From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 06:42:42 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 23:42:42 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601064242.006b4674@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: TI first object At 06:24 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >>1. To put into practice the fact that we are all parts of one universal >human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, >class, or color. > >>[Suggested revision] > >>TI members please comment - ALL members! > > >Sounds good. What about the word 'universal'? Isn't that a bit pompous? >Is 'one human family' not a sufficient expression, suggesting an inclusivity >of all humans (if not, then what about 'worldwide human family'?) > >Martin > > Alexis comments: Martins suggestion re: "universal" is an excellent one. Homo Sapiens, or humanity, is limited to this one planet. Pretending to universality is a bit exaggerated, we have enough trouble on planet Earth. I strongly support Martin's suggestion. From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:34:42 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:34:42 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601083442.006ac6fc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: TI first object At 11:49 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >This is getting silly. We will all be in devachan before we get this >settled. Why not make the TI first object: > >To put into practice the fact that we are a part of humanity without regard >to external or social distinctions. > >Chuck MTI, FTSA > >Chuck; That's brilliant! Let's go for it! Alan..are you looking? alexis From TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 1 22:58:44 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:58:44 +0100 From: Alan Message-Id: Subject: TI first object Mime-Version: 1.0 Suggestions and/or agreements trickle in. Not enough replies yet for any kind of consensus. Maybe I will try and do a kind of "digest" of comments received in a short while and post to theos-buds. All comments so far sent in seem to have been received - yours is not forgotten! Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From cv576@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Jun 1 04:03:00 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 00:03:00 -0400 From: cv576@freenet.carleton.ca (Donald Guenen) Message-Id: <199606010403.AAA06696@freenet6.carleton.ca> Subject: Help! Could somebody please tell me how to unsubscribe from this list? PLEASE and thank you!!! -- Donald Guenen - cv576@freenet.carleton.ca May you Dwell in the Light! From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 02:12:46 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 22:12:46 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606010414.AA15265@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Are we all in agreement? >Please be tolerant, and respect the opinions and religious views of all >the list members! > >Thank You - > >John E. Mead jem@vnet.net roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 02:27:57 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 22:27:57 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606010430.AC15438@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: >Since it's original formation in July 1993, Theos-L has been a >discussion list created not to divide, but to unite the members >John E. Mead >jem@vnet.net >76220.131@compuserve.com > Perhaps those who do not respect this idea could have the decency to unsubscribe? Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From eldon@theosophy.com Sat Jun 1 11:43:07 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 04:43:07 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601114307.0069f658@mail.deltanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Chuck: >Joe Sixpack is exactly who the founders had in mind. >Right now the TS is a debating society for people who know more about >sanskrit than about living and it has damned little that relates to >everyday life. We can speak of Theosophy for the millions, but that's only one aspect of it. It can be applied to social reform, to changing the everyday lives of people in general. That work is fine, but it is something that anyone can do. There's another important work, and that involves the preservation and carrying forward of the theosophical doctrines, as a living tradition. That work provides an opportunity for people, when they feel the attraction, to draw closer to the Mysteries. Carrying forward the doctrines as a living tradition, there needs to be people that have learned them and made them a part of their lives. These people provide an opportunity to pass on an understanding of the philosophy that cannot be approached simply by reading books. >We are about to see Theosophy for the Millions. Just wait until we can all >post to the newsgroup (with any luck I will solve a problem with my com >program and be on in couple of days) and the newsgroup gets hundreds of >postings a day, most of them from people who are decidedly not theosophists. But what is it that you or I have to *offer* the millions? Are we firmly established on the Path, and actually expecting to draw *millions* to find the way? Can we do what great teachers haven't? I don't think so. On a more basic level, if we're simply dealing with social work, with political reform, with adjustments to the external lives of people to make things a bit more peaceful and harmonious, we certainly could do this. But so could Christians, Buddhists, Marxists, Humanists, Spiritualists, and Anarchists. There's nothing special to the theosophical doctrines that is needed to do this work. >We can't hide in our little holes anymore and content ourselves with boring >each other to death with rounds and chains. There is a huge world out there >that needs us and if we cannot make ourselves relevant to them, they will go >somewhere else. We are about to come blasting into the world and that means >that we are going to have to talk about practical applications of what we >know. But we've never been hiding in holes. We talk in one language to joe sixpack, and in other languages to people of other backgrounds, in other contexts. In a theosophical class, intended for students of Theosophy, it's right and appropriate to study the doctrines and to work on new inner realizations and insights. This is not elitism nor ignoring suffering humanity. We have individual ways to grow and develop in life, and we express our special natures to the world in our own unique ways. Some people may express themselves as politicians. Others as artists, educators, scholars, scientists, etc. None of these approaches is wrong, unless an individual has not found what is right for him, and is doing something that his heart feels is wrong. It's wrong, I think, to judge the value of someone's contribution to the world in terms of quantity, in terms of numbers of people affected. The measure is in terms of how true someone is to their own heart and inner calling. This is something that others cannot tell; each of us has to look within and be our own judges. I agree that some superficial aspect of Theosophy, something with a theosophical flavor to it, would have mass appeal, and do good for the millions. But I'd hope that for people ready for something more, that we don't close the gate to the teachings, to the esoteric philosophy, hiding or obscuring the public availability of the teachings. >Hang on. It's gonna be a hell of a ride. It'll be wild. This type of work is good, as good as any other, and I wish you well with it. It's not the only show in town, though, so don't start tearing down posters for the quiet, still, unseen attractions that a few people of deep heart slip away to attend. -- Eldon From eldon@theosophy.com Sat Jun 1 12:20:04 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 05:20:04 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601122004.006bf870@mail.deltanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: T.S. in a Rut Bjorn: >>I'd agree that it is in a rut. But I think that the problem is >>that it stops short of being a spiritual organization, of making >>some living connection with the Mysteries. It remains a book >>study club, and does not serve the spiritual needs of its >>members or its community. >Seems like you see this clearly. Perhaps it is likely to remain a book study >club. To transform it to an organization that would serve the spiritual >needs of its members would take a new impulse from the sponsoring masters. >If that occurred, it would probably not be recognized as such by the >leadership, or a majority of the members, so, what can be done? The burden, I think, is upon the individual members to take responsibility for their lives, and to approach the spiritual themselves. They have to get something going in themselves, in order to become in touch with the work of the Masters, and make their lodges and theosophical groups living centers of the spiritual. The books contain various terms, concepts, ideas. Behind the dead-letter of the books are buried significant esoteric doctrines. Working through to the jewels and nuggets of gold under the surface dross, we can become ennobled and start to tread a valid approach to the Path. Things like leadership of the theosophical group, its organization and structure, etc. are all superficial, and insignificant. What's important is our giving expression to the high, the holy, the sacred, the most spiritual side of life. There is much that does not exist in the world, simply because there's no one ready and able to give it expression. The Masters, I think, work to express in the world these same higher qualities. They're more adept at doing it than we are. I tend to think that we are individually responsible for making our own spiritual impulse in the world, and don't need to wait for one from the Masters to give us a shove. Our connection to the spiritual is inward, direct, immediate, and does not need someone outside ourselves, even Masters, Bodhisattvas, or Buddhas to power us and keep us going. (This is not to say, though, that there's no value to having a Guru. Having a spiritual teacher is highly important, at times, depending upon our karma, needs, and current lessons in life.) -- Eldon From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 03:58:25 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 23:58:25 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606010600.AA16595@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Thank you Eldon! Your appearance on the seen gives me some hope! You are talking from your heart and from an inner realization. And you are touching on very central issues. What theosophists have become is what people are going to associate with theosophy. Bjorn > >There's another important work, and that involves the preservation >and carrying forward of the theosophical doctrines, as a living >tradition. That work provides an opportunity for people, when they >feel the attraction, to draw closer to the Mysteries. > >Carrying forward the doctrines as a living tradition, there needs >to be people that have learned them and made them a part of their >lives. These people provide an opportunity to pass on an understanding >of the philosophy that cannot be approached simply by reading books. > roxendal@alpinet.net From martinle@lainet.com Sat Jun 1 06:00:44 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 23:00:44 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: to Chuck & Alexis Please brother and sisters I repeat my statement about Alexis and Chuch. I simply send their e-mail to my wonderful Mac's trash. On the other hand, I do enjoy reading theosophical comments, ideas, and opinions . . . even though I do not contribute almost anything, let me tell you some of your ideas I had shared during my lectures and meetings in various Lodges and Study Groups. Please do not get discouraged for the jokes, silly lines of Chuck and Alexis emails. simply delete them without thinking . . . It is call VIVEKA, in sanskrit defined as Nitya anitya vastu viveka ha ( to discern the between what is from what is not). Plato was very emphatic on this subject of personal censorship, it is intelligence at best, to build a good and positive environment. Your brother Martin Leiderman, a theosophist in LA From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 06:49:06 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 23:49:06 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601064906.006b831c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 06:49 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >The post below is an example of the kind of discussion that has taken up a >majority of the space on this list since I joined recently. Since this is a >public list we have to assume that people who are seeking spiritual >nourishment now and then sign up in the hope of finding something that can >help them on their path. The word "theosophy" carries a promise of >enlightenment. > >Since this is a Theosophy list with many knowledgable and intelligent >members, it is only natural for a new list member (such as myself) to see >the discussions as SOMEWHAT representative of "Theosophy" in general. If the >intention was to cause maximum damage to the reputation of Theosophy and >theosophists, I could not design a better strategy than what is now being >carried out by a few dominant list members. > >Bjorn > >At 02:59 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >>> >>You know of course that if you had lived during Blavatsky's lifetime you'd >>have called her an "atrocious one" or a "kickfighter"! I do suggest that it >>might be polite if you'd "butt out' of what is obviously a personal >>continuing conversation in a jocular vein. You don't have the faintest idea >>what the continuing conversation is all about so why impose upon it? If you >>had even a faint idea why Paul Johnson is upset with Daniel Caldwell or why >>I am upset with Liesel F.Deutsch you'd have some grounds to discuss it. But >>you don't so, I repeat, why impose yourself when you have no knowledge of >>the causes or situation? >> >>alexis >>> Alexis comments: I strongly stand by what I wrote above. Bjorn wrote a totally uncalled for comment to Chuck Cosimano in regard to one of his "one liners", suggesting that Chuck belonged in Montana with the "other unabombers and trouble makers", so I told him he was rude, and I still think he's rude, and that what I wrote was entirely appropriate. There are getting to be all too many self-appointed censors on this list. It's a shame. >> >> >> >roxendal@alpinet.net > > > From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 06:56:45 1996 Date: Fri, 31 May 1996 23:56:45 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601065645.006bc9a0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Therapeutic Touch At 07:12 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Oy! I got the password from Ripco, but now my old com program is doing weird >things and I can't seem to get to it. I have a call in to my computer expert >and hopefully she can fix the problem. >And then, comes the revolution! >Poor Bjorn. I don't think he has much experience with Americans and of all >the ones to start with...! > >Chuck the Atrocious >Heretic >Troublemaker > >Chuck: Michael got me a new way to get to it today and when he's around tomorrow I'll attempt it. He's going home to Guernsey on Monday. We just couldn't find him a job without a legitimate immigrant visa. The biggest problem is that he's a truly expert tech supports person with 11 years experience but no degree. In England it doesn't matter, but you know the U.S. I can't wait to get the access to the alt. theosophy. It seems to me that there are all too many self-appointed censors around here and too many people who feel that somebody appointed them as arbiters of the words and thoughts of others. I have always, and will always do and say exactly what I think is right for me to do and say, and I will always speak the truth as I see it. If others disagree, that is of course their right. But it is not my problem. There is some positive movement in the house situation. Nothing final, but things are looking up. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:15:32 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:15:32 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601071532.006bfbe4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? At 07:12 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Well, you remember what I heard in reference to the senile one at the '86 >convention. >By the way, have you had a chance to visit the world's best website >http://home.earthlink.net/~boogienation/psionic.htm > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >Chuck: What in heaven's name does "boogienation" mean? I copied the address down and will access it tomorrow. John brought home some kind of fancy tech gadget and he's going to copy my hard disk onto tape tomorrow too. I really spend almost no time "cruising the web", between writing, and researching, and painting, and caring for my counseling patients, and corresponding with some three hundred students around the world, and Shamanic work, and playing with Denali, I just don't have time to "Play on the Web" and read too. I just got a new AIDS patient and so I'll be busy with him for a while. Considering what an gawd-awful son of a bitch some of the people on this board think me, I get a lot of good stuff done. I'll bet you and I between us do far more actual good in the world than all the people who brag about being "Chelas of the Masters" put together. Old Joseph G. MIller (The Zen Roshi and Sufi Murshid) always told me that my primary function was to be a spiritual catalyst, though he actually said "spiritual shit disturber", and I am certainly following his predictions. Shame you never met him, you'd have loved him. He was the President of the San Francisco Lodge for many years. He was also a very good friend of Grady Mc Murphy. He called John and I and our special friend Jay "The Unholy Trinity". Oh, as you suggested I skimmed Jinarajadasa's "First Principles of Theosophy" this afternoon. To quote Dorothy Parker...."Tonstant weader fwowed up!" The racial stuff is incredibly bad! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:21:55 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:21:55 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601072155.006bd370@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Will the real Masters KH and M please stand up At 07:13 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Worse than read it. Gerda and I have a friend who lives near Olcott and is a >member and he is a devotee of Lizzy Prophet. He had us over to his place to >see a video of her and it was ridiculous! The woman is a con artist and her >followers are imbeciles. It was all Gerda and I could do to hold off >laughing until we got into the car (he is a friend after all) and then we >both were literally doubled over for ten minutes at least. >I haven't done that since I had club business that took me into a store for >cross-dressers and I barely managed to keep a straight face there. >If poor Bjorn believes in that garbage, he is going to regret being on this >list real quick. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >Chuck: Oh I agree. Do you know about old man Ballard and his wife (they started the "I am" Movement) and he went to jail for swindling altogether too many little old ladies out of their pensions. Had some problems with his wife too. I am amazed to find that there are people who actually respect the man,but perhaps he's one of Lizzy Prophets "sources". Bjorn apparently believes in his garbage too. But remember, Bjorn is a "Chela of the Masters", so we should bow down before him. Fat chance! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:25:50 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:25:50 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601072550.006a0b38@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Seniles At 07:13 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Ignore her! All you are going to do is raise your blood pressure and people >will complain about you wasting bandwidth (whatever in Szandor's Purple Hell >that is). >Anyway, if she gets on alt.theosophy Col. Aquino will eat her for breakfast. > I may send him a private e-mail asking him to post. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker >Agent Provacateur for the Dark Forces >(Duck Lizzy, here comes another one!) > >Chuck: Do that very thing! Aquino is a really intelligent person. I am sure he and I won't agree on too many things (because I've read all of the "Temple of Set"material) but I am so anxious to disagree with someone intelligent for a change. Of course he may surprise me and I him. What a hoot if Aquino and I ended up agreeing! You know the more I think about it the more I think you ought to invite him to join Theos-list too. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:32:48 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:32:48 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601073248.006af614@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: The Earl Grey Council At 07:14 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Well, maybe northern Sweden is like Montana. Anyway, I find that roast Chela >is very tasty if served with a light wine sauce and just a hint of thyme. >Why is it these damned foreigners (oh boy, is Alan going to have a British >cow over that one, sorry Alan, you know who I mean) keep thinking that they >can get away with trying to control speech? Don't they remember why we >virtually closed down UNESCO? >Americans go to war over this sort of thing. > >Should I nuke him? > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker >Chela to the Master Ahriman (Chief Dugpa of the Earl Grey Council) > American's sure do! But lately I've noticed a whole bunch of americans that want to limit free speech too. (especially yours and mine). Admittedly the Internet is just that, "An International Net" but you know and I know that American's will never stand for limitations on freedom of expression! UNESCO got in trouble for their policies vis a vis controlling news media. Someday Non-American's will finally understand how totally monomaniacal Americans are in regard to personal liberty and freedom of expression. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:42:20 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:42:20 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601074220.006b7fa4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Please stop this At 08:13 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>>>>>cut<<<<<<<<< >>> >>>Anymore than it makes you right, and I have facts on my side. >> >>No Liesel it's you who need to grow up and you don't have that much time. >>alexis >> > >Alexis - your bottom line above I find difficult to read as anything >other than cruel, and fond as I may be of you, I hope you will withdraw >it and apologise. > >Alan :-( >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > >Alan: You're quite correct I was extremely angry and spoke without thinking but desiring to hurt. I withdraw the "bottom line" and truly apologize for it as I was sorry I said it the moment I pressed the "send" button. However, that does not effect the fact that I am still very angry with Leisel as she ignores everything I say and do except that one thing. My comments about Leadbeater. But they are facts, and all of the evidence is on my side of the argument. And I do not believe the van Gelders are being truthful on this subject. They are far too personally involved with the man. If one has to admire or ignore Leadbeater to have some kind of relationship with Leisel, I will forgo the pleasure. When, not if, theosophy goes down the tubes it will be primarily CWL's fault. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:44:18 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:44:18 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601074418.006aa13c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Will the real Masters KH and M please stand up At 08:24 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <2.2.32.19960531080648.006c5194@mail.slip.net>, alexis >dolgorukii writes >>sometimes I >>wish we could go back to the rigid exclusivity of the real Mystery Schools! >> >>alexis > >Please don't join the E.S. > >Alan :>( >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > >Alan my friend, of all the impossibilities in the cosmos, that is the most extremely unlikely! But then, it's NOT a mystery school, just a place for the massaging of egos. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:52:40 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:52:40 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601075240.006af8a8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations At 08:26 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>>>cut<<<<<<< >Mea culpa - I have not paid yur opus the attention it deserves. I will >go to the section you metion and read up your comments. Before so >doing, I would mention en passant that my own opinion (to date) is that >there never was a "sect" of Essenes per se in the sense that the >Therpeutae seem to have been ... but I anticipate. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > Alan: I don't thing it's proper to call the Theraputae a "sect" either. They were a community or sodality of like minded people. I do believe they provided the initial inspiration for the people who became the Essenes who were also a community or sodality of like-minded people. The Theraputae were folks who took to the Deserts beyond Sais to escape the monstrous sink of decadence that Egypt had become by that time in history. I think we're going to have some lovely talks on this subject. You do agree that Pythagoras's Krotona Sodality bore very strong resemblances to the theraputae. I find it also very intriguing that the most modern research links Pythagoras with the Celts and Druids. Have you seen this research? I am going to send you a personal post on a subject that involves the psychic. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 07:54:31 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 00:54:31 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601075431.006a09f0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations At 08:33 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alexis, > >I will continue the discussion about your view on reincarnation and karma. >It requires a bit more time than usual to prepare some suitable >questions. But I'm working on it and expect it to be finished within a couple >of days when I have more leisure. > >Martin > > Martin: I will happily await your convenience, and equally happily continue the discussion at any time suitable to you. I am more than familiar with the problems of finding time to do all the things one needs and wants to do. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:15:24 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:15:24 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601081524.006b7f8c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations At 08:37 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Nicea was 325 c.e. - that's a lot of years. All the N.T. material dates >from this period, along with a vast amount of other writing, including >nearly all of the gnostic material. I have always found the Gnostics to be far too dualistic for my personal comfort. I am, as my book makes clear, a total monist. > >> The >>primary problem I have with Post-Nicean Christianity (other than my usual >>problems with oppression and repression, power, control, and profit) is it's >>absolute obsession with sin and evil. That, I believe, has done so much harm >>that nothing at all can compensate for it. Christianity Alan, has just done >>too much harm for me to either condone it or forgive it. Of course an obsession with "sin and evil" is part of the dualistic view. But as you surely know it's not as a philosophy that I totally reject Christianity, it's as a political and social force that I reject it, and it's as a political force that it has done all its tremendous harm. > >Listen, Sunshine :-) I am not making a defence of Christianity, or to be >more precise, Churchianity. I am trying to say that what developed into >"post-Nicean" Christianity (and even, here and there, later >developments) *contained* and still contains some esoteric or "mystery" >teaching - quite a bit, in fact. Alan my question is this: I agree that Early Christianity contains valid mystery teachings. Cannot one find that same esoteric teaching elsewhere? I'm sure you know ther's nothing at all original in Christianity and all of it's esoteric or mystery teachings were taken from others. So why not take the good from a less tainted source? Church-wise, I am a heretic and an apostate, and would have been burned a long time back had I lived in a >different age. Alan, there's another thing that's wrong with Christianity. They'd have burned you, they'd never have burned me! In-search-of-truth-wise it is another story. I cannot >help but think sometimes that your hatred of Christianity (which I can >fully understand) clouds your objectivity? Alan: I freely admit to an immense animus against not simply Christianity but the entire Judeo-Christian-Islamic Triad (which I see as more monolithic than most), but as regards the search for truth, it is my very strong perception that it can be found elsewhere more strongly, and less problematical. If one seeks esoteric truth, and I have spent most of my life so doing, why "grub about in the muck" when one can find it elsewhere? Do you see what I mean? If Christianity possessed some esoteric truth that was unique to Christianity I would view it differently, but, you will "surprise and amaze" me if you can prove that Christianity possesses one single esoteric truth that cannot be found elsewhere. > >Xtianity and Judaism contain, between them, a great deal of written >material, some "canonical" and more "apocryphal". Don't throw the baby >out with the bath water! Oh believe me Alan: I never have, and never will, throw the baby out with the bath water. Read the section on Judaism too > >My favorite example (which I regard as a discovery, though I am probably >not the first to have noticed it over the centuries) will be posted for >your consideration in due course ... >> >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > Alan: I await that message with baited breath. No Kidding. Some pretty famous theologians have tried to change my mind but no one has yet presented me with any definite evidence. I used to have long and enjoyable tete a tetes with John 23rd and he actually shocked and amazed me by largely agreeing with my views. In fact, many of my present views result from his work with me. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:21:18 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:21:18 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601082118.006c8204@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Therapeutae, etc. Alan: It's now 1:19 A.M. I have pushed the "save as" button, and I will deal with this very long message when I am fully awake. It looks like an interesting discussion. sorry, good night alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:27:06 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:27:06 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601082706.006c3c8c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Therapeutae, etc. At 10:26 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: > > >Alan, please be careful. You are starting to sound like me! Asking >for sources and citations? Asking for "backup" info to support a claim? > >I think I remember that Alexis said in a response to Jerry HE that his >book would NOT >have footnotes, endnotes, etc. etc. > >Daniel > > >Daniel: I certainly did! I will not have citations a quotes and things in my books because I want people to read them. Not just Librarians! The thing to remember is that scholarly books don't sell! Sensational books do! And that is my goal. Now as to alan's request, of course I will give him sources where possible. They won't BE in the book itself but I'll gladly discuss where I got my points with Alan. I both like and respect him. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:28:23 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:28:23 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601082823.006b05a8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 11:45 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Martin, >You certainly may. > >Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker >I don't think I've ever done kickboxing, with psionics count? > >Chuck: I hate to look ignorant, but WHAT is "kickfighting" or "Kick boxing"? alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:32:50 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:32:50 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601083250.006adf78@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 11:48 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Bjorn, >You will be hearing from Alex shortly. Flame retardant armor is recommended. > >But seriously on this. The list runs in cycles. We get very serious and >scholarly for a while then we get burned out on that and have some fun for a >while and then we get serious and scholarly again. >Part of creating a nucleus of universal siblinghood is learning to get along >with each other despite our foibles and some of us are more open about them >than others. I like to make jokes and Alex likes to snarl. In the meantime, >there is more to people than philosophy and if this list corrects one of the >big, huge problems the ts has, namely that people in it rarely know each >other very well, than it will than more have served its purpose. > Theosophists are humans with human problems and human failings. We eat, we >drink, we bleed, we laugh, we mourn and on this list we have often done it >together. It has allowed me to make new friends (and a few new enemies) and >renew old friendships as well. And if I pick on you it's all in fun in the >hope that you'll laugh at your own foibles as I laugh with others at mine. >You're in a different culture here. Relax and learn to enjoy it for what it >is. After all, you wouldn't expect to hear Wagner at a rock concert and the >internet is as raucous as it comes.. > >Chuck MTI, FTSA > >Chuckie: I don't like to "snarl" it just comes with the genetics and with my totem, that and flames through the nostrils are par for the course. I don't snarl all the time, only when I mean it. Sometimes I just lash my tail and lower my ears alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:33:25 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:33:25 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601083325.006ce5d4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 11:47 PM 5/31/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Now now, let's let Martin have his fun too. Besides, we can nominate him for >something later. > >Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA >Have you seen the web page yet? > >Oh can we Daddy...goodie! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sat Jun 1 08:36:58 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:36:58 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960601083658.006c1bf8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Help! At 12:03 AM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Could somebody please tell me how to unsubscribe from this list? > >PLEASE and thank you!!! > > > >-- >Donald Guenen - cv576@freenet.carleton.ca > > May you Dwell in the Light! > >Donald: Send a message to: Listproc@vnet.net no subject line..... message: signoff theos-l your very welcome alexis d. From poulsen@dk-online.dk Sat Jun 1 14:20:31 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 12:20:31 -200 From: Kim Poulsen Message-Id: <01BB4FB4.DB3F7FE0@x.dko.global-one.dk> Subject: Re: planes Encoding: 90 TEXT Kay: >HPB writes that linga-sharira is related with spleen, so i think >her linga sharira or astral body is CWL&AAB's "etheric body". >Sinnet directly writes in "Esoteric Buddhism": "Third principle is >astral body, or linga sharira, it's etheric double of physical body". I must say that I accept the concept of AAB - that the physical body possess etheric tissue of greater importance than the gross body and that this constitutes the etheric body. The astral body would still be the etheric double (with double being the key word here). Such an etheric body would explain for example the "phantom" pains of people with amputated limbs. It would serve as the recipient of prana (through the etheric counterpart of the spleen) - (I understand perfectly your line of reasoning here). It would also explain the statement that the (gross) physical body is not considered a principle (the real principle would be the etheric body). The linga sharira is described as the vehicle of prana, but prana would exist on all planes and vivify all principles. Linga itself is a force (and the word is generally used alone when discussing consciousness) and linga sharira is the sheath or body of this force. My discussion with JHE may take the direction of a complete analysis - the above is mere casual remarks - (it is terribly time consuming). >K.H.'s kama-rupa should be an astral body of CWL and most other people. >Sinnett writes that "animal soul" is 5th principle in letter #32 >and M. doesn't critisize it, but in "Esoteric Buddhism" Sinnett >writes: 4. Animal Soul - Kama-rupa. (Chapter II). >Footnote below table says that this set of principles is improved >relatively to previosly published in "Theosophist". :() >Note that Sinnett has only one Manas (5-th principle), not divi- >ding it to "rupa" & "arupa". I accept another concept (explained in detail on p. 260 ff. of "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire") - that the enumeration of a mans principles is dependant on his level of evolution. In other words: the various classifications may explain various states and levels of evolution. This would explain the differing classifications (some of them differing beyond any correspondence). Krishna in Bhagavad-gita doesn't >divide manas, too, but there's only 5 principles. HPB in vol. 3 >of SD divides it to higher & lower and comes more closely to >the CWL's system: > HPB CWL > [atman] Atman > Buddhi Buddhi > [Buddhi]-manas Arupa-manas > Kama-manas Rupa-manas > Pranic Kama Astral [correspondence ot these two > Astral Etheric was explained above] > Objective Physical I rarely try to make the correspondence that exact. But here I would probably conclude that CWL used the gross physical as a principle (not as a mistake but rather as a veiled explanation) and completely left prana out of consideration - and that the objective body of HPB would correspond to both the etheric and physical of CWL. These differences are trifling and could just as well be observed between the various classifications of HPB. >From above follows that founders & mahatmas widely experimented >with a set of principles, and this set probably wasn't "ready" >up to the time of writing "TD", so we shouldn't dogmatize infor- >mation on principles published in TD. Or that the principles depend on level of evolution. >Summarizing this, i colclude that CWL/AAB system seems to me more >appropriate. Note that on each "odd" plane live to bodies and on >each "even" plane lives one. It helps to overlay this system to >5-fold (Atman, Buddhi, Manas, Kama of Bh.G.) + physical body. >Atman should be here "2-fold", too, but because it's both "personal" >& "impersonal", i think. And because i cannot apply logic to matters >that are higher than manas. I must say that I use both the principles enumerated by HPB, TSR, Sinnett or Besant/CWL/AAB without any sense of deeper conflict. And just as you do, I use ancient sources to corroborate it (I love the BG). I have yet to find an classification (in the sources I accept) that cannot be satisfactorily explained and made to correspond with the other classifications without making any too fantastic interpretations. I find it very enjoyable you - with your obvious interest in the philosophical aspect of theosophy - have found your way to Theos-l :-) In friendship, Kim From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 13:40:44 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 08:40:44 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960601084259.26cfc392@mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: TSA Voting Tally Update Hi Here is an update on the subject. The following letter was FAXED to John Algeo. Will keep you informed when I hear from him. ...Ramadoss ======================================== FAX MESSAGE June 1, 1996 8:15 AM John Algeo National President Theosophical Society in America Wheaton IL ELECTION VOTING TALLY Dear Bro. Algeo: It is now two weeks since this subject issue is being corresponded. It is almost a week since I Faxed you a long letter explaining how you should have no problems in sending me the information since the IL law is very clear on the issue of access to TSA information. While the unrestricted disclosure of voting tally is not going to alter the results of the election, unrestricted access to the voting tally data addresses the very fundamental issue of member's access to TSA books and records. If you agree that IL law applies to TSA, then I should have received the information requested by FAX which has not happened so far. If you think that IL law does not apply to TSA, then you should explain in very simple language why, so that we ordinary members can understand? Do you think that this is an unreasonable request from a member in good standing of TSA? On these simple matters, I think everyone expects a quick and fast response. So I am still waiting for (1) quick action from you and (2) to receive the voting tally details by FAX expeditiously. With fraternal greetings Yours fraternally M. K. Ramadoss Member TSA FAXCC: William Greer, National Secretary From RIhle@aol.com Sat Jun 1 15:04:30 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:04:30 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Message-Id: <960601110429_405101479@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Bjorn writes> >I am new to this list and am shocked at the level and type of discussions >going on here. I am also a student (chela) of the Masters and can't see that >this list serves the cause of the Brotherhood. I would suggest that the list >owner either > >1. cut off the most destructive participants > >or > >2. close the list > > Richard Ihle writes> Belated welcome to you, Bjorn! Let us somber Swedes (my grandparents are from Varmland) stick together, at least, against all these other more fortunate genetic types on the list who ~naturally~ smile, talk, touch one another, etc. . . . My compliments to you for quick apprehension of the basic problem on theos-l: what to do about individuals who seem to be unwilling and/or unable to put a personal limit on how damaging they will allow themselves to be to others. My opinion on this seems to reverse itself every other day: On the day someone tells an older lady she is senile and does not have much time left to live, I say, "We simply must get rid of someone who is so cruel." On the following day when the person apologizes, I say, "No, it would be a great impoverishment of the list to lose such a valuable contributor." What to do? I'm sure I don't know. In a way, the whole situation almost reminds me of Edward Bulwer-Lytton's novel VRIL (it has been several decades, so don't depend on the following details) where universal amity was accomplished by having people carry around "vril-rods" by means of which they could easily destroy one another any time they wished. Since everyone had one, nobody used them; therefore, the people behaved themselves. Yes, sometimes this seems just like theos-l--with the unfortunate difference that a few individuals seem to have picked up on the fact that the majority on the list are simply not willing to be as personally destructive with the vril as they might be just to win an argument. The old story: the more gentle at the mercy of the less gentle again. What to do? I'm sure I don't know. Welcome, anyway, brother Bjorn. Godspeed, Richard Ihle From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 15:45:13 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 11:45:13 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601114513_208318221@emout14.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Alan, Uncle Chuckie is honored to be in the running. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 14:20:04 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 10:20:04 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606011622.AA19491@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: Discussions The question of democracy and free speech is relevant. And, just to make my position clear - I am all for it. Some people on this list seem to confuse Democracy with the right to mentally and emotionally abuse anyone who says anything they don=B4t agree= to. This is NOT democracy. If anything, it is Anarchy. It is clear to me and many others on this list that this state of affairs is not necessarily "Demochratic" nor an expression of "free speech". The effect is to shock and scare away constructive and loving people from the list - most are not willing to take the kind of abuse they are being subjected to here, for no good reason. People are turning away in disgust and the cause of Theosophy - Universal Brotherhood - is given a blow in the belly. In the minds of many people "visiting" this list, Theosophy is going to be forever associated with CRUELTY, INTOLERANCE and INSANITY. With a couple of individuals tyrranizing just about everybody else, without any restraint whatsoever, we have a situation of OPPRESSION, not freedom. These individuals are abusing the opportunity of lawlessness to impose their own law of the gun on everyone. The majority of people who have some moral standards and a legitimate interest and need to discuss matters of a more or less personal nature (having to do with the spiritual path) will not say a word because they do not want to be ridiculed and abused as soon as they express themselves. There is a VERY ACTIVE censorship on this list right now. The question is not whether or not there is going to be censorship - the question is whether or not it is going to be exercised by people like Chuch and Alexis, who seem to be motivated by a need to hurt their sisters and brothers, or by a list owner who upholds the standards of brotherhood and tolerance. At mankinds present stage of evolution democracy does not work without rules. The list owner is hiding behind a let go attitude, although the founding principles of this list - tolerance and respect for various beliefs - is constantly being violated in the most shameless fashion. This makes the list owner a part in a karma making process. Failure to uphold a minimum standard of decency and civilty is not furthering the cause of freedom, it is inviting a wild west condition where the fastest and biggest gun rules. This has happened on this list and will result in many more"nice" people turning away in disgust.=20 Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 14:20:07 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 10:20:07 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606011622.AB19491@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 11:06 AM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Richard Ihle writes> >Belated welcome to you, Bjorn! Let us somber Swedes (my grandparents are >from Varmland) stick together, at least, against all these other more >fortunate genetic types on the list who ~naturally~ smile, talk, touch one >another, etc. . . . Nice to meet you, Richard. Yes I am from Stockholm, Sweden, although I have lived abroad for 10 years. >Yes, sometimes this seems just like theos-l--with the unfortunate difference >that a few individuals seem to have picked up on the fact that the majority >on the list are simply not willing to be as personally destructive with the >vril as they might be just to win an argument. The old story: the more >gentle at the mercy of the less gentle again. An interesting way of describing the dilemma. >What to do? I'm sure I don't know. Well, if the list owner refuses to take action, decent people will move on and leave the wolves to eat each other. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From fami@mail.telepac.pt Sat Jun 1 17:15:23 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 17:15:23 GMT From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Arag=F5es?= Message-Id: <199606011715.RAA27184@mail.telepac.pt> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: help getting address Hi : I've been lurking for some months. I'm not a member of any Theosophy Society Section. I'm portuguese and I'm interested in "Theosophic architecture" and "Atlantis Architecture". Sometimes it's difficult for me read all the messages in this list but I make an effort to be on day because I have a little memory in my computer and I can't keep many messg. I am not participating a lot in discussion because 1) I'm learning with it 2) some matters like voting are not in my primarly interests 3) in the subjects of my interest, when I learn enough, I'll participate if I can. I'm writing to you all now, because I'm very interested in contacting an american architect/theosoph called Robert Stacy-Judd, that I think, lives in Los Angeles, California. Here in Portugal is difficult to get his address (email or not) Could anyone help me with that ? About the Portuguese Theosophical Society I don't know much, once that I'm not a member. Well, thanks a lot in advance. I'll be in touch, Fatima From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 19:22:34 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:22:34 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Discussions In-Reply-To: <9606011622.AA19491@alpinet.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > The question of democracy and free speech is relevant. And, just to make my > position clear - I am all for it. >>>>>mega clip >>>>>>> I am also a subscriber to another list - listening-l where J Krishnamurti's philosophy is discussed. That list is also unmoderated and the list owner Dirk is rarely seen, just like John Mead. That list also goes thru cycles of never ending arguments and comes back again. Looking at the similarities, it is very clear that we are dealing with an entirely new medium of communication and so what some see as problems are just builtin inherent nature of the medium. To bring Democracy with its "rules" is no no. If anyone does not like this or any other list, they can easily make the choice of either lurking or unsubscribing. If some have exercised their choice, it is ok. It is their gain or loss which ever way they perceive it. Try to bring controls either implicitly or explicitly will only shut down this list. And many of us do not want to see it. BTW are you a member of TS (Adyar) or any other organization and which lodge/branch you belong to. I am just curious. You can answer if you want to . ....Ramadoss From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 19:28:34 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:28:34 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Discussions In-Reply-To: <9606011622.AB19491@alpinet.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > At 11:06 AM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>> clip >>> > Well, if the list owner refuses to take action, decent people will move on > and leave the wolves to eat each other. > > Bjorn > > roxendal@alpinet.net A lot of decent people are on this list and some are posting and others are lurking. The theosophical "wolves" are kind, considerate, loving domesticated ones and don't like to eat each other. The wolves outside are worse. .... Ramadoss From borges@mendota.terracom.net Sat Jun 1 15:29:34 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 96 14:29:06 From: "Raul Ortegon" <"Raul Ortegon"@mendota.terracom.net> Message-Id: <199606011932.OAA20756@mendota.terracom.net> Priority: Normal Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Discussions Could post the name of the newsgroup, please? On Sat, 1 Jun 1996 15:24:16 -0400, m.k. ramadoss wrote: >On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > >> The question of democracy and free speech is relevant. And, just to make my >> position clear - I am all for it. >>>>>>mega clip >>>>>>> > >I am also a subscriber to another list - listening-l where J >Krishnamurti's philosophy is discussed. > >That list is also unmoderated and the list owner Dirk is rarely seen, >just like John Mead. That list also goes thru cycles of never ending >arguments and comes back again. > >Looking at the similarities, it is very clear that we are dealing with an >entirely new medium of communication and so what some see as problems are >just builtin inherent nature of the medium. > >To bring Democracy with its "rules" is no no. If anyone does not like >this or any other list, they can easily make the choice of either lurking >or unsubscribing. If some have exercised their choice, it is ok. It is >their gain or loss which ever way they perceive it. > >Try to bring controls either implicitly or explicitly will only shut down >this list. And many of us do not want to see it. > >BTW are you a member of TS (Adyar) or any other organization and which >lodge/branch you belong to. I am just curious. You can answer if you want >to . > > > ....Ramadoss > > ------------------------------------- Raul Ortegon borges@terracom.net "To not believe is NOT to disbelieve." ------------------------------------- From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 19:31:14 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 14:31:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: help getting address (fwd) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi Here is a person trying to get hold of a Theosophist who may be a member of TSA. See if you can help. ...Ramadoss > Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 12:19:34 -0400 > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Arag=F5es?= > Subject: help getting address Hi : I've been lurking for some months. I'm not a member of any Theosophy Society Section. I'm portuguese and I'm interested in "Theosophic architecture" and "Atlantis Architecture". Sometimes it's difficult for me read all the messages in this list but I make an effort to be on day because I have a little memory in my computer and I can't keep many messg. I am not participating a lot in discussion because 1) I'm learning with it 2) some matters like voting are not in my primarly interests 3) in the subjects of my interest, when I learn enough, I'll participate if I can. I'm writing to you all now, because I'm very interested in contacting an american architect/theosoph called Robert Stacy-Judd, that I think, lives in Los Angeles, California. Here in Portugal is difficult to get his address (email or not) Could anyone help me with that ? About the Portuguese Theosophical Society I don't know much, once that I'm not a member. Well, thanks a lot in advance. I'll be in touch, Fatima From euser@euronet.nl Sat Jun 1 22:43:09 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:43:09 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606012243.AAA04385@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alexis> You know of course that if you had lived during Blavatsky's lifetime you'd have called her an "atrocious one" or a "kickfighter"! Martin comments: you use the word 'of course' quite often in your postings. Is this supposed to add weight to your utterances? Alexis>I do suggest that it might be polite if you'd "butt out' of what is obviously a personal continuing conversation in a jocular vein. Martin comments: 'jocular vein', really.. Is it perceived so by Liesel? And whence this sulky posting of yours if it concerns only 'jocular vein'? There is evidently a contradiction between tone and content here.. Alexis> You don't have the faintest idea what the continuing conversation is all about so why impose upon it? If you had even a faint idea why Paul Johnson is upset with Daniel Caldwell or why I am upset with Liesel F.Deutsch you'd have some grounds to discuss it. But you don't so, I repeat, why impose yourself when you have no knowledge of the causes or situation? Martin comments: Before you were a subscriber to theos-l I was at least two or three times so, dropping out after certain periods for various reasons. I'm quite aware of the Paul Johnson - Daniel Caldwell debates and ditto with the debates regarding Leadbeater. So, I *do* know about it, actually more than I would like to. I will say one thing however, and it is this: even if you're right about Leadbeater (Jerry H-E has in the past mentioned some documentary evidence regarding the 'Leadbeater case'), even then it is far wiser to take someone's [substitute: Liesel] feelings into account and not try to put your idea's through someone's throat. This person will probably vomit and it might just end right in your face.. (an ugly picture, but a psychological truth). Don't you think you might actually accomplish more if you would be a little more considerate at times? A basic thing is having respect for each other, and I suspect that you DO have respect 'even for Liesel' despite the comments you were exchanging. I have (and hate it) to be nitpicking on this point because this respect is not sounding through very much in your posts (the same would probably be true for Liesel regarding you - I would have to trace back all the posts even before I subscribed to this forum this time to be more definitely here) Can't you show a little more of that to her? Friendly, Martin Euser From euser@euronet.nl Sat Jun 1 22:43:18 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:43:18 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606012243.AAA04400@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alexis> There are getting to be all too many self-appointed censors on this list. It's a shame. Martin comments: Freedom of speech is a very good and necessary thing indeed. As with all freedom, however, it is imperative that people learn to operate within certain self-imposed boundaries, having to do with the rights and freedoms of others. Why is it that so many Americans are obsessed with their *rights*? Do they still have to learn their *duties*? One's duty may be the 'right' of the other, isn't it? Alexis>I have always, and will always do and say exactly what I think is right for me to do and say, and I will always speak the truth as I see it. If others disagree, that is of course their right. But it is not my problem. Indeed. But that's not the issue here (except for the Leadbeater case). The issue is, or rather has become: personal attacks on each other. Sure you are wise enough to not belief that anything good comes from it. Why continue or react, as the case may be? (I subscribed but a couple of days ago to theos-buds and didn't see much of the previous quarrels there) Anyway, I'm glad you withdraw your remark about Liesel as Alan rightly requested. Again to this 'self-appointed censor' thing. It sounds as a hollow phrase to me, because it is used too often by you (and Chuck sometimes). You're not dealing with kids on this list, but with grown-ups who *do* have some standards of behaviour.. Maybe you will have more success with this style of communicating on alt.theosophy (if there are many young people on it), but this style is often contra-productive on this board. You *will* have noticed that by now, I presume? Now, having said this, this doesn't mean I'm not interested in your *ideas*. In fact, I'm going to discuss your views on karma and reincarnation thoroughly with you, if you can stand severe scrutiny and dissecting of your opinions on these things. Martin Euser From euser@euronet.nl Sat Jun 1 22:43:24 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:43:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606012243.AAA04408@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Ruminations (Alexis-Martin); Long post! Continued discussion on karma, reincarnation and religion between Alexis and Martin (Euser). Brackets [], inserted in your previous reply, indicate questions or comments by me. Martin> >One point remains a bit obscure to me, and that's your view on reincarnation. >You say on p. 24, that 'death isn't (a recurring incident)'. Alexis>No, it isn't Martin Euler [Euser] will die but once, because Martin Euler [Euser] as an individual will live but once. Martin comments: as a persona [mask, outer vehicle] yes Alexis> As I see it it isn't individual personalities [lower four principles?] that "reincarnate" but rather the intrinsic (to the Cosmos) evolving never-physical immortal intelligence [jiva?] that incarnates serially but not consequentially [i.e. as a consequence of previous incarnations of this jiva?]. In other words the intrinsic spirit manifests itself by way of a physical intelligence [brain-mind?] and learns and expands it's awareness by way of that manifestation. In the course of that manifestation, the physical personality (Martin Euler) becomes an energy field (force field) in being. Energy once created is never lost [right], ergo, when the personality "dies" (by which I mean leaves the physical shell) it continues as an energy-field-in-being and is therefore a independent spirit in its own right. Martin comments: Are you referring to the lower four principles here or what? Alexis> What it is, however, is what was the mediating factor between the Intrinsic Evolving Intelligence [jiva?], and [between jiva and what?] I call that the Virtual Intelligence entity. It probably best corresponds to metaphysics's "Higher Mind", or at least that's the thing that comes closest to it. Martin comments: This independent spirit in its own right, that's what you would call Manas, the fifth principle? If so, it is consistent so far with the view of HPB and GdP, I think. Martin (previously)>You explain this by saying that an individual human >being continues as >an independant spirit in it's own right in the 'post-mortem' state. Martin: actually I had in mind to ask you *explicitly* whether this individual human being that continues as an independant spirit in its own right *reincarnates* or not. Does it manifest in a persona, does it take a lower set of four principles again in order to reincarnate or not? Does this independant spirit have anything to do with the previous tencencies it had in its vehicle (persona) in its last incarnations, *if* it reincarnates?If not, what happens to these previous tendencies, characteristics (on earthly, astral, mental planes)? Martin (previously)>One of the questions one could ask is: what about karma, what about the>effects of deeds that are not yet equilibrized. How else then by reincarnation >could these effects or consequences be settled? Please explain to me! Alexis> That's a good question and of course I can see why you'd ask it. But, I must respond by saying that I have a different view of Karma than that which is taught either by Theosophy or Brahminism or Buddhism. The problem as I see it is that the universe doesn't function in a retributive manner and by any other name "karma" is retributive. Martin comments: HPB speaks of Karma-Nemesis. But I don't believe in some great being who punishes the poor sinners either, BUT I *do* believe in an intrinsic corrigating intelligence , which is essentially one's Self.. Alexis>The universe itself, is an entirely value-free information system and nothing at all which an individual does while in the physical state is going to have more than an attitudinal effect on their future. Martin comments:What about an Adolf Hitler? Will there be no correction for this perverted 'intelligence' ?? Can we learn all our lessons in one lifetime? We can develop only a small part of all our potentials in one lifetime. What about little children who die ; surely the spirit of these children will reincarnate? So much to learn.. Alexis>A person, because of the things that they do, and because of the way that they think, and because of WHAT they think, create an environment that colours and flavours their personal future. Agreed. Alexis>But that is the way an individual influences their post-mortem future, [and where may that be? couldn't that be on earth again?] it has nothing at all to do with the universal intelligence field. Martin comments: This seems to dismiss all notion of the interrelatedness of cosmos and humans. When I say that ethics is built-in in the structure of the universe, how do you react then? Alexis>There is no judgement, there is no retribution, "seeking of equilibrium", there is only a milieu that every individual creates for themselves. Martin comments:and what are the factors that play a role in this creating a milieu for themselves? You say: energy is not lost, and that's true, so what about the energy of a deed on earth that impresses itself on the astral light, what about the tendencies of the Manas pertaining to this earth? That's energy too. What happens with it? I submit that only by having one's mind fixed in a state of consciousness that is beyond the working of the 'pairs of opposites' (conform the Bhagavad Gita) one is able to neutralize and equilibrize all tendencies set up, evoked in interaction, etc. on this earth. If one cannot do that one will inevitably be drawn back to this earth, psychomagnetically drawn to an appropriate environment, appropriate for the reincarnating entity. As long as the thirst for life on this earth is not finished one will be drawn back to it. ALL the grand philosophies, including Plato's, Pythagoras', Buddha's, etc,etc. affirm this. You will have to do a lot of explaining before it will satisfy my mind. (not that the current theories of karma and reincarnation explain everything - these theories are far from complete, I think, but that's a totally different thing for now) Alexis>The only think that matters, the only thing in the universe that matters, is intelligence. It is how that intelligence is utilized and how it processes and stores information, that is critical. That's what the Universe is all about, the infinitization of intelligence, and the processing and storing of information for the use of that intelligence. All information is valid. All information, and experience is the major source of information, is needful to the universal data-bank. Martin comments: if you include the perception of love, growth of love for all beings, sure. This spawns another question: how long does this growth of love, of perception of unity continue? This question has to do with the concept of evolution and the nature of initiations. An intricate question in my opinion. Alexis>What an individual human being does with their personal information data-bank, matters only within their personal paradigm. It does not matter in the slightest, within the universal paradigm. Martin comments: but there are vast layers between a personal paradigm and the universal paradigm, like family and group paradigms, national paradigms ('freedom of speech' :)). It seems that you totally ignore the consequences of one's actions on others. After all, one doesn't live alone in the universe. It surely mattered to the Jews what Hitler did with his personal paradigm.. Alexis>Now as to "reincarnation" as the intrinsic evolving intelligence manifests serially but non-consequentially, each succeeding manifestation, and I must emphasize that they are not inter-connected except by way of the Intrinsic evolving intelligence [Jiva, not Manas I take it], is, nonetheless, a consequence of all the previous manifestations and so is "flavoured" or "coloured" by them. But each of them is unique and individual and so is the "last in line". "Karma", to me, is simply one of religion's "little control mechanisms". It's a way to make people "behave" according to the dictates of religion and more important than that, the dictates of the people that run the religion. Martin comments: in theosophy we (at least I do) have a different view of karma. It is not something *outside* oneself. That would be absurd indeed. It is inside onself but has to do with the interconnectedness of all beings. One Akasha penetrates all, and holds all information, BUT this information is individualized within each being. Martin (previously)>Also, how would you account for the vast differences between people, unequal opportunities, if not by karma? Alexis>Well, of course there's the incarnational process I just described, there's genetics, there's environmental factors, and things like Nationality and Ethnicity and skin colour, but most of all, it's "the roll of the dice". People don't like it, I know, and would rather believe they were born blind to pay off some old debt. But I am afraid that's not it, some people who are born blind, are that way because their Mother had syphilis. Martin comments: this last example pertains to my mentioning that the theories on karma and reincarnation are not completely exposed in theosophy or any system whatsoever. You can add babies from heroine-addicted mothers, Softenon-babies, etc. The 'roll of the dice' theory seems a bit too mechanical to me however. If such accidents happen, I would rather think of some recompensation in another life. 'Roll of the dice' is inherently injust. Where does this leave the idea of justice? Do you throw that away? Martin (prev.)> >Now, about religion, that's quite a story! I agree that most of religions >have become a bit of an empty shell. But what about finding the esoteric >meanings of what's left of value in them? What do you think about that? Alexis>I have spent more than thirty years in the second object pursuit of the study and comparison of this planet's religions. My conclusion? They are ALL utterly empty shells.such esoteric meaning as any of them may once have contained is long lost, and everything of value is lost with them. Martin comments: so, you dismiss Blavatsky's writing about esoteric meanings in religions. She has spend a mighty lot of time on that: Isis Unveiled, Secret Doctrine, Key to Theosophy, and other writings as well. Alexis>Religion today has only one series of goals,that is the attainment and maintenance of power, control, and profit, over and at the expense of those who accrue to the religion in question. The human race would be well shed of the lot of them! Martin comments: you confuse what *people* do with religion as a legitimation for the power/control games with religion itself. There's a mighty difference in that. Alexis>They are unorthodox, but they are my views. I take total responsibility for them. Martin comments: I bet you do! These are some starting questions only. Fasten your seat-belt! It will be a tough drive.. Martin From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 1 22:33:45 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:33:45 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: <1JEzQFAJVMsxEw6i@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Subject: Will the real Masters KH and M please sit down again In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960601074418.006aa13c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960601074418.006aa13c@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >>Please don't join the E.S. >> >>Alan :>( > >>Alan my friend, of all the impossibilities in the cosmos, that is the most >extremely unlikely! But then, it's NOT a mystery school, just a place for >the massaging of egos. > >alexis > I didn't really think it likely. Another pathetic attempt at humor down tha pan ... ALan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 1 22:34:38 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:34:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: <255zMKA+VMsxEw4p@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Ruminations In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960601075240.006af8a8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960601075240.006af8a8@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >I am going to send you a personal post on a subject that involves the psychic. > >alexis I look forward to it. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 1 22:32:12 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:32:12 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Please stop this In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960601074220.006b7fa4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960601074220.006b7fa4@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >You're quite correct I was extremely angry and spoke without thinking but >desiring to hurt. I withdraw the "bottom line" and truly apologize for it as >I was sorry I said it the moment I pressed the "send" button. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. > > >However, that does not effect the fact that I am still very angry with >Leisel as she ignores everything I say and do except that one thing. My >comments about Leadbeater. But they are facts, and all of the evidence is on >my side of the argument. And I do not believe the van Gelders are being >truthful on this subject. They are far too personally involved with the man. >If one has to admire or ignore Leadbeater to have some kind of relationship >with Leisel, I will forgo the pleasure. When, not if, theosophy goes down >the tubes it will be primarily CWL's fault. I don't quite understand why people who disagree so considerably cannot nonetheless agree to "live and let live" in the area of disagreement and let go of the anger. I would imagine (could be wrong) that as a healer you might find it difficult to help someone with whom you were extremely angry at the time. Soon we shall have the original TS material about the CWL affair circa 1908 that turned up in England recently. This is if course about history as much as it is about theosophy, so some latitude will, I hope, be allowed. I agree, for example, with your other post concerning ~First Principle of Theosophy~ but would point out (and do) that as my own first intro to the subject this book gave me a head start, for all of its flaws. Sometimes it is only by spotting the mistakes that we are moved to look for the truth. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sat Jun 1 22:45:07 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:45:07 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: <9pKx4OAzfMsxEw5R@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Ruminations In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960601081524.006b7f8c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960601081524.006b7f8c@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >>>snip<<< > >Alan my question is this: I agree that Early Christianity contains valid >mystery teachings. Cannot one find that same esoteric teaching elsewhere? >I'm sure you know ther's nothing at all original in Christianity and all of >it's esoteric or mystery teachings were taken from others. So why not take >the good from a less tainted source? Why not take from any source that's going? Who is to define "tainted"? >>>snip<<< > >If Christianity possessed some esoteric truth that was unique to >Christianity I would view it differently, but, you will "surprise and amaze" >me if you can prove that Christianity possesses one single esoteric truth >that cannot be found elsewhere. "Prove?" Proving *any* esoteric truth is nigh impossible. We either experience it or we don't. Having experienced it, we then interpret the experience. Then we are quite likely to fight about the interpretation! > >>My favorite example (which I regard as a discovery, though I am probably >>not the first to have noticed it over the centuries) will be posted for >>your consideration in due course ... >>> >>Alan > >Alan: > >I await that message with baited breath. No Kidding. Some pretty famous >theologians have tried to change my mind but no one has yet presented me >with any definite evidence. I am not trying to change your mind, so un-bait your breath. The example I have in mind depends upon other sources for its veracity, though it stands up well as an example of "something other" on its own. > Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:24 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:24 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191924_547305083@emout16.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Eldon, What have the great teachers really done except find reasons for people to kill each other? Sorry, I'm in a rather testy mood at the moment, but anyway, I think there is room for many different approaches to theosophy and as long as we are willing to respect each others' views and agree to disagree all should be well. But please don't think that I am in any way interested in "social reform". That was a Victorian concept created by people whose one goal in life was to come up with systems for other people to live under and we have born the fruits of that madness throughout this century. It is an idea that has produced nothing but graveyards. Theosophy in action is something not easily defined. It does not reduce to slogans very well and may be only something one does without actually realizing one is doing it. It means something different for each individual and that is the problem with talking about it because while for me it may mean going into battle for a friend, for others it may mean trying to control someone else's behavior. That's why us theosophists fight all the time. I remember at the much over-touted World Parliament of Religions a few years back I went to Jay Williams' talk. When it was over two women took violent issue with his idea that people should be able to agree to disagree on things. They were sitting in front of me and one of the had the temerity to say "Just like Theosophists!" I couldn't take it any more and in my most snobbish voice (ask Brenda if she can remember be me using it) I piped in, "We rather like it that way." In many ways, that's what siblinghood is all about, agreeing to disagree and don't worry, I'm not into tearing down other people's placards as long as they don't tear down mine, but then I have a feeling I wasn't the one that comment was aimed at. Chuck MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:30 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:30 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191928_547305117@emout07.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Alex, Well, boogienation is the handle of the devotee who is giving the page to me, for free and the price being right I can hardly disapprove of his choice of name. Let me know how the attempt to get on the newsgroup turns out. I'm having the devil's own time here. The dark forces are surely at work and Martin is behind it all, curse him. :-) Anyway, you, I and the universe know the kind of work we really do. What the hell do we care what the idiots who don't know us think? Besides, as we all know from reading the Mad Bishop, Karma is a mathematical concept. Now if we add in the silly Wiccan idea of everything coming back three times, we get something like this. "The life of a sparrow is worth the lives of three hundred thousand people," Earth First That being the case, for every sparrow I keep alive in the winter I get to kill three hundred thousand people without any karmic imbalance. Of course it's hokum! That's why I just wrote it. But as Karma as they define it is hokum as well, why worry about something that doesn't exist? In any event, I grow impatient with these fools. I can't wait until we are all on alt.theosophy and they have to deal with real people. How fast do you think Martin can run? Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:33 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:33 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191932_547305135@emout10.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Will the real Masters KH and M please stand up Alex, Perhaps Bjorn should be reminded who won the Battle of Poltava. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:36 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:36 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191935_547305154@emout14.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Col. Michael Aquino Alex, I think it would be a great idea to get him on this list. Just think how fast everyone would unsubscribe! Of course, John Mead may not be too happy with me if that happened though I get the impression he secretly enjoys all this. After all, he knew what would happen when he created it. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:38 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:38 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191937_547305162@emout16.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: The Earl Grey Council Alex, Well, let's see. This list has a hundred some odd subscribers at best. A fully carried newsgroup can reach millions. Do you remember the saying about Britain? That while other countries were trying to conquer Europe, the British were surrounding Europe? So why worry about this. We are going to have a much bigger sandbox to play in and the ones who want to censor US will, if they have the nerve to post to the newsgroup, learn that they are minnows swimming with sharks. I am actually toned down on this list out of respect for John Mead. On MY newsgroup, I will recognize no such limitations. And our audience will be bigger than anyone in the TS has imagined. Like you, my patience wears thin and I am itching to go to war. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:39 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:39 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191939_547305189@emout18.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alex, Kickboxing is a version of boxing that combines some martial arts. I prefer to watch normal boxing myself. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:44 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:44 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191941_547305212@emout07.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alex, I sit corrected. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:45 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:45 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191944_547305228@emout08.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alex, I suggest we nominate Martin for the Madame Blavatsky's Baboon Award. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Sat Jun 1 23:19:48 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 19:19:48 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960601191947_547305243@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Rich, I think the problem with Bjorn is that he has forgotten that theosophists are human, not mythical beings who sit learning chelaship. And he really does not understand Americans. He can't unless he's lived here long enough. A couple of years ago a young (possibly, because I am now at the age when anyone not covered in wrinkles looks young) woman from Denmark came to the Annual Gathering. She was very surprised at how utterly different American Theosophists were from anything she had ever seen in Scandanavia, or the rest of Europe for that matter. We are a lot feistier and some of us, well, we do get a little carried away at times especially if we come from backgrounds where it is the norm to debate with some, well, nastiness for lack of a better word. It comes from getting death threats and being called an agent of the Antichrist for your books. I wish Bjorn could have been at that meeting some years back in Chicago at one of the lodges where the debate got so furious that the neighbors called the police! I spoke at the same lodge a few years later and after my talk another debate broke out and Gerda and I literally fled the room. Have you gotten onto alt.theosophy yet? Once I can, it will probably take up much more time than this list and Bjorn can be happy with his discussions as bland as white sauce. As it is, I spend most of my writing time answering friend Alex's many posts. After all, if I can bug millions of people.... Keep that vril stick handy. And just think what HPB would have written if someone had called her the Unabomber. Chuck MTI, FTSA From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 23:22:37 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 18:22:37 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: e-mail at Adyar Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII TO: THEOS@NETCOM.COM I just received a message from a friend that Adyar seems to be on e-mail. Can you check and let us know what the e-mail address is. mk RAMADOSS From liesel@dreamscape.com Sat Jun 1 23:00:25 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 19:00:25 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606020005.UAA02314@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. He just hit out, blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. For shame! And that calls itself a shaman! Liesel From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 22:30:13 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 18:30:13 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020032.AA22811@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 03:24 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >BTW are you a member of TS (Adyar) or any other organization I was a member of the Stockholm lodge when I lived there, but am not a member at this time. Before and after I have practiced different spiritual disciplines, within and without this or that organization, such as various forms of meditation, yoga and Tai Chi/Qi Gong. My first conscious contact with the Masters in this life was made 20-something years ago, assisted by "The I Am Discourses" a book containing affirmations and dictations by Saint Germain and Jesus. For this "opening of the door" I will be ever grateful. BTW, my first significant spiritual realization came about while reading a book by Maharishi Mahesh yogi! Today I don't believe he is a part of the Brotherhood at all, but nevertheless, his writings helped me take a giant leap forward! I was one of the pioneering New Agers in Sweden, organizing events where churches and spiritual groups worked together and presented different programs. This was in the 70ies. I liked some of the writings of Annie Besant, readily available in Sweden, but find them hard to get here. She is not much liked by US theosophists, it seems. Any idea about how to get a book list to order from? Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 22:30:16 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 18:30:16 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020032.AB22811@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 03:29 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > >> At 11:06 AM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>> clip >>> >> Well, if the list owner refuses to take action, decent people will move on >> and leave the wolves to eat each other. >> >> Bjorn >> >> roxendal@alpinet.net > > A lot of decent people are on this list and some are posting and >others are lurking. The theosophical "wolves" are kind, >considerate, loving domesticated ones You must be kidding. I am sure that the victims that have been torn apart by their fangs and claws would not agree. I see that there are many considerate and loving people on this list, of course, and I think their right to freedom of expression is violently being encroached upon by the not so kind "wolves", who even seem to be PROUD of their ability to hurt others. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 22:30:18 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 18:30:18 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020032.AC22811@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 02:46 AM 6/1/96 -0400, Alexis wrote: >I told him he was rude, and I still think he's rude, Apparantly the concept of rudeness does exist in the consciousness of Alexis. So far he is applying it to others only, but perhaps one day in the not to far distant future he will start applying it in self-analysis. Yes, I believe in miracles! Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 22:39:42 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 18:39:42 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020041.AA22903@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis On all other mailing lists I have been on, discussions like the one below have been directed to private email conversation. We don't need this in a theosophical discussion in front of one hundred people. Bjorn At 08:08 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis >decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough >respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. He just hit out, >blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. For shame! And >that calls itself a shaman! > >Liesel > > > roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sat Jun 1 23:48:00 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 19:48:00 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020150.AA23362@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Russian Theosophical Society Kay, Did you get my email? Bjorn At 02:54 AM 5/30/96 -0400, you wrote: >Hello! > >========================= >* Forwarded by Macnev Uri >* From : Kay Ziatz >========================= > >> For: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) > > Hi. > >> Where in Russia do you live? >In Moscow. > >> What TS branch do you belong to? >None. I avoid membering in any societies. >I was planning to join international TS (Adyar), but I've read here >that they expelled whole danish lodge because they were studying A. Bailey. roxendal@alpinet.net From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 02:25:54 1996 Date: 01 Jun 96 22:25:54 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Message-Id: <960602022553_76400.1474_HHL29-3@CompuServe.COM> >Eldon, >What have the great teachers really done except find reasons for people to >kill each other? Chuck. as you well know, every truth is a double-edge sword. Even psionics can be used to either help or hurt. We have to accept this every time we publish a new book. Jerry S. Member, TI Comment: My own feeling is that Theosophy will never appeal much to Joe Sixpack (as Eldon pointed out, its too much damned hard work), but I am rooting for you, and will give you an A for effort. From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 02:25:44 1996 Date: 01 Jun 96 22:25:44 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Sheep vs Wolves Message-Id: <960602022543_76400.1474_HHL29-1@CompuServe.COM> >Well, if the list owner refuses to take action, decent people will move on >and leave the wolves to eat each other. > >Bjorn Hello, Bjorn. Welcome to theos-l. You seem to have the wrong idea about us. "Decent people" are sheep. Wolves tend to eat sheep because they are smarter, faster, and more hungry. Sheep tend to be slow and stupid (not a nice word, I know, but I can't think of a better one right now). Now, "sheep" refer to those theosophists who have an intellectual understanding of Theosophy, who believe every word of the theosophical texts, and who think that they know something. "Wolves" are those theosophists who have added direct experiences to their studies, who doubt some of the teachings given out in the literature, and who also think that they know something. Theos-l is a green clovered wide-open pasture in which the sheep meet up with the wolves. A smart sheep will learn from the encounter, while a really dumb one will run away in terror. On the other hand, the wolf too can learn here, and they too are dumb who run off to seek after more docile sheep to kill. Because not all the sheep on theos-l will roll over and play dead, nor will all of them bow down and serve the wolves. Now, the way I see it, the wolves would like nothing more than for the sheep to wise up and become wolves too, wolves being a lot more advanced than sheep (according to the wolves, anyway). The sheep on the other hand would all like the wolves to go back into the forest where they belong (according to the sheep, anyway) and leave them alone to contemplate this pretty pasture in peace. But the wolves refuse to go, and the sheep refuse to become wolves. So, the bottom line for sheep is to learn what they can and to practice what they have read in their books (compassion etc). And the bottom line for wolves is pretty much the same thing. Some fun, huh? >With a couple of individuals tyrranizing just about everybody else, without >any restraint whatsoever, we have a situation of OPPRESSION, not freedom. Gee Bjorn, you sound a bit sheepish here. Could I interest you in a very nice wolf coat? Didn't think so. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 02:25:51 1996 Date: 01 Jun 96 22:25:51 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Ruminations Message-Id: <960602022550_76400.1474_HHL29-2@CompuServe.COM> The conversation between Alexis and Martin is very interesting, and I can't help butting in with some of my own comments: >Alexis>The universe itself, is an entirely value-free information system and >nothing at all which an individual does while in the physical state is going >to have more than an attitudinal effect on their future. Actually, I would think that an "attitudinal effect" would be sufficient. This is, I believe, exactly what the "skandhas" are all about. >>Martin comments: This seems to dismiss all notion of the interrelatedness >>of cosmos and humans. When I say that ethics is built-in in the structure >>of the universe, how do you react then? > >Alexis>There is no judgement, there is no retribution, "seeking of equilibrium", >there is only a milieu that every individual creates for themselves. I agree with Alexis on this one. God help us all, if the universe has a built-in standard of ethics. The various theories of karma are our own human inventions that attempt to "explain" the universe to the human mind. They are models of reality, and as such fall short of the truth. >Alexis>The only think that matters, the only thing in the universe that >matters, is intelligence. It is how that intelligence is utilized and how it >processes and stores information, that is critical. That's what the Universe >is all about, the infinitization of intelligence, and the processing and storing of >information for the use of that intelligence. All information is valid. All >information, and experience is the major source of information, is needful >to the universal data-bank. Although in different words, I have arrived at this same conclusion myself. The Theosophical teaching that the purpose in evolution is self- consciousness and that we all end up better than before is nonsense, in my view. During the Arc of Descent we gain ignorance, and during the Arc of Ascent we gain intelligence and knowledge. >Martin: This spawns another question: how long does this growth >of love, of perception of unity continue? How long does a manvantara last? >Alexis>What an individual human being does with their personal information >data-bank, matters only within their personal paradigm. It does not matter >in the slightest, within the universal paradigm. I think that it does matter a little. The "gods" whatever else they may be, digest the knowledge that we learn. In a practical sense, one person's experience is infinitesimal, but in a theoretical sense, it does count a little bit. Its a bit like the butterfly effect--a butterfly flapping its wings in California will effect the weather in Maryland in a few weeks-- but the amount of this effect is too small to measure. >Alexis: Now as to "reincarnation" as the intrinsic evolving intelligence > manifests serially but non-consequentially, each succeeding manifestation, >and I must emphasize that they are not inter-connected except by way of the >Intrinsic evolving intelligence [Jiva, not Manas I take it], is, nonetheless, > a consequence of all the previous manifestations and so is "flavoured" >or "coloured" by them. But each of them is unique and individual and so is >the "last in line". Your "intrinsic evolving intelligence" is what HPB called the Reincarnating Ego or simply Ego (capital E). I am not so sure that any ray or personality can be called the "last-in-line" except in a relative sense, because time itself is mayavic, and it is the only thing that separates the various ego manifestations. Otherwise, I agree. >Alexis: "Karma", to me, is simply one of religion's "little control mechanisms". >It's a way to make people "behave" according to the dictates of religion and >more important than that, the dictates of the people that run the religion. This is today's materialistic (ala scientific) viewpoint. If we look at karma as simply the Law of Causality, and allow for a little chaos, I have no problem at all with the doctrine of karma. >Martin: It is not something *outside* oneself. That would be absurd >indeed. It is inside onself but has to do with the interconnectedness >of all beings. Wrong. It is both inside and outside. There is an external and an internal karma. Hit your finger with a hammer. The pain that you experience is an external karmic effect of your action. Martin: The 'roll of the dice' theory seems a bit too mechanical to me however. >If such accidents happen, I would rather think of some recompensation >in another life. 'Roll of the dice' is inherently injust. Where does >this leave the idea of justice? Do you throw that away? An extremely good question. However, life consists of dice rolls (sorry Einstein, but God does in fact play dice) and causality both. It contains both chaos and order, and cannot have one without the other lurking about somewhere. A person's birth is most often karmic (order) but occassionally will be pure chance (chaos). The Chaos Factor kicks us in the teeth every once and awhile, without any explaination or "by your leave." Justice is mavaic, like everything else in life. If you like, you can always say that even chaos is one's karma, and in fact, you won't be too wrong, because it is what is sometimes called collective karma, and it comes about simply because we agreed to be mortal human beings when we came here, and so agreed to accept life as it is, chaos and all. If you feel a need for a "reason" why something horrible happened to you, then just remember the famous line "life's a bitch, then you die" and the fact that you signed up for this when you came here. If you are religious, the famous line "its God's will, and God works in mysterious ways" has helped a lot of folks over the years, and makes about as much sense as anything else. >Alexis (re religion): They are unorthodox, but they are my views. I take total >responsibility for them. > >Martin comments: I bet you do! Although Alexis's view is a bit harsh, I tend to agree that we would all be better off without relgions of any kind. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 02:25:57 1996 Date: 01 Jun 96 22:25:57 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Message-Id: <960602022557_76400.1474_HHL29-4@CompuServe.COM> >Let me know how the attempt to get on the newsgroup turns out. Chuck, Let me know when it is available on either Compuserve or AOL. I won't even try it until one of them picks it up. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 03:10:28 1996 Date: 01 Jun 96 23:10:28 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: More Sheep vs Wolves Message-Id: <960602031028_76400.1474_HHL65-1@CompuServe.COM> >You must be kidding. I am sure that the victims that have been torn apart by >their fangs and claws would not agree. I see that there are many considerate >and loving people on this list, of course, and I think their right to >freedom of expression is violently being encroached upon by the not so kind >"wolves", who even seem to be PROUD of their ability to hurt others. Bjorn, please read my "wolves vs sheep" post for some insight into this problem. Yes, its true. Wolves are proud of their actions. Do you know why? Of course you don't. Its because sheep need shock therapy at times. When a wolf lashes out at a sheep, especially a theosophical one, he (or she) would expect to be met with love and compassion--is this not what Theosophy teaches, and is this not what you have been reading and studying about for lo these many years? Well, John Meade's endless patience bears testimony to his theosophical prowess. If you were in charge, your compassion-less nature would have booted Alexis and Chuck into another network (for their own good, doubtless). Theos-l is a battleground my friend. Its a bloody battle between some pretty mean wolves and some pretty hard-headed sheep. Ask Eldon, a well-meaning sheep, whom most of us wolves have come to respect over time simply because he can't be felled, try as we may. But he, at least, answers the fang and claw with compassion (usually) and tolerance (most of the time). I suspect he is a better sheep for it. Anyway, he wants to remain a sheep, and has no desire whatever to become wolfish, and even ignores wolfish tendencies when they subtly enter his thoughts. I admit, he has most of us wolves confounded and circling our wagons. He is a formidable foe, and his postings are being listened to by other sheep (doubtless by those who lurk as well) which make our task doubly difficult. But most sheep are not as bright as Eldon, and they lash back at us with as much invective as a wolf (and here maybe is the way of their conversion, don't you think?). Because sheep that run away, or sheep that cry FOUL in the night against our attacks, are sheep that are not ready for wolf-dom yet anyway, and are certain to remain sheep for at least seven more lifetimes before another chance like theos-l comes along for them. Think about it. Jerry S. Member, TI From ramadoss@eden.com Sat Jun 1 13:40:44 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 08:40:44 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960601084259.26cfc392@mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: TSA Voting Tally Update Hi Here is an update on the subject. The following letter was FAXED to John Algeo. Will keep you informed when I hear from him. ...Ramadoss ======================================== FAX MESSAGE June 1, 1996 8:15 AM John Algeo National President Theosophical Society in America Wheaton IL ELECTION VOTING TALLY Dear Bro. Algeo: It is now two weeks since this subject issue is being corresponded. It is almost a week since I Faxed you a long letter explaining how you should have no problems in sending me the information since the IL law is very clear on the issue of access to TSA information. While the unrestricted disclosure of voting tally is not going to alter the results of the election, unrestricted access to the voting tally data addresses the very fundamental issue of member's access to TSA books and records. If you agree that IL law applies to TSA, then I should have received the information requested by FAX which has not happened so far. If you think that IL law does not apply to TSA, then you should explain in very simple language why, so that we ordinary members can understand? Do you think that this is an unreasonable request from a member in good standing of TSA? On these simple matters, I think everyone expects a quick and fast response. So I am still waiting for (1) quick action from you and (2) to receive the voting tally details by FAX expeditiously. With fraternal greetings Yours fraternally M. K. Ramadoss Member TSA FAXCC: William Greer, National Secretary From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 08:40:44 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TSA Voting Tally Update Message-ID: <2.2.16.19960601084259.26cfc392@mail.eden.com> Hi Here is an update on the subject. The following letter was FAXED to John Algeo. Will keep you informed when I hear from him. ...Ramadoss ======================================== FAX MESSAGE June 1, 1996 8:15 AM John Algeo National President Theosophical Society in America Wheaton IL ELECTION VOTING TALLY Dear Bro. Algeo: It is now two weeks since this subject issue is being corresponded. It is almost a week since I Faxed you a long letter explaining how you should have no problems in sending me the information since the IL law is very clear on the issue of access to TSA information. While the unrestricted disclosure of voting tally is not going to alter the results of the election, unrestricted access to the voting tally data addresses the very fundamental issue of member's access to TSA books and records. If you agree that IL law applies to TSA, then I should have received the information requested by FAX which has not happened so far. If you think that IL law does not apply to TSA, then you should explain in very simple language why, so that we ordinary members can understand? Do you think that this is an unreasonable request from a member in good standing of TSA? On these simple matters, I think everyone expects a quick and fast response. So I am still waiting for (1) quick action from you and (2) to receive the voting tally details by FAX expeditiously. With fraternal greetings Yours fraternally M. K. Ramadoss Member TSA FAXCC: William Greer, National Secretary ------------------------------ End of THEOS-SPAN Digest 14 *************************** From pwalstra@pi.net Sun Jun 2 19:51:28 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 21:52:09 +0200 From: "Peter I. Walstra" Message-Id: <31B1F0E9.6E48@pi.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: TI first object References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > 1. To put into practice the fact that we are all parts of one universal > human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, > class, or color. The revision is fine with me. I also agree with both Alexis' and Martin's proposals. (I guess we all know what it is we're trying to be or do; on the other hand, it's important to make available well-thought-about P.R. stuff for [modern] theosophy.) Peter I. Walstra Member T.I. From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 04:00:40 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:00:40 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602000040_405426821@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Freedom!!!!! I find it fascinating the argument used by petty tyrants who think that they can control what we say and think. They love to draw the imaginary distinction between freedom and license, license being saying things they don't want to hear, like people who think they are chelas are deluded idiots. Then there are those who long for the return of the fascist movements of the 1930's and fear that if people express themselves too openly it will be destructive of "community." So let me make this clear. There is only one person who can decide if this list is to be moderated and that is John Mead and I cannot imagine why he would want the administrative nightmare of doing so, particularly in light of the offense such an action would give to the Americans on this list, who are the overwhelming majority and frankly don't give a damn what other countries do. And it is really no mystery why Americans feel this way. It's part of our history and our folklore. ANY attempt to control speech is absolutely and unqualifiably anathema to us. It is a subject that is not open to discussion and any politician who thinks it can be done has best kiss his office goodbye because even if he survives the first election, he won't last through another one, not after the press has had its way with him and his family. So please stop wasting bandwidth with this nonsense. It is not going to happen and even if by some bizarre lunacy it should, there is a newsgroup now which I can guarantee will never be moderated for any reason. And I can guarantee it because a dear friend of mine put it together for us. The net stays free and if you don't like it, LEAVE! Chuck the Obnoxious, MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker Friend of Alex From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 04:53:08 1996 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 23:53:08 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Earl Grey Council In-Reply-To: <960601191937_547305162@emout16.mail.aol.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 1 Jun 1996 Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Alex, > Well, let's see. This list has a hundred some odd subscribers at best. A > fully carried newsgroup can reach millions. That is exactly what I am dreaming for! May be it will come true one of these days. ....ramadoss From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 03:00:36 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 23:00:36 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020502.AA24859@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 12:04 AM 6/2/96 -0400, Chuck wrote: >So please stop wasting bandwidth with this nonsense. I thought your position was that we all should express ourselves freely on this list? >The net stays free and if you don't like it, LEAVE! Do you find my presence here disturbing? > There is only one person who can decide if this >list is to be moderated and that is John Mead I understand this. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 05:11:01 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:11:01 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Discussions In-Reply-To: <9606020032.AA22811@alpinet.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > At 03:24 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > > > >BTW are you a member of TS (Adyar) or any other organization > > I was a member of the Stockholm lodge when I lived there, but am not a > member at this time. Before and after I have practiced different spiritual > disciplines, within and without this or that organization, such as various > forms of meditation, yoga and Tai Chi/Qi Gong. My first conscious contact > with the Masters in this life was made 20-something years ago, assisted by > "The I Am Discourses" a book containing affirmations and dictations by Saint > Germain and Jesus. For this "opening of the door" I will be ever grateful. > BTW, my first significant spiritual realization came about while reading a > book by Maharishi Mahesh yogi! Today I don't believe he is a part of the > Brotherhood at all, but nevertheless, his writings helped me take a giant > leap forward! Glad to see your message. Couple of things might interest you. Long before Mahesh Yogi became well known, in late 50s I had a good friend who was doing his graduate work in Chicago and later taught in Brooklyn, Mahesh Yogi discussed with him some of his ideas of how to market his ideas and make money. So it was clear from day one, what his long term objectives were. Recently I also read a book by his first "disciple" in the US and organized the group and was the president of the group, that one day after a long meditation he realized that all the effects were just a reaction of his nervous system and nothing to do with any higher matters and instantly he resigned for ever from TM. So I wonder how far away Maheshi Yogi from any of the real Brothers. But I do not dismiss that he or his books or his systems does not help someone. It is said even a stone can teach valuable lessons for an intelligent man. > > I was one of the pioneering New Agers in Sweden, organizing events where > churches and spiritual groups worked together and presented different > programs. This was in the 70ies. > > I liked some of the writings of Annie Besant, readily available in Sweden, > but find them hard to get here. She is not much liked by US theosophists, it This may not be completely true. There are many, who have been benefitted from her books. You do not have to like the author to derive some understanding or benefit from the book. You will be surprised how many Theosophists in the US like her and her books. The proof of the pudding is in eating - if her books have helped someone to better understand or any other way benefitted some one, that is all it counts. > seems. Any idea about how to get a book list to order from? Please send a e-mail to theos@netcom.com with a request for (1) where you can get her books in your country and (2) if you could order them from TPH, Wheaton, IL. As a last resort you can get a list from Adyar and can order from there. The last choice will take time. I heard today that Adyar is on e-mail and keep listening and I will be posting it as soon as I know the e-mail address. BTW, are you interested in any particular book by Annie Besant? Regards, .....Ramadoss > > Bjorn > > roxendal@alpinet.net > > From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 05:12:16 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 00:12:16 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Discussions In-Reply-To: <9606020032.AB22811@alpinet.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Just hang in there. This will soon get better. ....ramadoss On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > At 03:29 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > > > >> At 11:06 AM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >>>> clip >>> > >> Well, if the list owner refuses to take action, decent people will move on > >> and leave the wolves to eat each other. > >> > >> Bjorn > >> > >> roxendal@alpinet.net > > > > A lot of decent people are on this list and some are posting and > >others are lurking. The theosophical "wolves" are kind, > >considerate, loving domesticated ones > > You must be kidding. I am sure that the victims that have been torn apart by > their fangs and claws would not agree. I see that there are many considerate > and loving people on this list, of course, and I think their right to > freedom of expression is violently being encroached upon by the not so kind > "wolves", who even seem to be PROUD of their ability to hurt others. > > Bjorn > > roxendal@alpinet.net > > From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 03:46:48 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 23:46:48 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020548.AA25401@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 12:04 AM 6/2/96 -0400, Chuck wrote: > saying things they >don't want to hear, like people who think they are chelas are deluded idiots. Seeing that you and Alexis don't know me much, at least not yet, I don't find whatever you have to say about me very interesting at all. I do see, however, that you don't mind judging somebody you know very little about. I'll give you a tip: If you want to hurt me, first get to know me and find some of my weak spots and attack there. Then, MAYBE I'll get angry. Which, if I understand the "game" you are playing correctly, would please you? Well, I will tell you what I see in you at this point, since you have very generously been showing off some aspects of your personality : A good heart with a lot of positive feelings for other people. Also Immaturity and the selflimiting identification with the ideas of being an obnoxious troublemaker. The worst problem seems to be that you actually think you are HELPING people with this childish silliness. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 04:13:53 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:13:53 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606020616.AA25561@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 01:11 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >On Sat, 1 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: So I >wonder how far away Maheshi Yogi from any of the real Brothers. But I do >not dismiss that he or his books or his systems does not help someone. In my case his book helped me open my eyes to see that God Consciousness is everywhere. >Please send a e-mail to theos@netcom.com with a request for (1) where you >can get her books in your country Thanks. I live in the US. >BTW, are you interested in any particular book by Annie Besant? Right now I would like to get a little book called something like "Our life in three worlds". I have it in Swedish and find that it presents basic and important teachings in a very concentrated easy to read format - good for new (and old) students. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 06:45:10 1996 Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 23:45:10 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602064510.006c41f0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 06:47 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Martin comments: > >Freedom of speech is a very good and necessary thing indeed. >As with all freedom, however, it is imperative that people learn to operate >within certain self-imposed boundaries, having to do with the rights >and freedoms of others. Why is it that so many Americans are obsessed >with their *rights*? Do they still have to learn their *duties*? >One's duty may be the 'right' of the other, isn't it? Martin: You will find, if you make contact with many other American based groups, that most Americans are positively repelled by the idea of "Duties". Many of us were altogether too frequently disgusted by the concept of "Dienst" in the period 1933 -1945. Most American's you will find will absolutely refuse to learn "their duties". Now as to self-imposed boundaries: Well I have my own and you have your own, there is absolutely no reason they should be identical. I submit that you haven't been on this list long enough to make a creditable evaluation of the overall thrust of my messages. I submit that to judge all my messages by jocular messages between Chuck Cosiman and myself is entirely unfair and irresponsible. I submit that to judge me at all doesn't lie within your purview or authority. I submit that it is my perception that the greatest motivation behind your judgemental attitude towards me derives from the entirely unorthodox approach I have to what Eldon and Daniel call the "Core Doctrines" of Theosophy, and that I believe is the ONLY thing that drives you. If you would go through my postings since I joined the board you would find that, with the exception of my "games" with Chuck Cosimano, the majority of my messages have been thoughtful, original, and entirely unorthodox. But I also submit that the actual content of my messages on this board are of really little interest to you. > >Indeed. But that's not the issue here (except for the Leadbeater case). Please explain the sentence above. I don't wish to misunderstand you. >The issue is, or rather has become: personal attacks on each other. In the first place, if you had been on this list long enough to follow the whole situation, you would find that I am not entirely at fault. I have been accused of things that in my own estimation, I did not do. The problem with Liesel Deutsch originated when she violently reacted to my total disapproval of Charles Webster Leadbeater, my mistake was, and I freely admit it, to let my Russian temper get the best of me and replied in kind. When something I say is true, and is backed up by vast amounts of printed evidence, I do not accept being told that I cannot discuss the subject. I have "filtered" Liesel and you'll find if you read her postings that a great many of them are entirely gratuitous attacks on me, on my veracity, on my intelligence, and on my honor. And yet you apparently feel that I, who have only replied to one particularly scurrilous remark in a fit of anger (and immediately apologized) am entirely and singly at fault. That is unacceptably unfair. >Sure you are wise enough to not belief that anything good comes from it. You are absolutely right that I think nothing good comes of it. But I will tell you that this campaign to make me the "demon" of this list is slanderous, libelous, and totally undeserved. You will get no "Mea Culpeas" out of me. You seem to operate on the premise that to be accused of something makes one guilty, well that may be true in Roman Law but it is not true in American Law. I have been accused of "Bashing" Eldon Tucker, but the accusation is untrue, I disagreed with both his statement and his attitudes, that is indeed true, but that is not "bashing". On the other hand I have been bashed for that illusionary action far more times than I find acceptable. >Why continue or react, as the case may be? (I subscribed but a couple >of days ago to theos-buds and didn't see much of the previous quarrels >there) >Anyway, I'm glad you withdraw your remark about Liesel as Alan rightly >requested. > I'd have apologized far sooner and well before Alan's request but I know that Liesel has me filtered so how would she see it? >Again to this 'self-appointed censor' thing. It sounds as a hollow phrase to >me, because it is used too often by you (and Chuck sometimes). You're not >dealing >with kids on this list, but with grown-ups who *do* have some standards of >behaviour.. >Maybe you will have more success with this style of communicating >on alt.theosophy (if there are many young people on it), but this style >is often contra-productive on this board. You *will* have noticed that >by now, I presume? > Martin: Please delete the sarcasm. I find the attempts at censorship on this board far too one sided, far too personality specific, and infinitely far too indicative of an entirely hypocritical double standard. There seems to be one standard for myself and Chuck, and an entirely different standard for others. This I will never accept. Secondly, I have never assumed I was dealing with "Kids" on this board. I think your assumption that I have is presumptuous to say the least. I also think it's presumptuous of you to imply that people who are young are either ignorant or unintelligent. >Now, having said this, this doesn't mean I'm not interested in your *ideas*. >In fact, I'm going to discuss your views on karma and reincarnation thoroughly >with you, if you can stand severe scrutiny and dissecting of your opinions >on these things. > >Martin Euser > You know Martin; my opinions have been subject to scrutiny and dissection for many years, and by people with strings of Doctorates inches long. Alan Bain is a person who severly scritinizes and criticizes my opinions regularly and I have no trouble with it. You apparently are extremely pleased with yourself, and I have no reason to doubt either your intelligence or your knowledge. But, I'd thank you to return the compliment. I have three hundred students all over this planet, most of them mature and well-educated people, when you insult me, you insult them. alexis > > > > > From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:00:11 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:00:11 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602070011.006aef44@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 06:46 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >>>>>>>cut<<<<<<< >Martin comments: >you use the word 'of course' quite often in your postings. >Is this supposed to add weight to your utterances? Martin: I'm, among many other things, a professional writer. The "of course" is what is called a "stylistic habit" and has no other motivation. I think it would help if you were not so totally negative in your perception of everything I say and do. > >Alexis>I do suggest that it might be polite if you'd "butt out' of what is >obviously a personal continuing conversation in a jocular vein. > > >Martin comments: >'jocular vein', really.. Is it perceived so by Liesel? How "perceived by Liesel" she has made it clear that she has filtered both Chuck and myself...so what we say is hardly anything we expect her to read. >And whence this sulky posting of yours if it concerns only 'jocular vein'? >There is evidently a contradiction between tone and content here.. This is entirely your personal perception Martin, and I think "sulky" is a word one uses to children and I am probably your senior. > > >Alexis> You don't have the faintest idea what the continuing conversation is >all about so why impose upon it? If you had even a faint idea why Paul >Johnson is upset with Daniel Caldwell or why I am upset with Liesel >F.Deutsch you'd have some grounds to discuss it. But you don't so, I repeat, >why impose yourself when you have no knowledge of the causes or situation? > >Martin comments: Before you were a subscriber to theos-l I was at least two >or three times so, dropping out after certain periods for various reasons. >I'm quite aware of the Paul Johnson - Daniel Caldwell debates and ditto >with the debates regarding Leadbeater. So, I *do* know about it, actually >more than I would like to. I will say one thing however, and it is this: >even if you're right about Leadbeater (Jerry H-E has in the past mentioned >some documentary evidence regarding the 'Leadbeater case'), even then >it is far wiser to take someone's [substitute: Liesel] feelings into account >and not try to put your idea's through someone's throat. They're not "ideas" Martin they are facts! This person will >probably vomit and it might just end right in your face.. (an ugly picture, but >a psychological truth). Don't you think you might actually accomplish more >if you would be a little more considerate at times? If you'd been on the list at that time, you'd know that I started out by being very considerate indeed. I dropped the subject entirely and didn't even refer to it. It was only when CWL unavoidably came up in a context divorced from his pederasty and I disagreed with him on some philosophical matters, that Liesel "went off like a rocket". How about Liesel being considerate of my feelings? Eh? >A basic thing is having respect for each other, and I suspect that you >DO have respect 'even for Liesel' despite the comments you were exchanging. >I have (and hate it) to be nitpicking on this point because this respect is not >sounding through very much in your posts (the same would probably be true >for Liesel regarding you - I would have to trace back all the posts even before >I subscribed to this forum this time to be more definitely here) Do so. >Can't you show a little more of that to her? It's far too late for that Martin, I will, if I can, have no further contact with her at all. I don't really like dealing with people who call you names when you disagree with them. > >Friendly, > >Martin Euser > I am nobody's enemy Martin. alexis> > From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:05:07 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:05:07 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602070507.006dee74@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations (Alexis-Martin); Long post! Martin: It is just past midnight here in California and so I have pressed the button and I will give your discussion the attention that it deserves when I have adequate time in the next day or so. It would be fair neither to myself or to you to answer intelligent questions when I am pressed for time and quite tired. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:07:12 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:07:12 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602070712.006db7d8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Will the real Masters KH and M please sit down again At 07:07 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >> >I didn't really think it likely. Another pathetic attempt at humor down >tha pan ... > >ALan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > >Alan: My friend, it must be the fault of all those impossibly teutonic genetics I bear.When I am tired I get too literal to bear. alexis From kymsmith@micron.net Sun Jun 2 07:05:00 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 96 01:05 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: "Isis Unveiled" question I have begun reading "Isis Unveiled," finding it a wonderful and fascinating read, although I have to have a dictionary lying next to me during these reading sessions. I think this monograph will require many repeat readings in order to better understand it. "The Secret Doctrine" is of course next - although it too looks daunting. Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that incarnation into the physical more than once is an exception, rather than the rule? That surprised me; I have read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across that viewpoint. I had read that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over 1000 years) between incarnations, but that would allow for many more incarnations than one or two. Yet, also, the long period of rest between incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even immediate re-incarnations. Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or suggest a consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am premature in my confusion - will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?" Thank You, Kym From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:16:13 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:16:13 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602071613.006db990@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Please stop this At 07:11 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>>>cut<<<<<<<< > >I don't quite understand why people who disagree so considerably cannot >nonetheless agree to "live and let live" in the area of disagreement and >let go of the anger. I would imagine (could be wrong) that as a healer >you might find it difficult to help someone with whom you were extremely >angry at the time. Soon we shall have the original TS material about >the CWL affair circa 1908 that turned up in England recently. The thing is, Alan, I am perfectly willing to "agree to disagree" with Leisel about CWL. But I will NOT agree to "shut up" about the subject when I feel it's as important as it is. Believe me Alan, I'm getting information out of France, Italy, and South America that make the pederasty a minor fluke. What I object to highly is her constant stream of abuse and innuendo because of my attitude towards CWL.She has gone so far as to accuse me of "taking out my problems with my Father on CWL" which is pop psychology and is kind of funny when you consider that the only problem I had re: my Father was the lack of one. > >This is if course about history as much as it is about theosophy, so >some latitude will, I hope, be allowed. I agree, for example, with your >other post concerning ~First Principle of Theosophy~ but would point out >(and do) that as my own first intro to the subject this book gave me a >head start, for all of its flaws. Sometimes it is only by spotting the >mistakes that we are moved to look for the truth. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > As to "spotting the mistakes" Oh Alan that's my favorite method of learning. It's the Rmana Maharshi "Nehti- Nehti_" method...I have always felt one learns more by rejecting nonsense than any other way. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:23:06 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:23:06 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602072306.006e8248@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations At 07:12 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>>>cut<<<<< > >Why not take from any source that's going? Who is to define "tainted"? It's not a difficult definition: The Inquisition+pogroms+gettos+Crusades+The Holocaust= "tainted". "By their fruit shall ye know them!" > >>>>snip<<< >> > >"Prove?" Proving *any* esoteric truth is nigh impossible. We either >experience it or we don't. Having experienced it, we then interpret the >experience. Then we are quite likely to fight about the interpretation! But do we not tend to have experiences that are to some degree "scripted" and the result of the mis en scene of our pre-dispositions and beliefs? >> > >> >I am not trying to change your mind, so un-bait your breath. The >example I have in mind depends upon other sources for its veracity, >though it stands up well as an example of "something other" on its own. >> >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > > Alan: Eh bien mon ami, I await with intense interest. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:28:14 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:28:14 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602072814.006c50b8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? At 07:20 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Well, boogienation is the handle of the devotee who is giving the page to me, >for free and the price being right I can hardly disapprove of his choice of >name. >Let me know how the attempt to get on the newsgroup turns out. I'm having >the devil's own time here. The dark forces are surely at work and Martin is >behind it all, curse him. :-) >Anyway, you, I and the universe know the kind of work we really do. What the >hell do we care what the idiots who don't know us think? >Besides, as we all know from reading the Mad Bishop, Karma is a mathematical >concept. Now if we add in the silly Wiccan idea of everything coming back >three times, we get something like this. >"The life of a sparrow is worth the lives of three hundred thousand people," >Earth First >That being the case, for every sparrow I keep alive in the winter I get to >kill three hundred thousand people without any karmic imbalance. >Of course it's hokum! That's why I just wrote it. But as Karma as they >define it is hokum as well, why worry about something that doesn't exist? >In any event, I grow impatient with these fools. I can't wait until we are >all on alt.theosophy and they have to deal with real people. >How fast do you think Martin can run? > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > You know that Martin will in all likelihood take every word you just said totally seriously. He's Dutch (I think) and they are as entirely literal as any German or Slav. Holland is still one of my two or three favorite places. Dutch Boys are really good in bed! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:29:42 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:29:42 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602072942.006ad894@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Will the real Masters KH and M please stand up At 07:21 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Perhaps Bjorn should be reminded who won the Battle of Poltava. > >Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >My Great-Grandfather eight times removed! That's who! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:32:42 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:32:42 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602073242.006c3d08@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Col. Michael Aquino At 07:21 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >I think it would be a great idea to get him on this list. Just think how >fast everyone would unsubscribe! Oh I don't know despite the few who find us inconvenient and too "shocking" there are a number of really intelligent people on this list and I like to have dsicussions with them, and I am sure they'd find the colonel both interesting and intriguing. >Of course, John Mead may not be too happy with me if that happened though I >get the impression he secretly enjoys all this. After all, he knew what >would happen when he created it. I think so too! > >Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:34:42 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:34:42 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602073442.006cb6e8@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 07:23 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >I suggest we nominate Martin for the Madame Blavatsky's Baboon Award. > >Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA > >Chuck: But if we did that, what would we have to nominate the terrrible Swede for? The Hagar the Horrible award? alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:41:40 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:41:40 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602074140.006e4c40@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 08:30 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >You must be kidding. I am sure that the victims that have been torn apart by >their fangs and claws would not agree. I see that there are many considerate >and loving people on this list, of course, and I think their right to >freedom of expression is violently being encroached upon by the not so kind >"wolves", who even seem to be PROUD of their ability to hurt others. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >Bjorn: No, he's not kidding he's just been on the list a lot longer than you. As to your remarks above, they are far more arrogantly intemperate than any I could be accused of. Why don't you think about that? People who cast stones at others, and that seems your specialty, had better be very careful to be entirely without sin. And your comments about wolves are utter hyperbole, I sleep with one of them lying across the end of my bed every night. I think Bjorn that Denali (my wolf) is a far kinder and more gentle person than you. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 07:57:56 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:57:56 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602075756.006bb808@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 08:38 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >At 08:08 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >> Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis >>decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough >>respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. He just hit out, >>blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. For shame! And >>that calls itself a shaman! >> >>Liesel >> >> >> >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >This is directed to the entire list. That is an example of the constant stream of invective that proceeds from that source. If I am constantly taking to task for ignoring her except once, for which I immediately apologized, then where are her responsibilities to me? I was, and still am under the impression that Martin's last name was EULER If it isn't I was wrong. But her implication that I misspelled his name out of malice is totally insane. Now, when we get down to malice, and viciousness, how do we describe calling another Human Being a "that"? I also wasn't under any impression that I had picked a fight with Martin, and we are having some interesting and lively discussions, with no really sharp disagreements that I can see. As far as to my qualifications to being a shaman, she has no basis of comparison. When she can cure the very sick (animals too) as frequently as I do, she can begin to judge me. And all this because I presume to tell the truth about someone she forbids me to do so about! Now this is an example of the "double standard" that people on this list exercise that I complain so bitterly about. Never, ever, not once, on this board have I spewed streams of invective and spite, and yet Liesel is sympathized with and I am castigated. For Shame indeed! alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 08:19:05 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 01:19:05 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602081905.006d90cc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Ruminations At 10:31 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: Jerry: The set of apparent questions and answers below, are Martin's questions in response to my pamphlet; ruminations, and my first set of responses to him. The second set is in preparation and I will post it in the next couple of days (this is a busy weekend for me socially) Today (the 2nd june)is my 25th anniversary with my domestic partner John. The only differences between your views and mine are that, as always, yours tend to be less radical. alexis >The conversation between Alexis and Martin is very interesting, and >I can't help butting in with some of my own comments: > >>Alexis>The universe itself, is an entirely value-free information system and >>nothing at all which an individual does while in the physical state is going >>to have more than an attitudinal effect on their future. > Actually, I would think that an "attitudinal effect" would be >sufficient. This is, I believe, exactly what the "skandhas" are all about. > > >>>Martin comments: This seems to dismiss all notion of the interrelatedness >>>of cosmos and humans. When I say that ethics is built-in in the structure >>>of the universe, how do you react then? >> >>Alexis>There is no judgement, there is no retribution, "seeking of >equilibrium", >>there is only a milieu that every individual creates for themselves. > I agree with Alexis on this one. God help us all, if the universe >has a built-in standard of ethics. The various theories of karma are our >own human inventions that attempt to "explain" the universe to the >human mind. They are models of reality, and as such fall short of the >truth. > > >>Alexis>The only think that matters, the only thing in the universe that >>matters, is intelligence. It is how that intelligence is utilized and how it >>processes and stores information, that is critical. That's what the Universe >>is all about, the infinitization of intelligence, and the processing and >storing of >>information for the use of that intelligence. All information is valid. All >>information, and experience is the major source of information, is needful >>to the universal data-bank. > Although in different words, I have arrived at this same conclusion >myself. The Theosophical teaching that the purpose in evolution is self- >consciousness and that we all end up better than before is nonsense, in >my view. During the Arc of Descent we gain ignorance, and during the >Arc of Ascent we gain intelligence and knowledge. > > >>Martin: This spawns another question: how long does this growth >>of love, of perception of unity continue? > How long does a manvantara last? > >>Alexis>What an individual human being does with their personal information >>data-bank, matters only within their personal paradigm. It does not matter >>in the slightest, within the universal paradigm. > I think that it does matter a little. The "gods" whatever else >they may be, digest the knowledge that we learn. In a practical sense, >one person's experience is infinitesimal, but in a theoretical sense, >it does count a little bit. Its a bit like the butterfly effect--a butterfly >flapping >its wings in California will effect the weather in Maryland in a few weeks-- >but the amount of this effect is too small to measure. > >>Alexis: Now as to "reincarnation" as the intrinsic evolving intelligence >> manifests serially but non-consequentially, each succeeding manifestation, >>and I must emphasize that they are not inter-connected except by way of the >>Intrinsic evolving intelligence [Jiva, not Manas I take it], is, nonetheless, >> a consequence of all the previous manifestations and so is "flavoured" >>or "coloured" by them. But each of them is unique and individual and so is >>the "last in line". > Your "intrinsic evolving intelligence" is what HPB called the >Reincarnating Ego or simply Ego (capital E). I am not so sure that any >ray or personality can be called the "last-in-line" except in a relative >sense, because time itself is mayavic, and it is the only thing that >separates the various ego manifestations. Otherwise, I agree. > >>Alexis: "Karma", to me, is simply one of religion's "little control >mechanisms". >>It's a way to make people "behave" according to the dictates of religion and >>more important than that, the dictates of the people that run the religion. > This is today's materialistic (ala scientific) viewpoint. If we >look at karma as simply the Law of Causality, and allow for a little chaos, >I have no problem at all with the doctrine of karma. > > >>Martin: It is not something *outside* oneself. That would be absurd >>indeed. It is inside onself but has to do with the interconnectedness >>of all beings. > Wrong. It is both inside and outside. There is an external >and an internal karma. Hit your finger with a hammer. The pain that >you experience is an external karmic effect of your action. > > I call it the "Chaos Factor" but a rose is a rose is a rose. > >>Martin: The 'roll of the dice' theory seems a bit too mechanical to me however. >>If such accidents happen, I would rather think of some recompensation >>in another life. 'Roll of the dice' is inherently injust. Where does >>this leave the idea of justice? Do you throw that away? > An extremely good question. However, life consists of >dice rolls (sorry Einstein, but God does in fact play dice) and causality >both. It contains both chaos and order, and cannot have one without >the other lurking about somewhere. A person's birth is most often >karmic (order) but occassionally will be pure chance (chaos). The Chaos >Factor kicks us in the teeth every once and awhile, without any explaination >or "by your leave." Justice is mavaic, like everything else in life. If >you like, you can always say that even chaos is one's karma, and in >fact, you won't be too wrong, because it is what is sometimes called >collective karma, and it comes about simply because we agreed to >be mortal human beings when we came here, and so agreed to >accept life as it is, chaos and all. If you feel a need for a "reason" >why something horrible happened to you, then just remember the >famous line "life's a bitch, then you die" and the fact that you signed >up for this when you came here. If you are religious, the famous >line "its God's will, and God works in mysterious ways" has helped >a lot of folks over the years, and makes about as much sense as >anything else. > >>Alexis (re religion): They are unorthodox, but they are my views. I take total > >>responsibility for them. >> >>Martin comments: I bet you do! > Although Alexis's view is a bit harsh, I tend to agree that we would >all be better off without relgions of any kind. > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > > > From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 08:35:40 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 01:35:40 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602083540.006d9930@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 01:45 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>cut<<<<<<<< >Seeing that you and Alexis don't know me much, at least not yet, I don't >find whatever you have to say about me very interesting at all. I do see, >however, that you don't mind judging somebody you know very little about. Alexis comments: One needs to know very little at all about a person who publically claims to be "A Chela of the Masters", and who publically claims to have been "In contact with the Masters for 20 years". Sorry but this is one of the few times I agree wholeheartedly with the conservative occult approach. "Anyone who makes public claims is making false claims". I also freely admit that based upon both study and experience I have absolutely no respect for the intelligence of anyone who takes either Mr. Ballard's "I am Movement" or Elisabeth Clair Prophet's "Church Universal and Triumphant" seriously. Ballard was a fraud who went to jail for swindling little old ladies out of their pensions, and Elisabeth Clair Prophet hasn't gone to jail yet! Bjorn, you clearly have delusions of grandeur. It only takes a few moments experience of you to realize that! >I'll give you a tip: If you want to hurt me, first get to know me and find >some of my weak spots and attack there. Then, MAYBE I'll get angry. Which, >if I understand the "game" you are playing correctly, would please you? > >Well, I will tell you what I see in you at this point, since you have very >generously been showing off some aspects of your personality : > >A good heart with a lot of positive feelings for other people. > >Also > >Immaturity and the selflimiting identification with the ideas of being an >obnoxious troublemaker. The worst problem seems to be that you actually >think you are HELPING people with this childish silliness. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > > From liesel@dreamscape.com Sun Jun 2 07:53:40 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 03:53:40 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606020858.EAA27903@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: courtesy Alexis writes one has to admire or ignore Leadbeater to have some kind of relationship >with Leisel, I will forgo the pleasure. AlLiesel answers Alexis, my name is Liesel. It isn't at all that you don't like CWL, but rather that you get insulting. You did the same thing recently when you talked about Dora Kunz. She happens to be a very much loved, & highly respected elder stateslady of TS Wheaton. And all you can do is try to rip her down. Sorry, pal, but I won't stand for that. When you can keep a decent tongue in your head I might talk to you, but not if you deal in half truths & insults. Liesel From liesel@dreamscape.com Sun Jun 2 08:02:16 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 04:02:16 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606020907.FAA03402@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To: Bjorn Dear Bjorn, Yoou can get all the Annie Besant books you'd like by writing to The Theosophical Publishing House Box 270 Wheaton Ill. 60189 1-800-669 -9425 You can order books, or ask for their catalogue. But aks for the one which contains Besant books, because they're always publishing little flyers with a few titles listed on them. Liesel From Richtay@aol.com Sun Jun 2 10:08:13 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 06:08:13 -0400 From: Richtay@aol.com Message-Id: <960602060811_208725885@emout08.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Dear Bjorn, I am one of those who have permanently signed off from Theos-L, among quite a few others I know. After over a year on it and quite a few fruitful discussions. I signed off a few weeks ago, after wanting to for a long time, when Eldon was brutally attacked in another pointless round of posts where the SUBSTANCE of what he said was rarely addressed, rather it was his CHARACTER and MOTIVE which was attacked. And it was **nasty**. No apologies were offered either. I had it. It is sad that after 10 years in the Theosophical movement, working hard, putting out a Theosophical newsmagazine, working in a local lodge, connecting with Theosophists all over the world, I didn't feel welcome on the very list where we should have all been able to come together, lovingly, and support each other in our work for the Movement. No luck. You should be informed, however, that a new list has been formed for the express purpose of discussing THEOSOPHY, its principles, and its practice, with NO PERSONAL ATTACKS allowed or the list owners WILL boot people off the list. The name of the list is THEOSOPHY WORLD and you can subscribe to theos-world@theosophy.com. Spread this info to whomever you think might be interested. I would be interested in getting to know you and your work in the movement, what books you read, what projects you're involved in, etc. Best wishes. Your brother, Rich Taylor From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 10:23:26 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:23:26 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: "Isis Unveiled" question In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Kym Isis Unveiled is a very fascinating book. One of the things that one may want to keep in view is that there are always exceptions to the rule. Sometimes these exceptions are more difficult to understand than the rule. You are right in that it is daunting task to read Secret Doctrine. Many of the books by Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater are much easier to read and understand. However, Theosophy being what it is, there are many who think only what HP Blavatsky wrote is authentic. It would be best for you read them for yourself and decide for yourself. .....Ramadoss On Sun, 2 Jun 1996 kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > I have begun reading "Isis Unveiled," finding it a wonderful and fascinating > read, although I have to have a dictionary lying next to me during these > reading sessions. I think this monograph will require many repeat readings > in order to better understand it. "The Secret Doctrine" is of course next - > although it too looks daunting. > > Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that incarnation > into the physical more than once is an exception, rather than the rule? > That surprised me; I have read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across > that viewpoint. I had read that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over > 1000 years) between incarnations, but that would allow for many more > incarnations than one or two. Yet, also, the long period of rest between > incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even > immediate re-incarnations. > > Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or suggest a > consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am premature in my confusion - > will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?" > > Thank You, > > Kym > > From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 10:34:38 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:34:38 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: courtesy In-Reply-To: <199606020858.EAA27903@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 2 Jun 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > Alexis writes > > one has to admire or ignore Leadbeater to have some kind of relationship > >with Leisel, I will forgo the pleasure. > > AlLiesel answers > > Alexis, my name is Liesel. > > It isn't at all that you don't like CWL, but rather that you get insulting. > You did the same thing recently when you talked about Dora Kunz. She happens > to be a very much loved, & highly respected elder stateslady of TS Wheaton. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Liesel: I love this. This is what HPB meant when she talked about courageous defense of those injustly attacked. I may or may not agree with someone, but I respect those who have provided their services to TS and tried to propogate Theosophy to the best of their ability. ....Ramadoss > And all you can do is try to rip her down. Sorry, pal, but I won't stand for > that. When you can keep a decent tongue in your head I might talk to you, > but not if you deal in half truths & insults. > > > > Liesel > > From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 10:39:50 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:39:50 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Discussions In-Reply-To: <960602060811_208725885@emout08.mail.aol.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 2 Jun 1996 Richtay@aol.com wrote: > Dear Bjorn, > > I am one of those who have permanently signed off from Theos-L, among quite a > few others I know. After over a year on it and quite a few fruitful > discussions. I signed off a few weeks ago, after wanting to for a long time, > when Eldon was brutally attacked in another pointless round of posts where > the SUBSTANCE of what he said was rarely addressed, rather it was his > CHARACTER and MOTIVE which was attacked. And it was **nasty**. No apologies > were offered either. I had it. > > It is sad that after 10 years in the Theosophical movement, working hard, > putting out a Theosophical newsmagazine, working in a local lodge, connecting > with Theosophists all over the world, I didn't feel welcome on the very list > where we should have all been able to come together, lovingly, and support > each other in our work for the Movement. No luck. Rich: You should know that many on this list, including me, enjoyed your posts as many were also very educative. So please feel free to post whenever you feel like. ....Ramadoss > > You should be informed, however, that a new list has been formed for the > express purpose of discussing THEOSOPHY, its principles, and its practice, > with NO PERSONAL ATTACKS allowed or the list owners WILL boot people off the > list. The name of the list is THEOSOPHY WORLD and you can subscribe to > theos-world@theosophy.com. > > Spread this info to whomever you think might be interested. > > I would be interested in getting to know you and your work in the movement, > what books you read, what projects you're involved in, etc. Best wishes. > > Your brother, > Rich Taylor > From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 10:56:38 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 05:56:38 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Blind Men and the Elephant Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Here is some thing that we can think about. Theosophy was not officially defined when Theosophical Society was launched in 1875. There have been discussions on various issues relating to the unseen world and as such there is always a difference of opinion. This reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Just like each blind man tried to feel one part of the elephant and tried to generalize what the whole elephant looks like, we have Theosophy that we all try to attempt to describe or define or understand. Buddha, faced a somewhat similar situation dealing with various concepts that he tried to discuss. He stated that since there will always be difference in opinion on the unseen, it is easier to discuss those things which are seen. I think when new comers see all the discussion going on here and try to understand what Theosophy is, the above may help them understand why there is always differences of opinion or views etc. ...Ramadoss From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 11:17:45 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 06:17:45 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Donna In-Reply-To: <199606020005.UAA02314@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Donna: I very much liked your post and would like you to know about it. ...Ramadoss From blafoun@azstarnet.com Sun Jun 2 15:59:39 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 08:59:39 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@AZStarNet.com (Blavatsky Foundation) Message-Id: <199606021559.IAA07914@web.azstarnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: "Isis Unveiled" question: To Kym on Reincarnation and Isis Kym writes: >I have begun reading "Isis Unveiled," finding it a wonderful and fascinating >read, although I have to have a dictionary lying next to me during these >reading sessions. I think this monograph will require many repeat readings >in order to better understand it. "The Secret Doctrine" is of course next - >although it too looks daunting. > >Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that incarnation >into the physical more than once is an exception, rather than the rule? >That surprised me; I have read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across >that viewpoint. I had read that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over >1000 years) between incarnations, but that would allow for many more >incarnations than one or two. Yet, also, the long period of rest between >incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even >immediate re-incarnations. > >Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or suggest a >consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am premature in my confusion - >will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?" > >Thank You, > >Kym > Daniel replies: Kym, I would suggest that as you read Isis Unveiled that you also consult several other sources. In the Collected Writing Edition of Isis (edited by Boris de Zirkoff), Mr. de Zirkoff has written a very informative "Introductory" on "How 'Isis Unveiled' Was Written." (Vol1, 62 pp.----Wheaton, Ilinois, Theosophical Publishing House." In this Introductory, Mr. de Zirkoff (on pp. 43-5) goes over certain facts and "seeming discrepancies", especially concerning reincarnation. Also I would consult the "The Mahatma Letters" from the Masters M. and K.H., there are three differnt editions currently in print, but if you look in the index under "Isis Unveiled", you will see a good number of pages in which the Mahatmas make certain comments on the writing of Isis, etc. In one of the Mahatma Letters, Master Morya pens the following note to A.P. Sinnett: "By-the-bye, I'll re-write for you pages 345 to 357, Vol. I, of Isis---much jumbled and confused by Olcott, who thought he was improving it!", Letter No. 13, p. 75 in the 3rd Edition of the Mahatma Letters. Colonel Olcott served as one of the proof-readers for Isis and also "englished" some of the text for H.P.B. And in Madame Blavatsky's THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY, the question is asked: "But does not the author of 'Isis Unveiled' stand accused of having preached against re-incarnation?" And HPB answers: "...At the time that work was written [1875-76-77)], re-incarnation was not believed in by any Spiritualists, either English or American, and what is said there of *re-incarnation* was directed against the French Spiritists....The Re-incarnationists of the Allan Kardec School believe in an arbitrary and immediate re-incarnation. With them, the dead father can incarnate in his own unborn daughter, and so on. They have neither Devachan, Karma, nor any philosophy that would warrant or prove the necessity of consecutive rebirths. But how can the author of 'Isis Unveiled' argue against *Karmic* reincarnation, at long intervals varying between 1,000 and 1,500 years, when it is the fundamental belief of both Buddhists and Hindus?" pp. 191-192 original edition. And as early as April 12, 1875, HPB mentions (in a letter to a correspondent) "Allan Kardec" and says: "...though I do not beieve in reincarnation in the same sense as the French spiritists...." There is much more that could be said on this subject. There are, in fact, a number of articles written by H.P.B. on this very subject of reincarnation and Isis. I'm glad that you are diving into Isis. I would suggest that you read it very slowly and with as much attention as you can muster. This will pay off for you later in your studies. Too many students read HPB's works like they would a novel or a newspaper! I'm also glad that you are intent upon reading later the Secret Doctrine. Before you read the Secret Doctrine, I would suggest that you read the following three books: THE OCCULT WORLD by A.P. Sinnett ESOTERIC BUDDHISM by A.P. Sinnett THE MAHATMA LETTERS TO A.P. SINNETT Chronologically speaking: 1877 ISIS UNVEILED 1881 THE OCCULT WORLD 1883 ESOTERIC BUDDHISM [1880-5] THE MAHATMA LETTERS 1888 THE SECRET DOCTRINE Reading these books in chronological order will help you to see the *unfolding* of the teachings as given by H.P.B. and her Masters. Also, Kym, if you're interested, we can suggest other select articles by HPB which give additional insights as you read these works. Reading these works may be difficult for you. Do not let THAT deter you! The struggle to understand what you read will be very productive IN THE LONG RUN! If you're interested I will give you several quotes from the Mahatma Letters which give good advice on how to study the Theosophical teachings. Let me know and I will post them to you. Daniel Daniel H. Caldwell P.S. Also I will be most happy to help you obtain any of the above works that you do not have. Just let me know and I will give you ordering info, etc. or possibly some of these works can be borrowed either from your local library or elsewhere. Just let us know how we may help you. From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 16:18:08 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:18:08 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602121808_316413639@emout12.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions You have not seen us begin to tear people apart. Stick around. Chuck the Atrocious Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 16:18:58 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:18:58 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602121857_316414045@emout16.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Jerry, Where have you been. Alex and I have been worried. You're right, psionics can be used both ways. It's supposed to be. That's why I wrote the books in the first place. In my experience I have seen a number the Joe Sixpacks of the world come into the TS and stay and have a wonderful experience. It is only hard if you take the books literally. Chuck the Obnoxious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker Wolf From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 16:19:04 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:19:04 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602121903_316414106@emout12.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Sheep vs Wolves Jerry, Of course the sheep are stupid. They think they're chelas. Or, as Dora Kunz once asked me after seeing me argue fruitlessly with a devout and extremely stupid sheep for an entire afternoon, "Where did the Masters get him and how can we send him back?" Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker Wolf in wolf's clothing From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 16:19:06 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:19:06 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602121906_316414130@emout16.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Jerry, Hopefully, it will available soon. I have a similar problem and I am responsible for its creation even though it was done by a dear friend of mine. Chuck the Wolf MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker "Now let me see, where was recipe for roast chela?" From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 16:19:59 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 12:19:59 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602121908_316414151@emout10.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: More Sheep vs Wolves Jerry, The smart sheep may come back as wolves the next time, the dumb sheep have to wait seven incarnations and the idiot sheep who think they are chelas because a crook told them just go to avitchi and bother us no more. Chuck the Enlightened Wolf MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From eldon@theosophy.com Sun Jun 2 23:18:30 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 16:18:30 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602231830.006991f0@mail.deltanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: "Isis Unveiled" question Kym: >Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states >that incarnation into the physical more than once is an >exception, rather than the rule? That surprised me; I have >read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across that >viewpoint. I had read that Theosophy espouses to long >periods (over 1000 years) between incarnations, but that >would allow for many more incarnations than one or two. The general rule, as I've understood it, is perhaps thousands of years between lifetimes. There are, though, a number of factors that cause this to vary. Being in the Kali Yuga, or dark age, where the most spiritual advance is possible, being in incarnation is more desirable, and people have shorter after-death experiences. A greater percentage of people are embodied at any one time, and the population of the earth swells. People who die prematurely, by accident, may dwell in the earth's atmosphere, unconscious in kamaloka, for the duration of what their lives would have been. Or they may sometimes find immediate rebirth. There are other special cases where when a young child dies, an adept may take up life in the dying-child's body, and become its new occupant. (This is called "avesa".) For people with little spiritual content in their lives, there is little energies to be worked out in the after death states, and they'd find quicker rebirths. Some extreme cases would have almost immediate rebirth. (This does not mean that they're horribly unevolved individuals, but just that their current lifetime has been mostly a waste. We all have bad days where nothing seems to get done; on a bigger scale, sometimes there's a whole lifetime that has nothing to show for it.) On the other end of the scale, for Mahatmas, able to give tangible expression to all their inner spiritual urges, they'd have very short or non-existent after-death states, because in them all the higher energies that were felt in life were fulfilled; there was no unfulfilled dreams, longings, aspirations to fuel a heaven world experience (devachan in Theosophical books, or dewachan in Tibetan). >Yet, also, the long period of rest between incarnations seems >to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even immediate >re-incarnations. As you see from above, although there are many exceptions that I won't have mentioned in this quick message, many do have short between-life experiences, although that is not the general rule. There are differences between Theosophy and Eastern philosophy, because it is a fresh presentation of the esoteric philosophy. (One example of these differences is that Theosophy says "once a man always a man", whereas some Eastern religions call for rebirth in lower forms like as animals.) Established religions and philosophies tend to decay over time, and need reformers to restore them to their original truths. Theosophy was an attempt at reform at Western thought, although it already shows its own signs of decay, finding itself buried in a mound of contradictory opinion of its would-be followers. >Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or >suggest a consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am premature >in my confusion - will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?" There's a lot that is addressed in "The Secret Doctrine", but for the more basic questions that you ask, a good intermediate theosophical book might be helpful. Two I'd recommend would be "The Ocean of Theosophy" by W.Q. Judge and "The Esoteric Tradition" by G. de Purucker. Others on theos-l may recommend different books based upon their backgrounds. -- Eldon From eldon@theosophy.com Sun Jun 2 23:27:39 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 16:27:39 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602232739.006ac92c@mail.deltanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Buying Theosophical Books in Europe Bjorn: To get theosophical books in Europe, it can take quite a while to order from an American publishing house. Here are other, closer sources for theosophical literature: Gazelle Books Services, Ltd. Falcon House Queen Square Lancaster LA1 1RH UNITED KINGDOM They carry books by Point Loma Publications and perhaps by other theosophical publishers. Theosophical Library Center 33 Thornton Hill Exeter, Devon EX4 4NR UNITED KINGDOM They are the representatives of the T.S. Pasadena. Theosophical Publishing House [London] 50 Gloucester Place London W1H 4EA UNITED KINGDOM These are the most likely to carry Annie Besant's books. -- Eldon From blafoun@azstarnet.com Sun Jun 2 18:05:03 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 11:05:03 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@AZStarNet.com (Blavatsky Foundation) Message-Id: <199606021805.LAA18380@web.azstarnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Attention: Liesel and Alexis Liesel and Alexis, In my opinion, both of you need to cool it with each other. If either one of you wants to write spiteful things about each other, e-mail each other privately. Please spare the rest of us! Come on, shake hands over cyberspace and stop those painful words. You are both human and apparently you two just don't relate well to each other! Alexis apologized and I hope you Liesel will do also. I am not taking sides and I am not trying to be a mediator, but nothing is being gained by this name calling ,etc. Why can't the two of you discuss CWL without getting into a cyberspace fist fight? Alexis, if you have facts on CWL, present them. And Liesel, if you know differently, then present the facts on the other side. But can't this be done with some cool, calm deliberation instead of what all of this has degenerated into? I know you probably both feel strongly about the issue under consideration, but all this personal "back and forth" is negative and serves no useful, constructive purpose for either one of you or for the rest of us. Daniel >At 08:38 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: > >> >>At 08:08 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>> Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis >>>decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough >>>respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. He just hit out, >>>blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. For shame! And >>>that calls itself a shaman! >>> >>>Liesel >>> >>> >>> >>roxendal@alpinet.net >> >> >>This is directed to the entire list. > >That is an example of the constant stream of invective that proceeds from >that source. If I am constantly taking to task for ignoring her except once, >for which I immediately apologized, then where are her responsibilities to me? > >I was, and still am under the impression that Martin's last name was EULER >If it isn't I was wrong. But her implication that I misspelled his name out >of malice is totally insane. > >Now, when we get down to malice, and viciousness, how do we describe calling >another Human Being a "that"? > >I also wasn't under any impression that I had picked a fight with Martin, >and we are having some interesting and lively discussions, with no really >sharp disagreements that I can see. > >As far as to my qualifications to being a shaman, she has no basis of >comparison. When she can cure the very sick (animals too) as frequently as I >do, she can begin to judge me. > >And all this because I presume to tell the truth about someone she forbids >me to do so about! > >Now this is an example of the "double standard" that people on this list >exercise that I complain so bitterly about. Never, ever, not once, on this >board have I spewed streams of invective and spite, and yet Liesel is >sympathized with and I am castigated. For Shame indeed! > >alexis > > > From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 18:54:57 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 11:54:57 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602185457.006b294c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: "Isis Unveiled" question At 03:10 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >I have begun reading "Isis Unveiled," finding it a wonderful and fascinating >read, although I have to have a dictionary lying next to me during these >reading sessions. I think this monograph will require many repeat readings >in order to better understand it. "The Secret Doctrine" is of course next - >although it too looks daunting. Alexis comments: An important thing to remember Kym, while you use your dictionary, is that HPB was only just familiarizing herself with English when she wrote "Isis". English wasn't her second language but far more likely her seventh or eighth. If I might suggest something though, it probably wouldn't be too good an idea to go directly from "Isis" to the "Secret Doctrine", they are very different books and both of them are difficult though in entirely different ways. The possible problem is "burn out". Too much at once, can burn the most dedicated scholar out. It might be a good idea to read some books about Theosophy from all sorts of viewpoints, and then go back to the "hard stuff". > >Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that incarnation >into the physical more than once is an exception, rather than the rule? >That surprised me; I have read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across >that viewpoint. I had read that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over >1000 years) between incarnations, but that would allow for many more >incarnations than one or two. Yet, also, the long period of rest between >incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even >immediate re-incarnations. Alexis comments: The second object of the theosophical movement is the comparative study of religions, philosophies, and sciences. This is where that object comes into play. One should make a study of what all the points of view on the subject of incarnation and reincarnation are, and compare them for points of contact. > >Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or suggest a >consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am premature in my confusion - >will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?" Alexis comments: I don't think there is any one source available to answer your questions in any kind of authoritative manner. But it's the study of all of the various sources that is the most productive of the growth of understanding. No one source is ever the "absolute truth", not Blavatsky, not anyone, and she would have been the first to tell you this. > >Thank You, > >Kym > Best wishes in your adventure. alexis dolgorukii > From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 18:59:43 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 11:59:43 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602185943.006b355c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: courtesy At 06:37 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: > > > >> And all you can do is try to rip her down. Sorry, pal, but I won't stand for >> that. When you can keep a decent tongue in your head I might talk to you, >> but not if you deal in half truths & insults. >> >> >> >> Liesel >> >> > >Leisel: I have absolutely no desire to "talk" to you at all. I've had enough of your invective and insults. Your perceptions of anything I say are so blinded by your antipathy to me that it's not worth the effort. I'll leave you "filtered" thank you. I have no intention of insulting you, either publically or privately, but I see absolutely no reason to subject myself to your hatefulness. alexis From alexei@slip.net Sun Jun 2 19:09:34 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 12:09:34 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960602190934.006b1b6c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 02:07 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: Daniel: I thank you for your intelligent words. But there's nothing to worry about, there will be no further contact between myself and Leisel on any subject at all. I've had all I am about to put up with and as far as I can see there's just nothing at all of value to be gained by anybody in continuing the contact. I've apologized for an angry and stupid comment I made in the spate of hot temper. As far as I can see there's absolutely no chance at all of Leisel ever apologizing, so forget it. She is so blind sided by her antipathy to me that no matter what I say she warps it to some kind of negative action. Tutti finito! alexis From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 17:18:19 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 13:18:19 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606021920.AA29694@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Buying Theosophical Books in Europe At 12:41 PM 6/2/96 -0400, Eldon wrote: > >To get theosophical books in Europe, it can take quite a while >to order from an American publishing house. Thank you, but since I now live in the US I will try to order from Illinois. Bjorn > roxendal@alpinet.net From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 19:23:04 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 14:23:04 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Buying Theosophical Books in Europe In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960602232739.006ac92c@mail.deltanet.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Probably TPH London may also be a good source. ....ramadoss From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 17:31:30 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 13:31:30 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606021933.AA29790@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 02:07 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >Liesel and Alexis, >In my opinion, both of you need to cool it with each other. If either one >of you wants to write spiteful things about each other, e-mail each other >privately. If personal vendettas are necessary, private E-mail is the right place for them. Please spare the rest of us! Indeed. I have received email from a former listmember who came to a point when this list seemed to be a nightmare or even "curse" to him. all this personal "back and forth" is >negative and serves no useful, constructive purpose for either one of you or >for the rest of us. This, I think, is the key issue. As long as these tendencies dominate on the list, the purpose for which the list was created is compromised, which is an understatement. Many intelligent, mature and constructive members are unsubscribing. Unless the listowner takes action, this list is likely to be a lost cause. New lists are forming and will replace this one as a meeting place for constructive theosophists. Bjorn > > >>At 08:38 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >> >>> >>>At 08:08 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>> Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis >>>>decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough >>>>respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. He just hit out, >>>>blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. For shame! And >>>>that calls itself a shaman! >>>> >>>>Liesel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>roxendal@alpinet.net >>> >>> >>>This is directed to the entire list. >> >>That is an example of the constant stream of invective that proceeds from >>that source. If I am constantly taking to task for ignoring her except once, >>for which I immediately apologized, then where are her responsibilities to me? >> >>I was, and still am under the impression that Martin's last name was EULER >>If it isn't I was wrong. But her implication that I misspelled his name out >>of malice is totally insane. >> >>Now, when we get down to malice, and viciousness, how do we describe calling >>another Human Being a "that"? >> >>I also wasn't under any impression that I had picked a fight with Martin, >>and we are having some interesting and lively discussions, with no really >>sharp disagreements that I can see. >> >>As far as to my qualifications to being a shaman, she has no basis of >>comparison. When she can cure the very sick (animals too) as frequently as I >>do, she can begin to judge me. >> >>And all this because I presume to tell the truth about someone she forbids >>me to do so about! >> >>Now this is an example of the "double standard" that people on this list >>exercise that I complain so bitterly about. Never, ever, not once, on this >>board have I spewed streams of invective and spite, and yet Liesel is >>sympathized with and I am castigated. For Shame indeed! >> >>alexis >> >> >> > > > roxendal@alpinet.net From euser@euronet.nl Sun Jun 2 20:15:56 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 22:15:56 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606022015.WAA15844@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? First a snippet out of a conversation between Chuck and Alexis: Alexis>You know that Martin will in all likelihood take every word you just said totally seriously. Martin comments: no, not really. I know Chuck a little bit better than that (at least I think I do :)) Alexis> He's Dutch (I think) [yes] and they are as entirely literal as any German or Slav. Martin comments: a totally sweeping generalization (to imitate your style :)). Actually my country is oriented very much towards the USA. The folks here are as different from each other as in any country. The main flaw here is the imitation of American soap opera's. We shouldn't do that. The Americans have invented that and nobody can do that kind of stuff better than ye yankies :) Now to the serious stuff Alexis>I submit that you haven't been on this list long enough to make a creditable evaluation of the overall thrust of my messages Martin comments: I'm not evaluating the overall thrust of your messages, I'm trying to sense what's happening on this list. Alexis> I submit that to judge all my messages by jocular messages between Chuck Cosiman and myself is entirely unfair and irresponsible. Martin comments: of course and nobody (I hope) is doing that. Alexis>I submit that to judge me at all doesn't lie within your purview or authority. Martin comments: I'm not judging you at all - this seems to be a hangup of you. If you read my posts more carefully, you will see that I'm concerned what's going on on this list. And I'm not putting all the fault on your shoulders-see my posting Re: Donna; Re: Chuck & Alexis. ALexis>I submit that it is my perception that the greatest motivation behind your judgemental attitude towards me derives from the entirely unorthodox approach I have to what Eldon and Daniel call the "Core Doctrines" of Theosophy, and that I believe is the ONLY thing that drives you. Martin comments: actually you're wrong in your perception. My greatest drive is a search for truth in these matters. Why do you think I' m discussing your point of view with you at length? Think about that! Alexis>If you would go through my postings since I joined the board you would find that, with the exception of my "games" with Chuck Cosimano, the majority of my messages have been thoughtful, original, and entirely unorthodox. Martin comments> well, when I have the opportunity I will check out the archives of John Mead. Alexis> But I also submit that the actual content of my messages on this board are of really little interest to you. Martin comments: well, well. I submit that projecting *your ideas * about the motives of others into these others is one of your flaws (as it probably is with all of us) :) >Indeed. But that's not the issue here (except for the Leadbeater case). Alexis>Please explain the sentence above. I don't wish to misunderstand you. Martin comments: I wrote that sentence because I suspect that factual information on Leadbeater is not appreciated by many on this forum (and that this information triggers many angry responses). Martin (prev)>The issue is, or rather has become: personal attacks on each other. Alexis> In the first place, if you had been on this list long enough to follow the whole situation, you would find that I am not entirely at fault. I have been accused of things that in my own estimation, I did not do. Martin comments> That's quite possible (would have to check that). Alexis> The problem with Liesel Deutsch originated when she violently reacted to my total disapproval of Charles Webster Leadbeater, my mistake was, and I freely admit it, to let my Russian temper get the best of me and replied in kind. When something I say is true, and is backed up by vast amounts of printed evidence, I do not accept being told that I cannot discuss the subject. Martin comments: I regard Liesel as a very friendly lady and a 'cyber-friend' but I know she won't tolerate strong disapprovals of Charles Leadbeater. It is understandable: loyalty to one's teacher is a strong thing , yet not always wise if carried to the extreme. I mean, you can be loyal to someone and yet disapprove of some of his/her actions. That distinction is something many people find very hard to swallow. In other words: you can condemn some act of a person, but, by doing so, you don't condemn the whole of the person, the whole of his/her character. I take it that you condemned many of his acts and views, but not the person Leadbeater? Alexis> I have "filtered" Liesel and you'll find if you read her postings that a great many of them are entirely gratuitous attacks on me, on my veracity, on my intelligence, and on my honor. Martin comments> There are some postings of her that attack you. Personally, I see these as born out of anger (though I would have to confirm that vision by retracing the history of this conflict.) Alexis>And yet you apparently feel that I, who have only replied to one particularly scurrilous remark in a fit of anger (and immediately apologized) am entirely and singly at fault. That is unacceptably unfair. Martin comments: I have nuanced and elaborated my vision on this in this post and the other (RE: Donna; Re: Chuck & Alexis). So you see I'm a little bit more unbiased than you may think. Alexis> But I will tell you that this campaign to make me the "demon" of this list is slanderous, libelous, and totally undeserved. Martin comments: I'm feeling annoyed about this, and wish there would be some 'truce' to begin with, and an attempt at reaching a better mutual understanding. Alexis> You seem to operate on the premise that to be accused of something makes one guilty, well that may be true in Roman Law but it is not true in American Law. Martin comments: well, not really. I'm beginning to see more sides, facets, to this conflict. But, probably for 'historical' reasons (what happened during your stay on this list to you, by you (?)) , you seem to make a lot of 'noise' (I mean, you very strongly defend yourself against accusations made against you) and a lot of people feel disturbed by that. I'm not saying you're 'guilty', your temper causes you a lot of trouble, that's for sure. You acknowledged that yourself (see a quoted response of yours above re Russian temper). Alexis>I have been accused of "Bashing" Eldon Tucker, but the accusation is untrue, I disagreed with both his statement and his attitudes, that is indeed true, but that is not "bashing". Martin comments: I agree with you here Alexis>On the other hand I have been bashed for that illusionary action far more times than I find acceptable. Martin comments> There has been a strong reaction, yes, from many sides. Whether this is to be classified as 'bashing' is a matter of further discussion. >Anyway, I'm glad you withdraw your remark about Liesel as Alan rightly >requested. > Alexis>I'd have apologized far sooner and well before Alan's request but I know that Liesel has me filtered so how would she see it? Martin comments: Someone will sure forward that to her. And maybe she's not really filtering you, but only refusing to get into discussion/debate with you. >Again to this 'self-appointed censor' thing. It sounds as a hollow phrase to >me, because it is used too often by you (and Chuck sometimes). You're not >dealing >with kids on this list, but with grown-ups who *do* have some standards of >behaviour.. >Maybe you will have more success with this style of communicating >on alt.theosophy (if there are many young people on it), but this style >is often contra-productive on this board. Alexis> I find the attempts at censorship on this board far too one sided, far too personality specific, and infinitely far too indicative of an entirely hypocritical double standard. There seems to be one standard for myself and Chuck, and an entirely different standard for others. Martin comments> Well, you may be right here. It *is* something we have to look at more closely. I wonder what others are thinking about this. Alan? others? Alexis> I also think it's presumptuous of you to imply that people who are young are either ignorant or unintelligent. Martin comments: that was not really my intention to imply. My thoughts concerned the straightforwardness of your postings. That might appeal more to youngsters, who have no history of being affiliated with one of the TSs. >Now, having said this, this doesn't mean I'm not interested in your *ideas*. >In fact, I'm going to discuss your views on karma and reincarnation thoroughly >with you, if you can stand severe scrutiny and dissecting of your opinions >on these things. > >Martin Euser > Alexis>You know Martin; my opinions have been subject to scrutiny and dissection for many years, and by people with strings of Doctorates inches long. Alan Bain is a person who severly scritinizes and criticizes my opinions regularly and I have no trouble with it. Martin comments: ok. Just thought you might be a little bit sensitive to severe criticism or scrutiny of your opinions. Apparently you aren't. Alexis>You apparently are extremely pleased with yourself, and I have no reason to doubt either your intelligence or your knowledge. But, I'd thank you to return the compliment. Martin comments: hot tempered you will remain, I guess :) Alexis>I have three hundred students all over this planet, most of them mature and well-educated people, when you insult me, you insult them. Martin comments: no way, I try to approach each individual as a unique being. >And whence this sulky posting of yours if it concerns only 'jocular vein'? >There is evidently a contradiction between tone and content here.. Alexis>This is entirely your personal perception Martin, and I think "sulky" is a word one uses to children and I am probably your senior. Martin comments: chagrin was the word I was meaning.I changed that to sulky after looking into a dictionary (but apparently I picked the wrong word). Martin (prev)> So, I *do* know about it, actually >more than I would like to. I will say one thing however, and it is this: >even if you're right about Leadbeater (Jerry H-E has in the past mentioned >some documentary evidence regarding the 'Leadbeater case'), even then >it is far wiser to take someone's [substitute: Liesel] feelings into account >and not try to put [push] your idea's through someone's throat. Alexis> They're not "ideas" Martin they are facts! Martin comments: facts may be harder to swallow for some persons > Don't you think you might actually accomplish more >if you would be a little more considerate at times? Alexis>If you'd been on the list at that time, you'd know that I started out by being very considerate indeed. I dropped the subject entirely and didn't even refer to it. It was only when CWL unavoidably came up in a context divorced from his pederasty and I disagreed with him on some philosophical matters, that Liesel "went off like a rocket". How about Liesel being considerate of my feelings? Eh? Martin comments: of course, I would expect consideration from Liesel as well. >Can't you show a little more of that [respect] to her? Alexis> It's far too late for that Martin, I will, if I can, have no further contact with her at all. I don't really like dealing with people who call you names when you disagree with them. Martin comments: Like I said before: understandable, and I see no way to do something about it. It is between you and Liesel. And, only when the majority of this list would start having a good look at the roots of this conflict, then, maybe, something would change in their attitude towards you. > >Friendly, > >Martin Euser > I am nobody's enemy Martin. alexis> > Martin From euser@euronet.nl Sun Jun 2 20:16:09 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 22:16:09 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606022016.WAA15870@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis Liesel wrote: > >At 08:08 PM 6/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >> Thank you for your kind words. I want to add one. When Alexis >>decided to pick a fight with Martin Euser, he didn't even have enough >>respect for Martin as a person to get his last name right. Martin comments: some persons take more care of checking names, whether they've spelled these correct than others. I don't bother too much when my name is being misspelled. It is the individual's own responsibility to correctly enter names, data, etc. into their messages. I would suggest, though, in general, that the larger the forum the more one should take the trouble to have names, etc. correctly typed in. Its a courtesy to the other readers and will prevent misunderstandings as to whom is referred. Liesel>>He just hit out, >>blindly, & part of that was the misspelling of Martin's name. Martin comments: I certainly don't hope that that was the case. I doubt it; Sometimes, however, I get the impression that there's a 'red aura' hanging around some of Alexis postings. I get the impression that Alexis is really angered about something . The point may be that some injustice has been actually done towards him and I would like to see it clarified. (Alan, others??) Not having been subscribed long enough I cannot see the root of it, although it wouldn't surprise me when it turns out to be once again related to C.W. Leadbeater. I sometimes wonder whether Liesel can bear any criticism at all on beloved persons. Not an easy thing though, and it seems only wise to take that into consideration. >>For shame! And that calls itself a shaman! >> >>Liesel >> >> Alexis>That is an example of the constant stream of invective that proceeds from that source. If I am constantly taking to task for ignoring her except once, for which I immediately apologized, then where are her responsibilities to me? Martin comments: the way I see it is that you BOTH have responsibilities to each other, Liesel included. I still am not sure whether it is the factual content of your messages in the past concerning Leadbeater has started this war of words OR the tone of the (yours and Liesels) messages. Would have to wait until John has archived all the postings. One thing is certain: the Leadbeater case is an explosive mixture which can easily be detonated. And I don't like the way that Liesel adds more fuel to the fire of hatred that's going on between you two. Alexis>I was, and still am under the impression that Martin's last name was EULER If it isn't I was wrong. But her implication that I misspelled his name out of malice is totally insane. Martin comments: well, Liesel, I appreciate your motives to come to my rescue, but I don't have a real fight with Alexis, some skirmishes perhaps. I don't think Alexis misspelled my name intentionally, I would not know of one reason why he would. Alexis>I also wasn't under any impression that I had picked a fight with Martin, and we are having some interesting and lively discussions, with no really sharp disagreements that I can see. Martin comments: Right and I intend to keep it that way. Disagreements need not lead into flame wars. I don't have the slightest need for that kind of thing. Alexis>And all this because I presume to tell the truth about someone she forbids me to do so about! Martin comments: what is the purpose of discussing Leadbeater's flaws? It distracts the attention of many on this list from the more important things we should be discussing (IMO). Alexis>Now this is an example of the "double standard" that people on this list exercise that I complain so bitterly about. Never, ever, not once, on this board have I spewed streams of invective and spite, and yet Liesel is sympathized with and I am castigated. For Shame indeed! Martin comments> It may be very well that there's a double standard on this list. I suggest we have a *closer look* at it and be more careful from now on. People who make their point too strongly, being (too?) straightforward will often get themselves into difficulties with others, who don't like this kind of approach. Fact of life, mon ami, and I doubt whether you can change that. Often it is wiser to soften (temper) ones straightforwardness a little bit. Martin From eldon@theosophy.com Mon Jun 3 03:17:29 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 20:17:29 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603031729.006829c0@mail.deltanet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions Chuck: >You have not seen us begin to tear people apart. >Stick around. You're kidding, I hope??? The more savage a manner that someone tears apart others, the more they prove to the world that they "haven't got it" as far as spiritual insight. They may not see this themselves, but it's quite obvious to others that observe what is going on. This is different, of course, from where a great spiritual reformer is tearing apart the old cobwebs that hide the light from people. But in this case, the reformer is cleaning out the philosophy and practices of people, not slaying the followers of the old way. The reason, I suspect, that you've held back in your responses, and not let people "really have it!" is the same that most of us hold back. It's called "self respect". The terrible things that we tell others that they are really say more about our own states and experiences than they are descriptive of the other people. On alt.theosophy, if people really let loose with their worst sides, they'll run the risk of getting buried in a mound of dung from the thousands of readers than don't care a bit about what they say, but only enjoy the game of "ripping people". I'm not sure how you intend to write on that newsgroup, but as for myself, I'll give extra care to my words, considering the different and far wider audience reading them. -- Eldon From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 19:15:41 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 15:15:41 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606022117.AA00512@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 04:34 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Alexis comments: One needs to know very little at all about a person who >publically claims to be "A Chela of the Masters", There are many chelas in the theosophic movement. One of the reasons it was founded was to provide an environment for chelas and would-be chelas to meet and receive training. At this point I am assuming that you do not KNOW if I or another student is a chela or not. IF you really KNOW that I am not a chela, that necessarily implies that I have been deluded. So, do you KNOW this, or are you just making assumptions based on your understanding of the "conservative occult approach" etc? and who publically claims >to have been "In contact with the Masters for 20 years". I wrote that the first time in this lifetime I made a conscious connection with a real Master, was about 20 years ago. That happened to be Jesus, which was all the more baffling to me because I had a history of being a fervent opponent to christianity, and Jesus had previously not had any significant place in my then only just budding spiritual life. You seem to think that mentioning these things is inappropriate or a sign of "delusion". It's interesting that you hang on to this portion of the "conservative occult approach" while challenging so many other aspects of it. Well, I DO think it is OK and sometimes even important to bear witness of these things, and I am sure you recognize my right to do so. I certainly recognize your right to consider me deluded, too, although I would not be so quick to take that approach myself. When I cannot absolutely know if somebody's claims are true, I prefer to take the gentler "wait and see" approach. Sorry but this is >one of the few times I agree wholeheartedly with the conservative occult >approach. I also >freely admit that based upon both study and experience I have absolutely no >respect for the intelligence of anyone who takes either Mr. Ballard's "I am >Movement" or Elisabeth Clair Prophet's "Church Universal and Triumphant" >seriously. I definitely take both Mr Ballard's "I Am Movement" and ECP's CUT seriously. I realize that this means that you "have absolutely no respect for my intelligence" and, to put it bluntly, I couldn't care less. I also take "Bridge to Freedom", "Agni yoga" and Yogananda seriously. I see all these activities and their teachings as expressions of truth, and, yes, as sponsored by the Brotherhood. Talking about intelligence in this context, I read a book by James Lewis and Gordon Melton, called "Church Universal and Triumphant in Scholarly Perspective". This is a special issue of "Syzygy: Journal of Alternative Religion and Culture".* On the back page it is stated that "Church Universal and Triumphant is a New Religious movement in the Theosophical tradition". The research team conducted personality and intelligence tests on many hundreds of Church members. The only really outstanding result was the deviation from the average population in intelligence. The average church member was shown to be dramatically more intelligent than the average american. I suspect that the same would be true if a large number of theosophists would be tested. Anyway, you have very little (no) objective support for assuming that members of these organizations should be lacking in intelligence, whereas I at least have SOME support for the opposite assumption. Bjorn * This Journal can be of interest to theosophists who are interested in a more objective study of modern religious movements, see http://faraday.clas.virginia.edu/~jmb5b/syzygy.html for more info. One problem with new spiritual movements is that they are usually VERY controversial. Just look at early Teosophy! Or early Christianity! There are always these lawsuits and controversies, designed to malign and tear down something that is perceived as threatening. This happened to Mr. Ballard and the I Am movement, as well as to Blavatsky et al. This doesn't mean that they were not who they were supposed to be. The work of SYZYGY is very helpful in establishing a more detached and neutral perspective on such movements. The following is taken from their web page: > Syzygy is an interdisciplinary journal devoted to the study of >New Religious Movements (NRMs). In addition to the usual groups >studied under the NRM label, Syzygy publishes articles and book reviews >on the New Age Movement, communal and utopian groups, Identity >groups, Spiritualism, New Thought, occultism, Neo-Paganism, astrology, >UFO groups, and related phenomena. Scholars with interests in these >areas are encouraged to submit papers and book reviews. For an index to >back issues, please click here. roxendal@alpinet.net From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 22:38:21 1996 Date: 02 Jun 96 18:38:21 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Discussions (to Rich Taylor) Message-Id: <960602223821_76400.1474_HHL29-1@CompuServe.COM> Rich: >It is sad that after 10 years in the Theosophical movement, working hard, >putting out a Theosophical newsmagazine, working in a local lodge, connecting >with Theosophists all over the world, I didn't feel welcome on the very list >where we should have all been able to come together, lovingly, and support >each other in our work for the Movement. No luck. Rich, I hope that you have read my Wolf vs Sheep post, even though you have permanently signed off. You are, of course, a very nice and respectable sheep, and I know how the big bad wolves have hurt your feelings, and made you run away to a better and safer place. I really am sorry. I probably did as much as any of the other wolves here to do you in. But at least our motives are clear. We are, in fact, trying to help. Your idea of working harmoniously together in a happy Theosophical fold to help the Movement is well meant, but misguided (at least in this wolf's opinion). Theosophy must clean its own house first, before we can ask 6 bizzillion Joe Sixpacks to come aboard. We have a lot of internal work to do first. I would think that first and foremost, we need to define Theosophy, and "core teachings" one way or another. We also need to put the CWL business behind us and move forward. The latter, of course, needn't concern you, because you are not in TSA anyway, but even your negative views (as you clearly expressed them here) must transform into forgiveness before the Joe Sixpacks can be brought into the tent. For us all to pretend to be harmonious and happy little theosophists would be play false, and even Joe Sixpack would catch on in no time. We wolves prefer honesty. Lets us theosophists come together and learn how we can all agree with one another before we pull in a whole bunch of newbies who will look to us for theosophical role modeling. >You should be informed, however, that a new list has been formed for the >express purpose of discussing THEOSOPHY, its principles, and its practice, >with NO PERSONAL ATTACKS allowed or the list owners WILL boot people off the >list. The name of the list is THEOSOPHY WORLD and you can subscribe to >theos-world@theosophy.com. The problem with this is that it is all based on a false premise-- that all theosophists are happy and content with the teachings left to us. Such a list will certainly be no more than a bunch a sheep smelling the clover and believing all is well in the world. Its a lot like Eldon worrying about the "dark side of life." You will all be like dogs chasing after your own tails. You will all need at least seven more lifetimes to see how the land really lays. Only in chaos do new forms emerge. The chances for a new and whole Theosophical Movement are better here on theos-l for this very reason. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 22:38:22 1996 Date: 02 Jun 96 18:38:22 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant Message-Id: <960602223822_76400.1474_HHL29-2@CompuServe.COM> Doss: >This reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Just like >each blind man tried to feel one part of the elephant and tried to >generalize what the whole elephant looks like, we have Theosophy that we >all try to attempt to describe or define or understand. > >Buddha, faced a somewhat similar situation dealing with various concepts >that he tried to discuss. He stated that since there will always be >difference in opinion on the unseen, it is easier to discuss those things >which are seen. The real difference between Buddhism and Theosophy, Doss, is that Theosophy attempts to define reality, while Buddhism provides techniques and leaves reality itself undefined in words. Theosophy is theoretical, while Buddhism is practical. This is exactly why Carl Jung called Theosophy "lazy thinking" -- because theosophists who study the literature over a long period of time become convinced (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand life, and what life is all about, from reading books, is indeed lazy thinking. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Sun Jun 2 22:38:30 1996 Date: 02 Jun 96 18:38:30 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Message-Id: <960602223830_76400.1474_HHL29-3@CompuServe.COM> >Jerry, >Where have you been. Alex and I have been worried. >You're right, psionics can be used both ways. It's supposed to be. That's >why I wrote the books in the first place. >In my experience I have seen a number the Joe Sixpacks of the world come into >the TS and stay and have a wonderful experience. It is only hard if you take >the books literally. Chuck, I just finished my dissertation, and at long last, have my PhD. Among other goodies, this will doubtless sell several more copies of my books (I am retired and need the money folks) all by itself. The fact that magic is also a two-edged sword is exactly why I started writing my books, Chuck. I watched too many people burning their fingers through ignorance. There may be a few Joe Sixpacks who stay with Theosophy, but I still don't think that the membership will ever be up there where it was before the infamous K incident. I hope that I am wrong. When I came into Theosophy, I too tried to take the literature literally, and very seriously. But by that time, I had already been initiated into Kundalini Yoga, and had a few mystical experiences to hand, so I was able to sift a lot of chaff from wheat right off the bat. Thus I was unable to ever be a real sheep. Maybe a wolfish-sheep, or a sheepish-wolf? The root problem here is that our worldview has to address, and assimilate, our experiences. If we have certain experiences that are simply not covered in the TS literature, then we must expand our concept of Theosophy to address that. If we have experiences that conflict with TS literature or Core Teachings, then our worldview must also address that--because we must always tweak our worldview to account for our experiences. The only alternative is to ignore those experiences and such repression always leads to pathological conditions downstream. I have been successful with this for the most part, by employing the terms exoteric and esoteric to ideas or teachings. Now I know that both you and Alexis don't care for those terms, but they really have been a big help to me. Karma and reincarnation, for example, as taught by Judge and G de P are very acceptable to me as long as I consider them to be exoteric teachings. In other words, the way they are taught in the TS literature is simply not the way I experience or intuitively see them. So, I call my own view esoteric, and thus can assimilated both the literature and my experiences into my worldview very nicely. Otherwise, I probably would have left Theosophy a long time ago. Eldon is right when he says that the words of the Core Teachings point to a body of esoteric (wordless) teachings that have to be experienced. So, after we bring in a bizzillion Joe Sixpacks and their families, how do we get them away from a literal interpretation? Jerry S. Member, TI From jem@vnet.net Sun Jun 2 23:07:41 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:07:41 -0400 (EDT) From: "John E. Mead" Message-Id: <199606022307.TAA11589@katie.vnet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: "Moderating" lists etc. hi - just a quick note to reaffirm that I do not support moderating this list. my experience has been that trying to control Theosophists is ultimately "un-theosophical". peace - john e. mead ------------------------------------------------------------------------ John E. Mead jem@vnet.net Theos-L etc. list-owner Member of Theosophy International [Physics is impossible without imaginary numbers] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sun Jun 2 23:16:13 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:16:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Buying Theosophical Books in Europe In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Probably TPH London may also be a good source. > > ....ramadoss > It is now necessary to write to Theosophical Books Ltd., 50 Gloucester Place, London W1H 4EA. Tel: +44 171 935 5265 Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:19:00 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:19:00 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602191858_405788620@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: The Earl Grey Council Doss, It is my friend, it is! I have learned the ripco problem is at their end and with a little patience I will on the newsgroup soon. Chuck From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:19:44 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:19:44 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602191943_405788968@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! Roxendal, I do not find your presence disturbing. I find it insulting and disgusting. You are free to express any nonsense you wish, but when you attack the freedom that my ancestors threw a king out for you insult our people. I have attempted a reasonable discourse with you and all I have received in return are attacks. You clearly have no interest in anything but that which fits your own little world and cannot see any other way of approaching theosophy or life. Frankly anyone who so damnably stupid as to think that a fraud like Ballard could say anyone is a chela is in no position to judge anyone else. Fortunately you are going on my filter list and I will no longer have to put up with your fascist garbage. Chuck the Obnoxious From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:19:53 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:19:53 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602191952_405789057@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Alex, I know all about the dutch. Dutch girls are also very good in bed and they love my whip collection. There was this real cute one who used to work at the Art Institute... Happy Marquis de Sade's birthday. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:20:07 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:20:07 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192006_405789178@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: many times great grandpa Alex, Why does that not surprise me? Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker "Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds At the battle of Copenhagen. Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds Running from one Norwegian." From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:20:11 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:20:11 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192008_405789198@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? Alex, How about the Mad Meatball in White Sauce Award? Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker "How many Swedes does it take to change a light bulb?" "Only one, but he can't afford to pay the taxes on it." From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:20:13 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:20:13 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192011_405789224@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis Alex, A very good reply. I would have sent somethingsimilar by at that moment my girlfriend was complaining that the chains were too tight. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker Where is the little Dutch boy when we need him and I don't mean Martin? From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:20:17 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:20:17 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192016_405789262@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! Alex, I have sent my last message to this moron. He is now on my filter list. Anyone who is damned fool enough to think he is a chela because that crook Ballard told him (no doubt after being paid for the initiation, that was the usual procedure I'm told) is not worth the bandwidth to argue with. My patience is at an end. Chuck the Atrocious Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:20:19 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:20:19 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192019_405789282@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Rich It's nice to see you are still dropping in occassion, if only to castigate us. I wish you the best on theos-world, but for obvious reasons I will not be joining it. After campaigning against moderating this list I cannot in conscience join one that is moderated. And of course no moderation will be considered for alt.theosophy. One other thing, this all began with a personal attack on me by the mad chela (he apparently really thinks he is one). I normally do not let such things disturb me, but even I have a few chinks in rhinocerous hide. I thought it was meant in jest but clearly the man is not kidding. He really equates anyone who disagrees with his way of doing things with a madman who blows people up for real. I attempted a reasoned discourse with him but that has proven impossible so I am forced to filter him, which is something I really hate doing but my blood pressure won't take much more of his nonsense so if I seem just a bit testy, please be patient. I doubt you will find him a pleasant person to have on theos-world. But I wish you the best with your project. And do drop in again. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:23:59 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:23:59 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960602192359_405791172@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: "Moderating" lists etc. John, Thank goodness! I knew we could count on you. Now maybe we can get back to arguing over theosophy again. Chuck From RIhle@aol.com Sun Jun 2 23:44:59 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:44:59 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Message-Id: <960602194459_126236502@emout16.mail.aol.com> Subject: Bleat and Howl [One should] "bleat with the sheep and howl with the wolves." --Gurdjieff, I think, but perhaps someone else. Well, I don't know about this "sheep and wolves thing." If it were anyone other than Jerry S. touting the wolves, I would probably animadvert in more strenuous fashion; however, in Jerry's case I have learned that waiting with my objections often turns out to be the best policy--since my gainsayings usually disappear on their own. Still . . . for the time being, number me with the sheep, or better yet the lambs (or better yet, a semi-shepard of myself, at least). . . . I don't know . . . all a person has to rely on in the end is or her own line of development, isn't it? Certainly, the result of my own is the reverse of what has been suggested: It seems like much more the case that I started out as a wolf and turned into a-- Well, who knows? All I can say is that I have now become far too gentle to be a proper wolf any more. If I do inflict pain, the awareness of the fact that I have done so usually makes me suffer more than my victim. Indeed, in the case of those closest to me, there is no question that I would rather have the particular pain they are subjected to myself rather than to watch them in pain. Am I completely off-track? Were Gautama, Ramakrishna, Saint Francis, etc. secretly living according to some "wolf-ideal" that they never mentioned? No, by my lights, a person who hurts others mindlessly--or worse, just for the "fun" of it--may be highly valuable as a "unpleasant life-lesson" for someone else's spiritual evolution; however, the hurtful person himself or or herself may still be at the starter's blocks in regard to his or her own development. --Unless he or she is doing it mindfully and with concern for another person's psychogenetic development, of course. . . . Even here, however, there seems to be a certain presumptuousness, the ins-and-outs of which I have not yet resolved for myself. I have experimented with this many times on this list, and I suppose I will continue to do so, but at this point I can say neither that it is proper, nor that it yields good results. These experiments are innocuous enough, I suppose: usually they are just the result of my perception (right or wrong) that someone may be using certain ideas or knowledge merely as the "raw material" for a desire-mental or mental "ego-formation" ("I REALLY AM the mental-stuff I am drawn to" / I REALLY AM my dispassionate mentation"). My methodology is just to nit-pick point-by-point so that they no longer get so much egoic pleasure or unbridled superordination from their chosen delusion. My hope is that they will sooner or later "up-level" to the next strata of egoic mistake. This might turn out to be a bad thing to do, and naturally it is predicated on the completely unsupported assumption that for some reason I think I have the "Vantage of Perspective" on the other person's psychogenetic condition. Well, bad or good, I cannot help noticing that this type of "presumptuous helping" seems to have little in common with other potentially "helping methodologies" which might possibly be in use on this list. For one thing, if I lose point after point with Eldon, it does not cross my mind to set matters right by telling him that he is the ugliest theosophist in history. By the standard of ~ventrum omnipotentum~, the "all-powerful vocal chord," I suppose I could claim some sort of "victory" in this way; however, would the name-calling really make Eldon more likely to keep the Once-Removed-Vantage on his future mental egoic-constructs of the same nature, or would he merely be all the more resolute in his ego-tainted ideas because an obvious ***hole espouses the opposing view? Nevertheless, my continuing hope, naturally, is that we have no ***holes on this list and that everyone, no matter how wolfishly abrasive, does what he or she does with high purpose and helpful intent. I am aware that I could be wrong in this as well, though: it might just be a foolish sheep-prayer from someone who can still bleat but who has lost the knack for howling. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sun Jun 2 23:45:33 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:45:33 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: <9CARLIAdeisxEw70@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Subject: Discussions In-Reply-To: <960602223821_76400.1474_HHL29-1@CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <960602223821_76400.1474_HHL29-1@CompuServe.COM>, Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> writes > For us all to pretend to be harmonious and happy >little theosophists would be play false, and even Joe Sixpack >would catch on in no time. We wolves prefer honesty. Lets >us theosophists come together and learn how we can all >agree with one another before we pull in a whole bunch of >newbies who will look to us for theosophical role modeling. GULP! Now this is a *real* challenge which goes to the heart of every controversy we have had or will have on the list (or anywhere else). I doubt that we can ever all agree with each other, but we *could* - given the willingness to do so, and trying very hard to act on it - agree to accept each others' differences as (to quote the TI statement) members of a universal human family, and try to do so without name-calling, sarcasm or "put-downs." Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From ramadoss@eden.com Sun Jun 2 23:57:15 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 18:57:15 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant In-Reply-To: <960602223822_76400.1474_HHL29-2@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 2 Jun 1996, Jerry Schueler wrote: > Doss: > >This reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Just like > >each blind man tried to feel one part of the elephant and tried to > >generalize what the whole elephant looks like, we have Theosophy that we > >all try to attempt to describe or define or understand. > > > >Buddha, faced a somewhat similar situation dealing with various concepts > >that he tried to discuss. He stated that since there will always be > >difference in opinion on the unseen, it is easier to discuss those things > >which are seen. > > The real difference between Buddhism and Theosophy, Doss, > is that Theosophy attempts to define reality, while Buddhism provides > techniques and leaves reality itself undefined in words. Theosophy > is theoretical, while Buddhism is practical. This is exactly why Carl > Jung called Theosophy "lazy thinking" -- because theosophists who > study the literature over a long period of time become convinced > (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Agreed, No one can know everything. ....ramadoss > life, and what life is all about, from reading books, is indeed lazy thinking. > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > > From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 00:00:36 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:00:36 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Earl Grey Council In-Reply-To: <960602191858_405788620@emout09.mail.aol.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Chuck: I will be looking forward to you and others on alt.theosophy. ..doss From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 00:27:32 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 19:27:32 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant In-Reply-To: <960602223822_76400.1474_HHL29-2@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 2 Jun 1996, Jerry Schueler wrote: > Doss: > >This reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Just like > >each blind man tried to feel one part of the elephant and tried to > >generalize what the whole elephant looks like, we have Theosophy that we > >all try to attempt to describe or define or understand. > > > >Buddha, faced a somewhat similar situation dealing with various concepts > >that he tried to discuss. He stated that since there will always be > >difference in opinion on the unseen, it is easier to discuss those things > >which are seen. > > The real difference between Buddhism and Theosophy, Doss, > is that Theosophy attempts to define reality, while Buddhism provides > techniques and leaves reality itself undefined in words. Theosophy > is theoretical, while Buddhism is practical. This is exactly why Carl I have been trying to make Theosophy practical in the sense that I try to apply the ideal of Universal Brotherhood to help any man(woman) or any other entity that I can help. So I feel there is a practical side to Theosophy. Again I was trying to highlight the point that there is going to be a variety of ideas, opinions, internal facts we have to deal with as the full reality is beyond all words. ....doss > Jung called Theosophy "lazy thinking" -- because theosophists who > study the literature over a long period of time become convinced > (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand > life, and what life is all about, from reading books, is indeed lazy thinking. > > Jerry S. > Member, TI From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Sun Jun 2 23:30:38 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:30:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Leadbeater In-Reply-To: <199606022016.WAA15870@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <199606022016.WAA15870@mail.euronet.nl>, Martin_Euser writes >Martin comments: what is the purpose of discussing Leadbeater's flaws? >It distracts the attention of many on this list from the more important >things we should be discussing (IMO). The point is simple: He made many mistakes (viz., "Life on Mars") and told lies about himself. If such a well-known writer is shown to be in error in one thing, then his writing on other things needs, perhaps, more careful examination than might be the case for another writer. When we also know that he told lies (as with regard to his age) we ask ourselves "Why? Is this person trustworthy? If he lies to us in one matter, may he not have lied to us in others?" These questions do not dismiss all his work as worthless, however, but we older students are generally aware of the great veneration in which this man was held. In my own "Bishops Irregular" [Bain, Bristol, 1985] I published details concerning his consecration as a Liberal Catholic Bishop which included the information uncovered by Gregory Tillet. As no one has produced any evidence to suggest that *Tillet* lied, I presumed (and still do) that his research was reliable, especially in the lie about his age - the original birth certificate was published. I donated a copy of the book to my own local Lodge. Shock Horror! It disappeared from the shelf within the week. Yet we state, "There is no Religion Higher than Truth." Part of the second object, surely? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 22:37:23 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 18:37:23 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030039.AA01892@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Representing the Masters Below is an example of how the masters are misrepresented through this list. This is a public list and new members drop in at any time. They will see what old experienced list members express as indicative of what theosophy (and the Brotherhood) is about. Bjorn At 07:22 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >I know all about the dutch. Dutch girls are also very good in bed and they >love my whip collection. >There was this real cute one who used to work at the Art Institute... >Happy Marquis de Sade's birthday. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > > roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Sun Jun 2 22:37:25 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 18:37:25 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030039.AB01892@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: chela? What Alexis and Chuck think and say about me I do not care about. But I feel I should clarify this "chela-business" so other list members do not get the wrong idea about me. When I said that I am a chela of the masters I was using the word meaning "devoted student and disciple". After the violent reactions from A&C I have come to realize that the word may be used in a different meaning by some (many?) theosophists. My life is devoted to the spiritual path and service under the masters, this is true, but by that I do not claim any "rank" or special spiritual attainment etc. I am assuming that many (most?) serious students of theosophy share this path; the desire to advance spiritually and to serve mankind under the masters. If I have used the word "chela" inappropriately, I sincerely apologize. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From jem@vnet.net Mon Jun 3 00:53:41 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 20:53:41 -0400 (EDT) From: "John E. Mead" Message-Id: <199606030053.UAA14716@katie.vnet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: I-Ching: Primal Correlates?? I was looking at the Shambhalla Pocket Classic edition of the I-Ching (trans. Thomas Cleary) and have been unable to find any other references to what he refers to as the "Primal Correlate" to a given Hexagram. He mentions that they are useful in readings, but does not give any methodology for construction. I was wondering if anyone had run into them before?? e.g. (numbers are the usual I-Ching ordering of hexagrams; so 1 is Creative, and 2 is the Receptive, etc.) (relationship is reflexive) 1 2 3 20 4 19 5 57 6 58 7 13 8 27 9 32 10 46 (etc.) thanks for any insight. I have not found this concept in the usual sources (Wilhelms etc.) or Wings. peace - john e. mead ----------------------------------------------------------- John E. Mead jem@vnet.net Theos-L etc. list-owner Member of Theosophical Society in America Member of Theosophy International [Physics is impossible without imaginary numbers] [Mathematics is impossible without consciousness] ----------------------------------------------------------- From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 01:02:33 1996 Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 20:02:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: chela? In-Reply-To: <9606030039.AB01892@alpinet.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 2 Jun 1996, Bjorn Roxendal wrote: > If I have used the word "chela" inappropriately, I sincerely apologize. > > Bjorn Hi, you are correct in your response. For most "chela" in Theosophical context has certain connotation. That is how I understood it. Now that you have explained, the issue should be laid to rest satisfactorialy. ...Ramadoss From liesel@dreamscape.com Mon Jun 3 00:29:38 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 20:29:38 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606030134.VAA16918@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: "Isis Unveiled" Dear Kym, Theosophists believe in very many reincarnations. The time between reincarnations varies, depending. For instance, we believe that a young soldier killed in a war may reincarnate again very quickly, whereas some person who has led a very useful & saintly life, might get a long rest inbetween earth lives. There are a number of Theosophical books about reincarnation. The newest one, written a few years ago, is by John Algeo. I can't find it in my book case just now, but the title is something like "Reincarnation Explored". He also made it into a video. If you're a member at Wheaton, you can borrow this stuff from the Library. The Theosphical Publishing House has it for sale. Hope that answers your question. Liesel From liesel@dreamscape.com Mon Jun 3 01:25:48 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 21:25:48 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606030231.WAA18609@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To Doss, Re: courtesy Thanks, Doss for your support. I'm getting awfully tired of this. Who wants to sit & argue all the time. I'd rather learn/teach Theosophy. Liesel From liesel@dreamscape.com Mon Jun 3 01:44:10 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 21:44:10 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606030249.WAA27020@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Attention Liesel & Alexis Dear Daniel, The only time I get nasty is in response to someone else getting very nasty, & hitting below the belt. ALexis did that & I responded in kind. Since I didn't start it, I'm not going to apologize either. But as far as I'm concerned we might better just stop the whole thing, before the whole list breaks apart. I haven't read what Alexis wrote for the past month or so, & I understand that it just kept on being insulting. I've read several of his messages in the last few days, but now I'm going to stop again. If I answer, it'll just get us in deeper. If he wants to talk about how awful I and my friends are, I'm not going to be aware of it, because I'll again be skipping over what he writes. I don't think it's possible to get a reasonable exchange going re CWL, so that may as well not be tried. Other than that, I'm open to any reasonable suggestions about any theosophical topics. But they've got to make some sort of sense. Liesel From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 00:03:15 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 01:03:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Ruminations In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960602072306.006e8248@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960602072306.006e8248@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >>"Prove?" Proving *any* esoteric truth is nigh impossible. We either >>experience it or we don't. Having experienced it, we then interpret the >>experience. Then we are quite likely to fight about the interpretation! > >But do we not tend to have experiences that are to some degree "scripted" >and the result of the mis en scene of our pre-dispositions and beliefs? Sure, that's part of the problem as well! :-) Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 04:03:51 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:03:51 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603000351_405948573@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis My heavens, Daniel as peacemaker. This calls for a drink! Let's hope it works. Chuck MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 04:04:38 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:04:38 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603000438_405949084@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Eldon, I wasn't kidding when I wrote it. I have been accused of a lot of things in my life but being compared to the Unabomber was just too much. I thought it was a joke, at first, sort of like the clowning about between me and JRC, but no, the man is serious. And on top of it he claims to have a direct line to the Masters! I make a poor punching bag, but as I have now blasted him thoroughly and put him on my filter list, I will probably calm down and get back to debating with you the relative merits of our differing views. As far as the newgroup goes, well they can get pretty wild and you know what I can be like. Chuck MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 04:04:45 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:04:45 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603000442_405949143@emout15.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples Jerry, Living will take them away from literal interpretation. There is no teacher like experience and as a pentecostal friend of mine once said many years ago, "If doctrine conflicts with experience, go with experience." Now Eldon is one of the lucky ones. Obviously he managed to build up such terrible Karma that the Lords of Karma decided to give him a lifetime off to recover before blasting him again. He has an idyllic life, a gorgeous wife and I'm sure delightful children, things life has never given me and I find it hard not to be jealous at times. So he can afford to be a sheep. We wolves have it a little harder, but maybe next time we will get some rest and can be sheep for a while. My guess it the Joe Sixpacks will be a mixture of sheep and wolves depending on what life had dealt them when they come to us. Eldon will be there to encourage the sheep and give them lots of stuff to read and hopefully they will not be disturbed by the snoring of the wolves when they put us to sleep regurgitating it. We will get the wolves and turn them loose on the sheep. It all works out in the end. Congratulations on finally getting the Ph.D. That means there's still hope for me. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 02:33:15 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:33:15 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030435.AA03862@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Agni Yoga >To: roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net >Date: Sun, 2 Jun 1996 22:13:10 +0300 >From: Kay Ziatz >Reply-To: Kay Ziatz >Subject: Agni Yoga > > Hello Bjorn! Bjorn wrote re Agni yoga: >r>I have read some of it in English. It is hard to get into it, since much >of >r>it is answers to questions, and the questions are not included. But I am >r>convinced that El Morya has written (or dictated) the answers. > > I've read almost all books of Agni-Yoga but haven't seen such "answers". >Probably you've read letters of E.I.Roerich (?) > Most of these books do not have chapters, etc. They consist of >many paragraphs with a number assigned to each of them (like in Bible). >I agree, "it is hard to get into it", as you said, but because it isn't >like a Secret Doctrine or Bailey books, maybe it should be accepted more >emotionally than intellectually. It may be good for people of mystical >nature but not for me. > For instance, I'll try to translate some: > >1. You may be asked - can a time of Maytreya consist an epoque? >Say - if a cross campaigns gave entire epoque, then Maytreya >epoque is 1000 times more important. It must be passed with such a >consciousness. > >2. People don't understand, what God and Bodhisattva mean. Like blind >ones ask - what a light like is? But people even haven't words for >decribing qualities of light, though they see it everyday. People so >much afraid of unusual, that have mixed borders of light with a darkness. >Most easier for them is suppose that God's palace is located on a big- >gest star. Otherwise their god will leave without residence. Phenomenon >of incommensurableness makes them to minorize existing. > >3. You wonder often, why I don't give an answer to question? > You must know that arrows of thought often touch object of answer. >Suppose a wanderer who crosses an abyss over a rope. Will it be wise >to yell him? Yell can destroy his balance. Because of that you should >not mention names without instant need. Skill of using personal names is >necessary. Skill of telling a name must be like a hammer knock in a space. > > (Signs of Agni-Yoga, 1929). > >And so on. Each book consists of approx. 600 paragraphs like these. >It should be noted that original text is shorter than my translation. >It's laconic. Perhaps you've seen an original text of Bhagavad-Gita >and an English translation which is much longer. Russian grammar >reminds Sanskrit. For instanse, "you might be asked" in first pa- >ragraph replaces one word "ask" in plural and "future time". So >adequate English traslation maybe impossible. Spanish or Portuguese >translation should look better, I hope. > > W/best regards, Kay Ziatz (real name: Konstantin Zaitzev) > >P.S. Please forward this letter to theos-l > I can only evenaually post messages there. > > >--- SuperSlicer > * Origin: Nonsense (Fidonet 2:5020/360.4) roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 02:33:20 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:33:20 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030435.AC03862@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 07:22 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: > damnably stupid as to think that a fraud like Ballard >could say anyone is a chela is in no position to judge anyone else. >Fortunately you are going on my filter list and I will no longer have to put >up with your fascist garbage. This time it is "damnable stupid". And why? Because I have somewhat different beliefs than Chuck. Because of these my beliefs he calls me "damnable stupid". Why this person is participating in a Theosophical discussion forum is beyond me. Apparantly it is not healthy for him either, complaining as he does of getting high blood pressure. Then, because I think it is a good idea to have a mechanism to reduce personal name calling etc on this list, he calls my opinions "fascist garbage". Well, Chuck, your knowledge of Ballard and the I Am movement isn't even superficial. Do you not know how Blavatsky was constantly maligned and accused of being the fraud of the century etc? Can't you see that this is likely to happen again and again until the world has changed to a considerably higher state of consciousness? I have some famliarity with the personality and character of Mr Ballard, and would say that compared with HPB, his were impeccable. And yet, HPB worked for the Masters with all her faults. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 02:33:23 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:33:23 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030435.AD03862@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 07:24 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >I have sent my last message to this moron. > Anyone who is damned fool enough to think he is a chela because that crook Ballard told him (no doubt after being paid for the initiation, that was the usual procedure I'm told) is not worth the bandwidth to argue with. So now, "moron" it is. And, of course, "damned fool" (almost the same thing, right?). Chuck, did you know that Ballard died 1939? How old do you think I Am? Where did you get your "information" about Ballard from???? In my case I know numerous people who have belonged to his movement and left. They do not have any reason to protect him since they don't belong to his organization, and may even not like the way it is being run. But never have they have any complaints even remotely similar to what you are coming up with. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 05:08:23 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:08:23 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603050823.006b9a84@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 03:32 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:07 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >>Liesel and Alexis, >>In my opinion, both of you need to cool it with each other. If either one >>of you wants to write spiteful things about each other, e-mail each other >>privately. > >If personal vendettas are necessary, private E-mail is the right place for them. > >Please spare the rest of us! > Bjorn: I've already made it clear that there will be absolutely no input vis a vis Liesel from me. I have "filtered" her and so I will have no opportunity to respond to, or read, her messages. And I will resolutely ignore such messages from her as I see on other people's messages. Now is it not time for you to drop your little "crusade"? alexis >>> >>> >> >> >> > From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 05:50:28 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 22:50:28 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603055028.006c9148@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters doing? At 04:17 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >First a snippet out of a conversation between Chuck and Alexis: > >Alexis>You know that Martin will in all likelihood take every word you > just said totally seriously. > >Martin comments: no, not really. I know Chuck a little bit better >than that (at least I think I do :)) > >Alexis> He's Dutch (I think) [yes] and they are as entirely literal as >any German or Slav. First lat me apologize for inadvertently getting your name wrong, I really thought it was Euler. I have no idea where I got the idea, but it was firmly ensconced in my head. Now, Chuck and most of the folks on this list are aware that I am primarily German-Russian in my genetics, and it is a long time joke between alan, Chuck, and I about my literalness. > >Martin comments: a totally sweeping generalization (to imitate >your style :)). Actually my country is oriented very much towards >the USA. The folks here are as different from each other as in any >country. The main flaw here is the imitation of American soap opera's. >We shouldn't do that. The Americans have invented that and nobody >can do that kind of stuff better than ye yankies :) Martin: I used to live in Amsterdam and had a Dutch lover (actually two of them), I know a lot about your country and have long considered retiring there. I love the place so please don't think I was being negative or derogatory in any way. > > > > >Martin comments: of course and nobody (I hope) is doing that. A.D.: Thank you and I can see that you're not. > > > >Martin comments: I'm not judging you at all - this seems to be a hangup >of you. If you read my posts more carefully, you will see that I'm concerned >what's going on on this list. And I'm not putting all the fault on your >shoulders-see my posting Re: Donna; Re: Chuck & Alexis. A.D.: It has never been a "hang up of mine" but in the last weeks I have been the object of such extreme negativity, and such streams of constant invective that I have become not simply "testy" but very over sensitive. > > >ALexis>I submit that it is my >perception that the greatest motivation behind your judgemental attitude >towards me derives from the entirely unorthodox approach I have to what >Eldon and Daniel call the "Core Doctrines" of Theosophy, and that I believe >is the ONLY thing that drives you. A.D.: I have received, over the last several months so much "flak" for precisely that reason that I am afraid that I have come to almost expect it. Most likely you don't deserve to be the target for other peoples problems with me, and I really didn't mean to insult you in any way. > > >Martin comments: actually you're wrong in your perception. My greatest >drive is a search for truth in these matters. Why do you think I' m discussing >your point of view with you at length? Think about that! A.D.: Good point and well taken! But I will have to reserve judgement regarding your attitude to my un orthodoxy. > > > Alexis>If you would go through my postings since >I joined the board you would find that, with the exception of my "games" >with Chuck Cosimano, the majority of my messages have been thoughtful, >original, and entirely unorthodox. > >Martin comments> well, when I have the opportunity I will check out >the archives of John Mead. Please do. > > >Alexis> But I also submit that the actual content >of my messages on this board are of really little interest to you. > > >Martin comments: well, well. I submit that projecting *your ideas * >about the motives of others into these others is one of your flaws >(as it probably is with all of us) :) That remark of mine, when viewed in coolness, was uncalled for. I retract it an apologize for it. > > > >>Indeed. But that's not the issue here (except for the Leadbeater case). > >Alexis>Please explain the sentence above. I don't wish to misunderstand you. > > >Martin comments: I wrote that sentence because I suspect that factual >information on Leadbeater is not appreciated by many on this forum >(and that this information triggers many angry responses). Now what you say is entirely true. I have great difficulty in comprehending how any one can be wildly antagonized by facts. Facts are facts, they have nothing to do with opinions. In Leadbeater's case the things I have been saying are based upon documented evidence, not opinions or rumors, but strongly documented empirical evidence. The aren't at all arguable. These things are a matter not of Theosophical History but public record. Believe me there are far worse things alleged about Leadbeater than what I've been talking about. So then Martin, how does one deal with the irrational? You know, and I know, that there are people in this world who claim the holocaust never happened, but it did, and reasonable people are not intimidated into silence by the....what shall we call it?....."The irrational will to disbelieve" of people who refuse to accept facts? > > >Martin (prev)>The issue is, or rather has become: personal attacks on each > other. > >Alexis> In the first place, if you had been on this list long enough to >follow the >whole situation, you would find that I am not entirely at fault. I have been >accused of things that in my own estimation, I did not do. > > >Martin comments> That's quite possible (would have to check that). > > >Alexis> The problem with >Liesel Deutsch originated when she violently reacted to my total disapproval >of Charles Webster Leadbeater, my mistake was, and I freely admit it, to let >my Russian temper get the best of me and replied in kind. When something I >say is true, and is backed up by vast amounts of printed evidence, I do not >accept being told that I cannot discuss the subject. > > >Martin comments: I regard Liesel as a very friendly lady and a 'cyber-friend' >but I know she won't tolerate strong disapprovals of Charles Leadbeater. >It is understandable: loyalty to one's teacher is a strong thing , yet >not always wise if carried to the extreme. I mean, you can be loyal to >someone and yet disapprove of some of his/her actions. >That distinction is something many people find very hard to swallow. >In other words: you can condemn some act of a person, >but, by doing so, you don't condemn the whole of the person, the whole >of his/her character. I take it that you condemned many of his acts and >views, but not the person Leadbeater? > A.D.: Martin I have not "condemned" anything I have said I object to his actions as a proven Child Molester. What I mainly object to there is the fact that the man used his position of authority to misuse that authority, in a sexual way, with young children over whom he had been given authority. I also believe that many of his actions regarding his teaching of Theosophy have hurt the society. The Krishnamurti debacle being the most hideously obvious. It is also my strong belief that the theosophical movement would be far healthier than it is today had it not been for his writings, teachings, and actions. I can hardly condemn the man himself, he died the year before I was born. May I suggest that you read" "The Elder Brother" by Gregory Tillett? It will give you a clearer idea of why I feel the way I do. >Alexis> P.S. As to my "Russian Temper" it's actually the "Dolgorukii Family Temper"...HPB was infamous for her angers, rages, insulting or intemperate remarks, and her extreme sensitivity. And she was just one eighth Dolgorukii! I'm the senior male member of the family! It really isn't "O.K." for either of us, but it's the way we were made and people who value us have to try to understand that there's another side to our character. From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 06:13:38 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 23:13:38 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603061338.006c20d4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis Martin: Thank you for your many kindnesses to me in this posting. I appreciate it more than you can know. By the way, Alan Bain, when printing the Pamphlet "Ruminations on the Subject of Theosophy" (in the first edition) misspelled the bejesus out of Dolgorukii (which is easy to do). So I asked him politely to change it, and laughed about it with him. Now, why do I need to be able to discuss Bishop Leadbeater? Well it's clearly not out of purient interest, or a desire to "spread gossip". Firstly, in this case, it's public record and not gossip. But, as you already know, my perceptions and conceptions vis a vis the theosophical movement, and the philosophy it contains, absolutely requires that I refute those aspects of the philosophy and doctrine with which I disagree. Now, it is my perception that Bishop Leadbeater, and Mrs. Besant are very much the source and fountain of everything with which I disagree strongly. Therefore, if I am prevented from discussing the flaws I see inherent in their input, I am effectively silenced. Both the Bishop and Annie Besant are long passed away, but their influence on the society, which I view as pernicious, has not. I cannot explain why I consider that influence to be pernicious if I cannot discuss the source of the influences. Is that not so? It is also, I think, impossible to have any kind of rational discussion when one party is basing their discussion of history and the public record and the other party is basing the discussion on the Akashic Records as "read" by a friend. Is this not so? Apropos, it might be good were I to make my views on Dora van Gelder-Kunz clear. I have met Dora, and she is a funny, nice, and interesting person. As to her psychic qualities, I have been in the "psychic community" for over thirty years now, and I have met an enormous number of psychics. I have met many psychics I feel are not as talented as Dora, and I have met some who I believe to be far more able and talented than Dora. This is not to devalue her, but it is also not hagiography. I have attended a seminar and demonstration on healing that she gave, and I find her a competent healer, but no more. That by the way is not a disparagement, there are very few competent healers. But as to the connection between the van Gelder family and Bishop Leadbeater, I believe that the closeness creates a "conflict of interest" and makes any van Gelder unable to accurately and fairly judge the Bishop. He was like family to them, and most courts wisely recuse family from testifying. Now I hope this gives you a better idea where I am coming from. alexis From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 04:17:38 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:17:38 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606030619.AA04465@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis Alexis wrote: >Bjorn: > >I've already made it clear that there will be absolutely no input vis a vis >Liesel from me. I have "filtered" her and so I will have no opportunity to >respond to, or read, her messages. And I will resolutely ignore such >messages from her as I see on other people's messages. This sounds like an interesting excercise in self control! Now is it not time >for you to drop your little "crusade"? Certainly. I am looking forward to constructive exchanges, agreeing or disagreeing. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 06:36:53 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 23:36:53 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603063653.006cc3e0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! There's a very old Zen saying that goes: "Those who know...don't say...those who say...don't know". As to your "meeting the Master Jesus"..that which cannot be empirically proven shouldn't be "testified to". The most important thing that cannot be empirically proven is the concept that Jesus was ever a real and living person. If that is so, it would then be hard to encounter "his" spirit, would it not? Now as to intelligence tests? Most academics in the field of education consider them to be a very poor indicator of intelligence at all. Secondly tests given in the kind of circumstances you report are as easily manipulated in any chosen direction as political polls and are therefore about equally valid. My strong disapproval of Elisabeth Clair Prophet arises from my estimation that the woman is entirely fraudulent. The same disapproval also arises from a lot of reading of her printed words and they are totally unoriginal and un valid. My disapproval of her "disciples" arises from the fact that I find it inconceivable that anyone could fall for her words. In other words Bjorn, I don't "buy" your arguments. I've been observing Elisabeth Prophet (and the entire "new Age" Metaphysical Community) for some twenty years now and all I can say is that incredible banalities like "EL Morya" and "Cosmic Secret agent K-17 (or was it K-27?) have provided me with countless hour of amusement, the utter superficiality and banality of her writing leaves me totally aghast and appalled that anyone could "fall for it". You have been entirely "up front" and honest about your point of view, I could do no other than be equally frank and honest in my response. I have no animosity toward you are any of the people in the "I Am Movement" or the "Church Universal and Triumphant" but i do have a good deal of pity. alexis From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 06:51:46 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 23:51:46 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603065146.006c144c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Theosophy for Joe Sixpack and Theosophy for Disciples At 06:45 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: > I just finished my dissertation, and at long last, have my PhD. >Among other goodies, this will doubtless sell several more copies of >my books (I am retired and need the money folks) all by itself. > The fact that magic is also a two-edged sword is exactly >why I started writing my books, Chuck. I watched too many people >burning their fingers through ignorance. Alexis d.: Jerry, my warmest congratulations to Dr.Schueler! I've been following (lurking- us wolves are good at that) your sever al postings and I want to say that they are all wise and very well stated. > There may be a few Joe Sixpacks who stay with Theosophy, >but I still don't think that the membership will ever be up there where >it was before the infamous K incident. I hope that I am wrong. Alexis d.: Jerry, you are right as usual. They will not come to theosophy as it exists today, so the question of their "staying" is moot. > When I came into Theosophy, I too tried to take the >literature literally, and very seriously. Alexis d.: Has there ever been a Theosophist who didn't? I know I did. But by that time, I had already been initiated into Knuckling Yoga, and had a few >mystical experiences to hand, so I was able to sift a lot of >chaff from wheat right off the bat. Thus I was unable to ever >be a real sheep. Maybe a wolfish-sheep, or a sheepish-wolf? > The root problem here is that our worldview has to >address, and assimilate, our experiences. If we have certain >experiences that are simply not covered in the TS literature, >then we must expand our concept of Theosophy to address >that. If we have experiences that conflict with TS literature or >Core Teachings, then our worldview must also address >that--because we must always tweak our worldview to account >for our experiences. The only alternative is to ignore those >experiences and such repression always leads to pathological >conditions downstream. > I have been successful with this for the most part, >by employing the terms exoteric and esoteric to ideas or >teachings. Now I know that both you and Alexis don't care for >those terms, but they really have been a big help to me. Karma >and reincarnation, for example, as taught by Judge and G de P >are very acceptable to me as long as I consider them to be >exoteric teachings. In other words, the way they are taught in >the TS literature is simply not the way I experience or >intuitively see them. So, I call my own view esoteric, and thus >can assimilated both the literature and my experiences into my >worldview very nicely. Otherwise, I probably would have left >Theosophy a long time ago. Eldon is right when he says >that the words of the Core Teachings point to a body of esoteric >(wordless) teachings that have to be experienced. > So, after we bring in a bizzillion Joe Sixpacks and >their families, how do we get them away from a literal interpretation? > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > Jerry: We keep them away from a "literal interpretation of the literature", by simply keeping them away from the literature until they have been warned that it is entirely exoteric (to use your definition which is a good one) and symbolic and not to be understood literally. It is also imperative to provide literature that is not so entirely misleading. Which is the motivation for my crusade" against Leadbeater and the others who, I feel, a primarily responsible for the misleading nature of the literature, and also, in Leadbeater's case, for the Krishnamurti debacle. How would Krishnamurti have turned out had his entire childhood not been blighted? alexis > From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 06:53:21 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 23:53:21 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603065321.006c22a0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: "Moderating" lists etc. At 07:10 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >hi - > >just a quick note to reaffirm that I do not support moderating >this list. > >my experience has been that trying to control Theosophists is >ultimately "un-theosophical". > >peace - > >john e. mead >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >John E. Mead jem@vnet.net >Theos-L etc. list-owner >Member of Theosophy International >[Physics is impossible without imaginary numbers] >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >Hurrah...good for you John! My experience has been that trying to control Theosophists is impossible! alexis From jrcecon@selway.umt.edu Mon Jun 3 06:54:51 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 00:54:51 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: The Universal Family of Humanity Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII [A long one folks (-:)] It has, for some time now, been my belief that the concept of the formation of the nucleus of a universal family of humanity is the very core of modern Theosophy, the most profound idea within the Theosophical movement, the movement's "true north" ... that the compass of every theosophical sect ought to point towards to maintain its stability, its focus, and *its relationship to the foundational purpose of its existence*. Even further, I believe that the *reason* modern Theosophy appears to be such a mess, has splintered into a hundred different factions, is irrelevant to and largely ignored by the humanity it was begun to serve, and has withdrawn into itself as a turtle into its shell, is because its animating idea - *The Formation of the Nucleus of a Universal Family of Humanity* has been buried and forgotten ... replaced by small sects of people taking slices of the current, little tributaries, and attempting to make of them the whole of Theosophy; by people unable to resist the terrible selfishness present in the *personal* desire to be admitted into a "Mystery School" (a failing the Masters fought - unsuccessfully - from the very beginning of the society); by people caught in the snare of secret-chasing, unknowingly chained by the deep delights of wrestling with ornate philosophy and bound to the addictive pleasures of "insight" apparently gained therefrom. The First Object (I'll be so bold as to assert (-:) is much more than simply the statement of a nice sentiment, more than something to pay lip service to, to keep around like a pet goldfish ... in the room but usually ignored ... no, it is the tip of an idea so immense, so earth-shattering, so *kinetic* that if modern Theosophy were *truly* commit to it as an *Object*, that is, as a *goal* - the theosophical current would virtually instantaneously spring back to life. We were, I believe, as Theosophists, handed an *opportunity* to accomplish a remarkable task on behalf of the spiritual kingdom on this planet. The *gift* we were given was the *chance to serve on a global scale* ... and all the "teachings", the esoterica, were *not* given for our *personal benefit*, and we certainly do not have some sort of charge to "keep them alive" (how ridiculous - Those Who Keep Them can release them to whom they want, in any form they desire, at any time they wish) - the "occult" knowledge is but little scraps of an impossibly huge body of knowledge, scraps *intended to serve the accomplishment of the Formation of the Nucleus of a Universal Family of Humanity*. The purported "next religion" about which there is so much argument? Look in the First Object and *it is there* ... and not only that, but the "keys" to reading the theosophical esoterica are *also* buried in it. I understand these are bold claims ... and in fact they do not fit into *any* of the current theosophical sects, but bear with me (-:) - I'll try to support them ... to unpack what (IMO) are the first few layers of the remarkable idea/mission embedded in the First Object. No one may accept the totality of the premise ... but at least a discussion of the First Object - an idea the Adepts clearly and continually stated to be of prime importance to them - will be worth a bit of discussion. And curiously enough (IMO), of all the intense discussions I've seen in Theosophy over the years, discussion of the minutia of karma, of reincarnation, of the globes and races and rounds, of occult theory and occult practice in all its nuances, I've seen barely even an ounce of attention, a moment of intellectual energy, expended on understanding what the Formation of the Nucleus of a Universal Family of Humanity might mean. Its depths have *never* been explored, its door never even opened - yet this was the idea the Adepts held to be the one thing that *could not vary* regardless of what Sinnet, Hume, or even HPB wanted to do with Theosophy. And I suppose the best way to start would be to frame, in succinct a fashion as possible, what I believe to be the *foundational vibration of the theosophical current, inspired by Adepts and initiated by HPB*: The Adepts, understanding with foresight the century we are now in the midst of, and grasping the stunning burst of intellectual development - with all its power and its delusions - that was immanent, and understanding as well that the chief characteristic of the intellect is the *differentiating function* (i.e., that it is the "great slayer" of the (unified) "real", the *source* of the "heresy of separateness"), understanding that it was a *required stage of evolution*, but that it harbored tremendous dangers, and desirous of aiding in that evolution by trying to mitigate the great pain inherent in the delusions of the intellect, sought then a means of *immunizing* our race against the worst of the viral infections the spirit of differentiation (that is the core of the intellect) had almost inevitably to cause. The source of the *danger* exists in the very core of the intellect - whose first and most fundamental sentiment is "I, not I". It *seeks* to differentiate, to pull apart what is whole, to *magnify* differences, to see how many pieces compose the atom, how many different hierarchies can be named as composing the natural world, how many categories it can create to demonstrate how *different* humans are from one another. (Want to see this in action? *Every* race, every philosophy (*including Theosophy!), and every religion has produced a "ranking system" in which its members are the *highest*, and all others descend "downward" from the defined peak). Its development, for aeons possessed by but a few every generation, was on the verge of becoming widely diffused. Its powers are unprecedented - it can cure diseases, produce food, clothing and shelter for everyone on earth, but its downside is virulent. And the anti-virus, the immunizing agent, had to (of necessity) be of the nature of the virus - i.e., had to be *an idea* ... an idea *as basic and powerful as the predilection to say "I, not-I", but *diametrically opposed*. "To form a nucleus of a universal family of humanity, *without distinction* of race, creed, sex, caste or color." This, this remarkable idea, *is* the "anti-virus". In a world now completely deluged under the effects of "Us *vs.* Them", it was to be a powerful, focussed and deliberate articulation of the sentiment "Us *and* Them". But the means of introducing it could not be simply to state it - various forms of it had been stated for *millennia* with little effect. This merely had the effect of a doctor *telling* a patient they were going to get some medicine. To actually *inject it* into the body of humanity, it would require *a group of humans ... not Adepts, *humans*, to *actualize* the idea within the confines of the human civilization*. At least some minority of members of *our kingdom* had to have the courage, the perseverance, the tremendous creativity required to *begin demonstrating what the human kingdom as a whole would look like *after* it had completed the development of the mind* ... when it will begin to *resolve and unify instead of differentiate*. That is, the "anti-virus", from another perspective, is the *idea that will govern us in the future*: That we *are* a "universal family of humanity" - and we, we as *Theosophists*, were handed the golden opportunity to *form its nucleus* ... to be the *first iteration*, the *seed*. And yet, the founders (other than HPB) almost to the person failed to grasp this - either the idea or the opportunity. The TS itself fell prey almost immediately to the virus itself. But the idea itself is so powerful that it *remains* the animating agent behind whatever life is left in the Theosophical current. And not only that, but precisely those things that are complained about continuously in theosophy (and certainly on this list) are those things that constitute the actual living work of the First Object. (To explain this will take a bit of an articulation of the first layer of the Object (-:): The biggest initial problem is that the First Object is easy to read, and everyone thinks almost immediately that they understand it - but look even a bit more closely (with even half the effort that "karma" is looked at in TS circles (-:) - and suddenly it appears positively immense in its ramifications. To accomplish it, and accomplish it *genuinely*, even upon first glance indicates some very interesting (and perhaps even counterintuitive) realizations ... It has virtually *nothing* to do with "being nice". Notions like politeness, "reasoned discourse", "manners", "insults", etc., etc. vary by culture, by race, by personal upbringing, the exigencies of fate and fortune, and numerous other factors. If we are talking about a universal family, the first huge idea to be faced (and great courage indeed it takes to face it) is that *there is no "correct" mode or style of discourse*. At *every* layer of personality there *are* differences, and very substantial ones, between people ... and the era we live in, the era of mind, has served to do little other than greatly intensify our perception of those differences. The problem is that for most of history, the large majority of humans have been used to assuming that *their acculturated norms are "the" norms*. And this is the first profound truth embedded in the First Object: To take it as a *goal* means we must assume the responsibility of *continually* striving to function *as spiritual entities* ... that is, at the layers of our own energy systems where personality level differences *are not relevant*. This is important. For much of history, different races and cultures simply did not even come into contact with one another .. and when they did, either warfare resulted in the domination of one over the other, or migration happened and the conflicts ceased because the parties separated - did not remain in relation to one another. Both of these *avoided the fundamental issue*. In our current world, with its population explosion and the global telecommunications net, there *is* no place to go - differences that have existed since the beginning of exoteric recorded history must, for the first time, be *resolved*. The *challenge* of the First Object is to find *the way out*. On this list both "traditional" avenues have been tried. Almost everyone has, at one time or another, attempted to establish a correct "norm" - both for content and mode of communication ... but in this unique forum, no one has been able to dominate. And currently, the other "safety valve" is being tried - a usenet list on one hand, and a completely moderated list on the other. Both have been generated (IMO) as *reactions* to the tremendous tension and *pain* that surrounds the formation of a universal family. While I hope both are successful, my own *personal* hope is that people stay connected to theos-l ... because the actual *work* of the First Object is *happening here*. Almost no one thinks they are making personal attacks, and almost everyone feels as though they are subject to them. *WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?* More to the point (to deeply, if somewhat gratuitously stroke those that have stuck it out (-:) - it means that we have *begun the work* - make no mistake, *look* at the First Object ... race, cultures and personalities are *very* different, and to actually form the nucleus of a universal family means that, perhaps for the first time in our race's history ... a group of people, in whom exist the *entire spectrum of those differences*, instead of resolving through the domination of one perspective over another, or simply fleeing one another and avoiding the issue, have chosen to *stay in relation to one another for the sake of an ideal* ... and virtually everyone that has stayed has been virtually *required* to reach for the spiritual aspects of their being - the only place where *actual* resolution exists. Even further, in the very depth and viciousness of the apparent combat itself is the sign that *genuine* work is being done. There are multiple personality types on this list . types that in the human family as a whole have *never* resolved the differences between them. To be willing to *remain connected*, to try to dominate if one has the desire to dominate, to resist that domination if one feels that desire, to be *fully who we are without any compromise*, and hence face the full pain of the conflict with others in whom very different beliefs and standards exist, ... is to begin the *carve the paths that humanity as a whole may someday follow* ... We are, my brothers and sisters, playing the biggest game on earth, and messin' with the very fabric of human reality here - we are *seeking that road, the hidden perspective, the unknown solution, through which even the greatest differences may be somehow resolved - the two "pressure release valves" - domination or avoidance - that have always been the way resolution has come (neither of which every *truly* produced a resolution) we have forgone. Are their not "Alexis' and Liesels, Chucks and Bjorns, JRCs and Eldons, Daniels and K. Paul Johnsons (etc., etc)" throughout the world? Not only at the individual level, but even at the largest scales ... Muslims and Hindus, Catholics and Protestants, first world and third world, Jews and Iraqis, Chinese and Taiwanese ... the list goes on ad infinitum. Thing is, increasingly *no one* is able any longer to either dominate or avoid. But not one is seeking the means of *genuine* resolution ... nor even knows how to look. To pursue the actualization of the First Object is really the commitment to *discover historically unprecedented patterns of relationship* ... patterns that literally do not yet exist ... but that *when discovered in practice* ARE the patterns humanity is almost desperately (if still virtually unconsciously) seeking right now. And if we succeed in *finding* those patterns, *we will have produced the "anti-virus" that can be replicated ... can be *applied* to some of the oldest and deepest problems facing our race*. Does it make *sense*, even with this little brief exploration of the First Object, that the Adepts elevated the idea of universal family above all others? That they tried, constantly and throughout their contact with the founders, to continue to bring people back to that central idea? [And I must say here that, while everyone on the list has value, I continue to be almost in *awe* of John Mead ... in giving us, in exchange for his own personal hours of volunteer work, this forum as a gift .. and in his continued adamant refusal to moderate the list ... he is making it *possible* to do work that would not be possible anywhere else. Once again John, my deepest and most profound thanks ...] While this has probably gone on too long for now, I couldn't finish without mentioning (IMO) yet another significant point about the First Object. And that is that the "teachings" given out are all - if ya think about it - meant to *support* the work of the First Object? That the Second and Third Objects, the notions of cosmo and anthrogenesis, and the framework for understanding how to reach for more interior states of consciousness are all meant to be used *in the service* of the work of forming the nucleus for a universal family of humanity? That to study them alone and for one's personal development is inherently deeply selfish, to believe that one has, *because one has studied them*, somehow "above" the rest of humanity ... that is, to *use* those teachings as a means of *strengthening the sense of difference rather than understanding them as the means of discovering the road to resolution* ... is to seriously *misuse* those teachings? And this, I believe, is why Theosophy really is in trouble right now - the teachings have been virtually *severed* from the work of universal brotherhood ... they are being presented as things that can be (even should be) learned in and of themselves, rather than as both the larger paradigm and the personal knowledge needed to actualize the formation of the universal family. To anyone that feels like it, might I suggest this "key"? Any particular aspect of the theosophical you happen to be studying right now, try studying and meditating on it *assuming the furtherance of the First Object is the reason that particular knowledge was released by the Adepts* ... that out of all the immensity of the wisdom possessed, particular pieces were deliberately chosen (and others not even mentioned) with a very specific end in mind - *to fit those forming the nucleus of a universal family with what they would need to accomplish the task*. While I cannot say this is the truth, I *can* say that reading theosophical literature *with the First Object foremost in mind* changes every bit of it into *something else*, seems to trigger the intuitive understanding of it at a vastly increased scale, and provides *the* thread that *links* the immense body of literature, and suggests connections between apparently completely unconnected parts. *It functions as a key*. Anyway ... `nuff for now. Start taking your shots (har har har har har har har! Get it?! Tee hee). With Love, -JRC From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 06:59:59 1996 Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 23:59:59 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603065959.006d8418@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? At 07:22 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >I know all about the dutch. Dutch girls are also very good in bed and they >love my whip collection. >There was this real cute one who used to work at the Art Institute... >Happy Marquis de Sade's birthday. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >Here I go being literal again! Can't fight genetics! Is it really de Sade's Birthday? alexis From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 07:04:36 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:04:36 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603070436.006dbe5c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: many times great grandpa At 07:23 PM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Why does that not surprise me? > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >"Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds >At the battle of Copenhagen. >Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds >Running from one Norwegian." > >Chuck: Except for the fact that I am 14 inches shorter than Peter Alexeivitch, there's a famous portrait of him that shows a strong facial resemblance. But then all the Romanov's and Dolgorukiis look alike. Blavatsky was different looking but there was a Dolgorukii duiring Peter alexeivitch's reign,yclept Jacob who looked just like her. Flat Kalmuk face and all. alexis From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 07:09:33 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:09:33 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603070933.006e0748@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl I wish that everyone would find another metaphor for "nasty and mean and viscious"....I share my life with a wolf, and he's the gentlest, kindest, sweetest thing on the planet. I have met hundreds of wolves and none of them are "as advertised" the average Jack Russel terrier can terrify a wolf! alexis the wolf friend From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 07:58:59 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 00:58:59 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603075859.006acc80@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 12:05 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >My heavens, Daniel as peacemaker. > >This calls for a drink! >Let's hope it works. > >Chuck MTI, FTSA > >Chuck: I really believe Daniel was entirely sincere. It will work as far as I am concerned. I am not, and really never have been "at war" with Liesel. But the pagans weren't "at war" with the Christians either, look what good it did them! I will never say another negative thing about Liesel but I will also never be silenced on a subject I consider to be of paramount importance to the future of theosophy. If Theosophy is to have a future, we have to clean up our past, and CWL is an important part of that past. alexis From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 08:06:18 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 01:06:18 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603080618.006d2a18@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: The Universal Family of Humanity At 03:02 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > [A long one folks (-:)] > JRC: Far too long for 1:00 A.M.! I've pushed the "save as" button and I'll read it at my leisure tomorrow. I think you've hit on an important subject to discuss and I'' be first in line! But I won't be "taking any shots"....I usually agree in general with what you say. Why don't you post this on alt. theosophy? It's just the kind of discussion that's wanted there. Today was John and my 25th anniversary. alexis (I think I've found a mate for my wolf!) From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 08:11:32 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 01:11:32 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603081132.006da818@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 02:16 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alexis wrote: > >>Bjorn: >> >>I've already made it clear that there will be absolutely no input vis a vis >>Liesel from me. I have "filtered" her and so I will have no opportunity to >>respond to, or read, her messages. And I will resolutely ignore such >>messages from her as I see on other people's messages. > >This sounds like an interesting excercise in self control! Bjorn: I've Mastered (by love alone) a large male wolf, surely I can Master my own temper! > >Now is it not time >>for you to drop your little "crusade"? > >Certainly. I am looking forward to constructive exchanges, agreeing or >disagreeing. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net I sincerely hope so, mais que sera, sera. By the way I lived in Stockhom for almost two years when I was infinitely younger (the early 1950's) alexis dolgorukii From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 09:40:55 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 04:40:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Universal Family of Humanity In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII John: One of the most refreshing post I have seen for quite some time. You have hit hit the nail on its head - metaphorically. I am going to keep your post in my archives of important posts. After several years of membership of TS, I am still here only because of the First Object. As more I keep it in the background in my day to day activities, it has given me creative ways to approach problems and issues I deal with so that I can help the individuals I come across. Thanks again for the post. ...Ramadoss From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 11:07:50 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 06:07:50 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960603061007.26cfdd58@mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Contributions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS There have been some mention about the contributions of Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater to Theosophy and Theosophical Society. It was during the time of Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater, the membership of the Theosophical Society, Adyar grew enormously until the drop after J Krishnamurti made his famous "Truth is a Pathless Land" statement. If you look at the current statistics of the various organizations in the Theosophical Movement, the membership and the number of countries in which branches are active, TS, Adyar is the largest. All the other Theosophy organizations have membership which are very small and the countries in which they are active are few. (If anyone has statistical information to support or dispute this, I would welcome it). While Olcott established branches far and wide, it is the lectures and books of AB and CWL which introduced Theosophy to most of the members. I am one of those who benefitted by reading the books and lectures of AB and CWL. But for the contributions of AB and CWL, IMHO, TS, Adyar would now have the membership and geographical coverage similar to that of the other TS organizations. As the facts speak for themselves, and each can draw their own conclusions about the contributions of AB and CWL. As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us ponder over what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and TS. ....Ramadoss From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 01:41:29 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:41:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: I-Ching: Primal Correlates?? In-Reply-To: <199606030053.UAA14716@katie.vnet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <199606030053.UAA14716@katie.vnet.net>, "John E. Mead" writes >I have not found this concept in the usual >sources (Wilhelms etc.) or Wings. > >peace - > >john e. mead John - I wonder if this *is* in Wilhelm (just looked into my copy) but called something else? Could it relate to the "nuclear trigrams" for instance? My copy has, in the Index, "Primal Arrangement, see Sequence of Earlier Heaven." ??? Peace, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 01:44:02 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 02:44:02 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: chela? In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Hi, you are correct in your response. For most "chela" in Theosophical >context has certain connotation. That is how I understood it. Now that you >have explained, the issue should be laid to rest satisfactorialy. > > ...Ramadoss As a matter of interest, I have seen many instances of Bjorn's use of "chela" in "popular" works of a theosophical or neo-theosophical nature - ie., anyone who makes a serious study of "The Mysteries." Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 13:43:26 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 14:43:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Heroes and heroines Mime-Version: 1.0 The following letter from Mrs. Besant appeared in "The Theosophic Messenger" in April, 1904: Benares City, Feb. 17, 1904. "My Dear Friends: I am told, on what ought to be good authority, that there is a growing tendency in the T.S. in London to consider me as a "sacrosanct personality, beyond and above criticism." Frankly, I cannot believe that any claim so wild and preposterous is set up, or that many know me so little as to imagine that, if it were set up, I would meet it with anything but the uttermost condemnation. Even a few people, holding and acting on such a theory, would be a danger to the Society. if any considerable number held and acted on it the Society would perish. Liberty of opinion is the life- breath of the Society; the fullest freedom in expressing opinions, and the fullest freedom in criticising opinions, are necessary for the preservation of the growth and evolution of the Society. A "commanding personality" - to use the cant of the day - may in many ways be of service to a movement, but in the Theosophical Society the work of such a personality would be too dearly purchased if it were bought by the surrender of individual freedom of thought, and the Society would be far safer if it did not number such a personality among its members. Over and over again I have emphasized this fact, and have urged free criticism of all opinions, my own among them. Like everybody else, I often make mistakes, and it is a poor service to me to confirm me in those mistakes by abstaining from criticism. I would sooner never write another word than have my words made into a gag for other people's thoughts. All my life I have followed the practice of reading the harshest criticisms, with a view to utilize them, and I do not mean, as I grow old, to help the growth of crystallization by evading the most rigorous criticism. Moreover, anything that has been done through me, not by me, for Theosophy, would be outbalanced immeasurably by making my crude knowledge a measure for the thinking in the movement, and by turning me into an obstacle of future progress. So, I pray you, if you come across any such absurd ideas as are mentioned above. that you will resist them in your own person and repudiate them on my behalf. No greater disservice could be done to the Society, or to me. than by allowing them to spread. It is further alleged that a policy of "ostracism" is enforced against those who do not hold this view of me. I cannot insult any member of the Society by believing that he would initiate or endorse such a policy. It is obvious that this would be an intolerable tyranny, to which no self-respecting man would submit. I may say, in passing, that in all selections for office in the movement, the sole consideration should be the power of the candidate to serve the Society, and not his opinion of any person - Col. Olcott, Mr. Sinnett, Mr. Mead or myself. We do not want faction fights for party leaders, but a free choice of the best man. Pardon me for troubling you with a formal repudiation of a view that seems too absurd to merit denial. But as it is gravely put to me as a fact, I cannot ignore it. For the Society, to me, is the object of my deepest love and service, my life is given to it, it embodies my ideal of a physical plane movement. And I would rather make myself ridiculous by tilting at a windmill, such as I believe this idea to be, than run the smallest chance of leaving to grow within the Society a form of personal idolatry which would be fatal to its usefulness to the world. In the T.S. there is no orthodoxy there are no Popes. It is a band of students eager to learn the truth, and growing ever in the knowledge thereof, and its well-being rests on the maintenance of this ideal. Ever your sincere friend, ANNIE BESANT." Posted by Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From liesel@dreamscape.com Mon Jun 3 12:52:23 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 08:52:23 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606031357.JAA09923@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To: Bjorn R Bjorn, Coould you please explain in a little more detail who Ballard is. I've never heard of him, & I suppose a number of us on theos-l haven't either. I'd really be interested in hearing about him. Thanks. Liesel From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 15:13:22 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 10:13:22 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Alan: You have done a great service to Theosophy by posting AB's statement. I am printing a hard copy and faxing it to John Algeo with a request that it be published in the next AT. I hope he publishes it. Cheers ...Ramadoss From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 15:22:43 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:22:43 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603112242_209384110@emout08.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl Rich, Now really, you can howl. Just look up at the full moon and try. Chuck the Wolf MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 15:22:52 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:22:52 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603112251_209384203@emout14.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Discussions Alan, Anyone who looks to us for role modelling is in real trouble. :-) That is, unless they value independence of thought and action combined with an hopefully honest search for truth. Chuck the Wolf, MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 15:23:05 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:23:05 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603112304_209384323@emout14.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: I-Ching: Primal Correlates?? John, I've never heard of it either. I hope someone out there can give us some info. Chuck From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 14:25:46 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:25:46 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Clean up In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960603075859.006acc80@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960603075859.006acc80@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >If Theosophy is to have a future, we have to >clean up our past, ... and our present? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 14:23:21 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:23:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Intelligence Tests In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960603063653.006cc3e0@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960603063653.006cc3e0@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >Now as to intelligence tests? Most academics in the field of education >consider them to be a very poor indicator of intelligence at all. O Shit! That's me blown out of the water again! Alan @-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 17:25:29 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 10:25:29 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603172529.006b7924@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Contributions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS At 07:11 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: Doss: With all due respect to you, I would like to offer some observations regarding your remarks concerning the "contributions of A.B. and C.W.L. to Theosophy and The theosophical Society". >There have been some mention about the contributions of Annie Besant and C W >Leadbeater to Theosophy and Theosophical Society. > >It was during the time of Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater, the membership of >the Theosophical Society, Adyar grew enormously until the drop after J >Krishnamurti made his famous "Truth is a Pathless Land" statement. The Question is: Was it either moral or ethical to have put Jiddu Krishnamurti in a position in which he was driven to make such a speech? I don't believe it is possible to avoid the idea that because of Bishop Leadbeater's obsession with J.K. the man's childhood was totally blighted. It is also an important aspect of this to inquire why and how the "membership grew enormously" during the tenure of Mrs Besant and Charles Leadbeater. It is my belief that it grew for different reasons in Europe and India. I think that in India it grew because of Mrs. Besant's work in the Congress Party, and because of Indian Nationalism being so very strongly furthered by the efforts and financial contributions of The Theosophical Society. In Europe it grew primarily because of the efforts of the immediate followers of H.P.B. and because it was a social fad. It cannot be denied that in Europe, the theosophical movement was an upper-class phenomenon, and was especially popular among the creative people who had been originally drawn in by Mme.. Blavatsky (i.e. Vasily Kandinsky and Paul Klee and Piet Mondrian and Alexander Scriabin and Eric Satie). I think that by the time of the Krishnamurti speech, most of these people had been driven away by the sensationalism and "fairy tale" quality of Leadbeater's work. Mrs. Besant's written works are simply "mirror images" of Leadbeater's works, and this is true too of Arundale, Jinarajadasa, and Sri Ram etc. It is my very strong belief that were the written works of Charles Webster Leadbeater to somehow never have been written, the works of all these other writers would never have come into being. It is certainly not exaggerating to say that what Theosophy is today, is what it was made to be by Charles Leadbeater with the acquiescence of Mrs Besant. > >If you look at the current statistics of the various organizations in the >Theosophical Movement, the membership and the number of countries in which >branches are active, TS, Adyar is the largest. All the other Theosophy >organizations have membership which are very small and the countries in >which they are active are few. (If anyone has statistical information to >support or dispute this, I would welcome it). In view of the proportionate ratio of membership to population, in a world population of some four and one half Billion, the membership in all of the Theosophical Societies put together is entirely insignificant. If one were to subtract the number of members in India, it would even be more significant. I am persuaded that the reasons for membership are not at all the same in India and the rest of the world. I have had much contact with Indian Nationals who are not Theosophists and I have always been very unhappy regarding the level of hostility I have encountered vis a vis the T.S. > >While Olcott established branches far and wide, it is the lectures and books >of AB and CWL which introduced Theosophy to most of the members. I am one >of those who benefitted by reading the books and lectures of AB and CWL. The very first Theosophical Books I ever read were Leadbeater's "Masters and the Path" and "The Inner Life", and I am sure that you are completely correct when you say that many, if not most, people are introduced to Theosophy by these and other works of Leadbeater and Besant. But for me that was nearly thirty years ago, I have learned much in the interim. I have studied much in the interim. I have had much experience in the interim. With all due respect I must say that I find myself very resentful for all the many "errors" (to say the least) in those writings. In the course of the last thirty years I have discovered the Good Bishop to have been so very wrong about so many things, and when one compares his words with his actions, so terribly hypocritical, that I am angry at myself for having been so gullible as to have been duped. > >But for the contributions of AB and CWL, IMHO, TS, Adyar would now have the >membership and geographical coverage similar to that of the other TS >organizations. Doss, there's just no way anyone can make such an estimation. There's also the great possibility that without the shame of the Krishnamurti incident and the scandals surrounding the Bishop, the T.S. would be a much larger and more significant organization. It would also possibly not be fragmented. because the schism with the American section and W.Q.Judge was, in my estimation wholly at the instigation, and the result of the ambitions of, Annie Besant. > >As the facts speak for themselves, and each can draw their own conclusions >about the contributions of AB and CWL. The strange thing about "facts" Doss, is that they are not the same to each person. To arrive at those "facts" I think, one is obliged to go outside of "Theosophical Sources". > >As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us ponder over >what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and TS. Ah, but once again, that is entirely a matter of perspective. You think they helped Theosophy so you are grateful. I think they harmed Theosophy greatly and so gratitude is irrelevant. > > > ....Ramadoss > > People can disagree, and disagree strongly, and still be Brothers and Friends: I admire you greatly for all your efforts. alexis d. > From jhe@toto.csustan.edu Mon Jun 3 17:27:14 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 10:27:14 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Message-Id: <9606031727.AA05595@toto.csustan.edu> Subject: re: "Isis Unveiled" question >Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that >incarnation into the physical more than once is an exception, >rather than the rule? That surprised me; I have read a bit about >theosophy but hadn't come across that viewpoint. Blavatsky in ISIS UNVEILED is speaking of the reincarnation of the personality as being an exception in nature. The concept of reincarnation of the personality was made popular at that time by a French Spiritualist named Alan Kardec. Blavatsky argues against Kardec's concept in ISIS, but does not introduce her own concept of reincarnation until after the teaching concerning the principles of the human constitution are introduced. later introduced a different concept--reincarnation of the individuality (spiritual ego), of which the personality is only an ephemeral ray. Critics of reincarnation often refer to Blavatsky's statement in ISIS UNVEILED as evidence that HPB did not believe in reincarnation at first and adopted it later. But these critics are not making that distinction that HPB clearly made in ISIS UNVEILED--the personality vs the individuality. >I had read >that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over 1000 years) >between incarnations, but that would allow for many more >incarnations than one or two. The period between incarnations was given in the Mahatma Letters as an average of 100 years per year of life. The average period between incarnations was also stated to be about 1500 years. Since HPB taught that the fifth root race (i.e. fifth stage of human evolution) began five million years ago, that leaves time for lots of incarnations in this period alone. >Yet, also, the long period of >rest between incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy >which accepts even immediate re-incarnations. Popular Hinduism also teaches that people reincarnate as animals plants and even rocks, depending upon their "karma." Personally, HPB's concept of reincarnation makes more sense to me. >Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or >suggest a consensus to these philosophies? Perhaps I am >premature in my confusion - will this be addressed in "The >Secret Doctrine?" > >Thank You, > >Kym I recommend that you read THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY next. It will give you an overview of HPB's teachings in a very straight forward question and answer format. She discusses reincarnation and what reincarnates in some detail there. To fully grasp the teaching, you will need to carefully read what she says about the human constitution in the same book. JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From alexei@slip.net Mon Jun 3 17:40:36 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 10:40:36 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960603174036.006c3c38@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines At 10:03 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >The following letter from Mrs. Besant appeared in "The Theosophic >Messenger" in April, 1904: > And what an absolutely fascinating letter it is! It could have been written by Blavatsky herself it's so open and frank. Now, I must begin to wonder: If it is in fact as sincere as it seems to be, then what in heaven's name happened to the woman between 1904 and her death in 1933? When I look at Mrs. Besant in her robes of Office, I can only wonder how it came to pass that the woman who wrote this wonderfully wise letter could have permitted herself to be transmogrified into a veritable "Pope of Theosophy"? It is simply stupefying to realize that her predictions as to what would occur if she was to be "iconized" have come so completely true. I certainly think a discussion of how the total change came about is worthy of our time. What do you think Alan? alexis > Benares City, Feb. 17, 1904. > >"My Dear Friends: > >I am told, on what ought to be good authority, that there is a growing >tendency in the T.S. in London to consider me as a "sacrosanct >personality, beyond and above criticism." > >Frankly, I cannot believe that any claim so wild and preposterous >is set up, or that many know me so little as to imagine that, if it >were set up, I would meet it with anything but the uttermost >condemnation. Even a few people, holding and acting on such a theory, >would be a danger to the Society. if any considerable number held and >acted on it the Society would perish. Liberty of opinion is the life- >breath of the Society; the fullest freedom in expressing opinions, and >the fullest freedom in criticising opinions, are necessary for the >preservation of the growth and evolution of the Society. A "commanding >personality" - to use the cant of the day - may in many ways be of >service to a movement, but in the Theosophical Society the work of such >a personality would be too dearly purchased if it were bought by the >surrender of individual freedom of thought, and the Society would be far >safer if it did not number such a personality among its members. > >Over and over again I have emphasized this fact, and have urged free >criticism of all opinions, my own among them. Like everybody else, >I often make mistakes, and it is a poor service to me to confirm me >in those mistakes by abstaining from criticism. I would sooner never >write another word than have my words made into a gag for other people's >thoughts. All my life I have followed the practice of reading the >harshest criticisms, with a view to utilize them, and I do not mean, >as I grow old, to help the growth of crystallization by evading the >most rigorous criticism. Moreover, anything that has been done through >me, not by me, for Theosophy, would be outbalanced immeasurably by >making my crude knowledge a measure for the thinking in the movement, >and by turning me into an obstacle of future progress. > >So, I pray you, if you come across any such absurd ideas as are >mentioned above. that you will resist them in your own person and >repudiate them on my behalf. No greater disservice could be done to the >Society, or to me. than by allowing them to spread. > >It is further alleged that a policy of "ostracism" is enforced against >those who do not hold this view of me. I cannot insult any member >of the Society by believing that he would initiate or endorse such >a policy. It is obvious that this would be an intolerable tyranny, >to which no self-respecting man would submit. I may say, in passing, >that in all selections for office in the movement, the sole >consideration should be the power of the candidate to serve the Society, >and not his opinion of any person - Col. Olcott, Mr. Sinnett, Mr. Mead >or myself. We do not want faction fights for party leaders, but a free >choice of the best man. > >Pardon me for troubling you with a formal repudiation of a view that >seems too absurd to merit denial. But as it is gravely put to me as >a fact, I cannot ignore it. For the Society, to me, is the object >of my deepest love and service, my life is given to it, it embodies >my ideal of a physical plane movement. And I would rather make myself >ridiculous by tilting at a windmill, such as I believe this idea to >be, than run the smallest chance of leaving to grow within the Society >a form of personal idolatry which would be fatal to its usefulness >to the world. In the T.S. there is no orthodoxy there are no Popes. >It is a band of students eager to learn the truth, and growing ever >in the knowledge thereof, and its well-being rests on the maintenance >of this ideal. > > Ever your sincere friend, > > ANNIE BESANT." > >Posted by Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > > From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 15:46:53 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 11:46:53 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606031749.AA09577@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 02:12 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Both the Bishop and Annie Besant are long passed away, but their influence >on the society, which I view as pernicious, has not. Alexis: I have a special interest in Annie Besant and her writings. So far I have seen some psychic elements of influence that came through her and that I would agree were pernicious, but I haven't seen this in her writings. Can you give examples? Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 15:47:02 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 11:47:02 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606031749.AE09577@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Contributions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS At 07:11 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us ponder over >what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and TS. Yes, that is a very good starting point. Then, coming from that perspective we can also learn from their mistakes, so they do not have to be perpetuated. Let us have TRUTH, but not without compassion. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 15:47:10 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 11:47:10 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606031749.AB09577@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines Thank you, Alan, for digging this up and sharing it with us At 10:03 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >The following letter from Mrs. Besant appeared in "The Theosophic >Messenger" in April, 1904: > roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 15:47:00 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 11:47:00 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606031749.AD09577@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Attention: Liesel and Alexis At 04:07 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Bjorn: I've Mastered (by love alone) a large male wolf, surely I can Master >my own temper! To master ones own temper by love - I believe that to be a key to real mastery. >I sincerely hope so, mais que sera, sera. By the way I lived in Stockhom >for almost two years when I was infinitely younger (the early 1950's) Wow, you must be ancient! I thought I am old and I was BORN in the early 50ies. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From ramadoss@eden.com Mon Jun 3 17:57:48 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:57:48 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Contributions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960603172529.006b7924@mail.slip.net> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Alexis: Glad you posted the message. I would let the readers here to make up their own mind on the matter. ...Doss Ramadoss On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, alexis dolgorukii wrote: > At 07:11 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > > Doss: > > With all due respect to you, I would like to offer some observations > regarding your remarks concerning the "contributions of A.B. and C.W.L. to > Theosophy and The theosophical Society". > > >There have been some mention about the contributions of Annie Besant and C W > >Leadbeater to Theosophy and Theosophical Society. > > > >It was during the time of Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater, the membership of > >the Theosophical Society, Adyar grew enormously until the drop after J > >Krishnamurti made his famous "Truth is a Pathless Land" statement. > > The Question is: > > Was it either moral or ethical to have put Jiddu Krishnamurti in a position > in which he was driven to make such a speech? I don't believe it is possible > to avoid the idea that because of Bishop Leadbeater's obsession with J.K. > the man's childhood was totally blighted. It is also an important aspect of > this to inquire why and how the "membership grew enormously" during the > tenure of Mrs Besant and Charles Leadbeater. It is my belief that it grew > for different reasons in Europe and India. I think that in India it grew > because of Mrs. Besant's work in the Congress Party, and because of Indian > Nationalism being so very strongly furthered by the efforts and financial > contributions of The Theosophical Society. In Europe it grew primarily > because of the efforts of the immediate followers of H.P.B. and because it > was a social fad. It cannot be denied that in Europe, the theosophical > movement was an upper-class phenomenon, and was especially popular among the > creative people who had been originally drawn in by Mme.. Blavatsky (i.e. > Vasily Kandinsky and Paul Klee and Piet Mondrian and Alexander Scriabin and > Eric Satie). I think that by the time of the Krishnamurti speech, most of > these people had been driven away by the sensationalism and "fairy tale" > quality of Leadbeater's work. Mrs. Besant's written works are simply "mirror > images" of Leadbeater's works, and this is true too of Arundale, > Jinarajadasa, and Sri Ram etc. It is my very strong belief that were the > written works of Charles Webster Leadbeater to somehow never have been > written, the works of all these other writers would never have come into > being. It is certainly not exaggerating to say that what Theosophy is today, > is what it was made to be by Charles Leadbeater with the acquiescence of Mrs > Besant. > > > >If you look at the current statistics of the various organizations in the > >Theosophical Movement, the membership and the number of countries in which > >branches are active, TS, Adyar is the largest. All the other Theosophy > >organizations have membership which are very small and the countries in > >which they are active are few. (If anyone has statistical information to > >support or dispute this, I would welcome it). > > In view of the proportionate ratio of membership to population, in a world > population of some four and one half Billion, the membership in all of the > Theosophical Societies put together is entirely insignificant. If one were > to subtract the number of members in India, it would even be more > significant. I am persuaded that the reasons for membership are not at all > the same in India and the rest of the world. I have had much contact with > Indian Nationals who are not Theosophists and I have always been very > unhappy regarding the level of hostility I have encountered vis a vis the T.S. > > > >While Olcott established branches far and wide, it is the lectures and books > >of AB and CWL which introduced Theosophy to most of the members. I am one > >of those who benefitted by reading the books and lectures of AB and CWL. > > The very first Theosophical Books I ever read were Leadbeater's "Masters and > the Path" and "The Inner Life", and I am sure that you are completely > correct when you say that many, if not most, people are introduced to > Theosophy by these and other works of Leadbeater and Besant. But for me that > was nearly thirty years ago, I have learned much in the interim. I have > studied much in the interim. I have had much experience in the interim. With > all due respect I must say that I find myself very resentful for all the > many "errors" (to say the least) in those writings. > > In the course of the last thirty years I have discovered the Good Bishop to > have been so very wrong about so many things, and when one compares his > words with his actions, so terribly hypocritical, that I am angry at myself > for having been so gullible as to have been duped. > > > >But for the contributions of AB and CWL, IMHO, TS, Adyar would now have the > >membership and geographical coverage similar to that of the other TS > >organizations. > > Doss, there's just no way anyone can make such an estimation. There's also > the great possibility that without the shame of the Krishnamurti incident > and the scandals surrounding the Bishop, the T.S. would be a much larger and > more significant organization. It would also possibly not be fragmented. > because the schism with the American section and W.Q.Judge was, in my > estimation wholly at the instigation, and the result of the ambitions of, > Annie Besant. > > > >As the facts speak for themselves, and each can draw their own conclusions > >about the contributions of AB and CWL. > > The strange thing about "facts" Doss, is that they are not the same to each > person. To arrive at those "facts" I think, one is obliged to go outside of > "Theosophical Sources". > > > > > >As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us ponder over > >what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and TS. > > Ah, but once again, that is entirely a matter of perspective. You think they > helped Theosophy so you are grateful. I think they harmed Theosophy greatly > and so gratitude is irrelevant. > > > > > > > ....Ramadoss > > > > > People can disagree, and disagree strongly, and still be Brothers and Friends: > > I admire you greatly for all your efforts. > > alexis d. > > > > From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 15:59:18 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 11:59:18 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606031801.AA09714@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Interesting work on Jesus and early Christianity: http://www.skypoint.com/members/ceo/ THE CHRISTIAN CONSPIRACY=A9=20 The Orthodox Suppression of Original Christianity=20 _________________________=20 Now for the first time in one book, after more than 10 years of research= =20 Joseph P. Macchio uncovers these startling facts: Texts concerning the origin and proliferation of evil were destroyed by the Church Fathers 1,800 years ago.=20 =20 Ancient Christian texts contained secret teachings of Jesus, that may be necessary for salvation.=20 =20 Traces the lineage of the mysterious Christian Gnostics.=20 =20 Why and how did Irenaeus, Augustine, and others reformulate Christian dogma their way.=20 =20 The mystery teachings of Jesus are not included in the New Testament.=20 =20 Church Fathers suppressed amazing evidence about Jesus' life in Kashmir, India years after the crucifixion.=20 roxendal@alpinet.net From jhe@toto.csustan.edu Mon Jun 3 21:03:27 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 14:03:27 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Message-Id: <9606032103.AA13111@toto.csustan.edu> Subject: re: attention: Liesel and Alexis Alexis writes: >...but I will also never be silenced on a subject I consider to >be of paramount importance to the future of theosophy. If >Theosophy is to have a future, we have to clean up our past, and >CWL is an important part of that past. Here is the rub. Here we are in a theosophical discussion group which should imply a freedom to explore theosophical subjects in all of its aspects. The only limitation I remember reading when I joined was that we are supposed to be considerate to others on the list. To me, this rule means that we are not supposed to hurl insults at each other. That is a reasonable request IMO. But if this rule also means that we cannot discuss certain theosophically relevant subjects if some subscribers object to them, then we are in deep trouble. Over the past years, I discussed some of the issues concerning CWL in some depth on theos-l. I did so because, like Alexis, I believe that a frank discussion and exploration of the activities and teachings of this man should be a legitimate topic of discussion on theos-l, not to mention TSA. I had hoped that the discussions would stimulate some thinking and questions among the readers concerning the past and future direction of the TS. After all, when the TS was formed, it was meant to be an organization where people were brought together by their desire to seek for truth. I think this is still a noble cause. But today, the TS is predominately a membership which has no idea what is going on and apparently goes to extreme efforts to avoid knowing. There are others who live in a fantasy world of theosophical lore about neighboring planets populated by little green men, a "smiling" solar logos who is in charge of this planet, and rocks that fall in love with little boys who sit on them. The TS over the past 100 years has indeed become a confused mess and there doesn't seem to be enough people interested in theosophy in its original sense who want to get to the bottom of that confusion. IMO the apathy, denial and self imposed ignorance of the majority of the membership is more to blame for the failure of the TS than all of the bad and/or ineffective leaders and policies put together. After over thirty years of fighting apathy and getting burned by those in power who are threatened by change, I've come to the point where I fully understand that famous line: "Frankly, Miss Scarlet, I don't give a damn." But if there are two or three people on this list who are willing to discuss CWL's effect on the TS, and this discussion is motivated from an intellectual integrity--a desire for truth, and they are willing to stand up to the aggressive and passive- aggressive abuses of those who do not wish this subject to be discussed, I would be more than happy to join in and add considerably more information beyond what I had contributed in the past--that is, once this topic progresses to the point where I had last left off. The only weapon we have against ignorance is knowledge. JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Mon Jun 3 22:16:04 1996 Date: 03 Jun 96 18:16:04 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! Message-Id: <960603221604_76400.1474_HHL30-1@CompuServe.COM> Bjorn: >There are many chelas in the theosophic movement. One of the reasons it was >founded was to provide an environment for chelas and would-be chelas to meet >and receive training Would someone please pass this information on to the various TS headquarters. It seems to me that they need to know this. It is certainly news to me. Where can I go for my training? Jerry S. Member, TI From jhe@toto.csustan.edu Mon Jun 3 22:42:24 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:42:24 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Message-Id: <9606032242.AA16770@toto.csustan.edu> Subject: re: Contricutions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS >It was during the time of Annie Besant and C W Leadbeater, the >membership of the Theosophical Society, Adyar grew enormously >until the drop after J Krishnamurti made his famous "Truth is a >Pathless Land" statement. True. The TS was originally a provocative philosophical movement until 1908 when AB and CWL changed it into a cult dedicated to the worship of Krishnamurti as the World Teacher. After the "Pathless land" speech and K's resignation, the TS membership dropped dramatically and steadily. >If you look at the current statistics of the various >organizations in the Theosophical Movement, the membership and >the number of countries in which branches are active, TS, Adyar >is the largest. All the other Theosophy organizations have >membership which are very small and the countries in which they >are active are few. (If anyone has statistical information to >support or dispute this, I would welcome it). What is your point? >But for the contributions of AB and CWL, IMHO, TS, Adyar would >now have the membership and geographical coverage similar to >that of the other TS organizations. How can you compare? The Pasadena Society closed all of their Lodges in 1904. They rechartered new Lodges in 1930 and closed them again in 1951. So of course the Adyar TS has more membership, they have been a membership Organization dedicated to building a large membership from the beginning. The Pasadena TS has not been so dedicated for most of its history. ULT has no membership and no dues--it never had any. If you were talking about three membership Organizations that have been continuously operating as such, then I would say that you have a fair bases of comparison upon which to make your above statement. But this is not the case. >While Olcott established branches far and wide, it is the >lectures and books of AB and CWL which introduced Theosophy to >most of the members. I am one of those who benefitted by reading >the books and lectures of AB and CWL. True. They flooded the market with their own books and promoted them while leaving HPB's writings to be forgotten tombs. >As the facts speak for themselves, and each can draw their own >conclusions about the contributions of AB and CWL. True. And depending upon which selection of "facts" you want to present, one can make them say almost anything. >As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us >ponder over what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and >TS. OK--I'm pondering........I give up. What have they contributed for which I should be grateful? JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 22:47:29 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:47:29 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603184729_548531116@emout10.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: The Universal Family of Humanity John, A good posting. I actually read through it without my eyes glazing over once. I shold explain something. There are other reasons for creating alt.theosophy than merely reacting to some of the stuff here. I had been thinking about a newsgroup from the time I got on the net and the opportunity appeared. It gives us a chance, if I can ever post on it, to get to millions of people, something HPB could only dream about. And there were some technical, mechanical problems with the list that were annoying, that had nothing to do with John Mead (who is undoubtedly acquired so much good karma for this that he is on his way to Nirvana), but merely part of the computer network. Glad to see you're back. Chuck MTI, FTSA From Drpsionic@aol.com Mon Jun 3 22:47:36 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:47:36 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960603184735_548531193@emout07.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: What are the Masters Doing? Alex, Yep, yesterday really was his birthday. We have birthday party for him every year and my arm is tired. Chuck the Atrocious, MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 22:02:19 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 23:02:19 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960603174036.006c3c38@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960603174036.006c3c38@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >>The following letter from Mrs. Besant appeared in "The Theosophic >>Messenger" in April, 1904: [quote omitted] >> >And what an absolutely fascinating letter it is! It could have been written >by Blavatsky herself it's so open and frank. Now, I must begin to wonder: If >it is in fact as sincere as it seems to be, then what in heaven's name >happened to the woman between 1904 and her death in 1933? >When I look at Mrs. Besant in her robes of Office, I can only wonder how it >came to pass that the woman who wrote this wonderfully wise letter could >have permitted herself to be transmogrified into a veritable "Pope of >Theosophy"? > >It is simply stupefying to realize that her predictions as to what would >occur if she was to be "iconized" have come so completely true. > >I certainly think a discussion of how the total change came about is worthy >of our time. What do you think Alan? Well, this is a start on some research, and there will possibly be other letters. The one I posted was reproduced by the editor(s) of "The Theosophic Voice" in 1908. This only went to three issues (in Chicago). Most of its content was taken up with the CWL affair, his resignation from the T.S. and later reinstatement. I have some more reading to do, as I have the temporary loan of all three issues. All being well, more historical material will arrive in Bristol on Wednesday ... Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 23:18:26 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 00:18:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Desire for Truth In-Reply-To: <9606032103.AA13111@toto.csustan.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <9606032103.AA13111@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes >But if there are two or three people on this list who are willing >to discuss CWL's effect on the TS, and this discussion is >motivated from an intellectual integrity--a desire for truth, and >they are willing to stand up to the aggressive and passive- >aggressive abuses of those who do not wish this subject to be >discussed, I would be more than happy to join in and add >considerably more information beyond what I had contributed in >the past--that is, once this topic progresses to the point where >I had last left off. > >The only weapon we have against ignorance is knowledge. > >JHE > Count me in, Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Mon Jun 3 21:53:39 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:53:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Alan: > >You have done a great service to Theosophy by posting AB's statement. ***blush*** Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Tue Jun 4 00:34:54 1996 Date: 03 Jun 96 20:34:54 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant Message-Id: <960604003454_76400.1474_HHL52-3@CompuServe.COM> Doss: >I have been trying to make Theosophy practical in the sense that I >try to apply the ideal of Universal Brotherhood to help any man(woman) or >any other entity that I can help. So I feel there is a practical side to >Theosophy. In a large sense, I agree with you completely. However, Christians learn in Church to turn the other cheek, and to return hate with love, and so on. Many try to put that into practice. Are you implying that we all basically all on the same Path? Could you tell me what the difference is, in your view, between theosophical altruism and any other practicing Christian or other religious person? The reason that I bring this up, Doss, is that altruism, to me, is a given, and very first step that we all should have learned in Church before coming into Theosophy. I would hope that a theosophist is a cut above the average religious person because a theosophist has Knowledge that the Christian or Jew or Mulsim doesn't have. I guess what I am suggesting here, is that maybe there is more to being a practicing theosophist than merely being altruistic (?). Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Tue Jun 4 00:34:46 1996 Date: 03 Jun 96 20:34:46 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl Message-Id: <960604003446_76400.1474_HHL52-1@CompuServe.COM> Richard: >Well, I don't know about this "sheep and wolves thing." If it were anyone >other than Jerry S. touting the wolves, I would probably animadvert in more >strenuous fashion; however, in Jerry's case I have learned that waiting with >my objections often turns out to be the best policy--since my gainsayings >usually disappear on their own. I am sorry if I gave you the impression that I prefer wolves to sheep. They both have their good points and bad points. I actually would consider myself a sheepish-wolf. >Still . . . for the time being, number me with the sheep, or better yet the >lambs (or better yet, a semi-shepard of myself, at least). . . . You are way too modest. A sheepish-wolf if I ever saw one. Meditation (which you espouse) is a sure way to turn any sheep a bit wolfish. A true sheep steers clear of meditation for fear it will change him (or her) -- which it will. >I don't know . . . all a person has to rely on in the end is or her own line >of development, isn't it? Yes. But if we rely only on our book-learning, then what happens to us after death, when we go through Devachan and all our mental baggage is dropped? At birth, we must start all over again, bringing with us, perhaps, but the love of books. > Certainly, the result of my own is the reverse of >what has been suggested: It seems like much more the case >that I started out as a wolf and turned into a-- This could only happen if your meditative experiences totally confimed your understanding of the literature. An interesting idea. In my own case, this is true to a very large extent, but there is a small portion of the literature that just won't jive, and I simply have to let it go. >Well, who knows? All I can say is that I have now become far too gentle to >be a proper wolf any more. As Alexis has noted, wolves are actually gentle. Sheep can be as nasty as anything, you know. My use of the terms, spawned by Bjorn's horror at what he called the theosophical "wolves," was not directed at gentleness vs nastiness but rather at sheepishly following the literature, or using one's experiences to wolfishly shift the chaff from the theosophical wheat. Eldon's use of the metaphor of mining gold is apt, because for every nugget of gold there is a lot of coal and dirt that must be cleared away. And what, but meditation, can we possibly use to accomplish this filtration in any meaningful way? > If I do inflict pain, the awareness of the fact >that I have done so usually makes me suffer more than my victim. Me too, but a wolf is actually a sensitive animal, while most sheep are relatively insensitive to the pain to others. The analogy here is applicable primarily because from the sheep's point of view the wolf is a walking horror with no compassion at all, while from the wolf's viewpoint we have an entirely different situation. This idea may be seen more clearly from the Zen viewpoint. When a student says something to his Master that the Master interprets as too much reliance on literature, the Master may respond by hitting the student with a stick. While this act can be seen as lacking compassion, it just may be exactly what the student needs to bring about satori. Now, I am not suggesting that the wolves are Masters and the sheep are students. That is where the Zen analogy breaks down. But otherwise the idea is pretty close. The wolf vs sheep is really a case of book-reading vs experience, and the wolf's message is that without experience, one is simply a follower of what someone else has said. Even when our experience confirms what we have read, the information itself becomes a felt-knowledge rather than just head-knowledge and the sheep turns into a wolf. Our head-knowledge is discarded during the Devchan, while felt-knowledge is brought with us into our next life. Thus the importance of distinguishing between the two. >This might turn out to be a bad thing to do, and naturally it is predicated >on the completely unsupported assumption that for some reason I think I have >the "Vantage of Perspective" on the other person's psychogenetic condition. Agreed. This is the inherent danger of the wolf's attempt to "change the sheep or else." The fact is, some sheep (like Eldon) prefer to remain so, and are quite happy with themselves, and I agree that those don't need changing. But what about all of the sheep who have responded in ugly and mean-spirited reprisal? What happened to the compassion that they themselves are supposed to manifest? If such sheep would look at themselves in the mirror, they might not see the gentle and loving souls that they envisioned themselves to be. The wolf's message to those, is simply to lighten up, get a sense of humor, learn not to take things personally, learn to control your ego, and so on. Sheep, the real sheep, are living in a fool's paradise that will come crashing down on them at some point. They see the world in an image of how they want it to be, rather than how it really is (my days as a Christian Scientist proved to me that Christian Scientists are sheep). For this reason, I would say that Eldon, and doubtless others, are not real sheep. Now personally, I don't want to set myself up as any sheep's karmic agent. I am simply pointing out what is going on here on theos-l. Alexis and Chuck, however, must speak for themselves. >Nevertheless, my continuing hope, naturally, is that we have no ***holes on >this list and that everyone, no matter how wolfishly abrasive, does what he >or she does with high purpose and helpful intent. My hope too. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Tue Jun 4 00:34:51 1996 Date: 03 Jun 96 20:34:51 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant Message-Id: <960604003450_76400.1474_HHL52-2@CompuServe.COM> Jerry S.: >>... because theosophists who >> study the literature over a long period of time become convinced >> (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand... >>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Doss: > Agreed, No one can know everything. Its more than that, Doss. The human mind thinks that it can, and tries very hard. If it feels incompetent, it simply reads a bit more to try to learn faster. Its like a dog chasing its tail. It thinks that it can catch it by simply going faster. I know, because this is how I used to be. James Long noted this in me, and told me that I was trying to wrap truth up in a box tied neatly with a pretty ribbon. He pointed out that what I was trying to do, couldn't be done, and he suggested I stop reading and studying and instead try to assimilate what I had already read. The truth, in short, was already within me, if I could only see it. This pretty well changed me around, gave me a whole new worldview, and transformed me from a sheep to a wolf, for which I will be eternally gratefully. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Tue Jun 4 00:34:57 1996 Date: 03 Jun 96 20:34:57 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: re: CWL Message-Id: <960604003456_76400.1474_HHL52-4@CompuServe.COM> Jerry HE: >But if there are two or three people on this list who are willing >to discuss CWL's effect on the TS, and this discussion is >motivated from an intellectual integrity--a desire for truth, and >they are willing to stand up to the aggressive and passive- >aggressive abuses of those who do not wish this subject to be >discussed, I would be more than happy to join in and add >considerably more information... Count me in. Jerry S. Member, TI From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 23:09:26 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 19:09:26 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040111.AB14782@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 04:45 PM 6/3/96 -0400, Alexis wrote: > >As to your "meeting the Master Jesus"..that which cannot be empirically >proven shouldn't be "testified to". Dear Alexis, can you tell me who made the rule that only that which can be empirically proven should be shared with other people? Do you follow that rule yourself? Do you know *anyone* that follows that rule? If you do, what kind of person is that? The most important thing that cannot be >empirically proven is the concept that Jesus was ever a real and living >person. If that is so, it would then be hard to encounter "his" spirit, >would it not? Have you or anybody else proven that he was NOT a real and living person? If that has not been proven, either, then it follows that it could be entirely possible that he WAS a real and living person, right? I mean, so far nothing is proven, right? Another fact to consider is that there are many beings in our universe who have never lived on this planet. Any number of them may be encountered, for better or for worse, as the case may be. What about your "spirits". Can they be empirically proven? I know that you have talked about them, even on this list. Or are you testifying about matters that are unseen (physically) and can not be empirically proven yourself? >My strong disapproval of Elisabeth Clair Prophet arises from my estimation >that the woman is entirely fraudulent. The same disapproval also arises from >a lot of reading of her printed words and they are totally unoriginal and un >valid. My disapproval of her "disciples" arises from the fact that I find it >inconceivable that anyone could fall for her words. These are almost the exact same words that were thrown at Blavatsky, thousands of times. What you do is expressing a strong personal opinion, which I certainly respect, but certainly no "proof". I have also studied her printed and spoken word, as those of her predecessor, Mark Prophet. I have meditated on the energies and consciousness content of the material, studied their auras and so forth, and have come to an ENTIRELY different conclusion. >In other words Bjorn, I don't "buy" your arguments. That's fine, I don't expect that. the utter superficiality and banality of her >writing leaves me totally aghast and appalled that anyone could "fall for it". Well, just like people fell for HPB they fall for ECP. And usually those who fall for her are intelligent people and independent thinkers. The only source where much of the teachings of this movement is to be found in a concentrated form is in the book "Climb the Highest Mountain". To me it seems hard to believe that this book (and others) can be perceived as "banal" or "superficial". IMO it is very much in the theosophic tradition and similar in vibration. I hope nobody on this list is even considering judging this matter based on either my or Alexis views, though. It is easy enough to check out for anyone who like to do so. Here are some web pages for a starter, including a short book list: http://www.tsl.org/ >You have been entirely "up front" and honest about your point of view, I >could do no other than be equally frank and honest in my response. I have no >animosity toward you are any of the people in the "I Am Movement" or the >"Church Universal and Triumphant" but i do have a good deal of pity. How do you show this "pity"? I mean how are you going to show me pity, now, seeing that I believe in these things? Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Mon Jun 3 23:09:23 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 19:09:23 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040111.AA14782@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Discussions At 04:48 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > I have been accused of a lot of things in >my life but being compared to the Unabomber was just too much. You proudly sign your messages "obnoxious troublemaker". Then when you get into some trouble you can't take it. Look, you are explicitly ASKING for trouble. You are *advertising* yourself as a troublemaker. What, then, are you complaining about??? If you are a troublemaker, and proud of it, why then chicken out and put me on your filter list when you are starting to be successful in stirring up some trouble??? Some troublemaker! I thought it >was a joke, at first, sort of like the clowning about between me and JRC, but no, the man is serious. Nobody asked me if it was a joke or not. So far, you have not had any success reading my mind. If you would like to know what and how I meant it, you could just ask. And on top of it he claims to have a direct line to >the Masters! Which I did not claim at all. I mentioned that I made a concious contact with Jesus about 20 years ago. This was a major turning point and led me, after a few years, to Theosophy. And, the glorious being He is! Christianity know very little of the real Jesus. He is a magnificent Ascended Master, and I see nothing wrong with sharing experiences like this with other spiritually minded people. >I make a poor punching bag, but as I have now blasted him thoroughly Not at all, troublemaker. You need more powerful explosives to begin to blast me even a tiny little bit. Perhaps you should ask you know who for help? Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From kymsmith@micron.net Tue Jun 4 03:04:00 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 96 21:04 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Response to JRC's posting Dear JRC, Please excuse me if I have misunderstood your treatise on The First Object; but I took it to be saying we need to 'establish' this 'nucleus' or 'core'. . . and how this subject seems to be ignored in current Theosophical writings. However, my understanding is, from the beginning, The First Object had already been accomplished; the seed (nucleus) has already been formed; it is the "I AM." Theosophy is not the 'nucleus,' simply the translater of it into forms in which the physical mind can contemplate on and learn from. We are already a "family" (although, disturbingly, that term implies implicit heirarchy - adults over children, leaders over followers). Whether we choose as societies to recognize we are family, it does not make it Not So. Truth is Truth, no matter what we believe or think it is. Every philosophy or religion thinks they are the ones "handed an 'opportunity' to accomplish a remarkable task on behalf of the spiritual kingdom on this planet." The problem is that some 'religions' have the "gift" of communicating in a language the "common" people understand - regardless of whether their teachings are 'correct' or not. People will believe or follow what they think they understand. Theosophical literature and writings are notorious (past and present) for expressing thoughts and ideas in ways too complex, wordy, and, blatantly arrogant to allow or provide for the 'seed' to become planted in those who may wish to explore Theosophy, those who want to find a different way. Although I adore Ms. Blavatsky, she too was guily of arrogance in her writings. Perhaps it is a subconscious way for 'us' to keep 'it' to ourselves, not wanting to let go of such a perfect pearl. This doesn't make us bad, just a bit more 'human' than perhaps some of us would care to admit. Yes, you are correct. Everything should be read and studied with the First Object in mind. We do need to study the minute things extensively too, for we must be able to provide answers to the questions those seeking Theosophy will ask; they will want to know details about reincarnation, karma, etc. And so they should. I have problems enough explaining the meaning of the swastika in the emblem! I am a university student (majoring in philsophy) and a published author, and yet, I struggle often with even the most recent writings of Theosophy (Quest Magazine is an example). This is not to blow my own personal horn, just to draw attention to the fact that most people out there have not had the fortunate opportunities for an education I have - what obstacles must they overcome in their quest for spiritual knowledge? Is Theosophy contributing to their obstacles? Please correct me if I have misunderstood you; nor take this as a 'personal attack.' I, on the other hand, take everything personal, so be kind when or if you respond to my diatribe. . .just kidding. . .well, maybe. Thank you for your time, Kym From ramadoss@eden.com Tue Jun 4 03:22:37 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:22:37 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant In-Reply-To: <960604003454_76400.1474_HHL52-3@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Jerry Schueler wrote: > Doss: > >I have been trying to make Theosophy practical in the sense that I > >try to apply the ideal of Universal Brotherhood to help any man(woman) or > >any other entity that I can help. So I feel there is a practical side to > >Theosophy. > > In a large sense, I agree with you completely. However, > Christians learn in Church to turn the other cheek, and to return > hate with love, and so on. Many try to put that into practice. Are > you implying that we all basically all on the same Path? Could > you tell me what the difference is, in your view, between > theosophical altruism and any other practicing Christian or > other religious person? The reason that I bring this up, Doss, is > that altruism, to me, is a given, and very first step that we all > should have learned in Church before coming into Theosophy. > I would hope that a theosophist is a cut above the average > religious person because a theosophist has Knowledge > that the Christian or Jew or Mulsim doesn't have. I guess > what I am suggesting here, is that maybe there is more to > being a practicing theosophist than merely being altruistic (?). I am just a novice and as such it is possible there is more to Theosophy than altruism. At this stage I am quite happy and contended with being altruistic towards anyone and everyone without distinction of caste creed race sex or color. May be different strokes for different people. ...Ramadoss > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > > From ramadoss@eden.com Tue Jun 4 03:27:14 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:27:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant In-Reply-To: <960604003450_76400.1474_HHL52-2@CompuServe.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Jerry Schueler wrote: > Jerry S.: > >>... because theosophists who > >> study the literature over a long period of time become convinced > >> (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand... > >>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Doss: > > Agreed, No one can know everything. > > Its more than that, Doss. The human mind thinks > that it can, and tries very hard. If it feels incompetent, it simply > reads a bit more to try to learn faster. Its like a dog chasing > its tail. It thinks that it can catch it by simply going faster. > I know, because this is how I used to be. James Long > noted this in me, and told me that I was trying to wrap > truth up in a box tied neatly with a pretty ribbon. He pointed > out that what I was trying to do, couldn't be done, and he > suggested I stop reading and studying and instead try to > assimilate what I had already read. The truth, in short, was > already within me, if I could only see it. This pretty well changed > me around, gave me a whole new worldview, and transformed > me from a sheep to a wolf, for which I will be eternally > gratefully. > > Jerry S. > Member, TI I am fully aware of it. In a recent book, the author explains this like someone being inside a prison and is trying to rearrange things or understand things all within a prison. What is needed is break out of the prison and come out as free person and metaphorically in such freedom you are transformed. ...Ramadoss From ramadoss@eden.com Tue Jun 4 03:38:52 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:38:52 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Response to JRC's posting In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 3 Jun 1996 kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > Dear JRC, > > I am a university student (majoring in philsophy) and a published author, > and yet, I struggle often with even the most recent writings of Theosophy > (Quest Magazine is an example). This is not to blow my own personal horn, > just to draw attention to the fact that most people out there have not had > the fortunate opportunities for an education I have - what obstacles must > they overcome in their quest for spiritual knowledge? Is Theosophy > contributing to their obstacles? You are not alone in finding the writings of Theosophy in Quest being difficult. I have been around Theosophy for quite some time, and I have found it very difficult to read and many times the magazine went straight into the waste paper basket immediately after it arrived. It appears that Quest is on its way to a natural death after the next three or so issues. ....Ramadoss From martinle@lainet.com Tue Jun 4 05:09:11 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:09:11 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: re: CWL On the CWL subject, my experience is that many new people come to our Lodge (Spanish speaking) because they read first CWL, and they are facinated by it. If CWL's effect on people is one of mystery and wonder, and push them to cross tamas or inertia to get involve in spirituality . . . I think is great. In my case, I was a teenager when I read The Third Eye, by L. Rampa. I care less if he did what he said . . . the point is he brought me to the New Acropolis and then to the Theosophical Society and I am still searching. Books and influence like that is better that a bad TV program, IMHO. I always ask myself, if I go to India and select one individual to be the World Teacher and I choose one like Krishnaji . . . alas! what are the odds??? . . . what do you think Ramadoss, my brother. Martin Leiderman, a Theosophist From Drpsionic@aol.com Tue Jun 4 05:19:23 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 01:19:23 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960604011921_127320530@emout07.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! Jerry, Considering the quality of people claiming to be chelas these days, I'm damned glad I'm not one. And I finally got onto my own newsgroup today! I used a local outfit called Ripco. Now all we need is for it to get to the bigger servers. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 03:31:14 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:31:14 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040533.AA17219@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To: Bjorn R At 10:04 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > Bjorn, >Could you please explain in a little more detail who Ballard is. I've never >heard of him, & I suppose a number of us on theos-l haven't either. I'd >really be interested in hearing about him. Thanks. > >Liesel Hello Liesel, Good to hear from you. At this time I don't like to post this to the group, mostly because I don't want to deal with Alexis' reactions. But I will come up with something and Email to you, privately. Maybe I'll post it too, I don't know. The major problem is that I don't know what to write, since your question deserves an answer that gives more information than a quick email can do. He was a messenger of the Great White Brotherhood, working primarily under Saint Germain. The teaching emphasizes the Presence of God within us, they call it the "I AM Presence", and they give specific techniques for using its Light and Power for individual and world transformation. Dictations were given by several Ascended Masters. These were not channelings, as have become so popular lately. Please read this page http://home.earthlink.net/~futurecon/channel.html that explains the fallacy of channeling and psychism. Qoute: >One of the most humorous aspects of the New Age movement has been >the race by psychics and channels to out-do each other in claiming contact >with high souls. While one channeler regularly has tea with the Mahatmas, >another psychic decides to go it one better and channel God (as if there >were such a person!) This has forced other channels and mediums into >making up imaginary names of deities from distant, imaginary solar >systems in order to produce a plethora of high, non-competingGods so >each can preserve a somewhat unique niche for their own channeling >efforts. > >A channeler is nothing more than a medium with a fancy name. All the >great metaphysical leaders have spoken out strongly against this growing >tide of psychism. Blavatsky, Roerich, Hilarion, Manly Palmer Hall--all >agree that psychism is a huge blight on the phantasmagorical world of >psychic phenomena. In fact, mediums (read: channels) have often been >referred to by the Ancient Wisdom as "Inns for disembodied liars." How Ballard was trained and several of his retreat experiences are described in "Unveiled Mysteries" and "The Magic Presence". Fascinating accounts, unparallelled in the field of spiritual literature. Since this movement more emphasizes active work for personal and planetary transformation than intellectual understanding of umpteen details of the cosmic order it may appear "simple" compared to Theosophy. But the energies and the light that comes through it will readily convince the sensitive seeker more than a hundred intellectually advanced books could do. I will be happy to try to answer any question or help you find the above mentioned books, should you be interested (they are available through most metaphysical book stores). I am not a member of this organization but I have benefitted immensly from the more direct contact with my own God Self that I have been helped to and the closer walk with the Masters also. God Bless You! Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From martinle@lainet.com Tue Jun 4 05:22:18 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 22:22:18 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To Bjorn Dear brother Bjorn, I notice certain pleasure in answering to Alexis the way you do. I think is more productive to the list if we all share the best of us, and no responding to the worst of us. In the Platonic way, we are here, as friends to share the knowledge and tools we have learnt in this life and the wisdom we brought with us + the one we are able to transmute . . . all that may be powered by the sharing of ideas, so we do not have to rediscover everything again. I am most interested in knowing what you have to say about what tools and knowledge you got to share and in exchange I would do the same, and I am sure others will chip in. Theosophy distills the essence of the Truth by sharing it. The result is not Truth itself, but we are closer by understanding better or by knowing what is not. Your brother, Martin Leiderman, just a Theosophist From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 05:41:11 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 22:41:11 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604054111.006b0a34@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl At 11:24 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Rich, >Now really, you can howl. Just look up at the full moon and try. > >Chuck the Wolf MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker > >Chuck: I know you were joking and I am not taking it seriously, but you just gave me an opportunity to talk about my favorite subject: Wolves! I wonder if most people know that wolves do not howl at the moon (full or otherwise), they howl for various reasons and the most important are these; 1. Wolves howl because they really enjoy doing it! 2. A Lonely wolf howls because he or she is lonely and to let nearby packs know of his or her presence and innocent intent. Trespassing in a packs territories is very dangerous to the trespasser. 3. A hunting pack howls to keep in touch with one another's location and to warn other, strange wolves, away from their hunt. To wolves howling is a very important method of communication. Wolves only "bark" when playing, and have a really large repertoire of other sounds. Playing cubs really make a lot of joyous noises. Wolves are extremely intelligent and are the most compassionate and loving creatures I have ever encountered, and I have had dealings with most Mammals. alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 05:45:34 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 22:45:34 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604054534.006c01dc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Clean up At 12:44 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <2.2.32.19960603075859.006acc80@mail.slip.net>, alexis >dolgorukii writes >>If Theosophy is to have a future, we have to >>clean up our past, > > ... and our present? > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > >Alan: It seems to me that we must clean up our past, so that we can see clearly what needs to be "cleaned up" in our present. It seems to me that simply rearranging the present while ignoring the past is like sweeping the dust under the carpet. Without the past there is no present, and if the present is to be made better than it is, it cannot happen without acknowledging the things that have accrued from the past that may be hindering or obstructing the present. alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 05:51:19 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 22:51:19 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604055119.006b17ec@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Intelligence Tests At 12:49 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <2.2.32.19960603063653.006cc3e0@mail.slip.net>, alexis >dolgorukii writes >>Now as to intelligence tests? Most academics in the field of education >>consider them to be a very poor indicator of intelligence at all. > >O Shit! That's me blown out of the water again! > >Alan @-) >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > > As a matter of fact Alan, those self-same intelligence tests, applied in a similar fashion to that which Bjorn discusses, also "prove" that the inmates of most prisons are more intelligent than the general population, and even more embarrassing to Mensa; the inmates of most insane asylums are very significantly "more intelligent" than the normal population. Someday, perhaps, the educational-psychological establishments will work out a methodology to: 1st. Define intelligence (that's pretty well accomplished). 2nd: Not measure it but evaluate it. Until that is accomplished, I.Q. is just one bit of information to add to the data-bank, but it's really meaningless in making comparisons between people. "Rough guide" yes, "accurate chart" no! alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 06:06:02 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:06:02 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604060602.006cbf80@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 01:49 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:12 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > >>Both the Bishop and Annie Besant are long passed away, but their influence >>on the society, which I view as pernicious, has not. > >Alexis: >I have a special interest in Annie Besant and her writings. So far I have >seen some psychic elements of influence that came through her and that I >would agree were pernicious, but I haven't seen this in her writings. Can >you give examples? > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > Surely, however, I said that "her influence was pernicious" and her influence did not come from her writings. So then, let's start with something far more important than her writings. Bjorn, are you aware that Mrs. Besant was associated with Baron Julius D'Evola, and through him with Mussolini whom she invited to write articles for "The Herald of The East"?( He complied) If she was associated with Evola she was associated (at least peripherally) with Rene Guenon who was a major opponent of theosophy. Can this not be seen as "pernicious"? Secondly; it is my belief that in her role as "Outer Head" of the Esoteric Section, she set in motion an element that is in the process of dooming the theosophical movement. Now, as to her writings: How familiar with the work of Charles W. Leadbeater are you? I would suggest that you read his work and her work in a comparative manner and see if you can actually tell when Leadbeater leaves off and Mrs. Besant becomes original. The only writings of Mrs. Besant which I believe to be original with her were her political books, tracts,editorials, and pamphlets. Here a personality other than Leadbeater's shines through. Mrs. Besant, although I believe her to be a totalitarian, was a brilliant politician. It was allowing her name and prestige to be attached to books I very much doubt she actually wrote herself, that is pernicious. Actually Leadbeater's books are better written as they, at least,no matter whether they are valid or not, are distinctly original and much the better written. Thirdly: She could, but didn't prevent the Krishnamurti Debacle. That is the most pernicious of all. alexis dolgorukii From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 06:09:12 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:09:12 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604060912.006b17d4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Contributions of AB & CWL to Theosophy and TS At 01:51 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >At 07:11 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >>As one Adept said "Ingratitude is not one of our vices,", let us ponder over >>what AB and CWL have contributed to Theosophy and TS. > >Yes, that is a very good starting point. Then, coming from that perspective >we can also learn from their mistakes, so they do not have to be >perpetuated. Let us have TRUTH, but not without compassion. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >That's certainly an excellent point. alexis dolgorukii From blafoun@azstarnet.com Tue Jun 4 06:03:41 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 23:03:41 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun (by way of blafoun@azstarnet.com (Blavatsky Foundation)) Message-Id: <199606040603.XAA22581@web.azstarnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Look at Martin Euser's updated FAQ on Spiritual & Newage resources for newcomers I reproduce below Martin's FAQ which I just happened to stumble across a few minutes ago. Martin, why didn't you tell us about this! See his references to Theos-l and alt.theosophy and to TI. Daniel >http://ww2.altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/news?msg@7902@talk%2ereligion%2enewage > Spiritual & Newage resources FAQ for newcomers > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > From Martin Euser > Organization EuroNet Internet > Date 2 Jun 1996 12:25:17 GMT > Newsgroups talk.religion.newage > Message-ID <4os17d$f8u@news.euro.net> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > The purpose of this document is to point the way to newcomers on Usenet > to Internet resources concerning religion, spirituality > (in a broad sense) and connected issues. > If anyone can add to this info, please mail to: > > euser@euronet.nl > > Please include a short characteristic of the resource > you want to have included in this FAQ. > > > What's New in this FAQ (June, 1996) > ------------------------------------ > > > Newsgroups > > There's a new newsgroup, alt.theosophy , dedicated to a new approach > to this old philosophy (theosophy). Psychic & noetic experiences will be > discussed and related to theosophical, newage and psychological concepts. > Old terminology may well be replaced by new one, more up to date. > Syntheses will be sought, proposed and established. > Independant research into psychic/noetic realms by individuals is encouraged. > > A variety of theosophists, some of them psychics, including a shaman will be > present shortly on this forum to give their outspoken views. > (Advice can be offered to those with experiences that have > frightened them or that they wonder about. ) > > > TIP > > Getting access to usenet groups your site doesn't provide for: > > did you know that you can use Digital's Altavista searchengine > as a Newsgroup-reader? Search for a group, say, in the alt. hierarchy, > (usenet search rather then world wide web search) and you can > read articles, post one and reply. Easy and quick. Also useful for a search > on what a specific person has posted in several newsgroups.. > > Point your browser to: http://www.altavista.digital.com > > > > > > The Web: > > > o In the psychological-emotional realm there's work being done by a famous > psychic, Earl Gordon Curley, whose work on the '21 emotions exercise' > seems to have had quite a success. > See http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/ > > > o Theosophy International (TI) consists of a group of theosophists > dedicated to a renewal of theosophy. Terminology, psychic/noetic > experiences, alternative interpretations of teachings, establishing > new syntheses are among its interests. > > www.garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > E-mail: ti@nellie2.demon.co.uk (Dr. Alan Bain) > (See also newsgroup alt.theosophy) > > > > Mailing list: > > name: with*miracle e-gathering > Listowner: tjoslin@magpage.com (theodore joslin) > [contact to receive full mision statement or further info] > > group focus: with*miracle has been established to create a > peaceful and open environment to discuss personal views and > experiences of spirituality. all faiths are welcomed, that we may > learn from the diversity of perspectives and see that the spirit > works in infinite ways. The name "with miracle" reflects my [tj] belief > that we are always in the presence of the miracle of being alive > in a living universe. > > subscription address: listserver@del.net > subscription command: join with-miracle > > > > (End of what's New) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > 1. GENERAL NEWAGE INFO, SITES & RESOURCES: > > > WWW-sites (short description included): > ---------- > > o The OMNet home page has moved to: > > http://www.portal.com/~tyagi/om.html > > The new WWW-mage's guide is available at: > > http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/magi.html > > > The OMNet gives you access to the Mage's guide , > OMiNous Newsletters and to other info about the work they're doing. > > You can download the old Mage's Guide to the Internet ( version 2.0) > or have a look at the new online WWW-Mage's guide compiled by Tyagi Nagasiva. These guides describe many resources ( mystical > and occult documents & groups on Internet, including WWW-sites, > Mailing Lists, FTP-sites, Telnet Mystical Links, BBSs, Newsgroups, > Electronic Guides, etc.) > > > An OMiNous newsletter containing information about resources within the Internet esoteric and spiritual communities is available at: > > txt://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/magick/OMNet/omin1.06 > > or > > txt://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/OMNet/omin/omin1.06 > > Look there for new issues as well > ------------------------------------------------- > > > o www.newageinfo.com/res/welcome.htm > Resources MASTERINDEX for New Age sites > see also www.newageinfo.com/res/newage.htm > > > o www1.usa1.com/~salemctr/center1.html > New Age FAQs > > o www1.usa1.com/~caa/newage.html > New Age vs New Thought Movement > > o www.sedona.net/nen/nhne > New heaven new earth website; a good place to start. > > o www.well.com > A site with a good portion New Age > > o www.sun-angel.com > www.sun-angel.com/noosphere/noosphere.html > > o www.spdcc.com/home/newage/sub-newage.html > New Age journal > www.spdcc.com/home/newage/otherlnk.html > Digital therapist.. > > o www.kei.com/homepages/mkapor > Mitch Kapor's homepage. Internet and New Age. > (co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation) > > > o www.euro.net/5thworld/mystic/ > > > > > 2. BRIDGES, SYNTHESES, INTERNETWORKING > > > > o http://rain.org/~origin/ > > This site (the Origin network) combines science, humanistic philosophy, > and the spiritual insights of every culture, in a multi-faceted > dialogue that is intended to conduct the "search for truth" in the > context of the entire Internet. The objective of the network is to build > relationships-- between people, ideas, cultural groups, philosophical > and religious traditions-- and to help transform global society > gradually as the composite wisdom of global culture is cooperatively > organized by network participants and radiated across the world. > The associated Bridge-l mailing list is an important part of this network. > The world-scripture project (and book) can also be found here (see below). > > o The Internet Interfaith Consortium (IIC), dedicated to promoting > interreligious dialogue, has an interesting WWW site with comparitive > fragments of World Scriptures. > > See: http://rain.org/~origin/ws.html > > IIC has compiled a cooperative catalogue, available at: > > http://rain.org/~origin/iic.html > > > 0 Web-site for the conference on the 'ideal society': > http://rain.org/~origin/is.html > > > 0 Interfaith working group: > http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/religion/orgs/iwg/iwg.html > (Chris Purdom) > > > > 0 School of Wisdom WWW-site > > http://www.webcom.com/~metanoic/wisdom/ > > holistic systhesis of science/religion; fractals & chaos theory; > esoteric music; enneagram; & much more. > This site has a large collection of search-engines. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > 3. TOPICS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER: > > > ARE-Press > http://www.itribe.net/are/ > Writings of Edgar Cayce > > ASATRU > http://io.com/user/mimir/asatru.html > > > ASTROLOGY > > o www.sentex.net/~aquarius/update.html > Astrology and classical music; site has soundsamples > > o www.bdd.com/horo1/bddhoro1.cgi/horo > > > o See also Spirit-WWW (Comprehensive site) > > > ATHEISM > > o Web site that offers textual sources for examining atheism > in both the traditional anti-theist and newer ways: > > http://www.chattanooga.net/~tpkunesh/atheism.f/relaths.htm > -= a Guide for the Complete Atheist =- > a brief compilation of sources according to Christianity, > classical atheists, liberation theology, and religious atheists > > tom kunesh > > > BUDDHISM > > > o Tibetan Buddhism - transcripts from Dzoghen meetings by Lama Surya Das > in Cambridge, MA. Teachings in a modern setting: > http://www.kei.com/homepages/surya > > o coombs.anu.edu.au:80/WWWVL-Buddhism.html > The site where all Buddhistic texts are being collected, > studied and made accessible for laymen and professionals > see also coombs.anu.edu.au > > > > > CLASSICAL STUFF > > o A serious page with links to a huge number of sites regarding > classical stuff: > http://www.ucd.ie/~sspence/classics.html > > > > COMPREHENSIVE SITES (RELIGION, SPIRITUALITY, NEWAGE, ETC.) > > o Spirit-WWW (maintained by Rene' Mueller) > > Description: this site has many topics about spiritual issues. > Examples: Astrology, Theosophy, Reincarnation, Gnosis, Veda & Dharma, > Yoga Paths, Lightwork, Healing Methods, etc. > > A calendar of spiritual events, conferences, etc. can be found here > and is regularly updated. > > Also, you can get access here to newsgroups from the alt. hierarchy > not available on your site. > > How to reach: the universal resource locator (URL) is: > > http://zeta.cs.adfa.oz.au/Spirit.html > (this is the Australian site) > > http://www.protree.com/Spirit.html > (USA) > > http://www.spiritweb.org/ > (main site;USA) > > http://www.linknet.it/Spirit/ > (Italy) > > -------------------------------- > > (ALEISTER) CROWLEY, MAGICK, ETC. > > http:// www.winternet.com/~robin > http://www.lsi.usp.br/usp/rod/text/aleister_crowley.html > > ECKANKAR > http://www.eckankar.org > > > GNOSIS > > http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/ > http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/hotlist/hotlist.htm > http://www.clark.net/pub/murple/gnostic.html > http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/hotlist/hermet.html > > > HERMETIC TEXTS > > o The texts of the Corpus Hermeticum are being made available > on the web--The URL is > http://www.speakeasy.org/~mimir/caduceus/hermetica/index.html > > > KABBALAH > > http://www.digital-brilliance.com/kab/ > Colin's Hermetic Kabbalah Page > > http://www.webcom.com/~hermit/page/sefer.html > The Sefer Yetzirah > > http://fub46.zedat.fu-berlin.de:8080/~cantsin/maimon.html > Maimonides > > > MAGICK/OCCULT WWW-sites: > > http://www.tezcat.com/~wednsday/magick.html > http://matrix.eden.com/11/eden/users/jher/occult > http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/usr/sk4p/occult/occult > > http://www.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/magick.html > All kind of links to magick, alchemy, qabala/Kabalah,mysticism, > old groups, new groups, etc. > > http://www.uib.no/wolf/zoo/bjorn/occult.html > (in the magick directory you can find a bulletin board for exchange of information and questions, etc.) > > Anonymous FTP-sites with files relating to magick and occultism: > > ftp.lysator.liu.se > > Directory: /pub/magick/ > Subdirectories: Alchemy/; Beginner/; Books/; Chaos/; Community/; > Consciousness/; Enochian/; General/ ; Golden_Dawn/; Mysticism/; > Necronomicon/; Net/; Ordo_templi_orientis/; Orgone_committee/; > Qabalah/; Ritual/; and more > > ----------------- > > nic.funet.fi > > subdirectory /pub/doc/occult/magick > directory /pub/magick has many subdirectories > > ---------------- > > > nic.funet.fi/pub/doc/religion/occult > ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/magick > ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/religion/neopagan > wiretap.spies.com/Library/Fringe/Occult > imageek.york.cuny.edu/pub > > > alamut.topy.org/pub/alamut/topy > ftp.netcom.com/pub/ffunch/spirevol.html > ftp.netcom.com/pub/pa/pali151 > ftp.netcom.com/pub/Sh/Shub > ftp.portal.com/pub/ss/usenet > ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/alt.magick.gems > ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/equinox > ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/magick > ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/omnet > ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/programs > > > The following newsgroups may be of interest as well: > > alt.magick > alt.magick.chaos > alt.magick.sex > alt.magick.serious > alt.magick.tyagi > alt.magick.ethics > alt.pagan > alt.religion.wicca > alt.tarot > alt.mythology > alt.religion.shamanism > soc.religion.shamanism > > --------------------------------------------- > > MEDITATION > > o Spiritual unfoldment meditation web site at : > > http://www.cityscape.co.uk/users/ea80/fisu.htm > > fisu@cityscape.co.uk Rajesh Ananda at Foundation for International Spiritual Unfoldment > > > o The Third Circle Web Site: > > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/WEagle/ > > Instructions and examples of simple but powerful meditations. > The web site contains a section on the philosophy of TTC. > The Third Circle (TTC) is because you are your own Master. > An important concept is that of Self Source of Authority (SSOA). > > > (AVATAR) MEHER BABA > > o The Avatar Meher Baba home page is available on the WWW at URL: > http://www.oslonett.no/home/erics/index.html > > It is maintained by Eric Solibakke at Oslonett public access > and has an extensive selection of essential messages as well as a > brief biography, GIFs, pilgrimage information and address lists. > A newly added Anthology offers a wide range of Spiritual teaching > and inspirational stories, including anecdotes about Perfect Masters > and saints. A collection of Spiritual poetry called "Poetry of the > HeartMind" can also be accessed. This page provides a "Quote of > the Day" service at http://www.oslonett.no/home/erics/today.html > > Another Meher Baba www-site: http://davey.sunyerie/mb/html/mb.html > > > > MISCELLANEOUS > > o "SpiritLink Services"- http://www.amug.org:80/~a220/ > > Channeled material from the Pleiadians, Astrology, Reincarnation, > Sacred Geometry coloring book, Goddess Awakening Breathwork, Island > Nation, Community and more. > > > > MYTHOLOGY > > http://www.io.org/~untangle/mythtext.html > A collection of FAQ's (Frequently Asked Questions) from around the Internet. > The collection deals with various mythological topics, the mythologies of > various cultures, and with some of the mythology-related newsgroups and listservs on the Net. > Myths and Sacred scriptures (Bible,Koran), Theogony (Hesiod), Thousand and > a night (Arabic tales), etc. > > > NATURE, MOTHER EARTH (GAIA), RECONNECTION > > o http://www.pacificrim.net/~nature/ > > This site is dedicated to Project NatureConnect, > an activity of the University of Global Education. > Dr. Cohen [mjcohen@aol.com] has done much work on the area > of teaching people to reconnect to nature and spirituality. > > > > > PAGANISM > > http://www.lysator.liu.se/ftp/pub/religion/neopagan > http://www.computel.com/~fireyes/pagan/pagan.html > http://www.uwyo.edu/cte/Pagan.html > http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/plhome.html > http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/netstuff/pagan_net.html > > http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/netstuff/paganwww.html > (Pagan and occult sites) > > > PROJECTS: > > Gutenberg > > Many text files on spirituality, e.g. Myths and Legends of the Sioux > > > If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please > FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives: > [Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type] > > ftp mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu > login: anonymous > password: your@login > cd etext/etext90 through /etext95 > or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information] > dir [to see files] > get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] > GET INDEX?00.GUT > for a list of books > and GET NEW GUT for general information > and MGET GUT* for newsletters. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > PYTHAGORAS > http://www.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/Mage/pythagoreans.html > > QABBALAH > > o Qabbalah WWW site. > http://kether.sephiroth.org/vtol/ > > > > > RELIGION & SPIRITUALITY > > Here follow some more links without further description: > (not all verified on accuracy; In addition, websites move frequently > to other locations; often there's a note on the old address that shows you > the new location's address) > > http://www.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Religion/ > Society and Culture:Religion [note, this URL seems to have changed] > > http://www.sedona.net > > Sun Angel Innovations http://www.sun-angel.com/ > > Unifying Fields Foundation http://www.sun-angel.com/uff/ > > > http://www.digital.com/gnn/wic/hum.toc.html#relig > > http://galaxy.einet.net/galaxy/Arts-and-Humanities/Religion.html > > http://galaxy.einet.net/galaxy/Community/Religion.html > > http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dth3maf/gresham.html > > > http://www.biologie.uni-freiburg.de/~amueller/religion/ > > http://akebono.stanford.edu/yahoo/Society_and_Culture/Religion/ > > http://www.einet.net/GJ/religion.html > > http://www.matisse.net/~peregrin/ > > > > ftp://panda1.uottawa.ca/pub/religion/ > > gopher://cwis.usc.edu:70/11/Other_Gophers_and_Information_Resources/ > Gophers_by_Subject/Gopher_Jewels/acadamic/religion/Religion > > (the above all on one line) > > gopher://vega.lib.ncsu.edu:70/11/library/stacks/Alex/Browse%20by%20 > Subject%3A%20Religion > > (all on one line) > > gopher://marvel.loc.gov:70/11/global/phil > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > SAI BABA > > o contact sites for Sri Sathya Sai Baba: > > Sites on the Net favoring or critiquing Sri Sathya Sai Baba: > http://www.inside-info.co.uk/BABA/saibaba.htm > http://www.isc.tamu.edu/%7Emsr/hindu/sai/sai.html > http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~raghavan/sai.html > http://www.afn.org/~afn24770 > http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~hug > http://www.chem.uottawa.ca/ravi/ravi.html > http://www.tamu.edu:8000/~ggr4499/ > http://pc1502.geographie.uni-regensburg.de/html/miracle.htm (sevaral) > http://www.liv.ac.uk/~mhbarker/saibaba2.html > http://www.stat.unipd.it/h2000/cicap/saibaba.html > Usenet: newsgroup Soc.culture.indian, (see the thread entitled > SANDEHA NIVARINI SATHYA SAI BABA DISSOLVING DOUBTS) > > Further details available from Bon_Giovanni@gaianet.net > http://www.inside-info.co.uk/BABA/bon.htm > > > SEDONA-net > http://www.sedona.net > > > SHAMANISM > http://demon.co.uk/drci/shamen/shamanism/shamanism.html > > Shamanistic healing with Don Pedro: > http://www.prgone.com/bus/dpedro > > > > SWEDENBORG > http://www.netaxs.com/~mvd/Swedenborg.html (old URL) > The prefered Swedenborg URL is now: > http://www.netaxs.com/~mvd/ES/ > > > > SUFI SITES > > o http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/sufi.mystica.html > > > TAROT > ftp.netcom.com/pub/bota > (tarot & qabbalah) > http://www.iii.net/users/dtking/tarot.html > > > > THEOSOPHY > > o Theosophy-WWW (maintained by Paul Gillingwater) > > Description: this site is dedicated to theosophical info mainly, > though some other topics are also included like OBE > and scientific work (chaos theory). It contains also > some links to Zen and Newage-material. > > Examples: The seven jewels of wisdom; the psychological key to man; > basic theosophical teachings; history of theosophy; > Windows help-file about theosophy. Some of these articles > are duplicated on Spirit-WWW. > > How to reach: > > http://actrix.gen.nz/users/paul/theos.html > > > > Bradford Theosophical Society: > http://www.brad.ac.uk/%7Eatma/theosoc.html > > General Information on The Theosophical Society (Pasadena) > can be found at: http://user.aol.com/tstec/hmpage/tsintro.htm > > > Another Theosophical society: > http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/TS.html > > > > > > Introduction to the theosophy discussion-list: > http://www.vnet.net/users/jem/theos-l.html > > USERS HOMEPAGES/MISCELLANEOUS > > o Owen Thomas's homepage: > http://www.cts.com/browse/othomas0 > > > VOODOO > > http://www.nando.net/prof/caribe/voodoo.html > > > > WICCA > > http://faraday.clas.virginia.edu/~crf8a/wicca.html > http://www.eden.com/~aggedor/wicca.html > > > > > ZEN > > http://oac11.hsc.uth.tmc.edu/zen/index.html > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > 4. MAILING LISTS > ------------- > > > NHNE. > > "NewHeavenNewEarth is a spontaneous, grass-roots network of people who > believe that a divine plan is unfolding in the earth. Our primary goal is > to identify, understand and manifest this plan as best we can. > > "We also believe that our planet is passing through a time of profound > change. With this in mind, our secondary goal is to create a global > community of like-minded people that can safely pass through whatever > changes may come our way and help give birth to a new way of life on our > planet. > > "NewHeavenNewEarth > P.O. Box 10627 / Sedona / AZ / 86339-8627 > The Internet: nhne@sedona.net / America Online: NHNE > WWW: http://www.sedona.net/nen/nhne" > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Sacred Geometry and Sacred Architecture. > It is part of a larger listserv that incorporates interests > in sustainable agriculture and Permaculture landscape design. > > Some topics to be covered include SACRED GEOMETRY: > > History and philosophy, natural proportion, patterns, latent geometry > Platonic solids, ratio and proportion, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, phi, > golden section ; links between geometry, music, architecture > Neo-Platonic revival; deco-era industrial design revival > > Sacred architecture : ancient and modern buildings, constructions, etc. > > Many tangent topics. > > To SUBSCRIBE, send e-mail to almanac@ces.ncsu.edu with the message: > subscribe sustag-principles > > The Almanac System Administrator for NCCES > e-mail: > > An archive is available at sunsite.unc.edu > Access to this is possible by ftp, ftpmail, gopher and > www. > For any questions or requests about the archives, please address: > Lawrence F. London, Jr. - london@sunSITE.unc.edu > (or try Netsearch to locate archives; keyword: sacred geometry) > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > There is a special mailing list that will provide a daily > spiritual/metaphysical quote. One can subscribe to it by sending a > message with the word "subscribe" in the *subject* line to > > quotes-request@sun-angel.com > > > > New mailing lists are often announced through the NEW-LIST@vm1.nodak.edu > > You can subscribe to this list by sending mail to Listserv@vm1.nodak.edu > In the body of your message put: subscribe New-list Your Name > (inserting First_name Last_name at the place of Your Name) > > You can get more info by sending mail to Listserv@vm1.nodak.edu > with the command GET NEW-LIST README in the body of the message. > > ------ > > Earth-Spirit mailing list: > > discussion-list of the interconnection of Earth-based activism > and spirituality. Holistic point of view; dialogue about finding > a common ground in spiritual motivation to protect Earth & Her children. > > The list's host is Communications for a Sustainable Future (CSF), > located at the university of Colorado at Boulder. > > subscribe: send the following message to listserv@csf.colorado.edu > > Sub Earth-Spirit Yourfirstname Yourlastname > > > coordinator: Joy Williams [ dhummer@netcom.com ] > > ----------- > > There's an Avatar Meher Baba listserver at LISTSERV@rex.sunyerie.edu > > To subscribe, send the command "SUBSCRIBE Baba" (without quotes) in the > body of an email. > > The coordinator is Joseph Stewart [STEWART@nstaff.sunyerie.edu] > > > ----------- > > The Theos-l mailing list is open for all individuals > who want to talk about spirituality, philosophy and > science and their experience of the spiritual. > Understandably, this will be in a context of the > Theosophical tradition. Nevertheless, the participants > of this list are tolerant towards all religious views. > > How to subscribe? > > Send mail to: listserv@vnet.net > Leave the subject line empty. > In the body of the message, put: > subscribe theos-l Firstname Surname > (insert your first name and last name for Firstname and Surname) > and shortly you will begin receiving mail > and some instructions on how to use the listserver. > > ------------ > > MAILING LIST: HEAL-L > > Send "info heal-l" > to promail@mb.protree.com, or > "subscribe heal-l" to promail@mb.protree.com > to join direct. > You can access the connected page of heal-l in Healing- > section of Spirit-WWW as well. > For more info E-mail to: > mblais@mblais.pdial.interpath.net > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 5. TELNET > > A new bulletin board service, including a chat service and a sophisticated > messaging system, is available at theosophy.org > Simply telnet to this site to connect to it. Lot's of interesting stuff, > including Buddhistic essays. > Recently, there has been added a web site: http://theosophy.org > > The above site is built and being maintained by independent Theosophists. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 6. SEARCH ENGINES > > 0 The Alta Vista search engine from Digital Equipment Corporation: > http://www.altavista.digital.com/ > > A gigantic database that is being updated daily. Contains information > about newsgroups articles and public web sites. I tried it and found > information I was looking for for a year! > > > > 0 Yahoo at http://www.yahoo.com/ > > Contains references to more than one million WWW-pages > The homepage contains links to newage info. A regular newage FAQ > is listed at one of these links. > > 0 Lycos at http://lycos2.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/pursuit > Millions of unique adresses > > 0 Try the popular search engine: http://www.webcrawler.com > > > 0 At CERN you can find an elegant search-service: > http://cui_www.unige.ch/meta-index.html > Contains also links to other search-engines and offers a Finger-service > to locate people's E-mail addresses. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > 7. NEWSGROUPS > > > Some consciousness related newsgroups: > > alt.astrology > alt.atheism > alt.consciousness > alt.consciousness.mysticism > alt.consciousness.4th-way > alt.consciousness.near-death-exp > alt.dreams > alt.dreams.castaneda > alt.dreams.lucid > alt.evil > alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna > alt.freemasonry > alt.jyotish > > Jyotish is the name of the science which is referred to in the West > as "Vedic" or "Hindu" astrology (vedic prediction sciences). > > alt.magick.order > alt.magick.serious > alt.meditation > alt.meditation.quanyin > alt.out-of-body > alt.paranormal.channeling > alt.paranormal > alt.paranet.paranormal > alt.psychoactives > alt.philosophy.zen > alt.religion.eckankar > alt.religion.asatru > alt.religion.druid > alt.religion.gnostic > alt.religion.zoroastrianism > alt.satanism > > Remark: the original notion of 'Lucifer' is one of *lightbringer* or > lightcarrier, not an evil entity ('Satan')which it became later on > in mainstream Christianity. Man *had* to eat from the 'tree of > knowledge',ie. start developing self-consciousness in this world > and thus learn to take responsibility for his actions. > > > alt.yoga > aus.religion > clari.news.religion > misc.creativity > sci.philosophy.meta > soc.religion.eastern > talk.philosophy.misc > talk.origins > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Martin Euser | Let us be united in our common search > euser@euronet.nl | for truth > http://www.spiritweb.org/ > See: theosophy section > or http://actrix.gen.nz/users/paul/theos.html > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 04:10:40 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 00:10:40 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040612.AA17503@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Bjorn At 01:34 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Dear brother Bjorn, >In the Platonic way, we are here, as friends to share the knowledge and >tools we have learnt in this life and the wisdom we brought with us + the >one we are able to transmute . . . all that may be powered by the sharing >of ideas, so we do not have to rediscover everything again. Martin, I agree so totally with this. Personally I have a lot of respect for people and religious movements etc that I don't agree with and never would contemplate joining. The Mormons, for example. Many wonderful people there, with high moral standards. Or some "plain" christians. I know of such individuals that I consider far more advanced spiritually than myself, or most more spiritually "illumined" people I know. Universal brotherhood can not be built on what we know and what concepts we have, but only on compassion with all life. > >I am most interested in knowing what you have to say about what tools and >knowledge you got to share As I just posted a private email to Liesel to the group, by mistake, I am already starting. Since I did so, I'd like to say that this open heart to heart sharing is difficult when you know that you are likely to be stabbed in the back because of what you say. That's why I suggested moderation. Now that this is not an option we will see how we can do, the rules being what they are. My path is primarily karma yoga and bahkti yoga. I enjoy philosophy and metaphysical studies, too, but find that it is more meaningful for me to engage in service than to spend a lot of time discussing doctrine, including the wonderful theosophical teachings. There is so much work to do to save this planet! Meditation, of course, is very important also. I think what most of us need is a basic understanding of cosmic law and then application and experience. This is likely to help us balance karma at the fastest rate. My meditation experiences strengthen and inspire me more than anything. When I feel the Presence of the Indwelling Godhead - I AM - everything else is put into perspective, maya loses it grip on me. >and in exchange I would do the same, >and I am >sure others will chip in. If it is possible, in this group, to get a more personal perspective on the spiritual path from active and lurkers alike that would make me very happy. Your brother on the path Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 06:18:56 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:18:56 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604061856.006ab380@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Of wolves and a man. At 01:54 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >At 04:07 AM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >> >>Bjorn: I've Mastered (by love alone) a large male wolf, surely I can Master >>my own temper! > >To master ones own temper by love - I believe that to be a key to real mastery. > >>I sincerely hope so, mais que sera, sera. By the way I lived in Stockhom >>for almost two years when I was infinitely younger (the early 1950's) > >Wow, you must be ancient! I thought I am old and I was BORN in the early 50ies. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >Absolutely doddering, Bjorn, absolutely doddering! But luckily, I have inherited interesting genetics for longevity, all of my family (when we don't get murdered) live well into their ninth decade. My Mother is 90 and going very strong! Of all my relations, HPB died at the youngest age. In fact I am older than HPB when she died. The interesting thing about my temper (and it's exactly like HPB's in this regard) is it's like a summer squall...all thunder and lightning..and soon past! I never stay mad, and I never hold grudges. Wolves you know are evolutionarily some six million years old, and they are extraordinarily psychic. If you display anger in their presence they either attack (if they think they can win) or flee. In living with, and working with, a wolf (mine weighs 95 pounds) any emotion other than joy, playfulness, and love, must be not simply controlled, but entirely absent. They must also know that you can master them physically and never soubt it for a moment. My Wolf weights 95 pounds. It has been an incredible challenge and an even more incredible experience. When one is loved by a Wolf, one begins to know what love can actually be! alexis From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 04:23:33 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 00:23:33 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040625.AA17637@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 02:05 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >Surely, however, I said that "her influence was pernicious" and her >influence did not come from her writings. So then, let's start with >something far more important than her writings. Bjorn, are you aware that >Mrs. Besant was associated with Baron Julius D'Evola, and through him with >Mussolini whom she invited to write articles for "The Herald of The East"?( >He complied) If she was associated with Evola she was associated (at least >peripherally) with Rene Guenon who was a major opponent of theosophy. Can >this not be seen as "pernicious"? I didn't know about these things and they don't seem very significant to me. But I appreciate the information. Now, as to her writings: How familiar with the work >of Charles W. Leadbeater are you? I have read some, but not all of them. I would suggest that you read his work and >her work in a comparative manner and see if you can actually tell when >Leadbeater leaves off and Mrs. Besant becomes original. This also does not seem very significant to me. Most of AB's published writings are actually edited speeches. I feel they are very genuine and convey a clear understanding of the path, balanced with true devotion. It was allowing her name and >prestige to be attached to books I very much doubt she actually wrote >herself, that is pernicious. You doubting that she wrote them hardly make them pernicious. >Thirdly: She could, but didn't prevent the Krishnamurti Debacle. That is the >most pernicious of all. This is a sad story. Her intentions were good, she thought she helped prepare a World Teacher for his service, but there was bad judgement causing tremendeous damage. As for her writings, their possible lack of originality is not, IMO, pernicious. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 06:25:27 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:25:27 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604062527.006ccb84@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 04:46 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Chuck, did you know that Ballard died 1939? How old do you think I Am? Where >did you get your "information" about Ballard from???? >In my case I know numerous people who have belonged to his movement and >left. They do not have any reason to protect him since they don't belong to >his organization, and may even not like the way it is being run. But never >have they have any complaints even remotely similar to what you are coming >up with. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >Bjorn: May I suggest that you obtain some unbiased books about the various occult movements in America? There should be enough information therein for you to make up your own mind on this subject. Making up your own mind from information you obtained on your own is far better than anything I could tell you. I assure you however, that Mr. Ballard is not too well thought of, and he did, in fact get jailed for fraud. alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 06:32:44 1996 Date: Mon, 03 Jun 1996 23:32:44 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604063244.006bddc4@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: re: The Past At 05:07 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Alexis writes: > >>...but I will also never be silenced on a subject I consider to >>be of paramount importance to the future of theosophy. If >>Theosophy is to have a future, we have to clean up our past, and >>CWL is an important part of that past. > >Here is the rub. Here we are in a theosophical discussion group >which should imply a freedom to explore theosophical subjects in >all of its aspects. The only limitation I remember reading when >I joined was that we are supposed to be considerate to others on >the list. To me, this rule means that we are not supposed to >hurl insults at each other. That is a reasonable request IMO. >But if this rule also means that we cannot discuss certain >theosophically relevant subjects if some subscribers object to >them, then we are in deep trouble. > >Over the past years, I discussed some of the issues concerning >CWL in some depth on theos-l. I did so because, like Alexis, I >believe that a frank discussion and exploration of the activities >and teachings of this man should be a legitimate topic of >discussion on theos-l, not to mention TSA. I had hoped that the >discussions would stimulate some thinking and questions among the >readers concerning the past and future direction of the TS. >After all, when the TS was formed, it was meant to be an >organization where people were brought together by their desire >to seek for truth. I think this is still a noble cause. But >today, the TS is predominately a membership which has no idea >what is going on and apparently goes to extreme efforts to avoid >knowing. There are others who live in a fantasy world of >theosophical lore about neighboring planets populated by little >green men, a "smiling" solar logos who is in charge of this >planet, and rocks that fall in love with little boys who sit on >them. The TS over the past 100 years has indeed become a >confused mess and there doesn't seem to be enough people >interested in theosophy in its original sense who want to get to >the bottom of that confusion. IMO the apathy, denial and self >imposed ignorance of the majority of the membership is more to >blame for the failure of the TS than all of the bad and/or >ineffective leaders and policies put together. After over thirty >years of fighting apathy and getting burned by those in power who >are threatened by change, I've come to the point where I fully >understand that famous line: "Frankly, Miss Scarlet, I don't give >a damn." > >But if there are two or three people on this list who are willing >to discuss CWL's effect on the TS, and this discussion is >motivated from an intellectual integrity--a desire for truth, and >they are willing to stand up to the aggressive and passive- >aggressive abuses of those who do not wish this subject to be >discussed, I would be more than happy to join in and add >considerably more information beyond what I had contributed in >the past--that is, once this topic progresses to the point where >I had last left off. > >The only weapon we have against ignorance is knowledge. > >JHE > >------------------------------------------ > |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | > |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | > |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | > |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | > ------------------------------------------ > > >Jerry| You have just stated my ideas on this subject to the "n th" degree. Your historical knowledge is probably superior to anyone's, why don't we make this a topic for open discussion, with open questions and free answers. But it can't be accomplished if people start hurling invectives. alexis dolgorukii From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 05:12:38 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 01:12:38 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040714.AA18361@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Of wolves and a man. Alexis, I find this little letter from you quite unusual, and, flavorful. Hope you don't mind that I print it out and show it to my wife. Bjorn >> >> >>Absolutely doddering, Bjorn, absolutely doddering! But luckily, I have >inherited interesting genetics for longevity, all of my family (when we >don't get murdered) live well into their ninth decade. My Mother is 90 and >going very strong! Of all my relations, HPB died at the youngest age. In >fact I am older than HPB when she died. > >The interesting thing about my temper (and it's exactly like HPB's in this >regard) is it's like a summer squall...all thunder and lightning..and soon >past! I never stay mad, and I never hold grudges. > >Wolves you know are evolutionarily some six million years old, and they are >extraordinarily psychic. If you display anger in their presence they either >attack (if they think they can win) or flee. In living with, and working >with, a wolf (mine weighs 95 pounds) any emotion other than joy, >playfulness, and love, must be not simply controlled, but entirely absent. >They must also know that you can master them physically and never soubt it >for a moment. My Wolf weights 95 pounds. It has been an incredible challenge >and an even more incredible experience. When one is loved by a Wolf, one >begins to know what love can actually be! > >alexis > > > roxendal@alpinet.net From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 05:12:41 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 01:12:41 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606040714.AB18361@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 02:22 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: > >> >>Chuck, did you know that Ballard died 1939? How old do you think I Am? Where >>did you get your "information" about Ballard from???? >>In my case I know numerous people who have belonged to his movement and >>left. They do not have any reason to protect him since they don't belong to >>his organization, and may even not like the way it is being run. But never >>have they have any complaints even remotely similar to what you are coming >>up with. >> >>Bjorn >> >>roxendal@alpinet.net >> >> >>Bjorn: May I suggest that you obtain some unbiased books about the various >occult movements in America? There should be enough information therein for >you to make up your own mind on this subject. Making up your own mind from >information you obtained on your own is far better than anything I could >tell you. I assure you however, that Mr. Ballard is not too well thought of, >and he did, in fact get jailed for fraud. There was a lawsuit that they first lost but that was later overturned to their advantage. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 07:41:40 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 00:41:40 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604074140.006b8b6c@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Heroes and heroines At 07:50 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Well, this is a start on some research, and there will possibly be other >letters. The one I posted was reproduced by the editor(s) of "The >Theosophic Voice" in 1908. This only went to three issues (in Chicago). >Most of its content was taken up with the CWL affair, his resignation >from the T.S. and later reinstatement. I have some more reading to do, >as I have the temporary loan of all three issues. > >All being well, more historical material will arrive in Bristol on >Wednesday ... > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: >Ancient Wisdom for a New Age >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk >http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html > >Je t'attends! alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 07:46:43 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 00:46:43 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604074643.006db090@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant At 08:40 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Doss: >>I have been trying to make Theosophy practical in the sense that I >>try to apply the ideal of Universal Brotherhood to help any man(woman) or >>any other entity that I can help. So I feel there is a practical side to >>Theosophy. > > In a large sense, I agree with you completely. However, >Christians learn in Church to turn the other cheek, and to return >hate with love, and so on. Many try to put that into practice. Are >you implying that we all basically all on the same Path? Could >you tell me what the difference is, in your view, between >theosophical altruism and any other practicing Christian or >other religious person? The reason that I bring this up, Doss, is >that altruism, to me, is a given, and very first step that we all >should have learned in Church before coming into Theosophy. >I would hope that a theosophist is a cut above the average >religious person because a theosophist has Knowledge >that the Christian or Jew or Mulsim doesn't have. I guess >what I am suggesting here, is that maybe there is more to >being a practicing theosophist than merely being altruistic (?). > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > > >Jerry: I think that any truly good person is intrinsically altruistic and that holds true from Atheist to Zen Monk. But theosophy is more than that and less than that. It is knowledge, and understanding, and a urgently questing mind. It is a mind that seeks beyond the superficialities of religion. It is a mind that seeks! And in seeking, demonstrates rather than teaches! alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 07:53:07 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 00:53:07 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604075307.006d7044@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant At 08:42 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >Jerry S.: >>>... because theosophists who >>> study the literature over a long period of time become convinced >>> (falsely) that they know everything. The idea that one can understand... >>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >Doss: >> Agreed, No one can know everything. > > Its more than that, Doss. The human mind thinks >that it can, and tries very hard. If it feels incompetent, it simply >reads a bit more to try to learn faster. Its like a dog chasing >its tail. It thinks that it can catch it by simply going faster. >I know, because this is how I used to be. James Long >noted this in me, and told me that I was trying to wrap >truth up in a box tied neatly with a pretty ribbon. He pointed >out that what I was trying to do, couldn't be done, and he >suggested I stop reading and studying and instead try to >assimilate what I had already read. The truth, in short, was >already within me, if I could only see it. This pretty well changed >me around, gave me a whole new worldview, and transformed >me from a sheep to a wolf, for which I will be eternally >gratefully. > > Jerry S. > Member, TI > > >You know Jerry, the more i hear about James Long, the more I "long" to have met him. He sounds like an undeservedly ignored major leader in Theosophy. His actions regarding the E.S. in his organization alone, makes me really admire him. What a shame he was limited to one of the smaller groups. alexis From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 08:21:16 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 01:21:16 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604082116.006ad1cc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! At 09:10 PM 6/3/96 -0400, you wrote: >>>>>cut<<<<<<< > >Have you or anybody else proven that he was NOT a real and living person? If >that has not been proven, either, then it follows that it could be entirely >possible that he WAS a real and living person, right? I mean, so far nothing >is proven, right? Bjorn: May I suggest that you read Albert Screecher's book: "The Search for the Historical Jesus", and then we can talk about this subject. I am not a Christian "near Saint" Schweitzer is. I always prefer to refer people to real experts. > >Another fact to consider is that there are many beings in our universe who >have never lived on this planet. Any number of them may be encountered, for >better or for worse, as the case may be. That is true, but one has no way of actually identifying them. The hard part for those not Shamans, is deciding what is real. > >What about your "spirits". Can they be empirically proven? I know that you >have talked about them, even on this list. Or are you testifying about >matters that are unseen (physically) and can not be empirically proven yourself? Can I be empirically proven? Yes I can. Well I am intrinsically a spirit, as are you. As a Shaman, "spirits"who are intrinsically unidentifiable, use my body and voice as a transmitter for the Cosmic harmonic. Who they are, I have no idea,although I do see them from time to time, and they are very interesting indeed. BUT that is a far cry from saying I have met the Master K.H. or The Master Jesus. Do you understand what I'm trying to say? I have met several people whom I consider to be Adeptii, but they were in the flesh. Some of the spirits I work with and see may indeed be at that level but I would never presume to say so. If one is going to be an occultist, one must follow the rules of occultism. > >>My strong disapproval of Elisabeth Clair Prophet arises from my estimation >>that the woman is entirely fraudulent. The same disapproval also arises from >>a lot of reading of her printed words and they are totally unoriginal and un >>valid. My disapproval of her "disciples" arises from the fact that I find it >>inconceivable that anyone could fall for her words. > >These are almost the exact same words that were thrown at Blavatsky, >thousands of times. What you do is expressing a strong personal opinion, >which I certainly respect, but certainly no "proof". Many people have called Mme. Blavatsky a fraud, and in some instances they may be right. But reading her words one finds they are anything but superficial and banal, they may be absurd and ridiculous, but they are never banal. The theosophical writings that are banal and superficial were mostly written by Bishop Leadbeater and his many imitators, and they in fact are the basic sources for Elisabeth clair Prophets writings. > >I have also studied her printed and spoken word, as those of her >predecessor, Mark Prophet. I have meditated on the energies and >consciousness content of the material, studied their auras and so forth, and >have come to an ENTIRELY different conclusion. His name by the way, was Mark Probbert (he was her husband, not simply her predecessor). She changed it after his death to suit her purposes. This is one of the many reasons I find her extremely questionable. One of the joys of being a doddering old man is that I can say I met him once or twice. I liked him and thought he was a valid psychic. I do not think she is. i don't think he thought she was either. > > >Well, just like people fell for HPB they fall for ECP. And usually those who >fall for her are intelligent people and independent thinkers. But you see Bjorn, I was attracted to theosophy by three little things, the three objects, and by one big thing, the motto: "There's No Religion Higher Than Truth". I didn't "fall for HPB" or "CWL' or anyone. I was much attracted by "Isis Unveiled", but I am regarded as at least neo-heretical by many theosophists for my views on "The Secret Doctrine" > >The only source where much of the teachings of this movement is to be found >in a concentrated form is in the book "Climb the Highest Mountain". To me it >seems hard to believe that this book (and others) can be perceived as >"banal" or "superficial". IMO it is very much in the theosophic tradition >and similar in vibration. I hope nobody on this list is even considering >judging this matter based on either my or Alexis views, though. It is easy >enough to check out for anyone who like to do so. Here are some web pages >for a starter, including a short book list: > >http://www.tsl.org/ Oh I couldn't agree more, don't ever think I want anyone to take my word for anything. Read her words by all means. I trust the judgement of most people on this list. > >>You have been entirely "up front" and honest about your point of view, I >>could do no other than be equally frank and honest in my response. I have no >>animosity toward you are any of the people in the "I Am Movement" or the >>"Church Universal and Triumphant" but i do have a good deal of pity. > >How do you show this "pity"? I mean how are you going to show me pity, now, >seeing that I believe in these things? Bjorn: "Pity" is something one feels, it cannot be demonstrated. What it means is that I feel "sorry" for you. There are better things, I believe, for one to believe in. But it is your choice. You will learn differently in time. You are relatively young yet. > >Bjorn >roxendal@alpinet.net > > >In friendship alexis dolgorukii From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 08:28:32 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 01:28:32 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604082832.006a60ec@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: re: CWL At 01:18 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: > >less if he did what he said . . . the point is he brought me to the New >Acropolis and then to the Theosophical Society and I am still searching. >Books and influence like that is better that a bad TV program, IMHO. > > >Martin Leiderman, a Theosophist > > > >Martin: You have brought up a really fascinating subject. Please do tell us about "The New Acropolis", some of us are really interested as we have heard the name of that group often in varying contexts, but none of us know anything about it. Please enlighten us. alexis dolgorukii From ramadoss@eden.com Tue Jun 4 08:59:41 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 03:59:41 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: re: CWL In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 4 Jun 1996, Martin Leiderman wrote: > I always ask myself, if I go to India and select one individual to be the > World Teacher and I choose one like Krishnaji . . . alas! what are the > odds??? . . . what do you think Ramadoss, my brother. > > Martin Leiderman, a Theosophist You have brought a very interesting question. Let me add that when Krishnaji was "discovered" he was a very puny and not a bright looking eleven year old. What are the odds of chosing such a boy and who never passed a single examination and never had a formal educational certificate and who turns out to be a world renowned speaker? Go to any bookstore and look at New Age shelves and I find that his books number 10:1 or more compared to Theosophy books. After his "Truth is a pathless land" statement, there has never been any other Theosophical Leader who has affected more people in the world than him. Many of the current members of TS, including myself, have been affected by his books, videos and audios. ...With friendship....Ramadoss From ABRANTES@serv.peb.ufrj.br Tue Jun 4 09:57:06 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 09:54:06 -0300 From: Subject: Reincarnation Priority: normal Message-Id: <11CE7032FA@serv.peb.ufrj.br> Alexis Dolgorukii said: "Reincarnation was rejected as Christian doctrine after The Council of Constantinople even though some of the Father's of the Church, ie. Clemens Alexandrinus, ad argued in it's favour". I already send a message with some documents from Council of Constantinople that clearly states that the subject of condenmnation was the doctrine of pre-existence of souls, never reincarnation. This concept, pre existence of soul was particularly developed in Alexandria school at the time of Origen. At this message I send some parts of Origen'work that explain such subject. Observe that Origen never speak of reincarnation but pre existence of souls. The file can be fopund in http://ccel.wheaton.edu/fathers in file ECF04.TXT ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS. BOOK III.CHAP. I.--ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL,[2] WITH AN EXPLANATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THOSE STATEMENTS OF SCRIPTURE WHICH APPEAR TO NULLIFY IT. "in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth, and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the Master's use, prepared unto every good work."[4] He, accordingly, who purges himself, is made a vessel unto honour, while he who has disdained to cleanse himself from his impurity is made a vessel unto dishonour. From such declarations, in my opinion, the cause of our actions can in no degree be referred to the Creator. For God the Creator makes a certain vessel unto honour, and other vessels to dishonour; but that vessel which has cleansed itself from all impurity He makes a vessel unto honour, while that which has stained itself with the filth of vice He makes a vessel unto dishonour. The conclusion from which, accordingly, is this, that the cause of each one's actions is a pre-existing one; and then every one, according to his deserts, is made by God either a vessel unto honour or dishonour. Therefore every individual vessel has furnished to its Creator out of itself the causes and occasions of its being formed by Him to be either a vessel unto honour or one unto dishonour. And if the assertion appear correct, as it certainly is, and in harmony with all piety, that it is due to previous causes that every vessel be prepared by God either to honour or to dishonour, it does not appear absurd that, in discussing remoter causes in the same order, and in the same method, we should come to the same conclusion respecting the nature of souls, and (believe) that this was the reason why Jacob was beloved before he was born into this world, and Esau hated, while he still was contained in the womb of his mother. Abrantes From blafoun@azstarnet.com Tue Jun 4 14:34:57 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 07:34:57 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@AZStarNet.com (Blavatsky Foundation) Message-Id: <199606041434.HAA28341@web.azstarnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: All "out of the body" experiences are NOTHING BUT hallucinations?? On alt.eckankar I found the following posting by Dr. Mike Mueckler (biologist, I believe) who was once a member of the Eckankar group, who also has had many, many out-of-body experiences himself over the course of his life, and who as you will see in the post below, is now totally skeptical that such "soul traveling" is really real. Of course, I don't agree with his *extreme* position. I thought Alexis, Jerry S., JRC and others might be interested with the "attitude" displayed by Dr. Mueckler towards "psychic experiences." Far too many scientists have this attitude toward the psychic and this was part of what I was trying to convey to Alexis in one of my postings a month or two ago. Daniel > Date: 4 Jun 1996 03:41:56 GMT > From: mike@cellbio.wustl > Subject: Re: Soul Travel: Subjective or Objective? In article <19960603103233.aaaa0007F@babyblue.cs.yale.edu>, Joseph Polanik wrote: > you are obviously ignoring cases where people report, as part of their > so-called Near-Death Experience, details of the resucitation procedure > that occurred after the body became inert (or 'temporarily dead'). In > the same vein are cases where the experiencer left the immediate > vicinity of the body and noticed something unusual which was > incorporated into the report and later verified by others. > > in your many years of sifting thru the evidence you surely came across > cases such as this. perhaps you felt that this evidence didn't meet your > standards as to type, quality or quantity. To a trained observer, this is not evidence, it is closer to fable, story telling or wishful thinking. People lie, exaggerate, bend the truth, and convince themselves of things that never happened. There are perfectly rational explanations for all of these cases when one takes the reality of human fallibility into consideration. When the heart stops beating, the brain continues to function for many minutes. If it didn't the people really would be dead and would not be capable of being resuscitated. Visual and auditory sensory inputs during this state can be processed and translated into dream like images. Nothing mysterious about it at all. We know that the perception of disembodiment can be induced by sensory deprivation and electrical stimulation. Hypoxia probably induces a similar state under the right circumstances. Trivial. These events are real alright--lucid dreams and hallucinations--they have been reproduced in the laboratory by electrical probing, sensory deprivation, drugs, and by those who can induce lucid dreams. > so we are left with the supposed 'fact' that tests conducted in the > laboratory have yielded meagre results. if this is indeed a fact > it would invite the evaluation of the our standards and expectations as > indicated above. I love this. Perhaps I will use it for our next manuscript that is criticized by reviewers--Your standards of proof are too high! What do you want, real evidence or something? Of course the military found no evidence for remote viewing, because it is nothing but dreaming. That says it all. If it were real, you can bet your life that it would be exploited in business and by the military. > stimulating certain areas of the brain can produce reports of phenomena > similar to phenomena reported in OBE reports. even assuming the stimulus > is generating a new experience rather than evoking a memory of an old > one, these brain probing experiments don't prove as much as you seem to > think. They provide a perfectly rational, mundane explanation for a phenomenon I am all too familiar with, both subjectively and objectively. The evidence is overwhelming that these are nothing but dreams. That is obvious to anyone who has truly explored it first-hand with a true scientific attitude. > > Ah! there *is* a recurring phenomenology --- when it suits you to > recognize it. Again, well known to those who have thoroughly explored this state. Trivial. If you are obsessed with eck masters before you fall asleep, what are you likely to dream of, chopped liver? Use your head. > > and Twitchell's proclaimed experiences have none of these. > > this is a wild claim for which you have provided no support. suppose you > supply us with references to material which you think illustrates the > recurring phenomenology and with references to material which you think > shows that Paul's 'proclaimed experiences have none of these.' You can read Monroe's first book and several of the faq's available on the net on astral projection to get a feel for some of the recurrent themes. For example, the vibratory state accompaned by paralysis--a well known phenomenon to sleep researchers called sleep paralysis that accompanies rapid eye movement dreaming--exactly what you would predict would occur during a lucid dream. Others are right out of the older projection literature (silver cords) and are experienced only by people who are familiar with that literature, i.e., they experience exactly what they expect to experience--that's what lucid dreaming is all about. ......... From Drpsionic@aol.com Tue Jun 4 15:39:33 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 11:39:33 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960604113932_210218507@emout18.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Quest (to Doss) Doss, It was not so much that the writings about theosophy in the Quest were difficult to read so much as that there were hardly any writings about theosophy in the Quest. But it was good for lining the cat box. Chuck MTI, FTSA From ramadoss@eden.com Tue Jun 4 17:20:01 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 12:20:01 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960604122219.22f78a06@mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Quest (to Doss) At 11:39 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >Doss, >It was not so much that the writings about theosophy in the Quest were >difficult to read so much as that there were hardly any writings about >theosophy in the Quest. >But it was good for lining the cat box. > >Chuck MTI, FTSA > Chuck: You are very right about Quest. When Dorothy was the President, I even requested that Quest be not sent to me and reduce my annual dues and promised that the savings will be spent in the local lodge activities. Nothing happened and the Quest continued to come. ..doss From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 17:27:47 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 10:27:47 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604172747.006de898@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 02:22 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >At 02:05 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: > >>Surely, however, I said that "her influence was pernicious" and her >>influence did not come from her writings. So then, let's start with >>something far more important than her writings. Bjorn, are you aware that >>Mrs. Besant was associated with Baron Julius D'Evola, and through him with >>Mussolini whom she invited to write articles for "The Herald of The East"?( >>He complied) If she was associated with Evola she was associated (at least >>peripherally) with Rene Guenon who was a major opponent of theosophy. Can >>this not be seen as "pernicious"? > >I didn't know about these things and they don't seem very significant to me. >But I appreciate the information. They "don't seem very significant to you? Bjorn I know you were born after world war II, but to those of us who weren't, the very idea of someone being associated with either Mussolini or his pal Hitler, is VERY significant indeed. Julius d'Evola was charged as a war criminal after that war. The only reason that he wasn't either executed or imprisoned was because, unlike the fascists, the allies didn't think it worth the trouble to execute or imprison philosophers with powerful French friends. > > Now, as to her writings: How familiar with the work >>of Charles W. Leadbeater are you? > >I have read some, but not all of them. > >I would suggest that you read his work and >>her work in a comparative manner and see if you can actually tell when >>Leadbeater leaves off and Mrs. Besant becomes original. > >This also does not seem very significant to me. Most of AB's published >writings are actually edited speeches. I feel they are very genuine and >convey a clear understanding of the path, balanced with true devotion. > > It was allowing her name and >>prestige to be attached to books I very much doubt she actually wrote >>herself, that is pernicious. > >You doubting that she wrote them hardly make them pernicious. > >>Thirdly: She could, but didn't prevent the Krishnamurti Debacle. That is the >>most pernicious of all. > >This is a sad story. Her intentions were good, she thought she helped >prepare a World Teacher for his service, but there was bad judgement causing >tremendeous damage. > >As for her writings, their possible lack of originality is not, IMO, pernicious. > >Bjorn > >roxendal@alpinet.net > Plagiarism is definitely pernicious, but I don't think Besant was a plagiarist. I think she allowed Leadbeater to put things together in her name, and that's fraudulent, and fraud is pernicious. Leadbeater also wrote things and put them out under Krishnamurti's name (something Krishnamurti bitterly resented). But obviously you and I will never have a meeting of the minds on this subject so I will not discuss it further. You are a devtionalist and I am a rationalist so perhaps it's impossible. alexis dolgorukii > From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 17:31:44 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 10:31:44 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604173144.006d2fdc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Of wolves and a man. At 03:13 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alexis, I find this little letter from you quite unusual, and, flavorful. >Hope you don't mind that I print it out and show it to my wife. > >Bjorn Why would I possibly object? alexis >>> >>> >>>Absolutely doddering, Bjorn, absolutely doddering! But luckily, I have >>inherited interesting genetics for longevity, all of my family (when we >>don't get murdered) live well into their ninth decade. My Mother is 90 and >>going very strong! Of all my relations, HPB died at the youngest age. In >>fact I am older than HPB when she died. >> >>The interesting thing about my temper (and it's exactly like HPB's in this >>regard) is it's like a summer squall...all thunder and lightning..and soon >>past! I never stay mad, and I never hold grudges. >> >>Wolves you know are evolutionarily some six million years old, and they are >>extraordinarily psychic. If you display anger in their presence they either >>attack (if they think they can win) or flee. In living with, and working >>with, a wolf (mine weighs 95 pounds) any emotion other than joy, >>playfulness, and love, must be not simply controlled, but entirely absent. >>They must also know that you can master them physically and never soubt it >>for a moment. My Wolf weights 95 pounds. It has been an incredible challenge >>and an even more incredible experience. When one is loved by a Wolf, one >>begins to know what love can actually be! >> >>alexis >> >> >> >roxendal@alpinet.net > > > From jhe@toto.csustan.edu Tue Jun 4 18:20:25 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 11:20:25 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Message-Id: <9606041820.AA05269@toto.csustan.edu> Subject: re: re CWL Martin Liederman writes: >On the CWL subject, my experience is that many new people come >to our Lodge (Spanish speaking) because they read first CWL, and >they are fascinated by it. >If CWL's effect on people is one of mystery and wonder, and push >them to cross tamas or inertia to get involve in spirituality . >. . I think is great. > >In my case, I was a teenager when I read The Third Eye, by L. >Rampa. I care less if he did what he said . . . the point is he >brought me to the New Acropolis and then to the Theosophical >Society and I am still searching. Books and influence like >that is better that a bad TV program, IMHO. My experience was much like yours. But as a teenager it was CWL's MAN VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE that totally fascinated me. It was the first time I had ever seen a book that discussed clairvoyance. When I was a child, my older sister used to mock me when I spoke of my own experiences, so I quickly learned to keep these things to myself. But here was a book on the subject...and everything was so familiar.... Further study brought me to other subjects. I became serious about astrology (a subject that CWL did not believe in) which led me to an interest in astronomy. But astronomy confused me at first because it was so different from Jinarajadasa's astronomy in FIRST PRINCIPLES OF THEOSOPHY. Soon I figured out that CJ and CWL's science was simply out of date. Astronomy was a very different science after 1925 when we figured out that some of those nebulas were really galaxies like the one we live in. Astronomy led me to a fascination with other sciences. By 1970 I began to seriously study THE SECRET DOCTRINE. I had the book for years but it was too dense for me to read, and my readings of CWL did not help me to understand it any better. In the 60's Geoffrey Barborka helped when he convinced me to regard CWL's theosophy and HPB's as two different systems. I finally applied that lesson and went further. I began to regard every theosophical book as an individual understanding of the subject that may or may not agree with any other book. Then Theosophy became a philosophical system and a world view rather than a progressive revelation of some ultimate Truth. One theosophical writer no longer had to agree with another. Theosophical books did not have to be expressions of theosophical truths--they could also be misunderstandings of them. And that was OK too. Spiritual journeys seem to begin with some spiritual insight-- something that awakens an awareness that we have always had. CWL has an uncanny ability to do this to people. Alan, Eldon and Alexis also mentioned starting out with CWL. For beginning this journey, I think we, and many others owe a debt of gratitude to CWL. But a spiritual journey does not end after the first step. We have far to go and part of that journey requires us to learn to discern the true from the false. JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From euser@euronet.nl Tue Jun 4 18:22:18 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 20:22:18 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606041822.UAA11990@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Considering my Newage FAQ This afternoon I posted a reply to Daniels questions on theos-news. After seeing that Daniel had also posted my FAQ on theos-l it occurred to me that it would be better to discuss my reply on theos-l. Hence I reproduce my reply and add a little comment to it. >>I reproduce below Martin's FAQ which I just happened to stumble across a few >>minutes ago. >>Martin, why didn't you tell us about this! See his references to Theos-l >>and alt.theosophy and >>to TI. >> >>Daniel Daniel, I DID tell theos-l folks about it. The first time I mentioned it was october/november 1994 when I asked permission to add info about theos-l to my FAQ. The second time was a couple of weeks ago when I talked about my activities concerning the popularization of theosophy. But, in one thing you're right, I do not blow the horn (trumpet?) about this activity in theosophical circles. I may occasionally mention it and then drop the subject. Originally, the idea to post a FAQ containing theosophical references to newsgroups was born with Paul Gillingwater. We had some E-mail exchanges about my articles on theosophy, the world wide web and newsgroups. My FAQ has grown and evolved during the years. It has undergone a major change in format a couple of months ago. My motive behind developing this FAQ has been twofold: - to disseminate info about theosophy to a major newsgroup, and I chose talk.religion.newage because there may be many seekers for spiritual knowledge there (many confused because of the many pseudo-spiritual organizations that seem to exist) - to disseminate info on spirituality, religion, philosophy, etc. in a more general sense (not specifically theosophical) as a service to the internet audience. By doing so I also wanted to show that there are theosophists who don't confine themselves to a narrow circle of what to many seem to be an out worn , outdated, philosophy. You may have gathered by now, that I'm not particularly satisfied with the theosophical societies in this world. I think members have not realized sufficiently that the theosophical teachings must be extended (in several ways, one example being synthesizing modern psychological findings in it, another way being to put theosophical teachings in a more easy-to-read format). An important consideration is, IMO, that theosophists should not think they have the monopoly on truth. The newage movement has effectively taken over some of the original spiritual impulse, and, I may add, the newage movement is *very* diverse, containing fresh ideas and practices and unavoidibly lots of chaff amongst the wheat. So, an open mind to new developments is *necessary* , imperative, in order for theosophists to popularize and promulgate some of the teachings in the light of new findings & developments. We must learn to connect to people, to their ideas, take them seriously and see how we can contribute something. Not always easy, and I would like to see the informed opinion of others on this! Added note: I really would like to see experienced theosophists write some useful aricles for the internet-community, expose some of their explorations of the spiritual and psychic worlds, help to establish some extensions to theosophy, etc. Martin From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 17:30:24 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 13:30:24 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606041932.AA24854@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: To Donna, Re: Chuck & Alexis At 01:26 PM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >> >Plagiarism is definitely pernicious, but I don't think Besant was a >plagiarist. I think she allowed Leadbeater to put things together in her >name, and that's fraudulent, and fraud is pernicious. You thinking this was so doesn't make it so. And, as I said, most of ABs books are actually speeches she gave at different occasions. Perhaps CWL was her speech writer? I don't think so, but I don't really know or care. I read the books and I find mental clarity AND devotion in them. The teachings so presented are very beneficial, and, as far as I can see, fairly (although not perfectly) accurate. Leadbeater also wrote >things and put them out under Krishnamurti's name (something Krishnamurti >bitterly resented). I have an interesting book by Mary Lutyens (?) that goes into some detail regarding K, CWL and AB. Will get back to that. But obviously you and I will never have a meeting of the >minds on this subject You are probably right, but it is interesting to see what you base your opinions on. Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From alexei@slip.net Tue Jun 4 19:37:30 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 12:37:30 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960604193730.006c4464@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: All "out of the body" experiences are NOTHING BUT hallucinations?? At 10:38 AM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >On alt.eckankar I found the following posting by Dr. Mike > Mueckler (biologist, I believe) who was once a member >of the Eckankar group, who also has had many, many >out-of-body experiences himself over the course of his life, > and who as you will see in the post below, is now totally >skeptical that such "soul traveling" is really real. Of course, >I don't agree with his *extreme* position. I thought >Alexis, Jerry S., JRC and others might be interested with the >"attitude" displayed by Dr. Mueckler towards "psychic experiences." >Far too many scientists have this attitude toward the psychic and >this was part of what I was trying to convey to Alexis in one >of my postings a month or two ago. > >Daniel > >Ah. To paraphrase an old cliche: "Hell hath no fury like a disillusioned devotee". I think Dr. Mueckler is desperate to undo the damage to his scientific reputation caused by his affiliation with Eckankar and so now is "Plus Royaliste que Le Roi". The mistake that he, and many skeptics make, is in assuming that just because one can to some degree reproduce certain effects in the laboratory, that is the only explanation for the phenomenon. It is very easy to photograph a Rembrandt painting, but that doesn't make the result a Rembrandt Painting. I am not an admirer of Eckankar, and it's just possible that all of the experiences of out-of-body states that its devotees experience, are the result of "guided meditations", or induced self-hypnosis, and might truly be simply hallucinations. I regularly have experiences of the spiritual state but I will not, and cannot claim, I have "out of body" experiences, it's more a case of bilocality. I have had one totally out of body experience but that was in connection with just having been declared dead. alexis From kymsmith@micron.net Tue Jun 4 19:50:00 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 96 13:50 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: To: Daniel Caldwell Dear Daniel, Thank you for your educational and informative reply to my query on reincarnation and "Isis Unveiled." I am a member of the Theosophical Society (Wheaton, IL), so it will be easy for me to obtain the books you recommended. When you find the time could you post the quotes you spoke of (or tell me where I can find them) and the titles of the articles by Ms. Blavatsky? Also, what is the Blavatsky Foundation? Sincerely, Kym From martinle@lainet.com Tue Jun 4 20:39:59 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 13:39:59 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: re: CWL >> Martin Leiderman wrote: >> I always ask myself, if I go to India and select one individual to be the >> World Teacher and I choose one like Krishnaji . . . alas! what are the >> odds??? . . . what do you think Ramadoss, my brother. Ramadoss wrote: > You have brought a very interesting question. Let me add that when >Krishnaji was "discovered" he was a very puny and not a bright looking >eleven year old. What are the odds of chosing such a boy and who never >passed a single examination and never had a formal educational >certificate and who turns out to be a world renowned speaker? Question to Jerry Hejka-Ekins What is your opinion on CWL discovering "unbright young Krishamurti" ? What are the odds? Was he all that off everytime in all "his" opinions? From liesel@dreamscape.com Tue Jun 4 19:41:32 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 15:41:32 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-Id: <199606042046.QAA25141@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Your discussions At this point I see coming that some of you are going to start in some more dragging Leadbeater through the mud, and now you're starting in on Annie Besant. I don't belong to this list any more. I like to talk Theosophy that's uplifteing, & there are too many on this list who insist on down dragging. Well, without me. Good-bye. Liesel From Drpsionic@aol.com Tue Jun 4 23:25:18 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 19:25:18 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Message-Id: <960604192517_549359908@emout09.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl Alex, Having never met a wolf in person, I bow to your experience. I have never met a sheep before either, but I love roast lamb. Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Heretic Troublemaker From roxendal@sunrise.alpinet.net Tue Jun 4 21:58:20 1996 Date: Tue, 04 Jun 1996 17:58:20 -0400 From: Bjorn Roxendal Message-Id: <9606050000.AA27564@alpinet.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl At 07:30 PM 6/4/96 -0400, you wrote: >Alex, >Having never met a wolf in person, I bow to your experience. >I have never met a sheep before either, but I love roast lamb. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA >Heretic >Troublemaker Ah! The Atrocious One is back joking about us lamb! Firmly ensconsed behind his filter list! Bah! Bjorn roxendal@alpinet.net From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 4 23:59:49 1996 Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 00:59:49 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: To: Daniel Caldwell In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 In message , kymsmith@micron.net writes >Also, what is the Blavatsky Foundation? > >Sincerely, > >Kym > And so ask all of us ... Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 4 23:54:15 1996 Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 00:54:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Spiritual Journey In-Reply-To: <9606041820.AA05269@toto.csustan.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <9606041820.AA05269@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes > But a spiritual journey does not end after the first step. >We have far to go and part of that journey requires us to learn >to discern the true from the false. > >JHE One teacher used the following analogy for those attracted by the *glamour* of the "Templar" and "Magickal" approaches: "To start to build your own spiritual temple, take one brick. Place it upon another brick ..." Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 4 23:30:31 1996 Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 00:30:31 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Intelligence Tests In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960604055119.006b17ec@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960604055119.006b17ec@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >I.Q. is >just one bit of information to add to the data-bank, but it's really >meaningless in making comparisons between people. >"Rough guide" yes, "accurate chart" no! > >alexis I have long said that there should be an "E.Q." (Emotional Quotient) to go along with the I.Q. I walked away from MENSA because all they want to do is carry on playing mind- and puzzle-games. Raher like the Masons have to have 33 variants of "Knock, knock, who's there!" Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From ramadoss@eden.com Wed Jun 5 00:33:55 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 19:33:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: re: CWL In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 4 Jun 1996, Martin Leiderman wrote: > >> Martin Leiderman wrote: > >> I always ask myself, if I go to India and select one individual to be the > >> World Teacher and I choose one like Krishnaji . . . alas! what are the > >> odds??? . . . what do you think Ramadoss, my brother. > > Ramadoss wrote: > > You have brought a very interesting question. Let me add that when > >Krishnaji was "discovered" he was a very puny and not a bright looking > >eleven year old. What are the odds of chosing such a boy and who never > >passed a single examination and never had a formal educational > >certificate and who turns out to be a world renowned speaker? > > > Question to Jerry Hejka-Ekins > What is your opinion on CWL discovering "unbright young Krishamurti" ? > What are the odds? Was he all that off everytime in all "his" opinions? > Let me add: From the time Krishnaji was discovered by CWL, AB was also convinced of the discovery and she went all out to support Krishnaji in all possible ways. After Krishnaji started his life long career in speaking, there was none of his International Stature in this area. Even after Krishnaji passed away, I am yet to see any person of his stature on the horizon. We had several well known TS leaders but none came close to his stature. Ramadoss From jhe@toto.csustan.edu Wed Jun 5 00:35:17 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 17:35:17 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Message-Id: <9606050035.AA18758@toto.csustan.edu> Subject: Re: re CWL (to Ramadoss) Ramadoss asks: >> You have brought a very interesting question. Let me add >>that when Krishnaji was "discovered" he was a very puny and not >>a bright looking eleven year old. What are the odds of chosing >>such a boy and who never passed a single examination and never >>had a formal educational certificate and who turns out to be a >>world renowned speaker? >Question to Jerry Hejka-Ekins >What is your opinion on CWL discovering "unbright young >Krishamurti" ? What are the odds? Was he all that off everytime >in all "his" opinions? Allow me to answer your question by relating my personal experience on the matter: Around 1965, a woman friend who was a follower of Krishnamurti invited me to go with her to hear him speak in Ojai. That was my first experience with K. I remember Mrs. L. telling me the history of K. as the one time Theosophical World teacher who quit the Society and went off on his own. That was the first time I heard the story, since the fellow members in the Lodge I belonged to never talked about those things. Rather, they were very sensitive about exposing "dirty linen" in front of me, as they did not want to scare me away. After K. finished his talk, Mrs. L. told me that she was disappointed, and was sorry that she picked today to hear him because it was one of his "off days." She said that K. was rambling and didn't really say anything that day, but when he was "on," he was really "profound." She expressed the hope that I would have the opportunity to hear him at another time when he was more "on." But I wasn't at all disappointed, and found the whole experience fascinating--and I was particularly interested in the idea that throngs of people gathered to listen to a man ramble for the off chance that he would have an "on day" and say something profound. I was also fascinated with the question and answer period that followed the talk. I remember that K. deemed most of the questions as not legitimate and refused to answer them. I also remember someone asking him about his theosophical past. To this question, he was particularly vociferous about it being an improper one. Since I lived in Los Angeles until 1990, Ojai was only a 90 minute drive, and K. spoke there every spring, so he was easily accessible for me to hear at my pleasure. So whenever Spring came along and I was not too busy with other obligations, I would throw a blanket in the back of the car drive up, pay my five dollars at the gate, pitch my blanket under the shade of a tree and watch the show. I remember that some years his talks were rambling like the first one I heard, other years he would sometimes seem to occasionally catch a wind of inspiration and he would speak fluently and really capture the attention of his audience. I found that every year he would cover certain themes, which in the light of later knowledge, I find many of them to be ironic. For instance, I remember that he often talked about non attachment to material things. Yet he owned a Mercedes Benz--a real social status car at the time. He used to advise the younger people in the audience against getting sexually involved. That struck me as funny at the time. I thought: now here is a man who has lived a saintly, protected and celibate life giving sexual advice to teenagers. How presumptuous of him. It stuck me as being like like a Catholic Priest doing marriage counseling. Now that his twenty year affair with Ragagopal's wife has come out, I now realize that he was really speaking from personal experience. Though I don't think anyone guessed this at the time. Most interesting was his theme; "Don't follow me. Hear what I have to say, go and live your own life." Yet throngs of followers crowded into that grove every year to hear the words of the great Krishnamurti. It occurred to me that those who *really* heard Krishnamurti and followed his advice were *not* the ones who were coming every year to the oak grove, and they were *not* the ones who were buying his books. Now to answer your question. "What are the odds of chosing such a boy and who never passed a single examination and never had a formal educational certificate and who turns out to be a world renowned speaker? Probably quite good considering the exceptional environment and training the TS gave to K. He was left to want for nothing. He was surrounded by tutors and had the opportunity to go to the best schools in the world. He traveled the world extensively and was given the best accomodations. With his training and the publicity he received all of his life, I would have found it hard to believe that he could have become anything other than a "world renound speaker." He was trained to do this, and nothing else. But was Krishnamurti really what CWL thought he was? It appears that K. did not think so. He rejected the ceremonies, the disciples, and the LCC that was supposed to be the vehicle for his message. K. turned out to be a young man with enough integrity to reject what he did not believe. On the other hand, under the expert management of Rajagopal and some really slick legal maneuvers, the Krishnamurti Foundation was able to sustain Krishnamurti's stature as a spiritual teacher and maintain itself quite well with the income from K's books and his continuing lecture tours. During K's lifetime, he was able to attract ample wealthy donors that kept him and the Foundation in the financial security he grew accustomed to while under the care of the Theosophical Society. So, regarding your question: "Was [CWL] all that off every time in all `his' opinions?" I don't know. The odds are that CWL had to have been right about some things. But it is clear to me that Krishnamurti was not one of the things he was right about. However, I must add that I deeply admire Krishnamurti's integrity in rejecting CWL's vision and for leaving the TS. Also, I must point out that K's "Pathless land" speech reaches to the heart of HPB's teachings and goes directly against CWL's. This, I believe to be evidence of real spiritual intuition on Ks part, since it is unlikely that K ever read a word of HPB in his life. I like K's teachings very much, but is he the returned Christ? I don't think so. JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 4 22:54:48 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 23:54:48 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Clean up In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960604054534.006c01dc@mail.slip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <2.2.32.19960604054534.006c01dc@mail.slip.net>, alexis dolgorukii writes >It seems to me that we must clean up our past, so that we can see clearly >what needs to be "cleaned up" in our present. It seems to me that simply >rearranging the present while ignoring the past is like sweeping the dust >under the carpet. Without the past there is no present, and if the present >is to be made better than it is, it cannot happen without acknowledging the >things that have accrued from the past that may be hindering or obstructing >the present. > >alexis Er, yes - but that's what I was saying. The original post said we must clean up our past, and I added "AND" our present. IOW, both things are needed. Still it does not hurt tosay it again :-) Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Tue Jun 4 22:51:35 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 23:51:35 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Message-Id: Subject: Re: Freedom!!!!! In-Reply-To: <960604011921_127320530@emout07.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 In message <960604011921_127320530@emout07.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Jerry, >Considering the quality of people claiming to be chelas these days, I'm >damned glad I'm not one. >And I finally got onto my own newsgroup today! I used a local outfit called >Ripco. Now all we need is for it to get to the bigger servers. > >Chuck the Atrocious MTI, FTSA Demon Internet Ltd (UK) serves around 45,000 and is growing. It picked up alt.theosophy as soon as it appeared. Not many people posting to it so far though ... I put the TI staement up and: nothing. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk http://www,garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html From ramadoss@eden.com Wed Jun 5 01:08:51 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 20:08:51 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Message-Id: <2.2.16.19960604201109.0877ec46@mail.eden.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: Krishnaji Jerry wrote: >>> Clip >>>> > >Now to answer your question. "What are the odds of chosing >such a boy and who never passed a single examination and never >had a formal educational certificate and who turns out to be a >world renowned speaker? Probably quite good considering the >exceptional environment and training the TS gave to K. He was >left to want for nothing. He was surrounded by tutors and had >the opportunity to go to the best schools in the world. He As far as I have read, I do not think he ever went any of the *best* schools. Have you found any specific details of the schools he attended? >traveled the world extensively and was given the best >accomodations. With his training and the publicity he received >all of his life, I would have found it hard to believe that he >could have become anything other than a "world renound speaker." >He was trained to do this, and nothing else. But was >Krishnamurti really what CWL thought he was? It appears that K. >did not think so. He rejected the ceremonies, the disciples, and >the LCC that was supposed to be the vehicle for his message. K. >turned out to be a young man with enough integrity to reject what >he did not believe. > >On the other hand, under the expert management of Rajagopal and >some really slick legal maneuvers, the Krishnamurti Foundation >was able to sustain Krishnamurti's stature as a spiritual teacher >and maintain itself quite well with the income from K's >books and his continuing lecture tours. During K's lifetime, he >was able to attract ample wealthy donors that kept him and the >Foundation in the financial security he grew accustomed to while >under the care of the Theosophical Society. > >So, regarding your question: "Was [CWL] all that off every time >in all `his' opinions?" I don't know. The odds are that CWL had >to have been right about some things. But it is clear to me that >Krishnamurti was not one of the things he was right about. > >However, I must add that I deeply admire Krishnamurti's integrity >in rejecting CWL's vision and for leaving the TS. Also, I must >point out that K's "Pathless land" speech reaches to the heart of >HPB's teachings and goes directly against CWL's. This, I believe >to be evidence of real spiritual intuition on Ks part, since it >is unlikely that K ever read a word of HPB in his life. I like >K's teachings very much, but is he the returned Christ? I don't >think so. I don't think any one can be certain about whether he is the returned Christ or not. If he is the returned Christ, then you have the problem of the religions like Hindu, Buddhism, Moslem etc rejecting him because it is not their prophet or Avatar who is returning. Just a thought. If he really the returned Christ he would have had severe problems from the various Christian denominations all over world - some accepting and some rejecting. > >JHE > >------------------------------------------ > |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | > |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | > |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | > |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | > ------------------------------------------ As for his lectures, I have attended many in the mid sixties and early seventies. But much of what he was trying to say had an effect on me only later in the mid eighties onwards mainly through his video tapes. This is especially true of my attitude to life and those of my fellow humans and other living creatures. I am very grateful for it. ...Ramadoss From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Wed Jun 5 03:17:34 1996 Date: 04 Jun 96 23:17:34 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: All "out of the body" experiences are NOTHING BUT hallucinations?? Message-Id: <960605031734_76400.1474_HHL60-3@CompuServe.COM> Dan, Thanks for the post on the scientific view of psychism and OBEs. What was left unsaid was all of the cases where the patient, while near death, saw and heard what was going on around them, and recalled it all afterwards. This happened to my wife during birth of our first son. The doctor gave her a shot and told her that she would not be able to remember anything. She not only had full recall, but told him exactly what he was doing, what he had said, and so on. The doctor was left speechless, with no explanation. While it is easy for a doctor or outside observer to scoff at these experiences, those who have them tend to believe them because they seem very real, and also because of information they learned that could not have come through the physical senses, because these were all closed. The sheer number of folk who have had these experiences is staggering. Only a few scientists (such as C.G. Jung) are big enough to accept that the psychic is a separate continuum, as real as the physical one. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Wed Jun 5 03:17:31 1996 Date: 04 Jun 96 23:17:31 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Blind Men and the Elephant Message-Id: <960605031731_76400.1474_HHL60-2@CompuServe.COM> >But theosophy is more than that and less than that. It is knowledge, and >understanding, and a urgently questing mind. It is a mind that seeks beyond >the superficialities of religion. It is a mind that seeks! And in seeking, >demonstrates rather than teaches! >alexis Exactly. A theosophist should help others, and learn from the process. Helping and working with other people should be a learning experience. With the learning, we will be able to be even better helpers the next time. Jerry S. Member, TI From 76400.1474@CompuServe.COM Wed Jun 5 03:17:29 1996 Date: 04 Jun 96 23:17:29 EDT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Response to JRC's posting Message-Id: <960605031729_76400.1474_HHL60-1@CompuServe.COM> >>... I struggle often with even the most recent writings of Theosophy >> (Quest Magazine is an example) >> Doss:> You are not alone in finding the writings of Theosophy in Quest >being difficult. I have been around Theosophy for quite some time, and I >have found it very difficult to read and many times the magazine went >straight into the waste paper basket immediately after it arrived. It >appears that Quest is on its way to a natural death after the next three >or so issues. I hate to say "I told you so" but way back in the PeaceNet days, I wrote an article about the Fog Index, and how Quest's was so high that the magazine was in danger of dying for lack of a reading public. Looks like I was right. I only wonder how it has lasted this long, and why they didn't ease up a bit on the all the Ph.D. phrasology. Pd.D.s make a magazine respectable, but also so difficult to read that the public (which has a 7th grade reading level) is usually left in the cold. The Quest is a great magazine, but clearly not suitable for Joe Sixpack. Jerry S. Member, TI From RIhle@aol.com Wed Jun 5 03:24:06 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 23:24:06 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Message-Id: <960604232404_210725227@emout13.mail.aol.com> Subject: Re: Bleat and Howl Jerry S. writes> > As Alexis has noted, wolves are actually gentle. Sheep >can be as nasty as anything, you know. My use of the terms, spawned >by Bjorn's horror at what he called the theosophical "wolves," was not >directed at gentleness vs nastiness but rather at sheepishly following >the literature, or using one's experiences to wolfishly shift the chaff from >the theosophical wheat. Richard Ihle writes> Ok, now I get it. One might be wise, however, not to overlook the possibility that there may be very few, if any, common sheep on this list if one thinks of them in your latter way. First appearances may be deceiving. Underlying motives are important. Perhaps many of those who seem sheep-like are really those who are the most serious about trying to establish an elevated, wolf-style "dominance position" for themselves. Think you, Jerry, that your hard-acquired modicum of personal theosophical knowledge makes you any sort of worthy in their eyes? Think again. All the literature-muncher has to do to pass you up is to take the "faith-leap" that his or her knowledge comes by means of a holy line of Preternatural Dispensation, and you are defaulted below him or her with no further ado whatever. This is why there is such a big commotion every time the "Masters" issue is brought up: without a True-Jesus in the background somewhere, the Jehovah's Specially Appointed Witnesses at your door would just be an off-duty retail clerk with unattended nose hair and a homemaker with blue-light-special shoes going around bothering people. Similarly, without the capital ~M~ on ~Master~ or the ~T~ on ~Theosophical doctrine~, a certain type of person apparently has hard time thinking that he or she is better than the next guy. . . . No, I am unaware of any common sheep on this list. Here, we have BIG, egoically purposeful sheep whose merest turds are like mountains coming down to scatter a few tiny wolves. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From blafoun@azstarnet.com Tue Jun 4 06:49:50 1996 Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 23:49:50 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@AZStarNet.com (Blavatsky Foundation) Message-Id: <199606040649.XAA12001@web.azstarnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Look at Martin Euser's updated FAQ on Spiritual & Newage resources for newcomers >I reproduce below Martin's FAQ which I just happened to stumble across a few >minutes ago. >Martin, why didn't you tell us about this! See his references to Theos-l >and alt.theosophy and >to TI. > >Daniel > >>http://ww2.altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/news?msg@7902@talk%2ereligion%2en ewage >> Spiritual & Newage resources FAQ for newcomers >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> From Martin Euser >> Organization EuroNet Internet >> Date 2 Jun 1996 12:25:17 GMT >> Newsgroups talk.religion.newage >> Message-ID <4os17d$f8u@news.euro.net> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> The purpose of this document is to point the way to newcomers on Usenet >> to Internet resources concerning religion, spirituality >> (in a broad sense) and connected issues. >> If anyone can add to this info, please mail to: >> >> euser@euronet.nl >> >> Please include a short characteristic of the resource >> you want to have included in this FAQ. >> >> >> What's New in this FAQ (June, 1996) >> ------------------------------------ >> >> >> Newsgroups >> >> There's a new newsgroup, alt.theosophy , dedicated to a new approach >> to this old philosophy (theosophy). Psychic & noetic experiences will be >> discussed and related to theosophical, newage and psychological concepts. >> Old terminology may well be replaced by new one, more up to date. >> Syntheses will be sought, proposed and established. >> Independant research into psychic/noetic realms by individuals is encouraged. >> >> A variety of theosophists, some of them psychics, including a shaman will be >> present shortly on this forum to give their outspoken views. >> (Advice can be offered to those with experiences that have >> frightened them or that they wonder about. ) >> >> >> TIP >> >> Getting access to usenet groups your site doesn't provide for: >> >> did you know that you can use Digital's Altavista searchengine >> as a Newsgroup-reader? Search for a group, say, in the alt. hierarchy, >> (usenet search rather then world wide web search) and you can >> read articles, post one and reply. Easy and quick. Also useful for a search >> on what a specific person has posted in several newsgroups.. >> >> Point your browser to: http://www.altavista.digital.com >> >> >> >> >> >> The Web: >> >> >> o In the psychological-emotional realm there's work being done by a famous >> psychic, Earl Gordon Curley, whose work on the '21 emotions exercise' >> seems to have had quite a success. >> See http://www.asgo.net/~psychic/ >> >> >> o Theosophy International (TI) consists of a group of theosophists >> dedicated to a renewal of theosophy. Terminology, psychic/noetic >> experiences, alternative interpretations of teachings, establishing >> new syntheses are among its interests. >> >> www.garlic.com/~rdon/TI.html >> E-mail: ti@nellie2.demon.co.uk (Dr. Alan Bain) >> (See also newsgroup alt.theosophy) >> >> >> >> Mailing list: >> >> name: with*miracle e-gathering >> Listowner: tjoslin@magpage.com (theodore joslin) >> [contact to receive full mision statement or further info] >> >> group focus: with*miracle has been established to create a >> peaceful and open environment to discuss personal views and >> experiences of spirituality. all faiths are welcomed, that we may >> learn from the diversity of perspectives and see that the spirit >> works in infinite ways. The name "with miracle" reflects my [tj] belief >> that we are always in the presence of the miracle of being alive >> in a living universe. >> >> subscription address: listserver@del.net >> subscription command: join with-miracle >> >> >> >> (End of what's New) >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> 1. GENERAL NEWAGE INFO, SITES & RESOURCES: >> >> >> WWW-sites (short description included): >> ---------- >> >> o The OMNet home page has moved to: >> >> http://www.portal.com/~tyagi/om.html >> >> The new WWW-mage's guide is available at: >> >> http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/magi.html >> >> >> The OMNet gives you access to the Mage's guide , >> OMiNous Newsletters and to other info about the work they're doing. >> >> You can download the old Mage's Guide to the Internet ( version 2.0) >> or have a look at the new online WWW-Mage's guide compiled by Tyagi >Nagasiva. These guides describe many resources ( mystical >> and occult documents & groups on Internet, including WWW-sites, >> Mailing Lists, FTP-sites, Telnet Mystical Links, BBSs, Newsgroups, >> Electronic Guides, etc.) >> >> >> An OMiNous newsletter containing information about resources within the >Internet esoteric and spiritual communities is available at: >> >> txt://ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/magick/OMNet/omin1.06 >> >> or >> >> txt://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/OMNet/omin/omin1.06 >> >> Look there for new issues as well >> ------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> o www.newageinfo.com/res/welcome.htm >> Resources MASTERINDEX for New Age sites >> see also www.newageinfo.com/res/newage.htm >> >> >> o www1.usa1.com/~salemctr/center1.html >> New Age FAQs >> >> o www1.usa1.com/~caa/newage.html >> New Age vs New Thought Movement >> >> o www.sedona.net/nen/nhne >> New heaven new earth website; a good place to start. >> >> o www.well.com >> A site with a good portion New Age >> >> o www.sun-angel.com >> www.sun-angel.com/noosphere/noosphere.html >> >> o www.spdcc.com/home/newage/sub-newage.html >> New Age journal >> www.spdcc.com/home/newage/otherlnk.html >> Digital therapist.. >> >> o www.kei.com/homepages/mkapor >> Mitch Kapor's homepage. Internet and New Age. >> (co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation) >> >> >> o www.euro.net/5thworld/mystic/ >> >> >> >> >> 2. BRIDGES, SYNTHESES, INTERNETWORKING >> >> >> >> o http://rain.org/~origin/ >> >> This site (the Origin network) combines science, humanistic philosophy, >> and the spiritual insights of every culture, in a multi-faceted >> dialogue that is intended to conduct the "search for truth" in the >> context of the entire Internet. The objective of the network is to build >> relationships-- between people, ideas, cultural groups, philosophical >> and religious traditions-- and to help transform global society >> gradually as the composite wisdom of global culture is cooperatively >> organized by network participants and radiated across the world. >> The associated Bridge-l mailing list is an important part of this network. >> The world-scripture project (and book) can also be found here (see below). >> >> o The Internet Interfaith Consortium (IIC), dedicated to promoting >> interreligious dialogue, has an interesting WWW site with comparitive >> fragments of World Scriptures. >> >> See: http://rain.org/~origin/ws.html >> >> IIC has compiled a cooperative catalogue, available at: >> >> http://rain.org/~origin/iic.html >> >> >> 0 Web-site for the conference on the 'ideal society': >> http://rain.org/~origin/is.html >> >> >> 0 Interfaith working group: >> http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/religion/orgs/iwg/iwg.html >> (Chris Purdom) >> >> >> >> 0 School of Wisdom WWW-site >> >> http://www.webcom.com/~metanoic/wisdom/ >> >> holistic systhesis of science/religion; fractals & chaos theory; >> esoteric music; enneagram; & much more. >> This site has a large collection of search-engines. >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 3. TOPICS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER: >> >> >> ARE-Press >> http://www.itribe.net/are/ >> Writings of Edgar Cayce >> >> ASATRU >> http://io.com/user/mimir/asatru.html >> >> >> ASTROLOGY >> >> o www.sentex.net/~aquarius/update.html >> Astrology and classical music; site has soundsamples >> >> o www.bdd.com/horo1/bddhoro1.cgi/horo >> >> >> o See also Spirit-WWW (Comprehensive site) >> >> >> ATHEISM >> >> o Web site that offers textual sources for examining atheism >> in both the traditional anti-theist and newer ways: >> >> http://www.chattanooga.net/~tpkunesh/atheism.f/relaths.htm >> -= a Guide for the Complete Atheist =- >> a brief compilation of sources according to Christianity, >> classical atheists, liberation theology, and religious atheists >> >> tom kunesh >> >> >> BUDDHISM >> >> >> o Tibetan Buddhism - transcripts from Dzoghen meetings by Lama Surya Das >> in Cambridge, MA. Teachings in a modern setting: >> http://www.kei.com/homepages/surya >> >> o coombs.anu.edu.au:80/WWWVL-Buddhism.html >> The site where all Buddhistic texts are being collected, >> studied and made accessible for laymen and professionals >> see also coombs.anu.edu.au >> >> >> >> >> CLASSICAL STUFF >> >> o A serious page with links to a huge number of sites regarding >> classical stuff: >> http://www.ucd.ie/~sspence/classics.html >> >> >> >> COMPREHENSIVE SITES (RELIGION, SPIRITUALITY, NEWAGE, ETC.) >> >> o Spirit-WWW (maintained by Rene' Mueller) >> >> Description: this site has many topics about spiritual issues. >> Examples: Astrology, Theosophy, Reincarnation, Gnosis, Veda & Dharma, >> Yoga Paths, Lightwork, Healing Methods, etc. >> >> A calendar of spiritual events, conferences, etc. can be found here >> and is regularly updated. >> >> Also, you can get access here to newsgroups from the alt. hierarchy >> not available on your site. >> >> How to reach: the universal resource locator (URL) is: >> >> http://zeta.cs.adfa.oz.au/Spirit.html >> (this is the Australian site) >> >> http://www.protree.com/Spirit.html >> (USA) >> >> http://www.spiritweb.org/ >> (main site;USA) >> >> http://www.linknet.it/Spirit/ >> (Italy) >> >> -------------------------------- >> >> (ALEISTER) CROWLEY, MAGICK, ETC. >> >> http:// www.winternet.com/~robin >> http://www.lsi.usp.br/usp/rod/text/aleister_crowley.html >> >> ECKANKAR >> http://www.eckankar.org >> >> >> GNOSIS >> >> http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/ >> http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/hotlist/hotlist.htm >> http://www.clark.net/pub/murple/gnostic.html >> http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/hotlist/hermet.html >> >> >> HERMETIC TEXTS >> >> o The texts of the Corpus Hermeticum are being made available >> on the web--The URL is >> http://www.speakeasy.org/~mimir/caduceus/hermetica/index.html >> >> >> KABBALAH >> >> http://www.digital-brilliance.com/kab/ >> Colin's Hermetic Kabbalah Page >> >> http://www.webcom.com/~hermit/page/sefer.html >> The Sefer Yetzirah >> >> http://fub46.zedat.fu-berlin.de:8080/~cantsin/maimon.html >> Maimonides >> >> >> MAGICK/OCCULT WWW-sites: >> >> http://www.tezcat.com/~wednsday/magick.html >> http://matrix.eden.com/11/eden/users/jher/occult >> http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/usr/sk4p/occult/occult >> >> http://www.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/magick.html >> All kind of links to magick, alchemy, qabala/Kabalah,mysticism, >> old groups, new groups, etc. >> >> http://www.uib.no/wolf/zoo/bjorn/occult.html >> (in the magick directory you can find a bulletin board for exchange of >information and questions, etc.) >> >> Anonymous FTP-sites with files relating to magick and occultism: >> >> ftp.lysator.liu.se >> >> Directory: /pub/magick/ >> Subdirectories: Alchemy/; Beginner/; Books/; Chaos/; Community/; >> Consciousness/; Enochian/; General/ ; Golden_Dawn/; Mysticism/; >> Necronomicon/; Net/; Ordo_templi_orientis/; Orgone_committee/; >> Qabalah/; Ritual/; and more >> >> ----------------- >> >> nic.funet.fi >> >> subdirectory /pub/doc/occult/magick >> directory /pub/magick has many subdirectories >> >> ---------------- >> >> >> nic.funet.fi/pub/doc/religion/occult >> ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/magick >> ftp.lysator.liu.se/pub/religion/neopagan >> wiretap.spies.com/Library/Fringe/Occult >> imageek.york.cuny.edu/pub >> >> >> alamut.topy.org/pub/alamut/topy >> ftp.netcom.com/pub/ffunch/spirevol.html >> ftp.netcom.com/pub/pa/pali151 >> ftp.netcom.com/pub/Sh/Shub >> ftp.portal.com/pub/ss/usenet >> ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/alt.magick.gems >> ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/equinox >> ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/magick >> ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/omnet >> ftp.winternet.com/users/robin/programs >> >> >> The following newsgroups may be of interest as well: >> >> alt.magick >> alt.magick.chaos >> alt.magick.sex >> alt.magick.serious >> alt.magick.tyagi >> alt.magick.ethics >> alt.pagan >> alt.religion.wicca >> alt.tarot >> alt.mythology >> alt.religion.shamanism >> soc.religion.shamanism >> >> --------------------------------------------- >> >> MEDITATION >> >> o Spiritual unfoldment meditation web site at : >> >> http://www.cityscape.co.uk/users/ea80/fisu.htm >> >> fisu@cityscape.co.uk Rajesh Ananda at Foundation for International >Spiritual Unfoldment >> >> >> o The Third Circle Web Site: >> >> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/WEagle/ >> >> Instructions and examples of simple but powerful meditations. >> The web site contains a section on the philosophy of TTC. >> The Third Circle (TTC) is because you are your own Master. >> An important concept is that of Self Source of Authority (SSOA). >> >> >> (AVATAR) MEHER BABA >> >> o The Avatar Meher Baba home page is available on the WWW at URL: >> http://www.oslonett.no/home/erics/index.html >> >> It is maintained by Eric Solibakke at Oslonett public access >> and has an extensive selection of essential messages as well as a >> brief biography, GIFs, pilgrimage information and address lists. >> A newly added Anthology offers a wide range of Spiritual teaching >> and inspirational stories, including anecdotes about Perfect Masters >> and saints. A collection of Spiritual poetry called "Poetry of the >> HeartMind" can also be accessed. This page provides a "Quote of >> the Day" service at http://www.oslonett.no/home/erics/today.html >> >> Another Meher Baba www-site: http://davey.sunyerie/mb/html/mb.html >> >> >> >> MISCELLANEOUS >> >> o "SpiritLink Services"- http://www.amug.org:80/~a220/ >> >> Channeled material from the Pleiadians, Astrology, Reincarnation, >> Sacred Geometry coloring book, Goddess Awakening Breathwork, Island >> Nation, Community and more. >> >> >> >> MYTHOLOGY >> >> http://www.io.org/~untangle/mythtext.html >> A collection of FAQ's (Frequently Asked Questions) from around the Internet. >> The collection deals with various mythological topics, the mythologies of >> various cultures, and with some of the mythology-related newsgroups and >listservs on the Net. >> Myths and Sacred scriptures (Bible,Koran), Theogony (Hesiod), Thousand and >> a night (Arabic tales), etc. >> >> >> NATURE, MOTHER EARTH (GAIA), RECONNECTION >> >> o http://www.pacificrim.net/~nature/ >> >> This site is dedicated to Project NatureConnect, >> an activity of the University of Global Education. >> Dr. Cohen [mjcohen@aol.com] has done much work on the area >> of teaching people to reconnect to nature and spirituality. >> >> >> >> >> PAGANISM >> >> http://www.lysator.liu.se/ftp/pub/religion/neopagan >> http://www.computel.com/~fireyes/pagan/pagan.html >> http://www.uwyo.edu/cte/Pagan.html >> http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/plhome.html >> http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/netstuff/pagan_net.html >> >> http://www.brad.ac.uk/~kmhether/paganlink/netstuff/paganwww.html >> (Pagan and occult sites) >> >> >> PROJECTS: >> >> Gutenberg >> >> Many text files on spirituality, e.g. Myths and Legends of the Sioux >> >> >> If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please >> FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives: >> [Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type] >> >> ftp mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu >> login: anonymous >> password: your@login >> cd etext/etext90 through /etext95 >> or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information] >> dir [to see files] >> get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files] >> GET INDEX?00.GUT >> for a list of books >> and GET NEW GUT for general information >> and MGET GUT* for newsletters. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> PYTHAGORAS >> http://www.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/Mage/pythagoreans.html >> >> QABBALAH >> >> o Qabbalah WWW site. >> http://kether.sephiroth.org/vtol/ >> >> >> >> >> RELIGION & SPIRITUALITY >> >> Here follow some more links without further description: >> (not all verified on accuracy; In addition, websites move frequently >> to other locations; often there's a note on the old address that shows you >> the new location's address) >> >> http://www.yahoo.com/Society_and_Culture/Religion/ >> Society and Culture:Religion [note, this URL seems to have changed] >> >> http://www.sedona.net >> >> Sun Angel Innovations http://www.sun-angel.com/ >> >> Unifying Fields Foundation http://www.sun-angel.com/uff/ >> >> >> http://www.digital.com/gnn/wic/hum.toc.html#relig >> >> http://galaxy.einet.net/galaxy/Arts-and-Humanities/Religion.html >> >> http://galaxy.einet.net/galaxy/Community/Religion.html >> >> http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dth3maf/gresham.html >> >> >> http://www.biologie.uni-freiburg.de/~amueller/religion/ >> >> http://akebono.stanford.edu/yahoo/Society_and_Culture/Religion/ >> >> http://www.einet.net/GJ/religion.html >> >> http://www.matisse.net/~peregrin/ >> >> >> >> ftp://panda1.uottawa.ca/pub/religion/ >> >> gopher://cwis.usc.edu:70/11/Other_Gophers_and_Information_Resources/ >> Gophers_by_Subject/Gopher_Jewels/acadamic/religion/Religion >> >> (the above all on one line) >> >> gopher://vega.lib.ncsu.edu:70/11/library/stacks/Alex/Browse%20by%20 >> Subject%3A%20Religion >> >> (all on one line) >> >> gopher://marvel.loc.gov:70/11/global/phil >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> SAI BABA >> >> o contact sites for Sri Sathya Sai Baba: >> >> Sites on the Net favoring or critiquing Sri Sathya Sai Baba: >> http://www.inside-info.co.uk/BABA/saibaba.htm >> http://www.isc.tamu.edu/%7Emsr/hindu/sai/sai.html >> http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/~raghavan/sai.html >> http://www.afn.org/~afn24770 >> http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~hug >> http://www.chem.uottawa.ca/ravi/ravi.html >> http://www.tamu.edu:8000/~ggr4499/ >> http://pc1502.geographie.uni-regensburg.de/html/miracle.htm (sevaral) >> http://www.liv.ac.uk/~mhbarker/saibaba2.html >> http://www.stat.unipd.it/h2000/cicap/saibaba.html >> Usenet: newsgroup Soc.culture.indian, (see the thread entitled >> SANDEHA NIVARINI SATHYA SAI BABA DISSOLVING DOUBTS) >> >> Further details available from Bon_Giovanni@gaianet.net >> http://www.inside-info.co.uk/BABA/bon.htm >> >> >> SEDONA-net >> http://www.sedona.net >> >> >> SHAMANISM >> http://demon.co.uk/drci/shamen/shamanism/shamanism.html >> >> Shamanistic healing with Don Pedro: >> http://www.prgone.com/bus/dpedro >> >> >> >> SWEDENBORG >> http://www.netaxs.com/~mvd/Swedenborg.html (old URL) >> The prefered Swedenborg URL is now: >> http://www.netaxs.com/~mvd/ES/ >> >> >> >> SUFI SITES >> >> o http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/sufi.mystica.html >> >> >> TAROT >> ftp.netcom.com/pub/bota >> (tarot & qabbalah) >> http://www.iii.net/users/dtking/tarot.html >> >> >> >> THEOSOPHY >> >> o Theosophy-WWW (maintained by Paul Gillingwater) >> >> Description: this site is dedicated to theosophical info mainly, >> though some other topics are also included like OBE >> and scientific work (chaos theory). It contains also >> some links to Zen and Newage-material. >> >> Examples: The seven jewels of wisdom; the psychological key to man; >> basic theosophical teachings; history of theosophy; >> Windows help-file about theosophy. Some of these articles >> are duplicated on Spirit-WWW. >> >> How to reach: >> >> http://actrix.gen.nz/users/paul/theos.html >> >> >> >> Bradford Theosophical Society: >> http://www.brad.ac.uk/%7Eatma/theosoc.html >> >> General Information on The Theosophical Society (Pasadena) >> can be found at: http://user.aol.com/tstec/hmpage/tsintro.htm >> >> >> Another Theosophical society: >> http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/TS.html >> >> >> >> >> >> Introduction to the theosophy discussion-list: >> http://www.vnet.net/users/jem/theos-l.html >> >> USERS HOMEPAGES/MISCELLANEOUS >> >> o Owen Thomas's homepage: >> http://www.cts.com/browse/othomas0 >> >> >> VOODOO >> >> http://www.nando.net/prof/caribe/voodoo.html >> >> >> >> WICCA >> >> http://faraday.clas.virginia.edu/~crf8a/wicca.html >> http://www.eden.com/~aggedor/wicca.html >> >> >> >> >> ZEN >> >> http://oac11.hsc.uth.tmc.edu/zen/index.html >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> 4. MAILING LISTS >> ------------- >> >> >> NHNE. >> >> "NewHeavenNewEarth is a spontaneous, grass-roots network of people who >> believe that a divine plan is unfolding in the earth. Our primary goal is >> to identify, understand and manifest this plan as best we can. >> >> "We also believe that our planet is passing through a time of profound >> change. With this in mind, our secondary goal is to create a global >> community of like-minded people that can safely pass through whatever >> changes may come our way and help give birth to a new way of life on our >> planet. >> >> "NewHeavenNewEarth >> P.O. Box 10627 / Sedona / AZ / 86339-8627 >> The Internet: nhne@sedona.net / America Online: NHNE >> WWW: http://www.sedona.net/nen/nhne" >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> Sacred Geometry and Sacred Architecture. >> It is part of a larger listserv that incorporates interests >> in sustainable agriculture and Permaculture landscape design. >> >> Some topics to be covered include SACRED GEOMETRY: >> >> History and philosophy, natural proportion, patterns, latent geometry >> Platonic solids, ratio and proportion, Pythagoras, Fibonacci, phi, >> golden section ; links between geometry, music, architecture >> Neo-Platonic revival; deco-era industrial design revival >> >> Sacred architecture : ancient and modern buildings, constructions, etc. >> >> Many tangent topics. >> >> To SUBSCRIBE, send e-mail to almanac@ces.ncsu.edu with the message: >> subscribe sustag-principles >> >> The Almanac System Administrator for NCCES >> e-mail: >> >> An archive is available at sunsite.unc.edu >> Access to this is possible by ftp, ftpmail, gopher and >> www. >> For any questions or requests about the archives, please address: >> Lawrence F. London, Jr. - london@sunSITE.unc.edu >> (or try Netsearch to locate archives; keyword: sacred geometry) >> >> --------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> There is a special mailing list that will provide a daily >> spiritual/metaphysical quote. One can subscribe to it by sending a >> message with the word "subscribe" in the *subject* line to >> >> quotes-request@sun-angel.com >> >> >> >> New mailing lists are often announced through the NEW-LIST@vm1.nodak.edu >> >> You can subscribe to this list by sending mail to Listserv@vm1.nodak.edu >> In the body of your message put: subscribe New-list Your Name >> (inserting First_name Last_name at the place of Your Name) >> >> You can get more info by sending mail to Listserv@vm1.nodak.edu >> with the command GET NEW-LIST README in the body of the message. >> >> ------ >> >> Earth-Spirit mailing list: >> >> discussion-list of the interconnection of Earth-based activism >> and spirituality. Holistic point of view; dialogue about finding >> a common ground in spiritual motivation to protect Earth & Her children. >> >> The list's host is Communications for a Sustainable Future (CSF), >> located at the university of Colorado at Boulder. >> >> subscribe: send the following message to listserv@csf.colorado.edu >> >> Sub Earth-Spirit Yourfirstname Yourlastname >> >> >> coordinator: Joy Williams [ dhummer@netcom.com ] >> >> ----------- >> >> There's an Avatar Meher Baba listserver at LISTSERV@rex.sunyerie.edu >> >> To subscribe, send the command "SUBSCRIBE Baba" (without quotes) in the >> body of an email. >> >> The coordinator is Joseph Stewart [STEWART@nstaff.sunyerie.edu] >> >> >> ----------- >> >> The Theos-l mailing list is open for all individuals >> who want to talk about spirituality, philosophy and >> science and their experience of the spiritual. >> Understandably, this will be in a context of the >> Theosophical tradition. Nevertheless, the participants >> of this list are tolerant towards all religious views. >> >> How to subscribe? >> >> Send mail to: listserv@vnet.net >> Leave the subject line empty. >> In the body of the message, put: >> subscribe theos-l Firstname Surname >> (insert your first name and last name for Firstname and Surname) >> and shortly you will begin receiving mail >> and some instructions on how to use the listserver. >> >> ------------ >> >> MAILING LIST: HEAL-L >> >> Send "info heal-l" >> to promail@mb.protree.com, or >> "subscribe heal-l" to promail@mb.protree.com >> to join direct. >> You can access the connected page of heal-l in Healing- >> section of Spirit-WWW as well. >> For more info E-mail to: >> mblais@mblais.pdial.interpath.net >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 5. TELNET >> >> A new bulletin board service, including a chat service and a sophisticated >> messaging system, is available at theosophy.org >> Simply telnet to this site to connect to it. Lot's of interesting stuff, >> including Buddhistic essays. >> Recently, there has been added a web site: http://theosophy.org >> >> The above site is built and being maintained by independent Theosophists. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> 6. SEARCH ENGINES >> >> 0 The Alta Vista search engine from Digital Equipment Corporation: >> http://www.altavista.digital.com/ >> >> A gigantic database that is being updated daily. Contains information >> about newsgroups articles and public web sites. I tried it and found >> information I was looking for for a year! >> >> >> >> 0 Yahoo at http://www.yahoo.com/ >> >> Contains references to more than one million WWW-pages >> The homepage contains links to newage info. A regular newage FAQ >> is listed at one of these links. >> >> 0 Lycos at http://lycos2.cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/pursuit >> Millions of unique adresses >> >> 0 Try the popular search engine: http://www.webcrawler.com >> >> >> 0 At CERN you can find an elegant search-service: >> http://cui_www.unige.ch/meta-index.html >> Contains also links to other search-engines and offers a Finger-service >> to locate people's E-mail addresses. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> 7. NEWSGROUPS >> >> >> Some consciousness related newsgroups: >> >> alt.astrology >> alt.atheism >> alt.consciousness >> alt.consciousness.mysticism >> alt.consciousness.4th-way >> alt.consciousness.near-death-exp >> alt.dreams >> alt.dreams.castaneda >> alt.dreams.lucid >> alt.evil >> alt.fan.kali.astarte.inanna >> alt.freemasonry >> alt.jyotish >> >> Jyotish is the name of the science which is referred to in the West >> as "Vedic" or "Hindu" astrology (vedic prediction sciences). >> >> alt.magick.order >> alt.magick.serious >> alt.meditation >> alt.meditation.quanyin >> alt.out-of-body >> alt.paranormal.channeling >> alt.paranormal >> alt.paranet.paranormal >> alt.psychoactives >> alt.philosophy.zen >> alt.religion.eckankar >> alt.religion.asatru >> alt.religion.druid >> alt.religion.gnostic >> alt.religion.zoroastrianism >> alt.satanism >> >> Remark: the original notion of 'Lucifer' is one of *lightbringer* or >> lightcarrier, not an evil entity ('Satan')which it became later on >> in mainstream Christianity. Man *had* to eat from the 'tree of >> knowledge',ie. start developing self-consciousness in this world >> and thus learn to take responsibility for his actions. >> >> >> alt.yoga >> aus.religion >> clari.news.religion >> misc.creativity >> sci.philosophy.meta >> soc.religion.eastern >> talk.philosophy.misc >> talk.origins >> >> >> >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> Martin Euser | Let us be united in our common search >> euser@euronet.nl | for truth >> http://www.spiritweb.org/ >> See: theosophy section >> or http://actrix.gen.nz/users/paul/theos.html >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> > > > > > > From euser@euronet.nl Tue Jun 4 13:38:07 1996 Date: Tue, 4 Jun 1996 15:38:07 +0200 (MET DST) From: euser@euronet.nl (Martin_Euser) Message-Id: <199606041338.PAA04837@mail.euronet.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: my newage FAQ >>I reproduce below Martin's FAQ which I just happened to stumble across a few >>minutes ago. >>Martin, why didn't you tell us about this! See his references to Theos-l >>and alt.theosophy and >>to TI. >> >>Daniel Daniel, I DID tell theos-l folks about it. The first time I mentioned it was october/november 1994 when I asked permission to add info about theos-l to my FAQ. The second time was a couple of weeks ago when I talked about my activities concerning the popularization of theosophy. But, in one thing you're right, I do not blow the horn (trumpet?) about this activity in theosophical circles. I may occasionally mention it and then drop the subject. Originally, the idea to post a FAQ containing theosophical references to newsgroups was born with Paul Gillingwater. We had some E-mail exchanges about my articles on theosophy, the world wide web and newsgroups. My FAQ has grown and evolved during the years. It has undergone a major change in format a couple of months ago. My motive behind developing this FAQ has been twofold: - to disseminate info about theosophy to a major newsgroup, and I chose talk.religion.newage because there may be many seekers for spiritual knowledge there (many confused because of the many pseudo-spiritual organizations that seem to exist) - to disseminate info on spirituality, religion, philosophy, etc. in a more general sense (not specifically theosophical) as a service to the internet audience. By doing so I also wanted to show that there are theosophists who don't confine themselves to a narrow circle of what to many seem to be an out worn , outdated, philosophy. You may have gathered by now, that I'm not particularly satisfied with the theosophical societies in this world. I think members have not realized sufficiently that the theosophical teachings must be extended (in several ways, one example being synthesizing modern psychological findings in it, another way being to put theosophical teachings in a more easy-to-read format). An important consideration is, IMO, that theosophists should not think they have the monopoly on truth. The newage movement has effectively taken over some of the original spiritual impulse, and, I may add, the newage movement is *very* diverse, containing fresh ideas and practices and unavoidibly lots of chaff amongst the wheat. So, an open mind to new developments is *necessary* , imperative, in order f