol III. Well done for being so neutral and giving both sides of the argument. I personally could not decide either way without having read the 3rd volume. So I have ordered this from Kessinger (It will cost over A$100 !!) Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 20:51:35 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:13:55 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3576F86E.7C5C44EA@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes (to Thoa) > What is intuition? Something most women have and most psychics. If you need to ask, you don't have it. Maybe it could be a form of mentation. Read Jungian psychology for one insight into it. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:02:46 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:35:25 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #178 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806040450.WAA22722@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes (to Darren) >>Drooling? Kym, this sarcasm doesn't become you. > >!snickers mixed with snorts! In my experience, Kym is a Mistress-drooler (Like master-drooler only Kym). Drooling lessons may be available to selected applicants. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:07:03 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:39:04 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3577001A.4B6B@withoutwalls.com> Mark Kusek writes >> Kym wrote, answering Brenda: >> >> Humans may have created or contributed to 'evil' or 'evil-doings' >> but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and prickly-bushes >> are not, in themselves, 'evil.' > >Dinosaurs are evil. >(Satanasaurus, Demonicus Rex, Pterrordactyl, Tridentitops, Barney, etc.) We Protest! IDIOTS (International Dinosaurs In Other Theosophical Societies) From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:10:14 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:20:59 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Statute of limitations Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35771A4D.BE14CF87@netfeed.com> Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes >who really gives a rat's ass about >whether HPB told a so called "untruth" (whatever that is)? I give up. Who is it? HPB said, so far as I recal, that she sometimes told "fibs" - are "fibs" untruths? I never tried catching a rat's ass, so I don't give one, 'cos I can't. I wouldn't give one even if I had one. [Enter men in white coats with restraining equipment] Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:13:16 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:18:41 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Belonging as Religion (to bind or to join) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <17b6cdad.3576096f@aol.com> Megabeet@aol.com writes >In a message dated 98-06-03 19:11:46 EDT, you write: > ><< I suspect you meant to say "tenets". >> > >You're right. However, there are some who are so attached to the tenets of a >particular philosophy/religion, that they can be said to "tenants", so to >speak, (or perhaps even prisoners) in that particular thought-form. > >Did I cleverly wiggle my way out of that one ??? Not bad, not bad. Worthy of any theosophist! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:18:24 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:08:36 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806041838.NAA08603@proteus.imagiware.com> Brenda S. Tucker quotes and writes >>Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you >>suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark >food >>by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." >> >>Kym > >Dear Kym, > >And try to think of the favor you would have done the world if the "person" >turned out to be the next Unibomber or another Terry Nichols. .. or the next Mother Theresa, or the next World Teacher .... Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:18:25 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:03:15 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes and quotes >if we did what you >>> suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark >food >>> by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." >> >> So you take your chances. Also, once you get into the habit, the >>thought process becomes fsster and faster. >> >> Bart Lidofsky > >That could work if you have the time to think it through. But in an >emergency situation, or when you are face-to-face with someone seeking >advice, the intuition has to kick in, and guide the thought and action. >Knowledge before hand is necessary, but instinct has to take over when it >comes time for action. You can think everything out as much as you want, >but until you get the experience on the battlefield, you won't know how to >let your instinct guide you. Like the shark. It doesn't stop to think either fast or slow, and so it gets there first. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:24:07 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 02:05:44 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Atonement vs. Bootstraps Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806042004.QAA11519@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson writes >I'm just feeling my way in all this, led by Cayce and by all the >new research on the historical Jesus. But here's one way to see >the atonement that does not conflict with the doctrine of karma. >In the case of Jesus, he was in a very clearcut manner an >advocate of *individual* freedom and judgment as opposed to group >norms. The parable of the Good Samaritan, the comment about >plucking corn on the sabbath, the habit of public meals with all >sorts of "inappropriate" people-- etc. etc., all show him to be >saying in essence *your personal relationship with the Father in >heaven does not need to be mediated through all these collective >behavioral norms and thought patterns. You can be directly >connected to the Father, as I am.* This is almost the classic Jewish argument *against* Christianity! Who needs an intermediary when they can go direct to the boss? Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:24:24 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:30:45 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #177 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806040456.WAA23310@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Bart wrote: > >> Of course, most of us are not gifted with the ability to perceive >>karma. So what we have to do is TRY. Try to, as dispassionately as >>possible, determine which action or inaction would further the evolution >>of the human race the most, based on your >>interpretation/belief/disbelief of the primary literature and those that >>have come before and afterwards, and act accordingly. > >Bart, I am touched you responded to my query; but, if we did what you >suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark food >by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." Dear both, Many years ago I met an old woman who had been in St. Petersburg (later Leningrad) during the 1917 revolution which led to the creation of the USSR. She told me that when the uprising began in her part of the town, she was with two senior "comrades" who were playing chess and discussing communist ideologies etc. They both had a rifle leaning against the wall beside the window. "Aren't you going to join in the fighting?" she asked them. "We are intellectuals, and it is necessary to preserve the intellectuals, because it is they who will have the task of shaping the future of the Revolution" one of them replied. She told me that she looked at them both in disgust, took the two rifles, and went out into the street herself. She lived in exile in London as a bag lady. (The conversations are necessarily paraphrased, but the essence of the tale is clear enough - I am talking 45 years ago!) Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:24:43 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:15:15 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Atonement, headache, blinds Message-ID: <357754B3.572E8E70@sprynet.com> References: <199806050014.UAA02066@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> My personal take on atonement is that if there is true atonement, that means that the lesson is learned, and it is not necessary in the dharma to learn the lesson any further. Therefore, the karmic consequences of the actions will return in a different form than if there was no or incomplete atonement. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:28:59 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:58:27 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain -- IS THAT LOCATION AVAILABLE ? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000201bd8fb8$2f5e3720$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >I always thought Theosophy was a series of propositions for us to >consider and adopt if we found that they were reasonable. Me too. > >Something like: > >Every one of us is an Immortal -- the body is assumed employed, >deployed and finally consummated. The Spiritual Self oversees >constantly the process of mental and moral improvement. Partly reasonable. My experience suggests that the Spiritual Self oversees - period. > >Morals have a basis in Law and in fact. In fact, perhaps. In Law, no. > >Moral Law is Natural Law. "Morals" derive from "mores" which are human customs which vary from place to place and from time to time. The moral "law" of the Taleban [sp?] in Afghanistan is very different from that of (say) Illinois. Therefore such a view is unreasonable > >Evolution makes for Universal Rightness as well as Righteousness. "Evolution" is a theory. Change and development are observable facts. To follow a theory is reasonable. Dogmatically to accept a theory as "truth" is unreasonable. > >The "Fundamental unity of all Souls with the Universal Oversoul" >makes moral contagion possible through the subtle psychic medium >that we all share in. Completely unreasonable. IF such a unity already exists, then the statement can only mean that the"Universal Oversoul" is itself infected by contagion, and all Souls - acording to the above premise - are imperfect. The word contagion itself requires contact. Thus all Souls are corrupt by reason of being Souls in the first place. *That* would be a reasonable proposition, given the stated hypothesis. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:29:01 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:15:12 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Migraines in the Crown Chakra Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980605111512.00711520@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3576F96E.46D4@withoutwalls.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980604111033.00708b68@ozemail.com.au> Mark you wrote: >I suffer from migraines also, have for years. They are troubling and >often debilitating at the most inopportune times. Have you had any >success finding relief from them? It took me 13 years to get them to a manageable level. At the age of 11 my parents first took me to a physician, who after a series of x-rays, cats etc, declared there was no physical cause and promptly sent me to a psychologist. This was my first encounter with relaxation therapies and I actually found that the sessions were benificial but my migraines didn't go. Next stop was the orthodontist - I had my jaw broken and re-set, braces and 4 wisdom teeth removed and for about a year I felt great. I still had migraines but their severity and regularity was reduced. They returned with full force when I commenced Uni and the next stop was the optometrist. After getting glasses, I again I felt close to fine for about 12 months. Next was a naturopath who said It was probably dietary and to stop cheese, chocolate, wine etc All the usual goodies. And suggested meditation. I found a book called 'Pain relief without Drugs' - I can't remember the authors name but he was from Melbourne. I began to meditate but knew the effects would take a while to manifest themselves. At the same time I was introduced to Marijuana. Since then I have used meditation and medicinal marijauna and since then (approx 3 years) I have had maybe 5 or 6 debilitating migraines. Which is a massive improvement from one a week. Marijuana (Cannabis Sativa or C. Indica) has the added affect of 'cleansing the doors of perception' as Aldous Huxley would say, which means that during meditation I am able to enter Alpha, Beta states much more rapidly. Marijuana has de-stressed me no end and it is for this reason that I believe my Migraines were hereditary. My mother also suffers and is the most highly strung person you could meet. Since I was concerned about the long term side effects of marijuana smoking I did a fair amount of research and also consulted my Doctor. I strongly recommend 'Hemp for Health' by Chris Conrad. He deals with medicinal applications of marijuana in length. to others reading this (including Dr Bain - osteo-arthritis), if you suffer from Multiple Sclerosis, Gluocoma, Asthma, Migraines or are undergoing Chemotherapy then Marijuana is by far the best available remedy. the arguments against the use of MJ include schizophrenia, lung problems and a dampening of ambition. I personally don't think schizophrenia is a bad thing, just misunderstood - most Shamen are schizophrenic (not paranoid however). Lung problems can be minimised by using an Indian Hookah or water-bong as this removes most large particles. I have two friends who were asthmatics who now NEVER suffer attacks since smoking MJ. Incidentally anyone suffering an acute attack can be saved by getting them to quickly take 2-3 'tokes', this opens the small air sacs wider and promotes oxygen transfer. "DON"T BELEIVE THE HYPE" - Public Enemy "The Tibetans consider Cannabis sacred. A Mahayana Buddhist tradition maintains that during the six steps of ascetism leading to enlightenment, Buddha lived on one Hemp seed a day....In Tantric Buddhism of the Himalayas of Tibet, Cannabis plays a very significant role in the meditative ritual used to facilitate deep meditation and heightened awareness. both medicinal and recreational secular use of Hemp are likewise so common now in this region that the plant is taken for granted as an everyday necessity" - Plants of the Gods, Schultes and Hoffman. "This ain't no joke, come on and buy the world a toke And teach the world to sing in perfect harmony" Smash Mouth - Walking on the Sun Cheers, Darren the Pot-head * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:33:52 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:17:42 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <35775546.5EBC5DEE@sprynet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Bart Lidofsky writes (to Thoa) > > What is intuition? > > Something most women have and most psychics. > > If you need to ask, you don't have it. Bullshit. > Maybe it could be a form of > mentation. Read Jungian psychology for one insight into it. That's the reason why there is a need to ask; there are so many definitions for it that it becomes nearly meaningless. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:38:48 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 22:20:08 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: 900 year old people Message-ID: <357755D8.7BF71D3@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980605104232.00711520@ozemail.com.au> Darren wrote: > > When one travels at the speed of light or close to it, time is dilated. So > lets say that Jehovah comes down in his fiery wheel (UFO) speaks to some > Israelites, leaves them a magnificent chlorophyll generator/weapon (ark), > then takes off back to sirius or wherever. After 20 years of space flight > he returns to earth but alas 800 years have passed. To the people on earth > he seems 800 odd years old but is in fact only 20 years older. I find "ancient astronauts" theories to be inherently racist. What they tend to come down to is, "The Asians, Africans, and Native Americans could not have come up with the technology and cultures that they did on their own; only the white Europeans have that capability." Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:40:31 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 19:14:26 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> Thanks, Darren, for your comments on my essay. Wow, $100 in Australian dollars! Is it being sent by sea mail or air mail? Daniel Darren wrote: > > Daniel, > > I checked out your essay on vol III. Well done for being so neutral and > giving both sides of the argument. I personally could not decide either way > without having read the 3rd volume. So I have ordered this from Kessinger > (It will cost over A$100 !!) > > Darren > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: > http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, > * Send me > E-mail Express directly to my computer screen > 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com > For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ > For > adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: > http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 21:49:53 1998 Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 19:33:01 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-ID: <357758DD.386C@azstarnet.com> References: <004501bd9010$904724e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas, Thanks for your latest. I was not trying to be difficult with you concerning Vol. III. But what I was attempting to do was to show that one can go back to original sources and try to find evidence to verify or falsify various assertions and "reminiscences". The evidence clearly shows that Archibald Keightley could NOT have take part in this alleged destruction of the Volume III MSS *shortly before HPB's death*. Other pieces of evidence can clarify and even possibly verify/falsify other issues involving Volume III. And this procedure can be used on many other historical issues relating to HPB, AND even on items and issues regarding her *teachings*. Daniel W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 4th 1998 > > Reminiscence concerning the manuscript for SD Vol. 3 and 4. > > Dear Daniel: > > I was careful in what I said. It is a reminiscence, and also, > being nearly 60 years old, is therefore even in my mind, subject > to inaccuracies of memory as I said. Had I been able to refine > it further I would have done so. > > You are quite correct in quoting the material for which you have > reports, dates, etc. I am also aware of the conflicts involved > and the resulting surmises as to accuracy. I am sorry indeed > that I cannot lay any of those surmises at rest, and, perhaps I > ought not to have mentioned what I heard, inasmuch as I have > nothing but memory to go on. The information came to me as I > said at least "second hand." At the time I had no reason to > doubt it. > > Yours as always, Dallas > > ======================================= > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 8:51 PM > Subject: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 > > >Dallas wrote > > > >>I was given to > >> understand, many years ago by an old student of HPB, that very > >> shortly before her death, she called in Archibald Keightley > and > >> G.R.S.Mead and asked where the manuscripts for the 3rd and 4th > >> Volumes were. They showed her a large pile all typed and > ready. > >> She then said that she had received "instructions" to have > them > >> destroyed. They all three set to work and tore them up. This > is a > >> reminiscence, and I have not been able to secure independent > >> verification of this statement made to me. > > > >Dallas, > > > >"Shortly before her death"?? Are we talking > >about a few days or a few weeks at the most? > > > >Archibald Keightley left England in October, > >(sometime after Oct. 10th) 1890 and did NOT > >return to England till after HPB died. > >See THE PATH, Dec. 1890, p. 295 where > >Claude Falls Wright in his "London Letter" > >writes: "Dr. Keightley leaves us in a few > >days for New Zealand. . . ." This document > >is dated Oct. 1890. Also see other issues of > >THE PATH, first six months of 1891. > > > > > >Then in another "London Letter" dated > >January 7, 1891, Claude Wright writes: > >"H.P.B. has WITHIN THE LAST WEEK OR SO > >begun to get together the M.S.S. (long > >ago written) for the third volume of the > >SECRET DOCTRINE; it will, however, take > >a good twelve months to prepare for > >publication." > > > >>From the above we see that more than > >2 months after A. Keightley had left > >English soil, Claude Wright reports > >that H.P.B. was working on the > >3rd volume MSS. H.P.B. lived 4 more > >months after this report. > > > >In light of the above how could Archibald > >have been involved in the alleged > >destruction of the SD III MSS "shortly > >before HPB's death"?! > > > >Basil Crump (close friend and associate > >of Alice Cleather) wrote in the April, 1939 > >issue of THE CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST about > >an "elderly gentleman. . . who knew Mr. > >Thomas Green, . . . [Green had] helped with the > >printing at the H.P.B. Press in London. . . . > >Before he died Mr. Green told this gentleman. . . > >that he. . . was paid to set up the type > >of vol. III and part of Vol. IV of THE SECRET > >DOCTRINE. The proofs of vol. III were > >passed by H.P.B. shortly before her death > >and Mr. Green was just going to press with them > >when he received orders from her to break up the > >type. . . .That she gave orders for the type > >to be broken up makes it practically > >certain that she also destroyed the MSS. . . ." > > > >In the May, 1939 issue of the same magazine, > >James Pryse (well-know theosophist of the > >early days who lived at London Headquarters > >during the last 8 or 9 months of HPB's life) > >demolishs this "story". Mr. Pryse was the printer > >who had come from New York to help HPB and her > >group in setting up the H.P.B. Press in London. > > > >Pryse writes: > >"Mr. Green was not a printer, did not learn to > >set type. . . . He had no part in the management, > >and never handled any 'copy' as that was always > >given to me as manager. He had nothing to do > >with the printing until I took him in as my > >assistant when the printing plant was enlarged, > >quite a while AFTER H.P.B. discarded her wornout > >body. . . ." Pryse gives other good reasons > >for discounting the story of the anonymous > >"elderly gentleman" who related this story > >about Thomas Green to Basil Crump and his > >associates. > > > >This "story" may be related to your > >"story". The time period 1939 is close to > >your estimate 1937-1939. > > > >Dallas, I find it somewhat strange that in commenting > >on the testimonies of Annie Besant, Archibald > >Keightley and G.R.S. Mead that I quoted in a > >previous post, you repeatedly wrote: > > > >"A blank---a surmise situation---conflict in > >views." > > > >Taking such a "skeptical" point of view one > >could dismiss most of the positive testimony concerning > >HPB's life. And many "skeptics" do! > > > >Please, Dallas, read my paper on the origin > >and authenticity of Vol. III at > >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/sdiiimyt.htm > > > >The quoted testimony of Besant, A. Keightley and > >Mead conform to what other eyewitnesses said at the > >same time. Read my timeline and look for > >Ariadne's thread. *It is there* from 1885 through > >1897. > > > >Again I invite you to compare the contents of the > >Wurzburg MSS with the contents of Vol. III (of course > >excluding the esoteric papers). Again read what Bertram > >Keightley said about the original Volume I (1886) becoming > >Volume III (1887). This is confirmed by Archibald > >Keightley and HPB herself. > > > >Toward the end of my paper, I deal with the > >"conflicting views" issue. Please see that section > >for relevant remarks. > > > >Daniel Caldwell > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 22:07:54 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:02:41 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Buddist Cosmology Message-ID: <01bd902e$67eb2140$247d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> For anyone interested in the Tibetan Buddhist view of evolution, I = suggest reading MYRIAD WORLDS: Buddhist Cosmology in Abhidharma, = Kalacakra and Dzog-chen, by Jamgon Kongtrul Londro Taye (Snow Lion, = 1995). This excellent book gives us the three main views of evolution = according to Tibetan Buddhism. "Although they represent different approaches, these various = cosmological systems do not contradict one another; instead, they are = contained one within the other, like Chinese boxes" (p. 39). You won=92t find anything in this book that resembles evolution as given = in the Secret Doctrine, but it is still interesting. As for creators: "Buddhism is a truly nontheistic religion in which the concept of a god = as creator has no place. Buddhist cosmology recognizes a process of = creation but does not acknowledge any sort of supernatural creator. Who = then created the world? The Buddhist reply is that the collective force = of the evolutionary actions of sentient beings creates the world; = therefore, all beings contribute to the creation of the world." (p. 40). One more quote: "An absolute beginning of the universe is not posited in this system; = instead, the universe is conceived as a cycle without commencement that = repeats itself until all beings are liberated from the sufferings of = cyclic existence." (p. 47). If we allow that evolution is cyclic (every Arc of Descent followed by = an Arc of Ascent and vice versa) around our planetary chain and that = HPB=92s Cosmocratores and Manus and so on are all reflexes of our own = spiritual Selves, then the difference between the Secret Doctrine and = Tibetan Buddhist evolution becomes a lot less. Jerry S. From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 22:21:31 1998 Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 21:22:14 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Love Live Barney! Message-Id: <199806050322.VAA10720@mailmx.micron.net> Mark wrote: >>Dinosaurs are evil. >>(Satanasaurus, Demonicus Rex, Pterrordactyl, Tridentitops, Barney, etc.) Satan-asaurus! Demon-icus Rex! P-terror-dactyl! Trident-itops! Clever you are! But this Barney jab - my, my, were you not aware? - I am a "soldier of Barney" so, Mark. . .well, I must challenge you to a duel - step outside and put up your dukes . . .and, no, Thoa cannot help you. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 4 23:58:04 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 09:46:42 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Atonement vs. Bootstraps Message-ID: <357820F0.220C@withoutwalls.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > This is almost the classic Jewish argument *against* Christianity! Who > needs an intermediary when they can go direct to the boss? OK, but if he was an exemplar, a wayshower and not an intermediary, what then? Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 00:18:37 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:11:02 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Love Live Barney! Message-ID: <357826A1.599F@withoutwalls.com> References: <199806050322.VAA10720@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > Satan-asaurus! Demon-icus Rex! P-terror-dactyl! Trident-itops! Clever you are! > > But this Barney jab - my, my, were you not aware? - I am a "soldier of > Barney" so, Mark. . .well, I must challenge you to a duel - step outside and > put up your dukes . . .and, no, Thoa cannot help you. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought it was already proven on the list that "Barney (=666) is Satan." I don't really know if it is true. I just saw it written down somewhere so, as a theosophist, I just assumed it was absolutely true. ;-P Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 02:06:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:04:27 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: thought or intuition? Message-Id: Bart: > What is intuition? I don't know it, but I'll know it when I see it. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 02:13:20 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:05:41 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: 900 year old people Message-Id: >Darren wrote: >> >> When one travels at the speed of light or close to it, time is dilated. So >> lets say that Jehovah comes down in his fiery wheel (UFO) speaks to some >> Israelites, leaves them a magnificent chlorophyll generator/weapon (ark), >> then takes off back to sirius or wherever. After 20 years of space flight >> he returns to earth but alas 800 years have passed. To the people on earth >> he seems 800 odd years old but is in fact only 20 years older. > > I find "ancient astronauts" theories to be inherently racist. What they >tend to come down to is, "The Asians, Africans, and Native Americans >could not have come up with the technology and cultures that they did on >their own; only the white Europeans have that capability." Very perceptive, Bart. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 03:36:33 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:39:15 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Love Live Barney! Message-Id: Love Live Barney? Universal Love? Is Kym feeling LOVING today? Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 03:49:00 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:39:11 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: thought or intuition? Message-Id: >Thoa Tran writes and quotes >>if we did what you >>>> suggested the person who was threatening to jump would already be shark >>food >>>> by the time we figured out how to "act accordingly." >>> >>> So you take your chances. Also, once you get into the habit, the >>>thought process becomes fsster and faster. >>> >>> Bart Lidofsky >> >>That could work if you have the time to think it through. But in an >>emergency situation, or when you are face-to-face with someone seeking >>advice, the intuition has to kick in, and guide the thought and action. >>Knowledge before hand is necessary, but instinct has to take over when it >>comes time for action. You can think everything out as much as you want, >>but until you get the experience on the battlefield, you won't know how to >>let your instinct guide you. > >Like the shark. It doesn't stop to think either fast or slow, and so it gets >there first. To both Alan and Bart after the joke: I think of intuition as more than animal instinct. To me, animal instinct (as far as mating, gathering food, and other common survival functions) involves a built in practical mechanism. Intuition, which helps in finding solutions to complex questions and helps us connect to other beings, involve a deeper source. It feels to me like a point of contact to the knowing All. Thought, to me, is dependent on the data gathering and conceptual system. This depends on how much data we have is more limited than intuition. How do you think the human culture have made so many creative leaps? How did they manage to pull that rabbit out of nowhere? How do you "read" other people? Whether you define thought and intuition by the energy field, the conscious/unconscious mind, or the physical/spiritual, thought is still the limited surface mechanism and intuition the tool by which we probe the limitless depth. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 03:51:32 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:52:14 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Messiah [Heb] Christos [Greek] Message-Id: Alan: >Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the conjuction of the seven >planets of the ancients in Feb 1962 heralded the birth of this >generation's Messiah? The Messiah would be 36 years old right now, >and who would take notice of her/him/it? Ahem, the planets were off by a few years, but...YOO-HOO, HEY... Saint Alan of Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 03:59:45 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 01:00:18 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: rat's ass Message-Id: Alan: >Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes >>who really gives a rat's ass about >>whether HPB told a so called "untruth" (whatever that is)? > >I give up. Who is it? HPB said, so far as I recal, that she sometimes >told "fibs" - are "fibs" untruths? > >I never tried catching a rat's ass, so I don't give one, 'cos I can't. I >wouldn't give one even if I had one. I have a lot of mice asses. Anyone want some? >[Enter men in white coats with restraining equipment] It's about time! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 04:03:46 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 00:58:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Idiots Message-Id: >Mark Kusek writes >>> Kym wrote, answering Brenda: >>> >>> Humans may have created or contributed to 'evil' or 'evil-doings' >>> but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and prickly-bushes >>> are not, in themselves, 'evil.' >> >>Dinosaurs are evil. >>(Satanasaurus, Demonicus Rex, Pterrordactyl, Tridentitops, Barney, etc.) > >We Protest! > >IDIOTS > >(International Dinosaurs In Other Theosophical Societies) ROFL!!! I'm cc'ing this to TI-L for Alexis' benefit. I always knew he didn't mean any malice when he called people idiots. He was only declaring a brother/sister! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 05:21:33 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 04:22:47 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Evil = humanity Message-Id: <199806051022.EAA26920@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >The simple statement by you that you are someone's friend doesn't >necessarily make it true in my mind. It would seem illogical, not to mention just plain dumb, of me to say that someone on this list was my friend when that person reads this list - that would be a sure-fire way to get myself humiliated if I were lying. >>My point was: you may consider people "inherently evil" - but that doesn't >>mean it is true nor that others will take kindly to being referred to as >>"inherently evil." > >No, it doesn't. So I suppose we should just KEEP THE SECRET DOCTRINE secret. Again, Brenda, please note in my previous statement that I am referring to you specifically; not the hiding nor revealing of THE SECRET DOCTRINE. >When HPB says evil didn't exist on the earth until humans got here, how do >you interpret this? > >Evil is in our mental constitution. It is a construct which humans use, >but perhaps one which is not used by the animal kingdom or the adept (our >next) kingdom of nature. Evil wasn't here until there was a mind to >possess it. You stated in your previous post which started this exchange that humans are "inherently evil." "Inherently" means existing in someone or something as a natural and inseparable quality; an inborn characteristic. In your follow-up post (cited above) you state that "evil" is "a construct." I am not sure what you define as "construct," but to me it is 'to build' or 'to form' or 'to invent.' Construct is much different than inherent - and I agree that "evil" is a construct; however, again, I do not believe that humans are "inherently evil." There is nothing I've ever read in Theosophical doctrine that says humans are "evil" in themselves. According to the literature, a human is simply a Monad in flesh form. In THE SECRET DOCTRINE (Book 2:185-186), the Monad is referred to as being nothing "other than divine." A monad, even though it is divine, was provided the option of choice while in the flesh. Humans are also provided with much 'spiritual power' - that, too, has been misused. Until humans realize their true heritage and how much power they really have, the confusion will manifest itself in what appears to be "evil." Not all humans on this planet suffer from this confusion - hence, another case against evil being inherent in humans. And a monad becomes human because such an incarnation will aid us in the processes of growth, understanding, and compassion. >When I arrived, if it was as I think, with the human race, our >superior stature threw a shadow on the inferior animal kingdom. Thereby, >"evil" was created. There were now two kingdoms existing side by side. Now >that ascended masters are here (in their first race perhaps), evil takes on >a new appearance. It isn't the animals (which have long since moved on to >their next globe in the chain) and it isn't present in man's actions as we >would interpret evil to exist independently of another being. Instead evil >is the shadow thrown on us by the ascended masters. It is found when the >removal of human conditions is attained by beings of light. I've not a clue what you mean when you say that "evil is the shadow thrown on us by the ascended masters." What do you mean "evil takes on a new appearance?" And when you say "It is found. . .(last sentence)" - what is the "It?" As a matter of fact, I've not a clue what the entire above cited passage means! >Why is this so offensive to you that you have to look for a "friend" to >stand by you? Oooooh, a "neener, neener, neener" statement! I love those. And it did not escape me that you put the word 'friend' in quotations. Brenda, take your finger out of your eye and your elbow out of your ear and pay attention, please: No where in this post did I "look for a friend to stand by [me]." You were talking about Paul's friends - referred to them as "inherently evil" and I responded as I am Paul's friend and didn't take kindly to being referred to as "inherently evil." Brenda, you've misinterpreted most of what I have written; therefore, do you not think it is POSSIBLE you MAY have misinterpreted some of what HPB wrote? Kym From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 08:51:54 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 09:40:45 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Cancel the order! and Jews vs. Jesus Message-Id: <199806051340.JAA01282@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806050458.XAA32647@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 4, 98 11:58:12 pm Darren, if it is at all possible CANCEL THE ORDER for that outrageously, atrociously expensive volume from Kessinger. Every Theosophical title they have is extremely pricey; never having seen one I can only assume they're bound in gold plates or alligator hide. You can get exactly the same stuff for a quarter the price in one of the late volumes of the Blavatsky Collected Writings-- 14 I think, but check. Alan, I think that Jewish argument you talk about is very disingenuous. "Not need an intermediary?" What about the Mosaic law? What about being the chosen people? Sure, Reform Jews are about like Unitarians, and mystical Judaism has some wonderful insights. And granted, Christianity has erected just as oppressive a priestly hierarchy and set of exclusivistic rules as any other religion and is thus quite out of touch with the ethos of its founder. But you only have to look at the Orthodox in Israel today to see how much the focus is on manmade observances as opposed to direct communion with the divine. The basic ideas that God is a lawgiver and we have to obey a set a laws to get on his good side, and that some ethnic groups or social categories are holier than others and we should shun the unholy, are fundamentally evil and what Jesus rejected most emphatically IMO. Why are they evil? Until I hear a better definition, I'll hold to M. Scott Peck's in People of the Lie: evil people behave in destructive, scapegoating ways while denying all personal responsibility for their actions. There's never been anything as effective as religious codes and hierarchies in bringing that out in people. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 09:24:56 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 23:56:36 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Idiots Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980605235636.0071289c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: fellow idiots, they time has come to announce the return of the maitreya of idiots. The Grand Lodge welcomes IDIOT #467 Darren into it's ranks Hail Eris At 12:58 AM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >>Mark Kusek writes >>>> Kym wrote, answering Brenda: >>>> >>>> Humans may have created or contributed to 'evil' or 'evil-doings' >>>> but humans, animals, stink-bugs, lava rocks, and prickly-bushes >>>> are not, in themselves, 'evil.' >>> >>>Dinosaurs are evil. >>>(Satanasaurus, Demonicus Rex, Pterrordactyl, Tridentitops, Barney, etc.) >> >>We Protest! >> >>IDIOTS >> >>(International Dinosaurs In Other Theosophical Societies) > >ROFL!!! I'm cc'ing this to TI-L for Alexis' benefit. I always knew he >didn't mean any malice when he called people idiots. He was only declaring >a brother/sister! > >Thoa :o) > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 09:39:55 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:12:46 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: More About SD Vol. 3 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980606001246.0070de5c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> Thats 4 day express I think. You'd expect that for that price . However in Australia Customs can seize certain books. We have an insiduous form of censorship that operates behind the scenes. So I've actually placed the order through the adelaide lodge so that the mail expense will be minimised by being part of a larger consignment. I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my enthusiasm amusing for some reason. Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried that there are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the teachings because of a lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the christian Church - thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose clouded. I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly Dec 22, 2012 Darren >Thanks, Darren, for your comments on my essay. > >Wow, $100 in Australian dollars! Is it being >sent by sea mail or air mail? > >Daniel > >Darren wrote: >> >> Daniel, >> >> I checked out your essay on vol III. Well done for being so neutral and >> giving both sides of the argument. I personally could not decide either way >> without having read the 3rd volume. So I have ordered this from Kessinger >> (It will cost over A$100 !!) >> >> Darren >> >> * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: >> http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, >> * Send me >> E-mail Express directly to my computer screen >> 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com >> For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ >> For >> adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: >> http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html >> >> > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:02:22 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:22:36 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Atlantis Peak Maybe? Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980606002236.0070e2fc@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <357755D8.7BF71D3@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980605104232.00711520@ozemail.com.au> > I find "ancient astronauts" theories to be inherently racist. What they >tend to come down to is, "The Asians, Africans, and Native Americans >could not have come up with the technology and cultures that they did on >their own; only the white Europeans have that capability." The degree of a statements truth or falsehood lies only from within the dimension and framework it is perceived. From our perspective it seems the europeans may have come up with their capabilities, but were these manifesting in a hostile way? White europeans bear a great karmic burden - there is so much intrigue involved with some of the biggest stories; like the US$1 - can anyone tell me about the great seal and what does the latin mean? As many people are probably aware of the Astronaut theory is pushed by a called Erik von daniken I think, My mormon mother in law gave me this book to read - The chariots of the gods. It's got me thinking. I in no-way belittle any othe races that had suppossed vistiations, thes dhyani-cohens materialsed to me on the atsral plane, I understood. I alos beleive that almost every civilization had UFO contact. You just have to beleive your free. * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:03:36 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 00:04:11 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! and Jews vs. Jesus Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980606000411.0070e7a0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806051340.JAA01282@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199806050458.XAA32647@proteus.imagiware.com> Paul, Thanks for this advice. The main cost was in the $30 mail fee, presume for air deliver with insurance. But from what I'm lead to beleive is these books are soft-cover reprints and not worth the $49.95 price tag. In total US$79.95 = AS$115.00, very expensive for a reprint. I really want to make up my i own mind and want the most unbiased literature possible. BTW, How did you go with those review references I gave you of your books? Namaste Darren At 09:40 AM 6/5/98 -0400, you wrote: >Darren, if it is at all possible CANCEL THE ORDER for that >outrageously, atrociously expensive volume from Kessinger. >Every Theosophical title they have is extremely pricey; never >having seen one I can only assume they're bound in gold plates or >alligator hide. You can get exactly the same stuff for a quarter >the price in one of the late volumes of the Blavatsky Collected >Writings-- 14 I think, but check. > >Alan, I think that Jewish argument you talk about is very >disingenuous. "Not need an intermediary?" What about the Mosaic >law? What about being the chosen people? Sure, Reform Jews are >about like Unitarians, and mystical Judaism has some wonderful >insights. And granted, Christianity has erected just as >oppressive a priestly hierarchy and set of exclusivistic rules as >any other religion and is thus quite out of touch with the ethos >of its founder. But you only have to look at the Orthodox in Israel >today to see how much the focus is on manmade observances as >opposed to direct communion with the divine. The basic ideas that >God is a lawgiver and we have to obey a set a laws to get on his good side, >and that some ethnic groups or social categories are holier than others and >we should shun the unholy, are fundamentally evil and what Jesus rejected most >emphatically IMO. > >Why are they evil? Until I hear a better definition, I'll hold >to M. Scott Peck's in People of the Lie: evil people behave in >destructive, scapegoating ways while denying all personal >responsibility for their actions. There's never been anything as >effective as religious codes and hierarchies in bringing that out >in people. > >Cheers, >Paul > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:10:53 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:55:10 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-ID: <685dd6e3.357806d0@aol.com> I'm not quite sure what Darren is ordering for a $100 from Kessinger Publishing. I must have missed some posts. However, keep in mind that Kessinger reprints esoteric material much like: Sun Publishing Company (http://www.sunbooks.com), Binkley Publishing (http://www.abwam.com/nalybi/index.html) Health Research (http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/) Hence, you'll be paying a much higher price for a limited reprint volume. If you aren't desperate to get the material, I would scour the second-hand bookstores first. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:38:17 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 08:35:26 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-ID: <3578103E.4350@azstarnet.com> References: <199806051340.JAA01282@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Darren and Paul: Vol. III SD as sold by Kessinger is $49.95 in American dollars. You will NOT find in Vol. 14 of HPB's Collected Writings *all* of the major sections or essays as in the original 1897 Vol. III. Boris de Zirkoff put some of the sections in another volume of the Collected Writings. Then the esoteric papers at the end of SD Vol. III will be found in vol. 12 of CWs. Hope this helps. Daniel K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Darren, if it is at all possible CANCEL THE ORDER for that > outrageously, atrociously expensive volume from Kessinger. > Every Theosophical title they have is extremely pricey; never > having seen one I can only assume they're bound in gold plates or > alligator hide. You can get exactly the same stuff for a quarter > the price in one of the late volumes of the Blavatsky Collected > Writings-- 14 I think, but check. From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:48:48 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:33:50 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <35780FDE.6B3A2678@sprynet.com> References: Thoa Tran wrote: > I think of intuition as more than animal instinct. To me, animal instinct > (as far as mating, gathering food, and other common survival functions) > involves a built in practical mechanism. I would hope so, that intuition comes from the reincarnating principles and not from the more temporary principles. > Intuition, which helps in finding > solutions to complex questions and helps us connect to other beings, > involve a deeper source. It feels to me like a point of contact to the > knowing All. Thought, to me, is dependent on the data gathering and > conceptual system. This depends on how much data we have is more limited > than intuition. This is close to my own concept of intuition; it is knowledge that comes to the manas through the Atma by way of the Buddhi. However, animals and children who have not yet learned to speak have the capability of seeing things that most humans are trained and conditioned not to see. This is sometimes also called "intuition", but is really based in the temporary, "lower" principles, and is based in mentation in the midbrain. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 10:53:56 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 01:13:49 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980606011349.007112b0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <685dd6e3.357806d0@aol.com> To Lmhem111 - I have cancelled the order. Well will tomorow- actually make that saturday Thanks everyone for talking me out of it. Sorry yes for those don't know, the book was Kessinger press Secret Doctrine Vol 3- a somewhat contentious volume Its a pity it's not available as a website. pdf or HTML document. Oh well many TS literature is getting the conversion to cyberspace - it makes it so much easier to do word searchs. >I'm not quite sure what Darren is ordering for a $100 from Kessinger >Publishing. I must have missed some posts. However, keep in mind that >Kessinger reprints esoteric material much like: > >Sun Publishing Company >(http://www.sunbooks.com), >Binkley Publishing >(http://www.abwam.com/nalybi/index.html) >Health Research >(http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/) > >Hence, you'll be paying a much higher price for a limited reprint volume. If >you aren't desperate to get the material, I would scour the second-hand >bookstores first. > >Lmhem111 > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 11:06:42 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:55:30 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Atonement vs. Bootstraps Message-ID: <357814F2.E4B282E8@sprynet.com> References: <357820F0.220C@withoutwalls.com> Mark Kusek wrote: > > Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > > This is almost the classic Jewish argument *against* Christianity! Who > > needs an intermediary when they can go direct to the boss? > > OK, but if he was an exemplar, a wayshower and not an intermediary, what > then? You start wandering into Gnosticism. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 11:17:58 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:45:37 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980605104537.0078f184@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980606001246.0070de5c@ozemail.com.au> References: <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> At 12:12 AM 6/6/98 +0900, you wrote: >I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >enthusiasm amusing for some reason. Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge is not interested? How old are the key/active members? mkr From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 11:21:48 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:12:28 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: HPB's SD Vol. III Message-ID: <000301bd909c$bd8d64a0$400a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> HPB's alleged third volume of the SD can be found at: http://www.bibliofind.com/ Search for the following item: blavatsky, helena petrovna: esoteric writngs of helena petrovna blavatsky ; theosophical publishing house, (1980) first quest edition.vg wrappers front pages and wrapper bent at the tip. a scrape at the bottom of the front. some wear to the extremities. occult, metaphysics. stock # Offered for sale by Vicarious Experience at US$15.00 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 11:26:51 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:53:52 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! and Jews vs. Jesus Message-ID: <35781490.6E4A5FF7@sprynet.com> References: <199806051340.JAA01282@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > Alan, I think that Jewish argument you talk about is very > disingenuous. "Not need an intermediary?" What about the Mosaic > law? That is not an intermediary. > What about being the chosen people? As much as the Theosophists are the "chosen people". Chosen to bring certain parts of the Ageless Wisdom to the rest of humanity, Jews are asked to follow a much stricter discipline than the rest of humanity, as well. This is why Judaism discourages conversion; if one is a non-Jew, then one is considered to be following the law if they only obey a few simple laws, like using courts rather than blood oaths, kindness to animals, no incest, no stealing, no using false testimony against someone else, and the like. > Sure, Reform Jews are about like Unitarians, Many Jews calling themselves "Reform" are merely trying to assimilate Judaism into something more like their Christian neighbors, but the point of the Reform movement is to take the community out of moral decisions, and have each person study the law and make their own interpretations. The problem is that too many so-called "Reform" Jews make their own interpretations without studying first. Note that H. P. B. stated that meditation and an altruistic life are not sufficient; study is also necessary. > and mystical Judaism has some wonderful insights. Note that mystical Judaism is part of the mainstream, and not a forbidden cult. > But you only have to look at the Orthodox in Israel today to see how > much the focus is on manmade observances as opposed to direct > communion with the divine. Those are fundamentalists calling themselves Orthodox. They have the opposite problem of the Reform Jews; they study the Law, but take others' interpretations as the final say, and refuse to make any of their own. This, of course, is the attitude that Jesus rejected, and is rampant in much of Christianity today. > The basic ideas that God is a lawgiver and we have to obey a set a > laws to get on his good side, Or our own. Note that there is nothing in the Jewish religion about an afterlife, except for an indeterminate time in the future when the Messiah reunites all of humanity. There is speculation, including many Kabbalist scholars who believe in reincarnation. > and that some ethnic groups or social categories are holier than < others and we should shun the unholy, are fundamentally evil and what > Jesus rejected most emphatically IMO. So do most Jews. Jewish law specifically prohibits that attitude. Of course, so do the E.S. rules, and we see how much THOSE are followed... Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 11:28:29 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:03:41 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Atlantis Peak Maybe? Message-ID: <357816DD.B269A5E9@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980605104232.00711520@ozemail.com.au> <3.0.2.32.19980606002236.0070e2fc@ozemail.com.au> Darren wrote: > As many people are probably aware of the Astronaut theory is pushed by a > called Erik von daniken I think, My mormon mother in law gave me this book > to read - The chariots of the gods. It's got me thinking. I in no-way > belittle any othe races that had suppossed vistiations, thes dhyani-cohens > materialsed to me on the atsral plane, I understood. My father, for many years the chairman of the Applied Physics department at Columbia University, read Chariots of the Gods, and commented that it seemed to make a lot of sense to him, except in the areas of physics, where von Daniken had a lot of concepts that were completely wrong. A chemistry professor told him that the book made a lot of sense, except in the area of chemistry, where EvD was completely wrong. Curious, my father discussed the book with professors from many different departments, and received similar answers from all of them. There are many areas where science (which can be defined as the study of that which can be measured) conflicts with common sense. Apparently much of EvD's theories depend on disprovable common sense. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 12:10:00 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:54:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Vol. III, Moses Message-Id: <199806051654.MAA25491@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806051628.LAA04280@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 5, 98 11:28:31 am Thanks to Daniel for clarification andd Govert for research. I wonder if two vols. of the BCW cost more than $50 nowadays? At least they'd be available in Australia and thus no huge shipping fee. And that 1980 TPH reprint would be cheapest of all alternatives if it can be gotten to Australia. I assume it's now OP? If not, a new one should be pretty cheap. Bart, in what way is Moses *not* an intermediary between Yahweh and his people? Paul From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 12:43:54 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 10:37:03 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: 900 year old people Message-Id: <199806051733.MAA12234@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980605104232.00711520@ozemail.com.au> Darren, I LOVE this logic. If you can think like this, you can certainly help me to think on things. Brenda At 10:42 AM 6/5/98 +0900, you wrote: >When one travels at the speed of light or close to it, time is dilated. So >lets say that Jehovah comes down in his fiery wheel (UFO) speaks to some >Israelites, leaves them a magnificent chlorophyll generator/weapon (ark), >then takes off back to sirius or wherever. After 20 years of space flight >he returns to earth but alas 800 years have passed. To the people on earth >he seems 800 odd years old but is in fact only 20 years older. > >This could explain some of the biblical ages - The sumerian king list also >shows the SAME king at different historical periods. That is to say for eg, >there may have been an Enoch II who ruled from some given time and then >left in his UFO. In the meantime, an Enoch III gains the thrown for some >period of time , then 300-400 years later we see the re-appearance of Enoch >II on the king list. If it was a new Enoch he should IV not II. > >Just an Idea > >Darren > >* Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: >http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 (go there and try it!) or, * Send me >E-mail Express directly to my computer screen >12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ For >adding similar signatures to your e-mail go to: >http://www.icq.com/emailsig.html > > > > Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 12:54:51 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:28:36 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Lurking Rent Message-ID: <01bd90a7$5f2154c0$LocalHost@default> Here is a "zinger" I think is pretty good on the "salvation by a = Personal God" idea from Roy Mitchel in his "Exile of the Soul" = (Blavatsky Inst., Prometheus) "....The unending controversy between the exponents of = free-will and those of predestination with all the rarefied subtleties = that go into it, is a war to decide... whether, because God knows = everything in advance - as would become an omniscient deity - all events = are therefore fixed, or whether one of God's creatures can decide of his = own free will to do something God knows in advance he will not do or = something God had not foreseen. Predestination destroys the whole point = of the redemptive system, because whether an individual will be saved or = not is all fixed in advance. Free will, on the other hand, makes God = less than omniscient. If the Predestinarian is right, God knows in = advance every time he makes a soul for eternal torment, but seemingly He = continues to do so because He is bound by a law manifested in the sexual = proclivities of His creatures. In which case again He is not only less = than omnipotent but is a servant of sex." =20 - Jake Jaqua=20 From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 13:09:58 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 22:59:02 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: To Darren: internet lecture Message-Id: Darren: >I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >enthusiasm amusing for some reason. > >Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried that there >are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the teachings because of a >lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the christian Church - >thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose clouded. > > >I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly Darren, you might want to ask Eldon about how to give a lecture about the internet and theosophy. I think Eldon already gave several lectures on that topic. I'm sure Eldon had several roadblocks along his way. I think you read, last week, about Eldon's internet failure (can't remember the name, a magazine?) His Theosophy World list was almost dead for at least a year, and now it's hopping. Perhaps there's another way to get through to the lodge about your serious intent. On the other hand, they could be backwards when it comes to the internet. Perhaps there are people on this list who could use your internet expertise to promote theosophy. It's too bad that the enthusiasm of the young is not being used. The thing that the young is lacking is knowledge of established customs, and experience. The former is good in that the young can see beyond the rigid establishment, but bad in that the young do not know how to deal with the establishment. When you don't know how to deal with the establishment, the establishment can be a big brick wall. Can you imagine the dynamism that would arise if the establishment knows how to use the enthusiasm and the power of the young? Young people are idealistic and energetic. Young people also attract other young people. Instead of being afraid at the rowdiness and unconventionality of the young, the establishment should flow with the tide and guide it. And guide it in a way that would not squelch the energy. If the establishment fails to do that, the young will go elsewhere that would fit with their enthusiasm. The establishment will end up with a bunch of long time established folks gathering cobwebs. When the older generation dies, what then is left? A slab of brick wall. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 13:48:52 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:42:11 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-ID: <35783C02.29CFC93A@netfeed.com> References: <685dd6e3.357806d0@aol.com> Kerssinger xeroxes copies of scarce and rare books and perfect binds them like an ordinary paperback book, except that they all measure 8 1/2 x 11 inches. $100.00 Australian is pretty close to what one would pay for a used copy of the six volume "Adyar Edition" of the S.D., which isn't yet all that scarce. You might search www.bibliofind.com or one of the other used book data bases for a better deal. $65.00 to $85.00 U.S. is the typical price range for this book. jhe Lmhem111@aol.com wrote: > I'm not quite sure what Darren is ordering for a $100 from Kessinger > Publishing. I must have missed some posts. However, keep in mind that > Kessinger reprints esoteric material much like: > > Sun Publishing Company > (http://www.sunbooks.com), > Binkley Publishing > (http://www.abwam.com/nalybi/index.html) > Health Research > (http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/) > > Hence, you'll be paying a much higher price for a limited reprint volume. If > you aren't desperate to get the material, I would scour the second-hand > bookstores first. > > Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 13:52:35 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:32:42 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Evil = humanity Message-Id: <199806051829.NAA18865@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806051022.EAA26920@mailmx.micron.net> >>When HPB says evil didn't exist on the earth until humans got here, how do >>you interpret this? >> >>Evil is in our mental constitution. It is a construct which humans use, >>but perhaps one which is not used by the animal kingdom or the adept (our >>next) kingdom of nature. Evil wasn't here until there was a mind to >>possess it. > >You stated in your previous post which started this exchange that humans are >"inherently evil." "Inherently" means existing in someone or something as a >natural and inseparable quality; an inborn characteristic. Kym, If you haven't read my webpage, you might try it. I don't know if that will help explain my thinking or not, but the link is now at the bottom of all my posts. Evil is a construct existing outside of ourselves normally during the first through fourth races, although Archangel Lucifer's job, as I see it is to help us to recognize that we also have evil within ourselves and his race of activity is the fourth according to THE SECRET DOCTRINE. Now what seems to happen is that when the fifth through seventh races are lived through, evil becomes more than a concept which we avoid and it becomes a condition of living alongside or allowing the next kingdom of adepts to live within us. It becomes in my mind inherent through the fact that we recognize them as "all the good" in our lives. If I were to commit an act without their "presence," this act COULD very possibly be harmful and destructive. However with their influence of "good," even when they are temporarily "away" (so to speak, if that were possible?) my actions COULD also be constructive because I have attuned my actions to their "greater good and supreme nature and way of life." I am "learning" from them (Ascended Masters) how to live in balance and harmony. I am "learning" ways which are new and could be right or wrong. I think that when light reaches me it can be direct from the sun or it can be done with the use of Ascended Masters as intermediaries. Direct light from the sun does not necessarily imply that my action would be constructive and beneficial to those living around me. There are measures that I can take which help to insure that my direct Monadic actions are kept constructive, or so I have been taught. I will try to use these measures, but there is no guarantee. One recent thought on this matter is that when the light reaches me, I can protect myself from exposing the source of the light to others who may be "destructive" by breaking the light into its seven component parts. This is beautiful to think about because the light appears in my mind as seven little musical notes with different colors that seem to dance and make music. This HARMONY AND BALANCE is very protective of myself and actions and the idea is that now I have "SEVEN KEYS" which must be rejoined in order to understand them in their "light essence." I can keep this secret around others or I can rejoin them (mentally) and project the light in full power. >In your follow-up post (cited above) you state that "evil" is "a construct." >I am not sure what you define as "construct," but to me it is 'to build' or >'to form' or 'to invent.' Construct is much different than inherent - and I >agree that "evil" is a construct; however, again, I do not believe that >humans are "inherently evil." >A monad, even though it is divine, was provided the option of choice while >in the flesh. Humans are also provided with much 'spiritual power' - that, >too, has been misused. Until humans realize their true heritage and how >much power they really have, the confusion will manifest itself in what >appears to be "evil." Not all humans on this planet suffer from this >confusion - hence, another case against evil being inherent in humans. I am attempting to understand what I read when I offer this view of evil. I do not believe the power is in the human to act any longer as an independent being, but that the human is powerful in transforming their nature into one which allows the light to shine through us. Yes, we have power to transform ourselves, but rightfully credit must be given to the next kingdom for the blessings they bestow on the earth and through interactions. >>When I arrived, if it was as I think, with the human race, our >>superior stature threw a shadow on the inferior animal kingdom. Thereby, >>"evil" was created. There were now two kingdoms existing side by side. Now >>that ascended masters are here (in their first race perhaps), evil takes on >>a new appearance. It isn't the animals (which have long since moved on to >>their next globe in the chain) and it isn't present in man's actions as we >>would interpret evil to exist independently of another being. Instead evil >>is the shadow thrown on us by the ascended masters. It is found when the >>removal of human conditions is attained by beings of light. >I've not a clue what you mean when you say that "evil is the shadow thrown >on us by the ascended masters." What do you mean "evil takes on a new >appearance?" And when you say "It is found. . .(last sentence)" - what is >the "It?" As a matter of fact, I've not a clue what the entire above cited >passage means! Let's hypothesize that we are inviting ascended master light to live in us. As an androgynous, sixth race being we have a choice as to who shall be performing the actions. We can take turns, take occasionally rest breaks, perform "separate" functions, etc. If I do not have the ability to distinguish right from wrong according to the separate ascended master living in me, I am existing as a receptacle for their greater light and offering myself to their discernment as to what is right and what is wrong. If I say, "Remove all wrong from me and replace it with ascended master light." Away go certain areas of myself that I can hardly even distinguish. Other areas of myself remain intact and blaze forth their perfection as a way of saying, yes, there are parts of the human which are constructive. My views are partly achieved through association with the I AM Temple, an organization many people here may not have been fortunate enough to align with. I hope you will consider what I am saying. I realize this is an entirely new point of view and want to help people relax with it as much as possible. Evil is not a pleasant subject, but HPB often finds reason to discuss it and I feel compelled to use it when I think it could help. Ha Ha. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 14:06:45 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:15:54 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: HPB's SD Vol. III Message-ID: <357843E9.1617026@netfeed.com> References: <000301bd909c$bd8d64a0$400a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> This is the Quest paperback reprint published after the six vol. edition went out of print. This would be the cheapest way to go. $15.00 is about right for this. jhe Govert W. Schüller wrote: > HPB's alleged third volume of the SD can be found at: > > http://www.bibliofind.com/ > > Search for the following item: > > blavatsky, helena petrovna: esoteric writngs of helena petrovna blavatsky ; > theosophical publishing house, (1980) first quest edition.vg wrappers front > pages and wrapper bent at the tip. a scrape at the bottom of the front. some > wear to the extremities. occult, metaphysics. stock # Offered for sale by > Vicarious Experience at US$15.00 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 14:20:34 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 12:11:44 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-ID: <357842EF.99783DD4@netfeed.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980606011349.007112b0@ozemail.com.au> I took a look for you on www.mxbf.com a multiple listing book search. There is a six volume "adyar edition" for about 150.00 u.s., a bit greedy IMO. There is also a 1921 three volume edition for $125.00. u.s. That would be a reprint of the 1893 two volume edition edited by Besant, plus a reprint of Besant's 1897 third volume. It is three times the money then you would be giving to Kessinger, but I think it is a good value. Take a look. jhe Darren wrote: > To Lmhem111 - I have cancelled the order. Well will tomorow- actually make > that saturday > Thanks everyone for talking me out of it. > Sorry yes for those don't know, the book was Kessinger press Secret > Doctrine Vol 3- a somewhat contentious volume > > Its a pity it's not available as a website. pdf or HTML document. Oh well > many TS literature is getting the conversion to cyberspace - it makes it so > much easier to do word searchs. > > >I'm not quite sure what Darren is ordering for a $100 from Kessinger > >Publishing. I must have missed some posts. However, keep in mind that > >Kessinger reprints esoteric material much like: > > > >Sun Publishing Company > >(http://www.sunbooks.com), > >Binkley Publishing > >(http://www.abwam.com/nalybi/index.html) > >Health Research > >(http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/) > > > >Hence, you'll be paying a much higher price for a limited reprint volume. If > >you aren't desperate to get the material, I would scour the second-hand > >bookstores first. > > > >Lmhem111 > > > > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: > http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 > * Send me E-mail Express directly to my > computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com > For downloading ICQ at > http://www.icq.com/ > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 18:51:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:39:44 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <007c01bd90da$a42e2600$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 5th 1998 Dalas has been wondering : Karma and its perception has been a subject for debate. Some kinds of karma we see instantly. Drop a brick on your foot, it hurts, you are careful with heavy objects thereafter. Wave your hand unexpectedly in a person's face, their eyes will blink and they may flinch -- instinct " or memory of past hurt (Karma) had made that part of the body sensitive ? Boiling water or steam scalds. Sugar is sweet, Some of these things are inherent in the properties or qualities of substances -- but our use or movement near them adds a factor. What is our mysterious relation with "things," and with "people ?" Have a fight, verbal or physical. with someone, is the relationship changed thereafter ? Why ? Some of it is fear of karmic results. Why do some people want to go to "confession ?" Why do some expect "absolution ?" Why do many expect to be saved by Belief in Jesus, or some other deity ? Why do many think that "God" sees all they think or do ? Is it because we have an innate knowledge that karma operates ? Is Karma -- God ? What makes the difference between "good" and "evil ?" is it thought, feeling, motive, action -- or some combination of all of these ? Where can precise information be had ? Why is it that even the criminal desires to appear righteous ? Why is hypocrisy disliked ? why is honesty admired ? Why is the whole issue of morality and ethics so "touchy ?" Does karma work if no one sees us ? I seem to recall that Plato goes into this in a dialog named "The Laws" -- there is a discussion about the relative "laws of three countries." Finally there is agreement that those are mirrors of a wider a more encompassing law of inner fidelity, moderation and honor. Why should that be ? Karma is looked on as "Nemesis -- the pursuing reaction to evil acts. But to be fair, Karma is also good. It rewards virtue. We do not often look on "good fortune" as karma. We call it "luck, chance, etc." And we do not think that we deserve it. it just happens. But if we look around and into the affairs of nature we see laws operating everywhere, chaos nowhere, and cooperation and harmony far exceed disharmony and strife. So why should it be specially absent in human affairs ? These are questions I think of when this arises ? Why are we so interested in securing "something for nothing ? How can we be sure that value we pay out (up front) will be recompensed with a fair value of information or training ? How many seek "powers, magic words, special advantages, etc.," so that they can employ these to succeed where others fail, or to run in advance of the pedestrianating crowds ? Curious, curious. How, in the presence of mutual dependence, the desire for isolated favors and special independence. or the securing of ease obsesses us. We know that any excess ends up boring us. So why ? There are thinkers, and there are actors, but rare indeed are those who do both, and still rarer are those who do both well. They and all things are covered by karma in any case. What are ideals ? Who, and How are they formulated ? Why do they appeal to some and horrify others ? But to get back to the perception of Karma, the main deterrents to grasping its vastness are that its action is not always obvious. In some ways there is "quick karma" -- like the brick on the toe. In others it may take years. [Think of the magic change in Scrooge in Dickens's "Christmas Story." -- We all can will to change our attitude. ] If one should adopt the idea that karma is a fact, then there is a vast storehouse of the past -- of balances of good and bad, that we will have to meet. Now, today, we make decisions. Later, tomorrow, next year, next life perhaps we will meet the results of our present choices. But is this so ? What does man have "will ?" What is determination and what is Volition ? What is the "Mind ?" Why do we have accidents of distress or of fortune ? Why are we so unsure bout this subject ? Theosophy says that the evolution of the Universe, of the Worlds and of us, as also of the life-atoms is all wrapped in Karma, and that its operations lead every being from ignorance to wisdom. None is sacrificed or rejected or "killed." All being alive must move on. So one of its functions has to be educative. Why should we resist being educated ? And if we welcome fresh vistas, what can they be ? Karma are you there or are you not ? Can we know you and your works ? Dallas -------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 19:02:04 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:27:41 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Inner and outer Guru -- My Protest. Message-ID: <007e01bd90da$a71feec0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 5th 1998 Dear Jerry: Thanks for the note of the 4th to Daniel in which you set straight the matter of the "pressures" placed on me and yourself for opinions concerning HPB. I protested the unsubstantiated statement that Mr. Johnson made. I consider that I have as much right to protest on her behalf, as he has to make his view known. And in fact, I consider my position to be essential if HPB is to be given "equal time." It was made to defend one who was taken advantage of in her "absence." It is a matter of fairness. As I have said several times. All of us owe too much to HPB because of her presentation of Theosophy. Thus we have no right to stand in judgment over her. Do we do so over our Professors or our Teachers ? As I am able to see it, HPB came to sow the seeds of an entirely new civilization. The mission of HPB was to break the molds of men's mind-sets, and to destroy old modes of thought. The freedom to think and discover supplied new ideas and ideals for our consideration. The collective mind of mankind (thanks to Theosophical ideas) now stands open to a greater vista than it previously had. The effect of this can be traced in almost every department of living and of scientific discovery during the passage of the last hundred years. Primary to all has been the matter of ethical responsibility, based on universal concepts that all free minds can investigate themselves. Secondarily, some order has been restored in the matter of investigating the "astral" and the "occult." This is because the Theosophy that HPB taught advances the rules, details and the regulations of those things. Those who have written on theosophy after her death have very largely muddled her teachings. It is, in my opinion, far safer to go directly to what she had to teach, than take any second-hand writing to "tell it as it is." One of her contemporaries wrote of her: "Mme. Blavatsky has never deceived anyone, though she has often been obliged to let others deceive themselves." PATH IV p. 104. In the MAHATMA LETTERS, on. p. 272 we find the statement made on her behalf by her Teacher: "She is forbidden to say what she knows. You may cut her to pieces and she will not tell. Nay--she is ordered in cases of need to mislead people; and, were she more of a natural born liar--she might be happier...She is too truthful, too outspoken, too incapable of dissimulation; and now she is being daily crucified for it..." On p. 314 (Idem.) we may read: "You can never know her as we do, therefore--none of you will ever be able to judge her impartially or correctly. You see the surface of things; and what you would term "virtue," holding but to appearances, we--judge but after having fathomed the object to its profoundest depth, and generally leave the appearances to take care of themselves. In your opinion H.P.B. is, at best...as quaint, strange woman, a psychological riddle; impulsive and kindhearted, yet not free from the vice of untruth. We, on the other hand, under the garb of eccentricity and folly--we find a profounder wisdom in her inner Self that you will ever find yourselves able to perceive. In the superficial details of her homely, hard-working, common-place daily life and affairs, you discern but impracticality, womanly impulses, often absurdity and folly; we, on the contrary, light daily upon traits of her inner nature the most delicate and refined, and which would cost an uninitiated psychologist years of constant and keen observation, and many an hour of close analysis and efforts to draw out of the depth of that most subtle of mysteries--human mind--and one of her most complicated machines,--H.P.B.'s mind--and thus learn to know her true inner Self." Is it suddenly wrong to say publicly that I deeply respect and honor HPB, and that I owe much, if not all of my knowledge to her ? On her own behalf she wrote: "What I do believe in is: " 1.) the unbroken oral teachings revealed by living divine men to the elect among men; 2.) that it has reached us unaltered; and 3.) that the MASTERS are thoroughly versed in the science based on such unaltered teaching." LUCIFER, Vol. V, p. 157 Speaking of the source of her knowledge she wrote: [ this is also for Jerry Schueler' post of June 4th] "I got my drop (a draught of the golden water) from my Master (the living one)...he is a Saviour, he who leads you to finding the Master within yourself." HPB Letter to Hartmann. PATH X 369. Much more could be added, but this is already more than necessary to make the points that strike me as important in this. With best wishes to you as always, Dallas ================================== From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 20:06:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:06:29 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! and Jews vs. Jesus Message-ID: <60591cce.35789616@aol.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Note that mystical Judaism is part of the mainstream, and not a forbidden cult. > Besides Reform, Conservative and Orthodox, there is also a something called Reconstructionist Judaism. It's a New Agey sort of Judaism, more eclectic, with emphasis on meditation, singing and movement (eurythmy), Kabbalistic studies, philosophical discussion, etc. Groups in Reconstructionist Judaism sometimes call themselves Jewish Renewal Communities. They take much of their inspiration from an enlightened teacher called Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi. He is not afraid to dialogue with Catholic monks, Native American shamans, elders, Buddhist lamas, Sufi masters and psychologists of various schools. Reconstructionist Judaism is not be confused with another movement called Humanistic Judaism which is a nontheistic form of the religion established by Rabbi Sherwin T. Wine in 1963 in Detroit. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 20:21:31 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 01:46:40 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35775546.5EBC5DEE@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes >> If you need to ask, you don't have it. > > Bullshit. Thank you for your thoughtful and caring contribution. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 20:21:41 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:10:19 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Atlantis Peak Maybe? Message-ID: <19980606012745008.AAA201@pgiese> > Darren wrote: > > As many people are probably aware of the Astronaut theory is pushed by a > > called Erik von daniken I think, My mormon mother in law gave me this book > > to read - The chariots of the gods. It's got me thinking. I in no-way > > belittle any othe races that had suppossed vistiations, thes dhyani-cohens > > materialsed to me on the atsral plane, I understood. > I received the following conference notice from another list. It ended up being belittled from some of the same reasons cited in this thread: many of the emphasis on Atlantis, ancient astronauts, lost tribes of Judea, etc. reek of racism and deny the alternate cultural accomplishment and views that manifested in previous eras.[See --Life on the Illinois prairie has not robbed me of the ability to very things in a "politically correct" manner.] Since this thread is still vital, I'll offer it as food for thought (or embers for the flame, whatever the case may be). Pam [BTW --in copying the below, I couldn't resist including Catherine Yronwode's commentary, despite the violation of email list etiquette. Her web address is included for those interested in a bit of spunk.] -------------------------------------------------- Zecharia Sitchin, Drunvalo Melchizedek, Elder Hunbatz Men, Joan Ocean and others are coming together for The Prophets Conference~Yucatan September 15-21 autumn equinox in and around Merida, Mexico. http://www.aloha.net/~axiom/conference.html Elder Hunbatz Men of the Maya has called together The Prophets Conference~Yucatan for this autumn equinox. The Mayan Calendar shows the importance of this particular time as incorporating the energies of universal harmony and the principles of evolution. Many of us feel a great sense of urgency as time itself appears to be changing. We are experiencing a great deal more than some sort of millennial madness. We hear of changing electromagnetic fields and polar shifts. There is a growing experience of boundary dissolution, while at the same time, we have prophets coming forward from very ancient lineage, clearly telling us of cyclical completion. Increasing evidence is proving that we are recovering what has been lost: our knowledge and our identity. ----------end unsolicited e-mail i received today--------------- Sitchin, for those who don't know him, is one of the "ancient astronaut" cohorts of Erich von Daniken and is himself a mentor of Graham Hancock, who derived his ideas as well from John Michell. This is not meant to tar Michell with the brush of von Daniken...unless, like me, one sees "Atlantis" and "Ancient Anstronauts" as two sides of the same spurious coin. Sitchin is so troubling to archaeologists that an entire web site is devoted to debunking his theories, one of which is crucial to an understanding of contemporary spurious Egyptology, namely, the hypothesis that Khufu (Cheops) did NOT build the great Pyramid but that it was builts millennia earlier by "ancient astronauts." In the light of 19th century discoveries of building blocks marked by work-crews with the name "Khufu" -- marks that indicate that Khufu was the guy who commissioned the pyramid -- Sitchin has proposed a sort of conspiracy theory, that those workmen's marks are FORGERIES perpetrated in Victorian times by someone with a vested interest in promoting the belief that Khufu built the pyramid. Writers who follow the Atlantean imperative into pyramid revisionism (now there's a concept whose time has come!) usually cite Sitchin as their authority. And from there, as Hancock so adroitly demonstrates, it is a short metaphysical hop, skip, and jump to Charles Hapgood and the spectre of ..... Crustal Displacement. And sure enough, the folks putting this year's Sitchin-headlined conference together tell us that they "hear of changing electromagnetic fields and polar shifts." You see, when you buy the Atlantean ball of wax, you have to buy the WHOLE ball of wax as it as presently constituted. This is not the 1970s model so many of us knew and loved (or at least knew) under the aegis of John Michell -- the old Atlanean Ball of Wax with Secret Wisom and the Fire Crystal and The Hall of Records and The Recovery of Lost Knowledge. No, this is the New, Improved, Flaky-Crust Atlantean Ball of Wax, with Lemon-Freshened Polar Shifts! You get the same Secret Wisdom, Fire Crystal, Hall of Records, and Recovery of Lost Knowledge you've always had, but now, thanks to the magic of Elder Hunbatz Men of the Maya, that pokey-slow Aquarian Age you were waiting for has been given a speedy new processor for the Nineties. That's right! This time we're bringing you the Actual End of the World!!! For lots more fun, check out: "Zecharia Sitchin's Ancient Astronaut Theories -- A Skeptical Archive" http://goliath.inrs-ener.uquebec.ca/~paynter/paynter/zindex.html It's a meta-link page to sites relating to Sitchin, Hancock, and company, compiled and maintained by Royston Paynter. One of the more interesting of the anti-Sitchin (and hence anti-Michell, anti-Hancock, and anti-von Daniken) pages Paynter has links to is "Forging the Pharoah's Name?" by Martin Stower, at http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~martins/Pyramid/index.html You will also find links to Christopher Siren's very valuable Sumerian Mythology FAQ, to a great "History of Astronomy" page, and to lots more. Now, somebody stop me before i prophesy again! cat (who just came back from seeing "The Horse Whisperer" and realizes once again how wise and witty her unconsious was when it selected Robert Redford to play the coveted and award-winning role of My Animus in her 1968 dream, "My Animus and Li'l Buddy Are Shopping For Snakes and They Tell Me To Keep A Dream Journal.") The Lucky W Amulet Archive: http://www.luckymojo.com/luckyw.html Sacred Sex: http://www.luckymojo.com/sacredsex.html The Sacred Landscape: http://www.luckymojo.com/sacredland.html - From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 20:32:08 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 01:56:16 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Idiots Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980605235636.0071289c@ozemail.com.au> Darren writes >fellow idiots, > >they time has come to announce the return of the maitreya of idiots. The >Grand Lodge welcomes IDIOT #467 Darren into it's ranks > >Hail Eris All Hail #467! Chief Idiot. From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 20:36:31 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 01:50:09 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Atonement vs. Bootstraps Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <357820F0.220C@withoutwalls.com> Mark Kusek writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> This is almost the classic Jewish argument *against* Christianity! Who >> needs an intermediary when they can go direct to the boss? > >OK, but if he was an exemplar, a wayshower and not an intermediary, what >then? > Not sure what you are trying to say here. The short answer is that he may have been an exemplar or wayshower - most likely the latter, following the logic of your question. Alan the slightly puzzled ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 21:06:31 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:40:23 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Inner and outer Guru -- My Protest. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <007e01bd90da$a71feec0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >All of us owe too much to HPB because of her presentation >of Theosophy. Thus we have no right to stand in judgment over >her. Do we do so over our Professors or our Teachers ? Often within weeks of graduation! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 21:19:02 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:37:42 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806051654.MAA25491@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson writes >in what way is Moses *not* an intermediary between Yahweh >and his people? Right: Well I was taking to this bush up a mountain and it burst into flame. Then there appeared these two stone tablets with writing on them which I took down to the guys below.. A voice from the bush had a long conversation with me and I now have authority to tell you what to do. Alan the intermediary. ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 21:51:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 21:58:48 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <19980606031609992.AAA88@pgiese> > Thoa Tran wrote: > > I think of intuition as more than animal instinct. To me, animal instinct > > (as far as mating, gathering food, and other common survival functions) > > involves a built in practical mechanism. > > Intuition, which helps in finding > > solutions to complex questions and helps us connect to other beings, > > involve a deeper source. It feels to me like a point of contact to the > > knowing All. Thought, to me, is dependent on the data gathering and > > conceptual system. This depends on how much data we have is more limited > > than intuition. > > From: "Bart Lidofsky" > This is close to my own concept of intuition; it is knowledge that > comes to the manas through the Atma by way of the Buddhi. However, > animals and children who have not yet learned to speak have the > capability of seeing things that most humans are trained and conditioned > not to see. This is sometimes also called "intuition", but is really > based in the temporary, "lower" principles, and is based in mentation in > the midbrain. > You've hit on some of the confusion with defining intuition: 1. A lot of people confuse non-verbal thought processes with intuition. Just because you can get from point A to point J without mechanical thought, doesn't make it is intuition. For example, I do a lot of data design in my job. Complex data modeling consists of breaking down functionally identified constructs into idealized constructs and abstracting attributes and relationships into a generalized model. Physically, this work is done using diagrams. When you do this 8 hours a day, you start storing stable model components physically, rather than mentally. It's like guitar players "storing" the chords in their fingers. Or the phone numbers you can't remember unless your fingers "dial" the number. So when you do this, you find your self making great leaps, A to F, F to L, etc...It's not because you intuitively understand things better, it's just exploitating alternate memory stores. Of course when you do this, it's hard to explain A to F to others. I actually find it physically painful --it's like extracting a sleeping dog from it's chair --the thought doesn't belong where it is, but it's become comfortable. 2. People mistake stimulation from less-used senses for intuition (or precognition). I think the sense of smell is the leading culprit here.For years, acknowledgment of human pheremones is taboo. Proportionately, the sense of smell occupies a relatively large portion of our brain, but culturally, we repress it. For example, at work (excuse me for the dual reference, but I'm a Capricorn, so part of me is always at work), I've found myself getting a whiff of air that reminds me of the administrative building at SUNY-Binghamton 20 years ago. I think of graduate school. Suddenly our new intern, soon to get his M.S. appears. I think we form memory and constructs of smell more than we like to admit. There is something primal and bestial about the sense of smell. I had the advantage of growing up on a farm where we were taught to recognize the smell of a sick animal to that of a well animal and not to cringe from the repugnant or dying. Maybe that's why I embraced Crowley's writings when young and still have a collection of John Water's films. 3. If think the distinction between intuition and precognition gets thorny. Say someone runs a stoplight in from of me and I avoid them. How can we know that intuition plays a role? If I am an alert driver and from a distance I see a car going at too high a rate to stop safely, then regular waking-state intellect is at play. Suppose I had a dream the night before of a car accident. As I near the intersection, I get a feeling in my stomach and slow down to an unusual speed. Precognition. Now, suppose I'm going like hell as usual(intuned with my Martian self), I see the car not stopping, and I swerve instinctually, bending around the vehicle and emerging safely. Instinct. I think the only intuition scenario would be if I was distracted by the car radio yet found myself hitting the breaks in time, not because I was aware of the menancing car, but because it seemed the thing to do. From a deist perspective, I suppose I could also be praying for eternal guidance and wisdom while I was driving and suddenly hear that angelic voice tell me to stop the f---ing car. But I would call that divine guidance rather than intuition. I also suppose there's divine intervention which would just cut out both car engines, inches from actual collision. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 22:06:32 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 22:03:48 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-ID: <19980606032032159.AAA176@pgiese> > K. Paul Johnson writes > >in what way is Moses *not* an intermediary between Yahweh > >and his people? > > Alan the intermediary. > Right: Well I was taking to this bush up a mountain and it burst into > flame. Then there appeared these two stone tablets with writing on them > which I took down to the guys below.. A voice from the bush had a > long conversation with me and I now have authority to tell you what to > do. I'm trying to hear your voice Alan, but I've got this rain of frogs coming down here in Chicagoland. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all of the locust.......gotta go, the oldest kid is crying...... Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Fri Jun 5 23:06:33 1998 Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 21:05:35 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: HPB's MASTERS Message-ID: <19980606040544.3891.qmail@hotmail.com> There has been a great deal of discussion regarding HPB's "THEOSOPHICAL MAHATMAS." Though reference has been made to the section she devotes to this in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, pp.286-301 be read. It may be that some would find it easier to find it quoted here in Theos-talk. So I have made the effort of quoting most of what she says in the next to last chapter of the KEY. Expressing her regrets that their Sacred names have become household ones and "…fervently wishes that they had been kept secret within a small circle of trusted and devoted friends." It is likely that H. P. Blavatsky's own words will carry to a greater extent the energy and clarity of intent than any used by students of her doctrine. I have taken the liberty of CAPITALISING certain portions of this quotation for those-who might be, in too much of a hurry or require a quick reference and do not like to read long quotations. "XIV. THE "THEOSOPHICAL MAHATMAS" _________ ARE THEY "SPIRITS OF LIGHT " OR "GOBLINS DAMN'D" ? ENQ. Who are they, finally, those whom you call your "Masters" ? Some say they are "Spirits," or some other kind of supernatural beings, while others call them "myths." THEO. They are neither. I once heard one outsider say to another that they were a sort of male mermaids, whatever such a creature may be. BUT IF YOU LISTEN TO WHAT PEOPLE SAY, YOU WILL NEVER HAVE A TRUE CONCEPTION OF THEM. IN THE FIRST PLACE THEY ARE LIVING MEN, BORN AS WE ARE BORN, AND DOOMED TO DIE LIKE EVERY OTHER MORTAL. ENQ. Yes, but it is rumoured that some of them are a thousand years old. Is this true ? THEO. As true as the miraculous growth of hair on the head of Meredith's Shagpat. Truly, like the "Identical," no Theosophical shaving has hitherto been able to crop it. THE MORE WE DENY THEM, THE MORE WE TRY TO SET PEOPLE RIGHT, THE MORE ABSURD DO THE INVENTIONS BECOME. I have heard of Methuselah being 969 years old; but, not being forced to believe in it, have laughed at the statement, for which I was forthwith regarded by many as a blasphemous heretic. ENQ. Seriously, though they outlive the ordinary age of men ? THEO. What do you call the ordinary age ? I remember reading in the Lancet of a Mexican who was almost 190 years old ; BUT I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF MORTAL MAN, LAYMAN, OR ADEPT, WHO COULD LIVE EVEN HALF THE YEARS ALLOTTED TO METHUSELAH. SOME ADEPTS DO EXCEED, BY A GOOD DEAL, WHAT YOU WOULD CALL THE ORDINARY AGE ; YET THERE IS NOTHING MIRACULOUS IN IT, AND VERY FEW OF THEM CARE TO LIVE VERY LONG. ENQ. But what does the word "MAHATMA" really mean ? THEO. SIMPLY A "GREAT SOUL," GREAT THROUGH MORAL ELEVATION AND INTELLECTUAL ATTAINMENT. If the title of great is given to a drunken soldier like Alexander, WHY SHOULD WE NOT CALL THOSE "GREAT" WHO HAVE ACHIEVED FAR GREATER CONQUESTS IN NATURE'S SECRETS, than Alexander ever did on the field of battle ? Besides, the term is an Indian and a very old word. ENQ. And why do you call them "Masters" ? THEO. WE CALL THEM "MASTERS" BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR TEACHERS; AND BECAUSE FROM THEM WE HAVE DERIVED ALL THE THEOSOPHICAL TRUTHS, HOWEVER INADEQUATELY SOME OF US MAY HAVE EXPRESSED, AND OTHERS UNDERSTOOD, THEM. THEY ARE MEN OF GREAT LEARNING, WHOM WE TERM INITIATES, AND STILL GREATER HOLINESS OF LIFE. THEY ARE NOT ASCETICS IN THE ORDINARY SENSE, THOUGH THEY CERTAINLY REMAIN APART FROM THE TURMOIL AND STRIFE OF YOUR WESTERN WORLD. ENQ. But is it not selfish thus to isolate themselves ? THEO. Where is the selfishness ? DOES NOT THE FATE OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY SUFFICIENTLY PROVE THAT THE WORLD IS NEITHER READY TO RECOGNISE THEM NOR TO PROFIT BY THEIR TEACHING ? Of what use would Professor Clerk Maxwell have been to instruct a class of little boys in their multiplication-table ? Besides, they isolate themselves only from the West. In their own country they go about as publicly as other people do. ENQ. Don't you ascribe to them supernatural powers ? THEO. We believe in nothing supernatural, as I have told you already. Had Edison lived and invented his phonograph two hundred years ago, he would most probably have been burnt along with it, and the whole attributed to the devil. THE POWERS WHICH THEY EXERCISE ARE SIMPLY THE DEVELOPMENT OF POTENCIES LYING LATENT IN EVERY MAN AND WOMEN, AND THE EXISTENCE OF WHICH EVEN OFFICIAL SCIENCE BEGINS TO RECOGNISE. ENQ. Is it true that these men inspire some of your writers, and that many, if not all, of your Theosophical works were written under their dictation ? THEO. SOME HAVE. THERE ARE PASSAGES ENTIRELY DICTATED BY THEM AND VERBATIM, BUT IN MOST CASES THEY ONLY INSPIRE THE IDEAS AND LEAVE THE LITERARY FORM TO THE WRITERS. ENQ. But this in itself is miraculous ; is, in fact, a miracle. How can they do it ? THEO. My dear Sir, you are labouring under a great mistake, and it is science itself that will refute your argument at no distant day. Why should it be a "miracle," as you call it ? A miracle is supposed to mean some operation which is supernatural, whereas there is really nothing above or beyond NATURE and Nature's laws. Among the many forms of the "miracle" which have come under modern scientific recognition, there is Hypnotism, and one phase of its power is known as "Suggestion," a form of thought transference, which has been successfully used in combating particular physical diseases, etc. THE TIME IS NOT FAR DISTANT WHEN THE WORLD OF SCIENCE WILL BE FORCED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE EXISTS AS MUCH INTERACTION BETWEEN ONE MIND AND ANOTHER, NO MATTER AT WHAT DISTANCE, AS BETWEEN ONE BODY AND ANOTHER IN CLOSEST CONTACT. WHEN TWO MINDS ARE SYMPATHETICALLY RELATED, AND THE INSTRUMENTS THROUGH WHICH THEY FUNCTION ARE TUNED TO RESPOND MAGNETICALLY AND ELECTRICALLY TO ONE ANOTHER, THERE IS NOTHING WHICH WILL PREVENT THE TRANSMISSION OF THOUGHTS FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, AT WILL ; FOR SINCE THE MIND IS NOT OF A TANGIBLE NATURE, THAT DISTANCE CAN DIVIDE IT FROM THE SUBJECT OF ITS CONTEMPLATION, IT FOLLOWS THAT THE ONLY DIFFERENCE THAT CAN EXIST BETWEEN TWO MINDS IS A DIFFERENCE OF STATE. SO IF THIS LATER HINDRANCE IS OVERCOME, WHERE IS THE "MIRACLE" OF THOUGHT TRANSFERENCE, AT WHATEVER DISTANCE ? ENQ. But you will admit the Hypnotism does nothing so miraculous or wonderful as that ? THEO. On the contrary, it is a well-established fact that a Hypnotist can affect the brain of his subject so far as to produce an expression of his own thoughts, and even his words, through the organism of his subject ; and although the phenomena attaching to this method of actual thought transference are as yet few in number, no one, I presume, will undertake to say how far their action may extend in the future, when the laws that govern their production are more scientifically established. And so, if such results can be produced by the knowledge of the mere rudiments of Hypnotism, WHAT CAN PREVENT THE ADEPT IN PSYCHIC AND SPIRITUAL POWERS FROM PRODUCING RESULTS WHICH WITH YOUR PRESENT LIMITED KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR LAWS, YOU ARE INCLINED TO CALL "MIRACULOUS"? ENQ. Then why do not our physicians experiment and try if they could not do as much ? * ------------------------------------------------ * Such, for instance, as Prof. Bernheim and Dr. C. Lloyd Tuckey, of England ; Professors Beaunis and Liégeois, of Nancy ; Delbśuf of Liege ; Burot and Bourru, of Rochefort ; Fontain and Sigard, of Bordeaux ; Forel, of Zurich ; and Drs. Despine, of Marseilles ; Van Renterghem and Van Eeden, of Amsterdam ; Wetterstrand, of Stockholm ; Schrenck-Notzing, of Leipzig, and many other physicians and writers of eminence. ------------------------------------------------- THEO. Because, first of all, they are not Adepts with a thorough understanding of the secrets and laws of psychic and spiritual realms, but materialists, afraid to step outside the narrow groove of matter; and, secondly, because they must fail at present, and indeed until they are brought to acknowledge such powers are attainable. ENQ. And could they be taught ? THEO. Not unless they were first of all prepared, by having the materialistic dross they have accumulated in their brains swept away to the very last atom. ENQ. This is very interesting. Tell me, have THE ADEPTS THUS INSPIRED OR DICTATED TO MANY OF YOUR THEOSOPHISTS ? THEO. NO, ON THE CONTRARY, TO VERY FEW. SUCH OPERATIONS REQUIRE SPECIAL CONDITIONS. An unscrupulous but skilled Adept of the Black Brotherhood ("Brothers of the Shadow," and Dugpas, we call them ) has far less difficulties to labour under. For, having no laws of the Spiritual kind to trammel his actions, such a Dugpa "sorcerer" will most unceremoniously obtain control over any mind, and subject it entirely to his evil powers. BUT OUR MASTERS WILL NEVER DO THAT. THEY HAVE NO RIGHT, EXCEPT BY FALLING INTO BLACK MAGIC, TO OBTAIN FULL MASTERY OVER ANYONE'S IMMORTAL EGO, AND CAN THEREFORE ACT ONLY ON THE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHIC NATURE OF THE SUBJECT, LEAVING THEREBY THE FREE WILL OF THE LATTER WHOLLY UNDISTURBED. Hence, unless A PERSON HAS BEEN BROUGHT INTO PSYCHIC RELATIONSHIP WITH THE MASTERS, AND IS ASSISTED BY VIRTUE OF HIS FULL FAITH IN, AND DEVOTION TO, HIS TEACHERS, THE LATTER, WHENEVER TRANSMITTING THEIR THOUGHTS TO ONE WITH WHOM THESE CONDITIONS ARE NOT FULFILLED, EXPERIENCE GREAT DIFFICULTIES IN PENETRATING INTO THE CLOUDY CHAOS OF THAT PERSON'S SPHERE. But this is no place to treat of a subject of this nature. SUFFICE IT TO SAY, THAT IF THE POWER EXISTS THEN THERE ARE INTELLIGENCES (EMBODIED OR DISEMBODIED) WHICH GUIDE THIS POWER, AND LIVING CONSCIOUS INSTRUMENTS THROUGH WHOM IT IS TRANSMITTED AND BY WHOM IT IS RECEIVED. We have only to beware of black magic. ENQ. But what do you really mean by "black magic" ? THEO. Simply abuse of psychic powers, or of any secret of nature ; the fact of applying to selfish and sinful ends the powers of Occultism. A hypnotiser, who, taking advantage of his powers of "suggestion," forces a subject to steal or murder, would be called a black magician by us. The famous "rejuvenating system" of Dr. Brown-Sequard, of Paris, through a loathsome animal injection into human blood-a discovery all the medical papers of Europe are now discussing-if true, is unconscious black magic. ENQ. But this is medićval belief in witchcraft and sorcery ! Even Law itself has ceased to believe in such things ? THEO. So much the worse for law, as it has been led, through such a lack of discrimination, into committing more than one judiciary mistake and crime. It is the term alone that frightens you with its "superstitious" ring in it. Would not law punish an abuse of hypnotic powers, as I just mentioned ? Nay, it has so punished it already in France and Germany ; yet it would indignantly deny that it applied punishment to a crime of evident sorcery. You cannot believe in the efficacy and reality of the powers of suggestion by physicians and mesmerisers ( or hypnotisers ), and then refuse to believe in the same powers when used for evil motives. And if you do, then you believe in Sorcery. You can- not believe in good and disbelieve in evil, accept genuine money and refuse to credit such a thing as false coin. Nothing can exist without its contrast, and no day, no light, no good could have any representation as such in your consciousness, were there no night, darkness nor evil to offset and contrast them. ENQ. Indeed, I have known men, who, while thoroughly believing in that which you call great psychic, or magic powers, laughed at the very mention of Witchcraft and Sorcery. THEO. What does it prove ? Simply that they are illogical. So much the worse for them again. And we, knowing AS WE DO OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOOD AND HOLY ADEPTS, BELIEVE AS THOROUGHLY IN THE EXISTENCE OF BAD AND UNHOLY ADEPTS, OR-DUGPAS. ENQ. But if the Masters exist, why don't they come out before all men and refute once for all the many charges which are made against Mdme. Blavatsky and the Society ? THEO. What charges ? ENQ. THAT THEY DO NOT EXIST, AND THAT SHE HAS INVENTED THEM. That they are men of straw, "Mahatmas of muslin and bladders." Does not all this injure her reputation ? THEO. In what way can such an accusation injure her in reality ? Did she ever make money on their presumed existence, or derive benefit, or fame, therefrom ? I ANSWER THAT SHE HAS GAINED ONLY INSULTS, ABUSE, AND CALUMNIES, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY PAINFUL HAD SHE NOT LEARNED LONG AGO TO REMAIN PERFECTLY INDIFFERENT TO SUCH FALSE CHARGES. For what does it amount to, after all ? Why, TO AN IMPLIED COMPLIMENT, WHICH, IF THE FOOLS, HER ACCUSERS, WERE NOT CARRIED AWAY BY THEIR BLIND HATRED THEY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT TWICE BEFORE UTTERING. TO SAY THAT SHE HAS INVENTED THE MASTERS COMES TO THIS : SHE MUST HAVE INVENTED EVERY BIT OF PHILOSOPHY THAT HAS EVER BEEN GIVEN OUT IN THEOSOPHICAL LITERATURE. SHE MUST BE THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTERS FROM WHICH "ESOTERIC BUDDHISM" WAS WRITTEN ; THE SOLE INVENTOR OF EVERY TENET FOUND IN THE "SECRET DOCTRINE," WHICH, IF THE WORLD WERE JUST, WOULD BE RECOGNISED AS SUPPLYING MANY OF THE MISSING LINKS OF SCIENCE, AS WILL BE, DISCOVERED A HUNDRED YEARS HENCE. BY SAYING WHAT THEY DO, THEY ARE ALSO GIVING HER THE CREDIT OF BEING FAR CLEVERER THAN THE HUNDREDS OF MEN, (MANY VERY CLEVER AND NOT A FEW SCIENTIFIC MEN,) WHO BELIEVE IN WHAT SHE SAYS-INASMUCH AS SHE MUST HAVE FOOLED THEM ALL ! IF THEY SPEAK THE TRUTH, THEN SHE MUST BE SEVERAL MAHATMAS ROLLED INTO ONE like a nest of Chinese boxes ; since among the SO-CALLED "MAHATMA LETTERS" ARE MANY IN TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND DISTINCT STYLES, ALL OF WHICH HER ACCUSERS DECLARE THAT SHE HAS WRITTEN. ENQ. It is just what they say. BUT IS IT NOT VERY PAINFUL TO HER TO BE PUBLICLY DENOUNCED AS "THE MOST ACCOMPLISHED IMPOSTOR OF THE AGE, whose name deserves to pass to posterity," as is done in the Report of the "Society for Psychical Research" ? THEO. It might be painful if it were true, or came from people less rabidly materialistic and prejudiced. As it is, PERSONALLY SHE TREATS THE WHOLE MATTER WITH CONTEMPT, WHILE THE MAHATMAS SIMPLY LAUGH AT IT. IN TRUTH, IT IS THE GREATEST COMPLIMENT THAT COULD BE PAID TO HER. I SAY SO, AGAIN. ENQ. But her enemies claim to have proved their case. THEO. Aye, it is easy enough to make such a claim when you have constituted yourself judge, jury, and prosecuting counsel at once, as they did. But who, except their direct followers and our enemies, believe in it ? ENQ. But they sent a representative to India to investigate the matter, didn't they ? THEO. They did, and their final conclusion rests entirely on the unchecked statements and unverified assertions of this young gentleman. A lawyer who read through his report told a friend of mine that in all his experience he had never seen "such a ridiculous and self-condemnatory document." It was found to be full of suppositions and "working hypotheses" which mutually destroyed each other. Is this a serious charge ? ENQ. Yet it has done the Society a great harm. Why, then, did she not vindicate her own character, at least, before a Court of Law ? THEO. Firstly, because as a Theosophist, it IS HER DUTY TO LEAVE UNHEEDED ALL PERSONAL INSULTS. Secondly, because neither the Society nor Mdme. Blavatsky had any money to waste over such a law-suit. And lastly, because it would have been ridiculous for both to be untrue to their principles, because of an attack made on them by a flock of stupid old British wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over frolicsome lambkin from Australia. ENQ. This is complimentary. But do you not think that it would have done real good to the cause of Theosophy, if she had authoritatively disproved the whole thing once for all ? THEO. Perhaps. But do you believe that any English jury or judge would have ever admitted the reality of psychic phenomena, even if entirely unprejudiced beforehand ? And when you remember that they would have been set against us already by the "Russian Spy" scare, the charge of Atheism and infidelity, and all the other calumnies that have been circulated against us, you cannot fail to see that such an attempt to obtain justice in a Court of Law would have been worse than fruitless ! All this the Psychic Researchers knew well, and they took a base and mean advantage of their position to raise themselves above our heads and save themselves at our expense. ENQ. The S. P. R. Now denies completely the existence of the Mahatmas. They say that from beginning to end they were a romance which Madame Blavatsky has woven from her own brain ? THEO. Well, she might have done many things less clever than this. At any rate, we have not the slightest objection to this theory. AS SHE ALWAYS SAYS NOW, SHE ALMOST PREFERS THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BELIEVE IN THE MASTERS. SHE DECLARES OPENLY THAT SHE WOULD RATHER PEOPLE SHOULD SERIOUSLY THINK THAT THE ONLY MAHATMALAND IS THE GREY MATTER OF HER BRAIN, AND THAT, IN SHORT, SHE HAS EVOLVED THEM OUT OF THE DEPTHS OF HER OWN INNER CONSCIOUSNESS THAN THAT THEIR NAMES AND GRAND IDEAL SHOULD BE SO INFAMOUSLY DESECRATED AS THEY ARE AT PRESENT. AT FIRST SHE USED TO PROTEST INDIGNANTLY AGAINST ANY DOUBTS AS TO THEIR EXISTENCE. NOW SHE NEVER GOES OUT OF HER WAY TO PROVE OR DISPROVE IT. LET PEOPLE THINK WHAT THEY LIKE. ENQ. But, of course, these Masters do exist ? THEO. WE AFFIRM THEY DO. Nevertheless, this does not help much. Many people, even some Theosophists and ex-Theosophists, say that they have never had any proof of their existence. Very well ; then Mme. Blavatsky replies with this alternative : - IF SHE HAS INVENTED THEM, THEN SHE HAS ALSO INVENTED THEIR PHILOSOPHY AND THE PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE WHICH SOME FEW HAVE ACQUIRED ; AND IF SO, WHAT DOES IT MATTER WHETHER THEY DO EXIST OR NOT, SINCE SHE HERSELF IS HERE, AND HER OWN EXISTENCE, AT ANY RATE, CAN HARDLY BE DENIED ? IF THE KNOWLEDGE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN IMPARTED BY THEM IS GOOD INTRINSICALLY, AND IT IS ACCEPTED AS SUCH BY MANY PERSONS OF MORE THAN AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE, WHY SHOULD THERE BE SUCH A HULLABALOO MADE OVER THAT QUESTION ? The fact of her being an impostor has never been proved, and will always remain sub judice ; whereas it is a certain and UNDENIABLE FACT THAT, BY WHOMSOEVER INVENTED, THE PHILOSOPHY PREACHED BY THE "MASTERS" IS ONE OF THE GRANDEST AND MOST BENEFICENT PHILOSOPHIES ONCE IT IS PROPERLY UNDERSTOOD. Thus the slanderers, while moved by the lowest and meanest feeling-those of hatred, revenge, malice, wounded vanity, or disappointed ambition, - seem quite unaware that they are paying the greatest tribute to her intellectual powers. So be it, if the poor fools will have it so. REALLY, MME. BLAVATSKY HAS NOT THE SLIGHTEST OBJECTION TO BEING REPRESENTED BY HER ENEMIES AS A TRIPLE ADEPT, AND A "MAHATMA" TO BOOT. IT IS ONLY HER UNWILLINGNESS TO POSE IN HER OWN SIGHT AS A CROW PARADING IN PEACOCK'S FEATHERS THAT COMPELS HER TO THIS DAY TO INSIST UPON THE TRUTH. ENQ. But if you have such wise and good men to guide the Society, how is it that so many mistakes have been made ? THEO. THE MASTERS DO NOT GUIDE THE SOCIETY, NOT EVEN THE FOUNDERS ; and no one has ever asserted that they did : they only WATCH OVER, AND PROTECT IT. This is amply proved by the fact that no mistakes have been able to cripple it, and no scandals from within, nor the most damaging attacks from without, have been able to overthrow it. The Masters look at the future, not at the present, and every mistake is so much more accumulated wisdom for days to come. The other "Master who sent the man with the five talents did not tell him how to double them, nor did he prevent the foolish servant from burying his one talent in the earth. Each must acquire wisdom by his own experience and merits. The Christian Churches, who claim a far higher "Master," the very Holy Ghost itself, have ever been and are still guilty not only of "mistakes," but of a series of bloody crimes throughout the ages. Yet, no Christian would deny, for all that, his belief in that "Master," I suppose ? although his existence is far more hypothetical than that of the Mahatmas ; as no one has ever seen the Holy Ghost, and his guidance of the Church, moreover, their own ecclesiastical history distinctly contradicts. Errare humanum est. Let us return to our subject. THE ABUSE OF SACRED NAMES AND TERMS. ENQ. Then, what I have heard, namely, that many of your Theosophical writers claim to have been inspired by these Masters, or to have seen and conversed with them, is not true ? THEO. It may or it may not be true. How can I tell ? The burden of proof rests with them. Some of them, a few-very few, indeed-have distinctly either lied or were hallucinated when boasting of such inspiration ; OTHERS WERE TRULY INSPIRED BY GREAT ADEPTS. THE TREE IS KNOWN BY ITS FRUITS ; and as all Theosophists have to be judged by their deeds and not by what they write or say, SO ALL THEOSOPHICAL BOOKS MUST BE ACCEPTED ON THEIR MERITS, AND NOT ACCORDING TO ANY CLAIM TO AUTHORITY WHICH THEY MAY PUT FORWARD. ENQ. But would MDME. BLAVATSKY APPLY THIS TO HER OWN WORKS-THE SECRET DOCTRINE, FOR INSTANCE ? THEO. CERTAINLY ; SHE SAYS EXPRESSLY IN THE PREFACE THAT SHE GIVES OUT THE DOCTRINES THAT SHE HAS LEARNT FROM THE MASTERS, but claims no inspiration whatever for what she has lately written. As for our best Theosophists, THEY WOULD ALSO IN THIS CASE FAR RATHER THAT THE NAMES OF THE MASTERS HAD NEVER BEEN MIXED UP WITH OUR BOOKS IN ANY WAY. With few exceptions, most of such works are not only imperfect, but positively erroneous and misleading. GREAT ARE THE DESECRATIONS TO WHICH THE NAME OF TWO OF THE MASTERS HAVE BEEN SUBJECTED. There is hardly a medium who has not claimed to have seen them. Every bogus swindling Society, for commercial purposes, now claims to be guided and directed by "Masters," often supposed to be far higher than ours ! Many and heavy are the sins of those who advanced these claims, prompted either by desire for lucre, vanity, or irresponsible mediumship. Many persons have been plundered of their money by such societies, which offer to sell the secrets of power, knowledge, and spiritual truth for worthless gold. WORST OF ALL, THE SACRED NAMES OF OCCULTISM AND THE HOLY KEEPERS THEREOF HAVE BEEN DRAGGED IN THIS FILTHY MIRE, POLLUTED BY BEING ASSOCIATED WITH SORDID MOTIVES AND IMMORAL PRACTICES, WHILE THOUSANDS OF MEN HAVE BEEN HELD BACK FROM THE PATH OF TRUTH AND LIGHT THROUGH THE DISCREDIT AND EVIL REPORT WHICH SUCH SHAMS, SWINDLES, AND FRAUDS HAVE BROUGHT UPON THE WHOLE SUBJECT. I SAY AGAIN, EVERY EARNEST THEOSOPHISTS REGRETS TO-DAY, FROM THE BOTTOM OF HIS HEART, THAT THESE SACRED NAMES AND THINGS HAVE EVER BEEN MENTIONED BEFORE THE PUBLIC, AND FERVENTLY WISHES THAT THEY HAD BEEN KEPT SECRET WITHIN A SMALL CIRCLE OF TRUSTED AND DEVOTED FRIENDS. ENQ. The names certainly do occur very frequently now-a-days, and I never remember hearing of such persons as "Masters" till quite recently. THEO. It is so ; and HAD WE ACTED ON THE WISE PRINCIPLE OF SILENCE, INSTEAD OF RUSHING INTO NOTORIETY AND PUBLISHING ALL WE KNEW AND HEARD, SUCH DESECRATION WOULD NEVER HAVE OCCURRED. BEHOLD, ONLY FOURTEEN YEARS AGO, BEFORE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY WAS FOUNDED, ALL THE TALK WAS OF "SPIRITS." THEY WERE EVERYWHERE, IN EVERYONE'S MOUTHS; AND NO ONE BY ANY CHANCE EVEN DREAMT OF TALKING ABOUT LIVING "ADEPTS," "MAHATMAS," OR "MASTERS." ONE HARDLY HEARD EVEN THE NAME OF THE ROSICRUCIANS, WHILE THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A THING AS "OCCULTISM" WAS SUSPECTED EVEN BUT BY VERY FEW. NOW ALL THAT IS CHANGED. WE THEOSOPHISTS WERE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE FIRST TO TALK OF THESE THINGS, TO MAKE THE FACT OF THE EXISTENCE IN THE EAST OF "ADEPTS" AND "MASTERS" AND OCCULT KNOWLEDGE KNOWN ; AND NOW THE NAME HAS BECOME COMMON PROPERTY. IT IS ON US, NOW, THAT THE KARMA, THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE RESULTING DESECRATION OF HOLY NAMES AND THINGS, HAS FALLEN. ALL THAT YOU NOW FIND ABOUT SUCH MATTERS IN CURRENT LITERATURE-AND THERE IS NOT A LITTLE OF IT-ALL IS TO BE TRACED BACK TO THE IMPULSE GIVEN IN THIS DIRECTION BY THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY AND ITS FOUNDERS. Our enemies profit to this day by our mistake. The most recent book directed against our teachings is alleged to have been written by an Adept of twenty years' standing. Now, it is a palpable lie. We know the amanuensis and his inspirers (as he is himself too ignorant to have written anything of the sort ). These "inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and unscrupulous in proportion to their intellectual powers ; and these bogus Adepts are not one, but several. The cycle of "Adepts," used as sledge-hammers to break the theosophical heads with, began twelve years ago, with Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and Ghost-Land, and now ends with the "Adept" and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a work written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings. BUT IT IS USELESS TO GRIEVE OVER WHAT IS DONE, AND WE CAN ONLY SUFFER IN THE HOPE THAT OUR INDISCRETIONS MAY HAVE MADE IT A LITTLE EASIER FOR OTHERS TO FIND THE WAY TO THESE MASTERS, WHOSE NAMES ARE NOW EVERYWHERE TAKEN IN VAIN, AND UNDER COVER OF WHICH SO MANY INIQUITIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN PERPETRATED. ENQ. Do you reject "Louise" as an Adept ? THEO. WE DENOUNCE NO ONE, LEAVING THIS NOBLE TASK TO OUR ENEMIES. The spiritualistic author of Art Magic, etc., may or may not have been acquainted with such an Adept-and saying this, I say far less than what that lady has said and written about us and Theosophy for the last several years-that is her own business. Only when, in a solemn scene of mystic vision, an alleged "Adept" sees "spirits" presumably at Greenwich England, through Lord Rosse's telescope, which was built in, and never moved from Parsonstown, Ireland, * I may well be permitted to wonder at the ignorance of that "Adept" in matters of science. This beats all the mistakes and blunder committed at times by the chelas of our Teachers ! And it is this "Adept" that is used now to break the teachings of our masters! ----------------------------------------------------- * Vide "Ghost Land," Part I., p. 133, et seq. ------------------------------------------------------ ENQ. I quite understand your feeling in this matter, and think it only natural. And now, in view of all that you have said and explained to me, there is one subject on which I should like to ask you a few questions. THEO. If I can answer them I will. What is that ? END ----------------------------------------------------------------- Once HPB, herself has copitalized the word "NATURE" -this is not my capitalization. In a few places HPB has italied titles of books, and a few other things, which I have not been able to do, because my e-mail does not take italics. I hope I have made no typographical mistakes to inconvenience and delude readers. Please, correct any mistakes found in future communications to Theos-talk. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 00:06:32 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 01:06:39 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <3578CE5F.92FDFB0D@sprynet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Bart Lidofsky writes > >> If you need to ask, you don't have it. > > > > Bullshit. > > Thank you for your thoughtful and caring contribution. And thank you for your lack of arrogance. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 00:21:38 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 01:22:03 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! and Jews vs. Jesus Message-ID: <3578D1FA.6CB0E5F0@sprynet.com> References: <60591cce.35789616@aol.com> Lmhem111@aol.com wrote: > > Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Note that mystical Judaism is part of the mainstream, and not a forbidden > cult. > > > Besides Reform, Conservative and Orthodox, there is also a something called > Reconstructionist Judaism. It's a New Agey sort of Judaism, more eclectic, > with emphasis on meditation, singing and movement (eurythmy), Kabbalistic > studies, philosophical discussion, etc. Groups in Reconstructionist Judaism > sometimes call themselves Jewish Renewal Communities. They take much of their > inspiration from an enlightened teacher called Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi. I am quite familiar with the movement; Rabbi Ira Eisenstein was a good friend of my parents. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 00:36:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 23:38:01 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Double standards Message-Id: <199806060538.XAA25372@mailmx.micron.net> Sophia offered some text: This is one of the problems I have with Theosophical literature: 'not seeing the beam in their own eye.' There is nothing wrong with complaining about or "denouncing" someone or something if one truly believes it is necessary in order to expose wrongdoings. Just be honest about it -- In the text, THEO says: >THEO. WE DENOUNCE NO ONE, LEAVING THIS NOBLE TASK TO OUR ENEMIES. This statement was made after all the following had also been said by THEO: [If the following does not entail "denouncing" then I do not know what "denouncing" is] >And >lastly, because it would have been ridiculous for both to be untrue to >their principles, because of an attack made on them by a flock of stupid >old British wethers, who had been led to butt at them by an over >frolicsome lambkin from Australia. [that is a personal favorite of mine - I'm going to use it someday] >The Christian >Churches, who claim a far higher "Master," the very Holy Ghost itself, >have ever been and are still guilty not only of "mistakes," but of a >series of bloody crimes throughout the ages. Yet, no Christian would >deny, for all that, his belief in that "Master," I suppose ? although >his existence is far more hypothetical than that of the Mahatmas ; as >no one has ever seen the Holy Ghost, and his guidance of the Church, >moreover, their own ecclesiastical history distinctly contradicts. >Errare humanum est. [respect for other faiths, I thought, was a cornerstone of Theosophy] >Thus the slanderers, while moved by the lowest and meanest >feeling-those of hatred, revenge, malice, wounded vanity, or >disappointed ambition, - seem quite unaware that they are paying the >greatest tribute to her intellectual powers. So be it, if the poor >fools will have it so. [Compassion, anyone?] >The cycle of "Adepts," used as sledge-hammers to >break the theosophical heads with, began twelve years ago, with Mrs. >Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and Ghost-Land, and now >ends with the "Adept" and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a work >written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings. [Mrs. Emma was clearly evil] >The famous "rejuvenating system" of Dr. Brown-Sequard, of Paris, >through a loathsome animal injection into human blood-a discovery all >the medical papers of Europe are now discussing-if true, is unconscious >black magic. [Dr. B. does truly sound like a pervert] Again, all the above may be true, but Theosophists get themselves in boiling water by pretending to be oh-so-holier than the rest of us poor slobs. Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 00:51:31 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 23:47:14 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Beware of the Eagle-Eyed Ones Message-Id: <199806060547.XAA25684@mailmx.micron.net> Thoa caught me with my pantaloons down: >Love Live Barney? You know, I swear when I sent that title it said: Long Live Barney. Clearly, it was changed in cyberspace by those who desire to slander and mock the "Army of Barney." >Universal Love? Is Kym feeling LOVING today? Ug! That only occurs one day a year - and that day is a long way off still. Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 01:36:31 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 00:33:12 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Hell, what? Message-Id: <199806060633.AAA26765@mailmx.micron.net> If I yell to someone, "Hey, you jerk. . .go to avichi!" what am I saying? Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 12:06:35 1998 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 20:12:05 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <01bd90df$bccb78c0$4dcb37c0@gschueler.netgsi.com> >But if we look around and into the affairs of nature we see laws >operating everywhere, chaos nowhere, and cooperation and harmony >far exceed disharmony and strife. So why should it be specially >absent in human affairs ? > I am sorry, Dallas, but once again I just can't agree with you. I like nature and all, but when I look around I see chaos everywhere. What about a tornado or hurricane or tidal wave? These are generally considered to be chaotic (i.e., unpredictable) events. Death is as prevalent in nature as life, and chaos as prevelant as harmony. Of course, we all tend to see what we want to see... Jerry S. From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 16:36:40 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 14:28:51 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <003801bd9192$8c1e7160$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 6th 198 RE: Cycles, Cataclysms, as evidence of Chaos vs. Law. Dear Jerry: According to the Theosophy I am familiar with, tornadoes, tidal waves, earthquakes, solar flares, draughts, floods, epidemics and in fact all cataclysms are generated by the turbulent aspects of our human emotions and thoughts -- their impact on the "elements." In which case even destructive events are the product of the destructive aspects of our thinking and choosing. They do not happen at random and when they do occur they involve those persons who in this life or in earlier ones had contributed to their formation. You may say this is far-fetched. But, if we are dealing with living beings everywhere, each with its own intelligence and a nature that is not destroyed when it is dispersed, then we are dealing with the ethical impact of our acts, thoughts and feelings on those beings that compose our bodies and the rest of our environment, in one way or another. To look at such events as fortuitous, chancy, or lucky (or the reverse) is to say that we do not yet know the laws under which they occur. But to say that there is no law simply means that we do not know of any, yet. The Theosophist says as I understand it, that there is a great Law that causes all things to be. And that embodied in this law are the concepts of a perfection, or a kind of "graduation," towards which every class of being is progressing, each in its own way. It is expressed as cooperation and as brotherhood. Man's mind enables him to view a far wider range of causation than other beings can. His problem as I se it, is that he is encased in a body that has only a limited span of life and of opportunity for progress, but his Mind enables him to span time as a universal, and an eternal concept -- the two are at either end of the spectrum of reason and therefore there is a continuing conflict between the limits of the physical environment and the unlimited range of the mind. The range of the field of emotion (and desire or passion) form still a different range of sensation and feeling, and they are viewed with and through the mind's instrumentality. Their nature is not yet fully grasped and it seems to me that we are also in the process of understanding and managing them at present. it is another of the several puzzles that we are presented with in our lives. Now if you say Karma does not operate anywhere, and it is a figment of Theosophical delusion then I cannot say anything more. But there is, as I see it an overwhelming flood of evidence to show that causes produce effects according to the aim and intensity of the actor or generator. So why should Theosophy be wrong in assigning a probable relationship between cataclysms and man's generation of emotional cataclysms ? When I used the word "chaos" I meant something that did not happen under LAW. And even cataclysms are the result of a rather large operation of law. They are the attempt of nature to bring about an adjustment in the disturbance we human minds and wills have imposed (as a great mass of thinking beings) on Nature's hidden planes. It is the objective manifestation of those causes that are subjective (if you will allow me the use of those terms). And while we are at it, we could also ask if there is a universal plan of evolution -- not just of the physical body, as considered by the archaeologists and the paleo-physiologists, but as HPB suggests in SD I 181, also of the soul (mind and emotional natures) and the spiritual nature too. Interestingly enough, HPB deals with the questions of returning cycles in her article "The Theory of Cycles," THEOSOPHIST, July 1880 (ULT Edn. of HPB Articles, Vol. 3, p. 72-3). On p. 78 she writes more on this ("Ancient Doctrines Vindicated," THEOSOPHIST, May, 1881). In her article "Stars and Numbers," THEOSOPHIST, June 1881, (p. 405-6 same book) she speaks of the relation of conjunctions to the intersection of cycles on our earth involving whole populations. Dealing with epidemics in an article entitled "Does Vaccination Prevent Smallpox ?" THEOSOPHIST, March 1881, (ULT Edn. HPB Articles, Vol. 1, p. 341) she offers information about the cycle of the return of diseases. If you would like to pursue this further then I will advance more data, but I am sure that you are already aware of these things. Best wishes, Dallas. > Date: Saturday, June 06, 1998 10:23 AM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE >>But if we look around and into the affairs of nature we see laws >>operating everywhere, chaos nowhere, and cooperation and harmony >>far exceed disharmony and strife. So why should it be specially >>absent in human affairs ? ==========================================> >I am sorry, Dallas, but once again I just can't agree with you. >I like nature and all, but when I look around I see chaos everywhere. >What about a tornado or hurricane or tidal wave? These are >generally considered to be chaotic (i.e., unpredictable) events. >Death is as prevalent in nature as life, and chaos as prevelant >as harmony. Of course, we all tend to see what we want to see... > >Jerry S. From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 18:51:50 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 00:09:13 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Hell, what? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806060633.AAA26765@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >If I yell to someone, "Hey, you jerk. . .go to avichi!" what am I saying? Go get me a pizza? Alan :0) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:06:59 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 00:07:24 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Double standards Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806060538.XAA25372@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Theosophists get themselves in boiling >water by pretending to be oh-so-holier than the rest of us poor slobs. > Not all Theosophists, Kym. Some are quite kind to this poor slob. Even Bart has thanked me for my lack of arrogance - touching, that. Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:08:21 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 00:02:18 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980606032032159.AAA176@pgiese> Pam Giese writes >I'm trying to hear your voice Alan, but I've got this rain of frogs coming >down here in Chicagoland. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all of >the locust.......gotta go, the oldest kid is crying...... I understand. I've been to Chicago. (1985) Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:13:47 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 00:03:45 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3578CE5F.92FDFB0D@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> Bart Lidofsky writes >> >> If you need to ask, you don't have it. >> > >> > Bullshit. >> >> Thank you for your thoughtful and caring contribution. > > And thank you for your lack of arrogance. > > Bart Lidofsky My pleasure. It's nice to be humble. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:18:32 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 19:45:27 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Atlantis Peak Maybe? Message-ID: <8bc81ce.3579d498@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-05 11:15:06 EDT, Darren writes: << > I find "ancient astronauts" theories to be inherently racist. What they >tend to come down to is, "The Asians, Africans, and Native Americans >could not have come up with the technology and cultures that they did on >their own; only the white Europeans have that capability." >> There is an interesting book out which I am still in the process of reading called THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL written by Col. Philip J. Corso (Ret.). As Chief of the Army's Technology Division, Corso stewarded the Roswell alien artifacts in a reverse-engineering project that led to today's integrated circuit chips, fiber optics, lasers and super-tenacity fibers. This alien technology was seeded to major U.S. firms under the cover story that they were mundane technologies being worked on behind the Iron Curtain and which had been obtained by the CIA and military intelligence. We still can't master electromagnetic antigravity drive and brain-directed navigational controls which seems to have been a feature of the Roswell craft. But the "honkies" in 1947 did pick up a few things from Roswell, according to Col. Corso, so maybe the ET's (the Grays) will beam down and give us a few helpful hints on how to handle the other stuff (despite the "whiteness" of some of our population). We hold no skin prejudice against the Grays (except perhaps for some disgruntled abductees)! "The truth is out there !" - Agents Mulder & Scully Lmhem111 THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL by Col. Philip J. Corso (Ret) Simon & Schuster, New York, NY - 1997 ISBN 0-671-004361-1 From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:20:13 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 16:52:37 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Re: Inner and outer Guru -- My Protest. Message-ID: <3579D645.84A08B8@netfeed.com> References: <007e01bd90da$a71feec0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas, I appreciate your reply. At least four times I had to clarify that the issue I raised was a matter of fairness and each time my statement was disregarded and contradicted. These are strange times when one can no longer write a note and have any say over how it was intended to be understood. Perhaps this post modernist attitude also has a bearing upon how HPB is to be interpreted today. It appears that the intended meaning of the author is to be disregarded. Whether or not she wrote an "untruth" is all a matter of who can compose the cleverest argument for or against. I also appreciate your position--that people ought to speak up on behalf of those we believe have been wronged. Sadly, to little of this is done anymore. That was don't in the days when ethics were regarded as more absolute and less situational. OTOH, I have spend the last several years digging out and reading academic papers concerning W.B. Yeats' relationship to HPB. So far, I'm yet to find any significant papers on the subject that do not contain at least one error of fact which could have been easily avoided if the writer had just taken a little time to do some research into theosophy. The errors are so numerous, that it would take lifetimes to correct them. This situation also brings to mind the late Iverson Harris who devoted the final fifty years of his life to writing letters and correcting errors of fact concerning HPB and Point Loma issues. His output of letters fill several full sized filing cabinets. I have read through a good sampling of these letters, and find that he for the most part did a pretty fair job of citing the errors of fact and supplying documentation that would correct them. Many of these letters were written to published authors or articles and books. I also noticed that the academic writers who bothered to acknowledge his efforts, usually simply blew off his documentation and made no changes in their subsequent works. The only exception that I'm aware is the late Dr. Greenwalt, who worked closely with the Point Loma survivors and as a result made many changes in the second edition of his history of the Point Loma community. As I say, Greenwalt was an exception, not the rule. This has left me to seriously question whether it is either wise or fruitful to feel obligated to look into every allegation dreamed up by the latest writer. My experience has been that while it takes only a minute to write a careless statement, it takes a great deal of research and often a very long essay in order to investigate, correct and document corrections to the carelessly made statement. If the writer lacks the intellectual integrity to take the corrections to heart and to make changes, then as Iverson has demonstrated, the effort is wasted. As for Paul's latest allegations, the subject has been of such deep interest to me, that I could not even tell you what they are, except that HPB supposedly told three "untruths." As I told Paul, I'm far more interested in getting a clear idea of what he means by "untruth" before I would invest any time into even looking at those allegations. Whether his allegation is supportable or not, I of course, have no idea, and without a lot of clarification regarding Paul's position, I would not even have a bases to even formulate an opinion. I trust that Dan, who seems to enjoy sparring with Paul, will sooner or later post his research on the question. Past experience has also led me to conclude that posting hard won research via email is like swimming in quick sand. I can put hours into looking into an issue, more hours into composing and documenting carefully researched information, and post it to a discussion on that subject, only to find that a few months later a discussion on the same topic will repeat as if the first one never occurred. Consequently, I have since put my efforts elsewhere. Best Jerry W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > June 5th 1998 > > Dear Jerry: > > Thanks for the note of the 4th to Daniel in which you set > straight the matter of the "pressures" placed on me and yourself > for opinions concerning HPB. > > I protested the unsubstantiated statement that Mr. Johnson made. > I consider that I have as much right to protest on her behalf, as > he has to make his view known. And in fact, I consider my > position to be essential if HPB is to be given "equal time." It > was made to defend one who was taken advantage of in her > "absence." It is a matter of fairness. As I have said several > times. All of us owe too much to HPB because of her presentation > of Theosophy. Thus we have no right to stand in judgment over > her. Do we do so over our Professors or our Teachers ? > > As I am able to see it, HPB came to sow the seeds of an entirely > new civilization. The mission of HPB was to break the molds of > men's mind-sets, and to destroy old modes of thought. > > The freedom to think and discover supplied new ideas and ideals > for our consideration. The collective mind of mankind (thanks to > Theosophical ideas) now stands open to a greater vista than it > previously had. The effect of this can be traced in almost every > department of living and of scientific discovery during the > passage of the last hundred years. Primary to all has been the > matter of ethical responsibility, based on universal concepts > that all free minds can investigate themselves. Secondarily, > some order has been restored in the matter of investigating the > "astral" and the "occult." This is because the Theosophy that > HPB taught advances the rules, details and the regulations of > those things. Those who have written on theosophy after her > death have very largely muddled her teachings. It is, in my > opinion, far safer to go directly to what she had to teach, than > take any second-hand writing to "tell it as it is." > > One of her contemporaries wrote of her: > > "Mme. Blavatsky has never deceived anyone, though she has often > been obliged to let others deceive themselves." PATH IV p. 104. > > In the MAHATMA LETTERS, on. p. 272 we find the statement made on > her behalf by her Teacher: > > "She is forbidden to say what she knows. You may cut her to > pieces and she will not tell. Nay--she is ordered in cases of > need to mislead people; and, were she more of a natural born > liar--she might be happier...She is too truthful, too outspoken, > too incapable of dissimulation; and now she is being daily > crucified for it..." > > On p. 314 (Idem.) we may read: > > "You can never know her as we do, therefore--none of you will > ever be able to judge her impartially or correctly. You see the > surface of things; and what you would term "virtue," holding but > to appearances, we--judge but after having fathomed the object to > its profoundest depth, and generally leave the appearances to > take care of themselves. In your opinion H.P.B. is, at best...as > quaint, strange woman, a psychological riddle; impulsive and > kindhearted, yet not free from the vice of untruth. We, on the > other hand, under the garb of eccentricity and folly--we find a > profounder wisdom in her inner Self that you will ever find > yourselves able to perceive. In the superficial details of her > homely, hard-working, common-place daily life and affairs, you > discern but impracticality, womanly impulses, often absurdity and > folly; we, on the contrary, light daily upon traits of her inner > nature the most delicate and refined, and which would cost an > uninitiated psychologist years of constant and keen observation, > and many an hour of close analysis and efforts to draw out of the > depth of that most subtle of mysteries--human mind--and one of > her most complicated machines,--H.P.B.'s mind--and thus learn to > know her true inner Self." > > Is it suddenly wrong to say publicly that I deeply respect and > honor HPB, and that I owe much, if not all of my knowledge to her > ? > > On her own behalf she wrote: > > "What I do believe in is: " 1.) the unbroken oral teachings > revealed by living divine men to the elect among men; 2.) that > it has reached us unaltered; and 3.) that the MASTERS are > thoroughly versed in the science based on such unaltered > teaching." > LUCIFER, Vol. V, p. 157 > > Speaking of the source of her knowledge she wrote: > > [ this is also for Jerry Schueler' post of June 4th] > > "I got my drop (a draught of the golden water) from my Master > (the living one)...he is a Saviour, he who leads you to finding > the Master within yourself." > HPB Letter to Hartmann. PATH X 369. > > Much more could be added, but this is already more than necessary > to make the points that strike me as important in this. > > With best wishes to you as always, Dallas > > ================================== > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 6 19:51:42 1998 Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 20:49:01 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Double standards Message-ID: <3579E37D.F11699A3@sprynet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Not all Theosophists, Kym. Some are quite kind to this poor slob. > Even Bart has thanked me for my lack of arrogance - touching, that. > > Alan :-) No problem. Any time. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 04:36:33 1998 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 19:00:43 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <000201bd91f7$1150cea0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 6th 1998 Re: Intuition Dallas offers: "Manas" the Mind uses reason to work logically from premises to conclusions. This is different from instinct. A higher "gift" active in man is intuition. It KNOWS, and it does not depend on reason or instinct. It is allied to the superior spiritual principles and is in effect that Wisdom that is everyone's property. Intuition is direct cognition and comprehension. Everyone has this power operating to some degree. The bar to our frequent use of it is our tendency to depend on our reasoning powers. Those are usually based on superficial and incomplete knowledge. and as we may not know all the facts intellect alone, can mislead. We sometimes call our reason "common knowledge." But this is based largely on the information acquired by our personality of this life-time in its relation to what it remembers and to our everyday world. It seldom takes into account the spiritual nature of Man -- the Real Thinker and Seer. Theosophy offers a knowledge of the Spiritual aspect of our life. Not only should our thinking be based as far as we can upon this knowledge of the spiritual Self that we are in our essential part, but we have to look on ourselves as Immortals who are constantly experiencing through our personality the realities of our everyday life. We live with others and they with us. The relationship in its entirety is called Karma -- the laws of interaction and of cooperation. without them we could not live at all. If we carefully examine our lives and thoughts we will soon find that we are the immortal and CHANGELESS THINKER. We witness the passing scene as we might a play in which we participate -- the acts are the changing expressions of other conscious beings, and of our own consciousness. We can penetrate beyond and all appearances to the core, the essence of the spiritual nature of any being, be it an "atom," a human, or a solar system. It is a sense that probes the reason for its existence, for its presence, and for our present relation to it. It assumes that the same Laws pertain to it as to ourselves and that there is a uniform balance, a dynamic harmony in nature which adjusts apparent disparities. Let us start with the idea that everything we see (externally) is the expression of an interior Spiritual presence. All expressions are then from "within-outward." Our "inner sight" gives us access to anything in nature, a full comprehension of its value and purpose. it is not a reasoning from premises to conclusions but a direct and instantaneous cognition of all the facts and factors as well as their contingent expressions on all the planes of being. To perfect this divine faculty the aspirant can be neither attached to , nor disturbed by external stimuli or desires of any kind. He applies a knowledge of what living the higher life implies. A Master of Wisdom once wrote: "The more unselfishly one works for his fellow men, and divests himself of the illusionary sense of personal isolation, the more he is free from Maya (illusion), and the nearer he approaches Divinity." In all Theosophic teaching there is an endeavor to raise the intuition by presenting universal principles, processes and analogies. If those are recognized and applied each one can secure consistent answers to his questions. "As above, so below." > Date: Friday, June 05, 1998 8:09 PM > From: "Pam Giese" > Subject: Re: thought or intuition? >> Thoa Tran wrote: >> > I think of intuition as more than animal instinct. To me, animal >instinct >> > (as far as mating, gathering food, and other common survival functions) >> > involves a built in practical mechanism. >> > Intuition, which helps in finding >> > solutions to complex questions and helps us connect to other beings, >> > involve a deeper source. It feels to me like a point of contact to the >> > knowing All. SNIP > From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 08:36:32 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:53:16 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980607225316.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980605104537.0078f184@mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980606001246.0070de5c@ozemail.com.au> <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> Most of the lodge members seem to be over fifty and there doesn't seemd to be more than 20 active members. They are very happy using manual card systems and if thats how they like it then who am I to argue? Darren At 10:45 AM 6/5/98 -0500, you wrote: >At 12:12 AM 6/6/98 +0900, you wrote: >>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. > >Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge is >not interested? How old are the key/active members? > >mkr > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 08:43:31 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:57:21 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: HPB's SD Vol. III Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980607225721.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <357843E9.1617026@netfeed.com> References: <000301bd909c$bd8d64a0$400a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> jerry, thanks for the advice. And thank you every one else for helping me look after my money. My indulges my whims most of the time but this one was pushing it. darren At 12:15 PM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >This is the Quest paperback reprint published after the six vol. edition= went >out of print. This would be the cheapest way to go. $15.00 is about right for >this. >jhe > > >Govert W. Sch=FCller wrote: > >> HPB's alleged third volume of the SD can be found at: >> >> http://www.bibliofind.com/ >> >> Search for the following item: >> >> blavatsky, helena petrovna: esoteric writngs of helena petrovna blavatsky= ; >> theosophical publishing house, (1980) first quest edition.vg wrappers= front >> pages and wrapper bent at the tip. a scrape at the bottom of the front. some >> wear to the extremities. occult, metaphysics. stock # Offered for sale= by >> Vicarious Experience at US$15.00 >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---- >> >> > > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929=20 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 08:46:37 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:54:46 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Cancel the order! Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980607225446.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <35783C02.29CFC93A@netfeed.com> References: <685dd6e3.357806d0@aol.com> Lmhem111, thanks for the advice, my lodge has just put out a second hand copy of Adyar so I'll see how much they want for this. Namaste Darren At 11:42 AM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >Kerssinger xeroxes copies of scarce and rare books and perfect binds them like >an ordinary paperback book, except that they all measure 8 1/2 x 11 inches. >$100.00 Australian is pretty close to what one would pay for a used copy of the >six volume "Adyar Edition" of the S.D., which isn't yet all that scarce. You >might search www.bibliofind.com or one of the other used book data bases for a >better deal. $65.00 to $85.00 U.S. is the typical price range for this book. >jhe > > >Lmhem111@aol.com wrote: > >> I'm not quite sure what Darren is ordering for a $100 from Kessinger >> Publishing. I must have missed some posts. However, keep in mind that >> Kessinger reprints esoteric material much like: >> >> Sun Publishing Company >> (http://www.sunbooks.com), >> Binkley Publishing >> (http://www.abwam.com/nalybi/index.html) >> Health Research >> (http://www.healthresearchbooks.com/) >> >> Hence, you'll be paying a much higher price for a limited reprint volume. If >> you aren't desperate to get the material, I would scour the second-hand >> bookstores first. >> >> Lmhem111 >> >> > > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 08:50:21 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:46:01 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Atlantis Peak Maybe? Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980607224601.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <8bc81ce.3579d498@aol.com> The ancient astronauts do not necessarily need to be aliens from another planet. They could be hyperdimensional beings (ascended masters ?), time travellers, angels, the list is endless? The question is have they been beneficial or malicious to humans? Darren At 07:45 PM 6/6/98 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 98-06-05 11:15:06 EDT, Darren writes: > ><< > I find "ancient astronauts" theories to be inherently racist. What they > >tend to come down to is, "The Asians, Africans, and Native Americans > >could not have come up with the technology and cultures that they did on > >their own; only the white Europeans have that capability." >> > >There is an interesting book out which I am still in the process of reading >called THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL written by Col. Philip J. Corso (Ret.). As Chief >of the Army's Technology Division, Corso stewarded the Roswell alien artifacts >in a reverse-engineering project that led to today's integrated circuit chips, >fiber optics, lasers and super-tenacity fibers. This alien technology was >seeded to major U.S. firms under the cover story that they were mundane >technologies being worked on behind the Iron Curtain and which had been >obtained by the CIA and military intelligence. > >We still can't master electromagnetic antigravity drive and brain-directed >navigational controls which seems to have been a feature of the Roswell craft. >But the "honkies" in 1947 did pick up a few things from Roswell, according to >Col. Corso, so maybe the ET's (the Grays) will beam down and give us a few >helpful hints on how to handle the other stuff (despite the "whiteness" of >some of our population). We hold no skin prejudice against the Grays (except >perhaps for some disgruntled abductees)! > >"The truth is out there !" - Agents Mulder & Scully >Lmhem111 > >THE DAY AFTER ROSWELL by Col. Philip J. Corso (Ret) >Simon & Schuster, New York, NY - 1997 >ISBN 0-671-004361-1 > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 08:54:29 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 22:51:57 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980607225157.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: Thoa as always the voice of reason. Yes I beleive it is just a generation gap situation. I offered to donate a computer to the library but they were more than happy to just continue with a manual card system. I was hoping to make some of the older members a little less sacared and daunted by technology. I've managed to get my grandfather into computers and he is mid 70's. I also think our lodge is very small only around 10-12 people turn up for the weekly lectures. If our wisdom is as 'correct' (or close to) as we beleive it to be we need to spread the teachings more. We need to use the latest technological tools and we ought to have a media prsence if only in the role of 'devils advocate' so as to get people thinking. Thanks for your input, as always Darren (#467) MI At 10:59 PM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >Darren: >>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >> >>Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried that there >>are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the teachings because of a >>lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the christian Church - >>thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose clouded. >> >> >>I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly > >Darren, you might want to ask Eldon about how to give a lecture about the >internet and theosophy. I think Eldon already gave several lectures on >that topic. I'm sure Eldon had several roadblocks along his way. I think >you read, last week, about Eldon's internet failure (can't remember the >name, a magazine?) His Theosophy World list was almost dead for at least a >year, and now it's hopping. > >Perhaps there's another way to get through to the lodge about your serious >intent. On the other hand, they could be backwards when it comes to the >internet. Perhaps there are people on this list who could use your >internet expertise to promote theosophy. > >It's too bad that the enthusiasm of the young is not being used. The thing >that the young is lacking is knowledge of established customs, and >experience. The former is good in that the young can see beyond the rigid >establishment, but bad in that the young do not know how to deal with the >establishment. When you don't know how to deal with the establishment, the >establishment can be a big brick wall. > >Can you imagine the dynamism that would arise if the establishment knows >how to use the enthusiasm and the power of the young? Young people are >idealistic and energetic. Young people also attract other young people. >Instead of being afraid at the rowdiness and unconventionality of the >young, the establishment should flow with the tide and guide it. And guide >it in a way that would not squelch the energy. If the establishment fails >to do that, the young will go elsewhere that would fit with their >enthusiasm. The establishment will end up with a bunch of long time >established folks gathering cobwebs. When the older generation dies, what >then is left? A slab of brick wall. > >Thoa :o) > > > > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 10:36:32 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 10:31:31 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980607103131.012fc330@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980607225316.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> References: <3.0.3.32.19980605104537.0078f184@mail.eden.com> <3.0.2.32.19980606001246.0070de5c@ozemail.com.au> <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> This is the usual problem seen with the population which grew up in pre-computer age. The future belongs to the current generation which is growing up in the Internet age. Students in middle school are setting up web pages and elementary school students are able to navigate Internet. Anti-Internet older population will be run over soon in the next few years. mkr At 10:53 PM 6/7/1998 +0900, you wrote: >Most of the lodge members seem to be over fifty and there doesn't seemd to >be more than 20 active members. They are very happy using manual card >systems and if thats how they like it then who am I to argue? > > >Darren > >At 10:45 AM 6/5/98 -0500, you wrote: >>At 12:12 AM 6/6/98 +0900, you wrote: >>>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >> >>Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge is >>not interested? How old are the key/active members? >> >>mkr From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 10:43:35 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 11:35:43 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #189 Message-ID: <01bd9229$ef1cd300$LocalHost@default> Jerry H-E writes: >This situation also brings to >mind the late Iverson Harris who devoted the final fifty years of his >life to writing letters and correcting errors of fact concerning HPB and >Point Loma issues. His output of letters fill several full sized filing >cabinets. I have read through a good sampling of these letters, and >find that he for the most part did a pretty fair job of citing the >errors of fact and supplying documentation that would correct them. >Many of these letters were written to published authors or articles and >books. I also noticed that the academic writers who bothered to >acknowledge his efforts, usually simply blew off his documentation and >made no changes in their subsequent works. The only exception that I'm >aware is the late Dr. Greenwalt, who worked closely with the Point Loma >survivors and as a result made many changes in the second edition of his >history of the Point Loma community. As I say, Greenwalt was an >exception, not the rule. This has left me to seriously question whether >it is either wise or fruitful to feel obligated to look into every >allegation dreamed up by the latest writer. My experience has been that >while it takes only a minute to write a careless statement, it takes a >great deal of research and often a very long essay in order to >investigate, correct and document corrections to the carelessly made >statement. If the writer lacks the intellectual integrity to take the >corrections to heart and to make changes, then as Iverson has >demonstrated, the effort is wasted. In the limited experience I've had in letter-writing publishers, book-sellers and authors in correcting errors on Theosophy, that most lack integrity is certainly true. Since their integrity is not centered or directed toward abstract "Truth", one has to see that their chief concern is self-interest (including satisfying the vested interests and pruriency of the audience) with "truth" only served as a secondary concern. One really has to admire Harris for doggedly writing all those letters, which no doubt had their effect even if not obvious in immediate results. Much of the B.S. printed about Blavatsky doesn't surface anymore or as often. Since authors and publishers don't show much reaction to personal letters, revealing them in magazine articles and the like would seem to have better results, as authors and publishers DO respond to public if not private scrutiny, and the public in general does resent being fed unsupported balderdash. I don't care either about supposed "untruths" by Blavatsky, but am mostly concerned with studying the philosophy, since I've established to myself that it is genuine and to be trusted. Who cares if Blavatsky "got one caught sideways" a couple of times! She was always under pressure and a chela and not an adept after all. - Jake From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 10:51:49 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 11:35:43 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #189 Message-ID: <01bd9229$ef1cd300$LocalHost@default> Jerry H-E writes: >This situation also brings to >mind the late Iverson Harris who devoted the final fifty years of his >life to writing letters and correcting errors of fact concerning HPB and >Point Loma issues. His output of letters fill several full sized filing >cabinets. I have read through a good sampling of these letters, and >find that he for the most part did a pretty fair job of citing the >errors of fact and supplying documentation that would correct them. >Many of these letters were written to published authors or articles and >books. I also noticed that the academic writers who bothered to >acknowledge his efforts, usually simply blew off his documentation and >made no changes in their subsequent works. The only exception that I'm >aware is the late Dr. Greenwalt, who worked closely with the Point Loma >survivors and as a result made many changes in the second edition of his >history of the Point Loma community. As I say, Greenwalt was an >exception, not the rule. This has left me to seriously question whether >it is either wise or fruitful to feel obligated to look into every >allegation dreamed up by the latest writer. My experience has been that >while it takes only a minute to write a careless statement, it takes a >great deal of research and often a very long essay in order to >investigate, correct and document corrections to the carelessly made >statement. If the writer lacks the intellectual integrity to take the >corrections to heart and to make changes, then as Iverson has >demonstrated, the effort is wasted. In the limited experience I've had in letter-writing publishers, book-sellers and authors in correcting errors on Theosophy, that most lack integrity is certainly true. Since their integrity is not centered or directed toward abstract "Truth", one has to see that their chief concern is self-interest (including satisfying the vested interests and pruriency of the audience) with "truth" only served as a secondary concern. One really has to admire Harris for doggedly writing all those letters, which no doubt had their effect even if not obvious in immediate results. Much of the B.S. printed about Blavatsky doesn't surface anymore or as often. Since authors and publishers don't show much reaction to personal letters, revealing them in magazine articles and the like would seem to have better results, as authors and publishers DO respond to public if not private scrutiny, and the public in general does resent being fed unsupported balderdash. I don't care either about supposed "untruths" by Blavatsky, but am mostly concerned with studying the philosophy, since I've established to myself that it is genuine and to be trusted. Who cares if Blavatsky "got one caught sideways" a couple of times! She was always under pressure and a chela and not an adept after all. - Jake From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 11:06:32 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 10:38:07 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980607103807.012fb1f0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980607225157.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> References: Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the devout ones are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to move with technology. Let us see what happens. mkr At 10:51 PM 6/7/1998 +0900, you wrote: >Thoa as always the voice of reason. Yes I beleive it is just a generation >gap situation. I offered to donate a computer to the library but they were >more than happy to just continue with a manual card system. I was hoping to >make some of the older members a little less sacared and daunted by >technology. I've managed to get my grandfather into computers and he is mid >70's. > >I also think our lodge is very small only around 10-12 people turn up for >the weekly lectures. If our wisdom is as 'correct' (or close to) as we >beleive it to be we need to spread the teachings more. We need to use the >latest technological tools and we ought to have a media prsence if only in >the role of 'devils advocate' so as to get people thinking. > >Thanks for your input, > >as always > >Darren (#467) MI > > > At 10:59 PM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >>Darren: >>>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >>> >>>Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried that there >>>are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the teachings because of a >>>lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the christian Church - >>>thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose clouded. >>> >>> >>>I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly >> >>Darren, you might want to ask Eldon about how to give a lecture about the >>internet and theosophy. I think Eldon already gave several lectures on >>that topic. I'm sure Eldon had several roadblocks along his way. I think >>you read, last week, about Eldon's internet failure (can't remember the >>name, a magazine?) His Theosophy World list was almost dead for at least a >>year, and now it's hopping. >> >>Perhaps there's another way to get through to the lodge about your serious >>intent. On the other hand, they could be backwards when it comes to the >>internet. Perhaps there are people on this list who could use your >>internet expertise to promote theosophy. >> >>It's too bad that the enthusiasm of the young is not being used. The thing >>that the young is lacking is knowledge of established customs, and >>experience. The former is good in that the young can see beyond the rigid >>establishment, but bad in that the young do not know how to deal with the >>establishment. When you don't know how to deal with the establishment, the >>establishment can be a big brick wall. >> >>Can you imagine the dynamism that would arise if the establishment knows >>how to use the enthusiasm and the power of the young? Young people are >>idealistic and energetic. Young people also attract other young people. >>Instead of being afraid at the rowdiness and unconventionality of the >>young, the establishment should flow with the tide and guide it. And guide >>it in a way that would not squelch the energy. If the establishment fails >>to do that, the young will go elsewhere that would fit with their >>enthusiasm. The establishment will end up with a bunch of long time >>established folks gathering cobwebs. When the older generation dies, what >>then is left? A slab of brick wall. >> >>Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 13:06:34 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 11:09:21 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Jerry Hejka-Ekins on "....Who is it going to help?" Message-ID: <357AD751.58A9@azstarnet.com> Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote in one posting on Theos-Talk: > Dan, it amazes me how a simple statement on my part has become so > consistently misunderstood and misrepresented by you and Paul. I simply > raised an issue of fairness, and now you are saying that I "beat around the > bush and deal with everything but these three" [untruths]. Dan, I haven't > been following this string close enough to even know what these alleged > "three untruths" are that appear to be so controversial to you--therefore > how could I have "beat around the bush"? When you earlier tried to goat me > into looking into Paul's assertions, I wrote that I didn't have the time nor > the interest in the issue to do that kind of research right now. But you > keep insisting. Why are you putting pressure on Dallas and I to take time > to research and address Paul's latest allegations when you have the > resources, the ability, and evidently plenty of time to do this on your > own? I asked you this question before, and I'm yet to see you answer. Are > you missing some resources? If, so then I will be happy to send you a copy > of whatever you need, providing I have it to give. Further, what do you > think will be accomplished by all of this? If I were to document as an > absolute certainty that Paul's assertions are correct or incorrect, who is > it going to help? Not HPB--she is dead. Not those who are vested in HPB's > veracity as a matter of faith. They will not be moved by any information > that contradicts that faith anyway. Not the academic community. This is > the wrong forum for that. Further, even if my researching into this issue > by some miracle resolves the matter, does this mean that every time someone > says something you don't like about HPB, I have some obligation to drop > everything to research an issue that you are perfectly capable of > researching for yourself? Sounds like you are trying to lead me into a > black hole. Dan, the allegation that HPB was a liar and a fraud is not only > practically a universally held opinion in academic circles, it is treated as > a given that requires no supporting evidence. If Paul is trying to make the > point that HPB is a liar, then he is not saying anything different than what > almost everyone else in the academic community has been already saying for > over a century. So what is the big deal? Further, it takes five seconds > for someone to write a factually incorrect statement in an academic work. > It then requires someone else to write an entire paper, or sometimes even a > book to show that the off handed statement is wrong. I think even HPB > realized this problem when she commented that "error moves on an inclined > plane." IMO, the effort required to correct every factually incorrect > statement about HPB is beyond what anyone could do in a lifetime. So, the > question is: *if* Paul's assertions are incorrect (as I believe you assume > they are), is it really worth the time and energy it would take to correct > them? I don't believe so. Can you give me any reasons that may convince me > otherwise? > > If it is worth the time, then what am I going to accomplish here? As I > wrote before, a discussion about truth, lies, deceptions and people's > motivations for them would IMO, be far more fruitful then to merely > determine whether or not HPB was telling the truth, in some given instance. > Other than a tiny group of devotees who treat HPB as an icon on the one > hand, and an even smaller group of students on the other, who do make an > honest effort to study her writings, who really gives a rat's ass about > whether HPB told a so called "untruth" (whatever that is)? Then in another posting Jerry H-E followed up with these words: >This situation also brings to >mind the late Iverson Harris who devoted the final fifty years of his >life to writing letters and correcting errors of fact concerning HPB and >Point Loma issues. His output of letters fill several full sized filing >cabinets. I have read through a good sampling of these letters, and >find that he for the most part did a pretty fair job of citing the >errors of fact and supplying documentation that would correct them. >Many of these letters were written to published authors or articles and >books. I also noticed that the academic writers who bothered to >acknowledge his efforts, usually simply blew off his documentation and >made no changes in their subsequent works. The only exception that I'm >aware is the late Dr. Greenwalt, who worked closely with the Point Loma >survivors and as a result made many changes in the second edition of his >history of the Point Loma community. As I say, Greenwalt was an >exception, not the rule. This has left me to seriously question whether >it is either wise or fruitful to feel obligated to look into every >allegation dreamed up by the latest writer. My experience has been that >while it takes only a minute to write a careless statement, it takes a >great deal of research and often a very long essay in order to >investigate, correct and document corrections to the carelessly made >statement. If the writer lacks the intellectual integrity to take the >corrections to heart and to make changes, then as Iverson has >demonstrated, the effort is wasted. >From Daniel H. Caldwell: Jerry, I don't have the time right now to go over in detail with you what you write about me and the issues related to Paul Johnson, etc. But I do want to make some remarks on a few items of general and possibly even greater importance. I hope I'm not reading too much INTO your postings or I'm not guilty of taking things out of context, but I must say that your postings (especially the first) and especially your answer to the question: "....who is it going to help?" are quite an "eyeopener" to me!! >From your writing in these two recent postings, could not one properly conclude that theosophists who have written articles, booklets, papers or books on Madame Blavatsky (or in defense of her) were basically wasting their time and effort? "....Who is it going to help?" And many of us may agree with your comments on the "prejudiced" academic community. But what about people out in the "real" world who are seeking for light and truth and meaning, but who may be *genuinely confused* by all the contradictory things set afloat about Blavatsky and Theosophy? *In this context*, is it *truly* a waste of time and energy to try to clarify confusions and misstatements relating to HPB's life as well as about her writings AND teachings? [NOTE: I would probably agree that writing letters to editors who NEVER publish these letters may be considered a waste of time and energy but are there not better avenues in which to broadcast these issues? Again email even on Theos-Talk may not be the best "public" medium but what about the WWW?] And as I read and reread your last two postings, many comments by the Mahatmas & HPB come to my mind. Below are just a few observations by the Mahatmas which indicate (at least to me) that they considered "publicity" and "defense" as a necessity to combat various "misconceptions", "abuses" and "vilifications" about Madame Blavatsky, Theosophy and the Theosophical Society. Here are the quotes from the Master Morya: "I say again what you like me not to say, namely that *no regular* instruction, no regular communication is possible between us before our mutual path is cleared of its many impediments, the greatest being the public misconception about the Founders. . . . " "I say then that it is the vilification and abuse of the founders, the general misconception of the aims and objects of the [Theosophical] Society that paralyses its progress---nothing else. . . . " ". . . the most precious hints will fail to reach the minds of those craving for truth, for a solitary pearl is soon out shone in the midst of a heap of false diamonds, when THERE'S NO JEWELLER TO POINT out its worth. . . . " CAPS ADDED. "No law suit will help---but publicity in the matter of vindication as much as in the question of accusation---10,000 *circular letters* sent throughout to prove accusations [against Blavatsky] false...." If these letters had been directed to you, would you have replied to the Mahatma with your question: "....Who is it going to help?" Of course, HPB is now dead as you point out but is THAT really relevant to the issue under discussion? From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 14:36:32 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 15:28:49 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <01bd924a$7efeb9a0$1d7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> >According to the Theosophy I am familiar with, tornadoes, tidal >waves, earthquakes, solar flares, draughts, floods, epidemics and >in fact all cataclysms are generated by the turbulent aspects of >our human emotions and thoughts -- their impact on the >"elements." In which case even destructive events are the >product of the destructive aspects of our thinking and choosing. >They do not happen at random and when they do occur they involve >those persons who in this life or in earlier ones had contributed >to their formation. You may say this is far-fetched. > Not far-fetched as long as we agree that such natural events are the result of our collective karma and not our personal karma. If I was hit by lightning and died, you would probably say it was a result of my personal karma--something that I did in a past life. I see it rather as collective karma and the fact that I am human and I equate collective karma with chaos because neither is predictable nor are they deterministic. >But, if we are dealing with living beings everywhere, each with >its own intelligence and a nature that is not destroyed when it >is dispersed, then we are dealing with the ethical impact of our >acts, thoughts and feelings on those beings that compose our >bodies and the rest of our environment, in one way or another. >To look at such events as fortuitous, chancy, or lucky (or the >reverse) is to say that we do not yet know the laws under which >they occur. But to say that there is no law simply means that we >do not know of any, yet. > This is very deterministic thinking, and a few years ago I would have agreed with you. Nowdays I tend to think that some things in life are not deterministic (and therefore, by definition, are chaotic). It is rather like the Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Physics: our seemingly deterministic world is based on an indeterministic foundation. It is not a question of lacking data or needing more information. >The Theosophist says as I understand it, that there is a great >Law that causes all things to be. And that embodied in this law >are the concepts of a perfection, or a kind of "graduation," >towards which every class of being is progressing, each in its >own way. It is expressed as cooperation and as brotherhood. > I consider myself a Theosophist too, but I see karma as causality and I happen to agree with Jung that synchronicity also exists -- an acausal principle just as real and effective as casuality. I call karma causality and synchronicity I call chaos, but a rose is a rose is a rose. >Now if you say Karma does not operate anywhere, and it is a >figment of Theosophical delusion then I cannot say anything more. No, I never said that. >But there is, as I see it an overwhelming flood of evidence to >show that causes produce effects according to the aim and >intensity of the actor or generator. So why should Theosophy be >wrong in assigning a probable relationship between cataclysms and >man's generation of emotional cataclysms ? > Theosophy is only wrong when it says, like science said until chaos theory came along, that causality is all that there is. Now science knows that chaos exists and can't be eliminated nor predicted. One of these days I hope Theosophists will also recognise this. >When I used the word "chaos" I meant something that did not >happen under LAW. But synchronicity is a law too. Chaos also works with laws. Its just that these laws are acausal--not causally connected, and are independent of time and space. You need to redefine LAW to allow for acausal events. > And even cataclysms are the result of a rather >large operation of law. They are the attempt of nature to bring >about an adjustment in the disturbance we human minds and wills >have imposed (as a great mass of thinking beings) on Nature's >hidden planes. It is the objective manifestation of those causes >that are subjective (if you will allow me the use of those >terms). > Agreed. But all storms are unpredictable over time (they can only be predicted in a very short term). Karma is cause and effect and is pretty well predictable. >And while we are at it, we could also ask if there is a universal >plan of evolution -- not just of the physical body, as considered >by the archaeologists and the paleo-physiologists, but as HPB >suggests in SD I 181, also of the soul (mind and emotional >natures) and the spiritual nature too. > I fully agree with HPB. >Interestingly enough, HPB deals with the questions of returning >cycles in her article "The Theory of Cycles," THEOSOPHIST, July >1880 (ULT Edn. of HPB Articles, Vol. 3, p. 72-3). On p. 78 she >writes more on this ("Ancient Doctrines Vindicated," >THEOSOPHIST, May, 1881). In her article "Stars and Numbers," >THEOSOPHIST, June 1881, (p. 405-6 same book) she speaks of the >relation of conjunctions to the intersection of cycles on our >earth involving whole populations. Dealing with epidemics in an >article entitled "Does Vaccination Prevent Smallpox ?" >THEOSOPHIST, March 1881, >(ULT Edn. HPB Articles, Vol. 1, p. 341) she offers information >about the cycle of the return of diseases. > Collective events tend to be cyclic. Again, I agree with HPB. >If you would like to pursue this further then I will advance more >data, but I am sure that you are already aware of these things. > >Best wishes, Dallas. > Best to you too. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 15:06:37 1998 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 13:01:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: The Truman Show Message-Id: I'm sure the movie is not hurting for publicity, but I had to broadcast it to the theosophy lists. I saw the movie last night and it blew my mind. The concept of Maya is nothing new to me, but it was amazing seeing it played out in a movie. Most of the people in the audience were youths in their early twenties. I wondered how much of the meaning of the movie got to them. I wondered whether they understood the significance of it in relation to their world. I wondered whether that would make them contemplate the mayavic and controlling nature of their own world, how the media manipulated them, how people in authority, or people with whom they have strong emotional bonds manipulated them, how much culture and society dictated them, and how much interest groups have manipulated them. I wondered whether they wondered how much the human Will figured into all of this. Anyway, go see the movie! Two thumbs up from me. The movie displayed the concept beautifully, and people of all ages can understand and enjoy it. Like the way theosophy should sometimes be, eh? Gotta go and marbelize some tables. Happy weekend, folks! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 19:21:37 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 01:13:25 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: To Darren: internet lecture Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980607103807.012fb1f0@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss writes >Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the devout ones >are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to move with >technology. Let us see what happens. ORDER FROM THE HIMALAYAS All theosophists shall be equipped with computers and study internet skills with all possible speed. [Signed] THE MASTERS and MISTRESSES (via Alan the Intermediary) From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 19:36:36 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 01:03:29 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Jerry Hejka-Ekins on "....Who is it going to help?" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <357AD751.58A9@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye writes >Here are the quotes from the Master Morya: > >"I say again what you like me not to say, namely that *no regular* >instruction, no regular communication is possible between us before >our mutual path is cleared of its many impediments, the greatest >being the public misconception about the Founders. . . . " Some would argue that some of the greatest misconceptions about the founders are held in this day and age by theosophists themselves. > >"I say then that it is the vilification and abuse of the founders, >the general misconception of the aims and objects of the [Theosophical] >Society that paralyses its progress---nothing else. . . . " "I say then ..." In other words, this is the *opinion* [or OPINION] of the writer. Again, the "general misconception" must have been created by someone - theosophists?. Like others of the theos internet bunch, I too have been vilified and abused, *almost entirely by those that call themselves theosophists.* It has not paralysed my progress, though that too could be considered a matter of opinion. Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 19:51:37 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 19:51:10 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980607195110.012e8af0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.3.32.19980607103807.012fb1f0@mail.eden.com> At 01:13 AM 6/8/1998 +0100, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss writes >>Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the devout ones >>are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to move with >>technology. Let us see what happens. > >ORDER FROM THE HIMALAYAS > >All theosophists shall be equipped with computers and study internet >skills with all possible speed. > >[Signed] THE MASTERS and MISTRESSES > >(via Alan the Intermediary) Will the Internet skills be a requirement for accepting occult trainees? Can you check with THE MASTERS AND MISTRESSES? MKR From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 20:06:35 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 20:02:32 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: "....Who is it going to help?" Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980607200232.011b6b90@mail.eden.com> At 08:34 PM 6/7/1998 -0400, you wrote: >Caldwell/Graye writes >>Here are the quotes from the Master Morya: >> >>"I say again what you like me not to say, namely that *no regular* >>instruction, no regular communication is possible between us before >>our mutual path is cleared of its many impediments, the greatest >>being the public misconception about the Founders. . . . " > >Some would argue that some of the greatest misconceptions about the >founders are held in this day and age by theosophists themselves. >> >>"I say then that it is the vilification and abuse of the founders, >>the general misconception of the aims and objects of the [Theosophical] >>Society that paralyses its progress---nothing else. . . . " > >"I say then ..." > >In other words, this is the *opinion* [or OPINION] of the writer. >Again, the "general misconception" must have been created by >someone - theosophists?. > >Like others of the theos internet bunch, I too have been vilified and >abused, *almost entirely by those that call themselves theosophists.* It >has not paralysed my progress, though that too could be considered a >matter of opinion. > >Alan :0) Alan: this was forseen by HPB herself when she talked about theosophy having multiple sects - just like the multitude of christian sects each opposing the rest. In many cases, Human nature appears not to change no matter whether one is exposed to theosophy or not. BTW, organizations does not appear to accept these maillists since they cannot control them (like other media they are used to control), thanks to John Mead, Eldon Tucker, and Alan. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jun 7 22:29:43 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 20:31:36 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #189 Message-ID: <357B5B18.956093E2@netfeed.com> References: <01bd9229$ef1cd300$LocalHost@default> Thank you for this positive note. Perhaps Mr. Harris also kept up his effort under the belief that no effort is wasted, and that good results will eventually come, even if he would not live to enjoy their fruits. I'm glad anyway, that Harris was least able to benefit from Dr. Greenwalt's intellectual integrity. jhe MRJ wrote: > In the limited experience I've had in letter-writing publishers, > book-sellers and authors in correcting errors on Theosophy, that most lack > integrity is certainly true. Since their integrity is not centered or > directed toward abstract "Truth", one has to see that their chief concern is > self-interest (including satisfying the vested interests and pruriency of > the audience) with "truth" only served as a secondary concern. One really > has to admire Harris for doggedly writing all those letters, which no doubt > had their effect even if not obvious in immediate results. Much of the B.S. > printed about Blavatsky doesn't surface anymore or as often. Since authors > and publishers don't show much reaction to personal letters, revealing > them in magazine articles and the like would seem to have better results, as > authors and publishers DO respond to public if not private scrutiny, and > the public in general does resent being fed unsupported balderdash. > I don't care either about supposed "untruths" by Blavatsky, but am > mostly concerned with studying the philosophy, since I've established to > myself that it is genuine and to be trusted. Who cares if Blavatsky "got > one caught sideways" a couple of times! She was always under pressure and a > chela and not an adept after all. > > - Jake > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 00:02:26 1998 Date: Sun, 07 Jun 1998 21:47:46 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Jerry Hejka-Ekins on "....Who is it going to help?" Message-ID: <357B6CF1.28B9B6C2@netfeed.com> References: <357AD751.58A9@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye wrote: > >From Daniel H. Caldwell: > > Jerry, I don't have the time right now to go over in detail with > you what you write about me and the issues related to Paul Johnson, etc. > > But I do want to make some remarks on a few items of general and > possibly even greater importance. > > I hope I'm not reading too much INTO your postings or I'm not guilty of taking > things out of context, but I must say that your postings (especially the first) > and especially your > answer to the question: "....who is it going to help?" are quite an "eyeopener" > to me!! > > >From your writing in these two recent postings, could not one properly conclude > that theosophists who have written articles, booklets, papers or books on Madame > Blavatsky (or in defense of her) were basically wasting their time and effort? > "....Who is it going to help?" No. That is not what I'm saying. I think writing books and pamphlets in defense of HPB are valuable and should be done. Arguing with Paul's allegations without first getting to the bottom of what he is talking about, IMO is not valuable or even worth while. To give an example: Several years ago I got into it with Paul was over an allegation he made that Judge wrote a fake Mahatma letter warning Besant not to go to India because Olcott was planning to poison her. I wrangled with Paul over this one for several exchanges and finally I produced the letter in question to show that it said nothing of the sort. Paul replied that his point was not about the letter, but to show that Besant and Olcott were together in India during a certain period. My point is that if you are going to debate with Paul, you have to first get him to commit to his point, or else, in my experience it is a waste of time and energy. I believe that was the last time I engaged Paul over an historical issue. What I'm saying is that before I involve myself into this kind of thing, I have learned to first consider the source and the forum. My experience has been that email is so ephemeral, that it is not a suitable forum for this kind of debate. Your publications are another matter. Here you have hard copies of carefully written material that people can get and study for themselves. You have done a superior job on this. Obviously TMR has become your project to rebut. My present project concerns several authors who are more widely read who have spread factually incorrect information about HPB while writing about Yeats. The end goal of my research is to also have a publication (hopefully published through a major publisher) that will correct this misinformation. > And many of us may agree with your comments on > the "prejudiced" academic community. But what > about people out in the "real" world who are > seeking for light and truth and meaning, but > who may be *genuinely confused* by all the contradictory > things set afloat about Blavatsky and Theosophy? > *In this context*, is it *truly* a waste of time > and energy to try to clarify confusions > and misstatements relating to HPB's life as > well as about her writings AND teachings? > For those who are looking for information on HPB or the TM, I have a library here of over 15,000 volumes, and six filing cabinets filled with documents, with many more boxes yet to be filed. Anyone who is sincerely seeking information or documents is welcome to contact me. I get several such requests per week. I also have several research pieces in the works that are committed to be published by spring next year. > [NOTE: I would probably agree that writing letters to > editors who NEVER publish these letters may be considered a waste > of time and energy but are there not better avenues in which > to broadcast these issues? Again email even on Theos-Talk may > not be the best "public" medium but what about the WWW?] > I'm not sure that WWW is any better than email for this purpose. > And as I read and reread your last two postings, many comments > by the Mahatmas & HPB come to my mind. Below are just a few > observations by the Mahatmas which indicate (at least to me) that they > considered "publicity" and "defense" as a necessity to combat > various "misconceptions", "abuses" and "vilifications" about > Madame Blavatsky, Theosophy and the Theosophical Society. > I completely agree that defense of the innocent is necessary. As I expressed to Dallas, I'm saddened that this value has disappeared in our post modern society. However, I also believe that we need to be strategic about our efforts. Part of that strategy is to choose a worthwhile cause and to choose an effective medium to make that defense.[snip] > If these letters had been directed to you, would you have replied to > the Mahatma with your question: "....Who is it going to help?" > The letters were dealing with current issues and IMO they were looking to support in her part of the struggle to create a philosophical movement that would work towards fighting materialism and bringing about human solidarity. For that I would have been first in line to help. > Of course, HPB is now dead as you point out but is THAT really relevant > to the issue under discussion? I caught one point that Paul made that I thought was quite good. He said that HPB has been mythologized among the various theosophical groups. Though I may not necessarily agree with his specific characterizations, I think his overall point of quite relevant. The real HPB is quite dead to the public and to IMO, most people who regard themselves as Theosophists. This makes the battle so much more difficult, because I believe that even those who defend her very often inadvertently create even more damage. JOF's book IMO is a prime example of this. My strategy is to try to deal with people where they are with HPB at the moment. In Paul's case, I never know what is his point, so how can I deal with him? If I try to deal with what I think is his point, I learn that he is making a different point. When I try to deal with that point, I learn that he is really making a different point. You do much better with Paul than I do, so I'll leave that project to you. I have other things going that are also concerned with defending HPB, but they are on terms and in a media that I'm suited for and can do well. I hope this clarifies things. Peace jhe From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 06:15:52 1998 Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 20:36:45 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Migraines in the Crown Chakra Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980608203645.007100f4@ozemail.com.au> >Mark > >you wrote: >>I suffer from migraines also, have for years. They are troubling and >>often debilitating at the most inopportune times. Have you had any >>success finding relief from them? > >It took me 13 years to get them to a manageable level. At the age of 11 my parents first took me to a physician, who after a series of x-rays, cats etc, declared there was no physical cause and promptly sent me to a psychologist. This was my first encounter with relaxation therapies and I actually found that the sessions were benificial but my migraines didn't go. >Next stop was the orthodontist - I had my jaw broken and re-set, braces and 4 wisdom teeth removed and for about a year I felt great. I still had migraines but their severity and regularity was reduced. >They returned with full force when I commenced Uni and the next stop was the optometrist. After getting glasses, I again I felt close to fine for about 12 months. >Next was a naturopath who said It was probably dietary and to stop cheese, chocolate, wine etc All the usual goodies. And suggested meditation. >I found a book called 'Pain relief without Drugs' - I can't remember the authors name but he was from Melbourne. I began to meditate but knew the effects would take a while to manifest themselves. At the same time I was introduced to Marijuana. Since then I have used meditation and medicinal marijauna and since then (approx 3 years) I have had maybe 5 or 6 debilitating migraines. Which is a massive improvement from one a week. Marijuana (Cannabis Sativa or C. Indica) has the added affect of 'cleansing the doors of perception' as Aldous Huxley would say, which means that during meditation I am able to enter Alpha, Beta states much more rapidly. Marijuana has de-stressed me no end and it is for this reason that I believe my Migraines were hereditary. My mother also suffers and is the most highly strung person you could meet. >Since I was concerned about the long term side effects of marijuana smoking I did a fair amount of research and also consulted my Doctor. >I strongly recommend 'Hemp for Health' by Chris Conrad. He deals with medicinal applications of marijuana in length. to others reading this (including Dr Bain - osteo-arthritis), if you suffer from Multiple Sclerosis, Gluocoma, Asthma, Migraines or are undergoing Chemotherapy then Marijuana is by far the best available remedy. > >the arguments against the use of MJ include schizophrenia, lung problems and a dampening of ambition. I personally don't think schizophrenia is a bad thing, just misunderstood - most Shamen are schizophrenic (not paranoid however). Lung problems can be minimised by using an Indian Hookah or water-bong as this removes most large particles. I have two friends who were asthmatics who now NEVER suffer attacks since smoking MJ. Incidentally anyone suffering an acute attack can be saved by getting them to quickly take 2-3 'tokes', this opens the small air sacs wider and promotes oxygen transfer. > >"DON"T BELEIVE THE HYPE" - Public Enemy > >"The Tibetans consider Cannabis sacred. A Mahayana Buddhist tradition maintains that during the six steps of ascetism leading to enlightenment, Buddha lived on one Hemp seed a day....In Tantric Buddhism of the Himalayas of Tibet, Cannabis plays a very significant role in the meditative ritual used to facilitate deep meditation and heightened awareness. both medicinal and recreational secular use of Hemp are likewise so common now in this region that the plant is taken for granted as an everyday necessity" - Plants of the Gods, Schultes and Hoffman. > > >"This ain't no joke, come on and buy the world a toke >And teach the world to sing in perfect harmony" >Smash Mouth - Walking on the Sun > > >Cheers, > >Darren the Pot-head > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 07:03:54 1998 Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 21:14:57 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980608211457.0071a744@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806051654.MAA25491@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199806051628.LAA04280@proteus.imagiware.com> KPJ wrote: >Thanks to Daniel for clarification andd Govert for research. >I wonder if two vols. of the BCW cost more than $50 nowadays? >At least they'd be available in Australia and thus no huge >shipping fee. And that 1980 TPH reprint would be cheapest of all >alternatives if it can be gotten to Australia. I assume it's now OP? >If not, a new one should be pretty cheap. Sorry forgive a newbie but what is BCW? The cheapest way the Adelaide lodge Bookstore can get me the text is by selling me an entire second hand Adyar 6 Volume set for about the same price as the kessinger one off. Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 07:32:30 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:22:50 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <19980608123850228.AAA246@pgiese> > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > Re: Intuition > > Dallas offers: > If we carefully examine our lives and thoughts we will soon find > that we are the immortal and CHANGELESS THINKER. We witness the > passing scene as we might a play in which we participate -- the > acts are the changing expressions of other conscious beings, and > of our own consciousness. We can penetrate beyond and all > appearances to the core, the essence of the spiritual nature of > any being, be it an "atom," a human, or a solar system. It is a > sense that probes the reason for its existence, for its presence, > and for our present relation to it. It assumes that the same > Laws pertain to it as to ourselves and that there is a uniform > balance, a dynamic harmony in nature which adjusts apparent > disparities. > > Let us start with the idea that everything we see (externally) is > the expression of an interior Spiritual presence. All > expressions are then from "within-outward." Our "inner sight" > gives us access to anything in nature, a full comprehension of > its value and purpose. it is not a reasoning from premises to > conclusions but a direct and instantaneous cognition of all the > facts and factors as well as their contingent expressions on all > the planes of being. > > To perfect this divine faculty the aspirant can be neither > attached to , nor disturbed by external stimuli or desires of any > kind. He applies a knowledge of what living the higher life > implies. A Master of Wisdom once wrote: "The more unselfishly > one works for his fellow men, and divests himself of the > illusionary sense of personal isolation, the more he is free from > Maya (illusion), and the nearer he approaches Divinity." > > In all Theosophic teaching there is an endeavor to raise the > intuition by presenting universal principles, processes and > analogies. If those are recognized and applied each one can > secure consistent answers to his questions. "As above, so > below." > Dallas, What a wonderfully written summary! Thank you very much. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 08:31:12 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:13:30 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: What if Message-ID: <97c4ded8.357be37b@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-07 12:11:19 EDT, mkr writes: << Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the devout ones are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to move with technology. Let us see what happens. >> It would have been interesting if the Theosophical Society had been established in 1975 instead of 1875 but with headquarters still at Adyar. I say this, because India is one of the leading manufacturers of software, Bangalore being its Silicon Valley. With the ease of editing on word processors, W. Q. Judge, H.S. Olcott, Bertram and Archibald Keightley, and others who helped HPB with The SD would have been freed up to concentrate on their other theosophical projects. James Morgan Pryse, the printer and owner of the HPB Press, would have been, no doubt, in desktop publishing. THE LETTERS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY would have been the E-MAIL OF H.P. BLAVATSKY in 5 CD-ROMS, the SECRET DOCTRINE would have been 10 volumes instead of the measly two (or three) volumes and on CD-ROM as well. The Masters would have phenomenally produced e-mail from a mysterious and, here-to-for unknown web browser in the Himalayas. Intransigent TS board meetings would have taken place via AOL Flash Sessions, bulletin boards, or e-mail chat rooms, thereby eliminating the chances of WJQ, and later R. Steiner and perhaps Alice Bailey, from leaving the Society. Well, the possibilities are endless..... Lmhem111 From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 09:01:11 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:41:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: BCW Message-Id: <199806081341.JAA18116@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806081232.HAA25267@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 8, 98 07:32:41 am Darren, That's the Blavatsky Collected Writings. Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 09:10:57 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 09:48:57 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: The Internet, Now & Forever Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-08 05:28:29 EDT, Annette writes: << Too much energy is spent on refining the words, manipulating the words, stuffing ourselves with words. Too much energy is spent on strategy of reading body language, modifying and explaining. Posturing, weaving and ducking. Avoiding the truth. There's just too much darn dogma and dominance afoot! The challenge of the Net is to see and hear beyond the words. >> Very well put. I agree. Keep the Internet FREE and this list FREE. This is not a ULT Lodge, orthodox and heavily moderated. We don't want anyone standing over us with a ruler and smacking our fingers if we go outside the range of "approved" notions of theosophy! Let there be free expression and a free exchange of ideas. The parameters of theosophy are wide and all-encompassing, so the discussion will range over dozens of topics and themes. And why not? The Internet is the last outpost of freedom. Governments, in varying degrees and for obvious reasons, hate it! Ideologues, left and right, hate it! But I say "Long live the Internet!" Lmhem111 From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 09:36:52 1998 Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 09:23:21 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Internet, Now & Forever Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980608092321.01129940@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: At 09:48 AM 6/8/1998 EDT, you wrote: > >The Internet is the last outpost of freedom. Governments, in varying degrees >and for obvious reasons, hate it! Ideologues, left and right, hate it! But I >say "Long live the Internet!" > >Lmhem111 As HPB said, you only hate that which you fear. Governments and organizations do not know how to deal with it. Add my voice to "Long Live the Internet!". We have not seen nothing yet. mkr From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 09:55:17 1998 Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:20:40 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: BCW Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980609002040.0070d170@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806081341.JAA18116@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199806081232.HAA25267@proteus.imagiware.com> KPJ At 09:41 AM 6/8/98 -0400, you wrote: >Darren, > >That's the Blavatsky Collected Writings. Thanks Paul. I thought it might have been Barney's collected writings. Darren #467 * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 10:08:42 1998 Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:15:41 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980609001541.0070d67c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980607103131.012fc330@mail.eden.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980607225316.00737de4@ozemail.com.au> <3.0.3.32.19980605104537.0078f184@mail.eden.com> <3.0.2.32.19980606001246.0070de5c@ozemail.com.au> <35775481.B62@azstarnet.com> <3.0.2.32.19980605104803.00712b38@ozemail.com.au> MKR wrote: >This is the usual problem seen with the population which grew up in >pre-computer age. The future belongs to the current generation which is >growing up in the Internet age. Students in middle school are setting up >web pages and elementary school students are able to navigate Internet. >Anti-Internet older population will be run over soon in the next few years. Speaking further on matters technological and wondrous - I have created a Theosophy group on the ICQ service. For any ICQ users this will give a further means of communication to discuss Theosophy or as more of a personal communicator between members. The group page has no info as yet, but if anyone with links would like to e-mail them to me direct I will add them. Other groups available on the following page may also be of interest. It is interesting to see that under the Topic 'Spiritual, Religious & Persuasion' the largest denomination by far is the Wiccans, Eastern philosophies fall way behind: http://groups.icq.com/groups_directory.asp?cat=Spiritual,~Religious~and~Pers uasion&subcat=Other~Groups If you don't use ICQ it is worth a look. It enables instantaneous online communication and has many other useful features. No I don't work for Mirabilis. * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 10:15:53 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:42:51 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <003b01bd92eb$ea2b0660$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 8th Dear Pam: Well I did not do much more than stringing several good "quotations" together without the quotation marks. The way in which the comments that I read were phrased appeared valuable to me, so I put them down and cannot take much credit for using them as "my own." "Thus have I heard .............." Dal. ============================================== - >> From: "Dallas TenBroeck" >> Re: Intuition >> >> Dallas offers: > >> If we carefully examine our lives and thoughts we will soon find >> that we are the immortal and CHANGELESS THINKER. We witness the >> passing scene as we might a play in which we participate -- the >> acts are the changing expressions of other conscious beings, and >> of our own consciousness. We can penetrate beyond and all >> appearances to the core, the essence of the spiritual nature of >> any being, be it an "atom," a human, or a solar system. It is a >> sense that probes the reason for its existence, for its presence, >> and for our present relation to it. It assumes that the same >> Laws pertain to it as to ourselves and that there is a uniform >> balance, a dynamic harmony in nature which adjusts apparent >> disparities. >> >> Let us start with the idea that everything we see (externally) is >> the expression of an interior Spiritual presence. All >> expressions are then from "within-outward." Our "inner sight" >> gives us access to anything in nature, a full comprehension of >> its value and purpose. it is not a reasoning from premises to >> conclusions but a direct and instantaneous cognition of all the >> facts and factors as well as their contingent expressions on all >> the planes of being. >> >> To perfect this divine faculty the aspirant can be neither >> attached to , nor disturbed by external stimuli or desires of any >> kind. He applies a knowledge of what living the higher life >> implies. A Master of Wisdom once wrote: "The more unselfishly >> one works for his fellow men, and divests himself of the >> illusionary sense of personal isolation, the more he is free from >> Maya (illusion), and the nearer he approaches Divinity." >> >> In all Theosophic teaching there is an endeavor to raise the >> intuition by presenting universal principles, processes and >> analogies. If those are recognized and applied each one can >> secure consistent answers to his questions. "As above, so >> below." >> > >Dallas, >What a wonderfully written summary! Thank you very much. > > > >Pam >pgiese@snd.softfarm.com > >"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 10:18:14 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 06:10:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture Message-ID: <003901bd92eb$e6c238e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 8th Dear Doss: Well, I had not thought of that. If they have had to wait this long I am sure that no "directives" from the "Himalayas" will come. Taking the comment seriously for a moment: I would opine that the Mahatmas leave it to the individuals who are under Their training to make up their own minds, as part of the great and ongoing tests of chelaship and the endeavors of the chelas to make their own way and progress. Why should the Mahatmas bother about some detail such as that -- use the 'phone, or mail a letter or now, use INTERNET. Perhaps instead of horses they use planes or helicopters ! Would it not be reasonable to assume that they use the facilities of the times all down the ages ? Can you imagine the among of "power" that it would require on the psychic side of Nature to transmit messages, sounds, etc. ? And when the technology of the age is amiable why would they shirk that ? "Self-devised ways and mans" are the path that each student has to devise. How can one better serve ? That is the criterion. Anything that is devised has both "good" and "bad" uses. The knife edge is motive -- is the time spent on learning and working for one's own selfish enjoyment, or is it for the general improvement of humanity? Best wishes, Dallas Must be HPB's "sense of humor" peeking out > Date: Sunday, June 07, 1998 9:19 AM > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture >Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the devout ones >are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to move with >technology. Let us see what happens. > >mkr > > > >At 10:51 PM 6/7/1998 +0900, you wrote: >>Thoa as always the voice of reason. Yes I beleive it is just a generation >>gap situation. I offered to donate a computer to the library but they were >>more than happy to just continue with a manual card system. I was hoping to >>make some of the older members a little less sacared and daunted by >>technology. I've managed to get my grandfather into computers and he is mid >>70's. >> >>I also think our lodge is very small only around 10-12 people turn up for >>the weekly lectures. If our wisdom is as 'correct' (or close to) as we >>beleive it to be we need to spread the teachings more. We need to use the >>latest technological tools and we ought to have a media prsence if only in >>the role of 'devils advocate' so as to get people thinking. >> >>Thanks for your input, >> >>as always >> >>Darren (#467) MI >> >> >> At 10:59 PM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >>>Darren: >>>>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from >>>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my >>>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >>>> >>>>Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried that there >>>>are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the teachings because of a >>>>lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the christian Church - >>>>thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose clouded. >>>> >>>> >>>>I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly >>> >>>Darren, you might want to ask Eldon about how to give a lecture about the >>>internet and theosophy. I think Eldon already gave several lectures on >>>that topic. I'm sure Eldon had several roadblocks along his way. I think >>>you read, last week, about Eldon's internet failure (can't remember the >>>name, a magazine?) His Theosophy World list was almost dead for at least a >>>year, and now it's hopping. >>> >>>Perhaps there's another way to get through to the lodge about your serious >>>intent. On the other hand, they could be backwards when it comes to the >>>internet. Perhaps there are people on this list who could use your >>>internet expertise to promote theosophy. >>> >>>It's too bad that the enthusiasm of the young is not being used. The thing >>>that the young is lacking is knowledge of established customs, and >>>experience. The former is good in that the young can see beyond the rigid >>>establishment, but bad in that the young do not know how to deal with the >>>establishment. When you don't know how to deal with the establishment, the >>>establishment can be a big brick wall. >>> >>>Can you imagine the dynamism that would arise if the establishment knows >>>how to use the enthusiasm and the power of the young? Young people are >>>idealistic and energetic. Young people also attract other young people. >>>Instead of being afraid at the rowdiness and unconventionality of the >>>young, the establishment should flow with the tide and guide it. And guide >>>it in a way that would not squelch the energy. If the establishment fails >>>to do that, the young will go elsewhere that would fit with their >>>enthusiasm. The establishment will end up with a bunch of long time >>>established folks gathering cobwebs. When the older generation dies, what >>>then is left? A slab of brick wall. >>> >>>Thoa :o) > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 10:25:05 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 07:29:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <003a01bd92eb$e811ea60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 8th 1998 Dear Jerry: In considering all your points, I think we agree on most concepts. The only thing that I would say there is a difference about, is the broad aspect of karma, which includes all aspects of Universal manifestation. As far as I can see it includes everything, and the word "Karma" is (to me) not restricted to mankind. If so, then all aspects of differentiation, time observation, cycles, events in Nature as well as in man's personal life, etc... are broadly included. As I study I learn that Karma is (for us here and now) past, present and future. We generated some in the past, and are reaping those effects now, and when we react we generate more for our own future and for those around us. Karma may be held over for lives, so that when the right time arrives and circumstances develop for its manifestation it all comes together as circumstance for us to handle -- it is we who have to readjust things at that time. It is the basis for our personal advancing, and we always will affect others. How can we learn to be "harmless ?" [ The idea of pupils in a vast School.] We -- (perhaps it is only me) make the distinctions that we name personal, family, national, and also "chaos, indeterminacy, quantum," etc...are included in its broad and also very minute, particular scope. We -- (again maybe only me) are the ones who seek to classify aspects of Karma (LAW) -- but LAW is still law by whatever name. I am also quite convinced that Karma works for us humans on the basis of our motive when we generate, or create, or adopt some reason for our acts, be they thoughts, desires, or work --- to use a very broad group classification. Am I still "off base ?" Best wishes, Dallas. I append a few notes to your observations below. ==================================== >>According to the Theosophy I am familiar with, tornadoes, tidal >>waves, earthquakes, solar flares, draughts, floods, epidemics and >>in fact all cataclysms are generated by the turbulent aspects of >>our human emotions and thoughts -- their impact on the >>"elements." In which case even destructive events are the >>product of the destructive aspects of our thinking and choosing. >>They do not happen at random and when they do occur they involve >>those persons who in this life or in earlier ones had contributed >>to their formation. You may say this is far-fetched. ================================================ >> > >Not far-fetched as long as we agree that such natural events are >the result of our collective karma and not our personal karma. >If I was hit by lightning and died, you would probably say it was >a result of my personal karma--something that I did in a past life. >I see it rather as collective karma and the fact that I am human >and I equate collective karma with chaos because neither is >predictable nor are they deterministic. ================================================ DALLAS: Agreed, but however you designate it, it is still the all-enveloping KARMA of everything. Those who decide to act, deterine the results that will either individuallly, or collectively accrue to them and others -- it is all intermeshed, we all live together and share in the environment we have individually and collectively created. We both determine and enjoy (or are burdened) with the "proceeds." Karma is not a thing or a person, it is simply (to me) the reflex action of Nature to what we do individually, and collectively. Nature is compsed on innumerable sensitive "life-atoms." They are impressed by our thoughts, feelings and deeds. Being so impressed they leave us eventually carrying the imprss of what we have done to them. When, under cylcic law they "return" to us and again become part of our persoanl environment, they bring that origianl imperss with them. Since they form our personality, and are our "tools" at that time, the impress we madeon them has eihter improved their sensitivity or dulled it in certain directions. We then experince an envet in life with our personal nature either more sensitive or more dulled. When we act anew we either change those impression on these "personal" eements up or down the universal scale of progress. Thus we participate intimately in alll phases of evolution. We as humans, are the prime movers and have a much greater responsibility than we know. Dal. ================================================= > > >>But, if we are dealing with living beings everywhere, each with >>its own intelligence and a nature that is not destroyed when it >>is dispersed, then we are dealing with the ethical impact of our >>acts, thoughts and feelings on those beings that compose our >>bodies and the rest of our environment, in one way or another. >>To look at such events as fortuitous, chancy, or lucky (or the >>reverse) is to say that we do not yet know the laws under which >>they occur. But to say that there is no law simply means that we >>do not know of any, yet. =============================================== > >This is very deterministic thinking, and a few years ago I would >have agreed with you. Nowdays I tend to think that some things >in life are not deterministic (and therefore, by definition, are >chaotic). It is rather like the Uncertainty Principle in Quantum >Physics: our seemingly deterministic world is based on an >indeterministic foundation. It is not a question of lacking data >or needing more information. ================================================= DALLAS But, to me, those are included in "Karma." They do not obviate it, they only indicate that Karma works on the most minute of planes as well as the broad scene. If there is a center, a point, of individualism, of life, of power, there too is the karma that it/we is/are invoved in already, and, to that existing situation, it adds whatever it may in terms of, and to the level of its intelligence -- which may be cognitive and deterministic, or almost (tio us) unconscious. ( I do not like the use of that word, because everyhting is conscious at its own level.) Dal. ============================================== > >>The Theosophist says as I understand it, that there is a great >>Law that causes all things to be. And that embodied in this law >>are the concepts of a perfection, or a kind of "graduation," >>towards which every class of being is progressing, each in its >>own way. It is expressed as cooperation and as brotherhood. ============ > >I consider myself a Theosophist too, but I see karma as >causality and I happen to agree with Jung that synchronicity >also exists -- an acausal principle just as real and effective >as casuality. I call karma causality and synchronicity I call >chaos, but a rose is a rose is a rose. =========================================== DALLAS But synchronim is only evidence of intelligence in coexisting personalities and/or individualities at any level. It brings together in time what appear to us as disparate elements -- their karmic connection does this. We have to learn to see this. I am not sure what an "acausal principle" is, but off-hand I would say that we would probably relegate that to one of the all-inclusive aspects of the ABSOLUTE, which includes everything -- ourselves, worlds, galaxies, and "life-atoms." "Manifestation - Manvantara" emanates from IT periodically, cyclically, [under KARMA] as well as all the "beings" (conscious units of whatever degree). This dos not make them "creatures," nor does it make of the ABSOLUTE a "creator." As HPB repeatedly states in the first 300 pages of SD I, the functions of setting up Manifesatation (Manvantara) are relegated to those Great briengs who one were "men" such as we are at presnt, but who have "graduated" aeons ago, and are now responsible (as their duty) to see to the organizing of Nature as a whole, the worlds, and the functions of human growth -- the picture as I get it is one of organized intelligence (where every component has the identical POTENTIAL of the Highest, but has to learn to organize, recognize and then employ it). Dallas. ============================================== > >>Now if you say Karma does not operate anywhere, and it is a >>figment of Theosophical delusion then I cannot say anything more. > >No, I never said that. I KNOW YOU DIDN'T. > >>But there is, as I see it an overwhelming flood of evidence to >>show that causes produce effects according to the aim and >>intensity of the actor or generator. So why should Theosophy be >>wrong in assigning a probable relationship between cataclysms and >>man's generation of emotional cataclysms ? >> ========================================== >Theosophy is only wrong when it says, like science said until >chaos theory came along, that causality is all that there is. Now >science knows that chaos exists and can't be eliminated nor >predicted. One of these days I hope Theosophists will also >recognise this. > ============================================ DALLAS I would say that "Chaos Theory" is a misnomer -- in the sense that what is apparent 'chaos' to our view, is not CHAOS at all, but the manifestation of a higher (or is it a subtler) LAW that organizes what we were once unaware of ? There are namy things we are unaware of. To read a few pages of the SECRET DOCTRINE brings many into view. Dallas. ============================================= > >>When I used the word "chaos" I meant something that did not >>happen under LAW. > >But synchronicity is a law too. Chaos also works with laws. >Its just that these laws are acausal--not causally connected, >and are independent of time and space. You need to redefine >LAW to allow for acausal events. ========================================= DALLAS I have tried to above, by saying that KARMA includes every aspect of "event." Both the generation of acts, visible or invisible to us at present, and their results, again both visible and invisible. And furthermore, it is also eternal in operation, and is affected by neither size or time. Motive actuates it. And motive is a human power. Logically therefore, Humanity (represented by the power to think -- by MIND -- is also a timeless phenomenon -- representing the junction of the polar opposites of SPIRT and MATTER (metaphysially speaking). In a way this forms the primal 3 -- the original triangle of Spirit-Matter-Mind. [Atma -Buddhi-Manas in manifestation.] Dallas =============================================== > >> And even cataclysms are the result of a rather >>large operation of law. They are the attempt of nature to bring >>about an adjustment in the disturbance we human minds and wills >>have imposed (as a great mass of thinking beings) on Nature's >>hidden planes. It is the objective manifestation of those causes >>that are subjective (if you will allow me the use of those >>terms). >> >Agreed. But all storms are unpredictable over time (they can only >be predicted in a very short term). Karma is cause and effect and >is pretty well predictable. =============================================== DALLAS We may not be able to predict them with existing technology, but as time develops I notice that the refinement of instrumentation enables us to take note of ever increasing slight variations. Today we use refined Radar to see cloud movements and concentrations -- which predict possible storms. Suppose that we had even more refined instruments capable of evaluing magnetic and electric densities, and therefore as we gradually move away from the physical into the realm of astral Nature, we will be able to perceive (ahead of time -- or event) even more clearly the cycles of mass action that affect large masses of beings including men as units and as collectives -- collective Karma indeed. What is it that causes "accidents ?" What is it that draws some to a cataclysm and on the other hand causes others to escape its effects ? Is this all chaos and happenstance ? Or is there also a rule that excludes those who are not involved ? YOu cannot have a Universe that is half Law and half Chaos. One or the other, but not a mixture -- doesn't make sense. On the other hand there is a lot for us to learn. 20 years ago we couldnot see clouds and storms developing. 10 years ago we didnot have Internet. 50 years ago the jet-plane was an idea only under development. When Siinnett and Huma asked HPB to get th Masters to precipitate an issueof the London TIMES in simla on its day of publication in London they refused, saying that a psychic "miracle" would work adversly. Today this is commonplace. What will swe have "tomorrow?" And will that increase of facitlities make us more humane, more tolerant, mor caring for the poor and the needy? why is famine continuing ? why is drought not alleviated promptly. I am told that over 2,500 people died in India in the last month due to high temperatures and lack of water. Was that necessary ? And of what use is an "atom bomb?" WEll more evidence of the foolishness of humanity enveloped in "Kali Yuga." ================================================== > >>And while we are at it, we could also ask if there is a universal >>plan of evolution -- not just of the physical body, as considered >>by the archaeologists and the paleo-physiologists, but as HPB >>suggests in SD I 181, also of the soul (mind and emotional >>natures) and the spiritual nature too. >> > >I fully agree with HPB. > > >>Interestingly enough, HPB deals with the questions of returning >>cycles in her article "The Theory of Cycles," THEOSOPHIST, July >>1880 (ULT Edn. of HPB Articles, Vol. 3, p. 72-3). On p. 78 she >>writes more on this ("Ancient Doctrines Vindicated," >>THEOSOPHIST, May, 1881). In her article "Stars and Numbers," >>THEOSOPHIST, June 1881, (p. 405-6 same book) she speaks of the >>relation of conjunctions to the intersection of cycles on our >>earth involving whole populations. Dealing with epidemics in an >>article entitled "Does Vaccination Prevent Smallpox ?" >>THEOSOPHIST, March 1881, >>(ULT Edn. HPB Articles, Vol. 1, p. 341) she offers information >>about the cycle of the return of diseases. >> > >Collective events tend to be cyclic. Again, I agree with HPB. > > >>If you would like to pursue this further then I will advance more >>data, but I am sure that you are already aware of these things. > ============================================> >>Best wishes, Dallas. >> ============================================= From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 11:09:51 1998 Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 12:06:25 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-ID: <357C0C01.BEA423C6@sprynet.com> References: <199806051628.LAA04280@proteus.imagiware.com> <3.0.2.32.19980608211457.0071a744@ozemail.com.au> Darren wrote: > Sorry forgive a newbie but what is BCW? Blavatsky Collected Writings. Last White Lotus Day, I gave a talk at the New York TS Lodge about the value of the books. Note that Isis Unveiled and the Secret Doctrine were designed to teach, but the articles that Blavatsky wrote were designed to explain. I learned one important thing, though. The part on the Esoteric Section was not written by Blavatsky, but by Judge. It's still good stuff, but it's worth keeping the authorship in mind. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 11:54:43 1998 Date: Mon, 08 Jun 1998 11:39:21 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980608113921.00c86150@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <003901bd92eb$e6c238e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas: I believe that Internet itself a master technology pushed by those "powers" be for future of Humanity, however much it may cause headaches to organizations in the short run due to its openness, volume and velocity of information that moves. The results are showing up. The recent world wide agreement on eliminating mines was possible due to the extensive use of e-mail world wide. With very little funds, the activists were able to pull it through. Internet is also a true leveller. All of us are able to communicate on level - with no distinction on account of our personal characteristics or even learning and as I have mentioned earlier, it has helped to pierce the walls set up by organizations separating man and woman from fellow man and woman. Any intelligent person is going to use all available technology to effectively and efficiently achieve results. If anyone, due to ignorance or fear or sheer stubbornness does not want to use them, then it is their choice. But in the long run all accounts will be justly settled. mkr At 06:10 AM 6/8/98 -0700, you wrote: >June 8th > >Dear Doss: > >Well, I had not thought of that. If they have had to wait this >long I am sure that no "directives" from the "Himalayas" will >come. > >Taking the comment seriously for a moment: > >I would opine that the Mahatmas leave it to the individuals who >are under Their training to make up their own minds, as part of >the great and ongoing tests of chelaship and the endeavors of the >chelas to make their own way and progress. > >Why should the Mahatmas bother about some detail such as that -- >use the 'phone, or mail a letter or now, use INTERNET. Perhaps >instead of horses they use planes or helicopters ! Would it not >be reasonable to assume that they use the facilities of the times >all down the ages ? Can you imagine the among of "power" that it >would require on the psychic side of Nature to transmit messages, >sounds, etc. ? And when the technology of the age is amiable why >would they shirk that ? > >"Self-devised ways and mans" are the path that each student has >to devise. How can one better serve ? That is the criterion. > >Anything that is devised has both "good" and "bad" uses. The >knife edge is motive -- is the time spent on learning and working >for one's own selfish enjoyment, or is it for the general >improvement of humanity? > >Best wishes, Dallas > >Must be HPB's "sense of humor" peeking out > >===================================== > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: "M K Ramadoss" >Date: Sunday, June 07, 1998 9:19 AM >Subject: Re: To Darren: internet lecture > > >>Resistance to technological change is not new. May be all the >devout ones >>are waiting for orders from Himalayas before being convinced to >move with >>technology. Let us see what happens. >> >>mkr >> >> >> >>At 10:51 PM 6/7/1998 +0900, you wrote: >>>Thoa as always the voice of reason. Yes I beleive it is just a >generation >>>gap situation. I offered to donate a computer to the library >but they were >>>more than happy to just continue with a manual card system. I >was hoping to >>>make some of the older members a little less sacared and >daunted by >>>technology. I've managed to get my grandfather into computers >and he is mid >>>70's. >>> >>>I also think our lodge is very small only around 10-12 people >turn up for >>>the weekly lectures. If our wisdom is as 'correct' (or close >to) as we >>>beleive it to be we need to spread the teachings more. We need >to use the >>>latest technological tools and we ought to have a media prsence >if only in >>>the role of 'devils advocate' so as to get people thinking. >>> >>>Thanks for your input, >>> >>>as always >>> >>>Darren (#467) MI >>> >>> >>> At 10:59 PM 6/5/98 -0700, you wrote: >>>>Darren: >>>>>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A >beginners guide from >>>>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They >find my >>>>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >>>>> >>>>>Oh well, if I make people happy thats fine by me. I'm worried >that there >>>>>are so many splinter factions on the meanings of the >teachings because of a >>>>>lack of true initiates. We are heading the way of the >christian Church - >>>>>thousands of interpretations, new ethics, our true purpose >clouded. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I see a synthesis of doctrines melding shortly >>>> >>>>Darren, you might want to ask Eldon about how to give a >lecture about the >>>>internet and theosophy. I think Eldon already gave several >lectures on >>>>that topic. I'm sure Eldon had several roadblocks along his >way. I think >>>>you read, last week, about Eldon's internet failure (can't >remember the >>>>name, a magazine?) His Theosophy World list was almost dead >for at least a >>>>year, and now it's hopping. >>>> >>>>Perhaps there's another way to get through to the lodge about >your serious >>>>intent. On the other hand, they could be backwards when it >comes to the >>>>internet. Perhaps there are people on this list who could >use your >>>>internet expertise to promote theosophy. >>>> >>>>It's too bad that the enthusiasm of the young is not being >used. The thing >>>>that the young is lacking is knowledge of established customs, >and >>>>experience. The former is good in that the young can see >beyond the rigid >>>>establishment, but bad in that the young do not know how to >deal with the >>>>establishment. When you don't know how to deal with the >establishment, the >>>>establishment can be a big brick wall. >>>> >>>>Can you imagine the dynamism that would arise if the >establishment knows >>>>how to use the enthusiasm and the power of the young? Young >people are >>>>idealistic and energetic. Young people also attract other >young people. >>>>Instead of being afraid at the rowdiness and unconventionality >of the >>>>young, the establishment should flow with the tide and guide >it. And guide >>>>it in a way that would not squelch the energy. If the >establishment fails >>>>to do that, the young will go elsewhere that would fit with >their >>>>enthusiasm. The establishment will end up with a bunch of >long time >>>>established folks gathering cobwebs. When the older >generation dies, what >>>>then is left? A slab of brick wall. >>>> >>>>Thoa :o) >> > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 16:41:30 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 11:05:43 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #189 Message-ID: <000401bd9324$1839f880$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 9th 1998 Dear "MRJ" In this line of work I found that it paid off if you identified yourself (also send a brief, but interesting note/letter) as a "Minister," "Pastor," Dr. of Divinity, etc... not too many editors like to tread on religious toes, even if Theosophy is not a "religion," it is thought of as such, by those who do not investigate it. Criticism from academics is always welcome, if it seem plausible (a "doctorate" helps). But if "Mr. or Mrs. J. Q. Public" writes, it is generally ignored. Quester Dallas. PS we now have some fairly "authoritative" book at hand to use as reference base. That is also impressive, when used as supporting evidence. For those who might like to write in defense of HPB, Theosophy, etc., we ought to set up a list of materials we could refer to: LIST OF REFERENCE MATERIAL FAVORABLE TO HPB AND TO THEOSOPHICAL THEORIES [ such as ] S. Cranston H.P.B.: (Helena P. Blavatsky) Head & Cranston Reincarnation: The Phoenix Fire Mystery Cranston & Williams Reincarnation: a New Horizon in Science Religion and Society. Hancock & Bauval The Message of the Sphinx Robinson The Nag-Hemadri Library - Gnositc Scriptures Burrows The Dead Sea-Scrolls Fort The Books of Charles Fort -- Fort Book of the Damned Velikovsky Worlds in Collision Harrison Monograph on the Mahtma Letters etc.... > Date: Sunday, June 07, 1998 8:53 AM > From: "Jake Jaqua" > Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #189 >Jerry H-E writes: > >>This situation also brings to >>mind the late Iverson Harris who devoted the final fifty years of his >>life to writing letters and correcting errors of fact concerning HPB and >>Point Loma issues. From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 16:51:55 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:23:21 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: -- Atlantis Peak? How about Alens, UFOs, NDE, "Possession ?" Message-ID: <000301bd9324$16764f80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 8th 1998 Dallas offers: If aliens visit the earth there ought to be some Karmic connection. We all tend to view these things materially -- as that is our present environment. However Karma, which is the vast law of evolution that covers the Universe, our world, and ourselves, as well as the "life-atoms" and harmonizes all, ought to be appealed to for some reasonable explanation. However, and again, the mind which is in effect intra-dimensional (using imagination and fancy as tools, as well as observation and several kinds of "perception" on other planes -- like dreams, channeling, fancies, etc...) is apparently the one aspect of "ourselves" that is a constant. Better still, Patanjali called it the ONE CONSCIOUSNESS, which is the "Real Man" inside each of us. Karma eliminates physical visitations of entities from Mars, Venus, or extra-terrestrial planets, etc... unless there is a karmic link with specific individuals on Earth, and for a specific purpose. If so, then there would be no possibility of casual or "by chance" witnessing either their approach, work or departure. Nor would they be specially interested in making contact with any individual. I realize this will not be a popular view with many science-fiction addicts (and I am one) or the Ufologists (and I also follow this as closely as I can). [ Incidentally, and relative to another string we have been following. why should the "Masters of Wisdom" be specifically interested in any of us, because we are curious about hem and their powers ? Have we merited such attention? What have we done that improves the condition of the earth that they need spend any time at all on us and our personal affairs ? -- I ask this not to be derisive, or sarcastic, but to give proportion to the questions that occasionally fly around. ] Now what has Theosophy to say on the subject of UFOs and "visitation," "contacts with extra-terrestrials, and possession" etc. ? I ask myself. And in seeking for some explanation I notice that among the doctrines of Theosophy are those relative to the "Astral Plane" which is said to contain a number of types of inhabitants. To go into a listing would be exhausting, as they are covered in ISIS UNVEILED and also in THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY (Chapters 16 and 17). I write of a few below. Apparently there are Astral plane entities may manifest themselves when they encounter a person whose psychic nature is sensitive to them. Also they are affected by certain other cyclic and personal psychic or physiological factors. Generally we are rarely sensitive to asto-psychic entities (except when we have a nightmare, or some horrifying dream-experience) . But these "beings" do not come from outside our Earth, but are in fact a part of it, being the images that mankind has created and fixed there in the "astral Light" that surrounds us all and interpenetrates the Earth. Among its denizens are the "shells" of dead persons, the "kama-rupas" and to this should be added "nature spirits" of various kinds (known in the past as gnomes, sylphs, salamanders, undines, fairies, "little people," etc...). Also, to be included are the Kama-rupic remains of people who recently died or of those who led a very passionate and dissipated life such as incubi, succubae, vampires, lycanthropes, etc. Among these are the coherent Kama-rupas remains of those who died in the grip of some overwhelming passion, fear, or anger. Some of these are the "astral shells" of suicides, the murdered, victims of accidents, and executed criminals seeking revenge. Some of these are also said to be "black magicians" -- of various degrees of power -- by nature vicious, cruel and intensely selfish and always seeking to drag the unwary into their 'clutches' as more fuel to feed their pride, and a craving for domination and control. Sometimes the effect of such contact results, in a person with weak grasp over their own personality, to be supplanted, shoved aside, or "possessed" by the stronger "Personality" of a "visitor -- announced or unannounced." The phenomenon of "multiple personalities" may have its roots in this condition of weakness of control or of passivity. It may be temporary and occur at various times, or it may even be permanent and the real tenant of the personality is shoved out for the present incarnation. But the intelligence that these entities represent is rarely of any benefit to the subject that is "possessed," or who "witnesses" these beings. Much of this, as I said, is described in the pages of ISIS UNVEILED, and allusions are made to various aspects of these teachings in articles that HPB wrote. [ A list can be made available, if desired. ] So while van Danegan has brought together pictures and artifacts that apparently show "astronauts" of the past, why not also consider that civilizations constantly revolve, and that even today, the in- habitants of isolated societies, meeting or seeing Europeans, airplanes, steam boats, cars, trains, etc... which were/are entirely new to them, have carved in bone, stone and wood the likeness of what they have seen. Myth and rumor has it that when we were in Atlantean bodies we had a civilization that outshone the present in terms of material achievement -- so why not space travel and airplanes then -- reputed to work on anti-gravity (shades of Tesla and Keeley) , and weaponry that employed the Sun for motive power and energy (Lasers) Who built the Pyramids, carved the Sphinx, laid the floor of Baalbec, built Tiahuanaco, Macchu Piccu, and other incredible things; like roads that vanish into the ocean at many sites, particularly in the Islands of the South East Pacific. A census of ancient and unexplained monuments ought to be taken. Recently in San Diego a book written by several students of archaeology appeared it is some 1700 pages long and was issued concerning artifacts that museums and the archaeological departments of several Universities retain in their depositories because they cannot account for the anomalies found in them under the present generally accepted theories of evolution. Read the books of Charles Fort and of Emmanuel Velikovsky if you would like to acquaint yourself with more anomalies. I do not know how to account for the enormous pictures outlined in stone rows on the Nasca plateau. Nor can I account for the "lay-lines" that are said to unify ancient Druid sites of power in England, and Britany, or, the placement of the Pyramids and other temples on the Giza plateau and around Cairo (which appear to be representations of the main Stars to be seen in Orion and the two "Dogs" at a period of about 13,000 years ago in time). But there are those who have worked on those things and seem to have derived possible evidence linking them with earlier planetary, lunar and solar settings at a remote period of Zodiacal time. This is an interesting thread to follow, and perhaps there is much more to add to this than HPB and we have assembled so far. Best wishes to all, Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 07, 1998 7:01 AM > From: "Darren Porter" > Subject: Re: Atlantis Peak Maybe? >The ancient astronauts do not necessarily need to be aliens from another >planet. They could be hyperdimensional beings (ascended masters ?), time >travellers, angels, the list is endless? > >The question is have they been beneficial or malicious to humans? > >Darren > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 18:36:34 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 17:39:32 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Hell, no? Message-Id: <199806082339.RAA19685@mailmx.micron.net> I wrote in a previous e-mail: >If I yell to someone, "Hey, you jerk. . .go to avichi!" what am I saying? Let me re-phrase the serious question: In the SECRET DOCTRINE, HPB makes references to "avichi" - this is not supposed to be the same as the Hell we have all come to know and love - but that still doesn't help me figure out what it IS. DOUBLE DOG DARE: Are you SD scholars and HPB defenders going to let Alan get away with saying HPB was telling us all to go get a pizza? Kym From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 19:21:34 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:19:26 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: We are everywhere Message-Id: <199806090019.SAA22442@mailmx.micron.net> Darren wrote: >Thanks Paul. I thought it might have been Barney's collected writings. Watch it, Darren. . .watch it. Warrior of From Whom the Purple Thunderbolt Cometh From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 19:36:34 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 18:19:28 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Veggie karma Message-Id: <199806090019.SAB22445@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote: >DALLAS I have tried to above, by saying that KARMA >includes every aspect of "event." Both the generation of acts, >visible or invisible to us at present, and their results, again >both visible and invisible. And furthermore, it is also eternal >in operation, and is affected by neither size or time. Motive >actuates it. And motive is a human power. I may be lost here, but if, as you say, "motive actuates" karma and "motive is a human power" then how do beings other than humans (trees, birds, fish, grass, the Earth, the Universe) actuate karma? Theosophy claims that all beings have/generate karma and in the broad view one (me) can ALMOST accept that. But, I cannot even fathom how a turnip would generate karma - if karma is causation, I can't figure out where/how the turnip "caused" and where one could pin "motive" on the turnip. It doesn't seem "fair" that a turnip should chalk up karma points when it is simply doing what is natural and required for a turnip to do. Kym From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 20:21:38 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:16:03 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Vol. III, Moses Message-ID: <01bd9344$2b7b4500$1d7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> > I learned one important thing, though. The part on the Esoteric Section >was not written by Blavatsky, but by Judge. It's still good stuff, but >it's worth keeping the authorship in mind. > > Bart Lidofsky > I thought everyone knew that :-) Its probably Judge's best writing. Jerry S. From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 20:34:37 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:19:14 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Hell, no? Message-ID: <01bd9344$9d3e31c0$1d7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> > >Let me re-phrase the serious question: In the SECRET DOCTRINE, HPB makes >references to "avichi" - this is not supposed to be the same as the Hell we >have all come to know and love - but that still doesn't help me figure out >what it IS. > Avichi is a bonifide hell-world in Tibetan Buddhism. Jerry S. From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 20:36:36 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:14:40 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE Message-ID: <01bd9343$f9fad860$1d7d96d1@gschueler.netgsi.com> > Karma may be held over >for lives, so that when the right time arrives and circumstances >develop for its manifestation it all comes together as >circumstance for us to handle -- it is we who have to readjust >things at that time. It is the basis for our personal advancing, The idea of pastlife karma effecting us in this life is one that I don't like much, because the whole idea of reward/punishment is that it must be quick and consistant. So, if this is nature's way of having us learn "lessons" then it stinks. Being effected now for things done in the long-forgotten past is pathological. >We -- (again maybe only me) are the ones who seek to classify >aspects of Karma (LAW) -- but LAW is still law by whatever name. > The idea of karma being LAW as you put it is, again, against my grain. I can accept it only in an exoteric naive fashion. The problem is this: you will never ever get out of karma the way it is usually defined, and the way that you are defining it. If cause always produces effect and vice versa, then liberation is impossible. Well, I personally believe in liberation and that karma can be consumed or eliminated. What makes this possible is chaos, or the LAW of acausality. Jerry S. From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 20:51:40 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:56:42 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Egregores/synchronicity/"As Above so Below" Message-ID: <19980609021240673.AAA253@pgiese> Related to some recent threads, I came across the following site: > http://www.lightlink.com/vic/index.html There are some very good articles on projective images and synchronicity. Worth checking out... Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 20:53:28 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 16:03:49 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: The Internet, Now & Forever Message-ID: <000901bd9346$86405a00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 9th 1998 Dear "Lmhem111" I had to laugh over your vision of a ULT meeting "heavily moderated and very orthodox" Wow -- you ought to attend some when we are all searching for answers and the questions and responses fly fast and furious. I suppose, like everything else, any meting can be made staid and stolid -- in fact I would say that the nature of those who attend either depress or lighten any study class -- and all the meetings at ULT (which are free and open to any one) are study classes and we are all trying to help each other and find the best answers. So none should be "heavily monitored." Dallas > Date: Monday, June 08, 1998 7:24 AM > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subject: The Internet, Now & Forever >In a message dated 98-06-08 05:28:29 EDT, Annette writes: > ><< Too much energy is spent on refining the words, manipulating the words, >stuffing ourselves with words. Too much energy is spent on strategy of reading >body language, modifying and explaining. Posturing, weaving and ducking. >Avoiding the truth. There's just too much darn dogma and dominance afoot! The >challenge of the Net is to see and hear beyond the words. >> > >Very well put. I agree. Keep the Internet FREE and this list FREE. This is not >a ULT Lodge, orthodox and heavily moderated. We don't want anyone standing >over us with a ruler and smacking our fingers if we go outside the range of >"approved" notions of theosophy! Let there be free expression and a free >exchange of ideas. The parameters of theosophy are wide and all-encompassing, >so the discussion will range over dozens of topics and themes. And why not? > >The Internet is the last outpost of freedom. Governments, in varying degrees >and for obvious reasons, hate it! Ideologues, left and right, hate it! But I >say "Long live the Internet!" > >Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 8 21:02:50 1998 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 20:45:55 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: thought or intuition? Message-ID: <19980609020154404.AAA253@pgiese> No need to apologize, Dallas. Having spent most of my career steeped in the area of R&D, I recognize the value of scholastic reference, but..... I wonder sometimes, how many of us of recent generations can have truly original thoughts. I spent much of my childhood in front of a TV screen. My mother would turn on the PBS channel and tell us "shut up and watch, I've got work to do" (I wasn't raised in the most enlightened of households). So I watched, and I learned all sorts of things about history and philosophy that I would never have learnt in my public school system. Through TV, radio, books, internet, I've been exposed to more divergent thoughts and ideas than I can even remember. I suspect that I am more alike my baby-boomer peers than dissimilar. So it is, as long as I can remember, I've lived with the knowledge that I've forgotten more than I know. Sometimes I fancy that this notion comes from an awareness of past incarnations, but more likely, it's the recognition that my mind has still quite not assimilated all the information I've unwittedly sponged up through the years. Last week, this list chided Deepak Chopra. I've never heard him claim personal revelations about anything --it's just good packaging and marketing of ancient wisdom for the 1990's --and that itself has much value. When we're dealing with Truth, it's roots are old and the work of the seeker is more discovering and recovering than creating. I like the responses full of references --for those Mars in Aries types, like myself, who can never take another's word for anything and have to check it out ourselves, the references are great. But even more so, I enjoy the personal assimilation and personal presentation of these ideals. It makes the knowing all the more enjoyable. Peace, Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > Subject: Re: thought or intuition? > Date: Monday, June 08, 1998 9:42 AM > > June 8th > > Dear Pam: > > Well I did not do much more than stringing several good > "quotations" together without the quotation marks. The way in > which the comments that I read were phrased appeared valuable to > me, so I put them down and cannot take much credit for using them > as "my own." "Thus have I heard .............." Dal. > > ============================================== > > - > > >> From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > >> Re: Intuition > >> > >> Dallas offers: > > > >> If we carefully examine our lives and thoughts we will soon > find > >> that we are the immortal and CHANGELESS THINKER. We witness > the > >> passing scene as we might a play in which we participate -- > the > >> acts are the changing expressions of other conscious beings, > and > >> of our own consciousness. We can penetrate beyond and all > >> appearances to the core, the essence of the spiritual nature > of > >> any being, be it an "atom," a human, or a solar system. It is > a > >> sense that probes the reason for its existence, for its > presence, > >> and for our present relation to it. It assumes that the same > >> Laws pertain to it as to ourselves and that there is a uniform > >> balance, a dynamic harmony in nature which adjusts apparent > >> disparities. > >> > >> Let us start with the idea that everything we see (externally) > is > >> the expression of an interior Spiritual presence. All > >> expressions are then from "within-outward." Our "inner sight" > >> gives us access to anything in nature, a full comprehension of > >> its value and purpose. it is not a reasoning from premises to > >> conclusions but a direct and instantaneous cognition of all > the > >> facts and factors as well as their contingent expressions on > all > >> the planes of being. > >> > >> To perfect this divine faculty the aspirant can be neither > >> attached to , nor disturbed by external stimuli or desires of > any > >> kind. He applies a knowledge of what living the higher life > >> implies. A Master of Wisdom once wrote: "The more > unselfishly > >> one works for his fellow men, and divests himself of the > >> illusionary sense of personal isolation, the more he is free > from > >> Maya (illusion), and the nearer he approaches Divinity." > >> > >> In all Theosophic teaching there is an endeavor to raise the > >> intuition by presenting universal principles, processes and > >> analogies. If those are recognized and applied each one can > >> secure consistent answers to his questions. "As above, so > >> below." > >> > > > >Dallas, > >What a wonderfully written summary! Thank you very much. > > > > > > > >Pam > >pgiese@snd.softfarm.com > > > >"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 17:34:05 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:33:25 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Subject: Veggie karma Message-ID: <19980611223327.998.qmail@hotmail.com> Kym asks :-- "But, I cannot even fathom how a turnip would generate karma - if karma is causation, I can't figure out where/how the turnip "caused" and where one could pin "motive" on the turnip. It doesn't seem "fair" that a turnip should chalk up karma points when it is simply doing what is natural and required for a turnip to do." KARMA, comes from the root KRU to do or to act. Karma therefore implies action with its concomitant reaction. Hence everything by its mere existence-for it IS, and therefore is a "Be-ing"--acts, and hence causes a reaction. Hence APHORISM No. 5 states, "Karma operates on all things and beings from the minutest conceivable atom up to Brahma." As the Atom is a whirling group of neutrons, protons and electors, in the atom these are acting and making (causing) according to their number the elementary chemicals of the Periodic Table, with their atomic weights. The study of the actions and reactions of these chemicals with each other make for the study of the LAWS of Chemistry. Each chemical has its inherent natural properties, in association-when meeting up with other chemicals, they combine to form COMPOUNDS, with new-very different from their parentage-properties; and Compounds can act and react with other simple chemical or compounds, the offspring of these unions diverse and multifarious. The result of these combinations, show up in our Mineral Kingdom, Vegetable Kingdom and Animal Kingdom. When we begin to see unicellular and multi-cellular beings, we see their movements as those of living beings, manifesting what has been called LIFE. While Occultism has held that every atom which acts and reacts with other atoms and beings, is showing LIFE, hence Occultism' fundamental principle is that Life or JIVA (sometimes called PRANA = breath, in those that breath) is Universal and defused everywhere. ALL IS LIVING. In the Mineral, Vegetable and Animal Kingdoms, with their vast varieties, of species and genera, we see the evolutionary power of manifesting LIFE growing and developing as organic and in organisms; causing these manifesting in their totality our Earth. Hence going back to an earlier held doctrine that Mother Earth, itself as a totality, is a living organism, GAIA, some of the New Age thinkers talk this way now. All the multifarious beings composing these three kingdoms, like the chemicals, have their properties of form or shape, color, organic structure, behaviour acting and reacting to their environment and circumstances. The study of the LAWS of these beings make up our study of Geology, Physics, Botany, Biology, Physiology, Pathology, etc., etc. And result in all the variety of courses our Universities offer under these headings, divided and sub-divided endlessly. All these beings, have their natures imprinted within them, they act by natural impulse-in animals the word instinct could also be introduced, their LAWS are inherent. Outside of the mineral kingdom, where a genetic code exists, their actions as to how to develop into their special species, genera, are all laid down, in for the most cases in great details and unerringly-some slow evolutionary changes, and fast mutations apart, then these too maybe hence forth be transmitted. The "turnip" with its seed which holds the properties to be unfolded-enACTed-into its particular shape of roots, leaves, with its color, its flavour is ALIVE. It being alive, can transmit its peculiarities of minerals, enzymes, hormones, vitamins, etc., to effecting changes in the soil in which it grows, to other beings consuming it, the caterpillar, the animal grazer or the man. Being alive, it can pass on those living properties to the benefit of other organisms. It acts by natural impulse. The inherent intelligence of its kind. These Kingdoms which unlike man have not had individual mind MANAS awakened, have no self-knowledge (I am a turnip, not a rose, bean or something else) nor do they have other-knowledge (about the rose, bean or something else). They enACT only their own programmes-their genetically encoded behaviour. Man has reached that stage in the evolutionary progression where self-awareness and other-awarness has developed. Hence we have these University courses about the things around us. With this awakening man questions nature and him/herself. Man wonders if vegetarianism is better or worse the tiger or the deer have no such moral dilemmas to puzzle them. Nor the further responsibility to make choices. KARMA for man has added dimensions, which the mineral, vegetable and the animals have not to contend with. But these Kingdoms are continually acting and interacting, according to the Laws of their inherent natures, according the Karma. But here this topics development, may well end. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 17:48:48 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 22:47:02 GMT From: "Bee Brown" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <357f9b94.9896689@mail.ihug.co.nz> References: <3.0.2.32.19980611111728.00714e5c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980611111728.00714e5c@ozemail.com.au> On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:17:28 +0900, you wrote: > >The ICQ group is proving to be a headache due to Mirabilis' = incompetence. I >have created a page called 'Theosophy' that is to list any ICQ user that >wishes to register so others may contact them and have included links, = info >etc. However for some bizarre reason it doesn't seem to exist on the ICQ >server. I keep getting OLE OCDB errors and the time delays in fixing >anything are enormous. So at this point in time I recommend that anyone >interested just uses the ICQ net-detect client and that we each pass = around >our ICQ #'s as has been the case in the past few days. Eventually in the >future I will look at setting up the list page again. If anyone else = would >like to try please feel free as It may just be something on my PC (or = just >my ineptitude) that is causing the problems. >Curent ICQ members: >NOS (me - Darren) - 12448929 >Thoa - 13809746 >Eldon - 8244261 >Pam - 9274727 >Dallas - 13760916 Bee 4291138 > From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 18:18:55 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 19:13:30 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Doomsday Message-Id: <199806112313.TAA24844@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In response to Kym's and others' remarks about expectations of apocalypse, I suggest that there are powerful archetypes in the collective unconscious that easily take possession of people in certain circumstances. I just read a marvellously funny and intelligent novel, Imaginary Friends by Alison Lurie, just reprinted in paperback. Originally published in 1967, it seems very contemporary. It's about two sociologists who infiltrate a UFO cult in the name of science, but end up getting sucked into the phenomenon they're supposed to be studying. After they join the group incognito, its teenage prophetess Verena, who channels Ro of the planet Varga, announces that the Vargans are coming to earth to transform civilization. Why is it that prophet after prophet feels compelled to predict some catastrophic or at least intensely dramatic "end times" scenario, despite the fact that every previous one has been totally wrong? Wouldn't you think they'd learn from past mistakes? Re: my own research, I can't help wondering why Edgar Cayce, normally someone who gave very sound therapeutic and spiritual advice to people, occasionally lapsed into cataclysm-mongering. I lean toward concluding that he was simply channeling material that wells up in many people under the right circumstances. Nostradamus, for example, had many catastrophic visions. Deep down, we all know we're going to die. But we repress that knowledge, keep it out of consciousness. We also know that this planet and everything on it will be destroyed someday; another thing we avoid thinking about. Perhaps 6 billion people desperately avoiding the thought of their own death, or that of their planet, forces so much death-anxiety into the unconscious that it has to well up through archetypal images of massive destruction. But what's hardest to understand is the joy that some people seem to take in imagining huge-scale catastrophes befalling humanity. You get the impression that such folks, some of them Cayceans, will actually be disappointed if California never slides under the sea, or atomic war never kills millions of people, or whatever other predicted catastrophes don't get fulfilled. Indeed, sometimes I feel alone in discussions with Cayce people when I say "I certainly hope this is wrong!" Like they would rather have Cayce proved right than spare millions of lives. (Note that the ARE leadership has been quite lowkey about the dramatic predictions, and acts as if it expects nonfulfillment, however.) Comments? From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 19:15:47 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 17:15:28 -0700 From: "Rodolfo Don" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <357f9b94.9896689@mail.ihug.co.nz> References: <3.0.2.32.19980611111728.00714e5c@ozemail.com.au> <3.0.2.32.19980611111728.00714e5c@ozemail.com.au> >On Thu, 11 Jun 1998 11:17:28 +0900, you wrote: > > >> >>The ICQ group is proving to be a headache due to Mirabilis' incompetence. I >>have created a page called 'Theosophy' that is to list any ICQ user that >>wishes to register so others may contact them and have included links, info >>etc. However for some bizarre reason it doesn't seem to exist on the ICQ >>server. I keep getting OLE OCDB errors and the time delays in fixing >>anything are enormous. So at this point in time I recommend that anyone >>interested just uses the ICQ net-detect client and that we each pass around >>our ICQ #'s as has been the case in the past few days. Eventually in the >>future I will look at setting up the list page again. If anyone else would >>like to try please feel free as It may just be something on my PC (or just >>my ineptitude) that is causing the problems. >>Curent ICQ members: >>NOS (me - Darren) - 12448929 >>Thoa - 13809746 >>Eldon - 8244261 >>Pam - 9274727 >>Dallas - 13760916 >Bee 4291138 Rudy 9114742 I registered a few months ago, but I've never used it. >> > > > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 19:45:38 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:11:29 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980612101129.0074256c@ozemail.com.au> Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living animal, would it be ok to eat it? Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 19:49:33 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 19:39:44 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-ID: <19980612005559318.AAA255@pgiese> ---------- > From: "Visanu Sirish" > > How would the 2000 snafu, sometimes called the Millenium Bug, affect our > individual hard drives? Web browers, perhaps, but a hard drive on someone's > PC? I thought it would just affect big main frames in banks, government > agencies ( Social Security Administration, the IRS, etc), traffic controllers, > large corporations, etc. I'm not a computer nerd so this will have to be > explained to me. > Here's how it can affect you. Any software product that you run, has the potential of not handling the 1999-to-2000 transition properly. This means any piece of software on your PC, the software that lets you buy a movie on Primestar, the software that controls the microcircuitry in your car, the software that on the airplane that logs the most recent service date and monitors sensors, etc. etc. Now software engineers and programmers have known the year 2000, but for various reasons (admittedly short-sighted) data and programs use the convient 2-digit year representation rather than a 4-digit year. My division is currently restructuring all its data and will rewrite most of our software because none of the existing pieces are Y2000 compliant. I've heard that Luftansa and other major airlines plan to cancel flights from on 12/31/99 and 01/01/00 simply because the risk for on-board computers are worse those days. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 19:53:49 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 15:38:37 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <004501bd9595$5b1af140$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 11th 1998 Dear Thoa O: Glad to hear from you. I can't recall a direct statement that HPB made her self to the effect that she would "return." ( Although many great Teachers in the past are said to have told their disciples that they would. ) Mr. Judge in one of his articles THE CLOSING CYCLE (IRISH THEOSOPHIST, January 1895) says: :"H.P.Blavatsky has clearly pointed out in the KEY, in her conclusion, that the plan is to keep the T S alive as an active free, unsectarian body during all the time of waiting for the next great messenger, who will be herself beyond question...And in all this time of waiting the Master, "that great Initiate, whose single will upholds the entire movement," will have his mighty hand spread out wide behind the Society." [ ULT Ed. Judge Articles Vol. 2, p. 153 ] You speak of, as though you felt some of the "forces" that work to inspire -- as far as I can see they are three-fold. There is the great, general urge to perfection which brings the whole Evolutionary scheme of a Universal scale into being. There is the special care and force towards improvement of the human race that the Masters of Wisdom (to which the Adepts behind HPB belong) -- a force that urges all to brotherhood among all humans. Then, third, there is the individual power of a personage such as HPB -- who calling on the Inner Ray of the Atman, causes her personality to work incessantly for a movement such as the Theosophical. We have these three great ideas as our inspiration. They urge us to work for brotherhood and the enlightenment of mankind. That is as I see it. Without Karma, as the general law of compensation and fairness, without Reincarnation as the process whereby all souls improve by self-effort, and, without the power of free-choice, of dedicating ourselves to improvement by learning the secret laws of life and living, and by service of others, we would have no real hope or see any value to living. Everyone must be grateful to others who have helped them advance, and it is only right to state that. I find that looking back over my life I have had many inspirers: Krishna ( Bhagavad Gita), Buddha ( The Dhammapada), Lao-Tse (the Tao-te-Ching), Jesus (the Sermon on the Mount), Plato (many of his mind opening dialogs), and now especially near to me are HPB's writings and those of Judge. I am also familiar with some of A. Besant's writings, Krishnamurit's and de Puruker. But I prefer going back to the original sources from which they acquired their information -- without disrespect to any of them, I find that they "filtered" -- and conclude that anything I write must also be a kind of "filter" to my reader. So to be fair, I mention that and suggest going to those sources that are still unfiltered to which we all owe respect. I mean HPB and Judge. We have their original writings. All the other books have either been translated, modified, or are the result of a student's concepts of meaning. Thanks for your views on ICQ and the ethics of answering, etc... I agree. The Gita is something you ought to read carefully at least once. Judge's rendition is the one that I am most familiar with, but having lived in India there are hundreds of translations and thousands of "commentaries" -- again I try to get as close as I can to the "original." Since you are familiar with the Tao-te-Ching you will have the same sense of trust, even if the "paradoxes" are difficult to understand. I believe that they are deliberate, and Lao-tse tried to get the readers to go under the surface meaning to the core of things -- to get under the "eye" doctrine and secure a grasp of the "heart" doctrine there -- the real and the permanent. Best wishes as always, Dal. > Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 11:34 AM > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" > Subject: ICQ Theosophy Group >Dear Dallas: > >Dallas: >>June 11th -- Dear Thoa O -- Whatever gave you the idea that >>HPB had to return ? > >Wasn't it predicted somewhere that HPB would come back? Didn't she say so >herself? I don't recall where I got it. True or false, I was only joking. >I think it takes the collective to pull everything together, not just HPB. > >>One think I got out of Theosophy is the idea >>that reincarnation is a reasonable fact. Second, that an Adept >>like HPB does not "die" and vanish. Presumable one might surmise >>that She (if not incarnate and working hard now) is working as a >>Nirmanakaya, and may be "influencing" many that are true students >>of hers. >> >>It's just an idea, and she is probably no further away than the >>reach of our thought directed to her memory and work. > >>What do you say ? > >I think that the forces that inspire us to different levels of greatness >has always been, and always will be. It influenced HPB, and it influences >all of us. If we have the energy and if we know how to listen, we can >manifest it. It's only our own doubts, insecurity or laziness that >prevents us from staying in contact with that force. For example, I've >often done things that I thought were beyond my ability. Unfortunately, I >lack the focus and assertiveness to maintain those abilities. Or to be >more exact, the energy to maintain that focus and overcome my daily doubt >is so great, that I quit and move on to something else, to the confusion of >teachers who saw something special in me. I'm still working on that >psychological glitch. > >I saw on PrimeTime last night about a blond hair, blue eyed gentile woman >who helped saved some Jewish people during the Nazi era, despite the danger >to herself. She was only 18 years old when she witnessed awful atrocities. >She prayed to God for answers as to what she could do. The answer came to >her. The answer was that she has a Will to do good or bad. She chose to >do good. At the end of the program, when she was asked how was she able to >go through some difficult moments to help these people, she said, "You have >to listen to your heart instead of your head. When you listen to your >head, it will tell you to not do this because it's too dangerous. When you >listen to your heart, you will do what you need to do." (Some paraphrasing) >Her "heart", to me, is that instinct that reaches to the divine Self. > >>As to the ICQ -- while it is a means of quick communication >>between fellow "members" -- what does it offer otherwise ? As >>Darren posts there are at least 5 who have message numbers. Now >>what do we do that we aren't already doing ? I admit that I have >>not had the time yet to fully investigate. >> >>Seems that some are experiencing long time delays -- I am not. > >The ICQ could be good for the question and answer format. The question one >asks of another will have to be answered, since it is a direct chat. Once >you commit to chat with a person, it would be rude not to respond to a >question. With e-mail, you can ignore a question or a post. However, I >feel that the e-mail is a much better format for insightful posts. People >have the silence and privacy to compose what means most to them before they >send it out. Dialectism with others is good, but so is dialectism with >yourself. Also, people can mull over other's questions for a period of >time before responding. > >>As to longing for HPB's return (to return to your comment) what >>shall we do to hasten it? If she is here among us, how will we >>recognize her presence ? > >Again, it is not necessary for HPB to return. What is necessary is that we >learn to listen to our intuitive and overcome our doubts or laziness. > >>What is the nature of an interest in >>Theosophy : I mean on us, > >I'm guessing as students of theosophy, we are seeking for answers, for >inner change, and for peace. > >>and 2nd, what can be do for others ? > >Whatever we see that we can lend a hand to in our present environment. As >far as helping others in their spiritual search, that is up to them. All >one can do is have the information available, without rubbing somebody's >nose in it. Then again, we can be creative by donating a bunch of >theosophy books to the library, attach a spring to the bottom of a book so >that it leaps off the shelf whenever somebody walks by. Sort of a "read >me" signal. :o) (Can't help myself, gotta joke) > >>BTW have you ever read the Bhagavad Gita ? I bet you have. I >>have been re=reading it the last week. Made some notes and >>abstracts -- very interesting. If interested, I can share. > >Yes, I have. However, I'm in the middle of finding a good interpretation >of it. There's a Judge analysis that is available on the web, but that I >haven't gotten around to reading. Why is it that I haven't read any of >Judge's work, although they're available? It's not that I read them and >didn't like them. I just never read them. You said that HPB is your >teacher. I consider G. de Purucker mine because it is through his writings >that my interest in Theosophy grew. Now I am focusing on HPB, but my >heart's still with GdeP. > >>Are you familiar with Lao-Tse's Tao-te-Ching ? Now that is a >>real mind-twister to deal with, and yet, in some ways it is >>similar to the B. Gita ( yes I was also working on that too ). > >Very familiar. I usually take Lao-Tse's writing as releasing of inner >desire and conflict. I don't take his writing to mean releasing of daily >responsibility and escaping. Of course, that's also a reflection of me. I >find Sufi writings to be interesting, also. > >>Interested ? > >I would be interested in your interpretation. However, currently, I'm >afraid I won't have the time to return a long analysis. If you want one, >you'll have to wait for a long time, like Eiichi in my Mondrian posts. I >do read all the posts. > >>Best wishes, Dallas > >You, too, Dallas. And good health, too! > >Thoa :o) > > > > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 20:19:38 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:30:27 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980612103027.00749a44@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <92a1c7b2.35801869@aol.com> As my job in Information Technology often deals with Y2K as we call it I will offer some advice: Home PC's uses the BIOS and battery to store the date in 6 digits that is DD/MM/YY (or MM/DD/YY) when the YY becomes 00 it doesn't actually effect anything unless it makes a date calculation. For example, an automated kindergarten greeting system checks the birthdates of all people in a given area and checks it against the current date. If the age is in a given range the system sends out a letter saying 'you will start kindy soon' . The problem occurs then when the 00 (of 2000) has no century reference. So in this case a woman born in 1895 will be only 5 years old to the PC and will thus receive a letter. Apple users, 99% pentium users and most other post 1993-4 machines will be fine. If you have a PC that is not in this category you will still be fine in terms of Hard Drives etc, the problem will be with applications like Excel that refer to date/time. Remember though, it doesn't just affect your PC - many other household electronic products have a date/time function. Check with the manafacturer for items like House Alarms. At 01:48 PM 6/11/98 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 98-06-11 09:38:32 EDT, you write: > ><< Can we transfer our files on to a more modern hard drive without > the possibility of loosing them when that date strikes our Hard > Drive memories ? >> > >How would the 2000 snafu, sometimes called the Millenium Bug, affect our >individual hard drives? Web browers, perhaps, but a hard drive on someone's >PC? I thought it would just affect big main frames in banks, government >agencies ( Social Security Administration, the IRS, etc), traffic controllers, >large corporations, etc. I'm not a computer nerd so this will have to be >explained to me. > >Lmhem111 > >Lmhem111 > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 20:20:50 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 10:47:36 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980612104736.0074436c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806110807.CAA18617@mailmx.micron.net> Kym Wrote: >How do people with children (as I glean from e-mails that you are a father, >Darren) feel after uttering such a statement as "I think humanity will >collectively ascend on that date. . .etc.?" I also wonder what children >think when they hear their parents, friends, teachers, media, etc., express >such sentiment. I do think such subjects should be researched and discussed >and that children should not be exempt from such information - but I wonder >what it does to both the adult and child psyche (not to mention the >construction of some "jump back, Jack!" thought-forms) when a human mind >believes the "end is near." My son (5), has been asking me about death lately and I have been explaining to him the concept of re-incarnation. He gets it very easily as he hasn't been pre-doctrinated into anything yet. I don't talk about impending apocalypses with him. I gravitate personally to the Mayan End date of 22nd December 2012. But I also don't think this is the end. It will be just another earth-change, possibly caused by a pole shift due to the unequal freezing of the ice caps (Albert Einstein was a proponent of this theory). Terrence Mckenna has an excellent theory based on the I'Ching and fractal mathematics. He has calaculated an equation based on the I'Ching called Timewave Zero. He says the eschaton will occur in 22/12/2012 (god enters history) and that our history is the shockwave of this event. The wave represents NOVELTY, as we approach the date Novelty will increase exponentially. For more info http://www.levity.com/~eschaton If anyone does take the time to examine this theory fully I would be grateful for a theosophical interpretation. Regards Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 20:31:35 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 20:02:30 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Doomsday Message-ID: <19980612011849678.AAA255@pgiese> On the lighter side of this gloomy topic, check out: http://www.teleport.com/~nenslo/tape.html and http://www.teleport.com/~nenslo/rapture.html Nice images related to this thread. I chalk up our collective interest in the end-of-it-all as a jungian desire to embrace our darker fears and thereby disarm them. Since we've managed to come through the transit of Pluto in Scorpio all in one piece, I have trouble buying much of the millenium panic (except for computer systems, of course) Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "K Paul Johnson" > Subject: Doomsday > Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 6:13 PM > > In response to Kym's and others' remarks about expectations of > apocalypse, I suggest that there are powerful archetypes in the > collective unconscious that easily take possession of people in > certain circumstances. I just read a marvellously funny and > intelligent novel, Imaginary Friends by Alison Lurie, just > reprinted in paperback. Originally published in 1967, it seems > very contemporary. It's about two sociologists who infiltrate a > UFO cult in the name of science, but end up getting sucked into > the phenomenon they're supposed to be studying. After they join > the group incognito, its teenage prophetess Verena, who channels Ro of > the planet Varga, announces that the Vargans are coming to earth > to transform civilization. > > Why is it that prophet after prophet feels compelled to predict > some catastrophic or at least intensely dramatic "end times" > scenario, despite the fact that every previous one has been > totally wrong? Wouldn't you think they'd learn from past > mistakes? Re: my own research, I can't help wondering why Edgar > Cayce, normally someone who gave very sound therapeutic and > spiritual advice to people, occasionally lapsed into > cataclysm-mongering. I lean toward concluding that he was simply > channeling material that wells up in many people under the right > circumstances. Nostradamus, for example, had many catastrophic visions. > > Deep down, we all know we're going to die. But we repress that > knowledge, keep it out of consciousness. We also know that this > planet and everything on it will be destroyed someday; another > thing we avoid thinking about. Perhaps 6 billion people > desperately avoiding the thought of their own death, or that of > their planet, forces so much death-anxiety into the > unconscious that it has to well up through archetypal images of > massive destruction. > > But what's hardest to understand is the joy that some people seem > to take in imagining huge-scale catastrophes befalling humanity. > You get the impression that such folks, some of them Cayceans, > will actually be disappointed if California never slides under > the sea, or atomic war never kills millions of people, or > whatever other predicted catastrophes don't get fulfilled. > Indeed, sometimes I feel alone in discussions with Cayce people > when I say "I certainly hope this is wrong!" Like they would > rather have Cayce proved right than spare millions of lives. > (Note that the ARE leadership has been quite lowkey about the > dramatic predictions, and acts as if it expects nonfulfillment, > however.) > > Comments? > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 21:15:37 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 19:15:29 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Esoteric Section/Judge/Vol III Message-ID: <35808F41.322A@azstarnet.com> References: <86c19fae.35801519@aol.com> Judge wrote the Preliminary Memorandum of the E.S. when he was visiting HPB in London in Dec. 1888. She corrected, added and amended the text. See HPB's "Collected Writings," vol. 12. HPB herself wrote the 3 E.S. Instructions and later gave oral teachings to the Inner Group. One version of these oral teachings is given in Vol. III of the S.D. and reprinted in ESOTERIC TEACHINGS, Quest ed. A *complete* transcription of HPB's oral teachings is found in the 2nd edition of THE INNER GROUP TEACHINGS OF H.P. BLAVATSKY published by Point Loma Publications, San Diego, CA. If interested, I can give more details, etc. Daniel Caldwelll Megabeet@aol.com wrote: > > I would like some clarification on this too. > > In the Quest edition of the so-called Third Volume (pgs. 9-10), Annie Besant > said that Papers 1, 2 & 3 (Esoteric Instructions) were written by HPB. This is > followed by Notes on Papers 1,2 & 3 and Notes on Oral Teaching. On page 420, > there is the statement that "the following notes were contributed by students > and approved by HPB". Does the word "students" mean William Quan Judge in > particular and/or who else ?? > > Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 21:45:37 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:51:48 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Lords of Karma Management Plans Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806110909.DAA19203@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >I think we need to elect new leaders - NEW >Lords of Karma and NEW Mahatmas and New All Other Big-Wigs. Good idea - put it to the ACT people! OTOH, maybe we should have a revolution and do away with Big- Wigs altogether .... Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 21:53:57 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:56:00 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980611130348294.AAA209@pgiese> Pam Giese writes >[I doubt that my own daughter would make that mistake. Once when I was >late, I used the excuse that aliens had abducted me and the whole >supermarket while I was shopping. Since then, she has not allowed me >lengthy conversations with her friends.] Smart kid! She'll go a long way! Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 22:00:36 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:09:46 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <92a1c7b2.35801869@aol.com> Megabeet@aol.com writes >How would the 2000 snafu, sometimes called the Millenium Bug, affect our >individual hard drives? Web browers, perhaps, but a hard drive on someone's >PC? I thought it would just affect big main frames in banks, government >agencies ( Social Security Administration, the IRS, etc), traffic controllers, >large corporations, etc. I'm not a computer nerd so this will have to be >explained to me. Seems likely. My PC already recogises the millenium date, and knows what day of the week Tuesday will be in 2010. Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 22:04:34 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:16:51 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes >>BTW have you ever read the Bhagavad Gita ? I bet you have. I >>have been re=reading it the last week. Made some notes and >>abstracts -- very interesting. If interested, I can share. > >Yes, I have. However, I'm in the middle of finding a good interpretation >of it. Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (of TM and Beatles notoriety) did a first class job of the first seven [I think] chapters and it was published in the UK by Pengion Books. Contrary to popular opinion, he was not just a simple-minded Hindu monk, but also a university graduate who spoke and wrote in a number of languages. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 22:08:55 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:23:33 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <18nrkhAlEJg1Ew4W@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <004501bd9595$5b1af140$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Mr. Judge in one of his articles THE CLOSING CYCLE (IRISH >THEOSOPHIST, January 1895) says: :"H.P.Blavatsky has clearly >pointed out in the KEY, in her conclusion, that the plan is to >keep the T S alive as an active free, unsectarian body during all >the time of waiting for the next great messenger, who will be >herself beyond question...And in all this time of waiting the >Master, "that great Initiate, whose single will upholds the >entire movement," will have his mighty hand spread out wide >behind the Society." [ ULT Ed. Judge Articles Vol. 2, p. 153 ] The TS is, however, a fragmented, disputative, sectarian group of bodies, disunited behind various historical persons who dared to disagree. I guess the plan failed. Sorry, Mr. Judge. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Thu Jun 11 22:09:12 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:05:40 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <003a01bd953a$4fb5d3c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Seriously, look into the antecedents of a date like the Year ONE. >I mean of the Christian era. None of the Church councils were >able to determine a year ONE, so the chose a BIRTHDAY for Jesus >from a range that went from November to march and finally chose >Dec. 25th as it was generally celebrated in all pagan faiths as >"the Birth of the Sun." This didn't happen until around 400 ce (common era). Prior to that it was January 6th or 7th. All Rome's doing, this Dec. 25th thing. > >Next, is the selected year ONE (selected in retrospect) actually >the beginning ? The general scholarly consensus is that Jesus was born around 4 bce (before the common era) - so he arrived before his birthday! > Is it the birth of Jesus that is significant, or >when he began his "ministry," or when he died -- and there are >significant differences in regard to that too--I mean the dates. None of these is significant at all, except as a method of remembrance. If anything about him is of importance, it is the "ministry" itself, plus the resurrection, which is basically a "Look guys, I'm still around, even though I got myself killed!" A demonstration of survival. As in my time I've met quite a few "dead" folk, Jesus' story has kind of lost its edge .... and his "teaching" ministry is only his presentation of a form of "ancient wisdom." Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 00:00:37 1998 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 21:58:34 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: >Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: > >If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the >meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living >animal, would it be ok to eat it? > >Darren My main concern about eating meat is the suffering of an animal. Since no animal was killed, I say it's okay to eat the meat. Of course, if someone is against genetic engineering, s/he would refrain from eating created meat for that reason. Since I don't generalize all genetic engineering as bad, I find no harm in using genetic engineering to grow meat. If people would eat genetically engineered meat instead of butchering animals, then the purpose is good. Imagine the hunger that could be wiped out in this world! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 02:15:35 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 02:12:19 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Where's HPB? Message-ID: <008b01bd95d1$8755e9e0$200a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> A month ago I posted the following on a C.U.T. list: A close friend of Geraldine [Innocente, founder of the Bridge to Freedom] was a very interesting individual, Frances Ekey, who was HPB come again. She had joined the I AM in its very early days in 1934, knew Geraldine in 1945 just after she was contacted by El Morya and the Maha Chohan, and became an important I AM leader in Philadelphia. She made the switch to the Bridge with a lot of other I AM members in 1952. She was also the one who believed Mark Prophet to be a genuine channel for the Masters and founded with him the Lighthouse of Freedom, precursor of The Summit Lighthouse, at which founding meeting she was present. In the beginning of the 60s she breaks with Mark and goes her own way, publishing the "I AM the Lighthouse of Freedom" newsletter. She made her transition in 1968 and has been "on her knees" for twenty years now to repent for her mistakes as Apostle Peter, Henry II, Henry VIII, HPB and Frances Ekey and probably other incarnations. Meanwhile many theosophists and also the Masters Themselves hold her dear, very dear. (The very interesting thing about Ekey and her place in the story of the succession of emissaries of the Masters is that she was very close to all persons who were implementing the contingency plan for Krishnamurti's failure, i.e. the Ballards, Innocente and Mark. As HPB she had announced the coming of a 'torch-bearer of truth' for the last quarter of this century. Besant and Leadbeater were instructed to implement the plan roughly fifty years earlier with Krishnamurti. When he failed the Masters turned to Ballard and probably directed Ekey to help out. With the founding of The Summit Lighthouse she at least helped to lay the organizational foundation of indeed this century's 'effort' through Mother [Elizabeth Clare Prophet] and C.U.T. The Theosophical Society, which she helped founding as HPB, was originally intended to be the organizational vehicle for this century's effort were it not for Krishnamurti and the T.S. both failing many of their respective tests. (See for the background story http://pages.prodigy.net/schuller/story.htm with many clarifying quotes in the endnotes) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 03:33:50 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 01:38:57 -0700 From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" Subject: Re: Esoteric Section/Judge/Vol III Message-ID: <3580E921.4441EBE3@netfeed.com> References: <86c19fae.35801519@aol.com> Besant is correct, though Judge may have written the "preliminary Memorandum." Judge was not among the students who contributed the notes on the oral teachings. These were notes by Besant, Cleather and others. jhe Megabeet@aol.com wrote: > I would like some clarification on this too. > > In the Quest edition of the so-called Third Volume (pgs. 9-10), Annie Besant > said that Papers 1, 2 & 3 (Esoteric Instructions) were written by HPB. This is > followed by Notes on Papers 1,2 & 3 and Notes on Oral Teaching. On page 420, > there is the statement that "the following notes were contributed by students > and approved by HPB". Does the word "students" mean William Quan Judge in > particular and/or who else ?? > > Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 04:03:47 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:56:16 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980612035616.01055430@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: At 09:58 PM 6/11/1998 -0700, you wrote: >>Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: >> >>If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the >>meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living >>animal, would it be ok to eat it? >> >>Darren > >My main concern about eating meat is the suffering of an animal. Since no >animal was killed, I say it's okay to eat the meat. Of course, if someone >is against genetic engineering, s/he would refrain from eating created meat >for that reason. Since I don't generalize all genetic engineering as bad, >I find no harm in using genetic engineering to grow meat. If people would >eat genetically engineered meat instead of butchering animals, then the >purpose is good. Imagine the hunger that could be wiped out in this world! > >Thoa :o) May be that's how the world hunger is going to be solved. mkr From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 04:13:30 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:54:37 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980612035437.0105c550@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <18nrkhAlEJg1Ew4W@nellie2.demon.co.uk> References: <004501bd9595$5b1af140$03e78ccc@nwc.net> At 03:23 AM 6/12/1998 +0100, you wrote: >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>Mr. Judge in one of his articles THE CLOSING CYCLE (IRISH >>THEOSOPHIST, January 1895) says: :"H.P.Blavatsky has clearly >>pointed out in the KEY, in her conclusion, that the plan is to >>keep the T S alive as an active free, unsectarian body during all >>the time of waiting for the next great messenger, who will be >>herself beyond question...And in all this time of waiting the >>Master, "that great Initiate, whose single will upholds the >>entire movement," will have his mighty hand spread out wide >>behind the Society." [ ULT Ed. Judge Articles Vol. 2, p. 153 ] > >The TS is, however, a fragmented, disputative, sectarian group of >bodies, disunited behind various historical persons who dared to >disagree. > >I guess the plan failed. > >Sorry, Mr. Judge. > >Alan >------------------- I do not know about the messenger coming or having come, who knows. But the back up plan, which is unstoppable, is the Internet maillists we all enjoy and participate round the clock around the world. These lists have shown to be able to cut across the organizational lines separating seekers of wisdom. Just the fact we are freely talking here with no one to control, supervise, guide, edit etc. msgs is very clear evidence. TI is also an example of this attempt. I am looking for the day when most theosophists of any persuation or none, wired and participate on these discussions. It may well happen much sooner but for the last gasp active opposition of Dugpas attempting to prevent unity and action ever since these lists were created. My 0.02. mkr From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 04:18:55 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 04:03:38 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Where's HPB? Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980612040338.00ab2450@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <008b01bd95d1$8755e9e0$200a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> At 02:12 AM 6/12/1998 -0500, you wrote: >A month ago I posted the following on a C.U.T. list: > >A close friend of Geraldine [Innocente, founder of the Bridge to Freedom] >was a very interesting individual, Frances >Ekey, who was HPB come again. She had joined the I AM in its very early >days in 1934, knew Geraldine in 1945 just after she was contacted by El >Morya and the Maha Chohan, and became an important I AM leader in >Philadelphia. She made the switch to the Bridge with a lot of other I AM >members in 1952. She was also the one who believed Mark Prophet to be a >genuine channel for the Masters and founded with him the Lighthouse of >Freedom, precursor of The Summit Lighthouse, at which founding meeting she >was present. In the beginning of the 60s she breaks with Mark and goes her >own way, publishing the "I AM the Lighthouse of Freedom" newsletter. She >made her transition in 1968 and has been "on her knees" for twenty years >now to repent for her mistakes as Apostle Peter, Henry II, Henry VIII, HPB >and Frances Ekey and probably other incarnations. Meanwhile many >theosophists and also the Masters Themselves hold her dear, very dear. > >(The very interesting thing about Ekey and her place in the story of the >succession of emissaries of the Masters is that she was very close to all >persons who were implementing the contingency plan for Krishnamurti's >failure, i.e. the Ballards, Innocente and Mark. As HPB she had announced >the coming of a 'torch-bearer of truth' for the last quarter of this >century. Besant and Leadbeater were instructed to implement the plan >roughly fifty years earlier with Krishnamurti. When he failed the Masters >turned to Ballard and probably directed Ekey to help out. With the founding >of The Summit Lighthouse she at least helped to lay the organizational >foundation of indeed this century's 'effort' through Mother [Elizabeth Clare >Prophet] and C.U.T. The >Theosophical Society, which she helped founding as HPB, was originally >intended to be the organizational vehicle for this century's effort were it >not for Krishnamurti and the T.S. both failing many of their respective >tests. (See for the background story >http://pages.prodigy.net/schuller/story.htm >with many clarifying quotes in the endnotes) With all the problems that represent organizations, I believe that Internet is reducing the importance and need for organizations so that searchers for truth can pursue the search rather than get concerned with organizations. Also any organization, as time passes, develop its own restrictive view of truth and there is a vast pressure brought on the members to conform. See also my msg on second coming of HPB. My 0.02. mkr From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 07:33:46 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 08:22:56 EDT From: "Pat Reda" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: hi. my icq number is 12302004 (magi42@aol.com) (patrick reda) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 07:48:45 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 04:42:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <006f01bd95fe$ad211460$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 12th 1998 Dear Alan: Your observation about the present situation in the TSes is partially true. To the extent that they have departed from the original plan and have become political in management, and are concealing things from the membership, etc... they have failed very seriously. If the membership is not interested in seeking to revitalize them along the original lines (for whatever reason: indolence, ignorance of Theosophical doctrines and objectives, blind belief in "authority," etc...) they will continue on their divergent way. It is the membership alone that can bring about a change. If individuals do not agree with present policies and management, and are unable, democratically, to make changes, then they can exercise their right to resign. [ It seems obvious to me that if the "officers and management" of any T. S. set themselves/itself up to preserve its power as a management group, it is violating the democratic, patriarchal and service aspect of Theosophy, and is in fact degrading it. It is changing liberality into authoritarianism: "My rule -- right or wrong. I know better !" ] No "body" ever completely succeeds, when you look at it, as a "body." In the final analysis it is individuals who compose a group of whatever size. And it is the individuals who will have as individuals to agree to follow the aim, purpose and goal of the "philosophy" of Theosophy (outlined in detail by HPB in THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY). There is only one use for any truly Theosophical "body." It is the maintaining of the purity of the original teachings,l so that they can be transmitted unfiltered to those who inquire. Those in their turn will have to evaluate them and adopt whatever they decide they will use in their lives and for the regulation of their affairs. A Theosophical "body" would then consist of volunteers who would provide publishing, library, meeting rooms, etc., for those who may desire to acquaint themselves with Theosophy and discuss their individual study without making any imposition on their fellows. You may tell me that this makes for a very unstable situation and that the "growth" which all "bodies" are expected to foster will be stunted or retrogress. I would answer that this is true. Since the original objects as declared in the T S do not include the acquisition of a vast set of "numbers," any Lodge of the T S exists to afford the means to those who seek the opportunity of contacting THEOSOPHY as originally set out by the Masters and HPB as their Agent. In this Mr. Wm. Q. Judge, as HPB's closest collaborator, in charge of the largest individual Section (America) of the TS is also to be recognized as a chief "builder." HPB was the cement that held the T S together, and she also provided the material that members could learn from and discuss. After her death, and in time, starting in December 1893 there was political resistance generated among the "Officers and managers" of the TS that started in Adyar. As a result we have historically the "Judge Case" -- which was adjudicated in his favor in mid year 1894. By end of 1894 the attack was restarted. Seeing this, the members of the "American Section T S" as a group in which the members were truly democratic and autonomous determined to separate themselves politically from the incubus of the "Parent Body." They wanted to study and practice Theosophy. Accordingly, at the end of April in 1895 the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY IN AMERICA, was started in the Boston Convention of the Theosophical Society (American Section) . The details are fully set out in the Reports issued then. It was done legally. Then to make sure that the spirit of the Theosophical Movement ( not "Society") was sustained and maintained, "Resolutions" were passed of continued brotherly affiliation with the Theosophical Society with HQ in Adyar, and with its Sections and Lodges and Members in other places. It is a matter of history how those advances were treated, also that it was Col. Olcott, acting as President Founder, who declared that the Theosophical Society in America had "seceded" from the "parent T S" and proceeded to "excommunicate" all those members and Lodges of the American Section which had participated in the change. He rejected the "affiliation" offered -- contrary to the First Object of the Theosophical Society. This has been repeated since. That was the first official split--the result of a political base. Theosophy had neither been understood, nor was it applied ! Judge's death in March 1896 caused a crisis in the thinking of the members of the Theosophical Society in America who were close to him in the management of the affairs of the Society, and instead of following his advice "There should be calmness. Hold fast. Go slow." They rushed into giving away effective "control" to a person (Mrs. Tingley) who had less than 3 years experience with Theosophy and who was "untested" by time. The result of the changes that were selected and then made by such an "authority" derailed the work of Judge in short order. By 1898 most of those who had participated in the election of Mrs. Tingley resigned in protest. Historically we then witness that the career of the T S in A proceeded in a completely different direction, Though retaining the surface appearance of the body started in April 1895, the internal direction and its succeeding politics have emphasized the divergence from the original objects. In some ways it began to pattern itself after the Olcott managed T S in Adyar and its Sections -- not in detail, but the trappings of "Authority" came to the fore. The focus and purpose of the T S in America was altered and the result is that today, as I look at it, except for its honoring and respecting Judge and his work and writings, there is very little difference -- everything depends on the focus and direction chosen by its "leader (s)." By and large in the past decade or so there has been at the level of individuals of the TS (Adyar), the TS (Pasadena), and the ULT a reaproachment, a tolerance that tends to make relations more harmonious. But the political differences, and the individual objectives of these three bodies are very much continuing in the lines they have adopted. Of the three, the ULT alone is non-political. It adheres to and objectivizes its 'motto' : "To spread broadcast the teachings of Theosophy as recorded in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky and Wm. Q. Judge." All its meetings are free and open to any and all who desire to attend. Theosophy (as originally recorded) alone, is the object of its working. It tries to make it available to all. It is an "association" of volunteers, and not a "membership" affair with the usual paraphernalia of politicized management, fees, rules, officers, etc.... Those ULT associates resident in any one area make independent but consultative decisions concerning the conduct of their "Lodge," or "Study Group." Each "associate" is automatically an associate of the ULT anywhere. No questions are ever asked as to previous or current associations of those who desire to become "an 'Associate' of the ULT." The "Declaration of the ULT" is the sole document to serve as the bond between associates in all ULT work. In other words, the ULT exists for service to all, associates or non-associates, and takes no cognizance of any other motive or procedure. It is the practice of Theosophy alone that makes for the bond between all associates. It is a "similarity of aim, purpose and teaching" put into practice. Admittedly it is an experiment. It has been in active existence for 89 years as of this date. More detail about the ULT can be had from a booklet titled "The ULT Its Mission and Future." I offer this is as an addition to what I wrote earlier and also to make the historical events and objectives as applied, as clear as I see them -- and I may be also quite wrong in some of my characterizations. I have tried to base myself in what I write on actual historical events and current facts. Best wishes, Dallas. > Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 8:20 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>Mr. Judge in one of his articles THE CLOSING CYCLE (IRISH >>THEOSOPHIST, January 1895) says: :"H.P.Blavatsky has clearly >>pointed out in the KEY, in her conclusion, that the plan is to >>keep the T S alive as an active free, unsectarian body during all >>the time of waiting for the next great messenger, who will be >>herself beyond question...And in all this time of waiting the >>Master, "that great Initiate, whose single will upholds the >>entire movement," will have his mighty hand spread out wide >>behind the Society." [ ULT Ed. Judge Articles Vol. 2, p. 153 ] > >The TS is, however, a fragmented, disputative, sectarian group of >bodies, disunited behind various historical persons who dared to >disagree. > >I guess the plan failed. > >Sorry, Mr. Judge. > >Alan SNIP From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 12:06:50 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 09:53:26 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: <199806121650.LAA24481@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980612101129.0074256c@ozemail.com.au> At 10:11 AM 6/12/98 +0900, you wrote: >Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: > >If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the >meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living >animal, would it be ok to eat it? > >Darren Darren, There are two (at least) possible ways to make meat with nanotechnology. The first way is to take a real chunk of meat and put it in the "analyzer." This program takes every observable molecule of meat and memorizes it, perhaps for a miniscule section of the real thing, and then repeats the observed and memorized portion an appropriate number of times to arrive at the size we want. When the analyzer has arrived at an appropriate "program" it then begins to work through the molecular combinations with its "elemental soup" for raw material. Since man is ever bent on improving things however, the second way to make meat means taking the program and improving it: removing impurities and unnecessary components and "purifying" what was found in the real thing until we have a significant other program that doesn't match the composition of the first. This type of adapted substance is my preference. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 12:48:56 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:45:59 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-Id: >>>Darren: >>>Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: >>> >>>If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the >>>meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living >>>animal, would it be ok to eat it? >>> >>>Darren >> >>Thoa: >>My main concern about eating meat is the suffering of an animal. Since no >>animal was killed, I say it's okay to eat the meat. Of course, if someone >>is against genetic engineering, s/he would refrain from eating created meat >>for that reason. Since I don't generalize all genetic engineering as bad, >>I find no harm in using genetic engineering to grow meat. If people would >>eat genetically engineered meat instead of butchering animals, then the >>purpose is good. Imagine the hunger that could be wiped out in this world! >> >>Thoa :o) > >Doss: >May be that's how the world hunger is going to be solved. This brings me to a question. Is it ethical to clone humans, but maintaining only the lower brain function for the preservation of the body, for body parts? If you could see nothing wrong with genetically engineered meat, then why would you object to cloned body parts? My main argument is that there is a major difference between the two process. A mass of meat had its potential as a mass of meat and could not be anything more than a mass of meat. A human clone, however, started out from conception as a potential full human. It is only by harmful manipulation that its brain did not develop. Do you only cherish a life's present existence, or do you also cherish its potential? I suppose that's why some people eliminate eating eggs along with eating anything crawling and alive. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 13:38:32 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 11:23:58 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-Id: <199806121820.NAA01899@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980612104736.0074436c@ozemail.com.au> References: <199806110807.CAA18617@mailmx.micron.net> Darren, On p. 330-331 of the SD Vol II, HPB says, "If the observer is gifted with the faintest intuition, then will he find how the weal and woe of nations is intimately connected with the beginning and close of this sidereal cycle." A sidereal year is 25,868 years. HPB intimates that 10,000 years ago a major cataclysm occurred. And in addition, "... since Vaivasvata Manu's Humanity appeared on this Earth, there have already been four such axial disturbances; when the old continents - save the first one - were sucked in by the oceans, other lands appeared, and huge mountain chains arose where there had been none before." The axial disturance she speaks of is connected with the sidereal year because "Every Sidereal Year the tropics recede from the pole FOUR DEGREES in each revolution from the equinoctial points, as the equator rounds through the Zodiacal constellations." Since we are at a point 10,000 years since the last great cataclysm (?) it could be predicted that the next will occur in 16,000 years. According to the shift of 4 degrees, the tropic is currently at "23 degrees and a fraction less than half a degree" and still has "2 1/2 degrees to run before the end of the Sidereal Year." I tend to think this Vaivasvata Manu man is the fourth race because on p. 148 she speaks of it as "the male and female entity already separated into distinct sexes" as being present 18,000,000 years ago and as the 2 1/2 races before that covering 300,000,000 years (or so). This might refer to a fourth race man which would largely be extinct today as the typical race length is 18,000,000 years with an overlap of 9,000,000 years, and the fifth race beginning 9,000,000 years ago and having 9,000,000 years left to exist (overlapping now with the sixth race as our sixth sub-race is a preliminary step to the beginning of the sixth race which I have read will be in about 400,000 years.). In any case, I had thought that astrologically we were entering a new Sidereal Year, the Aquarian at this time and if this is the case in 16,000 years we will not be beginning a new Sidereal Cycle. Now if there have been four over the last 18,000,000 years, a cycle of 25,868 years is nullified, because it would take at least 25,868 times 12 = 258,680 plus 51,736 = 310,416 (if I'm correct) and even this figure is dwarfed by 18,000,000. Perhaps in 10 complete Sidereal Cycles we have 3,104,160 years times four = 12,416,640. This leaves a remainder of 5.5 million years with no cataclysms which could have split between the beginning and end of the cycles, hence 2.2 million years since the last cataclysm would bring another cataclysm in less than 1 million years. This is soon enough for me, but I can't figure it to be the beginning of a Sidereal Year. Even if we accept a year times 12 as a cycle we would pass through 3 (12-fold cycles) in 931,248 years and end up somewhere in Sagitarius. I don't call that the beginning of a Cycle, do you? Again, from the SD Vol II, p. 435 "Now our Fifth Root-Race has already been in existence - as a race sui generis and quite free from its parent stem - about 1,000,000 years; and that each of its four preceding Sub-Races has lived approximately 210,000 years;" If this is the case, there could possibly have been a cataclysm to mark the end of each of those sub-races (for the purpose of disposing of the fourth root race primarily, I would think. If there is a more accurate time allotment, maybe on page 433 (which is footnoted to help explain the preceding) Vol. II, she remarks that the giant Atlanteams perished 850,000 years ago and the last island of Atlantis disappeared 11,000 years ago. Maybe we are to infer that an island will go down every 25,000 years! with the next set for the year 19,000 (which can be spread out to make 12 (the highest month) adding 22 (or 31 and 13 give the same total) and the year of 12 (add 2 + 4 + 3 = 9) whereby all of the digits after the initial 1 are added together to make 9. In 17,000 years from now we can get rid of some 5th race human bodies - earth gets an abortion. My question is why does HPB claim that the tropic is moving towards the equator and corresponding away from the pole at the rate of four degrees a "revolution?" And if it has 2 1/2 degrees to go, someday the tropic of 23 1/2 will become 21. What did the tropic start at? Perhaps it vacilitates between 21 and 25? Any comments? >My son (5), has been asking me about death lately and I have been >explaining to him the concept of re-incarnation. He gets it very easily as >he hasn't been pre-doctrinated into anything yet. I don't talk about >impending apocalypses with him. >I gravitate personally to the Mayan End date of 22nd December 2012. But I >also don't think this is the end. It will be just another earth-change, >possibly caused by a pole shift due to the unequal freezing of the ice caps >(Albert Einstein was a proponent of this theory). >Terrence Mckenna has an excellent theory based on the I'Ching and fractal >mathematics. He has calaculated an equation based on the I'Ching called >Timewave Zero. He says the eschaton will occur in 22/12/2012 (god enters >history) and that our history is the shockwave of this event. The wave >represents NOVELTY, as we approach the date Novelty will increase >exponentially. >For more info > >http://www.levity.com/~eschaton > >If anyone does take the time to examine this theory fully I would be >grateful for a theosophical interpretation. > > >Regards > >Darren > >* Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: >http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my >computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at >http://www.icq.com/ > > > > Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 13:53:09 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 11:35:53 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-Id: <199806121832.NAA03407@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: >This brings me to a question. Is it ethical to clone humans, but >maintaining only the lower brain function for the preservation of the body, >for body parts? If you could see nothing wrong with genetically engineered >meat, then why would you object to cloned body parts? My main argument is >that there is a major difference between the two process. A mass of meat >had its potential as a mass of meat and could not be anything more than a >mass of meat. A human clone, however, started out from conception as a >potential full human. It is only by harmful manipulation that its brain >did not develop. Do you only cherish a life's present existence, or do you >also cherish its potential? I suppose that's why some people eliminate >eating eggs along with eating anything crawling and alive. > >Thoa :o) Thoa, Does the person in need of organs have 20 years to wait while a vegetative infant lies prone - not moving of its own accord, unconscious and requiring manipulation to prevent atrophy? And would the organs be healthy? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 14:51:09 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 12:40:57 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: food Message-Id: <199806121938.OAA11240@proteus.imagiware.com> Since it's lunchtime, and I'm sitting here with my vegetarian chili cup-of-cup, and in reading all the many food comments, I thought I'd add a few ideas and comments to the discussion. It seems more civilized and refined to eat lower rather than higher life forms. It's possible for most people to have a healthy and tasty diet based upon vegetarian principles. There are exceptions. Some people have health problems requiring them to eat a meat diet -- but this is not commonplace. And for certain peoples, like the Tibetans, their climate doesn't support the adequate production of vegetable foods, so they typically eat meat, even though their Western followers are often vegetarians. But it's easy to fall back on excuses when the real reasons are inertia against change, an enjoyment of the old habits of life, and a not wanting to hear about better and kinder ways of living. There are many reasons not to eat meat. One is with regard to harmlessness. We want to minimize our impact upon the world, taking the minimum of sentient life in order to sustain our own. This can be done respectfully, like when an American Indian may say a little prayer expressing respect and appreciation for the animal whose life he may be taking for food. Another reason is with regard to the grossness of the life energies involved. The plant kingdom energies are simpler and easier, I think, to break down and assimilate. Eating animals, especially those apparently more sentient, like household pets, would have higher, more complex energies to break down. Cannibalism would be bad, but the worst would be eating the flesh of a higher kingdom, like when a tiger may eat a human or in a Tibetan sky burial, where the departed person's body is hacked into small pieces to be eaten by vultures on some remote hillside. I don't think that we can make a general rule that applies to everyone. I've heard stories of children that go "yuck!" and won't touch meat. Perhaps we'll all have a natural aversion to it at some point. For the present, unless someone is undergoing some spiritual training that requires the vegetarian diet, I'd leave it to the discretion of each person, leave it as a personal life decision along with the decision to drink or not drink alcohol, fast or not fast, meditate or not meditate, exercise or not, etc. At some point, we'll evolve to need less and less for physical sustenance, until we one day, perhaps, live on prana and immaterial life energies. Until this happens, though, we still need to find food for the dinner table, balancing our appetites with health and ethical concerns. As an ending thought, I recall the statement that "we are the food of the gods." I don't think that this means that we're cooked and served up on their dinner table like a leg of lamb. It may be that when we're caught up by archetypes, having our lives changed and patterned after them, that the beings behind those archetypes have in a way assimilated us, using us as "food" to sustain their "physical existence". ... Something to think about. -- Eldon From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 15:06:20 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 12:57:27 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-Id: <199806121955.OAA13409@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: Thoa: >Is it ethical to clone humans, but maintaining only the lower >brain function for the preservation of the body, for body parts? This may not be necessary if it's possible at some point to discover and turn on some gene that allows the repair or regrowth of damaged organs or limbs. I've read how they've been able to turn off the gene that allows for brain grow in a rat, bringing to birth a baby rat with a brain stem but no brain. The idea was that at some point humans could be grown without brains, to serve as body parts for living people. I'm uneasy with the idea. It reminds me of the time in SD history when the human's interbred with the animals and created monster races of quasihuman beings. I'd think that the decision to use such a body part would be troubling, with a lot of soul searching, much as the decision to have or not have an abortion would be to a woman facing that choice. >Do you only cherish a life's present existence, or do you >also cherish its potential? I suppose that's why some >people eliminate eating eggs along with eating anything >crawling and alive. The ovo-lacto vegetarian rationale is that if the egg is not fertilized, it's a natural byproduct of the chicken's existence, and eating it does not involved the taking of a life. If the egg were fertilized, though, it should not be eaten, to qualify as vegetarian food. The same is true of dairy products like milk and cheese, where the cow is not killed in their production. The same argument can be applied to plants, in a more strict definition of vegetarianism, and say that plant food that involves the killing of the plant is bad, like the eating of a potato, but food not involving the killing of the plant is ok, like eating an apple not hurting the apple tree. -- Eldon From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 18:20:08 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:04:40 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-Id: Brenda: >Does the person in need of organs have 20 years to wait while a vegetative >infant lies prone - not moving of its own accord, unconscious and requiring >manipulation to prevent atrophy? And would the organs be healthy? In the brave new world of genetic engineering, the process of cloning would start when the person is still a child. Everyone rich enough would have a clone kept for him/her in an institution. If it's a lucrative business, perhaps they would develop a system by which the body is mechanically monitored, maintained, exercised and fed. Since nutrition is controlled, the organs might be healthier than in a conscious person who eats at McDonald's every day and smokes. With the general fear of death, and human's tendency to be numb to any idea once it becomes the norm, this is a possibility. In fact, a possible business would be someone buying cloning rights and cells from people, having a storage house of different categories of clones, and then selling individual organs to people who can't afford their own clones. Creepy. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 18:29:12 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:03:11 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-Id: Eldon: >The same argument can be applied to plants, in a more >strict definition of vegetarianism, and say that plant >food that involves the killing of the plant is bad, like >the eating of a potato, but food not involving the killing >of the plant is ok, like eating an apple not hurting the >apple tree. Living that way is possible. That means that you're limited to legumes, vegetables in the squash family, fruits (includes the tomato), grains, bell peppers, and eggplant. I would miss my carrots and green leafy vegetables. Since I love gourmet cooking, it would drive me crazy to be that limited. I make my judgment based on how sentient the animal is to me and whether they're under threat of extinction. For example, I eat seafood, but not dolphins or whales. I kill insects. I'm not sure how sentient an insect is. In fact, a crawling, unpredictable insect can be created from items bought from Radio Shack and put together based on Chaos Theory. I saw that on a TV program about present development of robots. I'm looking for a book that would give me more details, but no dice. Anyway, I never heard a turnip scream. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 19:48:46 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:09:12 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians/genetic engineering Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes > a possible business would be someone buying cloning >rights and cells from people, having a storage house of different >categories of clones, and then selling individual organs to people who >can't afford their own clones. Creepy. "For Sale - original human beings. Apply in strictest confidence to Clones Inc." ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 20:19:14 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:10:06 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Fw: Holy folk on a mountain -- IS THAT LOCATION AVAILABLE ? Message-ID: <000201bd9666$ce2b0b80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Date: Friday, June 12, 1998 4:08 PM > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain -- IS THAT LOCATION AVAILABLE ? >June 6th 1998 > >Dear Alan: > >Enjoyed your comments here as well as posted on other things. > >I can't expect to "fine-tune" all the things that I mean, but >will interject some comments below in your answers -- reminds me >of the lady of the house who sent the burler out of the room so >she could be alone with her husband. She knew the butler was a >peeper, so she looked out through the key hole and saw an eye >there, opened the door. Butler was rising from a stoop. "Are >you peeping again ," she asked? >With dignity he replied. "I was looking to see if Madam was >looking to see if I was looking to see if Madam was looking !" > His name was Thomas. ] > >Anyway ..... Best wishes as always Dal. > >========================================== >-----Original Message----- >From: "Dr A M Bain" >Date: Thursday, June 04, 1998 7:41 PM >Subject: Re: Holy folk on a mountain -- IS THAT >LOCATION AVAILABLE ? > > >>W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>>I always thought Theosophy was a series of propositions for us >to >>>consider and adopt if we found that they were reasonable. >> >>Me too. >>> >>>Something like: >>> >>>Every one of us is an Immortal -- the body is assumed employed, >>>deployed and finally consummated. The Spiritual Self oversees >>>constantly the process of mental and moral improvement. >> >>Partly reasonable. My experience suggests that the Spiritual >Self >>oversees - period. > > >================================================== > >Agree. But why ? > >================================================ > >>> >>>Morals have a basis in Law and in fact. >> >>In fact, perhaps. In Law, no. >>> >>>Moral Law is Natural Law. >> >>"Morals" derive from "mores" which are human customs which vary >>from place to place and from time to time. The moral "law" of >the >>Taleban [sp?] in Afghanistan is very different from that of >(say) Illinois. >>Therefore such a view is unreasonable > > >=========================================== > >I know the difference between "morality" of a customary or tribal >type and true morality (which is presumed to be based on >"universal law -- if that is acceptable), which I meant -- >perhaps "ethics" would have been a better word ? But really, I >don't want to get into the 10,000 arguments, and don't know how >to escape it. Need Oxzam's razor ! > >============================================ > >>>Evolution makes for Universal Rightness as well as >Righteousness. >> >>"Evolution" is a theory. Change and development are observable >facts. >>To follow a theory is reasonable. Dogmatically to accept a >theory as >>"truth" is unreasonable. > > >============================================= > >I certainly did not mean the Scientific hypotheses concerning >"evoluton" which is limited to form and fossils. I had in mind >the 3-fold Theosophical one ( SD I 181 ) > >=============================================== >>> >>>The "Fundamental unity of all Souls with the Universal >Oversoul" >>>makes moral contagion possible through the subtle psychic >medium >>>that we all share in. >> >>Completely unreasonable. IF such a unity already exists, then >the >>statement can only mean that the"Universal Oversoul" is itself >infected >>by contagion, and all Souls - acording to the above premise - >are >>imperfect. The word contagion itself requires contact. Thus all >Souls >>are corrupt by reason of being Souls in the first place. *That* >would be >>a reasonable proposition, given the stated hypothesis. > >================================================ > >I knew that would draw fire ! I tend to agree on this plane with >what you say. > >But if the "spiritual plane" transcends this, then it might be >free of our kind of "contagion" and yet undersand what it is, how >it arises, and what can be done about it. seems to me that >Jesus, Buddha, Krishna and othes tried to make this point and >give some "way out" for those who might want to do that ? > >Also perfectly true that I cannot speak from personal experience, >but the doctrines seem to me to be quite consistent and logical. > >You speak of NDE and penetrating the "astral plane." I don't >queston that although I have not consciously experienced such a >transition in this present personality of mine. I have heard >enough evidence to make it appear reasonable. > >But I also think it is reasonable to say that "Soul" is not >SPIRIT -- taking that to be pure, and the "soul" to be >purifiable. > >It there is "contagion" then what is the source and nature of the >contagion. If the "Oversoul" exists, then would not the transfer >of thought and emotion be convered under its abilities, >qualities, nature ? > >If as Theosophy avers the Soul is essentially the mind, then >there is the possibility of at least three positons for the >"soul." > >1. The "Higher Mind" ( or Divine soul ) [Buddhi-Manas] -- a >condition of the soul/mindwhe it allies itself with universal >ideals: nobility, altruism, generosity, tolerance, brotherhood, >tutoring, a sharing of knowledge, etc... And these tend to a >universality and an impersonality in outlook -- which is not cold >detachment, but rather a warm and intersted outlook on one's >surroundings and condition, including always all those who >surround us. > >2. The "Mind" [Manas] as a thinking, reasoning, remembering >(and forgetting) , logical capacity. [ In the exercise of this >faculty, there can be the coolness of detached inspection and a >refusal to "get involved." ] It is modified by the selection it >makes of subjects to consider (choice and motive -- implying also >freedom of choice). These modifications are broadly: correct >understanding, misunderstanding, perception, fancy, sleep >(unconsciousness of various kinds when the perceptive faculties >are in abeyance), and memory. Correct understanding results from >perception (observation and experiement), inference (or >imagination and fancy); and the testimony that others offer. > >3. the "lower mind" [ Kama-Manas ] -- when the mind is alllied >to the passions, desires, wants, needs, instincts, etc... all >pertaining to the "personality." And these tend to isolation and >selfishness. The lower mind does not have the all-inclusiveness >of the higher mind, and is so to say at the other end of the >spectrum of mentality or intellect. > >In all this ithere is a lot of latitude to agree or disagree >with. > >I'm not trying to make any special point beyond saying that the >difference makes it possible, as I see it, for that statement to >be correct. > >=========================================== > > > > >>Alan >>------------------- >>Brought to you from >> West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 20:20:23 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:18:28 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-ID: <19980613013449375.AAA245@pgiese> ---------- > From: "Brenda S Tucker" > > The first way is to take a real chunk of meat and put it in the "analyzer." > This program takes every observable molecule of meat and memorizes it, > perhaps for a miniscule section of the real thing, and then repeats the > observed and memorized portion an appropriate number of times to arrive at > the size we want. When the analyzer has arrived at an appropriate > "program" it then begins to work through the molecular combinations with > its "elemental soup" for raw material. Analyzer? What proof can you give that such a device exists? I design data bases and computer systems to support a company engaged in genetic engineering of corn and soybeans and I have never seen or heard of such a device outside of Star Trek( i.e. their replicator). Current devices can user PCR or RFLP to analyze the genetic fingerprint of a cell, but no one has the technology to recreate the complete DNA structure from just the protein and allele sequences. This is beyond the current state of science. As of yet, science does not even have the complete genetic map of any species, so artificially fabricating it at will is beyond everyone's mean. This is why there's so much clamoring and activity in the field as in order to patent a gene, you must be able to prove the link between location and function. Most genetic engineering involves the insertion of foreign DNA into another species (the other major type is the acceleration of an operand gene or a purposeful mutation). For example much of the European Corn Bore resistant corn is developed by taking a bacteria that is repugnant to Corn Bore and "inserting" it in a line of corn. This is a laborous task and prone to a lot of trial and err scientific experimentation. The resultant corn germplasm is the nutured and hopefully will end up as something looking like corn (maize). There are multi-generational quality tests done to ensure that the trait exists as well as ensure equivalency between the transformed corn and the original. Harvesting living cells for cloning and transformation is were many of the hard ethical questions lie. Maintaining embryos for the purpose of harvesting tissue for further cell replication is well within our current science. The current collective intelligence of genetic knowledge is 13G of genetic sequence information and is currently increasing at the rate of a G a month. All research stations share in the unprecedanted collaboration, usually referred to as the Human Genome Project. Current estimates are that the Human Genome will be completely mapped by 2005. Does this means that knowing the map, scientists will be able to manufacture humans out of any scraps of DNA lying around? No. But they will be able to do a better job screening children for a battery of afflications and educate couples with a history of disorders for their likely hood of passing on afflictions. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 20:49:38 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:34:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: food -- EATING WITHOUT KILLING Message-ID: <001c01bd966c$2f324560$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 12th Eating without killing: what about fruit, seeds, grains, milk (but leave enough for the calves), eggs (but do not jail the chickens). There are probably dozens of foods common to every area which could be had (in moderation) so that our bodies may be fed, without actually imposing starvation or tyranny and torture on the rest of Nature. How did we ever, as a "race" assume that we because we were "mightier," had the right to kill and destroy all the rest of the animate life on the Planet and other "beings," --- and then, historically and actually today, we have in certain places and by certain individuals, extend this to ourselves --- in murder, racial hatreds, and war ? What is the logic of this self-destruction madness ? Dallas More important : what are the remedies ? What do we teach our young ones, that they grow up with no respect for each other than the fear of violence and torture, of ourselves as their elders and teachers, and the rest of mankind -- I am of course speaking generally and of perhaps a small but very violent minority. What has happened to self-respect ? > Date: Friday, June 12, 1998 1:18 PM > From: "Eldon B Tucker" > Subject: food >Since it's lunchtime, and I'm sitting here with my >vegetarian chili cup-of-cup, and in reading all the >many food comments, I thought I'd add a few ideas >and comments to the discussion. > >It seems more civilized and refined to eat lower >rather than higher life forms. It's possible for >most people to have a healthy and tasty diet based >upon vegetarian principles. > >There are exceptions. Some people have health >problems requiring them to eat a meat diet -- but >this is not commonplace. And for certain peoples, >like the Tibetans, their climate doesn't support >the adequate production of vegetable foods, so >they typically eat meat, even though their Western >followers are often vegetarians. SNIP From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 20:57:54 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 18:24:04 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: -- Vegetarianism -cloning - meat, etc. Who pays ? Message-ID: <001b01bd966c$2e05ac40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 12th 1998 Dallas offers: RE: cloning of meat, etc... In considering this question ought we not to think of 1. the Astral model. How is it that the physical bit of matter (carrying its own astral substrate) gets duplicated ? Is it physiology alone ? I seem to recall that in SD II there is an indication that the "Atlanteans" (I mean us when we were in Atlantean bodies, living in those civilizations) carried on similar and even far worse things. Are we in the process of repeating those errors ? 2. what is happening on the Astral Plane ? 3. Does physical food alone sustain us ? 4. What about the pranic currents associated with food ? 5. What about the quality of the "feelings" and the "thoughts" that are also associated with food ? I mean the fear and hatred on an animal that is about to be slaughtered -- have you ever been to a slaughter house ? 6. Considering the vegetarian outlook: are we not eating food from creatures that have been violently slain and quite against their will ? what quality in terms of life energy and kamic power is now being drawn in by us ? We eat daily a great deal. Why is so much rejected ? How is the selectivity carried out ? Is there a Karmic aspect to this ? 7. Is animal food essential or is it a matter of taste? Many nations such as the Hindus (in general) are by custom vegetarians -- they seem to derive an adequate amount of sustenance from what they eat -- how is that ? 8. Is more arable land wasted by insisting on animal food than if that same land were planted with edible crops ? 9. What about the hungry and starving around the world ? Who is taking care of them systematically ? Yes. I know that their governments are also responsible for the situation in regard to food and health care. We allowed the genocide to proceed in Ruanda and did little to halt it -- to far -- too remote, etc... Does that exonerate us from complicity as members of the Human Family ? 10. Also I know that many charitable organizations do all they can to adjust these imbalances. But what about diffusing more information about the KARMIC situation ? 11. I also know that economic and commercial reasons will be hurled around as to the termination of many jobs and the need to see that there is compensation, etc... start the farms and the necessary building for irrigation. Why aren't our deserts made greener ? If Arizona can be made fertile, then what about other areas ? What about making desalination a cheaper matter ? What about "solar power ?" We just had devastating fires all over the tropical belt due to lack of rain -- has this happened before historically ? Does Nature do this, or do we humans create the situations that hasten famine, drought, and excessive heat for our small planet. I don't think there is enough seaweed to feed the entire planet, but we are about 70% water ! What's being done about that ? 12. I'm sure we can ask a lot more on this, and perhaps arrive at something we can work on and make changes. Can anyone think of some more applied Theosophy to be fed into the situation ? Best wishes to all and to the originator of the question. Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 6:24 PM > From: "Darren Porter" > Subject: Future Vegetarians >Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: > >If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the >meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living >animal, would it be ok to eat it? > >Darren From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 21:16:11 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:09:39 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: <199806130206.VAA15122@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <19980613013449375.AAA245@pgiese> At 08:18 PM 6/12/98 -0500, you wrote: >---------- >> From: "Brenda S Tucker" >> >> The first way is to take a real chunk of meat and put it in the >"analyzer." >> This program takes every observable molecule of meat and memorizes it, >> perhaps for a miniscule section of the real thing, and then repeats the >> observed and memorized portion an appropriate number of times to arrive >at >> the size we want. When the analyzer has arrived at an appropriate >> "program" it then begins to work through the molecular combinations with >> its "elemental soup" for raw material. > >Analyzer? What proof can you give that such a device exists? Pam, This is a dream. You can either decipher the exact code of a substance or you can manipulate the exact code. This is all I'm trying to say. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 21:47:53 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:44:54 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <19980613024455.18789.qmail@hotmail.com> First Darren and then Doss, wrote : -- ">>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners guide from>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They find my>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge is>not interested? How old are the key/active members? >mkr" Sophia is 69 and my brother Dallas is 76. We are old fogies! Right? The soul is not of the age of the body, you must look for other criteria. What is HPC? And "lodge" is a general reference, meaning little. There are so many groups, and all get tarred with the generalized word "lodge." This is unfair. Fraternally, Sophia From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 21:56:50 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:48:42 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: HPB's "Umtruths" Message-ID: <19980613024844.5076.qmail@hotmail.com> The Master's appearing-and others--in different places where they seem to have no historical authenticity to be. There quite a few books on psychic phenomena and ESP which have sections dealing with Astral travel or OBE (Out of body experiences). These speak of an apparition of a person appearing to another at a distance, while their physical remained miles away. One such book is Harold Sherman's "How To Make ESP Work for You." * In chapter VIII he deals with some well authenticated cases. Harold Sherman also wrote "You Live After Death," "Your Power To Heal" and "The Dead Are Alive," and some more titles which I forget. …………… · Incidentally in this book and in another whose title I have forgotten he warns very seriously about the need of protection for the unwary, curiosity seeker, and psychic dabbler, who might at first be beguiled by the sweet nothingnesses uttered or written, then gradually be taken over by other guides or entities, until unspeakably vile words, writings, and thoughts possess the trespasser, medium (today it would be the channeler) who has no way to control them, until he/she nearly goes mad (sometimes actual madness, may be multiple personalities might be the result). He documents cases in which he had to try and intervene to help and clear up such possessions, sometimes successfully other times not. * ……………. In SD or Isis, HPB in speaking of the Life of Appolonius of Tyana, says that sometimes he appeared to his disciples-teaching-simultaneously in many places-while his body of course remained only in one. There was a purpose to this of teaching and instruction, and evidently Appolonius knew the hidden laws and could control his travels in the Astral world at WILL. "9th. One phase of magical skill is the voluntary and conscious withdrawal of the inner man (astral form) from the outer man (physical body). In the cases of some mediums withdrawal occurs, but it is unconscious and involuntary. With the latter the body is more of less cataleptic at such times; but with the adept the absence of the astral form would not be noticed, for the physical senses are alert, and the individual appears only as though in a fit of abstraction-'brown study,' as some call it." [the 9th of 10 Items of Oriental Psychology, provided by H.PB in ISIS UNVEILED, Vol. II p. 258 et seq.] Why could the Masters, with HPB, and anyone else needed on the occasion not appear anywhere in the world? How would this make HPB "untrue" in reporting without particularly mentioning that the appearance was an apparitional one. Just what I consider a legitimate speculation, on available data. Fraternally, Sophia From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 22:02:24 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:40:27 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Veggie karma Message-ID: <19980613024031.2844.qmail@hotmail.com> Kym asks :-- "But, I cannot even fathom how a turnip would generate karma - if karma is causation, I can't figure out where/how the turnip "caused" and where one could pin "motive" on the turnip. It doesn't seem "fair" that a turnip should chalk up karma points when it is simply doing what is natural and required for a turnip to do." KARMA, comes from the root KRU to do or to act. Karma therefore implies action with its concomitant reaction. Hence everything by its mere existence-for it IS, and therefore is a "Be-ing"--acts, and hence causes a reaction. Hence APHORISM No. 5 states, "Karma operates on all things and beings from the minutest conceivable atom up to Brahma." As the Atom is a whirling group of neutrons, protons and electors, in the atom these are acting and making (causing) according to their number the elementary chemicals of the Periodic Table, with their atomic weights. The study of the actions and reactions of these chemicals with each other make for the study of the LAWS of Chemistry. Each chemical has its inherent natural properties, in association-when meeting up with other chemicals, they combine to form COMPOUNDS, with new-very different from their parentage-properties; and Compounds can act and react with other simple chemical or compounds, the offspring of these unions diverse and multifarious. The result of these combinations, show up in our Mineral Kingdom, Vegetable Kingdom and Animal Kingdom. When we begin to see unicellular and multi-cellular beings, we see their movements as those of living beings, manifesting what has been called LIFE. While Occultism has held that every atom which acts and reacts with other atoms and beings, is showing LIFE, hence Occultism' fundamental principle is that Life or JIVA (sometimes called PRANA = breath, in those that breath) is Universal and defused everywhere. ALL IS LIVING. In the Mineral, Vegetable and Animal Kingdoms, with their vast varieties, of species and genera, we see the evolutionary power of manifesting LIFE growing and developing as organic and in organisms; causing these manifesting in their totality our Earth. Hence going back to an earlier held doctrine that Mother Earth, itself as a totality, is a living organism, GAIA, some of the New Age thinkers talk this way now. All the multifarious beings composing these three kingdoms, like the chemicals, have their properties of form or shape, color, organic structure, behaviour acting and reacting to their environment and circumstances. The study of the LAWS of these beings make up our study of Geology, Physics, Botany, Biology, Physiology, Pathology, etc., etc. And result in all the variety of courses our Universities offer under these headings, divided and sub-divided endlessly. All these beings, have their natures imprinted within them, they act by natural impulse-in animals the word instinct could also be introduced, their LAWS are inherent. Outside of the mineral kingdom, where a genetic code exists, their actions as to how to develop into their special species, genera, are all laid down, in for the most cases in great details and unerringly-some slow evolutionary changes, and fast mutations apart, then these too maybe hence forth be transmitted. The "turnip" with its seed which holds the properties to be unfolded-enACTed-into its particular shape of roots, leaves, with its color, its flavour is ALIVE. It being alive, can transmit its peculiarities of minerals, enzymes, hormones, vitamins, etc., to effecting changes in the soil in which it grows, to other beings consuming it, the caterpillar, the animal grazer or the man. Being alive, it can pass on those living properties to the benefit of other organisms. It acts by natural impulse. The inherent intelligence of its kind. These Kingdoms which unlike man have not had individual mind MANAS awakened, have no self-knowledge (I am a turnip, not a rose, bean or something else) nor do they have other-knowledge (about the rose, bean or something else). They enACT only their own programmes-their genetically encoded behaviour. Man has reached that stage in the evolutionary progression where self-awareness and other-awarness has developed. Hence we have these University courses about the things around us. With this awakening man questions nature and him/herself. Man wonders if vegetarianism is better or worse the tiger or the deer have no such moral dilemmas to puzzle them. Nor the further responsibility to make choices. KARMA for man has added dimensions, which the mineral, vegetable and the animals have not to contend with. But these Kingdoms are continually acting and interacting, according to the Laws of their inherent natures, according the Karma. But here this topics development, may well end. Fraternally, Sophia ………………………… Just finished reading Kym's remarks of June 11th >>"I must say Jerry and Alan do have convincing points in that consequences (karma) should be experienced very soon after the action in order for one to learn and understand fully what one is supposed to learn and understand fully. It really does not make sense that a human is dealing with the consequences of events that happened eons ago - this very process adds to the frustration of humanity and is reflected in the rise of fundamental religions and cults. [???time lag???] Popular reasons for our suffering include "God is testing you/us." or "If Eve hadn't eaten the apple, humanity wouldn't be in the trouble they are in." or "There is a hell." or "There is a heaven." Or "God is dead." >> Yes, indeed there is am immediate reaction within the actor, we have placed weightage on to those characteristics, tendencies of character, which put in motion our action. Whether it was conciderate, helpful, peaceful, contentious, harmful, hateful, jealous, self-righteous, acquisitive, exclusive, etc., etc., we have increased that particular habit within ourselves, and have made it much easier to repeat a similar motivated action again. Each time we repeat it become easier and easier, to do the good, the bad, or the indifferent. Future actions will most likely be energized from the previous powerhouse that we have created in a particular direction. But this is all within the actor. What of the repercussions of our actions as they move out to other people and things animate and inanimate? An unkind word or action, will hurt and effect the recipient for some time to come, may even sour their whole attitude to a sex, a caste, a religion, a race and this will have its run of action for sometimes years to come. You may say that now karma, is that persons, how they react to what was done to them, yes, that is also true. But the spark off which might ignite a conflagration and its consequences, have to traced back to the initiator of the original action. Then as we watch a pebble thrown in a bucket, a pond, or a lake, or into a sea, will set every atom of water into motion eventually. It takes time for all these to be effected. Then the waves start back to the point of origin, sometimes more than once, until equilibrium returns. Easier to see and conceive of in a bucket, gets more complex in pond, and worse and worse the larger the body of water, in which other waves and currents are all in movement. Time for the action with its coexistent motion to reach the confine, is necessary, in order for the consequences to start returning back. This is karma as it effects others, and the world at large. Hence immediacy, or one life, will not be able to provide the time for the return of the causes as effects to return to the point of origin. Hence it may come in future lives. Example, a person creating a grave injustice in their Will which becomes active only after their death. They in preparing the Will have already increased their dendencies for injustice. But what of the physical effect of the Will's enactment, after they have left their body. Future lives alone give the possibility of the readjustment of the injustice. This is a very obvious example but there are less obvious ones, that also taking time, will have to return for opportunity of creating equilibrium, and adjusting the disturbed harmony. The curtain of forgetfulness, is dropped upon most of humanity, for many do not have the strength of character to either bear, what they would look upon as injustice meted out to them in former lives and would seek revenge, or be able to bear the horror of the mistakes and dreadful actions they themselves may have committed. It is taught that we are the sum of our tendencies of character (skandhas). Man know thyself, is the dispassionately be able to assess our faults, weaknesses, and our strengths, and know this is the result of previous actions. Then to work upon the eradication of weaknesses and faults, and the increasing of our worthwhile tendencies. Sophia From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 22:02:18 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:53:29 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Paradoxes Message-ID: <19980613025330.24690.qmail@hotmail.com> Darren wrote : -- "I don't think the universe needs a reasonable explanation. It manifests through paradox." Paradoxes have sometimes been termed, chaos to the senses (lower bodily reason centered mind), but cosmos to the mind (intellection centered in the higher, Buddhis-Manas). The paradox awakens intuition. Paradoxes and Poetry are used in mystical training of students. Look at the titles of HPB's books "Isis Unveiled"-Isis the goddess of secret wisdom-, "The Secret Doctrine"-when revealed is no longer secret, and especially "The Voice of the Silence." Fraternally, Sophia From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 22:09:48 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 19:56:22 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: -- Atlantis Peak? How about Alens, UFOs, NDE, Message-ID: <19980613025623.18092.qmail@hotmail.com> Darren wrote : -- ">>So while van Danegan has brought together pictures and artifacts>>that apparently show "astronauts" of the past,……" If I am not mistaken you mean Erick von Daniken, who wrote, "Gods from Outer Space," "The Gold of the Gods," "According to Evidence," and "In Search of Ancient Gods." My comment on these books all of which I have read years ago is, the FACTS are very interesting where verified (though doubt has been caste on some of them), but his conclusions, need not be accepted, there are alternative explanations which may be tried. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 22:16:12 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 20:00:55 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Past Life Memory Message-ID: <19980613030055.19601.qmail@hotmail.com> Alan's contribution to Pam's Past Life memory : -- "However, another, US published, book (I no longer have a copy, so cannot quote the title) was by a woman hypnotherapist, Helen Wambach. It never seemed to have occurred to her, nor had it happened in her regression sessions, that present life traumas in this life had any effect on the outcome whatever, and none of her sessions find this element present." Alan referred to Helen Wambach, one of her books is entitled "Reliving Past Lives," if my memory is correct this is the second book. These books describe the conduct of experiments on about 50 volunteers simultaneously, which she held over a number of years. She describes, I think giving the exact words she uses, in the hypnotic induction, both at the time of starting the session and before waking subjects up. In the induction at the beginning of the session, lays special stress that anyone not wanting to go through the regression need not do so, but an assurance is given that the experience would in no wise cause distress, and that they could forget if they wanted to. She provided for a variety of experiences that the person might face and allowed them FREE WILL regarding it; this was done once again at the close of every hypnotic regression session. By the hypnotic suggestions given she tried to provide the maximum protection person who had volunteered to participate. The first of her books, whose title might be something like "Life Before Birth," deals with the memories of the person, before and during conception, and then further into their life in the womb of their mother. Quite interesting from a theosophical point of view regarding the incoming soul in relation to their relations with their future family, their connection with the developing embryo and so forth. I remember particularly one case, where an unwedded mother to be was contemplating abortion, and the incoming ego stayed with her mother most of the time, trying to avert the abortion, because she (it turned) wanted to be born. The returning soul seems to be far wiser and capable, than the little babies intelligence, as we see it, trying to gain mastery over the infant body, acquiring mobility and speech. May this be of some help, Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 22:47:09 1998 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 23:38:43 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Esoteric Section/Judge/Vol III Message-ID: <3581F443.91A9045C@sprynet.com> References: <199806102255.XAA26914@mailhost.dircon.co.uk> alpha@dircon.co.uk wrote: > > > Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > I learned one important thing, though. The part on the Esoteric Section > >was not written by Blavatsky, but by Judge. It's still good stuff, but > >it's worth keeping the authorship in mind. > > > Are you able to supply any more information on this? It would be helpful to > know of any sources to go to, etc. Boris made no secret of this; if, however, you go through the index instead of going cover to cover, you might miss the introductory material which explains this. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 23:35:32 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 00:32:49 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-ID: <358200F1.6763CA16@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980612101129.0074256c@ozemail.com.au> Darren wrote: > > Here is an ethical question I have been thinking about: > > If in the future geneticists are able to grow meat in a laboratory and the > meat is identical to say a steak but never existed as part of a living > animal, would it be ok to eat it? It depends on why you don't eat meat. Generally, for most reasons for not eating meat, the answer is self-evident. For example, if one does not eat meat for health reasons, then the answer is obviously "no". If one does not eat meat to avoid harming animals, then the answer is obviously "yes". Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 12 23:44:18 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 09:30:16 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Paradoxes Message-ID: <3582A911.2F13@withoutwalls.com> References: <19980613025330.24690.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck wrote: > > Paradoxes have sometimes been termed, chaos to the senses (lower bodily > reason centered mind), but cosmos to the mind (intellection centered in > the higher, Buddhis-Manas). The paradox awakens intuition. Paradoxes > and Poetry are used in mystical training of students. > > Look at the titles of HPB's books "Isis Unveiled"-Isis the goddess of > secret wisdom-, "The Secret Doctrine"-when revealed is no longer secret, > and especially "The Voice of the Silence." Perhaps I misunderstand, but if you are saying that Life's secret mystery has been completely revealed, unveiled, shown, known, etc., by these books ... you are fooling yourself. This knowledge, as intricate and complex as our minds love to assume it to be, is as partial as a half eaten Oreo, and always will be. The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. I know nothing. Knowledge obscures the Truth. It is a bias no matter how else you qualify it. Truth is always beyond knowledge. I know nothing at all. The fools will scratch their heads at my admission, but the wise will understand. Those who think themselves wise will gloat, but they too will be in error. "Beyond, beyond, gone beyond." No one in particular. -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 00:20:53 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 01:14:15 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-ID: <35820AA7.E84B1D94@sprynet.com> References: <19980613013449375.AAA245@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > Analyzer? What proof can you give that such a device exists? > > I design data bases and computer systems to support a company engaged in > genetic engineering of corn and soybeans and I have never seen or heard of > such a device outside of Star Trek( i.e. their replicator). Actually, the device is certainly possible in theory. Interestingly enough, James Randi just announced that there is going to be a conference for the James Randi Educational Foundation, where there will be lectures on strange but possible sciences, including talks on nanotechnology. With the current speed of technological development, yesterday's fiction is today's science. To discount technology merely because it has not yet been developed is to put society in a world of trouble. Take, for example, the "Baby 'M'" case of a few years back. The case should not have even gone to court, but the technology was there and in use before anybody thought about the ethical implications. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 00:33:10 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 00:13:06 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980613001306.01151290@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <19980613024455.18789.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear Sophia: As a general rule older generation is less likely to use Internet. But that is not the case with those already on the lists. Recently I convinced a friend of mine who is in late 60s to get on Internet and he loves it. His sister who is about 10 years older than her is now on webtv and she loves it. ...Doss At 07:44 PM 6/12/1998 PDT, you wrote: >First Darren and then Doss, wrote : -- > >">>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners >guide from>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They >find my>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >>Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge >is>not interested? How old are the key/active members? >mkr" > >Sophia is 69 and my brother Dallas is 76. We are old fogies! Right? >The soul is not of the age of the body, you must look for other >criteria. >What is HPC? And "lodge" is a general reference, meaning little. >There are so many groups, and all get tarred with the generalized word >"lodge." This is unfair. > >Fraternally, Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 04:02:01 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 02:50:29 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Turnips in Terror? Message-Id: <199806130850.CAA21249@mailmx.micron.net> Thoa wrote: >Anyway, I never heard a >turnip scream. Hmmm. . .maybe turnips don't scream. . .but then again, maybe they do and we just can't hear them. And if they actually do. . .well. . .my only recourse is to go stark-raving mad. . .I can barely walk on grass without feeling guilty about all the damage I am doing to the inhabitants of such walked-upon grass. I found the following on the "Theosophy Company" website: ********************* Roots Of "Emotion The man who, in 1966, was the first to actually measure an "emotion" like response in plants, is interviewed in "The Sun" magazine for July, 1997. Cleve Backster recounts the story of the discovery that raised a number of eyebrows and caused more than a few frowns of disbelief in the scientific community. His experience is worth retelling. When asked what brought him to take note of electrochemical reactions in plants, he recalls: "The initial observation involved a dracaena cane plant I had in my lab in Manhattan. I had done a saturation watering of these plants - putting them under the faucet until the water ran out the bottom of the pots - and was curious to see how long it would take the moisture to get to the top. I was especially interested in the dracaena, because the water had to climb up a long trunk, then out to the end of the long leaves. I thought that if I put the galvanic-skin-response detector of the polygraph at the end of a leaf, a drop in resistance would be recorded on the paper as the moisture arrived between the electrodes. That, at least, was my cover story. I'm not sure whether there was another, more profound, reason for my action. It could be that my subconscious was nudging me into doing this - I don't know. In any case, I noticed something on the chart that resembled a human response on a polygraph: not at all what I would have expected from water entering a leaf. Lie detectors work on the principle that when people perceive a threat to their well-being, they respond physiologically in predictable ways. Bizarre Response - Fear Of Fire So I began to think of ways to threaten the well-being of the plant. First, I tried dipping one of its leaves into a cup of warm coffee. The plant, if anything, showed boredom - the line on the chart just kept tending downward. Then, at thirteen minutes, fifty-five seconds chart time, the thought entered my mind to burn the leaf. I didn't verbalize the idea; I didn't touch the plant; I didn't touch the equipment. Yet the plant went wild. The pen jumped right off the top of the chart. The only thing it could have been reacting to was the mental image. Next, I got some matches from my secretary's desk and, lighting one, made a few passes at the leaf. I realized, though, that I was already seeing such an extreme reaction that any increase wouldn't be noticeable. So I tried a different approach: I removed the threat by returning the matches to the secretary's desk. The plant calmed right down. I immediately understood something important was going on. I could think of no conventional scientific explanation. From that moment on my consciousness hasn't been the same. My whole life has been devoted to looking into this phenomenon." Baxter's comments speak for themselves. Students may note that his work bears on some of the major points given consideration by H.P.B. in "Psychic and Noetic Action." ************************ Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 04:47:01 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 03:43:08 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: No cost, no obligation Message-Id: <199806130943.DAA21530@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote to Kym: >The reason for that in not unwillingness, but the fact that you >do not seem to have the basic ideas of Theosophy at your >finger-tips. If you say so, Dallas. >I do not have the time to argue with you. Then don't. There is no requirement nor expectation on my part that you respond to my postings. You are right: time is saved and arguments are avoided when exchanges are between those who tend to agree with each other. >. . .himself. (sigh) Oh, well. . .I tried. Kym I am interested in >what Theosophy has to say on various subjects. I have proved, to >myself, that there is truth and verity in Theosophical source >doctrines, but not in later writings by students who followed >HPB, and especially in those who have written after her death and >were "unsupervised," so to say, by the older and more advanced >students, or her. ( And this ought to include what I write as >well. And that is why I quote the references from which I draw >inferences to answer questions. ) I look for the precedents set >by HPB and W Q Judge, and use them as explanations for questions >that arise. In so doing I offer areas where there is the record >of Theosophical doctrine. I will admit that there are new >questions and objections all the time, however, I have found that >familiarity with those basic doctrines gives the careful and >sincere student the necessary keys to unlock the doors of >understanding for himself. It is better that way that placing >reliance on someone else. > >I feel sometimes like a librarian would, showing others where to >find the answers they seek, but not participating in the >discussion. > >I hope you understand what I am trying to say. It is not the >first time that I have rubbed up against your queries, and >objections. So I thought I would take time out and explain to >you my policy and procedure. > >With best wishes, Dallas > >========================================= > >- -----Original Message----- >From: "Kym Smith" >Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 2:27 AM >Subject: Lords of Karma Management Plans > > >>Dallas wrote: >> >>>Kym -- humor aside, the veggie "karma" is not individualized -- >> >>Excuse me, but Dallas, are you implying I am engaged in >jocularity regarding >>a vegetable's karma? Personally, my heart wails with grief over >the little >>turnip's plight - it is destined to become, well, poop! or, as >you artfully >>wrote "being rejected and rotting" - that AND being required to >haul a load >>of karma along seems way too mean a fate for the little turnip. >I will, >>however, apologize on your behalf to the vegetable kingdom for >YOUR >>hard-heartedness. >> >>>it is a kind of group karma in which the individual monads >>>undergo a vast period of experience as parts of the animal >>>vegetable and mineral kingdoms -- through the constant >>>interchange of atoms and molecules (or rather the >individualized >>>focus (we use the word Monad) that is experiencing). >> >>But still, this doesn't seem fair nor right. It seems the >Catholics - >>enviously possessed of attractive attire - are sort of on the >right track >>with that "age of consent" business. They say one is >responsible for >>"free-will decisions" after age seven (way too early, if you ask >me, but >>that's beside the point). Why should there be such a thing as >"veggie >>karma" (group karma) if the turnip (or group of turnips) cannot >CHOOSE? >>Although you did say that there is no "individualization" of >karma for the >>turnip, you did seem to say that there was still some being >generated - yes? >> >>Maybe there are two types of karma? Karma which is the >"causation" (part of >>the creative force) and karma that is generated by "free-will >induced >>causes?" No? >> >>I must say Jerry and Alan do have convincing points in that >consequences >>(karma) should be experienced very soon after the action in >order for one to >>learn and understand fully what one is supposed to learn and >understand >>fully. It really does not make sense that a human is dealing >with the >>consequences of events that happened eons ago - this very >process adds to >>the frustration of humanity and is reflected in the rise of >fundamental >>religions and cults. Popular reasons for our suffering include >"God is >>testing you/us." or "If Eve hadn't eaten the apple, humanity >wouldn't be in >>the trouble they are in." or "There is a hell." or "There is a >heaven." or >>"God is dead." >> >>It would seem that The Big Cheese or The Big Cheese's Helpers >(angels, >>aliens, or other such beings) would have known such a >misunderstanding would >>take place as a result of such a Karma plan. If the Lords of >Karma are >>shaking their heads wondering why humanity just ain't gettin' >it - they've >>really only themselves, or the Big One, to blame. This is the >problem with >>having the SAME IMMORTAL BEINGS being in control for a long >period of time - >>we need look only at China or the corporate world for examples >of "the ole' >>boys network" needing a revamp. I think we need to elect new >leaders - NEW >>Lords of Karma and NEW Mahatmas and New All Other Big-Wigs. >> >>>Our chief barrier at present is the lack of knowledge of >>>the ethical effects of our choices and actions. >> >>Nicely put. But why the barrier in the first place? Why was >the material >>seemingly able to overshadow the spiritual? If things really >are such gravy >>on the spiritual side, why so easy to forget that gravy once in >the flesh? >>Why choose the flesh over the spiritual? >> >>>Anything else ? >> >>Uh. . .is this a trick question. . .or are you simply being >sassy? >> >> >>Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 05:17:07 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 04:08:58 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Karma or Injustice? Message-Id: <199806131008.EAA21651@mailmx.micron.net> Sophia wrote: >The curtain of forgetfulness, is >dropped upon most of humanity, for many do not have the strength of >character to either bear, what they would look upon as injustice meted >out to them in former lives and would seek revenge, or be able to bear >the horror of the mistakes and dreadful actions they themselves may have >committed. This makes sense, but how does one then know when to "fight back?" You wrote: "They would look upon an injustice meted out to them in former lives and would seek revenge." I agree this is very likely - but then how do I know that the person who, say, "robbed" me of my pay-check while I was walking down the street isn't simply aiding me in regaining balance because, say, I, in a former time, over-charged this person monetarily causing hardship for her and her family? If I called the police, had her arrested, she ended up imprisoned - would yet another "rebalance" have to occur? Karma seems to imply that we should "turn the other cheek" since we don't know if such an action, despite its seeming unfairness or wrongness, is actually a necessary event brought on by us in a previous existence. How does one choose their "battles" while keeping in mind 'karma?' Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 07:00:35 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 05:04:30 -0600 From: "Dick Slusser" Subject: re-sending "June hct" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19980613110430.0071c828@mail.indra.net> The June 98 hct is online with a tribute to John Cooper Available at ftp://theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9806.pdf HCT files carry the extension .PDF (Portable Document File) readable with the Adobe Acrobat reader. It is available free at http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html. The www homepage is http://theosophy.com/hct.html Namaste -- Dick Slusser, editor From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 08:00:37 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 08:56:43 EDT From: "Teos9 (Louis)" Subject: Re: Egregores and Masters Message-ID: <91bb7dc7.3582770c@aol.com> Could you please provide a phonetic pronounciation and a definition of the word "Egregore". Is there a particular dictionary that the word appears in? It is not in the internet version of the Miriam Webster dictionary. Thanks. Teos9 From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 08:15:36 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 09:17:58 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <15d130d.35827c07@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-11 05:28:29 EDT, Alan writes << Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (of TM and Beatles notoriety) did a first class job of the first seven [I think] chapters and it was published in the UK by Pengion Books. Contrary to popular opinion, he was not just a simple-minded Hindu monk, but also a university graduate who spoke and wrote in a number of languages. >> The question is did he really try to put the make on Mia Farrow? She claims he did. After the incident, she made the famous remark, "I know the difference between a puja and a pass!" No dummy herself ! Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 08:30:36 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 09:24:57 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: To All A Good Night Message-ID: <3a4a8b0e.35827daa@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-13 08:46:15 EDT, Darren writes: << Apple users, 99% pentium users and most other post 1993-4 machines will be fine. If you have a PC that is not in this category you will still be fine in terms of Hard Drives etc, the problem will be with applications like Excel that refer to date/time. >> You confirmed what I suspected - not PCs, but only large main frames (like at airports, banks, stock exchanges, etc.) will be affected (unless fixed in time). PBS News Hour had a segment last night (6/12) on the Millenium Bug. It's not as serious as some think, according to a few pundits. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 09:45:36 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 05:22:39 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: HPB's "Umtruths" Message-ID: <004001bd96d9$68fb2100$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 13th 1998 Dear Sophia: Excellent postings. Very helpful to us all. Multiple Appearances in Mayavi Rupa by Adepts. Apollonius of Tyanna: ISIS II 597, also I 486, II 97, 118, 344 434 10 Items of Oriental Psychology are in ISIS II p. 587-9 [ finger slipped ? ] Vegetable Karma and Karma of all -- excellent. Much appreciated Dallas > Date: Friday, June 12, 1998 8:07 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: HPB's "Umtruths" >The Master's appearing-and others--in different places where they seem >to have no historical authenticity to be. > >There quite a few books on psychic phenomena and ESP which have sections >dealing with Astral travel or OBE (Out of body experiences). These >speak of an apparition of a person appearing to another at a distance, >while their physical remained miles away. One such book is Harold >Sherman's "How To Make ESP Work for You." * In chapter VIII he deals >with some well authenticated cases. Harold Sherman also wrote "You Live >After Death," "Your Power To Heal" and "The Dead Are Alive," > >……………. >In SD or Isis, HPB in speaking of the Life of Appolonius of Tyana, says [ IT IS IN ISIS ] >that sometimes he appeared to his disciples-teaching-simultaneously in >many places-while his body of course remained only in one. There was a >purpose to this of teaching and instruction, and evidently Appolonius >knew the hidden laws and could control his travels in the Astral world >at WILL. ========================================= ISIS Vol. 2, p. 587 onward -- a most valuable summary on the Astral and the Psychic nature in man and the World -- solves many questions. Dallas >"9th. One phase of magical skill is the voluntary and conscious >withdrawal of the inner man (astral form) from the outer man (physical >body). In the cases of some mediums withdrawal occurs, but it is >unconscious and involuntary. With the latter the body is more of less >cataleptic at such times; but with the adept the absence of the astral >form would not be noticed, for the physical senses are alert, and the >individual appears only as though in a fit of abstraction-'brown study,' >as some call it." [the 9th of 10 Items of Oriental Psychology, >provided by H.PB in ISIS UNVEILED, Vol. II p. 258 et seq.] 587-8) > >Why could the Masters, with HPB, and anyone else needed on the occasion >not appear anywhere in the world? How would this make HPB "untrue" in >reporting without particularly mentioning that the appearance was an >apparitional one. > >Just what I consider a legitimate speculation, on available data. >Fraternally, Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 09:55:16 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:17:12 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence Message-ID: <004101bd96d9$6e2f38a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 13th Dear Mark: No one said that either ISIS or the S D or both together unveiled all the secrets of nature. HPB spoke quite carefully in her introductions advising us her readers that they unveiled sections of what was invisible to most of us. Since she knew that we would be skeptical of all this information, she made it available in gentle steps -- but to grasp it all without gaps, we need to become familiar with all she wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. It is not the Names or the claims that are important, but the knowledge that we can use and think over that is valuable. To make this absolutely clear, the concept of Universal Brotherhood (starting on the level of the ONE SPIRIT )-- shows our minds that we are already "one in that essence," but also "separate" because of the personal and individual development of understanding ( a "mind" encased in a physical form) so essential to the progress of each living "ray" of that ONE, as one of its active "agents" in manifestation. Once we become aware of the possibility of explaining the very mysterious occurrences that link us to the psychic world of the Astral, we become aware of a continuing interplay. Both religions and sciences are at present still skeptical of the existence of the psychic or astral plane. [ This is an "aside" : Religion, because they lose a vital hold over the minds of their parishioners, and science because they cannot explain in detail the phenomena that relate to mind and desire -- which are not easily reproducible. But science is getting to that understanding by positing the "morpho-genetic field," and the bio-energic fields," "randomness and indeterminacy and chaos Theory," etc... that tend to prove the selectivity and intelligence of the smallest particles of life/matter which they can contact and begin to analyze. Using the Hubble telescope and other analytical tools from Space and outside the distortions of our atmosphere, science has come to see that in the vast Universe "out there" there are similar inexplicable mysteries of existence: such as "Black Holes," "Dark Matter" (or should we call it "transparent matter" as light and other electro-magnetic waves are transmitted through it ?), the "Birth of Stars," "Planets belonging to other Suns," etc... ] One "aside" over. What HPB did, as I see it, is to make an introductory statement in 1877 (in ISIS) and draw together into once compass the most important statements that opened and unified the distributed accounts of that "invisible world." She used in that presentation classical accounts and current day information and study. She caused a great leap forward in Scientific investigation. Simultaneously a "death-blow" was given to the reserved areas of religious authority all over the world. HPB did not write for the Western world alone, but for all the world, and dealt not just with our development of science, but with the moral/ethical effects of inventions and discoveries that placed vast and terrible powers (such as the "atomic-bomb," and "cloning" and "gene manipulation" -- which is almost on the astral plane -- into the hands of Science. Her real challenge to us is: how are these powers and knowledge going to be used humanely ? She made it clear (but most do not believe her) that the only way to the peaceful, total, and harmonious development of mankind was by cooperation with Nature and not in torturing, distorting and destroying her in whole or in part. What I mean to say is: that only if we give to others weaker than ourselves their rights to habitat and to continued existence, will we succeed in our own personal and collective human existence. "Green Peace," and other ecologically active individuals and bodies, have moved the rather exclusive nature of purely economic considerations to a position of moderation. These along with worry over earth and environment pollution by Big Business and Big Government, are symptoms of this being understood. (At least the politicians seem to realize that their constituents demand that they pay some attention to humane directives in addition to wielding the legislative power they claim that they received as a mandate from their electorates.) But generally, such considerations are opposed and conquered by the power of the economic market viewed as a natural war-zone for contending giants in "Big Business," -- to whom the gaining of wealth far outweighs the consideration of the health, welfare and well being of millions of people. Witness the current plight of the "Tobacco Industry," (they deliberately placed addicting drugs in tobacco so that they would gain repeat business and induce dependency on their products.) "Aside" ended. Following ISIS and its success: the sequence of questions, inquiries, additional contributions began -- and those were handled in THEOSOPHIST, LUCIFER and PATH magazines up to HPB's death in 1891. The progress of diffusing Theosophy is important to us, if we follow it, our comprehension widens and deepens rapidly. The Secret Doctrine was first advertised in THEOSOPHIST as a projected emendation of ISIS. HPB wrote later that it changed into an entirely separate book. If one reads the exchange of letters between the Mahatmas and Sinnett, Hume and HPB, one can follow the course of that evolution, and in addition, gain insight into the reason for the writing of the S D. The S D makes it plain that there is an organization to the evolution of the Kosmos, the Solar System, our World and finally ourselves. The unifying link is the MONAD ( Atma-Buddhi - a "ray" of the ABSOLUTE -- see SD I 570-575 ) which is the prime cause for "forms" and "beings." It is spiritual, but serves also as a focal point around which the 6 "lower principles" accrete so that by their interaction a bodily form may eventuate. In the great gamut of beings between Primal SPIRIT (Paramatma) and Primeval "root-Matter" (Mula-Prakriti) there is the link of vital intelligence -- desire and mind ( SD II 79-80, 103,107-110, and this leads to the perception of the "Two Egos" in Man SD II 167; I 210, 295fn,105, 130, 574 ) That "form" then manifests the level of "intelligence" and progress up the ladder of evolution, of that entity. Mankind (as beings endowed with the thinking faculty) represents those "Monads" (as a group) which have reached the point (stage) of "self-consciousness." As a group this includes those whose "Manas (mental faculty)" has just been awakened at the "Lighting up of Manas -- some 18 million years ago for us. ( SD I 150fn, 159, 233., 247-8, ; II 69, 254, 272 ) And at the extreme end of the full development of the Mind in that group, lies the INTELLIGENCE and power of the full ADEPT : the MAHATMA, the BUDDHA, etc. (i.e., Those who become responsible for the organizing and the supervision of a new manifestation, and who are the Great Teachers of every World Humanity when it emerges from the equivalent of the "Animal stage" on to the "Human stage" of the "freedom" to chose one's own rate of evolution.) HPB in the KEY and in the S D, and in several of her articles, shows us the rationale for this progression. She indicates, most importantly, (in my esteem) that potentially all the powers of the SPIRIT (which unites all) reside in germ in each one of us. (SD I 572, 638-9 ) The development and the perfection of the human mind leads to that Knowledge -- which eventually turns into Wisdom (as the mind expands in an understanding of all the lines that unite every part of nature to ourselves and to others ). The path for us to develop to this level demands that we learn all we can about our own powers and their development and how we can best work in Nature around us. This leads to a perception of active and fundamental BROTHERHOOD. It leads the independent and free-willed Mind/man to perceive that he needs to so regulate himself and his "Kamic" desire-nature impulses ), that he makes himself into a voluntary collaborator with Nature. The thesis is: "Nature already contains all this in operation." 2nd. That we, as "scientists" and individuals, are constantly investigating (as we experience) and testing these Laws of living 3rd. That the laws of interaction on all planes in Nature make for a living, a vital WHOLE. The link between the material and the spiritual is the psychic and the intellectual. WE are MIND-BEINGS. 4th That we, as free-willed humans, can voluntarily contravene the laws of brotherhood and life in Nature -- and that we then generate personal Karma which may be either pleasant or unpleasant, but, in all cases it is EDUCATIVE. 5th That we have a moral/ethical obligation to cooperate in the progress of all beings in our immediate surroundings, taking it as a granted that we are presently incarnated in an environment where our Karma desires us to work. But we may also influence the whole world to some extent. I hope that these supplementary comments prove of some service. Dallas > Date: Friday, June 12, 1998 9:54 PM > From: "Mark Kusek" > Subject: Re: Paradoxes >Sophia TenBroeck wrote: >> >> Paradoxes have sometimes been termed, chaos to the senses (lower bodily >> reason centered mind), but cosmos to the mind (intellection centered in >> the higher, Buddhis-Manas). The paradox awakens intuition. Paradoxes >> and Poetry are used in mystical training of students. >> >> Look at the titles of HPB's books "Isis Unveiled"-Isis the goddess of >> secret wisdom-, "The Secret Doctrine"-when revealed is no longer secret, >> and especially "The Voice of the Silence." SNIP From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 09:59:31 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 07:38:54 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <004201bd96d9$70053120$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 13th 1998 Well Kym: I guess I am wrong. Anyway, Sophia took up your points and I hope she helped in the matter. You caught me when I was pressed for time and heavily loaded. As to knowledge of Theosophy -- I know what I said was loaded. But to make things easier, if you know what HPB wrote, then you are ahead of most of us. But who would claim that ? There is so much already available in writing. Now if you want to ask me for my references to find out why I write as I do, then I will be glad to send them so you can also look them up and corroborate (or otherwise) what I say. And that's all I am after. To be checked out. There are hundred of sympathetic friends of Theosophy, who, to my mind need to steep themselves in the theory and the teachings that the Masters through HPB offered: What I mean is: Are there seven Principles in Man and nature ? If so how do they interact ? Is there a general LAW -- whether called Karma or something else -- that unified the Worlds, mankind, the Galaxies and the atoms ? Can it be "broken ?" is it "partial? or complete ?" Does the SPIRIT exists (at least as a logical base) ? What is the "soul of man, and if it exists, what are it powers and nature ? What is the psychic nature as distinct from th mental ? Is Reincarnation reasonable ? Is the perfectibility of all nature a potential possibility ? Are the "Masters of Wisdom" Imaginary or possibly facts ? In my esteem: We do Theosophy no good if we don't seize that opportunity. It is unique for this incarnation. All of us ought to seize it and make use of it for the future -- at least as "mental furniture for 'Devachanic meditation.'" If we delude ourselves that there is some easy approach to Theosophy through some other writer/s, then we may make a serious error, as most writers have a built-in filter -- their own ignorance, or their inability to express the depths of what Theosophy can offer -- (and that includes me of course). Yes I considered your comment on the turnip humorous -- I tried to visualize an intelligence encased in a "turnip" with enough of a "mind" to have self-consciousness, and simply couldn't. Instinctive and vegetative consciousness, yes. But how would you define that ? I think that Soph did a fine job answering. I usually wait and see if the answers that are generated lead to what Theosophy has to say on a subject before I chip in. And sometimes I am impatient -- and always seem to get long-winded ! Best wishes, Dallas I still admire your power of thinking. Suggest, you direct it to making a series of related questions, so that the logic emerges. > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 3:03 AM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: No cost, no obligation >Dallas wrote to Kym: > >>The reason for that in not unwillingness, but the fact that you >>do not seem to have the basic ideas of Theosophy at your >>finger-tips. > >If you say so, Dallas. > >>I do not have the time to argue with you. > >Then don't. There is no requirement nor expectation on my part that you >respond to my postings. You are right: time is saved and arguments are >avoided when exchanges are between those who tend to agree with each other. > ====================================== WE need to define the precise area of disagreement. Best wishes as always, Dallas ========================================= >(sigh) Oh, well. . .I tried. > > >Kym > > > > > > > > > > > I am interested in >>what Theosophy has to say on various subjects. I have proved, to >>myself, that there is truth and verity in Theosophical source >>doctrines, but not in later writings by students who followed >>HPB, and especially in those who have written after her death and >>were "unsupervised," so to say, by the older and more advanced >>students, or her. ( And this ought to include what I write as >>well. And that is why I quote the references from which I draw >>inferences to answer questions. ) I look for the precedents set >>by HPB and W Q Judge, and use them as explanations for questions >>that arise. In so doing I offer areas where there is the record >>of Theosophical doctrine. I will admit that there are new >>questions and objections all the time, however, I have found that >>familiarity with those basic doctrines gives the careful and >>sincere student the necessary keys to unlock the doors of >>understanding for himself. It is better that way that placing >>reliance on someone else. >> >>I feel sometimes like a librarian would, showing others where to >>find the answers they seek, but not participating in the >>discussion. >> >>I hope you understand what I am trying to say. It is not the >>first time that I have rubbed up against your queries, and >>objections. So I thought I would take time out and explain to >>you my policy and procedure. >> >>With best wishes, Dallas >> >>========================================= >> >>- -----Original Message----- >>From: "Kym Smith" >>Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 2:27 AM >>Subject: Lords of Karma Management Plans >> >> >>>Dallas wrote: >>> >>>>Kym -- humor aside, the veggie "karma" is not individualized -- >>> >>>Excuse me, but Dallas, are you implying I am engaged in >>jocularity regarding >>>a vegetable's karma? Personally, my heart wails with grief over >>the little >>>turnip's plight - it is destined to become, well, poop! or, as >>you artfully >>>wrote "being rejected and rotting" - that AND being required to >>haul a load >>>of karma along seems way too mean a fate for the little turnip. >>I will, >>>however, apologize on your behalf to the vegetable kingdom for >>YOUR >>>hard-heartedness. >>> >>>>it is a kind of group karma in which the individual monads >>>>undergo a vast period of experience as parts of the animal >>>>vegetable and mineral kingdoms -- through the constant >>>>interchange of atoms and molecules (or rather the >>individualized >>>>focus (we use the word Monad) that is experiencing). >>> >>>But still, this doesn't seem fair nor right. It seems the >>Catholics - >>>enviously possessed of attractive attire - are sort of on the >>right track >>>with that "age of consent" business. They say one is >>responsible for >>>"free-will decisions" after age seven (way too early, if you ask >>me, but >>>that's beside the point). Why should there be such a thing as >>"veggie >>>karma" (group karma) if the turnip (or group of turnips) cannot >>CHOOSE? >>>Although you did say that there is no "individualization" of >>karma for the >>>turnip, you did seem to say that there was still some being >>generated - yes? >>> >>>Maybe there are two types of karma? Karma which is the >>"causation" (part of >>>the creative force) and karma that is generated by "free-will >>induced >>>causes?" No? >>> >>>I must say Jerry and Alan do have convincing points in that >>consequences >>>(karma) should be experienced very soon after the action in >>order for one to >>>learn and understand fully what one is supposed to learn and >>understand >>>fully. It really does not make sense that a human is dealing >>with the >>>consequences of events that happened eons ago - this very >>process adds to >>>the frustration of humanity and is reflected in the rise of >>fundamental >>>religions and cults. Popular reasons for our suffering include >>"God is >>>testing you/us." or "If Eve hadn't eaten the apple, humanity >>wouldn't be in >>>the trouble they are in." or "There is a hell." or "There is a >>heaven." or >>>"God is dead." >>> >>>It would seem that The Big Cheese or The Big Cheese's Helpers >>(angels, >>>aliens, or other such beings) would have known such a >>misunderstanding would >>>take place as a result of such a Karma plan. If the Lords of >>Karma are >>>shaking their heads wondering why humanity just ain't gettin' >>it - they've >>>really only themselves, or the Big One, to blame. This is the >>problem with >>>having the SAME IMMORTAL BEINGS being in control for a long >>period of time - >>>we need look only at China or the corporate world for examples >>of "the ole' >>>boys network" needing a revamp. I think we need to elect new >>leaders - NEW >>>Lords of Karma and NEW Mahatmas and New All Other Big-Wigs. >>> >>>>Our chief barrier at present is the lack of knowledge of >>>>the ethical effects of our choices and actions. >>> >>>Nicely put. But why the barrier in the first place? Why was >>the material >>>seemingly able to overshadow the spiritual? If things really >>are such gravy >>>on the spiritual side, why so easy to forget that gravy once in >>the flesh? >>>Why choose the flesh over the spiritual? >>> >>>>Anything else ? >>> >>>Uh. . .is this a trick question. . .or are you simply being >>sassy? >>> >>> >>>Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 11:00:35 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 11:57:24 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Turnips in Terror? Message-ID: <3582A164.584D36BC@sprynet.com> References: <199806130850.CAA21249@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > Thoa wrote: > > >Anyway, I never heard a > >turnip scream. > > Hmmm. . .maybe turnips don't scream. . .but then again, maybe they do and we > just can't hear them. And if they actually do. . .well. . .my only recourse > is to go stark-raving mad. . .I can barely walk on grass without feeling > guilty about all the damage I am doing to the inhabitants of such > walked-upon grass. Note that in Theosophical literature, the emotional principle is considered to be farther from the Atma than the mental principle. This can cause confusion in humans unaware of this. We tend to confuse the thoughts that emotions generate with the emotions themselves. Therefore, when we consider animals and even plants as having emotions, it is necessary to fight the automatic assumption that they react to those emotions similarly to us. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 11:15:35 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:10:37 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Karma or Injustice? Message-ID: <3582A47D.B11E6C9A@sprynet.com> References: <199806131008.EAA21651@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > Sophia wrote: > > >The curtain of forgetfulness, is > >dropped upon most of humanity, for many do not have the strength of > >character to either bear, what they would look upon as injustice meted > >out to them in former lives and would seek revenge, or be able to bear > >the horror of the mistakes and dreadful actions they themselves may have > >committed. > > This makes sense, but how does one then know when to "fight back?" You > wrote: "They would look upon an injustice meted out to them in former lives > and would seek revenge." I agree this is very likely - but then how do I > know that the person who, say, "robbed" me of my pay-check while I was > walking down the street isn't simply aiding me in regaining balance because, > say, I, in a former time, over-charged this person monetarily causing > hardship for her and her family? If I called the police, had her arrested, > she ended up imprisoned - would yet another "rebalance" have to occur? Just because someone has karma coming to them does not give anybody a natural right to inflict it. In the Christian Scripture, for example, a puzzling case is the fate of Judas. It appeared that it was definitely in the karma and the dharma of Jesus to be crucified. Yet Judas, who acts as a major agent of this, is damned for his action. Even thought the immediate results of his actions were "good", his karma was driven by his true intent: to stop Jesus. You will certainly learn one or more lessons from the robbery; possibly the correct ones. But you can learn the same lessons by other means. And the robber was not trying to teach you a karmic lesson; she was acting out of purely selfish motives (well, with near enough certainty for engineers). Going by the odds, you will probably generate less personal karma by going to the police than you would by inaction, if you look at the total picture. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 11:45:35 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 12:40:22 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: food Message-ID: <2a4ffe94.3582ab77@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-13 12:31:28 EDT, Eldon writes: << the worst would be eating the flesh of a higher kingdom, like when a tiger may eat a human >> What if a tiger ate a Guru, like for instance Ramana Maharshi or Sri Aurobindo ? Would the tiger achieve liberation from its Group Soul by digesting a meal composed of refined and spiritualized matter ? Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 12:30:37 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:25:58 +0100 From: "Einar Adalsteinsson" Subject: Re: Veggie karma Message-ID: <002401bd96e7$fb0284e0$316d9d9d@default> Good morning to the assembly. After having read what seems an endless succession of rather interesting communication on ethics (vegetarian, genetic etc.) and karma, I feel like participating with some thoughts of my own. When speaking about ethics, we often seem to take for granted that there must exist some universal 'Ethic Code' a set of impeccable rules that we can abide to, and thereby becoming some sort of 'moral Adepts'. My late friend and teacher used to state that: "there does not exist a single 'vice' among humans that has not at some time in some culture been considered a 'good deed' or 'right conduct' - and vise versa This does not mean that there is no 'right conduct' or that we can't live an ethically pure life. What it does say is that we should go very carefully about when we throw moral judgment on the deeds of others or human conduct in general. Furthermore, in my mind, there exists no moral judgment at all that we can use on the 'nature' i.e. the life other than the human species. The life of the animals is simply 'Natural' and therefore not ethical in its nature. I hold dearly a thought that I borrowed somewhere which says that: 'Whatever action you do, it is the motive that counts. Whatever you do with absolute loving kindness in your heart, will result in a beneficent outcome in the end, no matter how wrong it may seem to a witness at the moment." So, let's look at vegetarianism in this light. Then 'what' we eat might be of little consequence compared to the motive or rather the attitude we hold when eating. If f.ex. greed is our motive for eating in general, that is what determines our future karma rather than whether we eat a fruit or a beef. In general it seems to me that we should take our 'attitude' towards life in general to a profound consideration, with basic 'spiritual laws' as our guidelines. I suppose most of us have read the famous letter of Chief Seattle to the President. There we find some example of a holistic attitude that is worth looking at. We need to stop looking at life and nature as a collection of 'separate things' and start seeing it - yes actually PERCEIVING it - as a undivided web of life. We need to stop blame other humans for our misery and start PERCEIVING every single person we meet as a brother or sister - or better - as an expression of what I am myself. Let me give an example in a simplistic exposition on karma. I read in the Bible that humanity fell into sin when it ate the fruit knowledge - of knowing wrong from right, i.e. knowledge makes personal as well as common human karma of another dimension come into being. Today I can still agree to the words of St. Paul in: "The evil that I don´t want to do - I do, and the good that I want to do - I don't do" (please excuse my translation from memory) In other words, there is an abyss within myself, even between my still imperfect knowledge of 'good and evil' and my actual actions in life. Furthermore I am painfully aware of my very imperfect understanding. In this bizarre condition I find myself constantly refusing to look my actions in the face, thus consciously and unconsciously sweeping my guilt under that enormous cover of the unconscious. Then from time to time they come up as memories or urges which have to be dealt with, usually by showing them back to that convenient forgetfulness again. This is my daily observation, but I also have a theory - well it isn't mine really nor is it a theory, more like an observation now. Being All One in the inner realms (Atman) we are really never in conflict with anyone. When I hurt someone, then the one I really hurt is myself, the 'hurt' is actually located within my own psyche, my unconscious self or individuality. This is where all the consequences of my actions go, and from there I encounter their 'karmic results' every single moment of my life. These are the human conditions that almost totally conduct the life of an ordinary human. We call it instincts, tendencies, longings, etc. They can be emotional or mental, and even what we usually call our will, is nothing but mere conditionings from our unconscious. But the expressions of our unconscious do not come to us only from within. Everything we encounter in the outside world is in fact only an expression from within - within being of course everything there is, or the Unity of All. So whenever I encounter a karmic debt, be it from the hands of a fellow being or what may seem a mere 'incident' in the nature, it is all an expression from my unconscious self/Self. There is no one to blame, not even myself. This means of course that every moment we are in contact with our real inner 'Guru', our conscience, willing to guide us if we only heed the instructions. And the instructions: - Forgive your neighbor for he is never to blame - Return hatred with love for only in this way you will heal yourself - Accept everything that happens to you as a valuable message, and thank the messenger in your heart for the inconvenience of bringing the message - Remember that unconditional loving kindness is the only state of mind that does not create havoc in your psyche and thereby in the world - Know that love and understanding (insight or seeing) are two sides of the same thing, one its expression, the other its perception. There are no 'karmic Lords' out there, punishing us with karmic wands. We are our own redeemers, and at the same time redeemers of the world. We are not alone IN the world - we ARE the World. When we have got this figured out, then we will know the real meaning of the word BROTHERHOOD (without any reference to gender at all). Love and light, Einar (from Iceland) http://www.itn.is/~theosoph/ http://rvik.ismennt.is/~annasb/ ICQ: 10684770 From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 13:00:36 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 22:56:49 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: No cost, no obligation Message-Id: Dallas to Kym: >I still admire your power of thinking. Suggest, you direct it to >making a series of related questions, so that the logic emerges. Dear Dallas, Kym is doing fine the way she is. She does not need any directing in how she should write. I enjoyed her posts immensely. She's one of the people whose posts I go directly to when they're up. Dallas, unlike some others, I try to avoid telling you to stop quoting HPB's books. I think we can learn from everyone whatever format they chose to express themselves. I accept that you are who you are, that quoting HPB is your learning and expressive method, and I chose to learn from that. Not every statement has to directly tie into HPB's writing. If her writing is all-encompassing, then everything said could be traced back to her, even rock-n-roll. Lately, I've been feeling a bit of nudging on this list. And it's irritating me. Maybe it's PMS. Maybe I've got a lot on my mind lately. However, I don't think it's my imagination. Thoa :o/ From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 13:15:37 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 13:10:07 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Veggie karma Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980613131007.0086a100@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <002401bd96e7$fb0284e0$316d9d9d@default> At 05:25 PM 6/13/1998 +0100, you wrote: > >When speaking about ethics, we often seem to take for granted that there >must exist some universal 'Ethic Code' a set of impeccable rules that we can >abide to, and thereby becoming some sort of 'moral Adepts'. >My late friend and teacher used to state that: "there does not exist a >single 'vice' among humans that has not at some time in some culture been >considered a 'good deed' or 'right conduct' - and vise versa >> clip<<< > >Einar (from Iceland) In all these matters I keep in mind the famous analogy. A prisoner when he breaks out of the prison it is considered a crime. He/she will be prosecuted and punished. On the other hand, if there is fire in the prison, it is the duty of the prisoner to break out of the prison and he will not be prosecuted for doing so. So in every situation "all" factors come into play when any action takes place. So who can judge? mkr From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 23:47:14 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 05:43:15 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence Message-ID: <3583C560.223@withoutwalls.com> References: <004101bd96d9$6e2f38a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > I hope that these supplementary comments prove of some service. Well, they probably helped you with your typing practice. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Sat Jun 13 23:54:52 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 17:10:35 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <00de01bd9736$c9188f20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 13th Dear Thoa: Thanks for what you say I have been "out of order," and will try to recalibrate. Your friendly touch is healing, and appreciated. Are we not all under some stress or other -- I know I am, so thank you-all for "bearing" with me. Yes I have been anxious to show how unifying Theosophy can be for all of us. Best wishes as always, Dallas > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 11:16 AM > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" > Subject: No cost, no obligation >Dallas to Kym: >>I still admire your power of thinking. Suggest, you direct it to >>making a series of related questions, so that the logic emerges. > >Dear Dallas, > >Kym is doing fine the way she is. She does not need any directing in how >she should write. I enjoyed her posts immensely. She's one of the people >whose posts I go directly to when they're up. Dallas, unlike some others, >I try to avoid telling you to stop quoting HPB's books. I think we can >learn from everyone whatever format they chose to express themselves. I >accept that you are who you are, that quoting HPB is your learning and >expressive method, and I chose to learn from that. Not every statement has >to directly tie into HPB's writing. If her writing is all-encompassing, >then everything said could be traced back to her, even rock-n-roll. > >Lately, I've been feeling a bit of nudging on this list. And it's >irritating me. Maybe it's PMS. Maybe I've got a lot on my mind lately. >However, I don't think it's my imagination. > >Thoa :o/ > > > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 00:17:09 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:06:09 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Past Life Memory Message-ID: <2314124b.358305e3@aol.com> << The first of her books, whose title might be something like "Life Before Birth," deals with the memories of the person, before and during conception >> In that very same book, someone under hypnotic regression, was asked by Ms. Wambach what compelled him to come back into incarnation. He said because he liked to eat ! Hmmm. I can relate to that. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 00:26:13 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 19:16:44 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <8347ea13.3583085d@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-13 18:51:04 EDT, you write: << Sophia is 69 and my brother Dallas is 76. We are old fogies! Right? The soul is not of the age of the body, you must look for other criteria. >> Did either of you know B. P. Wadia? Even though the ULT doesn't place emphasis on personalities, I understand that Mr. Wadia was the shining light of the Bombay Lodge and that he attracted many to theosophy through the force of his character, charisma and oratorical skills. Attendence, I understand, was at its height during his lifetime. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:17:30 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 16:02:11 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Common Era, Before Common Era Message-ID: <19980613230211.4233.qmail@hotmail.com> Alan commenting of Dal's response to Jesus birthdate, wrote :- "This didn't happen until around 400 ce (common era). Prior to that it was January 6th or 7th. All Rome's doing, this Dec. 25th thing. >Next, is the selected year ONE (selected in retrospect) actually>the beginning ? The general scholarly consensus is that Jesus was born around 4 bce (before the common era) - so he arrived before his birthday!" I do like dropping the BC for CE -- Common Era And AD for BCE -- Before Common Era Wish we could see it used more often. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:26:05 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 02:12:47 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004101bd96d9$6e2f38a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >we need to become familiar with all >she wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of >which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. It is, it seems, a matter of "faith" - like Christianity. She also said, (In the KEY) "Theosophy is religion". In the appendix to the first edition kindly made available by the "other" theosophical societies, an American judge chose, on the evidence and claims of the then TS, to disagree. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:29:30 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:58:19 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group Message-ID: <8n0ZSVArAyg1EwI0@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <15d130d.35827c07@aol.com> Lmhem111@aol.com writes >In a message dated 98-06-11 05:28:29 EDT, Alan writes > ><< Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (of TM and Beatles notoriety) did a first class >job of the first seven [I think] chapters and it was published in the UK >by Pengion Books. Contrary to popular opinion, he was not just a >simple-minded Hindu monk, but also a university graduate who spoke >and wrote in a number of languages. >> > >The question is did he really try to put the make on Mia Farrow? She claims he >did. After the incident, she made the famous remark, "I know the difference >between a puja and a pass!" No dummy herself ! Never heard this story, but they were well-matched for size. He was (is, I believe) a little guy. If he really had to go through all the Hindu purification rites before being allowed back into Holy Mother India, maybe he thought (note "maybe") he might as well have plenty to get purified of. As I used to say, catholics *have* to sin regularly every week, otherwise there would be nothing to atone for on Sunday, and the confessional would have to be abolished. > Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:32:09 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 02:49:41 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Holy food Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <2a4ffe94.3582ab77@aol.com> Lmhem111@aol.com writes >What if a tiger ate a Guru, like for instance Ramana Maharshi or Sri Aurobindo >? Would the tiger achieve liberation from its Group Soul by digesting a meal >composed of refined and spiritualized matter ? Sorry about this folsk, but the answer which comes immediately to mind is "Holy Shit!" Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:39:04 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 02:53:27 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: nudge and de-nudge Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes >Lately, I've been feeling a bit of nudging on this list. And it's >irritating me. Maybe it's PMS. Maybe I've got a lot on my mind lately. >However, I don't think it's my imagination. > >Thoa :o/ The de-nudging fairy has been dispatched post haste. She says it is not PMS. Alan [pp. The Elemental Support group] ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:42:46 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:34:04 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: food -- EATING WITHOUT KILLING Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001c01bd966c$2f324560$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >How did we ever, as a "race" assume that we because we were >"mightier," had the right to kill and destroy all the rest of the >animate life on the Planet and other "beings," --- and then, >historically and actually today, we have in certain places and by >certain individuals, extend this to ourselves --- in murder, >racial hatreds, and war ? What is the logic of this >self-destruction madness ? What does the SD or ISIS or whatever say? Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:46:12 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 02:04:53 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Karma or Injustice? Message-ID: <5HjYqYA1Gyg1EwKt@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3582A47D.B11E6C9A@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes >Just because someone has karma coming to them does not give anybody a >natural right to inflict it. Many theosophists of my personal (ex) acquaintance seem to regard themselves as lords and ladies of karma. Methinks I am not alone in this experience. > In the Christian Scripture, for example, a >puzzling case is the fate of Judas. It appeared that it was definitely >in the karma and the dharma of Jesus to be crucified. Yet Judas, who >acts as a major agent of this, is damned for his action. Even thought >the immediate results of his actions were "good", his karma was driven >by his true intent: to stop Jesus. This has always been a difficult one for theologians. As a former theologian, I can only offer the explanation that the story of the Judas betrayal is a fiction, a myth to tell a story by. As received, the entire account is anachronistic vis a vis the life of a Palestian Israelite at the time of Jesus. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:47:10 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:44:01 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <35837131.2580@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > >we need to become familiar with all > >she [ HPB ] wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of > >which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. Dr. A.M.Bain replied: > We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is > all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has > yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. And pray tell, Dr. Bain, what is "real evidence"? And what would YOU accept in Blavatsky's case as REAL EVIDENCE? And is it really true that "we have ONLY her word for this"? Please elucidate what you mean by this statement I have put in quotes? Thanking you in advance for your response. Daniel Caldwell From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 01:55:31 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 02:47:28 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dal's questions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004201bd96d9$70053120$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck asks a number of questions, and so I respond from my own observations and experiences as an occultist of over 40 years practice. >Are there seven Principles in Man and nature ? If so how do they >interact ? Yes there are, but they don't interact. The same seven principles simply behave differently in different circumstances. Including turnips. > >Is there a general LAW -- whether called Karma or something >else -- that unified the Worlds, mankind, the Galaxies and the >atoms ? Yes. I think perhaps you meant to type "unifies" - the 's' on the keyboard has always been too close to the 'd' :-) Some call this LAW "God" which is fair enough if we do not attribute human characteristics to "God." > >Can it be "broken ?" is it "partial? or complete ?" It is complete, and cannot be broken, though it appears to rearrange its components on a regular basis through all seven principles (and planes). > >Does the SPIRIT exists (at least as a logical base) ? Same thing. "God" is "Breath" [Latin Spiritus, Greek Pneuma]. We, as individual are "breaths." [pl.] > >What is the "soul of man, and if it exists, what are it powers >and nature ? There are two concepts of "soul." One equates with the "astral/etheric" double, and is temporal and reactive. The other contains this, but extends "upwards" to include "mind" - understood as the ability to viualise and interpret (not always correctly!). As far as theosophical "lower manas" maybe. > >What is the psychic nature as distinct from th mental ? Psychic nature is "lower manas" and below. Mental nature is "higher manas" and above - while we are in incarnation. Eventually, all indications seem to show, "higher manas" will be absorbed into yet higher principles. > >Is Reincarnation reasonable ? Reasonable where necessary or desirable, otherwise not. > >Is the perfectibility of all nature a potential possibility ? Perfection is a human concept. So far as LAW is concerned, everything is always just as it is. Love is real, *and* shit happens. > >Are the "Masters of Wisdom" Imaginary or possibly facts ? > There are higher intelligences (non-incarnate) who might be so described, but they are "masters" or "adepts" in particular areas of the larger scheme of things. Sometimes they work through living human beings, but their messages are always garbled by the "lower" functions of their intermediaries. Also, they are in the same situation as "adepts" on earth. A Master Builder cannot do the work of a Master Goldsmith. Most of those who work with humanity appear (note "appear") to be former human beings. Maybe they all are, but I have met one or two who seem never to have incarnated here - which doesn't rule out the possibilty of their having human characteristics. _____________ All of us on the lists spend a great deal of time in discussion and debate. Very few seem to have (I hope I am wrong) direct experience of the things we debate. I have related short versions of just two of my own experiences. Why don't we all try to share what we know and have found (as we see it) and quote "sources" a damn sight less often. The sources (insofar as TS writings are concerned) are all over the web, and there are many many links to them via the TI website (see below). Any of us with a web browser can go get them. In my own opinion, much of what is available is misleading, to say the least, but I also believe it needs to be read and to be studied. Often by puzzling over what doesn't make sense to us, we, "the cracked" as Pam puts it, we get to find the sense and the true light enters. Other sources are the gnostic, kabbalist, and various religious writings, also all over the web. None of it is 100% "true". Turning the other cheek, for example, may work according to theory, but it can also get you slapped on both cheeks and more besides. This I can definitely confirm! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 02:01:09 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 21:20:20 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: HPB's "Umtruths" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980613024844.5076.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck writes > Incidentally in this book and in another whose title I have forgotten >he warns very seriously about the need of protection for the unwary, >curiosity seeker, and psychic dabbler, who might at first be beguiled >by the sweet nothingnesses uttered or written, then gradually be taken >over by other guides or entities, until unspeakably vile words, >writings, and thoughts possess the trespasser, medium (today it would be >the channeler) who has no way to control them, until he/she nearly goes >mad (sometimes actual madness, may be multiple personalities might be >the result). He documents cases in which he had to try and intervene to >help and clear up such possessions, sometimes successfully other times >not. * Most are protected by their own incompetence, or their lack of psychic ability, or both. For the fanatic, though, the risks are very real. No responsible occultist would write such "how to" books. If a genuine seeker can figure it out for him/herself (which is possible) they will probably be made aware of the risks at the same time. Alan's .02 worth ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 02:02:08 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:52:25 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Turnips in Terror? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3582A164.584D36BC@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes >Note that in Theosophical literature, the emotional principle is >considered to be farther from the Atma than the mental principle. Agreed, whether in theosophcal literature or not! > This >can cause confusion in humans unaware of this. Which is a very large number of people. > We tend to confuse the >thoughts that emotions generate with the emotions themselves. Occultism trains one to be able to make this distinction, which to most minds is possibly impossible to notice (the conjuction within the psyche is too close). The method is basically a great deal of self observation, especially of the 'mechanical' side of human being-ness, which is a much larger percentage than most of us would care to consider. This is my experience. I forget it very often! > Therefore, >when we consider animals and even plants as having emotions, it is >necessary to fight the automatic assumption that they react to those >emotions similarly to us. I don't know about 'fight' - question, maybe. No, question as a matter of course! I think they *do* react to those 'emotions' similarly to us. It's a biological or biochemic feedback reaction. Of course a plant can show fear of fire - all living things find fire to be life-threatening, even if not atma-threatening (which of course is isn't). Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 02:10:29 1998 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 23:53:13 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: No cost, no obligation Message-Id: Dear Dallas: >Thanks for what you say I have been "out of order," and will try >to recalibrate. Your friendly touch is healing, and appreciated. > >Are we not all under some stress or other -- I know I am, so >thank you-all for "bearing" with me. Theosophists under pressure, unite! >Yes I have been anxious to show how unifying Theosophy can be for >all of us. I know that your purpose is good. Your actions indicate that you care about others and about Theosophy. I know it's not easy for you to spend time reading, sharing your notes, typing and analyzing with fellow questioners. I often need to take a breather from contributing to the lists in order to get some reading done. Otherwise, I would stop learning but continue to communicate my ignorance. Of course, you at 76 have tons of reading and experience behind you and can whip them out on the keyboard. However, no matter how much we know, it is good to see what the other person needs. You can have years of experience, think that the answer is very clear, and try to apply the answer. What will happen is that the Cosmic joker will teach you a lesson for your arrogance of thinking you know, of figuring it all out in your head, of not continuing to look at what is in front of you. Because what is in front of you will continually change and escape you if you do not remain aware. I believe part of the process is to remain connected, and that means to each other, that means trying to understand what other people are thinking and feeling, that means affirming them. We are fractured, we push people away, and we scare them because we fail to affirm them. I believe that all this "decadence" that you see is the karmic result of people not being affirmed. That is why we have the various political revolutions, that is why we have the 60's revolution, that is why we have lack of respect and spirituality, and that is why we won't stand for tradition. >Best wishes as always, Dallas Kudos to you! Pretty cool cyber 76. Your sister Sophia and you have lots to offer because of your knowledge and experience. However, it's difficult to listen if the tone is of preaching. I also think that others should stop telling you to stop using HPB quotes. Then again, it could also be a reaction to you telling them to stick to Theosophical quotes. People should write whatever they please as long as it's not hurting anyone else. Best wishes and thank you for listening. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 03:32:01 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:28:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Veggie karma Message-Id: Welcome back, Einar! Einar: >When speaking about ethics, we often seem to take for granted that there >must exist some universal 'Ethic Code' a set of impeccable rules that we ca= n >abide to, and thereby becoming some sort of 'moral Adepts'. >My late friend and teacher used to state that: "there does not exist a >single 'vice' among humans that has not at some time in some culture been >considered a 'good deed' or 'right conduct' - and vise versa > >This does not mean that there is no 'right conduct' or that we can't live a= n >ethically pure life. What it does say is that we should go very carefully >about when we throw moral judgment on the deeds of others or human conduct >in general. Furthermore, in my mind, there exists no moral judgment at all >that we can use on the 'nature' i.e. the life other than the human species. >The life of the animals is simply 'Natural' and therefore not ethical in it= s >nature. That's why it's important to see, feel and listen for every case. By doing that, we can be flexible in our responses to each situation. Do you recall the situation in which some South American Soccer Players became stranded in the Andes? They had to eat their dead. Another is an old ethics question. If a life raft can only hold a limited amount of people without sinking, do you push away excess people who are desperately trying to crawl into your raft? >I hold dearly a thought that I borrowed somewhere which says that: 'Whateve= r >action you do, it is the motive that counts. Whatever you do with absolute >loving kindness in your heart, will result in a beneficent outcome in the >end, no matter how wrong it may seem to a witness at the moment." The problem I see is that people sometimes mistake a need for control with love. We often are not aware of what our true motives are. Some parents abuse their children in the name of love and discipline. A pedophile can claim that s/he loves the child. Some even insist on the right of being left alone in their love bonds. >We need to stop looking at life and nature as a collection of 'separate >things' and start seeing it - yes actually PERCEIVING it - as a undivided >web of life. We need to stop blame other humans for our misery and start >PERCEIVING every single person we meet as a brother or sister - or better - >as an expression of what I am myself. Let me give an example in a simplisti= c >exposition on karma. >I read in the Bible that humanity fell into sin when it ate the fruit >knowledge - of knowing wrong from right, i.e. knowledge makes personal as >well as common human karma of another dimension come into being. Today I ca= n >still agree to the words of St. Paul in: "The evil that I don=B4t want to= do - >I do, and the good that I want to do - I don't do" (please excuse my >translation from memory) >In other words, there is an abyss within myself, even between my still >imperfect knowledge of 'good and evil' and my actual actions in life. >Furthermore I am painfully aware of my very imperfect understanding. >In this bizarre condition I find myself constantly refusing to look my >actions in the face, thus consciously and unconsciously sweeping my guilt >under that enormous cover of the unconscious. Then from time to time they >come up as memories or urges which have to be dealt with, usually by showin= g >them back to that convenient forgetfulness again. When I look at people I admire, I also see the nobility in myself. When I look at people I dislike, I also see that in myself. I think that those who have grown up seeing the best and worst of everything, and have grown beyond their experiences, can better understand their true nature. Because they experienced extreme anger, they understand the rage of a murderer. Because they experienced pain and sadness, they understand another's pain and sadness. Because they have continued to spiritually grow despite the hurtful experiences, they appreciate kindness and effort, no matter how small. During times of darkness, a little light shines like the sun. This duality also tortures them. They alternate between falling back into self-protection, sadness and doubt, and an obligation to give light to others, just as others have given lights to them in their times of darkness. One moment can be rage at the evils of others, another moment can be love and understanding of everyone. The torture of this awareness is St. Paul's "The evil that I don't want to do - I do, and the good that I want to do - I don't do." It becomes a cycle of self-hatred, self-love, hatred of others, and unconditional love of others. Love flows into hate and back, attitude towards self flows into attitude towards others and back. This is Jung's light and shadow. This is the duality of the same coin. This is the interconnectedness, for they cannot flow into and change into each other unless they are equal. This is the mathematical law. >And the instructions: - Forgive your neighbor for he is never to blame - >Return hatred with love for only in this way you will heal yourself - Accep= t >everything that happens to you as a valuable message, and thank the >messenger in your heart for the inconvenience of bringing the message - >Remember that unconditional loving kindness is the only state of mind that >does not create havoc in your psyche and thereby in the world - Know that >love and understanding (insight or seeing) are two sides of the same thing, >one its expression, the other its perception. > >There are no 'karmic Lords' out there, punishing us with karmic wands. We >are our own redeemers, and at the same time redeemers of the world. We are >not alone IN the world - we ARE the World. When we have got this figured >out, then we will know the real meaning of the word BROTHERHOOD (without an= y >reference to gender at all). Another way of stating that is: Your hatred of what you see in others is your shadow. This shadow is the part you reject in yourself. You cannot face it in yourself and so you project it onto others, and see it in them. Although you may reject it in them, the shadow is also you. Therefore, your hatred is in a way self-directed. This is basic Jungian psychology. =46or example, say I hate racists and male-chauvinists. Why? Because they belittle and stereotype another group. Because I have suppressed and rejected my own belittling and stereotyping tendencies, I cannot understand the racists and the male-chauvinists. They are my shadow, I have totally rejected them, I hated them. By identifying the belittling and stereotyping tendencies in myself, my feeling of hatred is tempered, and understanding of the racists and the male-chauvinists increases. By understanding them, you have also drawn up your rejected self from the depth. Through this, you can act without the blindness and prejudice of hatred. This is possible because you cannot emotionally respond to anything, negatively and positively, unless there is some of it in yourself. You cannot hate something that you are not connected to. Therefore, because you hate, you are connected to what you hate. What you hate in others =3D What you hate in yourself. Law of mathematics again. We are saints. We are demons. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 03:46:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:45:31 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: nudge and de-nudge Message-Id: >Thoa Tran writes >>Lately, I've been feeling a bit of nudging on this list. And it's >>irritating me. Maybe it's PMS. Maybe I've got a lot on my mind lately. >>However, I don't think it's my imagination. >> >>Thoa :o/ > >The de-nudging fairy has been dispatched post haste. She says it is not >PMS. > >Alan [pp. The Elemental Support group] Everyone who believes in the de-nudging fairy, clap your hands to bring her dying glow back! Peter Pan :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 03:57:28 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 01:37:48 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Past Life Memory Message-Id: Lmhem111: ><< The first of her books, whose title might be something like "Life Before >Birth," deals with the memories of the person, before and during conception >> > >In that very same book, someone under hypnotic regression, was asked by Ms. >Wambach what compelled him to come back into incarnation. He said because he >liked to eat ! > >Hmmm. I can relate to that. Me, too! I live to eat. The fact that it kept me alive is a lucky incidental result. Oh, the nuances of well prepared cooked (and raw) food! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 07:47:01 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 08:37:28 EDT From: "Teos9 (Louis)" Subject: Re: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: <6ebd4b47.3583c409@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-02 13:20:12 EDT, you write: << http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane/pjimp.html)] >> I cannot locate this website on my AOL search engine. Is there some other way for me to get at it? Thanks From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 09:16:59 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 12:06:32 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980614120632.007424b0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <19980613024455.18789.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia, HPC is just a play on words. as in H - PC - Personal Computer. Darren At 07:44 PM 6/12/98 PDT, you wrote: >First Darren and then Doss, wrote : -- > >">>I've offered a course "The Internet and Theosophy : A beginners >guide from>>HPB to HPC, but the lodge doesn't seem to interested. They >find my>>enthusiasm amusing for some reason. >>Your course interests me. BTW, did you get any indication why the lodge >is>not interested? How old are the key/active members? >mkr" > >Sophia is 69 and my brother Dallas is 76. We are old fogies! Right? >The soul is not of the age of the body, you must look for other >criteria. >What is HPC? And "lodge" is a general reference, meaning little. >There are so many groups, and all get tarred with the generalized word >"lodge." This is unfair. > >Fraternally, Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 09:31:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:34:54 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Re: HPB ==A Protest by Dallas TenBroeck Message-ID: <3583DF8E.3447@azstarnet.com> References: <6ebd4b47.3583c409@aol.com> Dear Teos9@aol.com, The URL address you gave is correct and should lead you directly to Paul Johnson's reply to my HOUSE OF CARDS critique. Or try going to http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane This is David Lane's Home page. Then go down the page to the fifth point and look for "Theosophy and Its Discontents". He is moving his website to a new URL: http://www.mtsac.edu/~dlane/index.html But this website was not working for me this morning. Daniel Caldwell Teos9@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 98-06-02 13:20:12 EDT, you write: > > << http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane/pjimp.html)] > >> > I cannot locate this website on my AOL search engine. Is there some other way > for me to get at it? > > Thanks > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 09:46:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 09:53:35 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Alan's challenge Message-ID: <19980614151001964.AAA223@pgiese> Alan writes: > All of us on the lists spend a great deal of time in discussion and debate. > Very few seem to have (I hope I am wrong) direct experience of the > things we debate. I have related short versions of just two of my own > experiences. Why don't we all try to share what we know and have > found (as we see it) and quote "sources" a damn sight less often. > I hope you're wrong to. Seeing our own lives in terms of theosophy or mysticism or shamanism requires leaving the comfort as an "armchair occultist and leading a magical life. I've tried to do this for years and now things just kind of come. For example, this past week I found myself losing interest in my current reading material. I spent some time thinking about Paschal Beverly Randolph and how I'd like to read something of his, first hand. Yesterday I drove past a rather dumpy looking garage sale with just piles of boxes stacked on tables. I got the feeling to stop. So I did. In a box filled with abridged bibles and what not, I found Randolph's Eulis, Alice Bailey's White Magic, and a AMORC and astrology book! I offered the owner $5 for the books and a couple dishes and he thought I was overpaying! This is about the fourth time I've "asked for" and go books this way. Once I even asked and received by title! But this is just a little thing. It's just a simple example of "ask and it shall be given". In "Light on the Path", it says "ask and you shall have, but you have to know how to ask". Asking for me, means using my whole being. It's one-pointedness but beyond one-pointedness because it's harnessing a part of me that extends beyond by ego/mind. I can feel something "move" deep within the center of my self as I "place" the request outside myself and then let go and any anxiety about the outcome. I gave an example of books, but jobs, inspiration, strength, and wisdom seem to come in the same way. I have an awareness of energies that "receive" these requests. In lucid dreams, I can "physically" "put things on the table" and converse with the one or two "people" who fulfill these requests and guide me. Now are these guides Masters? It feels pretentious to say "yes", so I hestiate to do so, even though it does seem to fit with some of the working definitions that people use. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 12:17:06 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:17:16 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Common Era, Before Common Era Message-ID: <000301bd97b6$dae93300$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 14th Curiously, in one place writing of Jesus, HPB says 107 years BCE as his date [ Isis II 201, Esoteric Character of the Gospels, HPB Articles (ULT Edn. in 3 Vols,) Vol. 3, p. 181fn; Vol. 1 p. 117-- as 107 BC; ] Dallas > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 11:32 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: Common Era, Before Common Era >Alan commenting of Dal's response to Jesus birthdate, wrote :- > >"This didn't happen until around 400 ce (common era). Prior to that it >was January 6th or 7th. All Rome's doing, this Dec. 25th thing. >>Next, is the selected year ONE (selected in retrospect) actually>the >beginning ? > >The general scholarly consensus is that Jesus was born around 4 bce >(before the common era) - so he arrived before his birthday!" > >I do like dropping the BC for CE -- Common Era >And AD for BCE -- Before Common Era > >Wish we could see it used more often. Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 12:24:27 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 07:04:27 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <000501bd97b6$e02e1380$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 14th Dear Thoa:O Darned business this "preaching." I know you are not the only one who has said that of me. I'm not aware of it. also you are right about lots of reading, etc ... and I will say it of yself -- a very "spotty" mind that remembers some things and forgets others. Being 76 is annoying. My inner self is quite the same as it always is/was but this "old" body is not able to do the things it used to, and I have to make sure that I don't lead it to areas where it cannot function. Alan says like striking the wrong key on the typewriter, and then, rereading I skip making the right correction. Things! Sorry that the "quotes" are bothersome -- not intended. Ideas in well spoken words are I think important. Source doesn't matter (to me). To me Theosophy is not only the current of thought today, but the result of past thinking. Like mathematics you and I are solving current problems with a wisdom drawn from Euclid, Pythagoras of Plate --- etc..What do you think of the work done by Penrose, Margulis, Hawking, and Bohm, Einstein, etc., etc., who are pretty much in the forefront of scientific thought ? Isn't it a unity of past and present made "real" and "creative ?" Best wishes Dal. Pax! > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 12:20 AM > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" > Subject: No cost, no obligation >Dear Dallas: > >>Thanks for what you say I have been "out of order," and will try >>to recalibrate. Your friendly touch is healing, and appreciated. >> >>Are we not all under some stress or other -- I know I am, so >>thank you-all for "bearing" with me. > >Theosophists under pressure, unite! > LET'S FORM A UNION HA HA SNIP From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 12:28:18 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 05:52:51 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <000201bd97b6$d83a8dc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 14th 1998 Dear Lmhem: We both of us knew Mr. Wadia very well. For many years we lived in the same large home (Aryasangha) where he occupied the upper floor. He knew me almost since my birth. He was then in Los Angeles (1922) and our family went to New York when he moved there and opened the New York Lodge of the ULT (1925 -- of course I was only a baby then). In 1927 our family went to India, Bombay, and there the ULT was opened in 1929. If you are interested in his life and work there is a "Bio-Note" which I can send you, if you desire. But it is quite long and I wonder if you would like "hard copy" or should I try sending it direct to you by E-mail ? [ This is also available to others in our talk group if they are interested. ] My sister Sophia was born in Bombay in 1929 and has lived in Bangalore (where there is a ULT Lodge) about 250 miles from Madras in south India. My mother and she started the East-West School. It has had an enrolment of over 700 pupils (Montessori to High School graduation classes) and is one of the best in that town. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 10:36 PM > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subject: Internet & Theosophy >In a message dated 98-06-13 18:51:04 EDT, you write: > ><< Sophia is 69 and my brother Dallas is 76. We are old fogies! Right? > The soul is not of the age of the body, you must look for other > criteria. >> > >Did either of you know B. P. Wadia? Even though the ULT doesn't place emphasis >on personalities, I understand that Mr. Wadia was the shining light of the >Bombay Lodge and that he attracted many to theosophy through the force of his >character, charisma and oratorical skills. Attendence, I understand, was at >its height during his lifetime. > >Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 12:31:42 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 06:46:31 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence Message-ID: <000401bd97b6$ddf4ec60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 14th re: Evidence: The burden of proof is always, as I see it, a tug-of-war between what is offered and what is accepted. That which is accepted is always a matter of individual decision and responsibility, as I see it, and no claims can be admitted until they pass the bar of judgment of my mind. (That is for myself.) This being a free world, others may adopt or choose to accept on any grounds whatever what they believe is reasonable -- or unreasonable. The same problem of "proof" and "evidence" arose in 1880/81 with Sinnett/Hume asking if HPB and/or the Masters would get for them a copy of the London Times on publication date, to be phenomenally transferred to Simla -- as "proof" that the Adept claims, and Theosophy, were "true." This "test" was refused, and the Master who answered said, in brief: "The more evidence advanced, the more skeptics arise." To further illustrate this there is the "phenomena" of the production of an extra tea-cup and saucer from beneath the roots of a tree when HOP was on a picnic far away from the bazaars of Simla -- it was quite wonderful to have this happen and as the story goes some remained quite skeptical in spite of the fact that the tree roots grew in an around those objects and through the handle of the cup, and also the selection of the picnic spot had been random. Final desideratum is always subjective and interior. But is the "logic" adequate ? Now that is debatable, agree that your view and mine could differ. On that basis everything is seen differently all the time by all of us but we tend to agree on similarities. At the beginning of the S D ( p. xlvi-ii) HPB quotes from the mathematical law of certitude to show how a converging degree can tend towards agreement over any subject considered or any event witnessed. As to Judge vs HPB on subject of "religion." He was determining that "Theosophy" was not "a religion." HPB was saying, as I understand it: "Theosophy is religion." Meaning, again, as I understand it, that it is not "a religion" with beliefs, rites, rituals etc... but that it "united all who grasped it as a philosophy, together in understanding." In the "Declaration" of the ULT " similarity of aim, purpose and teaching " is offered as a basis for work and unity. As someone said not too long ago in these messages, the "core" or the "original" teachings of Theosophy ( which we owe to HPB and the Masters) are bases for our common study and understandings. Apart from those bases we have the many opinions offered by later students based on their study and thought -- and in many cases these are found to diverge from the bases chosen in the period of HPB's life and writing. It is not what "I say," or "others say" that matters, it is "what does Theosophy say." And there I would defer to HPB and the Masters in their writings, and vigorously try to grasp what they are talking about. Also, not "accepting" anything unless it makes sense -- using "my" 'common-sense.' For that no one else is responsible but my own free-will and choice. Personally I am not strong on taking anything "on faith," or of being a "blind believer" in anything someone else says, unless I have demonstrated to my self that their facts and logic is cohesive. In other words I take responsibility for what I think and say, and try to pass on, without any strings, those ideas that seem valuable to me. As I understand it is the "heart doctrine" that unites, and not the "eye doctrine" and all the externalities. Excuse me for any bluntness its only worth 0.03 (the price rises) Dal. > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 11:36 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>we need to become familiar with all >>she wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of >>which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. > >We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is >all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has >yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. > >It is, it seems, a matter of "faith" - like Christianity. She also said, (In >the KEY) "Theosophy is religion". In the appendix to the first edition >kindly made available by the "other" theosophical societies, an >American judge chose, on the evidence and claims of the then TS, to >disagree. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 13:01:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:01:26 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <35840FF6.F0F@globalserve.net> References: <000501bd97b6$e02e1380$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas: I know this was directed at another, but I would like to comment... For the first time since reading you I felt you the person. Perhaps part of this is a female thing, wanting emotional connection, wanting something to touch the soul, by which text quotes just don't cut it. > right about lots of reading, etc ... and I will say ia very "spotty" mind that remembers some things and > forgets others. I figured you had some computerized books so that you could punch in key words and up pops the appropriate quote. If you are quoting from memory, well, what can I say. > Sorry that the "quotes" are bothersome -- not intended. Ideas in > well spoken words are I think important. Source doesn't matter > (to me). The quotes are only bothersome when quotes are presented as the be all and end all. Like mankind cannot live by quotes alone. > To me Theosophy is not only the current of thought today, but the > result of past thinking. Like mathematics you and I are solving > current problems with a wisdom drawn from Euclid, Pythagoras of > Plate --- etc..What do you think of the work done by Penrose, > Margulis, Hawking, and Bohm, Einstein, etc., etc., who are > pretty much in the forefront of scientific thought ? Isn't it a > unity of past and present made "real" and "creative ?" Well said. Our difference seems to be that, having read and understood (or not) the recorded thoughts of others, I believe it is our task to assimilate those thoughts with our experiences and present the result as something come from ourselves. So my ideal debate is something like... "Trees speak to us of ancient wisdom. I have experienced this when etc etc, and others have told me that they have experienced etc etc. I am reminded of SoandSo's account in SuchandSuch book (pages xx) recounting similar experiences with various differences pertinent to the time of that writing." It would be sightly different when discussing say Bohr's theory of atomic structure, but not so much that rote learning and quoting would be the only way. The frustration occurs when someone quotes a book, as those of some years back did with the Bible, and says this is so. Until one has experienced at least some of the content of the quote, all it is is someone else's words. I wish you continued good health and much more writing in your own special style. Annette From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 13:16:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:07:19 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Karma or Injustice? Message-ID: <35841156.26786AB2@sprynet.com> References: <5HjYqYA1Gyg1EwKt@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > This has always been a difficult one for theologians. As a former > theologian, I can only offer the explanation that the story of the Judas > betrayal is a fiction, a myth to tell a story by. As received, the entire > account is anachronistic vis a vis the life of a Palestian Israelite at the > time of Jesus. I consider the entire New Testament to be myth, and believe Jesus to be a melding of the legends of several teachers of the time one of whom may have actually been called "Jesus". When I state that I consider religions like Wicca to be equally valid to religions like Christianity, I am not complimenting Wicca... In any case, however, even if the stories are false does not mean that they don't convey lessons. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 16:16:58 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:14:02 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: No cost, no obligation Message-Id: Annette to Dallas: >>Dallas: >> right about lots of reading, etc ... and I will say ia very "spotty" >>mind that remembers some things and >> forgets others. > >Annette: >I figured you had some computerized books so that you could punch in key >words and up pops the appropriate quote. If you are quoting from >memory, well, what can I say. Ah, now I know why I've been saving some of the posts! That way, once I've been on the list for a few more years, I can dig up any related topic and post them. So far, I have a good file on the Leadbeater scandal, TS politics, HPB, Krisnamurti's Truth, sexism, vegetarianism, debate over Paul's Masters, psychism and the ES. I even started posting "Truth is a Pathless Land" for Doss whenever he mentions it. I'm saving him some searching time. >> Dallas: >> To me Theosophy is not only the current of thought today, but the >> result of past thinking. Like mathematics you and I are solving >> current problems with a wisdom drawn from Euclid, Pythagoras of >> Plate --- etc..What do you think of the work done by Penrose, >> Margulis, Hawking, and Bohm, Einstein, etc., etc., who are >> pretty much in the forefront of scientific thought ? Isn't it a >> unity of past and present made "real" and "creative ?" > >Annette: >Well said. Our difference seems to be that, having read and understood >(or not) the recorded thoughts of others, I believe it is our task to >assimilate those thoughts with our experiences and present the result as >something come from ourselves. So my ideal debate is something like... >"Trees speak to us of ancient wisdom. I have experienced this when etc >etc, and others have told me that they have experienced etc etc. I am >reminded of SoandSo's account in SuchandSuch book (pages xx) recounting >similar experiences with various differences pertinent to the time of >that writing." I agree with Annette that knowledge is important, but it is also important that one can play around with knowledge. Has anybody ever played with a Lego? It has rigid parts, most of it squares and rectangles, with the delightful additions of triangles, little humans, and other odd parts. The Lego becomes a wonderful starship when one realizes that they interconnect with each other, the rigidly shaped parts and the amorphous parts. The rigid parts become the foundation and can be a support anywhere, while the amorphous parts help to make the starship unique. All that knowledge is the foundation, the known, and the rigidly shaped parts. Our creativity is the amorphous parts, our interpretation, our playfulness. Put together a Lego set and you'll see what I mean. You can buy a small one for 5 bucks. Thoa :o) P.S. Dallas, how did you get your name? I know it's a city in Texas. That's an unusual name for Theosophists with a love for India to give to their child. I can understand your sister's name Sophia, which relates to wisdom. From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 17:01:56 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 15:52:56 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: "Humans Being" Message-Id: <199806142152.PAA22987@mailmx.micron.net> Thoa wrote to Dallas: >Kym is doing fine the way she is. She does not need any directing in how >she should write. I enjoyed her posts immensely. She's one of the people >whose posts I go directly to when they're up. I appreciate your words, Thoa. In the "Big Picture" sphere, it is inspiring and courageous for someone to stand up for something they believe in or, conversely, to battle against an injustice. In the "Personal" theatre, I felt affirmed and valued after reading your post. In addition, as I believe you noted in further postings, Dallas responded to your post gracefully, quickly, and sincerely. That, too, is quite commendable. As far as my reaction to Dallas' (and other folks) posts to me - sometimes my feelings get tweaked; sometimes I experience the greatest of merriment; sometimes I think "Whew, I'm glad I'm not as dumb as they are!"; sometimes I think "People are so much smarter than me - this is clearly my first incarnation."; sometimes I think "Well, I whooped that snippy person but good with my witty retorts!"; sometimes I think "Dear God, if you love me and I promise never to giggle at a funeral again, please have that post I just sent to the list get lost forever in cyberspace."; sometimes I think "Now this post will truly show my brilliance and people will be blinded in awe by the light of my wisdom!" And then someone will say "We need to quit being so self-centered - that is what T/theosophy is all about." And then I think. . "Oh, bummer. Well, what the avitchi am I supposed to write and do now?" Kym From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 19:46:56 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:14:15 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Cups in Trees Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980615101415.007456e4@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <000401bd97b6$ddf4ec60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas Wrote: >To further illustrate this there is the "phenomena" of the >production of an extra tea-cup and saucer from beneath the roots >of a tree when HOP was on a picnic far away from the bazaars of >Simla -- it was quite wonderful to have this happen and as the >story goes some remained quite skeptical in spite of the fact >that the tree roots grew in an around those objects and through >the handle of the cup, and also the selection of the picnic spot >had been random. When I was very young I was on a camp and we had gone for a bushwalk. I, as usual, strayed from the path with a friend. We were in a deep thicket when my friend said something to scare me from a film we had just seen. Being only 5 or 6 I ran behind a large tree and lo and behold within the hollowed root area of this tree in the middle of the bush was a complete set of tea cups and saucers. They were unusual in design, but very clean and laid out neatly. We went to tell our teacher but she didn't believe us (or care). I'm not sure if i've conveyed the strangeness of the episode - but I'd forgotten it until I read the above and when I think of it now it still seems weird. * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 20:01:57 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:26:42 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980615102642.0074a770@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <358200F1.6763CA16@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.2.32.19980612101129.0074256c@ozemail.com.au> Bart Wrote:> > It depends on why you don't eat meat. Generally, for most reasons for >not eating meat, the answer is self-evident. > > For example, if one does not eat meat for health reasons, then the >answer is obviously "no". If one does not eat meat to avoid harming >animals, then the answer is obviously "yes". I stopped eating red meat after reading 'Beyond Beef' , a book I thoroughly recommend (can't think of the author though), and before I became a practising buddhist. I still love the taste of meat and If it could be grown without killing an animal I would eat it (although I must say sometimes now, the site of a bloody steak makes my stomach turn over). But the Hindus have a word - 'ojas' that implies a spirit of nutrition in fresh natural foods - and I'm more concerned over whether artifical meat would contain 'ojas'. Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 20:11:19 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:27:06 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: -- Atlantis Peak? How about Alens, UFOs, NDE, Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980615102706.00720b80@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <19980613025623.18092.qmail@hotmail.com> I did not write this, I think It could have been Dallas!!!! Regards Darren At 07:56 PM 6/12/98 PDT, you wrote: >Darren wrote : -- > >">>So while van Danegan has brought together pictures and=20 >artifacts>>that apparently show "astronauts" of the past,=85=85"=20 > >If I am not mistaken you mean Erick von Daniken, who wrote, "Gods from=20 >Outer Space," "The Gold of the Gods," "According to Evidence," and "In=20 >Search of Ancient Gods." My comment on these books all of which I have=20 >read years ago is, the FACTS are very interesting where verified=20 >(though doubt has been caste on some of them), but his conclusions, =20 >need not be accepted, there are alternative explanations which may be=20 >tried. Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929=20 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 20:16:56 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:02:58 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <17cf31d9.358472c3@aol.com> > Date: 98-06-14 19:40:54 EDT > From: Megabeet In a message dated 98-06-14 13:34:07 EDT, Dallas writes: << My sister Sophia was born in Bombay in 1929 and has lived in Bangalore (where there is a ULT Lodge) about 250 miles from Madras in south India. My mother and she started the East-West School. It has had an enrolment of over 700 pupils (Montessori to High School graduation classes) and is one of the best in that town. >> Thank you for the info. I have always liked Sri Wadia's STUDIES IN THE SECRET DOCTINE, Volumes I and II, Also someone I knew attributed POINT OUT THE WAY to P.B. Wadia's authorship. One of the regular students in the Washington ULT Lodge, Jacob Regardie (brother of Israel Regardie), now deceased, would delight in telling me that he often played tennis with Sri Wadia whenever he came to town. I had read that P.B. Wadia, Annie Besant And George Arundale were interned by the British for agitating for Indian Independence and, upon their release, they were given a hero's welcome in Madras, complete with parade. I was in Bombay 17 years ago and I visited the Adyar TS compound in that city. I was impressed by its size. There were a number of buildings there on the grounds. I was taken on a tour of the main building. There were no meetings going on at the time. Unfortunately, I was unable to visit the Bombay ULT and the Institute of Culture (Sophia Wadia). I am returning to India in September and perhaps I will be able make a stop in Bombay. If you could email me the times of the meetings there I would appreciate it. The present head of the Institute of World Culture will be speaking at the Washington ULT on June 21st but I don't know if I'll be able to make it. His name slips my mind for the moment. Lmhem111 (Marshall) From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 21:31:57 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 19:31:29 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Paradoxes Message-ID: <19980615023129.27392.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear Mark You wrote, "Perhaps I misunderstand, but if you are saying that Life's secret mystery has been completely revealed, unveiled, shown, known, etc., by these books ... you are fooling yourself. This knowledge, as intricate and complex as our minds love to assume it to be, is as partial as a half eaten Oreo, and always will be. The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao." Yes, you have misunderstood. I am not fooled, nor you and I hope after your comment, no one else is either. Thanks. Lao Tze's Tao The King (different spellings!) is wonderfully full of paradoxes, isn't it. Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 21:41:28 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 19:28:09 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Turnips scream Message-ID: <19980615022811.15378.qmail@hotmail.com> Kym wrote, "Hmmm. . .maybe turnips don't scream. . .but then again, maybe they do and we just can't hear them. And if they actually do. . .well. . .my only recourse is to go stark-raving mad. . .I can barely walk on grass without feeling guilty about all the damage I am doing to the inhabitants of such walked-upon grass." You have posted the article, which describes Baxter's experiments, which seem to show that the plants we may be tending at home or in our garden, are like pets of the animal kind, in intimate association with the one that cares for them. I remember reading (can't give the reference, my hard disk crashed 3 years ago, and date stored therein was lost, among them what I now relating, but cannot give reference for) of an experiment that Olga Worell the psychic healer (she did her work under the umbrella of a church and it was called "prayer") unwittingly engaged in. She was asked to visit by a Catholic College group when she was in California, and did so when she visited them. They had glasshouses in which they grew tomatoes, and had every 10th plant connected by electrodes to a polygraph machine. They had asked various people to collect a certain number of tomatoes and had recorded the reactions, the to collection. In most cases the plants seemed to show a state of coma when the person entered to rob them of their fruit, taking about 14 minutes to recover after the robbery. But the polygraph recordings showed an enhanced life when Olga entered into the glasshouse. Then purposely she was called out, and talk ensued and she went back to complete the task a little later on. The tomatoes had GIVEN 10 fruit that she was to collect, these were the best the ripest and were lying at the base of the plants, falling they had not been damaged. Do turnips scream? Yes in most cases if not in a coma they must be screaming. Walking on grass, why not be grateful and thankful to the grass, its wonderful color, with feel beneath our bare feet (better shoes off), and with the dew on it in the early morning if possible. Feel the lovely feeling when we lie upon it. Our enjoyment and our GRATITUDE and THANKFULNESS, it is about the only payment we can really be giving to nature, and the vegetable or animal kingdoms for the food on our plates. Is it not why every religion and many tribal societies have a sort of prayer-the Christians called "Saying Grace," before mealtime. It is to remember the chain of the 4 elements which have contributed to the growth and development of the plant, to the genetic material which produced that particular kind of fruit or vegetable or grain, to the collectivity of Nature which went into the food before us. The money exchange we made at the store, is for the work and investment of money that people have put into food production. What about the concatenation of beings and forces which have worked silently and for the most part unnoticed to make these foods. Our purses and bank cards are empty. The LOVE, the GRATITUDE, the THANKFULNESS in our heart and mind, is the only credit we have, and can unitize. Among the Zoroastrain Gathas there are some very moving and wonderful, statements giving a clue to this aspect of things. So walk, enjoy and revel in the grass, even when and if you have to harvest food, but let you heart be loving. Revel in the beauty of form and color of the flower and the sunset, feel blessed and try to give of BLESSEDNESS back to them. Shall I now, having written the above, say with my LOVE (I usually, as you may have notice, do not end this way!) but today it my be appropriate, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 21:46:58 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 19:41:48 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Feeding the Hungry Message-ID: <19980615024150.2252.qmail@hotmail.com> This subject is very close to my heart, and I have collected data and studied various aspects for years. So, I am going to write at some length taking up some points. It may turn out quite long, so a warning to those uninterested to 'wipe out.'" > Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 03:56:16 -0500 > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Re: Future Vegetarians "May be that's how the world hunger is going to be solved. Mkr" -- (Genetic engineering.) MEAT PRODUCTION. Take Argentina one of the big meat production and marketing countries. To a lesser extent this applies to other countries in varying degrees. Their ranchos cover astronomical acres of land where steers are raised for the market. A steer takes about 2-2˝ years to be ready for slaughter, during that time it grazes acres of grasslands-each grazed and having to recover over these seasons. During which time the same acres, or a large number of selected acres, could have been growing grains and other cereals and other more perishable crops; one, two or three crops a year. The latter store reasonably well, as against the cost of meat preservation. The costs of transshipment is involved for both, as they would be more than needed for the country of production, but grains/cereals are cheaper. While the meat from a full grown steer might feed about 12-15 largish families for a week or ten days, the food grown as grains and cereals could feed much vaster numbers for great periods of time. The use we put the world's land to in the production of food is very wasteful, and mostly guided by market and profitability-I am not denying the need for these to play their part, but they often have too over powering a consideration. This but one example, others are available. Just apply this to the acres under tea, coffee, vines for the production of alcoholic beverages, (not food to some extent luxuries!) and you can get a better picture. ROTTING FOOD. So many vegetables and fruit are allowed to rot, when the labour of picking and transportation is in excess of its marketability! MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES. Do control extensive land of food production areas the world over. They advance loans, and tell the farmers what to grow, providing seed (hybrid and possibly now genetically engineered); and fertilizers (very often from their own owned factories) and then they process and packages this output. This comes to the towns and cities into supermarkets-yes, all this is on the increase in so-called third world countries also. Take what has happened in Bangalore in the last year. We too now have big indigenous and foreign owned companies, buying our vegetables for tinning, and making into dried soups, very often for export. While the brands processed and packaged in supermarket increase day by day. More tourism with the concomitant expensive hotels and high price restaurants-where one meal for four, would feed a whole family (4/5) for nearly a month. The price of our vegetables have risen 50% in the last 3 months. The poor man and the middle class on their earnings find this too dear. Malnutrition cannot help but follow. FARMERS the world over are already or are becoming the prey of the middle man-who makes exorbitant profits, and the processor who can collects the raw material and sells at VALUE ADDED prices. Farmers are at the lowest level of this food-chain, and they still grow and grow and remain poor. While all those who do not and cannot produce their own food needs also find themselves suffering and contributing indirectly to the world wide shortages. FAMINE, DRAUGHT, CATASTROPHES and WARS place vast numbers of people at starvation levels and they died. Then very charitably, those who directly and indirectly contributed to these very causes, give AID, counting themselves generous and humanitarian! FEED THE HUNGRY-not the way things are going. Enough for now. Excuse my saying so much, which does not seem directly to be theosophy. And yet it is theosophy that should be applied in daily life, and to the life of our society and situation. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:01:59 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 02:38:38 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Common Era, Before Common Era Message-ID: <5wnjXFAesHh1EwRy@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <19980613230211.4233.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck writes >I do like dropping the BC for CE -- Common Era >And AD for BCE -- Before Common Era > >Wish we could see it used more often. Sophia It is the universal scholarly convention now. Alan -- Dr. A.M.Bain From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:11:43 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:33:27 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Karma or Injustice? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35841156.26786AB2@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky writes > I consider the entire New Testament to be myth, and believe Jesus to >be >a melding of the legends of several teachers of the time one of whom may >have actually been called "Jesus". When I state that I consider >religions like Wicca to be equally valid to religions like Christianity, >I am not complimenting Wicca... > > In any case, however, even if the stories are false does not mean that >they don't convey lessons. I think that is their main purpose! Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:16:57 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:36:58 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: "Humans Being" Message-ID: <9$iSEoAKjIh1EwB+@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199806142152.PAA22987@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >sometimes I think "Dear God, if you love me >and I promise never to giggle at a funeral again, please have that post I >just sent to the list get lost forever in cyberspace."; sometimes I think >"Now this post will truly show my brilliance and people will be blinded in >awe by the light of my wisdom!" > >And then someone will say "We need to quit being so self-centered - that is >what T/theosophy is all about." And then I think. . "Oh, bummer. Well, >what the avitchi am I supposed to write and do now?" > Whatever is necessary. Easier said than done! Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:18:16 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:22:15 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Common Era, Before Common Era Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000301bd97b6$dae93300$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 14th > >Curiously, in one place writing of Jesus, HPB says 107 years BCE >as his date [ Isis II 201, Esoteric Character of the Gospels, >HPB Articles (ULT Edn. in 3 Vols,) Vol. 3, p. 181fn; Vol. 1 p. >117-- as 107 BC; ] > >Dallas G.R.S. Mead was inclined to a similar opinion, as were some of the schlars who, examining the Dead Sea Scrolls, though Jeus might have been the Teacher of Righteousness mentioned in them, which would have meant that Jesus lived about 100 years earlier than commonly supposed. Mead even wrote the book, "Did Jesus Live 100 BC?" Robert Eisenmann, an American Academic, prefers to re-date the relevant parts of scrolls to a later period, and puts forward the hypothesis that the Teacher of Righteousness was James the Just, head of the first Jerusalm "Church." Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:23:26 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:31:39 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Paradoxes -- The Unifying Riddleof our Existence Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000401bd97b6$ddf4ec60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Personally I am not strong on taking anything "on faith," or of >being a "blind believer" in anything someone else says, unless I >have demonstrated to my self that their facts and logic is >cohesive. In other words I take responsibility for what I think >and say, and try to pass on, without any strings, those ideas >that seem valuable to me. A great deal of logic can be cohesive. Fact are elusive. > >As I understand it is the "heart doctrine" that unites, and not >the "eye doctrine" and all the externalities. It is the *shared* experience of the reality of Unity that unites, not doctrine, heart, eye, or belly-button. > >Excuse me for any bluntness its only worth 0.03 (the price >rises) Dal. A Jewish boy was aked in school: "What is two plus two?" "You buying or selling?" he asked. (Jewish - not antisemetic - joke) Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:27:47 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:16:05 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35837131.2580@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye writes >Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" > >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > >> >we need to become familiar with all >> >she [ HPB ] wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of >> >which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. > >Dr. A.M.Bain replied: > >> We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is >> all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has >> yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. > > >And pray tell, Dr. Bain, what is "real evidence"? And what would YOU >accept in Blavatsky's case as REAL EVIDENCE? "Pray tell" - what century are you living in? At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own experience that what she said was also what they found. > >And is it really true that "we have ONLY her word for this"? Please >elucidate >what you mean by this statement I have put in quotes? In all my reading, I have not come across references to Greta White Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which pre-dates HPB. > >Thanking you in advance for your response. Pray told by Dr. Bain. ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 22:29:40 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:43:44 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Alan's challenge Message-ID: <2fYQsuAgpIh1EwDp@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <19980614151001964.AAA223@pgiese> Pam Giese writes >This is about the fourth time I've "asked for" and go books >this way. Once I even asked and received by title! But this is just a >little thing. It's just a simple example of "ask and it shall be given". > >In "Light on the Path", it says "ask and you shall have, but you have to >know how to ask". Asking for me, means using my whole being. It's >one-pointedness but beyond one-pointedness because it's harnessing a part >of me that extends beyond by ego/mind. I can feel something "move" deep >within the center of my self as I "place" the request outside myself and >then let go and any anxiety about the outcome. I gave an example of books, >but jobs, inspiration, strength, and wisdom seem to come in the same way. >I have an awareness of energies that "receive" these requests. Now *this* is real stuff! I have experienced, in my own way, the very same things. My favorite example is from when I was writing my Essay "The Nazarenes" (See website). None of the source books on the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls were to be found. I asked, like you say, and within the week had the lot - including a spare to give to a friend. I've looked in the bookshops since, and none of them can be found! Alan :-) P.S. I copy some of my posts to ti-l, so I see you are getting annoying messages telling you you are not subscribed to it. If you want to be, I will subscribe you. Otherwise edit the mail header before sending (if you can). --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 14 23:46:56 1998 Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 21:33:36 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3584A420.5AE1@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great > Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own > experience that what she said was also what they found. Daniel Caldwell replies: We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame Blavatsky's lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See my article at: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix This appendix gives the first hand accounts of H.S. Olcott. I have a huge file of the other testimonies. Dr. Bain continues: > In all my reading, I have not come across references to Great White > Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which pre-dates > HPB. So? Using this kind of reasoning & argument, we could rule out many different kinds of things. But the real question to answer is what is the evidence for HPB's Masters and *how good is it*? Do you believe in the existence of Jesus Christ? Regarding Jesus, as far as I know we have no first hand accounts about him; only secondary accounts written by unknown authors who compiled various materials from an oral tradition, etc., etc. If you have any first hand, eyewitness accounts of Jesus, please let me know. With HPB's Masters, we have plenty of eyewitness accounts. Even K. Paul Johnson is convinced of the existence of Ooton Liatto and another adept. He writes on p. 62 of THE MASTERS REVEALED: ". . . . There is little doubt that two REAL adepts visited Olcott in New York." And elsewhere Johnson admits: "There were two points in the history of the TS at which the Masters Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages rather than elusive semi-ethereal beings...." And Johnson's statements are based on the testimony of Olcott and other Theosophical witnesses. Are you a "doubting Thomas" of Johnson's statements? THIS COULD GET INTERESTING! :) And speaking of the Adept Brotherhood, in 1882, Colonel Olcott wrote: "I know the Brothers to be living men and not spirits; and they have TOLD me that there are schools, under appointed adepts, where their science is regularly taught." If you accept any of the Theosophical teachings, what is so difficult in believing that there are Theosophical adepts, yogis, call them what you will, and that they have their own schools and communities? I have many friends who are *skeptics of Theosophy*, but they don't believe in Adepts plus they disbelieve all the rest of Theosophy, not to mention the Kabbalah and all esoteric traditions, etc.,etc. In the above, I am not suggesting that one should naively accept the evidence but it should be examined and studied and compared with other types of evidence for other things. How good is the "evidence" for the "paranormal" or "esoteric" items that you accept and believe in? I'm not trying to be difficult with you but simply asking you to compare things, etc. From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 06:46:58 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:35:35 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <000401bd9851$e6268920$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th Dear Annette: No I do not entirely "quote" from memory. I try to use what I have learned from Theosophy in what I write. In addition when I am uncertain I refer to my (rather extensive) notes and look for the source for something that I have forgotten the precise details of. But the only advantage that I may have is that I have been devoted to the study of what Theosophy teaches ( and also what comes out from Science, Philosophy, Psychology and Religion). No I don't "punch up my information," although, in studying I did find it very useful to concentrate a number of valuable statements together. I can copy these for others who may desire to see them for themselves, or use them in such answers as seem to warrant them. I very much believe (am convinced) that Nature contains everything and is far more finely balanced than we realize. WE have the power (in our ignorance, usually) to disturb nature's balances and doing this we create "Karma" [ The mechanism for the creation of karma is that our feelings, thoughts and decisions, acts too, impose themselves on the "elemental lives" which compose all things. They, being impressed go out into Nature and eventually return to us, either in this life or some subsequent one, and bring the impairment back to us to deal with. Of course if we harmonize with nature instead of an impairment, we cause those components of Nature to grow and flower, and the resultant "seed" that returns to us is an enhancement of our own capacities to fine tune with nature even better. ] I do not mean to sound as though I "knew everything." I do not. But I have found in Theosophy a system of search and work which gives useful clues to all our surroundings. Shall I hide this for myself or shall I spread it around ? Another friend detects this in me, and calls it "preaching." and I certainly do not like the sound of that. So I will try to modify my presentations. I do not believe that any "quote" or "book" says it all. I do think that some of the ways in which things are presented by wiser people than we are, can help. (Of course, it is I who think they are "wiser.") But, enough of this. Thanks for your help. Dal. PS I think when we post our comments they become the property of all of us, and while they may deal with a specific idea, we all read and use them, so we all ought to feel free to respond or query what is offered. D. > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 11:17 AM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation >Dear Dallas: >I know this was directed at another, but I would like to comment... >For the first time since reading you I felt you the person. Perhaps >part of this is a female thing, wanting emotional connection, wanting >something to touch the soul, by which text quotes just don't cut it. > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 06:55:36 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:50:27 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <000601bd9851$e85fb040$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th 1998 Dear Thoa:O Glad to read your back and forth between my writing and Annette's -- more can now be added from my today's MSG to her. As to my name. It is of Scottish origin. A small town near Edinburgh from which my Mother's ancestors descend. She was the grand daughter of George Mifflin Dallas who was Vice-president under Polk (Civil-war days). Dallas in Texas (and some other towns) was named in his honor, and at the time was just a dusty cross road in the vast Texas plains with a few buildings scattered around. So ? > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 2:32 PM > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" > Subject: No cost, no obligation >Annette to Dallas: >>>Dallas: >>> right about lots of reading, etc ... and I will say ia very "spotty" >>>mind that remembers some things and >>> forgets others. >> >>Annette: >>I figured you had some computerized books so that you could punch in key >>words and up pops the appropriate quote. If you are quoting from >>memory, well, what can I say. > >Ah, now I know why I've been saving some of the posts! That way, once I've >been on the list for a few more years, I can dig up any related topic and >post them. So far, I have a good file on the Leadbeater scandal, TS >politics, HPB, Krisnamurti's Truth, sexism, vegetarianism, debate over >Paul's Masters, psychism and the ES. I even started posting "Truth is a >Pathless Land" for Doss whenever he mentions it. I'm saving him some >searching time. > >>> Dallas: >>> To me Theosophy is not only the current of thought today, but the >>> result of past thinking. Like mathematics you and I are solving >>> current problems with a wisdom drawn from Euclid, Pythagoras of >>> Plate --- etc..What do you think of the work done by Penrose, >>> Margulis, Hawking, and Bohm, Einstein, etc., etc., who are >>> pretty much in the forefront of scientific thought ? Isn't it a >>> unity of past and present made "real" and "creative ?" >> >>Annette: >>Well said. Our difference seems to be that, having read and understood >>(or not) the recorded thoughts of others, I believe it is our task to >>assimilate those thoughts with our experiences and present the result as >>something come from ourselves. So my ideal debate is something like... >>"Trees speak to us of ancient wisdom. I have experienced this when etc >>etc, and others have told me that they have experienced etc etc. I am >>reminded of SoandSo's account in SuchandSuch book (pages xx) recounting >>similar experiences with various differences pertinent to the time of >>that writing." > >I agree with Annette that knowledge is important, but it is also important >that one can play around with knowledge. Has anybody ever played with a >Lego? It has rigid parts, most of it squares and rectangles, with the >delightful additions of triangles, little humans, and other odd parts. The >Lego becomes a wonderful starship when one realizes that they interconnect >with each other, the rigidly shaped parts and the amorphous parts. The >rigid parts become the foundation and can be a support anywhere, while the >amorphous parts help to make the starship unique. All that knowledge is >the foundation, the known, and the rigidly shaped parts. Our creativity is >the amorphous parts, our interpretation, our playfulness. Put together a >Lego set and you'll see what I mean. You can buy a small one for 5 bucks. > >Thoa :o) > >P.S. Dallas, how did you get your name? I know it's a city in Texas. >That's an unusual name for Theosophists with a love for India to give to >their child. I can understand your sister's name Sophia, which relates to >wisdom. > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 08:01:57 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 07:51:46 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Feeding the Hungry Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980615075146.0127f9c0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <19980615024150.2252.qmail@hotmail.com> At 07:41 PM 6/14/1998 PDT, Sophia wrote: >This subject is very close to my heart, and I have collected data and >studied various aspects for years. So, I am going to write at some >length taking up some points. It may turn out quite long, so a warning >to those uninterested to 'wipe out.'" >> clip <<< Thanks for your detailed msg. No thinking human being can be insensitive to the hunger problem. The problem can be solved if only there is a will to do it. I hope a day will come when women and men around the world will demand of their leaders to take interest in this issue and move them to solve it. ..mkr From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 12:27:04 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:22:44 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: No cost, no obligation Message-Id: Dear Dallas: >Dallas: >Glad to read your back and forth between my writing and >Annette's -- more can now be added from my today's MSG to her. > >As to my name. It is of Scottish origin. A small town near >Edinburgh from which my Mother's ancestors descend. She was the >grand daughter of George Mifflin Dallas who was Vice-president >under Polk (Civil-war days). Dallas in Texas (and some other >towns) was named in his honor, and at the time was just a dusty >cross road in the vast Texas plains with a few buildings >scattered around. So ? I'm interested in knowing about people, that's all. Whenever I go into someone's home, I look at the photographs. Although they're not members of my family, I still hold a fascination for them. You don't have to answer any of my questions if they're too personal. You obviously have an interesting life history. At what point did your family line studied Theosophy? Thoa :o) From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 12:38:54 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:16:10 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: "Humans Being" Message-Id: Kym: >As far as my reaction to Dallas' (and other folks) posts to me - sometimes >my feelings get tweaked; sometimes I experience the greatest of merriment; >sometimes I think "Whew, I'm glad I'm not as dumb as they are!"; sometimes I >think "People are so much smarter than me - this is clearly my first >incarnation."; sometimes I think "Well, I whooped that snippy person but >good with my witty retorts!"; sometimes I think "Dear God, if you love me >and I promise never to giggle at a funeral again, please have that post I >just sent to the list get lost forever in cyberspace."; sometimes I think >"Now this post will truly show my brilliance and people will be blinded in >awe by the light of my wisdom!" My gosh, you're just like the rest of us! I thought you were special, Kym. Actually, you've got spunk, lady. >And then someone will say "We need to quit being so self-centered - that is >what T/theosophy is all about." And then I think. . "Oh, bummer. Well, >what the avitchi am I supposed to write and do now?" Do whatever you want to do. In our growing process, we modify some things, stop doing some things, and start new ways of doing things. It's got to come naturally, though. Otherwise, you'll be a neurotic freak. I used to love joking in an insulting way, directed at the person in front of me. If you ever lived in the rude and brusque northeastern cities, you'll understand what I mean. In fact, there's a game on who can come up with the wittiest insults. The people usually laugh at the insults. Those northeasterners have a thick hide. It is their way of dealing with the pressures of their life. However, I had to change my ways when I moved out to California. The easy-going Californians do not take your insults as a joke. They take it as insults. IMO, they also have a rotten sense of humor. Instead of being sharp and edgy, they are relaxed and friendly. Both have their good points. Anyway, all I can recommend is that if doing the same ole things do not bring pleasure for you anymore, then it's time to change the routine. Maybe it's time to open an Avitchi Pizza Parlor. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 14:31:12 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:08:43 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Computer Haiku (fwd) for Mark Message-Id: <199806151808.OAA07919@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> > > IMAGINE IF, INSTEAD OF CRYPTIC, GEEKY TEXT STRINGS, YOUR COMPUTER PRODUCED > ERROR MESSAGES IN THE FORM OF HAIKU... > > ***************************************** > > The Web site you seek > cannot be located but > endless others exist > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Chaos reigns within. > Reflect, repent, and reboot. > Order shall return. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > ABORTED effort: > Close all that you have. > You ask way too much. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > First snow, then silence. > This thousand dollar screen dies > so beautifully. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > With searching comes loss > and the presence of absence: > "My Novel" not found. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > The Tao that is seen > Is not the true Tao, until > You bring fresh toner. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Windows NT crashed. > I am the Blue Screen of Death. > No one hears your screams. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Stay the patient course > Of little worth is your ire > The network is down > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > A crash reduces > your expensive computer > to a simple stone. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Yesterday it worked > Today it is not working > Windows is like that > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Three things are certain: > Death, taxes, and lost data. > Guess which has occurred. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > You step in the stream, > but the water has moved on. > This page is not here. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Out of memory. > We wish to hold the whole sky, > But we never will. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Having been erased, > The document you're seeking > Must now be retyped. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Rather than a beep > Or a rude error message, > These words: "File not found." > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Serious error. > All shortcuts have disappeared. > Screen. Mind. Both are blank. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - > > A file that big? > It might be very useful. > But now it is gone. > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 14:42:15 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:40:23 EDT From: "Teos9 (Louis)" Subject: Re: Alan's challenge Message-ID: <4172c98d.358578a8@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-15 09:40:13 EDT, you write: << (See website). >> Im fairly new to these posts and still feeling my way about. What website? Address please. Thanks From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 14:47:20 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:42:49 -0700 (PDT) From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Feeding the Hungry Message-Id: Sophia: >This subject is very close to my heart, and I have collected data and >studied various aspects for years. So, I am going to write at some >length taking up some points. It may turn out quite long, so a warning >to those uninterested to 'wipe out.'" Thank you, Sophia, for posting the information. It is too easy to ease into the comfort of our daily lives and ignore the facts that make us uncomfortable. Unfortunately, the popular media does not seem to think it is a topic that will bring them ratings. People usually want to know what affects their health and their pocketbooks. Anything that is of personal interest. What I would have liked to see more in the news is the analysis of the influence of everything we do, from what we eat, to how often we use the car, to land depletion, to effects on wild life, to those who have not. It is through awareness that will make us take action. With overpopulation a fact, everything we do has more of an effect. While what we do as an individual seems innocuous, what we do as a collective is endangering our environment, and others of the human and animal species. Every time we use gas, we are contributing to the crisis in the Middle East. Every time we drive a car, we are contributing to the pollution. Every time we eat, we are contributing to further unbalance. While the home space we take may not be much, multiply that by the human population of the world, and you see land being taken away from wild life, and forests being cleared. Our human waste contributes to the pollution on the land and in the ocean. This is not to condemn us humans. But it is a fact with overpopulation. Some partial solutions I see is information and free distribution of birth control, electric cars, alternative food (includes bugs), and awareness to help us develop a conscience. What puzzles me is the recent nuclear testing in India. With a population of around 1 billion and a land mass smaller than the United States (population 200-300 MM), where did they find the space to perform the testing? How do the locals in your area react to this recent development? >Enough for now. Excuse my saying so much, which does not seem directly >to be theosophy. And yet it is theosophy that should be applied in >daily life, and to the life of our society and situation. Sophia Actually, this is what we need, more information on application to daily life. Of course, stated in the way you did, as information for people to take as they will without preaching. Thoa :o) P.S. For anyone weaning off beef, ostrich meat is a great substitute, although expensive. Tastes like a lean beef. If you're venturing into vegetarianism, I don't recommend the old fashion method of eating mostly beans, dousing everything with amino acids, and trying to imitate meat. Vegetables are great in themselves without all the heavy doctoring up. They should be cooked in a way that brings out their delicate fresh flavor, enhanced with nuts, cream, yogurt, beans, grains, and tofu. I recommend The Greens Cookbook, and Fields of Greens for home gourmet vegetarian cooking. A lot of the other vegetarian cookbooks are still traditionally heavy tasting for my taste. Kills the taste of the vegetable. And who can enjoy eating beans all the time! If you're in San Francisco, try the Green's Restaurant. Excellent. If they come out with a great gourmet bug restaurant, I'd try it. Food should be a tasty celebration! From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 15:15:07 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:08:37 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: On reveling Message-Id: <199806152008.OAA21682@mailmx.micron.net> Sophia wrote: >So walk, enjoy and revel in the grass, even when and if you have to >harvest food, but let you heart be loving. Revel in the beauty of >form and color of the flower and the sunset, feel blessed and try to >give of BLESSEDNESS back to them. Hmmm. I don't see how I can "enjoy and revel" in the grass. It seems the concept of harmlessness is impossible. When I sit upon the grass, I realize that I may have knocked back to the ground an insect that struggled for five hours up a blade of grass and had almost reached the top until my bubbly butt just sat down on it. What if it were humans being affected like the insect? Imagine: a bigger species comes to this world and the leader advises these bigger beings to "walk, enjoy and revel" on the new world. The big aliens start romping and wrestling with each other - having a grand old time. In the process, humans are squished, maimed, and killed underneath them. Most humans would think that is TERRIBLE - why shouldn't we think the same about the inhabitants of the grass world? This world is fashioned in such a way that we are forced to kill to live - but I wonder. . .how can one be happy in it? It would seem to me that the more one knows, the sadder one would become. The more we know, the more we see the struggling, desperate, breaking hearts of both humans and animals. Yes, I can see the beauty of the sunset and feel the cushy-ness of the grass. Of course, I feel blessed - I've food to eat, a house to live in, a computer to pontificate on, heating and air conditioning, etc. . .so many others do not. But, most importantly, I have around me people who love me and a sense of purpose. . .so many others do not. I simply cannot understand a "happy wise person." Things are not as they should be - this is not the best of all possible worlds. I cannot "revel," Sophia. Not now. Kym From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:12:05 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 04:13:12 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Feeding the Hungry Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980615024150.2252.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck writes >FARMERS the world over are already or are becoming the prey of the >middle man-who makes exorbitant profits, and the processor who can >collects the raw material and sells at VALUE ADDED prices. Farmers are >at the lowest level of this food-chain, and they still grow and grow and >remain poor. While all those who do not and cannot produce their own >food needs also find themselves suffering and contributing indirectly to >the world wide shortages. How true this is - there is a genuine risk I may lose my home, as I rent it from just such a farmer. Alan :-( -- Dr. A.M.Bain From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:22:51 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 04:10:52 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Turnips scream Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980615022811.15378.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck writes >So walk, enjoy and revel in the grass, even when and if you have to >harvest food, but let you heart be loving. Revel in the beauty of >form and color of the flower and the sunset, feel blessed and try to >give of BLESSEDNESS back to them. Shall I now, having written the >above, say with my LOVE (I usually, as you may have notice, do not end >this way!) but today it my be appropriate, Sophia A most warming post. I like to try to remember to THANK the grass, the trees, the creatures, etc. I don't always succeed, sadly - but I do try! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:32:59 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 10:35:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <004901bd98a2$2f5a1a80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th 1998 Dan: Wasn't there a report during HPB's life time of a photograph taken of the "inner room" at Avenue Rd., in London, after its completion. which showed up in one of the upper corners, the face of a 'visiting adept' -- and, when noticed, it was explained that he was "visiting" to have a look at the "room" and was somewhat rueful about being "caught" on the exposed film, as apparently a photograph also looks part way into the astral ? I recall reading this but at this moment I do not know where, nor do I recall where I could look for it. Dal. > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 10:02 PM > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own >> experience that what she said was also what they found. > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame >Blavatsky's >lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See my >article at: > >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix > >This appendix gives the first hand accounts of H.S. Olcott. I have a >huge file of the other testimonies. > >Dr. Bain continues: > >> In all my reading, I have not come across references to Great White >> Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which pre-dates >> HPB. > >So? Using this kind of reasoning & argument, we could rule out many >different >kinds of things. But the real question to answer is what is the evidence >for HPB's Masters and *how good is it*? > >Do you believe in the existence of Jesus Christ? Regarding Jesus, >as far as I know we have no first hand accounts about him; only >secondary accounts written by unknown authors who >compiled various materials from an oral tradition, etc., etc. >If you have any first hand, eyewitness accounts of Jesus, >please let me know. > >With HPB's Masters, we have plenty of eyewitness >accounts. Even K. Paul Johnson is convinced of the existence of Ooton >Liatto and another adept. He writes on p. 62 of THE MASTERS REVEALED: > >". . . . There is little doubt that two REAL adepts visited Olcott in >New York." > >And elsewhere Johnson admits: > >"There were two points in the history of the TS at which the Masters >Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages rather than >elusive semi-ethereal beings...." > >And Johnson's statements are based on the testimony of Olcott and other >Theosophical witnesses. > >Are you a "doubting Thomas" of Johnson's statements? THIS COULD GET >INTERESTING! :) > >And speaking of the Adept Brotherhood, in 1882, Colonel Olcott wrote: > >"I know the Brothers to be living men and not spirits; and they have >TOLD me that there are schools, under appointed adepts, where their >science is regularly taught." > >If you accept any of the Theosophical teachings, what is so >difficult in believing that there are Theosophical adepts, yogis, >call them what you will, and that they have their own schools and >communities? > >I have many friends who are *skeptics of Theosophy*, but they don't >believe >in Adepts plus they disbelieve all the rest of Theosophy, not to >mention the Kabbalah and all esoteric traditions, etc.,etc. > >In the above, I am not suggesting that one should naively accept the >evidence but it should be examined and studied and compared with other >types of evidence for other things. How good is the "evidence" for the >"paranormal" or "esoteric" items that you accept and believe in? > >I'm not trying to be difficult with you but simply asking you to >compare things, etc. > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:42:17 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 14:09:31 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: "Humans Being" Message-ID: <004d01bd98a2$35825620$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th Dear Kym: You are right our "feelings" all get tweaked -- I think that's how they grow and sort themselves out on a basis of value and importance. It always seemed to me that I could "look at my feelings." And while recognizing that they grab me, yet I seem to be separate from them, and can "handle" them. So I accepted the Theosophical idea that they were a separate part of my make-up and while close to the mind, they were not part of it. [ I live in a body (but I don't know it well so I leave it to handle its own affairs); I have "feelings, desires and emotions." I see them come and go and sometimes they make sense and sometimes they are exaggerated and if allowed to continue unchecked I could get into very "hot" water. So I check them. But who or what in me does the checking ? Is it the "mind, thinking ? To some extent I would say yes, But I know that I can change my mind and, so to say, switch it on to work on a different subject that I select for it. So the mind is also a "tool". And by now I am no closer to knowing WHO I AM. Except that I exist inside ( or is it over or outside, the body ?) Theosophy offers as a solution the idea that there is a "ray" of the ONE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT that is resident in, around, above me, and is the ultimate ME. How does this grab you ? If there is a "universal god-spirit, a deity, perhaps a part of IT resides in me too, as logically it is everywhere. Question: then why are we not better than we are ? I would like to know too ! But why is it that we have these yearnings and longings for something "better." Where do they come from ? What are the virtues, the ideals, the nobility, the unselfishness the altruism aspects of our mystical "feelings ?" Now, if something can be changed, then there is a "changer" inside. That's what I want to meet and make sure that I understand. am I it ? I have always found it difficult to analyze others or to attempt to define them, because it seems to me that all of us are changing, and the persona we meet today, may have changed attitude and position by "tomorrow." I can see this happening in myself. I can only guess it happens in others. So I don't "give up" but try to understand. Also if we try to talk, and I am quite poor at dialog, really (in my esteem) I often come out as Thoa:O expressed and sound "preachy." So if it can be understood that is only my asking things, and not making it sound like it was carved in stone, I might be getting somewhere. As Pooh would say: "Bother !." And Piglet would say: "Have some haycorns with your honey." Best wishes: Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 3:16 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: "Humans Being" >Thoa wrote to Dallas: > >>Kym is doing fine the way she is. She does not need any directing in how >>she should write. I enjoyed her posts immensely. She's one of the people >>whose posts I go directly to when they're up. > >I appreciate your words, Thoa. In the "Big Picture" sphere, it is inspiring >and courageous for someone to stand up for something they believe in or, >conversely, to battle against an injustice. In the "Personal" theatre, I >felt affirmed and valued after reading your post. > >In addition, as I believe you noted in further postings, Dallas responded to >your post gracefully, quickly, and sincerely. That, too, is quite commendable. > >As far as my reaction to Dallas' (and other folks) posts to me - sometimes >my feelings get tweaked; sometimes I experience the greatest of merriment; >sometimes I think "Whew, I'm glad I'm not as dumb as they are!"; sometimes I >think "People are so much smarter than me - this is clearly my first >incarnation."; sometimes I think "Well, I whooped that snippy person but >good with my witty retorts!"; sometimes I think "Dear God, if you love me >and I promise never to giggle at a funeral again, please have that post I >just sent to the list get lost forever in cyberspace."; sometimes I think >"Now this post will truly show my brilliance and people will be blinded in >awe by the light of my wisdom!" > >And then someone will say "We need to quit being so self-centered - that is >what T/theosophy is all about." And then I think. . "Oh, bummer. Well, >what the avitchi am I supposed to write and do now?" > > >Kym > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:49:56 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:35:25 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <004b01bd98a2$328765a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th 1998 Dear Marshall: Thanks for the additional info on Mr. Wadia. I have a short " Bio-notes " on his life and work and can send it to you if you would like to see and read it. I agree that his books (originally published as anonymous articles in THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT -- a monthly magazine published by the Bombay ULT since 1930) are valuable to us. They have helped me a great deal in my study, also. "Uncle Jack Regardie" -- Val (my wife) is his niece -- told me of his playing of tennis in the early days in Washington -- and in Bombay in 1928-29, when he lived in the same compound in a detached bungalow, and where we had a ground floor "flat" on Bomanji Petit Rd., Malabar Hill, he used to play at the tennis court there with my father and mother, and with Donald Townshend and others. I was only 6 or 7. In our album of photographs I recall having one showing them at play. Soph has it now. It is also true that he was interned as you say during the 1st World War with A B and Arundale for advocating that the British give independence back to Indians for them to manage their own country. If you go back to visit Madras ask to visit the Madras Labor Union. It is in the "down-town area." There you will find that they preserve his name and fame -- When I visited over 30 years ago there were still living those who had worked with him and they had his room and desk and other things preserved as in a museum. His bust was placed on the top entrance to the building. There is a small green square in front of the building. Do visit the ULT in Bombay, Bangalore and Madras if you go. At the ULT in Bombay a whole floor is devoted to the activities of the INDIAN INSTITUTE OF WORLD CULTURE, which Mr. Wadia started in Bangalore [ their headquarters are near the Bangalore Lodge at 6, B. P. Wadia rd., Basavangudi. My sister lives at 1 B.P.Wadia rd. a few yards away. I am sure she will welcome you. -- her E-mail address is sophia10@hotmail.net ] Would you like a program of activities, as all the addresses are given there ? Meeting times in India at the ULT are usually: Sunday evening 6.15 pm to 7.30 pm; Wednesday (same timing) Question and Answer Meeting; and Fridays 6.15 pm to 7.30 pm Study Class usually in either THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY or THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. Bombay Lodge has a THEOSOPHY SCHOOL at 4.30 pm on Saturdays. It would be good to phone ahead of time and get dates and times reviewed. In Bombay contact Mr. V. Ramakrishna or Mr. Ramesh Sirkar. Phone: 208-5137 (in Bombay). In Bangalore contact Miss Sophia TenBroeck Phone: 667-2498 (in Bangalore). In Madras contact Dr, Jayalaxmi Kamath ( You can get her phone # in Bombay or Bangalore. I don't have it. ) June 21st will be ULT Day -- a special meeting held in commem-oration of the work of Robert Crosbie. All ULTs hold a special meeting in his honor on that day. In Washington at the ULT there the meeting will be at 11 am (I believe) and Mr. Rama Chandran of Bangalore ULT will speak. Do get additional directions from him. Best wishes to you, and let me know if I can help. I am letting the folks in Bombay and Bangalore know of your proposed visit. do let them know if they can help you when you arrive there. Dallas. > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 6:28 PM > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy >Date: 98-06-14 19:40:54 EDT >From: Megabeet > >In a message dated 98-06-14 13:34:07 EDT, Dallas writes: > ><< My sister Sophia was born in Bombay in 1929 and has lived in > Bangalore (where there is a ULT Lodge) about 250 miles from > Madras in south India. My mother and she started the East-West > School. It has had an enrolment of over 700 pupils (Montessori > to High School graduation classes) and is one of the best in that > town. >> > >Thank you for the info. I have always liked Sri Wadia's STUDIES IN THE SECRET >DOCTINE, Volumes I and II, Also someone I knew attributed POINT OUT THE WAY to >P.B. Wadia's authorship. One of the regular students in the Washington ULT >Lodge, Jacob Regardie (brother of Israel Regardie), now deceased, would >delight in telling me that he often played tennis with Sri Wadia whenever he >came to town. > >I had read that P.B. Wadia, Annie Besant And George Arundale were interned by >the British for agitating for Indian Independence and, upon their release, >they were given a hero's welcome in Madras, complete with parade. > >I was in Bombay 17 years ago and I visited the Adyar TS compound in that city. >I was impressed by its size. There were a number of buildings there on the >grounds. I was taken on a tour of the main building. There were no meetings >going on at the time. Unfortunately, I was unable to visit the Bombay ULT and >the Institute of Culture (Sophia Wadia). I am returning to India in September >and perhaps I will be able make a stop in Bombay. If you could email me the >times of the meetings there I would appreciate it. > >The present head of the Institute of World Culture will be speaking at the >Washington ULT on June 21st but I don't know if I'll be able to make it. His >name slips my mind for the moment. > >Lmhem111 >(Marshall) > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 16:56:28 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:49:12 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Dal's questions Message-ID: <004c01bd98a2$3421dbc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th 1998 Thanks Alan: Some comments added below -- Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 12:11 AM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Dal's questions >W. Dallas TenBroeck asks a number of questions, >and so I respond from my own observations and experiences as an >occultist of over 40 years practice. > >>Are there seven Principles in Man and nature ? If so how do they >>interact ? > >Yes there are, but they don't interact. The same seven principles simply >behave differently in different circumstances. Including turnips. ========================================= According to HPB they do interact because they are areas where the ONE CONSCIOUSNES -- the Atma -- uses, either consecutively or separately, all all together -- "thus have I heard" ========================================== >> >>Is there a general LAW -- whether called Karma or something >>else -- that unified the Worlds, mankind, the Galaxies and the >>atoms ? > >Yes. I think perhaps you meant to type "unifies" - the 's' on the >keyboard has always been too close to the 'd' :-) --------------------------------------------- YOU ARE RIGHT -- I DID NOT CATCH IT BEFORE SENDING IT. >----------------------------------- >Some call this LAW "God" which is fair enough if we do not attribute >human characteristics to "God." >> >>Can it be "broken ?" is it "partial? or complete ?" > >It is complete, and cannot be broken, though it appears to rearrange its >components on a regular basis through all seven principles (and planes). >> >>Does the SPIRIT exists (at least as a logical base) ? > >Same thing. "God" is "Breath" [Latin Spiritus, Greek Pneuma]. We, as >individual are "breaths." [pl.] ------------------------- agreed -------------------------- >> >>What is the "soul of man, and if it exists, what are it powers >>and nature ? > >There are two concepts of "soul." One equates with the >"astral/etheric" double, and is temporal and reactive. The other >contains this, but extends "upwards" to include "mind" - understood as >the ability to viualise and interpret (not always correctly!). As far as >theosophical "lower manas" maybe. ======================================== Agreed -- equivalents: Kama and Manas (desire and Mind ) ======================================== > >>What is the psychic nature as distinct from th mental ? > >Psychic nature is "lower manas" and below. Mental nature is "higher >manas" and above - while we are in incarnation. Eventually, all >indications seem to show, "higher manas" will be absorbed into yet >higher principles. >> AGREED >>Is Reincarnation reasonable ? > >Reasonable where necessary or desirable, otherwise not. > ================================== WHAT'S THE "OR NOT ?" Desire some enlightenment ===================================== > >>Is the perfectibility of all nature a potential possibility ? > ================================ >Perfection is a human concept. So far as LAW is concerned, >everything is always just as it is. Love is real, *and* shit happens. >> ================================ I meant "Reason" ================================== >>Are the "Masters of Wisdom" Imaginary or possibly facts ? >> >There are higher intelligences (non-incarnate) who might be so >described, but they are "masters" or "adepts" in particular areas of the >larger scheme of things. Sometimes they work through living human >beings, but their messages are always garbled by the "lower" functions >of their intermediaries. Also, they are in the same situation as "adepts" >on earth. A Master Builder cannot do the work of a Master Goldsmith. > >Most of those who work with humanity appear (note "appear") to be >former human beings. Maybe they all are, but I have met one or two >who seem never to have incarnated here - which doesn't rule out the >possibilty of their having human characteristics. ================================================ I agree we ue the designation "Masters" only to indicate proficiency as comparedtoour capacities in use. As I understand the Theosophical scheme, the progression from man to wise-man is graded by the individual who is teaching himself what Nature already has innately. Tio me it stands to reason that a band of Wise men would work together and to assist humanity as individuals thereof towards their own limprovement and learning. =================================== >_____________ > >All of us on the lists spend a great deal of time in discussion and debate. >Very few seem to have (I hope I am wrong) direct experience of the >things we debate. I have related short versions of just two of my own >experiences. Why don't we all try to share what we know and have >found (as we see it) and quote "sources" a damn sight less often. > >The sources (insofar as TS writings are concerned) are all over the >web, and there are many many links to them via the TI website (see >below). Any of us with a web browser can go get them. In my own >opinion, much of what is available is misleading, to say the least, but I >also believe it needs to be read and to be studied. Often by puzzling >over what doesn't make sense to us, we, "the cracked" as Pam puts it, >we get to find the sense and the true light enters. > >Other sources are the gnostic, kabbalist, and various religious writings, >also all over the web. None of it is 100% "true". Turning the other >cheek, for example, may work according to theory, but it can also get >you slapped on both cheeks and more besides. This I can definitely >confirm! ====================================== CORRECT == there are many "paths" to the mystic (or actual) GOAL. That is something that ISIS UNVEILED and later the S D seem to expose, so that we can grasp the similarity of the fundamentals of all those religions we are now aware of. I do not think the words are all that important but th ias are. I also agree that each in their search for "the TRUTH" appear to rove al over the map -- but is not the striving of value -- for them, and for us toobserve and correlate to our own strivings ? Dallas >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 17:24:59 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:01:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <008d01bd98ab$a60ad800$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 15th My mother found a copy of THE SECRET DOCTRINE in 1921 in the SANTA MONICA LIBRARY, took it home and started reading it in the evening. Said to my father "Bill, this is what you and I have been looking for." They started reading from the beginning and were very interested in the Proem and the Introduction. And soon, they found themselves (this is their story to us children) out of their depth, and looked in the phone book for "Theosophical" and also saw an ad in the paper for a ULT lecture on Sunday at the Metropolitan Building in L A -- went, and found it was what they really wanted -- both were excellent students the rest of their lives. I believe that Soph and I have both profited from the early contact, but like everyone, at some time we had to decide whether Theosophy was "sense or nonsense." I was in my fist year of college and found out that my knowledge was very inaccurate and limited. Determined to study it for myself intensively. I became convinced that it was coherent and reasonable. Ever since I have been studying and verifying it, making sure that the ideas intermeshed and were useful. Dal. > Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 10:45 AM > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" > Subject: No cost, no obligation >Dear Dallas: > >>Dallas: >>Glad to read your back and forth between my writing and >>Annette's -- more can now be added from my today's MSG to her. >> >>As to my name. It is of Scottish origin. A small town near >>Edinburgh from which my Mother's ancestors descend. She was the >>grand daughter of George Mifflin Dallas who was Vice-president >>under Polk (Civil-war days). Dallas in Texas (and some other >>towns) was named in his honor, and at the time was just a dusty >>cross road in the vast Texas plains with a few buildings >>scattered around. So ? > >I'm interested in knowing about people, that's all. Whenever I go into >someone's home, I look at the photographs. Although they're not members of >my family, I still hold a fascination for them. You don't have to answer >any of my questions if they're too personal. You obviously have an >interesting life history. At what point did your family line studied >Theosophy? > >Thoa :o) > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 17:53:29 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:51:42 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Alan's challenge Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4172c98d.358578a8@aol.com> Teos9@aol.com writes >In a message dated 98-06-15 09:40:13 EDT, you write: > ><< (See website). >> >Im fairly new to these posts and still feeling my way about. What website? >Address please. Thanks http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > See below! --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:05:06 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:55:18 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Egregore Message-ID: <5uhDwwAGhZh1EwQH@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Someone asked about the origin of the word "Egregore." The following is from the Glossary on the Golden Dawn web site (see "TI" website below for link) "Egregore: from a Greek word meaning "watcher." A thought-form created by will and visualization. A group egregore is the distinctive energy of a specific group of magicians who are working together, creating and building the same thought-form or energy-form." Not everyone would accept this definition in toto. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:06:18 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:47:26 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3584A420.5AE1@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own >> experience that what she said was also what they found. > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame >Blavatsky's >lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See my >article at: Mr. Caldwell: But no picture. No doubt they said they had met HPB's "Adept" teachers, and I agree that Olcott definitely did (Old Diary Leaves). However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another matter. As you have chosen to use the remainder of my post to lauch into yet another monologue on Paul Johnson's book, I am sure you will forgive me if I ignore it, along with your seemingly confrontatational style. Take it up with Paul, if you must, but I suspect that most of us are more than well-enough informed about your views on the matter. BTW, I have never met Jesus, nor wanted to. Whether he existed is irrelevant to me. Any teaching attributed to him is worth considering *on its merits* - as is also the case with HPB, "masters" or none. AB ------------- A.M.Bain, D.D. From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:21:37 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:58:13 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980615175813.00aba680@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <004901bd98a2$2f5a1a80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas: You are right. It is mentioned in Cleather's book on HPB. Let me see if I can quickly find it. ...mkr At 10:35 AM 6/15/1998 -0700, you wrote: >June 15th 1998 > >Dan: > >Wasn't there a report during HPB's life time of a photograph >taken of the "inner room" at Avenue Rd., in London, after its >completion. which showed up in one of the upper corners, the face >of a 'visiting adept' -- and, when noticed, it was explained that >he was "visiting" to have a look at the "room" and was somewhat >rueful about being "caught" on the exposed film, as apparently a >photograph also looks part way into the astral ? > >I recall reading this but at this moment I do not know where, nor >do I recall where I could look for it. Dal. > >============================================ > > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Daniel H Caldwell" >Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 10:02 PM >Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" > > >>Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >>> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the >Great >>> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from >their own >>> experience that what she said was also what they found. >> >>Daniel Caldwell replies: >> >>We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during >Madame >>Blavatsky's >>lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See >my >>article at: >> >>http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix >> >>This appendix gives the first hand accounts of H.S. Olcott. I >have a >>huge file of the other testimonies. >> >>Dr. Bain continues: >> >>> In all my reading, I have not come across references to Great >White >>> Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which >pre-dates >>> HPB. >> >>So? Using this kind of reasoning & argument, we could rule out >many >>different >>kinds of things. But the real question to answer is what is the >evidence >>for HPB's Masters and *how good is it*? >> >>Do you believe in the existence of Jesus Christ? Regarding >Jesus, >>as far as I know we have no first hand accounts about him; only >>secondary accounts written by unknown authors who >>compiled various materials from an oral tradition, etc., etc. >>If you have any first hand, eyewitness accounts of Jesus, >>please let me know. >> >>With HPB's Masters, we have plenty of eyewitness >>accounts. Even K. Paul Johnson is convinced of the existence of >Ooton >>Liatto and another adept. He writes on p. 62 of THE MASTERS >REVEALED: >> >>". . . . There is little doubt that two REAL adepts visited >Olcott in >>New York." >> >>And elsewhere Johnson admits: >> >>"There were two points in the history of the TS at which the >Masters >>Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages >rather than >>elusive semi-ethereal beings...." >> >>And Johnson's statements are based on the testimony of Olcott >and other >>Theosophical witnesses. >> >>Are you a "doubting Thomas" of Johnson's statements? THIS COULD >GET >>INTERESTING! :) >> >>And speaking of the Adept Brotherhood, in 1882, Colonel Olcott >wrote: >> >>"I know the Brothers to be living men and not spirits; and they >have >>TOLD me that there are schools, under appointed adepts, where >their >>science is regularly taught." >> >>If you accept any of the Theosophical teachings, what is so >>difficult in believing that there are Theosophical adepts, >yogis, >>call them what you will, and that they have their own schools >and >>communities? >> >>I have many friends who are *skeptics of Theosophy*, but they >don't >>believe >>in Adepts plus they disbelieve all the rest of Theosophy, not to >>mention the Kabbalah and all esoteric traditions, etc.,etc. >> >>In the above, I am not suggesting that one should naively accept >the >>evidence but it should be examined and studied and compared with >other >>types of evidence for other things. How good is the "evidence" >for the >>"paranormal" or "esoteric" items that you accept and believe in? >> >>I'm not trying to be difficult with you but simply asking you to >>compare things, etc. >> > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:21:38 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 16:05:29 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3585A86A.505A@azstarnet.com> References: <004901bd98a2$2f5a1a80$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas, I'm pretty sure it was in one of Alice Cleather's books. At least that's where I read it. Probably in the book of her reminiscenses of HPB called *H.P. Blavatsky as I Knew Her.* When I get the time I will look it up. Daniel W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 15th 1998 > > Dan: > > Wasn't there a report during HPB's life time of a photograph > taken of the "inner room" at Avenue Rd., in London, after its > completion. which showed up in one of the upper corners, the face > of a 'visiting adept' -- and, when noticed, it was explained that > he was "visiting" to have a look at the "room" and was somewhat > rueful about being "caught" on the exposed film, as apparently a > photograph also looks part way into the astral ? > > I recall reading this but at this moment I do not know where, nor > do I recall where I could look for it. Dal. > > ============================================ > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 10:02 PM > Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" > > >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the > Great > >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from > their own > >> experience that what she said was also what they found. > > > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > > > >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during > Madame > >Blavatsky's > >lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See > my > >article at: > > > >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix > > > >This appendix gives the first hand accounts of H.S. Olcott. I > have a > >huge file of the other testimonies. > > > >Dr. Bain continues: > > > >> In all my reading, I have not come across references to Great > White > >> Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which > pre-dates > >> HPB. > > > >So? Using this kind of reasoning & argument, we could rule out > many > >different > >kinds of things. But the real question to answer is what is the > evidence > >for HPB's Masters and *how good is it*? > > > >Do you believe in the existence of Jesus Christ? Regarding > Jesus, > >as far as I know we have no first hand accounts about him; only > >secondary accounts written by unknown authors who > >compiled various materials from an oral tradition, etc., etc. > >If you have any first hand, eyewitness accounts of Jesus, > >please let me know. > > > >With HPB's Masters, we have plenty of eyewitness > >accounts. Even K. Paul Johnson is convinced of the existence of > Ooton > >Liatto and another adept. He writes on p. 62 of THE MASTERS > REVEALED: > > > >". . . . There is little doubt that two REAL adepts visited > Olcott in > >New York." > > > >And elsewhere Johnson admits: > > > >"There were two points in the history of the TS at which the > Masters > >Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages > rather than > >elusive semi-ethereal beings...." > > > >And Johnson's statements are based on the testimony of Olcott > and other > >Theosophical witnesses. > > > >Are you a "doubting Thomas" of Johnson's statements? THIS COULD > GET > >INTERESTING! :) > > > >And speaking of the Adept Brotherhood, in 1882, Colonel Olcott > wrote: > > > >"I know the Brothers to be living men and not spirits; and they > have > >TOLD me that there are schools, under appointed adepts, where > their > >science is regularly taught." > > > >If you accept any of the Theosophical teachings, what is so > >difficult in believing that there are Theosophical adepts, > yogis, > >call them what you will, and that they have their own schools > and > >communities? > > > >I have many friends who are *skeptics of Theosophy*, but they > don't > >believe > >in Adepts plus they disbelieve all the rest of Theosophy, not to > >mention the Kabbalah and all esoteric traditions, etc.,etc. > > > >In the above, I am not suggesting that one should naively accept > the > >evidence but it should be examined and studied and compared with > other > >types of evidence for other things. How good is the "evidence" > for the > >"paranormal" or "esoteric" items that you accept and believe in? > > > >I'm not trying to be difficult with you but simply asking you to > >compare things, etc. > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:36:10 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:28:36 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Overcoming hatred Message-ID: <01bd98b5$520677a0$LocalHost@default> Thoa wrote in #214: >You cannot hate something that you are not connected to. >Therefore, because you hate, you are connected to what you hate. What = you >hate in others [is?] What you hate in yourself. Law of mathematics = again. We >are saints. We are demons. This is so very true! If you want to escape something, you have = to be indifferent to it. Hatred is based on fear often (always?) = People get threatened on the inside and outside, and they tend to Hate = what they are threatened by. If you get stronger that what you are = threatened by or come to terms with it, then you can afford to be = indifferent. Its a paradox though too, because you have affinities and = adversions to just live! - Jake =20 From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 18:51:10 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:46:13 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <3585B245.6178@globalserve.net> References: <000401bd9851$e6268920$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > I very much believe (am convinced) that Nature contains > everything and is far more finely balanced than we realize. WE > have the power (in our ignorance, usually) to disturb nature's > balances and doing this we create "Karma" [ The mechanism for > the creation of karma is that our feelings, thoughts and > decisions, acts too, impose themselves on the "elemental lives" > which compose all things. They, being impressed go out into > Nature and eventually return to us, either in this life or some > subsequent one, and bring the impairment back to us to deal with. > Of course if we harmonize with nature instead of an impairment, > we cause those components of Nature to grow and flower, and the > resultant "seed" that returns to us is an enhancement of our own > capacities to fine tune with nature even better. ] Dear Dallas: Thanks for putting it that way and causing a flash for me. I'd been subsconsiously trying to put together some concepts on the power within nature and couldn't get past the obvious physical things like cut down too many trees - starve of oxygen, make extinct too many animals - destroy the balance and possibly get over-run by killer bees, and why, with all this negativity from human-kind doesn't nature just wither away or go chaotic? In your words I saw the tremendous power of love and tenacity of nature to keep us alive, unconditionally. Either that or some big hand keeps putting it back in balance as fast as we screw it up :) > Shall I hide this > for myself or shall I spread it around ? Spread it, spread it. Tempus fugit. > Another friend detects this in me, and calls it "preaching." and > I certainly do not like the sound of that. Are you put off by the label, maybe? Remember too that, except for (what you guys call the) Masters, often our reaction is to the mirror of ourselves. Kym put it nicely in her post. Cheers Annette From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 19:51:08 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:53:12 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <19980616005312.9014.qmail@hotmail.com> > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" "Did either of you know B. P. Wadia? Even though the ULT doesn't place emphasis>on personalities, I understand that Mr. Wadia was the shining light of the>Bombay Lodge and that he attracted many to theosophy through the force of his>character, charisma and oratorical skills. Attendence, I understand, was at>its height during his lifetime." Yes, indeed he was the friend of my parents in LA when my brother was a baby. I grew up, looking upon him as my gutu in my heart; there was no such outer display. There is indeed in the ULT a great effort at avoiding the possibility of "personality cults." But after a person in dead, it is a little different. B P Wadia's editorial articles in the magazine The Aryan Path, were brought together and issued under his name, as the book THUS HAVE I HEARD." Now out of print. There is a grave danger in our outer personalities trying to usurp the place of the divine inner. So efforts are made to protect oneself and another from whatThe Voice of the Silence, says is "Pride and satisfaction at the fete achieved;" and again the advice is given, "Be humble if thou would'st attain wisdom. Be humbler still when Wisdom thou hast mastered. Be like the ocean which receives all streams and rivers, the oceans might calm remains unmoved." The Tao-The-King speaks of the wise, occupying a lowly ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 20:02:54 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:40:05 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3585BEE5.3DE9@globalserve.net> References: OK, I can say something here....... Here you guys go again getting all edgy over this "appearance or not of Adepts, Masters", entities thing. I mean, this is my point about quoting others. Just supposing HPB wrote at a time when it wasn't the done thing to meet in someone's living room and talk to someone from another plane (like it was done by the majority of the middle and upper classes in her time)? Or, suppose HPB was a peasant who saw entities and heard voices all the time and was already labelled as "the harmless village idiot". With her savvy she would have documented and spread the ideas but would have left out the "visitation" bit and then this would never have become such an issue! The truth is the truth by any messanger! Also, I recently witnessed a deep trance session in which the trancer passed on "wisdom" from a group of entities, supposedly ascended and watching over our progress. Some people saw shapes around the trancer, some felt a prescence. I didn't even see an aura this time. It was also made quite clear that whatever the entities said was "filtered" through the person passing it on. This was abvious to me as nothing that was said was beyond my comprehension, and I feel at least one thing should have been. In case any of you are interested, I did ask a question: "Respectfully, in whatever way you choose to present it, what entity was/is/will be the loudest silent communicator to us?" The answer, after what appeared to be some hesitation or bickering, was TREES. Then followed a bunch of regular stuff and warnings and hints that we all already know. I've been contemplating that answer subconsciously since then. When I get the "message", it will be a mixture of every thing I have remembered, read, postulated, analyzed, envisioned and intuited, through past lives, gene transfer, grabbing bits of other people's wisdom, tuning into the universal wisdom. No? Well, isn't that what HPB et al did? So what's the hang up? Well, it seems to be that we humans want to know, for sure, absolutely, without a doubt......that we are correct! When I was a young science student and struggling with life I spent a week at a monastery. No coincidence that they assigned me to what must have been the youngest best looking celebate male I could have met. After learning what it meant to concentrate and focus for real, we debated endlessly and as I left he said to me, "you know your trouble Annette? You can't accept anything without proof. Watch out you don't always pivot around the starting point and never get close to the finish line. Take some things on faith to get started at least and then filter it through as you go". I thought he meant "blind faith", I mean the habit he wore seemed like a dead giveaway, and I said, "no way!" I wasted a lot of time by not heeding those wise words. I mean, if you never accept something to work with and perhaps modify or maybe even reject later, you hardly get started. And then, when you've walked a distance with this principle as a tool, surely you can have patience with those who say either "no way" or "this way only". So you present some photographs....someone will "prove" them fakes. So you cook up some fakes.....someone will "prove" them authentic. It seems like a downward spiral to me. Cheers Annette Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Caldwell/Graye writes > >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great > >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own > >> experience that what she said was also what they found. > > > >Daniel Caldwell replies: > > > >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame > >Blavatsky's > >lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See my > >article at: > > Mr. Caldwell: > > But no picture. No doubt they said they had met HPB's "Adept" > teachers, and I agree that Olcott definitely did (Old Diary Leaves). > However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from > independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another > matter. > > As you have chosen to use the remainder of my post to lauch into yet > another monologue on Paul Johnson's book, I am sure you will forgive > me if I ignore it, along with your seemingly confrontatational style. > > Take it up with Paul, if you must, but I suspect that most of us are more > than well-enough informed about your views on the matter. > > BTW, I have never met Jesus, nor wanted to. Whether he existed is > irrelevant to me. Any teaching attributed to him is worth considering > *on its merits* - as is also the case with HPB, "masters" or none. > > AB > ------------- > A.M.Bain, D.D. > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 20:06:17 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:53:46 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Internet & Theosophy Message-ID: <19980616005347.8167.qmail@hotmail.com> > Date: Saturday, June 13, 1998 > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" "Did either of you know B. P. Wadia? Even though the ULT doesn't place emphasis>on personalities, I understand that Mr. Wadia was the shining light of the>Bombay Lodge and that he attracted many to theosophy through the force of his>character, charisma and oratorical skills. Attendence, I understand, was at>its height during his lifetime." Yes, indeed he was the friend of my parents in LA when my brother was a baby. I grew up, looking upon him as my gutu in my heart; there was no such outer display. There is indeed in the ULT a great effort at avoiding the possibility of "personality cults." But after a person in dead, it is a little different. B P Wadia's editorial articles in the magazine The Aryan Path, were brought together and issued under his name, as the book THUS HAVE I HEARD." Now out of print. There is a grave danger in our outer personalities trying to usurp the place of the divine inner. So efforts are made to protect oneself and another from whatThe Voice of the Silence, says is "Pride and satisfaction at the fete achieved;" and again the advice is given, "Be humble if thou would'st attain wisdom. Be humbler still when Wisdom thou hast mastered. Be like the ocean which receives all streams and rivers, the oceans might calm remains unmoved." The Tao-The-King speaks of the wise, occupying a lowly place, like water which runs downhill, for from a lowly place, one cannot be toppled. While The Bhagavad Gita, teaches that "pleasure and pain should be treated the same…" and that to the wise gold and a rock are the same, and that the Brahmin and the eater of the flesh of dogs are to be treated alike. Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 20:19:36 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:58:52 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: : Masters reincarnations & Cycles Message-ID: <19980616005854.1832.qmail@hotmail.com> Darren wrote : -- ">What motivation would the masters have? Are they subject to their desires? Wouldn't they get bored being immortal? Or do they voluntarily undergo memory wiping before re-incarnation? If they do maintain consciousness through the process of re-birth, will they be an adult in a baby's body?" Read the biography of the Dalai Lama "My People My Country," in which he describes partly his own childhood, and his recognition as a reincarnation of the former Dalai Lama, for some hints. An interesting aspect of his life is that even though recognised as a former Dalai Lama and while already being install as the current Dalai Lama, he spent years of his boyhood and youth, studying under the various Tibetan scholars of the different schools of Tibetan Buddhism, he had to gather back into the present brain-mind body the knowledge and wisdom of the whole of the tradition, he had to prove himself to his teachers and the whole of Tibetan hierarchy of his competence, dedication to master the doctrine, and the ability to control the psychic forces. He had to undergo Initiations into all the schools, and in his turn becoming an Initiator. This too, while holding office of the Highest (the Panchen Lama, being the only other of his stature) and yet showing REVERENCE to the teachers who instructed him in this life. And again Darren writes : -- "As do the>Mayan calender system ,which incidentally ends on Dec 22, 2012. Some people>think that this may be the eschaton. I think humanity willcollectively>ascend on that date, due to some mass extinction, pole shift, comet, >nuclear war. But there will be survivors and they should be the 6th root>race, or the precursors at least. I'm not sure how this date fits in with>HPB's time cycles given in the SD. But as she says herself the most>accurate cycle recordings are not given out to laity" Here I offer only an OPINION. Whether it is Cayce, Nostradamus, the Mayan calendar systems, or the references given out by HPB. Do we by any chance try to place these within our life time, or close to it? We are dealing with cycles that revolve over very long periods of time Some where I very clearly remember reading HPB saying that Europe "..had a reprieve" for about another ll,000 or 15,000 years. I have spent quite a good deal of time trying to locate this to quote, and have temporarily given up. Writing this, without a reference. Those who are better suited to look this up may kindly do so. Please. As to the axis to matter. HPB speaks of both tilting and turning over-and Geology seems to have verified this to some extent. Once the days and nights were of equal duration the world over when the axis was vertical. Gradually and the rate Brenda has mentioned it tilts away. And studied I did years ago gave me the impression that when it reaches the 30 degree mark, there will be the reversal. Like the top which warbles as it spins, as its rate of revolution winds down, and at a certain point, it falls over. Our earth warbling is now accepted, the movements of the magnetic north. Just suggestion for those working on the problem. Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 21:36:07 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 19:23:48 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: "Real Evidence" Message-Id: <199806160221.VAA09231@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <3585BEE5.3DE9@globalserve.net> References: Annette, Have you ever read a book by Dora Van Gelder called THE REAL WORLD OF FAIRIES? She writes of her experiences with the nature spirits present in the trees and I was very impressed when I read the book with the uniqueness of her descriptions and her experiences. These were fantastic trees and I would take a look at this book, if you can find it somewhere. Also, I think my favorite tree is the tree from the Garden of Eden because even though this mythical tree is mostly looked upon as a "past" experience symbolically for mankind, I wonder if there isn't some "future" role for a tree such as this. Do trees hold an important secret which secret once we stumble upon and are able to reveal, we can return to the Garden? I don't know. What is the purpose of God's command not to eat of its fruit? To me (with my recent light into seven races and dinosaur evolutions), it suggests that we don't really ever have contact with the plant kingdom (or at least not until the end of a round when the kingdoms meet on the seventh globe). Perhaps, if ascended masters are no longer confined to living on a single globe within our chain, their presence here means we, too, may accompany them to destinations which otherwise we wouldn't be permitted to witness and through their activities can attempt contact with other kingdoms of nature as they are currently present on other globes in our chain. This would be experience that I would value because as a human being we don't seem to have gained access to globes other than our own, but with their advanced influence and assistance, it might be possible to grow out of this type of limitation. It seems wonderful to have trees that bear fruit and participate in mankind's nourishment. Under my present state of mind, I am inclined to think that plants as well as animals are much, much, less evolved than they appear to us. If the animal kingdom as a whole has only reached the dinosaur state, then I suppose plants might in reality (on their own globe) appear something like cactuses or may not even possess leaves, let alone fruit yet. It would likewise be wonderful if animals could participate more fully in manipulating tree shistas to be more fruit and flower producting and this would allow man to effect the shista lives even further, wouldn't it? I suppose we'll have to wait until we can speak more openly with our "guides and instructors" to know for sure. Brenda >Also, I recently witnessed a deep trance session in which the trancer >passed on "wisdom" from a group of entities, supposedly ascended and >watching over our progress. Some people saw shapes around the trancer, >some felt a prescence. I didn't even see an aura this time. It was >also made quite clear that whatever the entities said was "filtered" >through the person passing it on. This was abvious to me as nothing >that was said was beyond my comprehension, and I feel at least one thing >should have been. >In case any of you are interested, I did ask a question: >"Respectfully, in whatever way you choose to present it, what entity >was/is/will be the loudest silent communicator to us?" >The answer, after what appeared to be some hesitation or bickering, was >TREES. >Then followed a bunch of regular stuff and warnings and hints that we >all already know. > >I've been contemplating that answer subconsciously since then. When I >get the "message", it will be a mixture of every thing I have >remembered, read, postulated, analyzed, envisioned and intuited, through >past lives, gene transfer, grabbing bits of other people's wisdom, >tuning into the universal wisdom. No? Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 22:36:08 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:26:52 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3585E5FC.18CA@eden.com> References: <3.0.3.32.19980615175813.00aba680@mail.eden.com> In "H P Blavatsky as I knew her", Alice Leighton Cleather writes: "One rather interesting incident which occurred when the interior of the Lecture Hall was being photographed is perhaps worth mentioning. When the plate was developed a face appeared at a small upper window, or transom, partly open, about ten or twelve feet from the ground, where no human being could by any possibility have been standing, except on a ladder, and there were none on the premises. What, or rather Who could it be? The face was a distinguished-looking one, of an oval shape; that of a man with a moustache and pointed beard. HPB soon solved the mystery. It was the face of a Master known as "Hilarion," and she said that while the photographer was still in the hall the Master had "looked in on" her in her study, and had told her rather ruefully, that he had "just been caught by the camera." I have a copy of the photograph, and the face is perfectly distinct. Little things of this sort were of common occurrence." pp. 24/25 ====================================== M K Ramadoss wrote: > > Dallas: You are right. It is mentioned in Cleather's book on HPB. Let me > see if I can quickly find it. > > ...mkr > > At 10:35 AM 6/15/1998 -0700, you wrote: > >June 15th 1998 > > > >Dan: > > > >Wasn't there a report during HPB's life time of a photograph > >taken of the "inner room" at Avenue Rd., in London, after its > >completion. which showed up in one of the upper corners, the face > >of a 'visiting adept' -- and, when noticed, it was explained that > >he was "visiting" to have a look at the "room" and was somewhat > >rueful about being "caught" on the exposed film, as apparently a > >photograph also looks part way into the astral ? > > > >I recall reading this but at this moment I do not know where, nor > >do I recall where I could look for it. Dal. > > > >From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > >Date: Sunday, June 14, 1998 10:02 PM > >Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" > > > >>Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> > >>> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the > >Great > >>> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from > >their own > >>> experience that what she said was also what they found. > >> > >>Daniel Caldwell replies: > >> > >>We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during > >Madame > >>Blavatsky's > >>lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. See > >my > >>article at: > >> > >>http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix > >> > >>This appendix gives the first hand accounts of H.S. Olcott. I > >have a > >>huge file of the other testimonies. > >> > >>Dr. Bain continues: > >> > >>> In all my reading, I have not come across references to Great > >White > >>> Brotherhoods (or Great Black ones for that matter) which > >pre-dates > >>> HPB. > >> > >>So? Using this kind of reasoning & argument, we could rule out > >many > >>different > >>kinds of things. But the real question to answer is what is the > >evidence > >>for HPB's Masters and *how good is it*? > >> > >>Do you believe in the existence of Jesus Christ? Regarding > >Jesus, > >>as far as I know we have no first hand accounts about him; only > >>secondary accounts written by unknown authors who > >>compiled various materials from an oral tradition, etc., etc. > >>If you have any first hand, eyewitness accounts of Jesus, > >>please let me know. > >> > >>With HPB's Masters, we have plenty of eyewitness > >>accounts. Even K. Paul Johnson is convinced of the existence of > >Ooton > >>Liatto and another adept. He writes on p. 62 of THE MASTERS > >REVEALED: > >> > >>". . . . There is little doubt that two REAL adepts visited > >Olcott in > >>New York." > >> > >>And elsewhere Johnson admits: > >> > >>"There were two points in the history of the TS at which the > >Masters > >>Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages > >rather than > >>elusive semi-ethereal beings...." > >> > >>And Johnson's statements are based on the testimony of Olcott > >and other > >>Theosophical witnesses. > >> > >>Are you a "doubting Thomas" of Johnson's statements? THIS COULD > >GET > >>INTERESTING! :) > >> > >>And speaking of the Adept Brotherhood, in 1882, Colonel Olcott > >wrote: > >> > >>"I know the Brothers to be living men and not spirits; and they > >have > >>TOLD me that there are schools, under appointed adepts, where > >their > >>science is regularly taught." > >> > >>If you accept any of the Theosophical teachings, what is so > >>difficult in believing that there are Theosophical adepts, > >yogis, > >>call them what you will, and that they have their own schools > >and > >>communities? > >> > >>I have many friends who are *skeptics of Theosophy*, but they > >don't > >>believe > >>in Adepts plus they disbelieve all the rest of Theosophy, not to > >>mention the Kabbalah and all esoteric traditions, etc.,etc. > >> > >>In the above, I am not suggesting that one should naively accept > >the > >>evidence but it should be examined and studied and compared with > >other > >>types of evidence for other things. How good is the "evidence" > >for the > >>"paranormal" or "esoteric" items that you accept and believe in? > >> > >>I'm not trying to be difficult with you but simply asking you to > >>compare things, etc. > >> > > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 23:06:08 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:54:13 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3585EC65.F6152E2C@sprynet.com> References: <199806160221.VAA09231@proteus.imagiware.com> Brenda S. Tucker wrote: > > Annette, > > Have you ever read a book by Dora Van Gelder AKA Dora Kunz. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Mon Jun 15 23:36:16 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 21:26:16 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3585F3E8.6DA5@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. Bain, In your latest reponse to my post you write: > But no picture. No doubt they said they had met HPB's "Adept" > teachers, and I agree that Olcott definitely did (Old Diary Leaves). > However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from > independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another > matter. > As you have chosen to use the remainder of my post to lauch into yet > another monologue on Paul Johnson's book, I am sure you will forgive > me if I ignore it, along with your seemingly confrontatational style. > > Take it up with Paul, if you must, but I suspect that most of us are more > than well-enough informed about your views on the matter. > > BTW, I have never met Jesus, nor wanted to. Whether he existed is > irrelevant to me. Any teaching attributed to him is worth considering > *on its merits* - as is also the case with HPB, "masters" or none. Let me first briefly address the "side issues" which you deem necessary to bring into the discussion. Why bring up my "seemingly confrontational style"? I could, no doubt, likewise dreg up from previous theos-talk postings examples of your own "seemingly confrontational style." But "your style" or "my style" is a side issue and only distracts from addressing directly the *main issue* of our last few postings. I have simply tried to be direct and honest with you in bringing to your attention certain facts and reasons which seemed relevant to your call for "real evidence". If this is confrontational on my part, then so is your own reply to Dallas (see below). Again when you mention my so-called "monologue on Paul Johnson's book" and then write that you will ignore my subsequent comments, you again sidestep the major issue which prompted my replies to your previous postings. Dr. Bain, my only reason in bringing up Johnson's comments about Ooton Liatoo, etc. was simply to point out that even the "skeptical" Johnson has accepted *some of the testimony from theosophical witnesses concerning the Masters.* I simply wanted to know what your position and assessment was on this testimony mentioned by Johnson. Certainly this is relevant to the main issue which I have attempted to clarify in my last two postings. And what is that "main" issue? Dallas Tenbroeck had originally written: >> >we need to become familiar with all >> >she [ HPB ] wrote on behalf of the Great Brotherhood of the Wise, of >> >which she and the Masters of Wisdom are a part. And you had replied: >> We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is >> all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has >> yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. I have no idea what prompted you to write these words. But in order to try to understand your view and position I felt it was necessary to ask you some questions. Especially asking you for a definition of "real evidence". Furthermore, is it really historically true and factual for you to state that "we have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. . . . no one has yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence"? THIS WAS THE QUESTION THAT NEEDED AN ANSWER. To my question concerning what constituted "real evidence", you then responded: > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great > >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own > >> experience that what she said was also what they found. *So do you now acknowledge* that "testimony from others. . . etc." would indeed constitute "real evidence" if it met certain standards? And to this, I most recently wrote: >We have the testimony of *more than 25 individuals* during Madame >Blavatsky's lifetime who said that they had met H.P.B's Adept Teachers. >See my article at: > http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnargu.htm#Appendix And then you replied in turn: > But no picture. No doubt they said they had met HPB's "Adept" > teachers, and I agree that Olcott definitely did (Old Diary Leaves). > However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from > independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another > matter. In light of the clarifications you've given to my original questions, I ask you as well as other readers to reassess the factuality of your original comment to Dallas, i.e.: >> We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is >> all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has >> yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. I will simply say that IMO this original comment by you was highly misleading and historically unfactual. *Especially* since you have subsequently admitted the existence of Olcott's testimony in OLD DIARY LEAVES. Now you raise the question: > However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from > independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another > matter. But, Dr. Bain, this new issue is a long way down the road from your original position that "We have ONLY her word for this. . . ."!! And your last comment: > BTW, I have never met Jesus, nor wanted to. Whether he existed is > irrelevant to me. Any teaching attributed to him is worth considering > *on its merits* - as is also the case with HPB, "masters" or none. is again sidestepping the main issue which you yourself originally brought up. Were we discussing "teachings"?????? What does consideration of the teachings have to do with your request or demand for: > >> At least a photo of HPB with a Mahatma. Maybe a picture of the Great > >> Brotherhood. Testimony from others who could confirm from their own > >> experience that what she said was also what they found. If the existence of HPB's Masters is *really* "irrelevant" to you, then why indulge in all your comments as given above? One more comment and I will end my rather long post. You write: > However, how many of these testimonials can be regarded as from > independent witnesses with no "theosophical" axe to grind is another > matter. Good question, but how do we truly judge these tesimonials? By what standards do we assess that the witness is "independent" and has no "theosophical" axe to grind? And even if the witness has a "theosophical axe" to grind (whatever you mean by that?), do we simply dismiss that testimony? See what the historians Jacques Barzun and Henry Graff write in their classic book THE MODERN RESEARCHER: In regards to "dismissing an author [or witness] after having 'doped out' that he is a Whig, a Catholic, a Dutchman, a Muslim, an alcoholic, [a Theosophist!], or a divorced man," Barzun and Graff comment: "Dismissal or systematic discounting of what a person says because of his or her nationality, religion, or personal history is only the crude and dull form of the delicate assessment here called for. ONE MIGHT AS WELL SPARE ONESELF THE EFFORT OF READING AT ALL IF ONE IS GOING TO MAKE THE TEXT A MERE PEG FOR A GLOATING DISTRUST. The aim should be rather to obtain a large return in knowledge, some of it held under caution, until two, three or four other accounts have modified or strenghtened its solid parts. In short, reader's suspiciousness is no answer to the question of writer's [or witness'] bias. On the contrary, sympathy is prerequisite to understanding. . . ." Forgive me if I again seem confrontational with you, but your initial statement to Dallas appeared unsympathetic and even worse historically unfactual. Hoping that any future discussions will focus on the main issue instead of irrelevant side issues. Daniel H. Caldwell From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 09:10:08 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:58:40 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Fear and Faith Message-Id: <199806161358.JAA13106@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806160336.WAA15390@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 15, 98 10:36:23 pm Jake and Annette said things yesterday that I'd like to try to connect because both seem so true. Together they may shed some light on Theosophical issues discussed on this list. Jake commented that hate is based on fear (always?) and that feeling threatened by something or someone is at the root of hostility. I'd say that physiologically, this is certainly true. The Cayce readings, while giving plenty of attention to the spiritual and mental aspects of our being, emphasizes that emotions are *physical* essentially. The "fight or flight response" is an undifferentiated arousal that occurs when we are confronted with perceived danger. Either way is fear based; depending on circumstances we either flee the fear-inducing stimulus or attack it. Cayce also emphasizes that emotions, being hard-wired in the physical body, are extremely hard to work with directly. However, there is a way to get at them, which is working with attitudes. They are mental habits, ways that we consistently interpret situations and orient ourselves to the environment. Thus, if a man feels immediate hatred when (for example) someone says something about his chosen spiritual teacher that threatens his own view of that person, there's no way to reason with these emotions. They're present in the adrenaline and the racing pulse, etc. and not subject to any rational intervention. If, however, we can get to the underlying *attitude* that causes such a stimulus (i.e. critical views of his spiritual teacher) to be perceived as threatening, and replace it with a different attitude, the destructive emotions can be short-circuited. (Destructive not just to the target, but to the person whose body is flooded with stress hormones.) The different attitude would be something like "It takes all kinds" or "Live and let live" or "Why should I expect other people to feel the way I do about x?" Tying this to Annette's remarks on faith vs. blind faith, and the need for proof. I'll speak personally on this because my own perspective has changed so much. The kind of faith that is required in the Cayce approach is simply the faith to make a solid effort to use the guidance available to you. For example, you don't have to have faith that Cayce got his diet stuff from infallible akashic records to benefit from the guidelines. You simply have to have a mustard seed of faith that says "Maybe I'll feel better if I cut out red meats and fats and highly processed food, drink lots of water, limit alcohol to a glass or two of red wine before dinner, etc.-- it's worth trying." The same goes for Cayce's guidelines about working with dreams, or meditation, or astrology, or attitudes and emotions. You start with just a grain of provisional faith that maybe these principles will change your life for the better, and start applying them. With the application comes the "proof." In my new book I come across as having a pretty high level of faith in the *usefulness* of the material in the readings. But that doesn't imply that one has to have faith in the literal accuracy of all the details, or the claims about sources. On the other hand, for the many years that Theosophy was at the center of my spiritual life, my faith was much less practical. There was faith that the overall spiritual philosophy was life-enhancing, bringing out aspirations and intuitions that had lain dormant before encountering it. And faith that HPB had devoted years to a genuine search for truth, which she conveyed to the best of her ability. Those are similar to the kinds of faith that one can have in Cayce. But then there is another kind of faith in specific unprovable claims or doctrinal elements, which is often held as a litmus test for being a "real Theosophist." Can't say that I ever had faith in the SD's anthropogenesis, for example. And there is also faith in HPB's phenomena-- something of interest to me but never crucial, and never an object of faith. And finally, faith in the veracity of HPB's claims about her life and her teachers. All of these things seem to me to have parallels in Christian faith in the historical veracity of the gospels, Christ's miracles, the doctrines in Paul's epistles, etc.-- because essentially unprovable and the source of endless wrangling with no possible resolution in sight. Thus I'd say that there is a kind of faith that goes hand in hand with *practice* and that this is necessary and healthy; it leads eventually to proof. But there's another kind of faith that is in the unprovable; it leads eventually to conflict with others. That's building one's house on sand instead of the rock of personally testable propositions. And people who attach their faith to phenomena or specific historical claims are the most susceptible to fear reactions, leading to hate, when they feel the object of their faith to be under attack. There are several religious groups whose toxic kind of faith is quite evident in the arguments and hard feelings you can find on the Internet between their followers and skeptics. On this list, I think most of us, especially those under 45 or so (who therefore came of age with the New Age Movement) have little interest in the propositional kind of faith, and are more focused on the practical kind. But the Theosophical movement as a whole is still focused on believing in a set of unprovable propositions about a specific person rather than a set of principles on how to live your life. IMHO. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 11:44:46 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 04:51:56 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <000401bd9944$539f0c00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Doss: Many thanks for the correct reference. I have Alice Cleather's books, but had forgotten the exact location of that statement. This is quite wonderful to receive help from others who have studied in their areas. If we can all do this, we will build up a marvelous fund of references that will prove valuable in the coming years to answer inquiries. Best wishes as always, Dallas > Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 4:33 PM > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >Dallas: You are right. It is mentioned in Cleather's book on HPB. Let me >see if I can quickly find it. > >...mkr > SNIP From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 11:54:49 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 03:49:32 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <000201bd9944$51012fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. A Special Meeting == All are welcome The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. It will be held in English and Spanish. A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey of the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be presented. Directions: The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , 245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] Close to University of Southern California (USC) off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. turn left and pass under the Freeway going East at Grand ave. intersection turn left. Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. (patrolled parking is provided) All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck ============================================ From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 11:56:49 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:54:35 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980616115435.00adb560@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <000401bd9944$539f0c00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas: It just so happened that I got Cleather's books recently from Canada. The lady I spoke with even mailed me without any prepayment, which is very unusual for even T/theosophists in the US, and I told her so. The books have info on HPB/TS/ES which I have not seen before. ...mkr At 04:51 AM 6/16/1998 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Doss: > >Many thanks for the correct reference. I have Alice Cleather's >books, but had forgotten the exact location of that statement. >>> Clip<<< From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 12:00:35 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 04:45:33 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: : Masters reincarnations & Cycles Message-ID: <000301bd9944$520c3700$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 16th Some references to Europe and Cataclysms: SD I 128 648; II 266 330-1 445 724-6 Isis II 366 424 426 HPB Articles (ULT Edn) III 72-3, 78, 108, 405-6, 417 THE THEORY OF CYCLES "Theosophist July 1880 "Ancient Doctrines Vindicated" "Theosophist," May 1881 "Stars and Numbers" "Theosophist" June 1881 "A Land of Mystery" "Theosophist" March, April, June, Aug. 1880 Ocean of Theosophy pp 129 132 Judge Articles (ULT Edn.) Vol. II 131-2 "Reflections on the Future" LUCIFER, March 1892 Vol I pp 161-2, 186-9, 195-98, 599, 229, WQJ Art., II pp 83 492-3 Dallas PS: In the Index to SD and ISIS will be found many more references to Cataclysms, Deluges, Earthquakes, the rising and subsidence of Continents lands and seas, and their Cycles -- also in the Monthly Magazines THEOSOPHY and THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT many interesting articles relating these events to modern observations and discoveries will be found. > Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 6:38 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: : Masters reincarnations & Cycles >Darren wrote : -- > >">What motivation would the masters have? Are they subject to their >desires? Wouldn't they get bored being immortal? Or do they voluntarily >undergo memory wiping before re-incarnation? If they do maintain >consciousness through the process of re-birth, will they be an adult in >a baby's body?" > >Read the biography of the Dalai Lama "My People My Country," in which he nd on that date, due to some mass extinction, pole >shift, comet, >nuclear war. But there will be survivors and they should >be the 6th root>race, or the precursors at least. I'm not sure how this >date fits in with>HPB's time cycles given in the SD. But as she says >herself the most>accurate cycle recordings are not given out to laity" > >Here I offer only an OPINION. Whether it is Cayce, Nostradamus, the >Mayan calendar systems, or the references given out by HPB. Do we by any >chance try to place these within our life time, or close to it? We are >dealing with cycles that revolve over very long periods of time Some >where I very clearly remember reading HPB saying that Europe "..had a >reprieve" for about another ll,000 or 15,000 years. I have spent quite >a good deal of time trying to locate this to quote, and have temporarily >given up. Writing this, without a reference. Those who are better >suited to look this up may kindly do so. Please. > ==================================== Soph: I too recall that phrase, but do not have the exact reference Dal. --------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 12:07:55 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 05:12:02 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation Message-ID: <000601bd9944$566f4300$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 16th Dear Annette: I guess I needed that bit of reassurance. The idea about the interaction of ourselves and Nature all around us, through the "life-atoms" or the "Skandhas/elementals" was an explanation that both HPB and Mr. Judge offered. It always seemed to me that the relationship between us and nature and between our astro-physical makeup and our volition needed that kind of linkage to make it reasonable. There are so many other "gems" to be found in theosophical writings from the "origins." We owe Them a great deal. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 5:07 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: No cost, no obligation >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: >> I very much believe (am convinced) that Nature contains >> everything and is far more finely balanced than we realize. WE >> have the power (in our ignorance, usually) to disturb nature's >> balances and doing this we create "Karma" [ The mechanism for >> the creation of karma is that our feelings, thoughts and >> decisions, acts too, impose themselves on the "elemental lives" >> which compose all things. They, being impressed go out into >> Nature and eventually return to us, either in this life or some >> subsequent one, and bring the impairment back to us to deal with. >> Of course if we harmonize with nature instead of an impairment, >> we cause those components of Nature to grow and flower, and the >> resultant "seed" that returns to us is an enhancement of our own >> capacities to fine tune with nature even better. ] >Dear Dallas: >Thanks for putting it that way and causing a flash for me. I'd been >subsconsiously trying to put together some concepts on the power within >nature and couldn't get past the obvious physical things like cut down >too many trees - starve of oxygen, make extinct too many animals - >destroy the balance and possibly get over-run by killer bees, and why, >with all this negativity from human-kind doesn't nature just wither away >or go chaotic? >In your words I saw the tremendous power of love and tenacity of nature >to keep us alive, unconditionally. >Either that or some big hand keeps putting it back in balance as fast as >we screw it up :) > >> Shall I hide this >> for myself or shall I spread it around ? >Spread it, spread it. Tempus fugit. > >> Another friend detects this in me, and calls it "preaching." and >> I certainly do not like the sound of that. >Are you put off by the label, maybe? >Remember too that, except for (what you guys call the) Masters, often >our reaction is to the mirror of ourselves. >Kym put it nicely in her post. >Cheers >Annette > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 12:10:35 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 11:59:57 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980616115957.0113e100@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <000201bd9944$51012fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> At 03:49 AM 6/16/1998 -0700, you wrote: >Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. > >A Special Meeting == All are welcome > >The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. > >It will be held in English and Spanish. It is rather rare to find bi-lingual programs. It is wonderful that it is planned to reach Spanish speaking audience as well. mkr From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 12:28:23 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 22:25:48 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Digest, please Message-Id: With the busy summer here, I need to reset all my lists to the digest mode. However, I can't find the instructions to do so. I sent it to theos-talk-request and used the same instructions as I would for theos-l. Popped back as invalid commands. Help! Thanks. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 12:40:18 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:19:44 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-Id: <199806161715.MAA01383@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <000201bd9944$51012fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas: Thanks for the invitation. I'd be glad to -- except that circumstances prevent me going anywhere this Sunday evening. There's an annual meeting of the T.S. in Los Angeles (Adyar), and I have to annend. Perhaps next year. -- Eldon At 03:49 AM 6/16/98 -0700, you wrote: >Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. > >A Special Meeting == All are welcome > >The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. > >It will be held in English and Spanish. > >A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey of >the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be >presented. > > >Directions: > > >The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , >245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) >Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] > >Close to University of Southern California (USC) > >off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. >go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. >turn left and pass under the Freeway going East >at Grand ave. intersection turn left. >Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. > >(patrolled parking is provided) > >All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck > >============================================ > > > > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 16:40:00 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:29:30 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <000201bd996e$f7fdce60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 16th 1998 Dear Annette: I would agree with you that any "proof" is only proof to the person who experiences the event. To all those whom he tells about it -- it is "hear-say" and they, if skeptical may call it delusional, fancy, dreaming, etc., etc., However if they repeat the experiment and get the same results, then it enters the area of observed facts, and repeatable evidence. Unfortunately, in dealing with visions, chanellling, trance experiences, automatic writing, messages, apportations, and a thousand other aspects of the relations of the "spiritual," and the "psychic" world with the physical world, there is apparently no repeat in the scientific scene of duplication on demand. According to most of them a duplication under exact "test" conditions is required. It should have no regard for the subject, object or observer and experimenter taken as "persons." and yet, in recent years the participation and influence of the experimenter and observers has had to be taken into account, as variables show up depending on the mood of those involved. So mood becomes a recognizable factor. [ "Mood" is a good catch-all word for the indefinable. And yet it recognizes a "something" non-physical that is also present. ] Now, if we set to work and accumulated in various categories all the current testimony in books and articles, the information that so far has been made available in books and magazines for the past hundred years, we might get some attention. Some come from Professors, who dare to investigate this delicate area, and some evidence is from ordinary people. But, what I mean is: Can we present enough in a concentrated mass so that the attention of the serious inquirer is held. How do we go about showing that there is more than "moonshine" present ? What could we present ? I would say that the overwhelming testimony to there "being something there," which is so far inexplicable to our kind of instrumentation or "test investigation" is a fact. So what can we do about the Scientists ? Nothing. But we ought to put our facts in good order, so that the reading and thinking public can find some well arranged and consecutive evidence they can refer to with confidence. Perhaps eventually the Academic world when it is a loose ends will deign to work on what we have brought together. As a matter of observation HPB worked with the "spiritualists" before the starting of the T S. ISIS UNVEILED brought a mass of facts that were in classical literature, and in the current newspapers together. She then advanced the Theosophical theories about the "astral," "psychic," and "Spiritual planes." With the help of THE COLLECTED WORKS BLAVATSKY, it is relatively easy to trace developments thereafter. In connection with this we ought to be able to present a theory, an hypothesis concerning the reason for such phenomena as occur. Also a reason why some people are either more or less sensitive to the "spiritual," and "psychic" than others, and why some are entirely insensitive, and some quite negative. Reviewing what Theosophy has to say on the subject and starting with the articles first written by HPB : "The Eddy Manifestations" [ A MODERN PANARION p. 1; Collected Works Blavatsky (CWB) Vol. 1, p. 30 we find that she systematically presented facts about the psychic and the astral planes and their relations through sensitives to this our physical plane of gross cognitions. For a quick, but comprehensive review, we might look at HPB's KEY TO THEOSOPHY (using the index under Astral, Psychic, Plane ) or THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Wm. Q. Judge reading the chapters 5 (Body and Astral Body), 6 (Kama-Desire), 12 (Kama-Loka), 16 (Psychic Laws, Forces and Phenomena) and 17 ( Psychic Phenomena and Spiritualism). That would give an over-view of what Theosophy offers, and it could form the base for a systematic analysis of the data accumulated in the past 125 years or so. The problem is of credibility. It does not really matter if the Academic world pays attention to us, but it is annoying to find that doubt, prejudice and skepticism (instead of spirit of investigation) prevails and has spread to the average man, who depends largely on scientific pronouncements for his store of usable "facts." His "authorities" are letting him down by their prejudice and ignorance in this area. But even when there is such a mass of data (reviewing what I have seen of it, it is still very unorganized) there is resistance from the great body of scientists (with some exceptions of course), because many of their theories and ideas would have to be changed if, in what Theosophy offers, is found to be accuracy and validity. The same could be said of the views maintained by many of the "splinter" groups that have originated in or out of Theosophical differences of opinion down the years, and in the vast field of psychic and spiritualistic investigators, practitioners, writers, etc... many of whom operate on a "for profit" basis, where one "produces or refunds." This pressure is that which generates fraudulent phenomena. And the "bad name" of the occult, and the esoteric, as well as the psychic and the spiritual grows. One good thing that can be said for reports of spiritual and psychic manifestations these days, is that no one's life is automatically threatened by church or state for expressing them. ( At least in most areas at present.) I am sure that much more could be added to these observations. thank you for what you have said. Dallas > Date: Monday, June 15, 1998 6:18 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >OK, I can say something here....... >Here you guys go again getting all edgy over this "appearance or not of >Adepts, Masters", entities thing. >I mean, this is my point about quoting others. >Just supposing HPB wrote at a time when it wasn't the done thing to meet >in someone's living room and talk to someone from another plane (like it >was done by the majority of the middle and upper classes in her time)? >Or, suppose HPB was a peasant who saw entities and heard voices all the >time and was already labelled as "the harmless village idiot". >With her savvy she would have documented and spread the ideas but would >have left out the "visitation" bit and then this would never have become >such an issue! The truth is the truth by any messanger! SNIP From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 17:54:58 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 15:41:25 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: "GET-TOGETHER" OF Sstudents ofTheosophy == Brookings, Oregon 7, 8, 9 August 1998 Message-ID: <004101bd9978$2a4174e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Meeting Announcement All are Welcome ============================== BROOKINGS STUDY GROUP [ U. L. T. ] 16209 W. Hoeffeldt # C, Brookings, Oregon, 97415 Phone: 541-469-1825 707-487-3063 [ Leave your name and phone number for a return call on our "machine" if we do not pick up. ] Invites all students of Theosophy to a gathering on August 7, 8, and 9th 1998 meetings to be held in Brookings and Smith River (near-by) Location: border of California and Oregon on Pacific coast. on Friday Aug 7th 7.30 pm to 9.30 pm, at the Conference Room, BROOKINGS BEACHFRONT INN Subject "The Three Objects of the Theosophical Movement set forth by Mme. Blavatsky in "Key to Theosophy" Format: Panel discussion All invited to participate Friday Aug. 7th 4.00 (prior to meeting) a pot-luck buffet at 14390 Ocean View Drive, Smith River, Ca., and Saturday Aug 8th Brunch at same address (time to be given later) to be followd by an informal discussion and exchange of ideas on Theosophical topics -- with special emphasis on Present and Future Work for Theosophy. All are Welcome Brookings Theosophy Study Group ===================================== Information about reservations available. Reservations ought to be made early. Many hotels and inns locally. R V accommodation at Harris Beach State Park Phone: 1-800-452-5687 ------------------------------------------------ Dallas TenBroeck From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 18:09:47 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 14:53:31 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <003e01bd9978$1b870280$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 16th Three years ago we had started a program of translating HPB and Judge into Italian and later into Spanish. This latter came about as a result of inquiries that we received from some Spanish bilingual students we had who wanted to invite their families and friends to come to the lodge and discuss or learn about Theosophy. This has grown and grown and we find that there is an interested and anxious group asking for information. As a result we have launched into publishing those books in Spanish, or Italian which had not hitherto been available. The enthusiasm and response is very encouraging. The bi-lingual programs are also held once a month or so, so that the linguistic barrier gradually disappears. But as there are always a number of new comers, the all Spanish classes continue with great enthusiasm. And that's the story. Same at New York ULT. There is interest arising everywhere -- a general and rising current can be sensed, as the cycle begins to revolve for the 2nd century after HPB gave us Their message. Best wishes to you as always, Dallas PS: Translation work in Dutch, French, Swedish, German, Russian, Hindustani, Punjabi, Kanarese, Tamil, Gujerati, Bengali and Marathi are also active and meetings are conducted in various centers in those tongues. > Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 10:28 AM > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited >At 03:49 AM 6/16/1998 -0700, you wrote: >>Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. >> >>A Special Meeting == All are welcome >> >>The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >>Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. >> >>It will be held in English and Spanish. > >It is rather rare to find bi-lingual programs. It is wonderful that it is >planned to reach Spanish speaking audience as well. > >mkr > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 19:21:49 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 19:58:49 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Faith & Fear Message-ID: <01bd9982$b4d50720$LocalHost@default> Paul, 'A very interesting letter which I read through twice in #222. Some = pretty good psychological analysies, I think, and interesting comments = on Cayce (I think I'll get the book now..) but you show your teeth a bit = at the final line (ha) when you say something I think is untrue (but I = won't argue on it!): >.... But the Theosophical movement as a whole >is still focused on believing in a set of unprovable propositions >about a specific person rather than a set of principles on how to >live your life. IMHO You've every right to believe different, but I think most = are concerned with the teachings, and Blavatsky secondarily. I remember the first time I was convinced that Blavatsky = was the "real thing." I was spending a 4 week isolation in a cabin in = West Virgina about 20 years ago and reading my first Blavatsky book - = "Esoteric Teachings of Blavatsky" put out by Quest. I can remember the = moment it dawned on me that "this isn't just speculation, it's the Real = Thing." And I never changed my mind since, although I had other things = to do before I pursued it actively. ' Just lucky, I guess. Also, that "fight or flight" analogy of Fear makes sense. = Maybe one can say in analogy that it also applies psychologically and in = regards to the ego. As everyone finds out, it is a serious thing and = people really are fighting for survival (psychological) in these matters = of belief. People also are altruistically fighting for the survival of = Truth and what they believe is Truth. Good luck with your new Cayce book. I bet Theosophists will like = it! Regards, Jake From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 19:39:59 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:29:26 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Dangers of mediumship, channeling Message-ID: <19980617002927.16414.qmail@hotmail.com> Alan wrote regarding Harold Sherman's books, where he speaks of having to help some people out of their possession. "Most are protected by their own incompetence, or their lack of psychic ability, or both. For the fanatic, though, the risks are very real. No responsible occultist would write such "how to" books. If a genuine seeker can figure it out for him/herself (which is possible) they will probably be made aware of the risks at the same time. Alan's .02 worth" Would this not partly explain some of the insanity cases, we have in our institutions, which our psychologists and psychiatrists, seem to have no idea how to treat? It seems to be a possibility. Fraternally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 19:52:15 1998 Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 23:55:03 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: "Humans Being" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004d01bd98a2$35825620$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >As Pooh would say: "Bother !." And Piglet would say: "Have >some haycorns with your honey." > >Best wishes: Dallas My favorite post of yours! In fellowship, Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 19:59:16 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:34:48 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Quotations Message-ID: <19980617003449.14976.qmail@hotmail.com> Alan commenting on what might be considered "over quoting:" said : "The sources (insofar as TS writings are concerned) are all over the web, and there are many many links to them via the TI website (see below). Any of us with a web browser can go get them. In my own opinion, much of what is available is misleading, to say the least, but I also believe it needs to be read and to be studied. Often by puzzling over what doesn't make sense to us, we, "the cracked" as Pam puts it, we get to find the sense and the true light enters. Other sources are the gnostic, kabbalist, and various religious writings, also all over the web." Thoa wrote, speaking to Dallas, "However, it's difficult to listen if the tone is of preaching. I also think that others should stop telling you to stop using HPB quotes. Then again, it could also be a reaction to you telling them to stick to Theosophical quotes." I remember things I have read, but do not know where to relocate them, for the adjacent material and the context is throws additional light. I have always been grateful to Dallas, I could turn to him and say, "Where have I read that?" And invariably I get a reply. See my recent comment on "reprieve" for Europe, which would throw some light on Brenda's contribution about the ending of cycles. I trust that Dallas will most likely try and find it-even if he does I hope someone else will look it up. I know I have read it more than once and I know I have made notes for it somewhere, but could not find these. I think that as long as Dallas, can provide references he should go on doing it. Is there another who will do the same? It is quite correct to say that very useful and valuable Websites are there. But the time taken in calling up book after book and using a search engine, and copying the material, for further reading, is both time and money consuming. Then the references to the old Magazines, are not on the Websites. So, for my sake at least go on giving the references, I keep them separately and have them for future use. Thanks Dallas, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 20:02:31 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:47:26 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Future Vegetarians --OJAS Message-ID: <19980617004727.9657.qmail@hotmail.com> " But the Hindus have a word - 'ojas' that implies a spirit of nutrition in fresh natural foods - and I'm more concerned over whether artifical meat would contain 'ojas'. Darren " OJAS and TEJAS , are two words in Sanskrit which mean LGHT and its radiation. Ojas relates to the light which is emitted and seen beyond the object, while Tejas is the intrinsic light of the thing within it. For example the Sun, with its inherent qualities and forces, is full of Tejas. The sunlight that it emits and which then falls upon objective nature, its solar system, and the things on our earth-I am not dealing with the subjective, now-is the Ojas which we perceive of the sun. Every object therefore emits a radiation, seen by our physical eyes, as the objects, form and shape, its colour; and also be cognised by other senses as smell, feeling and taste. Beyond the physical it emits the Ojas of its aura with those particular colours, which identify its freshness, and its particular qualities of goodness and nutrition. Colored Kirlian photography can start to give us some idea of this, being a possibility. The halo, a universal depiction to represent the wise and holy ones, is one symbolic representation of the person's Ojas. Some how I doubt that the Ojas would be the same in various sorts of meat, genetically engineered or cloned, so what is currently used "natural." A little additional material may be helpful, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 20:08:45 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:24:15 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Feeding the Hungry Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980617102415.00743784@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: References: <19980615024150.2252.qmail@hotmail.com> The first worlds desire for cash crops (cocoa, sugar, cashews, coffee etc) is causing the third world problems. Countries like Nepal are being forced by US pressure to abandon their one and only source of survival - HEMP. This product if farmed worlwide would end so many problems. There is no waste product from it. The uses are countless textiles, food, medicine, paper (best quality), biomass fuels, oil, the list gos on and on. It's funny because the US army once made a film called HEMP FOR VICTORY which encouraged farmers to grow the wonder crop. Food for thought Darren aka NOS (Bva Scm. (Hons)) At 04:13 AM 6/15/98 +0100, you wrote: >Sophia TenBroeck writes >>FARMERS the world over are already or are becoming the prey of the >>middle man-who makes exorbitant profits, and the processor who can >>collects the raw material and sells at VALUE ADDED prices. Farmers are >>at the lowest level of this food-chain, and they still grow and grow and >>remain poor. While all those who do not and cannot produce their own >>food needs also find themselves suffering and contributing indirectly to >>the world wide shortages. > >How true this is - there is a genuine risk I may lose my home, as I rent it >from just such a farmer. > >Alan :-( >-- >Dr. A.M.Bain > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 20:10:15 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 17:40:37 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Veggie karma-still bit really KARMA Message-ID: <19980617004039.6278.qmail@hotmail.com> > Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 > From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Dear Thoa a most insightful and thought provoking contribution to Einar's. Just a couple of points which might be considered. "I hold dearly a thought that I borrowed somewhere which says that: 'Whatever>action you do, it is the motive that counts. Whatever you do with absolute>loving kindness in your heart, will result in a beneficent outcome in the>end, no matter how wrong it may seem to a witness at the moment.' " You speak of motive being most important. Later on in this very study, you speak of knowledge. If out of ignorance but the very best of motive I do something danger or foolish. Do I reap a dual type of karrma, good for my motive on that plane, and poor or bad on the physical. Is it possible to think of karma being sort of mixed up in its results? "When I look at people I admire, I also see the nobility in myself. When I look at people I dislike, I also see that in myself." There was the Chinese philosopher who said that when he walked between two people he looked for the qualities he admired in the one on his right, and he observed the tendencies which he felt were not upto the mark in the one on his left. If these two companions changed side, he continue valuing the one on is right for good qualities and visa versa. Another teaching I have hear reiterated is that we should not judge the actor, but the act. We can hate an untruth, an injustice, the ugly, the disharmonious etc., But we should avoid hating the person who temporarily manifested one of these types of action. The person is a much more complicated individual than this one action, this might be a small percent of wrong, while the person has a greater percent of good, which we may not know about, overlook because we are temporarily blinded by hate or aversion. Is in not said "Judge not, that ye be not judged." (May be the quotation is a little wrong.) Hatred, criticism and aversion, keep the memory dwelling for long lengths of time on incident. All that while our own hearts and minds are dwelling and being filled with what we consider wrong or bad, we are living in this pollution, soaking its stench and ugliness. While we should use this time, and powers of our minds and hearts on better things. ". Furthermore, in my mind, there exists no moral judgment at all>that we can use on the 'nature' i.e. the life other than the human species. >The life of the animals is simply 'Natural' and therefore not ethical in its>nature." Maybe the word AMORAL would describe the living and acting of the lower kingdoms. Fratnernally, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 20:14:54 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 01:41:22 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Dal's questions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004c01bd98a2$3421dbc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 15th 1998 > >Thanks Alan: > >Some comments added below -- Dallas And I intersperse some more - Alan > >========================================== > >>W. Dallas TenBroeck asks a number of questions, and so I respond from my own observations and experiences as an occultist of over 40 years practice. >> >>>Are there seven Principles in Man and nature ? If so how do >they interact ? >> >>Yes there are, but they don't interact. The same seven >principles simply behave differently in different circumstances. Including turnips. > >========================================= > >According to HPB they do interact because they are areas where >the ONE CONSCIOUSNES -- the Atma -- uses, either consecutively or >separately, all all together -- "thus have I heard" It amounts to the same thing, as all seven principles are integrally part of the One Consciousness, so HPB and I agree! Consciousness is Being. Awareness is a function of Consciousness. > >========================================== > >>> >>>Is there a general LAW -- whether called Karma or something >>>else -- that unifies the Worlds, mankind, the Galaxies and the >>>atoms ? >> >>Yes. > >>----------------------------------- >>Some call this LAW "God" which is fair enough if we do not >attribute human characteristics to "God." >>> >>>Can it be "broken ?" is it "partial? or complete ?" >> >>It is complete, and cannot be broken, though it appears to >rearrange its components on a regular basis through all seven principles (and planes). >>> >>>Does the SPIRIT exists (at least as a logical base) ? >> >>Same thing. "God" is "Breath" [Latin Spiritus, Greek Pneuma]. >We, as individual are "breaths." [pl.] >------------------------- >agreed >-------------------------- >>> >>>What is the "soul of man, and if it exists, what are it powers >>>and nature ? >> >>There are two concepts of "soul." One equates with the >>"astral/etheric" double, and is temporal and reactive. The >other contains this, but extends "upwards" to include "mind" - >understood as the ability to viualise and interpret (not always correctly!). As far as theosophical "lower manas" maybe. > >======================================== > >Agreed -- equivalents: Kama and Manas (desire and Mind ) > >======================================== >> >>>What is the psychic nature as distinct from th mental ? >> >>Psychic nature is "lower manas" and below. Mental nature is >"higher manas" and above - while we are in incarnation. Eventually, all indications seem to show, "higher manas" will be absorbed into >yet higher principles. >>> >AGREED > > >>>Is Reincarnation reasonable ? >> >>Reasonable where necessary or desirable, otherwise not. >> >================================== > >WHAT'S THE "OR NOT ?" Desire some enlightenment We can move on to other worlds, other planes - call them what you will. It is a vast Universe, with plenty of room for all. I suspect that some of us reincarnate for "necessary" (To us or our chosen Work) reasons, some because we liked it here. Being a species whose chief and universal characteristic is clearly curiousity - people who are dying often say something like, "Hello! What's happening here then?" then it seems that departing souls (note) are most likely to "move on" to a "somewhere else" via what appears to the inner vision (language is a bummer) as a sudden and brief bright light opening a gap in the darkness. > >===================================== > >> >>>Is the perfectibility of all nature a potential possibility ? >> >================================ > >>Perfection is a human concept. So far as LAW is concerned, >>everything is always just as it is. Love is real, *and* shit >happens. >>> >================================ > >I meant "Reason" You lost me here - elucidate? > >================================== > >>>Are the "Masters of Wisdom" Imaginary or possibly facts ? >>> >>There are higher intelligences (non-incarnate) who might be so >>described, but they are "masters" or "adepts" in particular >areas of the larger scheme of things. Sometimes they work through living human beings, but their messages are always garbled by the "lower" functions of their intermediaries. Also, they are in the same situation as "adepts" on earth. A Master Builder cannot do the work of a Master Goldsmith. >> >>Most of those who work with humanity appear (note "appear") to >be former human beings. Maybe they all are, but I have met one or >two who seem never to have incarnated here - which doesn't rule out >the possibilty of their having human characteristics. >=============================================== > >I agree we ue the designation "Masters" only to indicate >proficiency as comparedtoour capacities in use. > >As I understand the Theosophical scheme, the progression from man >to wise-man is graded by the individual who is teaching himself >what Nature already has innately. > >Tio me it stands to reason that a band of Wise men would work >together and to assist humanity as individuals thereof towards >their own limprovement and learning. Except they would not see themselves as "Wise Men" but students! > >=================================== >>_____________ >> >>All of us on the lists spend a great deal of time in discussion >and debate. Very few seem to have (I hope I am wrong) direct experience of the things we debate. I have related short versions of just two of my own experiences. Why don't we all try to share what we know and have found (as we see it) and quote "sources" a damn sight less often. >> >>The sources (insofar as TS writings are concerned) are all over >the web, and there are many many links to them via the TI website >(see >below). Any of us with a web browser can go get them. In my >own opinion, much of what is available is misleading, to say the >least, but I also believe it needs to be read and to be studied. Often by puzzling over what doesn't make sense to us, we, "the cracked" as Pam puts it, get to find the sense and the true light enters. >> >>Other sources are the gnostic, kabbalist, and various religious >writings, also all over the web. None of it is 100% "true". Turning the other cheek, for example, may work according to theory, but it can >also get you slapped on both cheeks and more besides. This I can >definitely confirm! >====================================== > >CORRECT == there are many "paths" to the mystic (or actual) >GOAL. That is something that ISIS UNVEILED and later the S D >seem to expose, so that we can grasp the similarity of the >fundamentals of all those religions we are now aware of. > > I do not think the words are all that important but th ias are. > >I also agree that each in their search for "the TRUTH" appear to >rove al over the map -- but is not the striving of value -- for >them, and for us toobserve and correlate to our own strivings ? > >Dallas >> Precisely, it is the STRIVING that matters far more than the language we use to express it. I writing my original comments, I mentally "translated" from Kabbalist terminology the Theosophical terminology for some of it. Kabbalah is, for me, kind of like the "Rosetta Stone" of Occultism. All other systems fit into it. Some would no doubt say the same of Theosophy, or Wigglosophy or any other "ism" or "osophy". As I learned in my miniscule part in showbiz, "if it works, keep it in the act." Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 21:06:51 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 11:38:43 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: ICQ Group Discussion Topic #1 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980617113843.007352b0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <001c01bd957e$2fefbb20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> ICQ participants are invited to submit their responses to the first weekly discussion question: Karmically, what does the buddhist philosophy of 'right employment', mean to westerners? Do internatioanal corporations have a collective karma like countries and does this effect an employee? Please ICQ messages to Darren (NOS) and any other ICQ participants for further discussion. A summary of responses in the form of an article will be submitted to theos-world. this is a bit of an experiment so If it doesn't work out - oh well. I'm sure the differences between the newsgroups and using ICQ will lead to some unique use of both. >Bee B. 4,291,138 >Dallas 13,760,916 >Darren 12,448,929 >Eldon 8,244,261 >Einar 10,684,770 >Pam G. 9,274,727 >Thoa T. 13,809,746 >Patrick R. 12302004 >Rudy 9114742 Namaste (Guru : I would like some green tea (Chela : Nah !, Master ) Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 21:51:50 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:46:51 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3585F3E8.6DA5@azstarnet.com> Mr. Caldwell/Graye writes >Forgive me if I again seem confrontational with you, but >your initial statement to Dallas appeared unsympathetic and even worse >historically unfactual. Hoping that any future discussions will focus >on the >main issue instead of irrelevant side issues. You are forgiven. Neither of us is perfect. Let it be. AB ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 22:05:46 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 02:49:14 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000401bd9944$539f0c00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Dear Doss: > >Many thanks for the correct reference. I have Alice Cleather's >books, but had forgotten the exact location of that statement. > >This is quite wonderful to receive help from others who have >studied in their areas. If we can all do this, we will build up >a marvelous fund of references that will prove valuable in the >coming years to answer inquiries. Nice thought. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Tue Jun 16 22:13:29 1998 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 21:53:55 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <19980617030959353.AAA215@pgiese> ---------- > From: "Annette Rivington" > In case any of you are interested, I did ask a question: > "Respectfully, in whatever way you choose to present it, what entity > was/is/will be the loudest silent communicator to us?" > The answer, after what appeared to be some hesitation or bickering, was > TREES. > Then followed a bunch of regular stuff and warnings and hints that we > all already know. I can identify with this. My backyard is in need of some landscaping features. I stood in the back of the yard and asked the nature spirits what I should do. Then I heard this booming voice from of 60+ year weeping willow of "WATER, I WANT LOTS OF WATER". Now, 1/3 of my backyard is underwater in early spring and this is the willow's ideal setting; however it's a spawning area for mosquitoes and kills the grass. Now, having opened the doors, I have trouble not hearing the Willow's booming voice "Water. Where's my water?" like some elderly grandparent demanding his way, oblivious to the needs or concerns of others around him. This is my first experience with old willows --most of my willow contacts have been young trees, flexible and bending to the forces around them. Dealing with an old willow that saw the land before it was developed and now submits to me mowing around him is quite a different thing. It's important to know the types of trees. In HPB's days, most lay scientists were naturalists and they could identify the flora and fauna around them. I grew up in a family of naturalists. It was part of the knowledge I took for granted. Each species of trees has their own vibration. Once you sense this, you can never mistake an oak for something else again (oaks speak really loud). There's a great poem in the Mabinogion which lists the trees and months correspondence in Celtic lore. (If some one has a copy or can direct me to it online, I'd be grateful. I seem to remember that it was reproduced in the back of Grave's The White Goddess). Knowing Trees is part of the experiential learning of the power of nature. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 00:21:55 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 10:24:06 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Dal's questions Message-ID: <3587FBB4.657@withoutwalls.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Kabbalah is, for me, kind of like the "Rosetta Stone" of > Occultism. All other systems fit into it. Some would no doubt say the > same of Theosophy, or Wigglosophy or any other "ism" or "osophy". Ooooh ... ooooooh! Now I know what I am! I'm a Wigglosophist! Thanks Alan. "De dum da da ... de dumm da dee ... a Wigglosophist am I ... that's me!" bumpity bump, Mark (shakes his booty) -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 11:10:13 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 08:55:03 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: SD Study Group and LA Times Article Message-ID: <3587E6D7.1DDE@lainet.com> References: Dear Dallas, Susan and I had a great time visiting your Secret Doctrine Study group last night. It is a wonder how many times I have read the section studied last night and how anew feels each time. Since you referred to an articles recently appeared in the Los Angeles Times, see web site: www.latimes.com; I want it to share them with the list. They are important since the talk about conditions in the Universe that could cause it to expand and to collapse, like the Manvantaras and Pralayas, and about the no need for the 'ether' conceptin nowadays science. Any opinions? There was another great article in lA Times about Neutrinos, I have it if some one is interested. =========================================================== Los Angeles Times Monday, June 15, 1998 Missing Pieces of the Cosmic Puzzle As physicists continue pondering the nature of the universe, they say they can't find 70% of its energy, or the words to describe their problem. By K.C. COLE, Times Science Writer [B] ATAVIA, Ill.--Scientists pushing into unknown territory often find themselves at a loss for words. The more mysterious the emerging landscape, the further they must reach for appropriate language to describe it. Lately, physicists who study the big questions of the universe can be heard tossing around such terms as "quintessence," "X Dark Matter," "smooth stuff," "funny energy" and "tangled strings." These odd verbalizations mark their first attempts to understand one of the strangest mysteries of the cosmos: Where is all the energy hiding? It's bad enough that cosmologists can't find 99% of the matter that the leading theories say must lurk in the universe (the so-called dark matter). Now, they realize they're missing as much as 70% of the energy as well. And until they account for all the energy needed to keep the universe "in balance," physicists can't explain why the universe has neither exploded nor collapsed. Solving the "missing" energy problem is all the more urgent because it lies at the pivot of major mysteries of the cosmos, including: How did the universe evolve? How will it end? What is it made of? And that always intriguing question for physicists: Was Einstein right or wrong? Recent sightings of exploding stars, speeding away at the edges of the cosmos, may be a sign of the missing energy at work. If so, it's unlike anything ever seen before--hence, the labored attempts at descriptives. This unusual form of energy acts like a kind of anti-gravity, pushing distant galaxies apart. The good news is that this newly discovered "repulsive force" may solve the missing energy problem. The bad news is physicists don't yet have a clue as to its nature, its origin or its future. Although the evidence for a repulsive force in the universe is new, the struggle to pin down the ineffable is as old as science itself. And so is the search for an appropriate imagery to describe it. Isaac Newton described the forces between atoms as "a most subtle spirit, which lies hid in all gross bodies." James Clerk Maxwell, who worked out the basic equations of electromagnetism, started with "a lot of imaginary wheels and idlers in space," according to the late Caltech physicist Richard Feynman. Frustration Setting In While physicists squint into the darkness for clues to the forms hidden in shadows, they understandably stumble a lot. And the search for the missing energy is so elusive that it has them flailing about with more abandon than usual. "This is desperation," said astrophysicist Rocky Kolb, of Fermi National Laboratory, where a group of high-powered physicists met recently to ponder the universe's missing energy. "The pieces aren't fitting. It's like you understand how the heart works and how the liver works and you try to figure out how the whole thing works. For now, we have too many legs and not enough arms." Many physicists believe that Einstein already had the answer to the "missing energy" problem when he inserted a so-called "cosmological constant" into his equations that described the state of the universe. This "constant" was a mathematical term for the repulsive force needed to keep all the matter and energy in the universe from gravitationally pulling together, and crushing everything into oblivion. Later, when astronomers discovered that the universe was expanding of its own accord--spreading outward from its initial spectacular entrance in the Big Bang--adding an extra outward pushing force seemed redundant. Einstein dismissed his "constant" as the biggest blunder of his professional life. Today, cosmologists are divided over whether Einstein was right about being wrong. While some would like to resurrect the cosmological constant to explain the missing energy, others are busy creating even more exotic alternatives. However, for the present they have far too few clues to come to any sort of even tentative conclusion. Here's what they know: According to a majority of the top cosmologists and astronomers who gathered at Fermilab recently, the evidence is pretty solid that distant galaxies are flying away at faster and faster speeds. The speedometer astronomers use to measure this acceleration is a type of exploding star, called a supernova Ia, that appears to be a very consistent light source. Because all supernovas of this type emit the same amount of light, their brightness should give an accurate measure of their distance. But measuring anything at the far edge of the universe needs to be approached with a certain amount of caution. "There's good reason to think [the supernovas] are all the same. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," said University of Chicago astrophysicist Michael Turner, a leading authority on the cosmological constant. The true nature of speeding supernovas are central because they are the one piece of firm evidence that the universe is really accelerating at its outer fringes. And the acceleration, in turn, is the "smoking gun" pointing to the existence of a strange force pressing space and matter outward like a kind of negative gravity, said Turner. "If the universe is really accelerating, then we have something out there with negative pressure, and that's something new," he said. The argument that supernovas are flying off at higher and higher speeds is based on the fact that they appear dimmer than astronomers expected. If they're dimmer, the thinking goes, they must be farther away. But distance isn't the only effect that makes stars look dimmer. Space dust can produce the same effect. Skeptics of the speeding supernova theory argue that intergalactic dust may be creating a cosmic-scale optical illusion. "Maybe they're not dimmer," suggested Bill Press of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. "Maybe dust is making them [look] dimmer." The observers who tracked the supernovas said they had already ruled out the presence of red dust--the most common dust in the cosmos. But Press, playing devil's advocate, suggested they might be looking through another kind of dust. "[Maybe] they've discovered a new phenomenon, all right, but it's just gray dust." Hanging in the Balance Why do astronomers believe that most of the energy in the universe is missing in the first place? When physicists add up all the known energy and matter in the universe, they don't get enough to explain its behavior. The energy books don't balance. But the universe behaves as if they do--expanding at a stately pace. That is, the gravitational attraction of all the matter and energy pulling inward seems to almost exactly balance the expansive energy pushing outward. One reason scientists believe this balance exists is that in a universe with even a little more energy and matter, gravitational attraction would have crushed us into oblivion long ago. A universe with a little less energy and matter would have blasted out in all directions after the birth of the universe, never slowing down long enough to cohere into stars, planets and people. "The universe gives every sign of performing this balancing act," said Kolb. "It's as if magically the taxes you take in balance the budget to the penny." How do cosmologists count up all the energy and matter in the universe? By watching the motions of stars and galaxies, experimentalists calculate the total gravitational pull of matter. By cooking up equations, theorists re-create the ingredients needed to produce our universe. Both methods come up short. "We haven't weighed the universe with any precision," said Turner. "But there is a good case to be made that [the total amount of matter and energy] is about 35% [of what should be there to keep the universe balanced]. There's a very strong case for something beyond [what is already known]. . . ." That means that 65%-70% of the universe is something else. "The evidence tells us that most of the universe is 'funny energy,' for lack of a more technical term, and nothing more," Turner concluded. Some astronomers took to calling the funny energy "smooth stuff," to distinguish it from matter, which jells into particles and stars and galaxies, and is therefore "clumpy stuff." Others call it "X Dark Matter" or "tangled strings," terms which have yet to be fully understood. The challenge, of course, is to find out what this funny energy is. For now, only its behavior gives it away. The beast leaves no obviously detectable tracks beyond its repulsive push. "We only know it behaves differently [from ordinary matter and energy]," said Kolb. The repulsive push is actually "negative pressure"--a force that pulls in a direction opposite from gravity. Einstein's equations initially predicted that the universe would gravitationally collapse on itself. Since this didn't seem to be happening, he inserted the so-called cosmological constant--his version of negative pressure. The cosmological constant has come and gone since Einstein. "It's the most maligned constant in the history of physics," said Josh Frieman, one of the organizers of the Fermilab meeting. The main current objection to the cosmological constant is that it doesn't appear to be constant. It changes over time. "It's messier than a constant," said Paul Steinhardt, an astrophysicist from the University of Pennsylvania and one of the meeting organizers. To produce the universe as we know it, the repulsive force would have had to be much weaker for most of the past 15 billion years than it is today. A constant that changes is by definition paradoxical, and therefore messy. The idea of an inconstant constant so bothers some physicists that they proposed a new kind of funny stuff in the universe, called quintessence. The term comes from the fifth essence that ancient philosophers believed permeated the universe--in addition to the four fundamental essences of earth, air, fire and water. Whatever it is, quintessence would be a kind of cosmological constant that changes in force as the universe evolves. "Quintessence," said University of Pennsylvania astrophysicist Robert Caldwell, "is shorthand [for a cosmological constant that varies]. It's dynamic, it's real, it's substantive. But it's not like any other kind of matter." If all this sounds confusing, it is--even to (perhaps especially to) the physicists working on the problem. "No one understands it," said Case Western Reserve University astrophysicist Lawrence Krauss. Like others, Krauss doesn't see any need to introduce a new kind of "stuff" into the universe to account for the missing energy. Yes, the cosmological constant needs to change its value, he said. "But quintessence would have to change, too." Or as Turner says: "What was good enough for Einstein ought to be good enough for us." Curiously, the universe has been pushed apart by a repulsive force before. Called "inflation," this very early epoch in history caused the universe to expand exponentially in the first moments of its birth. Like the current acceleration, that expansion was propelled by the vacuum of empty space. A vacuum holds onto energy the way ice holds onto heat. When ice melts, it releases that heat, which turns into the energy of rapidly moving water molecules. In the same way, physicists believe a vacuum can melt, releasing energy. A currently accelerating universe, said Frieman, suggests "we could be entering a new period of inflation." If so, cosmological history is indeed repeating itself--15 billion years later. "Inflation happened, and went away," said Steinhardt. "One question is: Will this period of inflation end?" Making Something Out of Nothing Whatever truth they come up with, it won't be the first time physicists have made something out of nothing. Before Einstein, physicists had largely concluded that empty space was permeated by "luminiferous ether"--invisible, virtually undetectable material that light waves traveled through. Experiments suggested that light was a wave, and waves must wave through something. Yet the ether had almost impossible properties. Planets and stars had to float through it with no resistance. At the same time, in order to transmit fast vibrating light, it had to be solid material. Einstein's theory of relativity relegated ether to a graveyard of dead ideas. His theories about space and time rendered the ether unnecessary and irrelevant. "Einstein freed us from it," said Fermilab's former director and Nobel laureate, Leon Lederman. "Now we need to get rid of [today's version of ether] again." In the end, perhaps that will be the fate of funny energy, said Lederman. "Some kid now in junior high school will tell us [how to get rid of it]." Whether the answer to the "missing energy" turns out to be quintessence or inconstant constants or some other kind of strange stuff, the physicists will ultimately abandon their poetic words and images for the more concrete truths to be found in equations. "The imagery allows us to move forward more rapidly, but the truth is in the math," said Caltech physicist Kip Thorne. For the time being, the physicists will continue to speak in tongues, struggling to invent an appropriate language, sounding more like wordsmiths than scientists. Perhaps that's appropriate. The late Nobel laureate Niels Bohr, who first saw clearly into the fuzzy heart of atoms, said that physicists trying to describe the subatomic realm in everyday language were more poets than scientists. "The poet, too," he wrote, "is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images." Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories. You will not be charged to look for stories, only to retrieve one. Copyright Los Angeles Times From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 11:23:17 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 12:16:53 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Movements and members Message-Id: <199806171617.MAA10407@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806171400.JAA25107@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 17, 98 09:00:09 am Hi Jake, Thanks for your comments. The remark about the orientation of the "movement" wasn't in anger but in sorrow, so my teeth weren't showing. But I do stand corrected, as it's an unsupported generalization. I continue to be perplexed at how most individual Theosophists I've known are open, flexible, supportive of a wide variety of approaches-- and yet the movement itself seems to be the opposite of all those things. By which I mean that those in power or positions of influence in the various organizations seem far more dogmatic and narrowminded and focused on a specific belief system centered on HPB than the general run of members. And what gets published or scheduled in conferences is determined by that subset of members. Guess it's mostly a matter of which people are motivated to seek such power and influence-- the truest believers, in general. Anyhow, I was vague and thus unfair in my remarks about the "movement" and should have been more specific. Something weird about ARE, though, is that the higher ups seem generally more open to skeptical views, less dogmatic than the average active member. I think that's the influence of the Cayce family which has fought against making Edgar into an infallible authority figure, despite that being what many people want. Yes, I think there's a definite parallel between ego defense and physical self-defense mechanisms, and all the same physiological reactions occur in either one. Maybe part of the value of the Internet is to help us disentangle those reactions. If you've been ferociously attacked by some stranger on the other side of the country or the globe over a religious or political argument a thousand times (as I reckon I have) that fight-or-flight stress reaction starts to fade, out of simple familiarity with the phenomenon. You learn to shrug where you once would have hit the ceiling. I've suggested before that all the hate spewed on the Net is a kind of end-of-millennium Armageddon, a war of all against all, but it's thereby a kind of purging process preparing us to communicate more harmoniously and effectively in the future. Namaste, Paul From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 11:51:50 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 04:08:26 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dangers of mediumship, channeling Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980617002927.16414.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia TenBroeck writes >Would this not partly explain some of the insanity cases, we have in our >institutions, which our psychologists and psychiatrists, seem to have no >idea how to treat? It seems to be a possibility. > >Fraternally, Sophia The late Dion Fortune, a former theosophist who founded the Society of the Inner Light (A Kabbalist Soc.) stated this to be a veritable fact, and most likely to occur among people obsessed by the idea of being able to perform (personal) "magic". Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 17:06:35 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 14:42:05 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: Re: Movements and members Message-ID: <3588382D.2B03@lainet.com> References: <199806171617.MAA10407@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Dear K. Paul Johnson you wrote: > ... I continue to be perplexed at how most > individual Theosophists I've known are open, flexible, supportive > of a wide variety of approaches-- and yet the movement itself > seems to be the opposite of all those things. By which I mean > that those in power or positions of influence in the various > organizations seem far more dogmatic and narrowminded and focused > on a specific belief system centered on HPB than the general run > of members. I really don't know why to be perplexed at this. When I joined the TSA I want just that a place to study HPB works . . . When I wanted to study Kabala, I joined The Kabalah Center in Los Angeles. There I did not expect to find them studying HPB works, and so on. When I enrolled in engineering School I wante to study Engineering not Archaeology which I was also interested. Individual interests are always larger than aorganization with a specific and common goal. The TSA or TS's is a place to study Theosophy. What is wrong about it or to be perplexed about it. There is no 'power' needed about but common sense. The Theosophical Society is a place to become familiar, or to study or to live Theosophically. In our small study group (about 9-10 people) at my home, we study HPB but everyone is encourage to bring all kind of ideas, quotes, teachings, books and personal experience and philosophy to it to expand, or like CG jung would say, to amplify the weekly subject. Martin Leiderman In West Los Angeles From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 19:06:38 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:44:29 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Europe's Reprieve Message-ID: <19980617234430.10247.qmail@hotmail.com> There through Dallas and another theosophical friend I have received the reference. See SD Volume II, page 331, end of first paragraph Good thing this page, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 19:11:34 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:41:44 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Lords of Karma Message-ID: <19980617234145.24376.qmail@hotmail.com> Kym saus, "It would seem that The Big Cheese or The Big Cheese's Helpers (angels, aliens, or other such beings) would have known such a misunderstanding would take place as a result of such a Karma plan. If the Lords of Karma are shaking their heads wondering why humanity just ain't gettin' it - they've really only themselves, or the Big One, to blame. This is the problem with having the SAME IMMORTAL BEINGS being in control for a long period of time - we need look only at China or the corporate world for examples of "the ole' boys network" needing a revamp. I think we need to elect new leaders - NEW Lords of Karma and NEW Mahatmas and New All Other Big-Wigs." One possible way of understanding this is : That when a student of science gets his/her Masters degree, it does not mean that they can go into the laboratory and do anything they, please. They are not MASTERS of the various sciences to break the LAWS of the subject they have pursued. They are in fact paradoxically the science's most obedient SERVANTS. Therefore when an expression LORDS OF KARMA is used, it should be that these LORDS, understanding Karma, are first and foremost its most obedient SERVANTS. The, LORDS, in theosophy are not replacing the personal GOD, who seems to be able to do whatever HE/SHE, pleases, breaking all Laws, of his/her own establishment. Therefore these Lords have to wait upon the return of favourable cycles, at which time humanity is most ripe to receive help and instruction-like the farmer having to wait for spring to sow his seeds. They have to watch individual and collective humans, make their mistakes, and tie humans themselves into knots, binding themselves more and more. That is why in The Voice of the Silence, HPB, writes of those Great Wise Ones who choose Renunciation instead of Liberation, as treading the Path of Woe, "Woe, unspeakable for the living dead and helpless pity for the men of karmic sorrow. " And again, "The fruit of karma sages dare not still." Each person must "…run their appointed course in life." And. Einar from Iceland gave a contribution to the understanding of this. While Kym finds it difficult to "revel" saying, ". Of course, I feel blessed - I've food to eat, a house to live in, a computer to pontificate on, heating and air conditioning, etc. . .so many others do not. But, most importantly, I have around me people who love me and a sense of purpose. . .so many others do not. I simply cannot understand a "happy wise person." Things are not as they should be - this is not the best of all possible worlds. I cannot "revel," Sophia. Not now. Kym" As Sir Edwin Arnold who wrote The Light of Asia (the Life of the Buddha) so beautifully puts it, about the Buddha, "He wept with all his brothers tears." In seeing the awful sorrow of all things, and yet perceiving the great purposes that work for Good, are being sown in our hearts the seeds of resolve that strengthening bring forth within one the future Buddhas of the world. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 19:16:09 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 16:56:30 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Internet & Theosophy of 15 Jun 1998 Message-ID: <19980617235631.16584.qmail@hotmail.com> I see the above broken abruptly off, I repeat the last paragraph with its intended ending. "There is a grave danger in our outer personalities trying to usurp the place of the divine inner. So efforts are made to protect oneself and another from whatThe Voice of the Silence, says is "Pride and satisfaction at the fete achieved;" and again the advice is given, "Be humble if thou would'st attain wisdom. Be humbler still when Wisdom thou hast mastered. Be like the ocean which receives all streams and rivers, the oceans might calm remains unmoved." The Tao-The-King speaks of the wise, occupying a lowly place, like water which runs downhill, for from a lowly place, one cannot be toppled. While The Bhagavad Gita, teaches that "pleasure and pain should be treated the same…" and that to the wise gold and a rock are the same, and that the Brahmin and the eater of the flesh of dogs are to be treated alike. Fraternally, Sophia " ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Wed Jun 17 19:22:34 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:12:20 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Quotations Message-ID: <000201bd9a4c$a96fa460$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 17th Soph: Wesley found the reference in the SD you wanted "reprieve of about 16,000 years for Europe, etc..." SD II 331 top para ending. Those of us who have the S D on Computer could try using the "Search Engine" -- I forgot to try that, thinking that HPB wrote that in one of her articles -- I couldn't find it ! so Wesley did. I'd like to see ISIS on computer with a "search engine." There is an enormous amount of good information there for those who desire to find it. Apparently the last Solar year ended around 9,000 BCE with the engulfing of Poseidonis the last large island remnant of Atlantis. Add 25/26,000 years and we have about 16,000 AD Thanks all, Dallas > Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 6:34 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: Quotations >Subject: Quotations > >Alan commenting on what might be considered "over quoting:" said : "The >sources (insofar as TS writings are concerned) are all over the web, and >there are many many links to them via the TI website (see below). Any >of us with a web browser can go get them. In my own opinion, much of >what is available is misleading, to say the least, but I also believe it >needs to be read and to be studied. Often by puzzling over what doesn't >make sense to us, we, "the cracked" as Pam puts it, we get to find the >sense and the true light enters. >Other sources are the gnostic, kabbalist, and various religious >writings, also all over the web." > >Thoa wrote, speaking to Dallas, "However, it's difficult to listen if >the tone is of preaching. I also think that others should stop telling >you to stop using HPB quotes. Then again, it could also be a reaction >to you telling them to stick to Theosophical quotes." > >I remember things I have read, but do not know where to relocate them, >for the adjacent material and the context is throws additional light. I >have always been grateful to Dallas, I could turn to him and say, "Where >have I read that?" And invariably I get a reply. See my recent >comment on "reprieve" for Europe, which would throw some light on >Brenda's contribution about the ending of cycles. I trust that Dallas >will most likely try and find it-even if he does I hope someone else >will look it up. I know I have read it more than once and I know I >have made notes for it somewhere, but could not find these. > >I think that as long as Dallas, can provide references he should go on >doing it. Is there another who will do the same? It is quite correct >to say that very useful and valuable Websites are there. But the time >taken in calling up book after book and using a search engine, and >copying the material, for further reading, is both time and money >consuming. Then the references to the old Magazines, are not on the >Websites. So, for my sake at least go on giving the references, I keep >them separately and have them for future use. > >Thanks Dallas, Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 00:06:25 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 23:55:40 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Invitation to Boston Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980617235540.008807b0@mail.eden.com> > Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 21:18:28 -0400 (EDT) > From: "Zack Lansdowne" > Subject: Invitation to Boston Dear Friends, As a new member of this discussion list, I wish to introduce myself. I am a member at large of the TSA but have recently been elected President of the Theosophical Society in Boston. As some of you may know, the Boston Lodge had been part of the TSA for a long time; but a few years ago, the TSA attempted to dissolve our lodge and seize our assets. The Boston lodge responded with a legal fight. The outcome was that the Boston lodge became independent; it retained part of its assets, but the TSA and lawyers also received substantial portions. We have moved into a new location in Arlington (close to Boston), publish a quarterly newsletter, operate a bookstore, and have an active program of classes, workshops, and lectures. Since the Boston lodge is now completely independent, I am interested in establishing links with other theosophical groups. It would be nice for our members to feel welcomed when visiting other groups, and for members of other groups to feel welcomed when visiting us. So, here is my invitation to anyone on this list. If you plan to visit Boston, please consider visiting us. I would be glad to give directions, meet you, and be your host. Zack Lansdowne The Theosophical Society in Boston 21 Maple Street Arlington, MA 02174 (781) 648-0101 =================================== NOTE by MKR: I have seen in the last four decades, different TS organizations have isolated themselves from each other. Internet at last is tearing down the artificial organizational barriers (like the Berlin wall) and now those interested in Theosophy whether belonging to one or more of the organizations or none are interacting at the level of individuals as all of us are committed to the same objects. The invitation from Boston is one more example of the uniting influence of Internet and we have not seen anything yet. When most homes are wired for Internet, a day will come soon when many people interested in Theosophy around the world will be able to interact and discuss and help each other. May Internet live long! MKR From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 01:06:21 1998 Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 23:44:21 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Blink, blink, blink Message-Id: <199806180544.XAA07465@mailmx.micron.net> Martin offered an LA Times article on missing 'space stuff:' Fascinating article - seriously. But the passage below left me befuddled: > The late Nobel laureate Niels > Bohr, who first saw clearly into the fuzzy heart of atoms, said > that physicists trying to describe the subatomic realm in everyday > language were more poets than scientists. > "The poet, too," he wrote, "is not nearly so concerned with > describing facts as with creating images." So, the phrases: "funny energy," "clumpy stuff," "tangled strings," "smooth stuff," "X Dark Matter," and "missing energy" are considered POETRY - creators of images? Ok, let's all contemplate on the poetic phrase "funny energy," and, should you experience any difficulty imagining that concept, instead try "missing energy." Ready. . .set. . .go. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 01:36:20 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 00:32:49 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: HPB = Theosophy? Message-Id: <199806180632.AAA09137@mailmx.micron.net> Martin wrote to Paul: >I really don't know why to be perplexed at this. When I joined the TSA I >want just that a place to study HPB works . . . When I wanted to study >Kabala, I joined The Kabalah Center in Los Angeles. There I did not >expect to find them studying HPB works, and so on. When I enrolled in >engineering School I wante to study Engineering not Archaeology which I >was also interested. If someone thinks that Theosophy "IS" HPB and her works - then one would not be perplexed at Paul's post. However, not all who study Theosophy believe that the SECRET DOCTRINE or other such works authored by HPB are the bibles of Theosophy. HPB (via so-called "Mahatmas") did not invent Theosophy. Some Theosophists seem to think that she is the "messiah" of Theosophy - akin to the role Jesus has been delegated by many Christians. Paul has been a fave target of those who have such a view of the "Great and Holy HPB." This viewpoint is prominent in the TSA and in others who claim to be the "teachers or leaders" in Theosophy today - and it is a prime reason why those who prefer more expansive and more tolerant viewpoints are fleeing the Society. The Christians say "If you don't believe in Jesus, you will not be saved." The TSA comes awfully close to that when implying that questioning the authenticity of the "Mahatmas" or HPB makes one some kind of lost, pitiful, and ignorant heretic. Is studying HPB studying Theosophy? Can one be a Theosophist without ever having heard of HPB or the Mahatmas? Why is there such a thing as a "Theosophist" vs. a "theosophist?" Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 11:36:54 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 09:41:02 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: HPB = Theosophy? Message-ID: <3589431E.7CDA@azstarnet.com> References: <199806180632.AAA09137@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > If someone thinks that Theosophy "IS" HPB and her works - then one would not > be perplexed at Paul's post. However, not all who study Theosophy believe > that the SECRET DOCTRINE or other such works authored by HPB are the bibles > of Theosophy. > > HPB (via so-called "Mahatmas") did not invent Theosophy. Some Theosophists > seem to think that she is the "messiah" of Theosophy - akin to the role > Jesus has been delegated by many Christians. > > Paul has been a fave target of those who have such a view of the "Great and > Holy HPB." This viewpoint is prominent in the TSA and in others who claim > to be the "teachers or leaders" in Theosophy today - and it is a prime > reason why those who prefer more expansive and more tolerant viewpoints are > fleeing the Society. > > The Christians say "If you don't believe in Jesus, you will not be saved." > The TSA comes awfully close to that when implying that questioning the > authenticity of the "Mahatmas" or HPB makes one some kind of lost, pitiful, > and ignorant heretic. > > Is studying HPB studying Theosophy? Can one be a Theosophist without ever > having heard of HPB or the Mahatmas? Why is there such a thing as a > "Theosophist" vs. a "theosophist?" Kym, I want to make a few points in relation to what you have written above. I hestitate to do so because the subjects broached could probably not be adequately covered in a 500 page volume. But I'll throw some things out anyway. Although there are probably some Theosophical students who view HPB as you have described, I would think that there are many that have a somewhat different slant on HPB and her writings. If an individual is not interested in reading H.P. Blavatsky's works--- that is IMO okay. The world is a big place. . . . But without viewing HPB as the "messiah of Theosophy" and her works as "the bibles of Theosophy", I certainly think HPB's works are worthy of reading and studying. As I have said before, HPB wrote more than 10,000 pages on Theosophy and related subjects. Certainly for one interested in Theosophical subjects and estoteric matters her writings are a goldmine. I always encourage *interested* inquirers and students to dive into her writings. Read HPB. Become acquainted with what she is writing about and what she is attempting to convey in her major books as well as her many articles. In attempting to do that, I have found that one needs to gain a whole education! Hundreds of subjects need to be understood in order to really appreciate what HPB writes about. For me HPB's writings have been a "gateway" to a whole world of potential knowledge, understanding and learning. I have not found the study of HPB's writings in anyway "confining" or "limiting". When I read HPB I don't read her as though she is dictating absolute truth from infalliable Mahatmas. I simply try to *understand the ideas* she is attempting to convey and then I try to relate those to other relevant subjects, etc. And I think Dallas' method of collating excerpts from her various writings is another good approach. I know that several people on Theos-L have been irritated by his citations. But for serious students of her writings this is just another way of trying to understand what HPB is teaching. Like taking jig saw puzzle pieces and trying to fit them together in order to see the whole picture. This is a very productive method but it may not be everyone's cup of tea! There are literally hundreds of books that help to elucidate HPB's writings and most of them were not written or published by the various theosophical publishers. One of my favorite books that have helped me appreciate HPB's writings better is Mircea Eliade's 3 volume work A HISTORY OF RELIGIOUS IDEAS. Another wonderful work is IN SEARCH OF THE PRIMORDIAL TRADITION AND THE COSMIC CHRIST by Father John Rossner. etc etc etc etc I don't believe this approach is "limiting", "dogmatic" or anything that could be considered negative. Regarding your comments: > Paul has been a fave target of those who have such a view of the "Great and > Holy HPB." This viewpoint is prominent in the TSA and in others who claim > to be the "teachers or leaders" in Theosophy today - and it is a prime > reason why those who prefer more expansive and more tolerant viewpoints are > fleeing the Society. I have no idea if the "viewpoint" you write about is really "prominent in the TSA" or not. But as one of Paul's critics, my views of Paul'works has not been dictated by a belief in the "Great and Holy HPB." Could not one's critcisms be based on motivations other than the one you ascribe? I have outlined my criticisms of Paul's views in my HOUSE OF CARDS and have given in detail the reasons for those criticisms and have given chapter and verse. Readers can therefore assess the validity of those criticisms without having to attribute "bad" or "negative" or "good" motivations to me. I don't like sloppy research and some of Paul's statements are based on such work. I also don't like onesided presentations and therefore I have given material that Paul left out of his books. Paul Johnson's wriings on HPB are not the only writings I have criticized. For example, see my critique of Jean Overton Fuller's biography in THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY. I have also criticized some of the findings of Boris de Zirkoff and Geoffrey Barborka. All of these writers were sincere students of Blavatsky's life and writings. I don't question the sincerity of any of these writers but I have shown the defects in some of their research and findings. Is this so terrible and bad? And let me add that I still beleive that Paul Johnson and other critics have brought up good points, etc. that should be considered and addressed by any student of HPB. For example, see http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/untruths.htm One more thing and I will shut up. I must say that I have found it somewhat disconcerting to see Blavatsky students attempting to attribute bad motives to Paul for writing his books. But I find equally troubling the ascribing of "negative" motivations to those who have taken the time and effort to read, study and criticize Paul's works. These are really "side issues" and do not confront the real issues addressed in Paul's writings and in those of his critics. Daniel H. Caldwell From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 12:51:21 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 07:37:59 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Lords of Karma Message-ID: <004501bd9ae1$51b9eba0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Soph: Again, looking at your response to Kym and Einar Could you please break up you response from theirs ? I do not know where theirs ends and yours begins. I suggest using something definite, like a line " ============= " Otherwise the force of what you say is lost. Other people need to know what you intend making as a point. And I do to. Best wishes as always Dal. > Date: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 5:27 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: Lords of Karma >Kym saus, "It would seem that The Big Cheese or The Big Cheese's Helpers >(angels, aliens, or other such beings) would have known such a >misunderstanding would take place as a result of such a Karma plan. If >the Lords of Karma are shaking their heads wondering why humanity just >ain't gettin' it - they've really only themselves, or the Big One, to >blame. This is the problem with having the SAME IMMORTAL BEINGS being >in control for a long period of time - we need look only at China or the >corporate world for examples of "the ole' boys network" needing a >revamp. I think we need to elect new leaders - NEW Lords of Karma and >NEW Mahatmas and New All Other Big-Wigs." > >One possible way of understanding this is : That when a student of >science gets his/her Masters degree, it does not mean that they can go >into the laboratory and do anything they, please. They are not MASTERS >of the various sciences to break the LAWS of the subject they have >pursued. They are in fact paradoxically the science's most obedient >SERVANTS. Therefore when an expression LORDS OF KARMA is used, it >should be that these LORDS, understanding Karma, are first and foremost >its most obedient SERVANTS. The, LORDS, in theosophy are not replacing >the personal GOD, who seems to be able to do whatever HE/SHE, pleases, >breaking all Laws, of his/her own establishment. > >Therefore these Lords have to wait upon the return of favourable cycles, >at which time humanity is most ripe to receive help and instruction-like >the farmer having to wait for spring to sow his seeds. They have to >watch individual and collective humans, make their mistakes, and tie >humans themselves into knots, binding themselves more and more. That is >why in The Voice of the Silence, HPB, writes of those Great Wise Ones >who choose Renunciation instead of Liberation, as treading the Path of >Woe, "Woe, unspeakable for the living dead and helpless pity for the men >of karmic sorrow. " And again, "The fruit of karma sages dare not >still." Each person must "…run their appointed course in life." > >And. Einar from Iceland gave a contribution to the understanding of >this. > >While Kym finds it difficult to "revel" saying, ". Of course, I feel >blessed - I've food to eat, a house to live in, a computer to >pontificate on, heating and air conditioning, etc. . .so many others do >not. But, most importantly, I have around me people who love me and a >sense of purpose. . .so many others do not. >I simply cannot understand a "happy wise person." Things are not as >they should be - this is not the best of all possible worlds. I >cannot "revel," Sophia. Not now. Kym" As Sir Edwin Arnold who wrote >The Light of Asia (the Life of the Buddha) so beautifully puts it, >about the Buddha, "He wept with all his brothers tears." > >In seeing the awful sorrow of all things, and yet perceiving the great >purposes that work for Good, are being sown in our hearts the seeds of >resolve that strengthening bring forth within one the future Buddhas of >the world. Sophia > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 13:04:07 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 07:21:00 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: SD Study Group and LA Times Article Message-ID: <004201bd9ae1$44dd12e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 17th 1998 Re: Malibu, SECRET DOCTRINE class (Tuesdays 8.00 pm) Dear Martin and Suzan: We enjoyed having you come. Do come again if you would be able to take the time and make the long journey. It is rare to find someone who is a student of the S D. Your input and contributions to the discussion were most welcome. Feel at home, and come often. Alex tells me that you have your own study class in Sta. Monica and that you study the SD there too. Val and I hope to be able to come some day. We would like more details. Also thank you very much for the article from the L A Times that you enclosed -- it is the one that Val and I were referring to. As I see it Science is being forced by their discoveries into the areas which Occult Science investigated ages ago, and of which some detail was given in the SD over 100 years ago. WE also see that they are becoming more and more aware of what in Theosophy is called the "Astral Plane." I mean the sub-atomic area, the morpho-genetic field, Kirillian photography, gene manipulation, indeterminacy, Chaos theory, fractiles, etc... The theory about growth (expansion) and collapse (extinction) of the Universe is reasonable as by analogy the "Great breath" is the primordial pattern for our human breathing. You ask about Manvantara and Pralaya -- and I would say that those vast cycles of time represent by analogy on our plane the "breath" of manifestation followed by the "sleep" of non-manifestation. HPB in her article ISIS UNVEILED AND THE VISISHTADVAITA, "Theosophist" January 1886 (Correspondence) states that the period of Pralaya is not the entire destruction of everything. But rather it is a resting period during which the entire Universe recuperates. Again at the time of a fresh manifestation all the entities and energies of the old Universe reawaken progressively and resume their individual progress from the point at which they "went to sleep." Our experience in waking and sleeping is analogous. Reincarnation is also similar. In this I see the great law of Karma (both Universal and individual) is in operation. Nature contains everything, and Science is investigating that which is already in place and working. It codifies this information for human understanding and use. But the discoveries that are made on all hands, are only that: RE-DISCOVERIES. Nature has them in place and operating, from the smallest imaginable to the greatest. It is all part of the vast pattern of LIFE. According to the figures in SD II 68 footnote, this will take a very long time for our little World and Solar system. The figures for the entire UNIVERSE would be incomprehensible to us, just as the distances that the Hubble telescope now reveals are beyond our ability to view as measurement, in spite of the vast figures of distance and time they assign to various parts of the so far "visible" Universe. I see in this weeks U.S.NEWS & WORLD REPORT that they are now mapping the entire firmament in far greater detail than was ever possible, with a new kind of telescopic astro-camera, and that it will take an appreciable time to do this. Cole is a good writer. Yes, I also read the article on Neutrinos. That is worth posting also. With best wishes to you and Suzan, Dallas > Date: Wednesday, June 17, 1998 9:37 AM > From: "Martin Leiderman" > Subject: SD Study Group and LA Times Article >Dear Dallas, >Susan and I had a great time visiting your Secret Doctrine Study group >last night. It is a wonder how many times I have read the section >studied last night and how anew feels each time. >Since you referred to an articles recently appeared in the Los Angeles >Times, see web site: www.latimes.com; I want it to share them with the >list. They are important since the talk about conditions in the Universe >that could cause it to expand and to collapse, like the Manvantaras and >Pralayas, and about the no need for the 'ether' conceptin nowadays >science. Any opinions? >There was another great article in lA Times about Neutrinos, I have it >if some one is interested. >=========================================================== > >Los Angeles Times Monday, June 15, 1998 >Missing Pieces of the Cosmic Puzzle As physicists continue pondering the >nature of the > universe, they say they can't find 70% of its energy, or the words to >describe their problem. By K.C. COLE, Times Science Writer > SNIP From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 17:22:40 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 15:16:51 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Internet & Theosophy of 15 Jun 1998 Message-Id: <199806182213.RAA23234@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <19980617235631.16584.qmail@hotmail.com> Sophia, My communication of the 15th came in fine - just like below. However, I do have a comment.=20 >I see the above broken abruptly off, I repeat the last paragraph with=20 >its intended ending. > >"There is a grave danger in our outer personalities trying to usurp the=20 >place of the divine inner.=20 I think maybe you should know more about this. Let me tell you of an experience. When I read this post, of course, the first sentences struck me as I sometimes skim read much of the material posted here. I could hear a voice - the voice of my presence - my "divine inner" perhaps telling me that the correct response to you would be something like "You should know." Although I don't communicate with you much as of yet, I didn't think it was appropriate to jeopardize our harmony (in silence) just so that I could speak sarcastically on the internet and get out the message to you that "You should know." So, in a way what you say is true. Our outer does try to usurp the inner. Sometimes we place our values in one virtue such as harmony, over and above our duty and obedience to encourage "learning." And this is the effect that your statement drew out of me. =20 A much more positive approach to dealings which we have with our inner divine is to say, "Beloved Mighty I Am Presence Make me perfectly obedient in all things." (and alongside of this idea I like to tell the Presence - ) "I give this light from you recognition and feel Its presence here! I love it! I thank It for Its boundless Blessings in the Universe! I demand It be Eternally, Invincibly Protected and fulfill the Divine Plan, to illumine all with Eternal Freedom!" I may not be wise and happy, but there is wisdom within me and I am happy to know "IT." This is what I can accomplish with decree work. Brenda So efforts are made to protect oneself and=20 >another from whatThe Voice of the Silence, says is "Pride and=20 >satisfaction at the fete achieved;" and again the advice is given, "Be=20 >humble if thou would'st attain wisdom. Be humbler still when Wisdom=20 >thou hast mastered. Be like the ocean which receives all streams and=20 >rivers, the oceans might calm remains unmoved." The Tao-The-King=20 >speaks of the wise, occupying a lowly place, like water which runs=20 >downhill, for from a lowly place, one cannot be toppled. While The=20 >Bhagavad Gita, teaches that "pleasure and pain should be treated the=20 >same=85" and that to the wise gold and a rock are the same, and that the= =20 >Brahmin and the eater of the flesh of dogs are to be treated alike.=20 >Fraternally, Sophia " Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 18:21:25 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:22:44 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Fear and Faith-and Proof! Message-ID: <19980618232245.12587.qmail@hotmail.com> "Thus, if a man feels immediate hatred when (for example) someone says something about his chosen spiritual teacher that threatens his own view of that person, there's no way to reason with these emotions." and "Thus I'd say that there is a kind of faith that goes hand in hand with *practice* and that this is necessary and healthy; it leads eventually to proof. But there's another kind of faith that is in the unprovable; it leads eventually to conflict with others. That's building one's house on sand instead of the rock of personally testable propositions. And people who attach their faith to phenomena or specific historical claims are the most susceptible to fear reactions, leading to hate, when they feel the object of their faith to be under attack" To put everything down to a FEAR complex is far to simplistic it seems to me. Defense may spring from experience, from logical conviction, from study of accumulated witnesses, -in a court of law in some countries one witness is enough, in others two are required; from proven faith in those who have proved to be Trust worthy, from desire to protect the defenseless again slander. It seems an incomplete thesis to my way of thinking. How do you prove to a blind man the beauty of the sunset. He has not the sense required to see the colours and does he know this kind of beauty? But by listening to sighted people describe sunsets again and again, if he too taking there witnessing as truth, gains faith in the existence of beautiful sunsets, is he a fool? When we may not possess the perceptive faculties into the psychic/astral world, and especially into the spiritual, are we to say that these do not exist. And even if such a person should say as the materialists sometimes do say ,they do not exist, even then; Fear cannot be the only motivation? Psychologists are not so naďve. I am reminded of a story told about the Buddha. He had been speaking to collection of Bhikus (monks) and lay people about the bliss of Sukhavati-The Happy Land. One from the crowd raised his voice and said he did not believe in Sukhavati. The Buddha asked him from where he came, the man named a tiny little village far away/ The Buddha asked the audience, had anyone been to that village and could substantiate the man's claim to the existence of that village, none could. So the Buddha said as none could confirm the man's statement, obviously the village did not exist. The man was quite indignant, and he went into a lengthy description of the main street, the houses and who lived where. The Buddha after listening to the man said, "I have dwelt in Sukhavati, I can describe Sukhavati, as you describe your village." Just a contribution, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 18:30:41 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:19:36 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Trees Message-ID: <19980618231940.15191.qmail@hotmail.com> Maybe we should call you PAN and not Pam! "From the highest antiquity trees were connected with the gods and mystical forces in nature. Every nation has its sacred tree, with its peculiar characteristics and attributes based on natural, and also occasionally on occult properties, as expounded in the esoteric teachings." -Theosophical Glossary p. 337 "The Occult reason why the Norse Yggdrasil, the Hindu Asvatha, the Gogard, the Hellenic tree of life, and the Tibertan Zampun, are one with the Kabalistic Sephirothal Tree, and even with the Holy Tree made by Ahura Mazda, and the Tree of Eden-who among the Western scholars can tell? Nevertheless, the fruits of all those 'Trees,' whether Pippala or Haoma, or yet the more prosaic apple, are the 'plants of life,' in fact and verity." - SD II 97 "We see two kinds of trees, one of which denudes itself entirely and remains expressionless for a large part of its cycle, and another which slowly and continually renews itself in every part, never ceasing to give expression, and often holding in evidence the old leaf, the new leaf, the blossom and the fruit." -The Friendly Philosophy, 6 "The Symbol for Sacred and Secret Knowledge was universally in antiquity, a Tree, by which a Scripture or a Record was also meant."-SD I 128; and "The Symbol fo the 'tree' standing for various Initiates was almost universal. Jesus is called 'the tree of Life.' As also all the adepts of the good Law, while those of the left Path are referred to as the 'withering trees.' "-SD II 496 "Throughout all Asia Minor, the Initiates were called the 'tree of Righteousness,' and the cedars of Lebanon, as also were some king of Israel. So were the great adepts in India, …" -SD II 495-5 The Asvatta is the Tree of Life, and its Macrocosmic aspect is thus described : - "The tree was reversed, and its roots were generated in Heaven and grew out of the Rootless Root of all-being. Its trunk grew and developed, crossing the planes of Pleroma, it shoot out crossways its luxuriant branches, first on the plane of hardly differentiated matter, and then downward till they touched the terrestrial plane. …Thus the Asvattha, tree of Life and Being, whose destruction alone leads to immortality, is said in the Bhgavatgita to grow with its roots above and its branches below (ch. xv). The roots represent the Supreme Being, or First Cause, the LOGOS; but one has to go beyond those roots to unite oneself with Krishna, who, says Arjuna (xx), 'is greater than Brahman, and First Cause…the indestructible, that which is, that which is not, and what is beyond them.' Its boughs are Hiranyagarbha (Brahm or Brahman in his highest manifestations, say Sridhara and Madhusudana), the highest Dhyan Chohans or Devas. The Vedas are its leaves. He only who goes beyond the roots, shall never return, i.e., shall reincarnate no more during this 'age' of Brahma." -SD I 406 "Says the 'preceptor': 'Accurately understanding the great Tree of which the unperceived (Occult nature, the root of all) is the sprout from the see (Parabrahmam) which consists of the understanding (Mahat, or the universal intelligent Soul) as its trunk, the branches of which are the great egoism, in the holes of which are the sprouts, namely, the senses, of which the great (Occult, or invisible) elements are the flower-branches, the gross elements (the gross objective matter), the smaller boughs, which are always possessed of leaves, always possessed, of flowers…which is eternal and the seed of which is the Brahman (the deity); and cutting it with the excellent sword-knowledge (secret wisdom)-one attains immortality and casts off birth and death. This is the Tree of Life, the Asvattha tree, only after the cutting which the slave of life and death, MAN, can be emancipated." -SD, I 536 "To the follower of the true Eastern archaic Wisdom, to him who worships in spirit nought outside the Absolute Unity, that ever-pulsating great Heart that beats throughout, as in every atom of nature, each such atom contains the germ from which he may raise the Tree of Knowledge, whose fruits give life eternal and not physical life alone ….He cares little whether it be the seed from which grows the genealogical Tree of Being, called the Universe. Nor is it the Three in One, the triple aspect of the seed-its form, colour, and substance-that interest hi, but rather the FORCE which directs its growth, the ever mysterious, as the ever unknown. For this vital Force, that makes the seed germinate, bust open and throw out shoots, then form the trunk and branches, which, in their turn, bend down like the boughs of the Asvattha, the holy Tree of Bodhi, throw their seed out, take root and procreate other trees-this is the only FORCE that has reality for him, as it is the never-dying breath of life"-SD II 588-9 "While the Macrocosmic tree is the Serpent of Eternity and of absolute Wisdom itself, those who dwell in the Microcosmic tree are the Serpents of the manifested Wisdom. One is the One and All; the others are its refrlected parts. The 'tree' is man himself, of course, and the Serpents dwelling in each, the conscious Manas, the connecting link between Spirit and Matter, heaven and earth."-SD II 98 Let us then go to the tree within us-"the abode of Pitris (elementals in fact) of a lower order' and make it the Tree of Everlasting Life. "Pippala, the sweet gruit of that tree upon which come spirits who love the science, and where the gods produce all marvels." -SD II 97-8 May these be seed thoughts for meditation and help lead on and up, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 18:36:24 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 16:15:02 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: : Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. Message-ID: <19980618231505.14136.qmail@hotmail.com> When we speak of the laws made by countries and observed by tribes, they indeed show great variations as to their moral or ethical content. It is a democratic consensus, or one that has come into effect by tradition. These are man made, and represent the accepted norms of that country at a particular time. Democratically we now have debates about capital punishment and other laws, it is a common denominator and reflects what the generality of people will tolerate. There are therefore those do not accept the laws and are law breakers and the law of the land tries to catch and punish them according to the prevailing legal enactments. There are those whose morality and ethics are so far superior to the laws of the land that they would not steal from their neighbour even if the law were removed, or the police and judiciary ceased to function. On the other hand speaking of Karma we are not speaking of these man made laws. But of the Law inherently prevailing in nature and the beings that make her up, in their inter-relationships. There then follows the situation developed by Kym who said, on June 13, 98 : -- "I agree this is very likely - but then how do I know that the person who, say, "robbed" me of my pay-check while I was walking down the street isn't simply aiding me in regaining balance because, say, I, in a former time, over-charged this person monetarily causing hardship for her and her family? If I called the police, had her arrested, she ended up imprisoned - would yet another "rebalance" have to occur? Karma seems to imply that we should "turn the other cheek" since we don't know if such an action, despite its seeming unfairness or wrongness, is actually a necessary event brought on by us in a previous existence. How does one choose their "battles" while keeping in mind 'karma?' Kym" HPB also highlights this concern in the KEY, where she says : "THEO. Karma, the universal law of retributive justice. ENQ. Is it an intelligent law ? THEO. For the Materialist, who calls the law of periodicity which regulates the marshalling of the several bodies, and all the other laws in nature, blind forces and mechanical laws, no doubt Karma would be a law of chance and no more. For us, no adjective or qualification could describe that which is impersonal and no entity, but a universal operative law. If you question me about the causative intelligence in it, I must answer you I do not know. But if you ask me to define its effects and tell you what these are in our belief, I may say that the experience of thousands of ages have shown us that they are absolute and unerring equity, wisdom, and intelligence. For Karma in its effects is an unfailing redresser of human injustice, and of all the failures of nature ; a stern adjuster of wrongs ; a retributive law which rewards and punishes with equal impartiality. It is, in the strictest sense, "no respecter of persons," though, on the other hand it can neither be propitiated, nor turned aside by prayer. This is a belief common to Hindus and Bud- dhists, who both believe in Karma. ENQ. In this Christian dogmas contradict both, and I doubt whether any Christian will accept the teaching. THEO. No ; and Inman gave the reason for it many years ago. As he puts it, while "the Christians will accept any nonsense, if promulgated by the Church as a matter of faith....the Buddhists hold that nothing which is contradicted by sound reason can be a true doctrine of Buddha." They do not believe in any pardon for their sins, except after an adequate and just punishment for each evil deed or thought in a future incarnation, and a proportionate compensation to the parties injured. ENQ. Where is it so stated ? THEO. In most of their sacred works. In the "Wheel of the Law" (p. 57) you may find the following Theosophical tenet :-- "Buddhists believe that every act, word or thought has its consequence, which will appear sooner of later in the present or in the future state. Evil acts will produce evil consequences, good acts will produce good consequences : prosperity in this world, or birth in heaven (Devachan)....in the future state." ENQ. Christian believe the same thing, don't they ? THEO. Oh, no ; they believe in the pardon and the remission of all sins. They are promised that if they only believe in the blood of Christ (an innocent victim !), in the blood offered by Him for the expiation of the sins of the whole of mankind, it will atone for every mortal sin. And we believe neither in vicarious atonement, nor in the possibility of the remission of the smallest sin by any god, not even by a "personal Absolute" or "Infinite," if such a thing could have any existence. What we believe in, is strict and impartial justice. Our idea of the unknown Universal Deity, represented by Karma, is that it is a Power which cannot fail, and can, therefore, have neither wrath nor mercy, only absolute Equity, which leaves every cause, great or small, to work out its inevitable effects. The saying of Jesus : "With what measure you mete it shall be measured to you again" (Matth. vii., 2), neither by expression nor implication points to any hope of future mercy or salvation by proxy. This is why, recognising as we do in our philosophy the justice of this statement, WE CANNOT RECOMMEND TOO STRONGLY MERCY, CHARITY, AND FORGIVENESS OF MUTUAL OFFENCES. Resist not evil, and render good for evil, are Buddhist precepts, and were first preached in view of the implacability of Karmic law. For man to take the law into his own hands is anyhow a sacrilegious presumption. HUMAN LAW MAY USE RESTRICTIVE NOT PUNITIVE MEASURES ; but a man who, believing in Karma, still revenges and refuses to forgive every injury, thereby rendering good for evil, is a criminal and only hurts himself. As Karma is sure to punish the man who wronged him, by seeking to inflict an additional punishment on his enemy, he, who instead of leaving that punishment to the great Law adds to it his own mite, only begets thereby a cause for the future reward of his own enemy and a future punishment for himself. The unfailing Regulator affects in each incarnation the quality of its successor ; and the sum of the merit or demerit in preceding ones determines it." May this be a clarification in some measure, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 19:52:24 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:55:31 +0100 From: "Einar Adalsteinsson" Subject: : Conscious/Subconscious/Superconscious Message-ID: <002001bd9b14$9b6ff9a0$316d9d9d@default> Hi to you all. I hope I'm not too bold in forwarding a post of mine from another list, but since it is a reply on my last post (on "veggie karma", which I forwarded there) it may not be quite out in the blue. One might perhaps use the term "economy" for this. A member wrote: "To me this is a new way to see things, as I always thought of this as being the higher mind, so never dreamed of putting into the context of below the surface, or underneath before. No biggy to many others, but I was thrilled at a new look of an old picture, and just felt like sharing this with you,,, Its like a realization that others had already, but Duh, me, just got it today. Yahoo, Laughing, " Einar: It's always good to see a new side of things, to have a new understanding or insight. Only one has to be always aware that no 'picturing' equals the real thing. We may use the (mental) model that best fits our understanding, and also gives the best possible simulation of the reality that we are living inside and outside. The subconscious model I presented (rather vaguely though) Is based on the experience that we are 'All One' It has the advantage to 'bring home' the karmic experience. To me karma is a living thing, a part of me, not an Alien whim of some karma lords out there. It is an ever ongoing process, where the delay or time-lag is due to the resistance in the human psyche to process life in the moment (or EJ's toxic conditioning). We simply don't want to take or even see our complex escape routes from what is. So, instead of blaming karma on everything and everyone except ourselves we should see that it all stems from within, from our yet unconscious (or rather "hidden") True Self. The model of the unconscious that I use stems from the Italian Psychologist Assagioli, which I think was a student of Freud and co-student of Jung. It says in simple terms that the awake state (or conscious state) is like a circle or a plate on a sheet of paper surrounded by a larger circle which represents the unconscious part of the individual consciousness. Further out there is the ocean of universal consciousness with its countless individual conscious entities flowing around. At night, when we sleep there is no inner conscious circle and hence no rational thinking. In the morning when we wake up it opens up again, representing everything there is to be experienced in the entire universe. If we look at the sunconscious realm we can devide it up in two parts the subconscious and the super-conscious. The subconscious includes all the habits, subconscious memories, phobias and manias of the individual and is constantly (and mostly unconsciously) influencing the conscious part of the psyche. It is located just outside the circle of awareness and tends to totally lock out the influence of the higher constitution, which is located (in the model) near the outer circle and in fact in perfect atonement with the universal mind. Ordinary dreams - the irrational movie-like nonsense - stem from the subconscious part. The wise, symbolic dreams are really messages that stem from the deeper layers of the super-conscious. They are symbolic because that is the inherent language of the subconscious realms. True Insights are also from that super-level and Mystical experience occurs when there is a total breakthrough of that super-consciousness into the conscious, totally bypassing the dark filter of the subconscious. So, our task is to first remove the grossest of the content of the subconscious (working with karma and toxic conditioning) and bringing about a bridge to the super-conscious, a work that is religious/spiritual in its nature. When that bridge is firmly established (through mystical experience) the real work begins by slowly transforming the entire human constitution, including the gross body with its brain. That process is called the yoga of transformation or kundalini yoga. This is the model - or a gross picture of it - but please note that THIS IS ONLY A MODEL - one of many very different models in the spiritual arena. Please note also that no model even resembles the true thing - 'what is'. Models are only crutches for our rational mind - they have all to be ultimately abandoned, together with the rational mind. "Mind is the great slayer of the Real. Let the disciple slay the slayer" H.P.Blavatsky. Love and light Einar. http://www.itn.is/~theosoph/ http://rvik.ismennt.is/~annasb/ ICQ: 10684770 From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 20:06:56 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:01:04 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: HPB = Theosophy? Message-ID: <5MnjYxAQhbi1EwqV@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199806180632.AAA09137@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Paul has been a fave target of those who have such a view of the "Great and >Holy HPB." This viewpoint is prominent in the TSA and in others who claim >to be the "teachers or leaders" in Theosophy today - and it is a prime >reason why those who prefer more expansive and more tolerant viewpoints >are >fleeing the Society. Like me, others on the various theos lists, and an increasing number of people worldwide. Nowadays, when people read about "precipitation" it means rain is on the way ... not letters. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a *New* Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 20:22:16 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:31:44 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Science Message-ID: In #225 the articles on science Martin Quoted from the LA Times were interesting, however the following comment doesn't make any sense to me :          "  A vacuum holds onto energy the way ice holds onto heat. When       ice melts, it releases that heat, which turns into the energy of       rapidly moving water molecules. In the same way, physicists       believe a vacuum can melt, releasing energy." Ice ABSORBS heat to turn into water. When water RELEASES heat, it turns into ice, not as the article states. In the Mahatma Letters I think there is a paragraph illustrating the fundamental error of Science's idea of "Conservation of Energy," or that one Form of energy is "converted" into another ( I hope I have this right.] For instance: if you burn a ton of coal in a boiler with a generator to make electricity - the heat energy is not really "converted" at all into electricity. If you burn a ton of coal in an open field 100X BTUs of heat will be released into the atmosphere. If you burn the same 1 ton of coal in a boiler hooked to a generator and thus generate 10 KW of electricity - there will still be 100X BTUs of heat eventurally released into the atmosphere. So the heat energy was not "converted" into the electrical energy at all. - Jake  (as I type at this instrument of Science)         From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 20:23:28 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:02:05 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Invitation to Boston Message-ID: <7cAjs0ANibi1EwKd@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980617235540.008807b0@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss writes >Since the Boston lodge is now completely independent, I am interested in >establishing links with other theosophical groups. It would be nice for our >members to feel welcomed when visiting other groups, and for members of >other >groups to feel welcomed when visiting us. So, here is my invitation to >anyone >on this list. If you plan to visit Boston, please consider visiting us. I >would be glad to give directions, meet you, and be your host. > >Zack Lansdowne >The Theosophical Society in Boston >21 Maple Street >Arlington, MA 02174 >(781) 648-0101 >=================================== > >NOTE by MKR: > >I have seen in the last four decades, different TS organizations have >isolated themselves from each other. Internet at last is tearing down the >artificial organizational barriers (like the Berlin wall) and now those >interested in Theosophy whether belonging to one or more of the >organizations or none are interacting at the level of individuals as all of >us are committed to the same objects. The invitation from Boston is one >more example of the uniting influence of Internet and we have not seen >anything yet. When most homes are wired for Internet, a day will come soon >when many people interested in Theosophy around the world will be able to >interact and discuss and help each other. May Internet live long! > >MKR And may all caring theosophists join: --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: As well! (It's free)! http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 20:51:49 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 21:32:23 -0300 From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <01bd9b19$ba50ff40$LocalHost@default> Dear Brother Dallas, Many thanks for the invitation. Although we are members of the Adyar TS, we would like very much to be able to attend the meeting for more than one reason, including to know more about Mr. Robert Crosbie and the ULT. God willing one of these days we will be able to attend physically a meeting with you. In the mean time receive our warmest greetings from Brazil. Fraternally yours, Marina and Arnaldo Sisson F. -----Mensagem original----- De: W. Dallas TenBroeck Para: Dalval Tenbrook Data: Terça-feira, 16 de Junho de 1998 14:04 Assunto: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited >Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. > >A Special Meeting == All are welcome > >The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. > >It will be held in English and Spanish. > >A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey of >the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be >presented. > > >Directions: > > >The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , >245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) >Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] > >Close to University of Southern California (USC) > >off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. >go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. >turn left and pass under the Freeway going East >at Grand ave. intersection turn left. >Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. > >(patrolled parking is provided) > >All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck > >============================================ > > > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 18 23:54:48 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:52:25 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: : Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. Message-ID: <3589EE89.1B0E@globalserve.net> References: <19980618231505.14136.qmail@hotmail.com> Crikey Sophia, thank goodness I didn't have to remember all that as a child. Here's what most of us remember: "What goes around, comes around". Cheers Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 00:26:06 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:14:59 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Fear and Faith Message-ID: <3589F3D3.73A@globalserve.net> References: <199806161358.JAA13106@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Whew, well put Paul. Here's what I observed in life.... Those who put "blind" faith in a dogma, leader, or practice seem to carry doubt, fear and acquiescence with them to greater or lesser extents depending on the challenges of life. Those who develop a personal spirituality seem to have a strength from within that transcends the challenges of life and affords peace and generosity of spirit that succours all. Cheers Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 00:41:09 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 23:27:44 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Gamblers Anonymous Message-Id: <199806190527.XAA24273@mailmx.micron.net> Daniel wrote: >But without viewing HPB as >the "messiah >of Theosophy" and her works as "the bibles of Theosophy", I certainly >think >HPB's works are worthy of reading and studying. I certainly agree. However, I was most curious about whether one could be a Theosophist without ever having read HPB. You seem to to be implying - although I could be interpreting you quite wrongly - that one cannot; HPB and Theosophy go hand-in-hand. No? I've heard from the infamous "they" that there are "Theosophists" and "theosophists." What, in your opinion, is the difference, if you perceive one? >I >have not >found the study of HPB's writings in anyway "confining" or "limiting". HPB's intolerance of Christianity or other such groups that disagree with her is what I deem "confining" or "limiting." >And I think Dallas' method of collating excerpts from her various >writings >is another good approach. I know that several people on Theos-L have >been irritated by his citations. One of the reasons that Dallas' or any other person relying mainly on citations for discussion is considered 'irritating' is that one never knows if the person is simply reciting what he/she has read or heard, or is truly speaking from the inner self. Is a person who provides mostly responses jammed full of citations being genuine? It almost seems a form of keeping distance, and sometimes even height, between the the one who cites and his/her audience. >I have no idea if the "viewpoint" you write about is really "prominent >in the >TSA" or not. I left the TSA due to this viewpoint seemingly (to me) evident in John Algeo's writings. >Could not one's critcisms be based on motivations other than the one >you ascribe? I have outlined my criticisms of Paul's views in my >HOUSE OF CARDS and have given in detail the reasons for those criticisms >and have given chapter and verse. I have read your HOUSE OF CARDS and Paul's TMR. And yes, I do think the motivations you have toward Paul's writings could and does encompass other reasons than the sacredness of HPB - remember my post regarding the karmic link you and Paul seem to be locked in? Or did you chuck that one in the rubbish bin? Hmmmm? >Paul Johnson's wriings on HPB are not the >only writings I have criticized. For example, see my critique of >Jean Overton Fuller's biography in THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY. >I have also criticized some of the findings of Boris de Zirkoff and >Geoffrey Barborka. [snip] Is >this >so terrible and bad? I'm impressed! I'm all for those who feel it is their job to tell others what is wrong with them - I, myself, excel in this field and, on occasion, have some glorious fun. 'Course, you and I both recognize that, should we be in error of judgment and cause unnecessary pain - we will ultimately be the ones who "pay." "Karma" is a bit of a party pooper. >One more thing and I will shut up. You're too easy! Betcha one cyber-dollar that you'll find it impossible to remain true to that statement. Kym From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 01:03:38 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:44:27 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3589FABB.54E@globalserve.net> References: <19980617030959353.AAA215@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > knowledge I took for granted. Each species of trees has their own > vibration. Once you sense this, you can never mistake an oak for something > else again (oaks speak really loud). There's a great poem in the > Mabinogion which lists the trees and months correspondence in Celtic lore. > (If some one has a copy or can direct me to it online, I'd be grateful. I > seem to remember that it was reproduced in the back of Grave's The White > Goddess). Knowing Trees is part of the experiential learning of the power > of nature. Dear Pam: Thanks for the reference and the info. I have been thinking really hard on this. We have known for some time of the power of trees and the recent quotes from HPB support this. Note also the "tree of life" central to Native American spirituality. What I have been throwing around in my mind though are the questions: "What if the trees are the keepers of the Word? What if the cutting down of them and the effects on the environment and us is only part of the facts? What if we fail to see the wood (universal)for the trees (fragmentation)? (Sorry, couldn't resist). What if photosynthesis was put there to guard the loss of the universal knowledge, like a gatekeeper of the Library? What if books made out of trees and houses made out of trees was not simply best material for the job, but part of the communication? The last time a tree spoke to me he said quite clearly, "focus on me and get right first things first, and when you have that in hand, all that universe behind me will be yours to understand." That from a mere sapling really. So I can only imagine what a 700 year old oak has to say. I wonder if going to crystals from trees was the big mistake! Blessings Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 01:12:49 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 02:02:26 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3589FEF2.7346@globalserve.net> References: <199806160221.VAA09231@proteus.imagiware.com> <3585EC65.F6152E2C@sprynet.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Brenda S. Tucker wrote: > > > > Annette, > > > > Have you ever read a book by Dora Van Gelder > > AKA Dora Kunz. > Hi Bart & Brenda: No I haven't. I assume it would be worth my while. I'm booked to visit Chapters this weekend after a considerable dry spell and have a list now that includes this. Many thanks Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 01:25:53 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 01:59:05 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <3589FE29.18F6@globalserve.net> References: <000201bd996e$f7fdce60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > Now, if we set to work and accumulated in various categories all > the current testimony in books and articles, the information that > so far has been made available in books and magazines for the > past hundred years, we might get some attention. Some come from > Professors, who dare to investigate this delicate area, and some > evidence is from ordinary people. But, what I mean is: Can we > present enough in a concentrated mass so that the attention of > the serious inquirer is held. How do we go about showing that > there is more than "moonshine" present ? What could we present Dear Dallas: Thanks for your comments. I would just like to say that I think the great thing about these occult type things and other-plane experiences *is* that they follow no set pattern, cannot be reproduced at will, cannot be manipulated, cannot be tested, and have not become pap for mass production. These experiences are very personal and appear to defy our simplistic logic. They may be our last best hope for individual spirituality and as such, simply manifest without as the student seeks within. Love Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 01:37:48 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 00:31:21 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: On obey-ing Message-Id: <199806190631.AAA26453@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >A much more positive approach to dealings which we have with our inner >divine is to say, "Beloved Mighty I Am Presence Make me perfectly obedient >in all things." Mmmmmm. Somehow, the concept of being "perfectly obedient" doesn't sound so positive - especially when one doesn't know what "It" is. By the way, I went to your website and, unfortunately, found after reading it that the "Mighty I Am" theory wasn't any clearer. Does this have anything to do with that Prophet person? I read their books CLIMB THE HIGHEST MOUNTAIN and one other on auras, the title having escaped me. Now I hear they are packing heat in some state (Montana?). No? Kym From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 05:07:54 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:39:37 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Dal's questions Message-ID: <000501bd9b69$6ee64ce0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 18th Alan -- all I can say is Wow ! Just reading back and forth our comments in very interesting, but also I get lost trying to find who said what -- generally we do agree. My thesis is simple: Law is everywhere. Our understanding of it grows as we advance in understanding. so we are eternal students. Higher degrees are many and not yet fully understandable to us, but as potentials and possibilities, we can theorize many things without being absolutely sure. Thanks for the consideration. I have enjoyed this. Dal > Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 6:41 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: Dal's questions >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>June 15th 1998 >> >>Thanks Alan: >> >>Some comments added below -- Dallas > >And I intersperse some more - Alan snip From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 05:19:46 1998 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 15:02:44 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: ICQ Group Discussion Topic #1 Message-ID: <000601bd9b69$6ff2dae0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 18th Dallas offers: ICQ -- does allocate enough space for discourse. so answer here. LIGHT OF ASIA Book 8, (p. 149-51 my copy ) gives answer to "right employment" as Buddha saw it. Karma is Law, Dharma is agreement and living with the Law as a basis for brotherhood. Essentially it is universal benevolence and unselfishness. The strong support the weak. The wise instruct the ignorant without interfering in their free-will and power of choice. Man is the one free agent in Nature. His "intelligence" makes him free. Will is not directly free elsewhere in Nature; the law of Karma adjusts the encroachment of matter on the flow of the will -- which is the power of Spirit in action. Only in the human kingdom with the birth of intelligence, Will becomes free. And thus, at last, Karma finds the aid of an intelligence independent of itself, instead of a passive instrument for its compensating operations. Thus, even that Law of LAWS, KARMA, offers itself to become the Servant of Man. All Nature, except human nature, is non-conscious though animate, sensitive and vital. For, the rest of Nature is the assemblage of the resultant factors of the diverse properties of the universal qualities (called Gunas in the Bhagavad Gita: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas or Illumination, activity and inertia). Therefore, outside of the human kingdom Nature is neither moral nor immoral, and is destitute of malice or cruelty, or their reverse: affection. Karma is only just. Good and evil are, in truth, absent in Nature, and only make their appearance in the Kingdom of Man. [ Man in his independence has the power to go against the Laws of justice and fairness that rule Nature. Accordingly, Karma being invoked, will respond. ] In the many transformations of the Universe; in its vast progress there is a particular stage when the two opposing energies ( Spirit and Matter ) are so balanced that the resulting friction produces a third energy with the properties of both, and yet it is different from either of them. This Plane of Balance is the Human Kingdom. A habitat for this energy and for its many levels of development is needed. In the harmony of Nature it is this Earth -- as an example of this type of balance -- and this will also include all sidereal bodies where this type of balance exists. In the space between the atom and the Galaxy it manifests as the majestic progress of vast hopes of human intelligences of various levels and degrees of perception and understanding (knowledge, learning, wisdom) and this is expressed in terms of the moral/ethical Law, which governs the heart of man -- compassion. Man thus needs a different kind of definition. This is what the Buddha seems (to me) to be saying. If you wish to direct this theory of man's intelligence, growth and work to the business and corporate world around us, and in which we all share to some extent, the answers are (tome) obvious. It is a very rare business that is run on strictly ethical grounds and employs only ethical methods of work and service. Yes Service ! For if you inquire into the cause for trade you will find that it exists to provide service from one group or person to others. It is clear that all businesses international or not, and all countries and nations touch the world in many ways -- and leave an impress, an impact on the lives of their employees. In terms of individual Karma it is up to the employee to agree to serve a business, or to resign in protest, if the methods he is expected to employ are such as, impartially, he knows cannot stand up honestly and clearly in a court of law. If this were seen and adhered to 9 / 10ths of the evils of corporations and nations would cease. This is PRACTICAL IDEALISM. The sooner that we all get down to applying it, the sooner will the world become a better place. I have been fortunate that in the businesses I was associated with, or which I managed, such an ideal could be implemented and adhered to, and not so strangely, those businesses prospered. Dallas ICQ 13,760,916 > Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 7:24 PM > From: "Darren Porter" > Subject: ICQ Group Discussion Topic #1 >ICQ participants are invited to submit their responses to the first weekly >discussion question: > >Karmically, what does the buddhist philosophy of 'right employment', mean >to westerners? Do internatioanal corporations have a collective karma like >countries and does this effect an employee? > SNIP ==== Note: ICQ gives inadequate space for an answer such as this. From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 07:51:22 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 07:51:59 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <19980619130819009.AAA208@pgiese> Thanks Annette and Sophia for tree references.. With these, I'd been carrying around images of trees all day yesterday. Well, last night we had a unusually strong thunderstorm (with a tornado watch). The wind ripped off a 12" diameter,15' bough from my green ash. Miraculously, it didn't land on my car or my house but was oddly cradled by the green ash itself and a honeysuckle bush --like a person might hold a broken arm. I found the celtic poem which names the trees associated with Gwydion and the Ogham. I put it out on my website. I haven't done much work on the site, I've just put the stuff out there than didn't email well. It's at: http://www.snd.softfarm.com/pws/pgiese Here's my take on crystals vs trees. I think crystals are easier to work with because the crystal spirits are eager to raise up and communicate with the evolutionarily higher human energies (like some on this list are anxious to communicate with masters or aliens). I don't think trees feel this need and may not even recognize us as higher energies, so they're less inclined to communicate. I think that most trees just consider us to be especially dangerous pests, much more dangerous than insects. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 12:44 AM > > Pam Giese wrote: > > knowledge I took for granted. Each species of trees has their own > > vibration. Once you sense this, you can never mistake an oak for something > > else again (oaks speak really loud). There's a great poem in the > > Mabinogion which lists the trees and months correspondence in Celtic lore. > > (If some one has a copy or can direct me to it online, I'd be grateful. I > > seem to remember that it was reproduced in the back of Grave's The White > > Goddess). Knowing Trees is part of the experiential learning of the power > > of nature. > Dear Pam: > Thanks for the reference and the info. I have been thinking really hard > on this. We have known for some time of the power of trees and the > recent quotes from HPB support this. Note also the "tree of life" > central to Native American spirituality. > What I have been throwing around in my mind though are the questions: > "What if the trees are the keepers of the Word? What if the cutting > down of them and the effects on the environment and us is only part of > the facts? What if we fail to see the wood (universal)for the trees > (fragmentation)? (Sorry, couldn't resist). What if photosynthesis was > put there to guard the loss of the universal knowledge, like a > gatekeeper of the Library? What if books made out of trees and houses > made out of trees was not simply best material for the job, but part of > the communication? > > The last time a tree spoke to me he said quite clearly, "focus on me and > get right first things first, and when you have that in hand, all that > universe behind me will be yours to understand." > That from a mere sapling really. So I can only imagine what a 700 year > old oak has to say. > I wonder if going to crystals from trees was the big mistake! > Blessings > Annette > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 08:21:22 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 09:17:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Theosophy=HPB? Message-Id: <199806191317.JAA14818@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806180016.TAA21089@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 17, 98 07:16:10 pm Dear Martin, Wish I could copy your passages to comment on, but since I get thigest that would require deleting 500+ lines to get to the ones I want. So, summarizing, you say that there's no good reason for me to be perplexed by the fact that the embers of Theosophical organizations are far less focused on a belief system centered on HPB than the organizations themselves are. You add that you come to the TS to study Theosophy etc... The problem is that your response assumes that the Theosophical movement's sole purpose is to study "Theosophy" i.e. "a belief systemcentered on HPB," rather than "theosophy" i.e. the eternal gnosis present in myriad forms. The TS is in fact explicitly *not* an organization devoted to a single belief sstem or author. But its leaders have forgotten that, although the members have not-- most of them, that is. Cheers, Pau From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 08:51:22 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:44:15 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <009301bd9b89$1ecb32a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Annette -- you are quite right. But for those who have very "organized" minds and who desire to be able to investigate into that which we know, they need those preliminary stepping stones. How do we help them ? That is what I had in mind. Dal. > Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 11:42 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 09:01:58 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:31:25 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <009101bd9b89$1b6b8ce0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th Dear Arnaldo and Marina: You will surely be welcome. ULT offers no barriers to anyone and welcomes all who are students of Theosophy and devotees of HPB to all its meetings and especially to a "Special Meeting" as we will be holding next Sunday 21st. June. So we await your arrival. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 7:06 PM > From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" > Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited >Dear Brother Dallas, > >Many thanks for the invitation. Although we are members of the Adyar TS, we >would like very much to be able to attend the meeting for more than one >reason, including to know more about Mr. Robert Crosbie and the ULT. God >willing one of these days we will be able to attend physically a meeting >with you. In the mean time receive our warmest greetings from Brazil. > > Fraternally yours, Marina and Arnaldo Sisson F. > > > >-----Mensagem original----- >De: W. Dallas TenBroeck >Para: Dalval Tenbrook >Data: Terça-feira, 16 de Junho de 1998 14:04 >Assunto: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited > > >>Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. >> >>A Special Meeting == All are welcome >> >>The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >>Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. >> >>It will be held in English and Spanish. >> >>A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey of >>the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be >>presented. >> >> >>Directions: >> >> >>The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , >>245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) >>Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] >> >>Close to University of Southern California (USC) >> >>off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. >>go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. >>turn left and pass under the Freeway going East >>at Grand ave. intersection turn left. >>Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. >> >>(patrolled parking is provided) >> >>All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 09:06:52 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 04:44:35 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: (none) Message-ID: <008d01bd9b88$ee6fbe00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th 1998 Dallas offers: Some exerpts from a letter written by a recent Russian emigrant to America to a friend: Dear - - - - , I received your greeting card for my birthday. Thank you for the memory and for sharing with me you view on problems of life in Russia, and for asking questions. I'm going to answer them at the best of my ability. You ask me how I can cope with the death of your (and my) best friend. Three years ago I was not able to console you with anything valuable. It seems to me that today I have something valuable to say. Two and a half years ago my American friend asked me to attend a meeting of one of many small groups of people getting together to study Theosophy. Theosophy gives its students a clear exposition on ethics, science and philosophy. At first it was hard for me to follow the discussions and understand them, because of my English. And the subject was itself too lofty, but I knew on the spot that it would be a part of my life from now on. I knew that I'll get the answers on many questions, which I wanted to be answered since the days of my youth: Who am I ? What am I doing in this world ? Why it happens to me, to my friends ? What is death ? What is intuition ? What is freedom ? The following is an attempt to share with you my understanding of some theosophical ideas. I always wanted to know why Americans say that they are free people. I understand what is freedom of religious beliefs, political freedom, social freedom. But personal freedom is something completely different because nobody gives it to you but yourself. We are all slaves of ourselves because we live in fear to loose what we have, or, not to get what we want. This is true for people who are rich and who are poor, for a prince and for a beggar, for Americans and for Russians. Freedom is a light at the end of the tunnel -- we all follow through with a speed programmed by evolution. Where are we coming from? From the Beginning, where once we were together and we would be together again, when, finally we finish our journey. How can we describe something which is The Beginning and the End of Everything at the same time ? It is an "Absolute" principle which has no attributes, because IT is beyond duality, beyond human comprehension. But Everything emanates from IT. How ? I have to use metaphors in order to bring this subject to the level of human consciousness. How does our day start ? We are waking up. Where are we ? We don't know. Our brain wasn't functioning during the night sleep, our consciousness was in the other reality. We remember nothing, it seems we were nowhere, particularly during our dreamless sleep. what happens then ? An unconscious desire to be awake grows within us. The desire expresses itself in a first "conscious" breath. A first thought and a first movement comes with it. It is very conventional to use these images to substitute what we call primordial matter in Theosophy. Our planet as well as a million of other planets and stars began from IT. By millions and millions of years of evolution human "monads" have developed as a gaseous substance first, then as the mineral kingdom, then as the vegetable kingdom, and finally became the animal kingdom. The animal has consciousness which express itself in the form of instincts. The evolution has continued its work, and the history of Humanity did begin only when the humanlike body was enlightened with self-conscious mind. As a train goes smoothly and fast on the rails of very well maintained track, so do we follow our way because Karma takes care of everything. Karma is The Law of Nature, the Law of action and reaction, the law of absolute justice and balance, the law which most of us know as "what you sow you will reap." There is personal Karma, family Karma, community Karma, and so on. There are no doubts that in this world everyone and everything follows the same cycle: birth, growth, bloom, fruit-bearing, aging, death. Our Earth also goes through the same process. What happens when matter dissolves ? It turns into different elements. We know that nothing appears or disappears without leaving a trace. So what happen with our individuality ? It is in our genes say materialists. We get it from the previous generations and it goes to the next ones. Suppose there is no next generation, then what ? We commit the crimes or sow love and good. As a result, religious believers say, we go to hell or heaven. No, contradict the materialists, we die gaining nothing and loosing nothing. A coat is worn, we throw it away. Where is the one who wore it ? Theosophy states that our body dissolves, but our wandering soul is eternal. Our soul reincarnates in another body and experiences next life, as it did million and million times before and will do after. Talking about Karma and Reincarnation, H. P. Blavatsky, famous Russian theosophist, wrote in the "Key to Theosophy" : "We can only perceive that if with us things ought to have been different, they would have been different; that we are what we have made ourselves, and have only what we have earned for ourselves... Belief in Karma is the highest reason for reconcilement to one's lot in life, and the very strongest incentive towards effort to better the succeeding re-birth. Both of these, indeed, would be destroyed if we supposed that our lot was the result of anything but strict Law, or that destiny was in any other hands than our own." Yes, Karma takes into account all our deeds and thoughts, but only spiritual experience help us to progress, to make one more step towards freedom. We have to live spiritual life while we are here, on Earth. And spiritual life is the "LIFE OF COMPASSION." P S: I want to share with you how studying Theosophy affected my life. The first: One day I discovered that the surrounding world and myself have changed in proportions and in meaning. My self became smaller and less significant. The Nature which previously existed only as a background, providing pleasures or inconvenienc es of life, turned into a dear, lifetime companion, a friend. The second: I know theoretically what the "Great Master" [ the Buddha] has said: "Let a man overcome wrath by absence of anger, let him overcome evil by good. Let him overcome the miser by generosity and the liar by truth." So I stopped retaliating and justifying my self -- this is the first small step in this direction. The third: At the end of the day when I get in bed I have no trouble falling asleep any more, because I know now how to span a gentle bridge between two states of my consciousness. Be well and best regards to everybody. -- -- -- -- =============================== From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 09:06:42 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 05:20:14 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: (none) Message-ID: <008e01bd9b89$15b12e40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th 1998 By week end we shall, as a world, be at Mid-summer. Greetings to all at this turn of the annual cycle. June 25th also marks the 79th death anniversary of Robert Crosbie, the founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. [The ULT will hold a special meeting at 7.30 pm on Sunday June 1st to commemorate this anniversary. Address in Los Angeles at Theosophy Hall, Grand ave. and 33rd Street. ] Dallas offers: Some words from Robert Crosbie "How shall we apply Theosophy in daily life ? First, to think what we are in reality, on arising; to endeavor to realize what this small segment of our great existence may mean in the long series of such existences; to resolve to live throughout the day from the highest of our realizations; to see in each event and circumstance a reproduction in small or in great of that which has been; and to deal with each and every one of these from that same high point. Resolve to deal with them as though each had a deep occult meaning and presented an opportunity to further the successes of the past, or undo the errors. Thus living from moment to moment, hour to hour, life will be seen as a portion of a great web of action and reaction, intermeshed at every point, and connected with the Soul which provided the energy and sustained it. If each event is so considered throughout the day, be it small or great, the power to guide and control your energies will in no long time be yours. The smaller cycles of the personal ego will be related to the Divine Ego and the force that flows from the latter will show itself in every way, will strengthen the whole nature, and will even change the conditions, physical and otherwise, which surround you." "The Movement is accelerated by us to the extent we work for it, and hindered to the extent that we let it pull us along." "The greatest truths are the simplest." "For practical purposes: if we are developing the child-heart; if we are learning to love things beautiful; if we are becoming more honest and plain and simple; if we are beginning to sense the sweet side of life; if we are getting to like our friends better and extending the circle; if we feel ourselves expanding in sympathy; if we love to work for Theosophy and do not ask position as a reward; if we are not bothering too much about whether we are personal or impersonal -- this is traveling on the path..." R C -- The Friendly Philosopher. From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 09:15:36 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 06:41:54 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Gamblers Anonymous Message-ID: <009201bd9b89$1cfe61e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th Dear Kym: Speaking for myself. I am quite able to express myself without quotations as you may have noticed from my various postings. I hold that Theosophy can best be expressed by those who "brought it." For our present cycle and age, the job fell to HPB and to her colleague and co-worker in America, Mr. William Quan Judge. The "quotations" are intended to put the reader into direct touch with the source from which we have all met Theosophy, and to efface myself from that contact, so that I do not influence the understanding of the reader. That's all. HPB brought the same age-old truths that all the Great Teachers down the ages have spoken of, and which religious reformers down the ages have eventually made "religions" of. Such religions to flourish have encouraged the "masses" not to think, to remain ignorant, to have "faith," and to put their blind trust in priests (of whatever denomination or sect). HPB respected Jesus and spoke in the highest terms of him and his mission. The churches have tried uniformly, almost, to spoil his liberating influence. He originally came to reform the exoteric religion of the Jews. The priestly Levites, and Pharisees and the orthodox hated him and planned his murder. Why ? Because he destroyed their power, their "authority," and liberated a few of the common people from the yoke of "blind belief." But, as usual, most people love having someone else to do their thinking for them, and to be able (subconsciously) to have someone else to "blame" if things go wrong. Is it not strange that the reforms of which he spoke are still not observed in practice even to day by those who say they are "Christians ?" Who among us practice in daily life all the injunctions of the "Sermon on the Mount ?" Sadly we may say that if that were sincerely attempted most of our present, so loved civilization would be used in such completely different ways within a week, that much of it would not recover, and the so-called "rich and powerful" would turn to being true servants of the people instead of their leeches. Vice and crime would vanish. Fear of so many things would cease. Think for a moment of what a universal understanding of the "immortality of the soul, of honest Karma, of "paying all of one's debts;" and of "reincarnation" would do to world living and thinking. HPB spoke harshly of the churches, temples, synagogues, etc... and gave full reasons. She did not wish to destroy the benevolence of Jesus (or of any Great Teacher) -- as They all belong to a single Fraternity -- at all. But she desired people to begin to study and think for themselves. That is tough medicine for most of us, whether we are devotees of a religion or a science. Yes, Science has its beliefs, theories and priests who declare its infallibility, while it will be found to be changing all the time -- I can't tell you how many times in my life I have seen scientific theory reversed and changed, and I have been editor for a science publishing house for some time. What I am annoyed at, angry perhaps, is that when I was a child I was taught those were FACTS, not theories, and only after I burdened my mind and memory with those "facts," I was later told that they were untrue and ought to be modified. Why should I, you, the world be so constantly lied to ? Why should our mental powers be kept submerged by "authority ?" Why ? Why does the educational system in all countries not devote time to teaching children to think logically, with both heart and head. compassion and reason ought to develop together. Brotherhood is symbolic of such a change. The Theosophical Movement is founded on the Universality of our whole Living. Nothing less. There are no reserved seats. Yes I know there is talk of occultism, esotericism, and secrets. Are there any really ? If Nature contains all and Is all, then they are for the discovering. The path of learning does not stop with graduation and a job. It merely continues. And as usual it is a climb. This anyone can observe. If one develops an invention and does not care to announce it dangers, then in many cases those who use it suffer. I would not call the atom bomb a useful development of scientific acumen. It is utterly heartless in concept and usage. The wars and politics of nations are also symptomatic of the disease of selfishness fear and ignorance that burdens us all to some degree. How mush do we take for granted either because we do not care to investigate, or desire to "go out and play" like the irresponsible children do ? When does human adulthood begin ? How many times have priests (of various religions) claimed to be the hearers of the latest orders from "Heaven, " or from "God's own mouth ?" And how can anyone believe for a moment that there is TRUTH in that ? If the priests are powerful, and have the ear of God, then why have they not already arranged to banish evil and suffering, torture, genocide, famine, and oppression from the Earth ? If they have power then why have they not used it ? And so on. Ah, yes, there is a "devil !" And who is stronger God ? The priest would desire us to believe that, but cannot at the same time account for his weakness. Ah yes. Providence and divine dispensation, the testing of the moral mettle of the poor ignorant parishioners or their "Faith." etc... nonsense ! Or as HPB might put it: "Flapdoodle ! " As to authorities in Theosophy. You are the sole authority, and you read and decide what is reasonable. No "organization" or "Theosophical body" speaks for any kind of orthodoxy as theosophy is essentially heterodoxy, and respect for individual opinions. Brotherhood is tolerance, but it is not ignorance, nor does it encourage permissiveness. If you look on Karma as a "party pooper" then consider how much fun it would be putting your bare hand in the fire. Or trying to dry your clothes under a waterfall. No we accept those rules of nature that we are able to understand. what is so difficult about trying to behave honestly and sincerely ? What kind of perverted pleasure is there in anonymously harming another, or drugging oneself into insensibility with alcohol or various drugs, so that one is no longer in command of one's actions. Why is insensibility considered fun, at the expense of careful and cautious responsibility and the spontaneous care for the well-being of others around us ? Yes, I know for some the pressures of the day are deemed to bring some due and justifiable relaxations at the end of the day -- a rest -- but is this to be a reasonable or an unreasonable immersion into a psychic pleasure time ? All those questions are ETHICAL questions, and so far, most of us have been prevented from considering them. Either they are too difficult or they are not subjects for polite discussion. And why so ? Why is it unpopular to say that any evil thought or act will draw from Nature a painful response ? Why is it that we look on "good fortune" as our due, and on suffering and pain as unjust to us ? Is it that we have never been shown the intimate connection between ill thinking, ill acting, and suffering of a personal kind -- disease, accidents, reverses of fortune, etc... Why are we such awful cowards that we would do to unknown persons harm in the dark, when we cannot be recognized, so as to be held directly accountable for what we do that is ill ? Is it so awful that we suddenly find out that nature has been looking at us directly all this time, and that everything we have done has ben accurately entered into our karmic account ? What we ought to be asking is why are we being told this fact so late in life ! Why did not our parents and our teachers tell us that we would be unable to evade the direct consequences, in due time, of all that we think and do ? Why does this conspiracy of silence continue ? What is it in us that likes to "live dangerously ?" Why do we like continuing to be ignorant ? these questions ought to be asked of ourselves by OURSELF. We have no doubt done this before. But where except in Theosophy have explicit answers been given ? I think this is enough for one early morning. best wishes, Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 10:55 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: Gamblers Anonymous >Daniel wrote: > >>But without viewing HPB as >>the "messiah >>of Theosophy" and her works as "the bibles of Theosophy", I certainly >>think >>HPB's works are worthy of reading and studying. > >I certainly agree. However, I was most curious about whether one could be a >Theosophist without ever having read HPB. =================================== DALLAS : Of course. HPB was only a Messenger. The rules and laws of Nature have existed way before her exposition. They are the innate common-sense we all have. They are CONSCIENCE, the voice of the Wisdom that we have interiorly acquired over aeons of experience. We are immortals, and carry a memory of all we have been through the "Voice of Conscience" always warns us BEFORE we make a choice. When we make a bad one, we often feel remorse, which is reflecting on the results that will accrue to us, inevitably, from either good or wrong doing. Dal. ======================================= From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 10:21:57 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:15:07 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <358A807B.4EA@lainet.com> References: <199806191317.JAA14818@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Deal Paul, I agree with with you. But there is something that we differ, and has to do in the way you word it, but again,and I am not able to express it. But I'll do my best. The study of theosophy (and lets forget the capital T vs lower t)the way I understood from HPB, is not only to study all belief, all religions, all mythologies, all sciences, all arts, and so on, but to do in a 'special' way which is what I call theosophy. That system of investigating into the above mentioned, to extract Nature's Laws, to prove them in ones life, to compare them with other ways of expressing them, and so on, is what Theosophy is all about. It is an old system, or method, well seen by the Dialectic of Plato, and by the Neoplatonists like Plotinus, Porphiry, etc. It was not invented by HPB but she, certainly is a great expression of it. And as I study HPB, I become that way of looking, living, embodying the theosophical 'way.' If you see my list of lectures, very little is about HPB, per se. I talk about Quetzalcoatl, Osiris, Buddha, the Bible, Sacred Places, Alchemy, Kabbala, Comparative Symbols, etc. But I always refer to the theosophical system 'as taught by HPB' and that is what I meant to say in my last email. I expect to study 'that' which makes me a 'theosophist.' And in my opinion just because I almost know the Egyptian Book of the Dead by heart and I study that Book, does not make me a theosophist but a scholar in the that book. Theosophist is the one able to extract, investigate, assimilate, and live according to the Divine-Wisdom found in that book and in anywhere. Again, dear Paul I am not sure if I am able to communicate the disconfort with the way you worded your statement, I just do not see it. And I live theosophically, and committed to the TSA and a member and as a national lecturer. I already closed down in early 80's, in Los Angeles the New Acropolis when I saw the 'fascist' 'cultist' 'non-theosophically' turn it took, so I always on the guard. I do see people like me with human problems, trying the best, making mistakes, not able to communicate properly with all levels; but they are no different from any normal organization or corporation. Another point, about leaders of the TSA: I have spent several weekends with John Algeo at krotona, the topcis, were: Sacred Geometry, Walking the Laberynth one about symbols in children fables, and tales (don't remember the actual title), and one about the Letter of HPB to American Convensions. Do you see in those titles an HPB fanatic, dogmatic? I don't. I just miised Tony Lyssy's seminar about Neoplatonism and Theosophy, and one of Nathan Greer on Chaos. I do not see what you are saying. Sorry. And by the way, I did enjoy you book about the Master I bought from you directly few years ago. For one thing, It gave a good historical backgroud of the time of HPB. I was able to be trasported to last century and re-live the politics, the feeling of that century. Thank you for the research. I disagree with the conclusion, but that I would like to share with you, not from the historical point of view because I have not done not even 10% of the research you've done but from the 'logic applied' tying the pieces together. You know what I mean? Your brother, Martin From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 11:21:51 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 12:25:35 -0400 From: "John E Mead" Subject: RE: Science - Ice paradox >From: "Jake Jaqua" >ubject: Science >        "  A vacuum holds onto energy the way ice holds >onto heat. When >     ice melts, it releases that heat, which turns into the >energy of >     rapidly moving water molecules. In the same way, >physicists >     believe a vacuum can melt, releasing energy." > > Ice ABSORBS heat to turn into water. When >water RELEASES heat, it turns into ice, not as the article >states. Your point is true, but misses a very unique dynamic of the ice which the article probably was referring to... generally -- compounds get (physically) smaller when they freeze. so to heat them up you actually have to add the heat to melt the substance and *ADD* the heat to push your environment outward to make room for the larger fluid state (work done against the atmosphere (pressure)). water doesn't work that way. when water freezes it EXPANDS. That is why ice floats instead of sinking (into the pond and killing the fish etc. each winter :-). Hence you have the energy to add to melt the water *MINUS* the energy you get free when the atmosphere expands to fill in the *smaller* volume of the liquified water. The expansion of the atmoshere into this volume is a cooling effect on the outside Universe as the water melts. peace - john e. mead From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 12:51:54 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:42:35 -0700 From: "Mark Kusek" Subject: Re: Gamblers Anonymous Message-ID: <358AA30A.7A03@withoutwalls.com> References: <009201bd9b89$1cfe61e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > But, as usual, most people love having someone else to do > their thinking for them, and to be able (subconsciously) > to have someone else to "blame" if things go wrong. Noted without comment. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 13:07:01 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:58:24 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: On obey-ing Message-Id: <199806191755.MAA05515@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806190631.AAA26453@mailmx.micron.net> At 12:31 AM 6/19/98 -0600, you wrote: >Brenda wrote: > >>A much more positive approach to dealings which we have with our inner >>divine is to say, "Beloved Mighty I Am Presence Make me perfectly obedient >>in all things." > >Mmmmmm. Somehow, the concept of being "perfectly obedient" doesn't sound so >positive - especially when one doesn't know what "It" is. > >By the way, I went to your website and, unfortunately, found after reading >it that the "Mighty I Am" theory wasn't any clearer. Does this have >anything to do with that Prophet person? I read their books CLIMB THE >HIGHEST MOUNTAIN and one other on auras, the title having escaped me. Now I >hear they are packing heat in some state (Montana?). No? Kym, I know of no "Mighty I Am" theory. The seven races are theosophy. St. Germain Foundation is not affiliated with Elizabeth Claire Prophet. If you don't know the I AM Temple (which is the St. Germain Foundation), then I can tell you there are a series of 14 books, of which the first three are required reading for attending their Fundamental Classes, after which time you may receive a membership card (renewable every year by another 1-2 sets of Fundamentals) which entitles you to attend Decree Classes. There are 6 decree books in which they publish decrees on this list of subjects: ONE: Violet Flame Decrees, 1-4 Love, Forgiveness and Mercy Purity Victory Ascension TWO: Morning and Night Healing, I & II Angel, I & II Music, I & II Hand of God THREE: America, I & II Protection Business Supply, I & II Youth,I & II School FOUR: Light Light My World Electronic Circle Cosmic Light Sun Honor Flame Venus Messenger Speaks FIVE: Law Elohim Central Sun Magnet Great Great Silence I AM DECREE SETS A-18 Chapters A-N Chapters 15-18 (These are largely related to government purifying and raising.) I posted this back in November, so most people have already seen this list. At any rate, I was not trying to explain the I AM Temple by my post, but THEOSOPHY, pure and simple. Did you see anything new on this subject? Brenda P.S. I think the I AM Temple has a brilliant way of keeping us at ease with the idea of obedience. We decree most often for Godfre's obedience. He asked to decree for his obedience and as he was the founder, perhaps it could have helped back when he was alive, only we CONTINUE to decree for his obedience even now. After a number of these repetitions and seeing someone else so at ease with the concept, I began to feel attracted to the idea more myself. I also feel that the way I receive "instruction" is unique and I have found from experience that the "requests" so to speak are not only correct, but VERY helpful. I don't expect everyone to have this type of experience because I see it as a result partly of the purification of the vehicles, which both theosophy and the I AM Temple recommends, and if you haven't done the purifications, how could you be expected to participate in the results!? Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 13:21:49 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 11:09:19 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: On obey-ing Message-Id: <199806191806.NAA06541@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806190631.AAA26453@mailmx.micron.net> At 12:31 AM 6/19/98 -0600, you wrote: >Brenda wrote: > >>A much more positive approach to dealings which we have with our inner >>divine is to say, "Beloved Mighty I Am Presence Make me perfectly obedient >>in all things." Kym, Also "perfectly" obedient doesn't mean listening to every command. It means interpreting, weighing, feeling balanced and at ease with our "commands" and making the important ones count. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 14:06:58 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:00:27 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: On obey-ing Message-ID: <001801bd9bb4$a8706a40$1f0a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> Kym wrote: >>Mmmmmm. Somehow, the concept of being "perfectly obedient" doesn't sound so >>positive - especially when one doesn't know what "It" is. >> >>By the way, I went to your website and, unfortunately, found after reading >>it that the "Mighty I Am" theory wasn't any clearer. Does this have >>anything to do with that Prophet person? I read their books CLIMB THE >>HIGHEST MOUNTAIN and one other on auras, the title having escaped me. Now I >>hear they are packing heat in some state (Montana?). No? Dear Kym, Thank you for having read the two books you mentioned. Especially 'Climb the Highest Mountain' I consider a theosophical classic, though many theosophists might disagree. The book was written by Mark and Elizabeth Clare Prophet and is a condensation of their understanding of the teachings of the Ascended Masters. The headquarters of the organization is in Montana. I do not know what you mean with 'packing heat.' I am from Holland and don't know yet that expression. You are welcome to visit their site at www.tsl.com and to visit mine at http://pages.prodigi.net/schuller/homep.htm Yours Govert From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 14:21:50 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 15:15:23 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Dogmatism in and out of Theosophy Message-Id: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806191522.KAA23601@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 19, 98 10:22:05 am There's a lot to respond to in the last bunch of digests but I must comment first that I wrote the post Theosophy=HPB? without having read Kym's by the same title. Spent yesterday driving to Richmond and back for a museum meeting with a fellow Scorpio, a woman, who several times said the very words I was thinking. Seems to be more of this with Kym. Anyhow, first to Sophia: I think you were applying my remarks too specifically to your brother. I have two friends who have written in other fields entirely but have gotten the kind of hostility I've received, worse and from more people. So when I wrote I was thinking of Juan Cole, Ph.D., who has written about Baha'u'llah from the point of view of a trained historian who is also a sympathetic Baha'i believer. Nevertheless, his critical and questioning approach to Baha'i history caused him to receive voluminous hate mail from fellow believers and ultimately to be treated with such hostility by Baha'i leaders that he felt obliged to leave the religion. David C. Lane, Ph.D., is a practicing devotee of the Radhasoami Faith who is also an academician trained in critical thinking. His writings, which take a critical, skeptical approach to Radhasoami history, have caused him to receive tremendous denunciation from his fellow believers. Although no academician myself, I tried to approach HPB with a combination of sympathy and critical objectivity, and tasted the same kinds of negative energies projected my way that I saw Cole and Lane receive in such abundance. Now you might say that all the Baha'is who "defended" the traditional view of Baha'i, and all the Radhasoami disciples who "defended" their own traditional view of their gurus, and all the Theosophists who "defended" their traditional view of HPB, did so out of only the highest and purest motives-- those you cite in apparent defense of your brother. But the emotional tone of their remarks, should you read them all, is transparently evident to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. While none of the Baha'is can be honest enough with themselves to say "I hate Cole," and none of the RS people will admit "I hate Lane," and none of the "defenders" of HPB will call what they feel toward me "hate," the emotions are there for the world to see in their writings. And when I try to explain to myself where all this comes from, when I try to look into the hearts of the people who attack authors for taking an "irreverent" approach to their idols, I see *fear*. That's not the only thing there: cognitive processes are going on simultaneously with the emotional ones. But the primary factor determining *how* these people express their disagreement is *emotional* in nature. To Martin: since >90% of my books on HPB is historical background on her associations and <10% is an effort to interpret the aforesaid information and its implications about her claims regarding Masters, I don't mind at all if people accept the former and reject the latter. The primary service I meant to offer was to provide readers material with which to make their own interpretation, while offering my own as a tentative reconstruction. Nathan Greer and Tony Lysy are not examples of the kind of dogmatism and orthodoxy I was describing as reigning in the Adyar TS. Radha is, and John Algeo surprised me by turning out to be the same. Just because a person is dogmatic and orthodox in his view of HPB doesn't mean that person cannot range into other areas and display the virtues of an open mind and questing spirit. What's at issue, though, is the *center* of the belief system, and I feel that most of those in positions of power in the various Theosophical societies *centered* in a dogmatic view of HPB that she herself would, if she could speak to us today, condemn in the strongest terms. Yes, Martin, I understand what you mean about the logic tying the pieces together. Being an intuitive type, my strength is at recognizing relevant connections, not at systematic analysis of details. There's nothing unfair about critics pointing out that my books are strong in the former and weak in the latter. What's unfair is thousands and thousands of words condemning the latter in the most harsh and contemptuous tones, juxtaposed with a few grudging acknowledgments that maybe the books do unearth a tidbit or two of useful information. But life is unfair to everyone so I don't feel especially put upon! We all have our crosses to bear :) Fraternally, Paul From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 15:21:50 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:15:19 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-Id: <199806192015.OAA25959@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote: >Speaking for myself. I am quite able to express myself without >quotations as you may have noticed from my various postings. I certainly have, Dallas. And I appreciate it - however, your name, rather than your person, has become a "symbol" in the battle regarding "to quote or not to quote." It's called "fame," I think - and it does have its drawbacks. >I hold that Theosophy can best be expressed by those who "brought >it." I hold that Theosophy can best be expressed by those who "live it." >But, as >usual, most people love having someone else to do their thinking >for them, and to be able (subconsciously) to have someone else to >"blame" if things go wrong. Definitely agree - hence, the popularity of the "Devil" - it's all the Devil's fault, you know. >Who among us practice in daily life all the >injunctions of the "Sermon on the Mount ?" Not "all" of the injunctions of the SERMON ON THE MOUNT are worthy of adoption - it has different 'laws' for women than men. Note: the adultery clause. And, although the SERMON ON THE MOUNT contains great truths - it does make Jesus sound like a "us vs. them" kinda guy. >Yes, Science has its beliefs, theories and priests who declare >its infallibility, while it will be found to be changing all the >time -- I can't tell you how many times in my life I have seen >scientific theory reversed and changed, and I have been editor >for a science publishing house for some time. I think that is simply humanity gaining knowledge and understanding - rather than "Science" declaring its infallibility. The article Martin submitted shows that "Science" is willing, albeit balking all the way, to acknowledge when it is lacking in wisdom. >What I am annoyed at, angry perhaps, is that when I was a child I >was taught those were FACTS, not theories, and only after I >burdened my mind and memory with those "facts," I was later told >that they were untrue and ought to be modified. Why should I, >you, the world be so constantly lied to ? EXCUSE ME, but - when HPB stated that some of the things she said in ISIS UNVEILED should be modified - did you feel she had "lied" to you? Why different standards for science and not Theosophy? >There are no >reserved seats. Yes I know there is talk of occultism, >esotericism, and secrets. Are there any really ? I don't believe so - but both Jesus and HPB talk the talk of "not giving holy things to depraved men." I, myself, am unsure what a depraved person really is - as science more and more studies the brain. When is one "mentally insane" and when is one "depraved?" Should a person "mentally ill" be treated like "swine?" (Sermon on the Mount terminology) >How mush do we take for granted either because >we do not care to investigate, or desire to "go out and play" >like the irresponsible children do ? When does human adulthood >begin ? You may have it mixed up here. Perhaps we are too much "adult" and not enough "child" in our thinking. Children love to explore and learn - adults, not so much - adults tend to be stuck in their ways. >How many times have priests (of various religions) claimed to be >the hearers of the latest orders from "Heaven, " or from "God's >own mouth ?" And how can anyone believe for a moment that there >is TRUTH in that ? Again, are you holding this standard of "Truth" about hearing "orders from Heaven" to priests or to ALL who claim to hear Divine whispers? >If the priests are powerful, and have the ear >of God, then why have they not already arranged to banish evil >and suffering, torture, genocide, famine, and oppression from the >Earth ? If they have power then why have they not used it ? And >so on. Then I guess the Mahatmas, HPB, Gandhi, Jesus and all the rest did/do not have the "ear of God." For, according to your questioning - these people should have been able to "banish evil and suffering, [etc]". I think the reason the priests, or the Mahatmas, or anyone else so far has been unable to stop the suffering is because of such 'laws' as "Karma" and "Free Will." >Providence and divine >dispensation, the testing of the moral mettle of the poor >ignorant parishioners or their "Faith." etc... nonsense ! Or as >HPB might put it: "Flapdoodle ! " Your anger toward the priesthood is evident. I understand that - I fled the Catholic Church long ago. But there are also priests who are totally dedicated to easing the suffering of their parishioners and try their best to do so. >what is so difficult >about trying to behave honestly and sincerely ? What kind of >perverted pleasure is there in anonymously harming another, or >drugging oneself into insensibility with alcohol or various >drugs, so that one is no longer in command of one's actions. Why >is insensibility considered fun, Usually, only the young consider drunkeness and the like fun. Most others drink and take drugs to try and ease considerable suffering within their hearts and souls. They are not bad people - they just don't know where to turn, where to go for help. They are numbing themselves from the pain. You, living in India, have seen the horrible, painful lives led by many there - do you think they cope by using drugs for "fun?" >Why is it unpopular to say that any evil thought or act will draw >from Nature a painful response ? Because then people will say "Hey, that person had AIDS because he/she did something bad." or "Hey, that person is poor because they did something bad in a past life." It provides us with an 'out' - an escape route - to avoid helping people. Are we absolutely sure that people are suffering because of past deeds??? What if we are wrong? What if some people really are innocent and simply getting a raw deal? >Why is it that we look on "good >fortune" as our due, and on suffering and pain as unjust to us ? This is the type of question that is scary to those of us who are wary of the karma issue. Maybe, Dallas, pain and suffering is UNJUST! >Why are >we such awful cowards that we would do to unknown persons harm in >the dark, when we cannot be recognized, so as to be held directly >accountable for what we do that is ill ? This question doesn't seem to make much sense. If someone is to do harm to someone secretly, they would hardly have also in tow the desire to be caught at it. Please clarify this question. >Is it so awful that we >suddenly find out that nature has been looking at us directly all >this time, and that everything we have done has ben accurately >entered into our karmic account ? It wouldn't be. If people were to actually learn that, more people would understand why they are in the trouble they are in - provided this KARMA business is true. Why does karma have to remain so elusive? Why punish centuries later so the people cannot make the connection? That question has yet to be (to me) satisfactorily answered. >What we ought to be asking is why are we being told this fact so >late in life ! Not all of us are learning "so late in life." > Why did not our parents and our teachers tell us >that we would be unable to evade the direct consequences, in due >time, of all that we think and do ? Because our parents and teachers do not know or completely understand. >Why does this conspiracy of >silence >continue ? What you see as a "conspiracy" I see as humans afraid and in need of understanding and knowledge (hence, the argument for Theosophy to speak more in the vernacular). >What is it in us that likes to "live dangerously ?" Creativity? >Why do we like continuing to be ignorant ? It feels safe? >But where except in Theosophy have explicit answers been >given ? I don't see Theosophy offering "explicit answers" and there are many other places in which to learn such answers to life - some answers are written on prehistoric cave walls. Theosophy is just one of many ways - not the only way, nor even the best way - just a way. Kym From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 15:51:23 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:48:47 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Lords of Karma Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-17 20:16:39 EDT, you write: << this is not the best of all possible worlds. I cannot "revel," Sophia >> The nature of Diety is Sat-Chit-Ananda. Since we are emanations of Diety, Ananda or the Bliss aspect is always going to be present and even predominant over an incarnation of average length. Happiness (or contentment to some degree) is a lower manifestation of Ananda. And it seems to be the norm, rather than the exception because Sat-Chit-Anada is also the nature of the Monad. One can always look at the exceptions and say those are the norm but IMHO I don't think they are. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 16:21:22 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 14:21:40 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-ID: <358AD664.2707@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> I don't think anyone believes that Theosophy=HPB. IMOP, a better formula is: Theosophy = Divine-Wisdom found in all traditions + Divine-wisdom found in the HPB writing (new stuff) + HPB method of comparing, and extracting Divine Wisdom And Paul, I still don't see why to perplexed about the variety of people's belief. In any organization you will find from the most ortodox to the most liberal, but that is cause for perplexity. I wonder if your words (I don't know you well) are caused by old wounds, inner agenda, personality collisions, and so on? I'm saying this because in your words there a negative feeling I get from them, when you refer to Radha and John A. I found Radha very Krishnamurtian in her talks. In few lectures I have attended of Radhas, she never proselytized about HPB. But again you may have attended more lectures than me. On your books. I thank you for writing them. They showed some historical charactersand circumstances I would never have come in contact with, and you collected a lot of information about HPB,her times and possibilities about her Masters, along with issues that are interesting to ponder. I took for granted many things I have heard, and now I am motivated to learn more about her past, her connections, the Masters' connections with individuals, organizations, etc. your brother Martin Leiderman In sunny West Los Angeles From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 18:31:24 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:23:58 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980619182358.0086d130@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <358AD664.2707@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> At 02:21 PM 6/19/1998 -0700, you wrote: > >personality collisions, and so on? I'm saying this because in your words >there a negative feeling I get from them, when you refer to Radha and >John A. I found Radha very Krishnamurtian in her talks. In few lectures >I have attended of Radhas, she never proselytized about HPB. But again >you may have attended more lectures than me. > That should not surprise anyone. It was Sri Ram (Radha's father), when he was President, who facilitated many members to attend Krishnaji lectures during International Convention including myself, for which many members are grateful. Radha had known Krishnaji since her infancy and he was the the one who encouraged her to run for the office of International President after John Coats died. mkr From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 19:16:28 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:12:11 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Lords of Karma Message-ID: <007601bd9bdf$d65d6860$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th Dear Marshall: Do you have a copy of Mr. Judges' NOTES ON THE BHAGAVAD GITA ? On pages 98-100 he says some interesting things on SAT-CHIT-ANANDA. Best wishes, Dal. > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 2:12 PM > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subject: Lords of Karma >In a message dated 98-06-17 20:16:39 EDT, you write: > ><< this is not the best of all possible worlds. I cannot "revel," Sophia >> > >The nature of Diety is Sat-Chit-Ananda. Since we are emanations of Diety, >Ananda or the Bliss aspect is always going to be present and even predominant >over an incarnation of average length. Happiness (or contentment to some >degree) is a lower manifestation of Ananda. And it seems to be the norm, >rather than the exception because Sat-Chit-Anada is also the nature of the >Monad. One can always look at the exceptions and say those are the norm but >IMHO I don't think they are. > >Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 19:23:50 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:09:14 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <007501bd9bdf$a6883ac0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Kym: Thanks for notes and views -- agree with most, but am puzzled by the matter of ISIS -- I know that the proof readers and Olcott messed up some of the material, HPB says so, and so do the Masters in their Letters to Sinnett. But have you actually found anything that is totally false ? I would be interested in seeing that, if you have made notes and it is part of your study. Yes, you are right the "Sermon on the Mount" does contain some otherwise difficult to understand statements. But how much of those are due to the biases of the translators. I can't read the old Aramaic or the old Greek of the originals, Can you ? Can either of us ascertained what was actually said. like the Buddha, Jesus never wrote anything, so what we have in the gospels is only translated hear-say -- and many Biblical Scholars have of recent years been devoting a lot of time to revising those translation in the light of the Nag Hemadri Scrolls and the Dear Sea Scrolls. These days we have almost too much information and not enough time to verify what others claim to be able to discern. So we say to ourselves: He or she is an expert and they must be right. Ah yes. But what does common sense say ? And that does not operate on the basis of the "letter of the law, but seeks the "spirit," and the equity of the situation as a basis (like Solomon) to make judgment on. As to regaining the innocence of the child -- I will agree too, as our "adult" thinking has departed from that simplicity into many ways of excusing its convoluted justifications for actions and thoughts that break the laws of Nature ( or better still, bend and distort, or exaggerate them). It is said that the "lower self (kama-manas -- desire and mind united ) is a 'clever lawyer.' But in the ultimate sense is it justified ? I say no "man" who makes claims can do other than demonstrate them or shut up. Actions speak louder than words. When HPB was around there was plenty of "action," and plenty of "demonstration." Also plenty of people witnessed and reported on the "phenomena" that she performed at will. Not everyone saw that there was a lesson to be learned from what she did for them, nor were any "lessons" invariably learned. If they thought they were being entertained or mystified, they erred. She demonstrate that the human WILL is able to cause many things to take place without physical apparatus, or prestidigitation. No pupil can learn more than his acuity permits. How do we develop acuity ? I do not mean that we should be either credulous or superstitious. Neither lead to understanding, any more than curiosity does. I recall an incident rather late in her life when a student came to her and begged her to perform for him one of her phenomena. she answered: "You would not know one if you saw it." Another person present noticed that the unlit cigarette she held causally in her fingers had lighted itself without matches. Then there is that famous case of the German professor who visited her (unannounced) in Benares, and mentioned on leaving her, that he had heard that the Vedic sages had been able to cause a rain of flowers on demand. She raised her hand those who were there said and a shower of fresh cut roses with the dew still on them poured down from the ceiling one of them bouncing off his nose ! If one desired to catalog all the phenomena she performed and which was witnessed, we would have a sizeable volume to deal with. And that could be done as a project. But it would not make anyone wiser, as to the nature of Theosophy. Phenomena does not prove philosophy. And that is important. Only logic proves the probability of a philosophical or logical problem being solvable. It is like the stories told of Apollonius of Tyanna, (He is an historical figure and lived within one hundred years of Jesus's ministry, which incidentally, was far more than 3 years -- he died at the age of about 80 say contemporary texts -- Sepher Toldos Jesu). And Apollonius' feats and 'miracles' (many of which were seized on by the early church fathers and attributed to the non-historical Jesus, as they developed a mythology around his words and presence), were attested to by many historical figures of early Rome. He was the friend and confident of emperors and kings, much as St. Germain was at the time just preceding the French Revolution, which he was unsuccessful in averting. In a way this is similar to the lessons that our Karma offers us to learn from. I mean that if something comes unexpectedly to us, good or bad, we ought to ask why. In what way do I deserve this ? How many actually do this. Plato in the dialog THE LAWS hints at this rather pointedly. "The Ear of God ?" Well if there is no "god" that operates outside of the laws of the Universe, the Mahatmas, Jesus, etc... all operate within the boundaries of the Laws of our Universe, and we do not yet know all of them (I mean those Laws). Why should anyone desire, or depend on miracles ( if by miracle you man the breaking of the laws of nature) without any relation to individual circumstances, and the place, time, past or future -- but, by definition that is not so, nor does the Universe run chaotically. WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW ALL THAT THERE IS IN THE way of laws in our UNIVERSE. But we can learn about it, them and behave (morally and ethically) in accordance with what we know. Do we deny fairness, ethics, justice to others as to ourselves ? Science depends in all its work on the absolute rigidity of th operation of Law in all of nature's operations that they investigate -- or let us say that it is all a mess, and wasted time, and stop talking, arguing or developing anything constructive out of the turbulence we live in. But, there is something in us, too, which says THERE IS a LAW THAT IS COMMON TO ALL OF US, and we have to find and use it. I believe that a priest like father Damien on Molokai,or sister Theresa in Calcutta, are outstanding examples of human sanctity regardless of the "religion" they happen to burden themselves with. Many other examples could be advanced. And let's put them in contrast with a Jack the Ripper, a Hitler, a Genghis Khan, or a Manson -- and that is only to make a point, as the back streets in any city today, will reveal similar but less powerful entities who use the human shape to destroy and torture others. But why deal with the horrors when we can deal with the excellencies ? You are perfectly right that those who do not yet know how to think themselves out of their self-imposed plight and who suffer mental tortures and emotional upheavals try to drown themselves in insensibility -- for them the passage of time is an agony. Incidentally have you ever read the booklet THE GATES OF GOLD ? It was written by the same Adept who wrote THE LIGHT ON THE PATH. It illustrates some of the self-created inner tempest that an untamed psychic and emotional nature creates. But why is it that we seek stability ? What even causes the idea to arise -- if all is chaos and instability ? Now I am going to offer a solution (theosophical) which modern psychology (that apologizes for the extremes and exaggerations of an unbridled psyche (id, etc...) ) speaks of and does not (I think) understand. The septenary nature of each human being has to be studied and grasped as a basic concept. (This is provided by Theosophy and will be found explained in the KEY.) and, incidentally you are not going to get much out of theosophy unless you at least become familiar with its philosophy, and the vision it offers of the inner psychological soul and the mind=set of every human. (That is my opinion, of course.) The only way out is to seize it (the lower psyche) and make it obey the mind, and this has to be done gently and by degrees, but, without hesitation. We either, as mind beings, rule, or we are ruled. and being ruled is not very pleasant. [ If the ruler is an uncontrolled emotional and desire nature.] Of course the result is unbearable stress and psycho-mental agony. It helps if we start out with the idea that: 1) we are immortals--while the body can be killed, the Soul and Spirit are never "destroyed." [ and the "agony" does not stop until we get this idea clear and do something about it on our own. We have to do it. No one else can do it for us.] 2) Karma, the law of justice, rules the world. 3) we get exactly what we deserve from nature that surrounds us. 4) we have the power to make changes. We are FREE TO DO THAT. We are not asked to judge others by what we think are their problems (as revealed to us by what we may judge their situation to be), but to help them if we can. Each of us knows what our problems are (unless we are mentally impaired). Anyone who crows over another had better look to his own memories of what he or she has done, and which the rest of the world is still ignorant of ! If you want you can guess at pain and suffering being unjust. I would rather look at this world as a just and law-ruled one, and if I or others came under trying circumstances or are afflicted, why should we blame anyone but ourselves ? Why should we think that we are blameless ? The theory of "accountability" is an important one. We have a lot to answer for, each one of us. I do not think that living dangerously is creative. Foolhardy perhaps, but who desires self-destruction or self-impairment ? what is that kind of philosophy based on ? The ultimate desideratum is how do we regard ourselves. Have we ever sat down with a blank sheet of paper and began to tabulate our assets and our liabilities, our genius and our ignorance, our sense of virtue versus the vice that we sense also is part of us. And actually make a list of all we have, and those things that we do not, and that which we wish we had -- and I do not mean possessions on the outside, but inner possession of character and capacity of thought and feeling ? Trying this out is a great revealer of what we know of ourselves. It will also show up how many things we try to hide.Going back to the list from time to time and revising is also a revelation to ourselves of what we have been doing with our lives. and we don't need a degree in psychology to do that. As to explicit answers, when I find you throwing at me some of the words and phrases of theosophy I will know that you are studying on your own and not just picking up my phrases and ideas. A tennis court is not a class in philosophy. It is tennis. And when we play that is fun, but generally it gets us nowhere in terms of real advancement, of service to others, or of enhancement of our own capacities. ( and I have played plenty of ball games in my youth, too.) Well let's continue and have what fun we can. See if you can trace the moral effect (I don't mean customary or sectarian morals, but ETHICS on a universal scale) in regard to those Theosophical ideas that trouble you. Theosophy is a new style of thinking. and it is not very complimentary to the "lower self.!" I happen, after many years of testing to think that theosophy is the best way of looking at our world that I have yet found. It includes just about every aspect of life and all the potentials I can think of. Now you try it out. Best wishes as always, Dal. > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 1:39 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 >Dallas wrote: > >>Speaking for myself. I am quite able to express myself without >>quotations as you may have noticed from my various postings. > >I certainly have, Dallas. And I appreciate it - however, your name, rather >than your person, has become a "symbol" in the battle regarding "to quote or >not to quote." > >It's called "fame," I think - and it does have its drawbacks. >============================== Sorry I can't claim any -- only problems. In my own eyes I know that I am quite ignorant. What I have learned I put out for others to use, or not, as they may decide. Hopefully it makes sense to some. D. ============================================= From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 19:46:23 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:12:48 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Tibet, Trees Message-ID: Here's a recent newscilipping of continuing oppression of Tibetan Buddhism by China: "China Ruins Temples, Evicts Buddhist Nuns - Beijing: Chinese authorities forced Tibetan Buddhist nuns from a cave sanctuary and wrecked nearby temples to curb a religious resurgence in Tibet, a monitoring group reported yesterday. "About 50 nuns, their Buddhist lama, and other followers were expelled from the temples and meditation caves at Drag Yerpa in April, the London-based Tibet Information Network said, citing Tibetan sources and tourists. The temples were demolished so quickly that the clerics apparently did not have time to salvage altars." [The Blade, 6-13-98] TREES: I took a walk among the Sequoias in Ca. a number of years back and have to admit the "vibes" weren't what I expected. It was rather heavy, sodden and ancient, but not a "good" ancient, but like something of the past that it was good to progress beyond. Marvelous giants! Pine trees seem to have positive or "sattvic" vibes. I notice Morning Doves usually choose them as nest sites, and they are very "sattvic" birds. Happy Solstice and ULT Day, - Jake Jaqua From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 20:01:23 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:44:39 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Gamblers Anonymous Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806190527.XAA24273@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >"Karma" is a bit of a party pooper. Written, so I have heard, above the Temple of the Oracle at Delphi. (I may be wrong here) Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 20:12:05 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 01:48:12 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dal's questions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000501bd9b69$6ee64ce0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >My thesis is simple: Law is everywhere. Our understanding of it >grows as we advance in understanding. so we are eternal >students. Yep. > >Higher degrees are many and not yet fully understandable to us, >but as potentials and possibilities, we can theorize many things >without being absolutely sure. There are, IMO and experience, no "higher degrees" - just other places. To give an idea of what I mean here, the opening chapter of Genesis starts with "In the beginning ..." Think of the "beginning" as a place, not a moment. Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 21:16:43 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:29:42 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806192015.OAA25959@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Definitely agree - hence, the popularity of the "Devil" - it's all the >Devil's fault, you know. I deny everything. The Devil. From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 21:27:38 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:27:07 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <9XpS+aBr$wi1Ewbl@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <007501bd9bdf$a6883ac0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >and many Biblical Scholars >have of recent years been devoting a lot of time to revising >those translation in the light of the Nag Hemadri Scrolls and >the Dear Sea Scrolls. ROFL! What a great typo. And it's the Nag Hammadi Library (Some of it is in codex format, not scrolls) Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 21:31:27 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 02:46:16 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Answers to questions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806192015.OAA25959@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Why does karma have to remain so elusive? Why punish >centuries later so the people cannot make the connection? That question has >yet to be (to me) satisfactorily answered. Alan interjects: It can't be, unlless we must also "accept" that karma has no connection whatever with justice. > >I don't see Theosophy offering "explicit answers" and there are many other >places in which to learn such answers to life - some answers are written on >prehistoric cave walls. Theosophy is just one of many ways - not the only >way, nor even the best way - just a way. HPB and CWL type theosophy do offer "explicit answers," but does that make the answers correct? Answers to questions need to be tested against *experience of the matter in question*. Once upon a time, "The World is Flat" was a specific and universally accepted answer. The vast majority of people I have come across in what I am going to dare to call "the real world" have no idea whatsoever what "theosophy" is, and most of those who do ask, can't be bothered to go into it. My long gone Grandma studied nothing, and treated religion as mumbo jumbo, yet in her latter years she was often heard to say, "I can't wait to shuffle off these old bones." That's *innate* human wisdom. We all have it, but much of the time we are afraid to access it. Blather blather ....... Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 21:31:40 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:58:18 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-Id: <199806200209.VAA21992@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <358AD664.2707@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Martin writes: >And Paul, I still don't see why to perplexed about the variety of >people's belief. In any organization you will find from the most ortodox >to the most liberal, but that is cause for perplexity. I wonder if your >words (I don't know you well) are caused by old wounds, inner agenda, >personality collisions, and so on? I'm saying this because in your words >there a negative feeling I get from them, when you refer to Radha and >John A. I found Radha very Krishnamurtian in her talks. In few lectures >I have attended of Radhas, she never proselytized about HPB. But again >you may have attended more lectures than me. I would like to quickly comment regarding Paul's role as a spokesperson. Martin has carried a torch for the Adyar T.S., because he has been assigned the role of National Lecturer for some unknown period of time. This position makes Martin a consort with the establishment. He has found the "business" of teaching theosophy to his liking. Martin is different in this than Paul, however, because Paul's researches have led him down a different path - a path through which he likewise is now speaking to numbers, through his books and through his invitations to lecture. Paul has uncovered discrepency and tragedy and has done very fine written work which doesn't drag down an adventurousome spirit, but takes us to new visitas in understanding the progress of: masonry, politics, etc. Paul is on an adventure. As tedious as it may sound at times to be a National Lecturer, there are likewise many fond discourses and pathways worth visiting again and again through theosophy. When you, Martin, work within theosophy, you approach your subject matter in a relaxed manner. What I see working in Paul is lots of inquisitiveness and lots of emotion, because of his adventures - both with reading material and first hand. Paul's work approaches "investigative reporting." He writes his findings even if others might be offended. In order to do this kind of work and to continue doing it, he has to carry a double-edged sword. My daughter, Galina, and I were reading an article in the L.A. Times recently which criticized the CIA for not having foreknowledge of the Nuclear Testing in India. The report by a military figure criticized the spies for not being skilled in acquiring secret information, etc. Intelligence personnel would need to look at every potential source as one that can be worked over for information in subtle ways. While reading Paul's books (and Martin unfortunately (as far as I know) you don't have any,) Paul places stresses on key figures and watches as they wriggle out of difficulties and leads his readers on meandering searches for knowledge. He may be unusual as I imagine a writer might seem somewhat unusual to know, but I don't think he's particularly harmful. On the contrary, criticism to a writer is part and parcel of the reward he's seeking. Do you think any of us are asking for Everlasting Love for the work we do? Do you want more people to love and adore you? For some reason, this isn't very appealing. Most people want love to spread out - to reach into places its never been before and to inspire the downcast. How can we attempt work which would accomplish this? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 21:46:26 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 12:09:46 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980620120946.00735c00@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: References: <199806192015.OAA25959@mailmx.micron.net> At 02:29 AM 6/20/98 +0100, you wrote: >kymsmith@micron.net writes >>Definitely agree - hence, the popularity of the "Devil" - it's all the >>Devil's fault, you know. > >I deny everything. > >The Devil. As legal representation for Mr. Great Horned Beast (aka Beelzebub , Satan , George Bush) I request that my client not make any public statements. The Devils Advocate * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 22:01:28 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:40:01 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: ICQ Group Discussion Topic #1 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980620114001.007370b0@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <000601bd9b69$6ff2dae0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dallas, You are right ICQ (i seek you) does not allow for such elaborate answers. I was sort of hoping it would be used for brief Q&A style communications. I was going to post the ongoing communications in the form of a dialogue (a la Key to Theosophy). But however ot develops is fine by me. If we are online together we can have more immediate response style Q&A. Viva Mutation Darren At 03:02 PM 6/18/98 -0700, you wrote: >June 18th > >Dallas offers: > >ICQ -- does allocate enough space for discourse. so answer here. > >LIGHT OF ASIA Book 8, (p. 149-51 my copy ) gives answer to >"right >employment" as Buddha saw it. > >Karma is Law, Dharma is agreement and living with the Law as a >basis for brotherhood. Essentially it is universal benevolence >and unselfishness. The strong support the weak. The wise >instruct the ignorant without interfering in their free-will and >power of choice. > >Man is the one free agent in Nature. His "intelligence" makes him >free. Will is not directly free elsewhere in Nature; the law of >Karma adjusts the encroachment of matter on the flow of the >will -- which is the power of Spirit in action. Only in the >human kingdom with the birth of intelligence, Will becomes free. >And thus, at last, Karma finds the aid of an intelligence >independent of itself, instead of a passive instrument for its >compensating operations. Thus, even that Law of LAWS, KARMA, >offers itself to become the Servant of Man. > >All Nature, except human nature, is non-conscious though animate, >sensitive and vital. For, the rest of Nature is the assemblage >of the resultant factors of the diverse properties of the >universal qualities (called Gunas in the Bhagavad Gita: Sattva, >Rajas, and Tamas or Illumination, activity and inertia). >Therefore, outside of the human kingdom Nature is neither moral >nor immoral, and is destitute of malice or cruelty, or their >reverse: affection. Karma is only just. Good and evil are, in >truth, absent in Nature, and only make their appearance in the >Kingdom of Man. [ Man in his independence has the power to go >against the Laws of justice and fairness that rule Nature. >Accordingly, Karma being invoked, will respond. ] > >In the many transformations of the Universe; in its vast >progress there is a particular stage when the two opposing >energies ( Spirit and Matter ) are so balanced that the resulting >friction produces a third energy with the properties of both, and >yet it is different from either of them. This Plane of Balance >is the Human Kingdom. > >A habitat for this energy and for its many levels of development >is needed. In the harmony of Nature it is this Earth -- as an >example of this type of balance -- and this will also include all >sidereal bodies where this type of balance exists. > >In the space between the atom and the Galaxy it manifests as the >majestic progress of vast hopes of human intelligences of various >levels and degrees of perception and understanding (knowledge, >learning, wisdom) and this is expressed in terms of the >moral/ethical Law, which governs the heart of man -- compassion. >Man thus needs a different kind of definition. This is what the >Buddha seems (to me) to be saying. > >If you wish to direct this theory of man's intelligence, growth >and work to the business and corporate world around us, and in >which we all share to some extent, the answers are (tome) >obvious. It is a very rare business that is run on strictly >ethical grounds and employs only ethical methods of work and >service. Yes Service ! For if you inquire into the cause for >trade you will find that it exists to provide service from one >group or person to others. > >It is clear that all businesses international or not, and all >countries and nations touch the world in many ways -- and leave >an impress, an impact on the lives of their employees. > >In terms of individual Karma it is up to the employee to agree to >serve a business, or to resign in protest, if the methods he is >expected to employ are such as, impartially, he knows cannot >stand up honestly and clearly in a court of law. If this were >seen and adhered to 9 / 10ths of the evils of corporations and >nations would cease. > >This is PRACTICAL IDEALISM. The sooner that we all get down to >applying it, the sooner will the world become a better place. I >have been fortunate that in the businesses I was associated with, >or which I managed, such an ideal could be implemented and >adhered to, and not so strangely, those businesses prospered. > >Dallas ICQ 13,760,916 > >============================================= > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Darren Porter" >Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 7:24 PM >Subject: ICQ Group Discussion Topic #1 > > >>ICQ participants are invited to submit their responses to the >first weekly >>discussion question: >> >>Karmically, what does the buddhist philosophy of 'right >employment', mean >>to westerners? Do internatioanal corporations have a collective >karma like >>countries and does this effect an employee? >> SNIP ==== > >Note: ICQ gives inadequate space for an answer such as this. > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Fri Jun 19 23:01:25 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 22:02:04 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Why I left the TSA Message-Id: <199806200402.WAA19997@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote to me: >As to explicit answers, when I find you throwing at me some of >the >words and phrases of theosophy I will know that you are studying >on your own and not just picking up my phrases and ideas. A >tennis court is not a class in philosophy. It is tennis. And >when we play that is fun, but generally it gets us nowhere in >terms of real advancement, of service to others, or of >enhancement of our own capacities. ( and I have played plenty >of ball games in my youth, too.) Dallas, you give yourself way too much credit and me way too little, my friend. Rest assured, I am "not just picking up on [your] phrases and ideas." You know nothing about me nor what I have or have not studied. I lack any need or desire to "prove" anything to you; additionally, I also lack any need or desire to use Theosophical lingo to express my Self. If you think our discussions are simply "tennis" - in essence, suggesting you may have learned nothing from me - do not respond to or read my posts. I, on the other hand, have indeed learned a few things from you. Unfortunately, just because you have placed yourself in some kind of "teacher/leader" role does not mean others view you as such. I view you as an equal - nothing more, nothing less. If you are uncomfortable with that or have a problem with me as an individual - again, you do not need to respond to my posts. The delete key comes in handy in cases such as this. I'll be more than happy to have a conversation with you - but it will not be according to your rules nor will I ponder for too long the question "Oh dear, will this please or offend Dallas?" You clearly did NOT ponder the question "Oh dear, will this please or offend Kym?" And we should not have to. And, Dallas - get over your "ageism." I am in college, yes - but that doesn't necessarily mean I am "young" nor that I am pursuing my first degree. And here is a nightmare scenario for you: I'm out of school for the summer and I've nothing to do. . .except hang around theos-talk. Maybe. . .could it be?. . .I'm somehow YOUR karma? (gasp!) Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 01:16:25 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 00:06:34 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Militants in the movement? Message-Id: <199806200606.AAA26094@mailmx.micron.net> Govert wrote: >Thank you for having read the two books you mentioned. Especially >'Climb the Highest Mountain' I consider a theosophical classic, though >many theosophists might disagree. The book was written by Mark and >Elizabeth Clare Prophet and is a condensation of their understanding >of the teachings of the Ascended Masters. > >The headquarters of the organization is in Montana. I do not know what >you mean with 'packing heat.' I am from Holland and don't know yet >that expression. Dear Govert, Sorry about the slang - I should have known better; sometimes we Americans think the whole world is nothing but America. Regarding the expression "packing heat" - it means having a weapon or weapons on a person or premises (if I'm carrying a gun, I could say that I am "packing heat"). I made the comment in regards to a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center - an well-known (in America) and well-regarded (by me) organization that monitors extremist and/or hate groups. The organization reported that The Church Universal and Triumphant, headed by Elizabeth Prophet, was required by court decree (1994) to stop stockpiling weapons. Her husband was convicted, in 1989, of illegally buying hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of handguns and semi-automatic weapons - complete with ammunition. I am unaware of what has happened since then - except that Elizabeth reportedly has left Montana - destination unknown. I've not visited the Web site you offered - there may be more info there on what has occurred. I shall check it out. Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 01:46:29 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:36:36 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-ID: <358B5874.71D6@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <199806200209.VAA21992@proteus.imagiware.com> Dear Brenda, How quickly you have labeled me as: "because he has been assigned the role of National Lecturer for some unknown period of time. This position makes Martin a consort with the establishment. He has found the "business" of teaching theosophy to his liking...." And later you said: " ...While reading Paul's books (and Martin unfortunately (as far as I know) you don't have any,) ..." ===================== Didn't you read in my post that I bought a book from Paul himself ??????? It is even autographed by him (a collectors item!!!!) I think you are acting defensively very much, without too much thinking . . . Did you forget the great fun we have while both attending to our own talks at the Lodge back in Hollywood??? In a previous post, I mentioned how I became a National Lecturer, it was so simple: I asked John Algeo, and after a 20 minute interview and he said OK. That was it. So I really do not know were you are coming from. I am so free about it, there is no soul slavery, I had my experience with New Acropolis which opened my eyes to organizations and Cults. Can you say the same about all the cults to which you belong, like I AM and Co-Masons???? Your Brother, Martin Leiderman In West Los Angeles From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 02:01:20 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 23:53:46 -0700 From: "Martin Leiderman" Subject: Re: To Ramadoss Message-ID: <358B5C7A.6233@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <3.0.3.32.19980619182358.0086d130@mail.eden.com> Dear Ramadoss, Thank you for the historical background about Sri Ram, Radha and Krishnaji. Do you mind to write down some of your recollection about Sri Ram, as the person you met? Also about your name, I know what 'Rama' means (the Avatar), but what does 'doss' signify???? Your brother Martin Leiderman in West Los Angeles From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 07:01:18 1998 Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 18:50:03 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: : Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. Message-ID: <000201bd9c42$42879bc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 19th Soph: Enjoyed your posts on Karma and on the WORLD TREES OF LIFE. Thanks. Dal. > Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 4:59 PM > From: "Sophia TenBroeck" > Subject: : Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. >When we speak of the laws made by countries and observed by tribes, they >indeed show great variations as to their moral or ethical content. It >is a democratic consensus, or one that has come into effect by >tradition. These are man made, and represent the accepted norms of that >country at a particular time snip From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 07:16:19 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:10:54 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Bing's status Message-ID: <6d1c432f.358ba6cf@aol.com> Dear Martin, Martin, has Bing Escudero been reinstated as a National Lecturer? Is he still on the Board of Trustees ? I'm curious about his present status. Besides yourself, how many National Lecturers are there for the TSA? A long time ago, there used to be as many as four or five, if my memory serves me correctly. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 08:13:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 05:33:03 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <003e01bd9c4d$4f5dbcc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Alan: thanks for the correction. Mental gears clashed and slipped--wheeee== ! ** ! grrrind. What is "ROFL ?" It sounds kind of either woeful or menacing. Which ? Dal. > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 7:38 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Theos-talk-digest V1 #230 >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>and many Biblical Scholars >>have of recent years been devoting a lot of time to revising >>those translation in the light of the Nag Hemadri Scrolls and >>the Dear Sea Scrolls. > >ROFL! What a great typo. And it's the Nag Hammadi Library (Some >of it is in codex format, not scrolls) > >Alan >------------------- >Brought to you from > West Cornwall, UK > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 08:22:11 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 05:56:57 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <003f01bd9c4d$5068c420$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dallas offers: As I see it Karma has no time limits. We, too, as spirit/souls resident in successive bodies (personalities) have no time limits. Of course our present "personality" which is transient and constantly changing has a definite time sense, based on memory and instruction (learning and education). I definitely would not but HPB and CWL into the same category as CWL diverged seriously from HPB. The information of a basic nature about Karma can be found in the KEY and there it speaks of the "decision making" faculty as being that in which there is personal growth. In other words, our present "embodied minds" are the growing and experiencing "pupil" or "subject for self-improvement." The fact that we can both be involved as the "experiencer," and also the "detached onlooker," is a proof (to me) of the duality of our own nature: the Personal (doer) and the Immortal (the observer). This world, as the Buddha called it is the "World of works." The quality of the choices we make her and now guides our growth. the growth is essentially mental -- of the mind and psyche. The material we are developing is the sensitive "Monadic" mass of entities ( life-atoms, also immortals too ) which coming tog ether under their own laws provide us with our bodies and our feeling and lower-mind natures. Karma relates to those as an aggregate and also as units. The thesis is that we shape our bodies (perhaps as athletes, or as trained technicians) in acts and duties that we assign to ourselves and then discipline ourselves to perform (typing being one example of this). The pattern we impose on our lower nature includes an ethical aspect: the reason why we do what we do, and think what we think. It is "motive." Karma relates to our motives. If we agree that here is in each of us an immortal Spirit/Soul, then the "Karma" (good or bad) that follows us around, is simply the return to us of those Monads ( or groups of them ) which we used and molded or affected in the past -- even the past that this personality has no cognizance of (but which the eternal EGO -- the HIGHER SELF -- has full cognizance of. [ And that statement is perhaps the real core of our debate. Is it there or not ? Is it immortal or not ? Is the "personality" perceptible as another aspect of the Self in its continuous and continued "living ?" ] I fully agree that the personal memory of this life is not clear at all about past lives or their effects on us now. However there are "regressions" which tend to explain that there is a hand-me-down memory of experiences in an earlier life which affect our instinctive reactions this life -- and there is no other explanation, unless we also take into account the fact that a truly psychically sensitive person may well penetrate into the "Astral Light" and be attracted to, or report on, those experiences impacted there that relate to the instinctive memory of an event of danger (or of pleasure) recorded there. In such cases we may be merely a witness of another's memories, besides our "own." I think this is worth considering too. Apparently, acceding to theosophical teachings, there are many ramifications in the Astral Light which can be explored and experienced if we develop the WILL-integrity to do this without loss of control over our own nature. Hope this is of some help. But, really what HPB says in the KEY, I found to be most valuable -- on the subject of Karma, generally and specifically about "unmerited suffering." Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 8:14 PM > From: "Darren Porter" > Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 >At 02:29 AM 6/20/98 +0100, you wrote: >>kymsmith@micron.net writes >>>Definitely agree - hence, the popularity of the "Devil" - it's all the >>>Devil's fault, you know. From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 08:28:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 06:10:00 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Why I left the TSA Message-ID: <004001bd9c4d$51b875a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Kym" Apparently my method of answering and speaking is abrasive to you. What difference does it make what either of us have read or not ? It matters that if we are discussing the same philosophy we can employ time saving methods if we are both familiar with the same ideas. If either of us lacks that familiarity we will engage in endless nit-picking exercises as to the precise use of phrase. That is what is my problem -- not yours. Young or old, we are all immortal spirit/soul so that "age" is not a actor. Forget such definitions. Let's deal with ideas. By all means we are indeed each other's Karma -- or some aspect of it. I am trying to get at a slightly different level of experience that we have all shared somewhere, either here and now mentally, or in the past in some other way. I am not trying to "sell" you my views, experience, ideas, etc, but truing to ask you if you will share some of the things that are familiar to me, and which I sense you may be interested it. I try never to sit opposite another, but to sit beside, so that we have virtually the same perspective. We then compare views. I think we all seek for a deeper understanding, and of course we approach it differently. So let this be considered only my kind of "oil" poured on our troubled waters (or at least mine--if yours are not). If you are not familiar with Theosophical philosophy as expressed by HPB then we will be spending a lot of time discussing that which is already available. I may be in this time (ahead of you), or I may be (behind). Does that matter ? Nothing. How do our ideas relate ? Ideas have no date. Best wishes, Dal > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 9:20 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: Why I left the TSA >Dallas wrote to me: > >>As to explicit answers, when I find you throwing at me some of >>the >>words and phrases of theosophy I will know that you are studying >>on your own and not just picking up my phrases and ideas. A >>tennis court is not a class in philosophy. It is tennis. And >>when we play that is fun, but generally it gets us nowhere in >>terms of real advancement, of service to others, or of >>enhancement of our own capacities. ( and I have played plenty >>of ball games in my youth, too.) > >Dallas, you give yourself way too much credit and me way too little, my >friend. Rest assured, I am "not just picking up on [your] phrases and >ideas." You know nothing about me nor what I have or have not studied. > >I lack any need or desire to "prove" anything to you; additionally, I also >lack any need or desire to use Theosophical lingo to express my Self. If >you think our discussions are simply "tennis" - in essence, suggesting you >may have learned nothing from me - do not respond to or read my posts. I, >on the other hand, have indeed learned a few things from you. > >Unfortunately, just because you have placed yourself in some kind of >"teacher/leader" role does not mean others view you as such. I view you as >an equal - nothing more, nothing less. If you are uncomfortable with that >or have a problem with me as an individual - again, you do not need to >respond to my posts. The delete key comes in handy in cases such as this. > >I'll be more than happy to have a conversation with you - but it will not be >according to your rules nor will I ponder for too long the question "Oh >dear, will this please or offend Dallas?" You clearly did NOT ponder the >question "Oh dear, will this please or offend Kym?" And we should not have >to. > >And, Dallas - get over your "ageism." I am in college, yes - but that >doesn't necessarily mean I am "young" nor that I am pursuing my first degree. > >And here is a nightmare scenario for you: I'm out of school for the summer >and I've nothing to do. . .except hang around theos-talk. > >Maybe. . .could it be?. . .I'm somehow YOUR karma? (gasp!) > > >Kym > > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 08:43:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:41:56 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: To Ramadoss Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620084156.01799bf0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <358B5C7A.6233@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <3.0.3.32.19980619182358.0086d130@mail.eden.com> Dear Martin: Thanks for the msg. I have been to several lectures by Sri Ram and I did not meet him personally. Still I will post a brief msg summarizing a few observations about him which might interest some. My given name is Ramdas, which is Ram or Rama, the well known Indian God and Avatar as well as a historical figure - good guy whose wife Sita was abducted by the bad guy Ravana and finally bad guy is defeated and wife rescued. Das means a follower of Ram/Rama. Along the way in my school, those days all records were handwritten, no computers, the clerk was always misspelling my name as Ramadoss. Everytime we corrected, next month it went back to the same spelling. that's how I got my name! Finally we gave up and it is my legal name. Your friend mkr At 11:53 PM 6/19/1998 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Ramadoss, >Thank you for the historical background about Sri Ram, Radha and >Krishnaji. > >Do you mind to write down some of your recollection about Sri Ram, as >the person you met? > >Also about your name, I know what 'Rama' means (the Avatar), but what >does 'doss' signify???? > > >Your brother >Martin Leiderman From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 08:58:15 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:48:26 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Bing's status Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620084826.01795ca0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <6d1c432f.358ba6cf@aol.com> At 08:10 AM 6/20/1998 EDT, Lmhem111 wrote: >Dear Martin, > >Martin, has Bing Escudero been reinstated as a National Lecturer? No. >Is he still on the Board of Trustees ? No. >I'm curious about his present status. Just a member of TSA, and does not hold any offices, as far as I know. >Besides yourself, how many National Lecturers are there for the TSA? A long time ago, >there used to be as many as four or five, if my memory serves me correctly. > National Speaker schedule in the current issue of Quest shows the following names: Tim Boyd Richard Brooks Robert Ellwood Nathan Greer Anton Lysy Doss McDavid Joy Mills There should be others including Martin not listed in the Schedule. mkr From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 09:05:01 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 08:55:47 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Newsletter info Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620085547.01796670@mail.eden.com> Here is a msg from act-l which may interest some. mkr >Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 21:24:40 -0400 (EDT) >Reply-To: act-l@vnet.net >Originator: act-l@vnet.net >Sender: act-l@vnet.net >From: "Marcheta Henry" >Subject: Re: Newsletter 2: Physical Layout >X-Comment: Association of Concerned Theosopists > >I would like a copy of your next Theosophy News letter, please. I live >in the Mid-west, At Box 5, Weaubleau, Mo. 65774----snail mail address. >I also publish a Theosophy News lettter "MESSIAH" quarterly, if you'd >like a copy, I'd be happy to have your snail mail address also. I am >have indepentent Theosophical Corp. with a page on the Web, and we also >have weekly classes here. > >If any of your group are in this area, we would welcome you to stop by. > >Let there be Light always and in all ways. > >Marcheta Henry > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 09:28:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 09:22:24 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Bro. N. Sri Ram Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620092224.00b09ad0@mail.eden.com> Martin Leiderman asked me to write down my observations about N. Sri Ram, late International President and father of Radha Burnier, present International President. I have attended many of his lectures and I have not personally met him. He is one of the lowest keyed individuals I have seen. Very few knew of him outside the close knit active members of TS, until he was elected as President. Any one who has seen him is struck as a very gentle and quiet person. A very good model for any TS leader to follow. He was the personal secretary to Annie Besant and helped her when she published a Newspaper during Indian Independence days. He was known to be a master of english language, even though he majored in Math. During the time of C. Jinarajadasa as President, I heard that CJ always got his important communications reviewed by Sri Ram just to make sure that the communication is precise and no even inadvertantly misunderstood due to the use of a wrong word or sentence. In or or two cases I had personally known of his decisions, they have always been very sound in hindsight. When I attended his lectures, I was a young man and as such found some of the topics he addressed were beyond my comprehension. He was a very open minded person which is shown by his being responsible for many people to be introduced to Krishnaji. Every year, the International Convention at Adyar and Krishnaji's talks across the river from Adyar HQ used to take place in last week of December. The Convention schedule was so arranged so that there was no conflict between its schedule and Krishnaji's talks, so that anyone who wanted to attend the talks could do so without missing any convention activity. Usually everyone at the convention attended Krishnaji's talks. Sri Ram always attended Krishnaji's talks. Sri Ram widely travelled and lectured during his long association with TS. mkr From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 11:28:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:24:59 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: ACT Website Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620112459.011a57a0@mail.eden.com> In an announcement in act-l, JRC informs ACT website's new address: It has newsletters in PDF files and other info. You may want to visit the site. (BTW, the PDF files are big. The zipped PDF files are a little shorter.) From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 11:36:23 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 12:29:58 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Bing's status Message-ID: <358BE386.B07F4E84@sprynet.com> References: <6d1c432f.358ba6cf@aol.com> Lmhem111@aol.com wrote: > Martin, has Bing Escudero been reinstated as a National Lecturer? Is he still He is not on the list of National Lecturers I have from National Headquarters. Note that he can never be "reinstated", as his was a paid position as sole National Lecturer; the position no longer exists. It is now a voluntary position, where National pays for airfare, and the individual Lodges may or may not provide lodging (no pun intended). Several National Speakers (John Algeo, to name one) pay their own expenses. I don't have my list of National Lecturers available, but I remember it is up to something on the order of a dozen, right now. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 11:43:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 12:34:30 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Bing's status Message-ID: <358BE496.1AD5E207@sprynet.com> References: <3.0.3.32.19980620084826.01795ca0@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > Tim Boyd > Richard Brooks > Robert Ellwood > Nathan Greer > Anton Lysy > Doss McDavid > Joy Mills Others that come to mind include: Ed Abdill David Bruce Stephen Hoeller (sp?) Ruben Cabigting John Algeo Betty Bland (not sure if she is on the official list) Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 11:50:49 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:20:11 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Dal's questions Message-ID: <000201bd9c6a$54a1d3c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dear Alan: I would say that a "beginning" is always relative, in either time or space, taking the ultimates (undefinable) as a base, all "beginnings" are temporal and are correlate to other movables. Any spot on our Earth is of that nature in terms of the Universe. But, do not my thoughts as "individual thoughts," have a beginning, based on the problem or situation that I am looking at ? In terms of all that precedes or follows they are seen linked to early ones, and will in turn serve as links later on when we look back at them in memory. I just think that the Old Testament b'rasit or berasit ( Theos. Glos., p. 54) seems to have some interesting correlates. Particularly I like the one that interprets it as "In Wisdom...." Dal > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 6:25 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Dal's questions >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>My thesis is simple: Law is everywhere. Our understanding of it >>grows as we advance in understanding. so we are eternal >>students. > >Yep. >> >>Higher degrees are many and not yet fully understandable to us, >>but as potentials and possibilities, we can theorize many things >>without being absolutely sure. > >There are, IMO and experience, no "higher degrees" - just other >places. To give an idea of what I mean here, the opening chapter of >Genesis starts with "In the beginning ..." > >Think of the "beginning" as a place, not a moment. > >Alan >------------------- >Brought to you from > West Cornwall, UK > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 11:58:22 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 07:38:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-ID: <000301bd9c6a$55b602e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dear martin: I look at your equation, it is interesting. As I understand it, and if HPB in the SD is correct then Theosophy is that which is described in SD I pp 272-3 -- the uninterrupted record of of the work of many generations of students and seers who looked into every possible aspect of Nature -- visible and invisible, and have left us a record. The book: THE SECRET DOCTRINE is only a precis of some of the many aspects of this "Accumulated Wisdom of the Ages." From that point of view it is not "new," it is history. It may be difficult for us to accept this idea, as our views modeled after our education, tend to reduce history to whatever survived destructive invasions for the past 3 to 5,000 years. Beyond that all is very hazy, and we tend to discount the records of the oriental countries. There are many concepts elucidated to us in that book which are for us and our present level of civilization and research are "new." But in point of fact they are very OLD. So I would not say that HPB (and the Masters who also are co-authors) offer "new stuff." They present the same old doctrines. I also note that you say this yourself, when you add to your equation the words: "Divine Wisdom" and "HPB method of comparing and extracting Divine Wisdom." Of course that "old stuff" was the opinion of students who wrote after HPB was "dead." And, it distresses me to find that this idea is still current. It is too cursive, too superficial, and too comprehensive; and tends to turn students away from a study of the S D (in my opinion); It discounts the study of many students who have found that the S D, upon close and continuous study, reveals depths which our civilization and its "academies" have not yet plumbed. For that reason it is not "popular." But, I may be viewing what you say wrongly, and if so, correct me. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Friday, June 19, 1998 2:37 PM > From: "Martin Leiderman" > Subject: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. >I don't think anyone believes that Theosophy=HPB. > >IMOP, a better formula is: > >Theosophy = Divine-Wisdom found in all traditions + Divine-wisdom found >in the HPB writing (new stuff) + HPB method of comparing, and extracting >Divine Wisdom > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 13:58:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 11:48:47 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Quotes for June 20th Message-ID: <001901bd9c7c$50557ee0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dallas offers some more quotes for consideration from original Theosophical sources: "Whoever wants to see the real Mahatma, must use his intellectual sight. He must so elevate his Manas [Mind] that its perceptions will be clear and all mists created by Maya [illusion] must be dispelled. His vision will then be bright and he will see the "Mahatmas" wherever he may be, for, being merged into the 6th [Buddhi-wisdom] and the 7th [Atma--spirit] principles, which are ubiquitous and omnipresent, the "Mahatmas" may be said to be everywhere." "Mahatmas and Chelas" -- THEOSOPHIST July, 1884, HPB Articles, [ULT Edn. Vol. I, p. 294 ] "Most of us believe in the survival of the Spiritual Ego, in Planetary spirits and "Nirmanakayas," those great ADEPTS of the past ages, who, renouncing their right to Nirvana, remain in our spheres of being, not as "spirits" but as complete human Beings. Save their corporeal, visible envelope, which they leave behind, they remain as they were, in order to help poor humanity, as far as can be done without sinning against KARMIC LAW. This is the GREAT RENUNCIATION indeed; an incessant, conscious self-sacrifice throughout aeons and ages till that day when the eyes of blind mankind will open and, instead of the few, all will see the universal truth...." "The Roots of Ritualism in Church and Masonry" LUCIFER, March/May 1889; [HPB Articles ULT Edn., III p. 204 ] [ see also SD Vol. I pp. 207 to 210 ] "The idea that things can cease to exist and still BE, is a fundamental one in Eastern psychology." S D I 54 "The first and fundamental dogma of Occultism is Universal Unity (or Homogeneity) under three aspects." S D I p. 58, 181. "Esoteric philosophy teaches that everything lives and is conscious but not that all life and consciousness are similar to those of human or even animal beings. Life we look on as "the one form of existence," manifesting in what is called matter; or, as in man, what, incorrectly separating them, we name Spirit, Soul, and Matter [form]. SD I p. 49. "Matter is the vehicle for the manifestation of soul [mind] on this plane of existence, and soul is the vehicle on a higher plane for the manifestation of Spirit; and these three are a trinity synthesized by Life, which pervades them all ...universal Life..." S D I 49 "The Secret Doctrine teaches the progressive development of everything, worlds as well as atoms; and this stupendous development has neither conceivable beginning nor imaginable end. Our "universe" is only one of an infinite number of Universes...[all] links in the great Cosmic chain of Universes..." S D I p. 43 "In everything there is the One Spirit, the Perceiver, the Knower, the Experiencer; it spells unity throughout ...That One sees all... The cultivated intellect [develops] its ability to discriminate between shades of differences...No one can clear another's sight..." Robert Crosbie -- "The Friendly Philosopher," p. 2 and 3 "...right thought must precede right speech and right action...what ever conditions exist were produced by you...Do not attach yourself to any particular form of result. Leave results to the Law." FP, p. 3 "...good motive without knowledge makes sorry work sometimes...our best safeguard is an unselfish desire to benefit others...Thought is the plane of action." FP, pp. 4, 7 -------------------------------- Offered in the hope of developing some thought and discussion on these ideas. Dallas. ========================================== From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 14:13:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 15:16:56 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <358C0AA7.580F@globalserve.net> References: <009301bd9b89$1ecb32a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > Annette -- you are quite right. But for those who have very > "organized" minds and who desire to be able to investigate into > that which we know, they need those preliminary stepping stones. > How do we help them ? That is what I had in mind. Dal. Hi Dallas: This is something I have not spent time thinking on. Presumably because my experience has been that my life has been full of experiences and learning opportunities that presented themselves sooner or later in response to my requests. It was not until the last decade of my life though, that I looked back on it from the point of view of an observer and analyst and could see the threads from "wish" to "receipt" sometimes over decades. It became very obvious to me that humans get to "know" in response to a genuine desire "to know". All humans have "organized minds", so the process tends to be more or less standard across the race. One "asks" or "wishes" for understanding and all kinds of people, events, resources, books, movies, dreams, ideas, appear to one, like a gift. If one chooses to go with it, one receives what one desired, including the responsibility of becoming a fuller person. It definitely "helps" in the early stages to hear others say things like "do not fear, this may be strange, but is natural". It also "helps" when one gets stuck at one point in the process if another gives an idea that worked for them. All these resources and methods "help", however, the crux of this thing called life seems to be to do it alone. To come to it alone and to transform alone in the time one takes. So, the action "help" can take many forms, all of which are sucessful when the seeker is seeking. I believe the concept you are probing is that of encouragement for all human-kind to start the seeking process, because a closed mind tends to result in life in a void. One could postulate that it is not possible to help someone who is not seeking. In the dark times it is easy to believe that. Until one is reminded of karma and the natural law and then one remembers that everything done, said, and thought impacts everything else in the universe so that "help" is best given by "being" a fully living person. It would be nice and easy if humans could state the understandings of life in a "do-it-yourself" step by step program and then distribute it by whatever means were the currently accepted ones. In fact we have been trying to do that for some time now and have failed. I now believe that this failure occurs because the race has separated itself from the natural. Here I don't just mean a diconnection from the planet and spiritual things, but the whole natural way of life for our species....an imbalance in family, work, time, self, education, worship. To take one part of the problem and think one has solved it, let's say by writing down ideas and speaking them to audiences with demonstrations included for special effects for instance, appears to be working until one gathers the results for analysis. The results show that those most "helped" by this method are the ones doing the writing and speaking. Also that the "hit rate" for permanent transformation of those listening is very small. Also that this process takes years and often bumps back to square one when the speaker passes on or the book becomes "dated". Contrast this method with the natural process of living with a grandparent, loving the grandparent, watching them do as they say, seeing it bring them peace and prosperity, and remembering all of them - words, sights, smells, feelings - always, within. Extrapolate that 50 year time span to thousands of years! Look at all the good ideas that have fallen by the wayside. Take for instance Maslow's theory of the Hierarchy of Needs. Satisfy the lower level needs of the physical and the higher level self-actualization is facilitated. Sounds logical. The approaches of our welfare systems and our charitable organizations are based on this concept. It fails. I cannot answer your question properly as yet. I need more time. I am thinking on these ideas: perhaps we have strayed too far from the original plan and can only be brought back by an armageddon perhaps this state of affairs shows that the plan is very successful because the plan was to give us freedom of choice in which we would lose our way and in so doing would struggle to find it again perhaps "help" for others is entirely superfluous and ego driven and all that is necessary is to be "self" I have read recently of a theory that the reason we do not use the other 70% odd of our brain is because we shut it down when we, as a race, experienced traumatic cosmic events. That the memories are still there for all of us and that we can transcend the fear and unlock the knowledge. I would like to pursue that idea and then get back to you. In the meantime, on a daily basis, if the people have the courage to tell the stories, to communicate their experiences, to walk the talk... at least the knowledge of the existance of the knowledge can live and it seems can be spread, like a certain Bank once advertized - one customer at a time. So, dear Dallas, if in this lifetime you have chosen to go with the state of being of a "talking books", we need that help, it is not in vain, it's a valuable part of the whole process. PART OF. Hey, I'm writing to you about theosophy when I never expected to do so. Can't be bad? Blessed Be Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 14:28:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:18:15 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: ACT Website Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980620141815.006dd920@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <001801bd9c7c$3bc6bd40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas: Sorry for the confusion. There may be others who also are confused and hence posting this msg to theos-l, theos-talk, theos-news, and ti-l. Here is the info: ACT = Association of Concerned Theosophists, concerned Theosophists trying to bring about reforms in Theosophical Society in America (Adyar). JRC = John R Crocker is the one who put the website together and maintains it. ACT WEBSITE = It is the WWW site of ACT. Please do visit the WWW of ACT and you will find it interesting. ...mkr At 10:17 AM 6/20/98 -0700, you wrote: >June 20th 1998 > >Dear Doss: > >What does this MSG quoted below mean ? Who or what is JRC and >what is ACT WEBSITE ? > >You're way past me. Dal > >Or, is this none of my business ? > >=================================== > >-----Original Message----- >From: "M K Ramadoss" >; ti-l@vnet.net ; >theos-talk@theosophy.com >Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 9:43 AM >Subject: ACT Website > > >>In an announcement in act-l, JRC informs ACT website's new >address: >> >> >> >>It has newsletters in PDF files and other info. You may want to >visit the >>site. (BTW, the PDF files are big. The zipped PDF files are a >little shorter.) >> >> >> >> > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 16:43:17 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:45:42 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB, and more on Paul J. Message-Id: <199806202142.QAA20344@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <358B5874.71D6@lainet.com> References: <199806191915.PAA23920@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <199806200209.VAA21992@proteus.imagiware.com> Martin, This is all just rhetoric. How long have you been in the U.S.? Just 10 years or so, right? I think you speak and write English very well, but you may have misunderstood my post. Yeah, I used a label. Is it true that you like theosophy? At 11:36 PM 6/19/98 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Brenda, > >How quickly you have labeled me as: > "because he has been assigned the role of National Lecturer for some >unknown period of time. This position makes Martin a consort with the >establishment. He has found the "business" of teaching theosophy to his >liking...." > >And later you said: >" ...While reading Paul's books (and Martin unfortunately (as far as I >know) you don't have any,) ..." >===================== >Didn't you read in my post that I bought a book from Paul himself >??????? It is even autographed by him (a collectors item!!!!) >I think you are acting defensively very much, without too much thinking >. . . Did you forget the great fun we have while both attending to our >own talks at the Lodge back in Hollywood??? Now, yes, you have Paul's book. I mean that I hadn't read any of YOUR books, because I didn't think you had (written) any. You are a very fine speaker and I hope we can host a speech of yours in home again sometime. Yes, I'm defensive of Paul ... of Radha ... of theosophy. I defend it all. Let's have some more fun. What are you taking to today's pot luck? >In a previous post, I mentioned how I became a National Lecturer, it was >so simple: I asked John Algeo, and after a 20 minute interview and he >said OK. That was it. So I really do not know were you are coming from. >I am so free about it, there is no soul slavery, I had my experience >with New Acropolis which opened my eyes to organizations and Cults. >Can you say the same about all the cults to which you belong, like I AM >and Co-Masons???? Now, this is certainly eye-opening. I guess I just like the people in these cults, so I'll stay in them for awhile. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 17:13:14 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:54:30 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <004301bd9c98$10dfb3e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dear Annette: Isn't it extraordinary how much we can get out of things ? I have just scanned your long and interesting comments, but will take a while to mull over the ideas and answer, so be a little patient with me. Wanted to acknowledge however. I see some interesting comments you make there. Best wishes as always, Dal. > Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 12:33 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: >> >> Annette -- you are quite right. But for those who have very >> "organized" minds and who desire to be able to investigate into >> that which we know, they need those preliminary stepping stones. >> How do we help them ? That is what I had in mind. Dal. >Hi Dallas: >This is something I have not spent time thinking on. Presumably because >my experience has been that my life has been full of experiences and >learning opportunities that presented themselves sooner or later in >response to my requests. It was not until the last decade of my life >though, that I looked back on it from the point of view of an observer >and analyst and could see the threads from "wish" to "receipt" sometimes >over decades. It became very obvious to me that humans get to "know" in >response to a genuine desire "to know". All humans have "organized >minds", so the process tends to be more or less standard across the >race. One "asks" or "wishes" for understanding and all kinds of people, >events, resources, books, movies, dreams, ideas, appear to one, like a >gift. If one chooses to go with it, one receives what one desired, >including the responsibility of becoming a fuller person. > >It definitely "helps" in the early stages to hear others say things like >"do not fear, this may be strange, but is natural". It also "helps" >when one gets stuck at one point in the process if another gives an idea >that worked for them. All these resources and methods "help", however, >the crux of this thing called life seems to be to do it alone. To come >to it alone and to transform alone in the time one takes. > >So, the action "help" can take many forms, all of which are sucessful >when the seeker is seeking. I believe the concept you are probing is >that of encouragement for all human-kind to start the seeking process, >because a closed mind tends to result in life in a void. One could >postulate that it is not possible to help someone who is not seeking. >In the dark times it is easy to believe that. Until one is reminded of >karma and the natural law and then one remembers that everything done, >said, and thought impacts everything else in the universe so that "help" >is best given by "being" a fully living person. It would be nice and >easy if humans could state the understandings of life in a >"do-it-yourself" step by step program and then distribute it by whatever >means were the currently accepted ones. In fact we have been trying to >do that for some time now and have failed. I now believe that this >failure occurs because the race has separated itself from the natural. >Here I don't just mean a diconnection from the planet and spiritual >things, but the whole natural way of life for our species....an >imbalance in family, work, time, self, education, worship. > >To take one part of the problem and think one has solved it, let's say >by writing down ideas and speaking them to audiences with demonstrations >included for special effects for instance, appears to be working until >one gathers the results for analysis. The results show that those most >"helped" by this method are the ones doing the writing and speaking. >Also that the "hit rate" for permanent transformation of those listening >is very small. Also that this process takes years and often bumps back >to square one when the speaker passes on or the book becomes "dated". >Contrast this method with the natural process of living with a >grandparent, loving the grandparent, watching them do as they say, >seeing it bring them peace and prosperity, and remembering all of them - >words, sights, smells, feelings - always, within. Extrapolate that 50 >year time span to thousands of years! > >Look at all the good ideas that have fallen by the wayside. Take for >instance Maslow's theory of the Hierarchy of Needs. Satisfy the lower >level needs of the physical and the higher level self-actualization is >facilitated. Sounds logical. The approaches of our welfare systems and >our charitable organizations are based on this concept. It fails. > >I cannot answer your question properly as yet. I need more time. I am >thinking on these ideas: >perhaps we have strayed too far from the original plan and can only be >brought back by an armageddon >perhaps this state of affairs shows that the plan is very successful >because the plan was to give us freedom of choice in which we would lose >our way and in so doing would struggle to find it again >perhaps "help" for others is entirely superfluous and ego driven and all >that is necessary is to be "self" > >I have read recently of a theory that the reason we do not use the other >70% odd of our brain is because we shut it down when we, as a race, >experienced traumatic cosmic events. That the memories are still there >for all of us and that we can transcend the fear and unlock the >knowledge. >I would like to pursue that idea and then get back to you. > >In the meantime, on a daily basis, if the people have the courage to >tell the stories, to communicate their experiences, to walk the talk... >at least the knowledge of the existance of the knowledge can live and it >seems can be spread, like a certain Bank once advertized - one customer >at a time. > >So, dear Dallas, if in this lifetime you have chosen to go with the >state of being of a "talking books", we need that help, it is not in >vain, it's a valuable part of the whole process. PART OF. Hey, I'm >writing to you about theosophy when I never expected to do so. Can't be >bad? >Blessed Be >Annette > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 17:43:15 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 16:38:22 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: No pain, no gain Message-Id: <199806202238.QAA19710@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda writes: >I don't expect everyone to have this >type of experience because I see it as a result partly of the purification >of the vehicles, which both theosophy and the I AM Temple recommends, and >if you haven't done the purifications, how could you be expected to >participate in the results!? You're right, I've not done the "purifications." What are they? How much will they cost? Do they hurt? >Also "perfectly" obedient doesn't mean listening to every command. It >means interpreting, weighing, feeling balanced and at ease with our >"commands" and making the important ones count. Now see - look at this. How is someone supposed to keep track who's talking about what where when "occultists" take everyday words - the terms we The Unpurified use - and ascribe all kinds of different, and often unconnected, definitions to them? So, thus, thanks to you - when I talk to my creepy neighbor and say "You are perfectly creepy" I'll have to explain what "perfectly" means because he may have read your post which defines "perfectly." Life. Who knew? Oh, one more thing: Does the "I AM" organization advocate "packing heat?" Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 17:51:41 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:45:19 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Quotes for June 20th Message-ID: <358C3B7F.4F31@globalserve.net> References: <001901bd9c7c$50557ee0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 20th > > Dallas offers some more quotes for consideration from original > Theosophical sources: Dear Dallas: I am quickly going to try to re-write a couple of these quotations in the hopes of illustrating part of the problems recently discussed (lack of new members, perceived personal conflicts, lack of universal acceptance) > "Whoever wants to see the real Mahatma, must use his intellectual > sight. He must so elevate his Manas [Mind] that its perceptions > will be clear and all mists created by Maya [illusion] must be > dispelled. His vision will then be bright and he will see the > "Mahatmas" wherever he may be, for, being merged into the 6th > [Buddhi-wisdom] and the 7th [Atma--spirit] principles, which are > ubiquitous and omnipresent, the "Mahatmas" may be said to be > everywhere." > "Mahatmas and Chelas" -- THEOSOPHIST July, 1884, > HPB Articles, [ULT Edn. Vol. I, p. 294 ] "All who desire experience with the universal, an understanding of the meaning of being, will gain insight by using more than their simple physical senses. Freeing the mind to embrace more than the physical will bring a clarity of perception that will dispell the bounds of illusion. The resulting expansion in perception enables the seeker to experience what culminates in knowledge of the one truth that is ubiquitous and omnipresent. Transcending Maya by unbounding the Manas and hence experiencing the 6th and 7th principles." HPB's terms with which I have problems: *real* (the real Mahatma - implies only one way of experiencing the truth) *his intellectual sight* (very off-putting, implies an intellectual process and provides vulnerability for universal acceptance) the word *must* in every instance *elevate* (linear, implies upwards only, and precludes all those experiences of bringing the divine down to the phsyical, the circle of life, the spiral of knowledge) *mists* (dispell the mists - in antiquity many insights and transforming experiences were heralded by mists, still are) *his vision will then be bright* (vision meaning what? bright being only one shade of state and *dark* providing as much *vision* as light in appropriate instances) And finally I had to read it 3 times to be sure if it meant that the Mahatmas were merged in the 6th and 7th principles or the seeker was, and if the writer had experienced this for sure or was suggesting that it "may" be so. Of course, if I had read more about esoteric Buddhism and other related ideas, understanding this quotation would be easier. But here's the rub....these things do not grab me, I do not feel a connection either current or past lives, so I seek not in detail on that path and the terminology is overwhelming, complex, boring, disconnected from my daily life. This does not mean that I discount it, rather that I leave it to those who do choose it, believing that all paths lead to the same one truth. > "Most of us believe in the survival of the Spiritual Ego, in > Planetary spirits and "Nirmanakayas," those great ADEPTS of the > past ages, who, renouncing their right to Nirvana, remain in our > spheres of being, not as "spirits" but as complete human Beings. > Save their corporeal, visible envelope, which they leave behind, > they remain as they were, in order to help poor humanity, as far > as can be done without sinning against KARMIC LAW. I'm sorry (for taking up time, not sorry for being myself) I may be dumb, but this passage is a great example of one in which I perceive a direct contradiction, unless I start changing the words ........ "Except for their original physical suitcase, which they shed" maybe. I mean I get frustrated and want to say "spit it out and say what you mean". What *is* the difference, in this context, between a Spirit and a complete human Being without a physical body and a Nirmanakaya and the truth energy in everything? And, how is it possible to help poor humanity without sinning against Karmic Law, except to remain available and approachable when called upon and why not do that from Nirvana? And, if it is such a great renunciation and self-sacrifice to "give up Nirvana" for this service to humanity, the basic tenet may be incorrect? And, if help is there in this form, then it would seem that all who seek by this theosophical path would benefit from seeing and communicating with these spirits. If not, living the theosophy becomes that of accepting that some chosen ones do and others follow in some judgemental like vicariously experienced existance? And, no-one believes they are "poor humanity" until someone tells them so and then follows a "chicken and egg" like viscous-circle thing that many humans simply opt out of! > "...right thought must precede right speech and right > action...what ever conditions exist were produced by you...Do not > attach yourself to any particular form of result. Leave results > to the Law." > FP, p. 3 "Leave results to the Law" No way! Not attaching oneself to any PERCEIVED result - good advice, but not trying to see and understand the results and to be part of the process by learning from experience and changing actions that modify speech that unlock new thoughts that precede new speech and manifest new actions that create new circumstances that ....... Now, one could take the Book and sit on a mountain top until one gets right thought and then let it go to the Universe, but in my view, to do that and anything like it is to preclude this thing called Life. Life is in the plan, so why develop an answer that negates it's major part in the process. > "...good motive without knowledge makes sorry work > sometimes...our > best safeguard is an unselfish desire to benefit others...Thought > is the plane of action." > FP, pp. 4, 7 Having a "safeguard" is a bounding (and often binding) mechanism. By allowing this concept to enter the process, one immediately creates bounds on purity, transformation and transcendence. Why create a hole and put oneself in it to make the climb twice as long (so to speak). An unselfish desire to benefit others is a poor starting point if one is to find the truth. A selfish desire to know oneself, who is one of the others, provides the knowledge to automate the motives and clarify the thoughts that benefits onself and the others inseparably. One may "do for others" as an event in the process of discovering the truth in oneself. All who are living are seeking the truth in some way. Life *is* a search for understanding. One can deny it, pretend it will go away, slow it down, do it now and then between purely physical pursuits, do it 50/50 with the physical, or pursue it 100%, and all the permutations of, but one cannot escape it. I believe that the whole process is speeded up by one factor - FREEDOM, and I believe humans know that instinctively. >From one who finds HPB et al interesting, motivated by good, and probably transcended, but left us with a verbosity that would currently bound my mind and "soul" if I let it. No disrespect to them and anyone living the theosophy, as you well know. Let's put it like this.....when my time comes to know and be in the truth, I'll be me in it, and no one else's concepts will suffice, and yet everyone's concepts will be. The very fact that I gave in to the temptation to analyze and modify your quotations means I'm nowhere near that state yet, eh? Cheers Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 17:58:15 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:09:18 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <19980620232545897.AAA226@pgiese> > W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > > > Annette -- you are quite right. But for those who have very > > "organized" minds and who desire to be able to investigate into > > that which we know, they need those preliminary stepping stones. > > How do we help them ? That is what I had in mind. Dal. What is do you mean by "organized minds"? Each person's mind is uniquely organized. There's gobs of books on different schemes for defining the organization. A popular one in management theory is a 2X2 scheme where the first array is the left brain/right brain dichotomy and the second array is concrete/abstract thinking dichotomy. This creates four thinking types: left brain (linear, analytic, methodological) concrete [e.g. Jack Webb's Dragnet "give me the facts, just the facts, ma'am], left brain abstract [systemized application of known facts to the unknown world], right brain (holistic, image-based) concrete [what do I sense about the world around me] and right brain abstract [what do I intuit about the whole situation]. My boss actually recruits by this scheme and feels that the "perfect team" has one of each type. This schema is kindegartner stuff for a philosophically literate list like this. Astrology and Jung offer equally valid schemes. Any way, it sounds like Dallas is asking, "How do we spur an intuitive understanding for those on the left-brain concrete track?" I think folks have been a bit hard on Dallas regarding the quotes. Try seeing the quotes as snippets of wisdom, haiku, or dialogue in absentia rather than preaching or quoting gospel. I think they're meant in this way and, in humility, to add the added value of directing folks where to go for more information. Annette write: It would be nice and > easy if humans could state the understandings of life in a > "do-it-yourself" step by step program and then distribute it by whatever > means were the currently accepted ones. In fact we have been trying to > do that for some time now and have failed. I now believe that this > failure occurs because the race has separated itself from the natural. > Here I don't just mean a diconnection from the planet and spiritual > things, but the whole natural way of life for our species....an > imbalance in family, work, time, self, education, worship. > You've hit on a key point here. So much of our culture doesn't give consistent all-around value to so many things needed for personal expansion and personal spiritual growth --let alone valuing this on an evolutionary scale. Look at Art. In my state, not only is art and music not compulsary for elementary and middle school children, it has actually been cut out of some schools all together! As I remember, it was usually in the arts where children who had difficulties with regular academics found an area where they were on par or even excellent. Now the schools improve "self esteem" by lowering grading standards and having the kids regurgitate "affirmations". In the public schools that my daughter has attended, poetry assignments are rare and far between. Can you imagine trying to read the Stanzas if you never had any education in the language of poetry? From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:13:16 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:26:59 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dates Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <004001bd9c4d$51b875a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Ideas have no date. How about 4th of July - a date with ideas perhaps? Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:28:17 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:33:15 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Russian emigrant Message-ID: <358C46BB.1464@globalserve.net> References: <008d01bd9b88$ee6fbe00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> For some reason I was most heartened to read this. Thanks for sharing it. "one person at a time". Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:28:29 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:24:37 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: To Ramadoss Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <358B5C7A.6233@lainet.com> Martin Leiderman writes >Also about your name, I know what 'Rama' means (the Avatar), but what >does 'doss' signify???? In UK English slang, it means "to sleep" Maybe MKR is a sleeping avatar! Alan :-) ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:35:09 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:20:17 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980620120946.00735c00@ozemail.com.au> Darren writes >>I deny everything. >> >>The Devil. > >As legal representation for Mr. Great Horned Beast (aka Beelzebub , Satan , >George Bush) I request that my client not make any public statements. > >The Devils Advocate Listen pal - I am the big bogey man round here, not you. The Devil I am. From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:43:15 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:28:53 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <003e01bd9c4d$4f5dbcc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 20th > >Alan: thanks for the correction. Mental gears clashed and >slipped--wheeee== ! ** ! grrrind. What is "ROFL ?" It sounds >kind of either woeful or menacing. Which ? Dal. "Rolls On Floor Laughing." Neither woeful nor menacing! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:45:31 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:18:34 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Everlasting love Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806200209.VAA21992@proteus.imagiware.com> Brenda S. Tucker writes >Do you think any of us are asking for Everlasting Love for the work we do? ROFL! >Do you want more people to love and adore you? For some reason, this isn't >very appealing. Most people want love to spread out - to reach into places >its never been before and to inspire the downcast. How can we attempt work >which would accomplish this? By loving life in all its manifestations as best we can, is my approach - not always too successful. but as you say, the word is "attempt"! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:50:35 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:46:20 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dal's questions Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000201bd9c6a$54a1d3c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes (on theos-talk) >I just think that the Old Testament b'rasit or berasit ( Theos. >Glos., >p. 54) seems to have some interesting correlates. Particularly I >like the one that interprets it as "In Wisdom...." Without wishing to upset you, might I suggest that the original Hebrew text, which is freely available, migth be a better source that the Theosophical Glossary! You might find an excursion into mystical Judaism offers quite a bit of light here too! The book which Christians call "Genesis" is know in Judaism as "Berasit" or similar - depends on your method of transliteration. The 's' is the letter "shin" but to spell it that way could cause offence to some, or unwarranted offence *from* some. I spent two days contemplating this opening to "The Bible" as the earliest Hebrew texts are unpointed, so that the words can sometimes be rendered in fascinating and illuminating ways. In Eastern Aramaic written Christian writings, John's Gospel, whose beginning is usually translated as "In the beginning was the word" the same Aram/Heb word "Berasit" is used. In the Hebrew or Aramaic text there is no definite article, and it is possible, and I think legitimate, to translate as "In beginning" - a process divinely bugun. (Hebrew *has* the definite article - I am only saying that it does not form part of this wonderful word!) IMO, Israelite religion contains as many, and probably far more "Keys" to the ancient wisdom than any other source except perhaps the Indian ones. Alan ..... over to you, Bart! --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 18:54:46 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 19:24:40 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <358C44B8.1C78@globalserve.net> References: <004301bd9c98$10dfb3e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas: At the risk of being accused of using the list for personal chat.... Yes, it's quite extraordinary what we get out of things and how and from whom! Take as long as you want. I am about to go do some gardening and then pay my monthly bills and then do some work stuff ready to spend tomorrow mixing work stuff with visiting family and book shopping and maybe see a movie, all the while my brain will be thinking on these things. Contrast that with my husband who will probably do nothing more than read his theosophy books and sleep this weekend again. I really do think that my little personal example above is part of the problem we are discussing on the list.... The "philosophy" to survive must "live" each moment in the whole of us in this life. I am very sad when I think of the living philosophy that was practically exterminated by dominating groups like the Romans for instance, and very glad when I realize that, whatever one's choice of labels, the creation is so perfect that no one part of it gone awry can completely destroy it or any part of it's perfection. I have responded to your recent quotations currently to make a point. I am also "walking the talk" by joining some other SpiritWeb lists to learn more labels and understand more viewpoints. I dread this on the one hand because time bears down on me and it would be easier to say I don't have the time, but I have to accept that I manifest my own time and use of it, and that I must handle all ideas in order to approach closer to the one truth. Personally I have found that, in the past couple of years since I have been struggling with sprirtuality and my aura has changed with each new understanding, people approach me to talk about things. Yesterday a colleague took some time to get to the point, feeling his way with respect to safeness, comfort level, and responsibility of opening a door that I may choose to keep open when he might back out and want to close later (if you see what I mean) and wanted to discuss the "meaning of life" and commitment. Through synchronicity he was introduced to Neitzche (who knows how it's spelt!) and ideas which blew his mind and threw him off balance. I promised to read him (never had, thank goodness, might have gone off on a disasterous tangent earlier in life if I had from the sound of it!) so we could debate his ideas. Now, I could have said something like, "never read him, but X, Y and Z tell you all you need to know", and I believe our dialogue would have stopped there. Hence the bookstore visit tomorrow. I also want to make a collection of "spoken by Trees", so have saved all the tree postings and must buy the books suggested. I always wanted to write a book and couldn't find a topic that felt right. Who'd have thought I would have to wait until now to go to a channeller's presentation and ask a question that came from somewhere and get an answer that struck me as important to my process, if I do as I intend, will change my life once again? Bloody amazing! Love and good health Annette W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 20th > > Dear Annette: > > Isn't it extraordinary how much we can get out of things ? > > I have just scanned your long and interesting comments, but will > take a while to mull over the ideas and answer, so be a little > patient with me. > > Wanted to acknowledge however. I see some interesting comments > you make there. > > Best wishes as always, Dal. From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 19:13:16 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 18:59:14 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Ramadoss Message-ID: <358C4CD2.7E9F@eden.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Martin Leiderman writes > >Also about your name, I know what 'Rama' means (the Avatar), but what > >does 'doss' signify???? > > In UK English slang, it means "to sleep" Maybe MKR is a sleeping > avatar! > > Alan :-) > ------------------- > Brought to you from > West Cornwall, UK > I am not! ...doss From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 19:21:47 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 20:17:27 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <358C5117.540A@globalserve.net> References: <19980620232545897.AAA226@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > What is do you mean by "organized minds"? Each person's mind is uniquely > organized. > My boss actually recruits by this scheme and feels that the "perfect team" > has one of each type. Snip the schema - which I was very interested in reading about by the way. Can't agree though, Pam. I believe every person has the ability to use all those types of thought processes at the same time, and may be stuck in one mode because trained to do so and now it supports a situation in life existing because of the training, or because it is easier and more comfortable to act in one mode, or because one mode fits with desired results for one type of task. I think your boss is smart on the one hand and a pioneer on the other who runs the risk of spending more time bringing cohesion to the team than getting results, unless s/he uses the team not as a team but as individual resources which s/he consolidates..... Not unlike these quotes may be used...... > I think folks have been a bit hard on Dallas regarding the quotes. Try > seeing the quotes as snippets of wisdom, haiku, or dialogue in absentia > rather than preaching or quoting gospel. I think they're meant in this > way and, in humility, to add the added value of directing folks where to go > for more information. Have to disagree again...I think people have been hard on the quotes, including me, not on Dallas. If the quotes do not provide direction to more information for one, or stay with one as useful snippets of wisdom, then...... However, the very fact that they cause debate adds value, so ..... no contest in the long run. Appreciate your comments about education, Pam. Dare I say, let's face it, when the recent mass production age came upon us we were responsible for letting education become diluted until it served one purpose only - to produce workers for nations the goal of which was to be the winner in the competition. Now the public education system is going through massive downsizing which will hopefully spawn a private system that is affordable and all inclusive, that will in turn influence the public system. If I am honest and realistic, and imagine a fixed amount of time in conjunction with the vastly increased knowledge and skills that now exist even compared to my elementary school days, I would have difficulty coming up with a curriculum that covers it all. Here's a thought - everyone in society has sufficient resources to live phsyically and those who are teachers by nature just teach. In the classroom, in their homes, in the fields, on the internet, each time the meet with someone who wants to learn! Nice to chat with you. Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 19:43:18 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 17:32:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <005301bd9cac$33a80800$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 20th Dear Pam: All I had in mind was a methodical mind, where a constant attempt to correlate cause and effect, parts with their origins, and with the "Whole," and that's all I meant -- my mind runs like that I see/hear something and then wonder: Why me ? What relation does that have to me and what should I do with it ? When should I do anything, or nothing ? Is it my business, etc... Being of the nature of an analyst I try to make myself synthesize, enlarge, ask what is the Universal source for the present situation, or the present person's speech or seeming attitude, and like it is said in LIGHT ON THE PATH I very often find myself confronted with an almost insoluble mystery. I then ask myself what is the "principle" that is acting in them, predominantly, and why am I not in tune with it ? etc., etc., Importantly: Am I the one who is out of tune and misunderstanding ? I try to give the other the benefit of the whole horizon. If I stay narrowly in a "groove" I can't expect another to follow me there. As to left-brain right-brain etc... I don't believe for one moment that the brain is any more than a tool for the mind, and that what those electro-magnetic responses observed are, than the effects of the brain being used. There are too many cases of people with brain accidents or impairments who go on living with their thinking functions rather still intact. In any case that is only a physiological conclusion, and it does not take into account the 7-fold "human". What about creativity, genius, talent, and the individual development of any child ? Is this to be steam-rollered out of them ? That seems to be the whole trend of the present educational thrust, with some few exceptions. Psychology likewise -- it glorifies the Personality. And knows little or nothing of the EGO the TRUE SELF. Perhaps Maslow was one of the last good psychologists. And, I know that he like Arthur E. Morgan (both of whom I have met and conversed with) were quite familiar with Theosophy and with what HPB wrote. May I offer an instance from my own quick review of about 40 pages in the SD ? HPB says that a grasp and application of the 7-fold nature of man and the universe is the key to occultism and esotericism--SD I 205-6. And so far I think she is right in so saying. SD I 232-3 deals with the "creation" of man; SD I 230-1 deals with the dropping of the eternal Ray into "man"; SD I 216, 218, 224-5 deals with the nature of the Monad/Jiva; SD I 213 speaks of the "fiery Lions, the Agnishwatta Pitris as those eternal Living Ones that take up residence in "man;" and this is called the "secret of the Vedas on SD I 210; SD I 211 says that man never evolved physiologically from animals; -- I suppose that I could go on, but his is only a relatively small part of what she speaks of in the SD. -- and this is also a sample of the way in which I go after things. Your question about "Dallas" handling one who is of a particular train of mind, well, I would try to find out what their natural capacities are and ask if they are able to handle the development and management of an aspect of my business -- give them something to do which they can enjoy and build, but never lose the concept of the "team," and, that our business as a whole SERVES those who need it. People come back to those who are honest and quick on their toes - that's been my experience, and I have watched my businesses grow on that thesis. The idea is to fill a necessary "niche" in the whole structure, and not to do battle with all and sundry -- far less psychological or moral strain for me. But an awful lot of hours and work in any case. I always remember Edison: 99 % perspiration. [ did you know he was an early member of the T S ? ] I study the business world not to compete, but to adjust to areas of service, and to be efficient at it. I also shared what I learned. Interesting, my competitors rarely believed me, but my clients did. I was always very active in my trade organizations (Publishing and Printing). But I never went out on a preaching binge or tried to explain my philosophy unless someone asked, and then, as a preliminary, I would draw them out, seeking to understand what they really meant and how their kind of mind worked -- not to take advantage of it, but to give explanations that were clear to them. And sometimes this method failed miserably with some very wonderful and kind people, who had their own conclusions working for themselves. So I tried to arrange to "part as friends." It is a shame that the schools are run (for state and others) on a purely monetary basis, and have little or no consideration for the development of "returning immortal Egos, who will want to pick up the work of their past lives here and now. I note what you say about the humanities and the short shrift given nowadays to art, poetry, music and literature, and of course deplore such a materialism that wishes to develop thinking but obedient machines to fill job slots. See what HPB says about Education in her day, as practiced in England in the KEY, p. 264 on for about 8 pages. Had I a child to bring up under such circumstances I would use my own home (as you must be doing) as a school= room filling it with those items of the curriculum that give a well rounded perspective to a developing child. I take the view that children desire to be given a direction and a friendly supervisionary overlook. There is enough of bad problems in the schools today that I (and perhaps you) did not have to contend with. I know of several families where this has been successfully practiced. Well, well too long. Good bye for the moment Dal > Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 4:30 PM > From: "Pam Giese" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: >> > >> > Annette -- you are quite right. But for those who have very >> > "organized" minds and who desire to be able to investigate into >> > that which we know, they need those preliminary stepping stones. >> > How do we help them ? That is what I had in mind. Dal. > >What is do you mean by "organized minds"? Each person's mind is uniquely >organized. > >There's gobs of books on different schemes for defining the organization. >A popular one in management theory is a 2X2 scheme where the first array >is the left brain/right brain dichotomy and the second array is >concrete/abstract thinking dichotomy. This creates four thinking types: >left brain (linear, analytic, methodological) concrete [e.g. Jack Webb's >Dragnet "give me the facts, just the facts, ma'am], left brain abstract >[systemized application of known facts to the unknown world], right brain >(holistic, image-based) concrete [what do I sense about the world around >me] and right brain abstract [what do I intuit about the whole situation]. >My boss actually recruits by this scheme and feels that the "perfect team" >has one of each type. > >This schema is kindegartner stuff for a philosophically literate list like >this. Astrology and Jung offer equally valid schemes. Any way, it sounds >like Dallas is asking, "How do we spur an intuitive understanding for those >on the left-brain concrete track?" > >I think folks have been a bit hard on Dallas regarding the quotes. Try >seeing the quotes as snippets of wisdom, haiku, or dialogue in absentia >rather than preaching or quoting gospel. I think they're meant in this >way and, in humility, to add the added value of directing folks where to go >for more information. > >Annette write: It would be nice and >> easy if humans could state the understandings of life in a >> "do-it-yourself" step by step program and then distribute it by whatever >> means were the currently accepted ones. In fact we have been trying to >> do that for some time now and have failed. I now believe that this >> failure occurs because the race has separated itself from the natural. >> Here I don't just mean a diconnection from the planet and spiritual >> things, but the whole natural way of life for our species....an >> imbalance in family, work, time, self, education, worship. >> > >You've hit on a key point here. So much of our culture doesn't give >consistent all-around value to so many things needed for personal expansion >and personal spiritual growth --let alone valuing this on an evolutionary >scale. Look at Art. In my state, not only is art and music not compulsary >for elementary and middle school children, it has actually been cut out of >some schools all together! As I remember, it was usually in the arts where >children who had difficulties with regular academics found an area where >they were on par or even excellent. Now the schools improve "self esteem" >by lowering grading standards and having the kids regurgitate >"affirmations". In the public schools that my daughter has attended, >poetry assignments are rare and far between. Can you imagine trying to >read the Stanzas if you never had any education in the language of poetry? > > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 20:59:41 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 00:34:27 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Daily Basis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <358C0AA7.580F@globalserve.net> libidia writes (on theos-talk) >In the meantime, on a daily basis, if the people have the courage to >tell the stories, to communicate their experiences, to walk the talk... >at least the knowledge of the existance of the knowledge can live and it >seems can be spread, like a certain Bank once advertized - one customer >at a time. Amen. Amen. Amen Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 22:29:39 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 12:57:08 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980621125708.00745560@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.2.32.19980620120946.00735c00@ozemail.com.au> The following dialogue never took place and as such should be stricken from the record. My client does not know what he is doing and may plead insanity At 11:20 PM 6/20/98 +0100, you wrote: >Darren writes >>>I deny everything. >>> >>>The Devil. >> >>As legal representation for Mr. Great Horned Beast (aka Beelzebub , Satan , >>George Bush) I request that my client not make any public statements. >> >>The Devils Advocate > >Listen pal - I am the big bogey man round here, not you. > >The Devil I am. > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sat Jun 20 23:44:47 1998 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:43:25 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Lords of Karma Fri, 19 Jun 1998 Message-ID: <19980621044326.28520.qmail@hotmail.com> > Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 16:48:47 EDT > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subject: Lords of Karma In a message dated 98-06-17 20:16:39 EDT, you write: << this is not the best of all possible worlds. I cannot "revel," Sophia >> I did not say this, I quoted, from Kym (15 June) who said this and placed my name at the end, for she was addressing me. What you say about Sat-Chit-Ananda is very true and a very useful addition. Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 08:13:26 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 05:19:18 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Dates Message-ID: <000e01bd9d15$379aae40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 21st Dear Alan: RE "ideas have no date." What I mean that ideas as ideas have no time limit -- they either are, or become universal. I had in mind "universal" ideas. Specific dates with historical or other associations have general ideas associated with them and those reside in the minds of a small or greater group. No argument there. Dal > Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 4:35 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Dates >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>Ideas have no date. > >How about 4th of July - a date with ideas perhaps? > >Alan >------------------- >Brought to you from > West Cornwall, UK > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 08:43:25 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 09:44:29 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Daily Basis Message-ID: <358D0E3C.71FC@globalserve.net> References: Well, finally, I wrote my thoughts real good. The perspiration paid off. Dear Alan, when you have a minute, you can do me a favour please... a) What *does* that word "Amen" really mean b) Had a discussion recently about people seeming to need affirmation of themselves and their ideas. The person with whom I was debating said that he knew he sought affirmation and kept at it until he got it and then put that one in his toolkit and went onto the next one and he believed we all did that. I boldly said I didn't think we did. Bad move. Here I am today getting a good-type feeling from your response. Not that my life depends on affirmations by others of myself, and we forge on with life without them, but it's just been proved to me that it does happen. Why? Cheers Annette Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > libidia writes (on theos-talk) > >In the meantime, on a daily basis, if the people have the courage to > >tell the stories, to communicate their experiences, to walk the talk... > >at least the knowledge of the existance of the knowledge can live and it > >seems can be spread, like a certain Bank once advertized - one customer > >at a time. > > Amen. Amen. Amen > > Alan > --------- > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 09:13:27 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:06:00 -0300 From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <01bd9d1d$b869dd40$LocalHost@default> Dear Dallas, Kindly note that our intention in answering your open invitation to the meeting was to show sympathy and approval to the brotherly attitude shown in the open invitation to the ULT Day meeting, not that we would be able to fly from Brazil to actually attend the meeting. We repeat that we would like to attend, and that we hope to be able one of these days to be actually present with you in a meeting like that. With sympathy and warm fraternal greetings, Marina and Arnaldo. -----Mensagem original----- De: W. Dallas TenBroeck Para: theos-talk@theosophy.com Data: Sexta-feira, 19 de Junho de 1998 11:10 Assunto: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited >June 19th > >Dear Arnaldo and Marina: > >You will surely be welcome. > >ULT offers no barriers to anyone and welcomes all who are >students of Theosophy and devotees of HPB to all its meetings >and especially to a "Special Meeting" as we will be holding next >Sunday 21st. June. > >So we await your arrival. > >Best wishes, Dallas > >================================== > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" >Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 7:06 PM >Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- >All invited > > >>Dear Brother Dallas, >> >>Many thanks for the invitation. Although we are members of the >Adyar TS, we >>would like very much to be able to attend the meeting for more >than one >>reason, including to know more about Mr. Robert Crosbie and the >ULT. God >>willing one of these days we will be able to attend physically a >meeting >>with you. In the mean time receive our warmest greetings from >Brazil. >> >> Fraternally yours, Marina and Arnaldo >Sisson F. >> >> >> >>-----Mensagem original----- >>De: W. Dallas TenBroeck >>Para: Dalval Tenbrook >>Data: Terça-feira, 16 de Junho de 1998 14:04 >>Assunto: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- >All invited >> >> >>>Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. >>> >>>A Special Meeting == All are welcome >>> >>>The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >>>Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. >>> >>>It will be held in English and Spanish. >>> >>>A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey >of >>>the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be >>>presented. >>> >>> >>>Directions: >>> >>> >>>The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , >>>245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) >>>Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] >>> >>>Close to University of Southern California (USC) >>> >>>off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. >>>go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. >>>turn left and pass under the Freeway going East >>>at Grand ave. intersection turn left. >>>Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. >>> >>>(patrolled parking is provided) >>> >>>All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 10:13:25 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 06:14:34 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: Militants in the movement? Message-ID: <000401bd9d23$62ac09e0$110a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> >Dear Govert, > >Sorry about the slang - I should have known better; sometimes we Americans >think the whole world is nothing but America. Know what you mean. Many also think that history started at 1492 or even 1776. >Regarding the expression "packing heat" - it means having a weapon or >weapons on a person or premises (if I'm carrying a gun, I could say that I >am "packing heat"). I made the comment in regards to a report by the >Southern Poverty Law Center - an well-known (in America) and well-regarded >(by me) organization that monitors extremist and/or hate groups. Thank you for explaining. C.U.T. is as 'extremist' as the TS is 'cultish.' You have a copy of the report? >The organization reported that The Church Universal and Triumphant, headed >by Elizabeth Prophet, was required by court decree (1994) to stop >stockpiling weapons. Her husband was convicted, in 1989, of illegally >buying hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of handguns and semi-automatic >weapons - complete with ammunition. The only illegal part of the transaction was that he used an assumed name to hide the purchase, not from the government, but from extremist rightwingers in Montana, who have made it known to the organization that when push comes to shove in a situation where precautionary survivalist plans have to be implemented, that they would come after the food and other suplies of the organization. The hostility of some inhabitants of Montana towards C.U.T. was made evident with some drive-by shootings and the burning of a cross on Church property. The purchase of the weapons was only for defensive purposes in case of the disintegration of civil authority and the hiding of the purchase was to prevent it being known in the Montana circles of survivalists militia. Better they had done the purchase in the open so these groups would know what they might be up against. The removal of the weapons was a part of a deal with the IRS. It was a condition to keep tax-exempt status. This did not mean the abolition of second amendment rights of individual members. As you might gather, I am supportive of most of the aims and policies of C.U.T. and am a member of one of its sub-organizations, the Keepers of the Flame Fraternity. I do not object against their plans for survival. This Kali Yuga is a nasty time with a lot of unbalanced leaders of countries with a nuclear capacity. After we could hear that Russian nuclear weapons were not aimed at American children anymore--though that could be changed in the course of minutes--we now hear that China can reach the USA with its arsenal. Are you prepared to bring the theosophical message to the masses after the radio-active dust has settled? This organization has the commitment and practical means to do so, but hopes that peace will prevail. My own reading of history tells me that the Masters are realists and will sometimes sponsor organizations and persons, which use some military means for defensive purposes. Personally I believe the Templars to have been used by the Masters to hide inside its organization certain esoteric teachings and practices. I also think They were indirectly involved, through Masonry, in the American Revolution and in the movement for India's independence. >I am unaware of what has happened since then - except that Elizabeth >reportedly has left Montana - destination unknown. I've not visited the Web >site you offered - there may be more info there on what has occurred. I >shall check it out. Mrs. Prophet is still in Montana and recently visited Chicago. The organization is implementing a very interesting process of structural change to bring it in harmony with the most advanced and enlightened concepts in managerial science. Key words are: re-enrgizing, restructuring, paradigm shift, continual change, deep democracy, servant leadership and community building. > >Kym > From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 11:13:16 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 16:56:00 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980621125708.00745560@ozemail.com.au> All messages from my former Advocate: Darren who writes >The following dialogue never took place and as such should be stricken from >the record. My client does not know what he is doing and may plead insanity > ... are hereby null and void and should be ignored. he is dismissed, and will be sent to heaven to be tortured by eternal harping. The Horned Beast, Devil, and all other pseudonyms used by you pathetic mortals for my Gloriousness. Amen + = 0 >>>>I deny everything. >>>> >>>>The Devil. >>> >>>As legal representation for Mr. Great Horned Beast (aka Beelzebub , Satan George Bush) I request that my client not make any public statements. >>> >>>The (ex) Devils Advocate From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 14:13:15 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 10:55:11 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited Message-ID: <003601bd9d45$78b87260$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 21st 1998 Dear Arnaldo and Marina: The welcome was to your thoughts and sympathy, which are received instantaneously and very welcome/ I agree that to fly physically from Brazil would be asking much of anyone. But as I say we can think of each other and exchange such good wishes as cement ever more strongly the uniting bond of those who have found in Theosophy something that touches the heart. Best wishes to you both as brothers and souls with a common goal. Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 21, 1998 7:29 AM > From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" > Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All invited >Dear Dallas, > >Kindly note that our intention in answering your open invitation to the >meeting was to show sympathy and approval to the brotherly attitude shown in >the open invitation to the ULT Day meeting, not that we would be able to fly >from Brazil to actually attend the meeting. We repeat that we would like to >attend, and that we hope to be able one of these days to be actually present >with you in a meeting like that. > >With sympathy and warm fraternal greetings, Marina and Arnaldo. > >-----Mensagem original----- >De: W. Dallas TenBroeck >Para: theos-talk@theosophy.com >Data: Sexta-feira, 19 de Junho de 1998 11:10 >Assunto: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- All >invited > > >>June 19th >> >>Dear Arnaldo and Marina: >> >>You will surely be welcome. >> >>ULT offers no barriers to anyone and welcomes all who are >>students of Theosophy and devotees of HPB to all its meetings >>and especially to a "Special Meeting" as we will be holding next >>Sunday 21st. June. >> >>So we await your arrival. >> >>Best wishes, Dallas >> >>================================== >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: "Arnaldo Sisson Filho" >>Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 7:06 PM >>Subject: Re: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- >>All invited >> >> >>>Dear Brother Dallas, >>> >>>Many thanks for the invitation. Although we are members of the >>Adyar TS, we >>>would like very much to be able to attend the meeting for more >>than one >>>reason, including to know more about Mr. Robert Crosbie and the >>ULT. God >>>willing one of these days we will be able to attend physically a >>meeting >>>with you. In the mean time receive our warmest greetings from >>Brazil. >>> >>> Fraternally yours, Marina and Arnaldo >>Sisson F. >>> >>> >>> >>>-----Mensagem original----- >>>De: W. Dallas TenBroeck >>>Para: Dalval Tenbrook >>>Data: Terça-feira, 16 de Junho de 1998 14:04 >>>Assunto: U L T Day Annual Celebration for 1998 -- >>All invited >>> >>> >>>>Sunday June 21st. at 7.30 p.m. >>>> >>>>A Special Meeting == All are welcome >>>> >>>>The meeting, will commemorate the death of Robert Crosbie, >>>>Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists. >>>> >>>>It will be held in English and Spanish. >>>> >>>>A review of the life and work of Robert Crosbie, and a survey >>of >>>>the Objectives and work of the ULT from 1909 to date will be >>>>presented. >>>> >>>> >>>>Directions: >>>> >>>> >>>>The UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS , >>>>245 West 33rd Street, (corner of Grand Ave.) >>>>Los Angeles, 90007. [Phone: 213-748-7244] >>>> >>>>Close to University of Southern California (USC) >>>> >>>>off "Harbor Freeway" # 10. Exit at Adams Blvd. >>>>go South on Figueroa Ave. to Jefferson Blvd. >>>>turn left and pass under the Freeway going East >>>>at Grand ave. intersection turn left. >>>>Theosophy Hall, ULT. is at the next corner at 33rd St. >>>> >>>>(patrolled parking is provided) >>>> >>>>All are welcome -- Dallas TenBroeck From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 16:43:17 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 17:05:35 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Dates Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000e01bd9d15$379aae40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >What I mean that ideas as ideas have no time limit -- they either >are, or become universal. I had in mind "universal" ideas. What's the difference between "universal" ideas and any other ideas? Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 16:50:51 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:31:54 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #238 Message-ID: <01bd9d3a$7b76f720$LocalHost@default> Anybody else get a #238 with no messages in it?? Ha! "With each innovation follows a shadow." HPB says somewhere too, that for every little step made forward, the whole surrounding world has to be lifted (unconsciously?) to a degree also, and the surrounding world objects. I figure this Internet stuff will take 20-30 years to "level off" and be successfully integrated into Society sufficiently to be consistently reliable, including getting the malicious hacker types accountable to laws (if we last that long!) - Jake From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 16:55:13 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 13:31:54 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #238 Message-ID: <01bd9d3a$7b76f720$LocalHost@default> Anybody else get a #238 with no messages in it?? Ha! "With each innovation follows a shadow." HPB says somewhere too, that for every little step made forward, the whole surrounding world has to be lifted (unconsciously?) to a degree also, and the surrounding world objects. I figure this Internet stuff will take 20-30 years to "level off" and be successfully integrated into Society sufficiently to be consistently reliable, including getting the malicious hacker types accountable to laws (if we last that long!) - Jake From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 16:55:32 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 17:03:51 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Daily Basis Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <358D0E3C.71FC@globalserve.net> libidia writes >Well, finally, I wrote my thoughts real good. The perspiration paid >off. >Dear Alan, when you have a minute, you can do me a favour please... >a) What *does* that word "Amen" really mean "So be it" - or in modern parlance, "Yeah, let it all hang out!" >b) Had a discussion recently about people seeming to need affirmation >of themselves and their ideas. The person with whom I was debating said >that he knew he sought affirmation and kept at it until he got it and >then put that one in his toolkit and went onto the next one and he >believed we all did that. I boldly said I didn't think we did. Bad >move. Here I am today getting a good-type feeling from your response. >Not that my life depends on affirmations by others of myself, and we >forge on with life without them, but it's just been proved to me that it >does happen. Why? Part of the schme of things I guess - we all need a little cheer from time to time, otherwise we would give up, and the Great Mahatma is the Sky might not like that .... > >Cheers >Annette > >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> libidia writes (on theos-talk) >> >In the meantime, on a daily basis, if the people have the courage to >> >tell the stories, to communicate their experiences, to walk the talk... >> >at least the knowledge of the existance of the knowledge can live and it >> >seems can be spread, like a certain Bank once advertized - one customer >> >at a time. >> >> Amen. Amen. Amen >> >> Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 17:13:17 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 15:52:15 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: On education Message-Id: <199806212152.PAA00315@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >Now the public education system is going through >massive downsizing which will hopefully spawn a private system that is >affordable and all inclusive, that will in turn influence the public >system. Dallas responded on the same subject: >Had I a child to bring up under such circumstances I >would use my own home (as you must be doing) as a school= room >filling it with those items of the curriculum that give a well >rounded perspective to a developing child. I take the view that >children desire to be given a direction and a friendly >supervisionary overlook. There is enough of bad problems in the >schools today that I (and perhaps you) did not have to contend >with. I know of several families where this has been >successfully practiced. I don't know about other countries, but in America there is a great danger - and I use the term 'danger' (public dictionary definition) purposely - in the growth of "private" schools. Most private schools here are run by those with a specific RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. Children are taught reading, writing, and arithmetic - but they are also indoctrinated with religious propaganda. Maybe that doesn't frighten some - but it certainly does me. Also, the terms "private" and "all-inclusive" seem a contradiction in terms. Public schools play no favorites, all are welcome. Private schools pick and choose their students, take money away from the public schools, and they crank out just those type people HPB raved against. Sure, kids learn academics in private school better due to less "distractions" - but they risk learning to accept way too easily authority and prejudice. Home-schooling, at least here in my state, is done mostly by religious fundamentalists. They don't like the "liberal" or "tolerant" viewpoints of the public schools. They claim they want to keep their children away from "bad influences." I understand - but that fosters, again, the "us vs. them" attitude. Children, I believe, need to learn about all types of people and all types of beliefs and how to cope with different situations. Growing up with only people who agree with you or who want you to learn narrowed ideas is hardly balanced. The public schools need more money - not less. The public schools need more parental participation and guidance - not less. The public schools need more students who are acquainted with "theosophical ideas" (learned from home and brought to school so they can aid other students) - not less. MAJOR POINT: We have no right to demand that the schools teach "Theosophical ideas" - just like Christians have no right to demand schools teach "Christian ideas." Sadly, it appears, in America, that the more affluent will benefit from the growth of "private" schools and the less affluent will be subject to even less now in the public schools. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 18:13:15 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:46:26 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: New uploads to TI website. Message-ID: Greetings all! I have uploaded three essays on theosophy in general by Alexis. They are taken, with his kind permission, directly from the website of The Journal of Science and Spirit (Click on "What is Theosophy International?" for a link to this website.) The three articles are in HTM format, and can be accessed directly by going to http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/wisdom/wisdom2/Alexis. For those who don't know, Alexis is a relative of the one and only HPB, and I have a short historical info file available to readers who can receive attachments. E-mail me *personally* if you are interested, as the vnet lists cannot receive attachments. The file is in Wordperfect 7, which will import to later MS Word and other processors, but requires a PC running win 95. I will be able to make a text only version available to those with older operating systems. I have made a small alteration to the opening page of the TI website (see below) so that Internet Explorer users may need to right-click on "refresh") (Win95). Maybe Netscape and other users will need to "refresh" as well. Refreshingly, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 19:43:19 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:29:23 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: On education Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980621192923.00983340@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199806212152.PAA00315@mailmx.micron.net> At 03:52 PM 6/21/1998 -0600, you wrote: >Sadly, it appears, in America, that the more affluent will benefit from the >growth of "private" schools and the less affluent will be subject to even >less now in the public schools. >Kym As a product of public schools with a lot less of resources that you see in public schools in the USA, I agree the more support is needed for public schools. Some of the people who blazed trails come from middle class background and from public schools. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 19:51:12 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 19:24:08 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #238 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980621192408.00983340@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <01bd9d3a$7b76f720$LocalHost@default> At 01:31 PM 6/21/1998 -0400, you wrote: >Anybody else get a #238 with no messages in it?? Ha! "With each >innovation follows a shadow." HPB says somewhere too, that for every >little step made forward, the whole surrounding world has to be lifted >(unconsciously?) to a degree also, and the surrounding world objects. I This makes sense. As our actions every minute affect others near and in some cases far off from us, it is bound to affect in however minute way the whole society. There was a discussion between Krishnaji and a well known scientist on this issue. >figure this Internet stuff will take 20-30 years to "level off" and be >successfully integrated into Society sufficiently to be consistently >reliable, including getting the malicious hacker types accountable to laws >(if we last that long!) Considering the speed with which Internet usage is expanding and also the fact a small segment of very active group can initiate changes of enormous magnitude, I think it may not take that long. > - Jake > From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 20:01:29 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:33:22 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980622103322.0074ca60@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: References: <3.0.2.32.19980621125708.00745560@ozemail.com.au> Your termination of contract is noted. Please settle final bill within 14 days. If this bill is not paid within allotted time your higher principals will be returned to the source. Sincerely, A. Scheister Scheister, Doglikur and Besant Attorneys at Law At 04:56 PM 6/21/98 +0100, you wrote: >All messages from my former Advocate: >Darren who writes >>The following dialogue never took place and as such should be stricken from >>the record. My client does not know what he is doing and may plead insanity >> >... are hereby null and void and should be ignored. he is dismissed, and >will be sent to heaven to be tortured by eternal harping. > >The Horned Beast, Devil, and all other pseudonyms used by you >pathetic mortals for my Gloriousness. Amen + = 0 > >>>>>I deny everything. >>>>> >>>>>The Devil. >>>> >>>>As legal representation for Mr. Great Horned Beast (aka >Beelzebub , Satan George Bush) I request that my client not make any >public statements. >>>> >>>>The (ex) Devils Advocate > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 20:16:30 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:37:44 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: On education Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980622103744.0074cc2c@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806212152.PAA00315@mailmx.micron.net> Kym Wrote: >MAJOR POINT: We have no right to demand that the schools teach >"Theosophical ideas" - just like Christians have no right to demand >schools >teach "Christian ideas." Do scientists have a right to demand 'scientific' ideas ? Evolution is taught but don't we all beleive that Darwinian Evolution is a flawed theory? Darren * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 20:31:30 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 18:15:55 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-Id: <199806220113.UAA17979@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806202238.QAA19710@mailmx.micron.net> At 04:38 PM 6/20/98 -0600, you wrote: >Brenda writes: > >>I don't expect everyone to have this >>type of experience because I see it as a result partly of the purification >>of the vehicles, which both theosophy and the I AM Temple recommends, and >>if you haven't done the purifications, how could you be expected to >>participate in the results!? > >You're right, I've not done the "purifications." What are they? How much >will they cost? Do they hurt? Kym, I'm very glad you can withstand this pain of writing to strangers. >>Also "perfectly" obedient doesn't mean listening to every command. It >>means interpreting, weighing, feeling balanced and at ease with our >>"commands" and making the important ones count. > >Now see - look at this. How is someone supposed to keep track who's talking >about what where when "occultists" take everyday words - the terms we The >Unpurified use - and ascribe all kinds of different, and often unconnected, >definitions to them? > >So, thus, thanks to you - when I talk to my creepy neighbor and say "You are >perfectly creepy" I'll have to explain what "perfectly" means because he may >have read your post which defines "perfectly." Well, let's just imagine that someone (even me, perhaps) receives a "Command" from someone (like I like to refer to them) in the next kingdom of nature - an ascended master, one who is as far above my conscious ability as I am above the dinosaur. YOU TRY TO GET IT RIGHT. To me it would seem like interpreting and translating as many times as there are languages on earth!!! In other words, this is not human speaking to human. Comprendez? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Sun Jun 21 22:58:18 1998 Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:53:13 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-21 21:36:24 EDT, you write: >Well, let's just imagine that someone (even me, perhaps) receives a >"Command" from someone (like I like to refer to them) in the next kingdom >of nature - an ascended master, one who is as far above my conscious >ability as I am above the dinosaur. YOU TRY TO GET IT RIGHT. To me it >would seem like interpreting and translating as many times as there are >languages on earth!!! In other words, this is not human speaking to human. > Comprendez? > >Brenda Enter the Heretic I find this mystifiying. I frankly don't care if a command comes from the Grand High Pissant Poobah of Mars. If I don't like it, I ain't doing it. Anyone who has spent anytime studying what floats around on the Astral plane knows that there are lots practical jokers out there (do you have any idea how many fake Jesuses there are alone?) and they are all ready to issue commands to gullible folks and see what they do with them. If there is actually something out there as advanced beyond me as I am beyond the dinosaurs, he she or it is going to have far more interesting things to do with its time than give spiritual advice to us. That would be me like preaching to an ant hill. The ants aren't going to understand it. Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 08:32:12 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:29:04 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <358E5C20.3962@globalserve.net> References: > Enter the Heretic Hi Chuck. You wrote: > I find this mystifiying. I frankly don't care if a command comes from the > Grand High Pissant Poobah of Mars. If I don't like it, I ain't doing it. Good survival instinct. Have no choice really but to go with that instinct, so no great intellectual feat? > Anyone who has spent anytime studying what floats around on the Astral plane > knows that there are lots practical jokers out there (do you have any idea how > many fake Jesuses there are alone?) and they are all ready to issue commands > to gullible folks and see what they do with them. Haven't had the pleasure of meeting a fake Jesus, but yes, there are tricksters and the like. However, I prefer sometimes to see them as entities with a sense of humour who have their place in the scheme of things. Other times to let it go and say to myself that I don't understand them. Other times to think that what I believe I see is my limited interpretation and maybe a reflection of myself. > If there is actually something out there as advanced beyond me as I am beyond > the dinosaurs, he she or it is going to have far more interesting things to do > with its time than give spiritual advice to us. That would be me like > preaching to an ant hill. The ants aren't going to understand it. Here's the burning question.....what if, when the final elevation is achieved, there *is* nothing more interesting to do than play with the human race? Jestfully yours Annette From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 08:45:59 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 09:33:52 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Subj: Dates Message-ID: <78b4eb0d.358e5d41@aol.com> <> No, ideas....just unpleasant memories of that unfortunate George III. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 09:31:12 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:23:24 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: no messages in digest #238 Message-Id: <199806221419.JAA01432@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <01bd9d3a$7b76f720$LocalHost@default> Jake: >Anybody else get a #238 with no messages in it?? It's a minor inconvenience ... The digest goes out whenever enough messages have been accumulated, when it reaches a certain size. The digest is also generated at 9 AM, to insure that it goes out at least once a day. The problem is that the 9 AM daily digest (a "mkdigest" command to "majordomo" run by "cron" daily) is not smart enough to check to see if there are any mail messages waiting to go out and not run if there aren't any. I was told it'd cost me $37.50 for 1/2 hours of consulting time for the fix to be done by the imagiware.com support staff, but haven't considered the problem important enough to spend the money (my money -- I'm not receiving any donations or funding from other people or organizations). I have worked a lot with Unix and could probably fix the problem myself, but don't want to bother the imagiware.com staff with too many questions and requests, since I want to save any favors I need to ask of them for really important problems. -- Eldon Tucker From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 09:49:01 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:37:42 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <8eb25f14.358e6c38@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-22 10:25:42 EDT, Pam writes: << In my state, not only is art and music not compulsary for elementary and middle school children, it has actually been cut out of some schools all together! As I remember, it was usually in the arts where children who had difficulties with regular academics found an area where they were on par or even excellent. Now the schools improve "self esteem" by lowering grading standards and having the kids regurgitate "affirmations". In the public schools that my daughter has attended, poetry assignments are rare and far between. Can you imagine trying to read the Stanzas if you never had any education in the language of poetry? >> Good points, Pam. I agree with your statements. If our "watered-down" educational system and its"feel good" pop psych obsession continues, the country will soon find itself completely out of the loop academically (as far as the rest of the world is concerned). We live in strange times !! Lmhem111 From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 12:04:12 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:23:14 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: = IDEAS and their effect. Message-ID: <002401bd9dfd$17b88fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 22nd Re: Ideas 'universal' or otherwise Dear Alan: I think that there are many ideas that become limited by their association with what we think of as "personal benefit." And which are selfish because the "will force" (motive ?) that we endow them with is limited to some selfish matter that we think relates to ourselves alone. That, of course is a limited view. On the other hand there are those ideas which are generous and tolerant, which embrace humanity and are brotherly, from the 'heart' and are on the whole constructive, compassionate and of general benefit. The idea of "service, assistance, cooperation, ...." is what I mean. The first result in karmic effects that return to us soon (they are focused on ourselves as we are now) and . as I understand it, they create many of our "troubles and woes." The second add to the power of nature in general in its sweep towards general improvement. So I called them "universal." And to that I might have added the designation impersonal -- and yet, even those have some personal limitations, as our view at present of the Universe is quite limited. But, that can be changed as we widen and deepen our vision. Could you not say that the difference (as I intended) was to mark the difference between the "doctrine of the 'eye,' " and the "doctrine of the 'heart ?' " It is also quite true that any thought will affect in howsoever small a way the whole of the universe -- just as a pebble dropped in Malibu Pacific coastal waters will eventually have its effect on the Cornish Atlantic coast - or your and my exchange over I-net will affect all those who read it. I would add that it is not a matter of strength or of time, but that our living is constantly universalizing our attitudes. By that I mean that we often act impulsively, by habit or customarily, and fail to truly appreciate (at the time) the impact our thoughts, feelings and words may have on others, known or unknown at present to us. It is like the knowledge that we have acquired so far this life compared to the wisdom that our Inner Self has, and which relates to the experience it has acquired over aeons of time in many previous incarnations. Or, in another way, it is like an intelligent "atom" floating in its environment in the immeasurable ocean of Life, becoming aware that it, being a part of the Whole, is affected by and will affect all the rest of its brother atoms. It can, broadly speaking, be careless of such effect, or can turn itself into a very careful and attentive creator of useful mental and emotional forces. To secure a knowledge of that Wisdom should, I think, be our endeavor. (Assuming that we are those "thinking atoms.) At least, that is how I understand the thrust of Theosophy it in its philosophical view. The important thing to me is that it suggests to the embodied brain-mind that it has, as a close (live-in) associate, an "Immortal," which, NEVER DIES. (the "Higher Self.") And, while we may find it difficult to agree to this "IDEA." yet the impact of the reading of it, or the thinking on it, will reverberate for quite a while. It may even become the source for an active quest: "Am I, or am I not, an Immortal ?" Best wishes as always, Dal > Date: Sunday, June 21, 1998 2:57 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Dates >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>What I mean that ideas as ideas have no time limit -- they either >>are, or become universal. I had in mind "universal" ideas. > >What's the difference between "universal" ideas and any other ideas? > >Alan >------------------- >Brought to you from > West Cornwall, UK ------------------------------------ "By 'tre,' 'pol,' and 'pen' ye may know Cornish men ...." -- Trevanion Pendennis ============================================= From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 12:16:38 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 07:36:21 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: On education Message-ID: <002501bd9dfd$1963cea0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 22 nd Dear Kym: I sure agree with all you write. Isn't the matter of motive at the bottom of it all? I mean if the parent, or the teacher, and the educational system has the best interest of the child (looking at it as an Immortal, that has returned for a new "day" of living) at heart, those factors will be aimed at reawakening the best qualities and capacities latent in that child. Is there not a danger of too much categorizing and putting all through a kind of wringer so that nice little patties of stylized, educated products, with a certificate of graduation, emerge ? And then, there are those who have "been through the system" and still emerge, and are very much: "themselves." There is a need for some basic adapting to present situations, and there is also a need (I think) of allowing the greatest latitude (in harmless and constructive capacities and relationships) for the development of individual talent. (I mean developing unselfish and tolerant ways of thinking and viewing things. Yet, always questioning for the causes and reasons.) But, you know, I may be treading on my Sister's ground, as she is the one who has run and operated a school in Bangalore, South India since 1960. Even as a little girl I recall she used to say she wanted hundreds of children ! She got them ! Why don't you address her ? Best wishes, Dal. > Date: Sunday, June 21, 1998 3:29 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: On education >Annette wrote: > >>Now the public education system is going through >>massive downsizing which will hopefully spawn a private system that is >>affordable and all inclusive, that will in turn influence the public >>system. > >Dallas responded on the same subject: > >>Had I a child to bring up under such circumstances I >>would use my own home (as you must be doing) as a school= room >>filling it with those items of the curriculum that give a well >>rounded perspective to a developing child. I take the view that >>children desire to be given a direction and a friendly >>supervisionary overlook. There is enough of bad problems in the >>schools today that I (and perhaps you) did not have to contend >>with. I know of several families where this has been >>successfully practiced. > >I don't know about other countries, but in America there is a great danger - >and I use the term 'danger' (public dictionary definition) purposely - in >the growth of "private" schools. Most private schools here are run by those >with a specific RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. Children are taught reading, writing, >and arithmetic - but they are also indoctrinated with religious propaganda. >Maybe that doesn't frighten some - but it certainly does me. > >Also, the terms "private" and "all-inclusive" seem a contradiction in terms. >Public schools play no favorites, all are welcome. Private schools pick and >choose their students, take money away from the public schools, and they >crank out just those type people HPB raved against. Sure, kids learn >academics in private school better due to less "distractions" - but they >risk learning to accept way too easily authority and prejudice. > >Home-schooling, at least here in my state, is done mostly by religious >fundamentalists. They don't like the "liberal" or "tolerant" viewpoints of >the public schools. They claim they want to keep their children away from >"bad influences." I understand - but that fosters, again, the "us vs. them" >attitude. Children, I believe, need to learn about all types of people and >all types of beliefs and how to cope with different situations. Growing up >with only people who agree with you or who want you to learn narrowed ideas >is hardly balanced. > >The public schools need more money - not less. The public schools need more >parental participation and guidance - not less. The public schools need >more students who are acquainted with "theosophical ideas" (learned from >home and brought to school so they can aid other students) - not less. > >MAJOR POINT: We have no right to demand that the schools teach >"Theosophical ideas" - just like Christians have no right to demand schools >teach "Christian ideas." > >Sadly, it appears, in America, that the more affluent will benefit from the >growth of "private" schools and the less affluent will be subject to even >less now in the public schools. > > > >Kym > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 12:19:07 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:07:40 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Blavatsky Study Center Message-ID: <358E8F5C.5A7E@azstarnet.com> References: The Blavatsky Study Center at http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/ is back up and fully operational. Check it out.....especially the following pages: ++++ New Items of Interest Added to This Site and +++ The Blavatsky Online Reading Room More additions to the site are in the works and will be announced within the next few weeks. Please bookmark the site! From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 12:49:06 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 22:44:42 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: No pain, no gain Message-Id: > >From: "Chuck Cosimano" >Date: Sun, 21 Jun 1998 23:53:13 EDT >Subject: Re: No pain, no gain >Enter the Heretic Chuckie? Here? Next thing you know, Alexis will show up. Furs will be flying! Let's place a bet on our siblinghood. My 50 cents that there will be psionic bombings, HPB and the Master's wrath. If Alexis is here, I would bet the whole farm. Interesting to see this test. A playing field testing the first object. This time with no discussion of TS politics. Pure arguments over theosophical ideas. Maybe we are all coming together, since some of us with liberal viewpoints on Theos-L and TI-L are showing up here. I wonder whether those with conservative viewpoints would show up on Theos-L, TI-L, and ACT-L. Theosophists united? No pain, no gain? New areas of destruction? Thoa :o) From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 13:04:06 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 13:55:56 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <5a7e7148.358e9aad@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-22 09:37:29 EDT, you write: >Here's the burning question.....what if, when the final elevation is >achieved, there *is* nothing more interesting to do than play with the >human race? >Jestfully yours >Annette That is, actually a very very interesting question. It could very well be that everyone has it wrong and the real reward of going through all this is that you get to torment the poor humans. I have often thought that the controlling intelligence of the universe is, in fact, a sadist. Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 14:42:38 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 02:46:32 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19980622103322.0074ca60@ozemail.com.au> Darren writes >Your termination of contract is noted. Please settle final bill within 14 >days. If this bill is not paid within allotted time your higher principals >will be returned to the source. > >Sincerely, > >A. Scheister Listen here, Scheister, you won't be around in 14 days to collect unless you refund my deposit within 25 hours (we have longer days here). The Devil, aka "Old Nick" ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 14:55:54 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 12:42:42 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-Id: <199806221940.OAA04757@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: >Enter the Heretic > >I find this mystifiying. I frankly don't care if a command comes from the >Grand High Pissant Poobah of Mars. If I don't like it, I ain't doing it. > >Anyone who has spent anytime studying what floats around on the Astral plane >knows that there are lots practical jokers out there (do you have any idea how >many fake Jesuses there are alone?) and they are all ready to issue commands >to gullible folks and see what they do with them. > >If there is actually something out there as advanced beyond me as I am beyond >the dinosaurs, he she or it is going to have far more interesting things to do >with its time than give spiritual advice to us. That would be me like >preaching to an ant hill. The ants aren't going to understand it. Is this Chuck, Charles Cosimano? Chuck, read my webpage and tell me if you still feel the same about what you have just said to me. The trick to opening yourself up to "instruction" "commands" whatever is that we actually, completely, sincerely LOVE an "ascended master energy." The relationship is not static, it is not hi-bye, it is not when I have a need for you, it is let's be together as much as we can and let's make each other happy and let's find fulfillment in our lives. It's hard to imagine love for someone we can't physically PLACE - in time and space are our usual prerequisites. But this is consciousness. Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 16:30:54 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 17:12:24 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Spooks Message-ID: <01bd9e22$73f8be00$LocalHost@default> Chuck writes in #240: >Anyone who has spent anytime studying what floats around on the Astral = plane >knows that there are lots practical jokers out there (do you have any = idea how >many fake Jesuses there are alone?) and they are all ready to issue = commands >to gullible folks and see what they do with them. >If there is actually something out there as advanced beyond me as I am = beyond >the dinosaurs, he she or it is going to have far more interesting = things to do >with its time than give spiritual advice to us. That would be me like >preaching to an ant hill. The ants aren't going to understand it. He's right! They are ALL negative spooks of various sorts. = Read some Blavatsky, Judge, Mahatma Letters, Purucker and all the wealth = of Blavatsky-oriented material - who all say the same thing. Of = course one can choose not to believe the Blavatsky-oriented literature, = but this IS supposed to be a Blavatsky-oriented site isn't it? (The only = one too, as far as I know.) = - Jake Jaqua From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 18:15:48 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:15:35 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-22 13:54:38 EDT, you write: >Chuckie? Here? Next thing you know, Alexis will show up. Furs will be >flying! Let's place a bet on our siblinghood. My 50 cents that there will >be psionic bombings, HPB and the Master's wrath. If Alexis is here, I >would bet the whole farm. Interesting to see this test. A playing field >testing the first object. This time with no discussion of TS politics. >Pure arguments over theosophical ideas. Sounds great to me. Let the games begin! Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 18:45:51 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:36:35 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: Spooks Message-ID: <71426f07.358eea84@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-22 17:36:16 EDT, you write: > He's right! They are ALL negative spooks of various sorts. Read some >Blavatsky, Judge, Mahatma Letters, Purucker and all the wealth of >Blavatsky-oriented material - who all say the same thing. Of course one >can choose not to believe the Blavatsky-oriented literature, but this IS >supposed to be a Blavatsky-oriented site isn't it? (The only one too, as far >as I know.) OH NO!!!! I've just committed an orthodoxy!!! Oh, well, there goes the reputation! Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 18:59:17 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 19:34:29 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <8b695336.358eea06@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-22 16:00:49 EDT, you write: >Is this Chuck, Charles Cosimano? Chuck, read my webpage and tell me if you >still feel the same about what you have just said to me. > > It's me! I'll have to take a look at the page, but I have a feeling my distrust for such things will remain. I have this real deep feeling that something out there really doesn't like humanity and keeps coming up with things for folks to believe in and generally make life difficult for everyone. The problem is that feelings and intuitions are unreliable. I may be mistaking what you said, and no doubt the stuff on the web page will help clarify it, but making folks feel they are in touch with a loving being would seem to be child's play to Mr. Spookapook (as Vonda Urban so delightfully calls the generic class of astral pranksters). It isn't love, or the feeling of being loved that is the key to dealing with such realms. It is being grounded in knowing yourself and what you are looking for and then testing what you get by that inner self-awareness. If it fits that, then fine, go along and see what happens but be real careful not to deify this whatever it is. You have to remember that you are the one in charge of what you do and you can't just shuffle responsibility off to another source, no matter how spiritual or advanced it claims to be. Claims of Divine Inspiration have this bad history of getting people killed, usually those who disagree with the inspiration. I may be totally misreading this whole thing, but the idea of obedience makes me very nervous. Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 19:15:55 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:08:28 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: = IDEAS and their effect. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <002401bd9dfd$17b88fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes > It may even become the source for >an active quest: "Am I, or am I not, an Immortal ?" Delete "an" - ! Your post was a bit long for ny rather short question, and being stressed and tired, I fear I must postpone its consideration for another time. > >Best wishes as always, Dal Likewise, Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 19:26:29 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:03:14 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Drpsionic@aol.com writes >If there is actually something out there as advanced beyond me as I am beyond >the dinosaurs, he she or it is going to have far more interesting things to do >with its time than give spiritual advice to us. That would be me like >preaching to an ant hill. The ants aren't going to understand it. We are sorry, but could you repeat that? Where do you keep your pants - we want to nest there. The ants. From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 19:30:54 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:10:48 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes > Maybe we are all coming together, >since some of us with liberal viewpoints on Theos-L and TI-L are showing up >here. I wonder whether those with conservative viewpoints would show up on >Theos-L, TI-L, and ACT-L. Theosophists united? No pain, no gain? New >areas of destruction? Tempting fate, huh? Maybe some do this already? Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 19:32:45 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:53:03 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <001c01bd9e3a$bea63fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 22nd Re: quotes Disadvantage is that they are indeed snippets -- ideas that seemed important to me or illustrative of some Theosophical perspective. I know that not all may see them the same way I do. But the fact that they raise questions is good for all of us. Since readers may wish to find out more about the source and place of those snippets, I give a source from which they came and to which they can be restored to get that perspective. It is inevitable that we all generate our own views. Sameness is not a good basis. But inquiry is. Annette: you sorted out the quote on "Whoever wants to see the real Mahatmas...." [ A "real" Mahatma, means to me a designation meaning a "Great soul." a Wise soul. In the Theosophic scheme, a mind (Manas) linked with Buddhi (Wisdom and able to see any aspect of Nature at will) and ATMAN -- or conscious of being linked with--or a "ray" of--the UNIVERSAL ABSOLUTENESS. (We are all such "rays," but we do not all feel or think we are. If so, why ?) Expansion in perception is true, but also there is a deepening. In fact direction, as I see it, has no real meaning -- if we use the "holographic" idea, then every part, however small, is or represents the WHOLE. But for the "part" to be "conscious"of the WHOLE is another thing. A different dimension and not linear or spiritual or time altering, as I see it. "Intellectual sight" -- well what do we see with ? The eyes are instruments, the retina transfers visions of color from impressions to electro-magnetic vibrations that are transmitted to appropriate places in the brain. The brain in turn is the "screen" where the Seer sees the images. senses colors, motion, -- or smells scents, or hears a symphony, or a cacophony, or touches a sharp knife or a blunt club, etc. The Seer is the one who is "conscious." He/it can turn his attention from the passing scene to the scene of memory, or, using imagination and fancy can picture a development which the present vision and the mental image of past experience allows him to elaborate in outline as a "goal." He can also shut off all these and, turning inward ,contact the astral realm and see visions from that. But beyond and within the astral is the mental, and then the spiritual. How are those to be contacted and when contacted, recognized ? But how does the Seer act? Is it not the desire and the will which direct the attention of the Conscious unit one way or the other? Then who monitors "desire ?" and how does the will that selects and choose decide on a plan of action ? How does one decide that a certain plan is either selfish and dangerous to the ultimate well-being of the Unit, or unselfish, tolerant, benevolent and hence harmless to the environment as to the "Chooser ?" "Elevate" in the sense that figuratively "virtue" is held "superior" to "base" vice. Then what makes the difference between vice and virtue ? Is it the arbitrary "laws of the land ?" or is there in each of us a "monitor that KNOWS," (regardless of race, religion, sex, caste, color or creed) and we all know, deep in our hearts that this vision is unitary and common to all of us, and not diverse -- no matter how much we may argue that our view is the correct one for us. It is not an easy problem to decide on. How is it that we can travel and live and work with people in any land, the laws of which we do not know, and if we behave decently, we do not fall afoul of their "laws ?" "Mist" to me implies exactly the differences of opinion we have been speaking of, which have to be dispelled by and agreement for mutual knowledge and understanding, to give "clarity of perception" and therefore induce spontaneously to "right action." Where shall we all secure that unity of perception we can all agree on as being optimum? Is it not in impersonality and universality ? The old adage: "that which is right, is right all the time, for everyone and in all places and circumstances." I don't think we can get to be much broader. The other day In National Geographic I came across a statement made by a Nepalese fisherman, who was also a chaser after the honey that wild bees store in their combs on high trees in the forests. He said: We begin our lives by weaving a fishnet. We end our life before ever finishing it. We are always weaving this net and forever fixing it." The 6th principle in Theosophy is "Buddhi" universal wisdom concerning right and harmonious, brotherly and harmless thought and action. It is universal fairness, justice and mercy. It takes all factors into account and perceives directly what is the best thing to be done. [ Remains for the "mind-Manas" to seize the vision and the opportunity to carry out those ideas. The opponent to Manas is also interior: Kama-desire, selfishness self-interest, ignorance and indolence.] The 7th Principle is Atma --the Universal Spirit. Which cannot be described but has only one attribute: The light of purity. The theory is that all evolution is centered on securing for each "life-atom" in manifested Nature the opportunity to experience all the many aspects of living, and then of acquiring intelligence in great and progressive increments. The objective being, in general, that the individual intelligent life-atoms acquire by voluntary and free efforts the entire knowledge and wisdom that is inherent in the whole of the Universe. that they become each of them in their time and turn a Universal Being, with a full awareness of all that is living in the entire Universe. Overwhelming as a concept. perhaps. But I ask you in all seriousness. Where is the center of my consciousness or yours ? I don't think we can locate it in any way except conceptually. I also agree that some of the Theosophical terminology is extraordinary to our daily life work and experience, unless we work in the department of philosophy or religion in a University, or a publishing house that deals with that kind of material. But the ideas are applicable (by transference and adaptation) to daily life. They are of no value or use otherwise. But, for me, I have found that Theosophy provides (to me) a reasonable answer for all kinds of problems and questions. I think that in the course of this somewhat lengthy lifetime I have become a better person and also, I have worked in that direction as best I could. No one can speak for anyone but themselves. It is interesting that something in us responds to those ideas, and desires to understand more. I wonder why ? What is it ? Where are we going ? The "Nrmanakaya" is a designation given to indicate a spiritualized and highly moral and intelligent mind-man. It is a technical designation used in both Hinduism and Buddhism (with the Pali modifications) to designate a very wise being who retains his ability to live (minus a physical body) consciously and coherently on the invisible (astral, psychic, mental and spiritual) planes of Nature. [An embodied Nirmanakaya is a Mahatma.] Those are the 7 planes that Theosophy speaks about and has codified so that they can be understood. They correspond to the "seven principles in man." If you have a copy of the Secret Doctrine, turn to page 200 in Vol. 1, and look at the 7 planes illustrated there. In Vol. 2 p. 593, 632, and Vol. 1, p. 157 the 7 "principles" of man are also illustrated and explained. Like every real philosophy Theosophy has its own language so that students can exchange ideas quickly and accurately. Perhaps, to make it easier for us, HPB wrote the KEY TO THEOSOPHY, and there you will find that she took the pains to lead us to see the logic behind the Theosophical psychological approach that shows how our faculties are arranged. [ In the KEY these will be found on pp. 91, 134, 175 and the explanations are in between, if you are interested. ] Example: if we were advanced mathematical students, or astro-physicists, you and I, we would deal in equations, which to the average person would be sheer abracadabra. But if that person desired to reach a level of understanding comparable to ours (as theoretical mathematicians ) he could do so by following the steps we took to learn. Mind you, I am not saying that these two are fully comparable, but, theosophy has been called the mathematics of the Soul. What is the difference between a Nirmanakays and a physical body. The Nirmanakaya uses the "astral substance" on which the physical molecules and atoms arrange themselves. He does this consciously. Our use of the astral body is almost entirely automatic. We do not yet have the exact knowledge to handle "astral matter." We often feel in the astral plane, as in dreams, or trances, or in the visions that we have now and then, but few pay close attention to the event, and perhaps fewer yet, have the knowledge that enables them to actually handle and direct at will such things. The Nirmanakaya has this power and uses it for good. To the average man this is a wonder, something miraculous and it has been so down the ages, witness the accounts of such things that HPB gives in ISIS UNVEILED. Karmic law is vast and intricate, and includes us all. A Nirmanakaya can see it in operation and would not interfere where such interference is either unnecessary or dangerous to any of the beings involved. Harmlessness is the first criterion of the Nirmanakaya condition. (This as I understand it.) All who approach Theosophy to learn from it about themselves, and the rest of nature, and its secret operations, are benefiting from the knowledge and help of the Nirmanakayas and the Mahatmas. The promulgation of Theosophy is a demonstration of that. It is a tall claim, but if you do study what it says, you will conclude that it does a few good things: It posits the immortality of all human Spirit/souls. It posits justice and mercy in the Universe -- there is no doing of good or evil and then escaping from the direct results of that, sooner or later. It posits universal Evolution of consciousness. It posits universal intelligence. It sees a direct relationship between an atom of some mineral elementary substance to day, and the eventual man, or the "god-like" intelligence that may develop over aeons of years of experience, and that will eventually take that same "life-atom" to Buddhahood. It therefore speaks of reembodiment and reincarnation. It speaks of a primeval source. It speaks of an ultimate Goal of perfect realization of all that can be known and lived in our Universe. It speaks of the interaction of all beings on all planes, physical, astral, psychic, mental, spiritual and super-spiritual. It speaks of universal laws that regulate all this. Where does it speak of anything that debases, minimizes or destroys the existence of any being ? Where does it in its grand natural sweep, envisage the torture and hurting in a senseless manner hundreds and thousands of relatively harmless beings ? It does say that when this occurs it is a perversion of the noble mental faculty by those, who through ignorance distort themselves and their perceptions. We speak, commonly, of a "hell." Well , don't we create our own ? What does it ? Is it not selfishness, ignorance, fear, and a false concept of pleasure and enjoyment. The idea of separateness creates all the problems of life. But if we take it that we are all interconnected and that we depend all the time on others for our own living, then, does it not make a change ? suppose that oxygen no longer supported life, or that water no loner hydrated us, or that carbon compounds and proteins refused to nourish us -- how long could we "live ?" Nature provides us with a very intricate tenement, and we are not very good tenants, living in it. We are even extremely ignorant (usually) of our bodies and their functioning. Yes we do have freedom. But that freedom ought not to harm others. If in the exercise of that freedom we hurt others then a law far more powerful that we are, causes our suffering. We do live in a unified universe, even if we think we don't. It is the very nature of all the "life-atoms" that we impress to retain a memory of how we used them. When they return to us the return with the memory of our assistance or abuse, and the provide us then with ease or disease and accidents. This is the law of universal karma in action. But who ever thinks that minuscule and lowly atom has any great power to assist or annoy us ? theosophy says it does. At least , it is a point to be considered. The time to come and know truth comes to those who work for and seek it. Nothing ever comes to anyone who does not want it. Your thought and writing is much appreciated. I am equally sure that my answers will prove fragmentary and unsatisfactory. But we need to compare basic assumptions. Are they totally at variance or do they approach each other ? What are the bridges to understanding that we can establish ? You also make me realize that some of the quotes are, on the whole, too "advanced," although I hate to think that. I am one who desires to know, and I would not wait to have knowledge dropped on me, and not recognize it, I want to be ready to see and to seize it when it opens up to me. Also I do not think that any valuable knowledge would arrive on my doorstep if I did not somehow deserve it. Why should it? The problem of the "undeserved" is a great debating point. In the KEY TO THEOSOPHY, HPB calls it "unmerited suffering." Well I know I have not answered all your points, but perhaps this might help a little, Dal. > Date: Saturday, June 20, 1998 5:31 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >Pam Giese wrote: >> What is do you mean by "organized minds"? Each person's mind is uniquely >> organized. >> My boss actually recruits by this scheme and feels that the "perfect team" >> has one of each type. > >Snip the schema - which I was very interested in reading about by the >way. Can't agree though, Pam. I believe every person has the ability >to use all those types of thought processes at the same time, and may be >stuck in one mode because trained to do so and now it supports a >situation in life existing because of the training, or because it is >easier and more comfortable to act in one mode, or because one mode fits >with desired results for one type of task. >I think your boss is smart on the one hand and a pioneer on the other >who runs the risk of spending more time bringing cohesion to the team >than getting results, unless s/he uses the team not as a team but as >individual resources which s/he consolidates..... >Not unlike these quotes may be used...... > >> I think folks have been a bit hard on Dallas regarding the quotes. Try >> seeing the quotes as snippets of wisdom, haiku, or dialogue in absentia >> rather than preaching or quoting gospel. I think they're meant in this >> way and, in humility, to add the added value of directing folks where to go >> for more information. >Have to disagree again...I think people have been hard on the quotes, >including me, not on Dallas. If the quotes do not provide direction to >more information for one, or stay with one as useful snippets of wisdom, >then...... >However, the very fact that they cause debate adds value, so ..... >no contest in the long run. > >Appreciate your comments about education, Pam. Dare I say, let's face >it, when the recent mass production age came upon us we were responsible >for letting education become diluted until it served one purpose only - >to produce workers for nations the goal of which was to be the winner in >the competition. Now the public education system is going through >massive downsizing which will hopefully spawn a private system that is >affordable and all inclusive, that will in turn influence the public >system. >If I am honest and realistic, and imagine a fixed amount of time in >conjunction with the vastly increased knowledge and skills that now >exist even compared to my elementary school days, I would have >difficulty coming up with a curriculum that covers it all. >Here's a thought - everyone in society has sufficient resources to live >phsyically and those who are teachers by nature just teach. In the >classroom, in their homes, in the fields, on the internet, each time the >meet with someone who wants to learn! >Nice to chat with you. >Annette > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 22 20:45:50 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 21:33:13 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: On education Message-ID: <358F05D9.335B@globalserve.net> References: <199806212152.PAA00315@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > I don't know about other countries, but in America there is a great danger - > and I use the term 'danger' (public dictionary definition) purposely - in > the growth of "private" schools. Most private schools here are run by those > with a specific RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. Children are taught reading, writing, > and arithmetic - but they are also indoctrinated with religious propaganda. > Maybe that doesn't frighten some - but it certainly does me. > > Also, the terms "private" and "all-inclusive" seem a contradiction in terms. > Public schools play no favorites, all are welcome. Private schools pick and > choose their students, take money away from the public schools, and they > crank out just those type people HPB raved against. Sure, kids learn > academics in private school better due to less "distractions" - but they > risk learning to accept way too easily authority and prejudice. Hi Kym: Every point you make is appreciated. I guess my trouble is that when I think of something being new or evolutionary I make the gross assumption that it will be different from what humans have done before and what they could see had failed. I imagined all these unemployed former public school teachers bringing the best of the public system which dumped them into a private system which they created as entrepeneurs who made sure they satisfied the market, including making it affordable to the general populous. This idea will drop dead of course if it is shown that out of work teachers either prefer to or have no choice but to stay home on severance or unemployment benefits rather than continue to teach for less income than severance/unemployment (as currently they would not be able to receive both payments). And I just must add that although public schools are open to all, whether all are welcomed in reality and whether no favourites are played truthfully is a matter of perception. The threat of private schools taking money away from the public ones may appear unsavoury, but, if I was faced with the choice of sending a child of mine to a public school in which s/he may get shot to death or at least fails to learn because of living in fear of other students, and a safe non-chaotic alternative, I'm pretty sure which I'd choose and I'd bust my ass to earn the money to pay for it, which is what I see all the Execs and many of the "workers" in my company doing. I've always felt that *subject matter beyond elementary* is pretty arbitrary. The key educational factor for lifetime usefulness seems to be *learning how to learn and think*. Hence I envision the new system having the fundamentals of "life skills, memorization, problem solving, using intuition, research skills, communication and transference." OOps, this is not new! Theorectically I perceive that one could be educated in this manner in one "subject" and be set for life. Religious propaganda, authoritarianism and prejudice are and would be part of the curriculum, and what better way to eradicate them in the long term than by insisting that a young learner follow them to the letter? Admittedly I'm discarding all my teacher training and going with this based purely on what I have observed in people, especially myself and my children.....try to shove it down our throats and expect us to follow like "sheep" and we'll passively aggressively do the opposite of what you desire!!!! Cheers Annette From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 00:12:38 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 01:13:09 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <358F3965.4A54@globalserve.net> References: <001c01bd9e3a$bea63fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 22nd > > Re: quotes Dear Dallas: WHEW. Boy can you ever write! Just quickly to let you know that I have read all this posting and have saved it as I believe it's a mini Theosophy course for an outsider like me. Well received and thank you. A few general comments so you can then relax (yes, that is a kindly message).... > (We are > all such "rays," but we do not all feel or think we are. If so, > why ?) Because even though we all "came in" knowing we are, the physical is either so seductive or so overpowering that we forget and have to "learn" it or rather "release" it again. I mean, if a four year old child can describe how it all works and feels but shuts up for a lifetime when the system tells them a few dozen times "no you don't know that or anything else yet" there's something pretty chronic at work here! That "we are all such rays" is not a point of debate for me, the mystery for me as yet is ..... why go through this physical process at all, and why not able to remember the original state except when in an altered state? Remember, I and many others have experienced the kundalini (sorry I can't spell) release to some extent, and the escape from the body to the state of light or plasma, (and it's bloody hard to come back and do one's laundry in all seriousness). > represents the WHOLE. But for the "part" to be "conscious"of the > WHOLE is another thing. A different dimension and not linear or > spiritual or time altering, as I see it. p.s I know how holograms work so point taken. What I want to know is....why the experience of fragmentation at all? Why take universal energy and split it into parts with consciousness so that then one must labour to "see" it whole again? > How are those to be contacted and when > contacted, recognized ? Exactly! By non-physical means. So why the physical lesson? And why the doubt when the non-physical happens? > How does one > decide that a certain plan is either selfish and dangerous to the > ultimate well-being of the Unit, or unselfish, tolerant, > benevolent and hence harmless to the environment as to the > "Chooser ?" By being free (of needs, fears, indoctrinations). If one returns to the purity of the new born, one simply "knows". Exactly what you said later, I believe. > The other day In National Geographic I came across a statement > made by a Nepalese fisherman, who was also a chaser after the > honey that wild bees store in their combs on high trees in the > forests. He said: We begin our lives by weaving a fishnet. We > end our life before ever finishing it. We are always weaving > this net and forever fixing it." Exactly....so why do we begin? Why do we forget from whence we came and even start this never ending repetitive process of getting back "home"? And why are we so stupid that we get stuck in our own nets? Hoisted on our own petards? Imprisoned in webs of our own weaving? Victims of the base vices when we are born with knowledge of the highest virtues? The principles you delineate have been described as admirably by all of what we now call "indigenous people". This is my only point. It is not that I refuse to accept the labels or that I disagree with the ideas. Although .... the "transference" may not be as easy as intimated. > It is interesting that something in us responds to those ideas, > and desires to understand more. I wonder why ? What is it ? > Where are we going ? We are going home. When we recognize a path that feels right we take it Still doesn't answer why we choose to leave home in the first place! > The "Nrmanakaya" is a designation given to indicate a Snip Thank you for the explanation. I have seen the pages to which you refer and did not linger or retain because of the illustration that seemed bounded by "man-made" physical concepts. I will have to revisit! > Example: if we were advanced mathematical students, or > astro-physicists, you and I, we would deal in equations, which to > the average person would be sheer abracadabra. But if that > person desired to reach a level of understanding comparable to > ours (as theoretical mathematicians ) he could do so by following > the steps we took to learn. Mind you, I am not saying that these > two are fully comparable, but, theosophy has been called the > mathematics of the Soul. I am glad that you used this example because it illustrates what I am trying to say. This is life we are talking about here. Every person comes in with the ability to understand life and to experience love and peace. It simply takes many years to speak it in the language of here (and it feels like if one isn't quick enough to spit it out and cement it in early on so that a great life manifests for one, it's an uphill climb back)! What is this thing about "desiring to reach a level of understanding"? Why have we taken such a simple beautiful thing and made it so complex that the "ordinary" person has to "learn the steps"? Why, having come from pefection, have we manifest "blood, sweat and tears" and on top of that, have imprisoned ourselves in a reality that tells us it may take us eons to achieve what we long for? For goodness sakes why, when as children we simply went into our "imagination" and experienced universal, unconditional, blissful, fearless, all-loving and eternal BEING. (that is until some other human told us or showed us pain, fear, hate and submission). Re the list of "posits"..... No debate on content. So, why doesn't everyone live this? I am hoping that reading the books I purchased yesterday will shed some light for me. "The Children of the Law of One & The Lost Teachings of Atlantis", and "The Golden Bough". > We speak, commonly, of a "hell." Well , don't we create our own > ? What does it ? Is it not selfishness, ignorance, fear, and a > false concept of pleasure and enjoyment. The idea of > separateness creates all the problems of life. But if we take it > that we are all interconnected and that we depend all the time on > others for our own living, then, does it not make a change ? Yes, yes and yes. > I am equally sure > that my answers will prove fragmentary and unsatisfactory. But > we need to compare basic assumptions. Are they totally at > variance or do they approach each other ? What are the bridges > to understanding that we can establish ? Neither fragmentary, nor unsatisfactory. I don't feel a variance, but then I wouldn't, would I :) The bridge to understanding between you and I (for others maybe different) may be this..... I am way behind you in reading, thinking and understanding. I only know one thing for sure....that I (and thus, I believe, everyone) "knew" all of this at birth and expected life here to be as perfect as I knew it could and should be. Personally, Life so far has been one hell of a shock and disappointment. I see it as a "backwards slide". I don't take kindly to things that regress from a point of perfection. I am not looking for a "recipe" to explain how it works or how to make myself or others "better". I am seeking an understanding of WHY PHYSICAL LIFE AT ALL? If perfect why create imperfect? If universal, why fragment? Is it simply for the experience? Because, you see, if so, then every experience - war; famine; lust; evil; murder etc as well as all the "good" things has to exist for all time. I CANNOT ACCEPT that!!!!! I REMEMBER being a child. I remember knowing that I had to take responsibility and well as have fun. I remember knowing that life was service as well as receipt, that others mattered as much as myself, that I was an integral part of the earth and everything beyond, that reality wasn't the only plane around, that all I neeeded to know and all I needed to have was there for me and that it wasn't without a price. What I don't remember is why I chose to come here :) Having taken up quite enough of your's and everyone else's time, adieu and thanks, dear Dallas. Annette From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 00:27:38 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 00:25:31 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Internet in colleges Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980623002531.008cfc80@mail.eden.com> I have always felt that extensive use of Internet including such applications as www, e-mail, maillists, newsgroups, chat etc. is going to take off when the current generation of students graduate from schools and colleges. When I was looking into the computer and related facilities provided in colleges, it is very revealing where technology is heading. In the University of Texas at Austin, here are some facts: 1. There are more computers than telephones in the campus. About 26000 computers. 2. Every room in the dorm has an ethernet connection. 10 MB/sec and going to 100 MB/sec. with full Internet access. 3. Every student is assigned a e-mail account as soon as admitted. 4. Any student can set up a website. 5. Any student can set up a maillist. 6. Graduate Business School students are required to purchase a notebook computer when they start school. 7. Libraries have ethernet outlets so that you can connect your computer from a carrel. Like plugging a toaster into power outlet. and Much more..... In the next century, the impact of Internet is going to be like what happened when printing was invented. mkr From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 00:57:39 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:47:03 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: No humans allowed Message-Id: <199806230547.XAA06977@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote to me: >I'm very glad you can withstand this pain of writing to strangers. Due to my astuteness, I know that your statement, in some wicked and hell-born way, is supposed to be a poke at me. I am crushed. . .grieved. . .wait - I need a moment before I can go on. . .your words. . .your words are like tiny, sharp, gleaming knives. . .stabbing and hacking away at my heart and soul. Oh! All righty - I'm over it now. Let's move on, shall we? >Well, let's just imagine that someone (even me, perhaps) receives a >"Command" from someone (like I like to refer to them) in the next kingdom >of nature - an ascended master, one who is as far above my conscious >ability as I am above the dinosaur. Well now, this would all depend on JUST HOW FAR you are above the consciousness of the dinosaur before I could get all goose-bumpy with awe over such a "Command." >YOU TRY TO GET IT RIGHT. To me it >would seem like interpreting and translating as many times as there are >languages on earth!!! So, using your example, the odds are that the "Command" would be so garbled due to the huge probability of error in the translation that to heed anything from it would be rather goofy, wouldn't you think? >In other words, this is not human speaking to human. Does "this" mean the "ascended one talking to Brenda" or "Brenda talking to Kym?" > Comprendez? Oui. Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 01:06:06 1998 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 23:47:00 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-Id: <199806230547.XAA06972@mailmx.micron.net> Darren wrote: >Do scientists have a right to demand 'scientific' ideas ? Evolution is >taught but don't we all beleive that Darwinian Evolution is a flawed theory? I do not recall ever hearing in any classroom that Darwinism was a perfect theory - however, I doubt ANY religious doctrine or theory could stand up the the tests and scrutiny Darwin's theories have - and still remain robust. There is abundant empirical evidence regarding Evolution; religious theories, in comparison, lack such tangible tools. Someone says "Give me proof of evolution." Evolutionists could say "Look at viruses - they evolve becoming resistant to antibiotics. We have documented such evolution on paper and on film for all to see and examine." Someone says "Give me proof of God." Religionists could say "Babble, burp, and beep." Religions, including Theosophy, have yet to come up with even a semi-uniform 'working hypothesis' regarding who or what "God" is or is not - provided "God" does exist. And, for those who believe "God" does not exist, just saying "God does not exist" is an oxymoron. Where would a school even begin if mandated to teach "God" as a fact - which is required in order to teach Creationism? Again, whose "God" did the creating? The favorite seems to be the "God" of the those with the most money or biggest biceps at a particular time in history. Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 01:27:38 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 00:30:49 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: General Koot Message-Id: <199806230630.AAA08358@mailmx.micron.net> Govert wrote: >Thank you for explaining. C.U.T. is as 'extremist' as the TS is >'cultish.' You have a copy of the report? I learned of this through the newsletter of the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) - I've not a copy of a court transcript or anything. Would you like the address (snail or e-mail) of the Center? I can send it to you and other info I have via private e-mail correspondence - totally up to you. >The only illegal part of the transaction was that he used an >assumed name to hide the purchase, not from the government, but >from extremist rightwingers in Montana, who have made it known to >the organization that when push comes to shove in a situation >where precautionary survivalist plans have to be implemented, >that they would come after the food and other suplies of the >organization. This really doesn't make sense - and either way, C.U.T. would somehow have assumed that such a "survivalist" situation would occur. Rightwingers could come in and take MY food should such a thing happen - but I'm not stockpiling guns due to such a risk. I fail to see the logic of C.U.T. there. >The hostility of some inhabitants of Montana >towards C.U.T. was made evident with some drive-by shootings and >the burning of a cross on Church property. Again, this is also happening to churches with predominately black members and they have not found it necessary to break the law nor become a military-like encampment. >The purchase of the >weapons was only for defensive purposes in case of the >disintegration of civil authority and the hiding of the purchase >was to prevent it being known in the Montana circles of >survivalists militia. This rationale gives everyone the OK to pack some massive amounts of "heat." >Better they had done the purchase in the >open so these groups would know what they might be up against. Ah, yes! The "mutual-destruction" theory! If America has atomic bombs, the Soviet Union is entitled to them, also. We see where that's led. . .. >The removal of the weapons was a part of a deal with the IRS. It >was a condition to keep tax-exempt status. This did not mean the >abolition of second amendment rights of individual members. I am always tickled, and, at the same time terrified, that those who quote the amendment fail to notice the amendment is referring to a "well-regulated militia." >Are you prepared to bring the >theosophical message to the masses after the radio-active dust >has settled? Well, to be honest, I'm not sure I want to bring the Theosophical message to the "masses" even before any bombs drop - especially after reading your post. >My own reading of history tells me that the Masters are realists >and will sometimes sponsor organizations and persons, which use >some military means for defensive purposes. I think this is pure ca-ca talk. And I am dismayed that the people on this list who claim the existence of the "Masters" would remain silent after reading such words. . .unless they, too, think that "Masters" being involved in the killing and destruction of other humans and nations is an acceptable idea. "Masters" directing revolutions and such - well, with the "compassion" clause so dominant in Theosophy, I guess one has to say that the "Masters" were simply involved in. . .mercy killing? Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 09:27:38 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 07:19:11 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Internet in colleges Message-ID: <001101bd9eb1$f25e2ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 23rd Doss: I am still concerned with the transfer of files, etc, if dated, at the crucial time of 2000, and especially for the material that I have accumulated. Is there any safe format. I Inquired into MS and was told that even they have not set up a completely good safeguard yet. What about the millions of PCs and their access to mainframes, etc.. Of the Govet departments are going to have difficulties, then what about the Banks and other financial institutions, I am told ( in L A Times ) that this aspect of things is very shaky. Dal > Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:42 PM > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Internet in colleges >I have always felt that extensive use of Internet including such >applications as www, e-mail, maillists, newsgroups, chat etc. is going to >take off when the current generation of students graduate from schools and >colleges. > >When I was looking into the computer and related facilities provided in >colleges, it is very revealing where technology is heading. In the >University of Texas at Austin, here are some facts: > >1. There are more computers than telephones in the campus. About 26000 >computers. > >2. Every room in the dorm has an ethernet connection. 10 MB/sec and going >to 100 MB/sec. with full Internet access. > >3. Every student is assigned a e-mail account as soon as admitted. > >4. Any student can set up a website. > >5. Any student can set up a maillist. > >6. Graduate Business School students are required to purchase a notebook >computer when they start school. > >7. Libraries have ethernet outlets so that you can connect your computer >from a carrel. Like plugging a toaster into power outlet. > >and Much more..... > > >In the next century, the impact of Internet is going to be like what >happened when printing was invented. > >mkr > > > > > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 10:57:37 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 11:49:59 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-ID: <5a8289c9.358fcea8@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-23 02:10:59 EDT, you write: > The favorite seems to be the "God" of the those with the most >money or biggest biceps at a particular time in history. > > >Kym Biceps be damned. God is on the side that has the best army, always has been and always will be. And if it is possible to toss in a few men in skirts who like choirboys and speak dead languages, so much the better. When the Masters wrote that religion was the cause of 2/3 of humanities woes, they were understating the case. Religion is in all cases obnoxious at best and positively dangerous at worst. The only result of its existence has been to transform the bulk of humanity into sheep and the small remainder into wolves. Chuck From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 15:12:38 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:10:30 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: No humans allowed Message-Id: <199806232007.PAA19453@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806230547.XAA06977@mailmx.micron.net> You know, Kym, you're smart, but some people are really shy. Why, my son is so shy sometimes, it hurts me to watch him. Do you think there could be shy people right here on the internet and blazing ahead of themselves courageous new trails into hearts? >All righty - I'm over it now. Let's move on, shall we? > > >>Well, let's just imagine that someone (even me, perhaps) receives a >>"Command" from someone (like I like to refer to them) in the next kingdom >>of nature - an ascended master, one who is as far above my conscious >>ability as I am above the dinosaur. > >Well now, this would all depend on JUST HOW FAR you are above the >consciousness of the dinosaur before I could get all goose-bumpy with awe >over such a "Command." Well, we would all be about the same distance! >>YOU TRY TO GET IT RIGHT. To me it >>would seem like interpreting and translating as many times as there are >>languages on earth!!! > >So, using your example, the odds are that the "Command" would be so garbled >due to the huge probability of error in the translation that to heed >anything from it would be rather goofy, wouldn't you think? Let's try to understand what the ascended masters are trying to accomplish. I think I can do this best by studying my decrees. They contain really dynamite information and AMs can be very individually oriented and then suddenly expand until they encompass the national and world scenes. If I can assist them in generating energy around me in my life and contact with the world, then I'm glad to do it. It's just that sometimes we don't see the "real" purpose behind a command, and so when we try to perform the action, with the purpose in mind, we may have to make sudden adjustments. An action done with purpose in mind can contain many alternative routes to the same goal, so if we fall short accomplishing specically the command we had in mind, we can still go at the "accomplishing" of the purpose. We just return to the positive state of assisting life manifest "glory" and hopefully a second, third, fourth, etc., chance will come. Regards, Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 15:27:41 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 15:13:21 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: General Koot Message-ID: <001e01bd9ee3$7852d0a0$c70a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> > Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 1:42 AM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: General Koot >Govert wrote: > >>Thank you for explaining. C.U.T. is as 'extremist' as the TS is >>'cultish.' You have a copy of the report? > >I learned of this through the newsletter of the SPLC (Southern Poverty Law >Center) - I've not a copy of a court transcript or anything. Would you like >the address (snail or e-mail) of the Center? I can send it to you and other >info I have via private e-mail correspondence - totally up to you. Not necessary. Found their website. >>The only illegal part of the transaction was that he used an >>assumed name to hide the purchase, not from the government, but >>from extremist rightwingers in Montana, who have made it known to >>the organization that when push comes to shove in a situation >>where precautionary survivalist plans have to be implemented, >>that they would come after the food and other suplies of the >>organization. > >This really doesn't make sense - and either way, C.U.T. would somehow have >assumed that such a "survivalist" situation would occur. Rightwingers could >come in and take MY food should such a thing happen - but I'm not >stockpiling guns due to such a risk. I fail to see the logic of C.U.T. there. Yes, C.U.T. thinks that there is a substantial chance for such a situation to occur, substantial enough to be prepared. But we hope it will not happen. Better safe, than sorry. You are not at risk regarding rightwingers, because you probably have not food for more than a week. Sorry if you don't catch the logic. >>The hostility of some inhabitants of Montana >>towards C.U.T. was made evident with some drive-by shootings and >>the burning of a cross on Church property. >Again, this is also happening to churches with predominately black members >and they have not found it necessary to break the law nor become a >military-like encampment. If the issue was only discriminatory attacks from hate-groups then I would agree, but the main concern of C.U.T. is survival in the face of societal breakdown as a worst-case scenario. Meanwhile they are also preparing for a best-case scenario, in which the world stays relatively peaceful and we bring our message to as many people as possible. For this scenario we need some new organizational structures developed, which is being worked out now. >>The purchase of the >>weapons was only for defensive purposes in case of the >>disintegration of civil authority and the hiding of the purchase >>was to prevent it being known in the Montana circles of >>survivalists militia. > >This rationale gives everyone the OK to pack some massive amounts of "heat." The U.S. government has failed to provide its people with a common defense, so the people have to provide it for themselves. >>Better they had done the purchase in the >>open so these groups would know what they might be up against. >Ah, yes! The "mutual-destruction" theory! If America has atomic bombs, the >Soviet Union is entitled to them, also. We see where that's led. . .. This is not the MAD doctrine, but the doctrine of having a strong defense to deter an attack. In the MAD doctrine both parties have no defense at all in order to assure the mutual destruction. Quite a difference. >>The removal of the weapons was a part of a deal with the IRS. It >>was a condition to keep tax-exempt status. This did not mean the >>abolition of second amendment rights of individual members. >I am always tickled, and, at the same time terrified, that those who quote >the amendment fail to notice the amendment is referring to a "well-regulated >militia." I read the second amendment as stating that a well-regulated militia AND the right of people to bear arms will not be infringed upon. >>Are you prepared to bring the >>theosophical message to the masses after the radio-active dust >>has settled? >Well, to be honest, I'm not sure I want to bring the Theosophical message to >the "masses" even before any bombs drop - especially after reading your post. That's o.k. with me, though I fail to see the logic of my posting having an impact on your desire or non-desire to share theosophy. >>My own reading of history tells me that the Masters are realists >>and will sometimes sponsor organizations and persons, which use >>some military means for defensive purposes. >I think this is pure ca-ca talk. And I am dismayed that the people on this >list who claim the existence of the "Masters" would remain silent after >reading such words. . .unless they, too, think that "Masters" being involved >in the killing and destruction of other humans and nations is an acceptable >idea. Ca-ca meaning French for B.S.? Well you for one did not remain silent. Maybe Pul Johnson can enlighten us more about the role of the Masters, HPB, the TS and Annie Besant in the liberation of India from the British. Another example of the Masters' thinking on strategy is that they deplored the fact that the Tibetans did not have a stronger defense to deter the Chinese from invading Tibet. What suffering and religious and cultural persecution would have been prevented if they had a better defense and the west would have come to its aid. Here again the isue is about defense and the prevention of tragedy. >"Masters" directing revolutions and such - well, with the "compassion" >clause so dominant in Theosophy, I guess one has to say that the "Masters" >were simply involved in. . .mercy killing? Compassion and justice are for me the key-words and I do not translate them into pacifism nor situational ethics. For a more visionary account of Adepts invoved in politics throughout the ages read Manly P. Hall's "The secret Destiny of America." It all has to do with the evolving idea, and its implementation, of forms of self-governance. Mostly the powers-that-be resist that evolution and even will prevent with brute force its enfolding. Realistic idealism will anticipate that eventuality. Thanks for reading thus far. Govert From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 17:29:12 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 17:16:23 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: No humans allowed Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980623171623.009a8bf0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199806232007.PAA19453@proteus.imagiware.com> References: <199806230547.XAA06977@mailmx.micron.net> At 01:10 PM 6/23/1998 -0700, you wrote: >You know, Kym, you're smart, but some people are really shy. Why, my son >is so shy sometimes, it hurts me to watch him. Do you think there could be >shy people right here on the internet and blazing ahead of themselves >courageous new trails into hearts? > > Many great people are very shy. Two comes to my mind. Krishnaji and Sri Ram. But they are great speakers. So don't worry about your son being shy. mkr From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 18:44:15 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 19:44:07 EDT From: "Teos9 (Louis)" Subject: Re: Egregore Message-ID: <6eda4eea.35903dc8@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-15 19:09:39 EDT, you write: << "Egregore: from a Greek word meaning "watcher." >> Thanks for the definition. Can you also supply a phonetic pronounciation. Is it 'Egg-re-gore', Eeeg-re-gore or some other possibility? Thanks. From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 20:13:00 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 20:48:09 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Unimportant bugs Message-ID: <01bd9f09$c20b89a0$LocalHost@default> Eldon, Suspected the digest was on a timed schedule, and thus = occassionally one goes out with no mss. in it. Thanks for clearing = that patch of fog. - Jake From ???@??? Tue Jun 23 21:58:55 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 21:53:50 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Theosophist? Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980623215350.006e489c@mail.eden.com> While I do not like to blindly quote anyone, in the light of the various discussions on Theosophy, here is something which seems to dispel any wrong ideas. Men (and women and children) cannot all be Occultists but they can all be Theosophists. Many who have never heard of the Society are Theosophists without knowing it themselves; for the essence of Theosophy is the perfect harmonizing of the divine with the human in man, the adjustment of his god-like qualities and aspirations, and their sway over the terrestial and animal passions in him. Kindness, absence of every ill feeling or selfishness, charity, goodwill to all beings, and perfect justice to others as to oneself, are its chief features. He who teaches Theosophy preaches the gospel of goodwill; and the converse of this is true also -- he who preaches the gospel of goodwill, teaches Theosophy. ---HPB - Address to the American Convention 4/22/1988 Excerpted from Fohat, Summer 1998 MKR Comments: What is significant is the absence of any mention of the details of the constitution of man and universe and all the "technical" and "philosophical" material that she provided. So if there is anyone who has does not meditate (using whatever technique or none), who has not read SD or Voice of Silence or any other classic he/she can be a Theosophist in its fullest term whether they know it or not. It is the total attention to the the information contained in the classics in the absence of the above "practical" deeds in many tend to mis-present Theosophy. So Theosophy is not limited to the intellectuals only and is for the masses, who may be unread and ignorant. From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 01:12:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:11:13 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <35909881.26BC@globalserve.net> References: <001c01bd9e3a$bea63fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> <358F3965.4A54@globalserve.net> Dear Dallas, footnote: Just to let you know that I have just finished reading "The Children of The Law of One", "Archaic History of the Human Race and "Man at Home in the Universe", and in so doing have answered most of the questions in my last post, except: why does the Universal One/Consciouness/God screw up so much? (I know, it's our human perception and limited comprehension) :) I prefered the concept in "The Children..." book as it is more like "whoops, didn't take the lower vibration of the physical into account" as the second wave, who were to be the ascended Masters, watched what happened to the first wave. Theosophy is more like "the process takes billions of years though 7 rounds and 7 races and x7 sub-races and the gods screwed up at each race and it will not all be right until the 7th, and then it could happen all over again on another planet." I wanted to bring a kindly sort of closure to our debate, win-win maybe? As I was reading the Theosophy, I kept thinking, "how would you write this in a children's picture book so that you could teach it at a point when we know that the human mind is forming concepts for permancence?" Now if your answer is that it is not for children or narrow brained incarnations like me in general, then forget universality leading to botherhood, IMHO. Also, I have not changed my mind about why the books sometimes turn me off as follows, with quotes (and I know this is an unscientific sample): Me: The concept of "gods" that manipulate creation, pick and choose what they will incarnate in and what they will discard, and control the evolution of the human race. If the Pitris et al had waited and got together .... this problem of ours of body, mind, and spirit disconnection would not have happened. Can you see it from my point of view? I don't know which is worse to be faced with... an old man in the sky who got it darn near perfect and then threw us out because we overstepped our bounds, or a bunch of Lords of Wisdom that appear to be developing on the fly using us as a vessel. That's being extreme, but it makes my point. Readings: Archaic History pp 1-29 p29: "The Sons of Wisdom, the Sons of Night...ready for rebirth came down. They saw the (intellectually) vile forms of the first third (still senseless Race.) "We can choose", said the Lords, "we have wisdom." etc. van Pelt comments: "H.P. Blavatsky...says this Stanza contains the whole key to the mysteries of evil. It explains the puzzling equalities in human life, and many problems which have baffled the great minds of our races. Intellect may said to have been born at this time, and during this Fourth Round it developed as a fit vehicle for the higher faculty, Buddhi, or intuition. But Manas or mind will not be fully developed until the next or Fifth Round, and will have the opportunity of becoming entirely divine at the end of the Seventh Round." ME: Linear concepts, man being the pinacle of creation, standard evolutionary concepts mixed with Indian legends, class structures all over the place, and the following, which is a massive BARRIER to universality: "Those who were "not ready", are represented at present by some native Australian, African and Oceanic tribes (snip) and as conscious life grows, each is given what he has earned." For me the explanation that it is not my fault, nor the fault of the "gods" and that nature compensates by giving no Karma to work out, "as their more favored brethren in intelligence had", so that "in this respect the poor savage is more fortunate than the greatest genius of civilized countries", gets my back up something chronic. I have to tell you that I always start out reading Theosophy with interest and expected acceptance, and end up either angry or depressed. E.G. "The First (Race) on every zone was moon-coloured (yellow-white); the Second, yellow, like gold; the Third, red; the Fourth, brown, which became black with sin." It doesn't matter that the first seven (human) shoots were all of one complexion in the beginning, or that the next (seven, the sub races) began mixing their colours, the damamge is done and her white supremacy slip is showing. "like gold, black with sin", my stars! "All had common origin, inasmuch as all the 'Creators' were Divine Beings, though of different classes or degrees of perfection in their Hierarchy. THIS ACCOUNTS FOR THE DIFFERENCE OF RACES, THE INFERIORITY OF SAVAGES, AND OTHER HUMAN VARIETIES." ME: I guess the earth changes that destroyed the unfit ones didn't quite work? It matters not IMHO that we are now past that phase in incarnations, people latch onto these concepts and use them to support their desire to practice prejudice, not as an explanation and promise to never do it again. I have a problem with the Lemuria and Atlantis stuff, as it is opposite to what others have written on and have experienced in astral travel to both times and places. And finally, I am devastated to read that the Americans are the chosen ones. Or maybe not. The Hopi's look like a 90% probability to be the only surviviors of this next round of "cleansing". You have shown me Dallas that different people "read into" these works in different ways and I am most happy that you have found a lifetime of growth and peace in it. It certainly appears that my husband may too. That is excellent. Except, it is nigh on two years now that he found Theosophy. Before that he was "working" on his spiritual development what I call actively, with some martial arts for discipline and exercise, courses in various arts, sciences and business fields, exploring with groups of other "beliefs", and doing add jobs around the house and garden. Now it seems as if he is reading and waiting, almost as if any action by himself is irrelevant. THAT scares me. But when I read the texts too and get the feeling that I am some pawn in the creators' plan, a plan that takes billion of years on a fixed evolutionary path that I cannot impact, (except perhaps by screwing up and creating frightening Karma), I can understand this possible reaction. Many people, like my husband, are waiting for a something to come along and explain it all away as not their fault, predestined, not in their control. When Theosophy supports that desire, I cannot support Theosophy. I believe that we are the fallen ones, disconnected from the one supremeness by our choice, and that it is our responsibility and lifework to make it back in whatever way works best for us and for the whole concurrently. So, I think still that we are not at variance in intent. My debate with you was concerning why I believed that there were issues impeding universal acceptance and I think enough is enough, BECAUSE what ever the text, the people whom I have met here are good souls. And so I think the comment made about the works being pointers for an intellectual path of self discovery and development is a good one and I have no qualms in commenting that HPB should be required reading in any good education system. Blessed Be Annette From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 03:08:58 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:00:34 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: digest #242 (on education) Message-Id: <199806240800.CAA26148@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >Every point you make is appreciated. I guess my trouble is that when I >think of something being new or evolutionary I make the gross assumption >that it will be different from what humans have done before and what >they could see had failed. Rather than seeing your idealism as "trouble," I see it as refreshing and a sincere concern. Problem seems to be that a few others do not recognize nor care to ponder whether there is any bit of "trouble" in their way of thinking on this issue - are they trying to benefit children or themselves? Many adults tend to see children as mini-clones of themselves. . .and end up simply mucking it all up. . .or worse. >And I just must add that although public schools are open to all, >whether all are welcomed in reality and whether no favourites are played >truthfully is a matter of perception. True, but that appears to be an individual teacher or school principal problem - not the public-school philosophy in general. You're right, though - for example: it is well known that boys are given much more attention by teachers than girls are. . .many studies by sociologists have reflected this. >The threat of private schools taking money away from the public ones may >appear unsavoury, but, if I was faced with the choice of sending a child >of mine to a public school in which s/he may get shot to death or at >least fails to learn because of living in fear of other students, and a >safe non-chaotic alternative, I'm pretty sure which I'd choose and I'd >bust my ass to earn the money to pay for it, which is what I see all the >Execs and many of the "workers" in my company doing. I understand - but there are many mothers who "bust their ass" and still are not able to afford private school. Those parents who remove their children from public schools are really just making it worse for those children who are forced to stay. If the Execs and other employees of your company kept their children in the public schools, they could be more involved and aware of the problems. They would, since their children were there, be more motivated to solve such problems - and many more children would receive the education all children deserve. My main point is: whether we like it or not, the children in private school will eventually come FACE TO FACE with the children from public school no matter what anyone does. . .due to the success of the "them vs. us" theory, hopefully, it won't be in a dark alley. >Religious >propaganda, authoritarianism and prejudice are and would be part of the >curriculum, and what better way to eradicate them in the long term than >by insisting that a young learner follow them to the letter? I don't quite understand what you are saying here - could you please further explain what you mean? Are you saying we should put children under the yoke of authoritarianiam and prejudice and that will turn them off so much that they will not practice it as adults? If so, how does one explain the success of the Hitler Youth? Have I misunderstood you? Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 04:27:39 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:19:29 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <000401bd9f51$90380640$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 7:31 AM > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > Subject: Re: No pain, no gain >June 23rd Dallas offers : > > >I agree Obedience makes me very nervous if it is enforced >whimsically. On the other hand [OTOH] -- IMOP there is a lot of >evidence for LAW in our universe -- Science relies on it >implicitly. > >Why should humanity be excluded ? Why should the area of "morals >and ethics" be so touchy ? What have se to be afraid of ? Is >someone going to find out our horrid secrets ? Well then, are we >afraid to appear in our true colors ? Some heart searching seems >indicated. Dal > >================================== > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Chuck Cosimano" >Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 5:11 PM >Subject: Re: No pain, no gain > > >>In a message dated 98-06-22 16:00:49 EDT, you write: >> >>>Is this Chuck, Charles Cosimano? Chuck, read my webpage and >tell me if you >>>still feel the same about what you have just said to me. >>> >>> >> >>It's me! I'll have to take a look at the page, but I have a >feeling my >>distrust for such things will remain. >> >>I have this real deep feeling that something out there really >doesn't like >>humanity and keeps coming up with things for folks to believe in >and generally >>make life difficult for everyone. The problem is that feelings >and intuitions >>are unreliable >====================================== > >IT'S PROBABLY THE MEMORY IN NATURE OF THE BAD CHOICES WE MADE IN >THE PAST, AND WHICH IS NOW OUR "BAD" KARMA COMING HOME TO ROOST. >we HAVE TO UNDO OUR OWN ERRORS. Dal > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 04:42:39 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:28:03 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-ID: <000501bd9f51$914dbc00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 23rd Dear Kym: Before supposing any more it might be a good idea to dip into THE SECRET DOCTRINE. The question of "god" is discussed from pages 14 to 18 in the 1st volume, and elsewhere ( see the INDEX ) ; also, on the subject of evolution, which evolution do you mean physiological, emotional, mental spiritual ? Each one is separate, yet interblended in man. The 2nd volume of the SD disputes with Darwin rather successfully on the subject of fossil remains and his theories. If you wish, look it up and follow the references from either the Contents or the Index.. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 11:20 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" >Darren wrote: > >>Do scientists have a right to demand 'scientific' ideas ? Evolution is >>taught but don't we all beleive that Darwinian Evolution is a flawed theory? > >I do not recall ever hearing in any classroom that Darwinism was a perfect >theory - however, I doubt ANY religious doctrine or theory could stand up >the the tests and scrutiny Darwin's theories have - and still remain robust. >There is abundant empirical evidence regarding Evolution; religious >theories, in comparison, lack such tangible tools. > >Someone says "Give me proof of evolution." Evolutionists could say "Look at >viruses - they evolve becoming resistant to antibiotics. We have documented >such evolution on paper and on film for all to see and examine." Someone >says "Give me proof of God." Religionists could say "Babble, burp, and >beep." Religions, including Theosophy, have yet to come up with even a >semi-uniform 'working hypothesis' regarding who or what "God" is or is not - >provided "God" does exist. And, for those who believe "God" does not exist, >just saying "God does not exist" is an oxymoron. > >Where would a school even begin if mandated to teach "God" as a fact - which >is required in order to teach Creationism? Again, whose "God" did the >creating? The favorite seems to be the "God" of the those with the most >money or biggest biceps at a particular time in history. > > >Kym > > > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 04:45:21 1998 Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:45:02 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: <000601bd9f51$929445c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 23rd Annette: I write too much, in an effort to make my ideas understood -- and you have sent so much that is good and lets me understand you and what you are faced with. Such experiences. No one is an "outsider." We are all students with different lines and degrees of proficiency -- but even those cannot be categorized, as there are too many departments. so we all learn from each other. Let me put some notes in at appropriate places (for clarity) in what you write as I return it to you to look at. Thanks, Dal > Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:28 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: >> >> June 22nd >> >> Re: quotes >Dear Dallas: >WHEW. Boy can you ever write! Just quickly to let you know that I have >read all this posting and have saved it as I believe it's a mini >Theosophy course for an outsider like me. Well received and thank you. >A few general comments so you can then relax (yes, that is a kindly >message).... > >> (We are >> all such "rays," but we do not all feel or think we are. If so, >> why ?) > >Because even though we all "came in" knowing we are, the physical is >either so seductive or so overpowering that we forget and have to >"learn" it or rather "release" it again. I mean, if a four year old >child can describe how it all works and feels but shuts up for a >lifetime when the system tells them a few dozen times "no you don't know >that or anything else yet" there's something pretty chronic at work >here! That "we are all such rays" is not a point of debate for me, the >mystery for me as yet is ..... why go through this physical process at >all, and why not able to remember the original state except when in an >altered state? Remember, I and many others have experienced the >kundalini (sorry I can't spell) release to some extent, and the escape >from the body to the state of light or plasma, (and it's bloody hard to >come back and do one's laundry in all seriousness). ============================================== DAl: The fact that we can viualise and understand these ideas shows that they are not wrong, and that there is interorly a STABLE element that give us meaning to ourselves. We in our waking, questing moment try to analyse that, and fit it into the learning wehave acquired so far this incarnation. But there is always the background of our past lives where in other climes and languages we have dealt with similar ideas. I think that such memories (reminiscences of the Soul) indicate theexistence of a spiritual Ray within. If spirit is everywhere, then we cannot be xcluded, nor can anything or anyone else. =========================================== > >> represents the WHOLE. But for the "part" to be "conscious"of the >> WHOLE is another thing. A different dimension and not linear or >> spiritual or time altering, as I see it. >p.s I know how holograms work so point taken. What I want to know >is....why the experience of fragmentation at all? Why take universal >energy and split it into parts with consciousness so that then one must >labour to "see" it whole again? ============================================ If the WHY could be so easily answered, we would not be here undergoing all the troubles and strife that we do. So let us take ourselves as evidence of BEING here. Is not our "persona" (mask, the name and form we use this life) evidence that we use material drawn from the whole of nature around us. Science shows we receive and emit atoms by the billions almost every minute and in a year the physical material of our bodies is replaced 98% -- and wholly in 7 years. So we are not the BODY (or its BRAIN ) We use them as our tools. ========================================== > >> How are those to be contacted and when >> contacted, recognized ? >Exactly! By non-physical means. So why the physical lesson? And why >the doubt when the non-physical happens? ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ No "doubt." Simply who is in control ? for myself I want to be in control. Ifit means to watch and participate, I still want to be the "watcher." and at no time do I wish to be controlled or "led" wither and yon. ========================================= > >> How does one >> decide that a certain plan is either selfish and dangerous to the >> ultimate well-being of the Unit, or unselfish, tolerant, >> benevolent and hence harmless to the environment as to the >> "Chooser ?" >By being free (of needs, fears, indoctrinations). If one returns to the >purity of the new born, one simply "knows". >Exactly what you said later, I believe. YES > >> The other day In National Geographic I came across a statement >> made by a Nepalese fisherman, who was also a chaser after the >> honey that wild bees store in their combs on high trees in the >> forests. He said: We begin our lives by weaving a fishnet. We >> end our life before ever finishing it. We are always weaving >> this net and forever fixing it." >Exactly....so why do we begin? Why do we forget from whence we came and >even start this never ending repetitive process of getting back "home"? >And why are we so stupid that we get stuck in our own nets? Hoisted on >our own petards? Imprisoned in webs of our own weaving? Victims of the >base vices when we are born with knowledge of the highest virtues? > >The principles you delineate have been described as admirably by all of >what we now call "indigenous people". This is my only point. It is not >that I refuse to accept the labels or that I disagree with the ideas. >Although .... the "transference" may not be as easy as intimated. =========================================== Both wisdom and knowledge are universal, those we call aborigines or indigenous, amy by race have descended from covilizations as high as ours is now, or higher. -- Example: (a Si-fi theme) one finds all the academies of our world eliminated and all written lore destroyed. The residual populace would be forced back into the "hunter, gatherer state" almost immediately. Farmers would have an advantage. Urbanites would quickly starve unless they made a radical change almost overnight. Catastrophe, like the drwoning of an entire continent, or the raisingofthe mean level ofthe oceans by 2/400 feet in a couple of days -- most urban centers, and agricultural lands would be flooded, and the Eaatrth reduced to very scattered islands -- where wouldbe leanrin preserved ? In the high mountains. How would the frainy academicians cause their appratus to survivie woithout the necessar intermediate technicians adn workers to assist ? when everyone is hungry and shelterless what comes first ? Lore or shelter and food ? Of course this is fanciful -- but we are certainly not actually prepared for anything so extensive. Many of us have been through school and college. Do we retain or forget the sciences and techniques we learned then,0nd have not "used' since ? Do we apply daily our knowledge of those things ? Or have we abandoned that, and in those areas, descended again to the levels of ignorance that that education sought to eliminate ? I ask this because we are not using the benefits of our eduction to full extent we ought to. I think we create our own conditions by waht we omit using. It is the same for living. As intelligent beings we came into the world because there was a need for intstructing a new batch of men-minds. We are those men minds, and inside of us resides in each a Wise Man. He can watch what we do with our lives, warn us (Voice of Conscience, or Intuition) when we think of making a wrong choice (because wisdom consits in remembering the errors and pains of past lives ) -- and often we do not listen because we are not pleased with the prospect of curbing our desires. So we are really dual beings the Teacher and the learner -- and that makes for a tug of war sometimes. That's why we are here -- to become wiser or dumber ! We have to do it ourselves. We chose this position many lives back, and now we ahve to think ourselves out of this predicament. We have the power to do so. Theosophy does show a way in this regard. ========================================= > >> It is interesting that something in us responds to those ideas, >> and desires to understand more. I wonder why ? What is it ? >> Where are we going ? >We are going home. When we recognize a path that feels right we take it >Still doesn't answer why we choose to leave home in the first place! > >> The "Nrmanakaya" is a designation given to indicate a >Snip >Thank you for the explanation. I have seen the pages to which you refer >and did not linger or retain because of the illustration that seemed >bounded by "man-made" physical concepts. I will have to revisit! > >> Example: if we were advanced mathematical students, or >> astro-physicists, you and I, we would deal in equations, which to >> the average person would be sheer abracadabra. But if that >> person desired to reach a level of understanding comparable to >> ours (as theoretical mathematicians ) he could do so by following >> the steps we took to learn. Mind you, I am not saying that these >> two are fully comparable, but, theosophy has been called the >> mathematics of the Soul. >I am glad that you used this example because it illustrates what I am >trying to say. This is life we are talking about here. Every person >comes in with the ability to understand life and to experience love and >peace. It simply takes many years to speak it in the language of here >(and it feels like if one isn't quick enough to spit it out and cement >it in early on so that a great life manifests for one, it's an uphill >climb back)! What is this thing about "desiring to reach a level of >understanding"? Why have we taken such a simple beautiful thing and >made it so complex that the "ordinary" person has to "learn the steps"? >Why, having come from pefection, have we manifest "blood, sweat and >tears" and on top of that, have imprisoned ourselves in a reality that >tells us it may take us eons to achieve what we long for? For goodness >sakes why, when as children we simply went into our "imagination" and >experienced universal, unconditional, blissful, fearless, all-loving and >eternal BEING. (that is until some other human told us or showed us >pain, fear, hate and submission). ======================================== Annette: I wish it were simple to answer this. As I see it, we experience the buffetings of life, accidents, reverses of fortune, successes, pleasure, children, wife or husband that is a true companion (or the reverse), etc... The learning is always psychological because it is the harmony of spirit and soul that is the key to understanding. So long as the mind-soul is disturbed by strife and problems, its ability to lean is limited. It has first to make time to think. Then it has to take stock of itself. What are its talents and its ignorances. Why ? How to change and transform one into the other, etc... How do we plan or build anything ? Same for our own psyche. If we have "messed-up" we have to un-mess. What else can I say. Now if you take it to be that we have only one life to live then we are short of time. But if we are immortals and each life is a "day" in the Soul's living, then we have time to make those changes bit by bit. This does not give us a license to delay, for the time lost is irreplacable. When we notice something to be fixed that is the time to fix it, not later when we have no time left. So economy in the right performance of duty is one of the lessons to be learned. I think we have to look acerfully at ourselves and our situation. Guae both, and then decide whic is the most important thing to do. It may not be popular with our family or friends, but it something we have to do for our own self improvement. I do not mean going to extremes, as we have responsibilities to family and to friends which we assumed and those have to be discharged. But we can go at it with a changed attitude, and that will also take them into account as doing them an injustice justs puts us back and not forward. This is how "individual Karma" gets balanced. In a just Universe we get what we desrve, and if we don't like our present, then we can set to work to change it. It may be easy or not, but the changer is ourselves. =================================================== > >Re the list of "posits"..... >No debate on content. So, why doesn't everyone live this? >I am hoping that reading the books I purchased yesterday will shed some >light for me. "The Children of the Law of One & The Lost Teachings of >Atlantis", and "The Golden Bough". >============================================== Lots of reading there. Where will wisdom be culled ? ====================================== >> We speak, commonly, of a "hell." Well , don't we create our own >> ? What does it ? Is it not selfishness, ignorance, fear, and a >> false concept of pleasure and enjoyment. The idea of >> separateness creates all the problems of life. But if we take it >> that we are all interconnected and that we depend all the time on >> others for our own living, then, does it not make a change ? >Yes, yes and yes. > >> I am equally sure >> that my answers will prove fragmentary and unsatisfactory. But >> we need to compare basic assumptions. Are they totally at >> variance or do they approach each other ? What are the bridges >> to understanding that we can establish ? >Neither fragmentary, nor unsatisfactory. I don't feel a variance, but >then I wouldn't, would I :) >The bridge to understanding between you and I (for others maybe >different) may be this..... >I am way behind you in reading, thinking and understanding. I only know >one thing for sure....that I (and thus, I believe, everyone) "knew" all >of this at birth and expected life here to be as perfect as I knew it >could and should be. Personally, Life so far has been one hell of a >shock and disappointment. I see it as a "backwards slide". I don't >take kindly to things that regress from a point of perfection. I am not >looking for a "recipe" to explain how it works or how to make myself or >others "better". I am seeking an understanding of WHY PHYSICAL LIFE AT >ALL? If perfect why create imperfect? If universal, why fragment? >Is it simply for the experience? Because, you see, if so, then every >experience - war; famine; lust; evil; murder etc as well as all the >"good" things has to exist for all time. I CANNOT ACCEPT that!!!!! > >I REMEMBER being a child. I remember knowing that I had to take >responsibility and well as have fun. I remember knowing that life was >service as well as receipt, that others mattered as much as myself, that >I was an integral part of the earth and everything beyond, that reality >wasn't the only plane around, that all I neeeded to know and all I >needed to have was there for me and that it wasn't without a price. >What I don't remember is why I chose to come here :) > >Having taken up quite enough of your's and everyone else's time, adieu >and thanks, dear Dallas. >Annette ==================================== Wow -- I can trace parallels here with some of the aspects of my own lie, but I thought that I could take stock and then change as I desired. I needed to find a good aim. I got help from theosophical doctrines and philosophy. > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 06:42:38 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 01:36:25 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Egregore Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6eda4eea.35903dc8@aol.com> Teos9@aol.com writes >Thanks for the definition. Can you also supply a phonetic pronounciation. Is >it >'Egg-re-gore' That's about the nearest! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 08:12:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 08:05:31 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Internet in colleges Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980624080531.009bca90@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <001101bd9eb1$f25e2ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> At 07:19 AM 6/23/1998 -0700, you wrote: >I am still concerned with the transfer of files, etc, if dated, >at the crucial time of 2000, and especially for the material that >I have accumulated. > I don't think there should be any concern about file transfers etc. Either they tranfer or not and your copy of the file is safe especially if you have backed them up on disks. >Is there any safe format. Just back them up on a diskette or tape or other media. This is a good practice because your hard drive which is a mechanical device can and do crash and if it happens you will lose everything on the disk. Computers can also be stolen, which has happened to many computer owners. > >I Inquired into MS and was told that even they have not set up a >completely good safeguard yet. > >What about the millions of PCs and their access to mainframes, >etc.. We will have to see. > >Of the Govet departments are going to have difficulties, then >what about the Banks and other financial institutions, > Well tha't is their problem and they will find a solution. >I am told ( in L A Times ) that this aspect of things is very >shaky. > Sure there could be unexpected problems. >Dal > >-----Original Message----- >From: "M K Ramadoss" >Date: Monday, June 22, 1998 10:42 PM >Subject: Internet in colleges > > >> >>I have always felt that extensive use of Internet including such >>applications as www, e-mail, maillists, newsgroups, chat etc. is >going to >>take off when the current generation of students graduate from >schools and >>colleges. >> >>When I was looking into the computer and related facilities >provided in >>colleges, it is very revealing where technology is heading. In >the >>University of Texas at Austin, here are some facts: >> >>1. There are more computers than telephones in the campus. About >26000 >>computers. >> >>2. Every room in the dorm has an ethernet connection. 10 MB/sec >and going >>to 100 MB/sec. with full Internet access. >> >>3. Every student is assigned a e-mail account as soon as >admitted. >> >>4. Any student can set up a website. >> >>5. Any student can set up a maillist. >> >>6. Graduate Business School students are required to purchase a >notebook >>computer when they start school. >> >>7. Libraries have ethernet outlets so that you can connect your >computer >>from a carrel. Like plugging a toaster into power outlet. >> >>and Much more..... >> >> >>In the next century, the impact of Internet is going to be like >what >>happened when printing was invented. >> >>mkr From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 08:57:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:49:54 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Personal motives? Message-Id: <199806241349.JAA13120@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806200231.VAA23772@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 19, 98 09:31:43 pm Thanks, Martin, for your question; thanks, Brenda, for your comments. Having just returned from the ARE Congress I feel more persuaded than ever that here is a healthy spiritual organization in which I can participate fully as a member equal to any other. As many of you know, I have long felt that the TSes and ULT are not such organizations-- that they are unhealthy (and not just for me!) in many ways and that neither I nor anyone who shares as little of the unofficial belief system as I do can really be accepted as an equal partner. Martin, I see in your remarks an attempt at marginalization and dismissal of my remarks about Adyar TS leaders. Radha never did anything to me at all, and John was always pleasant until right before lowering the boom with his negative and inaccurate reviews. Yes, there are some bad memories that inform my remarks, but I can assure you that the overwhelming basis for my admittedly negative feelings toward Burnier and Algeo is the way they have treated other people, *not me*-- and a great *many* other people too. As well as how they have treated Theosophy. I won't argue personalities, however, preferring to let those eligible to vote in TS elections look into the job performance of their elected leaders, and decide for themselves. Cheers, PJ From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 10:15:57 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:08:36 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Personal motives? Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980624100836.009942a0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199806241349.JAA13120@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199806200231.VAA23772@proteus.imagiware.com> Let me add my 0.02. In all my dealings with Radha, she has always been very forthright, reasonable, candid and prompt. I want everyone to hear my personal experience. mkr At 09:49 AM 6/24/1998 -0400, you wrote: >Thanks, Martin, for your question; thanks, Brenda, for your >comments. Having just returned from the ARE Congress I feel more >persuaded than ever that here is a healthy spiritual organization >in which I can participate fully as a member equal to any other. >As many of you know, I have long felt that the TSes and ULT are >not such organizations-- that they are unhealthy (and not just >for me!) in many ways and that neither I nor anyone who shares as >little of the unofficial belief system as I do can really be accepted >as an equal partner. > >Martin, I see in your remarks an attempt at marginalization and >dismissal of my remarks about Adyar TS leaders. Radha never did >anything to me at all, and John was always pleasant until right >before lowering the boom with his negative and inaccurate >reviews. Yes, there are some bad memories that inform my >remarks, but I can assure you that the overwhelming basis for my >admittedly negative feelings toward Burnier and Algeo is the way >they have treated other people, *not me*-- and a great *many* other >people too. As well as how they have treated Theosophy. > >I won't argue personalities, however, preferring to let those >eligible to vote in TS elections look into the job performance of >their elected leaders, and decide for themselves. > >Cheers, >PJ > > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 10:42:39 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:24:14 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? Message-ID: <000d01bd9f84$26b90100$870a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> I am posting this article to give all of you on this list a little peek into the risks and dangers of the international financial situation. It seems that the karma of collective greed returned to our doorstep. Govert >Note: The June Issue of McAlvany Intelligence Advisor focused on this issue >- how the Asian financial meltdown is heading toward America. There are >many other highly regarded economic guru's who are saying the same thing. >For example: > > "I have never read of, or seen such a total economic breakdown and >massive destruction of wealth as has occurred, against all expectations, in >Asia in the last six months." - Marc Faber, The Gloom, Boom, and Doom >Report (2/12/98) > > "If China and Japan come unglued, you're looking at something that will >dwarf the depression of the 1930's." - Doug Casey, International >Speculator (2/19/98) > > "The excessive credit which the Fed pumped into the economy (as they've >been doing) spilled over into the stock market, triggering a fantastic >speculative boom. Belatedly, the Federal Reserve officials attempted to >sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking the boom. But >it was too late. By 1929 the speculative imbalances had become so >overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp retrenchment and >consequent demoralizing of business confidence." - Alan Greenspan, 1966 > > As you may well know, World Wars I & II followed global economic >debacles. The power elite have been counting on economic "leverage" if not >financial terror to take over the huge new markets in China just as they >leveraged financial control of industries and markets in Europe and Japan >(Trilateral Commission) following World War II. Keep in mind that >desperate fallen ones do desperate things; make the calls to bind these >forces of anti-Christ who would create and manage crisis right into their >New World "Odor". - C.R. > >-------------------------------------------- article follows: > >Inside Track On World News >By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster >Eric Margolis > >THAT NASTY SINKING FEELING IN TOKYO >By Eric Margolis 21 June 1998 > >Asia's financial crisis, dismissed as `a glitch' only a few months ago by >President Bill Clinton, went critical last week, sparking an international >economic emergency that threatened to collapse world stock markets and >bring on a global depression. > >Japan's once mighty yen, down 40% in value over the last 12 months, >continued its sickening drop. Last Monday, it hit a new low of 146 to the >dollar, as speculators and investors dumped yen for US dollars. >China issued an ultimatum. If the yen sank below the critical red line of >150, China would devalue its so-far steady currency, the yuan, to keep it >competitive with the falling yen and other sinking Asian currencies. >Devaluation by China would ignite another round of competitive devaluations >by its Asian trading partners and export rivals, producing rounds of >ruinous devaluations economists call `beggar they neighbor.' Just such >reciprocal devaluations caused the 1930's world depression. > >On Wednesday of last week, the US and Japan's central banks dry-gulched >speculators. They bought US $4 billion of yen, driving the dollar down and >pushing the yen up 5%. Stock markets rallied. Anti-yen speculators suffered >huge trading losses. The most capable member of the Clinton Administration, >Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, had averted disaster. > > >But Japan still faces the danger its painful recession may turn into >raging depression, or even financial collapse. Japan, the locomotive of >Asia's once vibrant economy, has run out of steam. Japan's overheated >bubble economy, based on rampant land speculation, reckless loans, cheap >money, shadowy accounting, and incestuous relations between businessmen and >politicians, burst eight years ago. Today, Japan's shrinking economy is >left with tottering financial institutions, huge debts and domestic bad >loans galore; industrial over-capacity; and tens of billions of outstanding >loans to bankrupt Asian nations like South Korea and Thailand. > >Western financiers demand Japan effect sweeping structural reforms that >include liquidating insolvent companies, allowing foreign institutions into >its financial system, firing redundant workers, opening domestic markets to >imports, and conducting business and accounting by US and European standards. > >Japanese are reeling under these assaults, and deeply confused. When the >yen was mighty, gaijin nations accused Japan Inc of being a financial >Yellow Peril bent on buying up the world. Now that the yen has sunk, >foreign critics accuses Japan of wrecking the world economy. Tokyo is being >bombarded by conflicting economic demands and advice from abroad. Still >emotionally crippled by its defeat in World War II, Japan twists in knots, >trying to placate all it critics. > >Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto promises to close weak banks and clean up >their US $650 billion in bad debts, deregulate business, and use tax cuts >and public works projects to stimulate the economy. All these remedies make >sense, save public works spending, which only enriches >politically-connected contractors. > >But nothing happens quickly in Japan, where bureaucrats, special interests, >local politicians, and custom, combine to frustrate change. The idea of >firing hundreds of thousands of unneeded workers, and closing venerable >firms, is simply anathema to Japan. At heart, Japan is a farming village, >writ large. Everyone tries to share the pain during hard times - better >less for all than none for many. Mass firings and business >closings are personal disgrace for company directors, an anti-social act. >There's no place in Japan for corporate mass executioners like America's >`Chainsaw' Al Dunlop, who boasted of cutting 15,000 jobs. > >Efforts to revitalize the economy by stimulating consumer spending are >being thwarted by the deep conservatism of Japanese. Japanese consumers. >hate borrowing, and mistrust stocks and bonds. When times are tough, they >increase savings, putting the funds into Post Office savings accounts that >pay under 1% interest. Like farmers everywhere, Japanese bury their savings >in the ground. > >A depressed yen will cause US labor unions to renew charges Japan is >`flooding' American with cheaper goods, and demand trade restrictions. >Worse, Asia, which accounts for 40% of Japan's commerce, has no cash to buy >goods from Japan, or repay Japanese loans. Japan's imports from Asia are >down 15%. So , at best, Japan and Asia, with the important exception of >China, appear headed for a long recession. > > >If Hashimoto's current rescue package fails and recession turns to >financial melt-down, as the Chairman of Sony recently warned might happen >-with startlingly un-Japanese candor, western stock exchanges will stagger. >If Japan's cash-crunch worsens, Japanese banks may begin cashing in the >hoard of US Treasury and Canadian securities they hold, plunging North >America into a monster liquidity crisis. > >Even experts don't understand the ramifications of our new, intermeshed >global economy, where financial storms race at the speed of light, leaving >ruin in their wake. Asia's banking crisis has undone governments in >Thailand, Indonesia, and Korea. Continued economic and social stress may >produce extreme political reactions across Asia - including Japan. > >Alarmingly, Asians increasingly accuse westerners seeking to take over >their nations by financial imperialism, blaming Wall Street for wrecking >the region's once soaring economies. The Nazis, recall, came to power as a >result of the 1930's depression, and the financial collapse of German >industry. > >Bill Clinton, with Monica much on his mind, visits China this week, right >into the eye of the widening Asian financial hurricane. Some glitch. > >Copyright eric margolis 1998 > >*********************************************************** ***************** >**** >To receive Foreign Correspondent via email, send a note to >majordomo@foreigncorrespondent.com with the message in the body: subscribe >foreignc > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 11:57:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:43:46 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <002a01bd9f8f$6a8ce440$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 24th Dear Annette: It's always a win/win -- Its a contest of smiles if we "know our business." Antagonisms and arguments are such a distancing annoyance -- they have no future only retrospective pain. and also, a feel of terrible incompleteness. -- as though one had failed to get through to the other his or her anxious interest. All good ideas and statements could be reduced (and perhaps we ought to try to do this consistently) to the level where a child would understand. The child trusts the elders to be honest and true. The elders, have (or ought) to respect this. (Not all do.) Tome theosophy is like abc, or 1, 2, 3 -- it "adds' up and is inclusive, and not selective. But it does ask for clarity. I don't think we will ever conclude our questionings. The more we compare the more we grow in understanding. It is, after all a brotherhood, one in which we share. Who are the "gods ?" I firmly think that we are the "gods." WE are those who know that deep down inside there is an immortal something. It is the source of "my" I-ness. And you, and everyone else has their own. But once that we get down to that level we find that we are touching each other most intimately and that the units form a vast WHOLE. Gone are the differences. They were not important anyway. Remember that Theosophy only claims to narrate "history." It is not constructed or imagined by either HPB or her Masters of Wisdom. they have the capacity ( which is latent in most of us) to see into the Akasa -- the superior Astral Light and see the record of all events and persons who participated there. In other words they can trace our heritage. We suspect it. The revolutions of civilizations and the dance of the "inferior/superior" does not matter in the long run, as all comes out even, with understanding and a common goal achieved by all, eventually -- and then on to further work -- there are all the in-coming life-atoms to assist. So work never really ends. I think that if we try to 'work for ourselves' alone, for some hoped for advancement, one really gets nowhere, as that can only be achieved by active sharing, and by helping others. The "professor" remains ahead of the classes of pupils because he keeps his knowledge green in its entirety and keeps on extending it. The pupils are forever playing catch up. Now if the "professor" takes a rest, then the "pupils" may catch up. Hence the idea of taking time out for a Nirvana or two would be quite unrealistic. The 2nd volume of the S D narrates the progress of various "races" etc... but it deals not with the physiological interplay and development (which our archaeologists deal with in classifying fossils) but the Theosophic archaeologist deals with the psychic and the mental and the spiritual heredity, and that is on a quite different stratum from the physical and the stony remains. In reading the S D one has to take care to disentangle all these lines. All "souls" are basically "good." But some allow their minds to get entangled with their desires to such an extent that the desires over-rule the power of the Spirit to get common sense to be heard. And that's about all I had in mind. Gotta go to work -- bye for the mo. Dal. > Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 11:30 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End >Dear Dallas, footnote: >Just to let you know that I have just finished reading "The Children of >The Law of One", "Archaic History of the Human Race and "Man at Home in >the Universe", and in so doing have answered most of the questions in my >last post, except: why does the Universal One/Consciouness/God screw up >so much? (I know, it's our human perception and limited comprehension) >:) > >I prefered the concept in "The Children..." book as it is more like >"whoops, didn't take the lower vibration of the physical into account" >as the second wave, who were to be the ascended Masters, watched what >happened to the first wave. >Theosophy is more like "the process takes billions of years though 7 >rounds and 7 races and x7 sub-races and the gods screwed up at each race >and it will not all be right until the 7th, and then it could happen all >over again on another planet." > >I wanted to bring a kindly sort of closure to our debate, win-win maybe? >As I was reading the Theosophy, I kept thinking, "how would you write >this in a children's picture book so that you could teach it at a point >when we know that the human mind is forming concepts for permancence?" >Now if your answer is that it is not for children or narrow brained >incarnations like me in general, then forget universality leading to >botherhood, IMHO. > >Also, I have not changed my mind about why the books sometimes turn me >off as follows, with quotes (and I know this is an unscientific sample): > >Me: The concept of "gods" that manipulate creation, pick and choose what >they will incarnate in and what they will discard, and control the >evolution of the human race. If the Pitris et al had waited and got >together .... this problem of ours of body, mind, and spirit >disconnection would not have happened. Can you see it from my point of >view? I don't know which is worse to be faced with... an old man in the >sky who got it darn near perfect and then threw us out because we >overstepped our bounds, or a bunch of Lords of Wisdom that appear to be >developing on the fly using us as a vessel. That's being extreme, but >it makes my point. > >Readings: Archaic History pp 1-29 >p29: "The Sons of Wisdom, the Sons of Night...ready for rebirth came >down. They saw the (intellectually) vile forms of the first third >(still senseless Race.) "We can choose", said the Lords, "we have >wisdom." etc. >van Pelt comments: "H.P. Blavatsky...says this Stanza contains the whole >key to the mysteries of evil. It explains the puzzling equalities in >human life, and many problems which have baffled the great minds of our >races. Intellect may said to have been born at this time, and during >this Fourth Round it developed as a fit vehicle for the higher faculty, >Buddhi, or intuition. But Manas or mind will not be fully developed >until the next or Fifth Round, and will have the opportunity of becoming >entirely divine at the end of the Seventh Round." > >ME: Linear concepts, man being the pinacle of creation, standard >evolutionary concepts mixed with Indian legends, class structures all >over the place, and the following, which is a massive BARRIER to >universality: >"Those who were "not ready", are represented at present by some native >Australian, African and Oceanic tribes (snip) and as conscious life >grows, each is given what he has earned." > >For me the explanation that it is not my fault, nor the fault of the >"gods" and that nature compensates by giving no Karma to work out, "as >their more favored brethren in intelligence had", so that "in this >respect the poor savage is more fortunate than the greatest genius of >civilized countries", gets my back up something chronic. > >I have to tell you that I always start out reading Theosophy with >interest and expected acceptance, and end up either angry or depressed. >E.G. "The First (Race) on every zone was moon-coloured (yellow-white); >the Second, yellow, like gold; the Third, red; the Fourth, brown, which >became black with sin." >It doesn't matter that the first seven (human) shoots were all of one >complexion in the beginning, or that the next (seven, the sub races) >began mixing their colours, the damamge is done and her white supremacy >slip is showing. "like gold, black with sin", my stars! > >"All had common origin, inasmuch as all the 'Creators' were Divine >Beings, though of different classes or degrees of perfection in their >Hierarchy. THIS ACCOUNTS FOR THE DIFFERENCE OF RACES, THE INFERIORITY >OF SAVAGES, AND OTHER HUMAN VARIETIES." > >ME: I guess the earth changes that destroyed the unfit ones didn't quite >work? It matters not IMHO that we are now past that phase in >incarnations, people latch onto these concepts and use them to support >their desire to practice prejudice, not as an explanation and promise to >never do it again. > >I have a problem with the Lemuria and Atlantis stuff, as it is opposite >to what others have written on and have experienced in astral travel to >both times and places. > >And finally, I am devastated to read that the Americans are the chosen >ones. Or maybe not. The Hopi's look like a 90% probability to be the >only surviviors of this next round of "cleansing". > >You have shown me Dallas that different people "read into" these works >in different ways and I am most happy that you have found a lifetime of >growth and peace in it. It certainly appears that my husband may too. >That is excellent. Except, it is nigh on two years now that he found >Theosophy. Before that he was "working" on his spiritual development >what I call actively, with some martial arts for discipline and >exercise, courses in various arts, sciences and business fields, >exploring with groups of other "beliefs", and doing add jobs around the >house and garden. Now it seems as if he is reading and waiting, almost >as if any action by himself is irrelevant. THAT scares me. But when I >read the texts too and get the feeling that I am some pawn in the >creators' plan, a plan that takes billion of years on a fixed >evolutionary path that I cannot impact, (except perhaps by screwing up >and creating frightening Karma), I can understand this possible >reaction. Many people, like my husband, are waiting for a something to >come along and explain it all away as not their fault, predestined, not >in their control. When Theosophy supports that desire, I cannot support >Theosophy. I believe that we are the fallen ones, disconnected from the >one supremeness by our choice, and that it is our responsibility and >lifework to make it back in whatever way works best for us and for the >whole concurrently. So, I think still that we are not at variance in >intent. > >My debate with you was concerning why I believed that there were issues >impeding universal acceptance and I think enough is enough, BECAUSE what >ever the text, the people whom I have met here are good souls. >And so I think the comment made about the works being pointers for an >intellectual path of self discovery and development is a good one and I >have no qualms in commenting that HPB should be required reading in any >good education system. >Blessed Be >Annette > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 12:27:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:24:10 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Egregore Message-ID: <256500fe.3591363b@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-23 19:50:32 EDT, you write: << Thanks for the definition. Can you also supply a phonetic pronounciation. Is it 'Egg-re-gore', Eeeg-re-gore or some other possibility? Thanks. >> Eh-greh-gore -aye, maybe. Just a guess. From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 13:42:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:30:23 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Internet in colleges Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-23 01:33:07 EDT, Doss writes: << Libraries have ethernet outlets so that you can connect your computer from a carrel. >> Sorry for being computer ignorant but what's "ethernet" and what's a "carrel" ?? Lmhem111 From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 13:57:39 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:53:33 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? Message-ID: <6955c723.35914b2f@aol.com> Subj: Re: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? In a message dated 98-06-24 11:48:03 EDT, Govert W. Schüller writes: << the risks and dangers of the international financial situation >> In 1900 America officially accepted the gold standard but now we have paper money. I remember when the change consisted of real silver coins instead of coins made from metal alloys. I recall seeing silver certificates in circulation, resembling our present dollar bill. We are suffering from the Karma of ill-conceived monetary policies. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 15:12:45 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:53:25 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? Message-ID: <001d01bd9fa9$c0c88ca0$190b9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> > From: "Marshall Hemingway III" > Subj: Re: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? In a message dated 98-06-24 11:48:03 EDT, Govert W. Schüller writes: << the risks and dangers of the international financial situation >> From the popint of view of the common good these policies were ill-conceived, from the point of view of some of the financial power elite these policies gave them greater opportunity to rig the system in their favor. We let them do it, so both made karma. Govert From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 17:44:09 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:52:14 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Dr. Bain and "Real Evidence" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000601bd9f51$929445c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Wow -- I can trace parallels here with some of the aspects of my >own lie A most unfortunate typo! Alan ------------------- Brought to you from West Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 18:02:23 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:49:45 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000401bd9f51$90380640$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >THE MEMORY IN NATURE OF THE BAD CHOICES WE MADE IN >>THE PAST, AND WHICH IS NOW OUR "BAD" KARMA COMING >HOME TO ROOST. >>we HAVE TO UNDO OUR OWN ERRORS. Looks very similar to the doctrine of "Original Sin" being shouted from the rooftops. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 18:11:15 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 13:47:10 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000501bd9f51$914dbc00$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Dear Kym: > >Before supposing any more it might be a good idea to dip into THE >SECRET DOCTRINE. The question of "god" is discussed from pages >14 to 18 in the 1st volume, and elsewhere ( see the INDEX ) ; >also, on the subject of evolution, which evolution do you mean >physiological, emotional, mental spiritual ? Each one is >separate, yet interblended in man. Dear Dal, I don't intend to be contentious, but do you have personal experience of these different sorts of evolution, and can you explain it in your *own* words? I suspect your meaning is really something like "According to the teaching given by HPB in the Secret Doctrine (which I [Dal] believe is true ...."). If I am right, it would be a fairer way of getting your views and feelings across. As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth, and brings immediately to mind Doss's post re the uneducated and ignorant, who would *certainly* IMO, believe what you have said was dogma, and was beleived by all theosophists of all shades, just because they describe themselves as theosophists. I do this, but I no more take the SD of the writings of HPB or any other writer as "gospel truth" - any more than I take the teachings of the gospels as gospel *truth*. Sincerely and in fellowship, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 18:27:50 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 18:15:09 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Internet in colleges Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980624181509.009aaa20@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: Ethernet is protocol used in linking many computers together using a cable. It was invented by Xerox Palo Alto Research lab 25 years ago. What I meant by carrel is the study desk in the library. One more thing. I visited the University yesterday and I was told that students can set up a server in their dorm rooms so that you can run your own www so long as it is not commercial or does not run games. The school does not want droves of users invading from around the world to play games and slowing down everyone. mkr At 02:30 PM 6/24/1998 EDT, you wrote: > >In a message dated 98-06-23 01:33:07 EDT, Doss writes: > ><< Libraries have ethernet outlets so that you can connect your computer from >a carrel. >> > >Sorry for being computer ignorant but what's "ethernet" and what's a "carrel" >?? > >Lmhem111 > > From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 21:30:41 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:18:45 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Happy trails Message-Id: <199806250218.UAA23203@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >You know, Kym, you're smart, but some people are really shy. Why, my son >is so shy sometimes, it hurts me to watch him. Obviously, not that smart as I have no idea what you're alluding to here. Are you saying that you are shy and exchanges with others (or even me in particular) is painful? Are you saying I'm shy and somehow my e-mails reflect that? Are you simply sharing some knowledge about your son and family life? >Do you think there could be >shy people right here on the internet and blazing ahead of themselves >courageous new trails into hearts? Again, I need your help here. You lost me with "blazing ahead of themselves courageous new trails into hearts." Whose hearts are getting the new trails? The shy people? Or the people who are reading writings from the shy people? And how does one 'blaze ahead of themselves?' One can blaze ahead of others, but I'm unsure how one blazes ahead of their own self. >An action done with purpose in mind can contain many alternative routes to >the same goal, so if we fall short accomplishing specically the command we >had in mind, we can still go at the "accomplishing" of the purpose. We >just return to the positive state of assisting life manifest "glory" and >hopefully a second, third, fourth, etc., chance will come. Please give me an example of "glory." In your opinion, how do you know what is "glory" and what is not "glory?" In other words, one may think they are creating "good" but in reality they are creating pain, suffering, or darkness for others. How does one know a "bad" command from a good "command?" How does one know a false "ascended master" from a true "ascended master?" Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 21:43:10 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:18:48 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Straight, no milk Message-Id: <199806250218.UAA23214@mailmx.micron.net> Govert wrote: >Yes, C.U.T. thinks that there is a substantial chance for >such a situation to occur, substantial enough to be >prepared. But we hope it will not happen. Better safe, than >sorry. You are not at risk regarding rightwingers, because >you probably have not food for more than a week. Sorry if >you don't catch the logic. Yes, I know what you're saying here, but I doubt it has much logic for me to "catch." Lizzie Prophet said the world was going to end in 1990 - C.U.T. has this "end time" mentality. And yes, I am at risk regarding "rightwingers" - America is run by them and I know the damage they can do - and they need not rob my cupboards to do it. >The U.S. government has failed to provide its people with a >common defense, so the people have to provide it for >themselves. You got that straight from an NRA (National Rifle Association) manual, didn't you!? >Compassion and justice are for me the key-words and I do not >translate them into pacifism nor situational ethics. For a >more visionary account of Adepts invoved in politics >throughout the ages read >Manly P. Hall's "The secret Destiny of America." First of all, I don't trust anyone with the first name of "Manly." Secondly, you may also have noticed that CLIMB THE HIGHEST MOUNTAIN is a wieldy book. Same with the SD or any other big, honkin' monograph. Rather than stockpile guns, I suggest stockpiling those titles. When the rightwingers attack, simply beat them to death with the corner edges of the aforementioned books. Messy, yes, but it will get the job done. Now, after having accomplished the mission of the Masters, imagine the tingles of holding up such aforementioned books (like the Statue of Liberty holds up her Light), slowly dripping thick drops of blood down your arm, knowing you have vanquished the enemy, preserved the Masters and Truth, revealed compassion, doled out justice, and lived to tell about it. You're right, pacifists miss out on all the good stuff. You know, Govert, I've figured it out. No one else is getting into this because you're a fruit loop and I just might be a fruit loop and they've all realized it but us. Kym From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 22:30:22 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:28:05 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <3591C3C5.5B2B@globalserve.net> References: <002a01bd9f8f$6a8ce440$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > Who are the "gods ?" I firmly think that we are the "gods." WE > are those who know that deep down inside there is an immortal > something. It is the source of "my" I-ness. And you, and > everyone else has their own. But once that we get down to that > level we find that we are touching each other most intimately and > that the units form a vast WHOLE. Gone are the differences. > They were not important anyway. Dear Dallas: THAT is our COMMON GROUND. I am starting a re-read of the teachings of Buddha, from square one. >From the four Dharmic Principles outwards. I will stop when the voices of others are just noise and bells and whistles. I am finding it a great experience to do this in age, when I can stick with the focus and experience, always to some extent, what the great ones experienced, rather than as an intellectual exercise. Love and long life to you Annette From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 22:45:22 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:47:14 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: <3591C842.6342@globalserve.net> References: <199806250218.UAA23214@mailmx.micron.net> Dear Kym and Govert: I wouldn't touch this little debate with a ten foot barge pole. Anyway, I'm still reeling from the recent reading that America will spawn the next race, and from "knowing psychically" that my boss and his favourites are planning to oust me once they get their hands on my "baby" the database, birthed from my brains, sweat and tears. When that happens, I'll be forced to re-read Atlas Shrugged for the tenth time and decide once again whether to get up and at 'em once more. Or maybe the stock market will crash and/or Canada will float down the Mississippi to lodge in the throat of the deep South and I'll be otherwise engaged. Think I'll meditate on birth and death, and forget the stuff in between for a while. Annette From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 23:01:01 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 20:44:23 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-ID: <3591C797.4307@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > W. Dallas TenBroeck writes > >Dear Kym: > > > >Before supposing any more it might be a good idea to dip into THE > >SECRET DOCTRINE. The question of "god" is discussed from pages > >14 to 18 in the 1st volume, and elsewhere ( see the INDEX ) ; > >also, on the subject of evolution, which evolution do you mean > >physiological, emotional, mental spiritual ? Each one is > >separate, yet interblended in man. > > Dear Dal, > > I don't intend to be contentious, but do you have personal experience of > these different sorts of evolution, and can you explain it in your *own* > words? I suspect your meaning is really something like "According to > the teaching given by HPB in the Secret Doctrine (which I [Dal] believe > is true ...."). If I am right, it would be a fairer way of getting your views > and feelings across. As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a > sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth, and brings > immediately to mind Doss's post re the uneducated and ignorant, who > would *certainly* IMO, believe what you have said was dogma, and > was beleived by all theosophists of all shades, just because they > describe themselves as theosophists. > > I do this, but I no more take the SD of the writings of HPB or any other > writer as "gospel truth" - any more than I take the teachings of the > gospels as gospel *truth*. > > Sincerely and in fellowship, > > Alan Daniel Caldwell replies: Dr. Bain, Concerning Dallas' quoted statement, you write: >As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a > sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth . . . Are you, by chance, reading *a little too much* into Dallas' words???? Dallas not only gives quotations and citations from Blavatsky texts but he ALSO explains theosophical teachings in his own words. This is not the only occasion when it has appeared that you are "irritated" with Dallas' method of quoting and citing various references from Madame Blavatsky's writings. You may not appreciate these references but I and other readers may find the citations useful for our individual studies. I hope Dallas *will continue* to quote and cite material that he thinks is appropriate to the given discussion. Also I believe Dallas has a right to say that he believes HP Blavatsky is *knowledgeable* and/or *correct* on a given point or subject. This is not the same thing as claiming that HPB is giving out "inviolate, certain and absolute truth"!! I would hope that individuals can have serious discussions here on Theos-Talk about what HPB wrote and taught without being labelled "dogmatists" and "fundamentalists" and accused of holding her teachings as "inviolate, certain and absolute truth." From ???@??? Wed Jun 24 23:27:38 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:17:45 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: digest #242 (on education) Message-ID: <3591CF69.4ED1@globalserve.net> References: <199806240800.CAA26148@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > Problem seems to be that a few others do not recognize nor care to ponder > whether there is any bit of "trouble" in their way of thinking on this issue > - are they trying to benefit children or themselves? Many adults tend to > see children as mini-clones of themselves. . .and end up simply mucking it > all up. . .or worse. You know, Kym, I've had about 2 hours sleep since Sunday trying to be all things and I go into work and people are like ENMESHED in some reality that I don't know whether to laugh hysterically at or cry pityfully about (stike that, pity and tears are OUT). Thinking things through is the last thing on their minds! > True, but that appears to be an individual teacher or school principal > problem - not the public-school philosophy in general. You're right, though > - for example: it is well known that boys are given much more attention by > teachers than girls are. . .many studies by sociologists have reflected this. Actually, I was thinking equally as much of what students do to other students, which of course parrots what their parents do to other parents! > If the Execs and other employees of your company kept > their children in the public schools, they could be more involved and aware > of the problems. They would, since their children were there, be more > motivated to solve such problems - and many more children would receive the > education all children deserve. Admirable concept. You'd have to legislate it though and make punishment for failure to comply at the least a public announcement and at the worst taking away their rosewood desks and business attire! By the way, some professor up here is giving a "ground breaking" university course on life skills, problem solving and thinking things through. The newspaper article continues: "and, surprisingly, the students taking this course appear to be getting higher grades in their other courses." Hallelulah! > >Religious > >propaganda, authoritarianism and prejudice are and would be part of the > >curriculum, and what better way to eradicate them in the long term than > >by insisting that a young learner follow them to the letter? > > I don't quite understand what you are saying here - could you please further > explain what you mean? Are you saying we should put children under the yoke > of authoritarianiam and prejudice and that will turn them off so much that > they will not practice it as adults? If so, how does one explain the > success of the Hitler Youth? Have I misunderstood you? No, I am saying that these things are in existance and provide the ying for the yan to blossom. I wasn't thinking of anything like the Hitler Youth Movement, more like compulsory physical education scantily clothed on a freezing winter morning when the fat kids were singled out and made to jump the horse, nearly killed themselves, and were shouted at for being failures. Like when I went to school! I was just trying to verbalize a concept of needing the -ve to experience the +ve, in a guided and controlled setting. And now for something completely different: A quote from the book I just read that warmed the cockles of the feminine part of my being.... "I, like most men, was a "wanter" rather than a "giver". I was inwardly wimpy - weak. Most women want a man that is inwardly strong, and not "needy" of them. That goes EVEN MORE SO for higher consciouness women. And even *higher* consciousness women also want one who is at least dedicated to god and achieving enlightenment, if not already enlightened." That's my comment on the Asian financial situation. I think I'm in love! But it's written by a Bhuddist monk - oh no, not again!! Cheers, Kym Annette From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 00:12:40 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:10:46 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: Dear Fellow Theosophists I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. Thomas Browne From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 00:27:38 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 01:20:18 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <5478a51d.3591de13@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-24 19:11:52 EDT, you write: >Looks very similar to the doctrine of "Original Sin" being shouted from >the rooftops. > >Alan I know, with probably equal validity. Chuck From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 06:42:37 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 19:01:20 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <000301bda02d$7db617a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 24th "Original Sin" as I understand it was not due nor just. Our Karma, good or bad, is what we set up through our choosing. Now, if you do not think we reincarnate, then indeed we live in a very unjust universe. But if you do think that we reincarnate then the "Thread-soul" which strings personality after personality on its eternal thread as we string days on our passing experience of this life, and call the memories of them "how we were when we did -- this or that -- becomes the "carrier" of our past good or ill thoughts and deeds. Personally I prefer to live in a just Universe where I am sure of my own fate as I am sure that water will wet me tomorrow when I shower. I'd like to think that my future is being constructed by me here and now, and that in the meantime I have to handle the good or ill that I may have done in the past. Best as always, Dal > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 4:23 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>THE MEMORY IN NATURE OF THE BAD CHOICES WE MADE IN >>>THE PAST, AND WHICH IS NOW OUR "BAD" KARMA COMING >>HOME TO ROOST. >>>we HAVE TO UNDO OUR OWN ERRORS. > >Looks very similar to the doctrine of "Original Sin" being shouted from >the rooftops. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 06:55:08 1998 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 19:04:20 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-ID: <000401bda02d$7eb1dcc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Alan you are quite right. I do carried away. I have worked on this so many times for so many years it has become 2nd nature to me to say it in that vein , and I need friends like you to remind me that it is better to say it is a theory than to say it is a fact.--even when I am intellectually quite sure that the fact is a fact -- at least for me. Dal > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 4:27 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>Dear Kym: >> >>Before supposing any more it might be a good idea to dip into THE >>SECRET DOCTRINE. The question of "god" is discussed from pages >>14 to 18 in the 1st volume, and elsewhere ( see the INDEX ) ; >>also, on the subject of evolution, which evolution do you mean >>physiological, emotional, mental spiritual ? Each one is >>separate, yet interblended in man. > >Dear Dal, > >I don't intend to be contentious, but do you have personal experience of >these different sorts of evolution, and can you explain it in your *own* >words? I suspect your meaning is really something like "According to >the teaching given by HPB in the Secret Doctrine (which I [Dal] believe >is true ...."). If I am right, it would be a fairer way of getting your views >and feelings across. As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a >sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth, and brings >immediately to mind Doss's post re the uneducated and ignorant, who >would *certainly* IMO, believe what you have said was dogma, and >was beleived by all theosophists of all shades, just because they >describe themselves as theosophists. > >I do this, but I no more take the SD of the writings of HPB or any other >writer as "gospel truth" - any more than I take the teachings of the >gospels as gospel *truth*. > >Sincerely and in fellowship, > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 08:57:38 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:48:54 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: == Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: <006c01bda03f$c3e524c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 25th 1998 Dear Andrew Brown: Suggestion: read and become familiar with THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE by H P Blavatsky. In its 78 pages you will have enough of the "Heart Doctrine" to give starting points for true meditation for a lifetime. If by meditation on the heart chakra you mean a psycho-physiological exercise of the kind recommended in some Tantric schools, I am afraid that there will be no end to disappointment. As the "heart" is used as a symbol for "wisdom," so meditation on that inner wisdom is on one's own inner self as the base for one's existence and purpose in life. By extension the "heart doctrine" or "wisdom" in any one of us will be found (if true) to encompass the wisdom of the whole Universe and of everyone else who is striving, as we are to become "perfected." There are of course many other "goals," some of which have been labeled "heart-meditation." But where is the truth, the final aim to be directed ? Some knowledge enables selection to be more accurate. Would you care to consider the following ? That is as I understand your question and would answer from one of the several Theosophical points of view. Ideally it is universal, impersonal, and provable by every one within the crucible of their own meditative thinking. Since it is also eternal it is available to those who consider that they are, at the core of their being, an immortal Spirit/Soul that is travelling through the experiences of many successive lives, so as to reach the goal of final perfection [ All Knowingness] for this Manvantara ( or period of manifestation). They make of their living and their personalities an impersonal and universal base for thinking, meditation and living their ordinary unspectacular lives. This means as a primary exercise moral (or ethical) purification: Harmlessness, Brotherhood, Unselfishness, Compassion, and Service to all. These are, of course, my own opinions on the subject which I have found to be fundamental to all Theosophical study. With best wishes to you, Dallas > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 10:29 PM > From: "Thomas Browne" > Subject: Heart/Chakra Meditation >Dear Fellow Theosophists >I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the >heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does >anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would >greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. >Thomas Browne > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 09:05:31 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 05:29:17 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <006b01bda03f$c25b7780$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Annette: When all is said and done, the sayings of the Buddha (25000 years old) are along with those of Krishna (5,000 years old) some of the most basic and really quite simple presentations of the great truths of our existence, purpose and practical living. I speak of course as they have struck me, and to which presentation I have of course added my own thinking. We each frame our own understandings, and like the wise spider weaving its web, we draw in more ideas and in the center of our net we live and store them. No wonder then that some of our native "Indians" fashioned (figurative) "dream catchers" out of threads gossamer, leaves and feathers -- in imitation, I think, of the non-material nature of those, and their innate power. [ Don't we imitate them ? Them when we use a radio or a TV and through the antenna (our "catcher" of vibrations--dreams--to some) draw in the diaphanous emanations that pervade the ether, and which we call a "broadcast" -- all vibrations, all insubstantial, and yet we have an apparatus that transforms the into sounds and images. All we need now is for someone to detect and transform the images on the Astral plane ; but so far, only certain individuals in "states of altered consciousness" perceive them.] But to get back to the Buddha: Why not start with his own words ? I mean the DHAMMAPADA, the "Footfalls of the Law" -- A year after his death all the members of the Sangha, the brotherhood met again under the presidentship of Ananda his closes disciple. They were set the task of writing down all that each had heard of what the Buddha had said -- since the Buddha, himself did not write anything. In the year following all those many versions were brought together and compared and copies -- so that the "Abhidharma" (from which both the Mahayana and the Hinayana Schools of Buddhism derive their fundamental doctrines) went on record. It was found that all the Bhikkus (monks) had remembered the Buddha saying certain things. These were, as the common testimony, set together as they all coincided in word and idea. This was then called the DHAMMAPADA. It consists of 26 chapters comprising 423 verses (slokas). Many translations have been made of these in many languages, and it is wise to use several for cross comparison. The "Tripitaka" or the three "baskets": 1. the doctrine, 2. the rules and laws of the "Sangha," the brotherhood of monks; and, 3. the metaphysical and philosophical dissertations and metaphysics -- these are the three divisions of Buddhistic lore. They constitute an enormous treasure trove. So "have fun." I would add to this the observation that, IMHO, HPB came so recently to do that kind of work again. On behalf of the Great and Ancient Brotherhood of the Wise, she had, as mission, one that drew together the whole world of religions, of philosophies and of sciences. She epitomizes all those without seeking to decry or to alter them. And she shows her readers and students how all those correlate on the basis of principles and ideas. But that is something each one of us has to come to see on his or her own terms. And thus each of us carves their own "path to the Truth." Best wishes as always, Dal > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 8:46 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End >W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: >> >> Who are the "gods ?" I firmly think that we are the "gods." WE >> are those who know that deep down inside there is an immortal >> something. It is the source of "my" I-ness. And you, and >> everyone else has their own. But once that we get down to that >> level we find that we are touching each other most intimately and >> that the units form a vast WHOLE. Gone are the differences. >> They were not important anyway. > >Dear Dallas: >THAT is our COMMON GROUND. > >I am starting a re-read of the teachings of Buddha, from square one. >>From the four Dharmic Principles outwards. I will stop when the voices >of others are just noise and bells and whistles. > >I am finding it a great experience to do this in age, when I can stick >with the focus and experience, always to some extent, what the great >ones experienced, rather than as an intellectual exercise. > >Love and long life to you >Annette > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 09:12:49 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 10:04:56 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-25 09:35:26 EDT, Annette write: << I'll be forced to re-read Atlas Shrugged for the tenth time >> See the Ayn Rand Institute at http://www.aynrand.org/ She's a great writer. I agree with much of her objectivist philosophy but I'm not keen on objectivism' aversion to mysticism. Too bad she didn't read the SD. She might have become a theosophist. If she had, she would have been the new HPB. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 09:27:37 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 02:17:22 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: <000401bda044$60a3a6c0$370b9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> >Govert wrote: > >>Yes, C.U.T. thinks that there is a substantial chance for >>such a situation to occur, substantial enough to be >>prepared. But we hope it will not happen. Better safe, than >>sorry. You are not at risk regarding rightwingers, because >>you probably have not food for more than a week. Sorry if >>you don't catch the logic. Kym responded: >Yes, I know what you're saying here, but I doubt it has much logic for me to >"catch." Lizzie Prophet said the world was going to end in 1990 - C.U.T. >has this "end time" mentality. And yes, I am at risk regarding >"rightwingers" - America is run by them and I know the damage they can do - >and they need not rob my cupboards to do it. She never said that. Her study of prophecies and astrology, and contact with the Masters made her conclude that April 1990 was a very dangerous time for the world. Dangerous, not the end. Years later we heard that in that month India and Pakistan were almost at each other's throat again and the USA and Russia were on high alert. Luckily nothing happened. "End time" mentality has indeed crept into the organization through certain fearful individuals. Meanwhile they also act as if they will be around for a long long time and its new president has taken a hard look at the 'organizational culture' and is implementing a very effective and creative plan to change the whole organization. >>The U.S. government has failed to provide its people with a >>common defense, so the people have to provide it for >>themselves. > >You got that straight from an NRA (National Rifle Association) manual, >didn't you!? I did not know they were into national defense issues. Though I can imagine that whatever might promote their cause they will use it, as is done by the other side of the debate. >>Compassion and justice are for me the key-words and I do not >>translate them into pacifism nor situational ethics. For a >>more visionary account of Adepts invoved in politics >>throughout the ages read >>Manly P. Hall's "The secret Destiny of America." > >First of all, I don't trust anyone with the first name of "Manly." > >Secondly, you may also have noticed that CLIMB THE HIGHEST MOUNTAIN is a >wieldy book. Same with the SD or any other big, honkin' monograph. Rather >than stockpile guns, I suggest stockpiling those titles. When the >rightwingers attack, simply beat them to death with the corner edges of the >aforementioned books. Messy, yes, but it will get the job done. Before I can have that pleasure I hope to be able to lure them away from their guns by inviting them to come and read together the SD. I know this will work, for they are very interested in literature promoting the superiority of the the Aryans. >Now, after having accomplished the mission of the Masters, imagine the >tingles of holding up such aforementioned books (like the Statue of Liberty >holds up her Light), slowly dripping thick drops of blood down your arm, >knowing you have vanquished the enemy, preserved the Masters and Truth, >revealed compassion, doled out justice, and lived to tell about it. You're >right, pacifists miss out on all the good stuff. O.k, if they did not like my little reading circle and started pulling out their guns, I do not know what I would do, but theoratically I will be in favor of shooting first. How I would feel afterwards I do not know either, but it might be pretty miserable. How did Washington feel after the last battle against the British? Or Eisenhower when the Allies finally beat the Nazi's? At home the people had a big party, but many soldiers came back deeply traumatized or not at all. Freedom comes with a price pacifists don't want to pay. >You know, Govert, I've figured it out. No one else is getting into this >because you're a fruit loop and I just might be a fruit loop and they've all >realized it but us. You have enriched my vocabulary again with "fruit loop." Only the meaning is missing. Fill me in again, Kym. Govert From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 10:12:37 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:05:56 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD Message-ID: <30a23b19.35926756@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-25 09:41:04 EDT, Daniel Caldwell writes: << You may not appreciate these references but I and other readers may find the citations useful for our individual studies. I hope Dallas *will continue* to quote and cite material that he thinks is appropriate to the given discussion. Also I believe Dallas has a right to say that he believes HP Blavatsky is *knowledgeable* and/or *correct* on a given point or subject. This is not the same thing as claiming that HPB is giving out "inviolate, certain and absolute truth"!! >> I agree, Daniel. The Internet is a free forum. Dal has the right to quote and comment from an HPB-Judge perspective. I'm an eclectic theosophist, myself, so I find post-Blavatskyian authors valuable as well. Others may not agree but we're not within the confines of an organization here. My two bits Lmhem111 From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 10:42:38 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:36:06 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: Re: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-25 11:02:28 EDT, Thomas Browne writes: << I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. >> Avalon, Arthur (Sir John Woodroffe): THE SERPENT POWER, BEING THE SAT-CHAKRA- NIRUPANA AND PADUKA-PANCAKA: TWO WORKS ON LAYA YOGA ; Madras India: Ganesh & Company, 1975. Repr. 1927 edition Leadbeather, C.W.: THE CHAKRAS, Theosophical Publishing House, 1927 (TPH reprint, 1979). Johari, Harish: CHAKRAS, Destiny, 1987. Trade SC, Motoyama, Hiroshi: THEORIES OF THE CHAKRAS: BRIDGE TO THE CONSCIOUSNESS; Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1981. Rendel, P.: Understanding the Chakras ; Using Western Esoteric Philosophy and Aspects of Western tradition - How to Use and Control the Inner Energies. Thorson's Publishers Gunther, Bernard: ENERGY ECSTASY: AND YOUR SEVEN VITAL CHAKRAS ; California, 1983 New Castle Publishing Co. Ozaniek, N.: The Chakras ; A Helpful Guide to the Popular Western Application of the Chakra System of Hindu Tantra. Element Publishers Bruyere, Rosalyn L.: WHEELS OF LIGHT, A STUDY OF THE CHAKRAS Volume 1 ; Bon Productions. Sierra Madre, CA., (1993). Gardner, Joy: COLOR AND CRYSTALS, A JOURNET THROUGH THE CHAKRAS ; Crossing Press, 1988, Judith, Anodea & Vega, Selene: Sevenfold Journey: Reclaiming Mind, Body & Spirit Through The Chakras ; Crossing Press, 1993. Lansdowne, Zachary F: CHAKRAS & ESOTERIC HEALING; Waser, 1992. sc, Paulson, Genevieve Lewis: KUNDALINI AND THE CHAKRAS, A PRACTICAL MANUAL; St.Paul. Llewellyn Publications. 1993. From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 11:57:51 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 11:50:21 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980625115021.00870e00@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <30a23b19.35926756@aol.com> At 11:05 AM 6/25/1998 EDT, you wrote: >In a message dated 98-06-25 09:41:04 EDT, Daniel Caldwell writes: > ><< You may not appreciate these references but I and other readers may find >the citations useful for our individual studies. I hope Dallas *will >continue* to quote and cite material that he thinks is appropriate to the >given discussion. > > Also I believe Dallas has a right to say that he believes HP Blavatsky is >*knowledgeable* and/or *correct* on a given point or subject. This is not the >same thing as claiming that HPB is giving out "inviolate, certain and absolute >truth"!! >> > >I agree, Daniel. The Internet is a free forum. Dal has the right to quote and >comment from an HPB-Judge perspective. I'm an eclectic theosophist, myself, so >I find post-Blavatskyian authors valuable as well. Others may not agree but >we're not within the confines of an organization here. > >My two bits >Lmhem111 Well said. The moment *any* organization gets into the picture, *control* comes in no matter however much they try not to. The fundamental strength, much to the dismay of many organizational types, of Internet is the unfettered freedom to express your opinions and ideas. mkr From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 13:47:48 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 14:43:57 -0400 From: "Phillips Spencer" Subject: Re: == Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: Importance: high Dear Andrew Brown: You may find "The Yoga Aphorisms of Patanjali" an interpretation by William Q. Judge very helpful also in your study. The Preface to this Book written by Mr. Judge I have found to be very valuable over the years in my understanding Ishwara. Spencer .-----Original Message----- > From: "Dallas TenBroeck" > Sent: Thursday, June 25, 1998 8:49 AM > Subject: Re: == Heart/Chakra Meditation > > June 25th 1998 > > Dear Andrew Brown: > > Suggestion: read and become familiar with THE VOICE OF THE > SILENCE by H P Blavatsky. In its 78 pages you will have enough > of the "Heart Doctrine" to give starting points for true > meditation for a lifetime. > > If by meditation on the heart chakra you mean a > psycho-physiological exercise of the kind recommended in some > Tantric schools, I am afraid that there will be no end to > disappointment. > > As the "heart" is used as a symbol for "wisdom," so meditation on > that inner wisdom is on one's own inner self as the base for > one's existence and purpose in life. > > By extension the "heart doctrine" or "wisdom" in any one of us > will be found (if true) to encompass the wisdom of the whole > Universe and of everyone else who is striving, as we are to > become "perfected." > > There are of course many other "goals," some of which have been > labeled "heart-meditation." But where is the truth, the final > aim to be directed ? Some knowledge enables selection to be more > accurate. Would you care to consider the following ? > > That is as I understand your question and would answer from one > of the several Theosophical points of view. > > Ideally it is universal, impersonal, and provable by every one > within the crucible of their own meditative thinking. Since it > is also eternal it is available to those who consider that they > are, at the core of their being, an immortal Spirit/Soul that is > travelling through the experiences of many successive lives, so > as to reach the goal of final perfection [ All Knowingness] for > this Manvantara ( or period of manifestation). They make of > their living and their personalities an impersonal and universal > base for thinking, meditation and living their ordinary > unspectacular lives. This means as a primary exercise moral (or > ethical) purification: Harmlessness, Brotherhood, > Unselfishness, Compassion, and Service to all. > > These are, of course, my own opinions on the subject which I have > found to be fundamental to all Theosophical study. > > With best wishes to you, Dallas > > ======================================== > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Thomas Browne" > Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 10:29 PM > Subject: Heart/Chakra Meditation > > > >Dear Fellow Theosophists > >I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is > put on the > >heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or > others. Does > >anyone know of writings which contain any information on this > topic. I would > >greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. > >Thomas Browne From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 15:38:51 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 16:35:02 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Chakra meditation Message-Id: <199806252035.QAA11819@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806251142.GAA27097@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 25, 98 06:42:45 am Dear Thomas, I recommend any book on meditation based on the Edgar Cayce readings, or the meditation readings themselves (vols. 1 and 2 of the Edgar Cayce Library series) for a westernized yoga that focuses on the chakras, including the heart. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 17:53:46 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:07:22 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Message-ID: <3592CA1A.1D50@netgsi.com> References: <008e01bd9b89$15b12e40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Dallas offers: Some words from Robert Crosbie > > "How shall we apply Theosophy in daily life ? ...etc Dallas, Crosbie's words (I have never read him) are a modern version of the magical Oath of the Abyss. This is like a Theosophical version of the Oath. Both are powerful techniques. Thanks for the post as I was unaware of this technique being available in Theosophy. Jerry S. From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 18:01:35 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:01:13 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <3592C7C9.172A@netgsi.com> References: <003f01bd9c4d$5068c420$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > [Dallas}: > I definitely would not but HPB and CWL into the same category as > CWL diverged seriously from HPB. Dallas, in future would you please add a caveat to your rather flamable statements such as this one, to include something like IMHO? I have never found any such "serious divergence" nor have you ever offered any when I asked many times in the past. Such "divergences" are in your mind, but not in mine, and are therefore your opinion rather than fact. As you are well aware, I am guilty of this too, but I have been trying to improve by toning down my own opinions or at least labeling them as such. Jerry S. From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 18:08:33 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 18:16:30 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <3592CC3E.19A3@netgsi.com> References: <199806191317.JAA14818@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <358A807B.4EA@lainet.com> > The study of theosophy (and lets forget the capital T vs lower t)the > way I understood from HPB, is not only to study all belief, all > religions, all mythologies, all sciences, all arts, and so on, but to do > in a 'special' way which is what I call theosophy. That system of > investigating into the above mentioned, to extract Nature's Laws, to > prove them in ones life, to compare them with other ways of expressing > them, and so on, is what Theosophy is all about. ... Martin, I agree with you here, but the problem that I have encountered is in "to prove them in one's life" or rather in one's experiences. What happens if your personal experience doesn't "fit" with one of HPB's teachings? Well, you have to ask yourself if HPB is wrong, or if maybe you are going crazy. Or, you can just ascribe her teaching to the exoteric, and try to convince yourself that your expriences are esoteric, and that no real discontinuity exists. I submit that sooner or later this will happen to all of us. Jerry S. From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:10:43 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:51:11 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806250218.UAA23214@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >You know, Govert, I've figured it out. No one else is getting into this >because you're a fruit loop and I just might be a fruit loop and they've all >realized it but us. Ahem - Aren't I in this exclusive club? Alan :0) From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:21:41 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:01:25 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000301bda02d$7db617a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >I'd like to think that my future is being constructed by me here >and now, and that in the meantime I have to handle the good or >ill that I may have done in the past. I'll go with that, but reincarnation isn't a *necessary* factor. It's true in this life anyway! > Best as always, Alan (aka Dr. Bain) :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:24:42 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:59:01 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Cybernetix@aol.com writes >Dear Fellow Theosophists >I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the >heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does >anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would >greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. >Thomas Browne I highly recommend the book "Yoga" - published and reprinted many time by Penguin Books in the UK in their "Pelican" series. Apart from knowing his subject extremely well, Ernest Wood was, for a while, secretary to the well-known theosophist , C.W.Leadbeater, though this is not in itslef a recommendation! He was however, a lifelong theosophist in his own right, and also published a book on "The Seven Rays." Alan Bain --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:26:23 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:29:39 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3591C797.4307@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye writes >Dr. Bain, > >Concerning Dallas' quoted statement, you write: > >>As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a >> sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth . . . > >Are you, by chance, reading *a little too much* into >Dallas' words???? Mr. Caldwell, I am expressing an opinion, and sharing it with Dallas and the list. You will notice that Dal replies to my posts with great courtesy, which I endeavoe to do when addressing his own posts. I cannot say that your posts appear courteous - the opposite in fact. I am a theosophist, but not a dogmatist, which is why you will find a link to *your* website from mine. I observe that the reverse does not apply. Are you, by any chance, making a mountain out of a molehill? Dr. Bain (Knows to everyone else as "Alan" in the spirit of brotherhood within theosophy.) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:32:17 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:07:38 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: = IDEAS and their effect. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <002401bd9dfd$17b88fa0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Could you not say that the difference (as I intended) was to mark >the difference between the "doctrine of the 'eye,' " and the >"doctrine of the 'heart ?' " You could indeed, but one matter that is in itself a probable mystery is "What is an IDEA, and from whence does it come?" > >It is also quite true that any thought will affect in howsoever >small a way the whole of the universe -- just as a pebble dropped >in Malibu Pacific coastal waters will eventually have its effect >on the Cornish Atlantic coast - or your and my exchange over >I-net will affect all those who read it. I would add that it is >not a matter of strength or of time, but that our living is >constantly universalizing our attitudes. Agreed, but by the time it gets here (from Malibu) its effect will be considerably reduced in strength. And wgain, on the subject of defining terms, what *is* an "attitude" ? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:32:44 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:03:49 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000401bda02d$7eb1dcc0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >Dear Alan > >you are quite right. I do carried away. I have worked on this >so many times for so many years it has become 2nd nature to me to >say it in that vein , and I need friends like you to remind me >that it is better to say it is a theory than to say it is a >fact.--even when I am intellectually quite sure that the fact is >a fact -- at least for me. > >Dal You are very generous to say this, and a good example to Mr. Caldwell! Alan >=============================== > >-----Original Message----- >From: "Dr A M Bain" >Date: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 4:27 PM >Subject: Re: Evolution "B" - Creationism "F" > > >>W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>>Dear Kym: >>> >>>Before supposing any more it might be a good idea to dip into >THE >>>SECRET DOCTRINE. The question of "god" is discussed from pages >>>14 to 18 in the 1st volume, and elsewhere ( see the INDEX ) ; >>>also, on the subject of evolution, which evolution do you mean >>>physiological, emotional, mental spiritual ? Each one is >>>separate, yet interblended in man. >> >>Dear Dal, >> >>I don't intend to be contentious, but do you have personal >experience of >>these different sorts of evolution, and can you explain it in >your *own* >>words? I suspect your meaning is really something like >"According to >>the teaching given by HPB in the Secret Doctrine (which I [Dal] >believe >>is true ...."). If I am right, it would be a fairer way of >getting your views >>and feelings across. As your post stands, it reads like the >doctrine of a >>sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth, and >brings >>immediately to mind Doss's post re the uneducated and ignorant, >who >>would *certainly* IMO, believe what you have said was dogma, and >>was beleived by all theosophists of all shades, just because >they >>describe themselves as theosophists. >> >>I do this, but I no more take the SD of the writings of HPB or >any other >>writer as "gospel truth" - any more than I take the teachings of >the >>gospels as gospel *truth*. >> >>Sincerely and in fellowship, >> >>Alan >>--------- >>THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >>http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >>E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 19:39:14 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:40:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Two days at ARE Congress Message-Id: <199806260040.UAA27691@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Greetings to both lists, Cayce students and Theosophists. Since I've been commenting on theos- lists about the ARE as compared to Theosophical groups, I'm sharing these impressions of the 1998 Congress, still going on in Virginia Beach. I attended Sunday evening through Tuesday afternoon. The opening picnic was a chance to visit with old friends and start to get to know some new ones; the space behind the meditation garden where it was held is perfect for the occasion. But this will soon be gone for the new building housing the medical research institute, the school of intuitive studies, and the life purpose institute. After the picnic, Charles Thomas Cayce gave a moving and personal keynote address, outlining several themes he proposed for the weeklong deliberations. One was what kind of ARE we would wish to come back to in another life, and what we could do to transform it in that direction. Another was how we might find the next Edgar Cayce. The most memorable part for me was Charles Thomas talking about a dream in which he saw his father Hugh Lynn and Rev. Pat Robertson talking, walked up to listen, and was told by Hugh Lynn, "It's the medical readings and the media." Meaning, presumably, that this is the way that the Cayce legacy might become known as widely as Robertson's CBN. (A local newspaper gave the number of annual calls received at ARE as 1 million and at CBN as 2 million, so we're within sight of them!) I cannot say enough about the qualities shown by the board members and executive council in the opening session Monday morning. Stan Khury led a presentation of current board concerns, and invited questions and comments from the audience. Alas, instead of serious, substantive questions, what the audience provided was IMHO a series of trivial and/or irrelevant long-winded pronouncements from people who were really confrontational to the leaders. But Stan, Charles Thomas and the others handled all this extremely well; I was really impressed that they could be so non-defensive under fire. Of all the speakers, the most impassioned and critical was Gail Cayce Schwartzer (not sure of last name here) who accused ARE of gross commercialism and turning its back on the research function; she said ARE was in the process of becoming a laughing stock rather than a light to the world (two possibilities outlined in the readings.) Not only did the leaders respond nondefensively, admitting that there was some truth in her observations; they made it clear that they considered it part of their job to take flack and were not blaming the source. I was very impressed by the way people were invited to speak up to the board and execs, and the seriousness with which even flaky comments were received. John Van Auken handled himself very well under fire, btw. My sense of audience reaction was that no one considered ARE or the board or execs perfect, and everyone felt this session was a good thing despite the acrimony. But also that the audience was quite supportive of the board and execs due to their openness, responsiveness, and accessibility. (It was quite easy to pull aside a board member or exec, or Charles Thomas, to share one's views on whatever issue might be at the top of one's agenda.) Bottom line: I came away super impressed by the attitude of board, execs and CTC that they owed the members this kind of open access and information about board affairs. And also the lack of hierarchy; no one acted "special" or holy because of their position as best I could tell. While ARE is not a democratic organization, it does have a democratic atmosphere or attitude. Monday continued with a choice of workshops followed by a choice of sharing groups. I picked the workshop on study group development, led by Jim Dixon, Ron Smith and Nancy Eubel. This was a weeklong series and I only attended the first. It was already apparent, though, that study groups are a subject that engenders great enthusiasm. There was a real spirit of enthusiasm in every program related to study groups, a sense that we will turn around the decline in their number in recent years, a feeling of tremendous gratitude for what study groups have meant in members' lives. This was a kind of optimistic enthusiasm that I don't recall ever experiencing in the Theosophical movement. The sharing group I attended was on world publications for the new millennium. (All these were designed to provide a formal means of member input to board and staff.) Our group quickly diverged from the topic of books and magazines to discussing the Internet. It was nearly unanimously agreed that the top priority is to get as much of the readings as possible on the net. Many other topics were discussed but this was clearly the one that got the most interest and concern. Monday evening after dinner the executive directors have presentations on their various areas of responsibility. Mark Thurston discussed a video series now in works. He showed excerpts from one on dreams in which he interviewed Henry Reed. This looked very professional, and the content was accessible to the general public but not "dumbed down." Rather at the level of the Toms's New Dimensions radio show, I thought. Mark also presented drawings of the new building and answered questions about the facility. Nancy Eubel focused her presentation on the revitalization of study groups, which she has taken as a special area of concern. John Van Auken surveyed recent publications and talked some about conferences. (I think; towards the end I was sleepy which is no reflection on anyone's speaking ability.) Tuesday morning was the time for regional representatives to speak, and we got brief reports from the field from all of these. There was a feeling of excitement about the programs across the country, a sense that these people truly loved their work with ARE and were delighted to share it. Again, a kind of infectious enthusiasm that was almost like those felt in missionary religions: Pentecostals, Mormons and Baha'is in my observation have it. But in this case the enthusiasm wasn't for a set of dogmatic beliefs, but rather for a set of workable principles and a pathway toward spiritual growth that is open to all regardless of belief system. The excitement about sharing the Cayce approach was not oriented to "converting" people to anything, but rather offering ways to enhance their discovery of their own mission and ideals. The next Tuesday program for me was a workshop led by Kirk Nelson on his prediction of the return of Christ for September 30 of this year. He tied together astrology, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Bible, and the Cayce readings. The audience was respectful and good sized but my sense of the general attitude was that people are quite interested but not at all persuaded by them. Certainly the leaders, when given the chance to comment on 1998 prophecies, made it clear that they expected nothing so dramatic as what Nelson has predicted. By the way, I went to Congress with a moderate amount of fear that someone might jump down my throat about my forthcoming book, in the way that some Theosophists have about my alleged disrespect for Blavatsky in previous books. There was hardly a trace of suspicion or discomfort that I saw from anyone-- except Kirk Nelson, who early on more or less accused me of being there to write a sociological expose of the ARE as a cult! (Actually, *asking* me if I was going to do that, in a tone that made it clearly an accusation.) Dunno where he got such an idea, as the manuscript has been read by several leaders in the group and was well received. It's very obviously a highly favorable portrayal of the group. Well, that's it, off the top of my head. Questions? Comments? From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 20:09:13 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:11:53 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: <19980626012746780.AAA79@pgiese> Thomas: If you're looking for something more than just writings, Deepak Chopra gives a very basic heart chaktra meditation/working in his audiobook "Path of Love". It's pragmatic and packaged for mass consumption, but the basics are all there. What I found interesting, is that he mentions the heart chakra as a good place to locate your "self"/"soul" if you don't already have a "location" for it. This seems like good advice --I've seen people "assume" that the "higher than chakra the better" and focus location on the third eye and crown. This can induce altered states, "discontinuous reality states", self illusion, and generally disrupt one's personal psychic environment. In the '70's it was easy to hear stories of institutionalized "seekers" who attempted to mingle these techiniques with psychatropic drugs. If you're need a major city, another good source of information is the local kundalini yoga groups. Here in the midwest, 3H0 and Krilya (check spelling) offer classes and lecture in these areas. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Thomas Browne" > Subject: Heart/Chakra Meditation > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 12:10 AM > > Dear Fellow Theosophists > I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the > heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does > anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would > greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. > Thomas Browne > > From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 21:09:23 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:27:49 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <1pkwh1AFsuk1EwpD@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <3592CC3E.19A3@netgsi.com> >I submit that >sooner or later this will happen to all of us. Well said, O lanoo! The Master A --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 21:24:15 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:17:28 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Materialistic Mamas Message-Id: <199806260217.UAA10125@mailmx.micron.net> Lmhemlll wrote regarding Ayn Rand: >She's a great writer. Oh, yes! I really adored the way she made rape - via her rape scene in ATLAS SHRUGGED - appear to be something women really, deep down, want. That book - an eclectic mixture of rape, the "me first" philosophy, abundant smoking, and raw capitalism - really got me aroused and excited about life. Whoo-hoo! It also makes one handy-dandy computer table-leg holder-upper. Why, that pragmatic Ayn thought of everything!!! >I agree with much of her objectivist philosophy but I'm >not keen on objectivism' aversion to mysticism. Too bad she didn't read the >SD. She might have become a theosophist. If she had, she would have been the >new HPB. "The new HPB?!" Are we talking about the same Ayn Rand - the one who also wrote yet another admirable piece of rather ripe poop entitled "The Virtue of Selfishness?" Well. . .I see only happy days ahead. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 21:32:11 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:01:18 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Re: Asian Financial Meltdown? Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980626120118.0075d494@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <000d01bd9f84$26b90100$870a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> I have posted some info on the Asian Financial Crisis to TI but was beaten down by some pro-free trade people. As an Australian we also face this crisis , our dollar is in freefall and the backlash has been seen recently in the Queensland State Elections. A new extremely conservative right-wing party - One Nation has taken 22% of the vote in its first ever run. They are anti-immigration, pro-trade barrier, pro-gun etc. Political Correctness and Cultural imperialism are now facing a worldwide backlash. Darren At 10:24 AM 6/24/98 -0500, you wrote: >I am posting this article to give all of you on this list a >little peek into the risks and dangers of the international >financial situation. It seems that the karma of collective >greed returned to our doorstep. > >Govert > >>Note: The June Issue of McAlvany Intelligence Advisor >focused on this issue >>- how the Asian financial meltdown is heading toward >America. There are >>many other highly regarded economic guru's who are saying >the same thing. >>For example: >> >> "I have never read of, or seen such a total economic >breakdown and >>massive destruction of wealth as has occurred, against all >expectations, in >>Asia in the last six months." - Marc Faber, The Gloom, >Boom, and Doom >>Report (2/12/98) >> >> "If China and Japan come unglued, you're looking at >something that will >>dwarf the depression of the 1930's." - Doug Casey, >International >>Speculator (2/19/98) >> >> "The excessive credit which the Fed pumped into the >economy (as they've >>been doing) spilled over into the stock market, triggering >a fantastic >>speculative boom. Belatedly, the Federal Reserve officials >attempted to >>sop up the excess reserves and finally succeeded in braking >the boom. But >>it was too late. By 1929 the speculative imbalances had >become so >>overwhelming that the attempt precipitated a sharp >retrenchment and >>consequent demoralizing of business confidence." - Alan >Greenspan, 1966 >> >> As you may well know, World Wars I & II followed global >economic >>debacles. The power elite have been counting on economic >"leverage" if not >>financial terror to take over the huge new markets in China >just as they >>leveraged financial control of industries and markets in >Europe and Japan >>(Trilateral Commission) following World War II. Keep in >mind that >>desperate fallen ones do desperate things; make the calls >to bind these >>forces of anti-Christ who would create and manage crisis >right into their >>New World "Odor". - C.R. >> >>-------------------------------------------- article >follows: >> >>Inside Track On World News >>By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster >>Eric Margolis >> >>THAT NASTY SINKING FEELING IN TOKYO >>By Eric Margolis 21 June 1998 >> >>Asia's financial crisis, dismissed as `a glitch' only a few >months ago by >>President Bill Clinton, went critical last week, sparking >an international >>economic emergency that threatened to collapse world stock >markets and >>bring on a global depression. >> >>Japan's once mighty yen, down 40% in value over the last 12 >months, >>continued its sickening drop. Last Monday, it hit a new low >of 146 to the >>dollar, as speculators and investors dumped yen for US >dollars. >>China issued an ultimatum. If the yen sank below the >critical red line of >>150, China would devalue its so-far steady currency, the >yuan, to keep it >>competitive with the falling yen and other sinking Asian >currencies. >>Devaluation by China would ignite another round of >competitive devaluations >>by its Asian trading partners and export rivals, producing >rounds of >>ruinous devaluations economists call `beggar they >neighbor.' Just such >>reciprocal devaluations caused the 1930's world depression. >> >>On Wednesday of last week, the US and Japan's central banks >dry-gulched >>speculators. They bought US $4 billion of yen, driving the >dollar down and >>pushing the yen up 5%. Stock markets rallied. Anti-yen >speculators suffered >>huge trading losses. The most capable member of the Clinton >Administration, >>Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, had averted disaster. >> >> >>But Japan still faces the danger its painful recession may >turn into >>raging depression, or even financial collapse. Japan, the >locomotive of >>Asia's once vibrant economy, has run out of steam. Japan's >overheated >>bubble economy, based on rampant land speculation, reckless >loans, cheap >>money, shadowy accounting, and incestuous relations between >businessmen and >>politicians, burst eight years ago. Today, Japan's >shrinking economy is >>left with tottering financial institutions, huge debts and >domestic bad >>loans galore; industrial over-capacity; and tens of >billions of outstanding >>loans to bankrupt Asian nations like South Korea and >Thailand. >> >>Western financiers demand Japan effect sweeping structural >reforms that >>include liquidating insolvent companies, allowing foreign >institutions into >>its financial system, firing redundant workers, opening >domestic markets to >>imports, and conducting business and accounting by US and >European standards. >> >>Japanese are reeling under these assaults, and deeply >confused. When the >>yen was mighty, gaijin nations accused Japan Inc of being a >financial >>Yellow Peril bent on buying up the world. Now that the yen >has sunk, >>foreign critics accuses Japan of wrecking the world >economy. Tokyo is being >>bombarded by conflicting economic demands and advice from >abroad. Still >>emotionally crippled by its defeat in World War II, Japan >twists in knots, >>trying to placate all it critics. >> >>Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto promises to close weak >banks and clean up >>their US $650 billion in bad debts, deregulate business, >and use tax cuts >>and public works projects to stimulate the economy. All >these remedies make >>sense, save public works spending, which only enriches >>politically-connected contractors. >> >>But nothing happens quickly in Japan, where bureaucrats, >special interests, >>local politicians, and custom, combine to frustrate change. >The idea of >>firing hundreds of thousands of unneeded workers, and >closing venerable >>firms, is simply anathema to Japan. At heart, Japan is a >farming village, >>writ large. Everyone tries to share the pain during hard >times - better >>less for all than none for many. Mass firings and business >>closings are personal disgrace for company directors, an >anti-social act. >>There's no place in Japan for corporate mass executioners >like America's >>`Chainsaw' Al Dunlop, who boasted of cutting 15,000 jobs. >> >>Efforts to revitalize the economy by stimulating consumer >spending are >>being thwarted by the deep conservatism of Japanese. >Japanese consumers. >>hate borrowing, and mistrust stocks and bonds. When times >are tough, they >>increase savings, putting the funds into Post Office >savings accounts that >>pay under 1% interest. Like farmers everywhere, Japanese >bury their savings >>in the ground. >> >>A depressed yen will cause US labor unions to renew charges >Japan is >>`flooding' American with cheaper goods, and demand trade >restrictions. >>Worse, Asia, which accounts for 40% of Japan's commerce, >has no cash to buy >>goods from Japan, or repay Japanese loans. Japan's imports >from Asia are >>down 15%. So , at best, Japan and Asia, with the important >exception of >>China, appear headed for a long recession. >> >> >>If Hashimoto's current rescue package fails and recession >turns to >>financial melt-down, as the Chairman of Sony recently >warned might happen >>-with startlingly un-Japanese candor, western stock >exchanges will stagger. >>If Japan's cash-crunch worsens, Japanese banks may begin >cashing in the >>hoard of US Treasury and Canadian securities they hold, >plunging North >>America into a monster liquidity crisis. >> >>Even experts don't understand the ramifications of our new, >intermeshed >>global economy, where financial storms race at the speed of >light, leaving >>ruin in their wake. Asia's banking crisis has undone >governments in >>Thailand, Indonesia, and Korea. Continued economic and >social stress may >>produce extreme political reactions across Asia - including >Japan. >> >>Alarmingly, Asians increasingly accuse westerners seeking >to take over >>their nations by financial imperialism, blaming Wall Street >for wrecking >>the region's once soaring economies. The Nazis, recall, >came to power as a >>result of the 1930's depression, and the financial collapse >of German >>industry. >> >>Bill Clinton, with Monica much on his mind, visits China >this week, right >>into the eye of the widening Asian financial hurricane. >Some glitch. >> >>Copyright eric margolis 1998 >> >>*********************************************************** >***************** >>**** >>To receive Foreign Correspondent via email, send a note to >>majordomo@foreigncorrespondent.com with the message in the >body: subscribe >>foreignc >> > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 21:38:58 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 19:43:59 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-ID: <35930AEF.5C58@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Caldwell/Graye writes > >Dr. Bain, > > > >Concerning Dallas' quoted statement, you write: > > > >>As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a > >> sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth . . . > > > >Are you, by chance, reading *a little too much* into > >Dallas' words???? > > Mr. Caldwell, > > I am expressing an opinion, and sharing it with Dallas and the list. > > You will notice that Dal replies to my posts with great courtesy, which I > endeavoe to do when addressing his own posts. I cannot say that your > posts appear courteous - the opposite in fact. I am a theosophist, but > not a dogmatist, which is why you will find a link to *your* website > from mine. I observe that the reverse does not apply. > > Are you, by any chance, making a mountain out of a molehill? > > Dr. Bain > > (Knows to everyone else as "Alan" in the spirit of brotherhood within > theosophy.) > --------- Daniel Caldwell replies: Dear Dr. Bain, It was you (not me) who wrote the following concerning Dallas' post: > >>As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a > >> sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth . . . Pretty strong statement??? I was simply questioning the validity of that statement or "opinion". Also I briefly commented on the issue of citing and referring to statements by Blavatsky. And why bring up the issue of whether my posts are "courteous" or not? I was simply frank and direct in my comments. I meant no insult Please reread my post. I didn't call you names or say anything negative about you as a person. But if you want to take what I said as the opposite of "courteous". . . then don't let me stand in your way! It is interesting to see that you bring up *side issues* instead of commenting directly upon the major points of my previous post. And unfortunately you have used this same "tactic" in other posts. OBTW, do you still stand by your initial statement about Madame Blavatsky: >> We have only her word for this, together with the Mahatma letters. It is >> all words. I - or anyone else - can make similar claims, but no one has >> yet been seen to be able to back them up with real evidence. You make strong stataments like this but when asked to explain and amplify, you either do not deal directly with the issue or you refuse to discuss the issue. Why not be direct and discuss the main issues frankly, honestly and seriously? You may actually have good points to make, but no one can read your mind. No doubt, you will consider this post as ____________ and ____________. From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 21:54:04 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:47:04 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: <35930BA8.D3F@globalserve.net> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > kymsmith@micron.net writes > >You know, Govert, I've figured it out. No one else is getting into this > >because you're a fruit loop and I just might be a fruit loop and they've all > >realized it but us. > > Ahem - Aren't I in this exclusive club? > > Alan :0) Please include me too. I assumed "fruit loop" meant what we used to call in England "a fruitcake", or someone on their way to the "Old Manor". Perhaps a definition would be in order prior to joining the club!!! Cheers Annette From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 22:24:09 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 12:53:47 +0900 From: "Darren Porter" Subject: Re: Materialistic Mamas Message-Id: <3.0.2.32.19980626125347.00742d48@ozemail.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806260217.UAA10125@mailmx.micron.net> I have heard of Atlas Shrugged only through Robert Anton Wilsons Books mainly The Illuminatus Trilogy. Perhaps to understand one both should be read. Darren Hail Eris! At 08:17 PM 6/25/98 -0600, you wrote: >Lmhemlll wrote regarding Ayn Rand: > >>She's a great writer. > >Oh, yes! I really adored the way she made rape - via her rape scene in >ATLAS SHRUGGED - appear to be something women really, deep down, want. That >book - an eclectic mixture of rape, the "me first" philosophy, abundant >smoking, and raw capitalism - really got me aroused and excited about life. >Whoo-hoo! It also makes one handy-dandy computer table-leg holder-upper. >Why, that pragmatic Ayn thought of everything!!! > >>I agree with much of her objectivist philosophy but I'm >>not keen on objectivism' aversion to mysticism. Too bad she didn't read the >>SD. She might have become a theosophist. If she had, she would have been the >>new HPB. > >"The new HPB?!" Are we talking about the same Ayn Rand - the one who also >wrote yet another admirable piece of rather ripe poop entitled "The Virtue >of Selfishness?" > >Well. . .I see only happy days ahead. > > >Kym > > > > > * Page me online through my Personal Communication Center: http://wwp.mirabilis.com/12448929 * Send me E-mail Express directly to my computer screen 12448929@pager.mirabilis.com For downloading ICQ at http://www.icq.com/ From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 22:53:58 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:43:11 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-Id: <199806260343.VAA15800@mailmx.micron.net> Govert wrote: >O.k, if they did not like my little reading circle and >started pulling out their guns, I do not know what I would >do, but theoratically I will be in favor of shooting first. >How I would feel afterwards I do not know either, but it >might be pretty miserable. In CLIMB THE HIGHEST MOUNTAIN the Prophets write that one should be willing to "live and die" for what is right - I do not recall a reference about "killing" for what is right. However. . .you go on with valid questions, such as: >How did Washington feel after the >last battle against the British? Or Eisenhower when the >Allies finally beat the Nazi's? This may shock you, but I do believe that the war against the Nazis was necessary, although not "right." People could have stopped Hitler long before he took power. I think we should have stepped in sooner in Bosnia, Rwanda, and I do think the American Revolution was necessary - but again, not "right." But this really has nothing to do with C.U.T. Govert, you talk as if C.U.T. was some kind of country or nation itself. It's not. It is supposed to be a sanctuary, a place of peace - a place of SPIRITUALITY. It is not some state within a state. Yet, somehow, C.U.T. and its followers (including you) have turned God and the "ascended masters" into some kind of brute warriors. It is no longer a place of reverence and Universal Love - it smells of gun metal and ammunition. It justifies breaking laws and killing. There is a difference between church and state. States should be secular - and should provide and direct any necessary military action. C.U.T. should be a place of LOVE - no talk of hate, fear, mistrust, or any other destructive thought-form should enter its gateway. You just don't get it, Govert. C.U.T. is now no different than the groups it claims to be fighting against. Should your and C.U.T.'s thoughtforms come to pass - you will have a long and arduous task of rectifying the massive amount of responsibility your mind holds in bringing on such a horror. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:04:41 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 23:57:56 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Materialistic Mamas Message-ID: <35931C44.12C7@globalserve.net> References: <199806260217.UAA10125@mailmx.micron.net> Dear Lmhem111: Thanks for the web page. I shall certainly give it a spin. Glad you found her inspiring too. Dear Kym: I should learn to keep my mouth shut about what books I read! But as to your comments to Lmhem111... > Oh, yes! I really adored the way she made rape - via her rape scene in > ATLAS SHRUGGED - appear to be something women really, deep down, want. That > book - an eclectic mixture of rape, the "me first" philosophy, abundant > smoking, and raw capitalism - really got me aroused and excited about life. Now why would you see it as rape, when I still see it as a clash of two strong people, both of whom are working something through in reality when people "think" they are not using each other but are until they get their lives truly in line with their philosophy. I prefer to remember the "love interaction" in "The Fountainhead" as a better example of this issue. And I think Rand *challenges* women readers to introspection and analysis, of their motives and indoctrination (maybe even "weakness"), in her novels. I'd comment further that if one "is aroused and excited about life", Ayn Rand does not present herself to one to *experience* her experience. It stays on my shelf and gets an airing regularly precisely because I am not a "lightworker" yet who can keep giving into this black hole of energy sucking, taker society without anguish. At least once a week I wrestle with the thought, "why am I busting my ass, using both sides of my brain, producing, organizing, visualizing, and stepping in to pick up the pieces when others breeze away or stand there all needy like? Why am I working like this for less than 50% take-home?" Rand explains why and also suggests a utopia. The result for the reader is to stretch to think about things and to question oneself, whom one usually thought (until hitting up against Rand) was just peachy great. I have some friends who seem really concerned that "the meek shall inherit the earth". They're true Rand followers (with autographed first editions and the works). Kym, I think part of the problem you have with me is that much of what I choose to experience is "reverse psychology". It presents itself and I go with it in order to experience the opposite (as well as that presented). Often in the opposite I experience the posit. > "The new HPB?!" Are we talking about the same Ayn Rand - the one who also > wrote yet another admirable piece of rather ripe poop entitled "The Virtue > of Selfishness?" Yeah. The virtue of expressing the strength within. Having the courage of one's beliefs to live one's life on one's own terms. Refusing to play games and refusing to become corrupt in order to "run with the crowd". Not sponging off other's genius. Not being an energy vampire. Staying the course whatever it takes. IMHO she smoked herself to death because she could not live up to her own philosophy. She got dragged into an organization that squabbled and lost focus. Her chosen disciple Nathanial let her down. Publishers hounded her to produce "best sellers" regardless of true content. A plethora of hangers-on drained her energy. By all accounts she died a "disappointed" woman. That's a lesson in itself! Sound familiar? Up and at 'em Cheers Annette From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:09:40 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:12:14 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: It came from America Message-Id: <199806260412.WAA17811@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >Anyway, I'm still reeling from the recent reading that America will >spawn the next race Well, America will spawn SOMETHING, I'm sure. But this does bring to mind one question: For all you folks who DO think that Americans ARE the "chosen" people - don't you think you should treat us "chosen" people with much more respect? Signed, An American From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:18:04 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:07:59 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <35931E9F.27E4@globalserve.net> References: <006b01bda03f$c25b7780$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Dallas: Please understand that I am smiling broadly (especially in light of recent postings)... > These were, as the common testimony, set together as they all > coincided in word and idea. This was then called the DHAMMAPADA. > It consists of 26 chapters comprising 423 verses (slokas). > > Many translations have been made of these in many languages, and > it is wise to use several for cross comparison. Oh God! 423 verses, needing to be cross-referenced! I'll try, I promise :) Once again I have saved your references and will experience the words as they present themselves to me. Currently I'm working on a theory of sending a clone to work so that I can just stay home and read and meditate and garden and astral travel :) Are you feeling better now? Blessings Annette From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:24:13 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 20:55:43 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-Id: <199806260421.XAA20065@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: At 01:10 AM 6/25/98 -0400, you wrote: >Dear Fellow Theosophists >I am doing a research study on Chakra Meditation where focus is put on the >heart chakra in particular, as well as the crown chakra and/or others. Does >anyone know of writings which contain any information on this topic. I would >greatly appreciate any help you could offer me. >Thomas Browne Tom, If you want to include the internet material. I love this site: http://www.danwinter.com/eartHeart/index.html This guy has done phenomenal work in my mind. Or see the Heartbeat 2000 project at http://www.danwinter.com/eartHeart/Hartbeat.html Thanks, Brenda Tucker Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:32:01 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 22:04:51 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Can you pass the cute monk test? Message-Id: <199806260404.WAA17271@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >I think I'm in love! But it's written by a Bhuddist monk - oh no, not >again!! What is it about those guys? Just a couple months ago, I went to a Tibetian gathering where monks danced and sang in ways which are really beyond words. I felt what seemed like my very soul rising from me and becoming one with all that was Beauty and Love. And, well, while I was resting in the bliss of an "alternate reality," I happened to glance around with what can only be described as human eyes - for they stopped and focused on one of the most handsome and appealing individuals I had ever seen - who also happened to be a monk. I felt myself plummenting back to earth due to my bawdy thoughts - but that fall from grace hardly moved me as my mind kept on wanting to go places it never, ever should. It was terrible and thrilling at the same time - and I kept thinking that the monk could read my mind since that is what "enlightened" people can sometimes do and, as a result, I was as embarrassed as all get out. Anyway, due to these types of events in my life, I tend to avoid "spiritual" huddles - I always leave feeling so. . .so. . .un-something. I hate that. It's a plot, Annette, a plot. Stay strong. Kym From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:40:31 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:24:04 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Happy trails Message-Id: <199806260421.XAA20073@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806250218.UAA23203@mailmx.micron.net> Dear Kym, This is the way that the conversation went prior to the quotes your post contains: >>I don't expect everyone to have this >>type of experience because I see it as a result partly of the purification >>of the vehicles, which both theosophy and the I AM Temple recommends, and >>if you haven't done the purifications, how could you be expected to >>participate in the results!? > >You're right, I've not done the "purifications." What are they? How much >will they cost? Do they hurt? I was not insinuating that any particular person hadn't purified enough. I was referring to the work I had done myself. Half jokingly (below where Kym is smart, but it doesn't help with shyness) I did not want to come out and try to claim credit again (after what I had already written) by saying that purifications are lengthy, time-consuming, not always enjoyable for many reasons (one main reason is that we become somewhat anti-social within our "class" of society) I don't want to come forth and tell about my life, if there was pain, if there were moments I'd rather not recall. I just wanted to claim some credit for an accomplishment that took many years of hard work. I don't think many people would understand that people who do purifications might look at them as work - work that is not always pleasant, but it is done in good faith that there will be a beneficial outcome. >>You know, Kym, you're smart, but some people are really shy. Why, my son >>is so shy sometimes, it hurts me to watch him. > >Obviously, not that smart as I have no idea what you're alluding to here. >Are you saying that you are shy and exchanges with others (or even me in >particular) is painful? Are you saying I'm shy and somehow my e-mails >reflect that? Are you simply sharing some knowledge about your son and >family life? I tried to change the subject somewhat because I think purification is a simple subject and you don't need me to list the things that can be done: vegetarianism, abstinence from alcohol, drugs, and other impure substances such as cigarettes, sexual abstinence, regular meditation, devotion. I'm surprised there weren't other theosophists who wanted to chime in and give their frequently encountered (when doing spiritual reading) list. I guess for simplification it could be the ten commandments. We have to really decide for ourselves is purification is a valid method of reaching for spiritual experiences. The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali says that it is. I also suppose I changed the subject to shyness because it is on my mind a lot and because you were once so quick to assert your friendship with someone I thought you could hardly even know. It's a nice topic if we look at it psychologically. I was perhaps hoping someone might have some data on how the internet has helped shy people overcome their shyness and find a new freedom with words and "strangers." Since my own son is shy, I'm fishing for data on the subject and he is so LOUD. His voice is big and booming. I'm very glad to see a reserve that might help him to control his nature. Since I'm his mother, I feel a responsibility for steering him in the right direction. What do I do when he starts screaming in public? But won't answer a question or ask a question when I prompt him? I know it hasn't anything to do with purification, except perhaps that I need to attempt control in his psychological makeup or at least attempt understanding. I, myself, don't make friends at all easily. I'm comfortable on the internet writing to "strangers" because I like my subject. I've had two very dear, good, friends in the last 20 years that I shall remember to bless all of my life. Maybe this is selfish, but I am really, really, impressed with them as individuals and admire and respect them lots. Both are women and one is a lawyer and one is a doctor. Sometimes when I look at this "short" "professional" list of friends, I wonder why I limited myself to these friends and if there isn't some underlying deception I'm pulling on myself. Sometimes I think perhaps all of my list of friends would be similar in nature and I don't know why, but I am trying to build a list of friends, because I could escape my home scene for awhile and go to their houses. So, I tell myself that my daughter's piano teacher is a friend, that my daughter's school friend's mom is a friend, and that people in the study center are "friends" because I could escape to their homes for a while, but I don't have the intimacy that I had with the doctor and the lawyer, and I don't cherish the relationship at all the same way. People have different standards for friends just as they have different standards for writing articles. I'm not trying to push anyone to TRY PURIFICATIONS, but I'm trying to make note that there have been some results in my life and I really EXPECT more. I can understand the list of "powers of the mind" as they are listed in the YOGA SUTRAS in a new way, because I have absolutely no idea how powers can be developed in me, where it becomes a simple matter when one accepts that a great being - taking up residency within my PRESENCE, could exert a different influence on my vehicles and the matter around me to create effects such as are described by soul powers. It's really nice thinking that powers are revealed "through me" by "another being at another level of evolution." >>Do you think there could be >>shy people right here on the internet and blazing ahead of themselves >>courageous new trails into hearts? >Again, I need your help here. You lost me with "blazing ahead of themselves >courageous new trails into hearts." Whose hearts are getting the new trails? >The shy people? Or the people who are reading writings from the shy people? >And how does one 'blaze ahead of themselves?' One can blaze ahead of >others, but I'm unsure how one blazes ahead of their own self. Shy people might be able to blaze their way into hearts in a new way because they don't have to face the people their speaking with here. I think that would be wonderful, because I don't think you should forfeit love and relationships just because you are shy - at particular times - in meeting new people. It may take courage for some people to write about their feelings here. There is some degree of ridicule going on and someone might like to be taken "to heart" or taken sincerely on what they say - intimately. >>An action done with purpose in mind can contain many alternative routes to >>the same goal, so if we fall short accomplishing specically the command we >>had in mind, we can still go at the "accomplishing" of the purpose. We >>just return to the positive state of assisting life manifest "glory" and >>hopefully a second, third, fourth, etc., chance will come. > >Please give me an example of "glory." In your opinion, how do you know what >is "glory" and what is not "glory?" In other words, one may think they are >creating "good" but in reality they are creating pain, suffering, or >darkness for others. How does one know a "bad" command from a good >"command?" How does one know a false "ascended master" from a true >"ascended master?" The glory I am referring to is like what might be happening in an Ascended Master Octave as it manifests on earth. The same way man's "glory" brought flowers and an abundance of animal life to earth when dinosaurs were replaced here. I'm surprised other theosophists haven't jumped at this one also. Discrimination is a quality that many theosophists are familiar with needing in order to walk the path. You just have to study and do everything that is "advised" in order to try to know these things. Purification is foremost in my mind. Thanks for caring, Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Thu Jun 25 23:54:16 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:46:45 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: It came from America Message-ID: <359327B5.5C1@globalserve.net> References: <199806260412.WAA17811@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > Well, America will spawn SOMETHING, I'm sure. > > But this does bring to mind one question: For all you folks who DO think > that Americans ARE the "chosen" people - don't you think you should treat us > "chosen" people with much more respect? > > Signed, > > An American Dear Kym: Just to give you some feedback from up here in Canada.... The coffee club debating society topic at work today (all males but me and mostly techies) was the Asian Financial situation. Here's what the guys firmly said: "What crisis? There's no way the States will pay back any debts they don't want to and after learning their lessons in Vietnam and proving it in the Gulf, they'll get out the arsenal and clobber whomever is becoming a bit of a nuisance, meanwhile secretly sabotaging key business off shore and bumping off a few irritating people. UN? What UN?" Thought you might like to know that certain of your neighbours are real happy and secure living in the shadow of the schoolyard bully :) Respectfully yours (and half American although I don't think Italian/Amer counts in the race scheme) Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 00:10:34 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 21:43:08 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: ARE Congress Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199806260040.UAA27691@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> >Well, that's it, off the top of my head. Questions? Comments? Yes, Paul, I have both. When is your book scheduled for release? and Were you on the program at the Congress? The following comment is a little off topic, but a feeling I would like to express anyway. I sometimes wonder if you have yet achieved the same level of interaction with ARE that you had with TS. The reason is that you are comparing two organizations at different stages in your activity within them. I also wonder if you don't have some of the same feelings that I do. For instance, I LIKED having teachers, authority figures, and writers and administrators that I could look up to. I felt there were people in the T.S. who could answer all of my questions and I felt I would never be without peers, those with greater understanding, etc. Now that I have changed much of what I understood theosophy and THE SECRET DOCTRINE to be, I don't particularly find others accepting the change in me OR changing along with me. Instead I encounter a lot of silence on the subject completely. Since I LIKED the authority and "great learning" perception I had of those I knew at the T.S., I am at a loss in trying to figure out new roles for everyone. Since no one that I know can authoritatively discuss my idea with me, because I don't believe they care to think about it much, I feel a real loss for companionship where I used to have much endeavor in that area. I'm not trying to get you to write personally about your role change within the organization, but maybe YOU don't like to see yourself as the PEAK personality anywhere. Maybe you haven't ascended to that role in ARE yet, but once your book comes out, will that change? There are lots of things I don't like about myself, my role, my persona, but I don't want to jump to conclusions about whether I can continue learning at the TS. I want to take my time and feel my way around in the dark for a few more years at least before really finding there are no longer any strong ties - indicating a HEALTHY relationship - that exist for me in the TS. I don't really think I'm capable of understanding that the masters whom I love dearly could not be present for me any more through the study of thesophy. The two have gone hand in hand for so long. Yours truly, Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 00:24:50 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 01:15:25 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Can you pass the cute monk test? Message-ID: <35932E6D.2BD4@globalserve.net> References: <199806260404.WAA17271@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > It's a plot, Annette, a plot. Stay strong. Dear Kym: I know I'm supposed to say something trite, but first I can't. I think perhaps you've illuminated something really important for me in sharing your experience. (will not tell you mine as young people are listening) Here's the threads you initiated for me: Unattainable, perceived divine and pure Seeing both the divine and experiencing the base desires of the physical Wanting to join with the divine Not wanting to join and hence deflowering the purity Wanting to be lost in perfect love Avoiding paranoid schizophrenia Desiring the experience and experiencing the shame Wanting to rape the divine and wanting to be raped by it Denying the desires and prolonging the stuggle Not denying the desires and prolonging the struggle Wanting to be ascended Being imprisoned and avoiding the inevitable Who needs a book when there's a fantasic bod available as a walking lesson? I'm being strong. Haven't had sex for 9 years and rarely see the physical shell on anyone any more. Yet to ascend anywhere though. Impassioned and excited Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 05:38:44 1998 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 17:47:58 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD, etc. Message-ID: <000301bda0ed$924f3640$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 25th Is this not illustrative of the way in which the mind progresses ? We are all centered on some ultimate goal, however well or poorly we may define it to ourselves. A forum such as this "Theos-talk" enables us to compare our thinking with others, constructively. We seek to refine, to sharpen to improve -- how else can we do it but by questions, opinions, answers, and assistance ? Is not the basis for Theos - sophia that wisdom-freedom which can only be expressed by brotherhood ? It is interesting to me, a rather devoted Blavatsky/Judge student, to encounter many "post-Balvatskian ideas and thoughts. It is not that I am unfamiliar with them, as the whole range of the theosophical movement is open through the magazines and books that have been published. What can be overwhelming is the quantity. Then, how does one develop selectivity ? Now that is individual entirely. And we have to determine for ourselves what is sequential and logical, -- coherent as a whole philosophy, and not just isolated snippets of information. I hope these few ideas may be of some help. Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 10:17 AM > From: "M K Ramadoss" > Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD >At 11:05 AM 6/25/1998 EDT, you wrote: >>In a message dated 98-06-25 09:41:04 EDT, Daniel Caldwell writes: >> >><< You may not appreciate these references but I and other readers may find >>the citations useful for our individual studies. I hope Dallas *will >>continue* to quote and cite material that he thinks is appropriate to the >>given discussion. >> >> Also I believe Dallas has a right to say that he believes HP Blavatsky is >>*knowledgeable* and/or *correct* on a given point or subject. This is not the >>same thing as claiming that HPB is giving out "inviolate, certain and >absolute >>truth"!! >> >> >>I agree, Daniel. The Internet is a free forum. Dal has the right to quote and >>comment from an HPB-Judge perspective. I'm an eclectic theosophist, >myself, so >>I find post-Blavatskyian authors valuable as well. Others may not agree but >>we're not within the confines of an organization here. >> >>My two bits >>Lmhem111 > >Well said. The moment *any* organization gets into the picture, *control* >comes in no matter however much they try not to. The fundamental strength, >much to the dismay of many organizational types, of Internet is the >unfettered freedom to express your opinions and ideas. > >mkr > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 06:23:44 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:15:22 EDT From: "Teos9 (Louis)" Subject: Re: JUNE 98 HCT Message-ID: <9dd8c11b.359382cb@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-08 23:45:53 EDT, you write: << The June 98 high Country Theosophist is online with a tribute to John Cooper >> Does anyone have the website address? From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 08:23:43 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 06:19:50 -0700 From: "Rodolfo Don" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <3591C797.4307@azstarnet.com> >Caldwell/Graye < writes >>Dr. Bain, >> >>Concerning Dallas' quoted statement, you write: >> >>>As your post stands, it reads like the doctrine of a >>> sect or church, inviolate, certain and adbsolute truth . . . >> >>Are you, by chance, reading *a little too much* into >>Dallas' words???? > >Mr. Caldwell, > >I am expressing an opinion, and sharing it with Dallas and the list. > >You will notice that Dal replies to my posts with great courtesy, which I >endeavoe to do when addressing his own posts. I cannot say that your >posts appear courteous - the opposite in fact. I am a theosophist, but >not a dogmatist, which is why you will find a link to *your* website >from mine. I observe that the reverse does not apply. FFFF,0000,0000Aren't you stretching the truth when you say that you are not a "dogmatist" when you are a "religionist?" Just curious about what you think religion is. Rudy > >Are you, by any chance, making a mountain out of a molehill? > >Dr. Bain > >(Knows to everyone else as "Alan" in the spirit of brotherhood within >theosophy.) >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 08:38:43 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:34:13 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Branden and Olcott Message-Id: <199806261334.JAA21933@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> I found Annette's parallels between Rand and Blavatsky interesting. Having found Randians in college always the weirdest and least compatible of the various cults represented, I never read any of Rand's books except for the short one-- Virtue of Selfishness? Anyhow, rather than intellectualize my reaction I will just say that it is a YUCK that reverberates from some gut chakra or other. Chacun a son gout. But I have read reviews of all the recent books about Rand, and dipped into both Branden's accounts. I think it's disingenuous to talk of Nathaniel Branden "disappointing" Rand without acknowledging that this young married man was seduced by this older and not particularly appealing married woman, that their sexual affair lasted for years, and that when he stopped satisfying her sexually she declared him an apostate to her philosophy. I see some abuse of power here on her part. Although there is no evidence of any sexual relationship between Olcott and HPB, I think the parallel is an interesting one. Since you brought it up, Annette, I will add that the standard view in non-Adyar Theosophical groups, and increasingly within the Adyar TS, is that Olcott "disappointed" HPB. No one seems to give a moment's thought to how she might have disappointed him. She certainly seduced him mentally and spiritually, although not physically. Set out to charm him and get him involved in her cause, induced him to turn his life upside down to serve her purposes (and/or her Masters.) When, after the Hodgson report, he declared his independence more or less, Olcott "disappointed" HPB. And it seems popular among Theosophists to condemn him for his change of attitude toward her. But let me close by asking this: if you had disrupted your entire life to follow someone, devoted ten years of your life to furthering their every wish, proclaimed their virtues to the world; if you were then confronted by what seemed to you to be strong evidence of fraud on that person's part, along with a letter in which that person ridiculed you for your loyalty, called you a "psychologized baby" who was under her control-- would *you* be disappointed? (Not to get into a wrangle about whether Olcott was right in suspecting HPB of fraud. But that he did so is evident from her own letters and implicit in some of his, and this is serious business coming from the number one favorable witness to her powers and her Masters.) From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 08:54:04 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:21:13 -0500 From: "Govert Schuller Subject: Re: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: <000401bda103$67790480$2c0a9cd1@Prod.prodigy.net> >Govert, you talk as if C.U.T. >was some kind of country or nation itself. It's not. It is supposed to be >a sanctuary, a place of peace - a place of SPIRITUALITY. It is not some >state within a state. It IS a place of spirituality, and unfortunately some, in their human fear, have perceived it as an autonomous entity, which it is not. It's relative isolation and hostile environment were factors in this. Still, given the mandate bestowed upon this group by the Masters, i.e. embody the teachings and survive with them no matter what comes down, we/they did pursue the right course with providing fall-out shelters and means to defend them. Yet, somehow, C.U.T. and its followers (including >you) have turned God and the "ascended masters" into some kind of brute >warriors. Spiritual warriors maybe, not brute, that's what you make of them. It is no longer a place of reverence and Universal Love - it >smells of gun metal and ammunition. It justifies breaking laws and killing. One person broke the law, was punished, apologized and admitted that he made an unnecessary mistake. Case closed. The killing is only justified in self-defense. I respect your differing view. >There is a difference between church and state. States should be secular - >and should provide and direct any necessary military action. C.U.T. should >be a place of LOVE - no talk of hate, fear, mistrust, or any other >destructive thought-form should enter its gateway. I agree, but the world is far from perfect and members of C.U.T. are far from perfect. Everybody will receive his karmic return of negative thought-forms. The organization acted on a set of common sense premises about the dangers in this world and came in my opinion to sound conclusions and decisions. Again, your differing point of view is noted. >You just don't get it, Govert. If IT is your opinion, just keep it. >C.U.T. is now no different than the groups it claims to be fighting against. >Should your and C.U.T.'s thoughtforms come to pass - you will have a long >and arduous task of rectifying the massive amount of responsibility your >mind holds in bringing on such a horror. I assume that you are referring to the idea that someone's fears will be a causative factor in the realization of its content. If I would really fear strongly, obsessively and continuous about falling through the floor while sitting behind my computer, one day it will happen. Maybe. Corollary it might be true that if you have no fear at all for getting attacked by a wild animal in the jungle it will not happen. Yes, that might be so, but it depends on one's spiritual attainment. Hopefully the collective spiritual attainment of humanity in toto is big enough to prevent nuclear war, eventhough history, especially the 1929-1945 period, did not leave a record inspiring optimism. So, better to prepare for any eventuality so you can face the future with confidence in a Golden Age of peace and enlightenment, which is a thought-form we also send out, hopefully stronger than the negative one. The latter has so far been registered by you and other theosophists as if the former does not exist. Personally I vouch for and witness its existence. Peace Govert From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 09:23:43 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 09:05:01 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Olcott Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <199806261334.JAA21933@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> At 09:34 AM 6/26/1998 -0400, you wrote: > >Although there is no evidence of any sexual relationship between >Olcott and HPB, I think the parallel is an interesting one. >Since you brought it up, Annette, I will add that the standard >view in non-Adyar Theosophical groups, and increasingly within >the Adyar TS, is that Olcott "disappointed" HPB. It is rather unfortunate. Here is a man who gave the prime of his life to work for the Cause. He may have made mistakes. Who has not. He embarked to India totally not knowing what the conditions were those days when travel, food and accommodation is so much of hardship. His achievement in establishing branches far and wide is legendary. > No one seems to >give a moment's thought to how she might have disappointed him. >She certainly seduced him mentally and spiritually, although not >physically. Set out to charm him and get him involved in her >cause, induced him to turn his life upside down to serve her >purposes (and/or her Masters.) I think that the major turning point came when he had a visit from one of the Adepts and was told what his opportunities and "rewards" were. It is not easy for most to give up almost everything and embark to a country he knew nothing of and a cause which is usually referred to as a "forlorn" hope. Just my 0.02. MKR From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 09:55:49 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:26:50 -0700 From: "Eldon B Tucker" Subject: Re: JUNE 98 HCT Message-Id: <199806261424.JAA03258@proteus.imagiware.com> >The June 98 high Country Theosophist is online with a >tribute to John Cooper > >Does anyone have the website address? Try: ftp://theosophy.com/pub/theosophy/hct/hct9806.pdf -- Eldon From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 10:09:29 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:43:30 +0000 From: "Clare Povers" Subject: ARE Congress KPJ Message-Id: <199806261436.PAA16896@dns1.enterprise.net> For Paul and Fellows on the List Theos World Dear Paul, Thank you for your interesting and detailed posted report 25th June, of your attendance to ARE ( standing for ???) The conduct of those answering queries etc. would seem to bear out their possible training ; how to respond without deflating, how to inform without condesending..etc. without the training showing.. REGARD and respect for the human dignity on all levels and for ALL. .One often hears the phases that are supposed to smooth the procedures but which have becomed hackneyed, a test out of one's tolerance. You certainly convey that "they"had bridged the gap between "them" and "us" So often there is the table in between acting as a barrier not a bridge of welcome and peace. So it was good to be there so we have benefited too!.Glad to hear that it IS possible for a large group to come together and enjoy the experience. Sad to know of so much terrible conflict elsewhere. - Certainly Theosophical gatherings could and sometimes DO convey a smiliar athmosphere but comparisons may indicate just a lack of awareness training, The practice and growth will come, especially if such training is really active" in-training" that gives live energy to the first object for theosophists . along side meditation and or relaxation...if acceptable to the individual concerned. .(maybe such as Dr. Patricia Carrington - has evolved. CSM Clinically Standardized Meditation....no religious demands but acceptable if that is your way) She has over the years experimented and practised. Her writing cover the subject very well useful for the Westerner and up to date. She has researched since early 1970's and instructs medical students in how to relate to patients in a manner that honors their dignity as human beings. But certainly the intentions are not confined to the medical field. If interested info.can be found at Pace Educational Systems Inc., 61 Kingesley Rd, Kendall Park, NJ 08824. toll-free phone #1-800-297-9897 Fax #:732-297-0778 She started to be interesed when teaching at Princeton University.. Relaxation and all techniques are covered in her investigation. Excellent conclusions and well written. A useful read for those who are already meditating as areas are explored that may be new to them, as well as for the shy, or first comers. There is a web site in the uk www. meditate.demon.co.uk I had to hunt around Yahoo and Alt.Vis. to make contact. Her next book will be probably "The Power of Letting Go" She certainly has combined science and the poetic. She works in New Jersey. her first book was "Freedom in Meditation." Also"Releasing" 1984 and a "The Book of Meditation" 1998 which is based on Freedom in Meditation" but more extensive. I have downloaded some Cayce material and find it of interest. The definite date in September in noted....we shall see....keep posted! Namaste Clare From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 10:23:43 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:01:09 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Brenda's questions re: ARE Message-Id: <199806261501.LAA00911@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806261400.JAA01388@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 26, 98 09:00:07 am Dear Brenda, First question first: the official pub date is the first week of September, but that allows several weeks to get to stores. I'm hoping to have my copies by mid-August. The second question is much harder. I was never "someone" in TSA terms. Sure, I had spoken annually or so to a couple of local lodges and once each to a couple more. And had showed up at a few conferences. But had never been published in any Adyar--sponsored forum or even visited Wheaton. Nor had I ever spoken to any Adyar-sponsored event above the local level. Had 30 or so pieces in Pasadena or independent Theosophical publications from about 1981-91, though. I guess you could say I was fairly visible within the movement, but it was really being published by SUNY Press that made me "arrive" in TSA terms. That is, being a recognized name. Unfortunately, I simultaneously "arrived" on the s--- list, in the dog house, as persona non grata, etc., throughout the movement, not unanimously or even to a majority, but on the part of enough highly vocal and nasty people that it was pure hell to experience. I have also been a complete nonentity as far as ARE is concerned. Have visited the HQ a zillion times, but attended no conferences. Have been a faithful study group participant three different times, once right there in Va. Beach, but that was the extent of involvement. The difference seems to be that with ARE you can be a nonentity within the group, bypass them and get published by a university press, and write more critically/skeptically than has ever been published within the organization, without arousing the kinds of hostility and ostracism that has been the case with Theosophy. I think that's largely because they're generally a much more optimistic and eclectic group, much less defensive in attitude. The leaders take a much more nuanced and objective view of Cayce than Theosophical leaders do of HPB, IMHO. Also, TSA tends to be paranoid about any perceived "up and coming" new influence and wants to strangle it in its cradle, perhaps because the existing powers that be are so lacking in the ability to convey anything new and exciting that they feel threatened by creativity in members. A subtheme of Initiates is how many of the truly creative and significant figures of the first half-century of Theosophy bailed out or were pushed out. Whereas with ARE there is a large appetite for novelty, a steady stream of new writers with new approaches, a leadership that reaches out to such people rather than pushes them away. Which makes me a very small and nonthreatening fish in a big and crowded pond. OTOH, getting published by SUNY and raved in the NY Times Book Review suddenly made me a big fish in a small and fairly unpopulated Theosophical pond. Thus, someone to be "dealt with" in the usual way, being treated scornfully and dismissively by leaders and their admirers. Surely more than a hundred people have been down the same road before me. The lesson I take from this is to carefully avoid getting much involved in any spiritual organization again. Sure, I might speak at the next Congress if asked, or to local or regional groups. But only in the immediately wake of the book's publication, after which a quick return to anonymity if possible. As to your other question, no I wasn't on the program this year. But if Jesus doesn't come on September 30, perhaps next year I can get the time slot taken by Kirk Nelson this time. BTW one weird note is that he and I are astrological cousins if not twins, born the same week. So I think it's funny that he'll be beating the drums for a literal interpretation of Cayce, predicting the second coming, the same month that I'll be coming out with a much more critical and questioning approach to Cayce's accuracy. Come October, one of us will look a lot more credible than the other :) Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 12:20:33 1998 Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 13:02:27 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Brenda's questions re: ARE Message-ID: <33B3F223.42D42FFC@sprynet.com> References: <199806261501.LAA00911@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Dear Brenda, > > First question first: the official pub date is the first week of > September, but that allows several weeks to get to stores. I'm > hoping to have my copies by mid-August. A) Will it be available through New Leaf? B) Will you go on a book signing tour (which might take you by New York way? We'd love to have you here). Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 12:34:17 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 05:37:27 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End Message-ID: <000701bda123$b7588140$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 26th Dear Annette: Be glad the 423 verses are only 97 pages ( not the 60,000 books of the Buddhist Canon) and that would take a large house to house. No, not cross-reference, but to read and think about. Take things in small bites, a "day at a time." Its easier but just as sure in the long run -- says my experience ( IMHO ) I must remember to put that in at least once or Gerry may object -- and he is of course right. Have fun, Dal > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 9:35 PM > From: "Annette Rivington" > Subject: Re: Re: The Beginning/End >Dear Dallas: >Please understand that I am smiling broadly (especially in light of >recent postings)... > >> These were, as the common testimony, set together as they all >> coincided in word and idea. This was then called the DHAMMAPADA. >> It consists of 26 chapters comprising 423 verses (slokas). >> >> Many translations have been made of these in many languages, and >> it is wise to use several for cross comparison. > >Oh God! 423 verses, needing to be cross-referenced! >I'll try, I promise :) > >Once again I have saved your references and will experience the words as >they present themselves to me. > >Currently I'm working on a theory of sending a clone to work so that I >can just stay home and read and meditate and garden and astral travel :) > >Are you feeling better now? >Blessings >Annette > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 12:46:58 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 04:04:23 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <000301bda123$b117dba0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 26th Dear Gerry: Of course you are right. All I write is only my opinion. But your caution is one well taken. And I ought to us IMHO far more often. I frequently assume we have all studied the same material together. As to differences between the writings of HPB and CWL have you got and read Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY. this book was published in 1923 I believe and in parallel columns she shows these differences. It has recently been reprinted by the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, of Edmonton, ( P.O.Box 4804), Alberta, Canada, T6E 5G6. Dr. Stokes in THE OE LIBRARY CRITIC, which he published monthly around the same period from Washington D C also has drawn attention to those differences. But the statement that I made was based on familiarity with both writings. I am sorry indeed if I have offended you or others, but I thought that everyone was familiar with those differences after their own study. In sackcloth and ashes, Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 4:15 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 >> [Dallas}: >> I definitely would not but HPB and CWL into the same category as >> CWL diverged seriously from HPB. > > >Dallas, in future would you please add a caveat to your rather >flamable statements such as this one, to include something like >IMHO? I have never found any such "serious divergence" nor >have you ever offered any when I asked many times in the past. >Such "divergences" are in your mind, but not in mine, and are >therefore your opinion rather than fact. As you are well aware, >I am guilty of this too, but I have been trying to improve >by toning down my own opinions or at least labeling them as >such. > >Jerry S. > > > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 12:50:34 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 04:10:36 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <000401bda123$b2a188e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 26th Dear Gerry and Marshall: Butting in with my 0.02, I have often found statements that HPB has made which at the time I did not understand or follow the logic of. I set them aside to be verified. and have found over some years sometime, that they dovetailed with the philosophy of Theosophy that she presented eventually. There are exception such a spellings and a few minor errors, which may have resulted from errors in proof reading. But, bye and large, Theosophy as she placed it before us is coherent and comprehensive. No other writer that I know of has been able to match her scope, and detailed knowledge of ancient and current thought (in her days). I grew to trust the statements made, while retaining my own right to check them out as far as possible by parallel studies. Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 4:21 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? >> The study of theosophy (and lets forget the capital T vs lower t)the >> way I understood from HPB, is not only to study all belief, all >> religions, all mythologies, all sciences, all arts, and so on, but to do >> in a 'special' way which is what I call theosophy. That system of >> investigating into the above mentioned, to extract Nature's Laws, to >> prove them in ones life, to compare them with other ways of expressing >> them, and so on, is what Theosophy is all about. ... > >Martin, I agree with you here, but the problem that I have encountered >is in "to prove them in one's life" or rather in one's experiences. >What happens if your personal experience doesn't "fit" with one of >HPB's teachings? Well, you have to ask yourself if HPB is wrong, or >if maybe you are going crazy. Or, you can just ascribe her teaching >to the exoteric, and try to convince yourself that your expriences >are esoteric, and that no real discontinuity exists. I submit that >sooner or later this will happen to all of us. > >Jerry S. > > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 13:04:23 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 04:25:14 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: = IDEAS and their effect. Message-ID: <000501bda123$b3f13a60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Dear Alan: What is an "Idea" indeed ! As far as I know in me it is a visualization in my own energic center of a response to a situation, a memory, or an anticipation on which I am working. I evoke these when I feel it is necessary. As for me, the mind and its powers are tools (not wholly mastered) but, they are NOT "Me." I use and generate and alter them. What I write now is an instance of this. { and I also forget. Words, at best are an attempt to convey much more than squiggles on paper or on a screen ). As to the power of a thought and distance. I would not be able to say whether distance diminishes such. From some of the things that the exchanges between HPB and her correspondents, or the Master and Sinnett, etc.. show to me, is that the "receiver" has to be in tune with the "Sender" -- or there is only an "influence" and not an exact reception. Apparently the receivers have to have developed control over their minds and intent, so that this refinement is produced voluntarily. I have also noted that there appears to be a kind of "telephone bell" that rings when one directs a thought at another "recipient." Then apparently the voluntarily attunement seems to take place. Those are my surmises from what I read. HPB and the Masters appear from what they write in some cases to be far more aware of the thoughts of those around them, or even at long distance than we are -- although from time to time some curious coincidences occur, which need to be noticed. Dal. > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 5:43 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: = IDEAS and their effect. >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>Could you not say that the difference (as I intended) was to mark >>the difference between the "doctrine of the 'eye,' " and the >>"doctrine of the 'heart ?' " > >You could indeed, but one matter that is in itself a probable mystery is >"What is an IDEA, and from whence does it come?" >> >>It is also quite true that any thought will affect in howsoever >>small a way the whole of the universe -- just as a pebble dropped >>in Malibu Pacific coastal waters will eventually have its effect >>on the Cornish Atlantic coast - or your and my exchange over >>I-net will affect all those who read it. I would add that it is >>not a matter of strength or of time, but that our living is >>constantly universalizing our attitudes. > >Agreed, but by the time it gets here (from Malibu) its effect will be >considerably reduced in strength. And wgain, on the subject of defining >terms, what *is* an "attitude" ? > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 13:09:10 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 03:54:16 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Message-ID: <000201bda123$af6c9ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 26th Dear Jerry: Now you have me guessing. I do not know the source of the "Oath of the Abyss." It sounds interesting and significant. Robert Crosbie was a very interesting man, a close friend of Mr. Judge. They met in Boston in 1888 or so, and Judge recognized Crosbie as a friend and an associate and he was eventually entrusted with the supervision of theosophical work and effort in the New England states, as that work grew and grew. If you are interested I have bio-notes on both Crosbie and Judge which can be made available, either direct (as they are long) or over Internet. It would be very valuable for interested students of Theosophy to become acquainted with the work and writings of Mr. Judge and Mr. Crosbie as that is a chapter in the history of the Theosophical movement that many are still unfamiliar with. However I would observe that in my study and experience I have found that Theosophy usually has something to say about most schools of thought, both ancient and modern. HPB declared in several places that it was "history." So I am not surprised to find that there is frequent corroboration of that which emerges. Crosbie never wrote any books, but some of his letups and steno. reports of some of his talks were gathered together and after his death THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER was issued by his friends and associates in the ULT. (pp. 415, $ 7.00) There is much of a practical nature that is covered, as well as the reason for the establishing of the ULT (United Lodge of Theosophists). Additionally, he placed great importance on the study of HPB's KEY TO THEOSOPHY, and Judge's THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. Some of the answers that he made at the regular study classes her at ULT where the OCEAN was studied have been gathered together and named ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS on the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. The answers are grouped in the same order as are the chapters in the OCEAN. (pp. 248, $ 6.00) During the last years of his life, from 1912 to 1919 Crosbie edited the magazine THEOSOPHY, still published by the ULT every month. In those pages he reprinted most of the original articles and answers to questions which HPB and Judge has printed originally in THEOSOPHIST, LUCIFER, and PATH magazines. ( Those had gone "out-of-print" by then, and most Theosophists of that period, 15 to 20 years after the death of those two) did not know HPB or Judge at first hand, nor was the theosophical world still familiar with their writings. Those articles have been made into books as accurate verbatim reprints of the originals, and are made available by ULT. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 4:08 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: >> Dallas offers: Some words from Robert Crosbie >> >> "How shall we apply Theosophy in daily life ? ...etc > >Dallas, Crosbie's words (I have never read him) are a >modern version of the magical Oath of the Abyss. This >is like a Theosophical version of the Oath. Both are >powerful techniques. Thanks for the post as I was unaware >of this technique being available in Theosophy. > >Jerry S. > > > > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 13:09:41 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 05:33:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: It came from America Message-ID: <000601bda123$b5840f60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 26th If reincarnation is a fact and we are eternal pilgrims, then our incarnation this life in a particular country does not take away the idea that as a whole we are "chosen people." No particular country has any special value since this is ONE EARTH and no matter where we had this birth we are attached to the same round globe. In the course of cycles we meet each other again and again. (IMHO) HPB does aver that on the AmericaS a new physiological race is being developed from the amalgamation of so many different racial types as we now find living here -- and in a minor way, this can be seen in Australia, and other countries that are being re-peopled with members of a different physiological derivation. Our ability to travel all over the world very fast, and the several wars have resulted in the sweeping over the face of sections of the earth of new groups and types, leaving an impress in their wake of physiological, emotional and intellectual contacts they impress the new environment with. Intellectually we may find ourselves attached by family ,education, religion, politics to one group, class or system or another. But that is momentary. What were we, and where were we last life, or several lives back ? Were we the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, the Byzantine, the Chaldees, or, the Atlanteans, the Lemurians, the Hindus, the Chinese -- and I mean as egos using bodies of those races. Are we not perhaps reaping in the present the impact we may have individually left in the history of a past now forgotten (but not lost to the "Memory of the immortal Soul"). Did we build the Pyramids, or help carve the Sphinx, or assist in the carving of the hundreds of cave-temples in Ellora, Ajanta, Karli, Elephanta in ancient India? Did we work at the irrigation projects that cover Thailand, and covered Cambodia (where there is now jungle) and watch Angkor Wat rise stone after stone out of the swamps around it ? Did we participate in carving the temples at Delphi, or Baalbec, and assist in laying out Stonehenge, Avesbury or Carnac, or the "serpent mound" in Iowa ? Were we in Macchu Piccu or at Copan and Teotehwacan. Did we lay out those mysterious lines in the Nazca plateau, or help to build the mysterious walls at Zimbabwe. Did we fight with Rama during the conquest of Lanka when he went is search of his ravished wife Sita ? Did we help carve those mysterious giant human figures set in the walls at Bamian in the Hindu Kush or, the 58 foot high giant carved out of native granite standing on his mountain at Shravan Belgola in Mysore, forever staring at the North? Did we sail with the Phoenicians, or the early Basques, or the Danes and sailors of Malabar and colonize the coasts of other climes ? And these are only monuments in fragments left to us to wonder at. What about our past in terms of ideas : Were we not with Odin in the North, and with the Druids in ancient Gaul? Did we follow Zoroaster as he left old India? Or much earlier, enter with the Brahmins of the "Aryan" hordes that invaded India from the North West a million years ago -- those Brahmins who studied under the Raja-rishees ? Did we live with the Incas or the Toltecs, the Todas, or study philosophy under the Hierophants of Egypt, and astronomy under Asuramaya of the Atlanteans. Did we listen to Pythagoras, or Krishna, or Gautama Buddha. Did we travel with Nagarjuna into China taking the Buddhist "Good Law" there ? Were we among the listeners at the "Sermon on the Mount?" Did we argue with Euclid or Thales and Solon, or with Paracelsus, and van Helmont on the subject of healing and th alchemy of "simples?" Did we study the Greek philosophers at Pico della Mirandols's Florentine Academy. Were we with Plato and Socrates in the Athenian Agora ? Did we help the librarians preserve some of the marvelous ancient Hermetic scrolls that the Romans, invading Alexandria, set on fire at the destruction of the Library ? Did we witness the explosion of the volcano at Santorini (Thera) and the subsequent tsunami that swamped the Grecian, Minoan and Phoenician empires ? These and a thousand more questions could be asked of the past, of our past. And in her writings, we find HPB discussing events and places more as a witness, than as one who reads history while never visiting those ancient places or delving into antique literature, thought and philosophy. I would not call the "Americans" (North, Central and South) a "chosen" people other than that their countries now witness the gathering together of those karmic threads that will enable a new "racial" (physiological, psychological, and perhaps spiritual) group to emerge. HPB predicts that. Looking over the scope of HPB's writings one is struck with the fact that at every age and in every nation there have always been : 1.) the religions and philosophies of the masses -- rites, ceremonies, etc... and , 2.) the religion or wisdom of the Wise. The old religions that we know of today are those attempts (made periodically by the Wise) to reform the popular modes of knowledge and worship. The Wise (as a silent, secret, unobtrusive group -- each knowing the others) remain unmoved; (but not unsympathetic). And from time, to time as the cycles permit they attempt to reform the popular modes, to bring them more into line with the truth that is the common property of all. (And the source of all the popular religions.) In the Theosophical Movement we are witnessing such an effort. (IMHO) Dallas. I have often wondered. > Date: Thursday, June 25, 1998 9:24 PM > From: "Kym Smith" > Subject: It came from America >Annette wrote: > >>Anyway, I'm still reeling from the recent reading that America will >>spawn the next race > >Well, America will spawn SOMETHING, I'm sure. > >But this does bring to mind one question: For all you folks who DO think >that Americans ARE the "chosen" people - don't you think you should treat us >"chosen" people with much more respect? > > >Signed, > >An American > From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 14:20:34 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:07:10 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Book tour? Message-Id: <199806261907.PAA28904@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806261809.NAA24002@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 26, 98 01:09:12 pm First I'll answer Clare's question: it's the Association for Research and Enlightenment. And yes, your comment about training being behind the way the leaders handled themselves seems right on to me; hard to imagine anyone just naturally taking such flak and not acting annoyed and threatened. Thanks for the info on sources of such training/ideas. Bart, I'm not sure how distribution is handled. SUNY and several other NY academic publishers share a distributor, CUP Services, in Ithaca. But whether that precludes other distributors, I don't know. Do know, however, that the SUNY Sales Director has direct contact with the chains and knows which titles will be picked up by them. I sure won't be doing any tour-- SUNY doesn't arrange for any such thing and I'm not up for financing and planning it myself. But I did get an indefinite invitation from a northern NJ ARE guy to speak about the Masters to them later this year. I said to him that it would be fair play for me to speak about HPB to the ARE folks and then speak to the TSA lodge about Cayce! So when do you have your fall program in place, i.e. what's my deadline for contacting you? (BTW have decided to retain TSA membership despite resigning from the ACT panel.) BTW SUNY *will* ship books for an appearance, let the sponsoring organization get them at big discount, and return unsold copies. I think the Oakland lodge made back the $100 they paid me for half my plane ticket that way, when I spoke in '95. Thanks for asking. Cheers, PJ From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 14:50:34 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 15:36:14 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Two days at ARE Congress Message-Id: <199806261936.PAA01480@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <3593CF14.D8BFF46B@swbell.net> from "J.S." at Jun 26, 98 09:40:52 am According to J.S.: > > I have attended many Congresses and can say it is not unusual for many > people to come with a confrontational attitude. I think this is because > they care so much and really "own" the organization. Yes, and there are many ways to perceive ARE-- or any organization-- as having gone off track, if you feel you know what the right track is. Gail's comments were the most sensible in essence IMO, about commercialism and lack of real research, but her delivery was *way* too aggressive. Plus, this really seems to be being redressed by the board and execs with the new institutes in the 2020 plan. The other complaints were about such things as the way the cross in the logo has changed, the rarity of seeing teenaged children of execs at such meetings, too much intellectualism, etc. Everyone thinks they > know what the readings say (even though there is sometimes little agreement > on what that is!) and they have a custodial feeling about protecting the > purpose and direction of the A.R.E. And this is their one chance to voice that feeling where it counts. Apparently there's a strong undercurrent of feeling that ARE has become too weak in its commitment to Christianity. I don't agree but can see where they're coming from. OTOH I'm one of the members who wouldn't be one if ARE were *more* exclusively Christian in focus. > > Kirk Nelson (as an aside opinion) can be rather abrasive at times but I > chalk it up to his hypoglycemia. ( I know when my sugar level gets down I > get crabby). Well, I figure something more substantive was behind his remarks. My galleys should be floating around there somewhere. In the book I praise ARE very highly for *not* being cultlike about the 1998 prophecies. But that sort of implies a negative view of his own work, although it's not mentioned. (Would have been if I knew ARE was publishing his book but it came out after mine was completed.) Anyhow, if he got wind of my attitude about the whole business, which is basically to cheer on the generally low-key approach that Charles Thomas Cayce and Mark Thurston take to the 1998 issues, this could make me seem antagonistic to his own POV. Interestingly, Kirk and I are astrological cousins, born the same week or so, and September is a big month for both of us. > > All-in-all, it sounds like you had a good experience. --Judith Better than good-- very encouraging and inspiring. The signs all over said "Welcome home" and the atmosphere really conveyed that message. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 16:50:34 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:32:38 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Two days at ARE Congress Message-ID: <12107ea6.35941377@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-25 20:44:27 EDT, you write: << Gail Cayce Schwartzer >> What relationship is Gail Cayce to Edgar - a grand-daughter? Just curious. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 17:10:26 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:47:01 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Branden and Olcott Message-ID: <279971a.359416d6@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-26 09:43:48 EDT, you write: << their sexual affair lasted for years, and that when he stopped satisfying her sexually she declared him an apostate to her philosophy >> Hmmmm. Shades of Slick Willey ! From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 17:21:55 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 17:59:33 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-26 10:28:10 EDT, you write: << I think that the major turning point came when he had a visit from one of the Adepts and was told what his opportunities and "rewards" were. It is not easy for most to give up almost everything and embark to a country he knew nothing of and a cause which is usually referred to as a "forlorn" hope. >> Don't forget his power of mesmeric healing which reached its peak in 1882. Thousands benefited from his mesmeric treatment which began to wane after 1883 when his own vitality began to diminish. The chapter entitled "Magnetic Healing" in Murphet's book is quite revealing. For a period of his life in India he actually went on a healing crusade. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 17:37:17 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 16:01:00 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: Materialistic Mamas Message-Id: <199806262201.QAA03719@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >Now why would you see it as rape, when I still see it as a clash of two >strong people, both of whom are working something through in reality >when people "think" they are not using each other but are until they get >their lives truly in line with their philosophy. I prefer to remember >the "love interaction" in "The Fountainhead" as a better example of this >issue. You are absolutely right regarding my error in citing the right book - the scene I am referring to was in THE FOUNTAINHEAD, not ATLAS SHRUGGED. Thanks for helping me clarify. Rand does clearly insinuate, through Dominique, that women - especially strong ones - are still always seeking fulfillment via "strong" men - even if it involves violence. >Yeah. The virtue of expressing the strength within. Having the courage >of one's beliefs to live one's life on one's own terms. Refusing to >play games and refusing to become corrupt in order to "run with the >crowd". Not sponging off other's genius. Not being an energy vampire. >Staying the course whatever it takes. One of the narrowest-thinking books I ever read was "The Virtue of Selfishness." According to Rand's philosophical theory - if my happiness would sincerely increase due to the death of my neighbor, there is nothing in Rand's philosophy that would condemn me killing my neighbor. Rand may not have really thought that way herself, but her written theory leaves that option wide open. She claims there are differences between natural disasters and social disasters - people worthy of help in some horrendous situations, but not in others. Rand assumes that those who are poor are there because of some kind of choice or personal laziness, and therefore, the best one can do is help them as minimally as possible. I heartily disagree. Rand also, if I recall correctly, never addressed what it means when a human performs an act for its own sake. A person may find no pleasure or meaning or happiness in wiping someone's running nose - but one can perform the action out of the pure sake of simply making another person more comfortable. People often do things for nothing more than the sake of doing such things - the world could not function if such acts were not performed - yet Rand seems to find no place for it in her theory. Rand advocates seeing the world only from one point of view: your own. Way too teeny a world for me. Kym From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 17:51:54 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:27:50 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Parousia Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806261501.LAA00911@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson writes >Cayce, >predicting the second coming, the same month that I'll be coming >out Wonderful what one can do taking words out of context! It's a very long time since *I* had a second coming .... [Sorry folks] Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 18:21:55 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:36:16 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: the cute monk test Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35932E6D.2BD4@globalserve.net> libidia writes >I'm being strong. Haven't had sex for 9 years and rarely see the >physical shell on anyone any more. Dear Annette, I'm ahead of you there (but maybe [?] a wee bit older, giving me an unfair advantage. (1978). >Yet to ascend anywhere though. >Impassioned and excited Depends what you mean by "ascend" - I've been to "higher planes" and it isn't necessarily passionate or exciting. Extremely interesting and informative though! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 18:30:02 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:20:14 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Rodolfo Don writes >Aren't you stretching the truth when you say that you are not a "dogmatist" when >you are a "religionist?" > >Just curious about what you think religion is. Dear Rudy, I am not in fact a religionist (whatever that might be!). I am something of a theologian, but so far as churches go I walked away from them *because* of *their* dogmatism. Religion, to answer your question, is a term usually derived from the Latin "religio" - to bond. Not all scholars agree on this derivation, but no better alternative is offered either. In any event, "bonding" is not necessarily a good thing. Hate gangs do it, as do many animals and birds of prey. Maybe those bishops' miters are beaks! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 18:37:18 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:39:45 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Can you pass the cute monk test? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806260404.WAA17271@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >I felt myself plummenting back to earth due to my bawdy thoughts - >but that fall from grace hardly moved me as my mind kept on wanting to go >places it never, ever should. > >It was terrible and thrilling at the same time - and I kept thinking that >the monk could read my mind since that is what "enlightened" people can >sometimes do and, as a result, I was as embarrassed as all get out. > >Anyway, due to these types of events in my life, I tend to avoid "spiritual" >huddles - I always leave feeling so. . .so. . .un-something. I hate that. > >It's a plot, Annette, a plot. Stay strong. "Cute monk off duty seeks bawdy thinking woman for mutual meditation in comfortable surroundings. Own satin sheets." (Classified ad from "Cute Monks Monthly.") From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 18:40:52 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:31:37 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD, etc. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000301bda0ed$924f3640$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >A forum such as this "Theos-talk" enables us to compare our >thinking with others, constructively. We seek to refine, to >sharpen to improve -- how else can we do it but by questions, >opinions, answers, and assistance ? Is not the basis for Theos - >sophia that wisdom-freedom which can only be expressed by >brotherhood ? This is the real value of all the various "theos" lists. > >It is interesting to me, a rather devoted Blavatsky/Judge >student, to encounter many "post-Balvatskian ideas and thoughts. >It is not that I am unfamiliar with them, as the whole range of >the theosophical movement is open through the magazines and books >that have been published. > >What can be overwhelming is the quantity. ... and the often low standard of the writing! > Then, how does one >develop selectivity ? Now that is individual entirely. And we >have to determine for ourselves what is sequential and >logical, -- coherent as a whole philosophy, and not just isolated >snippets of information. Add to sequential and logical, "common sense" :0) > >I hope these few ideas may be of some help. Me too Best as ever, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 20:21:55 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:12:23 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Oath Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000201bda123$af6c9ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 26th > >Dear Jerry: > >Now you have me guessing. I do not know the source of the "Oath >of the Abyss." Come on Jerry, Tell us all! What does it say? Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 20:50:30 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:03:34 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <61Vz21AGjCl1EwAk@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <000301bda123$b117dba0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >But the statement that I made was based on familiarity with both >writings. I am sorry indeed if I have offended you or others, >but I thought that everyone was familiar with those differences >after their own study. A wee bit naive, IMHO! > >In sackcloth and ashes, Dallas And very handsome you look! One doesn't come across that many truly honest people! Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 20:51:57 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:10:31 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: = IDEAS and their effect. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000501bda123$b3f13a60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes > I have also noted >that there appears to be a kind of "telephone bell" that rings >when one directs a thought at another "recipient." Then >apparently the voluntarily attunement seems to take place. Those >are my surmises from what I read. In my experience this *is* the case, but as in daily life here, not everyone is home when you call! The big difference is that we are always at home when they call! > HPB and the Masters appear >from what they write in some cases to be far more aware of the >thoughts of those around them, or even at long distance than we >are Yes. A double-edged sword though. If one (or me) notices that someone in company is lying through their back teeth, who can we tell without incurring wrath? Sometimes liars do not even realise they are doing it, and *believe* to themselves that they are telling the truth. > -- although from time to time some curious coincidences >occur, which need to be noticed. How very true, though some "conicidences" have an air of having been organisd in advance .... Best, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 21:51:55 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:48:06 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Branden and Olcott Message-ID: <35945D66.131@globalserve.net> References: <199806261334.JAA21933@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > I will just say that it is a YUCK that reverberates from some gut > chakra or other. Chacun a son gout. OK, KPJ, I have to respond because I started this whole Rand thing off....by accident may I add, a slip of the tongue. Never expected anyone to even read it, let alone respond. Please reverberate at will. I value your differing opinion. However, I'm confused about the "gout". I'm trying to translate what I think is French...each to his own "what"? I think your points are not only valid, but also tie in with the cute monk theory and my 9 year abstinence from sex. I did not give up sex (in this case the expression of love with my husband) for any spiritual reason. (this is not a digression....) One night, in the middle of you know what, he stared me straight in the eyes and left my bed for good. I will never forget his look. He looked at me as if I was a she-devil manipulating him into some act over which he had no control. It was a look I recognised later as of "pure hatred liberally laced with fear". I also realized that, of all our relationship, the you know what was the only circumstance in which my brain, intellect, upbringing, everything else except vulnerabilty and "love", was absent. So, in response to your comment........ > But I have read reviews of all the recent books about Rand, and > dipped into both Branden's accounts. I think it's disingenuous > to talk of Nathaniel Branden "disappointing" Rand without > acknowledging that this young married man was seduced by this > older and not particularly appealing married woman, that their > sexual affair lasted for years, and that when he stopped > satisfying her sexually she declared him an apostate to her > philosophy. I see some abuse of power here on her part. ...... may we please perhaps consider that something over and above the rational, logical Will to Power is happening in these instances? My husband is 14 years younger than me, and I know he once thought that he was "powerless" against my "seductive powers". If I wanted to be brutal, I could say he followed me around like a puppy dog until he wore me down with his flattery and adoration and "you know so much and have so much to teach me"! Do you honestly think that if I, or Rand or HPB thought we had some "magikal" power over men, we would waste it on mere undeveloped human men, or use it for mundane purposes like furthering our own material causes? It's a contradiction in terms and unrealistic for a strong, enlightened person to "use" another person intentionally! IMHO, no-one "satisfies" another sexually (or any other which way). OTOH, if a person is offered a gift which they perceive is given freely and the outcome is mutually satisfying, why stop? > Although there is no evidence of any sexual relationship between > Olcott and HPB, I think the parallel is an interesting one. > Since you brought it up, Annette, I will add that the standard > view in non-Adyar Theosophical groups, and increasingly within > the Adyar TS, is that Olcott "disappointed" HPB. As I said, it was accidental, but I did not know this history. I had read a para or two in theosophy books that intimated that HPB died an "exhausted and disappointed" woman because of what she saw happening to her "movement". When I read that, my only thought was, "anyone who makes the mistake of thinking that a movement is *of them* and that they can *determine it's future direction* (by trying to manage the acts of others who live the idea in their expression of it) is bound to be disappointed. I thought, "My stars, if I could do all that, I'd sit back and feel real chuffed that I had contributed something worthwhile and NOT take responsibility for anyone who followed it without working on their own life's philosopy". I couldn't understand why HPB didn't spend her last years tired but elated at the great work she had achieved! Was it a GIFT to humanity or wasn't it?! You wrote: No one seems to > give a moment's thought to how she might have disappointed him. > She certainly seduced him mentally and spiritually, although not > physically. Was it she who "seduced" him, or her ideas, her energy, her intellect, her connection with the Masters. Did he perhaps think (and desire) that if he was close to her it would come to him too? And this ties in with Rand's philosophy....making oneself a servant, devotee, and/or manipulator to gain even a glimmer of the experience and perceived "benefits" of another's genius is futile. The succulent fruits are gained as a result of one's own sweat. Any other way leads to disappointment. As I said, IMHO, no-one can seduce another, although one *can* be offered a seductee on a plate and give in to the desire to enjoy the elation of the relationship. Plus, I know I'm starting from scratch and have read very little to-date, so correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't HPB spend time in Tibet and isn't Theosophy a blend of the seeds from her Bhuddism and Spiritualism experiences, and don't those philosophies *demand* that the student take full responsibility for his development, being at the same time student and teacher, following not blindly the edicts of the Master but treading the path of discipline and consciousness raising practice? And, haven't all the effective Masters challenged and allowed their pupils to fumble, err and learn "the hard way"? > But let me close by asking > this: if you had disrupted your entire life to follow someone, > devoted ten years of your life to furthering their every wish, > proclaimed their virtues to the world; if you were then > confronted by what seemed to you to be strong evidence of fraud > on that person's part, along with a letter in which that person > ridiculed you for your loyalty, called you a "psychologized baby" > who was under her control-- would *you* be disappointed? Well, KPJ, I'm game.... Ages 10 - 18 years.......traumatized Ages 19 - 28 yrs ....... join the opposing philosophy (with a vengance) Ages 29 - 39 yrs ....... leave angry and return wiser to do it again Ages 40 and up ......... realize I manifest my own destiny, forgive myself and the other person, organize in my mind the wealth of knowledge gained from the experience and put on record both sides of the "story" if I felt it necessary, but definitely not repeat the experience. P.S....if you disrupt your entire life to follow someone, what happens in the following is what needs to happen in your life. IMHO. Whew, I feel better. Hope this brings back some balance and my apologies to the list. Blessings Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 22:21:55 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:58:11 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-ID: <35945FC3.3B82@globalserve.net> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: Hi Doss: If I am to finish this thread by understanding the lesson, I need to know a couple of things here. Would you care to answer... > I think that the major turning point came when he had a visit from one of > the Adepts and was told what his opportunities and "rewards" were. It is > not easy for most to give up almost everything and embark to a country he > knew nothing of and a cause which is usually referred to as a "forlorn" hope. In what way did the Adept appear and tell him? What do you mean by "opportunities and rewards"? Am I to make the inference that an Adept told him that he was being duped and wasting his time "following HPB"? Does this mean that Adepts can have differing opinions and "side with" individual members in a cause, hence promoting dissention? Finally, I am not being flippant when I say, IMHO there's nothing easier in life than "giving up everything and taking on a forlorn hope challenge" when current life brings little peace or satisfaction. What appears to be "everything" is infact "nothing to lose". :) Cheers Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 22:51:57 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:45:20 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Materialistic Mamas Message-ID: <35946AD0.4806@globalserve.net> References: <199806262201.QAA03719@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > You are absolutely right regarding my error in citing the right book - the > scene I am referring to was in THE FOUNTAINHEAD, not ATLAS SHRUGGED. Thanks > for helping me clarify. Thanks Kym, for letting me know that. I thought that's what you meant but, as I am not fully psychic (yet), couldn't be sure. > Rand does clearly insinuate, through Dominique, that women - especially > strong ones - are still always seeking fulfillment via "strong" men - even > if it involves violence. She sure does, with powerful literary skill! Once I read it, I never sought fulfillment in that manner again (despite my mother's misguidance) :) > in Rand's philosophy that would condemn me killing my neighbor. Rand may > not have really thought that way herself, but her written theory leaves that > option wide open. WADR then, if you expand/exptrapolate what she said to include this option, it then becomes *your* philosophy, not hers. Precisely why I am ONLY interested in reading EXACTLY what Buddha said, not what thousands of others after him say he said, or explain what he meant when he said what he said. > She claims there are differences between natural disasters and social > disasters - people worthy of help in some horrendous situations, but not in > others. Rand assumes that those who are poor are there because of some kind > of choice or personal laziness, and therefore, the best one can do is help > them as minimally as possible. I heartily disagree. Oh lord, shark infested waters..... (but oh so pertinent in these troubled times) My read on it is....... People chose to be where they are. For instance, if you chose to stay in an area to which drought and famine arrives and furthermore do nothing to prevent yourself from experiencing a slow painful death from starvation, you live with the consequences. (One of the reasons I am trying to tread the Druid path...."I make MY bed, I lie in it".) If I "give" to you any more help than normal philanthropic behaviour to minimize your suffering, you remain in the situation but are now worse off because you are dependent on me and my circumstances (or vagaries of personality/politics). If I give assistance to you to the detriment of my ability to maintain my own resources and personal satisfaction, two people are now worse off. If I give to you and you become comfortable, but we get embroiled in a power, domination thing, we are both worse off once again. If you chose to move but the borders are closed, your responsibility is to use your genius to solve the problem, not to beg me to let you in. My memory can be poor and selective (S), but I do not remember reading of or making the inference of destroying anyone or anything except in self defence. > Rand also, if I recall correctly, never addressed what it means when a human > performs an act for its own sake. A person may find no pleasure or meaning > or happiness in wiping someone's running nose - but one can perform the > action out of the pure sake of simply making another person more > comfortable. People often do things for nothing more than the sake of doing > such things - the world could not function if such acts were not performed - > yet Rand seems to find no place for it in her theory. In Rand's philosophy, a person NEVER performs an act "for its own sake". In her world, this would be illogical, unrealistic, and would lead to chaos. For her there is no such thing as "making another person more comfortable". One's comfort comes from oneself and one makes, creates one's own existance within the "natural" laws. Very definitely not opposed to what is natural, scientific, effective, beautiful,perfect. > Rand advocates seeing the world only from one point of view: your own. > > Way too teeny a world for me. And I believe she would have been honoured to shake your hand, in recognition of a strong woman who states her case and follows her own judgement without attempting to coerce, manipulate or cut down another. Nice debating with you Kym. Cheers Annette From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:21:55 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:15:48 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Hear/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: Dear Brenda thanks for the internet address I will check it out. Also, I am interested in discussing your own experiences of heart energy. How would you compare it to the intellect of brain-originated energy? Any comments would be very welcome. Regards Tom From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:30:31 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:07:00 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart Chakra/Meditation Message-ID: <3c6e067c.35946fe5@aol.com> Dear Spencer Thanks for your book suggestion on Patanjali by Judge. I will seek it out and learn from it. I am interested in your own comments or experiences on the field of heart energy. Would you like to share some of this with me. I am open to a discussion. Thomas From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:33:46 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:13:49 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart Chakra/Meditaion Message-ID: <615fdbb5.3594717f@aol.com> Dear Pam Thanks for your response to my request. I am very grateful. Also, I would like to discuss your own experiences on the field of heart energy and say, compared with that of the intellect or brain-centered energy. I am particularly interested in how all of this works and the effect it might have on a person. Regards Thomas From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:37:21 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:09:22 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart Chakra/Meditation Message-ID: Paul Thanks for your recommendation of Edgar Cayce' works. I will certainly research the work for relevance to my topic. I would also be interested in discussing with you any experiences or views you have on this field of the heart compared with the brain/intellect. I find it very stimulating and interesting. Thomas From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:42:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 00:11:44 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart/Chakra Meditation Message-ID: Dear Dr. Bain. Thank you for responding to my request. I am interested in discussing experiences of the domain of the heart compared with that of the intellect. I am very interested in how the two work and don't work together, particularly in the end result on the individual. Any comments would be of great interest. Regards Thomas From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:46:02 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:59:51 EDT From: "Thomas Browne" Subject: Heart Chakra Meditation Message-ID: <795cc2fb.35946e36@aol.com> Dear W. Dallas TenBroeck Thanks so much for responding to my email requesting information on the subject matter. Your response made me feel personally connected to a larger platform of people knowledgeable in this field and not cynical or without subtle understanding and/or experience. It is interesting that you responded to Andrew Brown. My brother and father are both called Andrew and my name is Thomas. I don't think there is any significance but, it tickled me. The content of your response proved very stimulating to me and I would like to ask you if you have practised focusing on your heart as in a spiritual meditation? If so, what was your experience? What is the difference between the crown and heart chakras from an experiential point of view? Anything you have to say on these matters will be sensitively acknowledged by me. I look forward to hearing from you. Regards Thomas Browne From ???@??? Fri Jun 26 23:51:57 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 23:58:15 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: the cute monk test Message-ID: <35946DD7.7743@globalserve.net> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > I'm ahead of you there (but maybe [?] a wee bit older, giving me an > unfair advantage. (1978). AGE BEFORE BEAUTY, IMHO! > Depends what you mean by "ascend" - I've been to "higher planes" and > it isn't necessarily passionate or exciting. Extremely interesting and > informative though! I meant I have yet to "rise above" the physical in any true sense. Travelling to the Upperworld, Middleworld and Otherworld to vacation from the physical doesn't count in my book. Oh, and by the by, since accepting the sexless life and being fiercely loyal to whom I committed (meaning I would not commit adultery), I find that a spiritual path and great friends to talk to electronically is far better than sex, and I'm not into competing with you on anything. What with Dallas just about masacaring my self concept of my literacy, I couldn't handle you showing me how far removed I am from the Merlin I think dwells within me. Not just yet :) annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 00:21:56 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:53:22 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Internet theatre Message-Id: <199806270453.WAA23486@mailmx.micron.net> Brenda wrote: >Since my own son is shy, I'm >fishing for data on the subject and he is so LOUD. His voice is big and >booming. I'm very glad to see a reserve that might help him to control his >nature. Since I'm his mother, I feel a responsibility for steering him in >the right direction. What do I do when he starts screaming in public? But >won't answer a question or ask a question when I prompt him? My words may be of no use to you as I am not a parent, and thus, may not understand what feedback a parent can utilize and what they can't. With that in mind, hopefully, the following won't be a complete waste of your time. As far as your son using the Internet as an outlet - I think it would be very helpful. One can learn a few social skills and even make friends for life; there are, of course, the obvious drawbacks of such things as pedophiles, lack of eye or body contact, and dangerous advice/talk/opinions. It is stunning how much a scrolling screen can impact someone - and much of that impact has to do with our own fantasy and contruction. In my own mind, I've built little worlds - worlds of theos-talk and TI-L. I've filled in the "blanks" of people who contribute with physical images and personalities. I believe this is a natural thing - but it can leave one open to some mental injury and rude awakenings about one's own psyche. For example, if I've built a "positive" image of someone and they then post something that contradicts that image - I feel a real stab of pain. If I've built a "negative" image of someone and then I realize they are not as bad as I perceived them - I experience a genuine embarrassment. It's also hard to write to someone and then not hear from them for awhile - since I don't really know what going on in their life I find myself fighting feelings of "rejection." Another biggie is the possibility of getting involved in a "sexual or intimate" type of relationship via e-mail. I've been that route - and it was one of the most wrenching things I've ever experienced. I had heard of such things happening and thought that the people who do that must howl nightly at the moon. Never did I believe I could "fall" for something like that. Wrong-O! Being happily married (as I am) or in a satisfying relationship does not make one immune to phrases of praise and sweet-talk. Anyway, your son will have his world opened up and he will learn a great many things - and it may help refine him (although it hasn't done that to me yet!). I think the Internet has more positive than negative aspects - but again, that's my opinion. Your son and his future are the most important - and that leaves you having to make really tough decisions. Some questions don't have answers and some answers aren't found in books. (Well, now, that's a revoltingly feeble statement, eh? Some of us just write to write, I think) Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 00:23:57 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 21:51:25 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Olcott Message-ID: <35947A4D.1152@azstarnet.com> References: <199806261334.JAA21933@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <35945D66.131@globalserve.net> K. Paul Johnson wrote: >No one seems to > give a moment's thought to how she might have disappointed him. > She [HPB] certainly seduced him [Olcott] mentally and spiritually, >although not physically. Annette wrote: >Was it she who "seduced" him, or her ideas, her energy, her intellect, >her connection with the Masters. Did he perhaps think (and desire) >that >if he was close to her it would come to him too? And this ties in with >Rand's philosophy....making oneself a servant, devotee, and/or >manipulator to gain even a glimmer of the experience and perceived >"benefits" of another's genius is futile. The succulent fruits are >gained as a result of one's own sweat. Any other way leads to >disappointment. >As I said, IMHO, no-one can seduce another, although one *can* be >offered a seductee on a plate and give in to the desire to enjoy the >elation of the relationship. Daniel Caldwell replies: Annette, I think you have hit the nail on the head with your remarks: >Was it she who "seduced" him, or her ideas, her energy, her intellect, >her connection with the Masters. And I take this statement of yours in a very positive sense. Olcott was a grown man in his forties when he met Madame Blavatsky. He had alot of experience out in the world and wasn't a naive kid. From his own testimony given during the years 1874 through 1891 (the years under discussion) Colonel Olcott had seen HPB perform literally scores of remarkable psychic feats. He had had many meetings with various Adepts and Masters connected with HPB. He knew from his own personal experience that HPB was genuine and that her Teachers were real persons. The Masters had had long face-to-face talks with him concerning Theosophy, HPB (their agent), etc. etc. He had his share of faults but see what the Masters write about him in THE MAHATMA LETTERS. And yes they reprimanded him from time to time when necessary. See Master K.H.'s letter precipitated on board the SS Shannon on August 22, 1888. Olcott was on this ship in the Mediterranean. He was headed for England where HPB was then residing. K.H.'s letter is as follows: Misunderstandings have grown up between Fellows both in London and Paris which imperil the interests of the movement. You will be told that the chief originator of most if not of all these disturbances is H.P.B. This is not so; though her presence in England has, of course, a share in them. But the largest share rest with others, whose serene unconsciousness of their own defects is very marked and much to be blamed. One of the most valuable effects of Upasika's mission is that it drives men to self-study and destroys in them blind servility for persons. Observe your own case, for example. But your revolt, good friend, against her "infallibility" - as you once thought it - has gone too far, and you have been unjust to her. . . . . . . Try to remove such misconceptions as you will find, by kind persuasion and an appeal to the feelings of loyalty to the cause of truth, if not to us. Make all these men feel that we have no favorites, nor affections for persons, but only for their good acts and humanity as a whole. But we employ agents - the best available. Of these, for the last thirty years, the chief has been the personality known as H.P.B. to the world (but otherwise to us). Imperfect and very "troublesome" no doubt she proves to some; nevertheless there is no likelihood of our finding a better one for years to come, and your Theosophists should be made to understand it. . . . . . . Since 1885 I have not written nor caused to be written save through her agency direct or remote a letter or a line to anybody in Europe or America, nor communicated orally with or through any third party. Theosophists should learn it. You will understand later the significance of this declaration, so keep it in mind. . . . Her fidelity to our work being constant and her sufferings having come upon her through it, neither I nor either of my Brother Associates will desert or supplant her. As I once before remarked, ingratitude is not among our vices. . . . To help you in your present perplexity, H.P.B. has next to no concern with administrative details and should be kept clear of them so far as her strong nature can be controlled. But this you must tell to all; with occult matters she has everything to do. . . . We have not "abandoned her." She is not "given over to chelas." She is our direct agent. I warn you against permitting your suspicions and resentment against her "many follies" to bias your intuitive loyalty to her. In the adjustment of this European business you will have two things to consider, - the external and administrative, and the internal and psychical. Keep the former under your control and that of your most prudent associates jointly; leave the latter to her. You are left to devise the practical details. I have also noted your thoughts about the Secret Doctrine. Be assured that what she has not annotated from scientific and other works we have given or suggested to her. Every mistake or erroneous notion corrected and explained by her from the works of other Theosophists was corrected by me or under my instruction. It is a more valuable work than its predecessor, - an epitome of occult truths that will make it a source of information and instruction for the earnest student for long years to come. . . . (This letter) . . . is merely given you as a warning and a guide; to others as a warning only; for you may use it discreetly if needs be . . . Prepare, however, to have the authenticity of the present denied in certain quarters. (Signed) K.H. [Extract correctly copied - H.S. Olcott.] Path, October, 1893 From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 01:21:58 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:07:25 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Olcott Message-ID: <35948C1D.4AC4@globalserve.net> References: <199806261334.JAA21933@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> <35945D66.131@globalserve.net> <35947A4D.1152@azstarnet.com> Caldwell/Graye wrote: > [Extract correctly copied - H.S. Olcott.] > > Path, October, 1893 Dear Daniel (I think I have remembered that correctly, but my apologies if not). Just wanted to acknowledge your posting and thank you for the further information, read and disgested. I am trying not to write here so much being as I am a lurker, but the lessons from the recent threads have been tremendous. Cheers Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 03:51:55 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 02:36:43 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Re: Straight, no milk Message-Id: <199806270836.CAA28450@mailmx.micron.net> Govert wrote: >If IT is your opinion, just keep it. Well!! I never!! See what happens when one tries to SHARE?! Poor Candide, removed from the castle with a great many kicks. . .I just may not get over your cruelty, Govert. But. . .you need not worry about me. . .I'll manage. . .somehow. Kym From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 07:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:00:20 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-ID: <19980627131654497.AAA245@pgiese> > Brenda wrote: > > >Since my own son is shy, I'm > >fishing for data on the subject and he is so LOUD. His voice is big and > >booming. I'm very glad to see a reserve that might help him to control his > >nature. Since I'm his mother, I feel a responsibility for steering him in > >the right direction. What do I do when he starts screaming in public? But > >won't answer a question or ask a question when I prompt him? > How old is your son again? This type of behavior is natural and common for children 3-5. Children are not born with the social skills to know what is appropriate or acceptable behavior and what is not. It is one of our jobs as parents to teach this. Young children also do not have the verbal skills to explain or analyze their feelings. Little girls develop this earlier than little boys. Screaming and crying in public is a difficult situation to deal with. At home it's easier --I always found a "time out" worked well ---and if the same standards of conduct are applied at home and away from home, it's easier for the child to learn. The important thing to remember is that "giving in" to the reason for the screaming and crying or shouting only teaches that screaming, shouting, and crying are the way to get what you want. When my daughter did this when she was young, she was told to stop and if possible removed from the scene. When she did it at home, she got a time out. She'd also do the "running away from mommy in the store" routine. When I'd catch up with her, she was scolded and I'd keep a stern look to let her know this was wrong. Children respond more to emotions than words, so it's as important to be emotionally consistent and that your words, emotions, and actions don't send "cross messages". Of course, the above is only true for young children who grow out of this phase by the time they're in school fulltime and start developing a sense of friends/society and if the parents haven't instilled self-discipline and action, teachers and social pressures will do it --in a much more painful fashion. I've seen little boys who were allowed to "run wild"/"be their natural selves" hit the hard reality that if they didn't control themselves enough to "play well" with other boys, the other boys wouldn't play with them. The word "discipline" has been an unpopular word but it's self-discipline that have gotten us here where we are now. Doesn't it take discipline to meditate? Discipline to read and study? The self-discipline we learn as children becomes the structure that we can build on the rest of our lives. As I said before, the above goes for young children. If he's over 9 and exhibiting this behavior, it would be time for some psychological help. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 08:20:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 08:21:20 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Heart Chakra/Meditaion Message-ID: <19980627133911199.AAA91@pgiese> Thomas -- A quick point here: In working with the chakras, you don't mediate ON the chakra, you meditate THROUGH the chakra. Many of the meditations on the heart chakras, throat chakras, etc are designed to help the student "locate" and "feel" the chakra energy in order to work do later work with the chakras and kundalini. Remember the Care Bear cartoons? When put into an unpleasant situation that they couldn't resolve through reason, passivity, or compromise, the Care Bears would release an energy of love and kindness out of the heart chakras (well as close to the heart as you might locate on a cartoon teddy bear). Quite magical really, except that I usually see/feel the heart chakra energy as being rather golden. [BTW --if you haven't noticed, Rely to Author sends the message to the whole theos-talk list. To send to an individual you need to type in their personal email address.] Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Thomas Browne" > Subject: Heart Chakra/Meditaion > Date: Friday, June 26, 1998 11:13 PM > > Dear Pam > Thanks for your response to my request. I am very grateful. Also, I would > like to discuss your own experiences on the field of heart energy and say, > compared with that of the intellect or brain-centered energy. I am > particularly interested in how all of this works and the effect it might have > on a person. > Regards > Thomas > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 08:41:38 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 05:38:55 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Heart Chakra Meditation Message-ID: <003b01bda1c9$5408c040$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 27th 1998 Dear Thomas: Curious about the address -- I though I picked that up from your message. IMHO -- the physiological chakras (plexi) are symbolical of psychological aspects of man's constitution. I would recommend that you read (study ?) the Theosophical concept of the 7-fold "man" living in a 7-fold universe.and that every "man" is a mirror of the Universe and subtly connected to every one of its "parts." Actually one has to think one's way through the composite being that we are, recognize the aspects we us are tools and not independent of the ONE CONSCIOUSNESS which is the source of our Individuality ( or Egoity -- I do not mean selfishness and isolation, but our "togetherness" with the whole of a living Nature ). This does not mean that questions such as : why am I seemingly separate ? what in me is aware of "separateness ?" If I pursue my "selfish isolation" of thought and feeling (we all do when awake) to what ultimate goal does this lead ? If I depend on the Universe (or Nature) around me for its cooperation, do I owe a debt of cooperation to It ? What are the elements of exchange ? You may say to me that this leads away from a consideration of the chakras. But if you look at the emblem adopted they are lotus flowers -- symbols of universality and eternity with the ancient Hindus. Also no test from the past ought to be considered on its literal, superficial words alone. There are always inner keys to the ideas used. [ I assume that you have access to a copy of THE SECRET DOCTRINE ? In Vol. 1, pp. 305 on you will find that HPB gives us several important keys to understanding symbols. There are others scattered through her book and these ought to be consulted. Now what does this ? IMHO it is the mind, the power of thinking, driven by the desire to know. If it is wisdom we seek, then that heart quality universalizes the search, makes it a mater of general usefulness as it constantly draws attention away from isolation to the integration of the individual with the rest of his environment. If you were studying a course in school you might elect to read deeper into the subject while following at the same time the discipline of the class under the Professor's teaching. You might learn more than the pupils who confine themselves to the course, but you cannot entirely escape from the mean adopted for common study. [Or you ,may have already developed genius along those lines in a past life, and find that the present class is pedestrianating. I which case you have a choice: to continue with it, for whatever reason (and those reasons ought to be carefully considered), or, choose (if possible) to enter the course of study at some more advanced level. In any case it would be wise to consult with others, the Professor or his Aides. I offer this as an illustration of many situations that one meets in living. Does this relate to the employment of the energies from our individual chakras ? The answer is yes. But like my illustration above, the predominance of one over others in ourselves only indicates the present facility we enjoy. But one ought also to consider that all the chakras depend on each other, and therefore all have to be kept in line, even while we might seemingly emphasize one. It is when we exaggerate or distort the whole of one's being by a strong desire to improve one in preference to others that trouble arises. So it is our ability to BALANCE that is the most important. And Balance implies that we are aware of the importance of each, as well as the potential development of any one that we may select. The implications of such a view are to first develop the power to see ourselves as detached observers (Witnesses) of the life, struggle and development of our involved personal selves in our everyday work and being. The personal everyday self focuses on what it considers important, and may select for study aspects of living or centers of knowledge (as the "heart" chakra) of which it has heard and to which it "feels" attracted. As friend Spencer indicates, PATANJALI's YOGA SUTRAS ( as explained and illustrated by Judge ) is of great help in organizing our concept of what and who we are, and where we ought to be going. It starts of course with the proposition that we are, at root base, immortals. And have under charge the assistance in the self-development of a similar immortal, which is the child-mind we call the personality. Not long ago it was "lit up" in this period of manifestation. It is at school and is testing the various avenues of learning, and studying its own powers to understand and to act. It is the one that has to act and live in the world. We can suggest to it through the "Intuition," and warn it f danger using the "Voice of conscience." But, we cannot do its work for it. We cannot take it over. WE know what the chakras are and how they work -- it is a part of universal knowledge, though not one that is emphasized as an aspect of psychology outside of Theosophy. And even there we are cautioned not to "materialize" them. they have to be seen as spiritual powers. Take the "Bhagavad Gita" or the "Dhammapada" for instance. Those are manifestations of the "heart chakra -- the Heart Doctrine. The personality senses them, may have heard of them or read of them, and may feel attracted to them. But has it, as a preliminary, broadened its understanding to a comprehension of all its already existence potentials ? That is what the inner Self suggests be done to each of us. And this may in fact take years of patient work. Do we have that patience ? and if we are "impatient," why so ? I offer these as ideas to consider, and know that they may not be fully satisfactory, but maybe they help some. Dallas > Date: Friday, June 26, 1998 9:59 PM > From: "Thomas Browne" > Subject: Heart Chakra Meditation >Dear W. Dallas TenBroeck >Thanks so much for responding to my email requesting information on the >subject matter. Your response made me feel personally connected to a larger >platform of people knowledgeable in this field and not cynical or without >subtle understanding and/or experience. It is interesting that you responded >to Andrew Brown. My brother and father are both called Andrew and my name is >Thomas. I don't think there is any significance but, it tickled me. The >content of your response proved very stimulating to me and I would like to ask >you if you have practised focusing on your heart as in a spiritual meditation? >If so, what was your experience? What is the difference between the crown and >heart chakras from an experiential point of view? Anything you have to say on >these matters will be sensitively acknowledged by me. I look forward to >hearing from you. >Regards >Thomas Browne > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 09:20:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:10:42 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627091042.009af900@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <35945FC3.3B82@globalserve.net> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> At 10:58 PM 6/26/1998 -0400, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >Hi Doss: >If I am to finish this thread by understanding the lesson, I need to >know a couple of things here. Would you care to answer... >>big clip<<< Cheers >Annette > Dear Annette: Sure I will try. Later today or tomorrow. Peace ...doss From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 09:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:02:27 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The SD, etc. Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627090227.009bb100@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: References: <000301bda0ed$924f3640$03e78ccc@nwc.net> At 11:31 PM 6/26/1998 +0100, you wrote: >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>A forum such as this "Theos-talk" enables us to compare our >>thinking with others, constructively. We seek to refine, to >>sharpen to improve -- how else can we do it but by questions, >>opinions, answers, and assistance ? Is not the basis for Theos - >>sophia that wisdom-freedom which can only be expressed by >>brotherhood ? > >This is the real value of all the various "theos" lists. > >Alan > This has never been possible in the past in the organizational setting. It is possible that organizational approach as we have known for a long time may be obsoleted by the reality of these lists. It is also to be noted that in these days of everyone is expected to pay real money, we get these lists for free. Something to think about and those who meditate may want to meditate on it! mkr From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 10:09:29 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 09:34:43 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627093443.009a2100@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <35945FC3.3B82@globalserve.net> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> At 10:58 PM 6/26/1998 -0400, Annette wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >Hi Doss: >If I am to finish this thread by understanding the lesson, I need to >know a couple of things here. Would you care to answer... > >> I think that the major turning point came when he had a visit from one of >> the Adepts and was told what his opportunities and "rewards" were. It is >> not easy for most to give up almost everything and embark to a country he >> knew nothing of and a cause which is usually referred to as a "forlorn" hope. > >In what way did the Adept appear and tell him? One day when Olcott and HPB were living in NY, the adept known as Master Morya suddenly materialized and talked to Olcott explaining the task of establishing TS around the world. BTW, as the Adept was leaving, Olcott wondered whether he was dreaming and the Adept read his thought and took off his silk head dress (turban) and left it as a momento. This is now in Adyar Museum. >What do you mean by "opportunities and rewards"? Though we do not have any specifics, we know that he was told that the he and HPB would be totally responsible for spreading Theosophy/theosophy and they were told what not to do. Also he was told that the Adepts would not get directly active. The opportunity was the immense good theosophy can do to a lot people around the world and if the project is successful, *all* the credit would go to Olcott and HPB. > >Am I to make the inference that an Adept told him that he was being >duped and wasting his time "following HPB"? No. Adept just laid before him the wonderful and difficult opportunity of spreading theosophy around the world. > >Does this mean that Adepts can have differing opinions and "side with" >individual members in a cause, hence promoting dissention? > As far as I have read, they don't side with anyone. They are on the side of what will be the best for the welfare of everyone. The dissentions are brought about by individuals. >Finally, I am not being flippant when I say, IMHO there's nothing easier >in life than "giving up everything and taking on a forlorn hope >challenge" when current life brings little peace or satisfaction. What >appears to be "everything" is infact "nothing to lose". :) I am not so sure. Especially when one has duties and responsibilities to fulfil. In his case Olcott had his ex-wife and children and when he did leave US, I think he made some arrangement to take care of them and acted responsibly. Hope this helps. Peace ...doss From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 10:20:34 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 07:55:49 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: H.P. Blavatsky's Articles on the WWW: In Chronological order by date of publication Message-ID: <359507F5.79E2@azstarnet.com> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> <3.0.3.32.19980627091042.009af900@mail.eden.com> H.P. Blavatsky's Articles on the WWW In Chronological order by date of publication 236 articles with full text Chronological list prepared by Daniel H. Caldwell Go to: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/blaartic.htm From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 12:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:46:03 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-ID: <35952FDB.5918@globalserve.net> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> <3.0.3.32.19980627093443.009a2100@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > Hope this helps. > > Peace Yes, Doss it does help, both in understanding the history of the movement and why I (the equivalent of "joe-six-pack") had so much difficulty with it initially. As for the future ...... At present I am still stuck seeing separate groups within and without who are all stuck believing that they have the word brought to them by their equivalent of the masters and my intuition is that an archiving, as interesting historical interpretation and inspiration when the going gets tough, of all past words, providing a feedom for individual effort for reconnection with the original god/energy, will manifest the future of the race. I suppose what I am saying is that I can be told that there's a divine plan, I can be shown how evolution supports it, and I can be made aware even of the future of my people, but unless I build up my own philosophy and go where it takes me, all is an illusion. Thanks for your time Annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 13:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 10:36:18 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: H.P. Blavatsky's LETTERS In Chronological order = J. COOPER Message-ID: <002801bda1fc$5f5cf500$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 27th 1998 Dear Daniel: After the shock of John Cooper's passing I have been wondering what will happen to his project of bringing out the (as far as he could muster) the complete Letters of HPB ? I know that the first volume (he wrote me not too long ago) me was in Algeo's hands and it was being proof-read. The Manuscripts for the 2nd Vol. had also been sent, and were being set up. I wonder who will be taking charge of that work. Will his wife see it through ? So my guess is that we wait ? Dal. > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 8:37 AM > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Subject: H.P. Blavatsky's Articles on the WWW: In Chronological order by date of publication >H.P. Blavatsky's Articles on the WWW >In Chronological order by date of publication > >236 articles with full text >Chronological list prepared by Daniel H. Caldwell > >Go to: > >http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/blaartic.htm > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 14:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 14:38:34 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-ID: <19980627195437130.AAB247@pgiese> After I sent this, I remembered a good book on this subject: Ken Wilber's "The Atman Project" (Quest Books) is a transpersonal psychological view of human development. Unlike most psychology texts, he leans heavily on spiritual and mythic resources and also unlike most psychological texts, he views the development of the personality as process that continues to unfolds throughout adulthood and possibly beyond. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Pam Giese" > Subject: Re: Internet theatre > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 8:00 AM > > > Brenda wrote: > > > > >Since my own son is shy, I'm > > >fishing for data on the subject and he is so LOUD. His voice is big and > > >booming. I'm very glad to see a reserve that might help him to control > his > > >nature. Since I'm his mother, I feel a responsibility for steering him > in > > >the right direction. What do I do when he starts screaming in public? > But > > >won't answer a question or ask a question when I prompt him? > > > > How old is your son again? > > This type of behavior is natural and common for children 3-5. Children are > not born with the social skills to know what is appropriate or acceptable > behavior and what is not. It is one of our jobs as parents to teach this. > Young children also do not have the verbal skills to explain or analyze > their feelings. Little girls develop this earlier than little boys. > > Screaming and crying in public is a difficult situation to deal with. At > home it's easier --I always found a "time out" worked well ---and if the > same standards of conduct are applied at home and away from home, it's > easier for the child to learn. The important thing to remember is that > "giving in" to the reason for the screaming and crying or shouting only > teaches that screaming, shouting, and crying are the way to get what you > want. When my daughter did this when she was young, she was told to stop > and if possible removed from the scene. When she did it at home, she got a > time out. She'd also do the "running away from mommy in the store" > routine. When I'd catch up with her, she was scolded and I'd keep a stern > look to let her know this was wrong. Children respond more to emotions > than words, so it's as important to be emotionally consistent and that your > words, emotions, and actions don't send "cross messages". > > Of course, the above is only true for young children who grow out of this > phase by the time they're in school fulltime and start developing a sense > of friends/society and if the parents haven't instilled self-discipline and > action, teachers and social pressures will do it --in a much more painful > fashion. I've seen little boys who were allowed to "run wild"/"be their > natural selves" hit the hard reality that if they didn't control themselves > enough to "play well" with other boys, the other boys wouldn't play with > them. > > The word "discipline" has been an unpopular word but it's self-discipline > that have gotten us here where we are now. Doesn't it take discipline to > meditate? Discipline to read and study? The self-discipline we learn as > children becomes the structure that we can build on the rest of our lives. > > As I said before, the above goes for young children. If he's over 9 and > exhibiting this behavior, it would be time for some psychological help. > > > Pam > pgiese@snd.softfarm.com > > "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." > > > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 15:20:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:13:56 -0700 From: "Rodolfo Don" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Dear Alan, The point that I was trying to get across is that dogmatism is neither possible nor desirable in theosophy. Once we have a doctrine or dogma in theosophy it ceases to be that, and becomes something else. On the other hand religion, is by its very nature dogmatic. It takes things for granted, like the existence of God and divinely inspired scriptures. This is why we have Theology: the study of God and its attributes (according to my dictionary). Theosophy is something totally different. It relies on the intelligence of an unselfish individual to reveal itself. To me theosophy equates with Truth. Which can be experienced, but never defined. A few years ago I attended the Theosophical Society International Convention at Adyar. They had at the opening session a bishop giving a benediction to all present. I found that action out of place, and never attended any other meeting. If I wanted to be blessed by a bishop or a priest, which I didn't care, I could have gone to any of the local churches. Something appropriate for me could have been a commitment made by all present, to the spirit of Truth, which we all are part of. Best wishes from lovely Gilroy, Rudy >Dear Rudy, > >I am not in fact a religionist (whatever that might be!). I am something >of a theologian, but so far as churches go I walked away from them >*because* of *their* dogmatism. Religion, to answer your question, is >a term usually derived from the Latin "religio" - to bond. Not all >scholars agree on this derivation, but no better alternative is offered >either. > >In any event, "bonding" is not necessarily a good thing. Hate gangs do >it, as do many animals and birds of prey. Maybe those bishops' miters >are beaks! > >Alan From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 15:50:33 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 01:49:19 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Kym married? Message-Id: Kym: >that. Wrong-O! Being happily married (as I am) or in a satisfying >relationship does not make one immune to phrases of praise and sweet-talk. Well, Kym, now you've shattered my image! I was imagining you as a single, sword-wielding feminist who have no room for men in her life. Your husband must be of strong stuff in order to measure up to your assessment. Remember how someone insinuated on theos-l that you might be lesbian? I'm about to go down the marriage path in a couple of months with Mark. We're planning to go to Kauai and maybe have Elvis impersonators as witnesses. We figure elopement is the cheapest route for everyone and more enjoyable for us. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 16:20:33 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 02:18:44 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Olcott Message-Id: Annette: >I am trying not to write here so much being as I am a lurker, but the >lessons from the recent threads have been tremendous. Just to let you know that I'm glad you were doing more than lurking in the last few posts. I've been enjoying your posts. I especially enjoy yours and Kym's discussion of Ayn Rand, and some personal accounts of your life. It's difficult to post personal details, but I think there are some who would nod and sympathize based on their own life. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 16:50:33 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 16:11:13 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627161113.01323df0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: References: At 01:13 PM 6/27/1998 -0700, Rudy wrote: > >Dear Alan, > >The point that I was trying to get across is that dogmatism is neither >possible nor desirable in theosophy. Once we have a doctrine or dogma in >theosophy it ceases to be that, and becomes something else. On the other >hand religion, is by its very nature dogmatic. It takes things for granted, >like the existence of God and divinely inspired scriptures. This is why we >have Theology: the study of God and its attributes (according to my >dictionary). > >Theosophy is something totally different. It relies on the intelligence of >an unselfish individual to reveal itself. To me theosophy equates with >Truth. Which can be experienced, but never defined. > Glad you posted this. We need to keep reminding ourselves that all the written material from what ever source is not the real thing. >A few years ago I attended the Theosophical Society International >Convention at Adyar. They had at the opening session a bishop giving a >benediction to all present. I found that action out of place, and never >attended any other meeting. If I wanted to be blessed by a bishop or a >priest, which I didn't care, I could have gone to any of the local >churches. Something appropriate for me could have been a commitment made by >all present, to the spirit of Truth, which we all are part of. > Well said. Was the Bishop from LCC? If so there is another problem. Discrimination against women becoming priests which TS should never tolerate because of its First Object. People should open up their "eyes" and see this conflict. mkr From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 17:10:08 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 16:03:58 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Re: Olcott Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627160358.0132e4f0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <35952FDB.5918@globalserve.net> References: <3.0.3.32.19980626090501.009a4490@mail.eden.com> <3.0.3.32.19980627093443.009a2100@mail.eden.com> At 01:46 PM 6/27/1998 -0400, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> Hope this helps. >> >> Peace > >Yes, Doss it does help, both in understanding the history of the >movement and why I (the equivalent of "joe-six-pack") had so much >difficulty with it initially. Dear Annette: I am fortunate to share my reading of the historical matters. > >As for the future ...... At present I am still stuck seeing separate >groups within and without who are all stuck believing that they have the >word brought to them by their equivalent of the masters and my intuition >is that an archiving, as interesting historical interpretation and >inspiration when the going gets tough, of all past words, providing a >feedom for individual effort for reconnection with the original >god/energy, will manifest the future of the race. > It is the same old problem that all of us face. While manythings written are very convincing, we need to keep in mind that the writer is just writing about real things the writer may have personally experienced. The reality cannot be put down even in 10,000 words and unless and until were go beyond the words and understand the real facts first hand, it is just belief. I guess when we have first hand knowledge, we will be able appreciate how limited any description can be. So we are both thinking on the same lines. >I suppose what I am saying is that I can be told that there's a divine >plan, I can be shown how evolution supports it, and I can be made aware >even of the future of my people, but unless I build up my own philosophy >and go where it takes me, all is an illusion. > Sure, you are 100% right. Parroting anything is just second hand and makes us second hand person. This is an issue that Krishnaji has tried to repeatedly emphasize and understand our own illusion. >Thanks for your time It is my pleasure. BTW, are there any other old msgs that I have not responded? If so it is just an oversight and not intentional. Please e-mail me privately and I will respond here. ....doss From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 17:20:35 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 13:32:50 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Re: Straight, no milk Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806270836.CAA28450@mailmx.micron.net> kym writes >Poor Candide, removed from the castle with a great many kicks. . .I just may >not get over your cruelty, Govert. But. . .you need not worry about me. . >.I'll manage. . .somehow. Sob. Howl. Sympathy. Empathy. Theosophy. Wiggleosophy! Your "pal-who-don't-write-often-enough" Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 17:35:27 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:14:01 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: the cute monk test Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35946DD7.7743@globalserve.net> libidia writes >I meant I have yet to "rise above" the physical in any true sense. >Travelling to the Upperworld, Middleworld and Otherworld to vacation >from the physical doesn't count in my book. Dear Merlin Three Worlds - have you other descriptions for these? > >Oh, and by the by, since accepting the sexless life and being fiercely >loyal to whom I committed (meaning I would not commit adultery), I find >that a spiritual path and great friends to talk to electronically is far >better than sex, and I'm not into competing with you on anything. What >with Dallas just about masacaring my self concept of my literacy, I >couldn't handle you showing me how far removed I am from the Merlin I >think dwells within me. Not just yet :) No competition! I voluntary opted for celibacy when I was ordained to the priesthood (which I have long ceased to exercise, except in a "pastoral" manner). I just got used to it, and got to prefer it! No big deal. > Alan the Apostate --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 17:50:36 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:44:03 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Olcott Message-ID: <359575B3.434@globalserve.net> References: Thoa Tran wrote: > It's difficult to post personal details, but I think there are some who > would nod and sympathize based on their own life. Dear Thoa and Kym: Why thank you Thoa for saying you enjoyed our chat. Just want to let you and others know that I get no secret self-satisfaction out of posting personal details, as I peceive neither do others on this list. In fact, often I wake up next morning and think, "h..s.. what *have* I done?". The thing is, when I am wrestling with the philosophy, these personal things pop into my mind hopefully as examples, and I fight the censor to go with what comes. I also find that when others sprinkle the text with personal experiences I emote and make sense of it. Nevertheless, hubby is about to subscribe to the lists, and I KNOW he hates sharing personal stuff, so, because I care for his feelings too...... (and thank goodness there's no archive!) I am wrestling with the thought of whether it is necessary to bare all in order to learn and transform. (Lord, I hope not!) My answer so far is this: I think I am a very good self-illusionist/liar to myself. I know I am not a follower. Somehow baring in public to support/deflower what I intellectualize, makes it life-serious. Perhaps a better way is to find a Master and be transparent? I too had a momentary flash off balance when I read Kym's account. I found it a great lesson in assumption, judgement, and comfort seeking on my part. Dear Kym, you're great as you are. Same goes for you, Kym's husband. When my husband went through his "testing" on this matter, he too was taken in by all the same things. I know this not by intellectualizing or analyzing, but because I called the other woman and discussed things with her. After all, if the path of my husband's development was to be with another who "gave" him something I could or would not, then I had no desire to stand in his way. OTOH, if our learning together was not complete, there was no way she was going to steal part of my future. I have no idea if my husband learned anything much from the experience, except that his wife could find out anything she set her mind to and act on it impassionately! I know the other woman did, as she was engaged to be married and had no idea she was about to receive a visitor who was giving up all here to be with her (the illusion of herself she had created by phone and mail to a secret location, that is). And I learned an immense amount about illusions and taking the easy road and how strong I could be when it mattered. ( I was lucky. I got my test between marriages with kids to consider and still have the antique clarinet to fondly remind me.) By the by, being fiercely feminist is not in conflict with being happily married, IMHO. I think expressing life in feminist terms is simply expressing what we find easy to categorize as the feminist side of the whole person. Just as being a tough negotiator in the workplace is expressing the perceived masculine side. Congratulations Thoa on the upcoming nuptuals and long life and happiness on the path together. enough for now blessings annette From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 18:50:35 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:11:14 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: 109 Message-ID: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL welcomes Dan Neether! Dan lives in Washington State and is a members of the TS as well as TI. Personal welcomes to dneether@gte.net Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 19:20:35 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:25:26 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Kym married? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thoa Tran writes >I'm about to go down the marriage path in a couple of months with Mark. >We're planning to go to Kauai and maybe have Elvis impersonators as >witnesses. We figure elopement is the cheapest route for everyone and more >enjoyable for us. I woner whatever happened to the purple hairy bunnies? Alan :)0 (Bit mixed up today) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 19:35:08 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:24:01 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Dr. Bain on Dallas T.'s quoting and citing The Secret Doctrine, etc. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Rodolfo Don writes > >Dear Alan, > >The point that I was trying to get across is that dogmatism is neither >possible nor desirable in theosophy. Once we have a doctrine or dogma in >theosophy it ceases to be that, and becomes something else. On the other >hand religion, is by its very nature dogmatic. It takes things for granted, >like the existence of God and divinely inspired scriptures. This is why we >have Theology: the study of God and its attributes (according to my >dictionary). Not quite. It's the study of the ideas about "God" etc. > >Theosophy is something totally different. It relies on the intelligence of >an unselfish individual to reveal itself. To me theosophy equates with >Truth. Which can be experienced, but never defined. Which is why some are skeptical about a divinely inspired HPPB or her Masters. > >A few years ago I attended the Theosophical Society International >Convention at Adyar. They had at the opening session a bishop giving a >benediction to all present. I found that action out of place, and never >attended any other meeting. If I wanted to be blessed by a bishop or a >priest, which I didn't care, I could have gone to any of the local >churches. Something appropriate for me could have been a commitment made >by >all present, to the spirit of Truth, which we all are part of. That is really *sick* - Yuk yuk yuk yuk yuk! > >Best wishes from lovely Gilroy, That's real nice. > Alan ------------------- Brought to you from LovelyWest Cornwall, UK From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 19:38:27 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 18:54:55 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: the cute monk test Message-ID: <19980628001058227.AAA220@pgiese> Ok, I flunked the cute monk test. I also flunked the not-so-cute but somewhat witty monk test. About six months ago I thought I was on the road to celibacy. I had begun to appreciate the stablization of physical and emotional energies that accompany celibacy and seem to "ease" spiritual growth. Then, whether back-sliding or boredom, I put out a call in the astral realm and ended up conjuring up a fire elemental (well, if he's not completely a fire elemental, he's possessed by one or at least channeling elemental fire energy). Well, eventually I got bored with the excessive fire elemental sex games, but rekindled my interest in the left-hand path, P.B. Randolph and the like. I think I might have to wait for menopause before I can conquer this one, without just fooling myself. Just a word from the lower part of the bell curve..in this episode of theos-talk True Confessions...... Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." ---------- > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: the cute monk test > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 5:14 PM > > libidia writes > >I meant I have yet to "rise above" the physical in any true sense. > >Travelling to the Upperworld, Middleworld and Otherworld to vacation > >from the physical doesn't count in my book. > > Dear Merlin > > Three Worlds - have you other descriptions for these? > > > >Oh, and by the by, since accepting the sexless life and being fiercely > >loyal to whom I committed (meaning I would not commit adultery), I find > >that a spiritual path and great friends to talk to electronically is far > >better than sex, and I'm not into competing with you on anything. What > >with Dallas just about masacaring my self concept of my literacy, I > >couldn't handle you showing me how far removed I am from the Merlin I > >think dwells within me. Not just yet :) > > No competition! I voluntary opted for celibacy when I was ordained to > the priesthood (which I have long ceased to exercise, except in a > "pastoral" manner). I just got used to it, and got to prefer it! No big > deal. > > > Alan the Apostate > --------- > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 21:27:23 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 00:47:11 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: "Fiercely Feminist" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <359575B3.434@globalserve.net> libidia writes >By the by, being fiercely feminist is not in conflict with being happily >married, IMHO. I think expressing life in feminist terms is simply >expressing what we find easy to categorize as the feminist side of the >whole person. Just as being a tough negotiator in the workplace is >expressing the perceived masculine side. Nicely put - I hope the undeducated can perceive the distinction! > >Congratulations Thoa on the upcoming nuptuals and long life and >happiness on the path together. I second third and fourth the motion! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 22:51:57 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:17:59 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <35957DA7.11A7@netgsi.com> References: <000401bda123$b2a188e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Butting in with my 0.02, I have often found statements that HPB > has made which at the time I did not understand or follow the > logic of. I set them aside to be verified. and have found over > some years sometime, that they dovetailed with the philosophy of > Theosophy that she presented eventually. > No problem as I fully agree with you. As a matter of fact, please check out the latest FOHAT magazine -- it has an article on The Origin of Evil. My blood pressure rose when I read the title, but I found the article to be excellent. It says exactly what I have been saying here and on theos-l for years, and taking many flames for. The article quotes HPB to say that evil is as real as good and that both are universal and dualistic, etc. It does my heart good to read an article like this one every now and then in a Theosophical journal. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 23:10:46 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:11:07 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #230 Message-ID: <35957C0B.5CD5@netgsi.com> References: <000301bda123$b117dba0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > As to differences between the writings of HPB and CWL have you > got and read Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY. this > book was published in 1923 I believe and in parallel columns she > shows these differences. It has recently been reprinted by the > THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, of Edmonton, ( P.O.Box 4804), Alberta, > Canada, T6E 5G6. > Thanks. I shall try to obtain a copy. > I am sorry indeed if I have offended you or others, > but I thought that everyone was familiar with those differences > after their own study. > > In sackcloth and ashes, Dallas > The ashes part is probably not called for :-) You haven't offended me at all, but Brenda is probably pretty miffed by now. I have read only a few book by CWL, and maybe the "differences" are in the others. A whole lot depends on one's interpretation of both HPB and CWL, as with all things. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 23:23:23 1998 Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 22:54:25 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <35945EE1.563C@netgsi.com> References: <000301bda02d$7db617a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > > "Original Sin" as I understand it was not due nor just. Our > Karma, good or bad, is what we set up through our choosing. > I believe that "oiginal sin" refers to the decision made by each of us to incarnate. > Now, if you do not think we reincarnate, then indeed we live in a > very unjust universe. > I don't see where justice and reincarnation have much to do with each other since we don't remember past lives and since each incarnation is with a new personality or ego anyway. > But if you do think that we reincarnate then the "Thread-soul" > which strings personality after personality on its eternal thread > as we string days on our passing experience of this life, and > call the memories of them "how we were when we did -- this or > that -- becomes the "carrier" of our past good or ill thoughts > and deeds. > The "thread-soul", IMHO is far beyond our daily "justice" as it is beyond the details of any one human life. > Personally I prefer to live in a just Universe where I am sure of > my own fate as I am sure that water will wet me tomorrow when I > shower. > I believe in reincarnation as HPB defines it, but I do not believe in a "just" universe. Justice is a human concern, and the universe could care less. Nobody ever said that life was fair--Carter's claim to immortality. > I'd like to think that my future is being constructed by me here > and now, and that in the meantime I have to handle the good or > ill that I may have done in the past. > I think that to some extent it is, but not entirely. Some future events are out of our hands, so to speak. But if your faith in this kind of godly justice (which is shared by all of the world's religions in some manner) helps you through the day, then keep with it. Personally I feel sure that justice is a human concept and only exists in our minds. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sat Jun 27 23:51:59 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 19:06:33 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: Message-ID: <35957AF9.7F34@netgsi.com> References: <000201bda123$af6c9ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > It would be very valuable for interested students of Theosophy to > become acquainted with the work and writings of Mr. Judge and Mr. > Crosbie as that is a chapter in the history of the Theosophical > movement that many are still unfamiliar with. > I believe that I have already read most, if not all, of Judge. But I have never read anything at all by Crosbie. Anything you can send me would be appreciated. > However I would observe that in my study and experience I have > found that Theosophy usually has something to say about most > schools of thought, both ancient and modern. HPB declared in > several places that it was "history." So I am not surprised to > find that there is frequent corroboration of that which emerges. > Right. > Crosbie never wrote any books, but some of his letups and steno. > reports of some of his talks were gathered together and after his > death THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER was issued by his friends and > associates in the ULT. (pp. 415, $ 7.00) There is much of a > practical nature that is covered, as well as the reason for the > establishing of the ULT (United Lodge of Theosophists). > A very modest price. I have never seen it in any store or TS publishing house. How does one get it? > Additionally, he placed great importance on the study of HPB's > KEY TO THEOSOPHY, and Judge's THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. Some of > the answers that he made at the regular study classes her at ULT > where the OCEAN was studied have been gathered together and named > ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS on the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. The answers are > grouped in the same order as are the chapters in the OCEAN. (pp. > 248, $ 6.00) > Thanks. > During the last years of his life, from 1912 to 1919 Crosbie > edited the magazine THEOSOPHY, still published by the ULT every > month. In those pages he reprinted most of the original articles > and answers to questions which HPB and Judge has printed > originally in THEOSOPHIST, LUCIFER, and PATH magazines. ( Those > had gone "out-of-print" by then, and most Theosophists of that > period, 15 to 20 years after the death of those two) did not know > HPB or Judge at first hand, nor was the theosophical world still > familiar with their writings. Those articles have been made into > books as accurate verbatim reprints of the originals, and are > made available by ULT. > > Best wishes, Dallas Do you have to be a ULT member to get a subscription? Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 00:21:58 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:22:28 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY Message-ID: <3595D314.1DBB@azstarnet.com> References: <000301bda123$b117dba0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> <35957C0B.5CD5@netgsi.com> Dallas wrote: > > > As to differences between the writings of HPB and CWL have you > > got and read Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY. this > > book was published in 1923 I believe and in parallel columns she > > shows these differences. It has recently been reprinted by the > > THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, of Edmonton, ( P.O.Box 4804), Alberta, > > Canada, T6E 5G6. > > Jerry wrote: >Thanks. I shall try to obtain a copy. Dallas and Jerry, The Margaret Thomas book has NOT been reprinted by the Edmonton Lodge. I even called them and asked and they said No, they have not reprinted this title. Mark Jaqua of PROTOGONOS is the one who reprinted this Thomas book. I have his address somewhere. Mark has posted things here on Theos-Talk. Mark, are you still here? Eldon, is Mark still subscribed to Theos-talk. I also have Mark's email address somewhere. Will try to find his postal address. Daniel Caldwell From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 00:51:58 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:20:15 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Celibacy & Spiritual Progress? Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627232015.01177df0@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <19980628001058227.AAA220@pgiese> Dear Pam: The subject of celibacy has come up from time to time. Traditional view is that celibacy is an essential part of spiritual progress etc. Krishnaji, who grew up in the traditional theosophical environment is the first person to speak against celibacy. So far no one either from within or outside theosophy groups has challenged his views. Any one interested is some quotes? mkr At 06:54 PM 6/27/1998 -0500, you wrote: >Ok, I flunked the cute monk test. I also flunked the not-so-cute but >somewhat witty monk test. > >About six months ago I thought I was on the road to celibacy. I had begun >to appreciate the stablization of physical and emotional energies that >accompany celibacy and seem to "ease" spiritual growth. Then, whether >back-sliding or boredom, I put out a call in the astral realm and ended up >conjuring up a fire elemental (well, if he's not completely a fire >elemental, he's possessed by one or at least channeling elemental fire >energy). Well, eventually I got bored with the excessive fire elemental >sex games, but rekindled my interest in the left-hand path, P.B. Randolph >and the like. I think I might have to wait for menopause before I can >conquer this one, without just fooling myself. > >Just a word from the lower part of the bell curve..in this episode of >theos-talk True Confessions...... > > >Pam >pgiese@snd.softfarm.com > >"Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." > >---------- >> From: "Dr A M Bain" >> Subject: Re: the cute monk test >> Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 5:14 PM >> >> libidia writes >> >I meant I have yet to "rise above" the physical in any true sense. >> >Travelling to the Upperworld, Middleworld and Otherworld to vacation >> >from the physical doesn't count in my book. >> >> Dear Merlin >> >> Three Worlds - have you other descriptions for these? >> > >> >Oh, and by the by, since accepting the sexless life and being fiercely >> >loyal to whom I committed (meaning I would not commit adultery), I find >> >that a spiritual path and great friends to talk to electronically is far >> >better than sex, and I'm not into competing with you on anything. What >> >with Dallas just about masacaring my self concept of my literacy, I >> >couldn't handle you showing me how far removed I am from the Merlin I >> >think dwells within me. Not just yet :) >> >> No competition! I voluntary opted for celibacy when I was ordained to >> the priesthood (which I have long ceased to exercise, except in a >> "pastoral" manner). I just got used to it, and got to prefer it! No big >> deal. >> > >> Alan the Apostate From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 00:57:41 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 23:36:23 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Celibacy and Spiritual Progress Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980627233623.019eabc0@mail.eden.com> The issue of celibacy and spiritual progress has come up from time to time. While all of us know the traditional view, the revolutionary viewpoint comes from Krishnaji who grew up in the traditional theosophical environment. On this subject, here is an excerpt from a recent book by Mary Lutyens on Krishnamurti, where she discusses the issue of Celibacy as seen by Krishnaji.=20 ..........mkr =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D And he [K] never "presented" himself as being celibate. According to the tenets of Leadbeater-Theosophy, celibacy was essential for any aspirant to the Path of Discipleship but K broke away entirely from Theosophy and its tenets in 1929 and thereafter often spoke publicly against celibacy. Here are a few quotations from his published talks to prove this point: "So-called holy men have maintained that you cannot come near God if you indulge in sex, therefore they push it aside although they are eaten up with it. But by denying sexuality they put out their eyes and cut out their tongues for they deny the whole beauty of the earth. They have starved their hearts and minds; they are dehydrated human beings; they have banished beauty because beauty is associated with And again: "I think we should understand what love and chastity are. The vow of chastity is not chastity at all, for below the words the craving goes on and trying to suppress it in different ways, religious and otherwise, is a form of ugliness which, in its very essence, is unchaste. The chastity of the monk, with his vows and denials, is essentially worldliness which is unchaste. All forms of resistance build a wall of separateness which turns life into a battlefield; and so life becomes not chaste at all." And yet again: "To deny sex is another form of brutality; it is there, it is a fact. When we are intellectual slaves, endlessly repeating what others have said, when we are following, obeying, imitating, then a whole avenue of life is closed; when action is merely a mechanical repetition and not a free movement, then there is no release; when there is this incessant urge to fulfil, to be, then we are emotionally thwarted, there is a blockage. So sex becomes the one issue which is our very own, which is not second-hand. And in the act of sex there is a forgetting of oneself, one's problems and one's fears. In that act there is no self at all." In answer to a question he was asked at a public meeting, "Is it possible for a man and a woman to live together, to have sex and children, without all the turmoil, bitterness and conflict in such a relationship?" K said, "Can't you fall in love and not have a possessive relationship? I love someone and she loves me and we get married=C4that is all perfectly straightforward and simple, in that there is no conflict at all. (When we say we get married I might just as well say we decide to live together.) Can't one have that without the other? Without the tail, as it were, necessarily following? Can't two people be in love and both be so intelligent and so sensitive that there is freedom and an absence of a centre that makes conflict? Conflict is not in the feeling of being in love. The feeling of being in love is utterly without conflict. There is no loss of energy in being in love. The loss of energy is in the tail=C4jealousy, possessiveness, suspicion, doubt, the fear of losing that love, the constant demand for reassurance and security. Surely it must be possible to function in a sexual relationship with someone you love without the nightmare which usually follows. Of course it is." =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D end=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 01:22:00 1998 Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 22:35:27 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Robert Crosbie Message-ID: <3595D61F.4D86@azstarnet.com> References: <000201bda123$af6c9ca0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> <35957AF9.7F34@netgsi.com> Daniel Caldwell writes: Jerry, Robert Crosbie's books are available from the Theosophy Company. No, you do not need to be an associate of the ULT to subscribe to the THEOSOPHY magazine. The June 1998 issue of THEOSOPHY magazine is online at: http://www.theosophycompany.org/febcon.html Here is the ULT website: http://www.ult.org/ also see http://www.theosophycompany.org/ Their address and phone number: Theosophy Company 245 West 33rd Street Los Angeles, CA 90007 (213) 748-7244 fax (213) 748-0634 THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER The writings of Robert Crosbie are included among the books belonging to the Theosophical literature for the reason that students have found them of great help in clarifying the teaching and as a practical guide in the Theosophical life. The Friendly Philosopher was compiled from his letters, talks and articles, published fifteen years after his death by appreciative students. ISBN 0-938998-13-7 ..................................................................................................... 7.00 UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY A smaller paperbound book of Mr. Crosbie's work .................................................. 6.00 LA TEOSOFIA UNIVERSAL Robert Crosbie's Universal Theosophy in Spanish ISBN 0-938998-36-6 ..................................................................................... 6.50 ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY For years Mr. Crosbie conducted classes in The Ocean of Theosophy. His comments and discussion on the Ocean were taken down by students and are available in this volume. ISBN 0-938998-12-9 ....................................................................................................... 6.00 RESPUESTAS A PREGUNTAS SOBRE EL OCEANO DE LA TEOSOFIA Robert Crosbies's Answers to Questions in Spanish. ISBN 0-938998-37-4 ..............................................................................................7.50 gschueler wrote: > > > It would be very valuable for interested students of Theosophy to > > become acquainted with the work and writings of Mr. Judge and Mr. > > Crosbie as that is a chapter in the history of the Theosophical > > movement that many are still unfamiliar with. > > > > I believe that I have already read most, if not all, of Judge. > But I have never read anything at all by Crosbie. Anything > you can send me would be appreciated. > > > However I would observe that in my study and experience I have > > found that Theosophy usually has something to say about most > > schools of thought, both ancient and modern. HPB declared in > > several places that it was "history." So I am not surprised to > > find that there is frequent corroboration of that which emerges. > > > > Right. > > > Crosbie never wrote any books, but some of his letups and steno. > > reports of some of his talks were gathered together and after his > > death THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER was issued by his friends and > > associates in the ULT. (pp. 415, $ 7.00) There is much of a > > practical nature that is covered, as well as the reason for the > > establishing of the ULT (United Lodge of Theosophists). > > > > A very modest price. I have never seen it in any store or > TS publishing house. How does one get it? > > > > Additionally, he placed great importance on the study of HPB's > > KEY TO THEOSOPHY, and Judge's THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. Some of > > the answers that he made at the regular study classes her at ULT > > where the OCEAN was studied have been gathered together and named > > ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS on the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. The answers are > > grouped in the same order as are the chapters in the OCEAN. (pp. > > 248, $ 6.00) > > > > Thanks. > > > During the last years of his life, from 1912 to 1919 Crosbie > > edited the magazine THEOSOPHY, still published by the ULT every > > month. In those pages he reprinted most of the original articles > > and answers to questions which HPB and Judge has printed > > originally in THEOSOPHIST, LUCIFER, and PATH magazines. ( Those > > had gone "out-of-print" by then, and most Theosophists of that > > period, 15 to 20 years after the death of those two) did not know > > HPB or Judge at first hand, nor was the theosophical world still > > familiar with their writings. Those articles have been made into > > books as accurate verbatim reprints of the originals, and are > > made available by ULT. > > > > Best wishes, Dallas > > Do you have to be a ULT member to get a subscription? > > Jerry S. > From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 07:51:55 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 02:17:15 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: the cute monk test Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <19980628001058227.AAA220@pgiese> Pam Giese writes > I think I might have to wait for menopause before I can >conquer this one, without just fooling myself. Good luck! > >Just a word from the lower part of the bell curve..in this episode of >theos-talk True Confessions...... Confession, it is said, is good for the soul. For some, it's good for the jail. Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 08:21:55 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:46:24 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? Message-ID: <006001bda293$fde86500$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 28th 1998 Dear Gerry: I finished reading the latest FOHAT too, and found that its articles, this issue, are helpful. It is a good issue. Dal. > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 9:12 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Theosophy=HPB? >> Butting in with my 0.02, I have often found statements that HPB >> has made which at the time I did not understand or follow the >> logic of. I set them aside to be verified. and have found over >> some years sometime, that they dovetailed with the philosophy of >> Theosophy that she presented eventually. >> > >No problem as I fully agree with you. As a matter of fact, >please check out the latest FOHAT magazine -- it has an article >on The Origin of Evil. My blood pressure rose when I read >the title, but I found the article to be excellent. It says >exactly what I have been saying here and on theos-l for years, >and taking many flames for. The article quotes HPB to say >that evil is as real as good and that both are universal >and dualistic, etc. It does my heart good to read an >article like this one every now and then in a Theosophical >journal. > >Jerry S. > > > From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 08:51:55 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 04:41:48 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY Message-ID: <006301bda294$012e1a20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> PROTOGONUS P O Box 444, Grand Rapids, Ohio, 43522 Publisher of a reprint of Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY As for: Mark Jaqua. My mistake. I forgot. I thought Edmonton T S had reprinted this. More sackcloth and ashes. Dallas. > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 10:57 PM > From: "Daniel H Caldwell" > Subject: Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY >Dallas wrote: >> >> > As to differences between the writings of HPB and CWL have you >> > got and read Margaret Thomas' THEOSOPHY OR NEO-THEOSOPHY. this >> > book was published in 1923 I believe and in parallel columns she >> > shows these differences. It has recently been reprinted by the >> > THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, of Edmonton, ( P.O.Box 4804), Alberta, >> > Canada, T6E 5G6. >> > > > >Jerry wrote: > >>Thanks. I shall try to obtain a copy. > >Dallas and Jerry, > >The Margaret Thomas book has NOT been reprinted >by the Edmonton Lodge. I even called them >and asked and they said No, they have not >reprinted this title. > >Mark Jaqua of PROTOGONOS is the one who reprinted this Thomas >book. I have his address somewhere. Mark >has posted things here on Theos-Talk. Mark, >are you still here? Eldon, is Mark still subscribed >to Theos-talk. I also have Mark's email address somewhere. >Will try to find his postal address. [ ABOVE - Dallas ] > >Daniel Caldwell > From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 09:21:55 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 03:41:48 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Fw: Virus Message-ID: <005e01bda293$f9bf54c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Date: Tuesday, June 23, 1998 11:38 PM > From: "Kenneth M Jones" > Subject: Virus Mags Net Customers, > >If you receive an email titled "WIN A HOLIDAY" DO NOT open it. > It will erase everything on your hard drive. Forward this letter > out to as many people as you can. This is a new, very malicious > virus and not many people know about it. This information was > announced yesterday morning from Microsoft; please share it with > everyone that might access the Internet. > Once again, pass this along to everyone in your address book so > that this may be stopped. > >DAS >Mags Net Support From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 09:25:05 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 04:36:02 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Message-ID: <006201bda294$00218c20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 28th 1998 Dear Jerry: To answer your inquiry about the writings of Mr. Crosbie: Two books are in print. The details are: Books by Robert Crosbie, the founder of the ULT. THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER -- A collection of his letters and stenographic reports of some of his talks. (pp. 425, $ 7.00) ( Index available separately ) ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS on the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY -- stenographic reports of some of his answers given at regular study classes in which Judge"s "The Ocean of Theosophy" was being studied. ( pp. 240, $ 6.00 ) Available from THE UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS 245 W 33rd St., Los Angeles, Ca., 90007. Phone 213-748-7244 Fax: 213-748-0634 Also available in New York from the ULT at: 347 East 72nd St., N.Y. 10021 Phone 212-535-2230 Mr. Crosbie was also the first editor of the monthly magazine THEOSOPHY (published by ULT since 1912). He died on June 25th 1919. During his time as editor THEOSOPHY published a series dealing with the history of the Theosophical Movement. from 1875 on, based on documents available. This was reprinted as a book in 1925 under the title THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT : 1875 -- 1925 and in 1951 this was reissued and updated to 1950 This is also available ( $ 6.00 ). [ THE T. M. -- 1875 - 1950 ] Theosophy School has been an integral part of the ULT work ; and for children he edited a book titled THE ETERNAL VERITIES. ($ 8.50). There is also a MANUAL for TEACHERS ( $ 6.00 ). I find I am repeating what I ALREADY said in my earlier posting. If you would like to see those then phone in or send an order to the ULT. Our objective has been to make Theosophy and such books as we publish available at the least possible cost. Soaring prices of paper and binding have in the last few years escalated these. The older books are sold at the originally established prices. Magazine THEOSOPHY, now in its 85th Volume, can be subscribed to. Its annual subscription is $ 17.00. Back volumes are available and if a library style binding is wanted the price is $ 25.00 a volume (if available). THEOSOPHY MAGAZINE is dedicated to the study of, and the reprinting of the works of H P Blavatsky and W Q Judge. It also reviews the passing relations of Theosophical philosophy to the current world of thought in the humanities and the sciences. Free sample copy is available to those who would like to see it. Glad to be of help. Dallas > Date: Saturday, June 27, 1998 10:20 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Re: >> It would be very valuable for interested students of Theosophy to >> become acquainted with the work and writings of Mr. Judge and Mr. >> Crosbie as that is a chapter in the history of the Theosophical >> movement that many are still unfamiliar with. >> S N I P From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 09:31:39 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 04:04:54 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Message-ID: <006101bda293$fef4f300$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 28th 1998 Dear Jerry: Just or Unjust Universe ? Karma or no Karma ? Is there a difference between man's perception of law and law in itself ? Does an "abstract," or "ideal" Nature underlie all we perceive, ourselves, every atom ? How can this be detected or determined? Who or what in us either feels or notices pain or joy ? Is the passage of time and events (of all kinds) a matter of sentiment (not sensation), or a matter of observation (besides either enjoying or suffering them) ? What is the difference between "thinking about" and "knowing ?" I ask these questions in all sincerity, since they are the tools that I use to build up my understanding of this environment, and of 'myself.' Why should events in and around me be either partially, or wholly, or not at all, subject to chance (or law) : is it possible to have an unstable mixture of both? And if so, who or what perceives it ? Apart from observed indeterminacy, is there not a general tendency to harmony and inter-action whereby units cooperate -- From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 14:23:41 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 14:34:19 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Worlds Message-ID: <35968CAB.501@globalserve.net> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Dear Merlin > > Three Worlds - have you other descriptions for these? Dear Apsotate: Thank you for identifiying my freudian slip of the fingers. The three "worlds" are Under, Middle, and Upper, in total, Otherworlds. I probably have a subconscious problem with the term Underworld resulting from childhood education in Greek mythology and from experiencing childhood "trips" to such and being "disciplined" for doing so. (From a parent....."Where the hell have you been again, do you realize what the time is?") Perhaps you know of the hundreds of Otherworlds. I stated them in the three main realms, and I am borrowing my terminology from Celtic Shamanism. However, one could use the more recent and more complex Theosophical terminology to express: Underworld: A state/plane/place in which beings connected with the Earth Mother exist. Power animals, Fairies, dragons and such "mythological creatures", who represent and provide knowledge concerning birth, rebirth, awakening, life-understanding. May be entered through a door in the tree of life (if you're a Kelti) or counterclockwise movement (if you're a whirling dervish-type) or simply connecting with the axis mundi. Often path trod with a feeling of descending into the bowels of the earth. Place to go to bring back a lost soul or to identify a dis-ease or to fight a possession, or simply to travel and receive undestanding on physical life in the scheme of things. Middleworld: The plane(s) closest to physical life in which spirits of those passed over and the spirit of our current selves may be met. The "training ground" for humans. Normally entered by what most call "meditation" and expressed in earth terms as "time travel". Place to go to gain direct knowledge of earth events in other times, experience consciousness raising, get messages from Guides, and dead humans not passed on to the higher levels. Upperworld: Reached by taking the climb up the tree of life or the sacred mountain (Mount Meru for instance) or the silver spiral, to the infiniteness of the cosmos. Place to meet immortal beings, deities, Masters. Normally envisioned by clockwise rotation upwards, or leaving the body, or transforming into pure energy. Usually have to be "invited" in/out further here and could be invited to "drink of the sacred chalice of life". The "end of the line" either temporarily before reincarnation (rebirth) or forever. The crossroads of all worlds, the place where creation waits to create. Important for travelling: the straight, strong, true staff symbolizing the axis mundi. I find this staff thing interesting as when Merlin whirls, my staff can be different lengths depending on my state of mind/emotions, but never taller than myself and is knarled half way down in clockwise turns! Shows my self-imposed limitations :) I haven't explained it well, but your recent description of your astral travel in the cosmos is practically identical to my experience. In the Underworld, I usually find myself walking the path back surrounded by many animals and glimpsing lots of fairie-like beings hiding in the flora, with my hand resting on the back of a powerful lion/panther being, chatting about stuff and feeling slightly sad. In the Upperworld which I have to reach by breathing very little, I am either crystal or plasma, and I simply don't want to come back at all. In the Middleworld, which I used to be only able to reach by physically being at a strong energy centre (like Stonehenge), I have never gone forward, always back, which was my reason for that comment to you about having coffee some tens of thousands of years ago. > No competition! I voluntary opted for celibacy when I was ordained to > the priesthood (which I have long ceased to exercise, except in a > "pastoral" manner). I just got used to it, and got to prefer it! No big deal. Interesting posting by Ramadoss on celibacy. I suppose when one "gives it up" voluntarily there is a struggle with desire. The experience of "having it taken away" is different. The questions are more like "why me, do I let this other person control my experience, is this a punishment/lesson/opportunity/test? Evolving eventually to, "what was that all about anyway, who needs it". Except, one is left with two burning questions: 1. Procreation is necessary and the equipment is defined/fixed? 2. Physical joining is a planned/necessary precursor for spiritual joining? Thinking back, I remember the time span from adolescence to motherhood, in which the sex-drive practically took over the psyche. This was a perfectly natural instinct in my mind (and it was a good thing humans had developed rules, or I would have procreated all over the place). If I had "gone with the natural", I would have stopped at motherhood for myself, but continued to give as an expression of love to others, some sort of misguided nurturing thing. Analyzing the expression of the female is easy. The male is more complex. It's all tied up with power and the extension of the self. The rod of life sort of thing. A release from tension in the burst of life. The staff of Merlin. Mind over matter Walk with me again sometime Regards merlin From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 16:20:35 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 16:11:48 -0500 From: "M K Ramadoss" Subject: Re: Thomas book Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980628161148.009aca30@mail.eden.com> In-Reply-To: <01bda2c6$3983b880$LocalHost@default> At 02:54 PM 6/28/1998 -0400, you wrote: > From: "Jake Jaqua" > Date: Sunday, June 28, 1998 2:44 PM > Subject: Thomas book Daniel Calwell writes in #259: >The Margaret Thomas book has NOT been reprinted >by the Edmonton Lodge. I even called them >and asked and they said No, they have not >reprinted this title. >Mark Jaqua of PROTOGONOS is the one who reprinted this Thomas >book. I have his address somewhere. Mark >has posted things here on Theos-Talk. Mark, >are you still here? Eldon, is Mark still subscribed >to Theos-talk. I also have Mark's email address somewhere. >Will try to find his postal address. Yes, I've published "Theosophy Vs. Neo-Theosophy" by Margaret Thomas. It is 178 pages, paperback, with 60 page appendix. The price is $7.00 plus $1.50 book rate post US. Make Check payable to M.R. Jaqua, POB 444, Grand Rapids, Ohio 43522 USA This edition of the Thomas book is from Victor Endersby's "Theosophical Notes." In the appendix is included an article critical of CWL which appeared only in the 1st edition of Avalon's "The Serpent Power." (courtesy of R. Robb) I print and bind these myself. The first one I did in 1990 was an aesthetic monstrosity. This one is not too bad. - Jake Jaqua Do you have the book in an electronic form? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 17:20:38 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 23:09:39 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35945EE1.563C@netgsi.com> gschueler writes >if >your faith in this kind of godly justice (which is shared >by all of the world's religions in some manner) helps you >through the day, then keep with it. Personally I feel sure >that justice is a human concept and only exists in our minds. Yea, verily. However, I think we can, in some measure, *make* justice happen. We can certainly raise hell when we don't get it! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 17:33:34 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 23:11:47 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Celibacy and Spiritual Progress Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980627233623.019eabc0@mail.eden.com> M K Ramadoss writes >The issue of celibacy and spiritual progress has come up from time to time. >While all of us know the traditional view, the revolutionary viewpoint >comes from Krishnaji who grew up in the traditional theosophical >environment. In the early Christian church, the view was that if you could manage it, then celibacy was preferable - otherwise, get married! Pragmatic, those guys. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 17:51:20 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 17:58:34 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Oath Message-ID: <3596BC8A.2ED8@netgsi.com> References: > Come on Jerry, Tell us all! What does it say? > > Alan :0) > --------- Not much. The idea is from the GD and OTO and says that before crossing the Abyss one must take an oath to response to every daily event as if it were a direct communication with God (or one's inner god if you prefer). It sounds easy but is very hard to follow through. The main thing is that every aspect of your life becomes meaningful. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 19:20:42 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 17:09:59 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: - What is an Idea ? And Children Message-ID: <19980629001001.2536.qmail@hotmail.com> Alan wanted to know -- What is an Idea? We adults ask this question and want a logical answer to it. Yet children show they KNOW, at the age of crawling, just standing, and starting to understand what is said to them, and while trying to speak themselves. They have this great faculty of comprehending IDEAS, and yet could not answer Alan's question! A normal child starts to KNOW the difference between a table and a chair, between food and water, between a cat and a dog, and so forth and so on, and this faculty grows day by day. Tables are of various sizes, made of different materials, and used even in slightly different ways, yet they are tables. The PURPOSE is to "put things upon it." While a chair's PURPOSE is "to be sat upon." The child does not yet comprehend the adult understanding of PURPOSE, yet the average child soon makes a distinction between tables and chairs. Yet these two words, to keep to this analogy, cannot be drawn in their abstract form. Individual tables and chairs of specific types, they can be drawn with measurements given and material specified, and fall into what is TYPAL knowledge. Yet the general idea of a table or a chair, is not TYPAL but ARCHETYPAL. And at this early age the child shows this extraordinary faculty of being able to judge types from an abstract Archetypal concept. It is so easy for us to overlook what a wondrous learning ability our children are manifesting. So ideas are Archetypal, and their manifestation in the material world is typal. The Phenomenon is the typal world, while the Noumenon is the Archetypal world. Ideas have their root in that which is formless, attributeless, and impartite. The word IDEA therefore itself is difficult to define. More difficult to define are the ideas, which do not have a measurement, and material substance. These are a higher grade of IDEAS, pertaining to the Noumenon world, and consist of words like the one we used earlier : PURPOSE. A child understands the difference of purpose of a table and a chair, but cannot define it. Other words of this category are those like, BEAUTY, JUSTICE, HONESTY, TRUTH, etc., etc. We try to represent them by examples, and we write long treatises and books, and can get doctorates for our efforts. But in fact they transcend all our efforts to define them, and any description we make invariably comes into criticism for we have said too much or too little, or in the wrong way. Ideas are primarily TRANSCENDENT, and any effort to pin them down in a hard and fast manner inevitably fails. Yet, again in our children, we find them having sometimes overpowering convictions about JUSTICE, IMPARTIALITY, HONESTY, etc. Deep within our adult selves we too have a inherent sense about these so very indescribable and unattainable IDEAS (which become IDEALS), shall I use the words, we have already had lengthy discussion over, MORALITY and ETHICS. These, latter kinds of ideas, pertaining to a higher sense of value and significance are in fact rooted in the divine nature of NATURE. Since DIVINITY, belongs to this very category of words, we may quarrel over a definition. But to my way of thinking, the important thing is that the child, and the adult if s/he has not allowed this inner perception to be stifled and corrupted with "worldly" (pragmatic) learning, is Divinely Discontent. This inner KNOWLEDGE stirs and leaves the person continuously unsatisfied, with longings and aspirations of a superior and higher type, which s/he may not want to acknowledge. This to my way of thinking is one of the proofs of the inherent PERCEPTIVE TRUTHS which we KNOW, and which all human languages and logical writings will never succeed in explaining. Trusting this may be of some help, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 19:50:35 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:49:13 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain Message-ID: <7d3f5f18.3596e48a@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-28 00:28:23 EDT, you write: >Nobody ever said that >life was fair--Carter's claim to immortality. > > That was JFK in response to a question about draft deferments during a press conference in the midst of one of the many Berlin crises in 1961. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 20:20:36 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:38:50 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Re: Message-ID: <3596E21A.1F8C@netgsi.com> References: <006201bda294$00218c20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote: > > June 28th 1998 > > Dear Jerry: > > To answer your inquiry about the writings of Mr. Crosbie: Two > books are in print. The details are: > Thanks Dallas. I will try to get these. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 20:49:12 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:44:52 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Thomas book Message-ID: <3596E384.76C6@netgsi.com> References: <01bda2c6$3983b880$LocalHost@default> > Yes, I've published "Theosophy Vs. Neo-Theosophy" by Margaret > Thomas. It is 178 pages, paperback, with 60 page appendix. The price > is $7.00 plus $1.50 book rate post US. Make Check payable to M.R. > Jaqua, POB 444, Grand Rapids, Ohio 43522 USA This edition of the > Thomas book is from Victor Endersby's "Theosophical Notes." In the > appendix is included an article critical of CWL which appeared only in > the 1st edition of Avalon's "The Serpent Power." (courtesy of R. > Robb) I print and bind these myself. The first one I did in 1990 > was an aesthetic monstrosity. This one is not too bad. > > - Jake Jaqua Thanks for the info. I will purchase a copy. I happen to have The Serpent Power and pretty much agree with the criticism. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 20:50:42 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:41:55 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Worlds Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35968CAB.501@globalserve.net> libidia writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> Dear Merlin >> >> Three Worlds - have you other descriptions for these? > >Dear Apsotate: >Thank you for identifiying my freudian slip of the fingers. Dear Merlin/libidia/Annette, I did that? Anyhow, I can see so many parallels in your description (which I have filed for reference) that I suggest you might like to download my free "Keys to Kabbalah" - and if you can make sense of it, we will have a comparitive base to discuss from. Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 20:53:31 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:36:12 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Message-ID: <3596E17C.F83@netgsi.com> References: <006101bda293$fef4f300$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > Is there a difference between man's perception of law and law in > itself ? > I don't think that any difference would be significant. > Does an "abstract," or "ideal" Nature underlie all we perceive, > ourselves, every atom ? How can this be detected or determined? > Good and evil are within us, not outside in nature. Nature is empty of suchness (I agree with Buddhism here), and thus requires a proper viewpoint rather than any purification. > Who or what in us either feels or notices pain or joy ? > The human ego or personality together with the physical body. > Is the passage of time and events (of all kinds) a matter of > sentiment (not sensation), or a matter of observation (besides > either enjoying or suffering them) ? > I suspect that it is both. > What is the difference between "thinking about" and "knowing ?" > A wide gap. Knowing comes only from direct experience. First we know, and then we think about, or vice verse. They are altogether different things. > I ask these questions in all sincerity, since they are the tools > that I use to build up my understanding of this environment, and > of 'myself.' > OK. There is nothing wrong with asking questions. > Why should events in and around me be either partially, or > wholly, > or not at all, subject to chance (or law) : is it possible to > have an unstable mixture of both? And if so, who or what > perceives it ? We are subject to both law (order) and chance (chaos) because these two polar opposites lie at the foundation of our universe. I am certain that the divine Monad does not perceive any of this but its ray does. > > Apart from observed indeterminacy, is there not a general > tendency to harmony and inter-action whereby units cooperate -- > or is this by chance ? We live in a world of duality where both harmony and discord exist, both order and chance. Chance came into play when we agreed to join the human life-wave. > Indeterminacy for the individual, and the > "Law of Mass Action" seems to operate for large groups. Yet, the > individual is always an unknown. > Even groups have a degree of indeterminacy although they do conform to statistical probability. Individuals do not conform to statistical probability and so are indeterminante. > Is this why we are always bound to our fellows, though > intellectually, ethically, psychically we may advance at a pace > chosen by our inner selves ? > I think that we are always bound to our fellows because they are us and we are them. The more spiritual we go, the less difference there seems to be between any two things. > How far can one stretch probability? and if this is observed, > would not th "Observer" have to have some reference points that > are stable? > Probability charactersizes large groups but not individuals. Our human life-wave is predictable while we as individuals are not. I am not sure what you mean by "stable" as there is no such thing in our world except maybe consciousness itself. All things are relative. > If everything "moves" then stability is not physical but > metaphysical -- as an ideal ? > According to Buddhism there are two truths: relative truth of everyday life (duality) and absolute truth (nonduality). I certainly agree that stability is not physical nor is anything physical very stable. > If so, then are ideals stable or mutable ? and again, if > mutable, who determines that and how ? > > Well, ideas or symbols in the Jungian sense probably exist as such for at least one manvantara, so they are certainly relatively stable. I think we, collective humanity, make all of these determinations. I would even agree that it is karmic. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 21:09:23 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:33:12 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Oath Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3596BC8A.2ED8@netgsi.com> gschueler writes >Not much. The idea is from the GD and OTO and says that >before crossing the Abyss one must take an oath to >response to every daily event as if it were a direct >communication with God (or one's inner god if you prefer). >It sounds easy but is very hard to follow through. The >main thing is that every aspect of your life becomes >meaningful. I like the idea, but why take an oath? All that happens then is, IMO, an increase in opportunities for guilt trips! (There is a GD link on the website below) Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 21:13:28 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 02:37:23 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: "Fiercely Feminist" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <359690C0.62B0@globalserve.net> libidia writes >Dear Dr: >Hubby and I realized a long time ago that he was more comfortable living >in his feminine and I was more comfortable expressing my masculine. No >probs I thought, this is a step forward. > >Except, how come I neogtiate mortgages, run our finances, hire >tradespeople, plan, manage and install, and still have to do the dishes >and bear the children? > >Evolution, Consciousness Raising or CopOut? >Yours >Human Dear Annette, I'd say recipricocity, mutuality, and that maybe you got a raw deal! Tell hubby that living in his feminine *at least* means doing the dishes. Teach him to knit and to iron clothes, do the washing, that sort of stuff. Could give you time to bear children (you sure you want this?) Alan :0) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jun 28 22:50:38 1998 Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 22:54:49 -0400 From: "Bart Lidofsky" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-ID: <359701F9.65D2C62@sprynet.com> References: <19980627195437130.AAB247@pgiese> Pam Giese wrote: > > After I sent this, I remembered a good book on this subject: > > Ken Wilber's "The Atman Project" (Quest Books) is a transpersonal > psychological view of human development. Unlike most psychology texts, he > leans heavily on spiritual and mythic resources and also unlike most > psychological texts, he views the development of the personality as process > that continues to unfolds throughout adulthood and possibly beyond. Unlike most pychologists, Ken Wilber is not one. He is a philosopher (and, in philosophical circles, considered a rather mediocre one, which is not to say that he has not come up with some excellent ideas). Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 02:20:36 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 01:10:44 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Guns, bombs, and other holy things Message-Id: <199806290710.BAA21301@mailmx.micron.net> Annette wrote: >Dear Thoa and Kym: >Why thank you Thoa for saying you enjoyed our chat. Just want to let >you and others know that I get no secret self-satisfaction out of >posting personal details, as I peceive neither do others on this list. >In fact, often I wake up next morning and think, "h..s.. what *have* I >done?". Although I agree that there are times when subjects become too personal for public consumption and should be shared via private e-mail - I don't think you or anyone has yet crossed that boundary. I think we stayed in the green zone. Consequently, our more personal conversations with each other and others reflected some effects Theosophy or any other philosophy is having upon us. A person can quote and cite and bleet and blat all day what others have said - but that doesn't tell anyone anything about what T/theosophy means to the person. All of us on this list can read, so quotations can sometimes be redundant or unhelpful - what is also important to me is to know what people are DOING with what they are reading. My exchange with Govert was an interesting and - I'm going to say it - scary conversation. And he and I have read the very same 'seed' literature. I think it is wise to know in what flock one has landed - helps one decide if one belongs there. . .or if they should alert any authorities. It takes greater courage to engage in self-inspection than it does to simply read voluminous texts and dissect ambiguous phrases (note: which is not to say that those who mainly use citations for discussion are not doing self-analysis). 'Course, then there are those who simply run onto the list, drop a bomb statement and then go silent. That gets on my last nerve. . .and I know they don't care about my last nerve. Kym From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 07:50:34 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 08:47:50 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: Worlds Message-ID: <35978CF6.34EC@globalserve.net> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Dear Merlin/libidia/Annette, > > I did that? Anyhow, I can see so many parallels in your description > (which I have filed for reference) that I suggest you might like to > download my free "Keys to Kabbalah" - and if you can make sense of > it, we will have a comparitive base to discuss from. Dear Apostate/Dr/Alan, Oooooooh, you mean some of the stuff in these other books I read and my own experience might carry some weight!!!!!!! Just to let you know that I downloaded your "Keys to the Kabbalah" a couple of weeks after first electronically meeting you and it's still here on my hard drive, waiting to become pertinent and hence remembered. Can't promise to get to it immediately, but accept your offer of a discussion at a later date. It's Monday morning here and I have to go to work. Every Monday morning all the non-support staff meet in the boardroom in their best executive clothing and primp, preen, posture, posit. Every Monday afternoon the support staff are given the filtered versions of the morning in similar but lower level meetings. I HATE Mondays anyway and I LOATHE attending meetings like this, and usually the week turns into the equivalent of two weeks in hours as many male managers are playing the game of leaving things until the last minute so that they can rush around and make a lot of noise to appear busy and to bark at the support staff to appear important. This has been going on in one form or another since I was born, and if Theosophy could change this AND give me a 3 day work week with the same income, it would bring me Heaven on Earth. by for now libidia From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 09:12:12 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:58:35 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Keys to the mysteries Message-Id: <199806291358.JAA17363@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> A couple of points raised: Annette, "gout" is supposed to have a circumflex over the u and means "taste," thus "to each her/his own (taste)" Lmhem111, Gail is Edgar Evans Cayce's daughter and thus Edgar Sr.'s granddaughter and cousin to Charles Thomas. CCheers, Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 09:27:13 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:26:31 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Celibacy, monogamy, and other Message-Id: <199806291426.KAA13408@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806291400.JAA10668@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 29, 98 09:00:09 am Tnanks Annette and others for baring your souls about this issue. I'm disinclined to follow suit, but have a general observation. Have devoted fairly lengthy periods of time to celibacy and monogamy, as well as to what probably should best be called non-monogamous non-celibacy, henceforth "other." In my own case, the "other" phase came first, and seemed to be inaugurated by the passage of transiting Neptune over the natal Sun. Transiting Uranus to natal Sun brought years of celibacy. Transiting Pluto to natal Sun coincided with the midpoint of several years of monogamy. Post-monogamy, post-celibacy, there are lessons to learn which I regard as just as "spiritual" as the lessons of each previous phase. But I don't think one can generalize about any of these ways being "higher" than others, as they are highly individual. None of us can know for sure that our current situation won't be succeeded by something radically different. I do think however, that regardless of what people choose do do with their genitals, it is better and healthier to have physical intimacy of some kind in one's life. From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 09:50:46 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:44:54 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: SUNY Press site Message-Id: <199806291444.KAA29551@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> Hey all, I just learned that the summer-fall catalog of State University of New York Press is now accessible on the World Wide Web, at http://www.sunypress.edu; my new book on Cayce is under "Religious Studies." The listing gives a fair amount of description of the book; I think what you see there is the back cover copy and will be on brochures announcing publication. Their whole catalog is available on this site, including listings of my own two previous books with them. I'm pleased to see positive reviews of The Masters Revealed quoted at some length. BTW although ordering info is provided, I would encourage ARE people to order it through the ARE catalog. But don't know when it might appear there. The book is still 6-8 weeks away from publication anyhow. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 10:05:13 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 10:39:16 -0400 (EDT) From: "K Paul Johnson" Subject: Heart chakra practice Message-Id: <199806291439.KAA25713@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> In-Reply-To: <199806291400.JAA10668@proteus.imagiware.com> from "owner-theos-talk-digest@proteus.imagiware.com" at Jun 29, 98 09:00:09 am Dear Thomas, This will be a condensed explanation of my own experience with these practices. I first learned how to meditate in a formal, disciplined way through the ARE literature based on the Cayce readings, and in a group devoted to their study. This involves a drawing down of energy from the crown and brow chakras through the throat to the heart, while saying "Our father, which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Then energy is drawn upwards from the root through the lower chakras to the heart, while saying "Give us this day our daily bread. Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." The the energy returns from the heart to the brow and crown while saying "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory." There is a lot of detail about parts of the prayer corresponding both to specific glands and to chakras, but this gives the basic pattern. That was in 1978, the same year I discovered theosophical literature in the ARE library and got more interested in Theosophy than Cayce. I soon gravitated to the Judge lineages, which discouraged any such practices and led me to abandon them. For many years I didn't think much about the Cayce material, although I did meditate in a variety of other, more Theosophically approved ways, like using the paramitas as points of aspiration/contemplation. But in the mid-1990s, while completing my last book on Theosophy, I got interested in the relationship between HPB's teachings and those of the Radhasoami sect of Hinduism. Particularly The Voice of the Silence and the idea of raising focus to the Third Eye, contacting the Masters in this way, hearing a soundless sound. All this is straight out of the Radhasoami books. So I started using Radhasoami practices and hoping for some guidance about *Eastern* Masters to follow. But what happened instead was that my Third Eye seemed to be more interested in Jesus, and what I experienced in the RS practices reminded me of the long-abandoned Cayce stuff, which I soon picked back up and have been following rather faithfully ever since-- about three years now. The RS practices strongly *de* emphasize any chakras lower than the Third Eye. I think, from my Internet conversations with various practitioners of these techniques, that they don't lead anywhere I want to go. People just get more otherworldly and indifferent to human needs of others by taking that path. Whereas practices that integrate the Third Eye techniques with focuses on the heart chakra make for a more balanced and joyful presence in the world. This is what I feel it has done for me, and also what I feel in the difference between ARE people and those I've encountered in paths focused solely on the Third Eye. There's a fair amount about all this in my own forthcoming book on Cayce. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 11:20:57 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:20:41 EDT From: "Chuck Cosimano" Subject: Re: - What is an Idea ? And Children Message-ID: <6164e75f.3597beda@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-28 20:25:18 EDT, you write: >Yet, again in our children, we find them having sometimes overpowering >convictions about JUSTICE, IMPARTIALITY, HONESTY, etc. "When I was a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man I put away childish things." Chuck From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 11:35:52 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 07:07:43 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Message-ID: <000401bda37a$a8e8ab40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 29th Then, Jerry: Would I be wrong in concluding that there is in each of us something which stands as an "Observer," and sees all the variables, itself being unmoved ? If so, what is That ? Is it our "True Self ?" or our "Real Self ?" Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 28, 1998 7:04 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? >> Is there a difference between man's perception of law and law in >> itself ? >> >I don't think that any difference would be significant. > > >> Does an "abstract," or "ideal" Nature underlie all we perceive, >> ourselves, every atom ? How can this be detected or determined? >> >Good and evil are within us, not outside in nature. Nature >is empty of suchness (I agree with Buddhism here), and thus >requires a proper viewpoint rather than any purification. > S N I P From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 11:50:58 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 06:57:13 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? Message-ID: <000201bda37a$a607ab60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 29th Dear Jerry: If Karma is a fact and all Nature (including each of us from top to bottom of our own nature) has existence and is significant, then, such an "oath" is superfluous. Karma operates whether we like it or not. Do you recall in LIGHT ON THE PATH there is a statement made by the writer that for the aspirant a point is reached when the vibration of emotion, of life, seems to come to an end, a stillness. This is then seemingly an "Abyss." But once past, the life of the disciple continues (perhaps on a different level of attention) and new vistas open for the aspiring and thinking soul. That book has many valuable and suggestive ideas, but is not easily understood. Its values have to be dug out of it by many returns and meditations on its intent. Here's how I begin to think about what you say: In a just and fair Universe everyone and everything is inter-related and all interactions are always registered and reacted to. We are all involved and cannot the facts of our present existence, all together. The alternative is a meaningless chaos in which we and everything else is an insane jumble. And there is too much order that we can sense to believe that to be the case. [ Or is insanity and jumble solely a manifestation of confusion in human consciousness ? Are we the only sane person in an otherwise insane and vast community ? ] The only glitch I can detect is our way of looking at things is: Are we impatient to know everything at once ? If so we hope that by faith, belief, rite and ritual (devised by someone else and which we are not given a clear and logical view of) we will somehow stumble on a meaningful "path" through the maze. [ But, Theosophy, gives a very extensive explanation of its solutions and reasons. So that there is no ambiguity left in our being able to perceive its logic and the way it serves to answer many problems in our lives, and fill many gaps of our present ignorance. IMHO ] Is it only mankind that is so independent that no rules apply, or that the whole of Nature ceases to have meaning ? As I see it, Theosophy, and its propositions serves to restore intellectual meaning to our lives and being. Are we so confused by education and belief (and our fear inducing memories of error), that we cannot find any base for stability from which to begin ? Is it not possible that the very fact that we quest and seek, indicates that at the root of our being, there is something that cannot "die ?" That is permanent ? -- in a world of constantly shifting shadows ? Its stability induces in us the desire to know ? All our difficulties, it seems to me, centers around responsibility. Why is that ? What is an Abyss? Is it something that "emotionally" we cannot grasp ? Then why not use the mind ? Did you ever read "DUNE" by Frank Herbert (I believe) ? Do you recall the test administered to an individual (when they became mature) to see if they were either of human intelligence or solely a superior "animal intelligence ?" In other words are we either "Thinkers," or only "Emoters ?" And, does the "Thinker" control and master the "emoter" inside ? Theosophy proposes that we are a mixture of both: A combination of two streams of consciousness: the "descending God," and the ascending "Animal Instinct" ( or consciousness on its personal way to "divine existence" ). I am afraid that my ability to express this may be faulty. To me the distinction is clear. Is the "Abyss" the fear of seeing one's lower self (the animal emotional self linked to the lower mind--or, Kama with Kama-Manas) in its true colors and actuality ? I can understand this to be distasteful, (to all of us) and seeing even a portion of our memories may result in rejection. But that is fear, which can be overcome by knowledge; and knowledge comes from thinking. Thought is an assistant, not an enemy of the Lower Self. It assists in making a transformation to something sublime. [It is likened to a teacher assisting a pupil, or a father assisting his son to learn] Yet, in most cases we have things in mind, as memories, that we now would rather never have done. But, we know we did them, or said them. Now we also know that in a just and fair Universe we will eventually have to "pay" for them. [Why are we innately so sure of this?] If we are children, we try to close the lid on those memories, but know that they will not vanish. If we are men-thinkers, we face our errors and improve from then on. It is said that the "battle is in the mind." We have to eventually fight out the field of our own past doing and of our early choices. No one else is going to do it for us. Also, there is no "escape." So many religions are built on the hope that we can escape ! One of the most recent, of which a history remains is that of the choice of Emperor Constantine. He believed bishop Eusebius (that God would pardon him and remit his "sins from punishment" if he would become a Christian and establish the Church, politically, as a State Religion in the Empire. Out of fear that he would suffer from his terrible crimes towards his family and nation, he embraced Christianity and made it the State Religion of the Roman Empire so as (he hoped) to escape the results (and just personal suffering due to him) for those deeds. Did it work ? What are the effects ? Should one "believe" in an institution that advocates doctrines that remit sins and does nothing for the victims ? Who makes restitution to them ? It plunged Europe and the rest of our world into a darkness of blind faith and blind belief from which we have not yet fully recovered. Those who did not "believe" were ruthlessly exterminated, tortured, victimized, for the next 1200 years or so. IMHO: We ought to ask ourselves who or what is profiting from this confusion ? What places obstacles in our way of developing the power of individual and independent thinking ? And, why ? Why is our world, political, social, psychological so unstable ? Is that natural or is it something that has been induced and under the influence of which we all suffer. Why are peace, prosperity and brotherhood desired on one hand and derided on the other ? These ideas and question run through my mind and I wonder when and where we may get a solution. Best wishes, Dallas > Date: Sunday, June 28, 1998 4:07 PM > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Oath >> Come on Jerry, Tell us all! What does it say? >> >> Alan :0) >> --------- > >Not much. The idea is from the GD and OTO and says that >before crossing the Abyss one must take an oath to >response to every daily event as if it were a direct >communication with God (or one's inner god if you prefer). >It sounds easy but is very hard to follow through. The >main thing is that every aspect of your life becomes >meaningful. > >Jerry S. > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 14:27:11 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:07:43 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Heart chakra practice Message-Id: <199806291905.OAA07714@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <199806291439.KAA25713@vlinsvr.vsla.edu> References: <199806291400.JAA10668@proteus.imagiware.com> >"Give us this day our daily bread. Forgive us our debts as we >forgive our debtors. Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us >from evil." I recently thought that this should read "Give us our debts as we forgive our debtors." - Like inviting more karma to be released as we had come to terms with it. Does anyone know if we could have mistranslated? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 14:42:17 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 12:14:00 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-Id: <199806291911.OAA08387@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <19980627131654497.AAA245@pgiese> Thanks to Kym and Pam for their posts on this topic. >How old is your son again? My son is three 1/2. >The word "discipline" has been an unpopular word but it's self-discipline >that have gotten us here where we are now. Doesn't it take discipline to >meditate? Discipline to read and study? The self-discipline we learn as >children becomes the structure that we can build on the rest of our lives. My son has Saturn in his first house and I see discipline in his ways that were not present in my daughter's early years, nor her later ones. My daughter is 8. Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 16:19:27 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:13:32 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Nobody sure makes a lot of noise Message-Id: <199806292113.PAA00438@mailmx.micron.net> Jerry offers Carter quote; Chuck interjected that it was really JFK's quote; Kym says you're both wrong as it was her grandmother who birthed the phrase: >Nobody ever said that >life was fair. . .[snip] Seems like that is just what those who believe in karma are saying. Seems like that is just what those who believe in Christianity, or any other monotheistic religion are saying - "free will" and "God does not err." Seems like that is just what those who are fortunate enough to have a house, car, job, and vacation-time are saying. That seems like a lot of nobody's. Kym From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 17:40:54 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:25:51 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources Message-ID: <002901bda3ad$1d7330c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 29th Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: >From HPB on the T S : "...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit and the survival of his soul; to make him regard every man of whatever race, color, or creed [as a brother], and to prove to him that the only truths revealed to man by superior men (not a god) are contained in the Vedas of the ancient Aryas of India, Finally to demonstrate to him that there never were, will be, nor are, any miracles; that there can be nothing 'supernatural' in this universe, and that on earth, at least, the only god is man himself." "It lies within his powers to become and to continue a god after the death of his physical body. Our society receives nothing the possibility of which it cannot demonstrate at will. We believe in the phenomena but we disbelieve in the constant intervention of 'spirits' to produce such phenomena. We maintain that the embodied spirit has more powers to produce them than a disembodied one. We believe in the existence of spirits, but of many classes, the human spirit being but one class of the any." -- HPB: "She Being Dead, Yet Speaketh" -- PATH, June, July, August 1892. (ULT HPB Articles I, pp. 116-7) HPB on "loyalty" : "H.P.B.is loyal to the death to the Theosophical CAUSE, and to those great Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole of Humanity into one Brotherhood.....Therefore the degree of her sympathies with the "Theosophical Society and Adyar" depends upon the degree of the loyalty of that Society to the CAUSE. Let it break away from the original lines and show disloyalty in its policy to the CAUSE and the original programme of the Society, and H.P.B., calling the T.S. disloyal, will shake it off like the dust from her feet..... There is no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished and replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all autonomous, as are the States of America, and all under one head President, who, together with H.P.Blavatsky will champion the CAUSE against the whole world. Such is the real state of things.....Madame Blavatsky does not owe the slightest allegiance to a Council which is liable at any moment to issue silly and untheosophical ukases.....It is the two Founders and especially the President, who have virtually sworn allegiance to the Fellows, whom they have to protect, and teach those who want to be taught, and not to tyrannize and rule over them." -- HPB "A Puzzle from Adyar." LUCIFER, Aug. 1889 (ULT --- HPB Articles, Vol. 1, pp. 219-220) "I never gave myself out for a full-blown occultist, but only for a student of Occultism for the last 35 or 40 years. Yet I am enough of an occultist to know that before we find the Master within our own heart and seventh principle--we need an outside Master....I got my drop from my Master (the living one); you, because you went to *****. He is a Saviour, he who leads you to finding the Master within yourself. It is ten years already that I preach the inner Master and God and never represented our Masters as Saviours in the Christian sense." -- HPB Letters quoted in PATH, Vol. X, p. 367 "...[ the Brothers are everywhere ] ...silent, secret, retiring, and who would never divulge themselves entirely to anyone, unless one did as I did--passed 7 and 10 years probation and given proofs of absolute devotion, and that he, or she, would keep silent even before a prospect and a threat of death. I fulfilled the requirements and am what I am, and this.....no one can take away from me." --- HPB ( Letter on Masters, and the early days of the TS in America and India. PATH Vol. X, pp 370-1 ) Offered in the hope of evoking thought and discussion Dallas ===================================== From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 18:20:53 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:15:45 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Worlds Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35978CF6.34EC@globalserve.net> libidia writes >Can't promise to get to it immediately, but accept your offer of a >discussion at a later date. I'll hold you to that! > >It's Monday morning here and I have to go to work. Every Monday morning >all the non-support staff meet in the boardroom in their best executive >clothing and primp, preen, posture, posit. Every Monday afternoon the >support staff are given the filtered versions of the morning in similar >but lower level meetings. I HATE Mondays anyway and I LOATHE attending >meetings like this, and usually the week turns into the equivalent of >two weeks in hours as many male managers are playing the game of leaving >things until the last minute so that they can rush around and make a lot >of noise to appear busy and to bark at the support staff to appear >important. When I became the catalog editor to a firm dealing in stamps for collectors, i found myself in the od position of being a complete department of one. This meant, that as department head (!) I used to have to report to the board meeting every month. I established my future relationship withthem on the first month by enetering when called, and annoucning to the self-important assembly - "It's OK - no need to get up." > >This has been going on in one form or another since I was born, and if >Theosophy could change this AND give me a 3 day work week with the same >income, it would bring me Heaven on Earth How about a two-day week? Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 19:05:47 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 20:27:33 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: Thomas book Message-ID: >Do you have the book in an electronic form? >mkr - Nope! From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 19:20:48 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:47:52 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: - What is an Idea ? And Children Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6164e75f.3597beda@aol.com> Drpsionic@aol.com writes >"When I was a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man I put away >childish things." First Corinthians. This is one of the esoteric books of the "new testament". Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 19:35:48 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:53:37 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-ID: <5FnzalABkCm1Ew6A@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <199806291911.OAA08387@proteus.imagiware.com> Brenda S. Tucker writes >My son has Saturn in his first house and I see discipline in his ways that >were not present in my daughter's early years, nor her later ones. Depending on other factors, he may have a hard time! Alan (Saturn in the first house in Aquarius) aged 65. --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 19:50:54 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:18:22 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Plea for help Message-ID: Dear lists, I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." I am seriously reviewing my position. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 19:54:37 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:51:42 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Message-ID: <+1UymhAOiCm1Ew4M@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <000401bda37a$a8e8ab40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 29th > >Then, Jerry: > >Would I be wrong in concluding that there is in each of us >something which stands as an "Observer," and sees all the >variables, itself being unmoved ? If so, what is That ? > >Is it our "True Self ?" or our "Real Self ?" Alan interjects: It is our true essence, our eternal spiritual being, beyond time and space. All the rest is temporal and subject to deception. So says the Teaching. on *very* rare occasions, it can intervene in our lives, and we may say, "Wow! a miracle!" --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 20:05:56 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 20:56:25 -0400 From: "Jake Jaqua" Subject: "Life is not fair.." Message-ID: Life does not seem fair to the one-lifetime human personality and isn't, I think, during physical life. I thought about this a lot, and think that it does not seem fair because we only see part of the human personality's life - the "second half" is its life in Devachan after physical death when it gets the reward of all its unfulfilled hopes and injustices. Devachan is supposed to be an "illusion" or dream-life - just like physical life - but on the other hand, this is as Real as any individual or relative life gets..... For the "Reincarnating Ego" life is fair because it is reaping reward and punishment from its previous lifetimes, which presumably it is aware of in some fashion. - Jake Jaqua From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 20:09:01 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:44:35 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Nobody sure makes a lot of noise Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <199806292113.PAA00438@mailmx.micron.net> kymsmith@micron.net writes >Jerry offers Carter quote; Chuck interjected that it was really JFK's quote; >Kym says you're both wrong as it was her grandmother who birthed the phrase: > >>Nobody ever said that >>life was fair. . .[snip] > >Seems like that is just what those who believe in karma are saying. Seems >like that is just what those who believe in Christianity, or any other >monotheistic religion are saying - "free will" and "God does not err." >Seems like that is just what those who are fortunate enough to have a house, >car, job, and vacation-time are saying. > >That seems like a lot of nobody's. Crunch! We get this kind of stuff a lot from the kind of folk you mention, who are, IMO, nobodies first class. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 20:13:51 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:09:44 +0100 From: "Dr A M Bain" Subject: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <002901bda3ad$1d7330c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >June 29th > >Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: > > >>From HPB on the T S : > >"...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, >established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion >founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and >every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon >his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; >to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden >within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to >give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit >and the survival of his soul; That may have been her intention. It hasn't happened, and HPB herself has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. > to make him regard every man of >whatever race, color, or creed [as a brother], and to prove to >him that the only truths revealed to man by superior men (not a >god) are contained in the Vedas of the ancient Aryas of India, Such truths are contained there, but were never *confined* there. >Finally to demonstrate to him that there never were, will be, nor >are, any miracles; that there can be nothing 'supernatural' in >this universe, and that on earth, at least, the only god is man >himself." We are still waiting for the demo ..... and what arrogance to suggest that the only god is "man himself". How the hell can anyone *know* that! > >"It lies within his powers to become and to continue a god after >the death of his physical body. Our society receives nothing the >possibility of which it cannot demonstrate at will. We believe >in the phenomena but we disbelieve in the constant intervention >of 'spirits' to produce such phenomena. We maintain that the >embodied spirit has more powers to produce them than a >disembodied one. We believe in the existence of spirits, but of >many classes, the human spirit being but one class of the >any." -- HPB: "She Being Dead, Yet Speaketh" -- PATH, June, >July, August 1892. >(ULT HPB Articles I, pp. 116-7) "We maintain?" upon what evidence? Like real life experience, not, "It is written ...." > >HPB on "loyalty" : > >"H.P.B.is loyal to the death to the Theosophical CAUSE, and to >those great Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole of >Humanity into one Brotherhood.....Therefore the degree of her >sympathies with the "Theosophical Society and Adyar" depends upon >the degree of the loyalty of that Society to the CAUSE. Let it >break away from the original lines and show disloyalty in its >policy to the CAUSE and the original programme of the Society, >and H.P.B., calling the T.S. disloyal, will shake it off like the >dust from her feet..... I suspect she did this a long while back. >There is no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished and >replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all >autonomous, as are the States of America, and all under one head >President, who, together with H.P.Blavatsky will champion the >CAUSE against the whole world. Such is the real state of >things.....Madame Blavatsky does not owe the slightest allegiance >to a Council which is liable at any moment to issue silly and >untheosophical ukases.....It is the two Founders and especially >the President, who have virtually sworn allegiance to the >Fellows, whom they have to protect, and teach those who want to >be taught, and not to tyrannize and rule over them." -- HPB "A >Puzzle from Adyar." LUCIFER, Aug. 1889 >(ULT --- HPB Articles, Vol. 1, pp. 219-220) A sad and forlorn hope which has yet to become anywhere near a reality. > >"...[ the Brothers are everywhere ] ...silent, secret, retiring, >and who would never divulge themselves entirely to anyone, True, perhaps, not "brothers" but "colleagues, readily available to anyone who can reach them. > unless >one did as I did--passed 7 and 10 years probation and given >proofs of absolute devotion, and that he, or she, would keep >silent even before a prospect and a threat of death. I fulfilled >the requirements and am what I am, and this.....no one can take >away from me." --- HPB If asked for proofs of devotion - run like hell. Only those who would control us ask for this kind of thing. The Truth of which there is no religion higher is free for all who seek it. No strings. >( Letter on Masters, and the early days of the TS in America and >India. PATH Vol. X, pp 370-1 ) > >Offered in the hope of evoking thought and discussion With success. --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 20:20:49 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:22:59 -0700 From: "Rodolfo Don" Subject: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <002901bda3ad$1d7330c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> Thank you Dallas for this post. It is time we call dogmatic religion by its real name. Just because all beliefs are welcome in the Theosophical Society doesn't mean that we have to accept them at face value, just as if they all were true. There are no beliefs that are true. For any of us to be able to perceive truth we have to see the whole picture, with all the ramifications, and all the sides of the story. The intellect alone cannot do that, and blind faith will take us to "LALA LAND". "THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN TRUTH", that should be the motto to every theosophist. It is the motto to me. And I'm just a member at large. Rodolfo Don >June 29th > >Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: > > >>From HPB on the T S : > >"...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, >established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion >founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and >every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon >his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; >to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden >within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to >give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit >and the survival of his soul; to make him regard every man of >whatever race, color, or creed [as a brother], and to prove to >him that the only truths revealed to man by superior men (not a >god) are contained in the Vedas of the ancient Aryas of India, >Finally to demonstrate to him that there never were, will be, nor >are, any miracles; that there can be nothing 'supernatural' in >this universe, and that on earth, at least, the only god is man >himself." > >"It lies within his powers to become and to continue a god after >the death of his physical body. Our society receives nothing the >possibility of which it cannot demonstrate at will. We believe >in the phenomena but we disbelieve in the constant intervention >of 'spirits' to produce such phenomena. We maintain that the >embodied spirit has more powers to produce them than a >disembodied one. We believe in the existence of spirits, but of >many classes, the human spirit being but one class of the >any." -- HPB: "She Being Dead, Yet Speaketh" -- PATH, June, >July, August 1892. >(ULT HPB Articles I, pp. 116-7) > > >HPB on "loyalty" : > >"H.P.B.is loyal to the death to the Theosophical CAUSE, and to >those great Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole of >Humanity into one Brotherhood.....Therefore the degree of her >sympathies with the "Theosophical Society and Adyar" depends upon >the degree of the loyalty of that Society to the CAUSE. Let it >break away from the original lines and show disloyalty in its >policy to the CAUSE and the original programme of the Society, >and H.P.B., calling the T.S. disloyal, will shake it off like the >dust from her feet..... >There is no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished and >replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all >autonomous, as are the States of America, and all under one head >President, who, together with H.P.Blavatsky will champion the >CAUSE against the whole world. Such is the real state of >things.....Madame Blavatsky does not owe the slightest allegiance >to a Council which is liable at any moment to issue silly and >untheosophical ukases.....It is the two Founders and especially >the President, who have virtually sworn allegiance to the >Fellows, whom they have to protect, and teach those who want to >be taught, and not to tyrannize and rule over them." -- HPB "A >Puzzle from Adyar." LUCIFER, Aug. 1889 >(ULT --- HPB Articles, Vol. 1, pp. 219-220) > > > >"I never gave myself out for a full-blown occultist, but only for >a student of Occultism for the last 35 or 40 years. Yet I am >enough of an occultist to know that before we find the Master >within our own heart and seventh principle--we need an outside >Master....I got my drop from my Master (the living one); you, >because you went to *****. He is a Saviour, he who leads you to >finding the Master within yourself. It is ten years already that >I preach the inner Master and God and never represented our >Masters as Saviours in the Christian sense." -- HPB Letters >quoted in PATH, Vol. X, p. 367 > > >"...[ the Brothers are everywhere ] ...silent, secret, retiring, >and who would never divulge themselves entirely to anyone, unless >one did as I did--passed 7 and 10 years probation and given >proofs of absolute devotion, and that he, or she, would keep >silent even before a prospect and a threat of death. I fulfilled >the requirements and am what I am, and this.....no one can take >away from me." --- HPB >( Letter on Masters, and the early days of the TS in America and >India. PATH Vol. X, pp 370-1 ) > >Offered in the hope of evoking thought and discussion > >Dallas > >===================================== > > > > From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 20:35:54 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 18:31:57 -0700 From: "Rodolfo Don" Subject: Re: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <002901bda3ad$1d7330c0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>June 29th >> >>Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: >> >> >>>From HPB on the T S : >> >>"...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, >>established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion >>founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and >>every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon >>his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; >>to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden >>within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to >>give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit >>and the survival of his soul; > >That may have been her intention. It hasn't happened, and HPB herself >has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. > It depends on who does the interpretation. From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 22:05:50 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:37:55 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Internet theatre Message-ID: <35984F83.3DC7@netgsi.com> References: <19980627195437130.AAB247@pgiese> <359701F9.65D2C62@sprynet.com> > Unlike most pychologists, Ken Wilber is not one. He is a philosopher > (and, in philosophical circles, considered a rather mediocre one, which > is not to say that he has not come up with some excellent ideas). > > Bart Lidofsky > Bart, like it or not, Wilber is generally considered to be a leading transpersonal psychologist and most transpersonal folks accept much of what he writes. OTOH most psychologists don't accept the fledgling transpersonal school anyway. I happen to like it and I tend to agree with Wilber on most points. Jerry S. From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 22:20:49 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:43:38 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Message-ID: <359850DA.3888@netgsi.com> References: <000401bda37a$a8e8ab40$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > > Then, Jerry: > > Would I be wrong in concluding that there is in each of us > something which stands as an "Observer," and sees all the > variables, itself being unmoved ? If so, what is That ? > I don't think that you would be wrong. It is called many things, including the Seer. It is pure consciousness. > Is it our "True Self ?" or our "Real Self ?" > > Dallas It is the "ray" of our divine Monad and yes, it is usually called our True Self or inner divinity. See, we can agree on some things :-) Jerry S. From ???@??? Mon Jun 29 22:49:43 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:21:47 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? Message-ID: <359859CB.3E8A@netgsi.com> References: <000201bda37a$a607ab60$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > > If Karma is a fact and all Nature (including each of us from top > to bottom of our own nature) has existence and is significant, > then, such an "oath" is superfluous. Karma is a "fact" in the same sense that all samsara is fact. Karma is the law of causality that governs our mayavic world. The "oath" is a psychological necessity just like the so-called Bodhisattvic vow. Both are taken to demonstrate our sincerity. >Karma operates whether we > like it or not. Agreed. >Do you recall in LIGHT ON THE PATH there is a > statement made by the writer that for the aspirant a point is > reached when the vibration of emotion, of life, seems to come to > an end, a stillness. This is then seemingly an "Abyss." But > once past, the life of the disciple continues (perhaps on a > different level of attention) and new vistas open for the > aspiring and thinking soul. Could be more of a Dark Night of the Soul than an abyss. These are two different things. > That book has many valuable and > suggestive ideas, but is not easily understood. Its values have > to be dug out of it by many returns and meditations on its > intent. > Well, from my own experience, having had a mystical experience before reading it, I had no real trouble understanding it. Mystical phrases, which are often seemingly paradoxical, are understood clearly after seeing nonduality directly, even if only for a few seconds. > Here's how I begin to think about what you say: > > In a just and fair Universe everyone and everything is > inter-related and all interactions are always registered and > reacted to. We are all involved and cannot the facts of our > present existence, all together. > > The alternative is a meaningless chaos in which we and everything > else is an insane jumble. And there is too much order that we > can sense to believe that to be the case. [ Or is insanity and > jumble solely a manifestation of confusion in human consciousness > ? Are we the only sane person in an otherwise insane and vast > community ? ] > The way I see it, Dallas, is that our universe contains both order and chaos in it. Thus it is both fair and unfair. But a "fair" universe would be dastardly difficult to define. There are always two sides to every event between two people, and what one thinks is fair is often unfair in the eyes of the other. > The only glitch I can detect is our way of looking at things is: > Are we impatient to know everything at once ? If so we hope that > by faith, belief, rite and ritual (devised by someone else and > which we are not given a clear and logical view of) we will > somehow stumble on a meaningful "path" through the maze. [ But, > Theosophy, gives a very extensive explanation of its solutions > and reasons. So that there is no ambiguity left in our being > able to perceive its logic and the way it serves to answer many > problems in our lives, and fill many gaps of our present > ignorance. IMHO ] > Whoa! I think you are giving Theosophy too much credit here. Mr James Long, a past leader of Pasadena and my spiritual mentor, once told me that I was trying to put truth into a box with a pretty yellow ribbon around it, and that this was not only impossible but I was setting myself up for a big fall. I have since discovered that he was right, and that no one can ever grasp truth in their hands or put it into words, not even Theosophy can do that. But it can, and does point the way in which we can go. > Is it only mankind that is so independent that no rules apply, or > that the whole of Nature ceases to have meaning ? > Do animals need to have meaning in their lives? I don't think so. This is, as Jung says, a human trait. Of course rules apply. There are rules for both order and for chaos. We choose them and agreed to them when we came here. > As I see it, Theosophy, and its propositions serves to restore > intellectual meaning to our lives and being. Are we so confused > by education and belief (and our fear inducing memories of > error), that we cannot find any base for stability from which to > begin ? Is it not possible that the very fact that we quest and > seek, indicates that at the root of our being, there is something > that cannot "die ?" That is permanent ? -- in a world of > constantly shifting shadows ? Its stability induces in us the > desire to know ? All our difficulties, it seems to me, centers > around responsibility. Why is that ? > I don't question what you say here, Dallas. The search for meaning is a nobel one. But you always want to hold onto order and throw away chaos. This is like trying to hold onto high and throw away low. They only exist in their relationship together and you can't have one without the other. Fair and unfair are two sides of one coin. They are the polar ends of a duality and co-exist together. You can transcend both, but you can't keep one and throw away the other. > What is an Abyss? Essentially, it refers to a Ring-Pass-Not of some kind. These rings are what hems us in, keeps us within certain boundaries of existence. Without them we would indeed have chaos reign so they are good things. But they hem us in and restrict us so they are bad things. Like most things in life, they are both good and bad depending on how we look at them > Theosophy proposes that we are a mixture of both: A combination > of two streams of consciousness: the "descending God," and the > ascending "Animal Instinct" ( or consciousness on its personal > way to "divine existence" ). I am afraid that my ability to > express this may be faulty. To me the distinction is clear. > No, not faulty. I agree with this. > Is the "Abyss" the fear of seeing one's lower self (the animal > emotional self linked to the lower mind--or, Kama with > Kama-Manas) in its true colors and actuality ? > >From our side of the Abyss, the fear is spirituality because to become aware of our real spiritual self goes with seeing the death or end of the personality, and the personality rightly fears the Abyss because it means death to it. > I can understand this to be distasteful, (to all of us) and > seeing even a portion of our memories may result in rejection. > But that is fear, which can be overcome by knowledge; and > knowledge comes from thinking. > Some knowledge does come from thinking, yes. But spiritual knowledge comes when thinking stops. Spiritual knowledge or gnosis transcends thinking entirely. Thinking is below the Abyss while gnosis is above it. > Thought is an assistant, not an enemy of the Lower Self. It > assists in making a transformation to something sublime. [It is > likened to a teacher assisting a pupil,... Thought is the slayer of the mind (?? or something like that). Thought and thinking is oriented to the mental plane which is why consciousness on the causal plane seems like a coma, and consciousness on the spiritual planes is unthinkable. Thinking takes us so far, but then must be left behind. > > It is said that the "battle is in the mind." We have to > eventually fight out the field of our own past doing and of our > early choices. No one else is going to do it for us. Also, > there is no "escape." > Agreed. But I do not agree with the notion that we have to suffer for every wrong done in the past and be rewarded for every good done in the past, for then our future would be infinitely long and all the great mystics or jivamuktas would be wrong. I believe in the promise of release or moksha from the Wheel of Necessity, and this means that karma must be comsumable. > So many religions are built on the hope that we can escape ! One > of the most recent, of which a history remains is that of the > choice of Emperor Constantine. He believed bishop Eusebius > (that God would pardon him and remit his "sins from punishment" > if he would become a Christian and establish the Church, > politically, as a State Religion in the Empire. Out of fear > that he would suffer from his terrible crimes towards his family > and nation, he embraced Christianity and made it the State > Religion of the Roman Empire so as (he hoped) to escape the > results (and just personal suffering due to him) for those deeds. > Did it work ? What are the effects ? Should one "believe" in an > institution that advocates doctrines that remit sins and does > nothing for the victims ? Who makes restitution to them ? > I see little difference in this and a pious Theosophist who does good works in order to accure personal merit for a better life next time. > It plunged Europe and the rest of our world into a darkness of > blind faith and blind belief from which we have not yet fully > recovered. Those who did not "believe" were ruthlessly > exterminated, tortured, victimized, for the next 1200 years or > so. > But the exoteric doctrine of karma did much the same in India. Have to go. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 00:40:51 1998 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 23:32:52 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: And your name is? Message-Id: <199806300532.XAA10801@mailmx.micron.net> Rudolfo wrote: >Thank you Dallas for this post. It is time we call dogmatic religion by its >real name. And just what might that "name" be? >Just because all beliefs are welcome in the Theosophical Society >doesn't mean that we have to accept them at face value, just as if they all >were true. To ask a person to accept much of anything at face value is to assume that person is in possession of a brain made of tiny, pickled things. HPB knew that wouldn't fly. However, one has to determine at what point they are objectively exploring a religion, or dismissing it - in fluffy, puffy words - as inferior to their own. >There are no beliefs that are true. This is an interesting frame of mind. So, do you agree that Theosophy is a belief and, therefore, not true? HPB believed she was speaking with "Masters" - is her belief false? >For any of us to be able to >perceive truth we have to see the whole picture, with all the >ramifications, and all the sides of the story. That is physically and mentally impossible for any human to do. What do we do instead, then? >"THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN TRUTH", that should be the motto to every >theosophist. >It is the motto to me. Every theosophist? My, my - I doubt all theosophists are that compliant - some may prefer to build a bigger and better igloo. But, even before one can adopt the preferred motto noted above - don't we have to agree on what Truth is? >And I'm just a member at large. Ah, memories. . .. Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 07:49:25 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 03:48:28 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Plea for help Message-ID: <000501bda424$fc95de20$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 30th Could the plea for Help please be redefined ? Reposed ? IMHO no plea ought to be ignored. It may have passed unnoticed by some. Dallas > Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 6:30 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Plea for help >Dear lists, > >I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > >Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about >the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if >poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for >a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > >WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? > >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > >I am seriously reviewing my position. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 08:00:22 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 03:55:22 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: "Life is not fair.." Message-ID: <000601bda424$fddc67e0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 30th As I read what HPB says in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY, the after-death states are "effect states." In other words they are based on the last life just lived, and in effect review it. No new "Karma" is generated in them. 1. The first state, named Kama-loka [ the place of desires] is the state where the errors and evils one has done, or participated in are relegated to the astral --to return to us as skandhas in our next incarnation(s). 2. The state of Devachan is a review of the good thoughts, deeds and impulses of our last life, and a building of them, after exhaustive meditation upon them all, into our character for the future use of the Ego in its succeeding incarnation and incarnations. That is how I understand what HPB teaches there. Dallas > Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 6:51 PM > From: "Jake Jaqua" > Subject: "Life is not fair.." > Life does not seem fair to the one-lifetime human >personality and isn't, I think, during physical life. I >thought about this a lot, and think that it does not seem >fair because we only see part of the human personality's >life - the "second half" is its life in Devachan after physical >death when it gets the reward of all its unfulfilled hopes >and injustices. Devachan is supposed to be an "illusion" >or dream-life - just like physical life - but on the other >hand, this is as Real as any individual or relative life >gets..... For the "Reincarnating Ego" life is fair because it >is reaping reward and punishment from its previous >lifetimes, which presumably it is aware of in some fashion. > - Jake Jaqua > > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 08:04:25 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 05:32:03 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Originaltheosophical sources Message-ID: <000801bda425$0123a3a0$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 30th 1998 Dear Rodolfo : Of course it depends entirely on who does the interpreting. But, essentially we do it each for ourselves. We do not entirely every rely on what others decide is best for us. Not all men are "sheep." there are a few "goats" who insist on "thinking for themselves." We are independent mind-beings and our growth is through the use of the selective faculty of ethical choice. The limits and place of ethical choosing is all around us in our life. Wisdom comes through our interdependence with others and our treating them as our brothers. So really we are dependent/interdependent all the time. That is how I see it. Dallas > Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 7:17 PM > From: "Rodolfo Don" > Subject: Re: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Originaltheosophical sources >>W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>>June 29th >>> >>>Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: >>> >>> >>>>From HPB on the T S : >>> >>>"...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, >>>established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion >>>founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and >>>every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon >>>his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; >>>to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden >>>within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to >>>give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit >>>and the survival of his soul; >> >>That may have been her intention. It hasn't happened, and HPB herself >>has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. >> > > >It depends on who does the interpretation. > > > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 08:05:39 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:45:45 -0500 From: "Pam Giese" Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? Message-ID: <001c01bda425$1bf61820$dc5d90d1@pgiese> Dallas writes:>>Do you recall in LIGHT ON THE PATH there is a >> statement made by the writer that for the aspirant a point is >> reached when the vibration of emotion, of life, seems to come to >> an end, a stillness. This is then seemingly an "Abyss." But >> once past, the life of the disciple continues (perhaps on a >> different level of attention) and new vistas open for the >> aspiring and thinking soul. > Jerry:Could be more of a Dark Night of the Soul than an abyss. >These are two different things. I agree with Jerry. St. John of the Cross describes this as a "dryness" when the "sweetness" of spirit seems to be withdrawn. While not pleasant, it's not the abyss. Dallas:>> Is the "Abyss" the fear of seeing one's lower self (the animal >> emotional self linked to the lower mind--or, Kama with >> Kama-Manas) in its true colors and actuality ? Jerry:From our side of the Abyss, the fear is spirituality because >to become aware of our real spiritual self goes with seeing >the death or end of the personality, and the personality >rightly fears the Abyss because it means death to it. > This is well put. The Abyss is much more an intellectual acceptance of obstacles. It is more than "confronting the shadow", to borrow a Jungian term. It's crossing a barrier where you lose everything to gain everything, except that at that moment of crossing (or falling into or crawling out of) you're not that assured of the "gain everything" part. Most folks avoid the Abyss altogether, out of fear or moderation. Others constantly flirt with its boundaries. Still others find themselves flung over the edge. Jerry: Some knowledge does come from thinking, yes. But spiritual >knowledge comes when thinking stops. Spiritual knowledge >or gnosis transcends thinking entirely. Thinking is below >the Abyss while gnosis is above it. Yes. I'd add that not only is gnosis the way out of the abyss, but being aware of a higher level of spiritual being in oneself is probably a sign that you actually crossed an abyss and not just solved an intellectual puzzle or survived an emotional crisis. Back to the Oath. Jerry writes: "The idea is from the GD and OTO and says that before crossing the Abyss one must take an oath to response to every daily event as if it were a direct communication with God (or one's inner god if you prefer). It sounds easy but is very hard to follow through. The main thing is that every aspect of your life becomes meaningful." This reminds me of what Robert Anton Wilson calls "living a magical life" where connectiveness and personal awareness replace the mechanical, scientific view of the world. It is also a point that separates for true occultist from the "armchair" occultist --it's where all the reading of religious texts and philosophies stop being a hobby and become a vocation, a way of life. Pam pgiese@snd.softfarm.com "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light..." From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 08:12:20 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 03:46:05 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources Message-ID: <000401bda424$f8978760$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 30th Dear Alan: Some comments interjected below --- Dallas > Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 6:24 PM > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Re: Some intersting quotaions from Original theosophical sources >W. Dallas TenBroeck writes >>June 29th >> >>Dallas offers a few more quotes for consideration: >> >> >>>From HPB on the T S : >> >>"...the Theosophical Society...It is a brotherhood of humanity, >>established to make away with all and every dogmatic religion >>founded on dead-letter interpretation, and to teach people and >>every member to believe but in one impersonal God; to rely upon >>his (man's) own powers; to consider himself his only saviour; >>to learn the infinitude of the occult psychological powers hidden >>within his own physical man; to develop these powers; and to >>give him the assurance of the immortality of his divine spirit >>and the survival of his soul; > >That may have been her intention. It hasn't happened, and HPB herself >has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. ============================================= DALLAS: I am afraid you are right, but fortuately, not everyone fell under that situation. There are those who study so as to understand the implications of what Theosophy has to say: Consider these: IMHO it is because few have really studied Theosophy, starting with the "Trhee Fundamentals" [ S D I 14 - 18 ] so as to really know them and then use them in studying the reat of that book and any "Theosophical" writing of any kind. Then [ S D I 272-3 ] -- the 1st Item there. on the "Ancient Source of Theosophy" . that is important to grasp. To consider that we are in our innermost essence Spiritual Beings, and therefore we are immortals. And therefore we are "brothers" to all other beings around us. As Soul/Minds we are responsible for the direction we give to our thoughts and choices (which implies that we direct our way of living and acting) That there is a range of evolution which links without breaks all entities, from the minutest of "life-atoms" to the greatest of Gallaxies -- and that link is Life, Intelligence, Consciousness. And, that mankind represents the "Thinking" and "Feeling" stage in this evolutionary scheme -- a stage that is midway between ignorance and wisdom (or total knowledge). We are able to contact, and, to imagine the condition of any being we may select to study and understand -- is that not because all potentials are focused in us as either thought or feeling ? The third important piece of information we can make use of are the 10 points of "oriental psychology" that HPB gives in ISIS UNVEILED, Vol. 2, pp 587-590 - Summarized briefly : -- 1 There are no "miracles"; the Universe is entirely lawful. 2. Nature consists of body (form), soul (indwelling energic form which includes mind and feeling) and Spirit (source of all forces, it is eternal and indestructible -- changeless). 3. Man is also three-fold (follows the same pattern). 4. Magic as a science is a knowledge of these principles. Magic as an art, is an application in practice of that knowledge. 5. When such knowledge is misapplied we have sorcery. When used beneficently we have Wisdom. 6. Mediumship is the opposite of adeptship. The medium is passive. The Adept actively controls his powers and all inferior potencies. 7. The astral Light retains as one of its properties the indelible image (impression) of all things and events. The Adept, using his spiritual vision can see into this at will and thus all knowledge is available to him. 8. Mankind is made up of many qualities and various "races" carry hereditary factors in their physical, psychic, and mental lines. In some groups sorcery is the general tendency, in others there is a tendency to passivity (mediumship), and a third group, seership, tending to adept study and initiation is the tendency. In this present period of ours these several "lines" are intertwined and mixed. 9. One phase of magical skill is the ability to withdraw the inner man ( Astral form) from the physical -- this may occur involuntarily as in the case of a medium. In the case of an Adept it is deliberate and controled. 10. The corner stone of Magic (Wisdom) is an intimate and practical knowledge of magnetism, electricity, and their effect on the human and animal kingdoms as also in all other aspects of nature. Occult properties are universal. To sum up all these in a few words: Magic is spiritual wisdom. It is harmless and beneficent only. The whole of nature is the pupil, ally and servant of the true Magician. One common vital principle pervades the entire manifesation and this is controlable by the perfected human Will. ==================================== > >> to make him regard every man of >>whatever race, color, or creed [as a brother], and to prove to >>him that the only truths revealed to man by superior men (not a >>god) are contained in the Vedas of the ancient Aryas of India, > >Such truths are contained there, but were never *confined* there. ========================================= Dallas : No implication of "confinement" was intended. Truth of itself is free. Descriptins vary, and some are better than others, or are clearer. ======================================== > >>Finally to demonstrate to him that there never were, will be, nor >>are, any miracles; that there can be nothing 'supernatural' in >>this universe, and that on earth, at least, the only god is man >>himself." > >We are still waiting for the demo ..... and what arrogance to suggest that >the only god is "man himself". How the hell can anyone *know* that! ======================================== Dallas: If "god" is OMNIPRESENT, then IT is present in Man too. NO arrogance, but a mere statemnt of fact. It is man's opinions that compartmentalize "God." How can "God" be a "he," "she" or even an IT ? Logically if God is Everything the UNIVERSE IS GOD IN MANIFESTATION. "I and my Father are ONE." Arrogance ? or a statement of fact ? And why should Man not aspire to be ONE with the "Father ?" and, say so ? ========================================= >>"It lies within his powers to become and to continue a god after >>the death of his physical body. Our society receives nothing the >>possibility of which it cannot demonstrate at will. We believe >>in the phenomena but we disbelieve in the constant intervention >>of 'spirits' to produce such phenomena. We maintain that the >>embodied spirit has more powers to produce them than a >>disembodied one. We believe in the existence of spirits, but of >>many classes, the human spirit being but one class of the >>any." -- HPB: "She Being Dead, Yet Speaketh" -- PATH, June, >>July, August 1892. >>(ULT HPB Articles I, pp. 116-7) > >"We maintain?" upon what evidence? Like real life experience, not, "It is written ...." >> ======================================== Dallas: HPB spoke on behalf of the Adepts. They maintain..... on the basis of logic and their experience......... Are we to set limits to the ultimate and the indefinable ? ===================================== >>HPB on "loyalty" : >> >>"H.P.B.is loyal to the death to the Theosophical CAUSE, and to >>those great Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole of >>Humanity into one Brotherhood.....Therefore the degree of her >>sympathies with the "Theosophical Society and Adyar" depends upon >>the degree of the loyalty of that Society to the CAUSE. Let it >>break away from the original lines and show disloyalty in its >>policy to the CAUSE and the original programme of the Society, >>and H.P.B., calling the T.S. disloyal, will shake it off like the >>dust from her feet..... ----------------------------------------------------------------> >I suspect she did this a long while back. MAYBE as a group, as a society. But not for individuals who make their own independent cnnection with Adept Wisdom. Theosophy is not "confined" by, or into the "Theosophical Society" no matter what may be its legal derivation and inheritance. As a pioneer, the T S has had a responsibility and a duty. The way in which it is managed is an ongoing matter. The managers do not necessarily like to be compared with the ideals that Theosophy present for them to use. The membership is responsible for keeping the management straight and in line with Theosophy. How many have that kind of strength ? Why do "revolutions" degenerate into "government ?" ===================================== >>There is no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished and >>replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all >>autonomous, as are the States of America, and all under one head >>President, who, together with H.P.Blavatsky will champion the >>CAUSE against the whole world. Such is the real state of >>things.....Madame Blavatsky does not owe the slightest allegiance >>to a Council which is liable at any moment to issue silly and >>untheosophical ukases.....It is the two Founders and especially >>the President, who have virtually sworn allegiance to the >>Fellows, whom they have to protect, and teach those who want to >>be taught, and not to tyrannize and rule over them." -- HPB "A >>Puzzle from Adyar." LUCIFER, Aug. 1889 >>(ULT --- HPB Articles, Vol. 1, pp. 219-220) >---------------------------------------------------------------- ------ >A sad and forlorn hope which has yet to become anywhere near a >reality. >---------------------------------------------------------------- ------ > >>"...[ the Brothers are everywhere ] ...silent, secret, retiring, >>and who would never divulge themselves entirely to anyone, > >True, perhaps, not "brothers" but "colleagues, readily available to >anyone who can reach them. ============================================ Dallas: The designation "Brothers" was commonly used in early T S days in referring to members of the Adept Brotherhood. Colleagues has a dendency to bring down to our level the concept. The Buddha, for example, or Jesus, as Men that succeeded in making their physical envelope transparent to the inner SPIRIT (which all men share in) are for us EXAMPLES which we respect. They fearlessly exposd for us to see a practical example of how a divineman ought to live and speak. As "immortals and as Spirit" we are all equals, but some have achieved far more than we have done yet, and we (or I at least) sense the difference and would consider it an honor to be their devotee. ============================================== > >> unless >>one did as I did--passed 7 and 10 years probation and given >>proofs of absolute devotion, and that he, or she, would keep >>silent even before a prospect and a threat of death. I fulfilled >>the requirements and am what I am, and this.....no one can take >>away from me." --- HPB ---------------------------------------------------------------- >If asked for proofs of devotion - run like hell. Only those who would >control us ask for this kind of thing. The Truth of which there is no >religion higher is free for all who seek it. No strings. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- Dallas: AGREED -- No one needs be controlled. Theosophy does not ask for that. It teaches Knowledge which leads to self-control. How far can one run from ones' self ? How about studying and undertanding it ? Which "self" is to be studied by what "SELF ?" And, Why ? Hermes the god of ancient wisdom said: "Man know thyself." ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- >>( Letter on Masters, and the early days of the TS in America and >>India. PATH Vol. X, pp 370-1 ) >> >>Offered in the hope of evoking thought and discussion > >With success. >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 12:41:04 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:25:14 EDT From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Plea Message-ID: <152c71b2.35991f7b@aol.com> Alan, As I posted on TI-L, I only saw your plea on TI-L. You must have forgotten to cc the other lists. I hope that by reposting your plea, you will get a better response. Remember that fable about the difference between people in hell and people in heaven? They all had long spoons that prevented them from feeding themselves. The people in hell starved to death trying to feed themselves with long spoons. The people in heaven fed each other with the long spoons. Normally, one should be wary of being "taken." However, you are a long time member of this list, and we should know you and trust you by now. Thoa :o) >From: "Dr A M Bain" >Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:18:22 +0100 >Subject: Plea for help > >Dear lists, > >I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > >Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about >the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if >poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for >a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > >WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? > >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > >I am seriously reviewing my position. > >Alan >- ------ From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 12:55:29 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:30:47 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: HPB herself has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. Message-ID: <359920C7.38B7@azstarnet.com> References: Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > That may have been her intention. It hasn't happened, and HPB herself > has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. Daniel Caldwell comments: No doubt, *some* have made HPB herself "a source of dead-letter interpretation". But at the same time, many have not taken the time and effort to read and study what HPB herself actually wrote. In order to understand and appreciate ANY author, one must attempt to set aside one's own "beliefs and disbeliefs" and really *listen* to what the author is attempting to convey. It is not a matter of believing or disbelieving, accepting or rejecting but it is a matter of trying to UNDERSTAND what the author is writing about. In the case of HPB, one also needs to read enough of her writings in order to understand what she is trying to convey through the medium of words, i.e. what are the "ideas", "concepts" and "themes" that she is writing about. Many students of Theosophy have only superficially read some of her writings and have opted to read other or more "simplified" presentations of Theosophy. Nothing is necessarily wrong with the latter approach but others prefer to read what HPB actually wrote and taught. And I don't think that makes these students automatically "fundamentalists" and "dead-letter" interpreters. *It is far too easy to label people and put them in this or that category.* No doubt, HPB's writings give us only a partial understanding of THEOSOPHIA. But how many of us have fully appreciated what she has given?? And to those who claim she gave only so much, one might say: "Well, give us what she didn't give, show us more. . . ." On second thought, what is the *real* meaning of Dr. Bain's statement? >HPB herself has become a source of dead-letter interpretation. We may all agree with this general but vague statement. But does anyone have good CONCRETE examples to illustrate the point? DETAILS are really important. . . . From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 13:20:30 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:13:21 EDT From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Sheeps and Goats Message-ID: <62ae0b81.35992ac2@aol.com> Dallas: >Of course it depends entirely on who does the interpreting. But, >essentially we do it each for ourselves. We do not entirely >every rely on what others decide is best for us. Not all men are >"sheep." there are a few "goats" who insist on "thinking for >themselves." Ba-a-a-a-a-ahhhhhh, or Nyaaaaaaahhhhh. Why do sheeps and goats sound the same? Maybe there's a fine line between being a sheep and a goat. They look different, but they sound alike. I like to think that I think for myself, but I can find many instances in which I'm a sheep. Ba-a-a-a-a-a-ahhhhhhhhh. Ram-in-uuuuu, Ram-in-uuuuuuuuu (ramming you?). P.S. Enjoyed your Q&A with Jerry. Very understandable. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 13:35:33 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:15:09 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Plea for help Message-Id: <199806301833.NAA14890@proteus.imagiware.com> Alan, As I posted on TI-L, I only saw your plea on TI-L. You must have forgotten to cc the other lists. I hope that by reposting your plea, you will get a better response. Remember that fable about the difference between people in hell and people in heaven? They all had long spoons that prevented them from feeding themselves. The people in hell starved to death trying to feed themselves with long spoons. The people in heaven fed each other with the long spoons. Normally, one should be wary of being "taken." However, you are a long time member of this list, and we should know you and trust you by now. Thoa :o) >From: "Dr A M Bain" >Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:18:22 +0100 >Subject: Plea for help > >Dear lists, > >I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > >Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about >the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if >poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for >a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > >WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? > >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > >I am seriously reviewing my position. > >Alan From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 14:05:25 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 11:54:29 -0700 From: "Brenda S Tucker" Subject: Astrology Message-Id: <199806301852.NAA17183@proteus.imagiware.com> In-Reply-To: <5FnzalABkCm1Ew6A@nellie2.demon.co.uk> References: <199806291911.OAA08387@proteus.imagiware.com> >Alan (Saturn in the first house in Aquarius) aged 65. Alan, I love astrology. Where's your sun? Brenda Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 16:49:49 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:49:20 EDT From: "Visanu Sirish" Subject: Re: Plea for help Message-ID: In a message dated 98-06-30 14:41:31 EDT, you write: << Subj: Plea for help Date: 98-06-30 14:41:31 EDT From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Sender: owner-theos-talk@proteus.imagiware.com Reply-to: theos-talk@theosophy.com Alan, As I posted on TI-L, I only saw your plea on TI-L. You must have forgotten to cc the other lists. I hope that by reposting your plea, you will get a better response. Remember that fable about the difference between people in hell and people in heaven? They all had long spoons that prevented them from feeding themselves. The people in hell starved to death trying to feed themselves with long spoons. The people in heaven fed each other with the long spoons. Normally, one should be wary of being "taken." However, you are a long time member of this list, and we should know you and trust you by now. Thoa :o) >From: "Dr A M Bain" >Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:18:22 +0100 >Subject: Plea for help > >Dear lists, > >I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > >Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about >the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if >poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for >a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > >WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? > >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > >I am seriously reviewing my position. > >Alan ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v45.13) with SMTP; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:41:31 -0400 Received: from proteus.imagiware.com (proteus.imagiware.com [206.215.211.3]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0) with ESMTP id OAA16141; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:41:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by proteus.imagiware.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id NAA14890 for theos-talk-outgoing; Tue, 30 Jun 1998 13:33:35 -0500 Message-Id: <199806301833.NAA14890@proteus.imagiware.com> X-Authentication-Warning: proteus.imagiware.com: majordom set sender to owner-theos-talk using -f Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:15:09 -0700 From: "Thoa Thi-Kim Tran" Subject: Plea for help Sender: owner-theos-talk@proteus.imagiware.com Reply-To: theos-talk@theosophy.com >> From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 17:04:25 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:09:30 +0000 From: "Clare Povers" Subject: Re: Plea for help Message-Id: <199806302202.XAA28960@dns1.enterprise.net> > Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:18:22 +0100 > From: "Dr A M Bain" > Subject: Plea for help > Reply-to: theos-talk@theosophy.com > Dear lists, > > I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > Clare writing in: I have just seen your message as I do not review each day. Have 449 messages in my folder. I did not SEE your original Theos- World Pleas for help and this (i.e. yours..) does not refer to date etc. or original. I cant find it. > Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about > the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if > poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for > a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > > WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? The First Object still vibraring Will endeavour to discover what help you need. If I can help will do so. email me direct if necessary. I will look at messages tomorrow morning about 9.30 a.m. lst July......Namaste Clare ps. I hope I have "worked" the technical aspect of this Pegasus Mail reply correctly > > As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or > respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > I am not in the U.K. but on the misty isle close by. > I am seriously reviewing my position. or are you reviewing a serious position. I hope not C. > MAY YOU BE HAPPY....Please keep your pecker up :-) > Alan > --------- > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 17:19:26 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 14:51:34 -0700 From: "Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? Message-ID: <001d01bda471$818cf400$03e78ccc@nwc.net> June 30th Gerry: I had a nice long answer -- and must have hit the wrong key so it vanished. Aren't you happy. So I'll put in some notes down below. Dal > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Date: Monday, June 29, 1998 9:05 PM > Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? >> If Karma is a fact and all Nature (including each of us from top >> to bottom of our own nature) has existence and is significant, >> then, such an "oath" is superfluous. > >Karma is a "fact" in the same sense that all samsara is fact. >Karma is the law of causality that governs our mayavic world. >The "oath" is a psychological necessity just like the so-called >Bodhisattvic vow. Both are taken to demonstrate our sincerity. =================================== Dal: Agreed. They are props for the personality. Mnemonics. We need not demonstrate our "sincerity" to anyone. A vow taken to one's self ought to be as binding as any other taken "outside." But it rarely is. Like springtime determinations! ================================= > >>Karma operates whether we >> like it or not. > >Agreed. > >>Do you recall in LIGHT ON THE PATH there is a >> statement made by the writer that for the aspirant a point is >> reached when the vibration of emotion, of life, seems to come to >> an end, a stillness. This is then seemingly an "Abyss." But >> once past, the life of the disciple continues (perhaps on a >> different level of attention) and new vistas open for the >> aspiring and thinking soul. > >Could be more of a Dark Night of the Soul than an abyss. >These are two different things. ========================================== Dal: Only a "dark night" (emotional description) to the lower mind. But it has the capacity, with the help of the Higher Mind, (IMHO) to universalize and to dispel this dire anticipation, realizing that it, too, is an immortal and by learning it can dispell fear and the ignorance that causes it. ================================================= >> That book has many valuable and >> suggestive ideas, but is not easily understood. Its values have >> to be dug out of it by many returns and meditations on its >> intent. >> > >Well, from my own experience, having had a mystical experience >before reading it, I had no real trouble understanding it. >Mystical phrases, which are often seemingly paradoxical, >are understood clearly after seeing nonduality directly, even >if only for a few seconds. GOOD -- NOT EVERYONE HAS BEEN SO FORTUNATE. > >> > Here's how I begin to think about what you say: >> >> In a just and fair Universe everyone and everything is >> inter-related and all interactions are always registered and >> reacted to. We are all involved and cannot the facts of our >> present existence, all together. >> >> The alternative is a meaningless chaos in which we and everything >> else is an insane jumble. And there is too much order that we >> can sense to believe that to be the case. [ Or is insanity and >> jumble solely a manifestation of confusion in human consciousness >> ? Are we the only sane person in an otherwise insane and vast >> community ? ] > >The way I see it, Dallas, is that our universe contains both >order and chaos in it. Thus it is both fair and unfair. But >a "fair" universe would be dastardly difficult to define. >There are always two sides to every event between two people, >and what one thinks is fair is often unfair in the eyes of >the other. ======================================== Dallas: Yes, I too see order and seeming Chaos. But I also mentally visualize a greater environment which runs in grand cycles of time, as also of place and being. Are those to be called CHAOS, or is there not hinted in the S D a regularity called the "great Breath" or the "pulsations" that vibrate throughout eternity ? SD I 27 # 8 ) > ============================================== >> The only glitch I can detect is our way of looking at things is: >> Are we impatient to know everything at once ? If so we hope that >> by faith, belief, rite and ritual (devised by someone else and >> which we are not given a clear and logical view of) we will >> somehow stumble on a meaningful "path" through the maze. But, >> Theosophy, gives a very extensive explanation of its solutions >> and reasons. So that there is no ambiguity left in our being >> able to perceive its logic and the way it serves to answer many >> problems in our lives, and fill many gaps of our present >> ignorance. IMHO ] ============================================ > >Whoa! I think you are giving Theosophy too much credit here. >Mr James Long, a past leader of Pasadena and my spiritual >mentor, once told me that I was trying to put truth into >a box with a pretty yellow ribbon around it, and that this >was not only impossible but I was setting myself up for a >big fall. I have since discovered that he was right, and >that no one can ever grasp truth in their hands or put it >into words, not even Theosophy can do that. But it can, and does >point the way in which we can go. > ============================================ DAl: I agree with Mr. Long. We frame our own pictures of these things and sometiems our ability is not as extensive as is needed in terms of ideals, ultimates and universals -- so we find we have to change and enlarge them ultimately as more factors are grasped. I fing this happening with me all the time. But they are not destructive (I find) of the original premises, merely details and add-ons to the picture. Then I find that one has to be so careful in what one says and the illustrations one uses, as they can be so easily misunderstood. So much time is then spent in adjusting ideas between each other. ========================================== >> Is it only mankind that is so independent that no rules apply, or >> that the whole of Nature ceases to have meaning ? >> > >Do animals need to have meaning in their lives? I don't >think so. This is, as Jung says, a human trait. Of course >rules apply. There are rules for both order and for chaos. >We choose them and agreed to them when we came here. =========================================== Dal: I would say that the animal kingdom in all its diversity is illustrative of the many different kinds of instincts that are under development there, which lead ultimately in those immortal "Monads" that are animating the collective intellligence that we call "an animal," ( Potential Men) to their ultimate individualization in another Manvantara yet to come. HPB seems to me to describe this process in some detail beginning Vol. 1, p, 153 to p. 299. She then amplifies the details in Vol. 2. She says that the Secret Doctrine teaches "history" SD I 267 top. A rather significant statement. ============================================ > >> As I see it, Theosophy, and its propositions serves to restore >> intellectual meaning to our lives and being. Are we so confused >> by education and belief (and our fear inducing memories of >> error), that we cannot find any base for stability from which to >> begin ? Is it not possible that the very fact that we quest and >> seek, indicates that at the root of our being, there is something >> that cannot "die ?" That is permanent ? -- in a world of >> constantly shifting shadows ? Its stability induces in us the >> desire to know ? All our difficulties, it seems to me, centers >> around responsibility. Why is that ? >> > >I don't question what you say here, Dallas. The search for >meaning is a nobel one. But you always want to hold onto >order and throw away chaos. This is like trying to hold >onto high and throw away low. They only exist in their >relationship together and you can't have one without the >other. Fair and unfair are two sides of one coin. They are >the polar ends of a duality and co-exist together. You >can transcend both, but you can't keep one and throw away >the other. > =========================================== Dal: It is not "chaos" that I would throw away at all, but behind either order or chaos must stand a larger background that encompasses them and of which we have only the S D to describe their probable arrangements -- which are under the primary Law of Karma, as I uinderstand it (not human karma) but a UNIVERSAL KARMA. As "pairs of opposites" they cannot be "thrown away." they need each other, but the fact that we can visualize them both, indicates that there is something in "us" which transcends those limits. Or am I wrong ? ============================================== >> What is an Abyss? > >Essentially, it refers to a Ring-Pass-Not of some kind. >These rings are what hems us in, keeps us within certain >boundaries of existence. Without them we would indeed >have chaos reign so they are good things. But they hem >us in and restrict us so they are bad things. Like most >things in life, they are both good and bad depending on >how we look at them ============================================= Dal. (SD I 90, 129-135) The "Ring Pass-Not" in the 'Book of the Dead' of Egypt, as I understand it, refers to the abyss between our life and the after-death states. It also refers to the stages of Initiation whereby one passes up the ladder of becoming wise, and the, wiser. Each life, for those who are determined, in retrospect shows evidence of this process. There would be little use pasing through a ceremony of which we could not understand the meaning and which we were unprepared for. I believe that the determined life is one in which one gradually secure information, and then through mediation on that, we see that which is linked to what we already are conversant with and convinced of. Then, does this not lead us to an understaning of what must come when one is ready to accept responsibility on a grander scale ? The fact that this stage is described indicates to me that there are those who have passed through it consciousnly and are able to describe its purpose, as well as its being. What man has done, Man can do ! ======================================== > >> Theosophy proposes that we are a mixture of both: A combination >> of two streams of consciousness: the "descending God," and the >> ascending "Animal Instinct" ( or consciousness on its personal >> way to "divine existence" ). I am afraid that my ability to >> express this may be faulty. To me the distinction is clear. >> > >No, not faulty. I agree with this. > >> Is the "Abyss" the fear of seeing one's lower self (the animal >> emotional self linked to the lower mind--or, Kama with >> Kama-Manas) in its true colors and actuality ? >> > >>From our side of the Abyss, the fear is spirituality because >to become aware of our real spiritual self goes with seeing >the death or end of the personality, and the personality >rightly fears the Abyss because it means death to it. ================================================= Dal: Have you ever considered (as I did just now) that the personality is made up of billions of immoral life-atoms -- of monads, each on their path of progression, and that hey have joined together as a cooperative, to enable one among them ( ourselves, as a unit of consciousness ) to use them and to gain for itself enligtenment -- self-conscious-spirituality -- or Benevolent Wisdom ? When the Personality (our lower mind) grasps the idea that it, too, is an immortal under independent self-instruction and self-education in what is apparently an endless chain of experieince, it feels a sense of security, of satisfaction -- all the effort is not wasted. There is now a meaning to living. We are not alone. We find there are brother pilgrims with whom we can relate. etc.... It knows then that the dissolution of the body will bring to its many parts a space of rest, but only temprarily, as they will have to reassemble ,and provide the returning Ego (from Devachan) with the fresh personality, reassembled anew ,for their joint continued education. It will then fear death no more than we fear going to sleep each night. ========================================= > >> I can understand this to be distasteful, (to all of us) and >> seeing even a portion of our memories may result in rejection. >> But that is fear, which can be overcome by knowledge; and >> knowledge comes from thinking. >> > >Some knowledge does come from thinking, yes. But spiritual >knowledge comes when thinking stops. Spiritual knowledge >or gnosis transcends thinking entirely. Thinking is below >the Abyss while gnosis is above it. ===================================== I think this is more a matter of description than of actuality. Each would describe it in their own words. There is innate knowledge, there is acquired knowledge. some knowledge is reasoned, and more may be acquired by profound meditation on all the assembled puzzling bits of evidence that our memory can display before us. to me this is strong evidence of purpose and a communality of method. Modern psychologists do not take, as Theosopy dies, the Ego center in man (The Higher EGO -- Buddhi-Manas) to be an immortal. hey do not regard reincatrnation as possible. to them the dispersal at death of the components of the personality is final. They do not regard the immortal "Atom" as symptomatic of an un-dying Consciousness. Theosophy adopts that view, and extends it to the evidence offered by the Adepts. ======================================== > >> Thought is an assistant, not an enemy of the Lower Self. It >> assists in making a transformation to something sublime. [It is >> likened to a teacher assisting a pupil,... > >Thought is the slayer of the mind (?? or something like >that). Thought and thinking is oriented to the mental >plane which is why consciousness on the causal plane >seems like a coma, and consciousness on the spiritual >planes is unthinkable. Thinking takes us so far, but >then must be left behind. ======================================== Dal: VOICE OF THE SILENCE, p. 2 : "The Mind is the great Slayer of the Real. Let the Disciple slay the Slayer." Question: Who or what is the "disciple ?" What is his nature and power ? How is that the mind slays the "real ?" Is it the memory and the earlier adopted conclusions that "slay" through continured delusions ? Do we not have to un-learn certain things ? It is difficult and painful, often. I have never felt that consciousness on the "causal plane" -- do you mean Buddhi ? -- is anything else but an extension of pure Manas -- a potential to regard events and Past, Present and Future as totally inter-related. As to Spiritual thought and or planes -- Is the key to those not opened by active benevolence and brotherhood -- or so the Adepts seem to repeatedly stress ? If you mean Intuition then I agree. But Intuition is "all-knowingness." The personality, to participate in such a condition, has to give up its selfish isolation, and desire to be related to others who are its peers, to be educated and refined to an ethical level, so that all its life is no longer focussed on self-defence, but now is brought to be focused on brotherhood and benevolence only. =============================== >> >> It is said that the "battle is in the mind." We have to >> eventually fight out the field of our own past doing and of our >> early choices. No one else is going to do it for us. Also, >> there is no "escape." >> > >Agreed. But I do not agree with the notion that we have to >suffer for every wrong done in the past and be rewarded for >every good done in the past, for then our future would be >infinitely long and all the great mystics or jivamuktas would >be wrong. I believe in the promise of release or moksha >from the Wheel of Necessity, and this means that karma >must be comsumable. ======================================= Dal: How else do we as a part of nature close the books on the disturbances we have made ? Responsibility and knowledge enable us to assist in makig ourselves trouble free, as I see it. And adjusting the past is only reasonable. Who but a coward would desire to escape it ? If we have made errors in the past that we now fear the consequences of, why is it that we fear at all if at the end of the life we now live we are going to be snuffed out anyway ? Is it not this inner fear and certainty that we are at the "bar" of nature that which moves us to desire to "escape ?" But in a "just and fair" Universe why should we allowed the sole luxury of a forgiveness, and a dispensation from paying our debts ? Out of that idea the whole basis for the politics of Church intermixture with State arose during the reign of Constantine. Confession, remission of sins, etc... emerged and has been used for centuries as a basis for welding the attention of the "faithful" who are from early childhood enjoined from "qusestioning." Have faith ! Faith is what ? Prove it ! You are a heretic -- Be excommunicated ! Thank goodness for excommunication. =========================================== > >> So many religions are built on the hope that we can escape ! One >> of the most recent, of which a history remains is that of the >> choice of Emperor Constantine. He believed bishop Eusebius >> (that God would pardon him and remit his "sins from punishment" >> if he would become a Christian and establish the Church, >> politically, as a State Religion in the Empire. Out of fear >> that he would suffer from his terrible crimes towards his family >> and nation, he embraced Christianity and made it the State >> Religion of the Roman Empire so as (he hoped) to escape the >> results (and just personal suffering due to him) for those deeds. >> Did it work ? What are the effects ? Should one "believe" in an >> institution that advocates doctrines that remit sins and does >> nothing for the victims ? Who makes restitution to them ? >> >I see little difference in this and a pious Theosophist >who does good works in order to accure personal merit for >a better life next time. ====================================== OK but Theosophy in practice is the service of others not of one's self, save as a member of humanity. We all advance together and we assist others to assist us. Or am I completely off the track ? ====================================== > > >> It plunged Europe and the rest of our world into a darkness of >> blind faith and blind belief from which we have not yet fully >> recovered. Those who did not "believe" were ruthlessly >> exterminated, tortured, victimized, for the next 1200 years or >> so. >> >But the exoteric doctrine of karma did much the same in India. ========================================== Dal: I lived in India for over 35 years, and never found that anyone there employed the idea of karma to try to escape that which everyone knew well: one eventually pays for one's errors. It is true that some Brahmins who were falso to their own superior Knowledge tried to impose by fear on some of the populace and cmpellthen to do actions which their own shastras and Vedas prohibit. They, like every other kind of priest in the world, will have to account for that individually to KARMA. > > >Have to go. Jerry S. >======================================= ME TOO FOR THE MOMENT Thank you enjoyed this DALLAS ========================================== > > From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 17:49:25 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 18:43:21 EDT From: "Marshall Hemingway III" Subject: possible sources of help for Alan Bain Message-ID: <3268aee2.35996a0f@aol.com> In a message dated 98-06-30 17:50:23 EDT, Alan write: << Dear lists, > >I recently sent out, in desperation, a plea for help to four "theos" lists. > >Apart from a few existing friends - two of whom didn't even ask about >the circumstances - I had ONE, repeat ONE response from a caring, if >poor subscriber, who was brotherly and sympathetic, which counts for >a lot, and is the true spirit of the theosophical ideal. > >WHAT PRICE THE FIRST OBJECT? > >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." > >I am seriously reviewing my position. > >Alan >> Dear Dr. Bain, This is the first I've heard of this. Are you ill? If you've maintained your esoteric connections via organizations, the TS, the LCC, the Co-M, the White Eage Lodge or the ULT could be a source of help to you. I'm just throwing the names out off the top of my head, not knowing what you've been active in. Maybe someone from one of groups in which you've been active could come round and look in on you. Is Cornwall near London? Perhaps you could email one or more of the groups you were/or are associated with and contact an old friend or friends who could help you. How about your own group, Theosophy Int'l? Any local members of your group who could be of assistance? I don't know what the problem is but if it's a physical ailment, you ought to really call or email the National Health Service. Department of Health http://www.open.gov.uk/ Just some ideas off the cuff. Lmhem111 From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 18:04:31 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 17:05:37 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kym Smith" Subject: Courage, except in the face of women Message-Id: <199806302305.RAA19021@mailmx.micron.net> Dallas wrote: >The Buddha, for >example, or Jesus, as Men that succeeded in making their physical >envelope transparent to the inner SPIRIT (which all men share in) >are for us EXAMPLES which we respect. They fearlessly exposd for >us to see a practical example of how a divineman ought to live >and speak. As "immortals and as Spirit" we are all equals, but >some have achieved far more than we have done yet, and we (or I >at least) sense the difference and would consider it an honor to >be their devotee. As a woman, I do not feel "it an honor to be their devotee." I can see how men would as most philosophies center around the potential of males. However, I believe that these holy "Men" - as you put it, Dallas - are lacking in some very basic life lessons. Buddha said that if women became prominent in Buddhism, Buddhism would only last one thousand years. Buddha resisted women being allowed "into the club." HPB on at least one occasion mentioned how her being 'just a woman' was one of the reasons she would never be allowed completely "into the club." Remember that famous line in Letters - "She does rave betimes." Oh, please. Now, some men on this list may say "And damn right - women shouldn't be let in with their constant PMSing all the time." Well, what else to expect when some of these men on this list can't even begin to adopt new tasks such as using gender-inclusive language. I wonder how someone is going to grasp a titantic Truth if the use of he/she frustrates them. Apples and oranges, you say? Not if Truth is Compassion. Many men and women may hold such holy "Men" in high honor - but I have a real hard time wondering just how "enlightened" someone can be if they got freaked out by the women who had the audacity of pulling up a chair and getting right comfy. Kym From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 19:04:33 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:57:31 -0400 From: "Annette Rivington" Subject: Re: possible sources of help for Alan Bain Message-ID: <35997B6B.4A54@globalserve.net> References: <3268aee2.35996a0f@aol.com> Dear Alan: Could you or somebody pllllease post your original message? The suspense is killing me. I don't know how I can help, but I would like to think I would try. You said: >As is said in some parts of the UK of people who talk but do not act or >respond, "He is all mouth and trousers." Amazing eh, how you find out two things when you ask for help - 1) who your true friends are, and 2) how everyone is dealing with some problem whether imagined or real that takes up their time and energy. Right now you are in competition with the World Cup (Football there, Soccer here). My company is smart and has it running on a big TV in the cafeteria all day. I asked one of the male coffee group why he thought they did that. His opinion is that management figure people will stay home and watch it, so they show it at work. I have an interesting story that might cheer you up. On one of my disasterous returns "home" to try to live, we were living in Chelmsford and my "boyfriend" was hamering a trellis on the front wall of the house and neither of us realized it was Cup Final Saturday. The guy next door (a big sucker) came marching out, jumped the fence, picked up my boyfriend and threw him against the wall saying he would do worse if he didn't stop the noise that was spoiling his concentration on the cup final. I called the police but they seemed sympathetic with the other guy. You've just got to get your priorities straight, Alan :) :) >I am seriously reviewing my position. Well, as I said before, Alan, from the school of hard knocks, you come in alone and are darned lucky if you don't go out alone. I'm always thinking of you, as you know, but fat lot of material good that does, I know :) Hi LmHem111 > Maybe someone from one of groups in which you've been active could come round > and look in on you. Is Cornwall near London? Perhaps you could email one or > more of the groups you were/or are associated with and contact an old friend > or friends who could help you. Sorry to say LmHem111, but Cornwall is the farthest from London, West-East that is. It would have to be local help. > I don't know what the problem is but if it's a physical ailment, you ought to > really call or email the National Health Service. Interesting that the NHS has a web page! You know if you want to get medical help before death's door in England, you have to go Private nowadays, and that takes multi-moolah! If you want a government subsidized dwelling, you have to wait a few decades. It's a real prob. OK, Alan, I have no idea what your problem is, and I know you think you are succumbing to what can be a debilitating disease, and I know it's easy to talk from miles away, but please try to remember that you have the power of mind over matter and you can manifest the rest of your life as simply as you did the first part and that the universe in it's abundance will come through for you. Love Annette From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 21:19:38 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 19:09:42 PDT From: "Sophia TenBroeck" Subject: Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. []originaly sent 980618] Message-ID: <19980701020943.17682.qmail@hotmail.com> > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 20:36:12 -0400 > From: "Jerry Schueler" > Subject: Re: Fw: No pain, no gain IS THIS UNIVERSE RUN BY LAW ? Dear Jerry S. In your recent posting you have made similar references to the man made law and natural, universal law that were made earlier this month. And as you do not ask questions or make reference to my posting of June 18th - "Karma, Universal Law and Man Made Law." In that I tried to answer some of these points, I wonder if you have read it. May I request you to go back and read it. If then there are comments and questions, it may be worth responding once again. Otherwise you repeat yourself and I repeat myself, and the others on the lists, wonder where we have bye passed each other. Looking for your response, if needs be I shall repost if you have wiped it out. All the best, Sophia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 23:04:32 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:28:09 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Courage, except in the face of women Message-ID: <3599ACC8.503C@netgsi.com> References: <199806302305.RAA19021@mailmx.micron.net> > > Many men and women may hold such holy "Men" in high honor - but I have a > real hard time wondering just how "enlightened" someone can be if they got > freaked out by the women who had the audacity of pulling up a chair and > getting right comfy. > > Kym > Amen. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 23:13:48 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:51:28 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: "Life is not fair.." Message-ID: <3599A430.1652@netgsi.com> References: > For the "Reincarnating Ego" life is fair because it > is reaping reward and punishment from its previous > lifetimes, which presumably it is aware of in some fashion. > Well, I for one don't think so. I think that the R. E. reaps data/experience, and has no concept of "fair" or "unfair" at all. Fairness is a human (ego) concept. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 23:19:32 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:53:14 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: Karma, Universal Law and Man made law. []originaly sent 980618] Message-ID: <3599B2AA.2F59@netgsi.com> References: <19980701020943.17682.qmail@hotmail.com> > Dear Jerry S. > > In your recent posting you have made similar references to the man > made law and natural, universal law that were made earlier this month. We make both man/woman-made laws and so-called universal laws. Who else? > And as you do not ask questions or make reference to my posting of June > 18th - "Karma, Universal Law and Man Made Law." In that I tried to > answer some of these points, I wonder if you have read it. May I > request you to go back and read it. If then there are comments and > questions, it may be worth responding once again. > > Sorry. I missed it. > Looking for your response, if needs be I shall repost if you have wiped > it out. All the best, Sophia > Sorry to trouble you, but you need to repost. Thanks Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 23:27:49 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:49:14 -0400 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Re: = Oath of the Abyss = What does it mean ? Newcessity ? Message-ID: <3599B1BA.1274@netgsi.com> References: <001d01bda471$818cf400$03e78ccc@nwc.net> > >Could be more of a Dark Night of the Soul than an abyss. > >These are two different things. > ========================================== > > Dal: Only a "dark night" (emotional description) to the lower > mind. But it has the capacity, with the help of the Higher Mind, > (IMHO) to universalize and to dispel this dire anticipation, > realizing that it, too, is an immortal and by learning it can > dispell fear and the ignorance that causes it. > ================================================= > Dallas, have you gone through the Dark Night of the Soul yet? I did. It wasn't pretty. And I would never say "only" a dark night. The whole point of the Dark Night is that the ego is cut off from the Ego or higher self and is filled with doubt. I was obsessed with reading and study until the dawn finally rose for me. > Dallas: > Yes, I too see order and seeming Chaos. But I also mentally > visualize a greater environment which runs in grand cycles of > time, as also of place and being. Are those to be called CHAOS, > or is there not hinted in the S D a regularity called the "great > Breath" or the "pulsations" that vibrate throughout eternity ? > SD I 27 # 8 ) > > Time and space form cosmos or order. This orderly cosmos rests on a sea of Chaos. Light shines only in a background of darkness. Existence only makes sense in terms of nonexistence. HPB's vision of planetary chains involving and evolving through manvantaras is her Theosophical description of cosmos, but Darkness & Chaos are behind it all and just as valid. > DAl: I agree with Mr. Long. We frame our own pictures of these > things and sometiems our ability is not as extensive as is needed > in terms of ideals, ultimates and universals -- so we find we > have to change and enlarge them ultimately as more factors are > grasped. I fing this happening with me all the time. But they > are not destructive (I find) of the original premises, merely > details and add-ons to the picture. Then I find that one has to > be so careful in what one says and the illustrations one uses, as > they can be so easily misunderstood. So much time is then spent > in adjusting ideas between each other. > OK. We seem to agree that our worldview must also change to conform to our experiences. > Dal: I would say that the animal kingdom in all its diversity is > illustrative of the many different kinds of instincts that are > under development there, which lead ultimately in those immortal > "Monads" that are animating the collective intellligence that we > call "an animal," ( Potential Men) to their ultimate > individualization in another Manvantara yet to come. HPB seems > to me to describe this process in some detail beginning Vol. 1, > p, 153 to p. 299. She then amplifies the details in Vol. 2. She > says that the Secret Doctrine teaches "history" SD I 267 top. A > rather significant statement. > OK. The only difference between a mineral, a plane, an animal and a human being is time. > Dal: > It is not "chaos" that I would throw away at all, but behind > either order or chaos must stand a larger background that > encompasses them and of which we have only the S D to describe > their probable arrangements -- which are under the primary Law of > Karma, as I uinderstand it (not human karma) but a UNIVERSAL > KARMA. > Behind duality is nonduality. Karma is the law of causality in our dualistic world. Nonduality doesn't need karma. The SD says little to nothing about nonduality except to call it the name Beness, which is as good as any. > As "pairs of opposites" they cannot be "thrown away." they need > each other, but the fact that we can visualize them both, > indicates that there is something in "us" which transcends those > limits. Or am I wrong ? You are exactly right. It all must be transcended. > Dal. (SD I 90, 129-135) > The "Ring Pass-Not" in the 'Book of the Dead' of Egypt, as I > understand it, refers to the abyss between our life and the > after-death states. It also refers to the stages of Initiation > whereby one passes up the ladder of becoming wise, and the, > wiser. Each life, for those who are determined, in retrospect > shows evidence of this process. > There are many such ring-pass-nots. I think that we were refering to the Great Outer Abyss (or Veil of the Abyss) which is the ring-pass-not for the human mind (at a point called Daath). > The fact that this stage is described indicates to me that there > are those who have passed through it consciousnly and are able to > describe its purpose, as well as its being. What man has done, > Man can do ! Agreed. Consciousness is what passess through the Abyss, not thinking. Jerry S. From ???@??? Tue Jun 30 23:34:31 1998 Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 21:28:49 -0700 From: "Daniel H Caldwell" Subject: Dear Alan Bain Message-ID: <3599BB01.61FA@azstarnet.com> References: <199806302305.RAA19021@mailmx.micron.net> <3599ACC8.503C@netgsi.com> Dear Alan, Please let all of us know what is going on. I think I can say that all of us on Theos-talk are concerned. I didn't see the original post you wrote. Please let us know how we can possibly help. Daniel Caldwell