From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:58:13 +0100 From: Alan Subject: TI Message-ID: <$FWJSUAFCFUyEwHU@nellie2.demon.co.uk> THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises men and women who, of their own free choice, subscribe to the spirit of the three objects first formulated by the Theosophical Society, but in a more up-to-date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community, and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion, theosophy, philosophy, and the scientific method, according to individual ability and inclination." 3. To investigate mysteries of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities, with an underlying respect for all life." THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is a voluntary network, whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects, and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required - nor assumed to be held - by any member. All have the right to choose, without trace of coercion, the path by which they seek understanding. There are no fees, no subscriptions, although voluntary donations and/or contributions could be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules, whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We hope to be of service, and to share what we have in amity with other theosophical, occult, and esoteric organizations, as also with like-minded individuals. To join Theosophy International, send an e-mail message asking to be registered to TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk or give your name and other details you wish to share to whoever introduced you. To join in disussion about promoting "TI" objects, send an e-mail to listproc@vnet.net with no subject header and the message subscribe TI-L your name Do not use a "sig" file - you will get an extra "error" message! "TI" has 44 members in ten countries. Alan Bain IMPORTANT NOTE: Although TI members are active on the various theosophy mailing lists (theos-l, theos-buds, etc., and which are maintined by John Mead (himself a TI member), none of the theos mailing lists is owned or exclusively reserved for members of Theosophy International, Nor is TI a part of any other theosophical organisation. --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:48:06 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: An ordered universe? Message-ID: In message <199609301809.OAA09215@leo.vsla.edu>, "K. Paul Johnson" writes >Finally, isn't it a paradox that an astrological configuration >can indicate an period of accident-proneness? It would seem >astrology points to an ordered universe; yet it can also >identify periods when the order in one's personal universe is >most likely to break down. No paradox at all. While astrology may seem to point to an ordered universe, it actually points to the universe *as it is.* The ancients, in their study and development of astrology, have left us with the legacies which include allowing for disorder, because disorder has been observed as part of the "system" and its astrological indicators recorded. It seems more likely that the universe is subject to LAWS, but that these laws may *appear to us* to bring about what *we* call disorder, but which fits into the general scheme. I you fall into the right swamp, you could become an alligator's dinner quite fast. LAW: Alligators have to eat. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 19:14:02 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: AC Message-ID: <960930191401_114923535@emout09.mail.aol.com> As do I. The most interesting and dangerous game is still human. There is no sport in killing something that can't shoot back. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 19:15:16 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: A Messiah Message-ID: <960930191516_114924659@emout16.mail.aol.com> Ann, Have you been missing things on this list lately? By any standard definition, we are all nuts, but that's what makes it fun. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:02:03 GMT From: "Einar Adalsteinsson & A.S.B." Subject: Re: Initiation: "monestary" Message-ID: <199610010002.AAA10739@rvik.ismennt.is> At 04:07 30.09.1996 -0400, you wrote: John Straughn.... >So, basically, I suppose I am a theosophist. I only wish there was a wa= y to=20 >join some "theosophic monestary" so that I could devote ALL my time to i= ts=20 >study. >--- >The Triaist > Einar: There is a "theosophic monestary" - and you are standing close to it.=20 Like the real Church of Jesus Christ is ONLY within, so is every true monastery. To enter such monastery you only have to turn 180=B0 and look = (and eventually enter) within. Meditation is one door, service is another, and you don't have to leave the outer arena of life when you enter. Monastery life is simply a particular state of mind, more or less devoid of the personal I, and every religion has a set of instructions to its practice. There is one thing I'm pritty shure that doesn't belong to the "monestari= c mind", and that is the intellectual gymnastics of argumentation - the "Doctrine of the Mind". Study is OK, but the path within goes through the "Open Heart".=20 Considering the Secret Doctrine, you should procede with care. (The "Secr= et" might be, that there is no "Doctrine"!!). Otherwise I wish you all the best on your journey. Einar Adalsteinsson,=20 a prentice of the "theosophic monestary". From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:48:48 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: A Messiah Message-ID: In message <960930121729_72723.2375_FHP55-1@CompuServe.COM>, "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> writes >Chuck the Heretic: > >>Welcome to the madhouse we call theos-l. > >Who's "we"? YOu got a bunch of people at your house reading these posts over >your shoulder? > >-Ann E. Bermingham > Probably. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:43:56 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Homepage changes Message-ID: Dear all, I have been restructuring my homepage below, and some additional material has been added in the DIRECTORY OF GOODIES link. Some error (probably on my part) is showing three directories: HPB WRITINGS/ TS BOOKS/ TS HISTORY/ *THESE LINKS DO NOT WORK* I have replaced them (and contents) with directories: HPB/ BOOKS/ HISTORY/ I am trying to find out how to get rid of the "404 ERROR" directories, but they do not show up when I ftp to the site, so I'll have to look into it further. :-( Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:47:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI Message-ID: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises men and women who, of their own free choice, subscribe to the spirit of the three objects first formulated by the Theosophical Society, but in a more up-to-date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community, and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion, theosophy, philosophy, and the scientific method, according to individual ability and inclination." 3. To investigate mysteries of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities, with an underlying respect for all life." THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is a voluntary network, whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects, and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required - nor assumed to be held - by any member. All have the right to choose, without trace of coercion, the path by which they seek understanding. There are no fees, no subscriptions, although voluntary donations and/or contributions could be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules, whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We hope to be of service, and to share what we have in amity with other theosophical, occult, and esoteric organizations, as also with like-minded individuals. To join Theosophy International, send an e-mail message asking to be registered to TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk or give your name and other details you wish to share to whoever introduced you. To join in disussion about promoting "TI" objects, send an e-mail to listproc@vnet.net with no subject header and the message subscribe TI-L your name Do not use a "sig" file - you will get an extra "error" message! "TI" has 44 members in ten countries. Alan Bain IMPORTANT NOTE: Although TI members are active on the various theosophy mailing lists (theos-l, theos-buds, etc., and which are maintined by John Mead (himself a TI member), none of the theos mailing lists is owned or exclusively reserved for members of Theosophy International, Nor is TI a part of any other theosophical organisation. --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 08:33:00 -0300 From: Subject: Unveiled Isis (Holy Writ) Message-ID: Four points about Holy Writ: 1) BOOK III, chapter III (116,145) page 126 HPB writes "if we want to be sure that Jesus was a nazarene - even though with ideas of a new reformer - we must not search for the proof at the gospels, but at its original versions. Tischendorf, at his greek translation refers to Luke 4:34 as "Iesou Nazarene" and syriac text we read "Iasua, thou, oh nazarene". Why HPB rerfers to Luke 4:34 ? The gospel used by Church (that HPB critices) ALSO refers to Jesus as nazarene. There is no contradiction here with syriac text. 2) chapter V (191,217) page 215 "At 1Cor2:9 a passage cited as Holy Writ, doesn't find at OT. This passage was taken from apocripha Eliah'Revelation in accordance with Origen and Jerome". But 1Cor2:9 refers literraly to Isaiah 64:3 !!!! 3) at the same page HPB continues: "Mark 1:2 there is a citation from Malaqui 3:1, that is atributed to Isaiah". Again no contradiction. Malaqui 3:1 is correct but the passage is also present in Isaiah 40:3. 4) chapter IV (133,185) page 172 "Whatever that be the words atributed to Jesus, Peter or Paul and others, none of this words are a worship act, and Jesus himself never refers his identity with his Father". Wrong. John 10:30; John 17:21-22 Abrantes From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 01 Oct 96 08:06:36 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <961001120635_72723.2375_FHP40-2@CompuServe.COM> Doss: >The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal >pyramidal organizational structure . . . >Now we have Internet and we have seen an example of a large formal >organization having been shut down because the interested members have >found that Internet has changed the environment and the needs are no >longer met by a formal organization. >So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going >to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . Hasn't the TSA already made the move in that direction with the creation of the National Lodge? Also, they plan to have electronic study groups, bulletin board and chat group. But there would have to a decentralization of power and less central control to make it work in the way you are speaking of. More local control and less at the top. >Theos-l is pioneering in this direction and has already helped a lot of >us to discuss various items in a world wide forum, and all this has been >made possible by one person who saw the need -- John E Mead. My salute to >him. I forsee theos-l participating to mushroom in the years to come. Since I was 5 years old, I always fancied myself a pioneer - that was when Davy Crockett was the rage. : - ) But every person that starts something on the Internet, whether it be a web page, mailing list or newsgroup is participating in the beginnings of a world-wide network of communication. The atomic mushrooming of this list still depends, IMHO, on several things. Number one, the availability of computers and modems. 2: Computer literacy, probably found in greater numbers in those just entering kindergarden. 3: The quality and quantity of discussion on this list. The prediction of this list going mega may be premature. Let's just see what happens. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:39:29 +0100 From: "Martin Euser" Subject: Mandelbrot set Message-ID: <199610011301.PAA06505@mail.euronet.nl> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BBAF39.63453FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brigitte wrote: >One more thought, has anyone seen the programm on PBS regarding the Mandelbrot set? > I would love to learn more about this new Theory. It had to to with exploring the most minute particles which became possible with the computor age. What they showed on T.V. was an design like mandalas with little buddhas as the final symbol it lokked very mystereous but also very interesting. Please coment on this. Thank you. Brigitte Hi Brigitte. You may like the info on the Julia set (a subset of the Mandelbrot set) by the School of Wisdom (they added a symbolic interpretation to some examples of this set) URL:http://www.webcom.com/~metanoic/wisdom/ Otherwise, a search through the AltaVista engine could render some interesting info too. Martin Martin Euser | Let us unite in our common euser@euronet.nl | search for truth. http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/Theosophy/Overview.html ------=_NextPart_000_01BBAF39.63453FE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Brigitte wrote:

>One more = thought, has anyone seen the programm on PBS regarding the Mandelbrot = set?
> I would love to learn more about this new Theory. It had to = to with exploring
the most minute particles which became possible = with the computor age.
What they showed on T.V. was an design like = mandalas with little buddhas as the final
symbol it lokked very = mystereous but also very interesting.
Please coment on this. =  Thank you.  Brigitte


Hi Brigitte. You may like the = info on the Julia set (a subset of the Mandelbrot set)
by the School = of Wisdom (they added a symbolic interpretation to some examples
of = this set) =  URL:http://www.webcom.com/~metanoic/wisdom/

Otherwise, a = search through the AltaVista engine could render some = interesting
info = too.

Martin




-----------------------------------= --------------------------------------------
Martin Euser =          | =     Let us unite in our common =          
euser@euronet.nl =   |    search for truth.   
http://www.spiritweb.org/Spirit/Theosophy/Overview.h= tml =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;    
-----------------------------------------= -------------------------------------

------=_NextPart_000_01BBAF39.63453FE0-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 10:43:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > Doss: > >The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal > >pyramidal organizational structure . . . > >So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going > >to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . > > Hasn't the TSA already made the move in that direction with the creation of the > National Lodge? Also, they plan to have electronic study groups, bulletin board > and chat group. I hope all the plans work. > But there would have to a decentralization of power and less central control to > make it work in the way you are speaking of. More local control and less at the > top. The way Internet is evolving is - no control at any level - top or bottom. > > >Theos-l is pioneering in this direction and has already helped a lot of > >us to discuss various items in a world wide forum, and all this has been > >made possible by one person who saw the need -- John E Mead. My salute to > >him. I forsee theos-l participating to mushroom in the years to come. > > Since I was 5 years old, I always fancied myself a pioneer - that was when Davy > Crockett was the rage. : - ) But every person that starts something on the > Internet, whether it be a web page, mailing list or newsgroup is participating > in the beginnings of a world-wide network of communication. > > The atomic mushrooming of this list still depends, IMHO, on several things. > Number one, the availability of computers and modems. 2: Computer literacy, > probably found in greater numbers in those just entering kindergarden. 3: The > quality and quantity of discussion on this list. > > The prediction of this list going mega may be premature. Let's just see what > happens. I am an eternal optimist. However we all have to wait and see what and how these things develop. Thanks for your thoughtful comments. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:08:35 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 677 Message-ID: <32514203.3B6D@TIW.COM> > Does anyone know the current address of the Philosophical Research > Society (Manley Palmer Hall's followers)? I have a very old address as > 3341 Griffith Park Blvd., Los Angeles 27 but I am sure it has changed > (dates from 1947). If they have E-mail or a Web site I would also be > interested. Many thanks. Jutta Lehmann I have visited their library and attended a talk at their LA location in the past twenty years; I believe that their current address is the same as it has been for some time. Check out any of the many publications of Manly Hall; I am sure that you can find it. Or I will look it up, if you prefer, and get back to you. Also, I am sure it is in the LA phone directory. Following the death of Manly P. Hall there was an immense power struggle within the organization. People were expelled from the secret rosicrucians (and instead became masonic rosicrucians). Secret alchemists who were once communists carried on as secret alchemists. Program lectures continue on, including the very informative ones of Dr. Stephan Hoeller. Mrs. Hall sued the organization. Significant documents were sold off or "lost". I don't know whether they still possess three copies of "The Triangular Book of the Count of Saint Germain", which is said to have been one of two authentic manuscripts of the Count of Saint Germain. (This document, in coded french, apparently no longer exists within the french esoteric milieu, presumably because of Nazi intervention during World War II). Perhaps we should ask the Philosophical Research Society to mail a copy to Robert Amadou. > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 19:49:45 +0200 (MET DST) > From: wichm@xs4all.nl > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: Maitreya > Message-ID: <199609301749.TAA21672@magigimmix.xs4all.nl> > > According to my information Scottish painter Benjamin Creme announced that > the new world teacher Maitreya lives incognito amongst us. Creme was to > make public on Friday, 14th May 1977 in Los Angeles in what country he > resides. I haven't kept track about present excuses for failed predictions. > Creme as far as I know makes public now and then pronouncements of the > returned Christ. > In Europe Benjamin Creme is quite well known. They have a page on internet > in Holland and I am sure in many other countries as well. > In Dutch newspapers Creme's ideas were linked to Theosophy. > I have mentioned him on my page: "On the psychology of spiritual movements": > http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/psymove.html > Michael Nancy Conley, who is the current president of the board of directors of the Oakland Lodge of the TS has explained to me that she was in contact with Benjamin Creme for the purpose of giving a lecture. However, the Creme folk insisted on dominating the venue of the presentation (presumably in order to insure that only the "true gospel" could dominate the minds of the hearers) and so the TS could not agree to have Creme as a speaker. I am told (please, someone out there correct me if not so) that the last chiefs of the Whare Ra Temple of the Smaragdum Thalassis sold off their house-with-a-vault in order to give proceeds to same Benjamin Creme. Best wishes, Robert Word > > ------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:46:11 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Maitreya Message-ID: <961001174611_298297728@emout15.mail.aol.com> Creme's Maitreya failed to appear because he couldn't find his way out of the sewer. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:46:58 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Warning dreams Message-ID: <961001174656_298298373@emout19.mail.aol.com> Paul, I really don't know. For every warning of disaster that comes true there are probably thousands that don't. As for me, I've made a career about ignoring all kinds of warnings and I'm still going. Besides, we all die of something sometime and better to go over a cliff than linger with cancer. On the other hand, I don't have any reason to go near any place that has cliffs. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:47:05 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Dharma Message-ID: <961001174704_298298471@emout03.mail.aol.com> Ann, Coal mines are higher than duty. The Marianas Trench in the Pacific is higher than duty and that's the lowest (close to center of earth) point on the planet. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 00:09:10 GMT From: "Einar Adalsteinsson & A.S.B." Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <199610020009.AAA20446@rvik.ismennt.is> Ann & Doss >The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal >pyramidal organizational structure . . . >So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going >to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . I have been "listening" to your chat on organisational evolution, and I had the impulse to "speak up" on this subject, because I had an insight on this many years ago, when I read the first biography on Krishnamurti "The Years of Awakening" by Mary Luthiens. During the climax of the process, the "body" of K reported a message (from the Great ones): "...The work that is being done is of gravest importance and exceedingly delicate. It is the first time that this experiment is being carried out in the world....." The experiment relates to Krishnamurtis (kundalini) "process", which as you may know went on all his life. The intuition was that there would be opened up an entirely new way of kundalini transformation, one that didn't depend on external guidance of an incarnated guru. I would have to depend on direct intuition and an extremely clear mystical awareness. In the past the piramidal or hirarchial structure of the esoteric instructions has always been unavoidable. This has involved that the real spiritual teachings and training have ALWAYS been given through an ever evolving hierarchy of guru-chela relationships. Seen from the top the master always chooses the chela according to his ability to understand and endure the lerning processes involved. This is a totally different system from networking, where all have more or less equal access to the teachings, and where each has to choose what he can digest. The former process is obviosly much quicker and more effective, but it requires a lot of evolved beings with a lot of time awailible. This points to the New Age idea, that there will be a mass production of initiates soon (which is rather daubtful in my mind), which would require a new way to handle things. Anyway I have been working along these lines for many years, both personally and in my humble attempt in leading newcomers to the spiritual path. I am convinced that a clear intuitive understanding is absolutely neccessarl for this new way of self-enlightenment. On the esoteric path, the mystical experience has been the first neccessary stage of transfomation, since until the neophyte has "experienced" the Unity of All, the left hand path is wide open for him. On the hirarchial structure of the TS, it's a different matter. Olcott is said to have modelled the democratic structure of the TS after the Constitution of the United States, thus ensuring both full democracy and strong infrastructure. Some day, (when everyone has been initiated,) laws, rules and government will be unneccessary, but until then a strong democratic government seems to me to be the choice. This seems a good deposit to keep the discussion going until next time.... With LOVE to you all. Einar from Iceland. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Let's change the world, by each of us changing ourselves, TOGETHER. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 17:12:50 +1200 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961002051250.006d9c54@whanganui.ac.nz> At 12:02 PM 01/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > >> Doss: >> >The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal >> >pyramidal organizational structure . . . >> >So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going >> >to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . >> >> Hasn't the TSA already made the move in that direction with the creation of the >> National Lodge? Also, they plan to have electronic study groups, bulletin board >> and chat group. > > I hope all the plans work. >> But there would have to a decentralization of power and less central control to >> make it work in the way you are speaking of. More local control and less at the >> top. > The way Internet is evolving is - no control at any level - top >or bottom. > >> >> >Theos-l is pioneering in this direction and has already helped a lot of >> >us to discuss various items in a world wide forum, and all this has been >> >made possible by one person who saw the need -- John E Mead. My salute to >> >him. I forsee theos-l participating to mushroom in the years to come. >> >> Since I was 5 years old, I always fancied myself a pioneer - that was when Davy >> Crockett was the rage. : - ) But every person that starts something on the >> Internet, whether it be a web page, mailing list or newsgroup is participating >> in the beginnings of a world-wide network of communication. >> >> The atomic mushrooming of this list still depends, IMHO, on several things. >> Number one, the availability of computers and modems. 2: Computer literacy, >> probably found in greater numbers in those just entering kindergarden. 3: The >> quality and quantity of discussion on this list. >> >> The prediction of this list going mega may be premature. Let's just see what >> happens. > > > I am an eternal optimist. However we all have to wait and see >what and how these things develop. > > Thanks for your thoughtful comments. > > MK Ramadoss > Bee writes. I have much to bless the Internet for in my year long participation. I have discovered many new people and topics of interest. One hint leads to another and next thing I find myself on a discussion list for General Semantics and there I find people with knowledge of my latest interest in the books of Vitvan. I now have written to the School and have learned some interesting things that I would never have known before the Internet came my way. It is exciting getting my mail each morning to see what comes up next. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. There cannot be a crisis today; my schedule is already full. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 20:13:21 +1200 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961002081321.006959b4@whanganui.ac.nz> At 08:10 PM 01/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Ann & Doss > >>The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal >>pyramidal organizational structure . . . >>So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going >>to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . > >I have been "listening" to your chat on organisational evolution, and I had >the impulse to "speak up" on this subject, because I had an insight on this >many years ago, when I read the first biography on Krishnamurti "The Years >of Awakening" by Mary Luthiens. During the climax of the process, the "body" >of K reported a message (from the Great ones): "...The work that is being >done is of gravest importance and exceedingly delicate. It is the first time >that this experiment is being carried out in the world....." The experiment >relates to Krishnamurtis (kundalini) "process", which as you may know went >on all his life. > >The intuition was that there would be opened up an entirely new way of >kundalini transformation, one that didn't depend on external guidance of an >incarnated guru. I would have to depend on direct intuition and an extremely >clear mystical awareness. > >In the past the piramidal or hirarchial structure of the esoteric >instructions has always been unavoidable. This has involved that the real >spiritual teachings and training have ALWAYS been given through an ever >evolving hierarchy of guru-chela relationships. Seen from the top the master >always chooses the chela according to his ability to understand and endure >the lerning processes involved. This is a totally different system from >networking, where all have more or less equal access to the teachings, and >where each has to choose what he can digest. The former process is obviosly >much quicker and more effective, but it requires a lot of evolved beings >with a lot of time awailible. I like your insightful way of expression. Perhaps this is the reason that so many are seeking some sort of enlightenment in which ever way they see it. All these 'guru' types could not get rich if people were not in the mood for them. It probably will take time before many wake up to the fact that it all lies within themselves and then have the courage to follow their own tune. I had not thought of it in the way you have put it but it seems sensible. > >This points to the New Age idea, that there will be a mass production of >initiates soon (which is rather daubtful in my mind), which would require a >new way to handle things. Anyway I have been working along these lines for >many years, both personally and in my humble attempt in leading newcomers >to the spiritual path. I am convinced that a clear intuitive understanding >is absolutely neccessarl for this new way of self-enlightenment. On the >esoteric path, the mystical experience has been the first neccessary stage >of transfomation, since until the neophyte has "experienced" the Unity of >All, the left hand path is wide open for him. Intuitive understanding is the way it works for me. It is interesting to read that GdeP says that it is really not 'me' that thinks and understands but the higher self understands while the thinking is actually thought energy that comes and goes through our lower mind and does not originate within ourselves. It is the intuitive understanding that comes from 'on high' that could constitute proper thinking. Like attracts like so it seems that 'how' we are at heart is what attracts wandering thoughts within the thought world to us and appears to originate within our mind. Interesting to ponder on. > >On the hirarchial structure of the TS, it's a different matter. Olcott is >said to have modelled the democratic structure of the TS after the >Constitution of the United States, thus ensuring both full democracy and >strong infrastructure. Some day, (when everyone has been initiated,) laws, >rules and government will be unneccessary, but until then a strong >democratic government seems to me to be the choice. Democracy seems to mean many things to many people. I live in a democracy but I see little evidence of it except my freedom to vote for equally useless politicians :-( In many organisations it is the person who has the time and inclination who gets to run it not necessarily the most able one. > > This seems a good deposit to keep the discussion going until next time.... > > > >With LOVE to you all. > >Einar from Iceland. >*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ >Let's change the world, >by each of us changing ourselves, >TOGETHER. >*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ > > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. There cannot be a crisis today; my schedule is already full. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 09:56:43 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Unveiled Isis Message-ID: <9610021656.AA07185@toto.csustan.edu> Hi Abrantes Once again we seem to be going over and over the same principles already discussed in previous posts. Though the specific passages in ISIS which you object to are always changing, your objections seem to be forever ignoring the basic premises that we have already discussed several times. To answer this new group of objections: Abrantes: >1) BOOK III, chapter III (116,145) page 126 HPB writes "if we >want to be sure that Jesus was a nazarene - even though with >ideas of a new reformer - we must not search for the proof at >the gospels, but at its original versions. Tischendorf, at his >greek translation refers to Luke 4:34 as "Iesou Nazarene" and >syriac text we read "Iasua, thou, oh nazarene". > >Why HPB rerfers to Luke 4:34 ? The gospel used by Church (that >HPB critices) ALSO refers to Jesus as nazarene. There is no >contradiction here with syriac text. JHE As we have discussed before, HPB distinguishes between "Nazara" and a "Nazoria" both words were translated "Nazarene" by the early Christian fathers--thus the confusion. The former denotes the city of Nazareth, and the latter denotes a mystical sect of Jews who built the town of Nazara that later became known as Nazareth. HPB's point is that Tischendorf's translation and the Syric text *do* make the distinction between "Nazara" and "Nazoria" and are saying that Jesus was a Nazoria (i.e. a Notzri, a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect), not necessarily a Nazara (i.e. one who is from or was born in Nazareth: The Naziereate sect existed long before the laws of Moses, and originated among people most inimical to the "chosen" ones of Israel, viz., the people of Galilee, the ancient olla-podrida of idolatrous nations, where was built Nazara, the present Nazareth. It is in Nazara that the ancient Nazoria or Nazireates held their "Mysteries of Life" or "assemblies," as the word now stands in the translation, which we but the secret mysteries of initiation, utterly distinct in their practical form from the popular mysteries which were held at Byblus in honor of Adonis. (ISIS II:131). This is all germane to HPB's larger argument of identifying the historical Jesus with the Nazoria. Remember that Yeishu den Pandera (aka Yeishu ha-Notzri) was a leader of the Nazoria sect in 100 BCE. The Jewish word for Christians was "Notzri." In other words, the Jews wrote about Christians (Notzri) that lived 100 years before the Biblical Jesus. How can this be? Abrantes: >2) chapter V (191,217) page 215 "At 1Cor2:9 a passage cited as >Holy Writ, doesn't find at OT. This passage was taken from >apocripha Eliah' Revelation in accordance with Origen and >Jerome". > >But 1Cor2:9 refers literraly to Isaiah 64:3 !!!! JHE To give you the original English of this passage: In 1Corinthians, ii. 9, a passage is quoted as Holy Scripture, which is not found in the Old Testament as all, but which is taken, as Origin and Jerome state, from an apocryphal work "The Revelation of Elias" (Origen: Tract. xxxv.). In my Bible, the passage quoted in 1Cor2:9 is: "Things beyond our seeing, thing beyond our hearing, things beyond our imagining, all prepared by God for those who love him." Isaiah 64:3 reads: "When thou didst terrible things that we did not look for, the mountains shuttered before thee." The two passages look very different to me. 1Cor.2:9 does not appear to be quoting Isaiah 64:3. So I will have to agree with HPB's on this one. But we would have to check Origen's statement to confirm what she is saying here. Abrantes: >3) at the same page HPB continues: "Mark 1:2 there is a citation >from Malaqui 3:1, that is atributed to Isaiah". > >Again no contradiction. Malaqui 3:1 is correct but the passage >is also present in Isaiah 40:3. JHE Mark1:2-3: In the prophet Isaiah it stands written: `Here is my herald whom I send on ahead of you, and we will prepare your way. A voice crying aloud in the wilderness, "Prepare a way for the Lord; clear a straight path for him."' Malachi3:1: Look, I am sending my messenger who will clear a path before me. Isaiah40:3: There is a voice that cries: Prepare a road for the LORD through the wilderness, clear a highway across the desert for our God. In comparing the three passages, I am inclined to think that the writer of "Mark" had both passages in mind and sort of combined them. Therefore the error is more with the writer of "Mark" for not crediting both scriptures. In any case, I can't fault HPB here, she was just quoting the author of "Supernatural Religion," who seems to be in this case, not so much wrong as not completely accurate. Abrantes: >4) chapter IV (133,185) page 172 "Whatever that be the words >attributed to Jesus, Peter or Paul and others, none of this words >are a worship act, and Jesus himself never refers his identity >with his Father". > >Wrong. John 10:30; John 17:21-22 JHE Not wrong. Allow me to requote this statement in its context: It is a most suggestive fact that there is not a word in the so called sacred scriptures to show that Jesus was actually regarded as a God by his disciples. Neither before nor after his death did they pay him divine honors. Their relationship to him was only that of disciples and "master;" by which name they addressed him, as the followers of Pythagoras and Plato addressed their respective masters before them. Whatever words may have been put into the mouths of Jesus, Peter, John, Paul, and others, there is not a single act of adoration recorded on their part, nor did Jesus himself ever declare his identity with his Father. He termed himself the son of God, but took care to assert repeatedly that they were all the children of God, who was the heavenly father of all. In preaching this, he but repeated a doctrine taught ages earlier by Hermes, Plato and other philosophers. Strange contradiction! Jesus, whom we are asked to worship as the one living God, is found immediately after his resurrection, saying to Mary Magdalene; "I am not yet ascended to my father; but go to my breathern, and say unto them, I ascend unto my father and your Father, and to my God and your God!" (John xx. 17). (ISIS II:192-93). Your citation of John 10:30; "My father and I are one", if taken out of context can indeed be argued to mean that Jesus is saying that he and God are an identity. But if you take this meaning, then who is he ascending to when he is resurrected? Putting your citation in context, gives it a very different meaning. Jesus is addressing a group of Jews who are not his followers, and talking about those who do follow him: My own sheep listen to my voice; I know them and they follow me. I give them eternal life and they shall never perish; no one shall snatch them from my care. MY FATHER WHO HAS GIVEN THEM TO ME IS GREATER THAN ALL, and no one can snatch them out of the Fathers care. My Father and I are one. (John 10:25-30). So how can Jesus be God and at the same time distinguish himself from God? There are two ways to resolve this: 1. The theological metaphysics of the Roman Catholic idea of the trinity. 2. Jesus is not speaking of an identity, but that he and his father are one in mind, and/or in spirit, in the same sense that a devoted, loving and close wife would say of her husband, or what any mystic of ancient times would say of his God. As for John 17:20-22, I believe it illuminates the meaning of the previous citation: But it is not these alone that I pray, but for those also who through their words put their faith in me; MAY THEY ALL BE ONE: AS THOU FATHER, ART IN ME, AND I IN THEE, SO ALSO MAY THEY BE IN US, that the world may believe that thou didst send me. (John 17:20-22) Don't these passages you have chosen really help to illustrate HPB's statement rather than contradicting it, when she writes: "He termed himself the son of God, but took care to assert repeatedly that THEY WERE ALL THE CHILDREN OF GOD, who was the heavenly father of all." But all of this still evades the point that HPB was making in this paragraph i.e.: where in the Bible does Jesus' disciples regard him as God? Jerry From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 11:30:44 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 Message-ID: <3252B4D4.699C@TIW.COM> > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:48:06 +0100 > From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: An ordered universe? > Message-ID: > > In message <199609301809.OAA09215@leo.vsla.edu>, "K. Paul Johnson" > writes > >Finally, isn't it a paradox that an astrological configuration > >can indicate an period of accident-proneness? It would seem > >astrology points to an ordered universe; yet it can also > >identify periods when the order in one's personal universe is > >most likely to break down. > > No paradox at all. While astrology may seem to point to an ordered > universe, it actually points to the universe *as it is.* The ancients, > in their study and development of astrology, have left us with the > legacies which include allowing for disorder, because disorder has been > observed as part of the "system" and its astrological indicators > recorded. > > It seems more likely that the universe is subject to LAWS, but that > these laws may *appear to us* to bring about what *we* call disorder, > but which fits into the general scheme. I you fall into the right > swamp, you could become an alligator's dinner quite fast. LAW: > Alligators have to eat. > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. The image of the alligator is closely related to that of the crocodile (although I believe that biologically, the two are not identical species), and the latter image appears in the iconography of various cultures. The Hindu astrology substitutes the crocodile ("makara") for the western capricornus; and the symbology of the two systems must connect, notwithstanding that the Eastern system is siderial rather than tropical in character. The ancient Egyptians worshipped a God in the form of a crocodile at a time when the creatures swam the Nile, and that one might be in danger of actually being eaten (though presumably, magi of the caliber of those described in Exodus, capable of turning rods into serpents, would have been immune from interference of this kind, at least in ancient myth). Whether or not the crocodile is a suitable symbol for "chaos", and what is precisely meant by "chaos"(is the bohu of the qabalists a "crocodile"?) could be illumined by further discussion. However, I do find the American expression "Holy macqueral!" rather tame, if not lame, compared to the expression "Holy Makara!". From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 13:13:58 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 Message-ID: <3252CD06.4992@TIW.COM> > Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:02:03 GMT > From: "Einar Adalsteinsson & A.S.B." > Subject: Re: Initiation: "monestary" > Message-ID: <199610010002.AAA10739@rvik.ismennt.is> > > At 04:07 30.09.1996 -0400, you wrote: > John Straughn.... > >So, basically, I suppose I am a theosophist. I only wish there was a wa= > y to=20 > >join some "theosophic monestary" so that I could devote ALL my time to i= > ts=20 > >study. > >--- > >The Triaist > > > Einar: > There is a "theosophic monestary" - and you are standing close to it.=20 > Like the real Church of Jesus Christ is ONLY within, so is every true > monastery. To enter such monastery you only have to turn 180=B0 and look = > (and > eventually enter) within. Meditation is one door, service is another, and > you don't have to leave the outer arena of life when you enter. Monastery > life is simply a particular state of mind, more or less devoid of the > personal I, and every religion has a set of instructions to its practice. > There is one thing I'm pritty shure that doesn't belong to the "monestari= > c > mind", and that is the intellectual gymnastics of argumentation - the > "Doctrine of the Mind". Study is OK, but the path within goes through the > "Open Heart".=20 > > Considering the Secret Doctrine, you should procede with care. (The "Secr= > et" > might be, that there is no "Doctrine"!!). > > Otherwise I wish you all the best on your journey. > > Einar Adalsteinsson,=20 > a prentice of the "theosophic monestary". John Staugn, dear Brother, why did you project into incarnation in a body of flesh, when the true Malkuth is already part of your own consciousness? Jesus, the Nazarene, a King of the Jews, once said, "The Kingdom of my Father is spread across the Earth, but men do not perceive it." My dear Brother, I am a Bishop, and a Gnostic Bishop, in the apostolic succession of our Lord Jesus Christ, and I am now praying to the Father that he shall so bless your consciousness continuum that you may yourself realize who you are, and whence you came. But now, John, since you have incarnated in a body of the flesh, let us get on with the pragmatics. There is indeed a monastary theosophical in California, it is called "Halcyon", and it is quite famous. You could actually move there and become a monk. I have not actually been there myself, but I am quite sure that there be good folk about who will kindly direct you to it. I have heard good things about it, even that some very interesting folk that I knew of yore are now there, and that the whole project is directly guided by the Masters. And since I implicitly believe any good myth, unless contradicted by any known facts, so do I believe this now as well. Should you not be a U.S. citizen, this is only a minor problem. Go to Acapolco, and get a ticket on the "underground express" that will take you straight to a safe house in San Jose. I believe they offer limousine service. Once in San Jose, ask for directions to "Halcyon". Go with God! Robert Word From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:11:46 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: Maitreya Message-ID: <199610022106.AA03694@vnet.net> On 30 Sep 96 at 19:49 wichm@xs4all.nl wrote: >According to my information Scottish painter Benjamin Creme >announced that the new world teacher Maitreya lives incognito >amongst us. Creme was to make public on Friday, 14th May 1977 in Los >Angeles in what country he resides. I haven't kept track about >present excuses for failed predictions. Creme as far as I know makes >public now and then pronouncements of the returned Christ. In Europe >Benjamin Creme is quite well known. They have a page on internet in >Holland and I am sure in many other countries as well. In Dutch >newspapers Creme's ideas were linked to Theosophy. I attended a public lecture of Creme's out of curiosity at The University of Tasmania several years ago. Benjamin Creme presented the teachings himself. I found his presentation to be a compilation of Theosophy, Alice A. Bailey's teachings and psychism. His teachings from the latter are a load of bunkum. And it is my firm opinion that the Maitreya he speaks of is indeed false. However, I leave others to their own opinions. Fraternally Maurice * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:14:12 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Robert Word wrote: > Should you not be a U.S. citizen, this is only a minor problem. > Go to Acapolco, and get a ticket on the "underground express" that > will take you straight to a safe house in San Jose. I believe they > offer limousine service. Once in San Jose, ask for directions > to "Halcyon". > > Go with God! > Robert Word No need to take this route. One can get a immigrant visa on the special religious quota and it is very easy. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 02 Oct 96 20:24:24 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <961003002424_72723.2375_FHP53-2@CompuServe.COM> Einar: >This points to the New Age idea, that there will be a mass production of >initiates soon (which is rather daubtful in my mind), which would require a >new way to handle things. I inwardly smiled when I read this, because I can understand your skepticism. But I would like to share with everyone this passage from A. Bailey's The Rays & The Initiations: "In connection with the individual and the first initiation, the seventh ray is always active and the man is enabled consciously to register the fact of initiation because either the brain or the mind (and frequently both) are controlled by the 7th ray. It is this fact which is of importance today in connectin with humanity, for it will enable mankind to pass through the door admitting them to the first initiatory process. It will be apparent to you why the present period in which human beings (in large groups) can take the first initiation corresponds to a situation in which bread is the major interest of men everywhere. Humanity will pass through the "birth' initiation and manifest the Christ life on a large scale for the first time during a period of economic adjustment of which the word "bread" is but a symbol. This period started in the year 1825 and will continue until the end of this century. The unfoldment of the Christ life - as a result of the presence and activity of the second divine aspect of love - will result in the ending of economic fear, and the "house of bread" will become the "house of plenty." Bread - as the symbol of material human need - will eventually be controlled by a vast group of initiates of the first initiation - by those who lives are beginning to be controlled by the Christ-consciousness, which is the consciousness of responsibility and service. These initiates exist in their thousands today; they will be present in their millions by the time year 2025 arrives. . . " This is a controversial and speculative statement, but it is "food" for thought, or at least it has been for me. What if at the present time and in the future, large numbers of people all over the world, were taking the first initiation? Quietly and without fanfare, they were going through the changes of being initiated, experiencing the reorientation of their bodies and turning towards the work of the Soul, in service of humanity. If there were enough of them, it could turn things around for humanity. It is a tantalizing idea. >On the hirarchial structure of the TS, it's a different matter. Olcott is >said to have modelled the democratic structure of the TS after the >Constitution of the United States, thus ensuring both full democracy and >strong infrastructure. I really don't know much about the structure of TS, so I will leave the discussion of this issue to those here who are far more knowledgable than I am. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 02:27:31 GMT From: "Einar Adalsteinsson & A.S.B." Subject: Re: Un-organizational Evolution Message-ID: <199610030227.CAA04057@rvik.ismennt.is> At 20:30 02.10.1996 -0400, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: >I inwardly smiled when I read this, because I can understand your skepticism. >But I would like to share with everyone this passage from A. Bailey's The Rays & >The Initiations: Einar: Thank you for the very intersting passage. I read some of the AB's books many years ago, but lately I've been following the mystical line, and have not followed up with this. I can fully agree that there is an interesting awakening going on right now, and it will probably become much intensified in the years to come. But real initiation is a "serious business", a transformation of both the psyche and the body (Suksma Sharira that is), that takes some serious time (trditionally 7 consecutive incarnations). But I was also referring to an entirely diffrent possibility, which to my mind fits quite well into these ideas of mass siritual awakening. It would be more like like an "advanced self-aware opening" to the spiritual realms a natural evolutionary process of an order of higher degree than previously. I agree that it will be propelled by the mass spirituality process, cfr. Dr. Sheldrake's theory of Morphic fields and the 100 apes... If we take the theosophical theory of the evolutionary process of life on the earth, it evolves through first sensing influences of "a new field of conciousness", to later acting on that field. Thus we can cut in with the mineral kingdom's ability to "sense" forces in nature including the life force, Prana, Ki etc. You can store vital energy in crystalls, and we interact with nature in that sense all the time. The next, the kingdom of plants, includes use of the vital energy in all its lifecicles, and according to experiments (cfr. The Secret Life of Plants) they are highly perceptive of emotional energy. The animals are clearly active emotionally, and the higher species seem to have quite advanced way of perceiving, and even acting on the thinking principle. When we come to the human domain, we at large seem to be still engaged in the gymnastics of the lower Mind, the rational thinking, but we all enjoy more or less the advanced "intuitional understanding" of the higher mind. What would then be the further progress? It would shurely be the higher intuition, the direct perception of the truth, the wisdom conciousness. This is obviously the next peceptive phase, and we are already touching this "Next Principle" of evolution. Now, what would be the "active" part of such "direct perception of truth", higher understanding, intuition, seeing, or whatever we agree on calling it? How about LOVE, the loving kindness, the "initiate" type of selfless compassion"? It is the autonomous act of higher understanding, isn't it? Love and understanding are two sides of the same principle, Unconditional Loving Kindness. There is no real Love without Understanding, and no real Understanding without Love!!!! I believe that this is the next stage of evolution, and we are more or less practicing it in our best moments, in the global spiritual movement of New-Agers. Being aware of the process and going with the current within, enormously enhanches its movement, but we have to leave the argumental stage and move into the intuitive, acceptive, listening state of free communication, without either believing or denying what we hear or see. This is the open and unconditional frame of mind that will bring us to the spirituality of the future. With LOVE to you all. Einar from Iceland. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Let's change the world, by each of us changing ourselves, TOGETHER. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 23:25:18 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: organizatiional evolution Message-ID: <199610030433.AAA29450@ultra1.dreamscape.com> I'd like to add my 2 cents worth to this discussion. Since I skipped several theos-l digests, because I was behind, it isn't quite clear to me who came across with what idea. Might be Bee or Ann or Doss or Einar. Someone said "The master always chooses the chela". That's not necessarily so. I remember some Theosophist writing that sometimes someone advances him(her)self so greatly that a master has to take notice. I think Serge King works on that principle, it's Kahuna. People get answers, if they ask the right questions. Otherwise, he is still. ""It probably will take time before many wake up to the fact that it all lies within themselves, and then have the courage to follow their own tune." I'd like to suggest that this isn't so easy all by yourself, because I know of some people who were made to try something like this. You go into completely uncharted territory. There are no recognizable sign posts. The entire landscape is new & strange. Now just try to find your way through this without any help, completely by hit or miss. Very difficult. Quoting DePurucker "It is the intuitive understanding that comes from on high that could constitute proper thinking". I think that statement needs to be clariefied a little, because I don't think it's such a great idea to just accept every ideas one gets from "on high" without checking it out against one's common sense. "Olcott is said to have modeled the democratic structure of the TS after the Constitution of the United States, thus ensuring both full democracy and strong infrastructure." I don't really know what Olcott set up, but what there is today, at least in the United States, is a mockery of democracy. Our board meets in privacy and decides what the Society is to do, and then it tells us peons some of what's been decided, not all of it. Elections are skewed, electioneering is skewed, and Wheaton can tell the branches & study centers what to study. Last year, I tried to find out what was happening with the large sum of money which some group in Mass. got as a result of the sale of the Boston branch's house. I got an evasive reply, and upon a 2d request no asnwer at all. Internationally, sections are disbarred without every being told why. All of this I don't call very democratic. In a true democracy, to my way of thinking, there should first off be flow of information , opinion, & decision from the bottom up as well as from the top down. Also, there are newer structures which aren't hierarchies. To me a hierarchy represents that I'm the boss and you're the peon. I think there should be much more member participation in the process. I believe in working by concensus as far as that can be done, because if everyone has a hand in what's being done, they're more interested in seeing to it that it succeeds. Besides, there's also greater richness of ideas. In one recent "Noetic Science Review" there was even a description of organizations in nature ohere each individual just does its part, and somehow the whole group reaches one common goal. The job gets done. The examples were a tree colony and I think an ant colony. Hierarchies are male inventions, where people have to fight each other to get to the top or perish, instead of cooperating, and we'll all get the job done together. Heap ugh. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 09:21:33 -0400 From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Chela selection Message-ID: <54CFF964E7F@CRLS.Hall.Public.LIB.GA.US> "Einar Adalsteinsson & A.S.B." wrote: >...evolving hierarchy of guru-chela relationships. Seen from the top the >master always chooses the chela according to his ability to understand >and endure the lerning processes involved. This is a totally >different... Yes, it is totally different from what I have heard. It was my understanding that the chela "chooses" the master or more accurately "forces" the master to accept the chela. It is our efforts on their behalf which form the link. The devotion of the student to the teacher is not "imposed" from above, but forged from "below". Lewis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lewis Lucas Chestatee Regional Library System Gainesville, Georgia (USA) llucas@crls.hall.public.lib.ga.us 770-532-3311 FAX 770-532-4305 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 13:15:01 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: To: Brigitte Balint, Re: Mandelbrot Set Message-ID: <199610031823.OAA18145@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Brigitte, M I learned about Mandelbrot and fractiles from a book called "Turbulent Mirror" by John Briggs & F. David Peat, Harper & Row 1990 HI prefer to quote from my book, because I'm a linguist, not a scientist. Here are 2 quotes that explain the Mandelbrot set: ""Multiplying a factor by itself produces feedback or 'iteration' and nonlinearity." "Mandelbrot began by iterating a simple algebraic expression on a computer. This sent him on a voyage into the infinite two dimensional sheet of numbers called the complex plane. The particular set of complex numbers Mandelbrot explored in this plane has since come to be named the 'Mandelbrot set' and dubbed 'the most complex object in mathematics.' Mandelbrot remains enthusiastic about what he's found. "This set is an astonishing combination of utter simplicity and mind-boggling complication. At first sight it is a 'molecule' made of bonded 'atoms', one shape like a cardioid and the other nearly circular. But a closer look discloses an infinity of smaller molecules shaped like the big one, and linked by what I proposed to call a 'devil's polymer' Don't let me go on raving about this set's beauty. "Hundreds, perhaps thousands of computer adventurers have by now journeyed into the set using home computer variatiions of an iterative program explained by AK Dewdney in the pages of "Scientific American'. But explorers of the Mandelbrot set need have no fear of being imposed on by a crowd like tourists at the Grand Canyon. The unearthly Mandelbrot landscape - the mathematical strange attractor - is vast, in fact infinite, and "there are zillions of beautiful spots to visit' Says Cornell mathematician John H Hubbard..." Strange attractors, as far as I can figure out are turbulences. Their strong motion attracts surrounding vibes, objects what have you. Something like that. Hope that helps. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 13:33:01 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Re: AC Message-ID: <199610031841.OAA23048@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Doss, You say >Let me add one more thing that I personally find offensive. In >one of his writings he has referred to J Krishnamurti as a Nigger. > >He should know better, Indians are not Niggers. I saw this mentioned in one >of my wanderings in WWWs some time ago.> ............ Nigger is a curse word. I don't know of anyone on this green earth who likes to be cursed at. By now, the word is as offensive to Indians as it is to African Anemericans, as it is to Caucasians, as it is to whoever else walks this earth. In outer space they probably haven't heard of it yet, or they'd find it offensive too. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 13:41:01 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: organizational evolution Message-ID: <199610031849.OAA25096@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Doss, You might be painting the picture of the future, or at least of part of the future. The one thing I think is lacking on theos-l is effective teaching. We're all voicing our own opinions, and that is good, but those opinions often vary from what I think is theosophy. If we're going to vary, we should at least know what we're varying from. I think a theosophical mailing list has to include basic theosophy, and I thinnk it would be great, if it included pointing out where the various points of view differ one from the other. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 03 Oct 96 14:51:32 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <961003185132_72723.2375_FHP60-4@CompuServe.COM> Liesel >I don't really know what Olcott set up, but what there is today, at least in >the United States, is a mockery of democracy. . . Thanks for your input on this issue. >"Noetic Science Review" there was even a description of organizations in >nature where each individual just does its part, and somehow the whole group >reaches one common goal. The job gets done. The examples were a tree colony >and I think an ant colony. Hierarchies are male inventions, where people >have to fight each other to get to the top or perish, instead of >cooperating, and we'll all get the job done together. The cooperative group is clearly the "next big thing". Hierarchies are outdated remnants of the Piscean Era, a time of duality, where's "who's on top?" was the number one question of the day. I am currently involved in a web project in which many members of an organization are involved. Everyone is lending a hand and participating and it is amazing to be a part of something where there is no egotistical titled chimpanzee screeching to control everything. -Ann E. Bermingham (echo) Heap ugh. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 96 14:59:12 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Gentle protest Message-ID: <199610031859.OAA25417@leo.vsla.edu> At least half of today's digest was unnecessary repetition of the posts of the previous day. Please only quote what you need to, folks, not the whole message that inspired your response. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 23:25:19 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: Moon over Maple Ridge Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961003074027.0067b56c@mail.deltanet.com> Brigitte: >One more thought, has anyone seen the programm on PBS regarding the Mandelbrot set? >I would love to learn more about this new Theory. It had to to with exploring >the most minute particles which became possible with the computor age. >What they showed on T.V. was an design like mandalas with little buddhas as the final >symbol it lokked very mystereous but also very interesting. >Please coment on this. I don't have time to write anything new right now, but did post something on the subject a while back on theos-l. It's been such a long time since then that I think that many readers haven't seen it, so I'll repost it in reply to your request. -- Eldon > Date: Mon, 30 Jan 1995 11:47:54 -0500 > From: Eldon Tucker > Subject: Regarding Chaos The subject of chaos, as a new subject of study, has the potential of enriching our understanding of live, and the law of cycles, and how the world works. We can derive many new keys to unlock the mysteries that stand before us in our theosophical studies. There's a very good book, "Turbulent Mirror," by John Briggs & F. David Peat, Perennial Library, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1989. This 222 page paperback presents the many areas of thought related to the study of chaos in both a mathematical and scientific manner, and in a well-digested, clearly-presented philosophical presentation. I'd highly recommend it as an important supplement to theosophical studies, and would personally place it much higher than "The Source of Measures." When we come to a study of chaos, as a modern discipline, we first need to realize that the term "chaos" was coined. Nonlinear dynamics and other areas of mathematics and physics, grouped under the term "chaos," are not extensions of early religious thought, simply because the same term was used. There is not the duality of chaos versus cosmos in the sense of randomness versus order. We don't have "accidents" at times and the karmic results of actions, the results of previous causes, at other times. This is not to say that everything *appears* to be ordered and well-behaved. While the mathematics of a living system, of a system undergoing continual iteration or self-feedback, is deterministic, ordered, and not random in nature, the matter of *predictibility* is a different subject. There are certain basic stages to the manifestation of a living system. A good graphic analogy, a good metaphysical symbol, is the bifurcation curve. At a low energy level, life cannot sustain itself, and death results. At a slightly higher energy level, life adjusts to its environment and can exist. At this stage it is stable, balanced, and ordered in a predictable, near-linear way. At yet a higher energy level, it undergoes its first bifurcation, where it now has a dual state, and it goes back and forth. At yet higher levels, the number of states that it goes through become more and more varied and unstable, until its state is totally unpredictable or chaotic. Again, we don't have a duality of chaos versus cosmos in the sense of randomness versus order. What we rather have is predictability versus unpredictability, but order nevertheless. We can have a system where we can, say, plot on a x/y graph an ellipse that represents all states of a system. That system is well-defined, is ordered; its states only exist on that curve. But the system may be "chaotic" in the sense that we cannot predict from one moment of time to the next where on that graph its state will be. The system is chaotic in the sense we cannot predict a precise future state, but is ordered. That order, that holds it to the well-defined set of stages, is called a "strange attractor." Another example of apparent chaos is in the static on phone lines, which comes under "intermittency." No matter how clear we try to make the line, there will be small, apparently random bursts of noise. When we examine those bursts of noise, they have the same pattern of small bursts of noise, at increasing degrees of magnification. We have a fractal order to the signal on the phone line. The order is not random, accidental, but described by fractals. (Fractals represent another area of study, that related to theosophic thought. We have a type of mathematical object that has fractional dimension, that has an infinite amount of detail, that at different levels of magnification shows the same pattern or richness of detail [the macrocosm/microcosm idea], and models real-life processes.) With chaos, we have order in the universe, but sometimes that order eludes us, sometimes that order is unpredictable in either time or space. That unpredictability and apparent disorder arises from living systems being at too high an energy level, being at too high a level of self-feedback, and where they have moved from an ordered existence along the turbulent pathway towards "chaos". When the apparent order is gone, the higher type of order is maintained in an almost metaphysical way, in strange attactors, in unseen forces that maintain order in the apparent external chaos of external unpredictability. Consider karma. If life were operating at a slower pace, we might have a more-immediate sense of cause-and-effect feedback for our actions and interactions with others. Now, in the turbulent, tense, difficult Kali Yuga, our karmic web is in a chaotic stage, where karma acts as a strange attractor, still guaranteeing that our results come back to us, but not externally predictably in a linear fashion in time and space. We know that the fruits of our actions will return to us, but cannot say when or where. Is everything karmic? No. There are accidents. Life is imperfect and all beings, even the highest Dhyani-Chohans, are subject to error. And there is yet an even more important ingredient: the free will of others in the present. Everything that other people do is not simply the results of *our* past actions. The whole of life is not merely a puppet show for *us*. Others have their free will do, and everyone participates in making what will happen. The interaction between us and others is *negotiated* in the sense that the person on each side of a relationship has an influence on what will happen. We have, between ourselves and others, not so much a give and take of x units of "karmic currency" as we have a living bond through which we co-create what happens. Coming back to chaos, an important idea is the "butterfly effect," the sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Certain systems may be living at a point where the slightest external change, the slightest perturbation, would cause a radical state change. A pencil balanced on its lead point would be an example of this. As we increase our energy levels, and move from the regions of ordered to turbulent existence, we find such points becoming more frequent. Taking some of the symbols from chaos, and using them as theosophical symbols, we could consider three for now. A *fractal* shows the macrocosm/microcosm relationship, and a study of how and when fractals occur in nature is rewarding. The *bifurcation curve* is the best mathematical illustration of the law of cycles, and should replace the symbol of the serpent swallowing its tail. And the *mandelbrot set* (which I haven't discussed in this posting) is an excellent example of the karmic web, of the law of living relationships. A caveat must be given at this point. Mathematics is a tool to model life, but *is not life itself.* Life has many options as to how it will manifest itself, and external forms are patterned after mathematical principles, but the life itself was not "caused" or controlled by the mathematics of those forms. The forms and the associated mathematics were chosen by the life, not the causes of the life. A second warning is that when we deal with a new field of scientific and philosophical thought, we approach it with an open mind, but not accept everything on face value, and assume that because many ideas are attractive and ring true, that we accept everything without due critical thought. The Wisdom Teachings in Theosophy relate to a far grander type of learning that we find in popular disciplines, and it's important to never lose sight of its majestic heights. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 23:04:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Olcott Library Subject: Re: PRS Address sought Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Sep 1996, Jutta K. Lehmann wrote: > Does anyone know the current address of the Philosophical Research > Society (Manley Palmer Hall's followers)? I have a very old address as > 3341 Griffith Park Blvd., Los Angeles 27 but I am sure it has changed > (dates from 1947). If they have E-mail or a Web site I would also be > interested. Many thanks. Jutta Lehmann > The current address of the Philosophical Research Society is: 3910 Los Feliz Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90027 Phone: (213) 663-2167 Fax: (213) 663-9443 E-mail: info@prs.org Web site: http://www.prs.org PRS has just recently published their Autumn Calendar 1996 with information on their programs and other interesting details. Elisabeth Trumpler Librarian Olcott Library & Research Center From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 01:05:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 Message-ID: <1AzbDBASNwUyEw3V@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >No need to take this route. One can get a immigrant visa on the special >religious quota and it is very easy. > >MK Ramadoss Please explain! Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:36:24 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: A Y in the Path: Beauty or the Beast Message-ID: <199610040937.FAA15110@ginger.vnet.net> A Y IN THE PATH: BEAUTY OR THE BEAST An Example of the Wrong Choice ________________ ________________ Edward Alexander Crowley, who is better known to the world by his first name of Aleister, is a classic example of a lifestream who was once a student of the Adepts of the Great White Brotherhood but who turned from the Light to the dark side after approaching the Y in the path. To take the right-hand path leads the traveller to the heights of spiritual attainment and life everlasting within the precincts of the Great White Brotherhood; however, to sojourn along the left-hand path is to take that way which leads to the darkest abyss of the Black Brotherhood. So the choice was made on that occasion by the one who eventually called himself Chio Khan (the Beast). The name says it all, dear brothers and sisters in Theosophy, for no one who treads the right-hand path would ever adopt such a name and make it their own. The one who traverses the spiritual path and remains thereon is never the beast. Remember this, travellers on the Way, so you can learn to discern the one from the other when you are confronted with the life history of another. In Theosophy we are taught that there is the right-hand path and its opposite the left-hand path. And every Theosophist should distinguish between the two as well as remain true to the Way of real Illumination to retain the designation Theosophist. For Theosophy is the Path of the Divine Wisdom. Incidentally, the Sanskrit for the right-hand path is dakshina-marga and those who follow this path are termed dakshinacharins, while the left-hand path is called vamachara and its followers vamacharins. An alternate appellation for vamachara is savyachara. Crowley is generally acknowledged as having held membership and high position in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and also in the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Eastern Temple [O.T.O.]), but it is not often mentioned that he was a Freemason of the Ancient and Accepted Rite. His 33rd degree Masonic diploma was issued in London during October 1910. He was subsequently expelled by the Grand Secretary General 33rd degree in London for conduct unbefitting that of a Mason. The Beast was firmly enmeshed in the depravity of inordinate sexual activities and psychic delvings. I noticed that the former has been somewhat mentioned on this Theosophy list in the sense of sexual activity, but from a point of not being certain of whether this is legitimate or not in the life of a spiritual aspirant. Well, ordinate sexual relations are deemed acceptable but not the inordinate and perverted sexual expressions indulged in by Crowley. Also, the real aspirant to spiritual attainment is not drawn by the phenomenal that is the psychic realm. This has been pointed out by the Masters themselves, Blavatsky and numerous other enlightened souls of Light. Add to the above another, as in the pamphlet issued in 1935 entitled Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the Other Side) by Dr H. Spencer Lewis, the Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order (A.M.O.R.C.) and holder of a charter of the O.T.O. direct from Theodor Reuss, the then head of the O.T.O., disavowed any connection with Crowley and his distortions within the legitimate O.T.O., etc. In fact, Dr Lewis considered Crowley to be a black magician. Crowley even described his literary writings as the first serious attempt to place before the public the facts of occult science "since Blavatsky's unscholarly hotch-potch of fact and fable, Isis Unveiled." And he considered his new order called Astrum Argentum (Silver Star) as the truly occult representative of the Great White Brotherhood. The black magic-sex teachings of Crowley are indicative of the Brothers of the Shadow rather than the Brothers of Light. I dare say many delude themselves through their own ignorance, ego and misconceptions. On the same token, it is amazing how many accept Crowley and his philosophy as being not only the genuine article but also spiritual. To these I say:- From the unreal lead me to the Real From darkness lead me to Light From death lead me to Immortality. - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:13:13 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Moon over Maple Ridge Message-ID: <961004111312_118339205@emout10.mail.aol.com> Eldon, Nor are we capable of knowing what the ultimate fruits of any given action will be. The most innocent and well -intentioned act may ultimately set of a nuclear holocaust, the most brutal action the one that saves humanity from it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 21:55:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: organizatiional evolution Message-ID: In message <199610030433.AAA29450@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >Hierarchies are male inventions, where people >have to fight each other to get to the top or perish, instead of >cooperating, and we'll all get the job done together. > >Heap ugh. > >Liesel Ditto heap ugh. Is there a replacement female invention? (Your post reminded me I still have a/the copy of Noetic Sciences Review which I meant to include in the package I snailed today. Sorry - will send with next post). Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 00:57:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: In message <961003185132_72723.2375_FHP60-4@CompuServe.COM>, "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> writes >Everyone is lending a hand >and participating and it is amazing to be a part of something where there is no >egotistical titled chimpanzee screeching to control everything. Now *why* does this remind me of a number of people ..... ? Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 19:57:40 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: warning dreams Message-ID: <199610050106.VAA20859@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear paul, This answer is mostly to say I hear ya, because these things puzzle me just as much as they do you. When I get such warnings, I play my response by ear. If I feel I ought to stay home I'll stay home, but, I think, more often I would opt to go anyway anyway, & btry to be on the look out. As for real advice on how to handle such events, the above is pure conjecture. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 19:57:32 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: ac Message-ID: <199610050105.VAA20851@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Alan says he's against killing animals, and mentions belonging to 2 organizations which further this. Then he ends with >Aren't I a goody two-shoes?> Dear Alan, when the day comes that a man need no longer feel he has to belittle himself because he helps protect animals, I think the millennium will have arrived. Liesel >> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 20:09:03 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: accidents in the universe Message-ID: <199610050117.VAA21565@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > >Subject: An ordered universe? >Message-ID: > >In message <199609301809.OAA09215@leo.vsla.edu>, "K. Paul Johnson" > writes >>Finally, isn't it a paradox that an astrological configuration >>can indicate an period of accident-proneness? >From what you say about astrology here, it would seem that that science was ahead of chaos theory, which also accounts for accidents. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 20:28:14 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: who's right Message-ID: <199610050136.VAA22704@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >henever we react to others' religious beliefs along the lines >of "You CAN'T be right, because I'M right, and our views are >mutually contradictory" we are falling short of the potential >for harmony and reconciliation that is part of our essence as >humans. >- - >....................................................... That raises a question in my mind. I have a young cusin with whom I had a long conversation about this just this PM. He has a friend who's an evangelist, and believes in the verbatim meaning of the Bible, and that one can only be saved through the intercession of Jesus Christ. AND SHE KNOWS SHE'S RIGHT. my cusin and I believe that the Bible is a mix of allegory, history, poetry and etc., awhich sometimes contradicts itself, and my cusin says he can prove it by quoting. We also believe that the way we save ourselves is through our own efforts ... maybe with the help of Jesus or some other religious leader whom we find wise. AND WE KNOW THAT WE'RE RIGHT. What course does anyone on this list suggest should we take to acquire harmony and reconciliation. We both proselite, the former more than the latter, and to me, if the former ever are the ones who dictate our mores, I will feel very abrogated. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 01:06:50 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: organizational evolution Message-ID: In message <199610031849.OAA25096@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >If we're going to vary, we should >at least know what we're varying from. I think a theosophical mailing list >has to include basic theosophy, and I thinnk it would be great, if it >included pointing out where the various points of view differ one from the >other. I think that the best that can happen on theos-l is the kind of thing we already have: person A says their piece, which is quoted and rebutted/amended/disputed (often with many quotations) by person(s) B C D E etc. I still have room on my homepages for useful writing(s) from theosophists of all persuasions, and again I offer to post anything of interest there, possibly under "Theosophical Writings" or in a sub- directory off of the "DIRECORY of GOODIES" link. These could then be downloaded by readers with web browsers and the contents discussed (preferably without *l o n g* quotations, as the complete original can be obtained by readers). Once I have some material, I will gladly forward copies to those without web browsers as part of my own committment to the TI approach of co-operative working. In other words, we could actually start *doing* this thing instead of talking about it - right now. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 03 Oct 96 21:36:42 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: VOICE OF THE SILENCE - ART IN ACTION Message-ID: <961004013641_74024.3352_BHT78-1@CompuServe.COM> They say that when your start studying works like THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, suddenly things start happening. But one is supposed to know, to will , to dare and be SILENT. This it turns out is not a Krishnamurtism, but an ancient oath familiar to the initiates at the school of Crotona in Ancient Greeks. Studying symbol, number and glyph the school transmitted and enriched the ancient tradition that we share today as theosophy. They had many ideas such as Atlantis, the globes, reincarnation, the monad, the ONE, polarity, periodicity and many many others. I have seemingly been emersed in synchronicities lately. I believe I should learn to BE SILENT AND LISTEN TO THE VOICE. I have begun to do this in my daily life with result so overpowering that I am forced to be silent for fear of being called "weird" (which has happened before believe me, but sometimes weird is really WEIRD). As I teach introduction to psychology ( for a very, very small institution) my words seems to at once reflect and activate major isssue in my current situation such as self-esteem as related to the job, the boss as archetype of parental dramas (Oedipus, Electra, Orestes and so on). Today we study Jung and a film clip of him pointed out that modern man is emersed in hideous dream. The American Indians asked him; "what does the white man want. He is always restless, seeking, hungry like a bird of prey." Modern man has sacrificed a deep relationship to the earrth and has a new relgious myth of science manifested in the Church of Technology in the Empire of the New Global Mind without a true Soul or guiding myth. Everday events thus trap one into listening to the VOICE OF THE SILIENCE once one has experienced the first reconnection. One begins to create for oneself a personal, individual myth. Some would say these myths have the power to be pathological and infectious. The notion of memes that infects the world of thought and language is under much current investigation. Computer virus and slang are transmitted around the world instantaneouly in the form of "Micheangelo" or "get a life". I think that the VOICE OF THE SILENCE is another echo given by Blavatsky to her readers to initiate the hard process of reconnecting to the SELF in the form of "myth" or action. Mishima had just this struggle of turning art into action. He failed and became an empty modern martyr not unlike Saint Sebastian who he so much admired. See Paul Schraders film for a very interesting distillation of the life and art of a modern man in search of a soul, a reason to live beyond the buy more, get more, have more mentality of the herd. Everywhere the VOICE OF THE SILENCE can be heard. I hope this brings some closure to my part in the discussion of the VOICE OF THE SILENCE. This theosophical classic will live on and be discussed again and again. I hope that others will someday experience the synchroncities that were a part of my reading and sharing on THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:36:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis Message-ID: In message <9610021656.AA07185@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes > >Hi Abrantes > >Once again we seem to be going over and over the same principles >already discussed in previous posts. Dear Jerry, I admire your perseverance in continuing to reply at length to Abrantes, and no doubt many readers on theos-l will be grateful for you insights. I am quite convinced that Abrantes, however, will not be one of them. His entire purpose seems to be and attempt to discredit ISIS - which is admittedly not perfect; but neither are his own sources! - and not to engage in any genuine truth-seeking. This is borne out to some extent that some of the arguments you bring to the discussion are quite close to my own reasoning in "The Nazarenes" (available on my web page, and which Abrantes has downloaded and read). Readers will note that *independently* of HPB, and, for that matter, GRS Mead ("Did Jesus live 100 BC?") I have reached some very similar conclusions with the help of evidence that was not available to either HPB or Mead. The main one is that the historical Jesus of the Christian tradition was a Nazarene, ie., a member and almost certainly a "master" ("Rabboni") or teacher in a Nazarene Israelite sect. Exchanging quotes will not get anyone very far, and there is little doubt in my mind - *as I have said to Abrantes on this list* - that he will continue to try to support the Roman Catholic position - evangelize, even - using the *excuse* of ISIS as his justification. [Dismounts from soap box] Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 10:51:20 -0700 From: Mika Perala Subject: ES documents Message-ID: <3256A018.37B8@dlc.fi> Hi! A friend of mine who is keeping a shop of theosophical books here in Helsinki is looking for TS Esoteric School instructions or documents. Can anyone here help him? Thank you. Mika (mikap@dlc.fi) member of TI and TS in Finland From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:36:27 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 Message-ID: Under US Immigration Laws there is a special consideration for immigrants who come to the country for religion related work. The immigration laws are designed to restrict/control those who come here looking for job opportunities. MK Ramadoss On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In message , > "m.k. ramadoss" writes > >No need to take this route. One can get a immigrant visa on the special > >religious quota and it is very easy. > > > >MK Ramadoss > > Please explain! > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:41:08 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: A Y in the Path: Beauty or the Beast Message-ID: Hi - A very informative summary. All of us are better informed of Crowley. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > A Y IN THE PATH: BEAUTY OR THE BEAST > > An Example of the Wrong Choice > ________________ ________________ > > > > Edward Alexander Crowley, who is better known to the world by > his first name of Aleister, is a classic example of a lifestream who > was once a student of the Adepts of the Great White Brotherhood but > who turned from the Light to the dark side after approaching the Y in > the path. > > To take the right-hand path leads the traveller to the heights > of spiritual attainment and life everlasting within the precincts of > the Great White Brotherhood; however, to sojourn along the left-hand > path is to take that way which leads to the darkest abyss of the > Black Brotherhood. So the choice was made on that occasion by the one > who eventually called himself Chio Khan (the Beast). The name says it > all, dear brothers and sisters in Theosophy, for no one who treads > the right-hand path would ever adopt such a name and make it their > own. The one who traverses the spiritual path and remains thereon is > never the beast. > > Remember this, travellers on the Way, so you can learn to > discern the one from the other when you are confronted with the life > history of another. In Theosophy we are taught that there is the > right-hand path and its opposite the left-hand path. And every > Theosophist should distinguish between the two as well as remain true > to the Way of real Illumination to retain the designation > Theosophist. For Theosophy is the Path of the Divine Wisdom. > Incidentally, the Sanskrit for the right-hand path is dakshina-marga > and those who follow this path are termed dakshinacharins, while the > left-hand path is called vamachara and its followers vamacharins. An > alternate appellation for vamachara is savyachara. > > Crowley is generally acknowledged as having held membership and > high position in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and also in > the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Eastern Temple [O.T.O.]), but > it is not often mentioned that he was a Freemason of the Ancient and > Accepted Rite. His 33rd degree Masonic diploma was issued in London > during October 1910. He was subsequently expelled by the Grand > Secretary General 33rd degree in London for conduct unbefitting that > of a Mason. > > The Beast was firmly enmeshed in the depravity of inordinate > sexual activities and psychic delvings. I noticed that the former has > been somewhat mentioned on this Theosophy list in the sense of sexual > activity, but from a point of not being certain of whether this is > legitimate or not in the life of a spiritual aspirant. Well, ordinate > sexual relations are deemed acceptable but not the inordinate and > perverted sexual expressions indulged in by Crowley. Also, the real > aspirant to spiritual attainment is not drawn by the phenomenal that > is the psychic realm. This has been pointed out by the Masters > themselves, Blavatsky and numerous other enlightened souls of Light. > > Add to the above another, as in the pamphlet issued in 1935 > entitled Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the Other Side) by Dr H. Spencer > Lewis, the Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order (A.M.O.R.C.) and holder > of a charter of the O.T.O. direct from Theodor Reuss, the then head > of the O.T.O., disavowed any connection with Crowley and his > distortions within the legitimate O.T.O., etc. In fact, Dr Lewis > considered Crowley to be a black magician. > > > Crowley even described his literary writings as the first > serious attempt to place before the public the facts of occult > science "since Blavatsky's unscholarly hotch-potch of fact and fable, > Isis Unveiled." And he considered his new order called Astrum > Argentum (Silver Star) as the truly occult representative of the > Great White Brotherhood. The black magic-sex teachings of Crowley are > indicative of the Brothers of the Shadow rather than the Brothers of > Light. > > I dare say many delude themselves through their own ignorance, > ego and misconceptions. On the same token, it is amazing how many > accept Crowley and his philosophy as being not only the genuine > article but also spiritual. To these I say:- > > From the unreal lead me to the Real > From darkness lead me to Light > From death lead me to Immortality. > > - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad > > > > > > > Fraternally > > Maurice > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > * Maurice de Montaine * > * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * > * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * > * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * > * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * > * * * > * * * * > * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 13:45:43 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 680 Message-ID: <3256C8F7.188B@TIW.COM> > Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:14:12 -0500 (CDT) > From: "m.k. ramadoss" > Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678 > Message-ID: > Maurice de Montaine wrote > Edward Alexander Crowley, who is better known to the world by >his first name of Aleister, is a classic example of a lifestream who >was once a student of the Adepts of the Great White Brotherhood but >who turned from the Light to the dark side after approaching the Y in >the path. Did this happen in a previous incarnation, or after he was expelled from the Golden Dawn (A.O. jurisdiction) by Mathers in 1905? or at another time? Kindly inform us, good Sir. > To take the right-hand path leads the traveller to the heights >of spiritual attainment and life everlasting within the precincts of >the Great White Brotherhood; however, to sojourn along the left-hand >path is to take that way which leads to the darkest abyss of the I've never checked out this neighborhood; do you know all about it? >Black Brotherhood. So the choice was made on that occasion by the one >who eventually called himself Chio Khan (the Beast). The name says it >all, dear brothers and sisters in Theosophy, for no one who treads >the right-hand path would ever adopt such a name and make it their >own. The one who traverses the spiritual path and remains thereon is >never the beast. This is interesting. Do you know of anyone else who ever called him or her-self "the beast"? Or was Crowley actually original here? > Remember this, travellers on the Way, so you can learn to >discern the one from the other when you are confronted with the life >history of another. In Theosophy we are taught that there is the >right-hand path and its opposite the left-hand path. And every >Theosophist should distinguish between the two as well as remain true >to the Way of real Illumination to retain the designation >Theosophist. For Theosophy is the Path of the Divine Wisdom. >Incidentally, the Sanskrit for the right-hand path is dakshina-marga >and those who follow this path are termed dakshinacharins, while the >left-hand path is called vamachara and its followers vamacharins. An >alternate appellation for vamachara is savyachara. I beg to differ with you here, Monsieur Maurice. These are technical terms in Tantric Hinduism; vamachara refers to Tantric ceremonies in which the 5 M's (including wine, which is widely used in other religions, such as Judaism) are literally partaken of. Dakshinachara refers to Tantric ceremonies in which substitutes (whether physical or meditative) for the 5 M's (kind of like Baptists using grape fruit juice instead of wine at communion) are used. These terms definitely do not refer to the "right hand path" and "left hand path" in the theosophical sense that you are positing. Ask any scholar of Tantric Hinduism. > Crowley is generally acknowledged as having held membership and >high position in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and also in You are correct that Crowley was initiated into the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. He was never a Chief of a Temple. In view of the lack of documentary evidence, some scholars of the history of the Golden Dawn, such as Dr. Nicolas Tereshchenko, have proposed that perhaps he was never initiated into the Second Order. (But some folks have even suggested this of Israel Regardie, now that the man is dead, and cannot defend himself). Dr. Stephan Hoeller has stated that viewing Crowley as a representative or typical member of the Golden Dawn is a little like viewing Martin Luther as the representative or typical member of the Roman Catholic Church. I would like to point out that Aleister Crowley had also been, at one time, a member of the Plymouth Brethren, a Calvinist religious denomination active then and still in england. >the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Eastern Temple [O.T.O.]), but >it is not often mentioned that he was a Freemason of the Ancient and >Accepted Rite. His 33rd degree Masonic diploma was issued in London >during October 1910. He was subsequently expelled by the Grand >Secretary General 33rd degree in London for conduct unbefitting that >of a Mason. I believe that your statements are rather misleading here, Maurice. Crowley was given a clandestine (unrecognized) 33rd degree in Mexico. The regular Ancient and Accepted Rite in england never recognized this, and Crowley was never expelled. Crowley ultimately joined a blue lodge in France, Anglo-Saxon Lodge, working under the Grand Lodge of France (this jurisiction of masonry was never recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England, and Crowley himself was never recognized as a Mason by the United Grand Lodge of England). However, Crowley was admitted to some High-Grade rites in England; he was made a 95th degree of the Ancient and Primitive Rite under John Yarker in England. (John Yarker had made one HP Blavatsky also an adoptive member of this Rite. Thus, in the Ancient and Primitive Rite, Aleister Crowley and Helena Blavatsky were Lodge Brother and Sister). Now here is some true grist for your mill, Maurice: Both Crowley and Regardie were expelled from the nation of France; their passports were stamped, and they were never to be allowed back into the country. Does this mean that France, at least, knows how to handle these horrible Black Magicians, Maurice? Unfortunately, I am reliably informed that their are 4 different thelemic OTO jurisdictions active in this country today, one of which is headed by a violent fascist. > The Beast was firmly enmeshed in the depravity of inordinate >sexual activities and psychic delvings. I noticed that the former has >been somewhat mentioned on this Theosophy list in the sense of sexual >activity, but from a point of not being certain of whether this is >legitimate or not in the life of a spiritual aspirant. Well, ordinate >sexual relations are deemed acceptable but not the inordinate and >perverted sexual expressions indulged in by Crowley. There are some who would say that Leadbeater also engaged in perverted sexual expressions. Was Bishop Leadbeater also on the left-hand path, Monsieur Maurice? If so, just when did he reach that Y? >Also, the real >aspirant to spiritual attainment is not drawn by the phenomenal that >is the psychic realm. This has been pointed out by the Masters >themselves, Blavatsky and numerous other enlightened souls of Light. That psychical phenomona played a huge role, or claims thereto, in Blavatsky's role, is well documented. Witness the numerous manifestations of letters, not to mention apports of all kinds, which were no doubt necessitated by conditions in pre-internet days. > Add to the above another, as in the pamphlet issued in 1935 >entitled Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the Other Side) by Dr H. Spencer >Lewis, the Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order (A.M.O.R.C.) and holder >of a charter of the O.T.O. direct from Theodor Reuss, the then head >of the O.T.O., disavowed any connection with Crowley and his >distortions within the legitimate O.T.O., etc. In fact, Dr Lewis >considered Crowley to be a black magician. The gilt hermetic cross sold by AMORC even today to members, is based on Crowley's design, rather than the design of the orthodox Golden Dawn Rose Cross. Lewis held a Xth degree O.T.O. from Reuss, and Crowley sued him on this basis in an ultimately failed attempt to take over AMORC. Crowley continued to have an evil reputation in AMORC for many years, and in recent years, members have actually been expelled from that Order for evincing too great an interest in one Aleister Crowley. > Crowley even described his literary writings as the first >serious attempt to place before the public the facts of occult >science "since Blavatsky's unscholarly hotch-potch of fact and fable, >Isis Unveiled." And he considered his new order called Astrum >Argentum (Silver Star) as the truly occult representative of the >Great White Brotherhood. The black magic-sex teachings of Crowley are >indicative of the Brothers of the Shadow rather than the Brothers of >Light. > I dare say many delude themselves through their own ignorance, >ego and misconceptions. On the same token, it is amazing how many >accept Crowley and his philosophy as being not only the genuine >article but also spiritual. To these I say:- > From the unreal lead me to the Real > From darkness lead me to Light > From death lead me to Immortality. > - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad >Fraternally >Maurice Brother Maurice, overall I tend to agree with you about the impression you have of Crowley; I just think that a few of your facts are wrong or misleading. Let some follower of Crowley defend Crowley; I simply wish to defend the truth. Robert * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia Do you know the Way? RE Word 7004 * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:28:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: who's right? - "No Religion Higher than Truth." Message-ID: <9e050EAKEuVyEw$i@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610050136.VAA22704@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >I have a young cusin with whom I had a >long conversation about this just this PM. He has a friend who's an >evangelist, and believes in the verbatim meaning of the Bible, and that one >can only be saved through the intercession of Jesus Christ. AND SHE KNOWS >SHE'S RIGHT. > >my cusin and I believe that the Bible is a mix of allegory, history, poetry >and etc., awhich sometimes contradicts itself, and my cusin says he can >prove it by quoting. We also believe that the way we save ourselves is >through our own efforts ... maybe with the help of Jesus or some other >religious leader whom we find wise. AND WE KNOW THAT WE'RE RIGHT. > >What course does anyone on this list suggest should we take to acquire >harmony and reconciliation. All you can do is offer *evidence* in support of your case, for it is certain that the kind of evangelist you mention cannot match it. While it is unlikely that the evangelist will take notice of or accept your evidence, you will have done your bit for "the cause" - and who knows, one day maybe your words will strike a chord ... but don't get entangled in an ongoing "debate". All that happens then is an endless of "battle by quotes" not dissimilar from the posting to the list of Abrantes. > We both proselite, the former more than the >latter, and to me, if the former ever are the ones who dictate our mores, I >will feel very abrogated. In a truly theosophical environment, no one would need to dictate anyone else's mores, as if the Teaching is correct, all such matter will be taken care of by karma. If my understanding of TS history has anything to commend it, then just such attempts by the Theosophical Societies down the years is producing just such a karma in the form of falling membership, protest meetings, alternative approaches (such as TI) and so on. But that's another subject, although I feel moved to say that the TS which *I* support does not appear to support *me* in return. In fact their own imposition of non-existent rules to dismiss me from my own Lodge Committee *because* I promote TI (described as a "rival organisation") and a different point of view amounts to just such dictatorship. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:58:09 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Koot Hoomi Message-ID: KOOTHOOM.ZIP This zip file contains all of the text of the privately published Abraxas reprint of "Koot Hoomi Unveiled" by Arthur Lillie. I have placed it in the HISTORY directory from the "Directory of Goodies" link on my homepage. This booklet represents a part of the history of the Theosophical movement as expressed by the Mahatma Letters and HPB's transmission of them. First published in 1883, Arthur Lillie's argument is not sympathetic to the claims of the Mahatma letters or HPB herself. Unbiased students will readily see why - he had, and still has, a case to answer. There is a modern preface by Theosophical and Occult historian R.A.Gilbert. I have extracted the data from a DTP file produced using Pressworks 2.0, a Windows 3.1 program, with the consequence that readers unzipping the file will have to put together the pieces themselves. Anyone having Pressworks 2.0 can receive the DTP file by e-mail. It is about 46K (zipped). A hard copy of the finished booklet is available to TI members for $5 without the card cover, or $7 with it (postage etc. included). Others can obtain it for $10 plus $2 postage & packing. In either case, e-mail me for payment method. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:12:32 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ac Message-ID: In message <199610050105.VAA20851@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >Alan says he's against killing animals, and mentions belonging to 2 >organizations which further this. Then he ends with >Aren't I a goody >two-shoes?> > >Dear Alan, when the day comes that a man need no longer feel he has to >belittle himself because he helps protect animals, I think the millennium >will have arrived. .. hmmm. I put that in because there are a number of people who do similar things who clearly think (excuse the pun) they are the cat's whiskers, and very noble, etc., etc. So I put myself down a little partly to remind myself that I am not so holy, and to defend the cause of animal welfare against those who oppose it by attacking its supporters - for there is no way they can attack the work they do, nor the compassion and genuine "brotherly" feeling they have towards the animals without themselves appearing diminished. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:36:36 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Immigration Message-ID: In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Under US Immigration Laws there is a special consideration for immigrants >who come to the country for religion related work. The immigration laws >are designed to restrict/control those who come here looking for job >opportunities. > >MK Ramadoss Many thanks. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 00:10:53 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <3257314D.1DFE@worldnet.att.net> > To take the right-hand path leads the traveller to the heights >of spiritual attainment and life everlasting within the precincts of >the Great White Brotherhood; however, to sojourn along the left-hand >path is to take that way which leads to the darkest abyss of the >Black Brotherhood. etc, ad nauseum It looks like I need to step in to defend the Beast yet again. I know that Crowley is often called a Black Magician, and I am well aware that many theosophists think this way. But to judge another person in such a manner is not only wrong, but foolish. Everyone, and this includes myself and the writer of the above lop-sided view of life, has both good and bad in them. We all tread the White and Black paths together. To think that there is a White=Right Road and a Black=Wrong Road is childish and the kind of dualistic thinking that I find so objectionable in Chrisitanity. Right and wrong is never all that clearly defined, and who are we to say that Crowley, or anyone else for that matter, was a Black Magician? >In Theosophy we are taught that there is the >right-hand path and its opposite the left-hand path. If this is true, then theosophy is no better than ay other religion of the owrld, and it is no wonder that its membership is declining. I would really like to think that theosophists, who are supposed to understand duality, would have grown beyond such childish ideas. OK, you had your say, and I have had mine. Most theosophists agree with you, but I still feel confident that truth (which includes both good and evil, black as well as white) is on my side, and that one day as you proceed down your path of fluffy whiteness, you will notice a black undertone, and discover that the real path is grey. Jerry S. Member, TI Opposer of Dualism Opposer of All Those Who Know Good from Evil and In This Manner Keep Evil Alive in the World From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:50:23 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: VOICE OF THE SILENCE - ART IN ACTION Message-ID: On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Keith Price wrote: > They say that when your start studying works like THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, > suddenly things start happening. But one is supposed to know, to will , to dare I think that any time anyone takes interest on subjects like VOS, it set in motion certain forces and we may or may not see/discern the effects. If one is very observant, one may be able to catch a glimpse. So what you have stated does not surprise me. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 00:03:34 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Unveiled Isis (Alan) Message-ID: <9610060703.AA30036@toto.csustan.edu> >His entire purpose seems to be and attempt to discredit ISIS - >which is admittedly not perfect; but neither are his own >sources! - and not to engage in any genuine truth-seeking. Hi Alan, You may be absolutely right about Abrantes, his entire purpose may be to discredit ISIS and is not engaged in truth seeking. If this is so, he will sooner or later convince himself that he has succeeded in discrediting ISIS regardless of what we may have to say. But I'm not absolutely sure this is his motivation. If his motivation is to evangelize, then I think he is intelligent enough to quickly find out that he is wasting his time here. "Daniel in the Lion's den" figured it out quickly enough. But as for Abrantes, he originally came on Theos-l saying that he wanted to explore ISIS with someone. I took it as a genuine inquiry and felt that theos-l is not worth its weight in salt if no one would engage him. Since no one else came forward, I did. Our discussions have suggested to me that Abrantes is very capable of critical thinking and he has demonstrated it on a number of occasions. The degree of his intellectual integrity, on the other hand, remains to be seen. At least Abrantes is reading ISIS and responding to it. I realize that he is far less critical about his religious beliefs than he is about HPB's arguments. That is his own weakness. But it is very human to be less critical of our own beliefs than of opposing ones. I think Abrantes was up front about his Christian beliefs. After all, in his first message, he stated that he was not a Theosophist but a Catholic. That is fine with me. His religion is his issue--not mine. What gave us common ground for discussion was his assertion that he found errors in ISIS, and wanted to discuss them. I responded that I have found errors too. (Surely, ISIS is a philosophical work, one should expect to find errors. Right?) I felt that a critical discussion with Abrantes concerning ISIS would be worth while, and be a substantive contribution to theos-l. After all, HPB raises a lot of questions concerning Christianity that few people think to ask. Frankly, I was a bit disappointed to find almost no participation in this discussion. Perhaps there are only three of us on theos-l who are interested in primitive Christianity and its origins. Or, perhaps, there are only two or three of us on theos-l who are interested in this subject *and* are not threatened by a critical discussion of Christianity. I also realize that Abrantes often finds "errors" by taking quotes out of context, and/or by ignoring the overall premises HPB gave in earlier chapters. But I keep in mind that he is reading a translation that may be flawed. I also keep in mind that it is very difficult for someone coming from one paradigm to follow ideas from another paradigm. But at least Abrantes engages the text! My experience has been that very few people in the Theosophical Society are willing to make the effort that is required to engage HPB's writings in the first place. That Abrantes is making this effort (regardless of his motivations) makes him all the more interesting. If the discussion ceases to be productive--that is, we keep retracing the same ground over and over again, then I will bow out. I have little time for theos-l lately anyway. But at the moment, I still see the promise of a productive discussion. And if nothing else, I think those of us on theos-l who are well read in Blavatsky, are obliged to respond to inquiries concerning her writings. Jerry From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 19:58:41 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: AC Message-ID: <199610060852.AA25700@vnet.net> On 5 Oct 96 at 16:51, Robert Word wrote: > Did this happen in a previous incarnation, or after he was expelled > from the Golden Dawn (A.O. jurisdiction) by Mathers in 1905? or at > another time? Kindly inform us, good Sir. In the same incarnation. > Or was Crowley actually original here? He never was original. > I beg to differ with you here, Monsieur Maurice. These are > technical terms in Tantric Hinduism; vamachara refers to Tantric > ceremonies in which the 5 M's (including wine, which is widely used > in other religions, such as Judaism) are literally partaken of. > Dakshinachara refers to Tantric ceremonies in which substitutes > (whether physical or meditative) for the 5 M's (kind of like > Baptists using grape fruit juice instead of wine at communion) are > used. These terms definitely do not refer to the "right hand path" > and "left hand path" in the theosophical sense that you are > positing. Ask any scholar of Tantric Hinduism. In the highest and most esoteric sense as distinct from the perverted sense, my brother, that which I stated in respect to these terms is correct. > I believe that your statements are rather misleading here, Maurice. > Crowley was given a clandestine (unrecognized) 33rd degree in > Mexico. The regular Ancient and Accepted Rite in england never > recognized this, and Crowley was never expelled. Crowley ultimately > joined a blue lodge in France, Anglo-Saxon Lodge, working under the > Grand Lodge of France (this jurisiction of masonry was never > recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England, and Crowley himself > was never recognized as a Mason by the United Grand Lodge of > England). However, Crowley was admitted to some High-Grade rites in > England; he was made a 95th degree of the Ancient and Primitive Rite > under John Yarker in England. (John Yarker had made one HP > Blavatsky also an adoptive member of this Rite. Thus, in the > Ancient and Primitive Rite, Aleister Crowley and Helena Blavatsky > were Lodge Brother and Sister). There is no misleading information in that which I said anent Crowley's Masonic affiliation. Since I possess a photographic facsimile of his Masonic diploma and the official letter of his expulsion, I honestly wonder at where you are getting your information. It is definitely the Ancient and Accepted Rite. If you choose to disagree with his Masonic diploma and the official letter from the Grand Secretary General of the Supreme Council 33rd Degree of London, then that is entirely up to you. The letter of expulsion includes that of Yarker as well. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 09:08:49 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: A Y in the Path Message-ID: <199610061417.KAA06401@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Maurice de Montaine Thanks for the enlightening Crowley biography. I'd be interested in knowing how old Crowley was when he died. Would you know? Thanks, Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 06 Oct 96 11:30:41 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Cyberpoltergeists _ Is it me as usual - or? Message-ID: <961006153041_74024.3352_BHT64-1@CompuServe.COM> I don't seem to be getting all the digests or something? Other things are happening with my hardware. It may be the list, compuserve, a full disk, a virus or me as usual? Anybody else? Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:25:38 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 680 Message-ID: <961006122537_326595402@emout16.mail.aol.com> Crowley doesn't need to be defended. I wish my books sold as well as his do. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:26:30 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: who's right? - "No Religion Higher than Truth." Message-ID: <961006122629_326595987@emout14.mail.aol.com> Alan, But there is a side benefit to having those around us who try to promote their own view of morality. It is so much fun to flout them to their faces and watch them turn pretty colors and sputter. On the other hand, for some reason they don't do that around me very much. I can't imagine why. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 06 Oct 96 12:32:21 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Mass Initiation or Global Hypnosis - General Weirdness Message-ID: <961006163220_74024.3352_BHT64-4@CompuServe.COM> Keith: I want to start with the general hermetic axiom that "as above, so below", that the macrocosm is in the microcosm and that the individual and totality are reflection of the ONE. As opposed to this idea we have the more dualistic notion, that the cosmos is here to trap us into sin and the individual must resist and control the external world for individual salvation or enlightenment. I think some recent posts on new age initiations, theosophical organizations, the left hand path of Crowley and those like him and my own personal experience have some relationship to the entire issues of "what to do?" to be spiritual or "how do one knows if you are spiritual or just fooling oneself"> Einar: >This points to the New Age idea, that there will be a mass production of >initiates soon (which is rather daubtful in my mind), which would require a >new way to handle things Keith: This is a favorite selling point of the new age. That a global initiation and exodus from the globe or a return to a golden age is around the corner of the millenium. It sounds a lot like the second return and the rapture of the Christians. It also sounds a little like some kind of outside force would be needed to cause this global transformation beside the long and difficult process of personal growth. I have had a weird intution that something like the astral raising of Atlantis occurred around 1968 as predicted by Cayce. The assasination of Kenedy and other synchronistic events before and after seem to point to some mass hypnosis or influx on the astral plane as evidenced by increased drug use, the breakdown of the family and local government units and support systems and the turning to mass addictions to drugs, trash TV and other entertainment and a general dependency on the government from womb to tomb leading to it's all the governments fault, let the government pay for it, control it , clean the environment, police the world etc. It doesn't matter if the Atlantis rising myth is only a myth as a schema it represents certain atavistic tendencies to return to individual primitivism, bread a circuses ( welfare and sports/rock music-now often strangely combined) and other manifestations of mass hypnosis and not intitiation. Jerry writes: The Beast was firmly enmeshed in the depravity of inordinate > sexual activities and psychic delvings. I noticed that the former has > been somewhat mentioned on this Theosophy list in the sense of sexual > activity, but from a point of not being certain of whether this is > legitimate or not in the life of a spiritual aspirant. Well, ordinate > sexual relations are deemed acceptable but not the inordinate and > perverted sexual expressions indulged in by Crowley. Also, the real > aspirant to spiritual attainment is not drawn by the phenomenal that > is the psychic realm. This has been pointed out by the Masters > themselves, Blavatsky and numerous other enlightened souls of Light. > Keith: Jerry has touched on some important issues. Bougeoise sexuality of one man married to one wife and having a house full of kids is probably a deep organizational family archetype for most throughout history, but I doubt if it is really what most questing people do. The European high societies were a hotbed of adultury, incest and homosexuality (see Marcel's Proust Remebrance of THINGS PASTfor the "High Society" unveiled and works like I CLAUDIUS for the homey domestic scandals of the Roman Empire royal familes. I think a certain sexual craziness is expected, but I think one is also expected to put children's toys aways when one become mature even to the point of abstinence. Life is all a big learning experience and no one gets out alive and we all have a lot of chances to screw up if we live long enough. So it isn't the sinning or the type of sinning but the inablity to control it at all that becomes frightening and the mark of addiction which it past ages was called possesion by demon spirits (spirit contra spiritus according to Jung). Jerry: OK, you had your say, and I have had mine. Most theosophists agree with you, but I still feel confident that truth (which includes both good and evil, black as well as white) is on my side, and that one day as you proceed down your path of fluffy whiteness, you will notice a black undertone, and discover that the real path is grey. Jerry S. Member, TI Opposer of Dualism Opposer of All Those Who Know Good from Evil and In This Manner Keep Evil Alive in the World Keith: I certainly don't have a firm grip of all this yet. Man seems to hanging from the cross as in the Tarot between highest spirit and lowest crap and the best he can do is to try to be ever conscious of it, and not go into unconsciousness which is a type of self-hypnosis of acting as if it weren't true or didn't reallly apply to one as far as consequences and the welfare of others is concerned. In other words, if I have HIV ( and I do) I have to not play the victim or the blamer, but get through it the best way I can which (among other things is bringing out the very worst and the very best in me, I'm told by others) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alan: -----a truly theosophical environment, no one would need to dictate anyone else's mores, as if the Teaching is correct, all such matter will be taken care of by karma. If my understanding of TS history has anything to commend it, then just such attempts by the Theosophical Societies down the years is producing just such a karma in the form of falling membership, protest meetings, alternative approaches (such as TI) and so on. But that's another subject, although I feel moved to say that the TS which *I* support does not appear to support *me* in return. In fact their own imposition of non-existent rules to dismiss me from my own Lodge Committee *because* I promote TI (described as a "rival organisation") and a different point of view amounts to just such dictatorship. Alan ---- Keith: Alan, I wish you the best of luck on this cyber-utopia, this Aquarian Erewhon. But like Gulliver, I'm only gullible north by northwest. I wish we could create "communities of competence'" like ancient Crotona and the Academies of Plato and perhaps the lamasaries of Shamballa-like Tibet. It would be nice if we were all clothed and clean and fit and althletic and healthy and had the time to pursue art, culture and love one another unconditionally, but do you get there by global goverment of personal effort----maybe like Jerry said, "it is a grey thing!" We can only create a nucleus of universal brotherhood as individual role models coming together to create a community role model -- sounds like Fabian socialism or hippie communites with a 1990's spin. I am not really a groupie myself. I have toyed with the idea of exploring Wicca and local covens, but from what I can tell just by reading the newsletters etc. they sound pretty sad. Like a bunch of old losers and misfit young people looking for somekind of return to nature-cum-acceptance of not fitting into the Bougeouis myth of surburbia and Lexus' and all that. And who can blame them? HAS ANYBODY FOUND MUCH OF REAL INTEREST AND COMMUNITY IN THE WICCA _ PAGAG MOVEMENTS ????????????? I hope I will be around a little while longer to see. My guess, is we will stumble along the best we can as we always have. Hey, anyone want to go to playoffs and eat pizza and drink beer or maybe just sit at home and watch a talk show? :) Namaste Keith PRice From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 11:34:18 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Cyberpoltergeists _ Is it me as usual - or? Message-ID: Keith: >From my experience in using just plain Internet Service Provider instead of AOL, Compuserve etc., I find no limitation on the incoming messages etc and has had no problems whatsoever. In your case it may not be just your hardware. MK Ramadoss On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Keith Price wrote: > I don't seem to be getting all the digests or something? Other things are > happening with my hardware. It may be the list, compuserve, a full disk, a > virus or me as usual? Anybody else? > > Namaste > Keith Price > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 17:47:46 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <961006174745_120004043@emout10.mail.aol.com> Jerry Schueler writes> >To think that >there is a White=Right Road and a Black=Wrong Road is childish >and the kind of dualistic thinking that I find so objectionable >in Chrisitanity. Richard Ihle writes> Remind me never to use Aleister Crowley again as an example, good or bad, for anything. I agree with your general sentiment, I think. In another way of looking at it, perhaps there is neither the Right Road nor Wrong Road, but only ~The Road~ for each individual . . . and upon which merely right or wrong ~steps~ may be taken. AC's steps may have been right for him and whatever goal he had in mind; however, I am quite certain that for me stepping along in "Beast Motif" would not be so natural. Anyway, I can't think of any up-front, jolly, unembarrassed way I could explain what I was doing to my mom or my son. On the other hand, Crowley's magical-meditative system ("Scientific Illuminism"?) cannot have been put together without at least some valid content and--even more importantly--at least some valid content which will not at the same time damage and degrade the person who practices it. Therefore, I remain interested in AC to a degree, but more-so, perhaps, in the eclectic magicians who say they have been influenced by AC but for some reason don't themselves look like they have been drained and doomed by what they have been doing. The big question in my mind is whether Aleister Crowley ever really accomplished anything truly "magically preternatural" in his life or not--anything, that is, that was worth the price that he may or may not have had to pay for it. (It is just a guess, naturally, on my part that he didn't do all the sex etc. and get off scott-free in terms of repercussions--health, energy, etc.) He became quite famous, of course, but we may not be able to give him credit for this without involving the "Catch-22" that I mentioned earlier--i.e., that the major accomplishment of most of the bigger names in occultism seems to be ~just precisely~ the mass of writing, speaking, etc. that they do about their ideas and ~not~ the successful use of their ideas in the accomplishment of something else. Thus, if you know of any special power/attribute Crowley developed by means of his magic, or any clear, extraordinary instance of his Thelema ("will"?) doing something which otherwise wouldn't have been possible, please let me know. And if what you tell me is good enough . . . to hell, then, with my mom and son. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 19:14:01 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <961006191401_203647529@emout12.mail.aol.com> Jerry, Good post. I will confess that I have grown tired of defending that which needs no defense. I wonder when our self-rigtheous brethren will shed their victorian skins to find the true serpents that live beneath. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:04:51 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis (Alan) Message-ID: In message <9610060703.AA30036@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes (re Abrantes) >If the discussion ceases to be productive--that is, we keep >retracing the same ground over and over again, then I will bow >out. I have little time for theos-l lately anyway. But at the >moment, I still see the promise of a productive discussion. And >if nothing else, I think those of us on theos-l who are well read >in Blavatsky, are obliged to respond to inquiries concerning her >writings. Fair comment, and I wish you well! Alan (I did read *all* of your post). --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:07:40 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: AC Message-ID: In message <199610060852.AA25700@vnet.net>, Maurice de Montaine writes > There is no misleading information in that which I said anent >Crowley's Masonic affiliation. Since I possess a photographic >facsimile of his Masonic diploma and the official letter of his >expulsion, I honestly wonder at where you are getting your >information. It is definitely the Ancient and Accepted Rite. If you >choose to disagree with his Masonic diploma and the official letter >from the Grand Secretary General of the Supreme Council 33rd Degree >of London, then that is entirely up to you. The letter of expulsion >includes that of Yarker as well. ZAP! Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:53:25 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: General Weirdness Message-ID: In message <961006163220_74024.3352_BHT64-4@CompuServe.COM>, Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> writes >Keith: > >Alan, I wish you the best of luck on this cyber-utopia, this Aquarian Erewhon. >But like Gulliver, I'm only gullible north by northwest. I wish we could create >"communities of competence'" like ancient Crotona and the Academies of Plato >and perhaps the lamasaries of Shamballa-like Tibet. It would be nice if we were >all clothed and clean and fit and althletic and healthy and had the time to >pursue art, culture and love one another unconditionally, but do you get there >by global goverment of personal effort----maybe like Jerry said, "it is a grey >thing!" We can only create a nucleus of universal brotherhood as individual >role models coming together to create a community role model -- sounds like >Fabian socialism or hippie communites with a 1990's spin. Now that, I wouldn;t be surprised, might be a route to follow! > >I am not really a groupie myself. I have toyed with the idea of exploring Wicca >and local covens, but from what I can tell just by reading the newsletters etc. >they sound pretty sad. So I too have noticed. > Like a bunch of old losers and misfit young people >looking for somekind of return to nature-cum-acceptance of not fitting into the >Bougeouis myth of surburbia and Lexus' and all that. And who can blame them? I don't blame them at all. If this wondrous thing called Theosophy had lived up to its expectations, they might have had something worth getting together for. I just uploaded "Message2.txt" of 1889 by HPB to my homepage - it is very sad reading, for it seems to me that she is announcing (maybe without realising it) that the battle for a true theosophy has already been lost. > >HAS ANYBODY FOUND MUCH OF REAL INTEREST AND COMMUNITY IN THE WICCA _ PAGAG >MOVEMENTS ????????????? > I hope I will be around a little while longer to see. My guess, is we will >stumble along the best we can as we always have. Hey, anyone want to go to >playoffs and eat pizza and drink beer or maybe just sit at home and watch a talk >show? :) > Can I skip the playoffs? Time I bought a red ribbon. Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 16:50:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: Those who claim that there is no such thing as the white path and the black path and that those are merely childish ideas, should realize that they instantly throw overboard the Ageless Wisdom. In fact the Ageless Wisdom offers some means (like serving the evolution or otherwise, the soul contact or lack thereof, acknowledging the God's Plan for humanity and cooperating with it or obstructing it, etc.) to discriminate between the white and the black, and that kind of discrimination is a part of OBLIGATORY equipment of every spiritually minded person. Picking up some pieces of theosophy, bits of the left-hand tantrism, some ideas of Al. Cr., etc, and cooking up a home-made 'spiritual' system may not exactly be the black path--maybe rather a shade of the grey one, which however does not make any essential difference: more dirt or less dirt is still dirt. Just another way of contaminating the Ageless Wisdom with some dirt. Some others on this list who support the above mentioned discussion as a good word game or just as a joke, may wish to remember that careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the environment their electronic speech may generate. I believe things like that should not go unchallenged, so I invite others to contribute their opinions about it. Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:46:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: HPB - Message 2 Message-ID: Dear all, I have uploaded to my homepage the file Message2.txt, being the text of H.P.Blavatsky's message to the American Convention of 1889. Click on the Directory of Goodies link and enter the HPB directory to obtain this file (and Message1.txt - the 1888 Message). Food for thought, even today. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:19:58 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: In message <961006174745_120004043@emout10.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >the major accomplishment of most of the bigger names in >occultism seems to be ~just precisely~ the mass of writing, speaking, etc. >that they do about their ideas and ~not~ the successful use of their ideas in >the accomplishment of something else. Not a soup kitchen in sight, except in the case of some of the earlier theosophists, like HPB and Annie Besant. "By their fruits ..." Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 02:31:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >Some others on this list who support the above mentioned discussion as >a good word game or just as a joke, may wish to remember that careless >language still creates karma commensurate with the literal meaning of the >words used and especially with the vibrations in the environment their >electronic speech may generate. > >I believe things like that should not go unchallenged, so I invite others >to contribute their opinions about it. > >Max "careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the environment their electronic speech may generate." I challenge this as an *absurd* statement! Your words read like those of a fundamentalist evangelist. Explain to me, as an example of your claim, the *literal meaning* of the word "joke." Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 21:06:07 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: who's right? - "No Religion Higher than Truth." Message-ID: What morality Chuck?? (ducking) -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:26:26 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: <199610070420.AA22993@vnet.net> Having already placed a posting relative to the truth about Crowley on this list, I have no intention to get drawn into a protracted debate based upon preconceived ideas and faulty research. I've found over the years that when someone does not really want to hear another side, it is forsooth pointless to go on and on. Let each one, then, hold to their specific viewpoint, irrespective of the fact that it may be misconceived and they are not genuinely willing to consider an alternative presentation. The truth will out in the end no matter what anyone thinks. Besides, I prefer to accept that which is presented by the Masters of the Great White Brotherhood as more likely to be true than what is presented by an average student in these areas. I do not doubt, though, that there are those who would even tell the Masters themselves that they don't know what they are talking about. Moreover, to present a fact and history of another in the proper manner for an educational purpose is not criticism. We have, therefore, to distinguish between the two. Fraternally Maurice de Montaine, B.A. (Hons.), M.A., M.Litt., Ph.D. Ancient and Accepted Rite, 33rd Degree. Antient and Primitive Rite, 33rd Degree. Co-Freemasonry, 33rd Degree. Rosicrucian Order (AMORC), 12th Degree (Past Chairperson, AMORC Hobart Organizational Group; Past member, International Research Council of Rose-Croix University; Past member, Australian Research Group of AMORC; Past member, AMORC Australian Networking). Traditional Martinist Order, 3rd Degree & Circle of Unknown Philosophers. Theosophical Society, Hobart Lodge (Past Secretary & Editor of Theosophia). etc., etc., etc. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 01:10:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: Hi I commend your post on AC. The facts presented by you and others are of value to at atleast some of us since many of us do not have the time to do the research ourself. Thank you again M K Ramadoss On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > Having already placed a posting relative to the truth about > Crowley on this list, I have no intention to get drawn into a > protracted debate based upon preconceived ideas and faulty research. > I've found over the years that when someone does not really want to > hear another side, it is forsooth pointless to go on and on. Let each > one, then, hold to their specific viewpoint, irrespective of the fact > that it may be misconceived and they are not genuinely willing to > consider an alternative presentation. > > The truth will out in the end no matter what anyone thinks. > Besides, I prefer to accept that which is presented by the Masters of > the Great White Brotherhood as more likely to be true than what is > presented by an average student in these areas. I do not doubt, > though, that there are those who would even tell the Masters > themselves that they don't know what they are talking about. > > Moreover, to present a fact and history of another in the proper > manner for an educational purpose is not criticism. We have, > therefore, to distinguish between the two. > > > Fraternally > > > Maurice de Montaine, B.A. (Hons.), M.A., M.Litt., Ph.D. > > Ancient and Accepted Rite, 33rd Degree. > Antient and Primitive Rite, 33rd Degree. > Co-Freemasonry, 33rd Degree. > Rosicrucian Order (AMORC), 12th Degree (Past Chairperson, AMORC > Hobart Organizational Group; Past member, International Research > Council of Rose-Croix University; Past member, Australian Research > Group of AMORC; Past member, AMORC Australian Networking). > Traditional Martinist Order, 3rd Degree & Circle of Unknown > Philosophers. > Theosophical Society, Hobart Lodge (Past Secretary & Editor of > Theosophia). > etc., etc., etc. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 09:25:28 -0700 (PDT) From: brigitte balint Subject: Re: THEOS-ROOTS digest 226 Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961001035645.2d174262@pop.uniserve.com> At 02:53 AM 10/6/96 -0400, you wrote: > >Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:50:23 -0500 (CDT) >From: "m.k. ramadoss" >To: theos-roots@vnet.net >Subject: Re: VOICE OF THE SILENCE - ART IN ACTION >Message-ID: > >On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Keith Price wrote: > >> They say that when your start studying works like THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, >> suddenly things start happening. But one is supposed to know, to will , to dare > > I think that any time anyone takes interest on subjects like VOS, >it set in motion certain forces and we may or may not see/discern the >effects. If one is very observant, one may be able to catch a glimpse. So >what you have stated does not surprise me. > > ...Ramadoss > >My favoured book, I keep it with me all the time. It is a live long study were I find new insight all the time. "Be humble, if thou wouldst attain to wisdom, be humbler still, when wisdom thou hast mastered." So many of our Theosphist should take that to heart and not be so proud of their knowledge. Brigitte From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 11:40:11 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: THEOS-ROOTS digest 226 Message-ID: On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, brigitte balint wrote: > At 02:53 AM 10/6/96 -0400, you wrote: > > > >Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:50:23 -0500 (CDT) > >From: "m.k. ramadoss" > >To: theos-roots@vnet.net > >Subject: Re: VOICE OF THE SILENCE - ART IN ACTION > >Message-ID: > > > >On Sat, 5 Oct 1996, Keith Price wrote: > > > >> They say that when your start studying works like THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE, > >> suddenly things start happening. But one is supposed to know, to will , to dare > > > > I think that any time anyone takes interest on subjects like VOS, > >it set in motion certain forces and we may or may not see/discern the > >effects. If one is very observant, one may be able to catch a glimpse. So > >what you have stated does not surprise me. > > > > ...Ramadoss > > > >My favoured book, I keep it with me all the time. It is a live long study were I find new insight all the time. > "Be humble, if thou wouldst attain to wisdom, be humbler still, when wisdom thou hast mastered." > So many of our Theosphist should take that to heart and not be so proud of their knowledge. > Brigitte > Amen. It is very hard to do. We are all are trained from birth, in the opposite direction. It takes a 180 turn to do it. I am trying to turn slowly. May be I have turned 1 degree. Still 179 degrees to go. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 06 Oct 96 17:43:16 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: VOICE OF THE SILENCE or voice of the addictions Message-ID: <961006214316_74024.3352_BHT203-1@CompuServe.COM> There are a lot of things happening to me that have nothing to do with theosophy, except I am trying to use a theosophical perspective in dealing with some very difficult life issues. Either theosophy is applicable to daily living or it is an attempt to escape the reality of our lower vehciles by promising a hazy killing of our lower vehicles or maybe it is away to control them and MASTER them and put the lower in service of the HIGHER by the use of POWER, LOVE AND WILL. You help me decide. I am thinking about the issues of addictions which include: 1. obviously opiates like opium, heroin and morphice etc. 2. alcohol 3. cocaine Less obviously: 1. food (excessive and compulsive disorders like overeatting and anorexia/bulimia 2. sex 3. relationships (some call it love) 4. money 5. power 6. stagnation and self-satisfaciton for no reason (laziness and pride) 7. self-pity These have been variously called demons, sins (seven or so deadly), addictions, character defects, instincts, and neuroses. I feel that if one actively tries to deal with them as in meditation, occult study, 12 step programs and psychotheraphy something will eventually happen. Some have focused on addiction in the individual which is obvious and some have looked to society as teaching addictions through group mindsets such as religions, ideologies, technologies of control, educational and entertainment media and military forces including propoganda, spying etc. We live in a "souless" age where there is information about every religion and ideology past, present and possibly future at the touch of an electronic search. Yet we are caught in a world wide web of illusion that is as close as our breathing and as far away as the stars - it is the illusion that we know what we are doing and that we are in control - that my free will is more powerful than the karmic wheel (what a joke, but one that every addict believes). In the past addictions were dealt with largely by burning people at the stake. I think many, many millions over the years have been burned at the stake by the inquistion for being too strange or not politically correct. The Knights Templar is a good example of mass extermination. I guess a theosophy study group is not really the place to deal with these issues as personal issues yet I wonder if theosophy can not help in the understanding of the hidden forces that at work in all of us whethere we acknowlege our addictions or not. I just got back from a planning meeting for our Lodge and what struck me, was that most people were not only convinced, but accepted it as an apriori assumption that what we need is MORE MONEY - more money would get us more members which would increase our POWER, which would increase our SELF-ESTEEM and this would somehow make the whole world a better place to live. I wanted to shout: N O T !!! What is needed is a freeing from these restlessness and searching for outside answers, MONEY is the MAHAMAYA of the human microcosm. It is not even paper. It is an idea. A magic idea that enslave millions into doing long hours of work for things that they are not even sure of, but are told that are good for them and their families. The families have largely been forced into this addictive scheme, by being redirected toward more and more focusing on WORK NOW FOR MORE TECHNOLOGICAL FUN TOMORROW. How many people live in a household where the mother stays home and takes care of the children and extended family of grandparents, old maid Aunts, handicapped Uncles and retarded nieces, so to speak. This idea is as foreign as a horse and buggy. We have been convinced that we are at WAR since 1939. Great systems called the military-industrial complex have convinced everyone that great sacrifice of freedom and personal dignity and choice is necessary so that women, children, the poor everywhere can be made EQUAL- equal to what is never said. What they are being made is equally addictive; women have rights, children have rights, the handicapped have rights and they are all fighting to do more, buy more, use more, make more, want more, It isn't that there is anything wrong with allowing all equal access, but equal access to what - bossing, manipulating, exploiting, ordering, controlling. What ever happened to equal access to will, choice, love and unconditioned self-esteem that one had merit outside one's ability to work more, earn more, control more, use more etc. There is always more and more "outs" to be rescued by ever fewer and fewer "haves". >From what I have heard, there is so much borrowed money, that is used to back "money" that is re-lent and the interest on this non-existent money is "value-magic" a black magic where by nothing is stretched and stretched and streched. Those really in the know have gone to Montana or Chile ;) I hope I am joking. The outlook demands either a head in the sand approach of addictions: I will blot out the pain of reality that I cannot control because I am an impotent individual or a willingness to wake up, being empowered to personal growth and societal renewal.. Sounds real preachy, but these ideas are all over the place, in one form or another. I know I sound preachy, but how many of us are focused on toys - valueless markers like money, stocks, bonds, interest rates, debts, credit cards, credit ratings, job evaluations, job titles and other "illusions" of temporary power - the temporary power is to enslave our minds and attention and focus our lives away from real community, art and personal growth. I have to put away the toys, even the toys of money and government solutions and face the karma of the consequences of my mass and collective karam surrounded by maya that I haven't begun to pierce. Take it from one who know, giving up an addction of any kind is that last thing anyone wants to do. It is a type of demon that haunts one just out of sight, but secretly guiding bad actions under the guise of motive of survival and even "altuism" (those people can't do it for themselves, we have to make it easy for them) This making it easy - becomes a co-dependent addiction for the helper and the one helped. The only hope would seem from an attempt to intelligently cooperate with the guiding healthy archetypes that are hopefully guiding constructively, as the negative archetypes are guiding destructively. People go where the rewards are. How many want to be really liberated from the VOICE OF THE ADDICTIONS in order to hear the VOICE OF THE SILENCE. The spiritual choice is not easy and many turn back at the last moment. Alan Watts famous in the American Zen community, died of alcoholism after years of being a world teacher. Not many are called, and even fewer, it seems, are chosen. If you think I am overly pessimistic, have you ever read some of the internet advertisements. I must get 4 or five a day. How do you block them? Most all are some variation of let's exploit the internet together by making more monye "easy" or some form of cyber-sex from blow up dolls to porn or occassionally a spiritual exploitation of "best psychic for success - dial 1-900 -) Maybe there should be a 1-900 for those who want to get away from all this. If one a 900 number would do it. As for me, I am looking forward to working in my garden and going to Krotona and just BEING and not DOING all the time. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 18:44:21 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: VOS or addictions Message-ID: <199610062352.TAA02865@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > food (excessive and compulsive disorders like overeatting and >anorexia/bulimia >2. sex >3. relationships (some call it love) >4. money >5. power >6. stagnation and self-satisfaciton for no reason (laziness and pride) >7. self-pity > Dear Keith, If you need to call items 2-5 "addictions", I'd say you've been brainwashed by certain sickies to believe that you're a very sinful person. None of these, when used in moderation are addictions. Anything used to excess can become an addiction. I'd like to ask you very seriously where you think you're heading. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:35:10 +0100 From: Alan Subject: VOICE OF WISDOM Message-ID: In message <961006214316_74024.3352_BHT203-1@CompuServe.COM>, Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> writes >There are a lot of things happening to me that have nothing to do with >theosophy, except I am trying to use a theosophical perspective in dealing with >some very difficult life issues. Either theosophy is applicable to daily living >or it is an attempt to escape the reality of our lower vehciles by promising a >hazy killing of our lower vehicles or maybe it is away to control them and >MASTER them and put the lower in service of the HIGHER by the use of POWER, LOVE >AND WILL. You help me decide. *Genuine* theosophy ("god-wisdom") is nothing if it is not applicable to daily living. The ancient Israelites knew this, and one can see from reading theor wisdom-literature that they were concerned with how to act for the better in the here and now. The same is true of the "two-ways" theology of some of the early Christians. Many people/theosophists seem to favor this notion of a "hazy killing" of our lower vehicles - the very vehicles which get us from place to place in *this* world, not some airy-fairy "astral plane" of the imagination. The lower are *already* in the service of the higher, otherwise we would not be able to aspire to the higher in the first place. Likewise, the higher is in the service of the lower, otherwise there would be *no* compassion, love, or "brotherhood" whatever. Yet there certainly is *some.* Beggars on the steets of my home city get given money, more often than not from those who are only a little better off than the beggars - they have somewhere to live, that's the only difference. True theosophy needs actions, not, as you note, money. And actions are performed by people who care about life. To paraphrase the scripture, "Whoever loveth wisdom loveth life; and they that seek her early shall be filled with joy." Alan. --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:51:10 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Isis Unveiled Message-ID: <2rGrZAAOObWyEw02@nellie2.demon.co.uk> ISIS001.ZIP This is a compressed ASCII representation of the first part of Madame Blavatsky's classic "Isis Unveiled" and contains all the material in the initial section, "Before the Veil" in the original work. Footnotes in the original have been incorporated in the text in square brackets []. In plain ASCII text it is not possible to render Greek, Hebrew, or Sanskrit words directly, and these have been rendered either in the nearest English equivalent, or, in a few cases where the author herself provided a transliteration, or the sense of the passage rendered it superfluous, omitted altogether. This file has been placed in my homepages below the "Directory of Goodies" in the sub-directory HPB. Alan Bain, October 6th, 1996 --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 10:13:56 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <961007101355_538182001@emout01.mail.aol.com> Rich, It's virtually impossible to describe in any written language, but when Crowley's stuff works, dammit you know it! Try to imagine sitting on top of a rocket without benefit of capsule and being blasted out of the solar system and then coming back in one piece. That's the closest I can get to describing it. For all his weirdness there is no question in my mind that Crowley was enlightened and the difficulties people have with his work (his relatively moderate, at least by the standards of the magickal folk I hang out with, lifestyle notwithstanding) comes from the fact that what he experienced simply cannot be described in words. And he did accomplish some pretty spectacular stuff. When British Naval Intelligence called him in because they needed some symbol to counter the swastika he simply held up two fingers, the symbol of Typhon, which neutralizes the solar power of the swastika. Did that stop the Nazis? By itself, of course not, but it sure helped. The list can go on and on, but the results are not as important as the Great Work and that he completed with The Book of the Law. Everything after that is an interesting addendum. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:16:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: "...The spoken word has a potency... Because sound and rhythm are closely related to the four Elements of the Ancients; and because such or another vibration in the air is sure to awaken corresponding powers, union with which produces good or bad results, as the case may be. No student was ever allowed to recite historical, religious, or any real events in so many unmistakable words, lest the powers connected with the event should be once more attracted." "The Secret Doctrine" I 307 On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In message 100000@library.berkeley.edu>, Maxim Osinovsky .edu> writes > >Some others on this list who support the above mentioned discussion as > >a good word game or just as a joke, may wish to remember that careless > >language still creates karma commensurate with the literal meaning of the > >words used and especially with the vibrations in the environment their > >electronic speech may generate. > > > >I believe things like that should not go unchallenged, so I invite others > >to contribute their opinions about it. > > > >Max > > "careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal > meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the > environment their electronic speech may generate." > > I challenge this as an *absurd* statement! Your words read like those > of a fundamentalist evangelist. Explain to me, as an example of your > claim, the *literal meaning* of the word "joke." > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 17:41:36 +0100 From: Michael Subject: Christmas Humphries Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961007164136.006890e0@xs4all.nl> I saw a BBC-TV program some time ago on court cases in which the judge probably condemned a suspect erroneously to death. Among the judges who probably misjudged a suspect and sent him to the gallows was Christmas Humphries! Michael Michael http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:25:22 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 682 Message-ID: <32594B12.9EC@TIW.COM> > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 19:58:41 +1000 > From: "Maurice de Montaine" > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: Re: AC > Message-ID: <199610060852.AA25700@vnet.net> > > On 5 Oct 96 at 16:51, Robert Word wrote: > > > Did this happen in a previous incarnation, or after he was expelled > > from the Golden Dawn (A.O. jurisdiction) by Mathers in 1905? or at > > another time? Kindly inform us, good Sir. > > In the same incarnation. > > > Or was Crowley actually original here? > > He never was original. Then who else used the term "Beast" or "Beast 666"? Are you referring to the Ceaser Nero here? > > > I beg to differ with you here, Monsieur Maurice. These are > > technical terms in Tantric Hinduism; vamachara refers to Tantric > > ceremonies in which the 5 M's (including wine, which is widely used > > in other religions, such as Judaism) are literally partaken of. > > Dakshinachara refers to Tantric ceremonies in which substitutes > > (whether physical or meditative) for the 5 M's (kind of like > > Baptists using grape fruit juice instead of wine at communion) are > > used. These terms definitely do not refer to the "right hand path" > > and "left hand path" in the theosophical sense that you are > > positing. Ask any scholar of Tantric Hinduism. > > In the highest and most esoteric sense as distinct from the > perverted sense, my brother, that which I stated in respect to these > terms is correct. > Perhaps, although I don't think my college professor in non-western religions would have agreed with you. But I shall leave such contentions to the scholars among us. > > I believe that your statements are rather misleading here, Maurice. > > Crowley was given a clandestine (unrecognized) 33rd degree in > > Mexico. The regular Ancient and Accepted Rite in england never > > recognized this, and Crowley was never expelled. Crowley ultimately > > joined a blue lodge in France, Anglo-Saxon Lodge, working under the > > Grand Lodge of France (this jurisiction of masonry was never > > recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England, and Crowley himself > > was never recognized as a Mason by the United Grand Lodge of > > England). However, Crowley was admitted to some High-Grade rites in > > England; he was made a 95th degree of the Ancient and Primitive Rite > > under John Yarker in England. (John Yarker had made one HP > > Blavatsky also an adoptive member of this Rite. Thus, in the > > Ancient and Primitive Rite, Aleister Crowley and Helena Blavatsky > > were Lodge Brother and Sister). > > There is no misleading information in that which I said anent > Crowley's Masonic affiliation. Since I possess a photographic > facsimile of his Masonic diploma and the official letter of his > expulsion, I honestly wonder at where you are getting your > information. It is definitely the Ancient and Accepted Rite. If you > choose to disagree with his Masonic diploma and the official letter > from the Grand Secretary General of the Supreme Council 33rd Degree > of London, then that is entirely up to you. The letter of expulsion > includes that of Yarker as well. Indeed. I understand that John Yarker was expelled from the regular Ancient and Accepted Rite in England because he had accepted a 33rd degree from the (unrecognized) Cerneau Schottish Rite in the U.S. But the case of Crowley, I find difficult to understand. As a member of Anglo Saxon Lodge under Grand Loge de France, he could never have been admitted to the regular (i.e. recognized) Ancient and Accepted Rite in England. Are you sure that the letter of expulsion emanates from the Regular Body? Also, do you admit that Crowley was never at any time a member of a recognized Blue Lodge (i.e., in this context, one recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England)? > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > * Maurice de Montaine * > * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * > * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * > * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * > * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * > * * * > * * * * > * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT Are you a member of a recognized or clandestine branch of the Order of the Red Cross? * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > > ------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:29:21 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Use of Message-ID: Hi, Brother Nathan: As far as I recall, I have not sent any message to theos@netcom.com on VOS. Is it possible that theos@netcom.com is subscribed to any of the theos-xxxx, in which case anything posted to that list will be automatically distributed by the listprocessor at vnet.net. Can you forward me a copy of the msg you are referring to so that we can find out how you got the message from me. It will be very interesting to find out. Thanks. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss Member, Theosophical Society in America San Antonio Lodge, Texas On Mon, 7 Oct 1996 Natsec@aol.com wrote: > Dear Brother Ramadoss, > > Your recent discussion about the VOS and its implications for living are, > while interesting, not appropriate to TSA's address. > Messages sent to the Society at should be restricted to > Society business, not to pass theosophical observations between individuals. > Thanks for your cooperation. > > William Nathan Greer > National Secretary > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 07 Oct 96 18:51:28 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <961007225127_72723.2375_FHP68-1@CompuServe.COM> Alan: Not a soup kitchen in sight, except in the case of some of the earlier theosophists, like HPB and Annie Besant. "By their fruits ..." Not everyone has the ability to do the soup kitchen thing. I know a woman who has tremendous organizational skills and boundless energies even though she's past 50 yrs. She's run a homeless shelter for battered women and a free meal kitchen. She's totally fearless about going into unsavory neighborhood to do her work and is ready to take over if a volunteer doesn't show up. She knows where the free shampoo is (or anything else free) from different company warehouses. While she's there, she'll try to haggle for more free items. She coaxes her friends (like me) to give her cast-off clothing. I think it takes a special kind of gutsiness to do this kind of job. I think those that do the writing inspire those following the karma yoga path. It's shame that often the karma yogis don't get names in print, as well. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:38:30 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >"...The spoken word has a potency... Because sound and rhythm are >closely related to the four Elements of the Ancients; and because such or >another vibration in the air is sure to awaken corresponding powers, >union with which produces good or bad results, as the case may be. No >student was ever allowed to recite historical, religious, or any real >events in so many unmistakable words, lest the powers connected with the >event should be once more attracted." > >"The Secret Doctrine" I 307 Repeat: what is the "literal meaning" of the word "joke." The above bears no relevant connection to my question below. I regret to say that in quoting from a book held by many, it would seem, as equivalent to "holy writ" you are coming over even more like a fundamentalist evangelist. Please do not quote from the SD. I would like to get *your* viewpoint. I have my own copy of the SD which I can refer to at any time on any subject brought up on the list. Alan > >> "careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal >> meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the >> environment their electronic speech may generate." >> >> I challenge this as an *absurd* statement! Your words read like those >> of a fundamentalist evangelist. Explain to me, as an example of your >> claim, the *literal meaning* of the word "joke." >> >> Alan >> --------- >> Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >> THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >> TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. >> --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:14:23 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <961007191422_538492392@emout19.mail.aol.com> Max, The more I see of it, the more I am convinced that large hunks of the Ageless Wisdom are really showing the cracks of age. The idea of white and black magick is the result of this weird victorian thing (which is not surprising as the Founders were, after all, Victorians) which I would hope we could get beyond. In a universe where, when the sun goes nova, the just and the unjust will fry alike, a universe where whole solar systems go swooshing down a black hole taking all of their inhabitants with them, the primitive and childish notions of justice and karma that make up an unfortunately large part of the teachings simply do not hold and must be abandoned in favor of a more realistic view of the way things work. You are right, it is throwing a lot overboard, but it's mostly useless baggage anyway. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:15:25 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: AC Defended Again Message-ID: <961007191524_538493216@emout04.mail.aol.com> Alan, That's true. No soup kitchens. We prefer to leave such good works to the likes of Al Capone. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:15:34 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: who's right? - "No Religion Higher than Truth." Message-ID: <961007191533_538493297@emout11.mail.aol.com> Gertrude, Back to your mousehole! Morality? Me? Don't be disgusting! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:15:52 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: <961007191550_538493498@emout05.mail.aol.com> Maurice, How do we know the Masters were telling the truth? Chuck the Heretic Supreme Panarch of the Church of the New Mystery Sky Marshall of the Universe From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:41:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Christmas Humphries Message-ID: In message <1.5.4.32.19961007164136.006890e0@xs4all.nl>, Michael writes >I saw a BBC-TV program some time ago on court cases in which the judge >probably condemned a suspect erroneously to death. >Among the judges who probably misjudged a suspect and sent him to the >gallows was Christmas Humphries! >Michael >Michael >http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ > An interesting observation - do you want to elaborate on it? Most people on the list are probably aware that Christmas H. was a writer on and promoter of Buddhism. Is that your reason for this post. Alan the slightly baffled. --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:51:10 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Isis Unveiled Message-ID: <2rGrZAAOObWyEw02@nellie2.demon.co.uk> ISIS001.ZIP This is a compressed ASCII representation of the first part of Madame Blavatsky's classic "Isis Unveiled" and contains all the material in the initial section, "Before the Veil" in the original work. Footnotes in the original have been incorporated in the text in square brackets []. In plain ASCII text it is not possible to render Greek, Hebrew, or Sanskrit words directly, and these have been rendered either in the nearest English equivalent, or, in a few cases where the author herself provided a transliteration, or the sense of the passage rendered it superfluous, omitted altogether. This file has been placed in my homepages below the "Directory of Goodies" in the sub-directory HPB. Alan Bain, October 6th, 1996 --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:02:09 -0400 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: A.C., Duality and Discrimination Message-ID: <199610080302.AA09837@vnet.net> Discrimination brings unfailing awareness of the distinction between the Self and the not-self. Sutras, II.26 (IKTainmi, trans) On 10/06, Jerry S. wrote (in discussing Crowley) that "to judge another person in this manner [note: as a black magician] is not only wrong, but foolish... Everyone... has both good and bad in them... To think that there is a White=Right Road and a Black=Wrong Road is childish and the kind of dualistic thinking that I find so objectionable in Christianity." He ended his post with the comment that those who know Good from Evil keep Evil alive. While I generally share Jerry's views on non-duality (he and I have both posted here book reviews on the subject of Dzogchen), I think he goes a bit too far in the statements above. After all, the essence of Buddhism is that there is a Noble Middle Way, but if there are no choices then there is no middle to choose. There is *one* duality, of a certainty, and that is between the illusion and that which it veils. It may be (and undoubtedly is) that all of us have both black and white in us but as Orwell sort of said, All animals are grey, but some are greyer than others. And in the theosophical world's tiredest cliche, should we not judge the fascist leaders of the Axis powers in WWII because, after all, there were those roads and train schedules? How silly. Discrimination [from the Latin word for distinction] is a mental process of choosing, and discrimination is the key (Patanjali says in his Sutras on Raja Yoga) to the spiritual process of disentanglement from the illusion. Discrimination, allowing Detachment, followed by Dispassion (all involving Discipline, for those who really like to stretch the alliteration). It seems to me that this is the fundamental problem of "theosophy" in the past sixty years or so: either there is NO PATH (a "pathless land", if you will) such as taught by Krishnamurti and others, or there is a definite, evolutionary process with marked stages of individual consciousness, human and otherwise (the "Ageless Wisdom" as put forth by HPB and those who claim to follow her). If they can both be "right", how then do we resolve the paradox? Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:02:11 -0400 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis (Jerry H-E) Message-ID: <199610080302.AA09844@vnet.net> Hi Jerry -- On October 06, you wrote to Alan (regarding the Isis Unveiled thread), >I felt that a critical discussion with >Abrantes concerning ISIS would be worth while, and be a >substantive contribution to theos-l. After all, HPB raises a lot >of questions concerning Christianity that few people think to >ask. Frankly, I was a bit disappointed to find almost no >participation in this discussion. Perhaps there are only three >of us on theos-l who are interested in primitive Christianity and >its origins. Or, perhaps, there are only two or three of us on >theos-l who are interested in this subject *and* are not >threatened by a critical discussion of Christianity. Or perhaps, there are also those of us who follow along with some interest but do not have the background to bring much of substance to the discussion. On Oct 02, you wrote to Abrantes, >Don't the passages you have chosen really help to illustrate HPB's statement >rather than contradicting it, when she writes: >"He termed himself the son of God, but took care to assert repeatedly that >THEY WERE ALL THE CHILDREN OF GOD, who was the heavenly father of all." >But all of this still evades the point that HPB was making in this >paragraph i.e., where in the Bible does Jesus' disciples regard him as God? >Jerry Specifically, Matthew 16:13 (Luke 9:18, etc.). It all hinges on the definition of Christ, doesn't it? And on "the words put into the mouths of Peter, Paul, etc.," as you say. Regardless of the validity of any particular Gospel when compared with other sources "not of the so-called sacred texts", removing Christ's divinity in the eyes of the disciples rather eliminates the significance of the Transfiguration on the Mount, wouldn't it? And you lost me on your reference to the ascension: doesn't your question about the separative entity that Christ was ascending to be with sort of skip over the part that he was ascending in the first place? Not an everyday thing! (Elijah and chariots notwithstanding.) Regards, Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 17:24:48 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis (Alan) Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961008042448.006decb4@whanganui.ac.nz> At 07:47 PM 06/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <9610060703.AA30036@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins > writes (re Abrantes) >>If the discussion ceases to be productive--that is, we keep >>retracing the same ground over and over again, then I will bow >>out. I have little time for theos-l lately anyway. But at the >>moment, I still see the promise of a productive discussion. And >>if nothing else, I think those of us on theos-l who are well read >>in Blavatsky, are obliged to respond to inquiries concerning her >>writings. > >Fair comment, and I wish you well! > >Alan (I did read *all* of your post). I even printed a no of them for our local prison chaplin who is studying the Nazarine aspect of Jesus and the history around that period. He say many thanks as he found some interesting info amongst it all. >--------- >Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 08:39:00 PDT From: "Porreco, Nick - CPMQ" Subject: Keith, VOICE OF THE SILENCE or voice of the addictions Message-ID: <3259278B@mortar.bpa.gov> Keith, Just a thought but maybe as you are listening for the Voice of the Silence it is as in Yoga, where the demons which were somewhat undiscernable because of all the background noise suddenly come forward as if amplified. It may be part of the process of their elimination where just as where CWL stated that in the process of getting rid of a habit it becomes most violent in its need for repetition which gives it renewed life just before its death. What I am trying to say that maybe in your awareness as you are listening to the voice other things are trying to distract you, mostly astral I think. Shanti, Nick From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 17:53:00 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: VOICE OF THE SILENCE or voice of the addictions There are a lot of things happening to me that have nothing to do with theosophy, except I am trying to use a theosophical perspective in dealing with some very difficult life issues. Either theosophy is applicable to daily living or it is an attempt to escape the reality of our lower vehciles by promising a hazy killing of our lower vehicles or maybe it is away to control them and MASTER them and put the lower in service of the HIGHER by the use of POWER, LOVE AND WILL. You help me decide. I am thinking about the issues of addictions which include: 1. obviously opiates like opium, heroin and morphice etc. 2. alcohol 3. cocaine Less obviously: 1. food (excessive and compulsive disorders like overeatting and anorexia/bulimia 2. sex 3. relationships (some call it love) 4. money 5. power 6. stagnation and self-satisfaciton for no reason (laziness and pride) 7. self-pity These have been variously called demons, sins (seven or so deadly), addictions, character defects, instincts, and neuroses. I feel that if one actively tries to deal with them as in meditation, occult study, 12 step programs and psychotheraphy something will eventually happen. Some have focused on addiction in the individual which is obvious and some have looked to society as teaching addictions through group mindsets such as religions, ideologies, technologies of control, educational and entertainment media and military forces including propoganda, spying etc. We live in a "souless" age where there is information about every religion and ideology past, present and possibly future at the touch of an electronic search. Yet we are caught in a world wide web of illusion that is as close as our breathing and as far away as the stars - it is the illusion that we know what we are doing and that we are in control - that my free will is more powerful than the karmic wheel (what a joke, but one that every addict believes). In the past addictions were dealt with largely by burning people at the stake. I think many, many millions over the years have been burned at the stake by the inquistion for being too strange or not politically correct. The Knights Templar is a good example of mass extermination. I guess a theosophy study group is not really the place to deal with these issues as personal issues yet I wonder if theosophy can not help in the understanding of the hidden forces that at work in all of us whethere we acknowlege our addictions or not. I just got back from a planning meeting for our Lodge and what struck me, was that most people were not only convinced, but accepted it as an apriori assumption that what we need is MORE MONEY - more money would get us more members which would increase our POWER, which would increase our SELF-ESTEEM and this would somehow make the whole world a better place to live. I wanted to shout: N O T !!! What is needed is a freeing from these restlessness and searching for outside answers, MONEY is the MAHAMAYA of the human microcosm. It is not even paper. It is an idea. A magic idea that enslave millions into doing long hours of work for things that they are not even sure of, but are told that are good for them and their families. The families have largely been forced into this addictive scheme, by being redirected toward more and more focusing on WORK NOW FOR MORE TECHNOLOGICAL FUN TOMORROW. How many people live in a household where the mother stays home and takes care of the children and extended family of grandparents, old maid Aunts, handicapped Uncles and retarded nieces, so to speak. This idea is as foreign as a horse and buggy. We have been convinced that we are at WAR since 1939. Great systems called the military-industrial complex have convinced everyone that great sacrifice of freedom and personal dignity and choice is necessary so that women, children, the poor everywhere can be made EQUAL- equal to what is never said. What they are being made is equally addictive; women have rights, children have rights, the handicapped have rights and they are all fighting to do more, buy more, use more, make more, want more, It isn't that there is anything wrong with allowing all equal access, but equal access to what - bossing, manipulating, exploiting, ordering, controlling. What ever happened to equal access to will, choice, love and unconditioned self-esteem that one had merit outside one's ability to work more, earn more, control more, use more etc. There is always more and more "outs" to be rescued by ever fewer and fewer "haves". >From what I have heard, there is so much borrowed money, that is used to back "money" that is re-lent and the interest on this non-existent money is "value-magic" a black magic where by nothing is stretched and stretched and streched. Those really in the know have gone to Montana or Chile ;) I hope I am joking. The outlook demands either a head in the sand approach of addictions: I will blot out the pain of reality that I cannot control because I am an impotent individual or a willingness to wake up, being empowered to personal growth and societal renewal.. Sounds real preachy, but these ideas are all over the place, in one form or another. I know I sound preachy, but how many of us are focused on toys - valueless markers like money, stocks, bonds, interest rates, debts, credit cards, credit ratings, job evaluations, job titles and other "illusions" of temporary power - the temporary power is to enslave our minds and attention and focus our lives away from real community, art and personal growth. I have to put away the toys, even the toys of money and government solutions and face the karma of the consequences of my mass and collective karam surrounded by maya that I haven't begun to pierce. Take it from one who know, giving up an addction of any kind is that last thing anyone wants to do. It is a type of demon that haunts one just out of sight, but secretly guiding bad actions under the guise of motive of survival and even "altuism" (those people can't do it for themselves, we have to make it easy for them) This making it easy - becomes a co-dependent addiction for the helper and the one helped. The only hope would seem from an attempt to intelligently cooperate with the guiding healthy archetypes that are hopefully guiding constructively, as the negative archetypes are guiding destructively. People go where the rewards are. How many want to be really liberated from the VOICE OF THE ADDICTIONS in order to hear the VOICE OF THE SILENCE. The spiritual choice is not easy and many turn back at the last moment. Alan Watts famous in the American Zen community, died of alcoholism after years of being a world teacher. Not many are called, and even fewer, it seems, are chosen. If you think I am overly pessimistic, have you ever read some of the internet advertisements. I must get 4 or five a day. How do you block them? Most all are some variation of let's exploit the internet together by making more monye "easy" or some form of cyber-sex from blow up dolls to porn or occassionally a spiritual exploitation of "best psychic for success - dial 1-900 -) Maybe there should be a 1-900 for those who want to get away from all this. If one a 900 number would do it. As for me, I am looking forward to working in my garden and going to Krotona and just BEING and not DOING all the time. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:58:53 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 682 Message-ID: <199610080652.AA00573@vnet.net> On 7 Oct 96 at 18:31, Robert Word wrote: > Perhaps, although I don't think my college professor in non-western > religions would have agreed with you. But I shall leave such > contentions to the scholars among us. They may not agree. Nonetheless, my brother, many among the academics and suchlike scholars also interpreted nirvana incorrectly. Do you get the point? By the way, my Ph.D. is in philosophy. Irrespective of whether it is Western or Eastern philosophy or religion, my brother, not all academics agree with each other, with students or whomever. Sometimes it is a matter of interpretation and personal opinion. On other occasions, however, they actually do interpret a term or idea correctly. Then there is distinguishing the esoteric context and the exoteric context. There are even disagreements and differing views among Theosophists pertaining to not only the general philosophical and religious terms but Theosophical ones as well. So it is for every teaching that I have come across and been involved with. Some more so than others. But behind all human equivocation lies the truth. > But the case of Crowley, I find difficult to understand. As a > member of Anglo Saxon Lodge under Grand Loge de France, he could > never have been admitted to the regular (i.e. recognized) Ancient > and Accepted Rite in England. Are you sure that the letter of > expulsion emanates from the Regular Body? You reveal all, my brother, when you say "I find it difficult to understand." The point is in your knowledge and your understanding or lack thereof. That is why you are encountering such a difficulty. There is nothing essentially difficult or extrordinary about it. I say this respectfully rather than in a derogatory context. Never use the word never in such a context, my friend. It is neither impossible nor unique. It has been done before and will be done again. Learn to assess each instance on its own merits rather than generalising too much. Both his Masonic diploma as I have stated and the letter of expulsion originate therefrom. I would have told you if it were otherwise. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:03:31 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Use of (fwd) Message-ID: Hi, Brother Nathan: It appears that the VOS message may have been received by theos@netcom.com from theos-roots@vnet.net, since the VOS is being discussed on it and theos@netcom.com is subscribed to theos-roots. I thought this may aid in locating/identifying how my message reached theos@netcom.com. I would be interested in your feedback. Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss ===================================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:29:21 -0500 (CDT) From: m.k. ramadoss Subject: Re: Use of Hi, Brother Nathan: As far as I recall, I have not sent any message to theos@netcom.com on VOS. Is it possible that theos@netcom.com is subscribed to any of the theos-xxxx, in which case anything posted to that list will be automatically distributed by the listprocessor at vnet.net. Can you forward me a copy of the msg you are referring to so that we can find out how you got the message from me. It will be very interesting to find out. Thanks. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss Member, Theosophical Society in America San Antonio Lodge, Texas On Mon, 7 Oct 1996 Natsec@aol.com wrote: > Dear Brother Ramadoss, > > Your recent discussion about the VOS and its implications for living are, > while interesting, not appropriate to TSA's address. > Messages sent to the Society at should be restricted to > Society business, not to pass theosophical observations between individuals. > Thanks for your cooperation. > > William Nathan Greer > National Secretary > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Oct 96 04:06:49 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Spirituality, Soiciety and Art - The Shekhinah or Secret Female Message-ID: <961008080648_74024.3352_BHT78-1@CompuServe.COM> Synchronicstically (yeah, that again!) I placed my hand on the exact book I have been looking for for years, but wouldn't have understood its importance until today. It is called "Kabbalah and ART" by Leo Bronstein. It's style is much like mine. I felt a deep soul connection, not just with what Mr. Bronstein says, but the way he says it. Perhaps, things like this can be talked about in no other way, but as poetic, hidden layers of what he called the image as substitution for ..........? For what? All art is pointing, not to just the artist or to the Platonic world of ideal beautiful perfect forms, and not even to the Jungian archetypes, but to the deeper veiled material that only those who have studied the Kabala can understand. I know that Jerry Schueler and Alan Bain for two and others on this list have studied the Kabala and argued about it from the standpoint of analytical details. But it isn't a system of spheres, paths and numerical and astorlogical correspondance, but a larger CORRESPONDANCE, a SUBSTITUTION. Mr. Bornstein portentiously talks about the Jewish intention. I have yet to discover what this is. I assume he is Jewish and knows. I have never been interested in Judiasm as such as have never had much to think about it one way or another. All I remember are the Nazi atrocites rehashed in the films of my youth like "Judgement at Nurenberg." He hints that his appreciation of the Anti-semitic artist Degas provided a bridge of understanding between the two men when before each found each other UNFORGIVEABLE. The bridge is the Shekhinah. Mr. Bronstein writes: "Kabalah's doctrine of the mystery of "the descent on behalf of the ascent via the Presence - the Shekhinah - the Light, the Secret, Metaphysical Woman, a doctrine made one with Kabbalha's still more mystrious doctrine of the cosmic initial Error cause by the severity and rigor of "pure' Father-judgement, the Error corrected-redeemed by the "fiat" of the Secret Wojan's Mother-mercy." The abstruse mystical repetivive style of Mr. Bronstein is part of the message. The analytical Father, hides the Mystical Mother as Shekhinah, hidden in the daily life, but reavealed in art and secret communion of the mystical state. Mystical STATE. The quality of mercy is not strained and the POWER of art is not restrained, but revealed in the most concealed word in the concealed Jewish language game: the Shekinah. It is the Shekhinah that speaks as the VOICE OF THE SILENCE, a pulls the strings of fate in the small insignificant life of the individual and the larger intention of the STATE of all things, all places, all people, all life. Mr. Bornstein writes: "Such also the Plentitude-Vagueness of any sensation, af any perception, as, in Kabbalah, of any aspect power of Hoshmah. WHen Shenkinah, the Secret Womanh, is identified with Kenesset Israel, the community of Israel as the community of the righteous only ( and Islam's inheritance of this in the sacredness, univerality and righteousness, of its Community of Believers, the Ummat-as-Islam). The Platonic ideal of Crotona the democratic academy of the study of divine geometry, porportion, and the sacred truth of Beauty half-veiled, half-revealed floats like a dream in a parallel universe waiting to be grasped and reborn. Oh, that we could discuss the issues without the fears, anxieties and paranoia of the end of the millineum. Everywhere we see people like frighened children afraid of their own shadows, the shadows of the intention of the future. Who but the artist can make the impress the image beyond words, analytic and logic, beyond art, transitory and evascent, into action into historical intention. We cannot ignore the intentionality of time, the intentionality of Art, the intentionality of Action, they blend like a smokescreen that captures the hazy image of Plato's cave, the images of SUBSTITIUTON and CORRESPONDANCE. These are my random thoughts based on a quick reading of Mr. Bornstein's book. I hope that those familiar with the Kabala and Jewish history can enlighten me on a subject - that speaks volumes of feelings, sensations, images, musical resonances of time enfolded upon itself like a spiralling hand --- but I get NO clear idea analytically about what he may be getting at on the mundane level of the history of Israel, Kabala and Art. Believe me I would like some help on this as he seems to touch on the subject, I have tried to express concerning Spirituality and Art from a Theosophical Perspective. I feel new doors of insight are about to open, I hope eventualy for everyone. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:11:47 -0300 From: Subject: Isis Unveiled(Holy Writ) Message-ID: <19A51F7373@serv.peb.ufrj.br> Talking with Dr. Alan Bain, Jerry wrote: >You may be absolutely right about Abrantes, his entire purpose >may be to discredit ISIS and is not engaged in truth seeking. If >this is so, he will sooner or later convince himself that he has >succeeded in discrediting ISIS regardless of what we may have to >say. But I'm not absolutely sure this is his motivation. If his >motivation is to evangelize, then I think he is intelligent >enough to quickly find out that he is wasting his time here. My motivation is discuss some topics covered in Isis Unveiled, that I could not understand, or I suppose to be wrong. Several times HPB refers to christian doctrine, and only for this reason (not to evangelize anyone...) I expose this doctrine quoting passages from Catechism and Holy Writ. Several times HPB refers to early christian readings, and only for this reason I reproduce some texts from them. Please don`t feel obligated to answer all my questions, I am not a scholar, and sometimes people have not enough patient to talk with a humble and modest man. Jerry wrote: >1)As we have discussed before, HPB distinguishes between >"Nazara" and a "Nazoria" both words were translated "Nazarene" >by the early Christian fathers--thus the confusion. The former >denotes the city of Nazareth, and the latter denotes a mystical >sect of Jews who built the town of Nazara that later became known >as Nazareth. HPB's point is that Tischendorf's translation and >the Syric text *do* make the distinction between "Nazara" and >"Nazoria" and are saying that Jesus was a Nazoria (i.e. a Notzri, >a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect), not necessarily a >Nazara (i.e. one who is from or was born in Nazareth: HPB reproduces tha translation of Tischendorf, at his greek translation that refers to Luke 4:34 as "Iesou Nazarene" and syriac text we read "Iasua, thou, oh nazarene". Both are translated as the same ambiguous term "Nazarene". These translations did not use the term "Nazoria" or a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect. So these passages can not be used to clarify the meaning of the word Nazarene. Jerry wrote: >In 1Corinthians, ii. 9, a passage is quoted as Holy >Scripture, which is not found in the Old Testament as all, >but which is taken, as Origin and Jerome state, from an >apocryphal work "The Revelation of Elias" (Origen: Tract.xxxv.). I mentioned that this passage is present in Isaiah 64:3 and Jerry correctly conclude that the two passages look very different. I make an error, the correct passage is Isaiah64:4 RSV, 1Cor2:9 But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him," RSV, Is64:4 From of old no one has heard or perceived by the ear, no eye has seen a God besides thee, who works for those who wait for him and finally: >Whatever words may have been put into the >mouths of Jesus, Peter, John, Paul, and others, there is not >a single act of adoration recorded on their part, nor did >Jesus himself ever declare his identity with his Father ISIS II,192 HPB and you Jerry seems to reject the idea that we can find passages in Holy Writ where for instance, . Read John 1:1-14 RSV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made... He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not. He came to his own home, and his own people received him not. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; I also already mentioned John 10:30 I did not take this passage out of context as you said. This passage expresses that identity of Jesus with God (gospel of John is the most clear gospel about it) and at same time expresses that the Son and the Father are different persons. This is a paradox, but it is written. Abrantes From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 08:31:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Use of (fwd) Message-ID: Hi The message below clarifies the problem and am glad it is diagnosed. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 07:15:40 -0400 > From: Natsec@aol.com > Subject: Re: Use of Dear Brother Ramadoss, Warm greetings to all our members in San Antonio. It appears that some other member accidentally posted their comments about VOS to ... then your ensuing response was automatically posted as well. Thanks for your cooperation. William Nathan Greer National Secretary From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 10:13:59 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Christmas Humphries Message-ID: <961008101356_204987182@emout05.mail.aol.com> Mistakes happen and unless I am mistaken, the elaborate system of judicial review we have in the US was hardly present here at that time, much less in England. If that is true, all it proves was that Mr. Humphries was human, which probably comes as no surprise to anyone. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 96 11:23:09 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Fictitious Tibet (article) Message-ID: <199610081523.LAA03965@leo.vsla.edu> Forwarded to me by email, and of some interest to this list. I have cut the last half which refers entirely to Rampa. > > > Agehananada Bharati, > "Fictitious Tibet: The Origin and Persistence of Rampaism", > Tibet Society Bulletin, Vol. 7, 1974 > > Let me first of all stake my claim and explain some terms in the > title: an apparently unexterminable tradition of sheer fiction taken as holy > fact originated in Europe and America slightly before the turn of the > century -- the brainchild of some fertile writers and orators, a number of > core tales about inaccessible Tibetan and Himalayan mystics took shape > in contrivedly esoteric writings which gained steady momentum until its > culmination in Lama Lobsang Rampa's, alias Mr. Hoskins', fantastically > fraudulent output beginning with The Third Eye and its sequels. I call this > whole phony tradition "Rampaism" after its phony consummator, Rampa- > Hoskins, and his all-too-numerous followers in North America and > Europe. This depressing crowd of partly well-meaning, totally > uninformed, and seemingly uninformable votaries holds something like > this as its modal view: that there is, somewhere hidden in the Himalayas > (invariably mis-stressed on the penultimate 'a'), a powerful, mystical, > initiate brotherhood of lamas or similar guru adepts, who not only know > all the mysteries of the world and the superworld, who not only > incorporate and transcend the teachings of Buddhism, Hinduism, and > Christianity, but who also master all the occult arts -- they fly through the > air at enormous speeds, they run 400 miles at a stretch without break, > they appear here and there, and they are arch-and-core advisors to the > wise and the great who hide these ultimate links to supreme wisdom and > control. In addition, they know all their previous incarnations, and can tell > everyone what his incarnations were and are going to be. Geographically, > the area where these supergurus reside is nebulously defined as "Tibet," > "Himalaya," and it often includes the Ganges and India. This, very > briefly, is the somewhat autoerotic creed of a large, and unfortunately still > growing, crowd of wide eyed believers in the mysterious East, apropos > which my colleague Professor Hurvitz at the University of British > Columbia sagaciously remarked that "for these people, the East must be > mysterious, otherwise life has no meaning." To put this somewhat less > succinctly and more technically, the enormous, pervasive alienation of > Euro-America from the religious themes of the Western world, matched > with the general disgruntlement, with the superciliously religious in the > established churches, the surfeit with scientific models which seem to > generate war and destruction, and most recently the proliferating > fascination with the exotic for its own sake -- about which later in greater > detail -- all these contribute to the desperate quest for ideas, rituals, and > promises that are different from those of the West, that are distant from > the West, and that are easily accessible, without any intellectual effort, > without any discursive input. > > Let me now present an historical sketch of the increasing ingress > of pseudo-Orientalia, and specifically of pseudo-Buddhica and pseudo- > Tibetica into Europe and America. During my research into ideological > change in the Buddhist clergy in Sri Lanka in 1971, I marveled at a > painting in a temple in the southernmost part of the island. In a long > subterranean corridor, some two hundred vignettes depicting the phases > of the dharma from its inception under the Bodhi-tree in Buddhagaya to > the foundation of the particular temple, the last one showed a white > woman kneeling and bowing down before the image of the Tathagata and > two monks administering sil (the five precepts of Thervada Buddhism) to > her; behind her, several white men in tropical hats and western suits, one > of them bearded. These, so the monk who showed me around informed > me, were Mme. Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott embracing Buddhism. This > is historically quite correct. The well-meaning American Colonel Olcott > and the Russian-born Mme. Blavatsky, founders of the Theosophical > Society, did indeed undergo that ceremony of initiation in that shrine in > Sri Lanka. Annie Besant became a convert to Mme. Blavatsky, rather than > to Buddhism, about a decade later. Leadbetter and other founding > members formed the incipient caucus of the Society which still survives, > albeit in highly modified and in a largely reduced form when compared > to the initial thrust into the religious ideological world of the early 20th > century. Now we must distinguish between the genuine and the spurious > elements in the movement as it relates to Buddhism. Annie Besant was no > doubt a sincere woman; one of the British Empire's most powerful > orators, cofounder of the Indian National Congress, and a fine mind, > genuinely annoyed at the inanities perpetrated by and constituted in the > missionary scene. Col. Olcott was a genuine person, too, concerned with > human affairs, and strongly cognizant of religious options other than those > of Christianity. But I think Mme. Blavatsky and Leadbetter were frauds, > pure and simple. My definition of a fraud or phony does not quite > coincide with the usual dictionary meanings of these terms. A phony does > not necessarily doubt the theses he or she propounds -- in fact they can be > full believers themselves. But what makes them phonies is their basic > attitude of refusal of matching their tenets with those of a genuine > tradition, and of imitating lifestyles which are alien to them, by doing > things that superficially look part of the lifestyle they imitate, or of > imitational lifestyles which simply do not exist in any cultural body, > except as idiosyncrasies. Leadbetter wrote about the kundalini, the secret > serpent power, and a melee of things exoteric and other which he had > picked up from Indian sources in early translations. He never learned any > of the primary languages -- Sanskrit, Pali, Tibetan; neither did Besant, > Olcott, and Blavatsky. Leadbetter was an aggressive homosexual, and > there is no doubt in my mind that he used his esoteric homiletic to seduce > young men -- some of them very famous indeed in later days. Now I don't > object to homosexuality -- I think the Gay Freedom movement is well > taken and should succeed. But I do object to utilizing bits of theological > or other religious doctrinal material to support one's own aesthetical and > sensuous predilections. Hindu Buddhist Tantric texts do indeed use sexual > models and analogues in their esoteric tracts, so it is quite in order if > scholars and practitioners use these texts in support of their sexual > behavior, because the support is objectively there. But no Tantric text > implies any but heterosexual relations in its corpus. The most recent > authentic presentation of the place of sexuality in Tibetan Tantrism (1) > should suffice as a document for the rejection of the esoteric innuendos in > Leadbetter's writings. H.V. Guenther, of course, is a valid empire of > Buddhist Tibetan studies in and of himself, and it may not be even > necessary to quote so exalted a source as his prolific writings in order to > dismantle the Blavatsky-to-Rampa type fraudulence; a very average > familiarity with Buddhism would do the job. > > Mme. Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, a multivolume work, is such > a melee of horrendous hogwash and of fertile inventions of inane > esoterica, that any Buddhist and Tibetan scholar is justified to avoid > mentioning it in any context. But it is precisely because serious scholars > haven't mentioned this opus that it should be dealt with in a serious > publication and in one whose readers are deeply concerned with the true > representation of Tibetan lore. In other words, since Blavatsky's work has > had signal importance in the genesis and perpetuation of a widespread, > weird, fake, and fakish pseudo-Tibetica and pseudo-Buddhica, and since > no Tibetologist or Buddhologist would touch her writings with a long pole > (no pun intended, Blavatsky is a Russian name, the Polish spelling would > be Blavatski), it behooves an anthropologist who works in the Buddhist > and Tibetan field to do this job. I don't think that more than five per cent, > if that many, of the readers of Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins' work have ever > heard about Blavatsky, but Lobsang Rampa-Hoskins must have read them, > cover to cover or in excerpts -- his whole work reeks of Blavatskyisms; > and of course, he doesn't quote sources -- fakes never do. Long before > Rampa, the whole range of quasi-mathematical spheres, diagrammatic > arrangements, levels of existence of consciousness, master-and- > disciplehood, hoisted on a style of self-indulgent, self-aggrandizing > rhetoric, was more or less created by Blavatsky. Medieval Christian > writers, the Hermetics and a large number of kindred thinkers and their > products had indeed presented a wide vista of quasi-mathematical, > impressionistic imaginary structures; earlier, of course, Jewish mysticism > with kabbalistic, Talmudic, and earlier medieval Rabbinical moorings > might have set the example for the medieval Christian writings of this > kind, unless the Christian writers were -- or were also -- inspired by > whatever filtered through to them from the Greek and Hellenic > esotericists, the Pythagoreans and a large number of neo-Pythagorean > writings spread through the Hellenic world. Medieval Christian scholars > did not read Greek, and whatever they did know about these esoteric > systems they obtained through Latin translations. Nobody knows to what > degree Blavatsky was familiar with any of this. As an anthropologist, I > believe in the perennial possibility of independent invention -- people get > similar ideas without any necessary mutual communication or diffusion. > Be that as it may, Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine and all the subsequent > writings of the Esoteric section of the Theosophical Society, later on > rechristened "Eastern" to forestall criticisms of mystery-mongering and the > pervasive tendency to identify the esoteric with the erotic, rested heavily > on such quasi-structural schemes. > > I do not doubt that in her earlier years, Blavatsky must have been > a highly eclectic, voracious reader. But as with all nonscholars in the field > of religious systems, she did not unmix the genuine from the phony; she > obviously regarded all sources as equally valid. Not knowing any of the > primary languages of the Buddhist-Hindu tradition, she had to rely on > whatever had been translated. And, as an epiphenomenon to the > awakening interest in oriental studies, a large number of unscholarly > writings emerged, produced by people who thought, or pretended, that > they could get at the meat of the newly discovered wisdom of the East by > speculating about it in their own way rather than by being guided by its > sources, or by seeking guidance from authentic teachers in those eastern > lands. > > Blavatsky, Besant, and the other founders of the Theosophical > movement were of course familiar with other translations then available. > The I Ching had just about then been translated into French for the first > time, though Richard Wilhelm's classical translation into English was > published after the Secret Doctrine. This whole quasi-mathematical, highly > self-indulgent speculation, of course, was part of the emotional packet of > the Renaissance and the late Middle Ages in general. There is no doubt > that esotericism was, always is, a reaction against the official ecclesiastical > hierarchy and against the official doctrines. In India and Tibet, > esotericization never took to this kind of pseudo-geometrical-mathematical > model, since those models were already part of the official, scholarly > traditions available. In these two countries, esotericization used what I call > psycho-experimentation models, including the erotic, as instruments of > opposition and criticism of the official religious establishments. It is quite > obvious that Mme. Blavatsky very much identified with this European > tradition of opposing the occidental religious belief system by esoteric, i.e. > quasi-mathematical, pseudo-scientific speculations and by writings that > encompassed diagrammatic representations of a secret universe. The > Secret Doctrine and much of the older "Esoteric" (later "Eastern") > sections of the Theosophical Society generated a welter of phantasmagoria > of a spherical, cyclical, graphic overlay type; the vague acquaintance with > mandala paintings in India added zest to these creations. > > I am just not sure whether Mme. Blavatsky read the serious Hindu > and Buddhist literature in translation and commentary available in her > days, particularly the Sacred Books of the East, created by Max Mueller > in the 80's of the last century. If she did, little of it showed in her > writings. One of the most annoying features in the "M Letters" (M for > Master) is her use of semi-fictitious names, like "H Master K" (Koot > Humi). There is, of course, no such name in an Indian language or in > Tibetan. But in the Upanishads, there is a minor rishi mentioned by the > obviously non-Indo-European name Kuthumi. Just where she picked it up > I don't know but I suspect she might have seen R.E. Hume's Twelve > Principal Upanishads which was first published by Oxford University > Press in the late '80s of the 19th century. The silly spelling "Koot Hoomi" > was probably due to the occidental mystery peddlers' desire to make > words sound more interesting by splitting them into a quasi-Chinesse > series of letters. The Master Letters signed "K" are quite clearly > Blavatsky's own invention; no Indian or Tibetan recluse talks or writes > like the European feuilleton writer of the early 20th century. In a passage, > "K" (for Koot Hoomi) criticizes a writer for saying that "the sacred man > wants the gods to be properly worshipped, a healthy life lived, and women > loved." "K" comments "the sacred man wants no such thing, unless he is > a Frenchman." The inane stupidity that must have gone into the early > converts actually believing that an Indian or Tibetan guru would use these > European stereogibes is puzzling. Yet again mundus vult decipi, and if the > average Western alien feels she or he can get to the esoteric goods, she > or he tends to lower the level of skepticism to a virtual zero. > > The works of Swami Vivekananda appeared at about the same time > as the Secret Doctrine. Vivekananda knew of, and heartily detested, the > esotericism of the Theosophical Society; he pronounced his disdain at the > Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1892 -- at which convention the > Theosophists were well represented. But while the followers of the > Ramakrishna Vivekananda movements as well as the followers of most > other neo-Hindu and neo-Buddhist movements officially decried the > esoteric, they and other groups marginal to them either blurred that > relatively parochial rejection of the esoteric, or much more commonly, > they blended both the esoteric of the Blavatsky type and the Hindu- > Buddhist reformist of the Vivekananda-Anagarika Dharmapala types into > the kind of broth which is now solidly ensconced in the wisdom-seeking > kitchens of the Western world. > > Let me now proceed to the arch-paradigm of esoteric phoniness of > the latter days. CUT-- rest of article about Lobsang Rampa fraud. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 08:54:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: Alan, This is not about jokes, this is about spiritual discrimination. Also, I am not a native speaker of English, so my English at times is very poor and may be difficult to understand. Sorry about it. Just ignore what I said about jokes. Re: my SD quote. It was intended to support my previous statements, so it seems to be relevant. What I intended to communicate is that theosophy cannot be all things for all people. It does NOT embrace teachings of people like A.Cr. It includes a very clear, distinct perspective on white vs. black magic, evil, and so forth, and it is provable. My message re: spiritual discrimination was written in the "IF ... THEN .." format, i.e. IF one adopts the Ageless Wisdom as a guiding light THEN indiscriminate search for knowledge is not good, certain restrictions apply. The Ageless Wisdom is the light of your, my, and everybody else's higher self, that's why it is so uniform from man to man and throughout the ages. Being awakened, it creates a sense of DIRECTION urging everybody to move in the SAME direction--from darkness to light. On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In message 100000@library.berkeley.edu>, Maxim Osinovsky .edu> writes > >"...The spoken word has a potency... Because sound and rhythm are > >closely related to the four Elements of the Ancients; and because such or > >another vibration in the air is sure to awaken corresponding powers, > >union with which produces good or bad results, as the case may be. No > >student was ever allowed to recite historical, religious, or any real > >events in so many unmistakable words, lest the powers connected with the > >event should be once more attracted." > > > >"The Secret Doctrine" I 307 > > Repeat: what is the "literal meaning" of the word "joke." The above > bears no relevant connection to my question below. I regret to say that > in quoting from a book held by many, it would seem, as equivalent to > "holy writ" you are coming over even more like a fundamentalist > evangelist. > > Please do not quote from the SD. I would like to get *your* viewpoint. > I have my own copy of the SD which I can refer to at any time on any > subject brought up on the list. > > Alan > > > >> "careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal > >> meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the > >> environment their electronic speech may generate." > >> > >> I challenge this as an *absurd* statement! Your words read like those > >> of a fundamentalist evangelist. Explain to me, as an example of your > >> claim, the *literal meaning* of the word "joke." > >> > >> Alan > >> --------- > >> Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > >> THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > >> TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > >> > > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Oct 96 12:33:36 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Theos-L: New Email Address Message-ID: <961008163336_72723.2375_FHP44-2@CompuServe.COM> Theos-l Subscribers: In the next few days I will no longer be using Compuserve. My new email adress is: safron@concentric.net Thank you, Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 10:53:09 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Maxim Osinovsky wrote: > > Re: my SD quote. It was intended to support my previous statements, so it > seems to be relevant. > > What I intended to communicate is that theosophy cannot be all things for > all people. It does NOT embrace teachings of people like A.Cr. It includes a > very clear, distinct perspective on white vs. black magic, evil, and so > forth, and it is provable. This is *one perspective* of what Theosophy is. And before judging AC too harshly as "evil - you may wish to remember that for many outside TS circles, HPB was "evil" - She drank bottles of wine, ate legs of lamb, went into battle impersonating a man, and managed to pretty much enormously upset large numbers of people. There may be some "absolute" evil, but (IMO) the vast majority of the time what people call "evil" is simply that which does not conform to *their* standards of what is right and wrong. Remember, before you speak the words spoken above, that to (for instance) a Christian fundamentalist, your *entire paragraph* would apply directly to *you*. IMO, the First Object will be accomplished at whatever distant time *every* religious and spiritual tradition stops calling the members of the others "evil". > My message re: spiritual discrimination was written in the "IF ... THEN > .." format, i.e. IF one adopts the Ageless Wisdom as a guiding light > THEN indiscriminate search for knowledge is not good, certain > restrictions apply. > > The Ageless Wisdom is the light of your, my, and everybody else's higher > self, that's why it is so uniform from man to man and throughout the ages. > Being awakened, it creates a sense of DIRECTION urging everybody to move > in the SAME direction--from darkness to light. Again, *one perspective*. Not the only one. We have had huge battles on this list in the past over the alledged "uniformity" of Theosophical activity. Maybe Alan or John Mead could assist you to glance at the archives ... most especially a discussion a few months ago between what could be called "process" theosophists and "body of doctrines" theosophists. Regards, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:57:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: Chuck, I am aware of the fact that the Victorian perspective is old hat, and that many people now believe in something different--e.g. that all forms and manifestations of life (including the Buddha, Al. Crowley, O.J.Simpson, President Clinton, John Algeo, etc.) are pure and sacred. :) However, this may be just another belief. (In passing: HSO might have been a Victorian gentleman, but HPB a Victorian lady???...) What I am concerned about is the spiritual knowledge that comes to us via our higher selves. I believe I possess some degree of soul consciousness, (as probably everybody else on theos-l), and what I see is that there IS sure and definite knowledge and a way of action based on it. And if you (i.e. your personality) is steady in allegiance to this 'right knowledge' and 'right action,' (to use the Buddha's wording) you will stick to it no matter what happens--even if the entire Milky Way is about to slip into a black hole. Future generations may discard the contemporary notions of karma and justice as childish inventions of immature 19th-century minds, but the reality behind those notions is going to persist as it is beyond limitations of space and time. That's why HPB wrote about "eternal, unchangeable conditions of soul-development," "inexorable occult laws" (BCW XII 597-8), one of the basic prerequisites to the occult training being practical purity of life, especially purity of the mind and heart, purity of motives and thoughts, etc. Down to earth, the Al.Cr. matter does not seem to be complicated, and whatever can be said about it cannot obscure some simple and basic facts about him. To put A.C. to the test it is enough to ask, Did he radiate light and love? Did he encourage awakening of the higher selves in his followers and pursuit of the spiritual knowledge rather than pursuit of hidden knowledge at any cost? Max On Mon, 7 Oct 1996 Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Max, > The more I see of it, the more I am convinced that large hunks of the Ageless > Wisdom are really showing the cracks of age. The idea of white and black > magick is the result of this weird victorian thing (which is not surprising > as the Founders were, after all, Victorians) which I would hope we could get > beyond. > In a universe where, when the sun goes nova, the just and the unjust will fry > alike, a universe where whole solar systems go swooshing down a black hole > taking all of their inhabitants with them, the primitive and childish notions > of justice and karma that make up an unfortunately large part of the > teachings simply do not hold and must be abandoned in favor of a more > realistic view of the way things work. > You are right, it is throwing a lot overboard, but it's mostly useless > baggage anyway. > > Chuck the Heretic > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:57:40 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Internet E-Mail and TSA Officers Message-ID: Dear Brother Greer: I was very delighted to see your e-mail message. It was the very first time I have seen any e-mail message from any of the National Officers and glad to see that at least you have taken the initiative to learn to use the e-mail. It is my hope that the other Officers will follow you. E-Mail is very extensively used in business, industry, government, individuals and all kinds of organizations. It is fast, incremental cost, other than time is Zero and saves all the various natural resources. Coupled with Fax and Telephone, it speeds up communications and we can get things resolved around the clock. It my hope that someday we will be able to use e-mail to communicate with each and every individual at Olcott at the individual level and it would help everybody. I have used e-mail very extensively, using couple of different e-mail software running on plain vanilla Internet. If you have any questions that I can help you or anybody with, please send a e-mail message. BTW, one does not need a high powered expensive computer to use Internet including e-mail, browing www, ftp etc. I am writing this on a 286 machine witha monocrome monitor. So Internet can be used with a very small budget. With best wishes MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 10:07:52 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 683 Message-ID: <325A8A68.14F5@TIW.COM> > > Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:16:55 -0700 (PDT) > From: Maxim Osinovsky > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination > Message-ID: > > "...The spoken word has a potency... Because sound and rhythm are > closely related to the four Elements of the Ancients; and because such or > another vibration in the air is sure to awaken corresponding powers, > union with which produces good or bad results, as the case may be. No > student was ever allowed to recite historical, religious, or any real > events in so many unmistakable words, lest the powers connected with the > event should be once more attracted." > > "The Secret Doctrine" I 307 > > On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > In message > 100000@library.berkeley.edu>, Maxim Osinovsky > .edu> writes > > >Some others on this list who support the above mentioned discussion as > > >a good word game or just as a joke, may wish to remember that careless > > >language still creates karma commensurate with the literal meaning of the > > >words used and especially with the vibrations in the environment their > > >electronic speech may generate. > > > > > >I believe things like that should not go unchallenged, so I invite others > > >to contribute their opinions about it. > > > > > >Max > > > > "careless language still creates karma commensurate with the literal > > meaning of the words used and especially with the vibrations in the > > environment their electronic speech may generate." > > > > I challenge this as an *absurd* statement! Your words read like those > > of a fundamentalist evangelist. Explain to me, as an example of your > > claim, the *literal meaning* of the word "joke." > > > > Alan > > --------- > > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > > I believe that Maxim Osinovsky raises a very valid point here, put it is one which mainly concerns occult practitioners with intellectual interests. The power of the Spoken Word, and the power of Thought, are aspects of experience more intensely within the purvue of those who have received degrees and training in the eastern system, the western system, or any valid trainings system or tradition; the profane normally do not experience these levels in an intense way. But as we practice in a controlled way, and create by thought or speech, then how can we fully follow artistic or literary interests in a completely free fashion. This is a way of expressing the difficulty, and we must take account of Maxim's statements regarding karma. But one possible approach may be to rely on the great provenance of the universe itself, leading to the all good. There are, of course, in some traditions, certain potent practices which are intended to benefit all sentient beings. I do not expect this type of discussion to make much sense to those who are intellectuals only, and who have never followed the initiatic way in practice. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 96 12:52:23 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Amazing openness Message-ID: <199610081652.MAA25773@leo.vsla.edu> This weekend I did some research at the A.R.E. Library and then some shopping at the bookstore. There I met the author of a book which I bought and read; last night I called the author to ask him some questions. (Getting into the secondary literature and getting acquainted with the people in the organization is what I'm doing while waiting for readers' reports on my ms.) I won't name the author or say exactly what his book was about, since the conversation was private. But suffice it to say that it is a self-published work that addresses a very crucial subject. He told me it had sold many thousands of copies mostly due to being listed in the A.R.E. catalog, and that he has lectured in thirty cities under A.R.E. sponsorship on the topic of his book. The amazing thing is that when I asked how much of the leadership of the organization shared his approach to the subject of his book, he answered "No one in management does, although quite a number of the members do." So, after several rephrases of the question to make sure I had it right, here's the story: author self-publishes a book that *none* of the higher ups in the organization agrees with, but STILL they sell it through their catalog and support his going out to lecture on it at the expense of the organization. This is so far from the mindset of any spiritual group I ever experienced that I'm submitting it just to show that there is a different and freer world out there. Hallelujah. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:21:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, JRC wrote: > This is *one perspective* of what Theosophy is. And before judging > AC too harshly as "evil - you may wish to remember that for many outside > TS circles, HPB was "evil" - She drank bottles of wine, ate legs of lamb, > went into battle impersonating a man, and managed to pretty much > enormously upset large numbers of people. There may be some "absolute" > evil, but (IMO) the vast majority of the time what people call "evil" is > simply that which does not conform to *their* standards of what is right > and wrong. Remember, before you speak the words spoken above, that to (for > instance) a Christian fundamentalist, your *entire paragraph* would apply > directly to *you*. IMO, the First Object will be accomplished at whatever > distant time *every* religious and spiritual tradition stops calling the > members of the others "evil". > Again, *one perspective*. Not the only one. We have had huge > battles on this list in the past over the alledged "uniformity" of > Theosophical activity. Maybe Alan or John Mead could assist you to glance > at the archives ... most especially a discussion a few months ago between > what could be called "process" theosophists and "body of doctrines" > theosophists. Dear JRC, In some sense you are absolutely right. As you know no objective proof is yet possible of spiritual realities. That's why views of theosophy based on objective evidence like theosophical writings, incidents if the lives of major figures of the theosophical movement, etc., may vary so widely from declaring theosophy a fraud (please refer to a recent post of KPJ re: Lobsang Rampa and HPB) to considering it the only outlet of the Light. In the framework of theosophy, the same attitude helps create a variety of perspectives on theosophy. We are like a society of blind people who do not see the sun directly, but feel--at least some--that something like that exists out there, and we try to compensate for the lack of direct knowledge by inventing competing theories. Under such circumstances, the only reasonable strategy is to practice tolerance and allow all views of the sun, even the view that it does not exist, to be on equal footing, which is probably what you've said. However, the sun is still there, regardless of what we may think about it, and we are not bound to remain hopelessly blind, thanks to people like HPB, the Buddha, the Christ, Ramakrishna, Pythagoras, Plato, Dionysius Areopagite, Meister Eckhart, to name just a few. I and you do not need to glance at any archives to make sure the sun exists or to know its proper description--we may look at the sun instead. The so called 'lower self' and its mind thirsty of objective proofs, are not able to know 'the sun.' Only the higher self has the necessary organs and faculties. Your higher self could assist you to see AC and the like things in their true perspective. Regards, Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 03:10:04 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Soup Message-ID: In message <961007191524_538493216@emout04.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Alan, >That's true. No soup kitchens. We prefer to leave such good works to the >likes of Al Capone. I've seen this guy's death mask. Think I'll skip the soup. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 13:09:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 683 Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Robert Word wrote: > The power of the Spoken Word, and the power of Thought, are aspects of > experience more intensely within the purvue of those who have received > degrees and training in the eastern system, the western system, or any > valid trainings system or tradition; the profane normally do not > experience these levels in an intense way. > > But as we practice in a controlled way, and create by thought or speech, > then how can we fully follow artistic or literary interests in a > completely free fashion. This is a way of expressing the difficulty, > and we must take account of Maxim's statements regarding karma. But one > possible approach may be to rely on the great provenance of the universe > itself, leading to the all good. There are, of course, in some > traditions, certain potent practices which are intended to benefit all > sentient beings. Robert, The source of the problem here is the word "controlled." Controlled by what--one's own desires? the mind? or the higher self? For someone controlled by his/her higher self there is nothing like creating "in a completely free fashion." His/her freedom is freedom from desires, mental patterns, ignorance, and illusion. As regards the sources of artistic inspiration, his/her task (or duty) is to make contact with the spiritual planes and to bring glimpses of spiritual beauty down to the earth to help merge Spirit and Matter in general and induce catharsis in listeners/viewers in particular. (Catharsis: the purging of an audience's emotions through a work of art.--The Random House Dictionary.) To this end, the artist may need to go through some preparation like purification of the heart and the mind, maybe some fasting, isolation from the chaotic impressions of the outer world, some meditation (concentrated thinking about the seed idea of the future artwork). This is a standard view based on Plato's and Plotinus' ideas, and also the way having followed (more or less) by such people as Beethoven, Wagner, Nicholas Roerich, and so forth. Maxim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 14:58:20 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Unveiled Isis (Bee, Abrantes) Message-ID: <9610082158.AA24073@toto.csustan.edu> JHE >Don't the passages you have chosen really help to illustrate >HPB's statement rather than contradicting it, when she writes: >"He termed himself the son of God, but took care to assert >repeatedly that THEY WERE ALL THE CHILDREN OF GOD, who was the >heavenly father of all." But all of this still evades the point >that HPB was making in this paragraph i.e., where in the Bible does Jesus' disciples regard him as God? >Jerry JM Specifically, Matthew 16:13 (Luke 9:18, etc.). It all hinges on the definition of Christ, doesn't it? And on "the words put into the mouths of Peter, Paul, etc.," as you say. JHE Precisely, it "all hinges on the definition of Christ." And considering the passages cited above, it also hinges on the definition of "messiah." But this my unnecessarily complicate the issue. HPB's argument was that the disciples did not address Jesus as God or as a god. They addressed him as "Rabbi" (teacher) and "Master" (initiate), but never as a god. Concerning Matthew 16:13-17: When he came to the territory of Caesarea Phillippi, Jesus asked his disciples, `who do men say that the Son of Man is [or the variant reading: "I, the son of man, am"] ? They answered, `Some say John the Baptist, other Elijah, others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.' `And you,' he asked, `who do you say I am? Simon Peter answered: You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.' Obviously, Jesus' disciples did not understand "son of man" to mean "God" here, unless they also considered John the Baptist, Elijah etc. to also be gods. Peter, in answering the question is reaffirming that Jesus is the "son of the living God." i.e. the God of the Jews. But that still doesn't make Jesus any more of a god than John the Baptist etc. But Peter also adds that Jesus is the "Messiah." According to Talmudic tradition, the Messiah is a political King who will come to power and bring an era of world peace. It is not a synonym for the Greek term "Christos" which is an initiate. I think part of the confusion that made the early Christians confuse the two terms is because both suggest people who are "anointed by God." But a political King (which Jesus never was) is not necessarily an initiate and vise versa. Christian Biblical scholars have been searching in vein for over 100 years to find in pre-Christian Jewish scriptures the use of the term "Messiah" as synonymous to Christos. Two or three years ago there was some excitement from the Dead Sea digs that they might have found it, but it was a false alarm. Personally, I think they may someday find that link, but it will be in the Nazarene tradition, not the Pharasees, Sadducees or even the Essenes. But that won't help the Biblical scholars who want to keep the status quo. Luke 9:18 repeats Matthew, except that Peter simply answers "God's Messiah" and Jesus swears him to secrecy. Again, we have the same problem. God's Messiah is not God any more than is Jim's messenger, or Jim's political King. JM >Regardless of the validity of any particular Gospel when >compared with other sources "not of the so-called sacred texts", >removing Christ's divinity in the eyes of the disciples rather >eliminates the significance of the Transfiguration on the Mount, >wouldn't it? JHE But HPB does not remove "Christ's divinity." She is only trying to show that we are all of the same divinity. She is also trying to show that the Biblical Jesus is a mythical figure based upon several historical and mythical figures. But that does not effect the divinity of Christ. JM And you lost me on your reference to the ascension: doesn't your question about the separative entity that Christ was ascending to be with sort of skip over the part that he was ascending in the first place? Not an everyday thing! (Elijah and chariots notwithstanding.) JHE Perhaps it is an everyday thing. Don't all good Christians ascend to their father when they go to heaven. Isn't heaven the place where God is? Isn't Hell where all theosophists are and God isn't :-) Bee Brown I even printed a no of them for our local prison chaplin who is studying the Nazarine aspect of Jesus and the history around that period. He say many thanks as he found some interesting info amongst it all. JHE Thanks. It is gratifying to know that there is more than one or two who is getting something out of this discussion. It makes the effort seem much more worthwhile. Abrantes My motivation is discuss some topics covered in Isis Unveiled, that I could not understand, or I suppose to be wrong. Several times HPB refers to christian doctrine, and only for this reason (not to evangelize anyone...) I expose this doctrine quoting passages from Catechism and Holy Writ. Several times HPB refers to early christian readings, and only for this reason I reproduce some texts from them. Please don`t feel obligated to answer all my questions, I am not a scholar, and sometimes people have not enough patient to talk with a humble and modest man. JHE And I am assuming that your motivations are exactly as you say. Abrantes HPB reproduces tha translation of Tischendorf, at his greek translation that refers to Luke 4:34 as "Iesou Nazarene" and syriac text we read "Iasua, thou, oh nazarene". Both are translated as the same ambiguous term "Nazarene". These translations did not use the term "Nazoria" or a member of the Naziereate [Nazarene] sect. So these passages can not be used to clarify the meaning of the word Nazarene. JHE I was taking transliterations from the Hebrew. Tiscendorf is still transliterating from the Greek. I think HPB is reading Tiscendorf to be making such a distinction between these phrases even though he uses the same Greek transliteration in both. We would have to find the actual text that HPB is drawing from to see whether or not she is misreading Tiscendorf. But it would be unlike her to do so. Sometimes she misquotes, but still preserves the meaning. Abrantes HPB and you Jerry seems to reject the idea that we can find passages in Holy Writ where for instance, . Read John 1:1-14 RSV JHE Yes, John 1:1-14 is a very profound passage. I quote it often in our Theosophical study groups, and require them to read the entire Gospel according to John. But this passage means one thing to a Christian, and a very different thing to a student of Theosophy. By the way, "Word" is translated from Greek "Logos," is very clearly a Greek philosophical argument. If John had actually written this, what word would he have used for logos? Maybe in another discussion we can get into the meanings here. Abrantes I also already mentioned John 10:30 I did not take this passage out of context as you said. This passage expresses that identity of Jesus with God (gospel of John is the most clear gospel about it) and at same time expresses that the Son and the Father are different persons. This is a paradox, but it is written. JHE Yes it is a paradox, as are all deeper spiritual teachings. But the paradox is not unsolvable, and doesn't require a trinitarian God doctrine to solve it. If the Christ is an abstraction for the spirit of God as HPB tried to show, and if this spirit of God dwells within all of us, then we are all "one with our father" and "My father [God] who has given them [humanity] to me [Christos--the spirit of God which is in all of us] is [indeed] greater than all. Best Jerry From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:14:20 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: <199610082208.AA14932@vnet.net> On 7 Oct 96 at 21:32, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Maurice, > How do we know the Masters were telling the truth? > > Chuck the Heretic > > Supreme Panarch of the Church of the New Mystery > Sky Marshall of the Universe It speaks for itself, Chuck. Besides, my brother, although I appreciate good humour I'm really not into this modern proclivity of indulging in superficial nonsense. Taking this type of reasoning to its logical conclusion we could just as well ask the following question: how can we be sure that we are alive or is it just a cruel joke? Yet another irrationality which I've heard from philosophy students: if God were all-powerful He should be able to create something that He couldn't lift. Well, in the final analysis, my friend, both these examples are contradictory. Anyway, going round in circles has never appealed to me. Blind faith is one thing, Chucky babe, while active and intelligent faith born from a real knowledge and understanding is quite another. Some of our contemporary approaches rather remind me of the same leanings of many in times gone by. In this respect alone, it's really nothing new. So, when all is said and done, dear seeker after Truth, each one has to work it out for themselves whether the Masters told and are telling the truth. Look at both what it is to be a genuine Master (in contradistinction to master with a lower case m, as in a master of letters or a master of painting) and what is actually being presented in the teachings brought forth by them. As far as I'm concerned, I know they were and they are telling the truth. A hint shall suffice for the eager and perceptive student to realise. Instead of utilising the lower mind to debase the noble and true with intentional irrationalities of human leanings, dear humanity, learn rather to go up higher and know therefrom a clarity of perception unknown to the muddied lens of the carnal mind. Indeed, to perceive Truth directly. Fill thy works with the nobility of the higher rather than the baseness of human dribble. By the bye, where do you propose we chuck the heretic? Are we back in the days of the Inquisition? Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 21:12:07 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Isis Unveiled(Holy Writ) Message-ID: In message <19A51F7373@serv.peb.ufrj.br>, ABRANTES@serv.peb.ufrj.br writes >My motivation is discuss some topics covered in Isis Unveiled, that >I could not understand, or I suppose to be wrong. Several times HPB >refers to christian doctrine, and only for this reason (not to >evangelize anyone...) Please accept my apology for having misunderstood your intentions. Perhaps there is a difficulty between our languages - however, the fault is mine. Sincerely, Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 22:07:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >Alan, > >This is not about jokes, this is about spiritual discrimination. Also, I >am not a native speaker of English, so my English at times is very poor >and may be difficult to understand. Sorry about it. Just ignore what I >said about jokes. I shall try to remember this, and I thank you for your clarification. > >Re: my SD quote. It was intended to support my previous statements, so it >seems to be relevant. > >What I intended to communicate is that theosophy cannot be all things for >all people. It does NOT embrace teachings of people like A.Cr. It includes a >very clear, distinct perspective on white vs. black magic, evil, and so >forth, and it is provable. Do you mean that it is provable that the teachings of theosophy have this clear distinction? If so, then of course *this* can be proved. What cannot be "proved" is that these theosophical teachings are totally correct. > >My message re: spiritual discrimination was written in the "IF ... THEN >.." format, i.e. IF one adopts the Ageless Wisdom as a guiding light >THEN indiscriminate search for knowledge is not good, certain >restrictions apply. This I like. All of the teachings of the various schools begin with "If." > >The Ageless Wisdom is the light of your, my, and everybody else's higher >self, that's why it is so uniform from man to man and throughout the ages. >Being awakened, it creates a sense of DIRECTION urging everybody to move >in the SAME direction--from darkness to light. This is *your* opinion about an Ageless Wisdom understood from *your* perspective. I too believe that there is an Ageless Wisdom, but I doubt the exactitude of its application as you appear to describe it. To follow (I hope) your approach: IF the Ageless Wisdom is 100% available and 100% able to be understood by incarnate human beings, THEN we need to watch out! IF the percentage of availability is less than 100%, and incarnate human ability to understand it is also less than 100% - THEN we still need to watch out! Part of your point (I think) is that such people as Crowley misinterpreted and/or misunderstood the Wisdom, creating confusion and distress for many students. However, it may also be true (another implicit "if") that the transmitters of the Wisdom may also have misinterpreted and/or misunderstood the Wisdom in varying degrees. This latter scenario seems to fit the evidence available. A good example from theosophical history is Leadbeater's description of life on Mars (CWLMARS.TXT) in the HISTORY directory in my homepage "Directory of Goodies" structure. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 21:40:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Amazing openness Message-ID: In message <199610081652.MAA25773@leo.vsla.edu>, "K. Paul Johnson" writes >author self-publishes a book that *none* of the higher ups in >the organization agrees with, but STILL they sell it through their catalog >and support his going out to lecture on it at the expense of the organization. >This is so far from the mindset of any spiritual group I ever experienced >that I'm submitting it just to show that there is a different and freer world >out there. Hallelujah. Glory be! Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 16:30:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: Dear Maurice, Thank you for your apology of Masters. Although I generally like what he has to say--it helps prevent my brain from getting rusty and my thinking from becoming too fundamentalist, Chuck sometimes goes too far. Max On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > On 7 Oct 96 at 21:32, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > > > Maurice, > > How do we know the Masters were telling the truth? > > > > Chuck the Heretic > > > > Supreme Panarch of the Church of the New Mystery > > Sky Marshall of the Universe > > > It speaks for itself, Chuck. Besides, my brother, although I > appreciate good humour I'm really not into this modern proclivity of > indulging in superficial nonsense. Taking this type of reasoning to > its logical conclusion we could just as well ask the following > question: how can we be sure that we are alive or is it just a cruel > joke? Yet another irrationality which I've heard from philosophy > students: if God were all-powerful He should be able to create > something that He couldn't lift. > > Well, in the final analysis, my friend, both these examples are > contradictory. Anyway, going round in circles has never appealed to > me. Blind faith is one thing, Chucky babe, while active and > intelligent faith born from a real knowledge and understanding is > quite another. > > Some of our contemporary approaches rather remind me of the same > leanings of many in times gone by. In this respect alone, it's really > nothing new. So, when all is said and done, dear seeker after Truth, > each one has to work it out for themselves whether the Masters told > and are telling the truth. Look at both what it is to be a genuine > Master (in contradistinction to master with a lower case m, as in a > master of letters or a master of painting) and what is actually being > presented in the teachings brought forth by them. As far as I'm > concerned, I know they were and they are telling the truth. > > A hint shall suffice for the eager and perceptive student to > realise. Instead of utilising the lower mind to debase the noble and > true with intentional irrationalities of human leanings, dear > humanity, learn rather to go up higher and know therefrom a clarity > of perception unknown to the muddied lens of the carnal mind. Indeed, > to perceive Truth directly. Fill thy works with the nobility of the > higher rather than the baseness of human dribble. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 21:50:17 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 683 Message-ID: In message <325A8A68.14F5@TIW.COM>, Robert Word writes >I do not expect this type of discussion to make much sense to those who >are intellectuals only, and who have never followed the initiatic way in >practice. Wow! As I challenged the statement you quoted, may I say that I for one am not an "intellectual only" and I *have* followed the "initiatic" way in practice. I therefore understand that if I want to have my head in the clouds (so to speak) it is crucial that I keep my feet on the ground *at the same time.* So - the discussion *does* make sense, and I argue that the statement challenged is bad sense. I still await the explanation asked for. Nothing personal intended - I truly believe that there is no religion higher than truth, and therefore seek clarification of statements made from whoever makes them. I can look up the statements of HPB, Annie Besant et al with no difficulty. If I want to know (say) *your* view and interpretation, I have to ask you, not a book. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 00:42:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Message3.txt Message-ID: The third message of HPB (to the American convention of 1890) has been placed in the HPB directory on my hompepage. Click on _DIRECTORY_ on the front page to get there, and follow the tree structure. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:19:37 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: A.C., Duality and Discrimination Message-ID: In message <199610080302.AA09837@vnet.net>, Jim Meier writes >It seems to me that this is the fundamental problem of "theosophy" in the >past sixty years or so: either there is NO PATH (a "pathless land", if you >will) such as taught by Krishnamurti and others, or there is a definite, >evolutionary process with marked stages of individual consciousness, human >and otherwise (the "Ageless Wisdom" as put forth by HPB and those who claim >to follow her). If they can both be "right", how then do we resolve the >paradox? It seems to me that there is without any doubt a process akin to that described by HPB et al, though I am not sure I would call it evolutionary. Erich Neumann, a teacher and student of C.J.Jung ["Origins and History of Consciousness"] spoke of a "stadial" development within the human psyche, but claimed to have made the empirical observation that although the different stages followed a clear progression from one to another, the time interval(s) between them were not fixed. So A to B might take six months, B to C 13 years, C to D three minutes, etc. (Exaggeration probable re 3 minutes!). I can see no evidence to support the "pathless land" notion. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 01:18:42 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis (Bee, Abrantes) Message-ID: In message <9610082158.AA24073@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes >JHE >Yes, John 1:1-14 is a very profound passage. I quote it often in >our Theosophical study groups, and require them to read the >entire Gospel according to John. But this passage means one >thing to a Christian, and a very different thing to a student of >Theosophy. By the way, "Word" is translated from Greek "Logos," >is very clearly a Greek philosophical argument. If John had >actually written this, what word would he have used for logos? >Maybe in another discussion we can get into the meanings here. Alan (poking nose in): In Kabbalist groups I have run, I too have placed importance on John 1:1, but rendered it as I think the author of John *might* have intended it, assuming a Greek provenance, "In the beginning was the teaching." For "word" the Aramaic Peshitta text has "Miltha" which is the equivalent of the Hebrew "Dbr". The Aramaic has "Alha" (fem. sing.) for "God" while the Hebrew translation therefrom has "Alhim" (masc. plur.) George Lamsa's rendering from the Peshitta reads: "The Word was in the beginning, and that very Word was with God, and God was that Word." The Capitalisation is Lamsa's, as Aramaic a) has no capital letters, b) has only capital letters - but not both. (Might mean something useful to someone) Alan :-| --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 00:55:16 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: New Issues of THEOSOPHY WORLD Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961008073823.006873d4@mail.deltanet.com> THEOSOPHY WORLD is an internet magazine dedicated to the theosophical philosophy and its practical application in the modern world. Contents of the first few issues are: May, 1996 (Preliminary Issue) > "Our Goals" by John Paul Rolston > "Status Update" by Eldon Tucker June, 1996 > "Looking to the Future" by John Paul Rolston > "Theosophy in Tibet: The Teachings of the Jonangpa School" > by David Reigle > "The Masters Revealed" by Dara Eklund > "Ergates: The Energetic Worker" by Rich Taylor > "Embarking on a New Attempt" by Rodolfo Don > "The Paracelsian Order" by John H. Drais > "Theosophy in the Computer Age" by Jerry Hejka-Ekins > "What Are the Life-Atoms?" by Bee Brown > "Teaching the Soul Direct" from a conversation between Charles > Johnson and Madame Blavatsky > "Rights, Duties, Privileges" by Henry T. Edge July, 1996 > "Narada: A Study in The Secret Doctrine" by G. de Purucker > "Technical Terms in Stanza I" by David Reigle > "Theosophy: A Living Truth" by Rodolfo Don > "Current Superstitions" by Dara Eklund > "Psychic and Spiritual Path" by G. de Purucker > "The Archetypla Virtue" by B. P. Wadia > "Transition of Kingdoms on Globe D" by Eldon Tucker > "HPB In the News Again!" (Anonymous) > "States of Matter" by Eldon Tucker > "HPB In Tibet" (Anonymous) > "Models of Karma" by Eldon Tucker > "Alexandria West: Open to the Public" (Anonymous) > "Theosophical Encyclopeadia in Preparation" by Philip Harris August, 1996 > "Blavatsky Net Goes Online" by Scribe > "Spiritual Evolution" by Raghavan Iyer > "Original Edition of 'The Voice of the Silence'" by John H. Drais > "Appealing to the Higher Nature" by Henry T. Edge > "Psychic Powers" by Andrew Rooke > "What if I Met a Master" by Eldon Tucker > "Once Again Blavatsky Words Are Proven True" by Radda Bai > "Armageddon" by Mrs. Harry Benjamin > "PI In Base 12 Notation" > "Each Member a Center" by William Quan Judge > "When Our Memory Fails Us" by Eldon Tucker > "Theosophical Glossary and the Psychic" by Mrs. Harry Benjamin > "Cycles and the Earth's Core" by Eldon Tucker > "Monads, Principles, and Sutratmans" by G. de Purucker September, 1996 > "The First Blavatsky Message" by H.P. Blavatsky > "Theosophy Lodge Online -- Press Release" > "Theosophical Internet-Relay Chat" by Eldon Tucker > "Best Wishes for Success" by Rodolfo Don > "Back Issues Available" > "Theosophy Blasted" by Numerous Critics > "Theosophy in the 20th Century and Beyond" by Andrew Rooke > "The Pledge of Kwan-Yin" by Raghavan N. Iyer > "The Power of a Single Number" by Chuck Bermingham > "Theosophical Correspondence Course" > "Comments on Fossil Hominids" by Eldon Tucker > "The Impact of Mind on the Course of Evolution" by Richard Taylor > "There is a TS Yoga" by Martin Euser > "Are Lower Planes Bad?" by Eldon Tucker > "Dharma Books" by Nicholas Weeks October, 1996 > "Great Theosophists: The Count de St. Germain" > "Second Annual Conference of the Brookings Theosophical Study > Group [ULT]" by A Student > "News from the Australian Theosophical Society" by Darrin Potaka > "Theosophy for Beginners is True Too" by Eldon Tucker > "Forty Years of Occultism" by Alan Bain > "Metaphysics and Ethics" by Raghavan N. Iyer > "The Source Teachings of Theosophy" by Richard Taylor > "Moving at the Speed of Light" by Eldon Tucker > "Some Comments on Publication of THE MAHATMA LETTERS and the > Esoteric Writings" by Daniel H. Caldwell > "Striking Unfamiliar Ground" by Katherine Tingley > "My First Memory of Joy Mills" by Richard Ihle > "Let Every Man Prove His Own Work" by Mrs. Harry Benjamin > "A Hike in the Woods" by Paul Johnson To submit papers or news items, subscribe, or unsubscribe, write to theos-world@theosophy.com. (The editoral slant of the magazine is towards exploring the theosophical philosophy, with an attempt to keep materials "on topic" and civil in nature. The associated discussion list is not solely limited to items appearing in the magazine; it is still experimental in nature and is subject to change.) -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 20:02:37 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Unveiled Isis Message-ID: <199610090111.VAA17319@ultra1.dreamscape.com> To Jim Meier R>of us on theos-l who are interested in primitive Christianity and >>its origins. Or, perhaps, there are only two or three of us on >>theos-l who are interested in this subject *and* are not >>threatened by a critical discussion of Christianity. As for myself, the former applies. I'm not a Christian, and so I'm just not interested in Christianity's early origins, Especially not to the extent you've been discussing them on this list for the past few weeks. But then, I'm not that interested in the roots of Theosophy either. I just can't see that digging around in the past can be that constructive. It's an interesting pass time, sometimes. But as far as having any practical applications, I find it rather useless. I'd rather read about and write about ideas I can use in my daily life. I haven't said anything about your disccussions so far, because I think you have a right to discuss whatever you want. I've just been passing it by. But if you start challenging me with maybe I feel threatened by your learned, critical discussions, I'll speak up & tell you "no way". But it seems to me that instead of being critical and hacking around on long dead early Christianity, it'd be more productive if you discussed something like the Sermon on the Mount, or the story with the loaves and fishes ... passages that can be applied to living today. At least that's my considered opinion. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 01:06:21 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: Use of (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961009010619.006a0d98@mail.deltanet.com> Ramadoss, Nathan, and Ruben: >Hi, Brother Nathan: > >It appears that the VOS message may have been received by >theos@netcom.com from theos-roots@vnet.net, since the VOS is being >discussed on it and theos@netcom.com is subscribed to theos-roots. > >I thought this may aid in locating/identifying how my message reached >theos@netcom.com. I would be interested in your feedback. > >Peace to all living beings. > >M K Ramadoss I noticed that a few email messages had the headers a bit mixed up. Like my posting to theos-l on October 3 says "To: Eldon B. Tucker". If the theos-l listserv header was temporary off, perhaps there was a short time when postings came out addressed as "to: xyz" where "xyz" was an individual list member, rather than "to: theos-l ..." This would make, for instance, postings to lists that theos@netcom.com (as well as everyone else), to seem to be individually addressed to the recipients. -- Eldon -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 19:41:24 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Spiritual Discrimination Message-ID: <199610090244.WAA26230@cliff.cris.com> Max: >Future generations may discard the contemporary notions of karma and >justice as childish inventions of immature 19th-century minds, but the >reality behind those notions is going to persist as it is beyond >limitations of space and time. One would hope that if it proves useless, it would be discarded or at least looked on as a curious antique. I would imagine that the knowledge of yesterday would be expanded and advanced in this time frame, while in the next generation, our knowledge would also be beyond what we think of it. As the old saying goes, the only thing that stays the same is change. So why should knowledge be any different? Our notions of karma/justice should be different as time goes on, just as the understanding of fire is somewhat beyond that of the caveman/woman. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 21:49:10 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: <199610090247.WAA26981@cliff.cris.com> On 7 Oct 96 at 21:32, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Maurice, > How do we know the Masters were telling the truth? > > Chuck the Heretic > > Supreme Panarch of the Church of the New Mystery > Sky Marshall of the Universe Sky Marshall of the Universe?! Sounds like one of those kiddie space shows from the 50's. "AND NOW ANOTHER EPISODE OF (whoosh!) SKY MARSHALL OF THE UNIVERSE!" Maurice: > Blind faith is one thing, Chucky babe, . . . Yes, Maurice, I can speak from personal experience and up-close examination. Chuck IS a real babe. > By the bye, where do you propose we chuck the heretic? Are we >back in the days of the Inquisition? No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:03:31 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Use of (fwd) Message-ID: Hi, Brother Nathan: It appears that the VOS message may have been received by theos@netcom.com from theos-roots@vnet.net, since the VOS is being discussed on it and theos@netcom.com is subscribed to theos-roots. I thought this may aid in locating/identifying how my message reached theos@netcom.com. I would be interested in your feedback. Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss ===================================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:29:21 -0500 (CDT) From: m.k. ramadoss Subject: Re: Use of Hi, Brother Nathan: As far as I recall, I have not sent any message to theos@netcom.com on VOS. Is it possible that theos@netcom.com is subscribed to any of the theos-xxxx, in which case anything posted to that list will be automatically distributed by the listprocessor at vnet.net. Can you forward me a copy of the msg you are referring to so that we can find out how you got the message from me. It will be very interesting to find out. Thanks. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss Member, Theosophical Society in America San Antonio Lodge, Texas On Mon, 7 Oct 1996 Natsec@aol.com wrote: > Dear Brother Ramadoss, > > Your recent discussion about the VOS and its implications for living are, > while interesting, not appropriate to TSA's address. > Messages sent to the Society at should be restricted to > Society business, not to pass theosophical observations between individuals. > Thanks for your cooperation. > > William Nathan Greer > National Secretary > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 08:31:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Use of (fwd) Message-ID: Hi The message below clarifies the problem and am glad it is diagnosed. Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 07:15:40 -0400 > From: Natsec@aol.com > Subject: Re: Use of Dear Brother Ramadoss, Warm greetings to all our members in San Antonio. It appears that some other member accidentally posted their comments about VOS to ... then your ensuing response was automatically posted as well. Thanks for your cooperation. William Nathan Greer National Secretary From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:57:40 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Internet E-Mail and TSA Officers Message-ID: Dear Brother Greer: I was very delighted to see your e-mail message. It was the very first time I have seen any e-mail message from any of the National Officers and glad to see that at least you have taken the initiative to learn to use the e-mail. It is my hope that the other Officers will follow you. E-Mail is very extensively used in business, industry, government, individuals and all kinds of organizations. It is fast, incremental cost, other than time is Zero and saves all the various natural resources. Coupled with Fax and Telephone, it speeds up communications and we can get things resolved around the clock. It my hope that someday we will be able to use e-mail to communicate with each and every individual at Olcott at the individual level and it would help everybody. I have used e-mail very extensively, using couple of different e-mail software running on plain vanilla Internet. If you have any questions that I can help you or anybody with, please send a e-mail message. BTW, one does not need a high powered expensive computer to use Internet including e-mail, browing www, ftp etc. I am writing this on a 286 machine witha monocrome monitor. So Internet can be used with a very small budget. With best wishes MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 00:43:12 +0100 From: Alan Subject: HPB Message3.txt Message-ID: The third message of HPB (to the American convention of 1890) has been placed in the HPB directory on my hompepage. Click on _DIRECTORY_ on the front page to get there, and follow the tree structure. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:41:53 +0000 From: "Alicia N. Pineda" Subject: Re: THEOS-SPAN digest 30 Message-ID: <19961009184151.AAA21311@LOCALNAME> Ernesto, Podria enviarme su mensaje una vez mas? Me ha sido imposible entenderlo completamente. Lo unico que he entendido es su pregunta acerca de la influencia que se puede tener en el comportamiento de un individuo determinado.... Saludos, At 01:56 AM 9/30/96 +0000, you wrote: > >Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 21:37:53 -0600 >From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs_?= Ernesto Cruz =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDnez?= >To: theos-span@vnet.net >Subject: Re: THEOS-SPAN digest 27 >Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19960928214242.1a6fd968@planet.com.mx> > >At 23:33 25/09/96 -0400, you wrote: > Hola que tal a todos los del foro!! > Soy yo de nuevo Jes=FAs desde M=E9xico, quiero pedir una disculpa por= > haberme >ausentando alg=FAn tiempo del foro, pero tuve algunas dificultades= > acad=E9micas >(ex=E1menes) y me fue dif=EDcil comunicarme. Bien, pasando a otras cosas me= > da >gusto que m=E1s personas se adhieran a este foro teos=F3fico en espa=F1ol,= > solo >que habr=EDa que presentarse o por lo menos saber desde donde hablan como= > Eric >que escribe desde Panam=E1, no creen? :), solo es con la intenci=F3n de >conocernos un poco m=E1s. > Por otro lado he leido algunas de sus contribuciones y me parecen muy >acertadas de todo a todo, pero se han puesto a pensar en esto...si el libre >albedr=EDo existe como lo pensamos y tambi=E9n podemos influir en el >comportamiento de otras personas con solo nuestros buenos deseos, esto como >se ver=EDa de acuerdo con el libre albedr=EDo? y adem=E1s si existe una ley= > de >Karma, como lo suponemos desde luego, c=F3mo deber=EDamos tratar este= > problema >de la influiencia sobre el comportamiento sobre un individuo determinado? >Estas preguntas me las hago a menudo, porque como podemos influenciar en >alguien sin alterar su libre albedr=EDo?, quienes somo nosotros para >alterarlo? qu=E9 piensan ustedes chicos, eh? >Fraternalmente Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz Mart=EDnez, Logia Unidad de M=E9xico >----------------------------------- >Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz Mart=EDnez >jecruz@planet.com.mx >http://www.planet.com.mx/~unidad/index,htm From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 16:02:45 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 683 Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961009030245.006f58e0@whanganui.ac.nz> At 04:31 PM 08/10/96 -0400, you wrote: > >On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Robert Word wrote: > >> The power of the Spoken Word, and the power of Thought, are aspects of >> experience more intensely within the purvue of those who have received >> degrees and training in the eastern system, the western system, or any >> valid trainings system or tradition; the profane normally do not >> experience these levels in an intense way. >> >> But as we practice in a controlled way, and create by thought or speech, >> then how can we fully follow artistic or literary interests in a >> completely free fashion. This is a way of expressing the difficulty, >> and we must take account of Maxim's statements regarding karma. But one >> possible approach may be to rely on the great provenance of the universe >> itself, leading to the all good. There are, of course, in some >> traditions, certain potent practices which are intended to benefit all >> sentient beings. > >Robert, > >The source of the problem here is the word "controlled." Controlled by >what--one's own desires? the mind? or the higher self? > >For someone controlled by his/her higher self there is nothing like >creating "in a completely free fashion." His/her freedom is freedom from >desires, mental patterns, ignorance, and illusion. As regards the sources >of artistic inspiration, his/her task (or duty) is to make contact with >the spiritual planes and to bring glimpses of spiritual >beauty down to the earth to help merge Spirit and Matter in general and >induce catharsis in listeners/viewers in particular. (Catharsis: the >purging of an audience's emotions through a work of art.--The Random >House Dictionary.) To this end, the artist may need to go through some >preparation like purification of the heart and the mind, maybe some >fasting, isolation from the chaotic impressions of the outer world, some >meditation (concentrated thinking about the seed idea of the future >artwork). > >This is a standard view based on Plato's and Plotinus' ideas, and also >the way having followed (more or less) by such people as Beethoven, >Wagner, Nicholas Roerich, and so forth. > >Maxim > The understanding I have gained is that we are all rather lowly evolved beings as yet and so our freedom consists of following or not following the Laws of the Universe. If we chose not to, then Karma throws bricks at us until we stop and look closer at our situation and which Laws we might be flouting. The continual sending of HPB's etc is to try to convince the lower personality to serve the higher without the fear of loosing itself. Individuality remains but vibrates at a higher level and so gains access and understanding of more of the Laws. We don't loose the lower aspects but draw them up to a higher aspect of ourselves as we evolve. Once we have elevated our desire nature to a level of non-attachment then the desire nature we once had is no longer there because it has been purified and incorporated into the place we have now arrived at. I would venture to suggest that words become more powerful as we evolve ourselves and even now the power of words spoken carelessly can hurt another person deeply even if they were not intended to do so. Words are sounds and carry vibrations just as music, singing, in fact all our senses ultimately pick up energy frequencies and the brain etc converts them into sounds, sight, touch etc. When I read a post on here it seems to get converted into mental thoughts or images in my mind which I then react to according to my own predilictions. So I can hurt myself from what is said by someone else even if that person did not intend that to happen. It is said that Krishnamurti was able to impart understanding to his audience by the power of his words and afterwards people sort of forgot what they had understood before. The use of invocations in so many rites of various belief systems, suggests that words said in the right order and pitch cause changes in matter as required by the participants. The motto of adepts - do, dare, and be silent seems suggestive of the power they wield at their stage of development. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Oct 96 21:17 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Sexism Message-ID: If one was unfamiliar with Theosophy, the reading of the postings on this list would suggest that Theosophy is a belief that fosters chavinism and the belittling of other faiths. Not much different, really, from the very patriarchial philosophy of Christianity, which according to most who post here, are in no way tainted. There is no crime in using gender neutral language; for how are we going to accept the "humanity" in all of us if we pretend that the female essence of humanity does not exist. The terms "man," "brotherhood," and "he" (when referring to all those on the quest) are used with no analysis of what they really imply. Just because it is offically sanctioned by society to use these terms as representatives of all does not make it right. I would have beleived those in Theosophy could at least transcend this most basic of errors; for it insists on critical thinking. Also, perhaps if one examined Wicca - and not from "newsletters" and hearsay - one may find them much more than stated on these postings. I did not find what I needed in Wicca; however, they were far from the stereotypical terms used here. I am suspicious, too, that men, who seem rather disrespectful of the female element judge Wicca negatively. As Wicca offers respect to women (valid or invalid), it seems natural that some of the men writing on this post would find it uncomfortable. I know this is not the first time this issue has been brought up in Theosophy. However, if something is to progress, some must have the courage to take the first step. We are more than male and female - we must act and speak and write accordingly. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 01:56:44 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: > > > On 7 Oct 96 at 21:32, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > > Maurice, > > How do we know the Masters were telling the truth? > > > > Chuck the Heretic > > > > Supreme Panarch of the Church of the New Mystery > > Sky Marshall of the Universe > > Sky Marshall of the Universe?! Sounds like one of those kiddie space shows > from the 50's. "AND NOW ANOTHER EPISODE OF (whoosh!) SKY MARSHALL OF THE > UNIVERSE!" > > Maurice: > > Blind faith is one thing, Chucky babe, . . . > > Yes, Maurice, I can speak from personal experience and up-close > examination. Chuck IS a real babe. > > > By the bye, where do you propose we chuck the heretic? Are we > >back in the days of the Inquisition? > > No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". > > -Ann E. Bermingham > > Isn't a babe female? I don't think he qualifies..... Besides, I prefer ground Chuck (smile & ducking) Gertrude the Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:04:48 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: <199610090959.AA24679@vnet.net> On 9 Oct 96 at 0:05, kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > If one was unfamiliar with Theosophy, the reading of the postings on > this list would suggest that Theosophy is a belief that fosters > chavinism > > There is no crime in using gender neutral language; While I respect your views, my dear sister, methinks genus homo, or more specifically some thereof, have taken certain things a bit too seriously these days and have to whatever degree gone to the extreme. I forsooth respect both genders. Nonetheless, I'll still utilise the masculine and feminine where it is appropriate. I notice, though, that those who purportedly hold to gender neutral vocabulary often don't mind using the feminine in reference to specific things or contexts. When people really start to comprehend the spiritual validity of the masculine and feminine, I assure you, they will see no harm in saying god or goddess, lord or lady, or whatsoever legitimate appellation. Bring into context, then, that which is out of context. Real derogative contexts are not acceptable, however, dear sister mine, where the context is not derogatory there is no reason to not use gender specific language. Mankind does have its fads and trends. In our contemporary society it has become trendy in some quarters to adhere to and push this agenda called gender neutrality. Thankfully, these fads are transitory. But quite a few get caught up in them. By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself at a specific period in the history of our planet and not by Blavatsky, the Theosophists, the Rosicrucians or any other. This illustrious Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. And it still retains the name as well as valid gender specific language to this very day. There, at least, sanity reigns. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:04:49 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: Spiritual Discrimination Message-ID: <199610090959.AA24681@vnet.net> On 8 Oct 96 at 23:09, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > I would imagine that the > knowledge of yesterday would be expanded and advanced in this time > frame, while in the next generation, our knowledge would also be > beyond what we think of it. Progressive revelation - Truth progressively revealed in accordance with the Law of Cycles. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Oct 96 08:55:55 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Babes Message-ID: <961009125555_72723.2375_FHP48-5@CompuServe.COM> Ann B.: >> No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". Gertrude the Churchmouse: >Isn't a babe female? I don't think he qualifies..... >Besides, I prefer ground Chuck (smile & ducking) Although my online dictionary defines it's slang usage as a "young woman", one must not forget that as we respond to the equalizing energies of the Aquarian Age, that the term can be applied to both sexes. I first heard it used in this manner when reading my soap opera newsgroup. One poster referred to a couple of the actors as "real babes." I found it quite refreshing. After all, why shouldn't men be known and appreciated for their beauty as well as women known and appreciated for their brains and accomplishments. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:53:34 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > > By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great > White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. > The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself at a > specific period in the history of our planet and not by Blavatsky, > the Theosophists, the Rosicrucians or any other. This illustrious > Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both > genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with > legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. And it > still retains the name as well as valid gender specific language to > this very day. There, at least, sanity reigns. > WOW! I wonder how you know that? Please give the list a chance Kym ... not all the men on it speak down to women as badly as that post does, and many agree either in part or wholly with your sentiments regarding the use of language. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:43:56 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: <961009114356_122507938@emout11.mail.aol.com> Ann, I was wondering if anyone on this list would know whom I was referring to. He was my favorite TV hero when I was a little kid. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:47:39 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: <961009114738_122510337@emout17.mail.aol.com> Gertrude, Back to your mousehole before I set Simon on you! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:50:59 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Babes Message-ID: <961009115057_122512641@emout09.mail.aol.com> Ann, I'm blushing. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 08:54:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Great White Brotherhood Message-ID: I think we do not know exactly how the members of the Brotherhood call their community. Here are some names known to me: 1. Great White Brotherhood: seems to be a surrogate name for Westerners; correct, descriptive, but imprecise. 2. Great White Lodge: mentioned in A.Bailey's "Initiation Human and Solar." 3. Shambhala: According to Alice Bailey is to be applied to ANOTHER planetary center, that of Will, the Brotherhood being the center of planetary LOve. Although it may be--and often is--applied to the Brotherhood, technically speaking it's incorrect. 4. Other names used sometimes interchangeably with Shambhala (like Agartha) do not seem to be used by Masters. BTW a new book on Shambhala just came out: |ACCESSION: 34598145 | AUTHOR: LePage, Victoria. | TITLE: Shambhala : | the fascinating truth behind the myth of Shangri-la / | PLACE: Wheaton, Ill. : |PUBLISHER: Theosophical Publishing House, | YEAR: 1996 | PUB TYPE: Book | ISBN: 083560750X | SUBJECT: Shambhala. | Legends -- Himalaya Mountains. 5. Hierarchy: used abundantly by A.Bailey, but I do not think it's in use between the Masters themselves. Seems to be another surrogate for Westerners. 6. Maitreya Sangha (i.e. Community of Maitreya): used as a logo on front covers and title pages of all Agni Yoga books; this one seems to be the most precise name and a self-designation (but I cannot prove it). If this is so, it is to used (i.e. pronounced and thought of) with great care. As to female adepts, I believe they exist (I do not refer here to a mysterious entity called the Mother of the World--another sacred name to be used with great care). My source of information: some Agni Yoga materials like Helen Roerich's letters and diaries not available yet in English translation. On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, JRC wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > > > > By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great > > White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. > > The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself at a > > specific period in the history of our planet and not by Blavatsky, > > the Theosophists, the Rosicrucians or any other. This illustrious > > Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both > > genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with > > legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. And it > > still retains the name as well as valid gender specific language to > > this very day. There, at least, sanity reigns. > > > WOW! I wonder how you know that? > > Please give the list a chance Kym ... not all the men on it speak down to > women as badly as that post does, and many agree either in part or wholly > with your sentiments regarding the use of language. > -JRC > > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:51:49 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <961009115148_122513308@emout20.mail.aol.com> Max, As you can imagine, purity of any kind and I don't usually get in the same building together. I suppose I'm one of those who believe in going after knowledge and damning the cost along with the torpedoes. But I also know lots of thelemites and find them to radiate more love and light than an equal number my theosophical brethren. They are infinitely less judgemental and if one needs help are more likely to give the help than lectures about karma. The unfortunate fact is that the more I examine much of what is called the ageless wisdom, I find it to be neither ageless nor particularly wise. It is the old problem of what is true and digging for that leads us to many different tunnels and we gain nothing by damning those tunnels that, for whatever reason, don't particularly appeal to us. For example, I rather like Crowley and I absolutely despise Christianity. But in my calmer moments (they occur about twice a year) I will admit that the christian probably has some element of truth in his belief, though for the life of me I can't see where it could be. Therefore, before this thing turns into another of our list screaming matches, let us agree to disagree on Crowley because clearly neither side is going to convince the other. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:51:54 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, to Dare, to Do, and to be Silent Message-ID: <961009115152_122513365@emout02.mail.aol.com> Maurice, AAARGH!!! That's one of the worst puns I've seen in a week and I'm surprised no one thought of it sooner. Anyway, the question of the Masters is a fascinating one. Being someone of my time and culture, I am biologically disposed to be cynical about everyone and that extends in many ways to them as well. The problem is how are we to judge these matters and that is something each must answer for himself. Belief and faith are not options for me, though they may be for others. I need evidence and that evidence is lacking for much of the Masters' material. That combined with the fact that we have only one side of the conversation (which makes interpretation difficult at best) and they were writing to eccentric Victorians and thus had to sugar coat some things and possibly outright lie about others to protect the readers from going into shock leads me to seriously question the validity of much of the work. It's a serious problem and one that does not lend itself to an easy solution. In the meantime, as you know from reading Chesterton, we no longer chuck heretics but crown them with laurels and buy lots of their books. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:16:00 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: Hi If you look beneath what you see many of us post here, you will find that in this maillist than any other, you find us all treat every human being as equals no matter what the language may suggest. It is the equality of everyone in the humanity that is at the foundation of Theosophy, and that is why it is here even after more than a century. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, JRC wrote: > On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > > > > By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great > > White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. > > The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself at a > > specific period in the history of our planet and not by Blavatsky, > > the Theosophists, the Rosicrucians or any other. This illustrious > > Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both > > genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with > > legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. And it > > still retains the name as well as valid gender specific language to > > this very day. There, at least, sanity reigns. > > > WOW! I wonder how you know that? > > Please give the list a chance Kym ... not all the men on it speak down to > women as badly as that post does, and many agree either in part or wholly > with your sentiments regarding the use of language. > -JRC > > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 08:57:19 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 684 Message-ID: <325BCB5F.6849@TIW.COM> ---------- > > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:58:53 +1000 > From: "Maurice de Montaine" > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 682 > Message-ID: <199610080652.AA00573@vnet.net> > > On 7 Oct 96 at 18:31, Robert Word wrote: > > > > But the case of Crowley, I find difficult to understand. As a > > member of Anglo Saxon Lodge under Grand Loge de France, he could > > never have been admitted to the regular (i.e. recognized) Ancient > > and Accepted Rite in England. Are you sure that the letter of > > expulsion emanates from the Regular Body? > > You reveal all, my brother, when you say "I find it difficult to > understand." The point is in your knowledge and your understanding or > lack thereof. That is why you are encountering such a difficulty. > There is nothing essentially difficult or extrordinary about it. I > say this respectfully rather than in a derogatory context. > > Never use the word never in such a context, my friend. It is > neither impossible nor unique. It has been done before and will be > done again. Learn to assess each instance on its own merits rather > than generalising too much. Both his Masonic diploma as I have stated > and the letter of expulsion originate therefrom. I would have told > you if it were otherwise. > Maurice, the statement "I find it difficult to understand" is only a manner of speaking, and it refers to your preposterous statements about Crowley, in this regard. Crowley was never a member of a numerically large, regular, Scottish Rite in England. And the outfit that you are referring to was most likely a clandestine little outfit of five or ten members, if indeed, it had any existence outside of a paper one at all. Such tiny little groups are rife with politics, and no significance can be attached to the expulsion of Crowley from it. Incidentally, Maurice, I hold clandestine authorities for the ancient and primative rite, and I am writing out a writ of expulsion right now for a certain fellow in Australia for making unmasonic statements about a brother. > Fraternally > > Maurice > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > * Maurice de Montaine * > * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * > * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * > * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * > * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * > * * * > * * * * > * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * > > ------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:52:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: I agree that it's a good point to stop before we begin throwing insults at each other. Thanks for your sensitivity to this issue. Love, Max On Wed, 9 Oct 1996 Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Max, > As you can imagine, purity of any kind and I don't usually get in the same > building together. I suppose I'm one of those who believe in going after > knowledge and damning the cost along with the torpedoes. But I also know > lots of thelemites and find them to radiate more love and light than an equal > number my theosophical brethren. They are infinitely less judgemental and if > one needs help are more likely to give the help than lectures about karma. > The unfortunate fact is that the more I examine much of what is called the > ageless wisdom, I find it to be neither ageless nor particularly wise. It is > the old problem of what is true and digging for that leads us to many > different tunnels and we gain nothing by damning those tunnels that, for > whatever reason, don't particularly appeal to us. For example, I rather like > Crowley and I absolutely despise Christianity. But in my calmer moments > (they occur about twice a year) I will admit that the christian probably has > some element of truth in his belief, though for the life of me I can't see > where it could be. > Therefore, before this thing turns into another of our list screaming > matches, let us agree to disagree on Crowley because clearly neither side is > going to convince the other. > > Chuck the Heretic > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 10:53:19 -0700 From: Robert Word Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 685 Message-ID: <325BE68F.2FC5@TIW.COM> theos-l@vnet.net wrote: > > Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 13:09:45 -0700 (PDT) > From: Maxim Osinovsky > To: theos-l@vnet.net > Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 683 > Message-ID: > > On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Robert Word wrote: > > > The power of the Spoken Word, and the power of Thought, are aspects of > > experience more intensely within the purvue of those who have received > > degrees and training in the eastern system, the western system, or any > > valid trainings system or tradition; the profane normally do not > > experience these levels in an intense way. > > > > But as we practice in a controlled way, and create by thought or speech, > > then how can we fully follow artistic or literary interests in a > > completely free fashion. This is a way of expressing the difficulty, > > and we must take account of Maxim's statements regarding karma. But one > > possible approach may be to rely on the great provenance of the universe > > itself, leading to the all good. There are, of course, in some > > traditions, certain potent practices which are intended to benefit all > > sentient beings. > > Robert, > > The source of the problem here is the word "controlled." Controlled by > what--one's own desires? the mind? or the higher self? > > For someone controlled by his/her higher self there is nothing like > creating "in a completely free fashion." His/her freedom is freedom from > desires, mental patterns, ignorance, and illusion. As regards the sources > of artistic inspiration, his/her task (or duty) is to make contact with > the spiritual planes and to bring glimpses of spiritual > beauty down to the earth to help merge Spirit and Matter in general and > induce catharsis in listeners/viewers in particular. (Catharsis: the > purging of an audience's emotions through a work of art.--The Random > House Dictionary.) To this end, the artist may need to go through some > preparation like purification of the heart and the mind, maybe some > fasting, isolation from the chaotic impressions of the outer world, some > meditation (concentrated thinking about the seed idea of the future > artwork). > > This is a standard view based on Plato's and Plotinus' ideas, and also > the way having followed (more or less) by such people as Beethoven, > Wagner, Nicholas Roerich, and so forth. > > Maxim Maxim, you are undoubtedly correct on all of these points, and I thank you for once again enlightening our hearts and minds with theosophical virtue. Robert > > ------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:01:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >What I intended to communicate is that theosophy cannot be all things for > >all people. It does NOT embrace teachings of people like A.Cr. It includes a > >very clear, distinct perspective on white vs. black magic, evil, and so > >forth, and it is provable. > > Do you mean that it is provable that the teachings of theosophy have > this clear distinction? If so, then of course *this* can be proved. > What cannot be "proved" is that these theosophical teachings are totally > correct. Yes, this is what I meant, that is 'the teachings of theosophy have this clear distinction.' Seems to be a banality, but (1) is not so evident for some theosophists, and (2) has some some important implications. As to 'proving' the theosophical teachings, it looks like the only thing that has been proven on this discussion list is that they cannot be proved, so please give me some idea of what kind of proof you expect. On my side, I believe that one may get all the neccessary proofs if one cares to do meditation and make contact with one's higher self (aka the Self, soul, spirit, atman). No contact with the Self, no proofs are possible. > >The Ageless Wisdom is the light of your, my, and everybody else's higher > >self, that's why it is so uniform from man to man and throughout the ages. > >Being awakened, it creates a sense of DIRECTION urging everybody to move > >in the SAME direction--from darkness to light. > > This is *your* opinion about an Ageless Wisdom understood from *your* > perspective. I too believe that there is an Ageless Wisdom, but I doubt > the exactitude of its application as you appear to describe it. Again, all perspectives (including mine) are secondary things. If there is underlying spiritual experience, all perspectives are just means to to approximately shape the intrinsically inexpressible experience and communicate it to others. So it would be a good idea not to adhere too closely to perspectives. Could we please discuss the Ageless Wisdom rather than perspectives on it? > To follow (I hope) your approach: > > IF the Ageless Wisdom is 100% available and 100% able to be understood > by incarnate human beings, THEN we need to watch out! Re: your IFs. Enlightened people are used to say it IS available and never was unavailable. To think otherwise means creating self-imposed barriers. That's a standard statement found in many spiritual books. It remains to be seen what you mean by 'understanding.' If you mean intellectual understaning, the answer would be: "no, we cannot understand it." Proof: Christian theology. > IF the percentage of availability is less than 100%, and incarnate human > ability to understand it is also less than 100% - THEN we still need to > watch out! > > Part of your point (I think) is that such people as Crowley > misinterpreted and/or misunderstood the Wisdom, creating confusion and > distress for many students. That's not my point. I believe that those who, like Cr., consciously rejected the Light and collaborated with the Darkness, do not have any contact with their higher selves and consequently have no access to the Ageless Wisdom. Due to persistence of their evil will, they may learn some technical occult secrets, but that's knowledge of matter (in its subtle gradations), not the Ageless Wisdom which is the knowledge of spirit. > However, it may also be true (another implicit "if") that the > transmitters of the Wisdom may also have misinterpreted and/or > misunderstood the Wisdom in varying degrees. This latter scenario seems > to fit the evidence available. A good example from theosophical history > is Leadbeater's description of life on Mars (CWLMARS.TXT) in the HISTORY > directory in my homepage "Directory of Goodies" structure. Yes, it's quite possible that the Ageless Wisdom may get distorted by the minds of its transmitters. A good example is what Gourdjieff called 'silly monks'--they may get into touch with the higher planes, but when they get back to the vale of life, their revelations translate into futile Christian babble or absolutely useless devotional stuff. As to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that writings by L. (and other theosophical writers, except HPB, Subba Row, a few books by A.Besant, a very few books by Mabel Collins, some books by Anne Kingsford, plus some other exceptions) are based on his ASTRAL visions and therefore are untrustworthy. Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Oct 96 15:39:53 EDT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be a Babe Message-ID: <961009193953_72723.2375_FHP56-1@CompuServe.COM> Chuck the Heretic >I was wondering if anyone on this list would know whom I was referring to. >He was my favorite TV hero when I was a little kid. Actually, it was my husband that picked up on it. Another space cowboy, it seems. BTW, it's good to see a man blush. -Ann E. Bermingham Hey! I thought I cancelled Compuserve! Why are they still sending me mail and letting me post? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:26:25 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: Babes Message-ID: <199610092120.AA08756@vnet.net> On 9 Oct 96 at 9:05, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > Ann B.: > >> No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". > > Gertrude the Churchmouse: > >Isn't a babe female? I don't think he qualifies..... > >Besides, I prefer ground Chuck (smile & ducking) > > Although my online dictionary defines it's slang usage as a "young > woman", one must not forget that as we respond to the equalizing > energies of the Aquarian Age, that the term can be applied to both > sexes. I first heard it used in this manner when reading my soap > opera newsgroup. One poster referred to a couple of the actors as > "real babes." I found it quite refreshing. After all, why > shouldn't men be known and appreciated for their beauty as well as > women known and appreciated for their brains and accomplishments. > > -Ann E. Bermingham Beloved all, It certainly is amazing how humour can sometimes be taken so seriously. To settle your minds to an ease, dear fellow Theosophists, I'm not gay. Although, I must admit, I'm very happy (g). Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:26:23 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: Great White Brotherhood Message-ID: <199610092120.AA08753@vnet.net> On 9 Oct 96 at 12:02, Maxim Osinovsky wrote: > I think we do not know exactly how the members of the Brotherhood > call their community. Here are some names known to me: On the contrary, my brother, they specifically refer to it under the general appellation Great White Brotherhood. Let us always remember that just because some may not be sure, then it does not necessarily follow that all are not certain or don't know. > 1. Great White Brotherhood: seems to be a surrogate name for > Westerners; correct, descriptive, but imprecise. Verily so. Nonetheless, such is it's general name now. It did have alternate general names in the distant past though. The Western theme in this respect has been almost universally adopted by the Brotherhood in its usage thereof. However, in contradistinction to you, my brother, I would affirm its preciseness. > 2. Great White Lodge: mentioned in A.Bailey's "Initiation Human and > Solar." Yes, I possess all AABs books. The Great White Lodge is an alternate name and description for the Great White Brotherhood. It is legitimate. However, this situation does not contravene the general usage of the other designation as above-mentioned. For sometimes the Masters themselves use Great White Lodge, but mostly it is Great White Brotherhood. Besides, it was my intention to demonstrate the legitimacy of using such terms as brotherhood that had me mention this Brotherhood. > 3. Shambhala: According to Alice Bailey is to be applied to ANOTHER > planetary center, that of Will, the Brotherhood being the center of > planetary LOve. Although it may be--and often is--applied to the > Brotherhood, technically speaking it's incorrect. Shamballa (Shambhala) is a distinct part of the Great White Brotherhood. The Brotherhood is composed of many brotherhoods, orders and offices under the one general organisation and banner. > 4. Other names used sometimes interchangeably with Shambhala (like > Agartha) do not seem to be used by Masters. BTW a new book on > Shambhala just came out: Strictly speaking, Agartha refers to a distinct underground place. It is not Shamballa. > 5. Hierarchy: used abundantly by A.Bailey, but I do not think it's > in use between the Masters themselves. Seems to be another surrogate > for Westerners. Hierarchy is a general term used to describe the overall nature of the Kingdom of God (the Spiritual Kingdom). Once again, within the use of this general term is the specific. These specifics are in part: Planetary Hierarchy and Solar Hierarchy. There are still higher aspects of Hierarchy. And Great White Brotherhood remains a legitimate general term as utilised by the collectivity of the Hierarchy by themselves as well as by others. > 6. Maitreya Sangha (i.e. Community of Maitreya): used as a logo on > front covers and title pages of all Agni Yoga books; this one seems > to be the most precise name and a self-designation (but I cannot > prove it). If this is so, it is to used (i.e. pronounced and thought > of) with great care. A specific aspect of the work of the Brotherhood on the physical plane. It is like saying El Morya's Ashram. Interestingly, Maitreya does maintain a specific Mystery School. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:05:51 -0400 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: Re: Isis & history (Liesel) Message-ID: <199610092205.AA14354@vnet.net> Hi Liesel -- I'm responding to your post of yesterday because you addressed it to me, but I only posted a quotation from the thread from Jerry H-E and Abrantes. As to a couple of points you made, >... and so I'm just not >interested in Christianity's early origins, Especially not to the extent >you've been discussing them on this list for the past few weeks. But then, >I'm not that interested in the roots of Theosophy either. I just can't see >that digging around in the past can be that constructive. It's an >interesting pass time, sometimes. But as far as having any practical >applications, I find it rather useless. I'd rather read about and write >about ideas I can use in my daily life. OK, but knowing the history of the forces that shaped our world/interests gives an insight to the forces acting *now*. The Judeo-Christian myth is such a large part of our American heritage, and even a cursory study of early Church history pops a lot of the balloons most of us grew up with as "givens". That's the sort of shock a fundamentalist will likely never recover from, but it sure opens up a fascinating depth of meaning for those who try to find the Christ in a context outside of orthodox theology. Like Theosophy. Of course, it's an interesting passtime, too. :) >... But it seems to me ... it'd be more productive if you discussed >something like the Sermon on the Mount, or the story with the loaves and fishes >... passages that can be applied to living today. At least that's my considered >opinion. >Liesel Productive in what sense? There's a bias against Christianty in Theosophy, and this forum probably isn't the best for such discussions (imo). The "anti- Christian" (at least, anti-organized Christianity) prejudice seems to cycle; first the comments by HPB and Olcott, then the 20's and the heydey of the LCC and Besant's ESOTERIC CHRISTIANITY, then the backlash against the Krishnamurti hysteria... who knows what the future will bring. On the other hand, there aren't that many Christian mail lists for Theosophists, either. Jim PS: The Sermon on the Mount is my personal favorite; p994 in the Gideon Bible, Matt 5-7. (Sales types spend a lot of time in hotel rooms) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:29:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Great White Brotherhood Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: > > 3. Shambhala: According to Alice Bailey is to be applied to ANOTHER > > planetary center, that of Will, the Brotherhood being the center of > > planetary LOve. Although it may be--and often is--applied to the > > Brotherhood, technically speaking it's incorrect. > > Shamballa (Shambhala) is a distinct part of the Great White > Brotherhood. The Brotherhood is composed of many brotherhoods, orders > and offices under the one general organisation and banner. > > 5. Hierarchy: used abundantly by A.Bailey, but I do not think it's > > in use between the Masters themselves. Seems to be another surrogate > > for Westerners. > > Hierarchy is a general term used to describe the overall nature > of the Kingdom of God (the Spiritual Kingdom). Once again, within the > use of this general term is the specific. These specifics are in > part: Planetary Hierarchy and Solar Hierarchy. There are still higher > aspects of Hierarchy. And Great White Brotherhood remains a > legitimate general term as utilised by the collectivity of the > Hierarchy by themselves as well as by others. > > > 6. Maitreya Sangha (i.e. Community of Maitreya): used as a logo on > > front covers and title pages of all Agni Yoga books; this one seems > > to be the most precise name and a self-designation (but I cannot > > prove it). If this is so, it is to used (i.e. pronounced and thought > > of) with great care. > > A specific aspect of the work of the Brotherhood on the physical > plane. It is like saying El Morya's Ashram. Interestingly, Maitreya > does maintain a specific Mystery School. Maurice, I find your corrections somewhat confusing. Since you own all A.Bailey's books you should know that the most consistent and precise way of thinking of Shambhala, etc., is in terms of planetary chakras according to the Hermetic principle of correspondences. It means that one may find some correspondences to Shambhala, etc., in one's own body (not necessarily physical body though), which makes the whole issue much more sensible and down-to-earth. I just would like to mention it, it's not my intention at this time to write about it in more detail. Your way of referring to Master Morya as El Morya suggests that you acknowledge the material channeled by Mark Prophet and Elisabeth Clair Prophet (spelling may be in error). I do not. More references: A lot of material about the Brotherhood may be found in the following Agni Yoga books: - Hierarchy - New Era Community (or just Community) - Brotherhood - Supermundane (subtitle: Book 1. The Inner Life of the Brotherhood) Very valuable material including minute details of the life of the Himalayan ashram of the Brotherhood, is found in Helen Roerich's book entitled "On the Threshold of the New World" (in Russian; published in Moscow by the International Roerichs' Center in 1994). An OCLC record follows: | |ACCESSION: 32004294 | AUTHOR: Rerikh, E. I. (Elena Ivanovna), 1879-1955. | TITLE: U poroga novogo mira / | PLACE: Moskva : |PUBLISHER: Mezhdunarodnyi tsentr Rerikhov : Firma BISAN-OAZIS, | YEAR: 1994 | PUB TYPE: Book | FORMAT: 167 p. ; 22 cm. | SERIES: Malaia Rerikhovskaia biblioteka | NOTES: Notes and correspondence of E. I. Rerikh. | Includes bibliographical references. | ISBN: 5869880343 (pbk.) : | SUBJECT: Rerikh, E. I. -- (Elena Ivanovna), -- 1879-1955. -- | Correspondence. | Yoga. | Hindu cosmology. | Philosophy, Buddhist. | Occultism. | Theosophy. | Dream interpretation. | Visions. | Philosophers -- Soviet Union -- Correspondence. | OTHER: Shaposhnikova, L. V. (Liudmila Vasilevna) Unfortunately this material is not covered in the book on Shambhala I referred to in my previous posting. Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:37:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: In message , CDGertrude writes >> > By the bye, where do you propose we chuck the heretic? Are we >> >back in the days of the Inquisition? >> >> No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". >> >> -Ann E. Bermingham >> >> > > >Isn't a babe female? I don't think he qualifies..... >Besides, I prefer ground Chuck (smile & ducking) >Gertrude the Churchmouse "Take one Chucky babe, and hew him into gobbets." (With apologies to ye olde Mrs Beeton's Cookbook) Controller of Heretics --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:24:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Unveiled Isis Message-ID: In message <199610090111.VAA17319@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >it'd be more productive if you discussed something like the >Sermon on the Mount, or the story with the loaves and fishes ... passages >that can be applied to living today. At least that's my considered opinion. Right. IMO the story about the loaves and fishes is allegorical. There are five loaves and two fishes. The five loaves are the books of the Law (Jesus was an Israelite). The two fishes are the two Covenants, the Old and the New. (New "Testament" is considered by many, including me, as a mis-translation). The New Covenant is, again IMO, based upon the New Covenant mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls literature (The "Damascus Document) and connected with the Nazarene sect of which Jesus was a rabbi. In other words, the parable is telling his followers to study the Law, and to obey both the Old and New Coventants with the God of Israel. As a Kabbalist, I see the Law and the Covenants as the spiritual Israel's version of the "Ageless Wisdom" or whatever we choose to call it. That's why I am also a theosophist. Of course, all of this need a hell of a lot of explanation and interpretation! OK? Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:04:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >Yes, it's quite possible that the Ageless Wisdom may get distorted by the >minds of its transmitters. It is quite possible and IMO 100% certain to occur in each and every transmitter. That does not make all transmissions 100% false or 100% true. I have read again some of my own "transmissions" of some years ago and found errors which I can *now* see were caused by my own wishful thinking interfering with the teaching I received (and still do). So - discrimination is the very first virtue we need to acquire and apply on our individual journeys. And to discriminate means to ask questions and challenge staements and assumptions. Gradually, I have found, we seem to get closer to the Truth, but as a *Christian* writer circa 14th century said, we cannot complete the work in *this* world. [The Cloud of Unknowing, Cap 1. - various publishers and editions]. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:15:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: To Know, To Dare, To be a Sucker Message-ID: In message <961009193953_72723.2375_FHP56-1@CompuServe.COM>, "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@CompuServe.COM> writes >Hey! I thought I cancelled Compuserve! Why are they still sending me mail and >letting me post? Don't ask! They may start charging you - though maybe they still are: check your credit card payments! Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:46:12 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Proofs Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >As to 'proving' the theosophical teachings, it looks like the only thing >that has been proven on this discussion list is that they cannot be proved, >so please give me some idea of what kind of proof you expect. None at all. There is only personal experience. This we *know* we have had as individuals, but we cannopt "prove" its validity to anyone. > On my side, >I believe that one may get all the neccessary proofs if one cares to do >meditation and make contact with one's higher self (aka the Self, soul, >spirit, atman). No contact with the Self, no proofs are possible. I would change the word "proofs" in your statement to "evidence" - then I would agree with what you say. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:56:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: IFs Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >Re: your IFs. > >Enlightened people are used to say it IS available and never was >unavailable. To think otherwise means creating self-imposed barriers. >That's a standard statement found in many spiritual books. > >It remains to be seen what you mean by 'understanding.' If >you mean intellectual understaning, the answer would be: "no, we cannot >understand it." Proof: Christian theology. > 1. I claim to be an enlightened person. I too say it IS available. 2. Statements in "spiritual" books are the opinions of the authors. 3. I have studied Christian Theology extensively. Much of it is intellectual, much of it is allegorical, much of it is metaphysical, and much of it is nonsense. 4. I have found the same thing with Theosophical studies, as well as related studies (Gurdjieff, Ouspensky, Kabbalah, etc.) over the past 40 years. So - Christian Theology is "proof" of nothing. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 18:48:55 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Sexism Message-ID: <199610092357.TAA29743@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Maurice writes >By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great >White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. >The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself ... By the bye, it has always astonished me that throughout the ages there were so many white brothers, and hardly ever a sister in the White Brotherhood. How do you account for that? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:06:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: In message <199610090959.AA24679@vnet.net>, Maurice de Montaine writes > By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great >White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. Yes, we should. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:17:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Babes Message-ID: In message <199610092120.AA08756@vnet.net>, Maurice de Montaine writes > To settle your minds to an ease, dear fellow Theosophists, I'm >not gay. Although, I must admit, I'm very happy (g). > That's nice. My mind would be at ease even if you were gay. (GG) Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 18:56:07 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism Message-ID: <199610100004.UAA00196@ultra1.dreamscape.com> PS to Maurice > This illustrious >> Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both >> genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with >> legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. Maurice, now really, I've been looking for quite a while for members of the White Brotherhood who are female. If you have some names & decriptions, I wish you'd send them to me. All I've ever found was Quan Yin, and the World Mother. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 23:42:44 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: HPB - Messages 4 and 5 Message-ID: I have uploaded to my homepage, in the HPB directory (click on DIRECTORY from the Contents Page) the Message of HBP to the Boston Convention of 1891 [Message4.txt] and her final Message addressed to the Fifth Convention of the American Section of the T.S. {Message5.txt] Both are dated April 15, 1891. In both messages she mentions her ailing health, which led to her departure fron this earthly realm the following month. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 19:14:39 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610100023.UAA01497@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >s to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that >writings by L. (and other theosophical writers, except HPB, Subba Row, a >few books by A.Besant, a very few books by Mabel Collins, some books by >Anne Kingsford, plus some other exceptions) are based on his ASTRAL >visions and therefore are untrustworthy. > >Max Dear Max, If the Master DK said that about Leadbeater, I think he was full of prunes. I didn't know CWL, but if that had been the case, he wouldn't have been able to teach his pupils anything higher than astral vision. He did, and I know that as a fact. Therefore DK was full of prunes in that regard. Can we please get over this stupid factionalism? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:31:07 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: In message , kymsmith@micron.net writes >I know this is not the first time this issue has been brought up in >Theosophy. However, if something is to progress, some must have the courage >to take the first step. We are more than male and female - we must act and >speak and write accordingly. Theosophy International seeks to address this very problem. Follow the links on my homepage below, or if you don't have a Web browser, e-mail me via ti@nellie2.demon.co.uk for more info, though I am sending the basic TI statement as an e-mail file by private post. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:49:43 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes >Could we please discuss the Ageless Wisdom >rather than perspectives on it? I think this is very difficult. You mention the Master D.K. whose existence and communications are meaningful to members of the Arcane School and the followrs of Alice Bailey. Many theosophists argue that this material is unreliable, and will not include it as part of the ageless wisdom. In other words, before we can even *hope* to discuss the Ageless Wisdom, we have to try to agree about what constitutes it. Much discussion on this list has been about this controversial subject. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:49:09 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: > > Ann, > I was wondering if anyone on this list would know whom I was referring to. > He was my favorite TV hero when I was a little kid. > > Chuck the Heretic > You were a child? I thought you were hatched!! (g) ducking -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:50:41 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Babes Message-ID: > > Ann B.: > >> No, heretics have antique value, especially if they are "babes". > > Gertrude the Churchmouse: > >Isn't a babe female? I don't think he qualifies..... > >Besides, I prefer ground Chuck (smile & ducking) > > Although my online dictionary defines it's slang usage as a "young woman", one > must not forget that as we respond to the equalizing energies of the Aquarian > Age, that the term can be applied to both sexes. I first heard it used in this > manner when reading my soap opera newsgroup. One poster referred to a couple of > the actors as "real babes." I found it quite refreshing. After all, why > shouldn't men be known and appreciated for their beauty as well as women known > and appreciated for their brains and accomplishments. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > > I reserve comment (s) -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:13:25 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: In message , JRC writes >On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Maurice de Montaine wrote: >> >> By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great >> White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. >> The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself at a >> specific period in the history of our planet and not by Blavatsky, >> the Theosophists, the Rosicrucians or any other. This illustrious >> Brotherhood contains within its ranks and offices those of both >> genders. It does not discriminate, nor does it do away with >> legitimate gender specific terms to appease ignorant humanity. And it >> still retains the name as well as valid gender specific language to >> this very day. There, at least, sanity reigns. >> >WOW! I wonder how you know that? He possibly belongs to it, my dear sibling, or has direct contact with its members, my good man! (I wonder if any of them are *gay* - foolish attempt at humor, slaps own wrist). > > >Please give the list a chance Kym ... not all the men on it speak down to >women as badly as that post does, and many agree either in part or wholly >with your sentiments regarding the use of language. > -JRC > Amen. JRC, like myself, is a member of Theosophy International, which promotes the use of gender inclusive language. I edited one of my own works to see if it could be done with a lengthy manuscript. I succeeded. Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 18:42:34 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism - to Kym Smith Message-ID: <199610092351.TAA29282@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Kym, Your voice is very much appreciated, but know that some of us have been trying, in vain, to have some of the dated Theosophical language modified to conform with more modern ideas & ideals, because, indeed, when they formulated "The Brotherhood of Man", in the last century, Sisters didn't count for much, even though several of them were running the Theosophical Society. To me, as a woman, even as a female older woman, who should be used to being thought of as a 2d class person, deifying the "Brotherhood of Man" is offensive. I'm neither a man nor a brother, but an equally valuable female human being, and I resent, along with all other women ... and many men ... any idea that insinuates that I'm not equal, if a little different ... and vive la difference! Just about a year ago, not quite, Wheaton was changing the wording of some of our bylaws. They changed around something on the first object, but we couldn't get them to do anything about "Brotherhood". It seems there is objection from International Headquarters, and so "Brotherhood" stayed. I can't see any young people of today be anything but turned off by an organization which says it champions "Brotherhood" as its highest ideal. If you'll have a look at the way we reworded the 3 objects when we formed Theosophy International, I can't quote what we say verbatim, but we talk about "The Human Family". Also our TI set-up is no longer hierarchical, and we had to twist Alan Bain's arm 10 times, before he would accept any leadership functions at all. Also, supposedly, theos-l is supposed to get away from theosophical provincialism. All Theosophical factions are welcome, and most are represented. If we still sound provincial, I would chalk that up to the various members who write in. To me, Theosoophy is eclectic, but that's not everyone else's view. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:17:58 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: A Parallel to Gender Neutral Language Message-ID: <199610100711.AA29896@vnet.net> A PARALLEL TO GENDER NEUTRAL LANGUAGE Plural Neutral Language An interesting parallel to the gender neutral language thread of which has been somewhat considered on the Theosophy List is that of plural neutral language. The misconceptions of humanity coupled to generalisations often find specific trends being developed in society which do not really reflect the purity of truth from a much higher level or viewpoint. Think for a moment on what I said about gender neutral language in my previous posting, eventhough I mentioned only a little about it. There is another problem, though, besides those misconceptions and generalisations: how far do we go in the experiment of social engineering? If we are to structure the world's languages around gender neutral language, then the next step may well be to adopt a plural neutral language. With such a language we could not or should not use any word that even hints at plurality. This would include words like the following: I, me, my, we, our, they,their, with, etc. In fact, there is a whole gamut of words and terms pertaining to plurality. That means we could not ask another where they are going, what they are doing or what they would like without having to rephrase it so there is no possibility of including a plurality referring word or words. Conversely, we could not use any of the presently accepted words when referring to ourselves under such a regime. I can well appreciate the ramifications of a scheme like this on all fields of human endeavour. Where numerals are normally used, my friends, there could not be anything other than one. No mathematics, no science, no arts as distinct types within the general designation, no different styles of music, etc. Even Theosophy would be affected, believe it or not, because there could be no Divine Wisdom as distinct from worldly wisdom and no Seven Principles, etc. Reincarnation would have to be discarded as it stipulates more than one embodiment. There couldn't be the other aspects of Cosmic Law: Law of Polarity, Law of the Triangle, Law of the Sacred Four, Law of Correspondence, Law of Cause and Effect, etc. After that experiment, my brothers and sisters, where do we go and what else do we delete? A system like the above is a total misunderstanding of the Law of the One and the idea behind unity. The Master R. once said:- "...mankind do almost mechanically accept the fads, styles, and trends fostered upon them by those who are able to manipulate the social structure of the planetary body to their own ends." Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Oct 96 05:52:24 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: A Dream Come True is A Work of Art Message-ID: <961010095223_74024.3352_BHT70-2@CompuServe.COM> You know if I had the power to change the world and make it more spiritual, I would start not with money, but with art. If I could have a dream come true, I would meet with the best minds and artists at a Crotona of the mind - the internet - the connection of the world mind and latent art and commerce, based on a national defense network rapidly becoming a sesspool of pornography, cheap commercial gimmicks and international banking and spying. If I could change it into a network of spirituality, I would meet with the best minds and artist in a concept art - the greatest minds met at the ancient Greek Crotona, why couldn't there be an internet site for the meeting of a global consciousness of peace, serentity, tolerance and a new world art of beauty, tranquilty and personal transformation using the cutting edge of technologies. Maybe someone is already doing this, but what if there could be a group effort to provide a new technology - imprinting the images drawn from the higher world of archetypal forms? By yoking with the higher consciousnesses of the Muses, Angels, etc, we could create a yoking of this higher energy among us all. How would one do this? I am not sure? My personal wish list for some collaborators and contributrors would include: !. Jean Houston 2. Raphael 3. Douet or Jafra 4. Ann Bermingham, Jerry Schueler, Alan Bain (hey, I'm not in this league, but I like to include my friends 5. Industrial Light and Magic effects artists 6. Microsoft technology It is only a dream, but even number 4, would be nice. I went to the Jungian library to look oup Shekinah in one of the reference works. I was amazed at the depth of the concept. I couldn't check it out, as I don't have a car right now and I couldn't check it out anyway. There was some talk of Shekinah returning as the Presence of the Divine in Daily life when the people are worthy. At times in Jewish history the Shekinah left and the art and culture and politics of that day declined. The SHekinah is not in one place, but may be in as many as 36 places around the globe at anyone time. Namaste Keith Price This is a limited list. Who would you ask to contribute 7. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 12:36:33 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: A Dream Come True is A Work of Art Message-ID: In message <961010095223_74024.3352_BHT70-2@CompuServe.COM>, Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> writes > >The SHekinah is not in one place, but may be in as many as 36 places around the >globe at anyone time. > >Namaste >Keith Price I see it as sort of equivalent to the Christian idea of the Holy Spirit. Ubiquitous. I am flattered at being included in your number 4. projection. My artistic ability is nil, though it depends perhaps upon your definition or art. We *do* have the ti-l list, and many of us can send and receive binary files (eg., images). I have a directory called PICTURES on my homepages, and I would be happy to put any "spiritually inspired" (or whatever) images into it, and to change the "gallery around from time to time. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 19:51:35 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: To Richard Message-ID: <325C3A87.3E0@worldnet.att.net> >AC's steps may have been right for him and whatever goal he had in >mind; however, I am quite certain that for me stepping along in "Beast >Motif" would not be so natural. Anyway, I can't think of any up-front, >jolly, unembarrassed way I could explain what I was doing to my mom or >my son. Me either. Crowley's Path is not my path. I am very eclectic when it comes to paths. >In another way of looking at it, perhaps there is neither the Right >Road nor Wrong Road, but only ~The Road~ for each individual . . . and >upon which merely right or wrong ~steps~ may be taken. Right. I am probably overreacting to the gushy stuff that Maurice was putting out. The problem is this: by separating evil from good, we create evil and maintain it. Maurice and others who seek after the White path of goodness don't realize that in that very process they create and sustain the Black path that they want so desparately to dissappear. Every Path has both good and evil along it, and thus every Path is grey. > that is, that was worth the price that he may or may not have >had to pay for it. We all have to ask ourselves this one, and face the answer that is within us. I do believe in karma, and Crowley, like everyone else, created his share of it. >Thus, if you know of any special power/attribute Crowley developed by >means of his magic, or any clear, extraordinary instance of his Thelema >("will"?) doing something which otherwise wouldn't have been possible, >please let me know. His special magical abilities show up in his works like AHA, THE BOOK OF LIES, WISDOM & FOLLY and others. In short, his wisdom or Gnosis. He clearly understood duality, for example, which few, if any, theosophists seem to have mastered. As far as daily mundane stuff like fortune or money, his magic was rather lacking (I have the same problem). As usual, I enjoyed your post. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 19:59:27 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: the Path Message-ID: <325C3C5F.536D@worldnet.att.net> >Those who claim that there is no such thing as the white path and the >black path and that those are merely childish ideas, should realize >that they instantly throw overboard the Ageless Wisdom. I believe that you mean me here. Actually, you are very wrong, and in several ways. I never said that such Paths did not exist. They do. In your mind. If you want to tread a White Path, then do so and I wish you well. If you want to tread the Black Path, then do so, and I wish you well. I tread a grey one, because I have learned about duality over the years and prefer non-duality. Black and White are like good and evil, which are also just like spirit and matter--two sides of the same coin or two polar ends of the very same thing. Separating them in your mind guarantees that both will exist. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 14:06:46 -0600 (CST) From: HERNANDEZ PEREZ GABRIEL Subject: Saludos!!! Message-ID: Estimados Hermanos: Mi nombre es Gabriel Ahmed Hernandez Perez. A traves de este medio me gustaria participar en el Foro Teosofico. Agradezco al Hno. Rodolfo Don y al Hno. Jesus Cruz por su contacto a traves de este medio. Me gustaria saber de que manera participa uno en el Foro. Debo enviar alguna informacion en particular a cada uno de Uds.?. Es posible establecer contacto personal con algunos de los participantes via email?. Agradecere a quien llegue este mensaje sobre la operacion de este Foro Teosofico, que sin duda, cumple cabalmente el proposito de formar un Nucleo de Fraternidad Universal. Con todo respeto, si la Sra. H.P. Blavatsky contemplara esto, habria dado por completada al menos una de las tantas tareas que tenemos los teosofos en el mundo. Con mis mejores deseos Ing. Gabriel A. Hernandez Perez From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 20:06:23 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <325C3DFF.3F2A@worldnet.att.net> > The truth will out in the end no matter what anyone thinks. >Besides, I prefer to accept that which is presented by the Masters of >the Great White Brotherhood as more likely to be true than what is >presented by an average student in these areas. As a matter of fact, Crowley was a member of the Great White Brotherhood (and remains today a card-carrying member). I have to wonder if you would know one, if you saw one? Don't believe everything you read. Doubt what others tell you, and test things out for yourself. Your Great White Brotherhood is probably not my Great White Brotherhood even though we both remain theosophists. Think about it. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 11:44:59 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <961010114458_123393627@emout12.mail.aol.com> Max, You are certainly welcome. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 11:45:51 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be a Babe Message-ID: <961010114551_123394146@emout10.mail.aol.com> Ann, Compuserve is almost as weird as AOL. But now I have to go change the oil in the rocket ship. The Moonpersons are acting up again. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 11:46:00 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Babes Message-ID: <961010114558_123394211@emout16.mail.aol.com> Maurice, You would be amazed at the fun you can have when someone takes your humor seriously. Fortunately most folks around these parts are used to mine by now. I knew when you were joking even if nobody else did. Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go pick up the rocket suit at the cleaners. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 10:43:54 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: A Dream Come True is A Work of Art Message-ID: <199610101634.MAA07544@cliff.cris.com> Keith: > You know if I had the power to change the world and make it more spiritual, I > would start not with money, but with art. If I could have a dream come true, I > would meet with the best minds and artists at a Crotona of the mind - the > internet - the connection of the world mind and latent art and commerce, based > on a national defense network rapidly becoming a sesspool of pornography, cheap > commercial gimmicks and international banking and spying. I think it depends on what part of the WWW you're looking at. Personally, I see a lot of diversity out there. I've found the web invalueable in doing research on subjects that range from beer to UFOs. I have seen many sites that were breathtaking in their presentation of the spiritual and had more content than I have the time to read. > How would one do this? I am not sure? My personal wish list for some > collaborators and contributrors would include: > > 4. Ann Bermingham, Jerry Schueler, Alan Bain (hey, I'm not in this league, but > I like to include my friends I hate to break the news to you, but a gnostic church already has me signed to do a web page. It's still under construction, but we hope to have all the links ready sometime in November, including a paper written by Stephan Hoeller. If anyone is curious, it can seen at: http://www.cris.com/~Bermingh/ If anyone here would like to learn HTML, I recommend "teach youself Web Publishing with HTML 3.0 in a week" by Laura Lemay ($29.99). It took me more than a week, but I was busy with other things. -Ann E. Bermngham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 13:22 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: Maurice, Firstly, let me thank you for your response to my posting named "Sexism." I gave a copy of it to members of a coven I used to attend, and it felt good for us too serious, faddish women to have a boisterous belly laugh. Although you claim to have a PhD in philosophy, it is suspect since you seem to address and speak in the most sophomoric of terms and ideas. May I suggest you look more deeply into Islamic fundamentalism; I think you would be snug as a bug in a rug in that philosophy. Hark! did I not hear Rafsanjani use the term "methinks" in one of his diatribes addressing the evils of change, and the satanically influenced upstarts of women? Also, it behooves no man to piss off a woman. Sister Carrie (coven member) wanted me to tell you that your new itchy red rash will disappear in time and that you will begin to notice a slightly higher pitch in your voice. That too will pass when she removes her spiked high heel off the effigy of your tiny testicle. Ah, Maurice, all things change given enough time. Don't you worry now, we'll wait. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 07:39:15 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: The Pun That Was No Fun Message-ID: <199610102032.AA03997@vnet.net> On 9 Oct 96 at 12:05, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Maurice, > > AAARGH!!! That's one of the worst puns I've seen in a week and I'm > surprised no one thought of it sooner. > as you know from reading Chesterton, we no longer > chuck heretics but crown them with laurels and buy lots of their > books. A thousand and one apologies for such an aweful pun. Permit me to say that I'll try my best to improve for the next one. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 16:54:32 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: GWB Message-ID: <199610102054.UAA27477@leo.vsla.edu> I would like to see some evidence about the history of the use of the term Great White Brotherhood. Although it may occur occasionally in the Founders' writings, (I know Olcott uses it in ODL but can't recall HPB doing so) it became popular mainly in the twentieth century. HPB certainly used many other terms far more often, from "the Brothers" to the "adepts" to the "Masters" to the "Mahatmas"-- none of which she originated. So I'd be surprised if it were proven that "Great White Brotherhood" originated with her or the MLs. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:05:15 +1000 From: "Maurice de Montaine" Subject: Re: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: <199610102058.AA07572@vnet.net> On 10 Oct 96 at 15:45, kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > Maurice, > > Firstly, let me thank you for your response to my posting named > "Sexism." I gave a copy of it to members of a coven I used to > attend, and it felt good for us too serious, faddish women to have a > boisterous belly laugh. > > Although you claim to have a PhD in philosophy, it is suspect since > you seem to address and speak in the most sophomoric of terms and > ideas. May I suggest you look more deeply into Islamic > fundamentalism; I think you would be snug as a bug in a rug in that > philosophy. Hark! did I not hear Rafsanjani use the term "methinks" > in one of his diatribes addressing the evils of change, and the > satanically influenced upstarts of women? > > Also, it behooves no man to piss off a woman. Sister Carrie (coven > member) wanted me to tell you that your new itchy red rash will > disappear in time and that you will begin to notice a slightly > higher pitch in your voice. That too will pass when she removes her > spiked high heel off the effigy of your tiny testicle. > > Ah, Maurice, all things change given enough time. Don't you worry > now, we'll wait. My dear sister, Is this where Theosophy has ended up? Is this the sublimity of the Divine Wisdom? Were I confronted by such as someone new turning up to a lodge of the Theosophical Society or to a mailing list thereto, I would truly turn the other way and depart. By the way, I'm not into black magic. Remind your coven sister that such things have a tendency to boomerang to the sender. Fraternally Maurice * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Maurice de Montaine * * E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au Postal Address: PO Box 205 * * Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105 South Hobart * * Internat. +61 3 6224 8105 Tasmania * * SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI! Australia 7004 * * * * * * * * * MAGNA EST VERITAS ET PREVALEBIT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:12:16 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Money Magic Message-ID: <961010181141_1413320618@emout10.mail.aol.com> Jerry Schueler writes> >As far as daily mundane stuff like fortune or money, his [A.C.'s] magic was rather lacking (I have the same problem). Richard Ihle writes> I used to be a Buick man. That was about twenty years ago. I traded up from a Electra 225 convertible to a Riviera. I loved that Riviera. I loved that Riviera so much: Batmobile shape, black lacquer finish, red leather interior, immaculate. People would turn their heads and watch me drive down the street. About that same time, I was experimenting with some visualization techniques. Like everyone else who has ever had a similar interest (don't lie, everyone else), I saw no reason why I should not try to conjure up a little money--actually ~a lot~ of money. I even remember the image I used: myself looking at a check made out to myself. I did this a couple times and then forgot about it. About a week later I drove into a service station to get some gas. While I was inside paying, I looked up just in time to see a big gas truck back right into the side of my Riviera. The gas truck's insurance company was prompt in paying: in no time at all I found myself looking at a $2,000 check--which just about exactly covered the repairs. After that, my Riviera had little wrinkles in the side if you looked closely. I didn't love it so much anymore. Now, I drive an old Lincoln Town Car. Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:14:54 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <961010191452_330797552@emout17.mail.aol.com> Jerry, Peter Carroll has a line that I think fits this whole mess. "If you lock the demons in the basement they will blow up the house." Chuck the Heretic (who is no relation to a talking pig of movie infamy) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:20:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: In message , kymsmith@micron.net writes >Also, it behooves no man to piss off a woman. Sister Carrie (coven member) >wanted me to tell you that your new itchy red rash will disappear in time >and that you will begin to notice a slightly higher pitch in your voice. >That too will pass when she removes her spiked high heel off the effigy of >your tiny testicle. > >Ah, Maurice, all things change given enough time. Don't you worry now, >we'll wait. Do I suspect that Maurice upset you? Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 96 19:24:12 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Sexism and resistance to change Message-ID: <199610102324.XAA18815@leo.vsla.edu> Q. How many Theosophists does it take to change a lightbulb? A. Theosophists haven't changed anything in 50 years. Kim, I sympathize with your views on sexist language, but this battle has been fought and lost. The Masters said brotherhood, HPB Their Agent said brotherhood, and everything they say is Eternal Truth. If you want to change it you're an enemy of the Lodge. While this may overstate the problem, it is not much of an exaggeration. Anyone who hopes to see the Theosophical movement adapt to the cultural changes of the twentieth century is up against a major problem. Theosophy as a movement has chosen to be in "high tension" rather than "low tension" with mainstream culture, using a sociological category I stumbled upon recently. Jehovah's Witnesses are in extremely high tension with mainstream culture, and Unitarian Universalists exemplify low tension. As long as Theosophists by and large believe that the anthropogenesis of HPB and her Masters trumps the last century of biological and anthropological knowledge, that every genuine teacher of an Eastern or esoteric tradition of the last century must be measured according to their degree of adherence to HPB's teachings, and so on, there is simply not enough respect for the "world outside" to motivate people to adapt to it. My own experience has been that initially I wanted to believe, and did believe, that Theosophy was vastly wiser and more knowledgable than mere science, religion and philosophy. But that need to have the Truth all wrapped up in a single package with a nice bow causes us to see things in a distorted way. Gradually I realized that there was a lot more truth outside the boundaries of Blavatskian Theosophy than within it. That can probably be fairly said of any religious, philosophical or scientific school of thought, but it appears to be an unacceptable thought to most Theosophists. Any truth you may have gleaned from outside Theosophy about sexism in language is going to get rejected as irrelevant or impertinent in comparison to the Ancient Universal Wisdom Religion Preserved by the Great White you-know-what. BTW I just found a passage in which HPB calls it the Great Ideal Brotherhood, which except for the sexist part is a much better way to say it. Cheers Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:00:56 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961011000054.006ab5cc@mail.deltanet.com> Chuck: [writing to Max] >As you can imagine, purity of any kind and I don't usually get in the same >building together. I suppose I'm one of those who believe in going after >knowledge and damning the cost along with the torpedoes. This sounds like you don't mind getting your hands dirty in life. That means that you may be able to get more things done that other people, if you apply yourself. The related question, though, is how frequently do you and your hands visit soap and the sink? >But I also know >lots of thelemites and find them to radiate more love and light than an equal >number my theosophical brethren. They are infinitely less judgemental and if >one needs help are more likely to give the help than lectures about karma. I don't really think that any of us is free of being judgemental, we just do it in different ways. One good example is how someone might be judged for using a "sexist term", without caring to ask the person what was meant. (That is, we judge another person's situation by "what would I do in that person's place" instead of by "how does that entirely differently person think and see things". >The unfortunate fact is that the more I examine much of what is called the >ageless wisdom, I find it to be neither ageless nor particularly wise. That's how *you* find it. I'm not sure you could extrapolate your personal experience to invalidate what others have found of value in it, though. >It is >the old problem of what is true and digging for that leads us to many >different tunnels and we gain nothing by damning those tunnels that, for >whatever reason, don't particularly appeal to us. Let each man (woman, etc.) dig their own tunnels, searching for gold whereever they may find it! >For example, I rather like >Crowley and I absolutely despise Christianity. But in my calmer moments >(they occur about twice a year) I will admit that the christian probably has >some element of truth in his belief, though for the life of me I can't see >where it could be. I'm not fond of both. I won't go out of my way to tell someone that there are more productive approaches to the spiritual than Christianity -- not unless they seem to be looking for something more. I won't in good conscience recommend anyone to read AC, though. That would seem to me like offering beer to children. >Therefore, before this thing turns into another of our list screaming >matches, let us agree to disagree on Crowley because clearly neither side is >going to convince the other. Does anyone really care? -- Eldon (stopping by during the middle of a lurking vacation) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:02:01 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Money magic Message-ID: In message <325C3A87.3E0@worldnet.att.net>, Jerry Schueler writes >As far >as daily mundane stuff like fortune or money, his magic >was rather lacking (I have the same problem). Overheard in an English Pub: "Hi - what do you do by the way?" "I'm a magician." "Oh. Out of work, then. Let me buy you a drink." Alan :-) This is a *true* story! --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 05:17:34 +0100 From: Michael Subject: Christmas Humphries Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961011041734.00676800@xs4all.nl> I wrote: >I saw a BBC-TV program some time ago on court cases in which the judge >probably condemned a suspect erroneously to death. >Among the judges who probably misjudged a suspect and sent him to the >gallows was Christmas Humphries! An interesting observation - do you want to elaborate on it? Most people on the list are probably aware that Christmas H. was a writer on and promoter of Buddhism. Is that your reason for this post. Alan the slightly baffled. Michael: Well, his name was dropped in one of the messages. It reminded me of this TV program. As to his background,. I quote from the jacket of Pelican book : "Buddhism" by Christmas Humphries: "Interested in Buddhism at an early age, in 1924 he founded the Buddhist Society, London, which is the oldest and largest Buddhist organisation in Europe.....In 1945 he expressed the consensus of such doctrines in the now famous "Twelve principles of Buddhism" which, already translated in fourteen languages, are in process of being accepted as the basis of world Buddhism." I believe that he was a Theosophist as well. By profession, if one may call it so, he was a senior Prosecution Counsel at the "Old Bailey" like his father before him and later judge. If judge Christmas Humphreys mentioned in the program was the same person it strikes me as ironical that a man with such high aspirations should condemn wrongfully a man to death! Michael Michael http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:41:26 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: > >s to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that > >writings by L. (and other theosophical writers, except HPB, Subba Row, a > >few books by A.Besant, a very few books by Mabel Collins, some books by > >Anne Kingsford, plus some other exceptions) are based on his ASTRAL > >visions and therefore are untrustworthy. > > > >Max I would like to know where this particular statement by Master DK can be found. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 21:36:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > If the Master DK said that about Leadbeater, I think he was full of prunes. > I didn't know CWL, but if that had been the case, he wouldn't have been able > to teach his pupils anything higher than astral vision. He did, and I know > that as a fact. Therefore DK was full of prunes in that regard. > > Can we please get over this stupid factionalism? Dear Liesel, CWL has definitely been a spiritually advanced person--much more advanced than myself, I acknowledge it. So it's quite possible that the energies flowing via CWL were beneficial and had an awakening quality, while some of his writings were distorted representations of reality. The problem is that an average theosophist is not equipped to discriminate between the right and the wrong in CWL's teachings. I am familiar with his writings, and I think books like "Talks on the Path of Occultism" where he describes the path of discipleship and initiation, are very good; that information may be verified and confirmed by one's higher self. What DK probably meant, is another category of CWL's books like "The Masters and the Path" (more specifically descriptions of initiations of Krishnamurti), "Man: Whence,...", "and especially "The Lives of Alcyon." This is quite different kind of information: unverifiable by most readers, and essentially unnecessary for spiritual development. Prolific literary output by CWL includes still another category of works of uncertain quality,--I mean his occult research. Since the same material is more fully covered by DK in his "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire," CWL's works belonging to this category should be obsolete. An appreciation of these works may be found in H.Laurency's "The Knowledge of Reality" (p.86): "The second phase [of the publication of esoteric knowledge], which lasted 1894-1920, was characterized by the close collaboration of two esoteric capacities: Annie Besant (1847-1933) and C.W.Leadbeater (1847-1934). By Blavatsky they had been put in touch with her teachers, who told them that while everything would be done to facilitate their further work, both, being old initiates of the highest degree of gnostics, were in a position to acquire causal sense (objective consciousness in the causal envelope) by themselves and thus able to make investigations of their own in the world of man. "They began by compiling and making a system out of the facts that Blavatsky had plucked together in her works. Then followed a piece of research work which, especially where Leadbeater was concerned, resulted in a production that was qualitatively and quantitatively unique. Nobody before him has given so many new facts. <...> "The following are the most important of the new fundamental facts (necessary to comprehend reality) accounted for by Leadbeater: the composition of matter; the difference between atomic and molecular matter; the seven atomic worlds of the solar system; the molecular worlds of the planetary system; involutionary matter; the evolution of the natural kingdoms; the consciousness expansion through the acquisition of ever widened collective consciousness; man's three atomic worlds and five molecular worlds; man's five material envelopes and consciousness in these; man's permanent atoms (the triad); the planetary hierarchy; the division of the planetary hierarchy into seven departments; the planetary government." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 21:41:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > >s to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that > > >writings by L. (and other theosophical writers, except HPB, Subba Row, a > > >few books by A.Besant, a very few books by Mabel Collins, some books by > > >Anne Kingsford, plus some other exceptions) are based on his ASTRAL > > >visions and therefore are untrustworthy. > > I would like to know where this particular statement by Master DK can be > found. "Telepathy and Etheric Vehicle" p.140-1 "Glamour" p.183-4 "Esoteric Psychology" I p.484 "Esoteric Healing" p.403 and 404 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:08:55 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961011060855.006c2a68@whanganui.ac.nz> At 12:05 AM 10/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Maurice writes > >>By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great >>White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. >>The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself ... > >By the bye, it has always astonished me that throughout the ages there were >so many white brothers, and hardly ever a sister in the White Brotherhood. >How do you account for that? > >Liesel > Hi Liesel, I remember reading somewhere that because male and female bodies on this physical plane had specific differences and were constituted differently, the Masters found it more convenient to use a male body to accomplish what they were to do. In the end male and female bodies are only a passing phase of evolution, they weren't the norm earlier and I understand they won't be the norm later on either. I sort of see us as a sexless consciousness ensconced in a physical body that allows certain experiences. The experience one gets in a male body, these days, is quite different from being in a female body, if only because of the hormones :-) Personally, I am not much bothered by names but paternalistic attitudes seem to need an underdog and a boss which is no help to either. I have met male underdogs who have female 'bosses'........ but I guess that is not as prevalent as the other way around. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:01:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >Could we please discuss the Ageless Wisdom > >rather than perspectives on it? > > I think this is very difficult. You mention the Master D.K. whose > existence and communications are meaningful to members of the Arcane > School and the followrs of Alice Bailey. Many theosophists argue that > this material is unreliable, and will not include it as part of the > ageless wisdom. > > In other words, before we can even *hope* to discuss the Ageless Wisdom, > we have to try to agree about what constitutes it. Much discussion on > this list has been about this controversial subject. OK, let's not label it Ageless Wisdom and not define it, let's call it 'spiritual experience.' The best results are achieved when the mind is in tune with the higher self and obedient to it. Then the mind does not impose its own perspectives on the spiritual experience but rather adjusts them as necessary for more adequate expression of the latter. Alan, I appreciate your integrity, and what follows is not in response to your posting,--just some stray thoughts re: general course of discussions on theos-l. Lack of effective communication between spiritually minded people today is partly due to the fact that the old model of the teacher-disciple relationship has collapsed, while the habit of spiritual discipline is not ingrained yet. Today we have at our disposal enormous amounts of information about yoga, etc., which perhaps entails a lot of independent research and practice. Under these circumstances, it is tempting to skip some 'unnecessary' preliminary stages and to go directly to 'advanced' things. Nevertheless the old laws (not models) of the spiritual development seem to be still valid. Indeed, it does not seem like we have overgrown Patanjali's Yoga Sutras or Plotinus' level of understanding. One still needs to learn spiritual lessons step by step in their proper sequence unless one wants to be periodically thrown back to basics. (This sequence is well known from Yoga Sutras.) This is what happens oftentimes on theos-l. We get thrown back repeatedly to ABC of spirituality. As a matter of fact I feel myself uncomfortable repeating some well known things, but I am doing it because I feel we may make some arithmetical errors while trying to solve higher-math problems. I wonder if we might agree on some basic things like these: the things spiritual are not expressible in the ordinary language; a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon; there are worlds of form and formless realms; nothing clothed in words is true; as below so above; and so forth. It would save our time and effort. Then we maybe will be able to agree somewhat on such issues as evil, black magic vs. white magic, the role of the Masters, etc. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 03:38:44 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Re: "Christmas Humphries" Message-ID: <9610111038.AA31912@toto.csustan.edu> Michael wrote: >I saw a BBC-TV program some time ago on court cases in which >the judge probably condemned a suspect erroneously to death. >Among the judges who probably misjudged a suspect and sent him >to the gallows was Christmas Humphries! Not likely. Christmas Humphreys was famous in England for his stance against capital punishment. The late Elsie Benjamine once told me that as a Judge, Humphreys was of very high status-- something comparable to a supreme court justice here. Jerry ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 06:01:22 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Maxim Osinovsky wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > > > >s to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that > > > >writings by L. (and other theosophical writers, except HPB, Subba Row, a > > > >few books by A.Besant, a very few books by Mabel Collins, some books by > > > >Anne Kingsford, plus some other exceptions) are based on his ASTRAL > > > >visions and therefore are untrustworthy. > > > > I would like to know where this particular statement by Master DK can be > > found. > > "Telepathy and Etheric Vehicle" p.140-1 > "Glamour" p.183-4 > "Esoteric Psychology" I p.484 > "Esoteric Healing" p.403 and 404 > These books/publications are not familiar to me. Who is the author/publisher? I am sure there are others here who also may be interested in the information. thanks. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:33:41 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: <199610111235.IAA22701@cliff.cris.com> Kym: > > Although you claim to have a PhD in philosophy, it is suspect since > > you seem to address and speak in the most sophomoric of terms and > > ideas. > > My dear sister, > > Is this where Theosophy has ended up? Is this the sublimity of > the Divine Wisdom? Were I confronted by such as someone new turning > up to a lodge of the Theosophical Society or to a mailing list > thereto, I would truly turn the other way and depart. > Kym's insightful post gave me the interesting idea that perhaps the members of this list were being taken for a ride. It is hard for me to believe that someone, in this time, could write like they just got off a saddled steed and were wearing a plumed hat. I could be wrong, but it sure got this list moving. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:07:29 -0700 From: rdon@garlic.com (Rodolfo Don) Subject: Re: Saludos!!! Message-ID: >Estimados Hermanos: > >Me gustaria saber de que manera participa uno en el Foro. Debo enviar >alguna informacion en particular a cada uno de Uds.?. Es posible >establecer contacto personal con algunos de los participantes via email?. Bienvenido Gabriel! Tu puedes enviar tus mensajes directamente a theos-span@vnet.net y tu mensaje va a todos los participantes del foro, o puedes enviar tu e-mail a alguien en particular. Como desees hacerlo. Si tienes algun tema en teosofia que te interesa, simplemente envialo al foro, con tu opinion sobre el mismo, y asi comenzarias una conversacion general. >Agradecere a quien llegue este mensaje sobre la operacion de este Foro >Teosofico, que sin duda, cumple cabalmente el proposito de formar un >Nucleo de Fraternidad Universal. Con todo respeto, si la Sra. H.P. >Blavatsky contemplara esto, habria dado por completada al menos una de >las tantas tareas que tenemos los teosofos en el mundo. Muy interesante tu observacion. Sin duda que el internet presenta un numero de posibilidades que aun no hemos tocado. > >Con mis mejores deseos > >Ing. Gabriel A. Hernandez Perez Saludos fraternales, Rodolfo Don web: http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:24:29 -0600 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs_?= Ernesto Cruz =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDnez?= Subject: Re: THEOS-SPAN digest 32 Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961010192838.2c8fd5fe@planet.com.mx> At 15:57 10/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Estimados Hermanos: Hola como est=E1s Gabrielito!! >Mi nombre es Gabriel Ahmed Hernandez Perez. A traves de este medio me=20 >gustaria participar en el Foro Teosofico. Agradezco al Hno. Rodolfo Don y= =20 >al Hno. Jesus Cruz por su contacto a traves de este medio. Hombre gracias por el cumplido, parece que por fin quiso el servidor que entraras chico!! >Me gustaria saber de que manera participa uno en el Foro. Debo enviar=20 >alguna informacion en particular a cada uno de Uds.?. Es posible=20 >establecer contacto personal con algunos de los participantes via email?. Bueno, no s=E9 si hablo por lo dem=E1s que al parecer no participan mucho= en este foro, pero yo quisiera decir que deber=EDamos discutir los temas que= nos interescan en primer t=E9rmino, ya que aqu=ED no hay moderador, en otro caso deber=EDamos votar para tener uno y que =E9ste propusiera los temas o por lo menos nos dijera algo de vez en cuando de lo que pasa en su logia, creo que deber=EDamos ser un poco m=E1s abiertos en cuanto a lo que estamos o no de acuerdo en cuanto a la teosof=EDa o como la entendemos, es muy importante no creen? >Agradecere a quien llegue este mensaje sobre la operacion de este Foro=20 >Teosofico, que sin duda, cumple cabalmente el proposito de formar un=20 >Nucleo de Fraternidad Universal. Con todo respeto, si la Sra. H.P.=20 >Blavatsky contemplara esto, habria dado por completada al menos una de=20 >las tantas tareas que tenemos los teosofos en el mundo. Pues eso de la fraternidad es cierto, pero desear=EDa que todos pudieran (quiero decir los veinte que est=E1n en este foro) vertir m=E1s a menudo sus ideas, un foro est=E1 compuesto de IDEAS no de DIRECCIONES DE CORREO ELECTR=D3NICO!!! :) Saludos a todos en el foro y espero ver m=E1s acci=F3n... ----------------------------------- Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz Mart=EDnez jecruz@planet.com.mx http://www.planet.com.mx/~unidad/index.htm http://www.planet.com.mx/~jecruz/index.htm La ciencia nos ense=F1a una forma nueva de pensar, la religi=F3n una nueva de sentir. Bertrand Russel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:15:18 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: <961011101517_207922883@emout01.mail.aol.com> Gertude, There is an angry Bandit sitting outside your mousehole sharpening her claws and muttering weird cat things about people who blaspheme her human. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:01:40 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: > > Gertude, > There is an angry Bandit sitting outside your mousehole sharpening her claws > and muttering weird cat things about people who blaspheme her human. > > Chuck the Heretic > I thought I saw a puddy tat! (g) -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:21:05 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: To Know, To Dare, To be Cosimano Cody Message-ID: In message , CDGertrude writes >> >> Ann, >> I was wondering if anyone on this list would know whom I was referring to. >> He was my favorite TV hero when I was a little kid. >> >> Chuck the Heretic >> > > >You were a child? I thought you were hatched!! (g) >ducking >-- Kid (n). A baby goat. So, Chucky as a babe(f) must be a Nanny Goat. Har har. (Oh dear) Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:05:10 -0700 From: "John E. Mead" Subject: yes virginia, I do exist Message-ID: <325ED2A6.1E0A@vnet.net> hi - as list owner and devote hermit, I thought I should state a few things of general interest.. 1. Maurice has signed off theos-l --- FYI 2. I had an interesting msg a few days ago.... we sometimes are considered an *exclusive* group??!! I think the idea is that being a discussion-list requires a subscribe, where the news-groups do not. I was happy to find that Internet has been so successful. It seems that *exclusive* is correlated with accessible. that actually seems understandable ... However, I must point out that we are not exclusive, but the rather *excluded*. after all.. who has seen any major "power in office" recognize our existence and participate? I wonder why, but know better. Truth is really higher than religion, and that includes Theosophical Societies. Truth hurts... but only when it not welcome. from the outcast realms of the virtual "white brotherhood" .... peace - john e. mead p.s. I may post something again, within the next six months. :-) -- John E. Mead Member of TSA, and Theosophy International (TI). Theos-L list owner; http://users.vnet.net/jem/theos-l.html (Physics is impossible without imaginary numbers; Mathematics is impossible without consciousness.) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 09:04:39 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961011200439.006b08c0@whanganui.ac.nz> At 03:37 AM 11/10/96 -0400, you wrote: > > >On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> >Could we please discuss the Ageless Wisdom >> >rather than perspectives on it? >> >> I think this is very difficult. You mention the Master D.K. whose >> existence and communications are meaningful to members of the Arcane >> School and the followrs of Alice Bailey. Many theosophists argue that >> this material is unreliable, and will not include it as part of the >> ageless wisdom. >> >> In other words, before we can even *hope* to discuss the Ageless Wisdom, >> we have to try to agree about what constitutes it. Much discussion on >> this list has been about this controversial subject. > >OK, let's not label it Ageless Wisdom and not define it, let's call it >'spiritual experience.' The best results are achieved when the mind is in >tune with the higher self and obedient to it. Then the mind does not >impose its own perspectives on the spiritual experience but rather >adjusts them as necessary for more adequate expression of the latter. > >Alan, I appreciate your integrity, and what follows is not in response to >your posting,--just some stray thoughts re: general course of discussions >on theos-l. > >Lack of effective communication between spiritually minded people today is >partly due to the fact that the old model of the teacher-disciple >relationship has collapsed, while the habit of spiritual discipline is >not ingrained yet. Today we have at our disposal enormous amounts of >information about yoga, etc., which perhaps entails a lot of independent >research and practice. Under these circumstances, it is tempting to skip >some 'unnecessary' preliminary stages and to go directly to 'advanced' >things. Nevertheless the old laws (not models) of the spiritual >development seem to be still valid. Indeed, it does not seem like we >have overgrown Patanjali's Yoga Sutras or Plotinus' level of >understanding. One still needs to learn spiritual lessons step by step >in their proper sequence unless one wants to be periodically thrown back >to basics. (This sequence is well known from Yoga Sutras.) > >This is what happens oftentimes on theos-l. We get thrown back repeatedly >to ABC of spirituality. As a matter of fact I feel myself uncomfortable >repeating some well known things, but I am doing it because I feel we may >make some arithmetical errors while trying to solve higher-math >problems. > >I wonder if we might agree on some basic things >like these: the things spiritual are not expressible in the ordinary >language; a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon; there are worlds >of form and formless realms; nothing clothed in words is true; as below >so above; and so forth. It would save our time and effort. Then we maybe >will be able to agree somewhat on such issues as evil, black magic vs. >white magic, the role of the Masters, etc. > Good point. I have felt this way for a long time and have only just found a way of getting on top of this, IMO. I found the General Semantic Institute's web page and I am also reading the book by the father to G-S Alfred Korzybski, Science and Sanity, published in 1933. It is not too hard to read and it sure does throw much light on the way we communicate.He was an engineer and mathmatician who was concerned about the confused thinking this world shows and some of his theories are very good. One of it's main themes is non-identity and that the map is not the territory. I have also found their g-s discussion list and I have learned a lot about the way I identify with words and symbols that actually have no factual reality and get annoyed with things people say mainly because I have chosen to identify certain emotions with those words. Talking about spiritual things can get into difficulty because we abstract from an esoteric fact and end up with our own preferences attached to the symbol we have used to express our interpretation of that fact. I have found g-s, so far, to hold many similarities to Buddhist precepts e.g detachment, etc. If Theosophists learned to communicate in more real semantic terms, we could have some interesting insights instead of emotional arguements :-) I don't mean to be rude but listening to this list and the way discussions are structured and listening to the g-s list, shows up quite a difference in methods of resolving differences. I will leave now before I get into hot water :-( Love you all regardless. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 15:15:23 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: A Parallel to Gender Neutral Language Message-ID: <199610112023.QAA22656@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Maurice, You're implying that we should have a language without any sex. What a bore that would be! What we're looking for is language which gives women an equal break with men. As for instance, very often when someone is making a very generalized statement, they use the pronoun "he" when they really mean "all people". If you look at the literature, you'll see that these kinds of practices are very ingrained. I once noticed that Annie Besant does the same thing I do, because we were brought up that way. When we talk about a person in command, we invariably assume that it's a "he". One just thinks of anyone who's anybody, or accomplishes anything, as "he"; and it takes an effort to think of such a person as "she". That's what we're talking about. We're tired of being considered 2d class citizens. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 07:43:48 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: sexism Message-ID: <199610112032.QAA27311@cliff.cris.com> > From: liesel f. deutsch > > Maurice, now really, I've been looking for quite a while for members of the > White Brotherhood who are female. If you have some names & decriptions, I > wish you'd send them to me. All I've ever found was Quan Yin, and the World > Mother. > They're probably in the back making coffee and sandwiches, or should I say upholding the cohesity of the universe while the guys talk about it. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:34:19 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610112032.QAA27330@cliff.cris.com> > > On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote in response to Max O.: > > > >> to Leadbeater, you may wish to know that Master D.K. stated that > > > > >writings by L. . . . are based on his ASTRAL visions and therefore are untrustworthy. > > > > > > I would like to know where this particular statement by Master DK can be > > > found. > > > > "Esoteric Psychology II" p.484 "Again, schools of esotericists, theosophists and rosicrucians (particularly in their inner schools) have also their own forms of this illusion of guidance. It is of a different nature to the two dealt above, but the results are nevertheless of much the same quality and reduce the student to a condition of being guided, often of being directed by illlusionary voices. Frequently the heads of the organization claim to be in direct communicatins with a Master or the entire Hierarchy of Masters, from Whom orders comes. These orders are passed on to the rank and file of membership of the organisation and prompt unquestioning obedience is expected from them...." And Whoever is writing this book goes on to say that the real work is to put an indivdual in touch with his soul, under which he would be self-guided. Some of the above seems to describe the beginning of many a cult or group with cult leanings. However, I do not see CWL's name actually mentioned, although I'm sure many who know his history would suspect that the above description could apply to him. The name of the game turned from "truth" to "control". > > "Esoteric Healing" p.403 and 404 "The occultists of the world, through the theosophical societies and other occult bodies, so-called, have greatly damaged the presentation of the truth anent reincarnation through the unnecessary, unimportant, inaccurate and purely speculative details which they give out as truths anent the processes of death and the circumstances of man after death. These details are largely dependent upon the clairvoyant vision of astral psychics of prominence in the Theosophical Society. Yet in the Scriptures of the world these details are not given, and HPB in The secret Doctrine gave none. An instance of this inaccurate and foolish attempt to throw light upon the theory of rebirth can be seen in the time limits imposed upon departed human souls between incarnations on the physical plane and the reurn to physical rebirth - so many years of absence are proclaimed, dependent upon the age of the departed soul and its place upon the ladder of evolution. If, we are told, the soul is very advanced, absence from the physcial plane is prolonged whereas the reverse is the case. Advanced souls and those whose intellectual capacity is rapidly developing come back with great rapidity, owing to their sensitive response to the pull of obligations, interests and responsibilites already established upon the physical plane. People are apt to forget that time is the sequence of events and of states of consciousness as registered by the physcial brain. Where no physical brain exists, what humanity understands by time is nonexistent. The removal of the barriers of the form, stage by stage, brings an increasing realisation of the Eternal Now. In the case of those who have passed through the door of death and who still continue to think in terms of time, it is due to glamour and to the persistence of a powerful thoughtform. It indicates polarisation upon the astral plan; this is the plane upon which leading Theosophical writers and psychics have worked, and upon which they have based their writings. They are quite sincere in what they say, but omit to recognize the illusory nature of all findings based on astral clairvoyance. The recognition of a pronounced time factor, and the constant emphasis laid upon timing, are characteristic of all highly developed people in incarnation and of those who lower, concrete minds are powerful in calibre. Children and child-races on the one hand, and those highly advance people whose abstract minds are functioning through the medium of the interpretive lower mind, usually have no sense of time. The initiate uses the time factor in his relations and his dealing with those living upon the physical plane, but is detached within himself from all recgonition of it elsewhere in the universe." Well, well, well! I want to thank you, Max, for bringing these quotes to my attention. You must have a fantastic memory to remember where they are in those many blue books. I would also thank you for showing me a very glaring reason why there is a rift between the TS and the Bailey Group. -Ann E Bermngham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:57:35 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: The Feminine Message-ID: <325EB4BF.225E@worldnet.att.net> > I am suspicious, too, that men, who seem rather disrespectful of >the female element judge Wicca negatively. As Wicca offers respect to >women (valid or invalid), it seems natural that some of the men writing >on this post would find it uncomfortable. As a male who has studied both wicca and "feminine spirituality" I have to say that anyone, males or females, who disrespect the feminine are in for a rough time karmically speaking. Wicca does more than give women some respect, however. In many covens, there is a tendency toward female superiority, which is just as bad as male superiority. Femininity and masculinity are two sides of a duality, and both are equal and necessary. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:17:21 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Re: Money magic Message-ID: <325EB961.3C25@worldnet.att.net> Richard -- Sounds like you learned a good lesson: Be careful of what you wish for-- it just might come true. I too had to learn this the hard way. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:21:45 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Re: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <325EBA69.592C@worldnet.att.net> Chuck, your Carroll quote is exactly what is going to happen to Maurice and others who think they can throw their demons into their basement and keep them there. It can't be done. Maybe this is why I like magic so much? I have both of Carroll's books on Chaos Magic, and agree about 90%, which is high for me. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:32:32 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: to K. Paul Message-ID: <325EBCF0.BF0@worldnet.att.net> >My own experience has been that initially I wanted to believe, >and did believe, that Theosophy was vastly wiser and more >knowledgable than mere science, religion and philosophy. But >that need to have the Truth all wrapped up in a single package >with a nice bow causes us to see things in a distorted way. >Gradually I realized that there was a lot more truth outside >the boundaries of Blavatskian Theosophy than within it. Paul, I see where you are coming from here. I haven't fallen quite so far myself, but maybe someday... I still find a lot of good stuff in ol HPB. But I agree with you that the TSs are ultra conservative and not open to any new ideas. I have completely given up trying to write anything for any of them. Unless your article rehashes what has been said a million times before it won't be accepted. HPB warned us about the molds of the mind and the habitual grooves that our thinking gets itself into, and it is just this that besets the TSs today. She also wrote that golden chains bind just as tightly as iron chains, but no theosophist today has a clue as to what she meant. Right now my membership is close to ending as I see little reason to remain. My only agreement with any of the TSs is my firm belief in universal brotherhood (oops, there's that sexist word again. Sorry folks). I suspect that you are in this boat with me (?). Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:39:20 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Great White Brotherhood Revealed at Last! Message-ID: <325EBE88.3B4E@worldnet.att.net> The so-called Great White Brotherhood is exactly the same thing as what G de P called the Hierarchy of Compassion. There is no difference, only a different name. And guess what? According to G de P everyone who has compassion for others is automatically a card-carrying member. As food for thought, I would like to say that I believe G de P was exactly correct. It is the esoteric (spiritual) group, not any physical one, that is intended by the name. The word White refers to the type of magic used, not race and certainly not "goodness" whatever the heck that word means. Jerry S. Member, TI Member, Great White Brotherhood, alias Hierarchy of Compassion From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:49:31 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Shifting Chaff from Wheat Message-ID: <325EC0EB.66A7@worldnet.att.net> Max: >So it's quite possible that the energies >flowing via CWL were beneficial and had an awakening quality, while >some of his writings were distorted representations of reality. The >problem is that an average theosophist is not equipped to discriminate >between the right and the wrong in CWL's teachings. Maybe the average theosophist has an IQ of about 60? Is this what you are suggesting? If you really have such a hard time trying to figure out what is right from what is wrong with ol' CWL, please just ask me, and I will be happy to distinguish the difference for you. Sorry, Max, but I agree with Liesel on this one. Jerry S. Member, TI PS. Please give me the name of one single person whose teachings do not include at least one "distorted representations of reality" and I will apologise to your superior wisdom. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:06:27 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Re Sexism and Bodies Message-ID: <325EC4E3.46EF@worldnet.att.net> >I remember reading somewhere that because male and female bodies on >this physical plane had specific differences and were constituted >differently, the Masters found it more convenient to use a male body to >accomplish what they were to do. In the end male and female bodies are >only a passing phase of evolution, they weren't the norm earlier and I >understand they won't be the norm later on either. Bee, I appreciate reading your thoughts. On the matter of sex, I can't help but think that there is more to it than just a difference in physical bodies. The feminine is lunar, the unconscious, changing, etc., while the masculine is solar, consciousness, changless, etc. These traditional terms all suggest a polar difference exists in thinking and attitude as well as body. I agree that we will both come together in one body some day, but not until we have worked through this whole duality business, and that is not going to happen any time soon. I have heard Masters say that women are natural mystics while men have to work at it. Women naturally accept reality, while men tend to dismiss it. That men tend to dwell more on time than women, and so on. What I am getting at, is that the male body is NOT the preferred one to use by an Adept, except in the sense that it is a male-dominated world, and that in order to spread a message, most folks will listen to a man over a women. HPB proved to be an exception to this rule, and deserves credit for what she did. A lot of female Adepts exist who never got popular recognition, and thus remained in the background--which is OK, because this is what they chose to do. Please do not think that a male body is somehow "better" or "superior" to a woman's body insofar as occultism is concerned. Its probably the other way around. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:11:49 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: yes virginia, I do exist Message-ID: Hi As one who has used maillists and newsgroups, let me add something that most of know. Some newbees may not. I find maillist responses are very quick. Newsgroup message propogation takes time and sometimes I have seen messages getting lost. I personally prefer the former due to the quick response. There is one advantange to the maillist we have here. Unless one is subscribed, one cannot post. This prevents the numerous spam (broadcast) messages cluttering the bandwidth and our time. MK Ramadoss On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, John E. Mead wrote: > hi - > as list owner and devote hermit, I thought I should > state a few things of general interest.. > > 1. Maurice has signed off theos-l --- FYI > > 2. I had an interesting msg a few days ago.... > we sometimes are considered an *exclusive* group??!! I think the > idea is that being a discussion-list requires a subscribe, where > the news-groups do not. I was happy to find that Internet has been so > successful. It seems that *exclusive* is correlated with accessible. > that actually seems understandable ... However, I must point out > that we are not exclusive, but the rather *excluded*. after all.. who > has seen any major "power in office" recognize our existence and > participate? I wonder why, but know better. Truth is really higher > than religion, and that includes Theosophical Societies. Truth > hurts... but only when it not welcome. > > from the outcast realms of the virtual "white brotherhood" .... > > peace - > john e. mead > p.s. I may post something again, within the next six months. :-) > > -- > John E. Mead > Member of TSA, and Theosophy International (TI). > Theos-L list owner; http://users.vnet.net/jem/theos-l.html > (Physics is impossible without imaginary numbers; > Mathematics is impossible without consciousness.) > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:16:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message , Maxim Osinovsky writes > >Alan, I appreciate your integrity, and what follows is not in response to >your posting,--just some stray thoughts re: general course of discussions >on theos-l. > >Lack of effective communication between spiritually minded people today is >partly due to the fact that the old model of the teacher-disciple >relationship has collapsed, .. or been superseded. > while the habit of spiritual discipline is >not ingrained yet. Do you thing we really need "ingrained habits" - suppose we get it wrong? There would be a great amount of repair work to do, even supposing that we recognised an error was present tobegin witn. > Today we have at our disposal enormous amounts of >information about yoga, etc., which perhaps entails a lot of independent >research and practice. Under these circumstances, it is tempting to skip >some 'unnecessary' preliminary stages and to go directly to 'advanced' >things. This has probably always been the case, regardless of the method of teaching or the teacher involved. > Nevertheless the old laws (not models) of the spiritual >development seem to be still valid. Indeed, it does not seem like we >have overgrown Patanjali's Yoga Sutras or Plotinus' level of >understanding. One still needs to learn spiritual lessons step by step >in their proper sequence unless one wants to be periodically thrown back >to basics. (This sequence is well known from Yoga Sutras.) Yes, that is probably true in broad terms; and it can be verified empirically by each ine of us as we travel on our individual journeys. >This is what happens oftentimes on theos-l. We get thrown back repeatedly >to ABC of spirituality. As a matter of fact I feel myself uncomfortable >repeating some well known things, They may not be well known to everyone who drops by on the list. People come and go, though there are a few of us who doggedly persist in hanging around to put our 2 cents' worth in. ..snip... > >I wonder if we might agree on some basic things >like these: the things spiritual are not expressible in the ordinary >language; Some are, some aren't. > a finger pointing at the moon is not the moon; there are worlds >of form and formless realms; nothing clothed in words is true; All the Teaching has ever done is point the way, if that is what you mean. The same is true of teachers, who cannot do their students' work *for* them. > as below >so above; and so forth. A point of order for clarification here, as this idea is so often misquoted. "That which is above is like unto that which is below" is a slightly archaic approximation of the original aphorism. "Like unto it" - not the same as it. > It would save our time and effort. Then we maybe >will be able to agree somewhat on such issues as evil, black magic vs. >white magic, I do not see these as *versus* each other: to take such a view, IMO, leads to a kind of evil in itself by setting up a confontational model (or paradigm if you want to talk posh) when we would surely be better of by seeking the middle way. > the role of the Masters, etc. Define "Masters" - I have an item on this among my web stuff somewhere. Making progress .... Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:18:47 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: In message <199610111235.IAA22701@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Kym's insightful post gave me the interesting idea that perhaps the members >of this list were being taken for a ride. It is hard for me to believe >that someone, in this time, could write like they just got off a saddled >steed and were wearing a plumed hat. I could be wrong, but it sure got >this list moving. Yes - I got 40 theos posts today. Haven't had that many in quite a while. Better get me a plumed hat ... Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:28:23 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: a dream come true is a work of art Message-ID: <199610112236.SAA01919@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Ann says: > think it depends on what part of the WWW you're looking at. Personally, >I see a lot of diversity out there. I've found the web invalueable in >doing research on subjects that range from beer to UFOs. Not that it has anything to do with Theosophy, Ann, but this morning, to my joy, I discovered a whole homepage with multiple linakgages about Germany in German. I was rummaging around in the schools section & found out that the University of Cologne has a Martin Buber Institiute for Jewish Studies. The requirements seem to me to be very strict. They require all sorts of languages, not only Latin, Greek and Hebrew, but also Aramaic, Arabic, Spanish, French, Yiddish, Polish & Russian, languages of countries where Jews lived for hundreds of years. I think not all languages are obligatory. I wrote an inquiry, because I'd like to know who in Germany is going to do Jewish Studies in that depth. Also, if I haven't already given it to someone, my husband had brought over a book in German, the history of the Jews in Germany. The Buber Institiute I'm sure could use that. for some of the courses offered, they said they'd give them if a teacher was available; for some of them they said they'd give them if there was enough interest. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:19:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: <8oiZZJAZGoXyEwMt@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610092357.TAA29743@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >Maurice writes > >>By the bye, perhaps we should admonish the Masters of the Great >>White BROTHERHOOD also for daring to use such a gender specific name. >>The name, of course, was chosen by the Brotherhood itself ... > >By the bye, it has always astonished me that throughout the ages there were >so many white brothers, and hardly ever a sister in the White Brotherhood. >How do you account for that? > >Liesel > My guess is that they believe(d) that a woman's place is in the kitchen. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:16:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: "Christmas Humphries" & Death Sentence Message-ID: In UK Law today a conviction for murder results in a mandatory "life" sentence, which is usually about 15 years, (!?). In Humphries' time the mandatory sentence was death by hanging - there was no other choice available to any judge. Whether the reported instance is true is not something I can comment on, but if he was in the position of passing sentence of a some convicted of murder (guilty or not) he would have had no alternative but to have him hanged. Alan In message <9610111038.AA31912@toto.csustan.edu>, Jerry Hejka-Ekins writes > >Michael wrote: >>I saw a BBC-TV program some time ago on court cases in which >>the judge probably condemned a suspect erroneously to death. >>Among the judges who probably misjudged a suspect and sent him >>to the gallows was Christmas Humphries! > > >Not likely. Christmas Humphreys was famous in England for his >stance against capital punishment. The late Elsie Benjamine once >told me that as a Judge, Humphreys was of very high status-- >something comparable to a supreme court justice here. > >Jerry > >------------------------------------------ > |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | > |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | > |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | > |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | > ------------------------------------------ > --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:14:59 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <7IQYxFATCoXyEwPF@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <961010191452_330797552@emout17.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Jerry, >Peter Carroll has a line that I think fits this whole mess. > >"If you lock the demons in the basement they will blow up the house." > >Chuck the Heretic >(who is no relation to a talking pig of movie infamy) "When interviewed, the talking pig expressed relief. 'I never heard of no Chuck' said the pig, 'but he sounds like a weirdo to me.'" A.P. (Alan's Place). --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:19:52 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: In message <961011101517_207922883@emout01.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Gertude, >There is an angry Bandit sitting outside your mousehole sharpening her claws >and muttering weird cat things about people who blaspheme her human. > >Chuck the Heretic Time to send for the Cats in White Fur ... --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:39:47 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism Message-ID: <199610112248.SAA02771@ultra1.dreamscape.com> dear Kym, i really don't blame you & your coven for being angry, but please don't threaten Maurice. He's just inexperienced & emotional enough to really get hurt. we yell at each other but we don't hit. I think we'd all prefer to keep it that way. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:09:08 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Christmas Humphreys Message-ID: <199610112317.TAA04585@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Now that we've dragged Leadbeater through the mud several times, let's start up on Xmas Humphreys! Are you guys aware of the fact that one may watch soap operas on TV just about all day long? I thought theos-l was to discuss Theosophy, not grind out more soap opera. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:09:14 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610112317.TAA04593@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Max, You wrote >The problem is > >> that an average theosophist is not equipped to discriminate between the >right and the wrong in CWL's teachings.<< > >I am familiar with his writings, and I think books like "Talks on the >Path of Occultism" where he describes the path of discipleship and >initiation, are very good; >> that information may be verified and confirmed by one's higher self.<< What DK probably meant, is another category of >CWL's books like "The Masters and the Path" (more specifically >descriptions of initiations of Krishnamurti), "Man: Whence,...", "and >especially "The Lives of Alcyon." >>This is quite different kind of information: unverifiable by most readers,<< Actually, Max, what you're saying is that you yourself have the ability to verify some of CWL's writings, so in those writings, CWL is right. On the other hand you do not have the ability to verify other CWL writings, so in those writings he's wrong. That makes a lot of sense, don't you think? Let's stop this factionalism, right now. Please! Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Oct 96 04:44:28 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: VOICE OF THE FASHION WORLD-READY TO WEAR or HEAR Message-ID: <961012084428_74024.3352_BHT62-1@CompuServe.COM> Parallel Lives -Parallel Voices - Parallel Images - Traveling and Supperimposting Dream Consciousness on Waking Consciousness Still more of the difference between the VOICE OF THE SILENCE as spiritual consciousness and guidance The Voice of Addictions that cry out for unsatieable satisfaction of the physical, emotional and mental needs of the body. And now an interesting look at the VOICES BEHIND THE WORLD of TV, high fashion and popular music. I have glimpsed many strange altered states of consciousness recently. I seem to slip into a waking reverie a lucid dream superimposed on waking reality. It is like another world dropping in like subliminal flashes. This other world is a possible world, as in potential, but also a possible state of mind as insanity I sometimes fear. It takes the form of noise from various levels of the spectrum of consciousness that manifest as half hard radio and TV chatter within chatter. The announcers always seem amused, but I rarely am. It seems as if they are telling the truth or at least stating what they really think as if they were a little drunk and making Freudian slips a little too frequently. I feel that I can see meanings that are referring to larger issues They drift in and qwiff pop from the implicate world into the explicate world of normal sensations, perceptions and consciousness. They bring horrible premonitions of a spiritual warfare taking place just below the surface of everyday reality. The premise is that many of us are being possessed by strong egotistical desires to control manipulate and gain power, but what we are doing is selling our soul a la Faust in a rather stupid race for luxurious that we have more or less been told we want, because we certainly don't need them - diamonds, furs, jewels, designer everything. They seek to posses us and we allow ourselves to be possessed by these desires to control, manipulate and gain power in a giant game of Mexican standoff: I will make you talk to me and kiss my hand because I have more glamour, wealth and prestige or power. The energy used to block love and direct unconscious anger. can only compress and erupt indirectly and forcefully like a volcano in other areas of life. People are afraid to love, but try to build great glamorous smoke screens of cosmetic beauty, designer clothes, and labels of control and power - the Shekinah - the designer label, the Star name, the classy car, the surgerically altered face, all without any underlying human or spiritual substance. I have slipped into reveries and imaginary revelries that have confirmed like St. Johns apocalyptic visions of the end times, that in the after death state, we will be faced with our unloosing, self-enclosed self-concerned mask and our SARCASTIC shows of socialability and "in the know" type chat. These premontions are everywhere on from "hip" stand up comedians constantly referring to suicide, the OJ trial, murder, gangs, violence and political scandals as the stuff of comedy. What ever happened to Charlie Chaplin for laughs? See the movie "READY TO WEAR" for a glimpse at the sick, sick, world of high fashion with all of its chic empty clothes, and hateful "up to the minute" slang which is as aggressive as a slap in the face. This movie seemed to reveal in a love-hate way the decadent morality and intrigue of the high fashion big money world of status based on image - Shekinah the spirit of guidance and comfort not as religious image, icon or symbol, but a as logo, trademark, tradename. The dead may walk again, and our masks come off to reveal the hideous demons bubbling and screaming inside. It won't be pretty or all at once. A quick look at television shows a constant barrage of alien sightings, grotesque fashion, in your face politics and trash TV beyond the satirical. Who watches this mess? Or worse still, who can escape it? The surreal imagery of computer morphing images like morphine has a strange hallucinatory, hypnotic fascination so that if aliens did come tomorrow, who would notice? Or perhaps for some the masks will come off to reveal the reborn, the spiritually purified . The masks holding back the golden light of love, now freely shown forth what was not ready to wear yet. A choice of walking around as demonic nudes in a pop music trance (pret-a-porter) or light as air musical beings. Follow the VOICE of FASHION You hear it everywhere Repent, the end is near! Spent, ready to wear. Follow the Voice of the Silence The Invisible Guiding Presence The image is more valuable than gold The alchemist have foretold It will not help to be well dressed On the day of zuzzim A life contracted within Reveals the hidden Shekinah to Win Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:23:18 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Commando Cody Message-ID: <961011192317_331632941@emout17.mail.aol.com> Recipe for roast Bishop: First take one Bishop, preferably an irregular one. Remove innards and replace with stuffing of choice (sage works very well) Place on roasting pan and insert apple in mouth Cook at 350 degrees until done (about 1/2 hour per pound or until meat thermometer reaches 140) Glaze with orange sauce and serve. Chuck the Heretical Chef From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:23:42 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Money Magic Message-ID: <961011192327_331632260@emout06.mail.aol.com> Rich, The mistake you made was in visualizing without a few safeguards. When I conjure money I always put in the proviso that getting it will not hurt me or mine. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:23:54 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <961011192329_331633094@emout02.mail.aol.com> Eldon, Well, I have to visit the sink more often than the screening clinic, but I do get things done. There is nothing wrong with offering small amounts to beer to children. My father did it every summer and in some countries kids get it all the time. Egyptians sent little jugs of beer to scribe school with their children for lunch. Now getting them sloshed is another matter because there is nothing more horrifying than a child trying to sing "Sweet Adeline." And you're right, nobody really cares anyway. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:25:02 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Maurice regarding "Sexism" Message-ID: <961011192445_331633129@emout05.mail.aol.com> As well as my bowels. Chuck the Heretic (Who actually looks rather good in a plumed hat and wishes men fought duels again) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 18:22:25 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism Message-ID: <199610112331.TAA05502@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >he Masters found it more convenient to use a male body to accomplish what >they were to do. In the end male and female bodies are only a passing phase >of evolution. Dear Bee, That sounds to me like more sexism. Why would male bodies be more convenient? Well, maybe because they didn't need to deal with menses; but then, how come it says that before the end, we must experience life in all kinds of bodies? The SD says that we began as hermaphrodites and will eventually go back to being hermaphrodites. To me, right now we're 2 sexes, with one lording it over the other much too often, especially, it seems, in the 3rd world. The result is more dead, more crippled, or if nothing else more overworked women. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:34:37 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: yes virginia, I do exist Message-ID: In message <325ED2A6.1E0A@vnet.net>, "John E. Mead" writes >hi - >as list owner and devote hermit, I thought I should >state a few things of general interest.. > >1. Maurice has signed off theos-l --- FYI Phew! > >2. I had an interesting msg a few days ago.... >we sometimes are considered an *exclusive* group??!! I think the >idea is that being a discussion-list requires a subscribe, where >the news-groups do not. I was happy to find that Internet has been so >successful. It seems that *exclusive* is correlated with accessible. >that actually seems understandable ... However, I must point out >that we are not exclusive, but the rather *excluded*. after all.. who >has seen any major "power in office" recognize our existence and >participate? I wonder why, but know better. Truth is really higher >than religion, and that includes Theosophical Societies. Truth >hurts... but only when it not welcome. > >from the outcast realms of the virtual "white brotherhood" .... > >peace - >john e. mead >p.s. I may post something again, within the next six months. :-) > If you are *very* good. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:36:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: In message <1.5.4.32.19961011200439.006b08c0@whanganui.ac.nz>, Bee Brown writes >I will leave now before I get into hot water :-( Love you all regardless. >Bee Brown >Member Theosophy NZ, TI. > >Success is getting what you want. >Happiness is liking what you get. Truth-seeking is getting into hot water :-) Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:22:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > "Telepathy and Etheric Vehicle" p.140-1 > > "Glamour" p.183-4 > > "Esoteric Psychology" I p.484 > > "Esoteric Healing" p.403 and 404 > > These books/publications are not familiar to me. Who is the > author/publisher? I am sure there are others here who also may be > interested in the information. All these books were dictated by Master DK and published under the name of Alice A. Bailey by Lucis Trust, N.Y. and Lucis Publishing Co., London. They may be available at the Olcott Library, phone # 1-800-669-1571. Also available in some metaphysics bookstores, or directly from the publisher. Best, Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:42:20 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: to K. Paul Message-ID: In message <325EBCF0.BF0@worldnet.att.net>, Jerry Schueler writes >My only agreement >with any of the TSs is my firm belief in universal brotherhood >(oops, there's that sexist word again. Sorry folks). I >suspect that you are in this boat with me (?). Ohne mich (without me). This was a slogan used to great effecr in (I think) the sixties by West German youth who were opposed to the draft. Maybe there is a place for it in a "New Theosophy" vis a vis the "Old" Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 01:49:27 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: To Know, To Dare, To be Roasted Message-ID: In message <961011192317_331632941@emout17.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Recipe for roast Bishop: > >First take one Bishop, preferably an irregular one. >Remove innards and replace with stuffing of choice (sage works very well) >Place on roasting pan and insert apple in mouth >Cook at 350 degrees until done (about 1/2 hour per pound or until meat >thermometer reaches 140) >Glaze with orange sauce and serve. > >Chuck the Heretical Chef This worked fine until I spat out the apple, after which I just started chattering on again mindlessly, while the sage passed happily through the etheric dimensions of ecclesiatical space-time, and the Great Pink Brotherhood [side effect of being roasted] and declared me an immortal adept of the ninety-ninth portal of poppadom. [No-one makes 100, its' just an ideal to strive towards]. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 21:16:36 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: Thanks for the information. Already there was a msg from Elizabeth Trumpler, the Head Librarian at Olcott. also please see my reply to it. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Maxim Osinovsky wrote: > > > On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > "Telepathy and Etheric Vehicle" p.140-1 > > > "Glamour" p.183-4 > > > "Esoteric Psychology" I p.484 > > > "Esoteric Healing" p.403 and 404 > > > > These books/publications are not familiar to me. Who is the > > author/publisher? I am sure there are others here who also may be > > interested in the information. > > All these books were dictated by Master DK and published under the name > of Alice A. Bailey by Lucis Trust, N.Y. and Lucis Publishing Co., London. > They may be available at the Olcott Library, phone # 1-800-669-1571. Also > available in some metaphysics bookstores, or directly from the publisher. > > Best, > Max > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:30:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > Actually, Max, what you're saying is that you yourself have the ability to > verify some of CWL's writings, so in those writings, CWL is right. > On the other hand you do not have the ability to verify other CWL writings, > so in those writings he's wrong. > > That makes a lot of sense, don't you think? > > Let's stop this factionalism, right now. Please! Of course let's stop it. Let's better identify points of mutual agreement and discuss them in a constructive spirit. It would be fine with me. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:48:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Shifting Chaff from Wheat Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Jerry Schueler wrote: > Maybe the average theosophist has an IQ of about 60? Is this what > you are suggesting? If you really have such a hard time trying > to figure out what is right from what is wrong with ol' CWL, please > just ask me, and I will be happy to distinguish the difference for > you. Sorry, Max, but I agree with Liesel on this one. Liesel suggested to drop the CWL business. > PS. Please give me the name of one single person whose > teachings do not include at least one "distorted representations > of reality" and I will apologise to your superior wisdom. Jerry, I prefer to take what you wrote above at face value. Names abound (my favorites included, others may be added): 1. Patanjali's Yoga Sutras 2. Shankara (Sri Shankaracharya) 3. many Mahayana scriptures, e.g. the Heart Sutra, Vimalakirtinirdesha Sutra, Avatamsaka Sutra, all Prajnaparamita Sutras 4. Plato 5. Plotinus 6. Dionysius Areopagite 7. Meister Eckhart 8. H.P.Blavatsky 9. Master DK's books written by Alice Bailey 10. all Agni Yoga books (there are 14 of them) 11. some scriptures of Kashmir Shaivism, e.g. Shiva Sutra, Tantraloka, etc. Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:46:28 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <325F0684.53A1@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > Well, well, well! > > I want to thank you, Max, for bringing these quotes to my attention. You > must have a fantastic memory to remember where they are in those many blue > books. I would also thank you for showing me a very glaring reason why > there is a rift between the TS and the Bailey Group. Well, it all started out when Alice Bailey was with the Esoteric Section. She claimed to be in touch with the Mahatmas. Annie Besant essentially said, "Nobody is in touch with the Mahatma's until I say they are in touch with the Mahatmas. Bailey disagreed. I, for one, find that Alice Bailey puts somewhat too much of her own filtering on her works. I particularly find her racism and homophobia to be highly offputting, even though I know that she is just a product of her times (Leadbeater's couching everything in Christian terms has a similar effect on me). Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:15:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > > "Esoteric Psychology II" p.484 > "Again, schools of esotericists, theosophists and rosicrucians > (particularly in their inner schools) have also their own forms of this > illusion of guidance. It is of a different nature to the two dealt above, > but the results are nevertheless of much the same quality and reduce the > student to a condition of being guided, often of being directed by > illlusionary voices. Frequently the heads of the organization claim to be > in direct communicatins with a Master or the entire Hierarchy of Masters, > from Whom orders comes. These orders are passed on to the rank and file of > membership of the organisation and prompt unquestioning obedience is > expected from them...." > > And Whoever is writing this book goes on to say that the real work is to > put an indivdual in touch with his soul, under which he would be > self-guided. Some of the above seems to describe the beginning of many a > cult or group with cult leanings. However, I do not see CWL's name > actually mentioned, although I'm sure many who know his history would > suspect that the above description could apply to him. The name of the > game turned from "truth" to "control". I would quote the above passage in more length to show that it clearly alludes to the Theosophical leaders of the past. It also gives a good perspective on the Masters (emphasis added): "...Under the system of training, imparted under the name of esoteric development, the goal of a similar relationship to the Master or the Hierarchy is held out as an inducement to work or to meditation practice, and some day the aspirant is led to believe that he will hear his Master's voice, giving him guidance, telling him what to do and outlining to him his participation in various roles. Much of the psychological difficulties found in esoteric groups can be traced to this attitude and to the holding out to the neophyte of THIS GLAMOROUS HOPE. In view of this, I cannot too strongly re-iterate the following facts: 1. That the goal of all teaching given in the REAL esoteric schools is TO PUT MAN CONSCIOUSLY IN TOUCH WITH HIS OWN SOUL AND NOT WITH THE MASTER." Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:19:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: > I found the General Semantic Institute's > web page and I am also reading the book by the father to G-S Alfred > Korzybski, Science and Sanity, published in 1933. It is not too hard to read > and it sure does throw much light on the way we communicate.He was an > engineer and mathmatician who was concerned about the confused thinking this > world shows and some of his theories are very good. One of it's main themes > is non-identity and that the map is not the territory. I have also found > their g-s discussion list and I have learned a lot about the way I identify > with words and symbols that actually have no factual reality and get annoyed > with things people say mainly because I have chosen to identify certain > emotions with those words. Talking about spiritual things can get into > difficulty because we abstract from an esoteric fact and end up with our own > preferences attached to the symbol we have used to express our > interpretation of that fact. I have found g-s, so far, to hold many > similarities to Buddhist precepts e.g detachment, etc. Sounds very interesting. Could you please give a reference to the web page you've mentioned? Thanks, Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 00:55:19 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: The women were busy in the kitchen...roasting pigs Also probably being pregnant Any more cliches? (it's late, so my spelling isn't up to par) -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Oct 96 02:53:46 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Spiritual power of material images Message-ID: <961012065346_74024.3352_BHT55-3@CompuServe.COM> I have become obsessed again with the power of images to connect and relate various levels of spirit into matter. I have studied the tarot and see that it can open doors as can the kabala, astrology and numerology. I have never understood the power of sigils or stylized names or talisman type representation to evoke spiritual power throught the paricipation techniqe of letters, shapes and forms in themself. The Enochian calls and tablets seem to be an espectially difficult system of using images, letters and sounds to evoke hypostasized entities. Yet my study reveals that these representational systems of correspondences and substitutions are the essence of compression and communitcation of very difficult spiritual realities, concepts and energies in the physical form. Man is said to be made in God's image, a stamping of the Presense of God in the physical individual man. The world of eletronic images of TV, computers and the like seem to blot out and overpower more traditional images like the Greek icon that was stylized and unrealitic and therefore that more "spiritual" and pointing to the spiritual. The notion of the spiritual ideal form hovering with the material medium of painting, music etc. lead to the larger issues of architecture, city planning and government systems. Plato in The Republic and the Greeks in general demanded proportion and symmetry, grace, poise and a certain cotemplative serenity in the order of society. Music in exotic modes were discouraged as too unsettlng to the study of ideas. As we increasing depend on computer for transaction and commerce, it would seem that corporate images and representation such as logos will be more elaborate and practical in some way. Money itself is being redesigned, credit cards have holograms and electronic transfer of funds seem to be demanding a new marker. I am sure these ideas are being developed, but when one considers Thomas Jefferson's Monticello, the city planning of Washington, DC and the esoteric symbols on the dollar bill. One must fear that any new attempts to overlay images and commerce must be careful to bypass traditonal representations as of the Greeks, Egyptians and such things to more simplified representation of the principles needed. In God we trust, the pyramid and the Eye, the eagle etc. seem quaint, but the motive of exalting "filthy lucre-dirty money" with a higher energy through art and representation seems to be present from earliest times of money as not value, but marker, representation of absent value, legitimized by the referring to entities and institutions from the Presidency, the consitution, the Federal banking system and religious and philisophical ideals unltimaely. I have always thought that theosophy demands an intuitive yoking with the difficult to explore words and worlds of say, THE STANZAS OF DZYAN. The words and symbols yoke to underlying unexpressable ideas, feelings and images regarding the universe or whatever.. These symbols in turn are interpreted and thrown together (symbolos - to throw with) with what is there waiting in the viewer or reader to resonate within the unconscious of each person. The power to transform and direct, rinspire and rorient is too great to waste. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Oct 96 02:54:07 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Double edged sword of double entendre Message-ID: <961012065407_74024.3352_BHT55-4@CompuServe.COM> >> Ann, >> I was wondering if anyone on this list would know whom I was referring to. >> He was my favorite TV hero when I was a little kid. >> >> Chuck the Heretic >> > > >You were a child? I thought you were hatched!! (g) >ducking >-- Kid (n). A baby goat. So, Chucky as a babe(f) must be a Nanny Goat. Har har. (Oh dear) Alan :-) --------- Keith Price: Watching Robert Altman's READY TO WEAR about the soulessness and black magic power of glamour, murder and intrigue in the fashion industry provided an unsuspected insight. The major conversational tools of this group of the "beautiful" people are the sarcasm, the pun, the double entendre and the like. I myself admire these devices and use them frequently. As in the movie, these word games provide a sense of identification of brotherhood of "knowing", but not telling directly. It provides quick, deceptive signals among players who play fast and mean. I think motive is imporant and hard to discern and easily misinterpreted. Pun for instance can be used to express connection and frienship or be sly ennuendo and put-downs for the purpose of building myself up at the expense of others. If you can't see expressiona and body language, it is hard to tell the difference between a verbal stab and tickle. I myself have realized, that the worst form of sarcasm is spiritual sarcasm and confessing love and friendship in a kind of forced matter to do or say what is expected, appropriate, and professional (if in that setting). Do white lies of love count? Probably, but not much. Definite sarcastic professions of affection are the most twisted of emotional karma. The double edge sword of the double entendre and sarcasm are powerful at cutting both ways. They cut the victim and the perpetrator ( the victim only feels a temporary twinge, but the perpetrator may carry this as a festerin, growing habit that creates long, long, karma to work out. I plan to be more careful about having only humourous, friendly or honest motive when using these tools., I will try to be more understanding and suspect only humorous or friendly motives of others who use these word games unless I have clear reason to otherwise. I think so much of the occult tradition is involved with the symbolic, the blinds, the double meanings, the symbol as subtitute for something larger. Thus I think it is probably expected that we like word games. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 09:13:28 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: sexism Message-ID: <961012091327_1312960608@emout07.mail.aol.com> Liesel writes--> >I really don't blame you & your coven for being angry, but please don't >threaten Maurice. He's just inexperienced & emotional enough to really get >hurt. we yell at each other but we don't hit. I think we'd all prefer to >keep it that way. Richard Ihle writes--> Thank you for this, Liesel. I don't think the "rash spell" was meant seriously, but one never knows how someone else might take things. If a blessing can work, perhaps so can a curse--perhaps especially if the person knows he or she is being cursed. Perhaps the best kind of witch would be one who casts a spell to ~take away~ from the other person all rashes and maladies which might be causing him or her to have the erroneous ideas in the first place. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 09:49:30 +0100 From: Kim Poulsen Subject: RE: Christmas Humphries Message-ID: <01BBB848.317C33C0@ppp49.dk-online.dk> (on Cristmas Humphries) >As to his background,. I quote from the jacket of Pelican book : "Buddhism" >by Christmas Humphries: "Interested in Buddhism at an early age, in 1924 he >founded the Buddhist Society, London, which is the oldest and largest >Buddhist organisation in Europe..... Actually the Buddhist Lodge of the TS which was transformed into the Buddhist Society (another unknown scandal perhaps?). In 1923 he published an edition of the Mahatma Letters and remained a theosophist and a buddhist throughout his life (he died in the 1970es or 1980es). I discovered this suppressed fact by accidence and The Buddhist Society admitted it (I used to be a member). But the word theosophy vanished from there long ago (even when describing the life of CH). It is a strange experience to see history change before your very eyes, to see important facts and aspects simply disappear!. Kim Attachment Converted: "C:\TEMP\WINMAIL1.DAT" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:14:09 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: To Know, To Dare, To be Cosimano Cody Message-ID: <961012101408_331993987@emout07.mail.aol.com> Let's see, I think I have one of those old V2s laying around the hangar somewhere. Hang on to the tea service! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:07 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: yes virginia, I do exist Message-ID: <961012101505_331994401@emout04.mail.aol.com> Glad to hear from you. We'll miss Maurice. he was fun, if a bit on the orthodox side. Take heart. If the powers that be want to play ostrich, that's their loss. We just have to do a bit of PR. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:16 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: The Feminine Message-ID: <961012101515_331994479@emout10.mail.aol.com> Jerry, And let us not forget that Wiccans can be even bigger hypocrites than Theosophists! Given the choice, I'd rather be around a pack of xtians! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:20 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Money magic Message-ID: <961012101518_331994496@emout11.mail.aol.com> Jerry, Why is it that I seem to be the only one who can do these workings and not blast himself? I've been doing them for 30 years and never had anything like that happen. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:21 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <961012101520_331994509@emout14.mail.aol.com> Jerry, Carroll is probably one of the best Magickal writers around right now. He managed to take Spare's ideas and make them comprehensible, which is no small feat and I find him much more interesting than Frater U. D.. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:23 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Shifting Chaff from Wheat Message-ID: <961012101523_331994529@emout16.mail.aol.com> Jerry, It's a good thing Alex isn't on the list any more or he'd offer his name. Of course we could say Aleister Crowley and watch the fur fly. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:26 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great White Brothers (???) Message-ID: <961012101525_331994546@emout17.mail.aol.com> Chuck is having roast pork for dinner. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 10:15:28 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: <961012101528_331994573@emout20.mail.aol.com> Well, Chuckie really did it to himself this time. While walking to a local restaurant yesterday I managed to slip and fall squack on my less-than-sufficiently-padded dignity, thus producing a spontaneous outburst of kundalini along with the embarrassment. This has produced a state of enlightenment and now I not only have the Master DK hiding in my linen closet but a housefull of divine beings, all of whom are falling over each other trying to pay homage to me in Tibetan. Not only is the house now extremely crowded, but it is annoying the cats who are going around attacking the divine beings, possibly under the illusion that they are spiritual mice. Never have been enlightened before, I find this all rather puzzling, so any advice will be greatly appreciated. Chuck the Enlightened Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:21:45 -0400 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: <199610121521.AA13961@vnet.net> On 11 October, in a reply to Ann, Bart wrote > I, for one, find that Alice Bailey puts somewhat too much of her own >filtering on her works. I particularly find her racism and homophobia to >be highly offputting, even though I know that she is just a product of >her times (Leadbeater's couching everything in Christian terms has a >similar effect on me). Alice Bailey (AAB) did color the teachings of DK to some extent -- especially in the early years of their collaboration -- and each of them acknowledged that fact. That early influence was more along the lines of linguistic limitation than substance, however. Now and again, someone posts on theos-l a personal interpretation of the Bailey texts, which is all well and good. Most theosophists and long-time readers of theos-l are probably aware of at least the major differences between the AAB writings and so-called "orthodox" theosophy (as put forth by the Adyar and Wheaton organizations, as examples). And there are quite a few differences. I. But the charge of racism is unfounded, imo, and the same indictment has been made against HPB and the founders of the TS. Racism is defined as 1) The notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior. 2) Discrimination or prejudice based on racism (from American Heritage dictionary). Neither of these meanings apply to the word "race" as used in either HPB's or AAB's writings. There are *differences* between nations and men which can be accounted for, in AAB's writings, as manifestations of distinct qualifying energies. But the idea of "better or worse" doesn't apply, and in fact the AAB teachings specifically address "racism" (as Bart used the word) as one of the major obstacles facing humanity; it is one of seven in the book, PROBLEMS OF HUMANITY. The AAB books are published by the Lucis Trust, and one of the LT's associated groups, World Goodwill, publishes a study guide designed for individual and group study on these Problems and also a series of related commentaries: Number 16 is entitled "Race Relations in an Interdependent World" (both materials are free for the asking). As DK himself said, "The era of one humanity is upon us. I ask you to drop your antagonisms and your antipathies, your hatreds and your racial differences, and attempt to think in terms of the one family, the one life and the one humanity" and "The only solution to this problem is the basic recognition that all men are brothers; that one blood pours through human veins; that we are all the children of the one Father and that our failure to recognize this fact is simply an indication of man's stupidity." II. Homosexuality is a sensitive issue for many people. Homophobia is the word Bart used; again, I don't think it can be accurately applied to AAB. The word is literally "fear of homosexuals," and it is presently used to cover the range from distaste to aversion to avowed hostility. These are all emotional states, however, and none of them reflect AAB's writings. The "problem of sex" for aspirants and disciples is complex and AAB addresses it at some length; "A Compilation on Sex" was published to pull together from the various books all that DK said on the subject, and it is 148 pages long. But there are only a few references to homosexuality at all. DK does refer to it as an abnormal condition, and in one instance the word "perversion" is used. From the American Heritage again, perversion is "a sexual practice or act which is deviant" and deviant is "differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of society." Arguments could be made about the changing "norms and standards of society," and this may be to what Bart was referring when he said AAB was "a product of her times." But the *literal* meaning of the words used is correct, when divorced from emotional connotations or individual prejudice. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:50:57 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Double edged sword of double entendre Message-ID: <961012115056_1312967672@emout06.mail.aol.com> Keith, OK, you be careful if you want to. The rest of us will keep having fun. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 18:07:34 +0000 From: "Alicia N. Pineda" Subject: Re: THEOS-SPAN digest 32 Message-ID: <19961012180732.AAA17746@LOCALNAME> Gabriel, Bienvenido a este grupo. Este es un saludo de Alicia, desde Fremont, California. Mi direction es: alicianp@wordnet.att.net Su servidora, At 09:06 PM 10/10/96 +0000, you wrote: > >Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 14:06:46 -0600 (CST) >From: HERNANDEZ PEREZ GABRIEL >To: theos-span@vnet.net >Subject: Saludos!!! >Message-ID: > >Estimados Hermanos: > >Mi nombre es Gabriel Ahmed Hernandez Perez. A traves de este medio me >gustaria participar en el Foro Teosofico. Agradezco al Hno. Rodolfo Don y >al Hno. Jesus Cruz por su contacto a traves de este medio. > >Me gustaria saber de que manera participa uno en el Foro. Debo enviar >alguna informacion en particular a cada uno de Uds.?. Es posible >establecer contacto personal con algunos de los participantes via email?. > >Agradecere a quien llegue este mensaje sobre la operacion de este Foro >Teosofico, que sin duda, cumple cabalmente el proposito de formar un >Nucleo de Fraternidad Universal. Con todo respeto, si la Sra. H.P. >Blavatsky contemplara esto, habria dado por completada al menos una de >las tantas tareas que tenemos los teosofos en el mundo. > >Con mis mejores deseos > >Ing. Gabriel A. Hernandez Perez > Alicia Cheers...and you will live longer From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Oct 96 04:45:51 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: VOICE OF THE FASHION WORLD-READY TO WEAR or HEAR Message-ID: <961012084550_74024.3352_BHT62-2@CompuServe.COM> Parallel Lives -Parallel Voices - Parallel Images - Traveling and Supperimposting Dream Consciousness on Waking Consciousness Still more of the difference between the VOICE OF THE SILENCE as spiritual consciousness and guidance The Voice of Addictions that cry out for unsatieable satisfaction of the physical, emotional and mental needs of the body. And now an interesting look at the VOICES BEHIND THE WORLD of TV, high fashion and popular music. I have glimpsed many strange altered states of consciousness recently. I seem to slip into a waking reverie a lucid dream superimposed on waking reality. It is like another world dropping in like subliminal flashes. This other world is a possible world, as in potential, but also a possible state of mind as insanity I sometimes fear. It takes the form of noise from various levels of the spectrum of consciousness that manifest as half hard radio and TV chatter within chatter. The announcers always seem amused, but I rarely am. It seems as if they are telling the truth or at least stating what they really think as if they were a little drunk and making Freudian slips a little too frequently. I feel that I can see meanings that are referring to larger issues They drift in and qwiff pop from the implicate world into the explicate world of normal sensations, perceptions and consciousness. They bring horrible premonitions of a spiritual warfare taking place just below the surface of everyday reality. The premise is that many of us are being possessed by strong egotistical desires to control manipulate and gain power, but what we are doing is selling our soul a la Faust in a rather stupid race for luxurious that we have more or less been told we want, because we certainly don't need them - diamonds, furs, jewels, designer everything. They seek to posses us and we allow ourselves to be possessed by these desires to control, manipulate and gain power in a giant game of Mexican standoff: I will make you talk to me and kiss my hand because I have more glamour, wealth and prestige or power. The energy used to block love and direct unconscious anger. can only compress and erupt indirectly and forcefully like a volcano in other areas of life. People are afraid to love, but try to build great glamorous smoke screens of cosmetic beauty, designer clothes, and labels of control and power - the Shekinah - the designer label, the Star name, the classy car, the surgerically altered face, all without any underlying human or spiritual substance. I have slipped into reveries and imaginary revelries that have confirmed like St. Johns apocalyptic visions of the end times, that in the after death state, we will be faced with our unloosing, self-enclosed self-concerned mask and our SARCASTIC shows of socialability and "in the know" type chat. These premontions are everywhere on from "hip" stand up comedians constantly referring to suicide, the OJ trial, murder, gangs, violence and political scandals as the stuff of comedy. What ever happened to Charlie Chaplin for laughs? See the movie "READY TO WEAR" for a glimpse at the sick, sick, world of high fashion with all of its chic empty clothes, and hateful "up to the minute" slang which is as aggressive as a slap in the face. This movie seemed to reveal in a love-hate way the decadent morality and intrigue of the high fashion big money world of status based on image - Shekinah the spirit of guidance and comfort not as religious image, icon or symbol, but a as logo, trademark, tradename. The dead may walk again, and our masks come off to reveal the hideous demons bubbling and screaming inside. It won't be pretty or all at once. A quick look at television shows a constant barrage of alien sightings, grotesque fashion, in your face politics and trash TV beyond the satirical. Who watches this mess? Or worse still, who can escape it? The surreal imagery of computer morphing images like morphine has a strange hallucinatory, hypnotic fascination so that if aliens did come tomorrow, who would notice? Or perhaps for some the masks will come off to reveal the reborn, the spiritually purified . The masks holding back the golden light of love, now freely shown forth what was not ready to wear yet. A choice of walking around as demonic nudes in a pop music trance (pret-a-porter) or light as air musical beings. Follow the VOICE of FASHION You hear it everywhere Repent, the end is near! Spent, ready to wear. Follow the Voice of the Silence The Invisible Guiding Presence The image is more valuable than gold The alchemist have foretold It will not help to be well dressed On the day of zimzum A life contracted within Reveals the hidden Shekinah to Win Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 14:09:36 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610121910.PAA20721@cliff.cris.com> > From: Bart Lidofsky > > Well, it all started out when Alice Bailey was with the Esoteric > Section. She claimed to be in touch with the Mahatmas. Annie Besant > essentially said, "Nobody is in touch with the Mahatma's until I say > they are in touch with the Mahatmas. Bailey disagreed. I've heard this one several times, but also other stories relating to her leaving TS, including the one Alice Bailey wrote in her autobiography. I've learned a lot about the many Theosophical organization from being on this list, but most of all, I've learned the differences that separate them, almost to the point of it looking like different sects of one religion. The Internet is educational in more ways than one can count. In my relationships with the LCC and the TSA, there was no mention of any other independent churches or Theosophical organizations. Perhaps one way to beat the competition is to simply pretend it doesn't exist. If your members don't know about anything else, they'll think your group is the only game in town. God bless the Internet! > > I, for one, find that Alice Bailey puts somewhat too much of her own > filtering on her works. I particularly find her racism and homophobia to > be highly offputting, even though I know that she is just a product of > her times (Leadbeater's couching everything in Christian terms has a > similar effect on me). > As they say, to each his own. I posted those quotes because I had the material available and I thought it would be interesting to those who do not own the books. -Ann E. Bermingham A thank you to Jim Meier for his comprehensive response. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:14:54 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961012191454.0067ae60@whanganui.ac.nz> At 11:20 PM 11/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >> I found the General Semantic Institute's >> web page and I am also reading the book by the father to G-S Alfred >> Korzybski, Science and Sanity, published in 1933. It is not too hard to read >> and it sure does throw much light on the way we communicate.He was an >> engineer and mathmatician who was concerned about the confused thinking this >> world shows and some of his theories are very good. One of it's main themes >> is non-identity and that the map is not the territory. I have also found >> their g-s discussion list and I have learned a lot about the way I identify >> with words and symbols that actually have no factual reality and get annoyed >> with things people say mainly because I have chosen to identify certain >> emotions with those words. Talking about spiritual things can get into >> difficulty because we abstract from an esoteric fact and end up with our own >> preferences attached to the symbol we have used to express our >> interpretation of that fact. I have found g-s, so far, to hold many >> similarities to Buddhist precepts e.g detachment, etc. > >Sounds very interesting. >Could you please give a reference to the web page you've mentioned? > >Thanks, >Max > Hi Max, Here is the URL www.newciv.org/worldtrans/ Some of the bigshots on the g-s discussion list aren't keen on persons like us on their list but fortunately the rest are fine. I lurk as I have been in hot water by mentioning Vitvan whose writings got me interested in g-s. Before that I didn't know g-s existed. They seem to think that persons into philosophy, theology, theosophy & mataphysics are not scientific enough for them. I want to find out about g-s but I don't need to talk to the grumps. Cheers Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:14:57 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: sexism Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961012191457.0066afcc@whanganui.ac.nz> At 09:18 AM 12/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Liesel writes--> >>I really don't blame you & your coven for being angry, but please don't >>threaten Maurice. He's just inexperienced & emotional enough to really get >>hurt. we yell at each other but we don't hit. I think we'd all prefer to >>keep it that way. > >Richard Ihle writes--> >Thank you for this, Liesel. I don't think the "rash spell" was meant >seriously, but one never knows how someone else might take things. If a >blessing can work, perhaps so can a curse--perhaps especially if the person >knows he or she is being cursed. > >Perhaps the best kind of witch would be one who casts a spell to ~take away~ >from the other person all rashes and maladies which might be causing him or >her to have the erroneous ideas in the first place. . . . > >Godspeed, > >Richard Ihle > Good for you, Liesel. I see you all managed to get rid of Maurice. I am sorry about that as I rather enjoyed his quaint Victorian manner of speech and was still trying to decide if he was for real and if so what caused him to speak in that manner. Preferable to witchi-poos sticking spikes in testicles. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:49:27 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961012194927.0068c5f4@whanganui.ac.nz> Ann wrote: > >I've learned a lot about the many Theosophical organization from being on >this list, but most of all, I've learned the differences that separate >them, almost to the point of it looking like different sects of one >religion. > >The Internet is educational in more ways than one can count. In my >relationships with the LCC and the TSA, there was no mention of any other >independent churches or Theosophical organizations. Perhaps one way to >beat the competition is to simply pretend it doesn't exist. If your >members don't know about anything else, they'll think your group is the >only game in town. God bless the Internet! Ditto. We received the latest Theosophist yesterday from Adyar and I just happened to read the standard blurb inside the front page and I got confused. It seems that the Society subscribes to the saying, ' Do as I say, not as I do.' Here is what I read. FREEDOM OF THOUGHT. As The Theosophical Society has spread far and wide over the world, and as members of all religions have become members of it without surrendering the special dogmas, teachings and beliefs of their respective faiths, it is thought desirable to emphasize the fact that there is no doctrine, no opinion, by whomsoever taught or held, that is in any way binding on any member of the Society, none which any member is not free to accept or reject. Approval of its three Objects is the sole condition of membership. No teacher, or writer, from H.P. Blavatsky downwards, has any authority to impose his teachings or opinions on members. Every member has an equal right to attach himself to any school of thought which he may choose, but has no right to force his choice on any other. Neither a candidate for may office nor any voter, can be rendered ineligible to stand or to vote, because of any opinion he may hold, or because of membership in any school of thought to which he may belong. Opinions or beliefs neither bestow privileges nor inflict penalties. The Members of the General Council earnestly request every member of The Theosophical Society to maintain, defend and act upon these fundamental principles of the Society, and also fearlessly to exercise his own right of liberty of thought and of expression thereof, within the limits of courtesy and consideration for others. This is offical from the magazine from the horse's mouth. Perhaps we should all have a copy pinned to our computers. Cheers > > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 23:34:49 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Just for fun Message-ID: A student who studied the Mysteries Had read all the relevant histories. He pored through each page To become a Great Mage. He isn't one yet, but his sister is. AB --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 18:48:35 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610122357.TAA03319@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Bee; You write >the way discussions are structured and >listening to the g-s list, shows up quite a difference in methods of >resolving differences. Wish you'd elucidate. I don't like the way we resolve our differences, because it never seems to lead us anywhere. So if someone else has a better way of doing it, please tell us. Maybe we can do it too. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 18:51:57 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism Message-ID: <199610130000.UAA03452@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >hey're probably in the back making coffee and sandwiches, or should I say >upholding the cohesity of the universe while the guys talk about it. > >-Ann E. Bermingham chuckle! Strange how little it takes for us to recognize each other. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 19:32:32 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610130041.UAA05409@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >. That the goal of all teaching given in the REAL esoteric schools is TO > PUT MAN CONSCIOUSLY IN TOUCH WITH HIS OWN SOUL AND NOT WITH THE MASTER." > >Max > Thank you, Max, for saying that. In my inmost mind I was never too keen about becoming a chela, & serve the Masters. But rather, I thought that my more important goal would be that I be of service to mankind. Since Theosophy says "Serve the Masters", I thought there was something wrong with me, and I blamed my not being very eager to serve any Masters on the fact that I didn't think much of my own father. Thank you, Max. You helped me get rid of a silly hangup. There's really nothing wrong, I think, but for me there is everything right with wanting to be a Bodhisattva -in -the -becoming. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 19:53:15 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism Message-ID: <199610130101.VAA06394@ultra1.dreamscape.com> I just want to requote several sentences of Jim's quote from Alice Bailey, because it exemplifies exactly what I was talking about yesterday. When we want to express something in general terms, we use "him", and never "her". Alice Bailey does it in this passage. Annie Besant did it numerous times, and so have I done it numerous times. It's just the way we were brought up, & you don't notice it, unless you very consciously look for it. >I ask you to drop >your antagonisms and your antipathies, your hatreds and your racial >differences, and attempt to think in terms of the one family, <> and "The only solution to this problem is the basic recognition that <> that one blood pours through human veins; that we are all the <> and that our failure to recognize this fact is simply an indication of <> See what I mean? Sisters and mothers are never mentioned. They're understood, somewhat. When you think of being God's children, most of us have grown up thinking of God as our Father in heaven. The Goddess, who belongs at his side is just now reawakening. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:51:17 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > >. That the goal of all teaching given in the REAL esoteric schools is TO > > PUT MAN CONSCIOUSLY IN TOUCH WITH HIS OWN SOUL AND NOT WITH THE MASTER." > > > >Max > > > > Thank you, Max, for saying that. In my inmost mind I was never too keen > about becoming a chela, & serve the Masters. But rather, I thought that my > more important goal would be that I be of service to mankind. Since > Theosophy says "Serve the Masters", I thought there was something wrong with ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > me, and I blamed my not being very eager to serve any Masters on the fact > that I didn't think much of my own father. Thank you, Max. You helped me get > rid of a silly hangup. There's really nothing wrong, I think, but for me > there is everything right with wanting to be a Bodhisattva -in -the -becoming. > > Liesel Dear Liesel: >From what I have understood about Theosophy, it is my understand that the life blood of Theosophy is to make all of us concerned about the well being of our fellow beings. The task of helping our fellow beings is so important and urgent in the world that Those who have gone far ahead of us in understanding welcome any one of us who can give whatever help we can in this direction. It is also my understanding that They are not looking for peons to serve them. In the world of today when there is so much pain and suffering is there, much can be achieved by energetic, enterprising self motivated self starters. When the "peonic" model is put forward by anyone, there follows all the counter productive consequences such as control over the thought and actions of other by those who claim to have close contact or direct connection with Those who are far ahead of us. No one needs an unnecessary intermediary. I believe Lord Buddha said this. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:21:03 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: AB vs HPB Message-ID: <326043FF.376E@worldnet.att.net> > I would also thank you for showing me a very glaring reason why >there is a rift between the TS and the Bailey Group. > >-Ann E Bermngham I agree with you, Ann. The quotes given are wrong. Time, for example, does exist on the inner planes, albeit not in the minute-hour-day sequences that we have in the waking state where time is counted by the earth's revolutions around the sun. Long ago I tried some AB material, and then went back to HPB. The quotes given by Max are probably one of my reasons. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:36:14 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: New Theosophy Message-ID: <3260478E.3263@worldnet.att.net> >Maybe there is a place for it in a "New Theosophy" vis a vis the "Old" > >Alan Well, unless you kick me out, I plan to stay in TI, which is a new theosophy. Jerry S. member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:55:47 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Magic (To Keith) Message-ID: <32604C23.3814@worldnet.att.net> >I have never understood the power of sigils or stylized names or >talisman type representation to evoke spiritual power throught the >paricipation techniqe of letters, shapes and forms in themself. The >Enochian calls and tablets seem to be an espectially difficult system >of using images, letters and sounds to evoke hypostasized entities. Keith, yes, they are difficult. But the principles on which they rest are also found in tantra and Tibetan Buddhism (especially speaking mantras and visualizing mandalas). Magic is not for everybody. It was only after I discovered how and why it worked, that I started to like it. >I have always thought that theosophy demands an intuitive yoking with >the difficult to explore words and worlds of say, THE STANZAS OF >DZYAN. The words and symbols yoke to underlying unexpressable ideas, >feelings and images regarding the universe or whatever.. These symbols >in turn are interpreted and thrown together (symbolos - to throw with) >with what is there waiting in the viewer or reader to resonate within >the unconscious of each person. The power to transform and direct, >rinspire and rorient is too great to waste. I agree. As you know, Jung taught that the archetypal self communicates with the conscious ego through symbols during dreams and visions. We have to come to grips with these images in order to progress. They are the very language of the spiritual realms. By re-channeling the libdio (Jung's psychic energy--but on theos-l I dread to use the p word) or "cannalizing" as Jung has it, we can redirect this energy into useful purposes. This is, in fact, the psychological explanation for how magic works. And dreamwork, an important part of magic, is the business of using our dreams to help us tread the Path. Anyone who wakes in the morning and forgets their dreams is wasting a large part of their life. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:01:08 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Our Plastic Past Message-ID: <32604D64.4484@worldnet.att.net> > But the word theosophy vanished from >there long ago (even when describing the life of CH). It is a strange >experience to see history change before your very eyes, to see >important facts and aspects simply disappear!. > >Kim Kim, I have been saying for a long time that the past is just as plastic as the future. Your story is a good example of this. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:07:13 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Karmaless Chuck?? Message-ID: <32604ED1.317@worldnet.att.net> >Jerry, >Why is it that I seem to be the only one who can do these workings and >not blast himself? I've been doing them for 30 years and never had >anything like that happen. > >Chuck the Heretic Well, there is one possibility. Some years ago I vowed to go ahead and let all of my karma hit me here and now and get it all done with. Maybe yours is in storage somewhere? The only other explanation that I can think of, is that you have reached jivamukta, and are karmaless. Nahhh... Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:15:04 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Chaos Magic Message-ID: <326050A8.2665@worldnet.att.net> >Jerry, >Carroll is probably one of the best Magickal writers around right now. >He managed to take Spare's ideas and make them comprehensible, which is >no small feat and I find him much more interesting than Frater U. D.. I have yet to find a copy of Spare's works anywhere. I only know of him via second hand (Kenneth Grant, etc). But the little I have read tells me he was pretty good, albeit a bit eccentric. I agree with your appraisal of Carroll, since modesty forbids me to include my own works in such a discussion as does yours with your own material. His magical equations, for example, I though was an excellent attempt to combine science and magic. I also like his eclectism, and of course, with a Ph.D. focused on chaos theory, I also like chaos magic (I posted a chaos magic essay to theos-l via ftp awhile back, don't know if its still there or not). Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:18:34 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Chuck's Enlightenment Message-ID: <3260517A.3F57@worldnet.att.net> >Never have been enlightened before, I find this all rather puzzling, so >any advice will be greatly appreciated. > >Chuck the Enlightened Heretic My advice: leave milk and cookies. Works for me. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:41:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > Dear Liesel: > > >From what I have understood about Theosophy, it is my understand that the > life blood of Theosophy is to make all of us concerned about the well > being of our fellow beings. The task of helping our fellow beings is so > important and urgent in the world that Those who have gone far ahead of > us in understanding welcome any one of us who can give whatever help we > can in this direction. It is also my understanding that They are not > looking for peons to serve them. In the world of today when there is so > much pain and suffering is there, much can be achieved by energetic, > enterprising self motivated self starters. When the "peonic" model is put > forward by anyone, there follows all the counter productive consequences > such as control over the thought and actions of other by those who claim > to have close contact or direct connection with Those who are far ahead > of us. No one needs an unnecessary intermediary. I believe Lord Buddha > said this. MKR, You are right: the Buddha never failed to say it. He often stressed that one needs to be strong and independent to go along the Path. Here is a relevant passage from the Buddha's discourses found in The Secret Doctrine (v.3, Adyar one-vol. edition, p.401) as quoted by Alice Bailey: "The Lord Buddha has said that we must not believe in a thing said merely because it is said; nor traditions because they have been handed down from antiquity; nor rumours, as such; nor writings by sages, because sages wrote them; nor fancies that we may suspect to have been inspired in us by a Deva (that is, in presumed spiritual inspiration); nor from inferences drawn from some haphazard assumption we may have made; nor because of what seems an analogical necessity; nor on the mere authority of our teachers or masters. But we are to believe when the writing, doctrine, or saying is corroborated by our own reason and consciousness. "For this," says he in concluding, "I taught you not to believe merely because you have heard, but when you believed of your consciousness, then to act accordingly and abundantly." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:47:38 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: Max: Thanks for the quote. I think Lord Buddha saw the pitfalls of anyone not standing on their own feet, especially in matters we cannot see and feel with our physical senses. This is not very different from what Krishnaji also has been saying all along. My 2 cents worth. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Maxim Osinovsky wrote: > > > On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > Dear Liesel: > > > > >From what I have understood about Theosophy, it is my understand that the > > life blood of Theosophy is to make all of us concerned about the well > > being of our fellow beings. The task of helping our fellow beings is so > > important and urgent in the world that Those who have gone far ahead of > > us in understanding welcome any one of us who can give whatever help we > > can in this direction. It is also my understanding that They are not > > looking for peons to serve them. In the world of today when there is so > > much pain and suffering is there, much can be achieved by energetic, > > enterprising self motivated self starters. When the "peonic" model is put > > forward by anyone, there follows all the counter productive consequences > > such as control over the thought and actions of other by those who claim > > to have close contact or direct connection with Those who are far ahead > > of us. No one needs an unnecessary intermediary. I believe Lord Buddha > > said this. > > MKR, > > You are right: the Buddha never failed to say it. He often stressed > that one needs to be strong and independent to go along the Path. > > Here is a relevant passage from the Buddha's discourses found in The Secret > Doctrine (v.3, Adyar one-vol. edition, p.401) as quoted by Alice Bailey: > > "The Lord Buddha has said that we must not believe in a thing said merely > because it is said; nor traditions because they have been handed down > from antiquity; nor rumours, as such; nor writings by sages, because > sages wrote them; nor fancies that we may suspect to have been inspired > in us by a Deva (that is, in presumed spiritual inspiration); nor from > inferences drawn from some haphazard assumption we may have made; nor > because of what seems an analogical necessity; nor on the mere authority > of our teachers or masters. But we are to believe when the writing, > doctrine, or saying is corroborated by our own reason and consciousness. > "For this," says he in concluding, "I taught you not to believe merely > because you have heard, but when you believed of your consciousness, then > to act accordingly and abundantly." > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 13 01:40:58 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: <199610130540.BAA04094@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: > >A student who studied the Mysteries >Had read all the relevant histories. >He pored through each page >To become a Great Mage. > >He isn't one yet, but his sister is. > >AB >--------- Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But seriously, isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? Most of the posts I see on here are related to discrimination of one thing or another. The fact is, we are all equals. When I write something, my ego is involved in the actual act of writing, but not necessarily in the message I am trying to convey. What I'm trying to say is, most of us write from our point of view. If we are male, we write from a male point of view. If we are female ...likewise. If we have to worry about being politically correct in everything we write, we are going to waste a lot of time making sure we are not going to insult someone else's ego with our message. In my opinion, this is time that could be better spent in discovering how to better help humanity, rather than squabbling over attributes of our lower manas that are subject to change when we pass on. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 13 01:46:52 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: New Theosophy Message-ID: <199610130546.BAA04306@envirolink.org> Jerry Schueler writes: >>Maybe there is a place for it in a "New Theosophy" vis a vis the "Old" >> >>Alan > >Well, unless you kick me out, I plan to stay in TI, which is >a new theosophy. > >Jerry S. >member, TI > I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the TI is starting to sound a lot like the NIV. I just hope you don't become so "new" as to forget the wisdom and the reality of the "old". --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 07:51:45 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <199610131252.IAA25444@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > >. That the goal of all teaching given in the REAL esoteric schools is TO > > PUT MAN CONSCIOUSLY IN TOUCH WITH HIS OWN SOUL AND NOT WITH THE MASTER." > From: liesel f. deutsch > Thank you, Max, for saying that. In my inmost mind I was never too keen > about becoming a chela, & serve the Masters. But rather, I thought that my > more important goal would be that I be of service to mankind. Since > Theosophy says "Serve the Masters", I thought there was something wrong with > me, and I blamed my not being very eager to serve any Masters on the fact > that I didn't think much of my own father. Where for a long time the soul serves the personality, eventually things turn around and the personality serves the soul. Since all souls are generally connected together, then the personality or earth mask begins to serve humanity because now it can see the connection within all other personalities. I think most Masters are looking for "a few good personalities" that will serve humanity, since that is their work. Each person probably comes to a certain level of rapport with their soul, then is recruited by a Master. Otherwise you'd have some egocentric person running amok in the plans, although I'm sure there is still a possibility of personality kinks getting in the way. ("But DK," he whined, "How can we make any money off of this stuff.") As for the admonishment "to serve the Masters", this sounds like a way of giving people who are not really in touch with Them a kind of goal. And a backward way of saying "serve humanity." But maybe it started to fall into an adoration of the Masters and completely got away from the real idea - serving people everywhere. (Alan's soup kitchen post fits here nicely.) A much more difficult task than worshipping some superman being and expecting him to sweep into your parlor wearing a turban. I guess this would come somewhere in the glamour and illusion category. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 10:12:46 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: The National Lodge Message-ID: <961013101245_1111784839@emout18.mail.aol.com> Jerry Schueler writes--> >HPB warned >us about the molds of the mind and the habitual grooves that >our thinking gets itself into, and it is just this that besets >the TSs today. She also wrote that golden chains bind just >as tightly as iron chains, but no theosophist today has a >clue as to what she meant. Right now my membership is close >to ending as I see little reason to remain. Richard Ihle writes--> Anyone have any thoughts on the new "National Lodge" as outlined on pp.18,19 of the latest AT? Upon first reading, I was favorably impressed (because it seemed like a move toward more open communication etc.); upon second reading, however, I was stopped-up by the sentence "The officers and board of the National Lodge are those of the Theosophical Society in America." But one good thing: The material is back to saying ~the Theosophical philosophy~ rather than just ~Theosophy~ when it (perhaps undoubtedly) means the doctrines found in HPB's writings. However, maybe I should wait until I see it referred to as ~the principal Theosophical philosophy~ a time or two before I send in the extra $15 to become a National Lodge Member. Another good thing: The same issue of the AT is to be commended, in my opinion, for having this quote from HPB prominently displayed on the front cover: ". . .the essence of Theosophy is in the harmonizing of the divine with the human in man." Anyone have any "inside information" on the National Lodge? Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:48:12 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: The National Lodge (fwd) Message-ID: The msg was posted on theos-l and I am forwarding here so that someone who has more info/news can comment on it. M K Ramadoss > Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 10:28:38 -0400 > From: RIhle@aol.com > Subject: The National Lodge Jerry Schueler writes--> >HPB warned >us about the molds of the mind and the habitual grooves that >our thinking gets itself into, and it is just this that besets >the TSs today. She also wrote that golden chains bind just >as tightly as iron chains, but no theosophist today has a >clue as to what she meant. Right now my membership is close >to ending as I see little reason to remain. Richard Ihle writes--> Anyone have any thoughts on the new "National Lodge" as outlined on pp.18,19 of the latest AT? Upon first reading, I was favorably impressed (because it seemed like a move toward more open communication etc.); upon second reading, however, I was stopped-up by the sentence "The officers and board of the National Lodge are those of the Theosophical Society in America." But one good thing: The material is back to saying ~the Theosophical philosophy~ rather than just ~Theosophy~ when it (perhaps undoubtedly) means the doctrines found in HPB's writings. However, maybe I should wait until I see it referred to as ~the principal Theosophical philosophy~ a time or two before I send in the extra $15 to become a National Lodge Member. Another good thing: The same issue of the AT is to be commended, in my opinion, for having this quote from HPB prominently displayed on the front cover: ". . .the essence of Theosophy is in the harmonizing of the divine with the human in man." Anyone have any "inside information" on the National Lodge? Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 22:21:02 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Subject: Re: A manera de presentacion Message-ID: Bienvenido al grupo Hno. Gabriel A. Hernandez Perez, Es mi opinion que debemos poner un poco de "salsa arcana" a nuestro grupo y compartir un poco mas amenudo nuestro pensar y actuar teosofico. Sin embargp es mas facil decirlo que hacerlo. Yo soy Martin Leiderman, naci en Venezuela, y soy miembro de la logia Espa=F1a en Los Angeles CA, este a=F1o cumplimos 75 de existencia. Nuestra Logia se reune todos los sabados de 2pm a 4 pm. La primera hora es para los miembros y estudiamos libros teosoficos, usualmente bajo la guia del presidente de turno de la Logia, ahora es el Hno. Franklin Romero (nacido en Cuba). En la segunda hora tenemos charlas, conferencia, o presentacion de videos a cargo de algun miembro de la Logia. Nuestras reuniones tienen un promedio de 12 personas. Mi trabajo personal es la aplicacion en mi vida diaria de lo que estudio, y medito sobre las ense=F1anzas teosoficas. Tambien trato de dar al menos una conferencia en otra Logia Teosofica al mes. Por ejemplo este mes el 18 en la Logia de Long Beach sobre La Gran Piramide, el 27 en Tijuana sobre el Libro Egipcio de los Muertos, el mes entrante en la Logia de Ojai sobre el Mito de Quetzalcoatl. Me gustaria el poder intercambiar ideas con todos ustedes si les parece sobre los puntos: 1- La Logia como centro de aprendizaje y hermandad. 2- En lo personal: como trabajar desde el Budhi, si me entienden, para percibir con Luz mi interior y el mundo que me rodea. 3- La importacia de la Sociedad Teosofica hoy en dia y del trabajo a realizar por la humanidad. Por favor compartan sus ideas sobre el respecto. Desde Los Angeles su servidor, Martin Leiderman Paz y Armonia a Todos From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:50:38 -0600 (CST) From: HERNANDEZ PEREZ GABRIEL Message-ID: Hola Teosofos de todo el Mundo!!!!!: Nuevamente les saluda su hermano Gabriel Hernandez. Me gustaria que reglamentaramos un poco lo referente al Foro Teosofico. Jesus Cruz propone la iniciativa de que exista un moderador de las charlas y de una lista de los temas teosoficos que podrian despertar el interes de todos los participantes. Asi que se valen sugerencias, comentarios o ideas para mejorar este Foro. Quiza valdria la pena comentar los eventos y conferencias que se efectuan en cada una de las Logias de cada pais. Ademas, seria bueno que interactuaramos con Teosofos no hispanos para saber que piensan de esta idea (foro teosofico), y saber como se las han arreglado para emailarse. Saludos Fraternales a todos!!!!! Desde la tierra de las chalupas, los chiles en nogada y los Fuertes de Loreto y Guadalupe reporto el brother Gabriel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:16:31 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Karmaless Chuck?? Message-ID: <961013121629_125542518@emout12.mail.aol.com> Jerry, It's actually simpler than that. As karma has to take an energy form in order to affect the physical reality, it was a very easy matter to create a witness pattern for it and then use one of my machines to balance it out, the same way I would balance out any other disease. Therefore, for all practical purposes, I am karmaless. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:16:33 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Chaos Magic Message-ID: <961013121632_125542553@emout14.mail.aol.com> Jerry, There are a number of web pages up with the complete text of Spare's major works on them. Just set your search engine and go browsing. One thing I find very interesting is that the perspective many of the younger Chaos magicians have is very similar to theosophy. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:16:35 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Chuck's Enlightenment Message-ID: <961013121635_125542578@emout15.mail.aol.com> Jerry, There's this young fellow on the Chaos list who had a servitor run amok and he was doing just that, bribing it with milk and cookies. I had a hell of a time persuading him that he had to do more than that to get rid of it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:36:53 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: New Theosophy Message-ID: In message <199610130546.BAA04306@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the TI is starting to sound a lot >like the NIV. I just hope you don't become so "new" as to forget the wisdom >and the reality of the "old". You seem to have a problem with something? Are "we" something separate from you? If you read the TI statement of intent, you will see that we quite clearly respect and wish to keep the reality of the old *and* to bring the wisdom of the past into the present. See below: "Ancient Wisdom for a New Age." THAT'S TI. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 17:17:42 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: sexism Message-ID: In message <199610130101.VAA06394@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >one blood pours through human veins; that we are all the > ><> > >and that our failure to recognize this fact is simply an indication of > ><> > >See what I mean? Sisters and mothers are never mentioned. They're >understood, somewhat. When you think of being God's children, most of us >have grown up thinking of God as our Father in heaven. The Goddess, who >belongs at his side is just now reawakening. Which reminded me of the following not so new theosophy: The book of Proverbs, 8:4-35: Wisdom (always "She" in both the original and in translation) speaks: "To you, O people, I call, and my cry is to all that live. O simple ones, learn prudence; acquire intelligence, you who lack it. Hear, for I will speak noble things, and from my lips will come what is right; for my mouth will utter truth; wickedness is an abomination to my lips. All the words of my mouth are righteous; there is nothing twisted or crooked in them. They are all straight to one who understands and right to those who find knowledge. Take my instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold; for wisdom is better than jewels, and all that you may desire cannot compare with her. I, wisdom, live with prudence, and I attain knowledge and discretion. The fear of YHWH is hatred of evil. Pride and arrogance and the way of evil and perverted speech I hate. I have good advice and sound wisdom; I have insight, I have strength. By me kings reign, and rulers decree what is just; by me rulers rule, and nobles, all who govern rightly. I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me. Riches and honor are with me, enduring wealth and prosperity. My fruit is better than gold, even fine gold, and my yield than choice silver. I walk in the way of righteousness, along the paths of justice, endowing with wealth those who love me, and filling their treasuries. YHWH created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of long ago. Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains had been shaped, before the hills, I was brought forth -- when he had not yet made earth and fields, or the world's first bits of soil. When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle on the face of the deep, when he made firm the skies above, when he established the fountains of the deep, when he assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters might not transgress his command, when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside him, like a master worker; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the human race. And now, my children, listen to me: happy are those who keep my ways. Hear instruction and be wise, and do not neglect it. Happy is the one who listens to me, watching daily at my gates, waiting beside my doors. For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from YHWH. [From the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible] (When seen in the Hebrew, there are clear "Kabbalistic" references in the text) Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:33:33 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Just for more (innocent) fun Message-ID: Don't anyone dare take this seriously! - The followers after Ouspensky Should be able to count up to tensky But sad to relate They can only reach eight And then have to start once againsky. Alan (1965). --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:45:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The National Lodge Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Oct 1996 RIhle@aol.com wrote: > > Richard Ihle writes--> > Anyone have any thoughts on the new "National Lodge" as outlined on pp.18,19 > of the latest AT? > > Upon first reading, I was favorably impressed (because it seemed like a move > toward more open communication etc.); upon second reading, however, I was > stopped-up by the sentence "The officers and board of the National Lodge are > those of the Theosophical Society in America." There is the fact that the members at large now constitute a large percentage of the TSA membership. We will have to wait and see how this National Lodge evolves. > > But one good thing: The material is back to saying ~the Theosophical > philosophy~ rather than just ~Theosophy~ when it (perhaps undoubtedly) means > the doctrines found in HPB's writings. However, maybe I should wait until I > see it referred to as ~the principal Theosophical philosophy~ a time or two > before I send in the extra $15 to become a National Lodge Member. I too would wait and see before I send in the extra $15 to become a National Lodge Member. > Another good thing: The same issue of the AT is to be commended, in my > opinion, for having this quote from HPB prominently displayed on the front > cover: ". . .the essence of Theosophy is in the harmonizing of the divine > with the human in man." Amen. > > Anyone have any "inside information" on the National Lodge? > May be someone would comment. If anyone wants to comment, but to remain anonymous, it can be arranged. MKRamadoss > Godspeed, > > Richard Ihle > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:23:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: New Theosophy Message-ID: In message <3260478E.3263@worldnet.att.net>, Jerry Schueler writes >>Maybe there is a place for it in a "New Theosophy" vis a vis the "Old" >> >>Alan > >Well, unless you kick me out, I plan to stay in TI, which is >a new theosophy. > >Jerry S. >member, TI > No one can kick you out! *That's* "New Theosophy" *and* TI! (New applications from "New Theosophists" via homepage below) Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:31:09 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: In message <199610130540.BAA04094@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >> >>A student who studied the Mysteries >>Had read all the relevant histories. >>He pored through each page >>To become a Great Mage. >> >>He isn't one yet, but his sister is. >> >>AB >>--------- >Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But seriously, >isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? Good grief. The header says "Just for fun" and the verse was written in 1965. Watch this space. "Cousin is" just doesn't rhyme. Sexism is certainly getting out of hand when a piece of doggerel is taken as a political statement! Alan :-( --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 17:25:07 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI list Message-ID: Just a reminder to TI members and others that TI has its own (unused for the most part) mailing list. To subscribe, send a message (no subject) containing only the following (no sig): subscribe ti-l Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 12:01:43 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: ESP Message-ID: <199610131710.NAA06388@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear folks, ESP is one subject we've bandied about quite a bit on this mailing list. Well, I've got something very postive to add to our bantering. I have a habit of buying interesting books & then just letting them sit in my book case. I just now had occasion to pull out such a one and read it, and let me tell you, if you're interested in factual, modern day info on ESP, to say nothing of getting a brief (1 book) overview of Theosophy, read Dora Kunz's "The Personal Aura". It's really good. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:16:10 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: New vs Old Message-ID: <32614E0A.7F10@worldnet.att.net> >I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the TI is starting to sound a >lot like the NIV. I just hope you don't become so "new" as to forget >the wisdom and the reality of the "old". >--- >The Triaist I don't know what NIV is, but as an old Master once said, you can't put old wine into new bottles (or new wine into old bottles for that matter). The problem here is that the TSs are great for newbies and beginners. But after some of us have read about karma and reincarnation ten thousands of times, it starts getting stale. This is because after a few decades of study, the spirit tends to dwindle as the mental gymnastics increases. Pretty soon, one takes the exoteric material for truth, and theosophy becomes a relgion rather than a living inner spirit, or as I like to call it, a spiritual current. In order to keep the spirit alive and well, the exoteric ideas must be recouched into new terms in order to provide new insights and keep the intuition stirred up. I try hard to do this on theos-l, as well as in my books. But most theosophists stick with the same old tired material, that is fine for newbies, but stale for me. As I have said many times, there is a whole lot more to karma and reincarnation than is written about in the TS literature. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:36:51 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: <326152E3.35B1@sprynet.com> Jim Meier wrote: > > On 11 October, in a reply to Ann, Bart wrote > > > I, for one, find that Alice Bailey puts somewhat too much of her own > >filtering on her works. I particularly find her racism and homophobia to > >be highly offputting, even though I know that she is just a product of > >her times (Leadbeater's couching everything in Christian terms has a > >similar effect on me). > I. But the charge of racism is unfounded, imo, and the same indictment has > been made against HPB and the founders of the TS. Racism is defined as 1) > The notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior. 2) Discrimination or > prejudice based on racism (from American Heritage dictionary). Neither of > these meanings apply to the word "race" as used in either HPB's or AAB's > writings. There are *differences* between nations and men which can be > accounted for, in AAB's writings, as manifestations of distinct qualifying > energies. But the idea of "better or worse" doesn't apply, and in fact the > AAB teachings specifically address "racism" (as Bart used the word) as one > of the major obstacles facing humanity; it is one of seven in the book, > PROBLEMS OF HUMANITY. I agree with the American Heritage dictionary's (especially using the term "ethnic stock" rather than "race"). Notice that the word "hate" is missing from that definition, that the qualifier "against" is not next to the words, "discrimination" and "prejudice". Especially prominent in the Victorian era through WWII was the concept of the "white man's burden"; the idea that members of other ethnic stocks were currently inferior to that of the light-skinned Europeans/Americans, and it was the burden of those of the "superior" ethnic stocks to bring those of the "inferior" ethnic stocks "up" to their own "level". Bailey goes a little further, and blames the "inferiority" on the actions of the Europeans/Americans, but that does not change the fact that the concept is inherently racist. In the Theosophical Society (Adyar-based), one prominent writer who also had that problem was Clara Codd. In any case, I certainly don't believe that Bailey had malicious intent. If her writings were based on revelations from DK, I could picture Master DK saying something on the order that the Europeans/Americans, in order to remove the karma they created through oppression of other ethnic groups with the least harm, had to work to reverse the damage, and Bailey simply wrote that in her own terms, carrying prejudice that was so much the thinking of the times that she didn't even realize it existed. > As DK himself said, "The era of one humanity is upon us. I ask you to drop > your antagonisms and your antipathies, your hatreds and your racial > differences, and attempt to think in terms of the one family, the one life > and the one humanity" and "The only solution to this problem is the basic > recognition that all men are brothers; that one blood pours through human > veins; that we are all the children of the one Father and that our failure > to recognize this fact is simply an indication of man's stupidity." And with THAT, I fully agree. > II. Homosexuality is a sensitive issue for many people. Homophobia is the > word Bart used; again, I don't think it can be accurately applied to AAB. > The word is literally "fear of homosexuals," and it is presently used to > cover the range from distaste to aversion to avowed hostility. It is true that "homophobia", like "racism", is a word that has suffered much from misuse and abuse. Bailey, however, makes the assumption that homosexuality is entirely a matter of choice, and it is specifically the choice of those who also choose the path of evil. That, in my opinion, goes beyond rationality, which makes "homophobia" a reasonable sobriquet. > Arguments could be made about the changing "norms and standards of society," > and this may be to what Bart was referring when he said AAB was "a product > of her times." But the *literal* meaning of the words used is correct, when > divorced from emotional connotations or individual prejudice. What I meant is that, in the reading of theosophical topics, one has to understand the prejudices that are so ingrained into the author's society that the author is not even aware that they have these prejudices. And you have to filter these out in order to truly what the author is saying. The problem is that the more repugnant these prejudices are to you, the harder it is to filter them out. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:43:13 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <32615461.69A0@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > The Internet is educational in more ways than one can count. In my > relationships with the LCC and the TSA, there was no mention of any other > independent churches or Theosophical organizations. Perhaps one way to > beat the competition is to simply pretend it doesn't exist. If your > members don't know about anything else, they'll think your group is the > only game in town. God bless the Internet! In New York, there is a Theosohpical Society lodge, and a ULT branch. When people come to me and complain that they were thrown out of a ULT meeting for asking the wrong kind of questions, I explain to them that the ULT is there for presentation, not for discussion, and that the ULT excels at presentation. I see no problem in people going to both groups. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:45:51 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <326154FF.7CBC@sprynet.com> Bee Brown wrote: > Ditto. We received the latest Theosophist yesterday from Adyar and I just > happened to read the standard blurb inside the front page and I got > confused. It seems that the Society subscribes to the saying, ' Do as I say, > not as I do.' Here is what I read. > > FREEDOM OF THOUGHT. I don't understand how the statement of freedom of thought has to do with "Do as I say, not as I do". Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 17:31:27 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Bee Brown wrote: > > > Ditto. We received the latest Theosophist yesterday from Adyar and I just > > happened to read the standard blurb inside the front page and I got > > confused. It seems that the Society subscribes to the saying, ' Do as I say, > > not as I do.' Here is what I read. > > > > FREEDOM OF THOUGHT. > > I don't understand how the statement of freedom of thought has to do > with "Do as I say, not as I do". > > Bart Lidofsky I think the reference is to some of the organizational things that have taken place regarding TS (Adyar) both in the USA and in other countries. You will also get a response from Bee. MKRamdoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 13 18:26:51 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: New Theosophy Message-ID: <199610132226.SAA21104@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >In message <199610130546.BAA04306@envirolink.org>, John Straughn > writes >>I'm not trying to offend anyone here, but the TI is starting to sound a lot >>like the NIV. I just hope you don't become so "new" as to forget the >>wisdom and the reality of the "old". > >You seem to have a problem with something? Are "we" something separate >from you? The latter I am taking as rhetorical due to basic obviousness that we are not...in sat. As to the former, I wish to explain. No, I do not have any problems with the TI as of yet. The comment made was in response to the term "new Theosophy" which startled me. When the translators for the NIV wrote their version, they believed that their version was right, and that all their translations written to be understood as the Hebrew/Greek would have been understood when the original(s) was written. However, the translators of the KJV thought the same. Their two translations have many differences, and I have to say that in reading the two esoterically, the KJV has kept truer to the terminology. However, in having read portions of the Hebrew Genesis, I would have to say that the KJV is quite a ways away from the intended message(s). However, my point is that both translators think they are right, but they differ from each other. My comment was not an attack on the TI, or a statement of disfavor. To put it in a better light...it was a warning to be cautious of how you incorporate the "old" into the new. It has been my experience in the past that the message of the "new" was often far from the intended message of the "old". >If you read the TI statement of intent, you will see that we quite >clearly respect and wish to keep the reality of the old *and* to bring >the wisdom of the past into the present. See below: I did read it, however my statement still stands true. I'm sure that the various translators of the bible also respected and wished to keep the reality of the old while incorporating it into the present. I apologize for not explaining my views more precisely the first time. >"Ancient Wisdom for a New Age." > >THAT'S TI. > --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 13 18:28:42 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Just for more (innocent) fun Message-ID: <199610132228.SAA21167@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >Don't anyone dare take this seriously! - > >The followers after Ouspensky >Should be able to count up to tensky >But sad to relate >They can only reach eight >And then have to start once againsky. *laugh* ....I'm sorry I ruined your fun the first time, Alan.:) >Alan (1965). >--------- >Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 96 17:25 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Sexism, spells, and other stuff Message-ID: It has been suggested the arguments regarding "Sexism" is unimportant in the Theosophical scheme of things. Really? How are we going to "help humanity" if every time we speak we unnecessarily offend a great number of them. Those who find "political correctness" tiresome are simply lazy. How are we going to help humankind if we can't integrate basic concepts of equality? We know this - Theosophy will first be identified by those who practice it, and if they practice in offensive ways, then Theosophy will be dismissed as just another "us against them" belief system. Yes, I am aware that for many Theosophists, the fewer that know of Theosophy, the more special that makes those of us who do. But what does that say about us, what does that say about Theosophy? I am also amazed that there is more outrage at the "spell" post than there was at the post it was in response to. Did most of you really read the post that prompted the "spell" post (yes, I will acknowledge a few (too few) did find it offensive, and the best posts speaking up were from men)? After reading many of the responses addressing the "girls," I sincerely hope the black people among us don't request audience in regards to the terms "White Brotherhood." Also, some seem to actually think I really put a "spell" on Maurice (I have gotten some pretty violent private posts on this subject - one claimed "women will use any and all means to emasculate men, including magic" - uh, ok. ..) It is clearly un-Wiccan to ever "curse" anyone, (so is the use of effigies) and only those ignorant of Wicca would ever declare that such was acceptable to Wiccans. Funny how those who screamed the most about people who can't take a joke freaked out the greatest after reading the "spell" post. I am disturbed too how even some women on this list are willing to accept non-equality. A woman even doubted the female body was as good as the man's (although that post was readdressed eloquently by a male, proving that men, when they so choose, are capable of seeing women as equals without feeling any personal threat - a sign of personal and mental strength - and yes, it goes both ways). Didn't HPB, and I'm fuzzy on this, express the thought that she was not given all by the Masters because she was a female, or something like that?? Do any of you really know someone who speaks only in the "feminine," as was eluded to in a post or two? If the terms really don't matter, why don't we try an experiment - speak only in the feminine - and see how long it takes before males, and perhaps some females, suggest we are somehow discriminating against the male essence. 'Tis such a thing, I now think, as Theosophical fundamentalism. And I am despondent with this new found knowledge. It is as was suggested in a wise post - that in the beginning, in the first discovery of Theosophy, the excitement and idealism pour forth, the false-assurance that the ideas are so refined, so insightful, they could never be tarnished, that those who claim to believe in them probably act and speak accordingly. God, I hate being so naive. And it has, perhaps, happened to me - as Baudlaire said, '...do not let me be like those I despise.' Kym (aka - "Witchie-poos") From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:45:53 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: <8XjpGBAhEXYyEwHi@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <326152E3.35B1@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >> II. Homosexuality is a sensitive issue for many people. Homophobia is the >> word Bart used; again, I don't think it can be accurately applied to AAB. >> The word is literally "fear of homosexuals," and it is presently used to >> cover the range from distaste to aversion to avowed hostility. > > It is true that "homophobia", like "racism", is a word that has >suffered much from misuse and abuse. Bailey, however, makes the >assumption that homosexuality is entirely a matter of choice, and it is >specifically the choice of those who also choose the path of evil. That, >in my opinion, goes beyond rationality, which makes "homophobia" a >reasonable sobriquet. Many people still make this assumption - that it is a matter of choice. For those affected (and/or afflicted in many cases) it clearly is no such thing. How many people would *choose* a life of social ostracism, hatred and prejudice, if it could be avoided simply by making a different "choice" - very few, I suspect. Oscar Wilde went to gaol for it, and who knows how many people have been brutally assaulted, rendered pysically disabled, and even horribly murdered for their so-called "choice"? Medical science is gradually beginning to discover that there are almost certainly biological and physiological causes which predispose people - at the very least - to varying sexual preferences and lifestyles. Even if homosexuality *were* a matter of choice, the Theosophcical Societies all claim to operate "without discrimination of sex." There used to to be the quaint (IMO) view among theosophists that homosexuals (m or f) were transiting from one sex to another betweeen incarnations ... Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:17:40 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Upload Message-ID: I have uploaded to my hompage directory structure "The Laws of Chaos Magic" by Jerry S. as Chaosmag.txt (56221 bytes) It can be retrieved directly from URL: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/wisdom/JERRY_S/ *Case is important* - type URL exactly as shown. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:49:25 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: discrimination Message-ID: <+XGpWEA1HXYyEwmD@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <32615461.69A0@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >In New York, there is a Theosohpical Society lodge, and a ULT branch. >When people come to me and complain that they were thrown out of a ULT >meeting for asking the wrong kind of questions, I explain to them that >the ULT is there for presentation, not for discussion, and that the ULT >excels at presentation. I see no problem in people going to both groups. Nor do I, and many others on this list, but all too often this is not the view of members of the lodges and/or branches concerned, and people are thrown out for having different opinions, or daring to attend a "rival" organisation - as happened to me, and SFAIK, others on this list. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:55:59 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Political Correctness Message-ID: <32618F9F.7978@sprynet.com> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > > It has been suggested the arguments regarding "Sexism" is unimportant in the > Theosophical scheme of things. Really? How are we going to "help humanity" > if every time we speak we unnecessarily offend a great number of them. > Those who find "political correctness" tiresome are simply lazy. I do not find "political correctness" to be tiresome. I find it to be reprehensible, and it should be anathema to anybody who seriously belongs to an organization whose motto is "THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN TRUTH". How many honest politicians do you know? Does politics equate, in general, with truth or lies? Then why the "political" in "political correctness"? Let's take a look at the origin of the term, "political correcntess". The Communist Party had a dualistic theory that our perceptions of reality were entirely colored by our politics. If one thought that people were starving to death or being falsely imprisoned in the Soviet Union, it was not because these things were actually happening, it's that one's politics were incorrect. Any member of the Communist Party who made a statement that reality was different than the party line was warned of being "politically incorrect". The term "political correctness" was again used in the early 1980's, to refer to hypocritical rules on college campuses where it was considered to be OK to say, for example, for a black professor to say that all Caucasians should be killed. It was NOT OK, however, to for a conservative student newspaper to quote the professor in criticism. Somehow, some people took this concept of the wrongness of truth when told about certain groups of people to be right (what George Orwell called "doublethink"). A more charitable definition of "political correctness" is taking the lies we tell out of politeness, and considering them to be the truth. Face it, if you're interested in the truth, then it's either correct, or incorrect. It's NEVER "politically correct". Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:04:50 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: <326191B2.7C36@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > There used to to be the quaint (IMO) view among theosophists that > homosexuals (m or f) were transiting from one sex to another betweeen > incarnations ... Would be as good an explanation of transsexuality as I've ever heard. There is a story about a student who asked a sage, "Why do crabs walk sideways?" The sage, picked up a crab, and said, "Why do you walk sideways?", and put the crab to his ear. He told the student, "The crab wants to first know why we walk forwards." "Why, because it's natural!", said the student. "Then, that is why the crab walks sideways", replied the sage. I, personally, did not have the choice of homosexuality available to me. When I was in college, I had a few very good friends who were homosexual and willing. If they were female, there is an excellent chance I would have taken them up on their offers. But, since they were male, although I was flattered, it was simply not something I was willing or able to do. It was not natural for me. I could not choose to go from heterosexuality to homosexuality. It is my suspicion that those who show open hatred of homosexuality DO have the ability to make that choice, and it scares the hell out of them. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:08:14 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: discrimination Message-ID: <3261927E.48E8@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <32615461.69A0@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes > >In New York, there is a Theosohpical Society lodge, and a ULT branch. > >When people come to me and complain that they were thrown out of a ULT > >meeting for asking the wrong kind of questions, I explain to them that > >the ULT is there for presentation, not for discussion, and that the ULT > >excels at presentation. I see no problem in people going to both groups. > > Nor do I, and many others on this list, but all too often this is not > the view of members of the lodges and/or branches concerned, and people > are thrown out for having different opinions, or daring to attend a > "rival" organisation - as happened to me, and SFAIK, others on this > list. At least for the last two decades, both the New York branch of the ULT and the New York Theosophical Society have encouraged cross membership. Getting cross-lecturers is a little more difficult; the ULT won't have our lecturers, and they don't like to lecture at the NYTS under the conditions we have of open questions and discussions. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:20:59 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Just for more (innocent) fun Message-ID: In message <199610132228.SAA21167@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >*laugh* ....I'm sorry I ruined your fun the first time, Alan.:) there's more ... Alan :-) --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:45:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Silly fun Message-ID: A pupil of Madame Blavatsky Encounteed a cat with a ratsky. He said, "Find another, For that is your mother >From the last life but one before thatsky." [If anyone tells me there is a difference between reincarnation and the transmigration of souls I shall SCREAM!] Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 19:43:59 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Sexism, spells, and other stuff Message-ID: <199610140113.VAA15006@cliff.cris.com> > From: kymsmith@micron.net > > I am disturbed too how even some women on this list are willing to accept > non-equality. A woman even doubted the female body was as good as the man's . . . For what? Handling a broad sword? Women can carry life and bear children. But putting in a plug for equality, it takes two to tango. Therefore, is it not wiser to think in terms of equality, appreciating the best of both sides of the coin? And not just in bodies, but also on the feminine and masculine within the psyche. My best to you, Kym, -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 19:31:59 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: <199610140113.VAA14992@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > > Especially prominent in the Victorian era through WWII was the concept > of the "white man's burden"; the idea that members of other ethnic > stocks were currently inferior to that of the light-skinned > Europeans/Americans, and it was the burden of those of the "superior" > ethnic stocks to bring those of the "inferior" ethnic stocks "up" to > their own "level". Bailey goes a little further, and blames the > "inferiority" on the actions of the Europeans/Americans, but that does > not change the fact that the concept is inherently racist. You hit a nerve with me right here. I came from an Eastern European background, both my grandparents being immigrants. My mother got off the boat at Ellis Island in her early twenties. I grew up with these attitudes, which I did not personally understand. To my mother's credit, she managed to get beyond those attitudes, something which was especially useful in that she taught high school in the inner city. When I go over to her brother's house for Christmas, I still have to listen to his rants about other enthnic groups. He never changed. > > It is true that "homophobia", like "racism", is a word that has > suffered much from misuse and abuse. Bailey, however, makes the > assumption that homosexuality is entirely a matter of choice, and it is > specifically the choice of those who also choose the path of evil. That, > in my opinion, goes beyond rationality, which makes "homophobia" a > reasonable sobriquet. > I was not aware of this in the material. Could you tell me exactly where this is located in the book(s)? > What I meant is that, in the reading of theosophical topics, one has to > understand the prejudices that are so ingrained into the author's > society that the author is not even aware that they have these > prejudices. And you have to filter these out in order to truly what the > author is saying. The problem is that the more repugnant these > prejudices are to you, the harder it is to filter them out. Considering my family history, I can well understand that. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:02:33 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Silly fun Message-ID: > > > A pupil of Madame Blavatsky > Encounteed a cat with a ratsky. > He said, "Find another, > For that is your mother > >From the last life but one before thatsky." > > [If anyone tells me there is a difference between reincarnation and the > transmigration of souls I shall SCREAM!] > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > Is there a difference between reincarnation & transmigration? Please expand and clarify. Thanks.... Gertrude the Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:05:40 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: > > Well, Chuckie really did it to himself this time. > While walking to a local restaurant yesterday I managed to slip and fall > squack on my less-than-sufficiently-padded dignity, thus producing a > spontaneous outburst of kundalini along with the embarrassment. > This has produced a state of enlightenment and now I not only have the Master > DK hiding in my linen closet but a housefull of divine beings, all of whom > are falling over each other trying to pay homage to me in Tibetan. Not only > is the house now extremely crowded, but it is annoying the cats who are going > around attacking the divine beings, possibly under the illusion that they are > spiritual mice. > Never have been enlightened before, I find this all rather puzzling, so any > advice will be greatly appreciated. > > Chuck the Enlightened Heretic > I, who am already enlightened, have a few words of wisdom, Uncle Chuckie! Tread softly, but carry a big stick! Be *nice* to the cats! Remember.............. Gertrude the Churchmouse is watching! -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:21:18 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Silly fun Message-ID: <961014002115_126078141@emout15.mail.aol.com> Gertrude, In reincarnation, you come back has a human. In transmigration, you come back as a CHURCHMOUSE! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:24:22 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: <961014002420_126080220@emout12.mail.aol.com> Gertrude, There is only one problem. The system alternates, so with one impact to the rear the kundalini goes up and enlightenment results. The next time it happens, it goes back down and you get unenlightened again. To many repetitions and confusion results and the person reincarnates as a churchmouse. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 17:30:17 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Unconscious assumptions Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961014043017.0069dd1c@whanganui.ac.nz> > > What I meant is that, in the reading of theosophical topics, one has to >understand the prejudices that are so ingrained into the author's >society that the author is not even aware that they have these >prejudices. And you have to filter these out in order to truly what the >author is saying. The problem is that the more repugnant these >prejudices are to you, the harder it is to filter them out. > > Bart Lidofsky This is what turned my attention to General Semantics as a way of understanding how this can be avoided. They say that it is our evaluations of anything outside our 'skin' that gets us into semantic trouble. We live in our own private worlds and are imbedded in a Reality that we take for granted and so we abstract from the first idea or stimulus according to our various emotional needs and blockages and arrive at some queer conclusions and feel annoyed if others do not share them. I am still lurking and reading so my understanding is far from complete. According to my understanding, they recommend taking into account that Smith1 is not the same as Smith2 e.g John Algeo is an autocrat from Wheaton so any of his associates from there may be reacted to in a similar way. They also hold a lot with the fact that Smith2 that got up our nose last week may not be the same Smith2 today as living is a process and this means all things change and so Smith2 may have been enlightened since last week and greet us with loving kindness which we may miss because we remember Smith2 from last week. They say that there is a natural order to the way the nervous system works and that the way much of humanity abstracts and identifies with their abstractions and evaluations causes un-sane semantic reactions to the structure of their world. We do not take into account the fact that in any event or incident there is a whole lot of things we do not know and so our evaluations should be provisional and leave the way open for more information to be added later and then be able to adjust our evaluations to incorporate the additional info. John Algeo may have very valid reasons, to himself, for being an 'autocrat'. G-s would say that without a proper description of meaning, that word 'autocrat' has no meaning in facts but is an evaluation by us. That is ok as long as we acknowledge that it is an evaluation we have made according to how we see it and acknowledge that there may be things we have no knowledge of, influencing his behaviour. That is sort of the way to look at it but there is a lot more to it all than what I have outlined here. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon Oct 14 00:23:52 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Sexism, spells, and other stuff Message-ID: <199610140423.AAA10895@envirolink.org> kymsmith@micron.net writes: >It has been suggested the arguments regarding "Sexism" is unimportant in the >Theosophical scheme of things. Really? How are we going to "help humanity" >if every time we speak we unnecessarily offend a great number of them. Rather I feel that every time we speak why do people have to feel that their sex is so important, that they must be offended unnecessarily. I am male, yes, but if I was female, I doubt that I would feel any different about the situation than I do now. >Those who find "political correctness" tiresome are simply lazy. How are we >going to help humankind if we can't integrate basic concepts of equality? >We know this - Theosophy will first be identified by those who practice it, >and if they practice in offensive ways, then Theosophy will be dismissed as >just another "us against them" belief system. Yes, I am aware that for many >Theosophists, the fewer that know of Theosophy, the more special that makes >those of us who do. But what does that say about us, what does that say >about Theosophy? I've got kind of a major question ...do we all believe that the "highest" aspect of women(to humor those who need it) and men are their atman ...which is not something individualized, but, in a way, is "shared" by all. Without sex. Without race. What is the purpose of the above-mentioned "practice" other than to attain and/or become this aspect? >I am also amazed that there is more outrage at the "spell" post than there >was at the post it was in response to. Did most of you really read the post >that prompted the "spell" post (yes, I will acknowledge a few (too few) did >find it offensive, and the best posts speaking up were from men)? After >reading many of the responses addressing the "girls," I sincerely hope the >black people among us don't request audience in regards to the terms "White >Brotherhood." I don't believe I read the "spell" post, but I had thought about the "White Brotherhood" having that little hint of racial discrimination...good call...shall we add this to our list of complaints? >Also, some seem to actually think I really put a "spell" on Maurice (I have >gotten some pretty violent private posts on this subject - one claimed >"women will use any and all means to emasculate men, including magic" - uh, >ok. ..) It is clearly un-Wiccan to ever "curse" anyone, (so is the use of >effigies) and only those ignorant of Wicca would ever declare that such was >acceptable to Wiccans. Funny how those who screamed the most about people >who can't take a joke freaked out the greatest after reading the "spell" >post. I actually did find Alan's joke somewhat amusing ...I just chose his post to make a serious example of what had been going elsewhere. Just a bad choice of "reply" I suppose.:) "An it harm none; do what thou wilst." The perfect code ..I'd be perfectly happy with it if it wasn't for my innate need for complexity. >I am disturbed too how even some women on this list are willing to accept >non-equality. A woman even doubted the female body was as good as the man's >(although that post was readdressed eloquently by a male, proving that men, >when they so choose, are capable of seeing women as equals without feeling >any personal threat - a sign of personal and mental strength - and yes, it >goes both ways). Didn't HPB, and I'm fuzzy on this, express the thought The blatant unequality of the past has little to do with habitual usage of words. It shouldn't matter if someone writes he, she, or person ...ugh. Ok. For all those offended by the use of "sexually discriminative proper nouns", please make a note of something. I do not think of myself as being any higher than you, whether you are female, male, black, white, hot-pink, or a hermaphrodite. But I am not going to waste my time going back and making sure that every time I write something, I'm not offending someone who has an overactive ego. If you don't want to be offended, think of it this way. When you die, you lose your sex. And if you're reincarnated, you might even be a different one. And if you become enlightened, you'll realize that it just ..doesn't ...matter in the end. >Do any of you really know someone who speaks only in the "feminine," as was >eluded to in a post or two? If the terms really don't matter, why don't we >try an experiment - speak only in the feminine - and see how long it takes >before males, and perhaps some females, suggest we are somehow >discriminating against the male essence. Yes, it would happen, and probably on a much more drastic level. Because men have an ego too. And it's widely known to be a little "bigger". I would slap the same comments onto those complaints, however, because what I'm trying to get at is, by worrying about it, you're feeding your lower manas, and are therby tearing yourself away from "enlightenment". Whether you're male or female, you're still feeding your lower self by worrying about physical and lower-mental "discrimination". >'Tis such a thing, I now think, as Theosophical fundamentalism. And I am >despondent with this new found knowledge. It is as was suggested in a wise >post - that in the beginning, in the first discovery of Theosophy, the >excitement and idealism pour forth, the false-assurance that the ideas are >so refined, so insightful, they could never be tarnished, that those who >claim to believe in them probably act and speak accordingly. > >God, I hate being so naive. And it has, perhaps, happened to me - as >Baudlaire said, '...do not let me be like those I despise.' > > >Kym (aka - "Witchie-poos") Thank you, Kym, it was a pleasure. *bow* --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon Oct 14 00:32:12 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Silly fun Message-ID: <199610140432.AAA11479@envirolink.org> Drpsionic@aol.com writes: >Gertrude, >In reincarnation, you come back has a human. >In transmigration, you come back as a CHURCHMOUSE! > >Chuck the Heretic No joke, Gertrude, except perhaps for the churchmouse bit...:) --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:00:47 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Silly fun Message-ID: > > Drpsionic@aol.com writes: > >Gertrude, > >In reincarnation, you come back has a human. > >In transmigration, you come back as a CHURCHMOUSE! > > > >Chuck the Heretic > > No joke, Gertrude, except perhaps for the churchmouse bit...:) > --- > The Triaist > > > Excuse me Trialist... what areyour trying to say? -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:05:17 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: Don't you mean "too"? -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon Oct 14 01:46:29 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Silly fun Message-ID: <199610140546.BAA15727@envirolink.org> CDGertrude writes: >> >> Drpsionic@aol.com writes: >> >Gertrude, >> >In reincarnation, you come back has a human. >> >In transmigration, you come back as a CHURCHMOUSE! >> > >> >Chuck the Heretic >> >> No joke, Gertrude, except perhaps for the churchmouse bit...:) >> --- >> The Triaist >Excuse me Trialist... >what areyour trying to say? >-- Trialist? Nah...doesn't fit my persona....:) I was trying to say that you have as much of a chance bieng transmigrated as a churchmouse as you do a horse. For instance, reincarnation: you WILL come back as a human. transmigration: you MAY come back as a chruchmouse, but one can never be positive.... I'm curious....what did you think I was trying to say? --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 22:12:02 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: discrimination Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961014091202.00681ad4@whanganui.ac.nz> At 08:24 PM 13/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <32615461.69A0@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes >>In New York, there is a Theosohpical Society lodge, and a ULT branch. >>When people come to me and complain that they were thrown out of a ULT >>meeting for asking the wrong kind of questions, I explain to them that >>the ULT is there for presentation, not for discussion, and that the ULT >>excels at presentation. I see no problem in people going to both groups. > >Nor do I, and many others on this list, but all too often this is not >the view of members of the lodges and/or branches concerned, and people >are thrown out for having different opinions, or daring to attend a >"rival" organisation - as happened to me, and SFAIK, others on this >list. To Bart, this above reasons was why I posted the FREEDOM OF THOUGHT and made the remark I did. If you are fairly new to the list, you may not be aware of Adyars expulsions of some countries' sections for not obeying the party line and yet they publish this in their magazine in every issue. I just thought it was a pity they did not stand by those sentiments. > >Alan >--------- >Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 22:12:04 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Re Sexism and Bodies Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961014091204.0068f614@whanganui.ac.nz> At 06:27 PM 11/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >>I remember reading somewhere that because male and female bodies on >>this physical plane had specific differences and were constituted >>differently, the Masters found it more convenient to use a male body to >>accomplish what they were to do. In the end male and female bodies are >>only a passing phase of evolution, they weren't the norm earlier and I >>understand they won't be the norm later on either. > >Bee, I appreciate reading your thoughts. On the matter of sex, >I can't help but think that there is more to it than just a >difference in physical bodies. The feminine is lunar, the >unconscious, changing, etc., while the masculine is solar, >consciousness, changless, etc. These traditional terms all >suggest a polar difference exists in thinking and attitude >as well as body. I agree that we will both come together >in one body some day, but not until we have worked through >this whole duality business, and that is not going to >happen any time soon. I have heard Masters say that women >are natural mystics while men have to work at it. Women >naturally accept reality, while men tend to dismiss it. >That men tend to dwell more on time than women, and so on. >What I am getting at, is that the male body is NOT the >preferred one to use by an Adept, except in the sense that >it is a male-dominated world, and that in order to spread >a message, most folks will listen to a man over a women. >HPB proved to be an exception to this rule, and deserves >credit for what she did. A lot of female Adepts exist >who never got popular recognition, and thus remained in >the background--which is OK, because this is what they >chose to do. Please do not think that a male body is >somehow "better" or "superior" to a woman's body insofar >as occultism is concerned. Its probably the other way >around. > >Jerry S. >Member, TI > Thanks for your thoughtful post. I understand what you are saying. I was referring to an idea that no longer concerned physical life in bodies any more. I still incline towards the difference in male and female bodies, outlook etc otherwise why has Nature bothered to create one of each in all the kingdoms of nature. I feel that each duality provides a unique experience in the physical realms and so we reincarnate in one or the other for the experience of that body and also for the experience gained by living in certain times in a male or female body. One thing sure up till now anyway, to be in a female body has been quite a different experience than a male one. I do not think Nature sees one as 'better' than the other, that is something we ourselves have tried to project on it for eons, it is merely different experiences and the results are how we handle the experience. Once we have left the need to have physical experiences, I suspect that male/female duality either disappears or else is radically different than we understand it. I have become very aware of how limited our knowledge is about the way the universe works, so I reserve opinions as being relative to our present state of knowing. I cannot really say anything with real certainty because I do not have all the facts. I need to try to keep in mind that any ideas I express are subject to change. That ain't as easy as it sounds :-) > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 22:12:11 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: spiritual discrimination Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961014091211.0068c368@whanganui.ac.nz> At 08:03 PM 12/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dear Bee; > >You write > >the way discussions are structured and >>listening to the g-s list, shows up quite a difference in methods of >>resolving differences. > >Wish you'd elucidate. I don't like the way we resolve our differences, >because it never seems to lead us anywhere. So if someone else has a better >way of doing it, please tell us. Maybe we can do it too. > >Liesel I forget who I replied to but I did elaborate rather inadequately on g-s but I think it would be something each person would have to investigate for themselves or wait a few years till I have enough understanding to attempt an explanation.......:-). I have learned a thing or two so far and have found it most valuable even if I have trouble practising it. > > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:22:24 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: discrimination Message-ID: <32622270.2F09@sprynet.com> Bee Brown wrote: > To Bart, > this above reasons was why I posted the FREEDOM OF THOUGHT and made the > remark I did. If you are fairly new to the list, you may not be aware of > Adyars expulsions of some countries' sections for not obeying the party line > and yet they publish this in their magazine in every issue. I just thought > it was a pity they did not stand by those sentiments. I have a number of problems with Radha, myself. Her requirement that newly formed Russian Lodges pass a test before admittance caused a lot of bad feelings. In the case of Canada, at least, she claims that while she understood the predicament that they were in (if they kept legal ties to Adyar, they would lose their tax-free status), she felt that letting them stay in "under the table" would have been hypocracy. Still, the individual members SHOULD have been given the choice as to which section to stay with. However, she claims that idealogical differences within Theosophy had nothing to do with the decision. Bart From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Oct 96 07:53:29 EDT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <961014115329_72724.413_FHP39-2@CompuServe.COM> This letter is in reply to an Email from Rich Taylor to Sy Ginsburg, inquiring about the St. Louis conference. I think it appropriate for discussion on Theos-L if anyone would like to do that. Dear Rich, Thanks for the information on what ULT presently stands for, or I gather, that is your view of it. When I joined the T.S.A. (Adyar) in 1978, I was given an application to sign. The only requirement was for a prospective member to be "in sympathy" with the 3 declared objects. I thought at that time, what a great organization this is! Interestingly, the current membership form for T.S.A. remains the same with that being the only requirement for membership, and until recently, I have been pleased to show it to prospective new members. Now, I go out of my way to tell such prospects that this is what the T.S. in Miami and South Florida stands for. I am silent about T.S.A. and Adyar because the expulsion of Denmark by Adyar and the expulsion of Boston by TSA, both apparently for putting to much emphasis on the study of the Alice Bailey teachings, raises questions for me. If it is official or unofficial ULT policy that what you call the "source teachings" are the basis of ULT membership, I personally find it objectionable, just as I would find any such restriction by TSA/Adyar objectionable, because it is not in concert with the 3 declared objects, which is all any member agrees to be in sympathy with. I take those objects seriously and that is why I joined the TS in the first place. My study of the history of the founding of the T.S. is in accord with those objects. You may recall that at the original organizing meeting the participants were listening to a lecture on the Egyptian canon of proportion, and the desire was to form an organization to investigate things of this sort. There was no Secret Doctrine written at that time, nor did the Mahatma letters exist, nor did most of HPB's later writings. There were no "source documents" in existence. Consequently, I must draw a distinction between theosophy, what I call neo-theosophy (HPB and what has followed from her), and the Theosophical Society itself, the basis of which lies in the original organizing meetings. I personally consider myself a student of the Secret Doctrine and especially of the Stanzas, and I have studied these for 18 years with a mentor who has written 2 major books on the subject. But that study, which I choose to engage in is just that: a study, it is not the Theosophical Society. If another member of the Society wants to study what Alice Bailey wrote, or some other writer, that is their privilege. It is for this reason that I support the "Pledge of Friendship and Assistance" , which was to be the substance of the St. Louis meeting. It is a device for those of us who feel strongly about the 3 declared objects which in present form arose out of the original organizers intent, to reassert our support of those objects in view of the above mentioned expulsions, and to defend them from attack by those who would seek to define and limit what a Theosophical Society may teach and study. For those who are unfamiliar with the "Pledge", I am reproducing it here along with the cover letter sent by the Friendship conference in St. Louis that was cancelled by its convenors. * **************************** Dear Theosophical Organization Executive: We sincerely regret having to report to you that the Convenors of the proposed Theosophical Friendship Conference in Webster Groves (St. Louis), Missouri, on October 4 and 5, 1996, have called off that Conference, and it was not held. Since we did not receive a sufficient number of reservations from our fellow Theosophists, we could not carry through with our plans. Of course, we would prefer to think that people are in sympathy with our purposes but simply could not make the necessary travel arrangements for a variety of reasons. Several friends have communicated support to us, and some even had indicated an intention to attend. Experience tells us that consensus documents are best if they are put in final form pursuant to deliberation in an open meeting attended by a diverse group of individuals. It was our hope to accomplish a perfection of our proposed Pledge of Friendship and Assistance at the meeting after a briefing on the reasons why we felt that such an agreement should be adopted. It now appears that we will not be able to present the Pledge as we had hoped; however, perhaps the matter may be accomplished in another way. Herewith is a copy of the Pledge which we had intended to suggest to the Conference. Would you please submit it to your Theosophical organization for consideration and let us have your approval or suggested changes. If a sufficient number of Theosophical organizations approve of the Pledge, then it may be appropriate later to submit it also to individual Theosophists. We are of the opinion that lines of communication between like-minded Theosophists should be opened and maintained, and we look forward to your support however it is communicated. Sincerely Carl Trauernicht, Jr. Sy Ginsburg (sent to executives of several Theosophical Societies who have expressed interest in the matter) PLEDGE OF FRIENDSHIP AND ASSISTANCE We whose names appear below hereby profess the greatest respect for and admiration of the Society formed in the City of New York, New York (U.S.A.), officially, on November 17, 1875, by Colonel Henry Steel Olcott, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, William Q. Judge, and others. It is, therefore, with profound concern that we have observed recent actions taken by officers of the Theosophical Society on both International (The Theosophical Society, Adyar, India) and National (The Theosophical Society in America) levels to restrict or expel members of national sections and lodges or branches thereof in an apparent effort to disallow what we believe are authorized and proper pursuits of Truth and the declared Objects of the Society. In our view, the collective threat of those International and National actions may be injurious to the harmony to be sought within the Theosophical Society as a whole, and we hold a most sincere desire to maintain that harmony among members who are committed to the Society heretofore maintained over many decades, as well as among members of other Theosophical Societies and organizations not affiliated with the above mentioned Theosophical Society. We whose names appear below (signatures on separate duplicate original sheets constituting one document), as a consequence of the foregoing, hereby do pledge to each other unwavering friendship and assistance, in whatever manner in which we may render assistance, in support of every effort to permit each of us to pursue the declared objects of the Society in our individual and collective ways and to promote harmony within and the growth of the Theosophical Societies the better to enable those Societies to disseminate the great Truths offered to and through them for the benefit of Humanity. Signing on behalf of an organization: *Organization Name (please print) _________________________________________________________ Authorized Signature _____________________________________, Date _________________________ *Note: Agreement by an organization to this Pledge of Friendship and Assistance is understood to mean approval of the organization through its collective membership and/or governing body, in accordance with its authorized procedures. It does not imply approval by every individual member of that organization. Street ___________________________________, City:_________________, St:___, Zip Code ________ Tel _________________________________, Fax:__________________________, Email ________________ * * * * * * * * Signing as an individual: Individual Name (please print) ____________________________________________________________ Signature ________________________________________________, Date _________________________ Street ___________________________________, City:_________________, St:___, Zip Code ________ Tel _________________________________, Fax:__________________________, Email ________________ The executed Pledge is to be returned to Carl Trauernicht, Jr. 314 N. Broadway, Suite 1810, St. Louis, Mo. 63102 Tel: 314-421-0911 Fax: 314-421-0913. Note: The Theosophical Society in Miami & South Florida and other Theosophical organizations have already approved this Pledge. If any individuals or Theosophical organizations wish additional copies of the Pledge or further information, please contact Carl Trauernicht Jr. or email to Sy Ginsburg From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:34:43 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <199610141251.IAA29292@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky >=20 > I do not find "political correctness" to be tiresome. I find it to be > reprehensible, and it should be anathema to anybody who seriously > belongs to an organization whose motto is "THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER > THAN TRUTH".=20 >=20 =20 Curious, I looked up the word below: a=B7nath=B7e=B7ma (e-n=E0th=B9e-me) noun 1. A formal ecclesiastical ban, curse, or excommunication. 2. A vehement denunciation; a curse: =93the sound of a witch's anathemas = in some unknown tongue=94 (Nathaniel Hawthorne). 3. One that is cursed or damned. 4. One that is greatly reviled, loathed, or shunned. [Late Latin, an accursed thing, from Greek anath=EAma, from anatithenai, = to dedicate : ana-, ana- + tithenai, to put.] All I can say is that after being on this mailing list for over one year,= I have learned that no person here buys any ban, curse or excommunication o= n their communications. While you are entitled to your opinions, if they want to discuss political correctness, they are going to do so. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:47:46 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: <199610141251.IAA29379@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But seriously, > isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. >Most of the posts I see > on here are related to discrimination of one thing or another. The fact is, > we are all equals. I'll applaud that, but there's a whole bunch of people (notice, I did not say "guys") out there who don't, for different reasons. No one likes to feel like a second-class person simply because of their sex, race, color, religion or you-name-it. How would you like to be pawed and felt up by your male clergy and co-workers? Then be afraid to be say anything about it because your were only one of the "girls" and lower in rank to the pawee? I didn't read this in the newspaper - I've lived it for thirty years. Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:54:00 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: <199610141308.JAA03243@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood That's it! The Great Blues Brotherhood! They hang out on the south side of Chicago, wearing black suits and sporting shades. Occasionally, they play harmonicas to spread enlightenment via music. BB King is their favorite disciple. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 96 9:39:59 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: TS membership--to Jerry S. Message-ID: <199610141340.NAA19343@leo.vsla.edu> Dear Jerry, Since you ask me on the list about my ambivalence regarding TS memberships, I'll answer on the list. Have been thinking a fair amount about this, along lines similar to your own. The important decision for me lately was raising my A.R.E. membership from the associate to the sponsoring level, due to my consistently favorable impressions of the work that organization is doing. Since the T.S.--Adyar requires dues and has not acted in the past year in a way that makes me want to pay more, I'll let that membership lapse. Outright resignation would imply that I think the organization will *never* be one I can support, whereas I retain hope that in the future I may wish to renew membership. I'd need to see convincing evidence that the E.S. stranglehold on the T.S.--Adyar had ended before considering renewal. With Pasadena, the question becomes different, because there are no dues and one thinks of being a theosophist as a lifetime commitment more than an annual decision. But basically my interests and orientation have now become dominated by Cayce and A.R.E. and the Theosophical membership is secondary at best. As for finding a spiritual community that is receptive to, rather than rejecting of, one's literary efforts, I think the A.R.E. looks far more promising for me than Theosophy ever did, and suppose the same is true for you with the Magicians. Cheers Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:38:10 -0700 From: alexis dolgorukii Subject: Re: The National Lodge (fwd) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19961014063810.0068d674@pop.slip.net> At 01:43 PM 10/13/96 -0400, you wrote: >The msg was posted on theos-l and I am forwarding here so that someone >who has more info/news can comment on it. > > M K Ramadoss > >Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 10:28:38 -0400 >From: RIhle@aol.com >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: The National Lodge > >Jerry Schueler writes--> >>HPB warned >>us about the molds of the mind and the habitual grooves that >>our thinking gets itself into, and it is just this that besets >>the TSs today. She also wrote that golden chains bind just >>as tightly as iron chains, but no theosophist today has a >>clue as to what she meant. Right now my membership is close >>to ending as I see little reason to remain. > >Richard Ihle writes--> >Anyone have any thoughts on the new "National Lodge" as outlined on pp.18,19 >of the latest AT? Alexis Dolgorukii comments: I entirely agree with Jerry Schueler who, as usual, is very perspicacious. > >Upon first reading, I was favorably impressed (because it seemed like a move >toward more open communication etc.); upon second reading, however, I was >stopped-up by the sentence "The officers and board of the National Lodge are >those of the Theosophical Society in America." NOTE: This is the most operative factor. The "National Lodge" is simply a naked power grab by the control freaks who are the officers of the Theosophical Society in America. Give them time, and sufficient encouragement, and "The National Lodge" under the absolute control of the "National Officers" will be the only option for membership. The people in charge of the TSA are totalitarian fanatics and that's the BEST one can say about them. A.D. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 16:09:56 -0600 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs_?= Ernesto Cruz =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDnez?= Subject: Re: THEOS-SPAN digest 35 Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961013161508.08b70e0e@planet.com.mx> Hola a todos los del foro, soy Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz desde M=E9xico, bien,= he recibido algunos de sus mensajes (solo 2), pero veo que nos movemos m=E1s= que antes, por lo que acepto la sugerencia de Mart=EDn, (espero que te pueda hablar de t=FA, sino disc=FAlpame), y creo que debemos hablar m=E1s de= nosotros: Nosotros somos la Logia Unidad, yo soy miembro de esta Logia desde 1991 y tengo desde 1989 asistiendo a la S.T. en M=E9xico como miembro, ahora= pusimos una p=E1gina de internet, con el fin de poder expresarnos en espa=F1ol con= los estudiantes de teosof=EDa del mundo, nuestra p=E1gina se compone de escritos teos=F3ficos que elaboran nuestros miembros m=E1s antiguos, a Gabriel= Hern=E1ndez, le he ofrecido asistir a nuestra logia, que sesiona de 11:00 A.M. a 3:00 P.M. los domingos aunque no me ha confirmado a=FAn nada, espero que le= veamos pronto, la primera hora y media es de logia abierta, es decir para el p=FAblico en general y la segunda hora y media es de logia cerrada, es decir para miembros, por otro lado, me mugustar=EDa que pensaran en lo del= moderador y en cuanto a la respuesta a la petici=F3n de Mart=EDn, pues espero= contestar en lo que queda de la semana, porque ahora me apuran para colgar, hasta la pr=F3xima... ----------------------------------- Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz Mart=EDnez jecruz@planet.com.mx http://www.planet.com.mx/~unidad/index.htm http://www.planet.com.mx/~jecruz/index.htm La ciencia nos ense=F1a una forma nueva de pensar, la religi=F3n una nueva de sentir. Bertrand Russel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:40:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: We are all equals Message-ID: Here is something I read, which some may like: Regard earnestly all the life that surrounds you. Regard constantly changing and moving life which surrounds you, for it is formed by the hearts of human beings. PS: The key word is "hearts". This firmly addresses the fact that we are all equals. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 09:20:55 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <32624C45.E4F@earthlink.net> AAB's writings on this subject are very wide-ranging but she does state that the causes of homosexuality (and many sex issues) are from very ancient processes, homosexuality itself began millions of years ago in "Lemuria." During those times one of the goals for human evolution was to *get* people to have sexual urges so as to reproduce and learn to have families. Given our imperfect planetary karma and human choices there was an overstimulation of the whole sex realm leading to all sorts of unplanned and unneeded expressions of that type of energy and relationship. Many today are born with the same strong tendencies that they experienced millions of years ago, which have not yet healed, and these have a very strong, almost irrestible, imprint on their lives. Interestingly, she also writes that it is the more evolved of humanity that bore the greater brunt of the past overstimulation and much of the difficulty today is that the same more evolved souls with strong personalities are re-expressing these past tendencies and influencing, in that direction, many around them. She also writes that the general process of healing, of course and as usual, for the whole sex issue, is a full, active and creative outer life of work and service. She does say that the processes from this that we are dealing with today are, yea hopefully, supposed to be resolved by this generation and the next. I have read HPB's and AAB's works thoroughly and find only harmony in the ideas presented in their teachings. Vocabularies change but the same truths flow through them all. Love, P -- *** A.Priori / 6524 San Felipe #323 / Houston, TX 77057 USA *** aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Oct 96 14:06:33 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: sex, gender, race,ecologoy and confusion Message-ID: <961014180633_74024.3352_BHT66-1@CompuServe.COM> Men are from Mars. WOmen are from Venus. I loook forward to have it on 8 plantes. How do I get a Fed-Airs express package? Confused and enlightened Keith PRice From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 17:06:56 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Fw: Political Correctness Message-ID: <199610142219.SAA04120@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: BERMINGH > To: Ann E. Bermingham > Subject: Political Correctness > Date: Monday, October 14, 1996 2:07 PM > > This morning, you and I had the conversation about "political correctness" > as a point of discussion on Theos-L. I have a comment on the matter that > maybe you could pass on to them. > > I believe that the term "politically correct" is a kind of cliche'd > cynicism. The common interpretation seems to be "ingratiating imposition", > or "excessive and formal social engineering." I submit, however, that the > existence of this term has been a springboard for confusion and for > unscruplous behavior. > > I believe that some people have begun to discuss "politically-correct > speech" as if it were the same as language change, or perception change. > They are not the same. When women throughout the world decided they'd had > enough subservience to men, they began to consider the various means by > which this slavery was kept in place. Unfortunately for lovers of > literature and language, it became quickly apparent that male-gender > expressions were being used for expressions that applied to both sexes, or > to all members of our species; e.g. "before the computer operator starts > the machine, he must make sure the disk is in the drive", or "for all > Mankind." > > Some of the solutions people have come up with are good; some awkward, and > some silly. But I have come to notice that the silly and/or awkward ones > play nicely into the hands of people who *don't want any changes", in other > words, *men* who want to retain their control over everything. > > I have just been reading a novel from the 1950's, in which there were a lot > of male-bias expressions that were not meant as such by the author. I've > noticed that in today's popular literature, many of those expressions have > been replaced by neutral-gender counterparts. > > Face it, people; a skilled writer or translator can do a lot to make such > changes paletable, and many modern writers do so. The world is changing > from one of female subservience to one of female equality. The language is > going to change to suit, whether it's forced or not. > > And as for those control-freaks out there: I have an opinion what they can > do with themselves, and I think a lot of others, both men and women, feel > the same way. And we are acting on those feelings, by destroying their > nice heirarchical (patriarchal) system, and replacing it with one where > everyone, both men and women, can develop their own lives without begging > orders from The Top. This will, no doubt, also change our language in new > and fascinating ways. -Charles E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 16:05:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Transmogrify Message-ID: In message , CDGertrude writes >Is there a difference between reincarnation & transmigration? >Please expand and clarify. >Thanks.... As Chuck's humor seems to have left the matter unclear, the general idea is that reincarnation is from human to slightly better human, while transmigration allows for the reincarnation of a human soul into an animal body. Hence the "Churchmouse" reply by Chuck. Suggest you transmogrify into something that eats Chucky creatures. (Sort of magically transform) Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:57:07 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: > > > > ---------- > > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > > Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood > > That's it! The Great Blues Brotherhood! They hang out on the south side > of Chicago, wearing black suits and sporting shades. Occasionally, they > play harmonicas to spread enlightenment via music. BB King is their > favorite disciple. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > Sounds good to me! Who is their leader? Gertrude the Churchmouse...scurrying to her hole before Uncle Chuckie or Bandit attacks! -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:59:22 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: > > > > ---------- > > From: John Straughn > > > Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But > seriously, > > isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? > > But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. > > >Most of the posts I see > > on here are related to discrimination of one thing or another. The fact > is, > > we are all equals. > > I'll applaud that, but there's a whole bunch of people (notice, I did not > say "guys") out there who don't, for different reasons. No one likes to > feel like a second-class person simply because of their sex, race, color, > religion or you-name-it. > > How would you like to be pawed and felt up by your male clergy and > co-workers? Then be afraid to be say anything about it because your were > only one of the "girls" and lower in rank to the pawee? I didn't read this > in the newspaper - I've lived it for thirty years. > > Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and > consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will > never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because > we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > > > > > > > > > > > > Girls? Sounds like you are refering to school children....How about trying ladies or women? Or would you like to be referred to as a boy? -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:12:46 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Politically Correct Theosophy? (Long post) Message-ID: POLITICALLY CORRECT THEOSOPHY? by John R. Crocker An Open Letter to Radha Burnier, John Algeo, and the Members of the Theosophical Society worldwide. It is certainly all the rage these days to complain about Political Correctness, and a lot of attention is being put towards discovering its excesses. It is alleged, by various public voices, that the PC movement is intent upon destroying First Amendment freedoms, and turning America into a godless, radical feminist nation of dirt worshippers (A Right Wing name for environmentalists). Others simply marginalize the movement as little more than the emotional rantings of whining women, nasty minorities, and tree-huggers. As someone who accepts, on philosophical and ethical grounds, the premises behind a lot that is labelled Political Correctness, and further, finds the foundations of those premises to be fully in harmony with the First and Second Objects of the Theosophical Society, it seems perhaps appropriate to attempt to articulate some of those foundations - in the hopes of helping the leaders understand that when, for instance, a growing number of voices insist on changing words like brotherhood in the First Object, it is not simply a negative reaction to something, but the assertion of a positive philosophical position. While the press focuses on the most surface manifestations of PC and seems delighted when it finds yet another anecdote about its excessiveness, beneath the surface lies something that is part of a much larger and fundamental restructuring of the relationships between genders, and between races. To begin, however, its probably necessary to strip away the surface layer: There is no such thing as a PC movement. The terms Politically Correct and PC movement were created a few years ago by a couple of extreme right-wing think tanks, and were created specifically as a political tactic - one that has been quite successful. Most of those who are charged with being part of the PC movement do not themselves claim membership in something called a PC movement ... they are assigned membership by the opponents of their various causes. They may call themselves feminists, or environmentalists, or proponents of racial equity, but the many people grouped under the PC label often have virtually nothing in common with one another, either in terms of the fields they work in or even in the intellectual basis of their work. In the early 1980s a movement began among politically conservative intellectuals in the rarefied circles of abstract political theory. The social fabric of the nation, indeed, the western world, was seen to be unravelling. Racial tensions and violence were again increasing (after a lull in the 70s) economic insecurity was rising in the population, and the structure of the nuclear family was eroding. Their analysis of the causes of this concluded that the serious problems were arising because a set of values that they believed were the core foundation values of the western world were coming under fire, and that hence the roots of social harmony were being destroyed. For instance, it was not just that the divorce rate was climbing rapidly that disturbed them, but the much deeper fact that the social paradigm that kept marriages together in the past was disappearing - not just that people were getting divorced, but that there was no longer any social stigma attached to divorce; not just that people were living and sleeping together out of wedlock, but that there were no longer any social sanctions - no one even bothered to hide behaviour that in the 1950s would have caused the participants to become virtual social outcasts were it not carefully concealed. These thinkers began defining and attempting to reaffirm what were called traditional values - in essence the values that were present in the 1950s, just prior to the revolutionary 60s - and included Judeo- Christian social and cultural values, and a form of free-market capitalist economic values. This group of values was called traditional and mainstream, and once defined, began to then be used as a standard by which to judge what was radical or extreme. The more defined these became, the more these people (and now others throughout conservative political, academic, and Christian circles) began noticing that these values were no longer being unquestioningly accepted as the good. For a time, most of the arguments were constrained to the intelligentsia in academic circles. Huge arguments about the Canon of western literature and philosophy were being waged on campuses (and still, for that matter, are). The reactivity of revolutionaries in the 60s, who mostly just argued against the existing paradigm, had become politically very sophisticated, and had begun to become as adept at the use of the political system as the proponents of traditional values had been. Reactions began, mostly in the humanities departments - professors of Political Science, Economics, English, Philosophy, History, and other Liberal Studies fields were coming under intense fire, by people making the case that all that was being read and discussed was the writings, and values, of Dead White Males. These faculties (over 90% of whom were Living White Males) naturally became very defensive, as their entire careers were built upon understanding an agreed-upon canon of writing. It was not just that their authors were being criticized (indeed, teaching the nature of the arguments between the authors of the canon was a chief part of the curriculum), but rather that people were starting to reject even the context within which the arguments took place as too narrow, oblivious or dismissive of the insights of large numbers of races and religions, and simply lacking resonance with the experience of a lot of women. Feminists were asserting the right to judge and analyze literature by standards completely outside of academic traditions - and literature professors were not happy about having their pet authors simply dismissed as sexist. Multiculturalists were beginning to seriously question both philosophy and politics that they considered to be little other than means of enforcing a certain set of norms, norms that made sense to those of northern European ancestry (as they came from European traditions) but were not necessarily in tune with people from anywhere else in the world. Environmentalists were beginning to seriously question the very premises of capitalist, free market economics, the very notion that the natural world was simply a place where one gets raw materials for human civilization, and disposes of its waste. In short, once a set of traditional values was defined ... it could not help but seem as though these values were under attack, often somewhat successful attack, from every different direction. But this was very difficult to fight politically, because the enemy was extremely decentralized ... the attacks weren't coming from a single source and weren't composed of large events, but came from countless sources, and were composed of thousands of small battles at the personal level. It is here that political operatives formulated the category called Politically Correct and defined the enemy as the PC movement. This then meant that it became possible to take an environmentalist advocating for environmental education in Oregon grade schools, a multiculturalist arguing for an African Studies program in a Chicago university, and a feminist charging her boss with sexual harassment at work in New York, and a PETA activist protesting the clubbing of baby seals (four people who themselves have nothing to do with one another, and certainly would not say they are in a movement together) and group them all under one heading. Millions of separate and completely unrelated actions by widely varying individuals and groups across the country can now be bundled within a single metaphor - so suddenly the enemy is well defined, appears to be enormous and threatening, and can be battled. It is important, for anyone who complains about the PC movement to understand this. The PC movement is not an organized, deliberate and planned campaign. The category of PC, and the anti-PC movement is. In the U.S.A., Rush Limbaugh's Executive Producer is the most powerful behind-the-scenes power broker in Republican circles. When Dan Quayle began to become terribly embarrassing to George Bush, two of the intellectual giants of the conservative think-tank world were literally assigned to him, both to make sure he didn't say anything stupid, as well as to articulate a family values philosophy through his mouth. (As someone who has run small political projects himself, I am in awe of the tactics of those who created the anti-PC movement ... I don't agree with them, but I must admire brilliant political work ... they created a category out of thin air, managed to get it introduced into the popular vocabulary, focused the public's attention on its excesses and so demonized it that people now feel it to be a badge of honour to be Politically Incorrect.) But what does all this have to do with Theosophy? Well, it probably is worth pointing out that our founders would almost certainly be called Politically Correct. This may seem a bit counterintuitive at first, as the most successful aspect of the anti-PC strategy has been to, at the emotional level, link the term PC with the feeling of restricting freedom ... and since the founders spoke their minds freely - often really freely, it would seem natural to think of them as being politically incorrect. (More about this linkage later). But we must look at exactly how they lived and what they believed in. Annie Besant, feminist and animal rights activist, if she did the exact same things today as she did when she lived, would be precisely what many now label a radical feminazi. HPB? Horrors! She left her husband. Never had kids. Lived with men. Travelled the world, and managed to upset traditional value systems not just at a single university, but in several nations. And she not only criticized Christianity in terms that even today would be considered extremely scathing, but actively advocated the introduction of Buddhist thought - that is, HPB, were she alive today, would not only be defined by conservative thinkers as the very height of Politically Correct but would be accused of being excessive about it. A major plank of the Right wing platform would probably be Kick HPB out of the country. She certainly wasn't a family values kind of person, and had access to a range of knowledge that would cause entire think tanks to run screaming for their lives. In fact she is to this day called one of the chief tools of Satan by Christian fundamentalists, and is blamed for being one of the principle causes of a whole host of Politically Correct evils. While this is worth mentioning, however, its not the chief argument I want to make. The grounds for asserting that the Theosophical Society should not only not resist adjusting itself to some of the premises behind what has been labelled PC, but should actively welcome the chance to do so, is based in the First and Second Objects - which are not only fully in harmony with some of those premises, but might almost be considered to be one of their earliest articulations. I'd like to focus on one of the root premises behind some of what is labelled PC - one that receives a good deal of derision, and is also a subject of current debate in Theosophical circles: language matters. One side of the argument seeks to alter especially the gender implications it sees present in universalizing pronouns (i.e., individually, we are men and women, but collectively we are men belonging to the race of mankind. Our association seeks to form the nucleus of a brotherhood and we are all FTS ... Fellows, Theosophical Society). On the other side are those that either hold that even the Objects should not be touched (a slightly odd argument, as they were altered several times in the early days ... as the TS developed and the Objects became more refined) and those that just do not see what the big deal is - some even claiming people who are superficial enough to be caught up and overly affected by something as minor as the gender in pronouns probably aren't even suited for the depth of the philosophy. While people have protested these attitudes, I'm not sure if a full case for gender inclusive language has yet been made in Theosophical circles. I shall try to do that here. The philosophical argument comes chiefly from feminist and multi- culturalist writers, and arises out of a couple of decades of study of the connection between language and culture. Basically, these people, in the sixties, began feeling as though a lot of their experience that was either undervalued or completely ignored in the past was not only worthy of attention, but needed to be articulated publicly. Their view of the traditional values was that these values did produce social harmony, but that harmony was dependent upon people accepting their place in a particular hierarchy of power - and it was asserted that the top of this hierarchy was white males, and northern European male values. The social harmony that these values produced was only present so long as women and minorities accepted, without complaint, access to power and opportunities of a far more limited nature than that afforded white men. They would answer, for instance - the conservative's argument - that the nuclear family was falling apart, and that the social stigma surrounding divorce should be re-introduced, by saying that many of those marriages survived because the woman subjugated a lot of her interests to the man, and had very few opportunities for anything like a career or profession (other than approved womanly professions ... secretary, teacher, nurse, maid ...). The nuclear family is far harder to hold together if both man and woman are equally in pursuit of careers, if the woman is not dependent for economic survival on the man (a fact that kept a lot of bad marriages together) and even further, the woman has, because of new birth control devices, far greater control over reproduction. While radical feminist thinkers are asserting that the family itself in any form requires the submission of the woman, and is simply not necessary even for the raising of children (and it is this that is most often quoted by the press as feminist and extreme) ... most feminist scholars stop far short of that - making the argument that while the family does appear to be in trouble right now, it is because we are in a naturally uncomfortable, but necessary, period of re-adjustment; that what is needed is not a return to a model that had failed to work (if it was as good as some claim it was, it wouldn't have fallen apart in the first place) but rather, the far more difficult work of understanding entirely new models of what marriage is, models in which the cement is based not upon male dominance, but upon the assumption that both may have equally strong and valid career goals, that both will share housework, child raising, etc., etc. The larger point is that these feminist and minority thinkers (and a number of white men who were persuaded by the strength of the arguments) seemed to notice (somewhat suddenly, in the opinion of some) that the status quo was fine so long as they played their assigned parts, but that if they began expecting the same power, privileges and opportunities afforded white males, they ran into severe obstacles ... in fact the whole system of traditional values was rigged against them. This at first led to the revolutions of the 60s ... and as culture altered, at least some women and minorities began gaining some access to power and privileges. After a time, however, a deeper sort of criticism began. Women were beginning to make it in the corporate world, but felt they had to sacrifice their femininity to do so (the differences between men and women are way deeper than just plumbing) - had to accept a very foreign, cut-throat set of values. African Americans began achieving some success, but discovered they needed to almost deny their culture - become white - to succeed. And both women and minorities had to simply accept a continual, subtle (and not so subtle) stream of jokes, demeaning comments, and often outright harassment. What began to be called into question was not just unequal distribution of power among race and gender, but the value systems within which power existed; what began to be desired was not just access to power, but an alteration of the power structure itself. It was at this point that the really serious questioning of the roots of the power structure began in earnest ... people began seeking to understand not just the manifestations of power, but its foundations. And it was then that, from a number of different directions, in a number of different fields, thinkers began converging towards a very similar conclusion: that a culture, value system and power structure that had for hundreds, even thousands of years, been almost entirely controlled by white men had naturally been integrated into the very roots of its continually evolving language, and that the act of learning that language, of learning to see the world through the concepts of that language, was the foundation level of that power structure, and the most pervasive means of continuing to acculturate children into those value systems. It is extremely subtle, and happens at an almost entirely unconscious level. And because of the subtlety, it is, perhaps, easy for some to say What's the big deal? Why trouble about the word brotherhood . you know it really means women too. To use a computer metaphor, at the surface level of society there are a large number of types of social interaction - fields of study and work, politics, religion, personal relationships, etc., etc. These might be seen as software programs that individuals are taught young, and learn how to use both individually and in groups. Language, however, is the DOS - the operating system. Its the first thing loaded on the computers. One is rarely aware of it directly, but it is the foundation upon which all other programs run, and deeply affects which programs can be run as well as the design of those programs (just try to run a Macintosh program on an old Microsoft computer if you don't think language matters!) There is much more at stake here, then, in arguments about words, than simply the words themselves. What feminists, multiculturalists, the differently abled (to quote another term laughed at by the anti-PC movement) and others are doing is attempting to re-program DOS. The most powerful argument against the PC movement is that it attempts to impose restrictions on the freedom of expression. The whole foundation of those who advocate changes in language, however, is that they are trying to open language - that language already has imposed powerful restrictions, not only on the speech, but in subtle ways on the whole range of opportunities, experiences, and even society's evaluation of the worth of countless generations of women and minorities. The people that created the anti-PC movement linked the notion of restriction with that of PC very deliberately ... but examine, for a moment: Here is a Theosophical Lodge meeting, a few people begin complaining loudly about the words brotherhood and man (as a pronoun). They begin insisting that these words be changed. The response is that they should ignore the words and focus on the meaning - in fact they may be seen as lacking depth if they make too big a deal out of it. If they persist, they may, then, be charged with attempting to impose restrictions on the freedom of expression of others in the room, of trying to impose their values on others. The argument ends and they lose (as, in fact, they have - despite a lot of people advocating these changes, our Three Objects have not altered). Is this a victory for freedom of speech in which someone who would impose restrictions has been stopped? They would say no, it is an affirmation of the status quo imposition of restrictions. I can understand how to someone who does not see why language matters that much, the whole debate seems like a huge pain. A couple of months ago a techie at my university came and upgraded the network software in the office in which I work. There was a pile of grumbling all day. People were being continually interrupted in normal functions they had come to not think twice about. The network's link to the university mainframe - and all our databases - kept getting broken and re-started. Even worse, after the guy left, for the next few weeks we had to re- learn a lot of stuff. Our programs had to be set up differently, we had to learn different ways to get our computers to talk to one another across the office. A couple of old programs simply would no longer run at all. The main problem was that we had to suddenly pay attention to what we had taken for granted. It took, however, only a couple of weeks before we began to get used to the new system, and suddenly, lo and behold, people began to like it. We began to discover all sorts of possibilities that we didn't have with the previous system. We noticed our programs ran smoother, quicker, with far fewer glitches and interruptions. Then even deeper changes started - instead of just learning different keystrokes to do the same things we had always done, we began to notice that we could change several standard operating procedures themselves ... that a couple of what had always been rather large and time-consuming tasks could be accomplished almost without effort once we began thinking in terms of the possibilities of the new system. And a number of functions students had desired, but we were prevented from giving them because we simply didn't have the technical tools suddenly became possible to deliver. In other words, we didn't understand how restrictive the previous system was until after we had gone through the discomfort of learning the new one, began to tap some of its possibilities, understand that most of our programs ran better and some new programs became possible, and realized we were not only providing the same services far more efficiently, but were able to provide several entirely new services as the result of the change. I must also say that personally, the experience was identical to that of learning to use gender neutral language. It was over a decade ago now, but I certainly resisted a bit at first. A good friend, however, persuaded me of the justice of the effort, and I found that once the intent to do it is there its not that big a deal. It took me a month of conscious effort, and after a couple of months the new program loaded itself back into the sub-conscious. It becomes second nature with very little trouble. And the fear of jumping on the PC bandwagon is, I think, misplaced. That fear is part of a deliberately orchestrated campaign by people who fully understand what alterations in language mean, take them very seriously, and are intent upon holding on to a power structure in which they are privileged. So we hear all sorts of stories about, for instance, how feminist and gay studies and Afro-centric programs are taking over our colleges, and are treated to horror stories of unqualified Hispanics who get promoted over qualified white men, and troubling accounts of women charging men unjustly with sexual harassment simply because they were thwarted in romance. But this ignores scale, and ignores the abuses of the current value systems. After over a decade of feminists, gay-rights activists, and minorities allegedly taking over our college campuses, well over 3/4 of the tenured faculty in the nation are still white men. Despite that terrible affirmative action, over 99% of the upper echelons of the Fortune 500 corporations are still white men. And for every man unjustly charged with sexual harassment, a thousand women are still beaten in their own homes, and frightened to even enter a legal system that values women so little that being caught with a bag of marijuana gets you a longer prison sentence than rape does. I would ask, then, those who resist altering the language of our Objects (to start with) especially those in leadership positions, to put aside the defensiveness, and the thought that the Objects should not be changed on such insignificant and superficial grounds (it does take a bit of contemplation to understand why language is so important) and consider: Part of the intent of the First and Second Objects was, and still is, a truly revolutionary idea. They speak of a genuinely universal outlook .. and are as clear and succinct an articulation of inclusiveness as I've seen. To form the intended nucleus and to study comparative religion and philosophy means, in essence, that we all, to some degree, must lift ourselves above our particular cultures, genders, religions and philosophies, and, in essence, create within ourselves a wholly new DOS ... one that does not privilege one perspective at the expense of others, one that can run an enormously wide range of programs. Looking at today's world, with its many fundamentalisms, nationalisms, and the thousands of different barriers drawn between us and them - our First Object is every bit as stunning, as revolutionary today as it was a century ago. A century ago, there was virtually no research into the link between language and culture, and the little there was was entirely pursued by white men (very few women and almost no minorities even had access to university levels of intellectual training - let alone the time and opportunity to pursue extended research). Brotherhood, and man had connotations of inclusiveness that they no longer posses. In fact, to growing numbers of people these words now signify the opposite of what they did a century ago. And so, because the meaning society finds in words has changed, I'd like to suggest that changing the wording of our Objects not only does not change the intent, but that the change in language is necessary to maintain the original intent. Because meaning has changed, the wording of our Objects now contradicts their meaning. How can we form something without regard to gender and call it a brotherhood? Because the perspectives of the First and Second Objects encourage altering our points of view, of acknowledging that races, religions, creeds, and both genders have value, would not the adjustment of the language be a powerful expression of that acknowledgement? As a white male, I cannot fully understand the precise subjective nature of the freedom, the encouragement, the empowerment, that the women and members of other races in my life tell me they feel when someone takes the trouble to speak with inclusive language. But because I love them, deeply value their very different perspectives, and they tell me that it matters - how can I not, as a demonstration of that love and value, name them as they wish to be named? If a Native American friend tells me that, to him, there's a big difference between being called an Indian - a name assigned as part of a mistake by a European explorer - and a Native American - affirming membership in a race of people whose inhabitation of his homeland predates Europeans - not only do I not feel my freedom of speech restricted, but I gladly, because I am a Theosophist who accepts the First Object as good, welcome the opportunity to express it in practice. If growing numbers of strong and educated women tell the TS that not only does the language of the Objects now carry connotations of exclusivity and elitism, but that in not changing them we appear to be taking a side in an ongoing social and political debate ... it is not necessary for all of us to fully understand the subjective difference within them that a change in language would make ... not necessary for us to fully understand what the big deal is .... Our First Object contains a revolutionary idea - the intent to form an association of people, not on the premises of a particular nation, religion, creed, gender or race, but on those of our mutual existence as spiritual entities pursuing spiritual growth on planet earth - and at the deepest levels of the TS our intent should continually be to find ways to express that inclusiveness more fully, to open our arms wider, to demonstrate our perspective to the world. We should not have to be dragged kicking and screaming into making our language gender inclusive, but should instead see it as an opportunity to more fully express the intent of our foundation Objects - should do so not with begrudging reluctance, but with pride, and as a statement of the very best of what we are. APPENDIX When this booklet first appeared as an article on the Internet Theosophy List, there was naturally some discussion of the topic. The following letter is outstanding in at least two ways. Firstly it shows that women in the U.S.A. were making their voices heard some time before the period covered by John Crocker. Secondly, it is outstanding because the writer is clearly more than a little older than those who are struggling to obtain justice and fairness in the use of language today. The argument, sometimes heard, that "the older woman" sees no reason for change is magnificently given the lie by Liesel Deutsch. (Alan Bain, March 1996): "Dear John, "1.) As a member of New Jersey College for Women, class of 1943, I have to tell you that protesting didn't start on the 1960ies. We did it too. Just to give you a few examples: "We were the first generation to wear jeans. In those days, women wore dresses & skirts. Slacks, jeans, especially for women were unheard of. We went to the Army-Navy store, bought a pair of men's jeans, & then safety-pinned them up around the waist so they would stay up. Incidentally, it was a crime to ever wash them. "New Jersey College for Women, now Douglass, is the women's college of Rutgers. We had a student government run by us young women, & a student court run by us young women, pretty near everything was run by women, except the kitchen, which was run by Mr. Lasagna. We had many women profs ... this, in the days when every important leader, except Frances Perkins and Eleanor Roosevelt, was male. Probably, the women profs were paid less. I never had occasion to ask them about that. "We had one history prof, Emily Hickman, who was a whiz. I made sure that I took at least an elective class with her. I had her for one semester on modern Russia. I was scared of her, but she was so good that I still remember a lot of what she taught us. "Well, in the late 30ies, just before I got to NJC, the administration fired Emily Hickman for her radical tendencies. The students protested loud & long, demonstrated & etc. until they finally rehired Emily Hickman. The happy ending of this story is that, at the end of WWII, she was invited to San Francisco to help fashion the United Nations' Charter. Douglass today has a building named Hickman Hall. "2.) When you start talking about that the Rush Limbaugh crowd pictures the politically correct crowd as ogres, I'd like to refer you to my favorite article on the components of prejudice, called The Enemy Within by Bob Moyer, in Psychology Today, 1-85, V. 19 #1. The lead pictures are of Reagan & Brejnev. Both have long passed into history, as has the cold war, which this article talks about, but the mechanism described is still with us: denial, dehumanization, projection, wrong images, theories of behavior, assumptions, irrationality, contradictions .. I skipped a couple, but I think you get the idea. If you're not too familiar with the subject of prejudice, here's a brief piece to fill you in on the subject. - Liesel Deutsch. Member, Theosophy International." --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:18:49 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: In message <326191B2.7C36@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> There used to to be the quaint (IMO) view among theosophists that >> homosexuals (m or f) were transiting from one sex to another betweeen >> incarnations ... > >Would be as good an explanation of transsexuality as I've ever heard. Hallo - what's this? No one mentioned transsexuality. Have you been wandering around my web pages? :-) > >I, personally, did not have the choice of homosexuality available to me. In general terms, neither do homosexuals. >It is my suspicion that those who show open hatred of homosexuality DO >have the ability to make that choice, and it scares the hell out of >them. .. ie., homophobia. > Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:15:29 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Transmogrify Message-ID: > > In message , CDGertrude > writes > >Is there a difference between reincarnation & transmigration? > >Please expand and clarify. > >Thanks.... > > As Chuck's humor seems to have left the matter unclear, the general idea > is that reincarnation is from human to slightly better human, while > transmigration allows for the reincarnation of a human soul into an > animal body. Hence the "Churchmouse" reply by Chuck. > > Suggest you transmogrify into something that eats Chucky creatures. > > (Sort of magically transform) > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > Dear Alan: Unfortunately, I think that Chucky is inedible...or maybe even poisonous! Gertrude the Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:17:51 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: TS membership--to Jerry S. Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961014192319.1fafa6bc@mail.eden.com> I am very glad to see your post. >From the long association I had with Theosophy and Theosophical Society and the many of the officers, let me add 2 cents worth. Fundamentally, what I have read in the Theosophical writings of various writers have helped me to deal with my problems and those with whom I interact as well as other living beings. For this I am very greateful and this is something I could not put a dollar value. In addition, I have run into many many fine human beings due to Theosophy and Theosophical Society. One of the problems sometimes some of us can run into is the environment in which you have the officers, the property/money and self-perceived importance in having an Officer's Title. This is especially so when your ideas may not be in line with those in the organizational structure and you expect something - money or other non monetary real or imagined favors including "spiritual" - direct or indirect from those in control. As they say, he who pays the piper calls the tune, so there is no surprise when those who bestow favors do overtly or subtly expect the recipients to fall in line with mainline thinking no matter whether such thinking is right or wrong or foolish. As one of the greatest thinkers of modern times said - " I do not expect anything from man or God" -- if one does not expect any favors from those who are elected and have control of the resources -- we can keep our total independence and apply Theosophical ideals to our daily life so that we can improve, however little, the life of those with whom we interact. As the philosophy of Theosophy is wonderful and its application can bring about a lot of good to all living beings, I continue to associate myself with Theosophy and TS and help in any way I can, so that more individuals will get exposed to the wonderful philosophy. As they say different strokes for different people, I am glad that you have found ARE to suit your needs. Whereever your interests and time is concentrated, I would be looking forward to your posts here -- it does not matter whether I personally agree with it or not -- it is what Theosophy has taught me. MKRamdoss At 09:49 AM 10/14/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dear Jerry, > >Since you ask me on the list about my ambivalence regarding TS >memberships, I'll answer on the list. Have been thinking a >fair amount about this, along lines similar to your own. The >important decision for me lately was raising my A.R.E. >membership from the associate to the sponsoring level, due to >my consistently favorable impressions of the work that >organization is doing. Since the T.S.--Adyar requires dues and >has not acted in the past year in a way that makes me want to >pay more, I'll let that membership lapse. Outright resignation >would imply that I think the organization will *never* be one I >can support, whereas I retain hope that in the future I may >wish to renew membership. I'd need to see convincing evidence >that the E.S. stranglehold on the T.S.--Adyar had ended before >considering renewal. With Pasadena, the question becomes >different, because there are no dues and one thinks of being a >theosophist as a lifetime commitment more than an annual >decision. But basically my interests and orientation have now >become dominated by Cayce and A.R.E. and the Theosophical >membership is secondary at best. As for finding a spiritual community >that is receptive to, rather than rejecting of, one's literary >efforts, I think the A.R.E. looks far more promising for me >than Theosophy ever did, and suppose the same is true for you >with the Magicians. > >Cheers >Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:18:10 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: > > > > ---------- > > From: John Straughn > > > Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But > seriously, > > isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? > > But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. > > >Most of the posts I see > > on here are related to discrimination of one thing or another. The fact > is, > > we are all equals. > > I'll applaud that, but there's a whole bunch of people (notice, I did not > say "guys") out there who don't, for different reasons. No one likes to > feel like a second-class person simply because of their sex, race, color, > religion or you-name-it. > > How would you like to be pawed and felt up by your male clergy and > co-workers? Then be afraid to be say anything about it because your were > only one of the "girls" and lower in rank to the pawee? I didn't read this > in the newspaper - I've lived it for thirty years. > > Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and > consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will > never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because > we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > > > > > > > > > > > > Girls? How about trying the terms ladies or women? Or, would you rather that we call you "boy"? Gertrude, the Militant, Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:54:37 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Not so funny, huh? Message-ID: In message <199610141251.IAA29379@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and >consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will >never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because >we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. LOUD APPLAUSE Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:27:03 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Sexism Message-ID: And what about Churchmice? Aren't we trodden-down pipples? (apologies to Zorro, the Gay Blade) I am mounting a Churchmouse defense fund... Any donations would be gratefully received... (s) Gertrude the Churchmouse Churchmice of the World - UNITE! -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:42:04 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: on AAB; race and homophobia (Bart) Message-ID: > > In message <326191B2.7C36@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes > >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> > >> There used to to be the quaint (IMO) view among theosophists that > >> homosexuals (m or f) were transiting from one sex to another betweeen > >> incarnations ... > > > >Would be as good an explanation of transsexuality as I've ever heard. > > Hallo - what's this? No one mentioned transsexuality. Have you been > wandering around my web pages? :-) > > > >I, personally, did not have the choice of homosexuality available to me. > > In general terms, neither do homosexuals. > > >It is my suspicion that those who show open hatred of homosexuality DO > >have the ability to make that choice, and it scares the hell out of > >them. > > .. ie., homophobia. > > > Alan > --------- > Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. > I tend to agree. Most homophobiacs appear to be running from their own leanings. They are frightened...actually scared shitless....to even acknowledge...that they themselves might be homosexual! On the other hand, what does this topic have to do with theosophy? I'd just as soon not see a flame war started here! Gertrude the Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:35:42 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Sexism, spells, and other stuff Message-ID: In message , kymsmith@micron.net writes >'Tis such a thing, I now think, as Theosophical fundamentalism. And I am >despondent with this new found knowledge. I move between despondency and rage ... Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 01:07:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Fw: Political Correctness Message-ID: In message <199610142219.SAA04120@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >> Face it, people; a skilled writer or translator can do a lot to make such >> changes paletable, and many modern writers do so. The world is changing >> from one of female subservience to one of female equality. The language >is >> going to change to suit, whether it's forced or not. It's good you pointed this out. Among modern theologians it is now more common to find gender-inclusive language than not. The New Revised Standard Version of the Bible also addresses the problem, and has been accepted worldwide as *faithful to the original texts.* An example of a correct (not "politically" correct) translation from the Greek New Testament: "Whoever has ear to hear, listen!" and NOT "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." Jesus used *inclusive* language here! The world *is* changing, the language *is* changing, and whoever does not change with the times gets left behind, for change is, as they say, the only certainty. Everything I write nowadays is written in a gender-inclusive way, and I'm not particularly skilled. I have also revise what I consider important writings from my past with no ill effects. Thanks again for the memo! Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:37:27 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: "Politically Correct?" - upload info Message-ID: As this subject has reared its ugly head once more, I have taken the opportunity to post John Crocker's excellent expose, "Politically Correct Theosophy" to my homepage directory structure. I have uploaded two versions, pcorrect.txt (32,441 bytes) and pcorrect.htm (33,943 bytes). Both can be found with a web browser at http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/wisdom/JRC/ Case *matters* - type exactly as shown. I am also posting the ASCII text version directly to the list for the benefit of recent subscribers who may not have web browsers. It lacks John's original italics emphases, but the meaning is clear enough. There is a short appendix by Liesel. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 02:12:04 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Transmogrify Message-ID: In message , CDGertrude writes >Dear Alan: >Unfortunately, I think that Chucky is inedible...or maybe even >poisonous! (Sigh) Alas, you are probably right :-( Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:52:47 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <961014235247_334021986@emout11.mail.aol.com> Sy, Why was the meeting cancelled? Gerda would have gone but she had fake masonry that weekend (and I had my house back to myself and after three afternnoons of orgies I was really tired!). Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:52:58 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: <961014235257_334022120@emout15.mail.aol.com> Ann, But are they enlightened? Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 00:52:22 -0700 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Christmas Humphreys Message-ID: <9610150752.AA10628@toto.csustan.edu> AB >In UK Law today a conviction for murder results in a mandatory >"life" sentence, which is usually about 15 years, (!?). In >Humphries' time the mandatory sentence was death by hanging - >there was no other choice available to any judge. Whether the >reported instance is true is not something I can comment on, but >if he was in the position of passing sentence of a some >convicted of murder (guilty or not) he would have had no >alternative but to have him hanged. > >Alan JHE In the American justice system, Judges may disqualify themselves from hearing a case if there is a moral conflict of interest involved. I would be very surprised if the British system does not have a similar rule. By the way, I understand that the average "life sentence" for murder in the U.S. is fourteen years. KP >Actually the Buddhist Lodge of the TS which was transformed into >the Buddhist Society (another unknown scandal perhaps?). In >1923 he published an edition of the Mahatma Letters and remained >a theosophist and a buddhist throughout his life (he died in the >1970es or 1980es). > I discovered this suppressed fact by accidence and The >Buddhist Society admitted it (I used to be a member). But the >word theosophy vanished from there long ago (even when >describing the life of CH). It is a strange experience to see >history change before your very eyes, to see important facts and >aspects simply disappear!. > >Kim JHE Humphreys (that's the correct spelling everybody) drifted away from Theosophical Society as it moved more an more towards becoming a cult dedicated to the worship of Krishnamurti. He was one of the trustees of the Mahatma Letter Trust and remained close to Theosophy as it was, but not as it became. I would be interested in knowing exactly what year the Buddhist Society became independent. JHE ------------------------------------------ |Jerry Hejka-Ekins, | |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT | |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu | |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org | ------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue Oct 15 05:25:28 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: <199610150925.FAA28407@envirolink.org> Ann E. Bermingham writes: >> Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But >> isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? The "girls" term was used purposely, but not to refer to all women. Rather, to women who constantly bring up serious issues and distort them to childish ends ...I'll explain this through this post. >But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. That is because they are too worried about their sex, rather than their atman, which I feel is most important. >I'll applaud that, but there's a whole bunch of people (notice, I did not >say "guys") out there who don't, for different reasons. No one likes to >feel like a second-class person simply because of their sex, race, color, >religion or you-name-it. > >How would you like to be pawed and felt up by your male clergy and >co-workers? Then be afraid to be say anything about it because your were >only one of the "girls" and lower in rank to the pawee? I didn't read this >in the newspaper - I've lived it for thirty years. You bring up an issue that can, however minutely, be related to these posts. I agree that there are some very sick men out there who feel that women are so much lower than them that they can "do with them as they please". There is a problem with how you may be defining sexual discrimination. The above is called sexual harrassment. I have yet to see anyone on this mailing list say , "Hey Ann, how about you and me jump in bed"? THAT is very different from writing "he" rather than "a person" or even "he/she". >Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and >consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will >never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because >we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. When I write "he" I am not looking down on women. And I surely don't look through them as, I know, many men do. But this bantering about a word which, when written, normally means "all people", is very childish indeed. If men were complaining about it similarly, I would call them boys. I've written why it was childish in a previous post. If you missed it, I would be happy to write it again. With love, --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue Oct 15 05:28:19 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610150928.FAA28438@envirolink.org> m.k. ramadoss writes: >Here is something I read, which some may like: > > Regard earnestly all the life that surrounds you. Regard >constantly changing and moving life which surrounds you, for it is formed >by the hearts of human beings. > > PS: The key word is "hearts". This firmly addresses the fact that >we are all equals. > >_______________________________________________________ > Peace to all living beings. > > M K Ramadoss Agreed. hmm...I wonder if it said "hearts of men" originally. And if it did...would it matter? For it would obviously be intended as a general term, would it not? --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue Oct 15 05:33:23 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: <199610150933.FAA28562@envirolink.org> CDGertrude writes: >> >> >> >> ---------- >> > From: John Straughn >> >> > Gotta throw the other sex in ...let's keep the girls happy. But >> seriously, >> > isn't this sexism thing getting a little out of hand? >> >> But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. >> >> >Most of the posts I see >> > on here are related to discrimination of one thing or another. The fact >> is, >> > we are all equals. >> >> I'll applaud that, but there's a whole bunch of people (notice, I did not >> say "guys") out there who don't, for different reasons. No one likes to >> feel like a second-class person simply because of their sex, race, color, >> religion or you-name-it. >> >> How would you like to be pawed and felt up by your male clergy and >> co-workers? Then be afraid to be say anything about it because your were >> only one of the "girls" and lower in rank to the pawee? I didn't read this >> in the newspaper - I've lived it for thirty years. >> >> Some of us "girls" have decided that we don't speak up for ourselves and >> consider ourselves equals and demand that attitude of others, then we will >> never be treated with respect. If we sound a little shrill, it's because >> we're tired of being some guy's cheap thrill. >> >> -Ann E. Bermingham >Girls? Sounds like you are refering to school children....How about >trying ladies or women? Or would you like to be referred to as a boy? >-- If I had said women, I would have meant it. I was referring to school children, in a somewhat figurative sense. This is explained further in a post to Ann. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 12:30:13 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: A Parallel to Gender Neutral Language Message-ID: In message <199610100711.AA29896@vnet.net>, Maurice de Montaine writes > A PARALLEL TO GENDER NEUTRAL LANGUAGE > > Plural Neutral Language > > > An interesting parallel to the gender neutral language thread of >which has been somewhat considered on the Theosophy List is that of >plural neutral language. The misconceptions of humanity coupled to >generalisations often find specific trends being developed in society >which do not really reflect the purity of truth from a much higher >level or viewpoint. Think for a moment on what I said about gender >neutral language in my previous posting, eventhough I mentioned only >a little about it. > > There is another problem, though, besides those misconceptions >and generalisations: how far do we go in the experiment of social >engineering? The problem does not arise from any "experiments" in "social engineering." The use of predominately male gender terminology offends and devalues many women both by implication and even sometimes by clear discrimination against them. The Theosophical objects claim to exist "without distinction of sex, race or creed," so the use of such terminology now that the use of language has changed in many other fields so as to be non-discriminatory is seen by many as contrary to the principles of theosophy, and its continued use as hypocritical. The rest of your post is based upon a hypothesis which seems, IMO, not to be relevant to this question. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Oct 96 07:31:37 EDT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@CompuServe.COM> Subject: The Weekend and the Pledge Message-ID: <961015113137_72724.413_FHP29-2@CompuServe.COM> >Sy, >Why was the meeting cancelled? Gerda would have gone but she had fake >masonry that weekend (and I had my house back to myself and after three >afternnoons of orgies I was really tired!). >Chuck In reply to Chuck's query: We simply did not have enough confirmed registrations to ask people, like myself, to spend the money to travel long distances to attend the St. Louis meeting. Since the conference cancellation, numerous people like yourself have inquired, and many have expressed disappointment; several indicating they intended to attend. But we did not know that. They made no motel reservation, nor did they send in the $5 registration fee. It is clear that a level of interest exists, but insufficient to ask people to engage in travel expense for such a conference. So, we shall try to accomplish by mail, what we could not through a conference, and have asked those Theosophical groups which have expressed interest to consider the Pledge and if they agree, to approve it and send their approval to Carl Trauernicht, Chairman of board of the Theosophical Society of St. Louis. If you know of any such interested Theosophical group, have them contact me by email or Carl Trauernicht, Jr., 314 N. Broadway, Suite 1810, St. Louis, MO 63102 Tel: 314-421-0911 Sy From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 07:07:47 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > m.k. ramadoss writes: > >Here is something I read, which some may like: > > > > Regard earnestly all the life that surrounds you. Regard > >constantly changing and moving life which surrounds you, for it is formed > >by the hearts of human beings. > > > > PS: The key word is "hearts". This firmly addresses the fact that > >we are all equals. > > > >_______________________________________________________ > > Peace to all living beings. > > > > M K Ramadoss > Agreed. hmm...I wonder if it said "hearts of men" originally. And if it > did...would it matter? For it would obviously be intended as a general term, > would it not? > --- > The Triaist It did say "men". It would not matter at all. I recall that "men" was used in a generic meaning those days and had no connotation of any sexist manner. MKRamdoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 07:28:51 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood Message-ID: <199610151308.JAA22303@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: The Great Black and Blue Brotherhood > Date: Monday, October 14, 1996 10:56 PM > > Ann, > But are they enlightened? > > Chuck the Heretic The Blues Brothers are from the Blues Lodge. >Why was the meeting cancelled? Gerda would have gone but she had fake >masonry that weekend (and I had my house back to myself and after three >afternnoons of orgies I was really tired!). The Babe strikes again. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:01:16 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Just for fun Message-ID: <199610151308.JAA22225@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > The "girls" term was used purposely, but not to refer to all women. Rather, > to women who constantly bring up serious issues and distort them to childish > ends ...I'll explain this through this post. > > >But isn't that the point? The "girls" aren't happy. > > That is because they are too worried about their sex, rather than their atman, > which I feel is most important. IMHO, being concerned with one's self-respect is absolutely necessary to reaching enlightenment. Balance is necessary in all areas of life. There is an imbalance if one half of humanity feels that they are being taken advantage of, in any way, and looked or talked down upon. For humanity to reach the next level, on a global level, there is going to be a long period of readjustment in which the Piscean era of duality is going to be replaced with the Aquarian ideal of equality. True, it's going to be uncomfortable and often scrappy for many people, but there is no stopping it. The Aquarian energies are pouring in and the women's movement for more equality is part of that. I realize you must find this inconvenient and disturbing to your personal spiritual search, but it's something that we are all going to deal with for a long time. One hundred years from now people willl wonder what all the fuss was about, because they will have gotten used to the ideas that were presented in John Crocker's excellent article. Back at the turn of the twentieth century, it must have been annoying and amazing that women actually had to gall to want to vote or be a part of Masonry. I believe, with my whole heart, that if everyone was more concerned with their atman, than this whole issue of equality would be unnecessary. If men and women everywhere were living the life of the soul, rather than their personalities, this would be a vastly different planet. However, this is not the case, and we must go with the flow of evolution for the majority of humanity. If you are reaching for a higher level, then I applaud your efforts. No doubt,as you do so, your attitude towards others will become one of joy, love and freedom. There will be no sense of racism, ethnicism, sexism, ageism or any other ugly ism. You will see people as they truly are, as shards of God incarnated in human bodies to work things out on the physical level. > called sexual harrassment. I have yet to see anyone on this mailing list say > , "Hey Ann, how about you and me jump in bed"? THAT is very different from > writing "he" rather than "a person" or even "he/she". You haven't seen my private posts. : -) > > When I write "he" I am not looking down on women. And I surely don't look > through them as, I know, many men do. But this bantering about a word which, > when written, normally means "all people", is very childish indeed. Perhaps it seems childish to you, but a whole mindset is in the process of change. As I said before, it will take time and will be uncomfortable. It's always hard to change. Again, you use the word "childish" to refer to those that want to change the language to reflect more equality. Isn't that a rather condescending term? Is that the way you feel about the people who are involved in that movement? Dr. Bain is a hearty advocate of changing language and he strikes me as a mature, learned man, as about as far away from a "child" as you can get. > If men > were complaining about it similarly, I would call them boys. I've written why > it was childish in a previous post. If you missed it, I would be happy to > write it again. Having read it once, I understand. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:05:14 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: A Parallel to Gender Neutral Language Message-ID: > > Plural Neutral Language > > > > An interesting parallel to the gender neutral language thread of > >which has been somewhat considered on the Theosophy List is that of > >plural neutral language. The misconceptions of humanity coupled to > >generalisations often find specific trends being developed in society > >which do not really reflect the purity of truth from a much higher > >level or viewpoint. Think for a moment on what I said about gender > >neutral language in my previous posting, eventhough I mentioned only > >a little about it. > > > > There is another problem, though, besides those misconceptions > >and generalisations: how far do we go in the experiment of social > >engineering? > Language *cannot* be viewed as a stagnant entity ... it is not a matter of "gender neutral" language being some experiment in "social engineering" - it is a matter of what *sort* of "social engineering" our language will accomplish. Do you really think the masculine language we've been using all these centuries is disconnected from the treatment of women for all those same centuries? *All* language "engineers" consciousness, it is the catagories in which we learn to think. When you say "man" when you mean "men and women", and "he" when you mean "he and she" - you are doing "social engineering" to every bit the same degree as those you now accuse of it. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:14:21 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Transmogrify Message-ID: <961015101421_211335273@emout04.mail.aol.com> Alan, Gertrude and I are good friends. Hence the banter. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:15:06 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Transmogrify Message-ID: <961015101505_211335774@emout04.mail.aol.com> Gertrude, I am inedible, poisonous. But you are crunchy and good with mustard. :-) Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 09:26:45 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Gender language in manuals Message-ID: <199610151429.KAA16641@cliff.cris.com> Hi folks My husband just informed me that Mark Williams Co, a very progressive computer company that puts out the Coherent OS and C-compiler, has changed the language in their manuals. In place of "he", they have put "she" and in other parts they have replaced gender references with gender-neutral terms, just to show that it can be done. When I asked him why they did this, he said that they tended to be on the cutting edge and were always looking for ways to teach people new ways of doing things. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue Oct 15 11:25:51 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610151525.LAA18953@envirolink.org> m.k. ramadoss writes: >On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > >> m.k. ramadoss writes: >> >Here is something I read, which some may like: >> > >> > Regard earnestly all the life that surrounds you. Regard >> >constantly changing and moving life which surrounds you, for it is formed >> >by the hearts of human beings. >> > >> > PS: The key word is "hearts". This firmly addresses the fact that >> >we are all equals. >> > >> >_______________________________________________________ >> > Peace to all living beings. >> > >> > M K Ramadoss >> Agreed. hmm...I wonder if it said "hearts of men" originally. And if it >> did...would it matter? For it would obviously be intended as a general >>term, would it not? >> --- >> The Triaist > > It did say "men". It would not matter at all. I recall that "men" >was used in a generic meaning those days and had no connotation of any >sexist manner. > >MKRamdoss Egggszacitally! Which is why I don't understand what all the fuss is about regarding written language and sexism. If people KNOW that the term he, his, man, or men is a generic and all-inclusive term....then why argue against it? --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 12:00:36 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: Many of us do not have any problem at all. When you overlook the substance and intent and look to the form and try to read something offensive into it, then we have a problem. Let us move on and address the human issues that surround us everyday and hope our presence will brighten up the day for those with whom we come into contact and interact whether in a one on one personal encounter or thru any other medium. MKRamdoss On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > m.k. ramadoss writes: > >On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > > > >> m.k. ramadoss writes: > >> >Here is something I read, which some may like: > >> > > >> > Regard earnestly all the life that surrounds you. Regard > >> >constantly changing and moving life which surrounds you, for it is formed > >> >by the hearts of human beings. > >> > > >> > PS: The key word is "hearts". This firmly addresses the fact that > >> >we are all equals. > >> > > >> >_______________________________________________________ > >> > Peace to all living beings. > >> > > >> > M K Ramadoss > >> Agreed. hmm...I wonder if it said "hearts of men" originally. And if it > >> did...would it matter? For it would obviously be intended as a general > >>term, would it not? > >> --- > >> The Triaist > > > > It did say "men". It would not matter at all. I recall that "men" > >was used in a generic meaning those days and had no connotation of any > >sexist manner. > > > >MKRamdoss > > Egggszacitally! Which is why I don't understand what all the fuss is about > regarding written language and sexism. If people KNOW that the term he, his, > man, or men is a generic and all-inclusive term....then why argue against it? > --- > The Triaist > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:42:15 -0400 From: Jerry Schueler Subject: Banishing Demons Message-ID: <3263E917.2883@worldnet.att.net> >Jerry, >There's this young fellow on the Chaos list who had a servitor run amok >and he was doing just that, bribing it with milk and cookies. I had a >hell of a time persuading him that he had to do more than that to get >rid of it. >Chuck the Heretic Oh, you wanted to get rid of it? I thought you just wanted to placate it. You need a good banishing ritual. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:55:38 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016180107.3627ad62@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. Ann: I am glad to see your very perceptive observation. Getting to the public is a very critical issue and the future of the TS is, IMHO, is going to depend on it. One of the very practical issues that has been discussed and addressed in the Lodges is that of closed vs open meetings. During the time I spent in India, I have *never* seen *any* lodge having a meeting closed only to members. *All* meetings are open to anyone. But you will find that there are lodges in this country that have predominantly closed meetings. Another issue that I see in the lodges here is the attitude towards increasing membership. For example in the San Antonio Lodge in which I am member and one of the National Board members is an officer, all the meetings are closed meetings. The open meeting is a rarity. In addition the current policy is that if a non member attends three meetings, then the person has to make up their mind either to join or not. In the latter case, the person is no longer welcome to attend any of the meetings (except for public meetings). This, in the opinion of a minority of members including myself, does not help spread Theosophy and I do not personally want to bring in anyone who in any way feels directly or indirectly pressured to join the society. I would rather have public come in and pick up some of the Theosophical Philosophy and go out and put them into practice so that it would affect others. If this was the policy of the lodge I joined several years ago, I would have never joined. I do not want to see any direct or indirect or subtle or heavy handed pressure to join. I hope the organization start looking closely and critically and see how Theosophy can reach the world. That would be key to 21st Century. I am posting a separate msg on the use of Internet. MKRamadoss > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:55:42 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016180111.2ef70552@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > You have again highlighted the issue of computers and Theosophy and TS. Computers and Internet (especially latter) are the most cost effective tools in todays world of communications. The track record of the last couple of years is that the administration is either ignorant of computers and Internet or have problems reorienting their thinking. For example theos-xxxx which has been, for the past two years, is available for free for anyone on the Internet (even on BBSs which have e-mail access to Internet). Thanks to the foresight and enterprise of John E Mead in setting them up and keeping them totally unmoderated (mostly he is seen no where for months!). TSA has not made any use of them. No one has seen any of the elected officials. Why? Because it is not officially sanctioned/controlled? Not only this. Even members of TSA (including myself who is no novice in computers) have a great difficulty in finding out about the theos-xxxx. How many times have these lists been mentioned in either AT or Quest? May be the administration is afraid that members may read about things that may not make them look good. As no one is here privy to what TSA is planning to do with the use of Internet to reach the public and spread Theosophy, we can only wait and see what future is in store. In the meantime each one of us in our own way apply Theosophical ideas and philosophy to help our fellow beings. I am forwarding this theos-buds as this issue may have to be looked at by others interested in Theosophy. MKRamadoss >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 23:15:49 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Hey, if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth wants to force > lies down the throats of the rest of us, that's their privilege. But I > reserve the right to point out their unequivocal equivocation (have fun > with your dictionary!). > > Bart Lidofsky > By all means do ... but so far all we've seen from you is a completely unsupported normative statement that appears to represent little other than a completely crystallized piece of childish defensiveness hatched by a mind with absolutely no openness to any idea other than the one he's concluded is the only correct one. We've had many a soul come on to this list, sit on a throne, and speak to it as though they know the truth - not speaking to equals with the intent to persuade, but as down to children .. ooooohhhhhh are you gonna be *fun* to play with. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Oct 96 02:11:49 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Seven Doors to Love - Open the closet - Let out those demons Message-ID: <961016061148_74024.3352_BHT84-1@CompuServe.COM> I think there are seven levels of deep human connection. The highest and most difficult to achieve is a true spiritual connection without barriers are preconditions. On a lower level we can connect using abstract technologies, I mean, terminologies. One a still lower level we can connect on the level of commerce and everyday information exchange. Not lower, but in the preciese middle, is the difficult connection of the heart which really includes all seven levels in a mysterious way some say. Desire, manipulation and power plays come still lower and you guessed it our old debil ssssssssssex, the snake coiled ready to rise to higher and higher levels of mischief all around us and through us. I personally love men, women and children everywhere, but that doesn't have anything necessarily to do with sex. In sex we become cojoined as bisexual beings and have these ciruitires are we couldn't link. I know I am preaching to the choir, but it is good to be back on solid ground, but stillwith my heade in the coulds. Well, I'm not that much better come to think of it. There are a lot of demons lurking everywhere in my closet, in the clouds, in cyberspace. It's really scary stuff. Seven levels of scare is too much. I would rather have seven levels of love. Wouldn't you? I image so many strange things that possibly there is a little to me black cats eating white mice or is it the other way around and which are you. I know I've never been a speeling be, I think but I'm checking. Never trust a spell nazi or anyone with doesnt' know a smouch from a schmooze. And while I'm I at, I'll say homosexual, shmoomosexual, poke um if the can't take a hawk from handsaw. Some people are straight north and gay northwest of desire. I say take a street called past desire, to surrende, transfer to acceptance and get off in heaven. ANy takers? If I don't hear from a few nonsexual men, woeman and little people, I'll just die cry and singn. Namasate Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Oct 96 02:34:52 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: A Ghost Story To Make You Crazy Message-ID: <961016063452_74024.3352_BHT146-1@CompuServe.COM> Everywhere I see pumkins, flying windows and 3-D cross your eyes and nueral pathway doors to the future. I think it is all a Christian plot to mesmerize the world and blame it on the witches. Too funny? Anygbody dieing laughing? Not yet check your stores for space alien barbies from hell with a wink in her eye that looks nothing like yoderway, oy vey, but you can thank Jesus its only a dream or a reall niigh=tmare. Tthe goys are gay this Halloween! cu3d - no vey, girl friends! Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Oct 96 07:46:30 EDT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Boston Lodge Expulsion Message-ID: <961016114630_72724.413_FHP40-1@CompuServe.COM> Bart Lidofsky writes: >I am not familiar with the expulsion of Denmark. On the other hand, I >have read all the correspondence, on both sides, on the Theosophical >Society in Boston. The way I see it, the Boston situation had a lot more >to do with money than any other issue. A group of people saw a valuable >property owned by an organization with a relatively small membership, >came in, took over, and grabbed the property and the money for >themselves. I have also read most, if not all, of the correspondence on both sides including the various legal documents such as the "Judgment of Findings" issued by the court in the Boston case which was settled by the parties. I have also visited the (now independent of Wheaton/Adyar) Theosophical Society in Boston (Besant Lodge) Inc. which bought and refurbished a building in Arlington, Massachusetts, a suburb of Boston, with their share of the settlement proceeds, and which is now the home of that Lodge. Who are the "group of people" to which Bart refers? Are they the people I met at the Boston Lodge who seem like nice folks, perhaps no better nor worse than the members of the Lodge to which I belong, and members of other Lodges that I have met. Many of them have a keen interest in the Alice Bailey teachings. But many are also interested in other things, i.e. The Secret Doctrine, Astrology, etc. I saw it for myself. Their present membership I believe is about 60-65. Or are the "group of people" that small minority who instituted the legal proceedings which resulted in the splitting up of the proceeds of the previous Boston Lodge building which had become a valuable property and was sold to Boston Universitry? Notwithstanding side issues raised in the case, it appears to me that a small minority of members, who did not like what the majority at the Boston Lodge were studying, mainly the AAB teachings, and in order to curtail these studies,brought a lawsuit for control of the assets which was encouraged and supported by the national organization. The approximate result of the settlement was that the building proceeds of about $800,000, were split with lawyers for both sides receiving about $200,000, the majority membership receiving about $400,000 with which they bought their present building in Arlington, Mass. and the minority membership receiving about $200,000. As of July, 1995, I was told that this $200,000 remained in a bank account. I do not know what has happened to it since. Maybe someone on the list can add something to this. The saga of the Boston Lodge is getting to be an old issue, but I do not see how it can go away until the officers and directors of TSA address the problem, redress whatever wrongs occurred and attempt to bring the Boston Lodge back into the fold. I know of no such efforts at the present time. Sy Ginsburg From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:00:32 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: <199610161329.JAA27839@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > And this kind of offense is caused by a revolt of the ego. By teaching people > that the truth lies in appeasing the ego, you are leading them further and > further away from the truth. People are becoming more and more offended > because in these modern times, it is becoming more and more important to be > "recognized". I would say that is very true. People do want to be "recognized" for their equal value. The Internet is good example of this, in that individuals that would not have the opportunity to put up web pages or dicusss their opinons with others, now are able to do so with people all over the world. I don't find any of this offensive, but just another indication of the incoming Aquarian mode of thought. The group will become more important than the guy at the top and every individual will have his say. Believe it or not, John, I also understand your concern about feeding egos. I think your approach is very spiritual, while I am looking at it from another angle- probably annoyingly astrological. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:25:49 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610161329.JAA27849@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > >Just to be the naughty person that I am - why not have she, her, woman or > >women as a generic and all-inclusive term? > If it had always been generally accepted, I would say, yes, go ahead and use > those terms. But Ann, don't get me wrong, I know where you are coming from. > But the facts are that when those terms were implemented, women WERE NOT > equals. They were, but they were not seen as so. But even so, those terms > were used in the past and this is the present. And here, in the present, we > now accept these terms as generic and all-inclusive in the racial, religious, > and sexual sense. "We" do not accept it. > And if one KNOWS that they are accepted in this manner, > then why do we have to insist on changing it for ego's sake? We should be > trying to get away from that, not giving into it. She has never been used in > the past as a generic term, so if it was used that way now, the public would > refer to it as regarding to women specifically. Because it is not an accepted > generic term. I'm only arguing this point because I'm trying to help you in > the best way that I can. Did you read what I wrote about how much sex matters > in the long run anyhow? It doesn't really. Yes, but I passed over replying to it. Perhaps that is one of fundamental differences in our thinking. I belive it does matter. Everything you do in this moment matters because it is the manifestation of the life your soul wants to live at this particular moment in time. I don't know how strongly I can say this. It all matters, because the lives you have lived and will live are providing the knowledge and wisdom that you eventually take with you at the end of your earth path. And what you take with you onto your next path - whatever that may be. BTW, changing everything to the feminine was a joke. > There are four general theories > about life after death. One is that you are chemicals and atoms, and that > when you die, your dead. That's it. I don't believe this is a Theosophical approach to the matter, nor mine. >Does your sex matter then? As my Akbar Lodge teacher once said, there is sex on every plane of existence. > Not really, > but then again nothing really matters with that theory except that you must do > everything possible to help humanity and nature for those may be the only > things that will exist past your death. The second is that you will be > reincarnated. Even then, you may not be the same sex as you were before, so, > once again, it doesn't matter. I believe it does matter. Being a man helps you to be a better woman and vice versa. Going back and forth increases our understanding of both sides and leads us towards balance. > Thirdly, you may become an animal, or a plant, > or even a fruitfly. I don't think sex will matter much there either. I doubt that a fruit fly incarnation is in my future, unless the Lords of Karma are really pissed at me. > And > lastly, you may become one with the one. And as that one, you may be sexless, > in fact, if you believe that your atman exists and is your one mutual > connection with humanity, then you are me and I am you and there is no male or > female to divide us. In sat....in REALITY, we are one. YES! I just wrote that somewhere in my novel. It came out the mouth of an ET. But seriously, what I see as our fundamental difference is that you see the journey leading up to that glorious reunion as not really counting for much. "It doesn't matter." Whereas I do believe it ALL matters. The workings of the physical plane and its many soap operas are scratch pads towards higher consciousness and will be discarded, but in the meantime, we do our best to get there. Perhaps it is time to do what many others have done on this list when then come to an end - agree to disagree. > Undivided by > anything. Undivided by language, sex, religion, race, or culture. And I love > you, Ann, I really do. Cool it. My husband sometimes reads this list. : - ) -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 10:14:15 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Banishing Demons Message-ID: <961016101414_1246226696@emout03.mail.aol.com> Jerry, No, he needed to banish it and the standard banishing stuff didn't work. So he sent if off to someone else to deal with. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Oct 96 10:23:25 EDT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Demonizing ServingCompu Message-ID: <961016142324_74024.3352_BHT145-2@CompuServe.COM> I don't like to demonize anyone but serving compu is eating my lunch. Comprendevus, si vous RSVP? Namaaste Joseph Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 11:56:54 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: <199610161556.LAA10369@envirolink.org> Ann E. Bermingham writes: > > >---------- >> From: John Straughn > > And this kind of offense is caused by a revolt of the ego. By teaching >people >> that the truth lies in appeasing the ego, you are leading them further >and >> further away from the truth. People are becoming more and more offended >> because in these modern times, it is becoming more and more important to >be >> "recognized". > >I would say that is very true. People do want to be "recognized" for their >equal value. The Internet is good example of this, in that individuals >that would not have the opportunity to put up web pages or dicusss their >opinons with others, now are able to do so with people all over the world. >I don't find any of this offensive, but just another indication of the >incoming Aquarian mode of thought. The group will become more important >than the guy at the top and every individual will have his say. I think I may have just caught you doing what we have been discussing all this time. "....every individual will have his say." *smile* But I do understand, now, looking at it in the astrological light. Our views are so different that it is probably senseless for us to continue arguing about it. >Believe it or not, John, I also understand your concern about feeding egos. > I think your approach is very spiritual, while I am looking at it from >another angle- probably annoyingly astrological. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > > Thank You. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:16:09 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: We are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > incoming Aquarian mode of thought. The group will become more important > than the guy at the top and every individual will have his say. Ann, what a wise observation. As one moves higher - sometimes with imposing and/and attractive title(s), self-importance makes the person not feel humble but very important and tend to sit on the traditional high horse and speak down to other humans who may not be that "high" nor have any title or anything of importance. Internet is the great equalizer and those on high horse may find it very difficult to understand and deal with. MKRamdoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:51:30 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: One Final Thought Message-ID: <199610161852.OAA23929@cliff.cris.com> It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material presented to the public. Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in a central government and more control given over to local groups. As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than letting it die out. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 96 14:38 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: To John Straughn and others, of course Message-ID: Dear John, You wrote: "I'm only trying to help you to understand that some things can be twisted so far out of proportion that they begin to inhibit, and even asphyxiate, the journey within. I will try to explain more on this matter later, but for now, I must rid myself of this fatigue...:)" As I implied in an earlier post, "correctness," can be a lot of work and some do find it tiresome. (I will remove the political as that term seems to disturb some when used in this context - and I now, through their arguments, see and understand the point - although I do not agree with the arguments really, it will serve no purpose to continue to use the offending term) "Correctness" is mentally challenging, not for the faint of heart or mind. Although it is clear that you have chosen to give homage to an old line of thought that may not deserve it, you must admit it is most Theosophical to explore new ideas and thoughts, try them out, see if they work - particularly those avenues which seem to be devoid of harm if adopted. Since, as you stated, different theories abound as to what will happen to us when we die, we must therefore concentrate on improving life here. If using particular words will make others feel welcome and comfortable, improve life here, and will not harm anyone while doing so. . .well? The "gender-inclusive" issue was so eloquently addressed in the letter post by John Crocker, (Mr. Crocker, where have you been all my life??) I can only do the writing a disservice by adding to it. However, if every time someone was told "that's the way it's always been," my god, would we even have plumbing??? Is that an argument you would accept if you put forth an idea of change, or a new idea, and that was the response given to you? Do you really think because something has always been "accepted" it is right? If not, why do you apply that as a defense in this discussion? What really is the standard we should use when judging ancient and not so ancient teachings and traditions? Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:42:08 -0400 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: "dsbrasil"? Message-ID: <199610162042.QAA04292@ginger.vnet.net> I've received a garbled posting, apparently in reponse to something on theos-l. Is anyone using an address of "dsbrasil"? It appears to be from a commercial service, canalvip.com -- no further information available/legible. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:00:24 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI welcome Message-ID: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL WELCOMES KYM SMITH! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:10:08 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: We are who? Message-ID: In message <199610160307.XAA27311@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >>Just to be the naughty person that I am - why not have she, her, woman or >>women as a generic and all-inclusive term? >If it had always been generally accepted, I would say, yes, go ahead and use >those terms. But Ann, don't get me wrong, I know where you are coming from. >But the facts are that when those terms were implemented, women WERE NOT >equals. They were, but they were not seen as so. But even so, those terms >were used in the past and this is the present. And here, in the present, we >now accept these terms as generic and all-inclusive in the racial, religious, >and sexual sense. No "WE" don't. Count me out - and a great many other people. Certainly 45 members of Theosophy International, one of whom provides this list for us all to use. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:15:57 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: *Some* of us are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: <8VpJmbANCVZyEwvl@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610160321.XAA28289@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >>I know of one local woman who quite the TS completely *because* she did >>not want to be described as one of a "brotherhood" and a large number of >>others who would not even look at theosophical literature because of >>what they perceive as *sexist* language. > >And this kind of offense is caused by a revolt of the ego. You do not know this woman, and are not qualified to state such a thing. I do know her (still) and she was offended all the way through. > By teaching people >that the truth lies in appeasing the ego, you are leading them further and >further away from the truth. I teach no such thing. How dare you say so. > People are becoming more and more offended >because in these modern times, it is becoming more and more important to be >"recognized". What is wrong with being recognised? Should I start ignoring you? I am tempted .... :-) > >>The beloved "First Object" is now turning people off, and turning them >>away, and the old guard keep wailing "Why is the membership continually >>in decline?" This may be only one reason, but it's real enough. >> >>How do I know about these things? I was a Lodge president for two >>years, vice president for one year, and I listened to what people said >>who came to meetings, after the meetings were over and before they >>began. From this listening I helped to develop the ideas in Theosophy >>International, for which *presumption* I was thrown out of my own >>Lodge's committee with two days notice. >> >>In some places, it could be said, Theosophy sucks. > >Yes, and these places, I assure you, are not the higher ones. Wow, you must be a REALLY high up important man who knows more than the rest of us! > Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:55:38 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016180107.3627ad62@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. Ann: I am glad to see your very perceptive observation. Getting to the public is a very critical issue and the future of the TS is, IMHO, is going to depend on it. One of the very practical issues that has been discussed and addressed in the Lodges is that of closed vs open meetings. During the time I spent in India, I have *never* seen *any* lodge having a meeting closed only to members. *All* meetings are open to anyone. But you will find that there are lodges in this country that have predominantly closed meetings. Another issue that I see in the lodges here is the attitude towards increasing membership. For example in the San Antonio Lodge in which I am member and one of the National Board members is an officer, all the meetings are closed meetings. The open meeting is a rarity. In addition the current policy is that if a non member attends three meetings, then the person has to make up their mind either to join or not. In the latter case, the person is no longer welcome to attend any of the meetings (except for public meetings). This, in the opinion of a minority of members including myself, does not help spread Theosophy and I do not personally want to bring in anyone who in any way feels directly or indirectly pressured to join the society. I would rather have public come in and pick up some of the Theosophical Philosophy and go out and put them into practice so that it would affect others. If this was the policy of the lodge I joined several years ago, I would have never joined. I do not want to see any direct or indirect or subtle or heavy handed pressure to join. I hope the organization start looking closely and critically and see how Theosophy can reach the world. That would be key to 21st Century. I am posting a separate msg on the use of Internet. MKRamadoss > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:55:42 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016180111.2ef70552@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > You have again highlighted the issue of computers and Theosophy and TS. Computers and Internet (especially latter) are the most cost effective tools in todays world of communications. The track record of the last couple of years is that the administration is either ignorant of computers and Internet or have problems reorienting their thinking. For example theos-xxxx which has been, for the past two years, is available for free for anyone on the Internet (even on BBSs which have e-mail access to Internet). Thanks to the foresight and enterprise of John E Mead in setting them up and keeping them totally unmoderated (mostly he is seen no where for months!). TSA has not made any use of them. No one has seen any of the elected officials. Why? Because it is not officially sanctioned/controlled? Not only this. Even members of TSA (including myself who is no novice in computers) have a great difficulty in finding out about the theos-xxxx. How many times have these lists been mentioned in either AT or Quest? May be the administration is afraid that members may read about things that may not make them look good. As no one is here privy to what TSA is planning to do with the use of Internet to reach the public and spread Theosophy, we can only wait and see what future is in store. In the meantime each one of us in our own way apply Theosophical ideas and philosophy to help our fellow beings. I am forwarding this theos-buds as this issue may have to be looked at by others interested in Theosophy. MKRamadoss >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:04:49 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: We are all in real deep .... Message-ID: In message <199610160225.WAA09587@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Oh, think of it! An entire LCC service with nothing but feminine >references. Attendance = 1 observer? --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:56:08 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: We are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes > Internet is the great equalizer and those on high horse may find >it very difficult to understand and deal with. You can say that again! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:34:29 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Seven Doors to Love - Open the closet - Let out those demons Message-ID: In message <961016061148_74024.3352_BHT84-1@CompuServe.COM>, Keith Price <74024.3352@CompuServe.COM> writes >If I don't hear from a few nonsexual men, woeman and little >people, I'll just die cry and singn. HI, KEITH! Don't die or cry - sing! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:28:48 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: In message <199610160333.XAA29048@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >>In message , >>"m.k. ramadoss" writes >>>It did say "men". It would not matter at all. I recall that "men" >>>was used in a generic meaning those days and had no connotation of any >>>sexist manner. >> >>It does now. That's why there is discussion (?) and debate (?). > >It does now. Who decided that the meanings should be changed? The general >populous who rely on their egos for satisfaction? They must be right. By which you appear to mean that they are wrong. You don't have an ego? Your posts suggest that you very much DO! The consensus opinion or large numbers of human beings doesn't mean anything? People change language all the time, and do you know, they are most likely never to have heard of theosophy, nor care if it exists or not. Millions live and die without us. The KJV of the Bible says "Suffer the little children to come unto me." In the 17th century "suffer" meant "allow" - now it means to experience the bad. In England now we use more American idioms than ever before, and much of our own cultural language heritage is fading away. It's part of history, of change. "Let" used to mean "stop" - now it means the opposite. We are moving into the 21st century. Many of the ideas of the 19th have gone, and many need updating. Can you imagine anyone talking like the characters in Dickens, Jane Austen, Thomas Hardy, or Wm. Shakespeare in today's world? If someone spoke to me in Chaucer's English, I wouldn't understand what was being said. And, BTW, this post is entirely in gender-inclusive language. > Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 00:02:06 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: To John Straughn and others, of course Message-ID: In message , kymsmith@MICRON.NET writes >What really is the standard we should use when judging ancient and not so >ancient teachings and traditions? IMHO, common sense, personal experience, the tests of practice and time. As they say in show-business, "If it works, keep it in the act." The present approach(es) of the main theosophical organisations are *not* working, interest and membership declines. "... all the world's a stage." [Willy Shakespeare] Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:55:06 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: One Thought Message-ID: In message <199610161852.OAA23929@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. Not such a final thought, surely, Ann? It seems to me that while you are properly addressing the larger issue of which gender language is but a part, there is much work to do, especially in keeping the issue(s) to the fore. The TSA web page (for example) ackowledges little else except its own activites, and is well covered in $ signs. All the contributions that we TI folk make come free, and usually at the contributors' expense. That, I believe, is the future. We are going to have to work hard for it though ... yes? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:59:09 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <199610170059.UAA19927@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: ramadoss@eden.com > > Most of us see this and other fundamental problems with the present > bylaws. All the building blocks are in place to shut down all the lodges and > transfer all the assets to the Trust and once this is done, no one has to > answer to any one. Correct it I'm wrong, but perhaps there wouldn't be any one to answer to simply because a great majority of the membership would leave. And new people might be quite apprehensive about joining an organization that allowed them little freedom. The organization would find itself like a ship in which all the passengers have jumped off and swum ashore, while the captain and crew stayed aboard. What good is all that money and property if they have no members to serve? What would be the purpose of their existence? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:14:42 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016192011.2a3f432c@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. Ann: I am glad to see your very perceptive observation. Getting to the public is a very critical issue and the future of the TS is, IMHO, is going to depend on it. One of the very practical issues that has been discussed and addressed in the Lodges is that of closed vs open meetings. During the time I spent in India, I have *never* seen *any* lodge having a meeting closed only to members. *All* meetings are open to anyone. But you will find that there are lodges in this country that have predominantly closed meetings. Another issue that I see in the lodges here is the attitude towards increasing membership. For example in the San Antonio Lodge in which I am member and one of the National Board members is an officer, all the meetings are closed meetings. The open meeting is a rarity. In addition the current policy is that if a non member attends three meetings, then the person has to make up their mind either to join or not. In the latter case, the person is no longer welcome to attend any of the meetings (except for public meetings). This, in the opinion of a minority of members including myself, does not help spread Theosophy and I do not personally want to bring in anyone who in any way feels directly or indirectly pressured to join the society. I would rather have public come in and pick up some of the Theosophical Philosophy and go out and put them into practice so that it would affect others. If this was the policy of the lodge I joined several years ago, I would have never joined. I do not want to see any direct or indirect or subtle or heavy handed pressure to join. I hope the organization start looking closely and critically and see how Theosophy can reach the world. That would be key to 21st Century. I am posting a separate msg on the use of Internet. MKRamadoss > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:14:46 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961016192015.296fb9ba@mail.eden.com> At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > You have again highlighted the issue of computers and Theosophy and TS. Computers and Internet (especially latter) are the most cost effective tools in todays world of communications. The track record of the last couple of years is that the administration is either ignorant of computers and Internet or have problems reorienting their thinking. For example theos-xxxx which has been, for the past two years, is available for free for anyone on the Internet (even on BBSs which have e-mail access to Internet). Thanks to the foresight and enterprise of John E Mead in setting them up and keeping them totally unmoderated (mostly he is seen no where for months!). TSA has not made any use of them. No one has seen any of the elected officials. Why? Because it is not officially sanctioned/controlled? Not only this. Even members of TSA (including myself who is no novice in computers) have a great difficulty in finding out about the theos-xxxx. How many times have these lists been mentioned in either AT or Quest? May be the administration is afraid that members may read about things that may not make them look good. As no one is here privy to what TSA is planning to do with the use of Internet to reach the public and spread Theosophy, we can only wait and see what future is in store. In the meantime each one of us in our own way apply Theosophical ideas and philosophy to help our fellow beings. I am forwarding this theos-buds as this issue may have to be looked at by others interested in Theosophy. MKRamadoss >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:30:10 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: About semantics Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961017203010.006a9b08@whanganui.ac.nz> As there has been a thread on theos-l regarding the use of language, I thought this might be of interest. Bee Brown MD: TAKING RESPONSIBILITY ...TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MEANINGS WE GIVE by Milton Dawes Proposition 1 "Whenever we agree or disagree with someone--or, to be more specific, with something--we have heard or read, we are to a great extent agreeing or disagreeing with 'ourselves'." (I invite you to pause for a moment and take special notice of your reactions to this proposition at this time.) This proposition, at first hearing or reading, may seem to you to be a silly, irresponsible, and totally unacceptable thing for anyone to suggest. And you may also think that an idea such as this is designed simply to discourage genuine criticisms, undermine self-confidence, and put a damper on debates, discussions, and everyday conversations. I doubt that any of this will happen;but in any case, those are not my intentions. I am merely stating what seems tome to be a valid proposition, based on my acceptance, interpretations, and applications of some general semantics principles and formulations. Proposition 2 The aim of Proposition 1 is mainly to provide supporting arguments for Proposition 2. Proposition 2 states that "If we are concerned to improve our relationships with our 'selves' and each other, and create healthier environments in homes, in the places we work, and wherever we socialize, we could start by becoming more alert to how we as individualscontribute to and create the kinds of societies we live in, as a consequence of the ways we interpret and give meanings to our experiences. And since language constitutes a great deal of our thinking related to our everyday personal, social and professional experiences and interactions, we could take more responsibility for the ways we interpret, and the meanings we give to, what we hear, read, see, experience, etc." Specifically, we could take more responsibility for how we as individuals interpret and give meanings to what our experts, gurus, scientists, religious authorities, politicians, teachers, friends, reporters, writers, relatives, and others say or write. For the kinds of values we hold, the ways we relate to each other, and the kinds of societies we create for ourselves and our children are, to a great extent, based on the ways we interpret, and the meanings we give to, what we read and hear. The Principle of Non-Identity To return to Proposition 1: One of the general-semantics principles alluded to earlier is the "principle of non-identity." This principle states that no two things are identical, that no things are the same, that no two things are similar in all respects. The principle of non-identity further states that "In a world of change, growth, process, changing relationships. . . a thing is not even identical with itself." Now if things are not identical with themselves, if they are continuously changing ever so imperceptibly from moment to moment--changing position, changing relationships, changing internally, and so on--how can they ever be identical with each other? In which instant, for example, could we look at the sweep hands of a watch and say it is exactly such and such time? The principle of non-identity is valid on both logical and empirical grounds. If any two things were similar in all respects, then, by definition and observation, they could not occupy or be seen to occupy two different space-time positions. If two things were identical (similar in all respects),we would not in any way be able to distinguish one from the other. We would not be able to point to one and say, "There is this one," then point to the other and say, "There is that one." To do that would be tantamount to admitting that one could be distinguished from the other and that they were seen in different places. But if each one occupied a different place,then their positional and functional relationships with other things would be different. So one could not honestly claim that they were similar in all respects. We are strongly inclined, each one of us, to ignore these inescapable differences between the interpretations and meanings we give to what we hear and read, and the words, intentions, expectations, and meanings of a speaker or writer. If we accept the principle of non-identity, then the meanings and interpretations of a listener or reader cannot be identical with--cannot be the same as--the meanings of another individual, speaking or writing in a different place and at a different time. We choose, interpret, and understand words according to our individual life experiences-and we each have different life experiences. Of course we do understand each other, to a certain degree, and we can follow instructions reasonably closely. We are able to communicate mainly because our meanings have overlapping features. But except for those who claim to be mind-readers, our interpretations come between what is said and heard and what is written and read. To be fair to a speaker or writer, as listeners or readers, we should take some responsibility for theinterpretations we make and the meanings we give to what we hear or read. The Principle of Non-Allness The principle of non-allness is another general-semantics principle advanced in support of Proposition 1. Briefly put, this principle states, "We cannot know, understand, become acquainted with, all of--nor say, describe, imagine,.. . all about anything," and this includes ourselves. The principle implies that, as interpreters, evaluators, and assigners of meanings, we cannot be absolutely certain of every aspect of our own evaluation processes;consequently, we cannot be sure of the accuracy of our own interpretations, nor can we know all that's behind the words of others. Accepting and remembering the principle of non-allness, we have the responsibility at least to make allowances for the possibility of errors, misevaluations, and misinterpretations. It is our responsibility to remind ourselves that all was not said or written, and that all could not have been said or written. It is our responsibility to remember that any interpretation we make, any meaning we give to what we hear or read, is based on very small samplings of whatever else could have been said or written. And it is our responsibility to remind ourselves that our agreements as well as disagreements are based on our evaluations of our interpretations of these small samplings. The General Principle of Uncertainty This principle is more general than Heisenberg's principle of uncertainty. It states, "Living as we do, in a dynamic world of change, growth, process, etc., and in a world where no two things, situations, etc., are identical, the 'truth' value of the relatively static and general statements we make should be evaluated in terms of degrees of probability ranging from impossibility to certainty." As an exercise, how, for instance, would you evaluate the truth value of the following statements? (The first one was seen in a bank.) "I pay back my loan the way I want." "He is on the permanent staff." "Till death do us part." "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" "Your car will be ready tomorrow." "Five hundred dollars cash back." If you refer to what was mentioned above regarding the principles of non-identity and non-allness, you may notice that these two principles (among others) 'make" a general principle of uncertainty inexorable. The principle of non-identity implies that to understand anything there have to besome prior interpretations. And, following this, we cannot be absolutely sure that what we understand is precisely what was meant. The principle of non-allness implies that all our understanding is based on limited analysis of limited input of limited information. So we cannot be absolutely sure that the way we have interpreted a statement precludes all other possible interpretations. (The "allness"--that is, all our understanding--in the above statement and implied in other general-semantics principles is not a contradiction or paradox if one includes a date.) The principle of uncertainty, together with those of non-identity and non-allness, "suggest" that we develop in ourselves certain attitudes, habits, orientations, approaches in our conversations, discussions, listenings, and readings. Such a habitual approach would include the following considerations. (1) We cannot not interpret, we cannot not make assumptions. (2) We should expect some degree of inaccuracy in our interpretations--based as they are on our individual experiences, standards, assumptions, beliefs, and training. (3) We should acknowledge these inaccuracies, assumptions, and uncertainties as unavoidable aspects of our communication processes. In support of this "uncertainty approach," we could change our agreement or disagreement responses to something along the following lines:"As far as I know; as much as I understand; based on the little information I have; not knowing what was left out; realizing that I had to makea few guesses and projections; I agree (or disagree) with my own interpretations of this that I am hearing (or reading); furthermore, since I do not expect people to say or write 'meanings' instead of'words,' I take responsibility for the meanings I give to whatever I hear or read." (Remember, we are talking about an attitude, so we don't have to actually say the above.) The societies we have inherited, help to create, and to a great extent support, do not usually encourage values pertaining to uncertainty and probability. So it is understandable if at this point you find that your thoughts include such words and phrases as ludicrous, idealistic, academic, philosophical, nothing would ever get done. We have been conditioned to believe, we are inclined to believe, and we have abundant evidence that leads us to believe that a person with an uncertainty approach will be seen, described, thought of, and treated something like this: "She or he is the kind of person who is unsure of herself or himself; can't be relied upon; is wimpish; splits hairs; lacks self-confidence; seems a weak character or a fence sitter; cannot make decisions." Despite our social and cultural conditionings, we can also consider the following positive aspects of uncertainty. The principle of uncertainty is not an absolute law of the universe, stating what must occur, what we must do at every single instant of our existence. Without some degree of certainty, there would be no science or mathematics as we know them. To recognize a principle of uncertainty is to learn to live our lives with a certain degree of uncertainty. In a world of change, process, and diversity, to be always certain is to be at a disadvantage. Following a map of certainty will sooner or later lead one up a path to increasing distress, while being uncertain helps us to acknowledge errors and to seek improvements. Being certain discourages creative approaches to solving problems; it promotes intolerance, prejudices, conflicts, and violence. Without doubts, there would be little advancement in knowledge. A recognition of the possibility of uncertainty helps us to accept more responsibility for our guesses, expectations, theories, and opinions. An individual or society that has no doubts about its certainties will sooner or later discover, to its dismay, that the world around it, and the people it encounters, cannot always be relied upon to meet its expectations. Words as Variables There are other general semantics premises and formulations that could be cited in support of Proposition 1. For now, those mentioned above will suffice.Let's return for a moment to Proposition 1: "Whenever we agree or disagree with something we have heard or read, we are to a great extent agreeing or disagreeing with ourselves." The "truth" value of this proposition has very little to do with whether one person is right and another wrong, or whether what is heard or read can be shown to be true or false. The "truth" value of the proposition has to be evaluated in terms of interpretations understandings, and meanings, not in terms of facts per se. Apart from the premises referred to, Proposition 1 can be supported using themathematical notion of "the variable." The variable has been defined as "a symbol that can represent any one of a set of values." Words can be considered as "semantic variables." In terms of process, time, space, context, frame of reference, interpreters (anything, for that matter) can be thought of in terms of variables. Any thing, situation, experience, or event is usually given a wide variety of interpretation and meaning values. As an unavoidable consequence of our unique life experiences, words mean different things to each of us. If you can recall situations where you thought you were misquoted or misunderstood, or followed directions to an unfamiliar place, or struggled with an instruction manual, you will have a good understanding of words as variables. Interpreting: An Automatic process We are not usually aware that we give our own meaning values to our experiences, or to what we hear or read. We make interpretations and give meanings without being aware that we are doing so. We are constantly making interpretations--it is an automatic process. Our nervous systems seem to work more efficiently by not requiring us at self-conscious levels to be constantly engaged in observing that we are making interpretations. Try to imagine what it would be like if every time we had an experience, or heard or read something, we immediately became aware that we were in a process of interpreting! Thisawareness would now in its turn become an experience to be interpreted. And this new awareness . . . get the picture? This extreme, self-reflexive mode of interpreting our experience of interpreting would probably put us in a trance-like state. It would be very difficult to make decisions or act. The complexities of modern living require us to become more mindful of the fact that we interpret and give meanings. As diverse societies and cultures come together; as individuals and groups speaking different languages meet, intermix, and interact; as individuals with different training and skills communicate and work with each other--their different meaning-based values clash. Not unexpectedly, confusions, prejudices, tensions, and conflicts tend to increase. Increasing our awareness that things are not what we say they are, that the meanings we give to our experiences and to situations we find ourselves in are uniquely our meanings, that words mean different things to different people,would do much to lower tensions, clarify differing viewpoints, and improve the quality of our relationships with ourselves and each other. No Direct Access to Meanings We have no direct way of knowing what others mean by their words. We have no way of bypassing the intrusive, selective, differentiating, integrating,representational processes of our nervous systems. Nor do we presently have anyway of knowing how much, and to what degree, we may or may not have added to, subtracted from, reconstructed, reshaped, distorted, or created any such meaning. How can we know how much our fears, hopes, expectations, prejudices, or values have contributed to the particular ways we observe, think about, and respond to situations? If we can't be sure that what we understand is what was meant, shouldn't we take some responsibility for the meanings we give? Exploring "Meaning"If we are to take responsibility for the meanings we give to what we read or experience, it would be helpful to do some explorations into the realms of meaning. Such explorations would deepen our understandings of meaning and sharpen our sensitivities to the importance of meaning in diverse areas of our everyday living. What follows is a very brief account of some of my explorations. The statements, however else they may be interpreted, should not be taken as conclusions but rather as propositions. They represent some aspects of what "meaning" means to me at the time of writing. Dictionaries give the "meanings" of words through references to other words. But remembering the times we have felt hurt, angry, put down, encouraged, or complimented by what someone said or wrote, we suspect that meanings have more to do with our lives than merely with other words in adictionary. "Meaning" is a high-order abstraction label for our attempts to build bridges between what we know (or think we know) and what we know we don't know--bridges between the data that come to us through our senses and whatever else we suspect is going on in and around us. Our unceasing and pervasive search for meanings provides us with undeniable clues--messages from"our-selves" to "our-selves"--that we do not know it all. Meaning represents our search for patterns that would provide us with some sort of continuity between events and our experiences, in different times and different places. Meaning has to do with our individual attempts to make sense of what we experience going on in our inner and outer worlds. We look for relationships, patterns, and connections to satisfy our need to know and understand what's going on; we look for clues that will help us get along better, obtain what we want, avoid problems, lessen stress, improve performance, and make better plans and decisions. Nothing in or of itself has meaning. No thing, event, experience, situation,or word is its own meaning. Meanings cannot be divorced from interpretations and interpreters. The meaning or meanings of anything will not be found in the thing. The meaning of a sound, painting, piece of music, dream, or statement will not be found in the sound, or music, or statement. If the meaning of a thing was a part of the thing, how would we know where the "meaning"ended and the thing began? "Meaning" refers to processes in psycho-physiological environments. Features of these environments include curiosity, surprise, anger, prejudice, opinions, beliefs, humor, fear, attitudes, values, and so on. Meaning does not exist in geographical environments as such; we cannot point to a meaning. Each one of us creates our own meanings. And since each of us has our own unique ways of seeing, experiencing, and thinking about things and situations, no two of us will give the same meanings to situations we find ourselves in or to words we have heard or read. In view of all this, it would seem more reasonable for us to ask, "What does this mean to me?" than to ask,"What does this mean?" Because words do not have meanings in themselves, we attempt to bridge the enormous gap between what we hear or read and what is intended by a speaker or writer. Frequently, we confuse and identify what we feel and understand, generated by what we hear or read, with whatever message a speaker or writer intended to convey. In a world of infinite numbers of relationships, where everything (as far as weknow) is dynamically interrelated with other things, a world where not all of these relationships are known or can be known, human meanings (despite our tendencies to hang onto the familiar and traditional) cannot be final or complete. As we get to know more about ourselves, our world, and ourselves-in-our-world, what things mean to us changes. As we see more, hear more, travel to new places, meet and talk with people, and acquire skills, the ways we "see" things change--despite our beliefs that we are the"same" persons. If we accept that situations, behaviors, or statements do not have meanings in and of themselves, then we cannot reasonably and responsibly say that anything is "meaningless." Saying that something is meaningless is another way of saying that it does not mean anything to us at this time. We can, if sufficiently motivated, make sense of and give meanings to anything we choose. Because meaning has to do with our deep need to find continuity and consistency in ourselves and in our worlds, the meanings we give are interrelated, integrated, and coordinated. The meanings we give to our experiences, or to what we hear or read, depend a great deal on the meanings we have given both to other experiences and to other things we have heard and read. This integration and consistency of meanings makes it extremely difficult for us to change attitudes, prejudices, beliefs, values, and behaviors, even when we realize that it is to our advantage to do so. Recognizing that meaning is so vital in all areas of our lives, that things are not what we or others say they mean, that we have the inalienable option to change our interpretations as we please, could greatly increase our levels of self-confidence and personal power. We could accelerate our personal development, increase our intelligence, and improve our personal and professional relationships by being more sensitive to , more sensible about,and more responsible for the ways we interpret and the meanings we give to our experiences and to what we hear or read. "Easier said than done," you may be thinking. (Since I said it myself, I agree with me.) As mentioned before, making interpretations and giving meanings are basically automatic processes. But with some practice, we can become more aware of these goings-on. It requires catching ourselves doing such things as explaining, giving opinions, criticizing, expecting things to happen in particular ways, and agreeing and disagreeing. Meaning plays an enormous role in our lives. To repeat, meaning is not just a matter of words. Our values, prejudices, beliefs, sciences, philosophies, religions, and artistic activities are based on meanings. We live our lives in terms of meanings. The kinds of societies we create and support develop from the interpretations and meanings we give to our experiences, especially to what we hear and read. "Meanings," to a great extent, direct our lives. But since we are capable, to some degree, of recognizing, reviewing, and modifying our interpretations, we can also direct our meanings to some extent. The Guessing Game Let's return once again to Proposition 1: Whenever we agree or disagreewith something we heard or read, we are to a great extent agreeing or disagreeing with ourselves. How do you now feel about Proposition 1? Do you agree? If your answer is "Yes," here is another question. What are you agreeing or disagreeing with--the words as you have read them or the words as you now understand them? Suppose Proposition 1 were expressed in a foreign language with words you could pronounce but did not understand. Would you agree or disagree? If you are still puzzled, here is how I arrived at Proposition1. When I read or listen to someone speaking, I am aware (sometimes) that I do not and cannot know what message or messages the words are intended to convey. I am aware (sometimes) that I do not know the feelings, expectations, motives, or attitudes represented by the words. So I make some guesses (without necessarily being aware that I am doing this). I arrive at some understanding based on my past experiences as well as my present beliefs and expectations. (This takes place at non-self- conscious levels.) My agreement or disagreement expresses my evaluation of my understanding. (This I am sometimes aware of.) If you disagree with the communication processes as outlined above (as you understand from the words), consider this: How comfortable would you be if you knew that anyone could read your mind" and know exactly what you were thinking or feeling? It certainly would be a different kind of world,"don't you think?" Taking Responsibility If we could read each other's minds directly and completely, our human worlds would probably be healthier places. But as this is not the case,we'll have to do the best with what we have. As far as we know, our communication processes necessarily involve interpretations. Based on our interpretations, we arrive at meanings. Our meanings are expressed through our feelings, attitudes, prejudices, beliefs, values, etc. The kind of society we help to create and support, our relationships, our social institutions, and so on, all depend on our attitudes, beliefs, values, and the like. We are not animals. We do not live our lives entirely according to instinctive urges. Our societies are based on interpretations and meanings. We have some measure of control over the ways we interpret things. With a certain degree of alertness,we can recognize and, if necessary, review, modify, and change our interpretations. We are self-reflexive beings. We have the abilities to correct and improve our interpretations toward probable higher "truth"values. It is easy for us to blame the politicians, the system, the corporations, the media--anyone but ourselves--for our social and other problems. We don't usually acknowledge the parts we play--how we, through the meanings we give, contribute to the problems we complain about. We could put much more effort into improving our thinking toward becoming more critical thinkers and interpreters. Applying such general-semantics principles as non-identity and non-allness could help us a great deal to improve our thinking about our thinking. We need to ask "our-selves" more often the question,"How do I know that what I believe is so?" For our own well-being, we need to remind "our-selves" more often that there are intrinsicdifferences between what we believe and what is going on. Reprinted from the Spring and Fall 1991 issues of ETC: A Review of GeneralSemantics. With permission. Permission is hereby granted to share electronic and hard copy versions of this text with individuals under circumstances in which no direct payment is made by those to whom the text is given for the text itself, the volume or other medium or online service in which it is included, tuition or other payment for the course or seminar, and so forth. This notice must remain a part of the text. Any other use is reserved to the author and requires prior permission. For further information, e-mail the "mailto:institute@general-semantics.org"Institute/a or write: The Institute of General Semantics, 163 Engle Street, #4B, Englewood, NJ 07631, USA. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:57:33 +1000 From: "Michelle Donald" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <199610170302.NAA04415@mail.zip.com.au> > At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: Hi Doss... > You have again highlighted the issue of computers and Theosophy and > TS. Computers and Internet (especially latter) are the most cost effective > tools in todays world of communications. The track record of the last couple > of years is that the administration is either ignorant of computers and > Internet or have problems reorienting their thinking. Thousands of organizations world wide DONT have Internet email for their staff. In fact I think you would find that TSA is well positioned in this regard compared to the average company. I have been emailing with Ruben at Olcott for some time. So it does exist for the computer department - which is the sensible way to start adding this service within an organization. Setting up internet access for an internal/private network such as those already existing in companies/ organizations including TSA is not an easy task and requires funding. I fear that your conclusions appear to be coloured by your other dealings with the administration. > For example theos-xxxx which has been, for the past two years, is available > for free for anyone on the Internet (even on BBSs which have e-mail access > to Internet). Not all BBS's with email access have mailinglist access via the gateways, so for many this is not an optioon (due to volume restrictions). Thanks to the foresight and enterprise of John E Mead in > setting them up and keeping them totally unmoderated (mostly he is seen no > where for months!). Yes many thanks to John. > this. Even members of TSA (including myself who is no novice in computers) > have a great difficulty in finding out about the theos-xxxx. How many times > have these lists been mentioned in either AT or Quest? May be the At least 3 times to my knowledge. I have been getting the AT for some years and that is where I found out about this list. It is a common complaint that members "have a great difficulty in finding out about"..... but it is usually a case of them not having read that particular part of the newsletter. But it is easier to attack the administration than it is ones own limitations. Sorry to seem a bit harsh in this message ...doss, but I am getting tired of the TSA bashing. This is a list to discuss the roots of TSY not a place to rehash the never ending complaints about TSA. > As no one is here privy to what TSA is planning to do with the use > of Internet to reach the public and spread Theosophy, we can only wait and Have you asked the computer people - such as Ruben??? Usually the reason members dont feel they know is those doing the work are so overworked they dont have enough time to let us know what they are doing. The conspiracy concept is a glamour/maya so easily applied when one forgets that "they" are humans like the rest of us. > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical > >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than > >letting it die out. Hi Ann and others I wonder if the problem is that the society needs to go through a natural cycle of "death" but it is being kept on some form of "life-support" which is not is keeping with the natural cycle?? I dont necessarily believe this but find that most of us want to keep things doing "well" or in the best condition with the high number of members etc, when from the very teaching we study/believe, the natural process of ups and downs, life and death, good and bad,means there will be an end to the structure and form created. BFN OOROO Michelle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - michelle@zip.com.au Happiness is a Digital PentiumPro 200 - well when it arrives. Many thanks to the Digital/Intel Fairy Godmother. :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:28:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: Hi Michelle: Your comments are welcome. What I posted is the view from the USA which may be different from that from Australia and I can understand that. As regards access to Internet, due to heavy competition, it costs in my town only $10.00 a month for unlimited use of full internet access - FTP, Newsgroups, Netscape or any other browser. Also e-mail access thru BBSs in the USA is much cheaper. So this is the medium of very effective communication at least here. Let us all hope that TSA will effectively and efficiently use Internet to get Theosophy to the outside world. Time only will tell how well it succeeds in doing so. ______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Michelle Donald wrote: > > At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: > > Hi Doss... > > > You have again highlighted the issue of computers and Theosophy and > > TS. Computers and Internet (especially latter) are the most cost effective > > tools in todays world of communications. The track record of the last couple > > of years is that the administration is either ignorant of computers and > > Internet or have problems reorienting their thinking. > > Thousands of organizations world wide DONT have Internet email for > their staff. In fact I think you would find that TSA is well positioned in > this regard compared to the average company. > > I have been emailing with Ruben at Olcott for some time. So it does > exist for the computer department - which is the sensible way to > start adding this service within an organization. > > Setting up internet access for an internal/private network such as > those already existing in companies/ organizations including TSA is > not an easy task and requires funding. I fear that your conclusions > appear to be coloured by your other dealings with the administration. > > > For example theos-xxxx which has been, for the past two years, is available > > for free for anyone on the Internet (even on BBSs which have e-mail access > > to Internet). > > Not all BBS's with email access have mailinglist access via the > gateways, so for many this is not an optioon (due to volume > restrictions). > > Thanks to the foresight and enterprise of John E Mead in > > setting them up and keeping them totally unmoderated (mostly he is seen no > > where for months!). > > Yes many thanks to John. > > > this. Even members of TSA (including myself who is no novice in computers) > > have a great difficulty in finding out about the theos-xxxx. How many times > > have these lists been mentioned in either AT or Quest? May be the > > At least 3 times to my knowledge. I have been getting the AT for some > years and that is where I found out about this list. It is a common > complaint that members "have a great difficulty in finding out > about"..... but it is usually a case of them not having read that > particular part of the newsletter. But it is easier to attack the > administration than it is ones own limitations. > > Sorry to seem a bit harsh in this message ...doss, but I am getting > tired of the TSA bashing. This is a list to discuss the roots of TSY > not a place to rehash the never ending complaints about TSA. > > > As no one is here privy to what TSA is planning to do with the use > > of Internet to reach the public and spread Theosophy, we can only wait and > > Have you asked the computer people - such as Ruben??? Usually the > reason members dont feel they know is those doing the work are so > overworked they dont have enough time to let us know what they are > doing. The conspiracy concept is a glamour/maya so easily applied > when one forgets that "they" are humans like the rest of us. > > > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical > > >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than > > >letting it die out. > > Hi Ann and others > > I wonder if the problem is that the society needs to go through a > natural cycle of "death" but it is being kept on some form of > "life-support" which is not is keeping with the natural cycle?? > > I dont necessarily believe this but find that most of us want to keep > things doing "well" or in the best condition with the high number of > members etc, when from the very teaching we study/believe, the > natural process of ups and downs, life and death, good and bad,means > there will be an end to the structure and form created. > BFN > OOROO > Michelle > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > michelle@zip.com.au > Happiness is a Digital PentiumPro 200 - well when it arrives. > Many thanks to the Digital/Intel Fairy Godmother. :-) > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:47:26 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Michelle Donald wrote: > > At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: > Setting up internet access for an internal/private network such as > those already existing in companies/ organizations including TSA is > not an easy task and requires funding. I fear that your conclusions > appear to be coloured by your other dealings with the administration. Dear Michelle: As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. As far as I have seen, I have not seen a single communication on e-mail from any of the elected officers either residing in Olcott or rest of them who are mostly spread around the country. Early this year I suggested that all the officers be provided e-mail access so that they can use it very effectively. In this day when even some homeless persons in the USA having their own home pages, such access should be doable. When I wrote the msg, I was not anticipating any expensive intranet with all the bells and whistles - just a simple communication tool. Any let us see what future is in store. Thanks for your comments and input on the subject. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:25:10 -0700 From: martinle@lainet.com (Martin Leiderman) Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: Dear brother MK Ramadoss, and others Please do not be so hard in the TSA. I work in a billion $$$ corporation that is just starting to get into the internet even though some of us are in there enjoying the benefits of research and sharing of information. But the 96 Summer School and Annual Convention at Olcott, John Algeo devoted plenty time to the roll of the TSA and the internet. Ruben scheduled tours to the server and explain and let people surf the internet as well as some education. Last year we had Don given a presentation during the Summer School. And during his talk at Krotona he mentioned the future of TSA in the Internet. The internet is always in his mind, the question, I think is always money, resources, etc. So, maybe a bit slow in our standards, but for the average member and user maybe just ok the pace. I think our energies should be devoted to enrich the electronic archives with articles, scanning old books, lectures pamphlets, pictures, etc., so when they are ready to do it in big scale they have it in storage. We must at all times be constructive in our thinking, not complaining but working ceaselessly for the cause of Universal Fraternity, and even if we want to complain should come out with more work. After all who is going to do the work if is not us, who has some awareness? Lastly the TSA is not important, I am a THEOSOPHIST even if the TSA ceases to exist, which means I do not need an organization to be a Theosophist. Therefore I do not expect the TSA to solve my problems and expectation, but I see myself as a resource to them any way they want me, even if they do not want me, I have plenty work to do as a theosophist in my community -giving lectures, classes, forming study groups in neibourhood where there is no theosophy, and so on. Please let me know if any one in this list does not know how and what to be a Theosophist in a community a have plenty ideas, and can even travel to their Lodge or Study Group to give some leadership awareness. There is plenty to do, but let everybody be themselves in their our pace. Martin Leiderman at your service in Los Angeles Peace and Harmony to all From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:40:45 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Intel(ligence)? Message-ID: In message <199610170302.NAA04415@mail.zip.com.au>, Michelle Donald writes >Happiness is a Digital PentiumPro 200 - well when it arrives. >Many thanks to the Digital/Intel Fairy Godmother. :-) Nice try or successful attempt? Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:47:40 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Electronic archives Message-ID: In message , Martin Leiderman writes >I think our energies should be devoted to enrich the electronic archives >with articles, scanning old books, lectures pamphlets, pictures, etc., so >when they are ready to do it in big scale they have it in storage. There is still some space left for this in the TI pages and directories via the URL below. Contributions welcome. While I think of it, I shall be compressing some of my own material which is currently prominent on this URL in order to make more space available for the kind of work(s) you mention, so anyone who want my own articles in simple form (as they are at present) should download them soon. Are any of the list subscribers MAC users, and if so, do you have a means of unarchiving PC zip files? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:17:27 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <3266E8B7.64D@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Michelle Donald wrote: > > > > At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: > > Setting up internet access for an internal/private network such as > > those already existing in companies/ organizations including TSA is > > not an easy task and requires funding. I fear that your conclusions > > appear to be coloured by your other dealings with the administration. > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. As far as I have seen, > I have not seen a single communication on e-mail from any of the elected > officers either residing in Olcott or rest of them who are mostly spread > around the country. Write to me at nyts@dorsai.org, and I'll get you John Algeo's address. Ruben Cabigting is ruben@netcom.com, but he is the main reader of theos@netcom.com. National now has a full-time connection (using a Windows NT Server....yeccchhhh!). In any case, I am helping out on just what you describe, and am planning a presentation for the Annual Meeting to see if we can get more Lodges on the Net. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 21:45:44 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are who? Message-ID: <199610170145.VAA14127@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >In message <199610160307.XAA27311@envirolink.org>, John Straughn > writes >>>Just to be the naughty person that I am - why not have she, her, woman or >>>women as a generic and all-inclusive term? >>If it had always been generally accepted, I would say, yes, go ahead and >>use those terms. But Ann, don't get me wrong, I know where you are coming >>from. But the facts are that when those terms were implemented, women WERE >>NOT equals. They were, but they were not seen as so. But even so, those >>terms were used in the past and this is the present. And here, in the >>present, we now accept these terms as generic and all-inclusive in the >>racial, religious, and sexual sense. > >No "WE" don't. Count me out - and a great many other people. Certainly >45 members of Theosophy International, one of whom provides this list >for us all to use. > >Alan Ok, Alan, I'll make sure to check you off on my list...:) --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:14:41 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <961016221441_128590806@emout06.mail.aol.com> Have you noticed that I'm staying out of this one. But may I remind you all that the moment one creates a sacred cow, that is invitation for someone else to come along with his poleaxe and turn it into holy hamburger. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 22:15:47 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Seven Doors to Love - Open the closet - Let out those demons Message-ID: <961016221545_128591605@emout08.mail.aol.com> Keith, Show me someone who claims to be nonsexual and I will show you someone who is either a liar or nuts. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 22:09:58 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: *Some* of us are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: <199610170209.WAA23570@envirolink.org> >>>I know of one local woman who quite the TS completely *because* she did >>>not want to be described as one of a "brotherhood" and a large number of >>>others who would not even look at theosophical literature because of >>>what they perceive as *sexist* language. >>And this kind of offense is caused by a revolt of the ego. >You do not know this woman, and are not qualified to state such a thing. >I do know her (still) and she was offended all the way through. Please tell me how this kind of offense is not related purely to distaste brought solely by the ego. (*_*=reworded) *If you teach people* >>that the truth lies in appeasing the ego *in this manner*, you are leading >>them further and further away from the truth. I can see how that was misconstrued as an attack on you. Please accept my apology. >I teach no such thing. How dare you say so. >> People are becoming more and more offended >>because in these modern times, it is becoming more and more important to be >>"recognized". >What is wrong with being recognised? Should I start ignoring you? I am >tempted .... :-) Ignoring me would be your choice. And I would not argue with you and make a social issue about your choice. I do not pursue recognition in these posts, that is not my goal. >>>In some places, it could be said, Theosophy sucks. >> >>Yes, and these places, I assure you, are not the higher ones. > >Wow, you must be a REALLY high up important man who knows more than the >rest of us! No, *chuckle*, I am not important. But at the same time I am. In the same way that you are not important, but equally are. If you do not think I am important, then to you I would not be. And I do not wish to change your mind. If someone else were to think I was important, I would attempt to make myself unimportant through humility, and by showing them how they are in sat my equal. I wish to be equal with all humanity, but not equally egotistical. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 22:15:01 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all in real deep .... Message-ID: <199610170215.WAA27884@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >In message <199610160225.WAA09587@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" > writes >>Oh, think of it! An entire LCC service with nothing but feminine >>references. > >Attendance = 1 observer? Make that two, I would be interested in seeing the reactions. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 22:18:09 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610170218.WAA29986@envirolink.org> >Cool it. My husband sometimes reads this list. : - ) Ah, jealousy of love, another wonderful inhibitor...:) --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed Oct 16 22:51:54 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: <199610170251.WAA15173@envirolink.org> >>>It does now. That's why there is discussion (?) and debate (?). >> >>It does now. Who decided that the meanings should be changed? The general >>populous who rely on their egos for satisfaction? They must be right. > >By which you appear to mean that they are wrong. You don't have an ego? >Your posts suggest that you very much DO! Having an ego and relying upon it's appeasement for satisfaction are two very different things. I have an ego, yes, for I am human. But do I get satisfaction out of strengthening it? No. And neither do I enjoy watching humanity do the same. >The consensus opinion or large >numbers of human beings doesn't mean anything? People change language >all the time, and do you know, they are most likely never to have heard >of theosophy, nor care if it exists or not. Millions live and die >without us. The KJV of the Bible says "Suffer the little children to >come unto me." In the 17th century "suffer" meant "allow" - now it >means to experience the bad. In England now we use more American idioms >than ever before, and much of our own cultural language heritage is >fading away. It's part of history, of change. "Let" used to mean >"stop" - now it means the opposite. Ok, in a previous post I mentioned that because people have changed the meanings of words over the years, ancient wisdom has been lost. I will admit that changing a word in order to be better understood by humanity is a very intelligent thing to do as long as there is sufficient proof that the word you are replacing is truly congruent in meaning to the new word. The issue at hand is not so much the replacement of one word with another (i.e. he = one, or a person), but the reasoning behind the transfer. If you are changing the word because you think it is more accurately described by a modern term...so be it, change the word if you must. But that is not the case, and that is not what I am arguing about. You (and not you specifically, "you" meaning those who have stated that they wish to change the words on the following grounds) wish to change the words because you, among and /or in sympathy with others, feel offended in a sexually discriminative manner. This is undeniably an offence to the ego and the ego only. Therefore, by changing the words because of the latter reason, you are giving in to and giving strength to your ego, thereby weakening your attraction to the atman. >We are moving into the 21st century. Many of the ideas of the 19th have >gone, and many need updating. Can you imagine anyone talking like the >characters in Dickens, Jane Austen, Thomas Hardy, or Wm. Shakespeare in >today's world? If someone spoke to me in Chaucer's English, I wouldn't >understand what was being said. And, BTW, this post is entirely in >gender-inclusive language. >> >Alan --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:34:54 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In message <199610161852.OAA23929@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" > writes > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical > >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than > >letting it die out. > > Not such a final thought, surely, Ann? It seems to me that while you > are properly addressing the larger issue of which gender language is but > a part, there is much work to do, especially in keeping the issue(s) to > the fore. The TSA web page (for example) ackowledges little else except > its own activites, and is well covered in $ signs. All the Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Even the Krishnamurti Foundation in its web page has a linkage to listening-l. I had sent in a write up on theos-xxxx to Quest Magazine published by TSA and I am yet to see it published. It seems that everything turns aroud $s. MK Ramdoss > contributions that we TI folk make come free, and usually at the > contributors' expense. > > That, I believe, is the future. We are going to have to work hard for > it though ... yes? > > Alan > --------- > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:56:06 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: *Some* of us are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > equal. I wish to be equal with all humanity, but not equally egotistical. I like your statement. Some time ago I read about an incident in which a world famous philosopher was having a discussion with a small group of individuals. He went around each one of them and asked them to tell what they are. One said he is a teacher, another a doctor, third a lawyer and so on. When the round was over, the philosopher said that all of them are wrong. He said each one of them is first and foremost a human being and then only what they did for a living. I made a great impression on me. As a practical matter when someone introduces me identifying me with my profession, I tend to correct them say that I am that professional only when I am functioning in that role and at all other times I am just a human being like everone else. This point of view has made it easier to communicate with all my fellow human beings. Thought I should share this with everybody here. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu Oct 17 02:20:03 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <199610170620.CAA27360@envirolink.org> Drpsionic@aol.com writes: >Have you noticed that I'm staying out of this one. >But may I remind you all that the moment one creates a sacred cow, that is >invitation for someone else to come along with his poleaxe and turn it into >holy hamburger. > >Chuck the Heretic "Eat my burger, for it is my flesh...and drink my milk for it is my blood. And OBEY ...the COW ....GOOOOD." --Green Jello :) --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:01:36 -0700 From: Mika Perala Subject: He and she - again Message-ID: <32666670.77A6@dlc.fi> Hi! You may be interested to know that in finnish language there is no "he" or "she". There is only "han"" "a" should be scandinavian leteer " a with two dots on it" pronounced as "hat"). All male and female are just "han". This fact has not prevented the discrimination ot the other sex, of course, though women do well here compared to many other countries. I could even say most of the other countries. Still, Mrs. Uosukainen, who at this moment helds the second most important "job" after president is called "the spokesman of parliament". :) I still think that the way we use words has an affect in our behaviour. Changes don`t come overnight though. BTW, some people here(in Finland) are annoyed because of the fact that our minister of defence is a woman who has never had any militar education. But after the WWII our minister of defence was a pacifist and a _theosophist_ Yrjo Kallinen!! Mika TI member (male) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:32:12 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all in real deep .... Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09610@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > Dr. A.M.Bain writes: > >>Oh, think of it! An entire LCC service with nothing but feminine > >>references. > > > >Attendance = 1 observer? > > Make that two, I would be interested in seeing the reactions. They would quite violent, for sure. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:48:45 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09625@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: ramadoss@eden.com > One of the very practical issues that has been discussed and > addressed in the Lodges is that of closed vs open meetings. During the time > I spent in India, I have *never* seen *any* lodge having a meeting closed > only to members. *All* meetings are open to anyone. But you will find that > there are lodges in this country that have predominantly closed meetings. I was not aware of this situation. When I was a member of the Akbar Lodge in Chicago, I don't remember any of the meetings being closed, except for meditation time. Several people came from a great distance and the door had to be kept open in case they came late. Thanks for the information. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:38:48 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09618@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: We are all equals > Date: Wednesday, October 16, 1996 11:39 PM > > >Cool it. My husband sometimes reads this list. : - ) > > Ah, jealousy of love, another wonderful inhibitor...:) Uh . . . inhibitor of what? Rust? Lust? Or dust? BTW, I've gotten the impression that your spiritual path is decidely Eastern/Yogic and that there is a great emphasis on eliminating or lessening the ego. Could you elaborate on this? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:03:00 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09636@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > what I am arguing about. You (and not you specifically, "you" meaning those > who have stated that they wish to change the words on the following grounds) > wish to change the words because you, among and /or in sympathy with others, > feel offended in a sexually discriminative manner. This is undeniably an > offence to the ego and the ego only. Therefore, by changing the words because > of the latter reason, you are giving in to and giving strength to your ego, > thereby weakening your attraction to the atman. And you are pronouncing big-time judgement on the rest of us. Is that not ego? I would say there are some very strong egos on this list. It has taken them a long time to get where they are and as a result they are very independent-minded Theosophists. Having reached that point, probably most of them have surrendered their egos, in some measure, to the Higher Self and are using those egos for humanity. Behind the ego mask, they have decided to form this list and as a united international group, discuss matters that might help TS survive. Can you show how the removal of ego and attraction to the atman is going to help us in the modernization and updating of TS around the world? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:21:12 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09592@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Have you noticed that I'm staying out of this one. > But may I remind you all that the moment one creates a sacred cow, that is > invitation for someone else to come along with his poleaxe and turn it into > holy hamburger. Or pork chops. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:26:43 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <199610171304.JAA09602@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Dr. A.M.Bain > Not such a final thought, surely, Ann? It seems to me that while you > are properly addressing the larger issue of which gender language is but > a part, there is much work to do, especially in keeping the issue(s) to > the fore. The TSA web page (for example) ackowledges little else except > its own activites, and is well covered in $ signs. All the > contributions that we TI folk make come free, and usually at the > contributors' expense. > > That, I believe, is the future. We are going to have to work hard for > it though ... yes? I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There are home pages out there that are better designed. I may sound as critical as Chuckie the Babe here, but that's my opinion. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:15:54 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that > makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There Imagine some of the older folks who may have eye problems trying to read the tiny type. .mkramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:48:02 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: worshipping some superman Message-ID: <199610171456.KAA23830@ultra1.dreamscape.com> I guess I'm a pantheist. The only thing I feel is worthy of being worshipped by me is whatever figured out that a nose would look good in the middle of my face, and that is used to inhale air .... etc. etc. But I see whatever- figured -out -about -my -nose in every cloud & tree & sometimes, when I'm in a good mood, in every human being. I call it god, bowing to the conventional nomenclature. That way, other people have an idea of what I'm talking about. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:19:51 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: sexism spells & other stuff Message-ID: <199610171528.LAA26660@ultra1.dreamscape.com> John Straughn wrote > But I am not going to waste my time going back and making sure >that every time I write something, I'm not offending someone who has an >overactive ego. Dear John, I agree with you. If you had to think of offending someone with everything you say & write, yu'd probably say & write very little. That may be to the point, you think, for some of us, but it's not the purpose of the internet. At the risk of putting my foot in it, "White Brotherhood" is offensive, in a way, to African Americans, aka black people, & etc. They object to it, because in our way of thinking everything that's white is thought of as being good &/or beautiful, while everything that's black is thought of as being evil &/or ugly. That's why a number of years ago young African Americans bought bumper stickers that said "black is beautiful". At this same time hair relaxers really came into their own, and African American women invented all sorts of new hair do's for themselves, while the men sported the newly invented "naturals". Now go ahead & tell me that you don't think of "White Brotherhood" as radiating a holy white light. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 11:46:43 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: alt.theosophy Message-ID: <199610171647.MAA26571@cliff.cris.com> Hi folks, I just subscribed to alt.theosophy and there is grand total of one message in it. Can someone tell me anything about this group and who started or maintains it? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 11:49:58 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <199610171650.MAA27772@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: m.k. ramadoss > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > > think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that > > makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There > > Imagine some of the older folks who may have eye problems trying > to read the tiny type. > Or some not-so-old folks who's vision isn't 20/20, like my husband who is legally blind. They'd probably just give up. The only way around this that I've found is to adjust the size of the type in Netscape. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:00:16 -0800 From: Art House Subject: We are all in this together... oh so true! Message-ID: <3266AC62.7C8B@earthlink.net> An observation regarding the Internet: >From a theosophical perpective, in general, can it not be taken as a growing manifestation of group or planetary consciousness (parts and whole), including hopefully, forms of content that contain energies from our higher triads and the monad (the duty of those who can make a contact?) But what most frequntly seems to appear, at large, are forms of content that contain energies from the personality with all its attendant struggles and concerns. Necessary for certain, but wise to discriminate. The network of humanity (on and off-line): Occasional glimpses of the most wonderful light (within and without) The community's kama-manasic belt (trudging on to become fully human) Large part astral sewer (desire on two legs) (re:the duty of those who can make a contact.) In aspiration and hope, Mark From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:28:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Theosophy and race Message-ID: More food for thought for those who concern themselves with racial issues: AUTHOR: Maharidge, Dale TITLE: The coming white minority: California and America's immigration debate IMPRINT INFO: New York : Times Books, 1996 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:05:31 +0100 From: Kim Poulsen Subject: RE: Christmas Humphreys Message-ID: <01BBBC84.2A081BA0@ppp178.dk-online.dk> JHE >Humphreys (that's the correct spelling everybody) drifted away >from Theosophical Society as it moved more an more towards >becoming a cult dedicated to the worship of Krishnamurti. He was >one of the trustees of the Mahatma Letter Trust and remained >close to Theosophy as it was, but not as it became. I would be >interested in knowing exactly what year the Buddhist Society >became independent. Sorry for the delay, I had to dig into my files. The Buddhist Lodge was founded in 1924 by Christmas Humphreys and Aileen Faulkner (his future wife). It became independent as early as 1926. People that knew him said that he remained an active theosophist to his death. An interesting point. I discussed this with a Nyingma buddhist, who did not have a too high opinion of theosophy. He belonged to a red-cap line and found it hard to digest one of HPB's favorite expressions :-) Attachment Converted: "C:\TEMP\WINMAIL1.DAT" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 19:12:48 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <961017191248_129047273@emout08.mail.aol.com> Oink! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:09:42 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: We are who. Message-ID: In message <199610170145.VAA14127@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >Ok, Alan, I'll make sure to check you off on my list...:) Good idea. I shall reciprocate! Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:32:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: <4MvYAiAXIsZyEw+w@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610171304.JAA09636@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Can you show how the removal of ego and attraction to the atman is going to >help us in the modernization and updating of TS around the world? OUCH! Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:35:01 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <7sTYIlAlKsZyEw9f@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610171304.JAA09602@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >speaking of the TSA web page, they spent >somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I >think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that >makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There >are home pages out there that are better designed. I have seen a nice one with an animated cartoon Sylvester the cat throwing a custard pie .... [mischievous thoughts entering left ...] Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:42:09 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: alt.theosophy Message-ID: In message <199610171647.MAA26571@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Hi folks, > >I just subscribed to alt.theosophy and there is grand total of one message >in it. Can someone tell me anything about this group and who started or >maintains it? > >-Ann E. Bermingham Chuck and Alexis, with help, but basically Chuck. It maintains itself somehow I think. The irony seems to be that Chucky babe can't access it. I stopped taking it. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:37:03 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: some super it Message-ID: <+MNZgqAfMsZyEw$K@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610171456.KAA23830@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes > I guess I'm a pantheist. The only thing I feel is worthy of being >worshipped by me is whatever figured out that a nose would look good in the >middle of my face, and that is used to inhale air .... etc. etc. But I see >whatever- figured -out -about -my -nose in every cloud & tree & sometimes, >when I'm in a good mood, in every human being. I call it god, bowing to the >conventional nomenclature. That way, other people have an idea of what I'm >talking about. > I actually believe this may have been humanity's first conception of "God." It fits the evidence! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:27:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: *Some* of us are all in this together - like it or not Message-ID: <8MgZwdArDsZyEweF@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes > As a practical matter when someone introduces me identifying me >with my profession, I tend to correct them say that I am that >professional only when I am functioning in that role and at all other >times I am just a human being like everone else. Some years ago, I was heading an active esoteric group. I later move to another part of England, where I worked on the local buses. One day a passenger got on my bus who had belonged to the group. When he saw who was giving him his bus ticket, he just didn't know which way to look, turn or whatever! Later we fell about laughing at this very practical lesson in personal values! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:23:22 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TSA on the web Message-ID: In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is >no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because >theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Maybe. I don't know who could answer that one! There is no mention of TI either, though the TI links eventually lead one to the TSA page, for they *do* offer a service to theosophical students that is going to take a long time to get itself on the internet sites. So some of the $$ are justified, so that interested parties can buy theosophical literature, if nothing else. And of course, for USA members at large, there is the library service. Pity they don't acknowledge "us" though (theos-xxxx and TI). On the web page, that is. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:18:09 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Definitions Message-ID: In message <199610170251.WAA15173@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >You (and not you specifically, "you" meaning those >who have stated that they wish to change the words on the following grounds) >wish to change the words because you, among and /or in sympathy with others, >feel offended in a sexually discriminative manner. This is undeniably an >offence to the ego and the ego only. Therefore, by changing the words because >of the latter reason, you are giving in to and giving strength to your ego, >thereby weakening your attraction to the atman. It is undeniably what it says it is. *People* (not just "egos" - a term undefined by you) offended, not just parts of them. You seem to be following a doctrinal position in your posts on this, but without stating what that position is, or defining your terms. The very word "Ego" is used in several ways by different schools of thought. Some might even be equated (by the users) with what you might call "atman." This is yet another language problem! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:41:59 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <3266E067.57E0@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > This is an issue which was discussed here before. There were > allegations of someone misappropriating the TS Lodge money and properties. Strange. I don't recall using the word "misappropriation", or any synonym for that word. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 01:36:32 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: Politically Correct Theosophy? Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961017131448.0067d300@mail.deltanet.com> Bart: [writing to Alan Bain] > I worked hard making the by-laws of the New York Lodge gender > non-specific. Correct is when you make language non-gender > specific. That is simply correct. What is NOT correct is when a > man/woman does so in such an awkward manner/womanner that he/she > seems to be throwing the change into your/your face. You're making an important point here. When language implies that women are somehow less capable or less deserving, it should be improved upon. But we shouldn't be arbitrary and capricious in picking terms that do not convey bias, training ourselves to get angry over them ("raising our awareness?"), then denouncing people that continue to use them. The term "one of the guys" is, for instance, inclusive of women, but because there's "guys" and "gals", someone may pick this term as a symbol of oppression and decide to do away with it in public speech. When we're reviewing terms for bias, we need, I think, to consider if the term primarily deals with men versus woman as classes of people, or if it deals with masculine and feminine qualities. Terms that denote women in an inferior role should be eliminiated, like "woman driver", "It's a man's world", "workman", etc. But terms that denote masculine or feminine qualities -- qualities which can be shared by people regardless of physical plumming -- are perfectly fine. Some terms like "brotherhood" I see as falling in this second class. The term does not mean, as I see it, "a men's club, a place where women are not invited because they can't make the grade." It rather means a sangha or mutual support of a positive, masculine, forthright, creative nature. The term certainly can be targeted to mean whatever someone wants it to, and it could be setup as a strawman in order to be shot down for someone's political agenda. But apart from such attacks, I see the term as a poetic way of expressing an association and bonding of a spiritual, creative, masculine nature. (Fortunately, so far, "fatherhood" and "motherhood" haven't also come under attack, as implying that only men or women or capable of certain kinds of parenting.) Terms that express masculine or feminine qualities are perfectly fine, as long as they don't imply that only men or only women can enjoy those qualities. And this works both ways. A term that implies that only a man can succeed in business is just as bad as one that implies that only a woman has intuition or some special perceptiveness. > Multiculturalism is another movement where Gresham's Law is in > full effect. It started out as an "E Pluribus Unum" type of > movement, recognizing the many that created the one. But too > many have been using multiculturalism as a divisive force, a > force to push people apart rather than to bring them together. It may originally have been conceived to foster mutual respect between people of different customs. But it seems to have devolved into the creation of artificial ethnic groups, with contrived customs based upon anscestor worship. I don't think that someone can say that they have a "cultural heritage" based upon one's greatgrandfather having been a slave in America, or several dozen generations earlier, someone else's ancestor having been a Greek slave in Rome. In order to make inner progress, we need, I think, to free ourselves of the biases and prejudices of the culture we find ourselves in. This includes not only the affects of long-standing traditions upon us. It also includes the changes that would be externally imposed upon us by "social engineers" of various political persuasions, each attempting to change people according to their own standards. Everytime someone attempts a makeover of us, changing our thoughts, feelings, language, and behavior according to *their* model of how things should be, we're faced with yet one more obstacle to our hastened evolution and to our moving beyond the status quo. (Except, of course, if we have associated with them, and they hold a mentor, tutor, teacher, guru role in our lives.) Granted, if we go into a certain cultural context, we have to temper our self-expression accordingly. Like a woman in western dress might be ill-received in some middle eastern countries. Or looking someone in the eyes in Japan might be considered aggressiveness, rather than being open and honest. But we are putting on different "masks" appropriate to each situation. What is important is that we use the keys given us by Theosophy to explore the deeper meanings of things, even if we often find ourselves having to keep our mouths shut, remaining silent about things that would simply be misunderstood. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:46:42 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <3266E182.1AAF@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > At 09:33 PM 10/15/96 -0400, Bart wrote: > >Sy Ginsburg wrote: > >> I am silent about T.S.A. and Adyar because the > >> expulsion of Denmark by Adyar and the expulsion of Boston by TSA, both > >> apparently for putting to much emphasis on the study of the Alice Bailey > >> teachings, raises questions for me. > > > > I am not familiar with the expulsion of Denmark. > > > When actions are taken in world over, it is very rare that members > outside the affected country knew anything because there is no easy way to > communicate between countries and so it is easy to keep them secret from > rest of the world. Speaking of which, do you (or does anybody else here) have any idea what the business with Pedro in Adyar was? What was the mysterious bylaw that Radha used? Did Pedro leave, or was he tossed? If so, then why? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:51:26 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <3266E29E.4F07@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > At 09:33 PM 10/15/96 -0400, Bart wrote: > > > > In terms of your complaints about the new bylaws of the TSA, I see > >mainly one problem, which I have vociferously maintained should be fixed > >at the earliest possible opportunity. It is now currently easier for the > >National Board to dissolve a Lodge than it is for them to expel a > >member. My recommendation is to require unaminty minus one for the TSA > >to dissolve a Lodge. Otherwise, the risk/benefit ratio is too badly > >skewed. > > Most of us see this and other fundamental problems with the present > bylaws. All the building blocks are in place to shut down all the lodges and > transfer all the assets to the Trust and once this is done, no one has to > answer to any one. While this may not happen with the present set of > officers, all it needs is a strong narrow minded fundamentalist President > with a set of meek board members to do it. It would be perfectly legal to do > it and with the multi-million dollars in the treasury, the board will have > the wherewithall to pursue any long drawnout expensive legal challenge. Not precisely. The funds must be used in the area. To do a mass takeover, it would require having flunky boards of directors ready in all the lodges taken over (well, New York, Miami, Seattle, and a couple of others, to be more precise). Not to say that the situation is not bad, it is just a different, but equally, bad situation from what you describe. > It took the Attorney General of California along with a group of friends of > Krishnaji to sue the Trustees of Krishnamurti Trusts. If this could happen > to someone like Krishnaji when he was alive and active, just imagine what > could happen to TSA's assets when (former) members may have no voice or > basis or money to litigate. The added irony in Krishnaji case was the > Trustees in turn had the unique honor of suing Krishnaji and his friends. > Some of the Trustees of the Krishnaji Trusts who were sued were members of > TS and at least one of them was (later on) an elected/appointed official of TSA. > > Thought the above information might interest someone. It does. Thanks for the info. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:59:34 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Expulsion Message-ID: <3266E486.2C27@sprynet.com> Sy Ginsburg wrote: > > The saga of the Boston Lodge is getting to be an old issue, but I do not see how > it can go away until the officers and directors of TSA address the problem, > redress whatever wrongs occurred and attempt to bring the Boston Lodge back into > the fold. I know of no such efforts at the present time. Actually, the REAL problem is, from what I have seen, endemic in the TSA (as well as many other organizations). Given the choice of actions, inaction is frequently the result. One major problem with that is that when there is a conflict with competent people an incompetent people, the competent people, disgusted at the lack of action, frequently end up going away, leaving the incompetent behind. It is up to the competent people (and I AM including you) who have more patience to try and move things in another direction, and to see that problems get fixed rather than ignored. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:07:49 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <3266E675.72BF@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral > language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the > modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material > presented to the public. I agree. The key to making it work is to take the extra effort to make the language clean rather than awkward. I removed all the gender-specific language from the by-laws of the New York Theosophical Society, and did it cleanly enough that nobody noticed it. Instead of say, substituting "Our father who art in heaven" with "Our father/mother who is in heaven", how about "Our parent who is in heaven"? Going to Theosophy, certainly replacing "Man" with "Humanity" will go a long way. And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 21:44:05 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <3266E0E5.77CB@sprynet.com> JRC wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > Hey, if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth wants to force > > lies down the throats of the rest of us, that's their privilege. But I > > reserve the right to point out their unequivocal equivocation (have fun > > with your dictionary!). > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > By all means do ... but so far all we've seen from you is a completely > unsupported normative statement that appears to represent little other > than a completely crystallized piece of childish defensiveness hatched by > a mind with absolutely no openness to any idea other than the one he's > concluded is the only correct one. We've had many a soul come on to this > list, sit on a throne, and speak to it as though they know the truth - not > speaking to equals with the intent to persuade, but as down to children > .. ooooohhhhhh are you gonna be *fun* to play with. In other words, if logic doesn't work, call the poster names. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:23:22 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <3266EA1A.7A2C@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is > no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because > theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Even the Krishnamurti > Foundation in its web page has a linkage to listening-l. I had sent in a > write up on theos-xxxx to Quest Magazine published by TSA and I am yet to > see it published. I double checked, and you are in fact right. I am really amiss at adding links to the NYTS web page, but when I do next, I will definitely put a mention of theos-xxxx in. I have been trying to get alt.theosophy, but neither Dorsai Embassy (where the NYTS has its account) or Sprynet (where I have my account) can give me access. Any suggestions? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:31:01 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <3266EBE5.176E@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > ---------- > > From: Dr. A.M.Bain > > Not such a final thought, surely, Ann? It seems to me that while you > > are properly addressing the larger issue of which gender language is but > > a part, there is much work to do, especially in keeping the issue(s) to > > the fore. The TSA web page (for example) ackowledges little else except > > its own activites, and is well covered in $ signs. All the > > contributions that we TI folk make come free, and usually at the > > contributors' expense. > > > > That, I believe, is the future. We are going to have to work hard for > > it though ... yes? > > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > think they got ripped off. Can you give me the source of that? There are several people active in TSA who are Web professionals, and would have happily done the job for free and better. Plus, there is an art staff at TSA. John Algeo mentioned to me some of the trouble they had with their symbol. I have recently started adding to the NYTS web page (www.dorsai.org/~nyts). Comments are welcome, ESPECIALLY pointing out what's wrong with it, EXTRA ESPECIALLY pointing out ways to FIX what is wrong with it. I'm going to start putting in some CGI later this fall, and some good suggestions will be appreciated. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 22:32:18 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <3266EC32.6B6@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > > think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that > > makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There > > Imagine some of the older folks who may have eye problems trying > to read the tiny type. Especially since people set the fonts on their browsers to be comfortable, not so that they can see all over the place. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:30:18 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: Seven Doors to Love (Reply to Keith) Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961018023016.0068e744@mail.deltanet.com> Keith: >I think there are seven levels of deep human connection. The highest and most >difficult to achieve is a true spiritual connection without barriers are >preconditions. ... Desire, manipulation and power plays come >still lower and you guessed it our old debil ssssssssssex, the snake coiled >ready to rise to higher and higher levels of mischief all around us and through >us. >I personally love men, women and children everywhere, but that doesn't have >anything necessarily to do with sex. In sex we become cojoined as bisexual >beings and have these ciruitires are we couldn't link. >Some people are straight north and gay northwest of desire. I say take a street >called past desire, to surrender, transfer to acceptance and get off in heaven. >Any takers? I think the key here is altruism, which is far more important than asceticism. The road to perfection is in forgetting oneself and in becoming an expressive instrument of one's inner divinity. The outer personality provides a window to one's inner light. It's far more important to get that light a blazing, than to be concerned if this pane of glass or that pane is soiled. The reason that we're taught to overcome personal desires is not necessarily so that everyone can become ascetics. Rather, I think, it's so that our minds and hearts aren't preoccupied with the pursuit of desire and can become freed to dwell on and become expressive of high intelligence, love, and wisdom. There's certainly a correlation between a refinement of desires, over time, and spiritual progress, but the spiritual progress didn't come from the killing out of lower desires. Rather, the lower desires faded due to being starved for attention, as we dwell on other things that can be equally captivating. The emphasis I would put is on increasing the "inner flow of light" rather than making sure one's hands are always clean in life. And the way to do that is to forget one's self, to fill one's attention with doing good things in the world, to be too busy to have the thought "I want this!" to cross one's mind. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 19:16:12 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961018061612.006ab0f8@whanganui.ac.nz> t 12:30 AM 18/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >ramadoss@eden.com wrote: >> >> At 09:33 PM 10/15/96 -0400, Bart wrote: >> >Sy Ginsburg wrote: >> >> I am silent about T.S.A. and Adyar because the >> >> expulsion of Denmark by Adyar and the expulsion of Boston by TSA, both >> >> apparently for putting to much emphasis on the study of the Alice Bailey >> >> teachings, raises questions for me. >> > >> > I am not familiar with the expulsion of Denmark. >> >> >> When actions are taken in world over, it is very rare that members >> outside the affected country knew anything because there is no easy way to >> communicate between countries and so it is easy to keep them secret from >> rest of the world. > > Speaking of which, do you (or does anybody else here) have any idea >what the business with Pedro in Adyar was? What was the mysterious bylaw >that Radha used? Did Pedro leave, or was he tossed? If so, then why? > > Bart Lidofsky > >The way I heard it was that Pedro's wife was unhappy in India and had gone home to Brazil and that Pedro felt one year away from his family was enough. Conrad Jamieson, a recent resident from NZ has taken over the job. I would doubt that he was 'tossed'. Why the negative reasons put forth for his departure? Does that show a bias? He had his own reasons for going as far as I understand. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:54:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Olcott Library Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. > There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. Elisabeth Trumpler Olcott Library From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:15:04 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <326766B8.C5D@sprynet.com> Elisabeth Trumpler wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. > > > > There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: > olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us > > Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. I knew SOMEONE at National had told me about this list (indirectly, through Michael Gomes or Loren Wheeler). Was it you? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:13:41 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <32676664.275@sprynet.com> Bee Brown wrote: > > Speaking of which, do you (or does anybody else here) have any idea > >what the business with Pedro in Adyar was? What was the mysterious bylaw > >that Radha used? Did Pedro leave, or was he tossed? If so, then why? > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > >The way I heard it was that Pedro's wife was unhappy in India and had gone > home to Brazil and that Pedro felt one year away from his family was enough. > Conrad Jamieson, a recent resident from NZ has taken over the job. I would > doubt that he was 'tossed'. Why the negative reasons put forth for his > departure? Does that show a bias? He had his own reasons for going as far as > I understand. Because of the rather cryptic way it was announced in The Theosophist; it simply said something on the order that Radha Burnier excercised some bylaw to replace Pedro with Conrad. Previously, the buzz had been that Pedro was being groomed to be the next president of the TS, so it appeared rather strange. If the announcement had said that, for example, Pedro was taking a leave of absence, or retired, or something like that, then there would have been no rumors flying around. As it was, the notice implied that Pedro was tossed by Radha, personally. I had met Pedro, and heard him lecture. He's an extremely intelligent man, knows his stuff, and is a strong supporter of allowing multiple points of view. On the podium, he puts out an image that strikes me as contrastingly authoritarian, but I have been told (and accept) that it is a matter of cultural differences; American theosophical presenters tend to qualify using words like, "in my opinion", and "according to so-and-so", while Indian presenters tend to just present the material, and uses cues ingrained into Indian culture for qualification. I hope that if Pedro DOES go back into TS politics, his real personality shows through. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:03:18 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > JRC wrote: > > > > On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > > > Hey, if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth wants to force > > > lies down the throats of the rest of us, that's their privilege. But I > > > reserve the right to point out their unequivocal equivocation (have fun > > > with your dictionary!). > > > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > > > By all means do ... but so far all we've seen from you is a completely > > unsupported normative statement that appears to represent little other > > than a completely crystallized piece of childish defensiveness hatched by > > a mind with absolutely no openness to any idea other than the one he's > > concluded is the only correct one. We've had many a soul come on to this > > list, sit on a throne, and speak to it as though they know the truth - not > > speaking to equals with the intent to persuade, but as down to children > > .. ooooohhhhhh are you gonna be *fun* to play with. > > In other words, if logic doesn't work, call the poster names. Read your post - the one I was responding to - *that* is what you call "logic"? Saying anyone who holds a particular position is someone who is "shoving lies down everyone's throat"? Gee ... that's a definition of "logic" that my dictionary apparently missed. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:14:58 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: alt.theosophy Message-ID: <961018101457_1644599336@emout09.mail.aol.com> Ann, Alt.theosophy was started by a friend of mine and like all alt. groups has trouble getting on some servers, thus the low traffic. It is totally unmoderated and no one owns it or maintains it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:31:41 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: My apologies for the omission. Many of us here have used olcott library e-mail and you have always been very prompt responsive and helpful. Keep up the good work. I am glad to know that several at Olcott have personal e-mail address and I hope some of them are on theos-xxxx lists. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Olcott Library wrote: > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. > > > > There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: > olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us > > Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. > > Elisabeth Trumpler > Olcott Library > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:39:47 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: Hi Bart: Glad to see you finally found out about this list which has been in operation since 1993. I was talking to a member in far off state and when I briefly mentioned about Internet, he said that he has the info sheet he picked up at the annual meeting and in the next five minutes he faxed me the information. Lo and behold, I was on all the theos-xxxx lists since then. Just thought I should share how I found the list. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Elisabeth Trumpler wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > > > > > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > > > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. > > > > > > > There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: > > olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us > > > > Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. > > I knew SOMEONE at National had told me about this list (indirectly, > through Michael Gomes or Loren Wheeler). Was it you? > > Bart Lidofsky > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:45:55 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: Bart: I hope my statement is not misconstrued. I never said or implied that you ever said "misappropriation" or any synonym. There was a lot of discussion several months ago on these subjects and at that time I recall someone implying that something of the sort of misappropriation or some synonym to that effect. At that time I recall posting a msg reiterating my stand that if there was anything to that effect, then the matter could be brought to the attention of IRS authorities. But no one responded. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > > This is an issue which was discussed here before. There were > > allegations of someone misappropriating the TS Lodge money and properties. > > Strange. I don't recall using the word "misappropriation", or any > synonym for that word. > > Bart Lidofsky > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:15:53 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bee Brown wrote: > >The way I heard it was that Pedro's wife was unhappy in India and had gone > home to Brazil and that Pedro felt one year away from his family was enough. > Conrad Jamieson, a recent resident from NZ has taken over the job. I would > doubt that he was 'tossed'. Why the negative reasons put forth for his > departure? Does that show a bias? He had his own reasons for going as far as > I understand. > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Thanks for the information. Many times when there is insufficient information we may come to wrong conclusion or inference. You post has cleared the air. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:09:05 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > > > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > > > think they got ripped off. Who wanted that icky aquamarine background that > > > makes the page hard to read? Miles and miles of teeny tiny type. There > > > > Imagine some of the older folks who may have eye problems trying > > to read the tiny type. > > Especially since people set the fonts on their browsers to be > comfortable, not so that they can see all over the place. > > Bart Lidofsky > Many newbees may not know how to change font size. Again, it is a good idea to set up a default font so that it is most comfortable to most visitors. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:02:15 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is > > no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because > > theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Even the Krishnamurti > > Foundation in its web page has a linkage to listening-l. I had sent in a > > write up on theos-xxxx to Quest Magazine published by TSA and I am yet to > > see it published. > > I double checked, and you are in fact right. I am really amiss at > adding links to the NYTS web page, but when I do next, I will definitely > put a mention of theos-xxxx in. I am very glad to see your response. You should also consider putting a link to other sources such as TI. From what I have seen, more links you have, you are better off because you will get more hits. One of the major problems that anyone who has set up a webpage or homepage, how do you make users to visit it. > > I have been trying to get alt.theosophy, but neither Dorsai Embassy > (where the NYTS has its account) or Sprynet (where I have my account) > can give me access. Any suggestions? You may have to talk to the key person who is in charge of the news server. Since there are more than 18,000 news groups, many Internet Providers are selective in the news groups they carry. Chuck is the person who is behind setting up the alt.theosophy and send him msg if you need any further information on the technical side of the newsgroup. I believe that you may be able to access all the messages thru one of the search engines such as altavista or dejanews. This is a round about way. From what I have seen, the propogation of messages is very slow in newsgroups due to the way they operate. With maillists such as theos-xxxx it is almost instantaneous. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:07:22 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > > > ---------- > > > From: Dr. A.M.Bain > > > Not such a final thought, surely, Ann? It seems to me that while you > > > are properly addressing the larger issue of which gender language is but > > > a part, there is much work to do, especially in keeping the issue(s) to > > > the fore. The TSA web page (for example) ackowledges little else except > > > its own activites, and is well covered in $ signs. All the > > > contributions that we TI folk make come free, and usually at the > > > contributors' expense. > > > > > > That, I believe, is the future. We are going to have to work hard for > > > it though ... yes? > > > > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > > think they got ripped off. > > Can you give me the source of that? There are several people active in > TSA who are Web professionals, and would have happily done the job for > free and better. Plus, there is an art staff at TSA. John Algeo > mentioned to me some of the trouble they had with their symbol. Many of us know about it. One wonders why any of these resources were not tapped. It may interest you, if you are not already aware of, there was a homepage on vnet.net on TSA which was setup and running within a weeks' time -- yes *one* weeks' time. > > I have recently started adding to the NYTS web page > (www.dorsai.org/~nyts). Comments are welcome, ESPECIALLY pointing out > what's wrong with it, EXTRA ESPECIALLY pointing out ways to FIX what is > wrong with it. I'm going to start putting in some CGI later this fall, > and some good suggestions will be appreciated. > > Bart Lidofsky > I admire your openness inviting criticism. I am sure you will receive some valuable comments and it would make your webpage better and have more hits and Theosophy will be the winner. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 96 17:45:49 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: About semantics Message-ID: <199610172145.VAA18796@leo.vsla.edu> Thanks, Bee, for a very interesting bit of information. General Semantics is of interest to me because Gina Cerminara, author of several books about Cayce most notably Many Mansions, came to our first TS meeting in Tidewater Virginia in 1980 and to several subsequent ones. She also wrote about GS. Since becoming an author I have learned the hard way the part about people agreeing or disagreeing with themselves! The most striking impression of the negative and positive reactions my books have gotten is that people are reacting not to the books themselves, but to their own interpretations of them, and imagination about the motives and intentions behind them. Which makes me more conscious of that trait in everyone, and of the need to always remind myself that I really *don't* know what an author intended or what her motives were, and shouldn't judge on the basis of speculation on those things. Cheers Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 12:07:35 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: Bart: Have you visited the homepage of Rudy on Theosophy and Theosophical Society. I do not have the url. I am forwarding a copy to him and I am sure he will respond. You may consider putting a link to his home page on NYTS. M K Ramadoss On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is > > no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because > > theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Even the Krishnamurti > > Foundation in its web page has a linkage to listening-l. I had sent in a > > write up on theos-xxxx to Quest Magazine published by TSA and I am yet to > > see it published. > > I double checked, and you are in fact right. I am really amiss at > adding links to the NYTS web page, but when I do next, I will definitely > put a mention of theos-xxxx in. > > I have been trying to get alt.theosophy, but neither Dorsai Embassy > (where the NYTS has its account) or Sprynet (where I have my account) > can give me access. Any suggestions? > > Bart Lidofsky > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 9:55:23 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Internet and Evolutioon Message-ID: <199610181355.NAA26625@leo.vsla.edu> In response to Mark's (Art House) comments about the Internet: indeed it is a "growing manifestation of group or planetary consciousness" that can express the energies of the higher parts of ourselves. But it is also true that there is a lot more kama-manas than buddhi-manas expressed on it. This is, as you suggest, inevitable given that humanity's center of gravity is kama-manas rather than buddhi-manas. But I do see a learning curve here. It's rather like the way the Vietnam War evoked intense anti-war sentiments because it came into people's living rooms via TV. The violence was no longer remote, and with the buffers removed the American people became much more sensitive to it. Similarly, the Internet has greatly increased the frequency of psychologically violent clashes between people who are partisans of various religious, scientific, philosophical points of view. And perhaps more so, it has increased *internal* debate and conflict within certain spiritual traditions, including Theosophy and Baha'i in my observation. And all this is out there for everyone to see and react to. At a certain point, though, after exposure to flame fests ad nauseum, and to dogmatic pronouncements from a succession of know-it-alls, we awaken to what is happening and see it from a higher level. Instead of demonizing the *person* who is saying the obnoxious things, we get to where it is more natural to simply see what level the person is stuck at, shrug one's shoulders, and wish them well. Saturation in kama-manasic combat can eventually make most people sick of it all and willing to look for a new way of communicating. Maybe I'm deluding myself, but I have the impression that all the flames I have received, and maybe those I've given, have been useful in forcing me to see things from a more detached perspective, with greater compassion for those enmeshed in belief systems that tell them to "fight for truth" and so on. And I think theos-l has evolved over the years into a kinder, gentler place; so have the Baha'i lists I read; so has the Eckankar newsgroup that interests me. In short, this tool I am using to communicate with you is indeed accelerating our evolution. So when JRC comments, quite justly, that theos-l has had a series of people making dogmatic ex cathedra pronouncements putting down everyone who didn't see Theosophy the same way they do-- I respond that this is a good thing, as it provides a learning opportunity for all concerned. Theosophy as a movement cannot grow beyond its present level of consciousness until Theosophists begin to feel uncomfortable with the dogmatism, the conflict, the resistance to change. Our comfort level with the movement has probably declined, for those of us who have been on the list for years. But that is a first step toward making necessary changes in ourselves and the organizations. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 96 14:05:11 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Johari exercise Message-ID: <199610181805.SAA25955@leo.vsla.edu> I just read an interesting post in another list that might prove interesting here. The writer described Baha'i in terms of what I think is Johari's Window: 1. Things we know about ourselves that are public knowledge. 2. Things the public knows about us that we don't know. 3. Things we know about ourselves that are unknown to others. 4. Things about ourselves that neither we nor others know. Making a brief stab at this in terms of Theosophists: 1. In this category are the Three Objects, the writings of HPB as the central focus, our eclecticism and global perspective. 2. Someone will get mad at any proposed answer to this one, since by definition it involves matters we shut out of consciousness. But I would say that there was a lot of deception in the early years of the movement, and Theosophists refuse to admit or deal with it although it is the first thing that comes to mind for outsiders. (No, I won't argue this with anyone.) 3. The amazingly widespread cultural influence of HPB is still mostly known only to insiders, although this is changing. 4. My books attempted to go into that; the extent to which HPB was affiliated with genuine teachers of authentic spiritual traditions from whom Theosophy is derived has been a matter of faith, not knowledge, for Theosophists, and has been denied by others. But one could answer this a hundred different ways, and I hope someone will try. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:56:08 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Politically Correct Theosophy? Message-ID: <199610181857.OAA27014@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Eldon B. Tucker > > Some terms like "brotherhood" I see as falling in this second > class. The term does not mean, as I see it, "a men's club, a place > where women are not invited because they can't make the grade." It > rather means a sangha or mutual support of a positive, masculine, > forthright, creative nature. This makes me want to play with word here. Like "sisterhood" might mean mutual support of a positive, feminine, forthright, creative nature. Brotherhood and sisterhood, two sides of the same coin. What shall we call the coin itself? > Granted, if we go into a certain cultural context, we have to > temper our self-expression accordingly. Like a woman in western > dress might be ill-received in some middle eastern countries. Or > looking someone in the eyes in Japan might be considered > aggressiveness, rather than being open and honest. But we are > putting on different "masks" appropriate to each situation. > In many countries, the culture is changing, becoming more Westernized, for good or bad. One wonders if the Internet will hasten the homogenization of the world, bringing us all closer to unity. > What is important is that we use the keys given us by Theosophy to > explore the deeper meanings of things, even if we often find > ourselves having to keep our mouths shut, remaining silent about > things that would simply be misunderstood. Or perhaps mouth shut could be replaced by honest communication? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:14:06 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <199610181914.PAA01097@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: m.k. ramadoss > > It may interest you, if you are not already aware of, there was a > homepage on vnet.net on TSA which was setup and running within a weeks' > time -- yes *one* weeks' time. > I haven't been able to access this page for a while. I get a "FORBIDDEN" message when I try. I assumed that the page went out of business after the officical TSA page went up. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:10:33 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: Re: The Personal Aura Message-ID: <3267E42A.D0A@earthlink.net> Hello, See http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/auras.html for images. Shanti, P -- *** A.Priori / 6524 San Felipe #323 / Houston, TX 77057 USA *** aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 09:55:52 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961018205552.00684fe0@whanganui.ac.nz> At 08:00 AM 18/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Bee Brown wrote: > >> > Speaking of which, do you (or does anybody else here) have any idea >> >what the business with Pedro in Adyar was? What was the mysterious bylaw >> >that Radha used? Did Pedro leave, or was he tossed? If so, then why? >> > >> > Bart Lidofsky >> > >> >The way I heard it was that Pedro's wife was unhappy in India and had gone >> home to Brazil and that Pedro felt one year away from his family was enough. >> Conrad Jamieson, a recent resident from NZ has taken over the job. I would >> doubt that he was 'tossed'. Why the negative reasons put forth for his >> departure? Does that show a bias? He had his own reasons for going as far as >> I understand. > > Because of the rather cryptic way it was announced in The Theosophist; >it simply said something on the order that Radha Burnier excercised some >bylaw to replace Pedro with Conrad. Previously, the buzz had been that >Pedro was being groomed to be the next president of the TS, so it >appeared rather strange. If the announcement had said that, for example, >Pedro was taking a leave of absence, or retired, or something like that, >then there would have been no rumors flying around. As it was, the >notice implied that Pedro was tossed by Radha, personally. > > I had met Pedro, and heard him lecture. He's an extremely intelligent >man, knows his stuff, and is a strong supporter of allowing multiple >points of view. On the podium, he puts out an image that strikes me as >contrastingly authoritarian, but I have been told (and accept) that it >is a matter of cultural differences; American theosophical presenters >tend to qualify using words like, "in my opinion", and "according to >so-and-so", while Indian presenters tend to just present the material, >and uses cues ingrained into Indian culture for qualification. I hope >that if Pedro DOES go back into TS politics, his real personality shows >through. > > Bart Lidofsky > >He has also been around the circuit in NZ and we all enjoyed his talks. One of our Wanganui Lodge members was at Adyar earlier this year to attend the School of Wisdom and she told me about it so I can inquire a little further as to what her impressions were about Pedro's standing at Adyar when she was there. I understand she had a good chat with him. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 17:08:20 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961018171354.2517d086@mail.eden.com> At 09:00 AM 10/18/96 -0400, you wrote: >Elisabeth Trumpler wrote: >> >> On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: >> >> > >> > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at >> > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. >> > >> >> There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: >> olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us >> >> Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. > > I knew SOMEONE at National had told me about this list (indirectly, >through Michael Gomes or Loren Wheeler). Was it you? > > Bart Lidofsky Some months ago I had the very interesting experience. I was speaking with someone at Olcott and during the conversation brought up Internet and Theos-xxxx and this person was totally unaware of theos-xxxx and I provided the info for accessing it. It is the marvel of modern communication that makes distance inconsequential. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 17:08:22 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961018171357.2517e82a@mail.eden.com> At 09:00 AM 10/18/96 -0400, you wrote: >Elisabeth Trumpler wrote: >> >> On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, m.k. ramadoss wrote: >> >> > >> > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at >> > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. >> > >> >> There's a third official TSA e-mail address, for the Olcott Library: >> olcott@dupagels.lib.il.us >> >> Several staff members have personal e-mail addresses as well. > > I knew SOMEONE at National had told me about this list (indirectly, >through Michael Gomes or Loren Wheeler). Was it you? > > Bart Lidofsky I am very glad that someone provided you with the information about this list. It is the foresight and enthusiasm of John E Mead that makes all of us interested in Theosophy to discuss anything with no one controlling, censoring or moderating it. But for this list I would not be communicating with you all. MKRamadoss Long live Internet - the great equalizer and communicator From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 17:08:25 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Organizational Evolution Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961018171359.2517074e@mail.eden.com> At 08:11 AM 10/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >Doss: >>The TS, when inaugurated in 1875, was designed on the basis of a formal >>pyramidal organizational structure . . . > >>Now we have Internet and we have seen an example of a large formal >>organization having been shut down because the interested members have >>found that Internet has changed the environment and the needs are no >>longer met by a formal organization. > >>So from the needs of Theosophists, I am wondering whether the TS is going >>to be a overtaken by Internet based communication and interaction. . . > >Hasn't the TSA already made the move in that direction with the creation of the >National Lodge? Also, they plan to have electronic study groups, bulletin board >and chat group. I think that the idea is a very good one especially now that there is a large number of at large members. We will have to see how the National Lodge is going to evolve. In addition to addressing the needs of members, I hope these steps also address how the public can participate. The success of Internet is due to the free access to the various activities. All the maillists I am on and all the newsgroups I access, have no any annual membership fees or dues and are *unmoderated*. Many organizations find it difficult to deal with such unmoderated activities since all organizations have grown up in an environment in which flow of information is controlled/edited/censored for various reasons including internal politics and power play. Even the proposed $15 dues for National Lodge. I will wait before sending in the money so that I can determine what I am going to get for the money - money is tight here with me at this time. Let us all wait and see. MKRamadoss > >But there would have to a decentralization of power and less central control to >make it work in the way you are speaking of. More local control and less at the >top. Once the electronic lines of communication opens up, then the defacto decentralization is bound to take place. However, people at the top will still hold on to material assets such as money, property and their use. Any and all activities which do not depend on or controlled by any of them will florish. > >>Theos-l is pioneering in this direction and has already helped a lot of >>us to discuss various items in a world wide forum, and all this has been >>made possible by one person who saw the need -- John E Mead. My salute to >>him. I forsee theos-l participating to mushroom in the years to come. > >Since I was 5 years old, I always fancied myself a pioneer - that was when Davy >Crockett was the rage. : - ) But every person that starts something on the >Internet, whether it be a web page, mailing list or newsgroup is participating >in the beginnings of a world-wide network of communication. > >The atomic mushrooming of this list still depends, IMHO, on several things. >Number one, the availability of computers and modems. 2: Computer literacy, >probably found in greater numbers in those just entering kindergarden. 3: The >quality and quantity of discussion on this list. > >The prediction of this list going mega may be premature. Let's just see what >happens. I am an eternal optimist. If it is not theos-xxxx it would be its next incarnation what ever it be that would fulfill the role as the great communicating/discussion medium! MK Ramadoss > >-Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 00:28:38 +0100 From: "Martin Euser" Subject: access to alt.theosophy Message-ID: <199610182234.XAA08345@venus.euro.net> For those who want to take a look at alt.theosophy and have trouble to subscribe to this group I reprint a part of my newage FAQ: --------------------- begin---------------------------- Rene's newsgateway: for those that can't access newsgroups in the alt.-hierarchy (like alt.pagan, alt.theosophy, alt.religion.wicca, etc.) they would like to participate in: http://www.spiritweb.org/cgi/newsgateway.cgi?newsgroupname Substitute the name of the newsgroup, eg. alt.pagan, for 'newsgroupname' after the questionmark [ie, after '.cgi?'] Reading postings should be possible, replying and posting a new message may not work. For posting a message to a newsgroup your service-provider doesn't carry, there's this solution: E-mail to group.name@news.demon.co.uk Substitute the name of the newsgroup you want to post to for 'group.name' Examples: alt.pagan@news.demon.co.uk alt.religion.shamanism@news.demon.co.uk Demon internet has a so-called E-mail to Usenet gateway, that's why it works. That procedure will work for many newsgroups, because demon internet carries a lot of alt-newsgroups. Typically your message is added to the list of articles in such an alt.newsgroup on demon internet and then distributed along with other new postings to news-servers around the world that carry this particular newsgroup. You may have to be patient, because it can take a couple of days before your posting is distributed worldwide! ------------------end---------- Martin From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 00:37:21 +0100 From: "Martin Euser" Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <199610182234.XAA08353@venus.euro.net> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Going to Theosophy, certainly replacing "Man" with "Humanity" will go a long way. And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. We had a discussion on that a couple of years ago on theos-l. Liesel suggested: universal Siblinghood (when I recall it right) and I've used that phrase in my theosophical writings for the internet. I prefer the word Siblinghood over Brotherhood because it is a term that is not only gender neutral, but also more accurate, descriptive of the fact that we hold many things (genes, behaviour, physiological aspects, etc.) in common with animals and other realms of nature. Martin From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:23:34 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Anthropos Message-ID: <9wwZ$hAmNAayEwFM@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <3266E675.72BF@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >Going to Theosophy, certainly replacing "Man" with "Humanity" will go a >long way. HPB actually *did* this in her writings, but in her day it was most easily done with footnotes, which she employed in a number of places, by explaining that she was using the term "man" in the sense of the Greek _anthropos_ - which means humanity. > And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender >specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support >that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. The TI Statement has a go at this, but maybe not quite specifically enough for you? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:45:27 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Links Message-ID: In message <199610181914.PAA01097@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >I haven't been able to access this page for a while. I get a "FORBIDDEN" >message when I try. >I assumed that the page went out of business after the officical TSA page >went up. Try following the link to the "old" site on the TI URL below. I will do the same, as if it has gone, I need to remove the link to it. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:11:21 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <199610181311.JAA23977@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > > I have recently started adding to the NYTS web page > (www.dorsai.org/~nyts). Comments are welcome, ESPECIALLY pointing out > what's wrong with it, EXTRA ESPECIALLY pointing out ways to FIX what is > wrong with it. I'm going to start putting in some CGI later this fall, > and some good suggestions will be appreciated. Love the background. The type is small, but there's not so much of it that it overwhelms. The symbol is well-placed and looks super on blue. You get high marks on my scale. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:03:55 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <199610181304.JAA22308@cliff.cris.com> > From: Bart Lidofsky > I have been trying to get alt.theosophy, but neither Dorsai Embassy > (where the NYTS has its account) or Sprynet (where I have my account) > can give me access. Any suggestions? I use Concentric and had no trouble accessing it. > I would certainly hope so. But speaking of the TSA web page, they spent > somewhere in the neighborhood of $1500 to have that thing designed and I > think they got ripped off. > Can you give me the source of that? There are several people active in >TSA who are Web professionals, and would have happily done the job for >free and better. Plus, there is an art staff at TSA. John Algeo >mentioned to me some of the trouble they had with their symbol. Yes, I've seen several pages which I know where done by a willing and able member of an organization, just for the sheer thrill of doing it. The pages are quite nice. As for sources, you can classify it as a rumor. I've been down the tangled path between Olcott and this list before and don't want to deal with it again. *IF* TSA did pay that much for the web page, it's sad. I would have liked Theosophy to have been presented to the WWW with a much livelier and readable face. Just my humble opinion here, as a graphic artist. Perhaps the officials with TSA are very happy with it. I dealt with many clients in the business whom I disagreed with in terms of design, but they got what they wanted and what they paid for. I'm not so much concerned with the dollar amount as I am with the quality of the page. Thanks for your URL. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 00:17:03 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Links Message-ID: >In message <199610181914.PAA01097@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" > writes >>I haven't been able to access this page for a while. I get a "FORBIDDEN" >>message when I try. >>I assumed that the page went out of business after the officical TSA page >>went up. I checked on the my URL (below the line). Click on "About Theosophy International" and when you get the next page, click on TI Web Link. This takes you to http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/TI.html Then click on "Introduction to Theosophy" and you have found a suggested pilot version for a TSA page by (I think) Mike Grenier. This is probably the page which is no longer reachable from the TSA page (follow it and you will see why, I suspect). To save time, go direct to http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theo.html (Note the "www1" part - it's a figure one, not a letter L.) Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 19:48:09 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <32682542.3E99@earthlink.net> AAB's writings on this subject are very wide-ranging but she does state that the causes of homosexuality (and many sex issues) are from very ancient processes, homosexuality itself began millions of years ago in "Lemuria." During those times one of the goals for human evolution was to *get* people to have sexual urges so as to reproduce and learn to have families. Given our imperfect planetary karma and human choices there was an overstimulation of the whole sex realm leading to all sorts of unplanned and unneeded expressions of that type of energy and relationship. Many today are born with the same strong tendencies that they experienced millions of years ago, which have not yet healed, and these have a very strong, almost irrestible, imprint on their lives. Interestingly, she also writes that it is the more evolved of humanity that bore the greater brunt of the past overstimulation and much of the difficulty today is that the same more evolved souls with strong personalities are re-expressing these past tendencies and influencing, in that direction, many around them. She also writes that the general process of healing, of course and as usual, for the whole sex issue, is a full, active and creative outer life of work and service. She does say that the processes from this that we are dealing with today are, yea hopefully, supposed to be resolved by this generation and the next. I have read HPB's and AAB's works thoroughly and find only harmony in the ideas presented in their teachings. Vocabularies change but the same truths flow through them all. Love, P -- *** A.Priori / 6524 San Felipe #323 / Houston, TX 77057 USA *** aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 20:43:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Thought (fwd) Message-ID: Here is the url for Rudy's home page: http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html =================================================== >Bart: > >Have you visited the homepage of Rudy on Theosophy and Theosophical >Society. I do not have the url. I am forwarding a copy to him and I am >sure he will respond. You may consider putting a link to his home page on >NYTS. > > > > > M K Ramadoss > > > >On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > >> m.k. ramadoss wrote: >> >> > Alan: You have been very observant. Did you notice that there is >> > no mention of theos-xxxx or alt.theosophy? May be it is because >> > theos-xxxx is not *officially* *approved*? Even the Krishnamurti >> > Foundation in its web page has a linkage to listening-l. I had sent in a >> > write up on theos-xxxx to Quest Magazine published by TSA and I am yet to >> > see it published. >> >> I double checked, and you are in fact right. I am really amiss at >> adding links to the NYTS web page, but when I do next, I will definitely >> put a mention of theos-xxxx in. >> >> I have been trying to get alt.theosophy, but neither Dorsai Embassy >> (where the NYTS has its account) or Sprynet (where I have my account) >> can give me access. Any suggestions? >> >> Bart Lidofsky >> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:19:00 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <32683A94.23DD@sprynet.com> JRC wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > JRC wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey, if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth wants to force > > > > lies down the throats of the rest of us, that's their privilege. But I > > > > reserve the right to point out their unequivocal equivocation (have fun > > > > with your dictionary!). > > > > > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > > > > > By all means do ... but so far all we've seen from you is a completely > > > unsupported normative statement that appears to represent little other > > > than a completely crystallized piece of childish defensiveness hatched by > > > a mind with absolutely no openness to any idea other than the one he's > > > concluded is the only correct one. We've had many a soul come on to this > > > list, sit on a throne, and speak to it as though they know the truth - not > > > speaking to equals with the intent to persuade, but as down to children > > > .. ooooohhhhhh are you gonna be *fun* to play with. > > > > In other words, if logic doesn't work, call the poster names. > > Read your post - the one I was responding to - *that* is what you call > "logic"? Saying anyone who holds a particular position is someone who is > "shoving lies down everyone's throat"? Gee ... that's a definition of > "logic" that my dictionary apparently missed. "Political Correctness" is, BY DEFINITION, determining truth by political expedience rather than objective reality. Sometimes, the same results are reached. Often, they are not. But they are ALWAYS tainted. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:22:33 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The Pledge and the Weekend Message-ID: <32683B69.1362@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > Bart: > I hope my statement is not misconstrued. I never said or implied > that you ever said "misappropriation" or any synonym. There was a lot of By the way, I realize that I did not make it sufficiently clear that when I said the major issue was property and money, I was not just talking about one side; there were problems on all sides of the issue. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:26:42 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Thought Message-ID: <32683C62.61BA@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > It may interest you, if you are not already aware of, there was a > homepage on vnet.net on TSA which was setup and running within a weeks' > time -- yes *one* weeks' time. That was the one with the scans of the covers of the TSA pamphlets? I know it was on my bookmarks. Unfortunately, the color scanner I obtained to make scans for the NYTS web page is defective, and I had to return it. I am waiting on a new one. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:42:02 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <32683FFA.5395@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > I am very glad that someone provided you with the information about > this list. It is the foresight and enthusiasm of John E Mead that makes all > of us interested in Theosophy to discuss anything with no one controlling, > censoring or moderating it. But for this list I would not be communicating > with you all. Well, you DID send some email to nyts@dorsai.org! After reading http://wwww.dorsai.org/~nyts, I assume? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:45:01 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <326840AD.5527@sprynet.com> Martin Euser wrote: > I prefer the word Siblinghood over Brotherhood because it is a term that > is not only gender neutral, but also more accurate, descriptive of the fact > that we hold many things (genes, behaviour, physiological aspects, etc.) > in common with animals and other realms of nature. It is also about as subtle as a sledgehammer, and a made-up word. I am certain that, with sufficient effort, a cleaner rewording can be done. BTW, I have read a BUNCH of your articles posted on various web pages; it's nice to see that you really exist. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:59:06 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <326843FA.6C11@sprynet.com> Patrick Alessandra Jr. wrote: > > I have read HPB's and AAB's works thoroughly and find only harmony > in the ideas presented in their teachings. Vocabularies change but the > same truths flow through them all. Everybody (including us) is a product of their time. Things which seem obvious and taken for granted by one generation are considered not at all obvious by the next. When the falsity of a major untruth built into society is revealed, it can cause a VERY rapid change (take a look at almost any movie made before 1970 and any movie after 1971, and see how radically the attitudes towards women changed in such a short period of time). When reading wisdom, one has to be aware of the times in order to make sense of them. I expect that an unannotated Secret Doctrine will be largely unreadable 100 years from now. I once gave a lecture on hypnosis based on one of Blavatsky's articles, and it took the Theosophical Glossary and a review of medical history to truly understand Blavatsky's position. In any case, when a work contains what Ed Abdill calls "a red flag", it becomes harder to read it. I find that of the early literature, for me, THE MAHATMA LETTERS contains few, if any red flags, the works of Blavatsky and Judge come after that, then come the works of Besant. Having been brought up in an atmosphere of mini-pogroms, I have an emotional prejudice against Christianity, which makes reading Leadbeater to be quite difficult, although I intellectually realize that he uses Christian symbology rather than Christianity itself. When I first looked at Alice Bailey, I opend two books of hers at random, and read a couple of pages. One was about how the white race was charged with bringing the black race up to the standards of the white race. The other was how homosexuality is the choice of evil people. I will go through the effort of finding these references again. In any case, it colored my emotional attitude towards Alice Bailey, and made it very difficult to read her works. Once again, on an intellectual basis, I realize that she had access to a great deal of wisdom; it's just hard to obtain wisdom with a red flag waving in front of your face. But, once again, I must stress that the negative responses are personal and emotional. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:52:19 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Michelle Donald wrote: > > > > > > At 03:43 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote: > > > Setting up internet access for an internal/private network such as > > > those already existing in companies/ organizations including TSA is > > > not an easy task and requires funding. I fear that your conclusions > > > appear to be coloured by your other dealings with the administration. > > > As far as I know, there are only two e-mail addresses at TSA. One at > > theos@netcom.com and the other at natsec@aol.com. As far as I have seen, > > I have not seen a single communication on e-mail from any of the elected > > officers either residing in Olcott or rest of them who are mostly spread > > around the country. > > Write to me at nyts@dorsai.org, and I'll get you John Algeo's address. > Ruben Cabigting is ruben@netcom.com, but he is the main reader of > theos@netcom.com. National now has a full-time connection (using a > Windows NT Server....yeccchhhh!). In any case, I am helping out on just > what you describe, and am planning a presentation for the Annual Meeting > to see if we can get more Lodges on the Net. Hi, Bart: Thanks for the information. If John Algeo has a e-mail address and it is his TSA official address paid for from the treasury of TSA, then I would expect it to appear in the official publications such as AT. So far I have not seen it. mkramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 21:26:34 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Re: Electronic archives Message-ID: <199610190235.WAA13718@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Alan, I still have some material on a disk. You said I should put it in myself, but I have no idea as to how to do it, or I would've put it in a long time ago. I found a whole 500pp book on the internet about doing web pages. As of the moment I'm otherwise occupied. I found out today why I'm dragging so much, & why it's so difficult for me to get up from a seat. My hemoglobin is 1/2 of what it should be, because my kindneys aren't making a certain enzyme they should be making. I'm going for a transfusion tomorrow AM, and beginning in 2 weeks I have to get enzyme shots 3 x per week. I'm hoping the insurancde will pay for one of the nurses at Summerfield to do it. Otherwise I have to chase cross town to my doctor's 3 times a week, That means being thus occupied for 3 afternoons a week, because bus tranportation takes that long. Liesel ......................................................................... >In message , Martin Leiderman > writes >>I think our energies should be devoted to enrich the electronic archives >>with articles, scanning old books, lectures pamphlets, pictures, etc., so >>when they are ready to do it in big scale they have it in storage. > >There is still some space left for this in the TI pages and directories >via the URL below. Contributions welcome. > >While I think of it, I shall be compressing some of my own material >which is currently prominent on this URL in order to make more space >available for the kind of work(s) you mention, so anyone who want my own >articles in simple form (as they are at present) should download them >soon. > >Are any of the list subscribers MAC users, and if so, do you have a >means of unarchiving PC zip files? > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:04:03 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Links Message-ID: <32684523.DE4@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > To save time, go direct to > > http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theo.html I use the Netscape mail reader, partially because it allows me to click on links such as yours rather than have to cut and paste them. The link, however, was dead. This is the link I got... http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theos.html ^ Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:29:40 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: policial correctness Message-ID: <199610190438.AAA20776@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Here we go again >if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth Whose truth are we talking about? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:42:58 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: we are all equals Message-ID: <199610190451.AAA21491@ultra1.dreamscape.com> OK, we are all equals. But we're not the same. At this stage of our evolution sex does matter. If you think it's not, you haven't watched TV lately. We haven't advanced enough to rebecome hermaphrodites. I go along with Ann's idea that it would be nice to have a service once with all female generic names. That is because, even though we all know that women and men are all equally important, this is not yet being acted out in our every day lives. And as of the moment it is very important to women to be recognized as being equally as valuable as men. As long as there's unwanted pinching in the office, we're not equal. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:08:45 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Internet and Evolutioon Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961019060845.0069ef60@whanganui.ac.nz> Well put, Paul. After just over a year on here and experiencing Alexis, I agree with you. I probably would not have agreed earlier on but now I can observe the changes in myself and the way I respond to others. At 02:26 PM 18/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In response to Mark's (Art House) comments about the Internet: >indeed it is a "growing manifestation of group or planetary >consciousness" that can express the energies of the higher >parts of ourselves. But it is also true that there is a lot >more kama-manas than buddhi-manas expressed on it. > >This is, as you suggest, inevitable given that humanity's center >of gravity is kama-manas rather than buddhi-manas. But I do >see a learning curve here. It's rather like the way the >Vietnam War evoked intense anti-war sentiments because it came >into people's living rooms via TV. The violence was no longer >remote, and with the buffers removed the American people became >much more sensitive to it. Similarly, the Internet has greatly >increased the frequency of psychologically violent clashes >between people who are partisans of various religious, >scientific, philosophical points of view. And perhaps more so, >it has increased *internal* debate and conflict within certain >spiritual traditions, including Theosophy and Baha'i in my >observation. And all this is out there for everyone to see and >react to. At a certain point, though, after exposure to >flame fests ad nauseum, and to dogmatic pronouncements from a >succession of know-it-alls, we awaken to what is happening and >see it from a higher level. Instead of demonizing the *person* >who is saying the obnoxious things, we get to where it is >more natural to simply see what level the person is stuck at, >shrug one's shoulders, and wish them well. Saturation in >kama-manasic combat can eventually make most people sick of it >all and willing to look for a new way of communicating. I have come to terms with the general semantic list and the hostility by some to anything spiritual in connection with their discipline. I was put down when they read my sig and saw the Theosophy bit. Once I would have got in there and suggested that they were short-sighted in their conclusions but I have realised that we are all on various levels and that I just leave them alone to get on with it and discuss what I need to know from them without mentioning Theosophy if avoidable. > >Maybe I'm deluding myself, but I have the impression that all >the flames I have received, and maybe those I've given, have >been useful in forcing me to see things from a more detached >perspective, with greater compassion for those enmeshed in >belief systems that tell them to "fight for truth" and so on. >And I think theos-l has evolved over the years into a kinder, >gentler place; so have the Baha'i lists I read; so has the >Eckankar newsgroup that interests me. > >In short, this tool I am using to communicate with you is >indeed accelerating our evolution. So when JRC comments, quite >justly, that theos-l has had a series of people making dogmatic >ex cathedra pronouncements putting down everyone who didn't see >Theosophy the same way they do-- I respond that this is a good >thing, as it provides a learning opportunity for all >concerned. Theosophy as a movement cannot grow beyond its >present level of consciousness until Theosophists begin to feel >uncomfortable with the dogmatism, the conflict, the resistance >to change. Our comfort level with the movement has probably >declined, for those of us who have been on the list for years. >But that is a first step toward making necessary changes in >ourselves and the organizations. I have had many occassions to rethink ideas that could be seen as comfort levels and even if a bit reluctantly, changed them. I have given a lot more thought to the gender issue since it has been aired here and understand a little better where I come from on this issue. Things have been said that I would never have thought off if left to my own devises so I thank you all for a growing time here. > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:41:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > I am very glad that someone provided you with the information about > > this list. It is the foresight and enthusiasm of John E Mead that makes all > > of us interested in Theosophy to discuss anything with no one controlling, > > censoring or moderating it. But for this list I would not be communicating > > with you all. > > Well, you DID send some email to nyts@dorsai.org! After reading > http://wwww.dorsai.org/~nyts, I assume? > > Bart Lidofsky I have visited NYTS homepage several times. I also may have encountered your messages on masonic newsgroups. It is very likely that I may have sent some email to nyts. As for communicating with a large group of individuals interested in various aspects of Theosophy and history of Theosophy and TS, all of it took place here on theos-l. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:48:50 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Christian symbology rather than Christianity itself. When I first looked > at Alice Bailey, I opend two books of hers at random, and read a couple > of pages. One was about how the white race was charged with bringing the > black race up to the standards of the white race. The other was how ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Bart: Many here have not read much of Bailey's books. It would be very interesting to some if you can find the relevant reference. No hurry. Just curious. MKRamdoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:53:24 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Patrick Alessandra Jr. wrote: > > > > I have read HPB's and AAB's works thoroughly and find only harmony > > in the ideas presented in their teachings. Vocabularies change but the > > same truths flow through them all. > > Everybody (including us) is a product of their time. Things which seem > obvious and taken for granted by one generation are considered not at > all obvious by the next. When the falsity of a major untruth built into > society is revealed, it can cause a VERY rapid change (take a look at > almost any movie made before 1970 and any movie after 1971, and see how > radically the attitudes towards women changed in such a short period of > time). When reading wisdom, one has to be aware of the times in order to > make sense of them. I expect that an unannotated Secret Doctrine will be > largely unreadable 100 years from now. I once gave a lecture on hypnosis > based on one of Blavatsky's articles, and it took the Theosophical > Glossary and a review of medical history to truly understand Blavatsky's > position. > > In any case, when a work contains what Ed Abdill calls "a red flag", it > becomes harder to read it. I find that of the early literature, for me, > THE MAHATMA LETTERS contains few, if any red flags, the works of > Blavatsky and Judge come after that, then come the works of Besant. > Having been brought up in an atmosphere of mini-pogroms, I have an > emotional prejudice against Christianity, which makes reading Leadbeater > to be quite difficult, although I intellectually realize that he uses > Christian symbology rather than Christianity itself. When I first looked > at Alice Bailey, I opend two books of hers at random, and read a couple > of pages. One was about how the white race was charged with bringing the > black race up to the standards of the white race. The other was how > homosexuality is the choice of evil people. I will go through the effort > of finding these references again. In any case, it colored my emotional > attitude towards Alice Bailey, and made it very difficult to read her > works. Once again, on an intellectual basis, I realize that she had > access to a great deal of wisdom; it's just hard to obtain wisdom with a > red flag waving in front of your face. > > But, once again, I must stress that the negative responses are personal > and emotional. > > Bart Lidofsky > Now that Alice Bailey is mentioned here, her books are not much read in India and there are not many who follow the teachings in her books in India. Could it be that the symbology she has used is not attractive to Indians? Just a thought. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:56:14 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Links Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > > To save time, go direct to > > > > http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theo.html > > I use the Netscape mail reader, partially because it allows me to click > on links such as yours rather than have to cut and paste them. The > link, however, was dead. This is the link I got... > > http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theos.html > ^ > Bart Lidofsky > For anyone interested, many of the mail readers such as Eudora Pro, one can click on any url in a message it loads your browser and takes one to the url without having to cut and paste. It appears that the functional features of programs are moving in the same direction to make it easy on the user. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 11:07:52 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <199610191657.MAA23759@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: m.k. ramadoss > > > Now that Alice Bailey is mentioned here, her books are not much read in > India and there are not many who follow the teachings in her books in > India. Could it be that the symbology she has used is not attractive to > Indians? Just a thought. > How interesting! What is read in India and what is attractive there? Is Krishnamurti's work popular? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:22:43 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: TS into the next century Message-ID: <199610191831.OAA22726@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Ann, I agree with everything you say. Add to it to bring nomenclature up to date, not only male/female, but also the sanskrit terms, which don't mean much to a beginner, and need to be thoroughly explained... the concepts are more important than the terms. Add to it to make the TS more accessible to young people (like not making them wait for 2 years to be able to vote, and if you insist on that, do some training in those 2 years which would better qualify them to vote ie know something about theosophy. Also don't make elections into a sham.) Don't keep all the goodies at Olcott, but make sure they reach the Lodges. ie have lots better communication between Olcott and the field. Try to eliminate bickering between factions. I'm as tired of defending CWL as others on this list are of defending AAB. Sure there's more I can't think of as of the moment. Liesel ............................................................................ >From: "Ann E. Bermingham" >To: "Theos-l" >Subject: One Final Thought >Message-ID: <199610161852.OAA23929@cliff.cris.com> > >It has occurred to me that the vigorous discussion regarding gender-neutral >language came out of one issue being raised - and that was the >modernization of the language of the TS objects, as well as other material >presented to the public. > >Somehow it has been sidetracked to egotism, etc. I believe that for this >particular Theosophical group the main issue is modernization, something >that is very hard to do with the present Theosophical administration. > >The issue of modernization not only applies to language, but has also >included computerization and the Society's use of computers to reach its >members and the public. Another is a lessening of the power being held in >a central government and more control given over to local groups. > >As far as I can tell, the real problem is one of bringing the Theosophical >Society and its associated groups into the next century, rather than >letting it die out. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > >------------------------------ > >Date: Wed, 16 Oct 96 14:38 MDT >From: From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:58:12 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > ---------- > > From: m.k. ramadoss > > > > > Now that Alice Bailey is mentioned here, her books are not much read in > > India and there are not many who follow the teachings in her books in > > India. Could it be that the symbology she has used is not attractive to > > Indians? Just a thought. > > > How interesting! What is read in India and what is attractive there? Is > Krishnamurti's work popular? > > -Ann E. Bermingham Like anywhere else, most of in India follow the beliefs and idealogy in which everyone in born in. In India, the predominant one is Hinduism will all the variety of opinions and beliefs. Most have heard about Theosophy due to Annie Beasant's active involvement in the Indian Independence - also due to the fact that A O Hume who had corresponded with KH was the founder of Indian National Congress which spearheaded the Independence movement. As for Krishnamurti (who is generally referred to Krishnaji out of regard and respect and reverence), many are aware of him and his teachings. I would say not many read him either. But in India there is traditionally a sense of respect and reverance to any one who is "religious". Theosophy is very natural to them because the two fundamental doctrines of Karma and Reincarnation are generally accepted belief. One thing one notices in India is the lack of much general interest in practices of meditation and other psychic practices. Hope I have given some idea. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 00:30:22 +0100 From: "Martin Euser" Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <199610192229.XAA03052@venus.euro.net> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > It is also about as subtle as a sledgehammer, and a made-up word. Sure, it is made-up but aren't all words :) I doubt that Western languages contain a proper word for what you're searching. (Essential) connectedness, at-one-ment, interrelatedness; these are some examples of words that try to convey the meaning of Brotherhood. What I like in the word Siblinghood is the fact that there are different orders of siblings - first order, second order (in blood-relation) and so it is with the relations between the different kindoms of nature. In the Dutch translation of it, the word siblinghood sounds much better than the original in English. This may be so because there's the same word for siblinghood and kinship in Dutch ('verwantschap'). I'm afraid this won't help you much :) >I am certain that, with sufficient effort, a cleaner rewording can be done. Let's hope so. It is however the *idea* that counts. The clothing of an idea in words is bound to be imperfect. A diversity or multitude of words may have to be used to convey some idea (and that on itself can be confusing, as spiritual literature abounds with examples of the latter). That's why general semantics can be useful in this regard. > BTW, I have read a BUNCH of your articles posted on various web pages; it's nice to see that you really exist. Thank you. I noticed that some people doubt that I exist (they seem to think that I'm a kind of virtual entity in cyberspace :) Peace, Martin From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:57:45 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Links Message-ID: In message <32684523.DE4@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >I use the Netscape mail reader, partially because it allows me to click >on links such as yours rather than have to cut and paste them. The >link, however, was dead. This is the link I got... > >http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theos.html > ^ > Bart Lidofsky Looks like I made a typo? IF so, others please note! Did this lead you to some files and links to fairly simple material? A TS Emblem logo on the opening page? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:03:57 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Internet and Evolutioon Message-ID: <6VKIWPANBVayEwWE@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <1.5.4.32.19961019060845.0069ef60@whanganui.ac.nz>, Bee Brown writes >Things have been said that I >would never have thought off if left to my own devises so I thank you all >for a growing time here. I think this is mutual, Bee. In fact it is one of the greatest virtues of the theos lists that we are able to learn from each other, and to see things from points of view that we may not have otherwise though of - at least, not so soon. Theos-l is more than a mailing list, it's an educational forum from which we all can grow a little faster, and maybe, one day, provide an kind of electronic "garden" to take joy in. Mushy stuff this looks like, reading it back. But I mean it. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 17:53:56 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Theosophy Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019175931.1bd73f8e@mail.eden.com> Here is a very interesting msg I found on a newsgroup. ----------------------------------------------- >Subject: Re: Why Christians Suck >From: spiritdctr@aol.com (SpiritDctr) >Date: 1996/10/18 >Message-Id: <54726m$3uk@newsbf02.news.aol.com> >Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com >References: <53vdul$r0m@synthemesc.insync.net> >Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) >Reply-To: spiritdctr@aol.com (SpiritDctr) >Newsgroups: alt.save.the.earth Yeah. get out and vote. by the way, the founding fathers were mostly Theosofists and if you look at theosophy you can see how (in spite of the Heavy Christian Pressure) the constitution and bill of rights came out so cool. Christians believe they are the chosen, so do the Muslims, so do the Jews. Perhaps all fo these "Chosen ones Beliefs" were implanted by exterrestials. Maybee they sit back and make wagers on how long the implanted beliefs will last and how many earthlings will die as a result of them. "I bet 10 shedarens that the muslims will kill 100 jews today." "Your on." 10 minutes later walks with his friend and wispers "just abduct 2 more Jews in the new settlements and give them the martyrdom bomb the place of worship implant". I split the bet 80/20. ==============End of Message =========================== MKR - Comment: Could it be that some Adepts were guiding the thinking of those who were working on these documents? There were articles published in 1930s on this issue. No one will know for sure. Glad to see there are those who see the connection between Theo-sophical ideas and worldly affairs of great import to the country and the world at large. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 18:53:49 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <32696A09.65C8@earthlink.net> > Everybody (including us) is a product of their time. Actuallt, once one is an Initiate, as HPB and A. Bailey then one's "truth" perspective is not limited to one's "times." The truths that are presented are transcendent of personal limitations. Shanti, P -- *** A.Priori / 6524 San Felipe #323 / Houston, TX 77057 USA *** aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 18:42:34 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: gender gap Message-ID: <199610192351.TAA16365@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > And here, in the >>>present, we now accept these terms as generic and all-inclusive in the >>>racial, religious, and sexual sense. >> >>No "WE" don't. Count me out - and a great many other people. Certainly >>45 members of Theosophy International, one of whom provides this list >>for us all to use. >> >>Alan > >Ok, Alan, I'll make sure to check you off on my list...:) >--- >The Triaist Dear John, Please take me off your list as well. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 18:58:15 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Message-ID: <199610200007.UAA17261@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > If someone else were to think I was important, I would attempt to make myself >unimportant through humility, and by showing them how they are in sat my >equal. I wish to be equal with all humanity, but not equally egotistical. > Scuse me, John, in all humility, I think I AM IMPORTANT. As long as Jesse Jackson goes around telling black kids to say "I AM SOMEBODY", and as long as Serge King tells me that if you don't know what to heal in a person, you start healing their self-confidence, because many of people's ailments come from lack of it, I'm going to go around thinking that I am important. Where I get humble is when I see another human being who has learned to do things better than I. I also get humble when I remember that, in spite of all that I have learned & achieved, I still have a long ways to go. I happen to think that most people who act humble are acting, because they think it's the thing to do, but they don't have the foggiest as to what real humility is. Humility, I think isn't something you acquire consciously, you just have it. I'm not saying I have it, I'm saying I've had the good fortune of meeting people who were truly humble. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:02:59 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Uploads Message-ID: I have uploaded VANDERLW.HTM VANDERL2.HTM in http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/HISTORY/ plus masters.txt in http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/WRITINGS/ Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:05:13 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: we are all people Message-ID: <199610200013.UAA17693@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear John, >I will admit >that changing a word in order to be better understood by humanity is a very >intelligent thing to do as long as there is sufficient proof that the word you >are replacing is truly congruent in meaning to the new word. The issue at >hand is> exactly that. We need to change the word in order to be better understood by present day humanity, as for instance generation x, but also to include the baby boomers. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:14:29 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: one final thought Message-ID: <199610200023.UAA18247@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Re opened and closed meetings. When I was Branch President, the instructions in the Branch Handbook were for the Branch to decide how many open and how many closed meetings it would have. I thought that the preferred formula was to have 3 open & 1 closed meeting per month. In practice, our closed meetings turned out to be the business meetings, & if we had time we went into something very theosophical for those in attendance. I remember one year end picnic we had, in which each person reviewed a book by Geoffrey Hodson. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:11:22 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: In message <32696A09.65C8@earthlink.net>, "Patrick Alessandra Jr." writes >> Everybody (including us) is a product of their time. > > Actuallt, once one is an Initiate, as HPB and A. Bailey then one's >"truth" perspective is not limited to one's "times." The truths that >are presented are transcendent of personal limitations. You are therefore, I presume, like AAB and HPB, an "Initiate" - otherwise how can you be sure? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:25:03 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Language Message-ID: <53+oeSAfFXayEw1g@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In an earlier post, referring to the all-pervading use of masculine or male terminology to which many modern people object, someone wrote: "And here, in the present, we now accept these terms as generic and all- inclusive in the racial, religious, and sexual sense." Of course I and others disagreed, but the anachronistic language still survives and is defended with a tenacity that suggests to many of us quite clearly where the defender is coming from (ie, male superiority and patriarchalism). However, the fact *is* that the above quote *was* true in the late 19th century when the "core" literature of latter-day theosophy was being written. And so the question is, "Why?" Was it because the 19th century writers really did see a hierarchy dominated by white males as the "natural order" of things? If they did, we might have to wonder just how much of the "core" theosophical writings are suspect in their assertion of eternal truths - unless of course this form of domination or control IS the natural order of things. Do gays have a Great Pink Brotherhood? :-) Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:34:24 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: politically correct theosophy Message-ID: <199610200043.UAA19487@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Eldon, you write >Some terms like "brotherhood" I see as falling in this second >class. The term does not mean, as I see it, "a men's club, a place >where women are not invited because they can't make the grade." It >rather means a sangha or mutual support of a positive, masculine, >forthright, creative nature. Eldon, I think tat's a perfectly good meaning of the word brotherhood. But don';t you see the problem is that not everyone would agree with you that this is so; and I don't realy think we need to antagonize any prospective new theosophical member because of a silly word, to which some people now attach a different meaning than the one you present above. It's cutting off our noses to spite our faces. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:48:57 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: boston lodge explusion Message-ID: <199610200057.UAA20371@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >the competent people, disgusted at the lack of action, frequently end up >going away, leaving the incompetent behind. > > It is up to the competent people (and I AM including you) who have more >patience to try and move things in another direction, and to see that >problems get fixed rather than ignored. > I think some of us are rather tired of being the competent people who are being given the shaft repeatedly. I've had about 10 years of it. That doesn't make me very competent, or if I ever was, the old gray mare ..... If I were beating a dead horse, I'd at least get some much needed exercise. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:51:49 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: one finak thought Message-ID: <199610200100.VAA20523@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender >specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support >that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. Dear Bert, and to whomever else it does concern ... please read what TI made of this. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:22:02 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: the pledge & the week end Message-ID: <199610200130.VAA22402@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > > >transfer all the assets to the Trust and once this is done, no one >has to >>> answer to any one.> > >What's the Trust? The reason why I'm asking is that last year, when I asked >Fernando de Torilljos to tell me what happened to the money the TS of A >obtained from the lawsuit which followed the sale of the Boston Lodge's >house, he said it was in the hands of a Trust. Is that connected? > >Liesel > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:32:47 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: pol corr theos Message-ID: <199610200141.VAA23084@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Or perhaps mouth shut could be replaced by honest communication? > That's what we did for hundreds of years.... keep our mouths shut, or wheedle or flatter ... instead of honest communication. Let's not go back to it. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:41:28 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: one last thought Message-ID: <199610200150.VAA23645@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Liesel suggested: universal Siblinghood I don't want to mislead anyone. I stole that from John Algeo, who was being facetious. Here's the 1st object of Theosophy International as of 2/96 "To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without discrimination with regard to sex (including sexual orientation), creed, class, or color." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:45:43 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Re: Electronic archives Message-ID: In message <199610190235.WAA13718@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes > Alan, > >I still have some material on a disk. You said I should put it in myself, >but I have no idea as to how to do it, or I would've put it in a long time >ago. You can send me files by e-mail. If they are larger than (say) 50K, it is best to split the file into smaller ones, and name them (say) file1.txt - file2.txt and so on. > I found a whole 500pp book on the internet about doing web pages. As of >the moment I'm otherwise occupied. I found out today why I'm dragging so >much, & why it's so difficult for me to get up from a seat. My hemoglobin is >1/2 of what it should be, because my kindneys aren't making a certain enzyme >they should be making. I'm going for a transfusion tomorrow AM, and >beginning in 2 weeks I have to get enzyme shots 3 x per week. I'm hoping the >insurancde will pay for one of the nurses at Summerfield to do it. Otherwise >I have to chase cross town to my doctor's 3 times a week, That means being >thus occupied for 3 afternoons a week, because bus tranportation takes that >long. Well I really hope the insurance will cover it. It's a nasty business to have to bear with. Our supposedly wonderful Nationa Health Service gets worse day by day - one hospital just announced that they will be refusing emergency admissions to anyone over 75 .... now that's downright evil. I hope your treatment goes well and without too much bother. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 18:32:16 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Re: Electronic archives Message-ID: <199610192340.TAA15646@ultra1.dreamscape.com> You've probably tried everything already for your arthritis. This guy at 5AM was selling shark cartilege. But the thing was he said it helped inflammation. My chiropractor just told me to take 1-2 ounces of Aloe juice every day, because my intestines are always inflamed. It works. Aloe works on inflammations. For what it's worth. Meantime, it looks like I can get my shots at Summerfield. We belong to the Loretto system (which is a local chain for all sorts of elder care) and Loretto has a home care service that my Medicare will pay for. I may have to listen some to preachings about letting Jesus be Lord, from the RN but so be it. Other than that, she's very nice. I had dealings with her when I was in the hospital 2 years ago with bronchitis. I'll try to transmit some of that stuff tomorrow. Some of it has to be cleaned up, because it has all kinds of silly signs in the middle of it. Liesel ............................................................................... >In message <199610190235.WAA13718@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. >deutsch" writes >> Alan, >> >>I still have some material on a disk. You said I should put it in myself, >>but I have no idea as to how to do it, or I would've put it in a long time >>ago. > >You can send me files by e-mail. If they are larger than (say) 50K, it >is best to split the file into smaller ones, and name them (say) >file1.txt - file2.txt and so on. > >> I found a whole 500pp book on the internet about doing web pages. As of >>the moment I'm otherwise occupied. I found out today why I'm dragging so >>much, & why it's so difficult for me to get up from a seat. My hemoglobin is >>1/2 of what it should be, because my kindneys aren't making a certain enzyme >>they should be making. I'm going for a transfusion tomorrow AM, and >>beginning in 2 weeks I have to get enzyme shots 3 x per week. I'm hoping the >>insurancde will pay for one of the nurses at Summerfield to do it. Otherwise >>I have to chase cross town to my doctor's 3 times a week, That means being >>thus occupied for 3 afternoons a week, because bus tranportation takes that >>long. > >Well I really hope the insurance will cover it. It's a nasty business to >have to bear with. Our supposedly wonderful Nationa Health Service gets >worse day by day - one hospital just announced that they will be >refusing emergency admissions to anyone over 75 .... now that's >downright evil. > >I hope your treatment goes well and without too much bother. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:12:48 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019231826.2a7f723a@mail.eden.com> Hi Here is a TS Homepage setup by Rodolfo Don which has some very interesting material. You may want to visit it. The URL is: http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:12:24 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TS - A view from the International President Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019231801.37c7c2d0@mail.eden.com> Hi I saw the following in the TS Homepage setup by Rodolfo Don at http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html which I thought might interest some who may not have seen the following article by the International President. MKRamdoss ===================== Why the Theosophical Society? Reproduced from "The Theosophist", (On the Watch-Tower), July 1996 issue. Everyone who applies for membership of the TS must be in sympathy with the declared Objects of the Society, as the application form itself makes clear. One can surely expect that, when subscribing to the Society's objects, more specifically to the universal brotherhood it seeks to bring about in the world, the applicant pays proper attention to what the Society stands for, and that joining the TS is not entirely a careless or insincere act. It is therefore surprising when, after some years of membership, someone says that he or she joined the Society not in order to support the Objects, but for some other reason; or still worse, holds the view that the Objects should be quite other than what they are. If the Objects were to be changed, then the Society would not be the Theosophical Society, but something else. In some countries, even the legal status of the Society would be seriously affected. The Inner Founders of the Society, the Teachers of H.P. Blavatsky and H.S. Olcott, who inspired them and brought them together in America, were very clear about what the Society should stand for, as evidenced by the letters which They were gracious enough to write. In 1880, addressing Sinnett, KH wrote (ML 3rd ed., letter 2): The Chiefs want a 'brotherhood of humanity', a real Universal Fraternity started; an institution which would make itself known throughout the world and arrest the attention of the highest minds. Again and again their intention had to be emphasized because the correspondent was unable to grasp its importance and wanted to gain knowledge from the Teachers, for knowledge gained brings a certain immediate satisfaction, while toiling for universal brotherhood is hard and seemingly less rewarding. The search for knowledge may become a selfish undertaking, and hence the note of admonishment: 'It is he alone who has the love of humanity at heart, who is capable of grasping the idea of a regenerating practical Brotherhood, who is entitled to the possession of our secrets.' (Letter 38) Because the words of the Mahatmas did not go home, HPB reminded Sinnett (Letter 138): 'You cannot have forgotten what I told you repeatedly at Simla and what the Master KH wrote to you himself, namely that the TS is part of a Universal Brotherhood...' It is very probable that for those whose vision is far seeing, and for whom past, present and future are like an open book, humanity's further descent morally and spiritually was already known. They may have foreseen that bitter conflicts and ruthlessly selfish activities would trouble the world for a long time to come. The emphasis on brotherhood could not but be considered as the potent remedy which they wanted to administer to humanity in the mass, which they declared was their paramount concern. Humanity today has its back to the wall. It will either survive by realizing that brotherhood and cooperation are unavoidable norms for human growth, or civilization will perish as a result of the 'progress' that includes possession of deadly weapons, poisoning of the environment, and other irresponsible acts. As the resources of the earth decrease and competition becomes more intense, individual as well as group selfishness become more aggressive than ever, and a twisted philosophy is being developed to support selfish aims. Recently some books have been published promoting racist ideas under the guise of science. Genetic engineering is a tool that these 'scientific racists' could put to use to accomplish their designs. IQ tests are also being conveniently manipulated to prove their theories about racial superiority. But the basic question is: What is real intelligence? Those who believe that compassion, sympathy and self-sacrifice have nothing to do with intelligent living could themselves be regarded as deficient in IQ. If this basic point is examined and defined without prejudice. Are the smart people with high IQs creating a better world, or is it getting worse? Does intelligence consist in generating widespread violence, corruption and insecurity, which is happening everywhere today? Amenesty International reports that the present century has surpassed every other age in torturing people. A recent report in The Guardian Weekly (2 June '96) says the United States budget for erecting prisons has risen from 2 to 10 percent. Out of every 100,000 Americans, 565 are behind bars. Running prisons has become a sort of industry with consultants and private companies having a hand in organizing and supervising. This may soon happen in many other places. Therefore, working for cooperation, trust and brotherly relations at the individual, national and every other level is vital for humanity. The Theosophical Society has by no means an obsolete aim. It must propagate universal brotherhood without distinction of race, religion and so forth, and also show by example that selfishness can be replaced by mutual trust and sympathy to the great advantage of all. The arguments in favor of unity are obvious. Even ordinary people can now see that if we proceed along the present direction of ruthless selfishness, there will be increasing difficulties. Progressive minds are viewing life as a whole. It is not necessary in the present context to acquire a deep philosophical insight, let alone wisdom, in order to realize that brotherhood is the only sane course and there is no other alternative. Lodge Work Some TS Lodges, especially those which are in theosophically remote areas, tend to center their work on whatever their own small membership finds interesting. Lodges and groups within our Society do have the freedom to work on themes of particular interest to them, and carry on activities which are to their liking, but the freedom must be exercised within the framework of the Society's character and structure. Were each unit to function without regard to the whole, the Society would not exist as a worldwide body, a globally spread family of harmoniously minded members. Behind every foolish act of human beings is some kind of philosophical assumption. The aggressive, competitive attitudes prevalent today have their roots in the assumption that there is nothing beyond the material world and, as material things appear to be separate from each other, the underlying philosophy encourages promoting the interest of the particular at the expense of the whole. Therefore members must probe deeply and discover how the human mind fragments life and brings about inequality and continual strife; also that the only philosophy which illumines the whole field of human activity and inundates it with happiness is the holistic one. Using words like unity or wholeness is one thing, but in order to grasp their deep meaning, and know how to apply the newly acquired perspectives to the different aspects of the human condition, we need not only a thoughtful, but a brotherly attitude. Let us remember that although we may have entered the Society for a variety of reasons, we should not remain in it without applying ourselves in a direction which will change world-thought by sweeping away the cobwebs of prejudice and suspicion. Radha Burnier Mrs Radha Burnier is current International President of the Theosophical Society. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 22:31:27 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: the pledge & the week end Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > > > >transfer all the assets to the Trust and once this is done, no one > >has to > >>> answer to any one.> > > > >What's the Trust? The reason why I'm asking is that last year, when I asked > >Fernando de Torilljos to tell me what happened to the money the TS of A > >obtained from the lawsuit which followed the sale of the Boston Lodge's > >house, he said it was in the hands of a Trust. Is that connected? > > > >Liesel I do not know what Trust he was talking about. There is the Theosophical Investment Trust which invests funds for TSA. There could be another Trust setup by the Boston Lodge. So it is possible that the money is sitting somewhere earning some income which is available for the Boston lodge to use. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:12:24 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TS - A view from the International President Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019231801.37c7c2d0@mail.eden.com> Hi I saw the following in the TS Homepage setup by Rodolfo Don at http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html which I thought might interest some who may not have seen the following article by the International President. MKRamdoss ===================== Why the Theosophical Society? Reproduced from "The Theosophist", (On the Watch-Tower), July 1996 issue. Everyone who applies for membership of the TS must be in sympathy with the declared Objects of the Society, as the application form itself makes clear. One can surely expect that, when subscribing to the Society's objects, more specifically to the universal brotherhood it seeks to bring about in the world, the applicant pays proper attention to what the Society stands for, and that joining the TS is not entirely a careless or insincere act. It is therefore surprising when, after some years of membership, someone says that he or she joined the Society not in order to support the Objects, but for some other reason; or still worse, holds the view that the Objects should be quite other than what they are. If the Objects were to be changed, then the Society would not be the Theosophical Society, but something else. In some countries, even the legal status of the Society would be seriously affected. The Inner Founders of the Society, the Teachers of H.P. Blavatsky and H.S. Olcott, who inspired them and brought them together in America, were very clear about what the Society should stand for, as evidenced by the letters which They were gracious enough to write. In 1880, addressing Sinnett, KH wrote (ML 3rd ed., letter 2): The Chiefs want a 'brotherhood of humanity', a real Universal Fraternity started; an institution which would make itself known throughout the world and arrest the attention of the highest minds. Again and again their intention had to be emphasized because the correspondent was unable to grasp its importance and wanted to gain knowledge from the Teachers, for knowledge gained brings a certain immediate satisfaction, while toiling for universal brotherhood is hard and seemingly less rewarding. The search for knowledge may become a selfish undertaking, and hence the note of admonishment: 'It is he alone who has the love of humanity at heart, who is capable of grasping the idea of a regenerating practical Brotherhood, who is entitled to the possession of our secrets.' (Letter 38) Because the words of the Mahatmas did not go home, HPB reminded Sinnett (Letter 138): 'You cannot have forgotten what I told you repeatedly at Simla and what the Master KH wrote to you himself, namely that the TS is part of a Universal Brotherhood...' It is very probable that for those whose vision is far seeing, and for whom past, present and future are like an open book, humanity's further descent morally and spiritually was already known. They may have foreseen that bitter conflicts and ruthlessly selfish activities would trouble the world for a long time to come. The emphasis on brotherhood could not but be considered as the potent remedy which they wanted to administer to humanity in the mass, which they declared was their paramount concern. Humanity today has its back to the wall. It will either survive by realizing that brotherhood and cooperation are unavoidable norms for human growth, or civilization will perish as a result of the 'progress' that includes possession of deadly weapons, poisoning of the environment, and other irresponsible acts. As the resources of the earth decrease and competition becomes more intense, individual as well as group selfishness become more aggressive than ever, and a twisted philosophy is being developed to support selfish aims. Recently some books have been published promoting racist ideas under the guise of science. Genetic engineering is a tool that these 'scientific racists' could put to use to accomplish their designs. IQ tests are also being conveniently manipulated to prove their theories about racial superiority. But the basic question is: What is real intelligence? Those who believe that compassion, sympathy and self-sacrifice have nothing to do with intelligent living could themselves be regarded as deficient in IQ. If this basic point is examined and defined without prejudice. Are the smart people with high IQs creating a better world, or is it getting worse? Does intelligence consist in generating widespread violence, corruption and insecurity, which is happening everywhere today? Amenesty International reports that the present century has surpassed every other age in torturing people. A recent report in The Guardian Weekly (2 June '96) says the United States budget for erecting prisons has risen from 2 to 10 percent. Out of every 100,000 Americans, 565 are behind bars. Running prisons has become a sort of industry with consultants and private companies having a hand in organizing and supervising. This may soon happen in many other places. Therefore, working for cooperation, trust and brotherly relations at the individual, national and every other level is vital for humanity. The Theosophical Society has by no means an obsolete aim. It must propagate universal brotherhood without distinction of race, religion and so forth, and also show by example that selfishness can be replaced by mutual trust and sympathy to the great advantage of all. The arguments in favor of unity are obvious. Even ordinary people can now see that if we proceed along the present direction of ruthless selfishness, there will be increasing difficulties. Progressive minds are viewing life as a whole. It is not necessary in the present context to acquire a deep philosophical insight, let alone wisdom, in order to realize that brotherhood is the only sane course and there is no other alternative. Lodge Work Some TS Lodges, especially those which are in theosophically remote areas, tend to center their work on whatever their own small membership finds interesting. Lodges and groups within our Society do have the freedom to work on themes of particular interest to them, and carry on activities which are to their liking, but the freedom must be exercised within the framework of the Society's character and structure. Were each unit to function without regard to the whole, the Society would not exist as a worldwide body, a globally spread family of harmoniously minded members. Behind every foolish act of human beings is some kind of philosophical assumption. The aggressive, competitive attitudes prevalent today have their roots in the assumption that there is nothing beyond the material world and, as material things appear to be separate from each other, the underlying philosophy encourages promoting the interest of the particular at the expense of the whole. Therefore members must probe deeply and discover how the human mind fragments life and brings about inequality and continual strife; also that the only philosophy which illumines the whole field of human activity and inundates it with happiness is the holistic one. Using words like unity or wholeness is one thing, but in order to grasp their deep meaning, and know how to apply the newly acquired perspectives to the different aspects of the human condition, we need not only a thoughtful, but a brotherly attitude. Let us remember that although we may have entered the Society for a variety of reasons, we should not remain in it without applying ourselves in a direction which will change world-thought by sweeping away the cobwebs of prejudice and suspicion. Radha Burnier Mrs Radha Burnier is current International President of the Theosophical Society. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:12:48 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019231826.2a7f723a@mail.eden.com> Hi Here is a TS Homepage setup by Rodolfo Don which has some very interesting material. You may want to visit it. The URL is: http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/MyPage.html MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:19:39 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Electronic Publishing Message-ID: Hi As the activities of theos-xxxx expands, I see the possibility of any new books or pamphlets or brochures on Theosophy being published on the Internet for free downloading by anyone interested. Once downloaded, some of the users may like to get a printed copy. >From what I have seen, some of the software documentation that come with some of the free downloadable software are made available in two popular formats. One is Adobe Acrobat Format and the other is Microsoft Word Format. In both cases, there are free software available for viewing and printing the documents. Can anyone who has more knowledge in this area provide any input? _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 17:18:04 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Links Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961020041804.00697cf0@whanganui.ac.nz> At 06:39 PM 19/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In message <32684523.DE4@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky >writes >>I use the Netscape mail reader, partially because it allows me to click >>on links such as yours rather than have to cut and paste them. The >>link, however, was dead. This is the link I got... >> >>http://www1.minn.net/~vlg/theos.html >> ^ >> Bart Lidofsky > >Looks like I made a typo? IF so, others please note! Did this lead you >to some files and links to fairly simple material? A TS Emblem logo on >the opening page? > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk > >So that is why I couldn't get at it. Told me the URL didn't exist or something similar. All for want of an s. I will have another go. Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:51:39 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019235715.291f158c@mail.eden.com> At 01:35 PM 10/17/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dear brother MK Ramadoss, and others > >Please do not be so hard in the TSA. >I work in a billion $$$ corporation that is just starting to get into the >internet even though some of us are in there enjoying the benefits of >research and sharing of information. >But the 96 Summer School and Annual Convention at Olcott, John Algeo >devoted plenty time to the roll of the TSA and the internet. Ruben >scheduled tours to the server and explain and let people surf the internet >as well as some education. Last year we had Don given a presentation during >the Summer School. And during his talk at Krotona he mentioned the future >of TSA in the Internet. >The internet is always in his mind, the question, I think is always money, >resources, etc. >So, maybe a bit slow in our standards, but for the average member and user >maybe just ok the pace. I am glad that for your feedback. Let us look forward to the day that Internet is used to reach out to the public so that Theosophy can affect large number of human beings out there. > >I think our energies should be devoted to enrich the electronic archives >with articles, scanning old books, lectures pamphlets, pictures, etc., so >when they are ready to do it in big scale they have it in storage. > You have brought up a very important topic which is in the minds of myself and many others who are active on theos-xxxx. The copyrights on most of the classics of Theosophy has expired. If they are scanned and put on the Internet, anyone can access any of them for free and download them. Once downloaded, they can be printed in attractive format for hard copy. In effect we are looking towards making the classics for free to anyone having access to Internet from anywhere in the world. I do not know if you are subscribed to theos-l. I just posted a message for feed back on this subject. If the publications are make available in Acrobat format or Word Format, there are free software available to view and print them. Thus anyone can print the books at their own home. I am glad you are also thinking on the same lines. However, such home printing will cut down on the sales of classics currently published and sold by TPH. >We must at all times be constructive in our thinking, not complaining but >working ceaselessly for the cause of Universal Fraternity, and even if we >want to complain should come out with more work. After all who is going to >do the work if is not us, who has some awareness? > We are dealing with two issues here. When there is a democratically setup organization with elected officers, one should expect comments and criticisms as these are made in the interests of Theosophy. Secondly, as for practical application of Theosophy, Theosophy has never been officially defined. Each one of us understand Theosophy to the best of our understanding and all of us are trying to put it into practice in our every day activities. So what one's understanding is and how one wants to apply for the benefit of Humanity is something each one of us has to decide. >Lastly the TSA is not important, I am a THEOSOPHIST even if the TSA ceases >to exist, which means I do not need an organization to be a Theosophist. >Therefore I do not expect the TSA to solve my problems and expectation, but >I see myself as a resource to them any way they want me, even if they do >not want me, I have plenty work to do as a theosophist in my community >-giving lectures, classes, forming study groups in neibourhood where there >is no theosophy, and so on. Please let me know if any one in this list does >not know how and what to be a Theosophist in a community a have plenty >ideas, and can even travel to their Lodge or Study Group to give some >leadership awareness. > I completely agree with you. As a Theosophist, I have to solve my problems. It reminds me of a statement that a famous philosopher/thinker made "I do not expect anything from anyone Man or God". At the same time, to be of help to my fellow beings, I have told everyone I know that I am accessible anytime around the clock for any reason whatsoever and my phone number is listed in the phone book. I even have toll free numbers set up for both my office and my home so that no one should have any difficulty to reach me any time day or night. >There is plenty to do, but let everybody be themselves in their our pace. > >Martin Leiderman at your service in Los Angeles >Peace and Harmony to all > > MKRamadoss ----------------------------- Peace to all living beings From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:26:33 -0800 From: Art House Subject: Love Revisited Message-ID: <3269F03A.781C@earthlink.net> Bert wrote: >And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender >specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support >that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. Would it just be too simple to say "the Love of Humanity?" When you remove the limiting masculine referent from words like "Brotherhood" or "Fellowship" and yet still are trying to say things like: >"(Essential) connectedness, at-one-ment, interrelatedness" or >"mutual support", "Love" seems more than adequate. It always bothered me that "Christ" was refered to in the masculine as the "Son" of God and all of that. If you do even a simple recapitualation of esoteric cosmogenesis with respect to polarity, it becomes obvious that the offspring of Spirit and Matter (Father and Mother) is the relationship of both. Unmanifest = Manifest (+.-) This "offspring" is neither pole AND both poles at once. It is Child (+.-). It is Love (+.-) It is Consciousness (+.-) It is That we are (+.-) I suppose I'd draw fire for suggesting "Brotherhood" be replaced with "Childhood of Humanity", or "Consciousness of Humanity", but along certain lines of thought it fits and places one in good perpective. But, doesn't "Love" has enough room in it to contain these concepts? This is the crux of the issue, isn't it? Lets face it! We err to continue using divisive separatist language when what we share as common goal presumes to lead us to unity. ______________________________ As an aside, (IMHO) We really need our personal egos and cannot function without them. It is right and natural that we have and identify with them. It is the Great Law which provides for them and will in good time release the hidden gem from within them. (A deep mystery is hidden in the word "I" and the silence that surrounds it) Assimilate. Integrate. Liberate. (+.-) Also (gently): >once one is an Initiate, as HPB and A. Bailey then one's "truth" perspective is not limited to one's "times." The truths that are presented are transcendent of personal limitations. I'd be careful here. Both HPB's writings and the books by Bailey are chock full of warnings and cautions to the contrary. Will this point of view lead to spiritual self reliance? And finally, To my knowledge, our American founding fathers were Masons and not Theosophists. The Philosophical Research Organization http://www.prs.org and the works of Manley P. Hall are ripe with information for those interested. I also know of an account of a series of visions George Washington supposedly had at Valley Forge that might prove of interest to those looking into the "esoteric origins of the United States". I'll see if I can dig up the reference. Yours in earnest Childhood, :-) Love, Mark From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 06:44:04 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: we are all people Message-ID: <199610201044.GAA19992@envirolink.org> liesel f. deutsch writes: >We need to change the word in order to be better understood by >present day humanity, as for instance generation x, but also to include the >baby boomers. If that is solely the reasoning behind your desire to change the word, then I totally agree with you. But as I have said, the impression I was given is that you were changing the word because it insulted and/or demeaned your and other's gender. If this is the reason behind the manipulation, then I disagree, for this strengthens the connection to the personal self (the ego), and severs the connection to the universal self (the atman). Your main goal, as I understand it, is to help humanity to "ascend" spiritually and/or become "enlightened". If this manipulation of words is for the purpose of appeasing the personal self's dissatisfaction, humanity's path to spiritual ascension will be hindered rather than helped. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 07:16:31 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Message-ID: <199610201116.HAA20577@envirolink.org> liesel f. deutsch writes: >> If someone else were to think I was important, I would attempt to make >>myself unimportant through humility, and by showing them how they are in >>sat my equal. I wish to be equal with all humanity, but not equally >>egotistical. > >Scuse me, John, in all humility, I think I AM IMPORTANT. As long as Jesse >Jackson goes around telling black kids to say "I AM SOMEBODY", and as long >as Serge King tells me that if you don't know what to heal in a person, you >start healing their self-confidence, because many of people's ailments come >from lack of it, I'm going to go around thinking that I am important. Where Yes, Liesel, you are important, and so am I, as is everyone. I suppose what I am trying to say here is that I do not believe that one person is any more important than the next. Normally if someone tells me that I am important, they are saying this because they feel that I am more important than they. Because I am modest, therefore, through my humility, those who have thought me more important find themselves as my equal, just as they should. I have also found that it is much easier to learn from someone if you neither look up to them or look down at them. This point of view also serves as a more efficient relationship between "student" and "teacher", for if the student knows he is equal with the teacher, then he also knows that he has as much to teach the master as the latter does to him. And if the master knows that he is equal with his student, then he will not ignore what the student has to teach. (I apologize for the "he" and "his", but this is how I write, and I am sure you know that I do not write in this way to demean you) >I get humble is when I see another human being who has learned to do things >better than I. I also get humble when I remember that, in spite of all that >I have learned & achieved, I still have a long ways to go. I happen to think >that most people who act humble are acting, because they think it's the >thing to do, but they don't have the foggiest as to what real humility is. Some do not, as they only know what it looks like on the outside. I think also that many people define humility as a state of being lower than another. I looked up the word in fear that I had used it incorrectly, but found that I had not. One of the definitions refers to the "lowness", but it is not the principle definition. What I meant by humility is modesty. And, as the first definition states (for humble), I am conscious of my own defects and shortcomings and I am not proud or self-assertive. This shows when I am face to face with others. I do not know how I come across on these posts, but I assure you I do not mean to act as though I am higher than you, for I do not feel that way at all. >Humility, I think isn't something you acquire consciously, you just have it. >I'm not saying I have it, I'm saying I've had the good fortune of meeting >people who were truly humble. > >Liesel If you do not feel that you are better than anyone else and if you feel that recognition is unimportant ...then you are humble. And if you do not feel this way, you can acquire it. All you have to do is change your views on others and yourself and realize that you are equal and not higher or lower, regardless of what anyone may tell you. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 07:27:48 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: we are all equals Message-ID: <199610201127.HAA20838@envirolink.org> liesel f. deutsch writes: >OK, we are all equals. >But we're not the same. >At this stage of our evolution sex does matter. If you think it's not, you >haven't watched TV lately. We haven't advanced enough to rebecome >hermaphrodites. > I go along with Ann's idea that it would be nice to have a service once >with all female generic names. That is because, even though we all know that >women and men are all equally important, this is not yet being acted out in >our every day lives. And as of the moment it is very important to women to >be recognized as being equally as valuable as men. As long as there's >unwanted pinching in the office, we're not equal. The pinching doesn't necessarily have to do with the world view of women, but the view of the pincher. And it doesn't have to do with gender so much either. It has more to do with sexual orientation. I have read articles where gay men have piched other men in the office environment. Gender is obviously not the case here. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 07:37:07 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: Definitions Message-ID: <199610201137.HAA21069@envirolink.org> Dr. A.M.Bain writes: >In message <199610170251.WAA15173@envirolink.org>, John Straughn > writes >>You (and not you specifically, "you" meaning those >>who have stated that they wish to change the words on the following >>grounds) wish to change the words because you, among and /or in sympathy >>with others, feel offended in a sexually discriminative manner. This is >>undeniably an offence to the ego and the ego only. Therefore, by changing >>the words because of the latter reason, you are giving in to and giving >>strength to your ego, thereby weakening your attraction to the atman. > >It is undeniably what it says it is. *People* (not just "egos" - a >term undefined by you) offended, not just parts of them. You seem to be >following a doctrinal position in your posts on this, but without >stating what that position is, or defining your terms. The very word >"Ego" is used in several ways by different schools of thought. Some >might even be equated (by the users) with what you might call "atman." > >This is yet another language problem! Ok, a language problem it is. And I agree that many things need to be changed for humanity to better understand less modern writings. But, as I have insinuated before, the reasoning behind an action is just as powerful as the action itself. As far as the word "ego" is concerned, in my understanding of the terminology, it is the "personal" self. I.E. the self which serves only the person in whom it dwells. Whereas the atman is the universal self, that which serves humanity and nature as a whole. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 07:46:53 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: <199610201146.HAA21278@envirolink.org> Ann E. Bermingham writes: >Can you show how the removal of ego and attraction to the atman is going to >help us in the modernization and updating of TS around the world? You can still modernize and update the TS literature by changing the words that don't need to be changed without giving in to the personal self and the personal self of others.(pers. self = ego) (btw, I am not saying "remove" the ego, for 1. we do need it, for it provides for individuality, and without it we would not be able to exist in this sphere of being, and 2. you can't remove it anyway.) It is not the manipulation of words that I am most concerned about, it is the reasoning behind the manipulation. I am not debating with those who are changing the words so that humanity will better understand the literature of the past, I am arguing with those who are changing the word(s) because they feel that their gender is being demeaned. --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun Oct 20 07:56:24 1996 From: John Straughn Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610201156.HAA21432@envirolink.org> Ann E. Bermingham writes: >BTW, I've gotten the impression that your spiritual path is decidely >Eastern/Yogic and that there is a great emphasis on eliminating or >lessening the ego. Could you elaborate on this? :) ...my spiritual path is based on many of the beliefs from all over the world and from all different eras. I guess you could say I am on the "renaissance" path of spiritual awareness and ascension. Eliminating the ego is not one of my concerns, but lessening it is, true. If I may ask, what is your stand on the ego? --- The Triaist From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 07:32:05 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Art House wrote: > > To my knowledge, our American founding fathers were Masons and not > Theosophists. The Philosophical Research Organization > > http://www.prs.org > > and the works of Manley P. Hall are ripe with information for those > interested. I also know of an account of a series of visions George > Washington supposedly had at Valley Forge that might prove of interest > to those looking into the "esoteric origins of the United States". I'll > see if I can dig up the reference. > > Yours in earnest Childhood, :-) > > Love, > > Mark You are right. Most of them were Masons. I don't think anyone of them ever knew the term Theosophy. I suppose the writer of the msg may be someone who has not read about Masons. Any way, some free publicity about Theosophy in cyberworld. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 07:36:16 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, John Straughn wrote: > Ann E. Bermingham writes: > >BTW, I've gotten the impression that your spiritual path is decidely > >Eastern/Yogic and that there is a great emphasis on eliminating or > >lessening the ego. Could you elaborate on this? > > :) ...my spiritual path is based on many of the beliefs from all over the > world and from all different eras. I guess you could say I am on the > "renaissance" path of spiritual awareness and ascension. Eliminating the ego > is not one of my concerns, but lessening it is, true. If I may ask, what is > your stand on the ego? > In one of the programs broadcast over San Diego PBS, years ago, Krishnaji gave a very interesting explanation of the Cross. The cross, as HPB had explained is a very ancient symbol. According to Krishnaji, it symbolizes "Kill the "I"". So eliminating the ego appears to be a universal ideas behind all spiritual paths. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 07:36:22 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: we are all equals Message-ID: <199610201855.OAA24127@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > The pinching doesn't necessarily have to do with the world view of women, but > the view of the pincher. And it doesn't have to do with gender so much > either. It has more to do with sexual orientation. I have read articles > where gay men have piched other men in the office environment. Gender is > obviously not the case here. Equal opportunity pinching? Perhaps what we're really talking about here is feeling that the pincher gets from having having *power* over the pinchee, who is being pinched without her/his permission or consent. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:32:29 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: <199610201855.OAA24145@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > Ann E. Bermingham writes: > >Can you show how the removal of ego and attraction to the atman is going to > >help us in the modernization and updating of TS around the world? > > You can still modernize and update the TS literature by changing the words > that don't need to be changed without giving in to the personal self and the > personal self of others.(pers. self = ego) I am not debating with > those who are changing the words so that humanity will better understand the > literature of the past, I am arguing with those who are changing the word(s) > because they feel that their gender is being demeaned. The question is *who* determines *when* another is "giving in to the personal self". Who makes those rather judgemental and all-knowing decisions? That infers that you, as a truly wise person, "knows" when "we" are "giving in to our personal selves." That might put you on the level of a guru or spiritual teacher, or aspiring to be one in this particular Theosophical circle. IMHO, I think a truly wise person who has that kind of insight and intuitive knowledge (gnosis) probably observes, then lets people work it out for themselves. BTW, are you a member of TS and for how long? Most of the people I have met on this list have been members of various TS organizations for a lot longer than I have - decades. For some reason, they have never been concerned with "giving in to their personal self", at least on a public basis. They seem to be more concerned with TS and how its functioning could be improved. That seems to be the focus of most discussion, although we wander a bit, now and then. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:57:00 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We are all equals Message-ID: <199610201858.OAA25370@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: John Straughn > Ann E. Bermingham writes: > >BTW, I've gotten the impression that your spiritual path is decidely > >Eastern/Yogic and that there is a great emphasis on eliminating or > >lessening the ego. Could you elaborate on this? > > :) ...my spiritual path is based on many of the beliefs from all over the > world and from all different eras. I guess you could say I am on the > "renaissance" path of spiritual awareness and ascension. Eliminating the ego > is not one of my concerns, but lessening it is, true. If I may ask, what is > your stand on the ego? I have one. Ann E. Bermingham : - ) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:37:32 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: policial correctness Message-ID: <326A7F7C.4671@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > Here we go again > > >if someone who claims to be dedicated to the truth > > Whose truth are we talking about? It depends; Are you taking the dualistic point of view that reality is a creation of our own subjectivity, and there is no objective reality? In that case, "political correctness" DOES have a place; if you believe hard enough in something, it will be true. Certainly, as Theosophists, we are allowed to take a pre-rational viewpoint towards reality. It DOES, however, go against all major theosophical writings, paradoxically creating a burden of proof on one who does not accept the validity of objective evidence. To accept the concept of truth being solely subjective, one has to reject Blavatsky, Leadbeater, Judge, Besant, Bailey, Steiner, the Mahatma Letters, etc. Now, once again, one certainly has the right to discuss this; from what I have been told, one of the purposes of this mailing list is for the free discussion of unpopular ideas. The trouble comes when one expects others to accept it without an argument. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:42:18 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <326A809A.2A45@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > Christian symbology rather than Christianity itself. When I first looked > > at Alice Bailey, I opend two books of hers at random, and read a couple > > of pages. One was about how the white race was charged with bringing the > > black race up to the standards of the white race. The other was how > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Many here have not read much of Bailey's books. It would be very > interesting to some if you can find the relevant reference. No hurry. > Just curious. It looks like it would be a good idea, in any case. I am at the end of a hard schedule (60 hour work weeks at my day job, plus a public lecture and a members' lecture at the NYTS, and teaching a class starting tomorrow), but when things lighten up a bit, I will put some time into going through the Quest Bookshop's excellent collection of Alice Bailey books, and see if I can relocate the references. Bart From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:45:56 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: TS into the next century Message-ID: <326A8174.4B0C@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > Add to it to bring nomenclature up to date, > not only male/female, but also the sanskrit terms, which don't mean much to > a beginner, and need to be thoroughly explained... the concepts are more > important than the terms. Michael Gomes is, at this moment, hard at work on an updated THEOSOPHICAL GLOSSARY (his abridgement of ISIS UNVEILED will be published this spring). Bart From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:50:21 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: <326A827D.5F9D@sprynet.com> Patrick Alessandra Jr. wrote: > > > Everybody (including us) is a product of their time. > > Actuallt, once one is an Initiate, as HPB and A. Bailey then one's > "truth" perspective is not limited to one's "times." The truths that > are presented are transcendent of personal limitations. Just for one quick case in point, read what Blavatsky says about hypnotism in the 2nd volume of The Secret Doctrine. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:51:39 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: One Final Thought Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961019235715.291f158c@mail.eden.com> At 01:35 PM 10/17/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dear brother MK Ramadoss, and others > >Please do not be so hard in the TSA. >I work in a billion $$$ corporation that is just starting to get into the >internet even though some of us are in there enjoying the benefits of >research and sharing of information. >But the 96 Summer School and Annual Convention at Olcott, John Algeo >devoted plenty time to the roll of the TSA and the internet. Ruben >scheduled tours to the server and explain and let people surf the internet >as well as some education. Last year we had Don given a presentation during >the Summer School. And during his talk at Krotona he mentioned the future >of TSA in the Internet. >The internet is always in his mind, the question, I think is always money, >resources, etc. >So, maybe a bit slow in our standards, but for the average member and user >maybe just ok the pace. I am glad that for your feedback. Let us look forward to the day that Internet is used to reach out to the public so that Theosophy can affect large number of human beings out there. > >I think our energies should be devoted to enrich the electronic archives >with articles, scanning old books, lectures pamphlets, pictures, etc., so >when they are ready to do it in big scale they have it in storage. > You have brought up a very important topic which is in the minds of myself and many others who are active on theos-xxxx. The copyrights on most of the classics of Theosophy has expired. If they are scanned and put on the Internet, anyone can access any of them for free and download them. Once downloaded, they can be printed in attractive format for hard copy. In effect we are looking towards making the classics for free to anyone having access to Internet from anywhere in the world. I do not know if you are subscribed to theos-l. I just posted a message for feed back on this subject. If the publications are make available in Acrobat format or Word Format, there are free software available to view and print them. Thus anyone can print the books at their own home. I am glad you are also thinking on the same lines. However, such home printing will cut down on the sales of classics currently published and sold by TPH. >We must at all times be constructive in our thinking, not complaining but >working ceaselessly for the cause of Universal Fraternity, and even if we >want to complain should come out with more work. After all who is going to >do the work if is not us, who has some awareness? > We are dealing with two issues here. When there is a democratically setup organization with elected officers, one should expect comments and criticisms as these are made in the interests of Theosophy. Secondly, as for practical application of Theosophy, Theosophy has never been officially defined. Each one of us understand Theosophy to the best of our understanding and all of us are trying to put it into practice in our every day activities. So what one's understanding is and how one wants to apply for the benefit of Humanity is something each one of us has to decide. >Lastly the TSA is not important, I am a THEOSOPHIST even if the TSA ceases >to exist, which means I do not need an organization to be a Theosophist. >Therefore I do not expect the TSA to solve my problems and expectation, but >I see myself as a resource to them any way they want me, even if they do >not want me, I have plenty work to do as a theosophist in my community >-giving lectures, classes, forming study groups in neibourhood where there >is no theosophy, and so on. Please let me know if any one in this list does >not know how and what to be a Theosophist in a community a have plenty >ideas, and can even travel to their Lodge or Study Group to give some >leadership awareness. > I completely agree with you. As a Theosophist, I have to solve my problems. It reminds me of a statement that a famous philosopher/thinker made "I do not expect anything from anyone Man or God". At the same time, to be of help to my fellow beings, I have told everyone I know that I am accessible anytime around the clock for any reason whatsoever and my phone number is listed in the phone book. I even have toll free numbers set up for both my office and my home so that no one should have any difficulty to reach me any time day or night. >There is plenty to do, but let everybody be themselves in their our pace. > >Martin Leiderman at your service in Los Angeles >Peace and Harmony to all > > MKRamadoss ----------------------------- Peace to all living beings From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:07:31 +1200 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Re: Electronic archives Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961021031947.1ef7d3a8@iprolink.co.nz> At 10:54 PM 18/10/96 -0400, Liesel wrote: > [snip] I found out today why I'm dragging so >much, & why it's so difficult for me to get up from a seat. My hemoglobin >is 1/2 of what it should be, because my kindneys aren't making a certain >enzyme they should be making. I'm going for a transfusion tomorrow AM, and >beginning in 2 weeks I have to get enzyme shots 3 x per week. I'm hoping >the insurancde will pay for one of the nurses at Summerfield to do it. >Otherwise I have to chase cross town to my doctor's 3 times a week, That >means being thus occupied for 3 afternoons a week, because bus >tranportation takes that long. My very best wishes to you, Liesel. May balance be yours, throughout these hassles. Murray From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:06:43 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Archive texts Message-ID: In message <2.2.16.19961019235715.291f158c@mail.eden.com>, ramadoss@eden.com writes >If they are scanned and put on the >Internet, anyone can access any of them for free and download them. Once >downloaded, they can be printed in attractive format for hard copy. In >effect we are looking towards making the classics for free to anyone having >access to Internet from anywhere in the world. I do not know if you are >subscribed to theos-l. I just posted a message for feed back on this >subject. Feedback: see URL below - you will find there *now* copies of Esoteric Buddhism, The Key to Theosophy, The Ocean of Theosophy, and an increasing number of similar and related texts. It's not a question of "If" any more - it has been and is being and will continue to be done. I have asked on theos-l for texts to be sent to me for upload to the TI homepage (as it has now become). Perhaps you would like to direct people's attention to the existing material, but you appear to be ignoring what I am sure you must have read on the list. I only yesterday announced three more uploads. To be sure, some of the material in the growing and *present* archive is not 100% sympathetic to some people's ideas of theosophy, but as the TS motto is "There is no religion higher than Truth" then truths which may not fit in to a particular subsciber's scenario should not be ignored by a true theosophist. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:56:14 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <326A83DE.6A27@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > Re opened and closed meetings. > > When I was Branch President, the instructions in the Branch Handbook were > for the Branch to decide how many open and how many closed meetings it would > have. I thought that the preferred formula was to have 3 open & 1 closed > meeting per month. In practice, our closed meetings turned out to be the It also depends on what you mean by "closed meetings". In the New York Lodge, we do not publicize the members meetings except to members, but we do not keep interested parties out, either. One program that we have, once per month (from an idea I got indirectly from Sy) is "First Friday at the Movies". We show a popular movie with Theosophical themes once per month (on the first Friday of the month, hence the name), with a discussion afterwards. I try to keep the movies varied in date and style (among the ones we have shown have been HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY, GROUNDHOG DAY, RASHOMON, and AMADEUS). The program is members-only more for legal reasons; we don't have to pay a licensing fee for showing the tapes if it is members only (we don't charge for the movie, but we DO ask for a donation to defer the costs of the refreshments served...) Bart From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 16:02:12 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: <326A8544.2B04@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > Was it because the 19th century writers really did see a hierarchy > dominated by white males as the "natural order" of things? If they did, > we might have to wonder just how much of the "core" theosophical > writings are suspect in their assertion of eternal truths - unless of > course this form of domination or control IS the natural order of > things. It is my contention that there are concepts that are so ingrained into a culture that those who belong to the culture don't even realize that they are there. Even within the TS; when someone states that the TS has no dogma, and I reply, "Yes it does: it assumes that there IS a brotherhood of humanity", I am frequently rebuffed, "That's not a dogma, that's the truth!". Or they accuse me of not believing in it (an unfortunate tendency of far too many people is to equate defending a (dis)belief with holding that (dis)belief). The gender non-neutral language (in my opinion, from my studies) is almost certainly due to the fact that virtually nobody even had the concept of pronouns sustaining inequality at that time. Bart From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:24:09 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: AAB - Sex & Our Times Message-ID: Bart: Take your time. Nothing urgent at all. _______________________________________________________ Peace to all living beings. M K Ramadoss On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > > > On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > > > > Christian symbology rather than Christianity itself. When I first looked > > > at Alice Bailey, I opend two books of hers at random, and read a couple > > > of pages. One was about how the white race was charged with bringing the > > > black race up to the standards of the white race. The other was how > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Many here have not read much of Bailey's books. It would be very > > interesting to some if you can find the relevant reference. No hurry. > > Just curious. > > It looks like it would be a good idea, in any case. I am at the end of > a hard schedule (60 hour work weeks at my day job, plus a public lecture > and a members' lecture at the NYTS, and teaching a class starting > tomorrow), but when things lighten up a bit, I will put some time into > going through the Quest Bookshop's excellent collection of Alice Bailey > books, and see if I can relocate the references. > > Bart > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 14:57:50 -0800 From: Art House Subject: Internet Publishing Formats Message-ID: <326AAE64.531C@earthlink.net> On Saturday, 19 Oct 1996 MK Ramadoss wrote: >From what I have seen, some of the software documentation that come with some of the free downloadable software are made available in two popular formats. One is Adobe Acrobat Format and the other is Microsoft Word Format. In both cases, there are free software available for viewing and printing the documents. Can anyone who has more knowledge in this area provide any input? _______ I'm not sure about the capabilities of the MS Word format beyond simple text content but have had sucess with the Adobe Acrobat PDF format. I like it because it allows for the inclusion of graphics, photographs and hyperlinks. It acts as a multimedia application and is stand-alone after download (i.e., not dependant on the Web. As a new publishing vehicle, it has (IMO) great potential. The encoding software is inexpensive and widely available. The Netscape plug-in "Amber", available at Adobe's web site http://www.adobe.com is easily installed and available free of charge. This allows you to read the PDF document in-line via Netscape. There is also a new improvemant to Netscape 3.0's email capability called "html email" It will allow one to keep content on a server yet send email to people (with Netscape 3.0 or better as their web browser) who can access it much as a web browser accesses a web page, complete with graphics, active hyperlinks, etc. It looks and acts to the receiver like a web page(s). This is brand new, but also has great publishing possibilities. For the time being however, it leaves out those people who use Microsoft Explorer or AOL, etc as their web browser. Worth watching. Hope this helps, Mark From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:20:16 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: politically correct theosophy Message-ID: In message <199610200043.UAA19487@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >I don't realy think we need to antagonize any prospective >new theosophical member because of a silly word, to which some people now >attach a different meaning than the one you present above. It's cutting off >our noses to spite our faces. > >Liesel It seems, sadly, that some people are so attached to one out-of-date word that they are willing to accept putting people off. It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that they actually *do* want a "brotherhood" - a male-oriented setup - and not a *genuinely* inclusive human nucleus. Alan :-( --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:14:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Electronic Publishing Message-ID: In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >Hi > >As the activities of theos-xxxx expands, I see the possibility of any new >books or pamphlets or brochures on Theosophy being published on the >Internet for free downloading by anyone interested. Once downloaded, some >of the users may like to get a printed copy. Quite a number are already available on the TI hompage below. See my other post on another list. > >>From what I have seen, some of the software documentation that come with >some of the free downloadable software are made available in two popular >formats. One is Adobe Acrobat Format and the other is Microsoft Word >Format. In both cases, there are free software available for viewing and >printing the documents. > >Can anyone who has more knowledge in this area provide any input? Some of the material is in WS Word, other in Wordperfect (which Word can read) and much of it is in ASCII or HTM format. There is a Directory (or Folder) structure which can be used like any other directory, similar to a user's hard disk or ftp site. The most direct route is via http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/ >From there, clicking on files or going back via the ".." structure will help you to get around. It's mostly common sense. > Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:43:53 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Definitions Message-ID: In message <199610201137.HAA21069@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >As far as the word "ego" is concerned, in my understanding of the terminology, >it is the "personal" self. I.E. the self which serves only the person in whom >it dwells. Whereas the atman is the universal self, that which serves >humanity and nature as a whole. Ah. Now my understanding is closer to that of C.G.Jung, which describes "Ego" as a complex within the Personal Unconscious, which abuts upon the "Self" which is the true I-dentity of the individual and through which we can relate to and come to terms with the activities of the "Collective Unconscious" within which we are all connected as part of the scheme of things. This definition of "Ego" would accord with your general statements on its possible dangers, but as all human beings cannot subsist (in incarnation, anyhow) without the Ego interface with the rest of the world, it cannot and will not be ignored. I would argue, for instance, that every time you make a statement which seems to denigrate the activity of the human Ego, you have to use your own Ego to make it. In ancient times, and other modern philosophies, I believe, some have used the term "Ego" as almost an equivalent to the latter-day theosophical "Atman." So, if we are to refer to what seem to me to be doctrinal matters, we really do need to define our terms beforehand, especially on a list like this, as people come to it from a number of different and even apparently contradictory disciplines. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:28:54 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: In message <3269F03A.781C@earthlink.net>, Art House writes >>And if anybody can come up with a non-awkward, non-gender >>specific way of saying "the Brotherhood of Humanity", I will support >>that person 100% in getting the English version of the Objects changed. > >Would it just be too simple to say "the Love of Humanity?" > >When you remove the limiting masculine referent from words like >"Brotherhood" or "Fellowship" and yet still are trying to say things >like: > >>"(Essential) connectedness, at-one-ment, interrelatedness" > >or > >>"mutual support", > >"Love" seems more than adequate. Urgent Repeat Message: Theosophy International has already completed this exercise. As there seem to be quite a few newcomers to the list, the TI Statement of Intent follows. It has already been agreed to by 45 individuals, many of who are subscribers to this list, and one of whom owns this list. here it is: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises men and women who, of their own free choice, subscribe to the spirit of the three objects first formulated by the Theosophical Society, but in a more up-to-date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community, and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion, theosophy, philosophy, and the scientific method, according to individual ability and inclination." 3. To investigate mysteries of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities, with an underlying respect for all life. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is a voluntary network, whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects, and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required - nor assumed to be held - by any member. All have the right to choose, without trace of coercion, the path by which they seek understanding. There are no fees, no subscriptions, although voluntary donations and/or contributions could be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules, whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We hope to be of service, and to share what we have in amity with other theosophical, occult, and esoteric organizations, as also with like-minded individuals. To join Theosophy International, send an e-mail message asking to be registered to TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk or give your name and other details you wish to share to whoever introduced you. To join in disussion about promoting "TI" objects, send an e-mail to listproc@vnet.net with no subject header and the message subscribe TI-L your name Do not use a "sig" file - you will get an extra "error" message! "TI" has 45 members in ten countries. Alan Bain IMPORTANT NOTE: Although TI members are active on the various theosophy mailing lists (theos-l, theos-buds, etc., and which are maintined by John Mead (himself a TI member), none of the theos mailing lists is owned or exclusively reserved for members of Theosophy International, Nor is TI a part of any other theosophical organisation. --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:32:01 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: All equal Message-ID: In message <199610201116.HAA20577@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >Yes, Liesel, you are important, and so am I, as is everyone. I suppose what I >am trying to say here is that I do not believe that one person is any more >important than the next. Please excuse my butting in (again) but once more I remind subscribers that this is yet another aspect of true belonging together which is covered by the TI Statement of Intent (which I just re-posted). Sigh. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 00:01:00 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: In message <326A8544.2B04@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > It is my contention that there are concepts that are so ingrained into >a culture that those who belong to the culture don't even realize that >they are there. Even within the TS; when someone states that the TS has >no dogma, and I reply, "Yes it does: it assumes that there IS a >brotherhood of humanity", I am frequently rebuffed, "That's not a dogma, >that's the truth!". Or they accuse me of not believing in it (an >unfortunate tendency of far too many people is to equate defending a >(dis)belief with holding that (dis)belief). Yes, It does not take much observation to see that this, at least, is true! > The gender non-neutral >language (in my opinion, from my studies) is almost certainly due to the >fact that virtually nobody even had the concept of pronouns sustaining >inequality at that time. Almost certainly they didn't have such a concept, and in the 19th century there was, therefore, no problem arising. In this latter end of the 20th century, however, people do have an increasing sense of pronouns sustaining inequality (as you put it) - hence the need for change in order for theosophical ideals to reach out to more people, and in particular the people who will ignore theosophy because they are put off at the very door by the wording. Their response, it could be argued, is unconscious, a reflex action based upon their perception of the language used. Maybe so, *but they still walk away.* Surely (sigh again) it is time that we spoke to people in *their* everyday language, and not that of 120 years ago? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:49:10 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: We are all people Message-ID: In message <199610201146.HAA21278@envirolink.org>, John Straughn writes >I am not debating with >those who are changing the words so that humanity will better understand the >literature of the past, I am arguing with those who are changing the word(s) >because they feel that their gender is being demeaned. How about taking on board the notion that the people who feel their gender is being demeaned feel that way because their gender *is* being demeaned? And if people feel their gender is being demeaned by theosophical terminology, then out of a regard for human feelings, out of a genuine sense of community - the kind of community spirit which the founders' use of the term "brotherhood" was intended to convey, but which is increasingly inappropriate - why should we *not* agree that it is time for a change? *Is such a change going to HARM anyone?* Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:16:46 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: theosophy defined Message-ID: <961020211645_1480901429@emout08.mail.aol.com> theosophy: "God-assisted speculation" --R.Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:30:20 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: politixcal correctness Message-ID: <199610210239.WAA11183@ultra1.dreamscape.com> To Bart, Am I talking about the dualistic point of view that reality is a creation of our own subjectivity, & there is no objective reality. You list a whole slew of Theosophists, all of whom seem to be of 2 minds. They all tell you The Truth. There is no religion higher than truth, and they all have it. They also all tell you, from HPB on down, to adopt whatever beliefs make sense to you, and not to adopt anything just because they say so. Have your pick Bart. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:41:13 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Boston TS Lodge Litigation Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961020234649.1d7f460e@mail.eden.com> Hi There was some discussion on the Boston TS Lodge litigation in which considerable sum of money was lost to fatten up the litigating lawyers. The following message was posted last December and is self explanatory. I hope those who are new to theos-l may like to see it. See also the following separate message I am re-posting. MKRamadoss PS: Please note that no one from Olcott who should have full access to facts have responded to this day. The reader can draw his/her own conclusions. ==================================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 21:45:10 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199512120345.VAA01926@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: ramadoss@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: MK Ramadoss Subject: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Status: At 04:48 PM 12/5/95 -0500, Ruben wrote: > >A memo from Brant Jackson on Proposed By-Law revisions: > >MEMO: To Members of the Atlanta Lodge >From: Brant Jackson >Subject By-Law revisions > > I have been asked by Louise Bromley to review the letter which >Sy Ginsburg, President of the Miami Branch, circulated to various Lodges >and individual members of the T.S. with regard to the proposed revisions >of the By-Laws. As a practicing attorney and member of the National >Judiciary Committee, I am familiar with the By-Laws, and the events out >of which these proposed revisions arose. I have also had an opportunity >to talk with John Algeo today with regards to my concerns. I would >therefore respond to Louise Bromley's request for my opinions and >responses to Mr. Ginsburg's stated concerns as follows: Imagine a case in which relatively new members constitute the >voting majority of a lodge's membership and also control the Board of >Directors. The lodge has real property and other assets worth many >hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Board of Directors and a majority > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ of the lodge members, acting under the influence of several powerful ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >members, vote to sell the real property for the financial benefit of the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >individual lodge members, i.e., to give each member a pro-rata share of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >sale proceeds. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > The Lodge has not dissolved, but remains a viable corporation, to >the transfer upon dissolution provisions of the By-Laws are not >violated. While this is in violation of the tax laws, the I.R.S would >not find out for a long time, and at best might merely revoke the >corporation's tax exempt status and tax each member upon the distribution >of the sale proceeds each received. > I think all Theosophists would see such an act as violating the >trust under which the property was given to that lodge, and all the >ideals of Theosophy as well. While offensive to us all, many of us would >think that the chances of it actually happening would be highly unlikely, >if not impossible. This scenario, however, actually happened recently ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >with the Boston Lodge, which sold its building, and has happened a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >number of times in other lodges across the world. > <> Some very interesting statements coming from Brant Jackson. Would he or any one in the administration at Olcott share facts and details of the Boston Lodge sale? All of us, who are members of the TSA would be interested to know. In addition, in his letter of November 28, 1995 to the Lodges and Study Groups, TSA National President states: "...the facts about some past disagreements over property in this country and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ abroad are not correctly stated in Sy's letter. The accounts in that letter are ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ simplistic and skewed versions of matters that were very complex and do not correspond ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ with the facts, as far as I know them." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There are various reasons why the facts should be laid out in full. Many of us do deal on a daily basis with very very complex matters. Let us not underestimate the abilities of the participants here. Hence many many here can fully comprehend and understand any complex matter if all the facts surrounding them are made available. Why not post them here for everybody to see? Secondly, if the Boston Lodge does indeed sell the property and individual members were personally and financially benefitted, then let us know the facts openly and fully. Individuals have gone to prison for conversion of tax exempt property and assets for personal use or benefit. As law abiding citizens, it is our duty to report any law breakers. Has any report been filed with IRS? If no such report of violation of tax laws has been made by those who know the "facts", the question is why they have not done so? One wonders? There are e-mail addresses to IRS and messages can be sent 24 hours a day and these individuals are very high officials who can initiate quick action. Lack of easy and free availability of facts and information on situations quoted/described as above leaves very low level of credibility of the statements made. Statements and conclusions fully supported by facts have a high degree of credibility on their own. Credibility of entities - individuals, organizations, nations etc are not created overnight; it is gradually built over a time. And once credibility is lost, it can never be regained. Let us lay on the table all the facts on the situations cited above in support of the revision of bylaws. If the facts are convincing, then it will generate a lot of support for the changes. If on the other hand, if there is non response, silence will speak for itself. And each one of us can draw our own conclusion why no one who has the knowledge of the facts is not speaking. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:41:18 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Boston Lodge Litigation Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961020234654.1d7f8aca@mail.eden.com> Hi The following message was also posted in December 1995. The message is self-explanatory and those who have not seen it can decide for themselves. MKRamadoss =============================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 15:04:04 -0600 (CST) From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale In-Reply-To: <951212141901_52052283@mail04.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO On Tue, 12 Dec 1995 Richtay@aol.com wrote: > >MEMO: To Members of the Atlanta Lodge > >From: Brant Jackson > >Subject By-Law revisions > > >[Imagine if] The Board of Directors and a majority of the lodge members, > acting under the influence of several powerful > >members, vote to sell the real property for the financial benefit of the > >individual lodge members, i.e., to give each member a pro-rata share of > >sale proceeds. > > While offensive to us all, many of us would > >think that the chances of it actually happening would be highly unlikely, > >if not impossible. This scenario, however, actually happened recently > >with the Boston Lodge > > > Whooaaa !! Hold your horses here, fella! I was SECRETARY of the Boston Lodge > during the fallout of the lawsuit, and I am personal friends with almost all > of the current board members. To my knowledge, no individual has received a > PENNY from the sale of the building, rather a new building was bought in a > suburb of Boston called Arlington. > > I did NOT support the lawsuit, nor do I support the Alice Bailey studies of > the current Arlington T.S., but it is grossly unfair, even malicious, to > insinuate that these Theosophists, however misguided, were actually motivated > by greed and personal gain. I can't believe this accusation is being posted > internationally, and the author of it should certainly recant and apologize > publicly. > > We may not agree with many of our brother and sister Theosophists, but > neither can we get away with slander and lies about them. How unbrotherly ! > > > Disgusted, > > Rich Taylor > Glad you posted the message. I do not know how many are aware of Brant Jackson's unsigned memo was circulated by the National President of TSA to all the Lodges and Study Centers, with a cover letter in effect endorsing Brant Jackson's letter. In the circustances, both the National President and Brant Jackson need to apologize in public and send copies to everyone to whom the cover letter and Jackson's letters were sent. If on the other hand they have facts support that the tax exempt assets were converted to private benefit, they need to file a complaint with Internal Revenue Service in public who will take action on the individuals involved. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 01:00:57 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: <961021010056_547593220@emout13.mail.aol.com> Just be cause we are related to people does not mean we love them. There is very little in humanity that is loveable. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 9:06:13 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: FELLOWSHIP!! Message-ID: <199610211306.NAA16394@leo.vsla.edu> I'm writing before reading the last two days' digests, on a Monday morning before the library opens. Went to a church last night that uses gender-inclusive language everywhere possible, has a woman minister, and I noticed the word fellowship used a lot. Now, what's wrong with fellowship in place of brotherhood in the TS objects and literature? It already has a certain sanction in that members are FELLOWS of the TS, not brethren and sistern. I'm sure some wet blanket stick-in-the-mud traditionalists can come up with some complaints about the term, but it sure as hell beats siblinghood. "To form a nucleus of the universal fellowship of humanity." Objections? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 08:44:05 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Slow Traffic Message-ID: Hi, I have posted several msgs yesterday and none of them have been received back from theos-l. Wonder there was a problem at vnet or at my end. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 10:24:52 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Masculine connotation? Message-ID: <199610211424.OAA08255@leo.vsla.edu> As usually happens, posting before reading the digest meant that there was something in there which related to the point I was trying to make. Someone, Bart I think, put `fellowship' in the same category with `brotherhood' as not being gender inclusive. Now, my experience has been that fellowship is always used in an entirely gender-neutral way, although I admit that one of the uses of `fellow' is masculine. But that is still better than `brother' which is an exclusively masculine term. Looking at our unabridged dictionary, I see fellowship defined as "the companionship of persons on equal and friendly terms", "the state of being together or sharing...", "intimate mutual personal intercourse", "a company or group of equals and associates"..."the quality or state of being comradely" etc. (these are the leading ones.) And for `fellow', the first definition is obsolete, but here goes: 1a. one associated with another as a sharer b. companion, comrade, associate-- used chiefly of men c. accomplice, henchman 2a. an equal in rank, power, or character: peer b. one of a pair 3a. a member of a company or group having common characteristics or common interests b. a creature of the same kind c. a member of an incorporated literary, scientific, and often professional society d. (pl.) a social group of youngsters or teenagers or the male members of such group etc. So the masculine connotations of fellow are much weaker and more partial than of brother, and they don't seem to carry over into the term fellowship at all. But I yield to Kym, Liesel and Ann as to whether or not this feels gender-inclusive to women. Another advantage, though, is that `fellowship' is a distinctly non-hierarchical term, whereas with brothers one is always older, or larger, etc., and Theosophy is full of hierarchical assumptions that don't translate very well from cosmic abstractions to human relations. So there is an egalitarian message to making fellowship the object, whereas brotherhood has no such implication. Cheers Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:50:30 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: <8PgpwRAmA$ayEwW9@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <961021010056_547593220@emout13.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Just be cause we are related to people does not mean we love them. There is >very little in humanity that is loveable. > >Chuck the Heretic Speak for yourself! I am *extremely* loveable, as I reminded myself only a moment ago. Alan the Angelic :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:45:46 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: theosophy defined Message-ID: In message <961020211645_1480901429@emout08.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes > > > > >theosophy: "God-assisted speculation" > --R.Ihle > > Nice one! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:17:56 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: FELLOWSHIP!! Message-ID: <961021191640_1448103060@emout11.mail.aol.com> It does not beat siblinghood! :-) But it'll work. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:40:17 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: politixcal correctness Message-ID: <326C2601.5E5@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > To Bart, > > Am I talking about the dualistic point of view that reality is a creation of > our own subjectivity, & there is no objective reality. > > You list a whole slew of Theosophists, all of whom seem to be of 2 minds. > They all tell you The Truth. There is no religion higher than truth, and > they all have it. They also all tell you, from HPB on down, to adopt > whatever beliefs make sense to you, and not to adopt anything just because > they say so. > > Have your pick Bart. What's your point? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:49:03 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Boston TS Lodge Litigation Message-ID: <326C280F.4847@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > Let us lay on the table all the facts on the situations cited above > in support of the revision of bylaws. If the facts are convincing, then it > will generate a lot of support for the changes. If on the other hand, if > there is non response, silence will speak for itself. And each one of us can > draw our own conclusion why no one who has the knowledge of the facts is not > speaking. If the people here don't mind the opinion of one of the people involved, I can see if I can con^H^H^Htalk Fernando de Torrijos or Ruth Adams into writing up their take. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:15:15 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: FELLOWSHIP!! Message-ID: <326C2E33.6B61@sprynet.com> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > "To form a nucleus of the universal fellowship of humanity." > > Objections? Only that it weakens the 1st object. While I would not want to weaken OR strengthen it, given the choice, I would take the latter (meaning I would prefer "Unity of Humanity" over "Fellowship of Humanity", although I am not happy with either). Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:42:11 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: <326C3483.2147@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > the language used. Maybe so, *but they still walk away.* Surely (sigh > again) it is time that we spoke to people in *their* everyday language, > and not that of 120 years ago? One thing I despise is the King Jamesisms in modern translations of the Bible. The King James Bible was written in formal but up-to-date language. It irks me that so many translators feel that they have to write in archaic language (of course, the revised version produced last year with its purposely awkward in-your-face heavy-handed alterations is pretty bad, too; I think a translator should try, as hard as possible, to create the same feeling for reading a work as one who speaks the original language feels). Michael Gomes is making a career of updating the language of the Primary Literature, and we're lucky enough to have him as the librarian at the NYTS. I just tried to convince him to monitor these lists on the NYTS Internet account (people have enough trouble understanding my own opinions here without having them figure out a split personality between my own account and being the official representative of the NYTS). Unfortunately, he's too busy with his other projects. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:14:53 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: <326C3C2D.4828@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Theosophy International has already completed this exercise. And I believe it can be better. And I HAVE read your entire page, several times (as you keep updating the articles). > 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without > distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color. Good, but not enough (for those who jump on everything that doesn't fit into their world-view, this is, of course, my OWN opinion, which, according to the rules of TI, I have every right to voice). I think it changes the intent somewhat. At one point, it was "to form the nucleus of a Brotherhood of Man", but that was considered wrong, because we aren't THE nucleus, and there is not more than one "Brotherhood of Man". The current (or soon to be current) incarnation is "to form a nucleus of the Brotherhood of Humanity"; certainly better, but not good enough, but at least retaining the intent. I feel like the TI one changes the intent; especially substituting "within" for "of"; I would be interested in the thinking behind that. > 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion, > theosophy, philosophy, and the scientific method, according to > individual ability and inclination." Actually, that goes in the wrong direction, IMNSHO. First of all, translations of the Objects to other languages (at least the TS version) make it clear that it is the study comparing religion, science, and philosophy; comparative religion is a term of Christian origin (comparing other religions to Christianity; most universities that have departments have renamed them from "Comparative Religion" to just plain "Religion", except of course for the Christian colleges, which retain the adjective). The term "theosophy" I believe to be redundant in this case, and I find "scientific method" too narrowing. I am not sure about what the phrase "according to individual ability and inclination" adds and would appreciate enlightenment at this point. > 3. To investigate mysteries of nature and unrealized human > potential and abilities, with an underlying respect for all > life. I like it on an absolute basis, but I find that the phrase "with an underlying respect for all life" creates an effective 4th objective, and I find that "to investigate mysteries of nature" makes it more poetic but less rational. "Unrealized human potential and abilities" is, on the other hand, a much better phrase than "the powers latent in humanity". One of the main things that attracted me to the Theosophical Society in the first place is the concept that one must use one's own facilities to determine the truth or falsehood of the doctrine; the Objects, in my opinion, should reflect this. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 14:44:45 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: <199610211946.PAA23874@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > > Just be cause we are related to people does not mean we love them. There is > very little in humanity that is loveable. Ask any Virgo and they'll tell you that. Ask any Pisces and they'll tell you the same, except that they've learned to love them anyway. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:48:16 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Boston TS Lodge Litigation Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > Let us lay on the table all the facts on the situations cited above > > in support of the revision of bylaws. If the facts are convincing, then it > > will generate a lot of support for the changes. If on the other hand, if > > there is non response, silence will speak for itself. And each one of us can > > draw our own conclusion why no one who has the knowledge of the facts is not > > speaking. > > If the people here don't mind the opinion of one of the people > involved, I can see if I can con^H^H^Htalk Fernando de Torrijos or Ruth > Adams into writing up their take. > > Bart Lidofsky > Bart: Most of us here have the best interests of Theosophy and are very open minded and have no access to grind whatsoever and would welcome any info. Any further input from Fernando and/or Ruth will definitely help. If they have facts and evidence to substantiate there was conversion of tax exempt funds to personal use/distribution, then we can look into how to get the attention of IRS as this may be a criminal offense under Federal Laws. I do appreciate appreciate your efforts in this direction and you have my full support in this matter. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:54:44 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Michael Gomes is making a career of updating the language of the > Primary Literature, and we're lucky enough to have him as the librarian > at the NYTS. I just tried to convince him to monitor these lists on the > NYTS Internet account (people have enough trouble understanding my own > opinions here without having them figure out a split personality between > my own account and being the official representative of the NYTS). > Unfortunately, he's too busy with his other projects. Bart: It takes quite some time to really get a feel for the power of Internet. It took me several months to really fully explore the possibilities. Give some time for Gomes and soon he will find out for himself. >From what I have seen, Internet is addictive - addiction for good. MKRamadoss PS: Some months ago I was in a book store exploring some computer books and I got into conversation with a couple of guys browsing some of the books and when I inquired about some information the said they will send me, they did not even ask my name or where I live or what I do. All they wanted to know was my e-mail address. It is a very telling example of where Internet communication is going. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:07:19 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: I disagree Uncle Chuckie..... one Virgo to another....you're even lovable.... in your own way Gertrude (the lovable) Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:17:19 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: we are all equals Message-ID: > > ---------- > > From: John Straughn > > > The pinching doesn't necessarily have to do with the world view of women, > but > > the view of the pincher. And it doesn't have to do with gender so much > > either. It has more to do with sexual orientation. I have read articles > > > where gay men have piched other men in the office environment. Gender is > > > obviously not the case here. > > Equal opportunity pinching? Perhaps what we're really talking about here > is feeling that the pincher gets from having having *power* over the > pinchee, who is being pinched without her/his permission or consent. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > > I agree with Ann. To me, getting pinched, etc. without my consent...is extremely annoying. And the part is the lack of consent........ I know that if I am out...with my special friend....that I might get pinched....as a sign of affection. That's ok. But if someone else does it, Katie bar the door! Gertrude the Churchmouse -- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 22:48 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Regarding Masculine Connotation Message-ID: Sorry, Mr. Johnson, but this "stick-in-the-mud" has to say that she doesn't like 'fellowship' either. "Fellowship" could be "kinship" or even "friendship" (in the way it is used in the sentence [Theosophical World View] either could work) "Brotherhood" simply needs to be done away with. Regarding the statment "To form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity" ideas could include: "To form a nucleus of the universal body of humanity" "To form a nucleus of the universal whole of humanity" "To form a nucleus of the universal society of humanity" The point is, whether these are satisfactory or not, it is quite possible to come up with something that will speak to everyone. I am amazed, with the vastness of our language, that Theosophists can't seem to come up with such a word. . .most of us claiming to be scholars and all. . . The Theosophical Society in America, or its president - John Algeo, is simply reflecting the fundamentalism, yes that word again, which threatens to tear us apart. There is a negative dissension in the ranks that need not be there, so easily would it be eliminated, yet. . .Either we should accept the terms or we are egomaniacs, or worse, we are somehow blackening a sacred and time-honored verbiage handed down by Masters. Honestly, sometimes, as a woman, I think the Theosophical Society doesn't really give a damn. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:52:31 +1300 From: Bee Brown Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961022045231.00691948@whanganui.ac.nz> At 05:05 PM 20/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> Was it because the 19th century writers really did see a hierarchy >> dominated by white males as the "natural order" of things? If they did, >> we might have to wonder just how much of the "core" theosophical >> writings are suspect in their assertion of eternal truths - unless of >> course this form of domination or control IS the natural order of >> things. > > It is my contention that there are concepts that are so ingrained into >a culture that those who belong to the culture don't even realize that >they are there. Even within the TS; when someone states that the TS has >no dogma, and I reply, "Yes it does: it assumes that there IS a >brotherhood of humanity", I am frequently rebuffed, "That's not a dogma, >that's the truth!". Or they accuse me of not believing in it (an >unfortunate tendency of far too many people is to equate defending a >(dis)belief with holding that (dis)belief). The gender non-neutral >language (in my opinion, from my studies) is almost certainly due to the >fact that virtually nobody even had the concept of pronouns sustaining >inequality at that time. > > Bart There has been much talk of language so here is something Vitvan wrote in 1944 about general semantics that under pins all the langusge problem if one choses to think about what he says. " To those of us who are in the quest for the understanding of Self, 'life,' etc., the importance of General Semantics lies in the fact that while living in a sense of separation from the factual reality (One-ness, dynamic activity-of-the-Whole, etc.), symbolical means of communication, definitions, symbolical representations respecting our meanings, faith, religions, beliefs, etc., constitute the content of our consciousness, respectively. To clarify the issue and render more sharply this "importance," let us envisage the overall picture of our present situation, state of development, etc. We do not think that we are living in verbalism (symbolical representation), we think we are living in an 'objective world.' But take any given 'thing,' and in the final analysis it must be described as a configuration of units of energy (called atoms, electrons, protons, photons, etc.) So it is with each or any 'object,' 'thing,' etc. Factually, then, we do not live in an 'objective world.' It has been repeatedly shown that from, or out of, energy frequencies received (registered) a photo-in-the-mind is formulated and this image, believed to be substantive, is that which we label 'objective world.' Not being able to live in an 'objective world,' we live in our words respecting that which we think about, predicate, hope, believe, etc., respecting the 'objective world.' In living in our words respecting 'the objective world,' we un-consciously identify those words with that which we believe to be 'objective.' We have been functioning this way for so long a period that we have grown into the unconscious habit of accepting the word, spoken, written, etc., for the 'object,' or 'thing' spoken about; and this habit has grown upon us to such an extent that when words (symbols) are used which are undefined, multi-ordinal, labels for abstractions, visions, hallucinations, metaphysical ideas, etc., etc., we accept such words as valid, i.e., as 'thing,' 'being,' entities, realities, existences, etc. In the overall picture of the truth respecting these functions of our respective minds we find that in the absence of an 'objective world' as a reality there is nothing left except the words, symbols, etc., of which we are conscious, and the energy impulses registered, of which we are unconscious. So, at present, in so far as conscious awareness extends, the words, symbols, etc., assume startling importance! Instead of using the word "startling" here, we could have used the word terrifying by reason of the fact that our attitudes, hopes, health, sanity, adjustment, economical security, whether we have war or do not have war, peace and security, or devastation, etc., etc., is determined by the character of symbols, generally and individually used. But as overwhelmingly important as this is, it is not the whole of the "importance" of understanding General Semantics, because, in the overall picture we find that the sharpest differentiation between our symbolical 'edifice' (world of words) and that from which we receive impulses, is prerequisite to the beginning of understanding the truth respecting livingness, i.e., truth respecting that which is factual, actual, etc. Figuratively speaking, General Semantics opens a door to the beginning of understanding. In the overall picture this "importance" cannot be over-emphasized, and if you do not credit this importance, try to device or find a better 'door.' Once this General Semantics 'door' has been found and opened, a vast dynamic 'ocean' awaits our exploration. Each of us is an integral 'part' of this 'ocean.' In the exploration process the first step consists in orientation, adjustment, familiarization, finding one's 'place' tempo, rhythm, etc., thereto or therein. The second step consists in consciously functioning therein. The third step will more than likely consist of Oneness, Wholeness, etc., respecting the comprehension of this dynamic 'ocean' as the activity of our own Self-Awareness. But what is the use to speculate upon these 'steps' if we have not found the 'door?' In the complete absence of symbols (words, etc.) can you think? I believe that you can function by pointing, nodding, ogling, etc., and I believe that you can function telepathically by knowing, by intuitive awareness, etc., but can you think without words and symbols? If you cannot think without words the factor of "importance" respecting semantics intrudes into your most private and exclusive 'world.' Then understanding of the content, adequacy, structure and function of language assumes paramount importance even in your most private domain." This is again the idea that the 'map' is not the 'territory'. The more I am aware that the words I uses are abstractions I have made from the frequencies of the 'objects' around me, the more I feel free from restrictions others like to put on me as I ralise they are identified with their view of their symbolic world and the words they use to verbalise it. I do not necessarily hold the same view and my symbolic world is my own private one and if I am not identified with those symbols then I have no need to look to others to confirm that the verbal symbols I use are ok. I can just BE and realise that there is an un-speakable level which we try to talk about but that is all we can do if we do not let ourselves experience it too. Just some thought. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy NZ, TI. Success is getting what you want. Happiness is liking what you get. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:09:07 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Regarding Masculine Connotation Message-ID: <199610221511.LAA02350@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: kymsmith@micron.net > Honestly, sometimes, as a woman, I think the Theosophical Society doesn't > really give a damn. I believe it does give a damn, but its focus is not fully committed to the future. There's still a lot of tendency to hang onto the past even when it doesn't work. Seems to me there is a tremendous split going on in many places, and not just TS. The old vs. the new. There are some people who are visionaries that want to move into the future and devise new ways of doing things. Then there are those who are very comfortable with the old regime and can't understand why anyone would want to change what they already see to be perfect. And they don't want to be made UNCOMFORTABLE. IMHO, I think it's going to take a lot of struggle to give birth to a new and improved TS. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:08:59 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Regarding Masculine Connotation Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > IMHO, I think it's going to take a lot of struggle to give birth to a new > and improved TS. > YES! .... IMO the TS is approaching, over the next few years, a point of bifurcation - it will either make a large scale shift and decide to serve the humanity of the 21st century, adapting what it has to the context and terms of a world very different than the one in which it was born ... or it will become one of those many many organizations that served their purpose in a particular era, but proved incapable of adjusting to the inevitable flow of evolution ... and will become a crystallized husk that atrophies and eventually dissolves. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 15:35:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Rerih (fwd) Message-ID: > Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:14:54 +0300 > From: Kay Ziatz > Subject: Rerih Hello! > TITLE: U poroga novogo mira / I have a big part of this book in ASCII file, called "Fire Ex- perience" (Ognenny Opyt). Also in russian, of course. [Standard memo sent to most my correspondents: Due technical means I cannot continue to write to theos-l. Provider made send & receive addresses different what prevents to write, or unsubscribe. Sorry for delays with answers. But I continue to read and will sometimes reply personally.] Konstantin. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 19:14:44 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: <961022191443_338999870@emout13.mail.aol.com> Alan, But you're not human! You've already evolved beyond that. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 19:30:50 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: one final thought Message-ID: <199610230039.UAA16533@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Bart, Having a movie once a month is a dandy idea. I wonder whether you know that there's a whole slooge of video tapes available for rent from the Olcott Library. If you don't already have it, ask Elisabeth for the video index. I think she has it. There's probably a fee, but it's worth it, because it contains a wealth & a variety of material. I also think that conditions at the NY Lodge are a bit different than in the many small Centers we have, for the simple reason that you are so large, have so many more members & so much more time, space, & manpower to play with that you can be much more pliable with what you present than can the smaller units. At the time, we rented the 1 hall Nutley museum every Sunday, and that was all we had, except for business (members) meetings which took place at someone's house. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:10:15 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI Revisited Message-ID: In message <326C3C2D.4828@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > >> Theosophy International has already completed this exercise. > > And I believe it can be better. And I HAVE read your entire page, >several times (as you keep updating the articles). Dear Bart, I have read your post very carefully, and filed it for further consideration. I for one can see some merit in your thoughts, but what you may not know is that the TI members underwent a great deal of individual (and boy, we cane all be *very* individual ) soul- searching during the formulation of the TI statement as it now stands. It took a great many posts to theos-l and theos-buds in the early part of this year. Maybe there will be more, but we have set up another list for this, called TI-L which is "owned" by John Mead and myself, though he asked me to take the main responsibility for TI-L. You will find subscription info in another post to *this* list. Being a consensus network, the Statement as it stands is a consensus document, and I should think that all of the members have set aside some of the finer points and personal preferences in order to agree on what is still only somewhere to start. So, in a sense, welcome to the debate - glad you could join it. Maybe you find sufficient of value in it to "sign up" - it won't cost you anything, as I cannot say I have seen your raising any great objections on matters of fundamental principle. TI, in a large part, is a lobbying group advocation change - but within, not outside of the theosophical movement in general. I am sure we could do it and put it better. You would be more than welcome to help! Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 23:56:04 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Language Message-ID: <$FZJiPAEEVbyEw$f@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <326C3483.2147@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > Michael Gomes is making a career of updating the language of the >Primary Literature, and we're lucky enough to have him as the librarian >at the NYTS. I just tried to convince him to monitor these lists on the >NYTS Internet account (people have enough trouble understanding my own >opinions here without having them figure out a split personality between >my own account and being the official representative of the NYTS). >Unfortunately, he's too busy with his other projects. Well good luck to Michael Gomes! I should think he is very busy undeed! However, spily personality or not, maybe you could keep us all posted on his progress. Crucial Aquarian Age question: will he put his work in the public domain? (Esp. the electronic domain). A discussion on this theme has just been started by MKR of the ti-l list, which only has 22 subscribers right now. To receive the list (it comes in digest form as standard, but you can change the options) send a message (no subject, and no "sig") to listproc@vnet.net with the single line subscribe ti-l Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 01:03:47 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: The New Improved Version .... Message-ID: <92w5+ZAjDWbyEwtj@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , JRC writes >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: >> >> IMHO, I think it's going to take a lot of struggle to give birth to a new >> and improved TS. >> >YES! .... IMO the TS is approaching, over the next few years, a point of >bifurcation - it will either make a large scale shift and decide to serve >the humanity of the 21st century, adapting what it has to the context and >terms of a world very different than the one in which it was born ... or >it will become one of those many many organizations that served their >purpose in a particular era, but proved incapable of adjusting to the >inevitable flow of evolution ... and will become a crystallized husk that >atrophies and eventually dissolves. > -JRC > As things stand, it looks like becoming the husk. Some of us (like thee and me and a few others) are working for change, but are there enough of us to make a real difference? Not yet, it seems. Some of us have hopes that TI will develop into an agent -or a catalyst - for the needed changes, but to date there are simply not enough of us. No doubt, as time passes, the nature and work of TI in this impulse will itself change, but for that to happen we need to *recruit* more people to the work of change. A LOT more people. Most of the list discussions are between theosophical people who already have a fair idea of what theosophy is about, and in consequence even the theos-lists - with all the rebelliousness we exhibit - must seem very insular to a total stranger to theosophical ideas. Ann is right - it will take a lot of struggle to "rebirth" a TS organisation that is meaningful for the 21st century. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:16:04 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: message of theosophy Message-ID: <199610230124.VAA20622@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >In one of the early Mahatma Letters, it was mentioned that the >doctrines/truths have to be presented in a manner suitable to then >prevailing conditions of the Humanity. > >In view of this, has anyone any thoughts of presenting the Theosophical >Ideas/doctrines/truths in a better way. Can we be creative? Good god, Doss, I've been trying to do that, almost as long as I'm a Theosophist... to present Theosophy in easily understandable terms. I did it when I was Branch President. When I write, which I do sometimes, I never use any Sanscrit terms, even though I know a lot of them,... not all. If you look at 'The Personal Aura" by Dora Kunz, you'll note that there's hardly a Sanskrit word used in the whole book, and it's not that Dora doesn't know them, but rather that she translates them into terms everyone can understand. Her brother, Harry Van Gelder, in his book "Inner Peace through the Process of Knowing" did the same thing. His book isn't as easy to understand as Dora's is, but contains no Sanskrit, and again not because he wasn't familiar with the terms. When you know what you're talking about, it's very easy to use understandable, English words, except maybe for a word like Karma, which doesn't exist in English, but is by now recognized in 1 form or another by just about everybody. I mean people know there is such a thing, even though they often don't know what it means theosophically. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:21:19 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: political correctness Message-ID: <199610230130.VAA21029@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Bart, My point is that I've made up my mind as to what side I'm on, and I'm giving you both sides, so you can choose which side you want to be on. At the same time, it's a rather futile argument, because neither one of us is going to change their mind. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:24:07 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Boston Lodge Message-ID: <199610230132.VAA21270@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >If the people here don't mind the opinion of one of the people >involved, I can see if I can con^H^H^Htalk Fernando de Torrijos or Ruth >Adams into writing up their take. > Dear Bart, that would be nice. Just be aware of the fact that Wheaton monitors theos-l, and they probably don't want Fernando to tell you anything. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:32:41 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: masculine connotations Message-ID: <199610230141.VAA22034@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Honestly, sometimes, as a woman, I think the Theosophical Society doesn't >really give a damn. > > >Kym > Kym, I think it gives a damn, it just doesn't know how to communicate that it does. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:59:50 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: re masculine connotations Message-ID: <199610230208.WAA24443@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > Ann writes There are some people who are >visionaries that want >to move into the future and devise new ways of doing things. Then there >are those who >are very comfortable with the old regime and can't understand why anyone >would want to >change what >they already see to be perfect. And they don't want to be made >UNCOMFORTABLE. > >IMHO, I think it's going to take a lot of struggle to give birth to a new >and improved TS. Dear Ann, This is a very old struggle. People with new ideas struggling to get them in, over the objections of people who like their status quo, is something I still remember from my teens, and I suspect that it's much older. Most often it's the younger generation clamoring to be heard with their fresh, innovative, idealistic, & often imaginative ideas ... some of which are darn good, & some of which turn out to be hairbrained. It always seems to take a struggle the get the new ideas across. But from a distance of many years, it also seems that the new ideas eventually just take over, as the people who have them mature and advance to positions of leadership. Just as an example, I remember how the conservatives howled loudly, & spread gloom & doom, told how the US was going down the tubes, because Social Security was a socialistic ploy, etc. etc. ad nauseatum, when that law was being debated before its passage. Well, it still is socialistic, but, now that it's been law for 60 years & we've gotten used to it, it's one socialistic idea that everyone in this country just accepts today, and most people wouldn't be without. If you just hang around long enough the new ideas people are struggling for today will just become usual everyday. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 23:59:52 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > Dear Bart, that would be nice. Just be aware of the fact that Wheaton > monitors theos-l, and they probably don't want Fernando to tell you anything. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Liesel Liesel: Recently when I looked at the subscribers on theos-l, I did not find theos@netcom but olcott library is there. I do not know if the Administration Elected Officers are reading the msgs here thru Olcott library e-mail or thru someone else's e-mail. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:05:42 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: re masculine connotations Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > still remember from my teens, and I suspect that it's much older. Most often > it's the younger generation clamoring to be heard with their fresh, > innovative, idealistic, & often imaginative ideas ... some of which are darn > good, & some of which turn out to be hairbrained. It always seems to take a > struggle the get the new ideas across. But from a distance of many years, it > without. If you just hang around long enough the new ideas people are > struggling for today will just become usual everyday. Ideas rule the world - said a great person. did we all not see Liberty, Equality and Fraternity idea from France revolutionized western ideas of democracy. At the onslaught of new ideas, the old ideas and those who cling to the dying ideas will be swept away. Hope it will take place in our life time and we will be able to recognized new ideas when they come up. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Oct 96 07:45:45 EDT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Boston TS Lodge Litigation Message-ID: <961023114544_72724.413_FHP36-1@CompuServe.COM> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > If the people here don't mind the opinion of one of the people >involved, I can see if I can con^H^H^Htalk Fernando de Torrijos or Ruth >Adams into writing up their take. > Bart Lidofsky Bart, if you could accomplish this and get Fernando to come forth, that would possibly get a dialogue going between the people involved in the Boston affair. I would do my best then to get Peter Kubaska, Boston TS (Arlington) President to respond. I can think of nothing better in the interest of the entire Theosophical movement (remember the first declared object) than to bring about dialogue and then rapprochement amongst the Boston people, putting behind us the lawsuit and recriminations that went on in Boston. That would not necessarily mean going back to one Lodge in Boston, it's probably too late for that, and given TSA's purported bylaw changes, I don't think there is any chance of Boston (Arlington) becoming part of TSA again. But it doesn't matter. The Theosophical movement is bigger than any one or another umbrella organization. There is no reason why a geographical area cannot have 2 or more Theosophical organizations, and many areas do. The point is, we who hold the declared objects in serious esteem, must be in sympathy with the declared objects and really be a nucleus of the universal brotherhood/sisterhood of humanity, instead of going around filing lawsuits against one another. Here is where leadership is important, and I mean national leadership. I have no doubt that people at Wheaton are lurking on this list. I am a lurker myself most of the time. If someone from Wheaton could call this to John Algeo's attention and if John would begin to assert leadership for the purposes of rappproachment in the Boston affair, a lot of healing could take place. How about it John? Sy Ginsburg From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:32:07 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Regarding Masculine Connotation Message-ID: <199610231214.IAA10047@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: JRC > > On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > > > IMHO, I think it's going to take a lot of struggle to give birth to a new > > and improved TS. > > > YES! .... IMO the TS is approaching, over the next few years, a point of > bifurcation - it will either make a large scale shift and decide to serve > the humanity of the 21st century, adapting what it has to the context and > terms of a world very different than the one in which it was born ... or > it will become one of those many many organizations that served their > purpose in a particular era, but proved incapable of adjusting to the > inevitable flow of evolution ... and will become a crystallized husk that > atrophies and eventually dissolves. I would call it death/rebirth time. If there's a transition to a better form that suits the time and needs of people, then it will be reborn. If it makes no effort and imagines that it is going to survive because it's blessed by a higher power or simply waits for the rest of humanity to "catch up" with it in consciousness, there may a rude awakening and a downfall. Thank you for another excellent post, Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 96 9:26:15 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: First Object Message-ID: <199610231326.JAA29516@leo.vsla.edu> In response to points made by Bart and Kym: I agree with you, Bart, that "nucleus within the universal human family" weakens the object. You don't say why, but to me it loses the prescriptive quality, the idea of trying to exemplify an ideal and be an evolutionary vanguard. You also don't say why "fellowship" weakens it for you; at least it retains this quality of "should" rather than "is." Why is fellowship weaker than brotherhood? Kym, may I call you that? I'm probably as put off by being called "Mr. Johnson" -- at least in contrast to the generally informal nature of this list-- as you might be by some distancing, gender-specific term. Anyhow, problems with your suggestions that I find: 1. "Kinship" is pretty good, although "family" might be simpler and equivalent. But they both are descriptive rather than prescriptive. Humanity already is kin, family, etc. But we sure as hell aren't a brotherhood or a fellowship! We need a future-oriented, optimistic term. Also, "kinship" doesn't have the breadth of meaning that "fellowship" does; its meaning is fairly restricted to genetic factors rather than social ones. 2. Body, whole, and society all lack the affective appeal of fellowship or even kinship. So let's keep trying. Maybe a whole new approach is in order: e.g. "to form a nucleus of universal human solidarity (love... whatever.) "Universal blank of humanity" limits the options. Cheers Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 01:47:54 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Love Revisited Message-ID: In message <961022191443_338999870@emout13.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Alan, >But you're not human! You've already evolved beyond that. > >Chuck the Heretic True: HIDE! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:35:01 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: re masculine connotations Message-ID: <199610231849.OAA14079@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: liesel f. deutsch > This is a very old struggle. People with new ideas struggling to get them > in, over the objections of people who like their status quo, is something I > still remember from my teens, and I suspect that it's much older. Most often > it's the younger generation clamoring to be heard with their fresh, > innovative, idealistic, & often imaginative ideas ... some of which are darn > good, & some of which turn out to be hairbrained. It always seems to take a > struggle the get the new ideas across. I come from the "boomer" generation, where I think we thought we would change things by our sheer numbers. In some way we did, for better or worse. In fact, our sheer numbers still influence what kind of products and services are advertised and marketed. Since most of us are approaching 50 or already made it there, the sale of hair dye has gone up. I remember reading somewhere that many who incarnated after WW2 were those who had died in the war. There lives had been rudely interrupted and they were eager to come back. Also, they were tired of conflict and were those who were against the Vietnam War. (No, don't have any page numbers. Just a vague memory). -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:12:43 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Uploads Message-ID: I have uploaded to http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/HISTORY the following files: BPS-A.TXT This is the 1989 revision of the "A" section of my 1985 book, "Bishops Irregular." Further information in the file itself. Besant04.txt This a letter from Ammnie Besant written in 1904. A free service in support of Theosophy International. There is still room for more manuscripts, articles, etc. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 18:10:54 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: merssage o theosophy Message-ID: <199610232319.TAA19458@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Apparently this didn't get through the first time. So here it is again. >In one of the early Mahatma Letters, it was mentioned that the >doctrines/truths have to be presented in a manner suitable to then >prevailing conditions of the Humanity. > >In view of this, has anyone any thoughts of presenting the Theosophical >Ideas/doctrines/truths in a better way. Can we be creative? Good god, Doss, I've been trying to do that, almost as long as I'm a Theosophist... to present Theosophy in easily understandable terms. I did it when I was Branch President. When I write, which I do sometimes, I never use any Sanscrit terms, even though I know a lot of them,... not all. If you look at 'The Personal Aura" by Dora Kunz, you'll note that there's hardly a Sanskrit word used in the whole book, and it's not that Dora doesn't know them, but rather that she translates them into terms everyone can understand. Her brother, Harry Van Gelder, in his book "Inner Peace through the Process of Knowing" did the same thing. His book isn't as easy to understand as Dora's is, but contains no Sanskrit, and again not because he wasn't familiar with the terms. When you know what you're talking about, it's very easy to use understandable, English words, except maybe for a word like Karma, which doesn't exist in English, but is by now recognized in 1 form or another by just about everybody. I mean people know there is such a thing, even though they often don't know what it means theosophically. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:08:31 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <326EDDAF.706F@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > Having a movie once a month is a dandy idea. I wonder whether you know that > there's a whole slooge of video tapes available for rent from the Olcott > Library. If you don't already have it, ask Elisabeth for the video index. I > think she has it. There's probably a fee, but it's worth it, because it > contains a wealth & a variety of material. We are well aware of it, but we would be considering that for members' meetings (except that we are blessed with a large number of excellent speakers, so we never have problems filling out the members' schedule). The movies we show the first Friday of every month, however, is a POPULAR movie, as opposed to a documentary. I got the idea from the Miami Lodge's regular series of viewings and discussions of Star Trek episodes (thanks, Sy!). Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:18:27 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <326EE003.4029@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Well good luck to Michael Gomes! I should think he is very busy undeed! > However, spily personality or not, maybe you could keep us all posted on > his progress. Crucial Aquarian Age question: will he put his work in > the public domain? (Esp. the electronic domain). Unfortunately, Michael Gomes has this problem with food; if he stops eating, he gets sick and dies. He therefore retains copyright on his books (fat lot of good it does him; H.P.B. TEACHES, a collection of Blavatsky articles he put together choosing them based on when she wrote them and their relevancy to modern people, sells very well, but he has yet to see a penny in royalties from Adyar. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:21:08 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: <326EE0A4.7774@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > >If the people here don't mind the opinion of one of the people > >involved, I can see if I can con^H^H^Htalk Fernando de Torrijos or Ruth > >Adams into writing up their take. > > > > Dear Bart, that would be nice. Just be aware of the fact that Wheaton > monitors theos-l, and they probably don't want Fernando to tell you anything. I mentioned the conversation to Loren Wheeler (treasurer of the NYTS and of Pumpkin Hollow Farm, and a good friend of Fernando and Ruth), and he thinks that Fernando would be happy to write something. I will be calling Fernando this weekend to ask him. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:24:48 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: <326EE180.531A@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > > Dear Bart, that would be nice. Just be aware of the fact that Wheaton > > monitors theos-l, and they probably don't want Fernando to tell you anything. > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Recently when I looked at the subscribers on theos-l, I did not find > theos@netcom but olcott library is there. I do not know if the > Administration Elected Officers are reading the msgs here thru Olcott > library e-mail or thru someone else's e-mail. Well, I don't look forward to discussing the merits of SGML vs. MARC with Ms. Trumpler... Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:29:17 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: First Object Message-ID: <326EE28D.1CC4@sprynet.com> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > In response to points made by Bart and Kym: > > I agree with you, Bart, that "nucleus within the universal > human family" weakens the object. You don't say why, but to me > it loses the prescriptive quality, the idea of trying to > exemplify an ideal and be an evolutionary vanguard. You also > don't say why "fellowship" weakens it for you; at least it > retains this quality of "should" rather than "is." Why is > fellowship weaker than brotherhood? Fellowship implies friendship; Brotherhood implies that we came out of the same womb, that we are all responsible for each other, that we are all responsible TO each other. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:34:31 -0400 From: CarolWard@aol.com Subject: Re: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: <961024133430_340044699@emout18.mail.aol.com> Hi Ram Doss! It was nice to get to meet you on Monday. We are back safe and sound and getting geared up to go back to work. Take care and greetings to all in your lovely TS group. Carol From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:55:27 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961024010110.3e774ad2@mail.eden.com> At 01:42 AM 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> Well good luck to Michael Gomes! I should think he is very busy undeed! >> However, spily personality or not, maybe you could keep us all posted on >> his progress. Crucial Aquarian Age question: will he put his work in >> the public domain? (Esp. the electronic domain). > > Unfortunately, Michael Gomes has this problem with food; if he stops >eating, he gets sick and dies. He therefore retains copyright on his >books (fat lot of good it does him; H.P.B. TEACHES, a collection of >Blavatsky articles he put together choosing them based on when she wrote >them and their relevancy to modern people, sells very well, but he has >yet to see a penny in royalties from Adyar. > > Bart Lidofsky It looks like with Internet Publishing becoming easier, there is going to be a lot of starving authors in the days to come. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:58:23 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961024010405.3e77cde0@mail.eden.com> At 01:46 AM 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >m.k. ramadoss wrote: >> >> On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, liesel f. deutsch wrote: >> >> > Dear Bart, that would be nice. Just be aware of the fact that Wheaton >> > monitors theos-l, and they probably don't want Fernando to tell you anything. >> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >> Recently when I looked at the subscribers on theos-l, I did not find >> theos@netcom but olcott library is there. I do not know if the >> Administration Elected Officers are reading the msgs here thru Olcott >> library e-mail or thru someone else's e-mail. > > Well, I don't look forward to discussing the merits of SGML vs. MARC >with Ms. Trumpler... > > Bart Lidofsky Most of us here would not know what SGML or MARC for that matter. We are having enough difficulty in understanding even commonly used english words, leave alone acronyms!! MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 01:06:15 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: TS Officers e-mail addresses Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961024011158.3bff4b6e@mail.eden.com> Hi: It appears that some of the officers of the various TS (Adyar) Sections around the world may be on Internet and may have e-mail addresses. If anyone knows of any e-mail addresses, please post them here or send me a direct e-mail. A compilation would be very useful. MKRamadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 96 01:24 MDT From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: To K. Paul Johnson Message-ID: Paul wrote: >Kym, may I call you that? I'm probably as put off by being >called "Mr. Johnson" -- at least in contrast to the generally >informal nature of this list-- as you might be by some >distancing, gender-specific term. No, you must call me Ms. Kym! Just kidding. Sorry if "Mr. Johnson" offended you. I refer to some friends by their "sir name" (!), but of course, you couldn't tell by my writing that it was not meant formally. It shan't happen again, Paul. > Anyhow, problems with your >suggestions that I find: >1. "Kinship" is pretty good, although "family" might be simpler >and equivalent. But they both are descriptive rather than >prescriptive. Humanity already is kin, family, etc. But we >sure as hell aren't a brotherhood or a fellowship! We need a >future-oriented, optimistic term. Also, >"kinship" doesn't have the breadth of meaning that "fellowship" >does; its meaning is fairly restricted to genetic factors >rather than social ones. >2. Body, whole, and society all lack the affective appeal of >fellowship or even kinship. Agreed. > >So let's keep trying. Maybe a whole new approach is in order: >e.g. "to form a nucleus of universal human solidarity (love... >whatever.) "Universal blank of humanity" limits the options. At the risk of being accused of complete dunderheadedness, the phrase "to form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity. . ." doesn't make sense. If we must stick to that sentence, shouldn't it be "to form a nucleus FOR the universal brotherhood...?" And, what does "form a nucleus mean?" (I already pontificated about this on the ti-l list) My dictionary says 'nucleus' means a "center" - it also says 'nucleus' means "a little nut!" I think it is trying to say it wants to be a or even THE center of growth or development - but the sentence seems to be grammatically erred. I, like you, am open to a whole new approach in terms and structure for that particular statement. "Brotherhood" must be replaced. Wonder how many incarnations it would take to actually see it happen though! But one must fight on. Cheers, Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:10:41 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: <326F4EB1.DB3@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > Well, I don't look forward to discussing the merits of SGML vs. MARC > >with Ms. Trumpler... > Most of us here would not know what SGML or MARC for that matter. We > are having enough difficulty in understanding even commonly used english > words, leave alone acronyms!! Spelled out wouldn't help much, either. MARC is the "traditional" system for transferring library records on computer; it is extraordinarily complicated, but very thorough. SGML is an up-and-coming method of, among other things, creating free-form databases, and some major library consortiums are looking into using that to replace MARC. If you have designed Web pages, then you already have taken a look at SGML; HTML is an SGML compliant system (or at least was until Netscape shoved their dirty paws into the mix...). Now back to our originally scheduled program... Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:14:58 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Universal *blank* of Humanity Message-ID: <326F4FB2.1400@sprynet.com> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > At the risk of being accused of complete dunderheadedness, the phrase "to > form a nucleus of the universal brotherhood of humanity. . ." doesn't make > sense. If we must stick to that sentence, shouldn't it be "to form a > nucleus FOR the universal brotherhood...?" And, what does "form a nucleus > mean?" (I already pontificated about this on the ti-l list) Don't have time to give you the essay version now but here's a short answer.... "Form a nucleus of" implies that the *****hood already exists. "Form a nucleus for" implies that it does not exist, but should be created. To me, "form a nucleus of etc." means to make people aware of that it exists. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 06:56:32 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Boston Lodge Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > extraordinarily complicated, but very thorough. SGML is an up-and-coming > method of, among other things, creating free-form databases, and some > major library consortiums are looking into using that to replace MARC. > If you have designed Web pages, then you already have taken a look at > SGML; HTML is an SGML compliant system (or at least was until Netscape > shoved their dirty paws into the mix...). Thanks for the detailed explanation. But for most of us, they are still what are called "Greek" and "Latin"!!! MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:11:35 -0500 (CDT) From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Healing Powers of Krishnaji Message-ID: <2.2.16.19961024071718.1927251c@mail.eden.com> In the latest issue of What is Enlightenment? there is a very interesting account of a serious health problem of Vimala Thakar being healed by Krishnaji. According to her, even Krishnaji did not know how the healing worked. It seems Krishnaji's mother had told him when he was young that his hands had the power to heal. It appears that some may have healing powers even without themselves consciously knowing how it works. This is one more side of Krishnaji. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:15:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: In message <326EE003.4029@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> Well good luck to Michael Gomes! I should think he is very busy undeed! >> However, spily personality or not, maybe you could keep us all posted on >> his progress. Crucial Aquarian Age question: will he put his work in >> the public domain? (Esp. the electronic domain). > > Unfortunately, Michael Gomes has this problem with food; if he stops >eating, he gets sick and dies. He therefore retains copyright on his >books (fat lot of good it does him; H.P.B. TEACHES, a collection of >Blavatsky articles he put together choosing them based on when she wrote >them and their relevancy to modern people, sells very well, but he has >yet to see a penny in royalties from Adyar. > > Bart Lidofsky So I guess he's dead by now? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:22:37 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: First Object Message-ID: <41nIOUA9F1byEwdy@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <326EE28D.1CC4@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >Brotherhood implies that we came out of >the same womb, that we are all responsible for each other, that we are >all responsible TO each other. > > Bart Lidofsky .. and that we are all male. TI uses "family," which is close to your "womb" analogy, and probably nearer the truth. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:22:51 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <199610241417.KAA25517@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: ramadoss@eden.com > It looks like with Internet Publishing becoming easier, there is going to be > a lot of starving authors in the days to come. Hi Doss! I read in a newspaper article several weeks ago that some writers are putting a portion or short chapter of their work on the web for review. Those who want to buy the whole book can go to the store or contact the author. It was said that this great for authors that the publishing houses would ordinarily pass by as appealing to too small an audience. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 10:00:03 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: Hi, Ann: Like shareware programs, one of these days we will see sharware like books published putting regular publishers out of business. MKR On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > ---------- > > From: ramadoss@eden.com > > It looks like with Internet Publishing becoming easier, there is going to > be > > a lot of starving authors in the days to come. > > Hi Doss! I read in a newspaper article several weeks ago that some writers > are > putting a portion or short chapter of their work on the web for review. > Those who > want to buy the whole book can go to the store or contact the author. It > was said that > this great for authors that the publishing houses would ordinarily > pass by as appealing to too small an audience. > > -Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 10:38:15 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: First Object Message-ID: <199610241952.PAA26613@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > In response to points made by Bart and Kym: > > > > I agree with you, Bart, that "nucleus within the universal > > human family" weakens the object. You don't say why, but to me > > it loses the prescriptive quality, the idea of trying to > > exemplify an ideal and be an evolutionary vanguard. You also > > don't say why "fellowship" weakens it for you; at least it > > retains this quality of "should" rather than "is." Why is > > fellowship weaker than brotherhood? > > Fellowship implies friendship; Brotherhood implies that we came out of > the same womb, that we are all responsible for each other, that we are > all responsible TO each other. > > Bart Lidofsky Brotherhood is the state or relationship of being brothers - two or more males. A brother can be two males with the same parents or members of a monastic order. In the dictionary, brotherhood is also defined as fellowship.(!) and an association of men, such as a fraternity or union, united for common purposes. Seems to me that even the dictionary officially associates the word "brother" and "brotherhood" with something that is exclusively male. Seems like the times demand a better word. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 14:55:41 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <199610241956.PAA28102@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: m.k. ramadoss > Hi, Ann: > > Like shareware programs, one of these days we will see sharware like > books published putting regular publishers out of business. > As you've said yourself, you're an eternal optimist. : - ) I doubt that most publishers are that behind the times. They'll just change their strategy to stay in business. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:32:28 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Acronyms Message-ID: <$mf5KCAcH2byEwt6@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , "m.k. ramadoss" writes >On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > >> extraordinarily complicated, but very thorough. SGML is an up-and-coming >> method of, among other things, creating free-form databases, and some >> major library consortiums are looking into using that to replace MARC. >> If you have designed Web pages, then you already have taken a look at >> SGML; HTML is an SGML compliant system (or at least was until Netscape >> shoved their dirty paws into the mix...). > >Thanks for the detailed explanation. But for most of us, they are still >what are called "Greek" and "Latin"!!! > >MKR Suggested theosophical versions of these acronyms: SGML - Society for the Glorification of Mahatma Lettes MARC - Mistresses Against Reactionary Correctness Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:51:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Healing Powers Message-ID: In message <2.2.16.19961024071718.1927251c@mail.eden.com>, ramadoss@eden.com writes >According to her, even Krishnaji did not know how the healing >worked. It seems Krishnaji's mother had told him when he was young that his >hands had the power to heal. It appears that some may have healing powers >even without themselves consciously knowing how it works. This is one more >side of Krishnaji. I have known two people with this gift. One had never heard of theosophy, and the other (who I still know) thinks it's rubbish. Food for thought? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:14:50 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <961024191449_340226860@emout19.mail.aol.com> Adyar's behavior is typical of publishers. They keep forgetting that artists are supposed to starve, not writers. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:16:03 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <961024191602_340227551@emout09.mail.aol.com> Alan, No, he robs banks like the rest of us. Of course his striped ski mask sort of gives him away. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:15:57 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <961024191557_340227507@emout02.mail.aol.com> Doss, Why do you think I'm going into the publishing end. I want to make the money before opportunity disappears. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:16:05 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Healing Powers of Krishnaji Message-ID: <961024191604_340227595@emout13.mail.aol.com> Doss, My guess is that most folks have healing powers but never use them and the bulk of those that do have no idea how they work. That's because none of us really know how they work, though theories abound. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:16:07 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Michael Gomes Message-ID: <961024191607_340227626@emout16.mail.aol.com> Ann, The procedure is becoming almost standard. With the ability use a web page to see the stuff and simply sending the disk, self publishing has become actually profitable for the first time in a century. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:27:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: A new approach! Message-ID: In message , kymsmith@micron.net writes >I, like you, am open to a whole new approach in terms and structure for that >particular statement. "Brotherhood" must be replaced. Wonder how many >incarnations it would take to actually see it happen though! But one must >fight on. At the risk - maybe certainty - of being boring, Theosophy International has *already* started off a new approach. How about taking this discussion to the TI-L list, and building on what we already have? Unlike the TS (Adyar or wherever) the TI Statement is not set in stone, and is still in its "beta" phase. A while back we spent a great deal of time getting it into the shape it is in now, and everyone wanted a rest. We've had a rest, so how about back to work? If we keep following the thread as it crops up on theos-l we will end up with another half dozen (or more) versions of TI, maybe with as many different names, which will get us nowhere. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:38:00 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: masculine connotations Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961025003747.0068f3c4@mail.deltanet.com> (My message got bounced, so I'm sending it again.) At 12:21 AM 10/23/96 -0400, you wrote: >>Honestly, sometimes, as a woman, I think the Theosophical Society doesn't >>really give a damn. >> >> >>Kym >> >Kym, > >I think it gives a damn, it just doesn't know how to communicate that it does. > >Liesel > > I can think of one example. A future article of mine got "cleaned up" for THE AMERICAN THEOSOPHIST. I had a reference to "layman" that was changed to "layperson". It could be that just new materials are being adjusted, and the classics left in their original verbatim form? -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:38:17 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: <3.0b23.32.19961025003815.0069cb04@mail.deltanet.com> (My message got bounced, so I'm sending it again.) Liesel: >When you know what you're talking about, it's very easy to use >understandable, English words, except maybe for a word like Karma, which >doesn't exist in English, but is by now recognized in 1 form or another by >just about everybody. I'd tend to disagree that we can simply adopt English terms. Using Sanskrit terms allows us an excellent opportunity to present the basic doctrines in words that aren't buried in negative connotations in English. Terms like "demon" in Greek mean one's Higher Self or Guardian Angel, but Christianity has twisted the term into meaning "devil", and so people automatically associate devil worship with the word. Or "universal brotherhood" as an English term was coined to represent an excellent idea, but since it's come to symbolize the second-class status of women in the past, it evokes outrage, and no longer communicates the grand ideas behind it. When we use "Dhyani-Chohan" or "Deva" instead of "demon", and something like "Sangha" instead of "Universal Brotherhood", we don't convey the wrong idea. There might be a "huh?" until we explain the term, but we don't get people putting words in our mouths and insisting that we are saying something that we most definitely are not. This is also why various disciplines evolve their own specialized terminology, to convey ideas that aren't found in popular thought. With Theosophy, we're putting into words quite a wealth of Eastern Wisdom that has been inaccessible in the West, although over the past century various versions of that wisdom have arrived in numerous other forms, including Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. I'd say, then, keep the Sanskrit terms, and use more, when our English equivalents are subject to misunderstanding. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 15:42:56 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 CarolWard@aol.com wrote: > Hi Ram Doss! > > It was nice to get to meet you on Monday. We are back safe and sound and > getting geared up to go back to work. > > Take care and greetings to all in your lovely TS group. > > Carol > Hi, Carol: We all enjoyed your talk. You may find the latest issue of What Enlightenment is? It has articles covering some of the women spiritutal leaders, including that of Vimala Thakar whose life was turned around after meeting Krishnaji. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:34:38 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: <199610251531.LAA18467@cliff.cris.com> > From: Eldon B. Tucker > > I'd say, then, keep the Sanskrit terms, and use more, when our English > equivalents are subject to misunderstanding. Eldon, I was involved with a yoga group for several years and Sanskrit words were thrown at me all the time and I diligently copied them into my notebook. There was even a Sanskrit class that was held on Sunday afternoon for the more ambitious. To this day, I couldn't tell you what most of them meant. Unless you do rigorous continuous study, really committ them to memory and then have the opportunity to use them all the time, it's difficult to remember them. The spelling and pronounciation is so different than the standard English that we use in the USA, it is literally like lifting words from a foreign language and dumping them into our own. Sanskrit terms would have to become part of the language and keep its original meaning to have any use in our culture. Do people really know the meaning of "karma" or "dharma" when they say them? Its too easy for the popular media to pick up a word and attach a meaning to it, something that may have nothing to do with its original meaning. Take the term "New Age". All it really means is another turn of the astrological wheel and the beginning of another age. Now it conjures ideas of everything from crystals to channelers to UFOs. If you can keep the Sanskrit words uncorrupted in meaning and make them widespread over the group that uses them, more power to you. If not, then start searching for equally good words in the English language. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:16:55 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: In message <3.0b23.32.19961025003815.0069cb04@mail.deltanet.com>, "Eldon B. Tucker" quotes: >>When you know what you're talking about, it's very easy to use >>understandable, English words, except maybe for a word like Karma, which >>doesn't exist in English, but is by now recognized in 1 form or another by >>just about everybody. I doubt it. I don't know just about everybody, and I suspect neither does anyone else. There are too many people. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:25:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: In message <3.0b23.32.19961025003815.0069cb04@mail.deltanet.com>, "Eldon B. Tucker" writes >I'd tend to disagree that we can simply adopt English terms. Using >Sanskrit terms allows us an excellent opportunity to present the >basic doctrines in words that aren't buried in negative connotations >in English. I left the theosophical classics alone for many years in my youth precisely *because* the Sanskrit terms were too many, too often used, and very difficult to follow in their explanation. With Kabbalah, which I found more congenial to western thought, a maximum of (say) 20 Hebrew words which could be seen as the "labels" for thought which words represent more than sufficed. And even those, I later discovered, could be rendered into meningful and accurate Englsih equivalents *by those who knew what they were talking about.* > > >Terms like "demon" in Greek mean one's Higher Self or Guardian Angel, but >Christianity has twisted the term into meaning "devil", and so people >automatically associate devil worship with the word. Scholars usually render this as *daemon* and italicise it, and in popular works will add a footnote explaing what you have pointed out. Modern bible translators are likely to translate it into its modern equivalent, usually "spirit" with a small "s." Sigh. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:14:49 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: In message <3.0b23.32.19961025003815.0069cb04@mail.deltanet.com>, "Eldon B. Tucker" writes >"universal brotherhood" >as an English term was coined to represent an excellent idea, but since it's >come to symbolize the second-class status of women in the past, it evokes >outrage, and no longer communicates the grand ideas behind it Yea verily! Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:12:03 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: masculine connotations Message-ID: In message <3.0b23.32.19961025003747.0068f3c4@mail.deltanet.com>, "Eldon B. Tucker" writes >I can think of one example. A future article of mine got "cleaned up" for >THE AMERICAN THEOSOPHIST. I had a reference to "layman" that was changed to >"layperson". It could be that just new materials are being adjusted, and >the classics left in their original verbatim form? That's editors for you! But why make one word of it? "Lay person" is quite good and even everyday English. There is no theoretical reason why the classics could not be paraphrased - it's been done with the bible, so long as it is *clearly described* as a paraphrase. Original classics need to be preserved in their original form, ecen though the teaching and ideas contained in them can be presented in 21st century language. Reading older texts has the advantage of conveying some of the nuances of thought that were appropriate to the time of the writer. Many years ago I had the opportunity to read William Lilly's "Christian Astrology" from a 1647 printed copy (you can get a facsimile edition now). It was full of archaisms and letter "s" very similar to letter "f" but I had an insight into 17th century astrology that a translation - for that's what it would be (Zadkiel did some of this) could not have conveyed. The objection concerning language that I have is the use of out-of-date language in works that are written today. Modern theosophical writing that talks in male-oriented language may reach out to people, but in all too many instances you may be sure that having reached out, it also pushes people away, who then go on to speak ill of theosophy. This is *not* a theory - it happens, and I have heard it happen in my own home city. I personally know five people who have done this - and they are all women. Do the theosophical societies want to write themselves into oblivion for the want of addressing a genuine need *already being expressed over and over* by an increasing number of people? Alan (theos-l person) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:47:22 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: First Object Message-ID: <7+d4seAKEOcyEw0z@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610241952.PAA26613@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >---------- >> >> Fellowship implies friendship; Brotherhood implies that we came out of >> the same womb, that we are all responsible for each other, that we are >> all responsible TO each other. >> >> Bart Lidofsky > >Brotherhood is the state or relationship of being brothers - two or more >males. A brother can be two males with the same parents or members of a >monastic order. In the dictionary, >brotherhood is also defined as fellowship.(!) and an association of men, >such as a fraternity or union, united for common purposes. Seems to me >that even the dictionary officially >associates the word "brother" and "brotherhood" with something that is >exclusively male. > >Seems like the times demand a better word. > >-Ann E. Bermingham > Quote: "THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises men and women who, of their own free choice, subscribe to the spirit of the three objects first formulated by the Theosophical Society, but in a more up-to-date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community, and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family, without distinction of sex, sexual orientation, creed, class, or color." :End quote. The "formation of a nucleus" depends upon the lack of distinction based upon the various prejudices which are all too often associated in people's minds with the categories mentioned. Possibly other categories could or even should be added, like age and ability. To join Theosophy International, send an e-mail message asking to be registered to TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk or give your name and other details you wish to share to whoever introduced you. To join in disussion about promoting "TI" objects, send an e-mail to listproc@vnet.net with no subject header and the message subscribe TI-L your name Do not use a "sig" file - you will get an extra "error" message! "TI" has 45 members in ten countries. Alan Bain IMPORTANT NOTE: Although TI members are active on the various theosophy mailing lists (theos-l, theos-buds, etc., and which are maintined by John Mead (himself a TI member), none of the theos mailing lists is owned or exclusively reserved for members of Theosophy International, Nor is TI a part of any other theosophical organisation. --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:57:30 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Disk publishing. Message-ID: In message <961024191607_340227626@emout16.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Ann, >The procedure is becoming almost standard. With the ability use a web page >to see the stuff and simply sending the disk, self publishing has become >actually profitable for the first time in a century. > >Chuck the Heretic So how do you protect the disk? A Chucky-babe spell? "Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to read the publication on this disk before someone copies it. This disk will self- destruct in 2 hours and 23 minutes." Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:43:32 -0800 From: Art House Subject: Ingrained Rivulets Message-ID: <3271428C.31DC@earthlink.net> Ahh yes, the myth of the starving artist and what they are supposed to be and do. Just another happy social thoughform that values the creative human spirit and welcomes its expressive liberation! - "It's in the nobility living in our present hearts that we find the roving characters of our fondest dreams." Mark From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:50:58 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: brotherhood substitute Message-ID: <199610252259.SAA13137@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > >So let's keep trying. Maybe a whole new approach is in order: >e.g. "to form a nucleus of universal human solidarity (love... >whatever.) How about To form a nucleus of human Love. or loving humanity. ? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:56:12 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: one final thought Message-ID: <199610252305.TAA13560@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Boy, this final thought is getting to be 1x1x1x1x1 etc. >The movies we show the first Friday of every month, however, is a >POPULAR movie, as opposed to a documentary. Bart, what's your purpose? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:06:35 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: ti-l 34 Message-ID: <199610252315.TAA14515@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Kym asks >what does the phrase "form a nucleus" mean???? Good question. Since you asked it, I asked myself, and found out, that I'd interpreted to myself what I think it means, but no one else has ever said anything to me about it. I think it means that we should be the center which gives impetus to others to act upon this idea. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:25:56 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: the 1st object Message-ID: <199610252334.TAA16159@ultra1.dreamscape.com> A much used word today is bonding. I'm trying in vain to make up a 1st object with bonding. To encourage human bonding. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:47:38 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: healing powers Message-ID: <199610252356.TAA17662@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Serge King said that everybody's hands have the power to heal, some people's power is much moreb pronounced than others'. If you want to try healing, next time your eyes get tired, rub your palms together, and then cup them a little tightly, but not too, over your eyes. Keep them there for a minute or 2. That relieves the tiredness, at least for me, & my chirporactor it does. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:49:34 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: healing powers Message-ID: <199610252358.TAA17778@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Also Dora says that almost everyone is able to learn Therapeutic Touch. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:56:31 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: english terms Message-ID: <199610260005.UAA18221@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Eldon, Sorry, I don't agree with you. If the English terms aren't well understood, you're not done with your job, which is to find words & phrases which clearly stand for the same thing in English as the foreign term. That's what a good translation does, as much as possible. It isn't possible 100%, but pretty near that, if the translator is worth their salt. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 01:36:32 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: We Were Once All Brothers Message-ID: <961026013631_1879596103@emout16.mail.aol.com> Not everyone has to have the same idea, right? I mean, someone on theos-l could say something that no one else liked but the other people would still like him or her as a person, wouldn't they? Wouldn't they? OK, then put me down as the last person in cyberspace to not to want to change one jot or tittle of THE THREE OBJECTS--and that especially includes ~brotherhood~. It seems to me that at least half the trouble with the TS is not that that it has been unwilling to keep up with times but rather, that the little groups who have stumbled into leadership roles have felt free to change anything anything they want according to their own lights. Some years ago we had the sudden appearance of "The Theosophical World View" which now shows up on the back cover of every AMERICAN THEOSOPHIST. More recently, we have witnessed the introduction of "THE THREE AIMS" (J.A.: "They are the inner side of those DECLARED OBJECTS"). Forget it. I don't want any more messing around with THE THREE OBJECTS. It is, in my opinion, the thing which should never, ever be changed under any circumstances. The Theosophical Society needs one permanent, indelible, sacred statement which can never be altered and by means of which all actions of all leaders, past and present, can be measured and held to strict account. And by this THREE-OBJECT measure, I find much that is blameworthy. What in THE THREE OBJECTS says that a lodge can be expelled for too much interest in an author other than H.P.B.? What in THE THREE OBJECTS says that the Russians must be kept out until they can pass an entrance exam? What in THE THREE OBJECTS frowns on psychics and magicians? Not only, in my opinion, is THE THREE OBJECTS "written in stone," but it is the only stone we have to throw at the enemies of the Personal Quest. Say that it can be changed and improved and we have not a stone but a bit of airborne fluff that is easily brushed aside. Some committee brushed it aside and we have an "official group philosophy"; someone else brushed it aside and we have "AIMS" as well; sooner or later something else may brush it aside and we may find ourselves repeating an obligatory Prayer to the Masters before we can have a meeting. I say that in the struggle to restore egalitarianism and freedom of thought within The Theosophical Society our only ally is a simple question: "How is this new policy or this new action justified by or related to THE THREE OBJECTS?" Oh yes, those old people were stupid not to be able to predict that ~brotherhood~ etc. would get narrowed in meaning. They were probably also stupid in the way worded other things as well. So what? Is there anyone who comes to Theosophy with any theosophical potential it at all who cannot see what the old people were trying to say? Sure, we have said it better in a more modern form for more modern times; however, that is not the point. The point is that by doing so we are saying it ~can~ be changed and added to. Perhaps no one ever really breaks a law; perhaps he or she only changes, adds, or makes exceptions to it according to his or her own interest. This, again in my opinion, is what has been the corrupting agent in the Theosophical Society for many, many years. At least in their own minds, the "inner circle" has often seemed to be operating from the basis of a changed, added-to, exception-laded and sometimes maybe even ~completely disregarded~ THE THREE OBJECTS. By my count there are forty-one words in the body of THE THREE OBJECTS. By my lights there is really only one problematic word--~brotherhood~. It is an antique, a relic, a museum piece. Why should modern women have to put up with this has-been? I don't know. Maybe because it can't be changed without turning THE THREE OBJECTS into THE THREE OBJECTS--REVISED. Will the modern women see this one word and think that the Theosophical Society is just another male-dominated organization? Maybe some will, I don't know. On the other hand, maybe some will stay long enough to look the "B" facts--Blavatsky, Besant, Bailey, Burnier etc. and conclude something quite different about the real Who's Who in the Society, past and present. . . . Anyway, I call upon your sense of kinship, siblinghood, fellowship etc. not to hate me for standing alone, obdurate, and behind-the-times with this one idea. Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:12:40 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: home page Message-ID: <199610252321.TAA15210@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Hi, Carol Ward, Glad to see you aboard. I know you have the makings of a valuable contributor. Welcome! Lee Deutsch From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:11:05 -0400 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Disk publishing. Message-ID: <961026131105_551461361@emout10.mail.aol.com> Alan, In most cases, a simple read-only is sufficient. There are e-book programs that protect from easy copying and while they won't stop a serious hacker, no one can stop a xerox machine either. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:29:13 +0100 From: Michael Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19961026182913.0067ebec@xs4all.nl> Ramadoss wrote: >In the latest issue of What is Enlightenment? there is a very interesting >account of a serious health problem of Vimala Thakar being healed by >Krishnaji. According to her, even Krishnaji did not know how the healing >worked. It seems Krishnaji's mother had told him when he was young that his >hands had the power to heal. It appears that some may have healing powers >even without themselves consciously knowing how it works. This is one more >side of Krishnaji. This was of course known for more than 25 years ago after Vimala Thakar wrote her: "On an eternal voyage" published in 1969 in which she gave an account of the healing sessions. At one time she was considered in Europe the future successor of Krishnaji. In fact her books were found to be more comprehensible than K.'s. She went around giving lectures and courses. K. denied once more that any person was chosen to, or could step in his shoes. I haven't heard of her for a long time. Michael http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/index.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:55:24 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: The 4 B's Message-ID: <71cI+GAMClcyEwEs@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <961026013631_1879596103@emout16.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >Why should modern women have to put up >with this has-been? I don't know. Maybe because it can't be changed without >turning THE THREE OBJECTS into THE THREE OBJECTS--REVISED. They shouldn't have to put up with it - and why shouldn't the three objects be the three revised objects? Other organisations move with the times and still retain their integrity - enhance it even. > >Will the modern women see this one word and think that the Theosophical >Society is just another male-dominated organization? Maybe some will, I >don't know. It's not a question of "maybe some will" but of "many already do." Your post here seems to be reinforcing the idea of a male-dominated organization. > On the other hand, maybe some will stay long enough to look the >"B" facts--Blavatsky, Heav smoker (now untheosophical) meat-eater (now untheosophical) user of "colorful" language (extremely untheosophical). > Besant, Manipulator and manipulated, supporter of "new" doctrines, supporter of CWL in connection with his self-admitted acts of child abuse. Believed that a young Indian boy was the reincarnation of the Christ. > Bailey Seems saner than some - but a *naughty girl* for going it alone and finding her own master! Very untheosophical behavior. > Burnier etc. and conclude something >quite different about the real Who's Who in the Society, past and present. . >. . Some thoughts on conclusions that might be reached above. > >Anyway, I call upon your sense of kinship, siblinghood, fellowship etc. not >to hate me for standing alone, obdurate, and behind-the-times with this one >idea. OK. But I think you are either confused or very very wrong. If I hated you for your opinions, I would not like to know me. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:02:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: We Were Once All Brothers? Wrong! Message-ID: In message <961026013631_1879596103@emout16.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >Forget it. I don't want any more messing around with THE THREE OBJECTS. It >is, in my opinion, the thing which should never, ever be changed under any >circumstances. The Theosophical Society needs one permanent, indelible, >sacred statement which can never be altered and by means of which all actions >of all leaders, past and present, can be measured and held to strict account. Sacred? SACRED? To use a term which in *today's* world dimisses half of the world's population by, in effect, calling them "brothers" when they are in fact sisters? It is *impossible to form a "brotherhood" ... "Without distinction of ... sex." In today's language the beginning of the first object is hardly "sacred" - it is plain nonsense which I and many others REJECT as expressing anything spiritual, and certainly not the spirit of theosophy. Are you willing to join a Society whose first object is to form a nucleus of the sisterhood of humanity? Or would that not be sacred? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:43:33 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Stupid old people Message-ID: In message <961026013631_1879596103@emout16.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >Oh yes, those old people were stupid not to be able to predict that >~brotherhood~ etc. would get narrowed in meaning. They were probably also >stupid in the way worded other things as well. So what? "So what?" So if they were as stupid as that, are they worth taking any notice of at all? Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:00:53 -0500 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: We Were Once All Brothers Message-ID: <199610261931.PAA06803@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: RIhle@aol.com > > Not everyone has to have the same idea, right? > > I mean, someone on theos-l could say something that no one else liked but the > other people would still like him or her as a person, wouldn't they? > > Wouldn't they? In my observations, the most animosity is saved for those who enter on this list and decide to talk down to everyone else. I don't believe you are in that category. > Will the modern women see this one word and think that the Theosophical > Society is just another male-dominated organization? Maybe some will, I > don't know. On the other hand, maybe some will stay long enough to look the > "B" facts--Blavatsky, Besant, Bailey, Burnier etc. and conclude something > quite different about the real Who's Who in the Society, past and present. . Your post made me wonder who is influential in any matter. I'm still a relative newbie to the TS World, while many here know the ins-and-outs of the political and historical forces within. Who, in the last and final decision, will be the one to change anything at all? Will it be TPTB? Us? The government? The membership? A revolution at the steps of Adyar and Olcott? Personally, I don't KNOW if a male-dominated Society. I'm not at Olcott, so I can't tell what is happening, although since Raha and Dorothy Abbenhouse have risen to high position, I assume there is no problem. I don't feel the language necessarily reflects male-domination at TS. It is simply a matter of keeping up with a movment that is widespread. But what I think is only on small part of a larger group - and yours is part of that, to be considered. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:07:58 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In message <961026013631_1879596103@emout16.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com > writes > >Why should modern women have to put up > >with this has-been? I don't know. Maybe because it can't be changed without > >turning THE THREE OBJECTS into THE THREE OBJECTS--REVISED. Er, a quick historical note ... the Three Objects *were* revised, more than once I believe, in the early days of the Society - (in fact the dreaded word "psychic" was even in the original Third Object) ... only since the deaths of the original generation did they *stop* being revised, and become the fixed (and IMO, stagnant) things they are seen as by some today. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 19:18:30 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: modernizing Message-ID: <199610270027.UAA03184@ultra1.dreamscape.com> > How do we get those "in charge" to listen???? > They're already listening, some of them. I said in a previous message that Dora Kunz does it, (see her "The Personal Aura") and Dora was President of the American TS for many years. Shirley Nicholson who used to be chief editor, and is now directing Krotona Institute, does it (see "Ancient Wisdom, Modern Insight"). And I'm looking through John Algeo's manual on the SD. That has a sprinkling of Sanskrit words, like Dhyani Chohans, and here I see a real interesting chart on p. 29 in Sanskrit & English equivalents called "The One and the Many, The First Fundamental Proposition." We're talking about the SD, which uses a lot of foreign words, especially Sanskrit. The chart is written with the Sanskrit & English following each other. It makes concepts clear to me that were hazy before. I think it's written so that present day people can understand the concepts of the SD., which has a lot of Sanskrit in it. It's written so that people can understand, not so that people can stand amazed at HPB's command of Sanskrit. liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:29:45 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: We Were Once All Brothers Message-ID: <3272C919.D7C@sprynet.com> RIhle@aol.com wrote: > OK, then put me down as the last person in cyberspace to not to want to > change one jot or tittle of THE THREE OBJECTS--and that especially includes > ~brotherhood~. I won't dislike you; I will, however, make a few points, and hope that inpsires you to make a few counterpoints back (or even agree with me!). And, to encourage you to stay, I will answer you in the style I use under the New York Theosophical Society Internet account, rather than the somewhat less polite style I use under my own name. > Forget it. I don't want any more messing around with THE THREE OBJECTS. It > is, in my opinion, the thing which should never, ever be changed under any > circumstances. The Theosophical Society needs one permanent, indelible, > sacred statement which can never be altered and by means of which all actions > of all leaders, past and present, can be measured and held to strict account. The Three Objects have been altered no less than 5 times since the founding of the Theosophical Society. In addition, they have been translated into many other languages all over the world. There are places where the Objects are vague (for example, the 2nd object, where the adjective, "comparative" can have 3 different meanings, either modifying the word "religion" alone, modifying the words "religion", "science", and "philosophy" indiidually, or modifying the three together, the idea of comparing religious, scientific, and philisophical ideas with each other. In addition, the English language itself changes over the years. It's not so bad yet that one needs a translation for the Three Objects, but a lot of understanding of the Secret Doctrine and Isis Unveiled is dependent on knowledge of language and culture of the late 19th century. The terms "Man" and "mankind" are almost archaic at this point; 30-40 years from now they will be. > And by this THREE-OBJECT measure, I find much that is blameworthy. What in > THE THREE OBJECTS says that a lodge can be expelled for too much interest in > an author other than H.P.B.? What in THE THREE OBJECTS says that the > Russians must be kept out until they can pass an entrance exam? What in THE > THREE OBJECTS frowns on psychics and magicians? Well, actually, you are confusing objects with bylaws. I am getting a copy of the bylaws of TSA and possibly Adyar in a few days (there are some changes which need to be made to the New York bylaws, and I need the TSA and Adyar bylaws for reference). They are available to any member, and outline exactly under what conditions a Lodge may be expelled. In my opinion, it is too easy to do so, and am actively lobbying to make it more difficult. In the meantime, with the current regime, I don't think that it's an issue to worry about, as they seem to be much more sympathetic towards politically incorrect beliefs. > I say that in the struggle to restore egalitarianism and freedom of thought > within The Theosophical Society our only ally is a simple question: "How is > this new policy or this new action justified by or related to THE THREE > OBJECTS?" I find that a trip to THE MAHATMA LETTERS can often be most helpful, as well. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:18:16 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <3272D478.579B@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > > Boy, this final thought is getting to be 1x1x1x1x1 etc. > > >The movies we show the first Friday of every month, however, is a > >POPULAR movie, as opposed to a documentary. > > Bart, what's your purpose? It's a lot easier for most people to watch a popular (i.e. mass market) movie and discuss it than for them to read some difficult, obfuscatory, disorganized, formally worded 19th century tome and discuss that. And many movies do have strong Theosophical implications. To take one case in point, let's take a look at GROUNDHOG DAY. The following reveals information about the ending of the movie, so if you don't want it spoiled, don't read it. GROUNDHOG DAY can be viewed as a light, romantic, comedy. Yet, it also has strong Theosophical implications. It symbolizes the cycle of life, death, and rebirth, and shows evolution through the cycles. Bill Murray stars as Phil Connors, a dislikable weatherman who has to do a Groundhog Day broadcast from Punxsutawney, PA. He is totally self-centered, treating the people around him alternatively as objects to fulfill his desires and things to stay away from. Snowed in to Punxsutawney, he spends the night there, only to wake up the next morning to find out that, once again, it is Groundhog Day. Nobody but he realizes that the day is repeating itself. He starts out by taking advantage of his situation, but gets more and more despondent as time goes on, and he seems doomed to repeat the situation endlessly. Yet, everything he does, he does for himself. He spends much of his time trying to seduce his producer. At one point, he decides to pursue her friendship rather than love, and succeeds, only to find that she does not remember anything the next day. It is only when he performs a selfless act (giving money to an old beggar) that he begins to change his situation. In noticing the beggar, Phil also notices that the beggar dies that night. Phil then vows that he will make sure that nothing bad happens to anybody in Punxsutawney on Groundhog Day. He proceeds to ensure that he is on the spot to stop everything bad that happens that day, making him the hero of Punxsutawney and, without any extra effort on his part, his producer falls in love with him. The film is an allegory for the many lifetimes we cycle through. What we do in any lifetime has little or no effect on what happens in the next lifetime, just like Phil going through lifetime after lifetime. Eventually, we discover that the key to continued satisfaction across the lifetimes is through altruism, helping one's fellow man. But, even after this realization comes, we still have to work off the karma we created in our previous lifetimes before we can ascend, symbolized in GROUNDHOG DAY as the next day dawning. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:28:43 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: <3272D6EB.13B7@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Heav smoker (now untheosophical) meat-eater (now untheosophical) user of > "colorful" language (extremely untheosophical). Like TSA National Speaker Stephen Haller(sp)? > Manipulator and manipulated, supporter of "new" doctrines, supporter of > CWL in connection with his self-admitted acts of child abuse. Believed > that a young Indian boy was the reincarnation of the Christ. I have a number of problems with Leadbeater, but I don't recall him admitting to child abuse (nothing was ever proven, in my recollection, and the only thing that was probably true was that he participated in a "circle jerk", at a time when it was considered standard behavior for English schoolteachers to teach their male charges about masturbation. For information about earlier that century, read TOM BROWN'S SCHOOLDAYS, and realize that "fagging" for an upperclassman included performing fellatio, which is why "fag" became slang for a homosexual. > Seems saner than some - but a *naughty girl* for going it alone and > finding her own master! Very untheosophical behavior. I find her master quite inferior to the ones who wrote THE MAHATMA LETTERS, at least in my opinion. By the way, I found the homophobic reference: ESOTERIC HEALING, particularly around page 62-64. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:45:06 -0400 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: We Were Once All Brothers Message-ID: <961027014506_341422268@emout19.mail.aol.com> Richard Ihle writes--> > Forget it. I don't want any more messing around with THE THREE OBJECTS. It > is, in my opinion, the thing which should never, ever [again] be changed under any > circumstances. The Theosophical Society needs one permanent, indelible, > sacred statement which can never be altered and by means of which all actions > of all leaders, past and present, can be measured and held to strict account. Bart Lidofsky writes--> The Three Objects have been altered no less than 5 times since the founding of the Theosophical Society. R.I.--> Thanks. I did not know this. However, I still "don't want any more messing around with THE THREE OBJECTS." One reason is given above. You provide the other reason: "There are places where the Objects are vague (for example, the 2nd object, where the adjective, "comparative" can have 3 different meanings, either modifying the word "religion" alone, modifying the words "religion", "science", and "philosophy" indiidually, or modifying the three together, the idea of comparing religious, scientific, and philisophical ideas with each other." In short, what is next on the change-agenda after ~brotherhood~? If I thought simply changing ~brotherhood~ would be the end of it, I would probably go along with it. If I thought the entire new TI version of the OBJECTS could be substituted for the original and never be changed after that, I would probably go along with it. However, neither of these two things seem likely. What seems likely is that if THE THREE OBJECTS begins to be regarded as something that can and should be changed from time to time, it will probably ~not~ be my mostly right-thinking friends on theos-l who will be doing the changing. Perhaps one might like to see this as a new "OBJECT": "To promulgate only true Theosophy, i.e., the inerrant doctrines found in the works of H.P. Blavatsky and her Masters." No? Well, I can think of some people who would--and they all got a lot more votes in the last election than anyone on the theos-l list. Thus, I have to agree: the "illusion" that THE THREE OBJECTS is something not meant to be tampered with probably has prevented and still prevents a lot of "change". . . . B.L.--> Well, actually, you are confusing objects with bylaws. R.I.--> Well, actually, I am getting my feelings hurt by people telling me that I am merely a confused person (Alan before you). B.L.--> I find that a trip to THE MAHATMA LETTERS can often be most helpful, as well. R.I.--> When they start coming to you, you'll be in business. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 00:51:10 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@rci.ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: message of theosophy -- using English terms Message-ID: > > In message <3.0b23.32.19961025003815.0069cb04@mail.deltanet.com>, "Eldon > B. Tucker" writes > >"universal brotherhood" > >as an English term was coined to represent an excellent idea, but since it's > >come to symbolize the second-class status of women in the past, it evokes > >outrage, and no longer communicates the grand ideas behind it > > Yea verily! > > Alan > --------- > THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ > E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk > And think of the controversy that was begun when the Revised Standard Version of the Bible was suggested as a replacement for the King James Version..... Unfortunately...even the RSV was replaced with "Good News" and other "modernized" versions of the Bible. As we speak, the "new" Lutheran liturgy...which I finally learned...is being replaced by a "new" liturgy..... Why can't this happen with the Theosopical Society? Gertrude (the busy) Churchmouse (busy learning the new liturgy) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:02:25 -0400 From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Getting too chatty Message-ID: <961026180224_341240721@emout13.mail.aol.com> I continue to subscribe to Theos-news for --NEWS-- and not CHAT. Please keep chat on the chat boards and leave this board for conferences, publications, etc. Richard Taylor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:36:51 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Lectures at the New York Theosophical Society Message-ID: <3272D8D3.4B6A@sprynet.com> All lectures are at the New York Theosophical Society, 240 East 53rd Street, between 2nd & 3rd Avenues, in New York City. The suggested donation is collected at the door; there is no advance registration for lectures. THEOSOPHICAL PRINCIPLES REVEALED IN EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE Sunday, October 27, 3:00 PM DR. BRIAN PERCIVAL In the late nineteenth century, widespread interest in the modern Theosophical movement arose concurrently with the development of a new outlook in architectural design and style which has come to be known as "modern". This presentation proposes to investigate correspondences and influences between theosophy and architecture. It is suggested that the debt that modern architecture owes to theosophical principles is significant. For example the idea of an "organic" or living architecture will be a familiar idea to theosophists. Illustrations will be cited, especially from Holland and America, where several well known architects as well as the architecturally influential painter Mondriaan, were known to be Theosophists. Brian R. Percival is an architect and teaches art and architectural history at Queens College. His interest in Theosophy emerged from an interest in Eastern cultures and religions which, in turn, was sparked initially by three years in Malaysia, traveling widely in Asia, India and Indonesia. He has twice taught an academic term at Hunan University in China. Suggested Donation: $5 ----- INTRODUCTION TO ASTROLOGY Sunday, November 3, 3:00 PM LINDA WEISSMAN Many people see Astrology only as a delineator of personality traits and a forecasting of "fated events". This introductory talk (to be followed with a seven class series, see page 15) focuses on the spiritual guidance and illumination that astrology can provide, and its depth and richness as the most ancient path to understanding the human connection to the cosmos and to all of life. Linda Weissman draws extensively on Jungian, archetypal and mythological referents. She is a researcher for the NYC Jung Center's ongoing Encyclopedia of Archetypal Symbolism and had taught astrology to the staff members there. She is a practitioner of yoga, and meditation; a student of the world's major religions, and a founding member of NYC's ALEPH Jewish Renewal Community. Suggested Donation: $5. --- I CHING: A THEOSOPHICAL INTRODUCTION Sunday, November 10, 3:00 PM ALAYNE BROWN The I Ching, dating back some 3000 years, is one of humankind's earliest attempts to interpret the meaning and process of life. Is it mere soothsaying superstition? Or does it serve as a profound guide to fostering world understanding and self-knowledge, as well as support the Theosophical view that the universe and all within it are one onterrelated and interdependent whole? Also, is there a connection between the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching and the 64 states of the DNA Code? These and other fascinating aspects of the I Ching will be discussed. Alayne Brown is an active Theosophist and has been a student of comparative religion and philosophy for many years. She is a free-lance writer and editor, specializing in both Eastern and Western spiritual texts, and was a spiritual activist for three years in the United Nations NGO community. Suggested Donation: $5 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:40:21 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Upcoming Classes at the New York Theosophical Society Message-ID: <3272D9A5.6DEA@sprynet.com> Registration may be made in person at the Theosophical Society Library or the Quest Bookshop, by phone by calling (212) 753-3835, by fax at (212) 758-4679, or by e-mail at our Internet address nyts@dorsai.org. However, admission is based on receipt of payment. Registration must be made at least 48 hours in advance of the class. A $5.00 late fee will be assessed for all late registrants. Also note that if the minimum number of students do not register in time, the classes will be canceled, regardless of the number of late registrants. There are a limited number of scholarship positions available in return for volunteering time; please call for details. READING TAROT FOR OTHER PEOPLE FREE INTRODUCTORY LECTURE OCTOBER 21 FOLLOWED BY 6 WEEK CLASS Monday, October 21, 28, November 4, 11, 18, 25, December 2 7:00 PM - 8:30 PM BART LIDOFSKY The Tarot has been in use for at least 500 years, and probably much longer. It can be a tool for observing the workings of karma, for meditation, and, most commonly, for divination. When doing readings for other people, however, special considerations must be made. This course on Tarot will be taught with the beginner in mind. Covered will be the meanings of the individual cards, how those meanings were derived, how the cards are read, and, most importantly, how to present these readings to others. Bart Lidofsky has been reading, studying and teaching the Tarot for 20 years. He is also a member of the New York Theosophical Society, and is on the Board of Directors. Class Fee: $100 --- PRANIC SELF HEALING Thursdays, October 31, November 7, 14, 21 6:30 - 8:00 PM DR. ALBRECHT HEYER Every ailment has its origin within the individual. Many problems can be prevented if we learn the language of our inner self. Overcoming negativity while establishing inner harmony is essential to achieving and maintaining health and happiness. This course will help provide the individual with the opportunity to recognize some of his hidden healing powers and discover his path harmonious to life. Dr. Albrecht Heyer is a naturopath and has studied natural healing traditions extensively in many parts of the world. He is author of A Beginner's Introduction to Nutrition, and is the host/producer of the popular cable talk show "Heyer Insights". Class Fee: $85 --- THE SECRET DOCTRINE: AN APPROACH TO ITS STUDY Tuesdays, November 5, 12, 19, 26, December 3, 10, 17 6:30 PM - 8:00 PM ED ABDILL This course is an introduction to what could easily become a lifetime study. What is The Secret Doctrine? Who wrote it? What kind of document is it? What are some of the ways we may study it? After addressing these questions, students will begin to read assigned portions of The Secret Doctrine. Classwork will include lecture, questions and discussion. A reasonable amount of homework will be assigned. Prerequisite: Foundations of the Ageless Wisdom (or equivalent). Texts are Required: Inquire at Quest Bookshop when registering. Ed Abdill is a former Director of the Theosophical Society of America. He has lectured for the Society throughout the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Brazil. Currently he is President of the New York Theosophical Society. Class Fee: $35 --- THE HOROSCOPE AS A MANDALA OF TRANSFORMATION: AN IN-DEPTH INTRODUCTORY COURSE Tuesdays, November, 5, 12, 19, 26, December, 3, 10, 17 6:30 - 9:30 PM LINDA WEISSMAN Astrology's primary components--houses, signs, planets--will be viewed through mythological, archetypal and Jungian perspectives. Some esoteric and theosophical teachings are also included. A few teachings from ancient and horary astrology will be introduced. Absolute beginners welcome, as well as those with a little previous astrological study. Linda Weissman draws extensively on Jungian, archetypal and mythological referents. She is a researcher for the NYC Jung Center's ongoing Encyclopedia of Archetypal Symbolism and had taught astrology to the staff members there. She is a practitioner of yoga, and meditation; a student of the world's major religions, and a founding member of NYC's ALEPH Jewish Renewal Community. Class Fee: $200 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 08:14:35 -0500 From: jmeier@microfone.net (Jim Meier) Subject: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <199610271314.AA06296@vnet.net> Hi Bart -- Since your 11 October posting describing the AAB writings as racist and homophobic, I have been curious as to the references that gave you those impressions. The passage in Esoteric Healing (Vol. IV of A Treatise on the Seven Rays) on page 63 that you quote makes reference to "ancient and evil habits" [AAB], not "evil men" [Bart]. That's quite a difference, imo. Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor issue in the series of teachings. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 07:17:40 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <199610271329.IAA20782@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > > It's a lot easier for most people to watch a popular (i.e. mass market) > movie and discuss it than for them to read some difficult, obfuscatory, > disorganized, formally worded 19th century tome and discuss that. That paragraphy says mouthfuls about the need for modernization. > . . . many movies do have strong Theosophical implications. To take one case > in point, let's take a look at GROUNDHOG DAY. The following reveals > information about the ending of the movie, so if you don't want it > spoiled, don't read it. > > GROUNDHOG DAY can be viewed as a light, romantic, comedy. Yet, it also > has strong Theosophical implications. It symbolizes the cycle of life, > death, and rebirth, and shows evolution through the cycles. The local Chicago magazine did an interview with Harold Ramis, who was responsible for the story and production of the fillm. He said that after it was released he got letters from Buddhists telling that it was the most buddhistic film they'd ever seen. Then he got letters from New Agers who thought it was written for them. And so on. Harold had to admit that he'd not written the film with any particular group or spiritual path in mind. It had just seemed like an interesting idea to him. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 07:22:57 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: <199610271329.IAA20794@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > > Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > Heav smoker (now untheosophical) meat-eater (now untheosophical) user of > > "colorful" language (extremely untheosophical). > > Like TSA National Speaker Stephen Haller(sp)? > Hoeller. Include in those vices drinking, including Perrier, as I once stole a bottle from him. Also include that he is one of the warmest and most loving human beings that I have ever met. > > Seems saner than some - but a *naughty girl* for going it alone and > > finding her own master! Very untheosophical behavior. > > I find her master quite inferior to the ones who wrote THE MAHATMA > LETTERS, at least in my opinion. By the way, I found the homophobic > reference: ESOTERIC HEALING, particularly around page 62-64. Who of us in all honesty can rate the Masters? Perhaps we can only rate the various personalites which they may dictate through. -Ann E. Bermingham > > Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 10:14:47 -0500 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Ingrained Rivulets Message-ID: <961027101446_218825450@emout19.mail.aol.com> Yes, What are these idiots who think that people will bother to write when they can't make any money for it going to do when the supply of ideas dries up because no one has any desire to write them down. If we want to keep the supply of new literature coming, then we damn well better make sure that there is money coming to those who do it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 15:09:26 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: In message <199610271314.AA06296@vnet.net>, Jim Meier writes >Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. >Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor >issue in the series of teachings. With respect, since when did the number of references to a topic decide its relative importance? The reported cry of Jesus "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" occurs only twice in the entire bible, but Christian theology and belief would be very different if it were not there at all - it is a *major* statement (which, IMCO) he probably never made at all, but that's another story. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:58:21 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Feelings Message-ID: In message <961027014506_341422268@emout19.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >Well, actually, I am getting my feelings hurt by people telling me that I am >merely a confused person (Alan before you). Delete "merely." I have no desire to put you down personally. I genuinely feel that you are confused, as parts of your post seemed to be at odds with other parts of it. And, of course, a post which begins by saying that you intend to take your stand regardless of others' views, and talks about people "hating" you suggests to some (me, at least) a denigratory attitude towards thos of differing opinions. Sometimes when we put fingers to keyboard we can only too quickly hurt others' feelings. Mine were hurt, too, by *your* post. Neither of us intended this to happen, but ... Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:50:47 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: In message <3272D6EB.13B7@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > I have a number of problems with Leadbeater, but I don't recall him >admitting to child abuse (nothing was ever proven, in my recollection, >and the only thing that was probably true was that he participated in a >"circle jerk", at a time when it was considered standard behavior for >English schoolteachers to teach their male charges about masturbation. >For information about earlier that century, read TOM BROWN'S SCHOOLDAYS, >and realize that "fagging" for an upperclassman included performing >fellatio, which is why "fag" became slang for a homosexual. Depends how you look at it. A fag who is compelled under duress (which is the truth of the situation) to perform acts of fellatio is a victim of child abuse - as no doubt was his upperclassman in his own day. SFAIK most of those affected and still living were in Australia, which is how Gregory Tillet was able to get so much info for his book, "The Elder Brother," being himself an inhabitant of Sydney with interests in the LCC. Reading between the lines, there seems to be good reason to suspect that some of these men are or were still traumatised by their experiences. It is all thoroughly documented. Some of the info (which includes newly discovered material) can be found in CWL.ZIP which should be in http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/HISTORY/ There is also further material in the 1908 "Theosophic Voice" published in Chicago (I have a DTP file of Issue 1, which contains some of the information current at the time). JHE also has a great deal of historical info, so don't be surprised if he chips in on this one. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 15:14:45 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: In message <199610271329.IAA20794@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >Who of us in all honesty can rate the Masters? Perhaps we can only rate >the various personalites which they may dictate through. Which kind of makes my point better than I did. Whatever HPB's perceived faults, or those of any of us, no human being is perfect, and that would include the writers of the Mahatma Letters, whoever they were, or even if their existence is pseudonymous. What matters is the Teaching itself, and what matters even more is that its students work at checking it out, veryfying it if possible, throwing out anything which proves to be false, and correcting anything which may have become twisted around in transmission - or by time, as in the language question. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:52:53 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <199610272252.RAA29830@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Jim Meier > Hi Bart -- > > Since your 11 October posting describing the AAB writings as racist and > homophobic, I have been curious as to the references that gave you those > impressions. > > The passage in Esoteric Healing (Vol. IV of A Treatise on the Seven Rays) on > page 63 that you quote makes reference to "ancient and evil habits" [AAB], > not "evil men" [Bart]. That's quite a difference, imo. > > Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. > Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor > issue in the series of teachings. Esoteric Healing is the one volume I've had the most difficulty understanding. I read the passages that Bart referred to with a question mark. Having no clear memory of Lemuria, or a lot of other things, I've made no particular judgement as to whether it is wrong or right. I believe it is one of those things that are food for thought. How the Master may have seen the issue then, from his perspective, and how he would deal with the problem so many years later is another question. While my reaction was fairly neutral to the passage, I suspect it hit Bart's buttons. He then decided that all the Bailey material was not worth his time. Bart has been quick to anger since he began posting and he may also be sensitive to any material that has any negative content about homosexuality. Thanks for your post, -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:41:19 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Osinovsky Subject: Theosophy and Postmodernism Message-ID: Jerry Hejka-Ekins: This is regarding an interview with you published in Fall 1996 issue of Bridging. Very interesting. I am interested too in the above issue, i.e. Theosophy and Postmodernism. I wonder if you are willing to support this new thread of discussion. If so, could you post the entire text of the interview on Theos-L if it's available as a computer file? Thanks, Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 19:55:35 -0500 From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Feelings Message-ID: <961027195535_1913293126@emout12.mail.aol.com> Alan Bain writes--> Delete "merely." I have no desire to put you down personally. I genuinely feel that you are confused, as parts of your post seemed to be at odds with other parts of it. And, of course, a post which begins by saying that you intend to take your stand regardless of others' views, and talks about people "hating" you suggests to some (me, at least) a denigratory attitude towards thos of differing opinions. Richard Ihle writes--> No, actually I think that "We Were All Once Brothers" was one of my most successful posts. Think about it: I wanted to make an ancillary point about the danger of making THE THREE OBJECTS something that can be changed, even for perhaps the best of reasons like updating the language. I may be confused about many things; however, I am pretty sure that my perception about the existence of individuals who would like to change the fundamental nature of the Society from Truth-Seeking to [T]heosophy-Finding (H.P.B. doctrine) is not among them. "THE THREE AIMS" (where one of the new purposes to "assist the Elders" or Whomever in Their Work etc.) did not invent itself. With THE THREE OBJECTS firmly in place, at least those in control will continue to be forced to do what they usually have had to do--work around it. With THE THREE OBJECTS firmly in place, at least we will continue to have some basis for complaining--i.e., that what is being done may be out of sync with what has been officially DECLARED that the Society is all about. So anyway, I wanted to bring up a point that had not yet been discussed. The problem I faced was that virtually everyone, including me, is in agreement that ~brotherhood~ is not a good term in this universal context any longer. On the other hand, I also felt that lowering the status of THE THREE OBJECTS from inviolable icon to pulse-of-the-moment-monitor might have ramifications that many, sisters as well as brothers, might not feel was worth the word change. I knew I had to be careful. ~Brotherhood~ seemed like it might be a very strong desire-mental idea for many--i.e., that not just "pure dispassionate reason" might be involved (it was for Eldon, though, as usual), but perhaps very stong emotions as well. Yes, I knew I was running a big risk. For example, I knew if JRC decided to nail me, I would ~stay~ nailed and never recover. I had to come up with an introductory strategy. Thus, the "don't hate me for saying this" motif. I assure you it had nothing to do with having a "denigratory attitude towards those of differing opinions." And it sort of worked, don't you think? At the most, just quite a few people now think I'm confused (thanks a lot); anyway, no one has stepped on my testicle or put a rash-spell on me--yet, at least. Furthermore, it was an honest feeling of apprehension, and hey, I'm not so macho that I need to lie about such things. . . . So anyway, I brought up a controversal point and survived theos-l. To me, that's a very successful post. And, all in all, perhaps changing ~brotherhood~ in THE THREE OBJECTS won't set the dominoes falling in the way I fear it might. Who knows? I'm not a prophet; I'm just a guy, hmm . . . , who suddenly has a itchy tes. . . . Godspeed, Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 17:11:48 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Ingrained Rivulets Message-ID: <199610280059.TAA27640@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Yes, > What are these idiots who think that people will bother to write when they > can't make any money for it going to do when the supply of ideas dries up > because no one has any desire to write them down. > If we want to keep the supply of new literature coming, then we damn well > better make sure that there is money coming to those who do it. As long as some money-hungry individual thinks he can put on a show for the least amount of pay given writers, the American public will continue to be bombarded with inane books, television shows and movies. Old television shows (The Brady Bunch) are made into movies and new television shows are made from a movie (Clueless). While probably thousands of eager script writers try to peddle their masterpieces, the producers and studio executives look for something "safe" and already proven to make them money. To hell with new ideas and culture, when they stand to make millions. Romance novels are writen by a strict formula and are cranked out by the thousands, ending up in garage sales. Cindy Crawford can "write" a book about make-up and have throngs running to the book store to see her sign it. Zillions of celebrities are signed for books, even if they are illiterate, just to get their name on the book cover. While many writers, with real ideas, probably go into the computer field to survive. And as for books being made into movies, this is what Tom Clancy had to say: "Selling your book to Hollywood is like giving your daughter to a pimp." How many good and best- selling books have been thrown into the Hollywood studio blender and came out as pap for the masses. Minus most of the original ideas and meaning. As for TV, all you have to do is look at the talk shows there. No actors, script, costumes and little production costs. Lots of viewers who will watch other people's troubles. The guests get $500, a room at a hotel and limo rides. When will writers get paid what they are worth? When the culture as a whole values ideas over the easy buck. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:53:07 -0500 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Stupid old people Message-ID: <961027205306_1214026438@emout19.mail.aol.com> Alan, While staying out of the gist of this argument, you have just asked a question that people may really not want to answer for fear of what that answer would be. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:29:34 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <32741A8E.4888@sprynet.com> Jim Meier wrote: > Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. > Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor > issue in the series of teachings. However, when I opened a couple of volumes at random, that was one of the first two things I saw. If you had a Jewish brother-in-law, and opened up a series of esoteric books, and the first thing you saw was how Hitler was correct in slaughtering the Jews, would you go much farther? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:32:11 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: one final thought Message-ID: <32741B2B.66E9@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > The local Chicago magazine did an interview with Harold Ramis, who was > responsible for the > story and production of the fillm. He said that after it was released he > got letters from Buddhists > telling that it was the most buddhistic film they'd ever seen. Then he got > letters from New > Agers who thought it was written for them. And so on. Harold had to admit > that he'd not > written the film with any particular group or spiritual path in mind. It > had just seemed like > an interesting idea to him. Harold Ramis was responsible for the production of the film, but the story and most of the script was written by Danny Rubin. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:34:31 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The 4 B's Message-ID: <32741BB7.4F9D@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > I find her master quite inferior to the ones who wrote THE MAHATMA > > LETTERS, at least in my opinion. By the way, I found the homophobic > > reference: ESOTERIC HEALING, particularly around page 62-64. > > Who of us in all honesty can rate the Masters? Perhaps we can only rate > the various personalites which they may dictate through. My apologies; I should have said, "based on the writings attributed to them". I did not intend to demean any Mahatmas, only the acts done in their name. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 23:40:57 +0100 From: Nils-Erik Thorell Subject: Re: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: <22405760709894@sbbs.se> Why do I get this kind of personal junk mail? At 21:35 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 CarolWard@aol.com wrote: > >> Hi Ram Doss! >> >> It was nice to get to meet you on Monday. We are back safe and sound and >> getting geared up to go back to work. >> >> Take care and greetings to all in your lovely TS group. >> >> Carol >> >Hi, Carol: > >We all enjoyed your talk. You may find the latest issue of What >Enlightenment is? It has articles covering some of the women spiritutal >leaders, including that of Vimala Thakar whose life was turned around >after meeting Krishnaji. > >MK Ramadoss > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 23:40:56 +0100 From: Nils-Erik Thorell Subject: Re: TS Homepage of Rodolfo Don Message-ID: <22405602409891@sbbs.se> Why do I get this kind of junk mail? At 14:39 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Ram Doss! > >It was nice to get to meet you on Monday. We are back safe and sound and >getting geared up to go back to work. > >Take care and greetings to all in your lovely TS group. > >Carol > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 19:56:33 -0500 From: CarolWard@aol.com Subject: Brant Jackson on Thought Power Message-ID: <961027195632_1679230364@emout12.mail.aol.com> Brant Jackson will be hosted by the Lowcountry Study center on Saturday, November 2 to speak on Thought Power. The program will be held at the West Ashley Regional Library from 10:15-1:15 and is free of charge. For more info or directions, contact CarolWard@aol.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Oct 96 07:22:40 EST From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Nov Classes at the Theos Society in Miami & South Florida Message-ID: <961028122239_72724.413_FHP28-1@CompuServe.COM> Classes at The Theosophical Society in Miami & South Florida, for November, 1996 831 S.E. 9th Street (831 South Federal Highway), Deerfield Beach, FL 33441 Telephone: 954-420-0908 All classes are offered without charge and you need not be a T.S. member to attend, (except for members meetings) ASTROLOGY: BASIC ASTROLOGY A basic Astrology course on astrological principles and practices. This course is not only for beginners, but for all who are interested in furthering their knowledge of Astrology. Certain course materials are required which you either have or will have to purchase. Tuesdays 2:00 pm , weekly, (ongoing) Facilitator: Cary Franks, Ph.D. P.M.A.P.A. AWARENESS: EXERCISES IN AWARENESS Exercises in "Reading your Being" and managing it for total growth, feeling the energies of the universe and receiving messages from channeled guided sources. Experience and build group energies while others act as your guides. Feel more integrated & connected. Saturdays 11:00 am, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitator: Jurgen Kruppa with the talents of Helene Buntman ASTROLOGY-NUMEROLOGY-TAROT Everyone is welcome to this open forum examining the thread running through Astrological Interpretation, Numerology and Tarot. Danuta uses a unique numbering system elucidated by her long years of study in Mathematics. Thursdays 1:00 pm,weekly,(ongoing)Facilitator: Danuta Miller BEACH WALK AND SUNDAY WALKING MEDITATION Join us in a monthly early morning Sunday walk on Deerfield Beach. Buddhist walking meditation , sensing exercises or just enjoyment. We meet at the parking meters behind the Deerfield Beach Resort 950 S.E. 20th Ave, A map and parking info. is available at the T.S. 8:00 am Sunday, Nov 10 & Sunday, Dec 8 (cancelled if raining) A COURSE IN MIRACLES Truth so profound and so simple that you don't think you need it. Yet the Course offers you a path of light and love to lift you higher than you've ever gone before. "Miracles are examples of right thinking." Thursdays 7:30 pm, weekly (ongoing) Facilitator: Elizabeth Waltman ESOTERICA What is Esotericism? Hermetics? Metaphysics? Occultism? Explore these terms and others that make up the landscape of inner inquiry. An informal, fun filled, forum to share your ideas and questions. Wednesdays 12:00 noon, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitator: Roxanne Nadolsky ESOTERIC SCIENCE & SPIRITUALITY STUDY GROUP Recently science has begun to verify what mystics have "seen." We study the connection between what science knows about the world and the mystical experience.Text: Sheldrake, A New Science of Life. Wednesdays: 3:00 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitators: Angeline Hall Tel: 954-979-1286 THE FOURTH WAY STUDY GROUP The 4th way of developing consciousness is a way in life. P.D. Ouspensky(a Russian Theosophist) codified it in his text The Fourth Way. Come study it with us for its practical application in your life. Mondays 7:30 pm, weekly, Facilitators: Frank Froehling & Elizabeth Waltman GNOSIS: ESOTERIC CHRISTIANITY OF MT. ATHOS The inner teaching of the monasteries of Mt. Athos, "The Holy Mountain" of Greece is known as Esoteric Christianity. These are revealed in the texts we study: Mouravieff ,Gnosis I, II & III Mondays: 6:00 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitators: Frank Froehling & Elizabeth Waltman GURDJIEFF: AN INTRODUCTION TO HIS TEACHING Gurdjieff teaches that we are asleep but we can and must wake up. We explore the basic elements of the teaching including: states of consciousness, negative emotions, & transformation. Wednesdays 6:00 pm, weekly, a 5 week course begins Nov 6 Facilitator:Sy Ginsburg (you can enter at mid-course) GROWING DIVINE CONSCIOUSNESS Come grow and share with us as we read and discuss the books entitled, The Impersonal Life, I Am That, and Meditation, Gateway to Light. Thursdays 6:00 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitator: Elizabeth Waltman GURDJIEFF CONTINUING STUDY GROUP Gurdjieff's teaching is called a way of Self-awareness(awakening) done in life. To follow it a group is needed that meets regularly & in which the members undertake tasks to remind each other to awaken. Wednesdays 7:30 pm, weekly (ongoing) Facilitator: Sy Ginsburg Prerequisite: Introductory Course KRISHNAMURTI STUDY GROUP Krishnamurti sought ways to set us all free. We conduct a shared inquiry into Krishnamurti's Notebook , discovering what he actually said, interpreting it and evaluating it as it relates to our own lives. Saturdays 4:30 pm, weekly (ongoing). Drop in at any time. Facilitator: Alf Jones LIBRARY WORKSHOP Come help us work on a card file for our library. Work with our librarian and become familiar with the treasury of books in the library of The Theosophical Society. Tuesdays 4:00 pm, weekly (ongoing) Facilitator: Angeline Hall Tel: 954-979-1286 MEDITATION: TRANSMISSION MEDITATION Transmission is a specialized form of group meditation in which the members act as channels by which the energies of the Masters are stepped down & made usable. No special expertise is required. Sundays 7:30 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitators: Paula Cartwright & DeEtte Ames TAROT & NUMEROLOGY Learn or enhance your knowledge of Tarot and Numerology in our weekly workshop. Answer questions, analyze your character and predict the future with these ancient methods. Thursdays 3:00 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitator: J.D. Checkett URANTIA BOOK STUDY GROUP Since its publication in 1955,The Urantia Book has become the core philosophy of thousands of readers seeking answers. It stands alone in its presentation of the unity of Science, Philosophy & Religion. First Saturday of each month, 7:30 pm, Sat Nov 2 & Sat Dec 7 Facilitator: Jack Miller, (ongoing) ALAN WATTS STUDY GROUP Explore the best of Eastern wisdom and Western metaphysics. Learn a natural mysticism to overcome the split between humanity & nature, man & woman, I & not-I. Text: Watts, The Book Fridays 7:30 pm, weekly Text: Watts,Wisdom of Insecurity Facilitator: Chuck Salvo, (ongoing) THEOSOPHY:FOUNDATION OF THE AGELESS WISDOM Basic concepts of Theosophy and their application to daily life are given in a short video presentation by Ed Abdill, National Speaker. Group discussion & exercises follow each of 5 videos. Sundays 2:30 pm weekly (ongoing) Nov 3,10,24, Dec 8,15,22 Facilitator: Carol Hurd,begins Nov 3, you can enter any time THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY SPEAKERS FORUM In consonance with the 2nd & 3rd Declared Objects of the Theosophical Society, we present a speakers forum to encourage the comparative study of religion, philosophy & science, and to investigate unexplained laws of nature & powers latent in humanity Sundays 3:30 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Nov 3 THE INTERGALACTIC FEDERATION & ASHTAR COMMAND, by Michael el Legion, Director UFO Film Society and Vortex Network talk Host on WNN Nov 10 CHANGING DESTINY'S COURSE, by Anastasia Furst, nationally known hand reader Nov 17 FLORIDA FEDERATION FALL CONVENTION AT ST PETERSBURG Nov 24 YOU AND YOUR BUTTONS, by Mariann Cisco, Certified Breath Practitioner and Physical Therapist THEOSOPHY: THE SECRET DOCTRINE Book I Cosmogenesis & Book II Anthropogenesis using HPB's magnum opus,The Secret Doctrine with reference to additional texts: Prem&Ashish, Man, the Measure of All Things & Man, Son of Man Sundays 1:30 pm, weekly, (ongoing) Facilitators: Ralph Beaudry, Bernard, and Carol Hurd SHARING THEOSOPHY We study The American Theosophist, the Quest and Letters to New Members. We give book reports, talk about what is being learned in classes, get to know other members, and develop a Lodge nucleus. Tuesdays 7:30 pm, weekly (ongoing) Facilitators: Cary Franks & other members Members Meeting THEOSOPHICAL FACILITATORS MEETING Meet other facilitators! Discuss what is going on in your classes! How does it pertain to Theosophy and what have you learned? What are your concerns? Second Tuesday of each month, 7:00 pm, Nov 12 & Dec 10 Facilitator: Cary Franks Members Meeting THEOSOPHY: ESOTERIC THEOSOPHY STUDY GROUP A group studying the great esoteric teachings given through H.P. Blavatsky, A.A. Bailey, G. Hodson, G. de Purucker and others. Saturdays 7:00 pm, weekly (ongoing), Meets in No. Lauderdale at facilitator's home: 1303 S.W. 81st Terr. Call 954-726-8009 Facilitators: Barbara Stetson, & Bernard for directions THEOSOPHY: ESOTERIC THEOSOPHY STUDY GROUP Full Moon Meditations: Using the unique energies at the full moon Sat, Nov 23 Sagittarius 11:10 pm EDT 11/24 (exact full moon) Sat, Dec 21 Capricorn 3:41 pm EST 12/24 " " " (Sat, Dec 21 is Winter Solstice, & sun enters Capricorn) at facilitator's home: 1303 S.W. 81st Terr. Call 954-726-8009 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 02:14 MST From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: Feelings Message-ID: Richard says: >anyway, no one has stepped on my testicle or put a rash-spell on me--yet, at least. >I'm not a prophet; I'm just a guy, hmm . . . , who suddenly has a itchy tes. . . . > >Godspeed, > >Richard Ihle Richard! Richard! Why do you tempt me so?? Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:24:55 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <199610281326.IAA16036@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Bart Lidofsky > Jim Meier wrote: > > Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. > > Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor > > issue in the series of teachings. > > However, when I opened a couple of volumes at random, that was one of > the first two things I saw. If you had a Jewish brother-in-law, and > opened up a series of esoteric books, and the first thing you saw was > how Hitler was correct in slaughtering the Jews, would you go much > farther? That's entirely up to the reader. There are so many books and so much material that I imagine any number of people could be offended. Christians would be offended by the idea that Jesus was not considered a personal savior. Jews and any number of other ethnic groups mind be offended by some passages. There are several nasty comments on TS. Whoever was writing it called it as they saw it. Unvarnished and quite similar to some of the posts that grace this mailing list. Why do I have thirteen blue volumes and have read them for over twenty years? Because I consider them the most value writings in terms of my own spiritual path. There are things I found in those books that I could find no where else - even in traditional Theosophical literature. Unless wasn't looking hard enough! At any rate, they were there for me when I needed them and I appreciate the work that went into them, unvarnished as it is. If you or anyone else get their spiritual nourishment from other sources, that's terriffic. Leave alone what doesn't do it for you. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:16:20 -0500 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Ingrained Rivulets Message-ID: <961028101618_133566051@emout18.mail.aol.com> Ann, Writers may never get paid what we are worth, but we still like to eat and look much askance on people who think we should just give stuff away. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:27:40 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Feelings Message-ID: <199610281728.MAA18583@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: RIhle@aol.com > > And it sort of worked, don't you think? At the most, just quite a few people > now think I'm confused (thanks a lot); anyway, no one has stepped on my > testicle or put a rash-spell on me--yet, at least. Furthermore, it was an > honest feeling of apprehension, and hey, I'm not so macho that I need to lie > about such things. . . . > > So anyway, I brought up a controversial point and survived theos-l. To me, > that's a very successful post. Is not rather bizarre that we should be so concerned of what some phantoms in cyberspace think of us? Do we fit in with their cyber opinon? Will the cyberpeople still like me? These questions are written to everyone on the list, including myself. Our intestinal fortitude to air and flaunt our opinions may be the same on or off-line. But it still comes down to not wanting the group to think badly of us, from playground to the office to theos-l. Do I post only with the crowd, lest someone cybernail me? Your opinion, Richard, made me consider the argument in a different light. In our pursuit of the new (Uranus/Aquarius), do we throw out the traditional (Saturn/Capricorn)? Could there be a balance or are the forces for revolution too strong? Or are the forces for tradition even stronger? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:30:41 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: Ingrained Rivulets Message-ID: <199610281730.MAA19691@cliff.cris.com> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Ann, > Writers may never get paid what we are worth, but we still like to eat and > look much askance on people who think we should just give stuff away. Add to that comment those people called artists and I heartily agree. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:00:37 +1200 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Re: TI-L digest 35 Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19961029141253.1ec7c23e@iprolink.co.nz> A couple of days ago, Kym wrote: >By the way, what does the phrase "form a nucleus" mean???? Besides the >'brotherhood' term, the sentence itself is a bit muddled in meaning, at >least to me. I'm not surprised you feel like this. To me, the first Object as actually worded is rather like the tip of an iceberg or, perhaps more aptly, like the trunk of a tree into which a whole root system feeds and out of which many branches and leaves grow. "To form a nucleus" is a simple enough phrase, but to actually do it "without distinction of race, creed, sex, ..." was pretty daring stuff in its day and still is when you look around at how most of the human race is behaving today. One of the first things I think of when I read this Object, is the idea from systems theory, of how a huge entity like the human race (to ignore the other major life waves on the planet for now) is made up of many subgroupings which in turn are made up of smaller subgroupings and so on down in size, for example, nation, province, city, urban region, household or family, parents and children. Then there are many other kinds of group which cut across these boundaries, for example male, female, elderly, those in mid-life, employed, students, teachers, and huge numbers of subdivisions within these. Looking a bit more inwardly, we see people linked by common interests or goals, such as members of a horse riding club, those whose education specialised in the same field, or a pressure group, and one of the exciting trends today is how the social group we interact with is no longer just those who live nearby, as in village life a few hundred years ago, but is being more and more defined by common interest, aims and liking, for example what is happening on the Internet where the members of a group are scattered across the world and have usually never met each other. In my own experience, it goes beyond the communication of thoughts or ideas, and feelings often come across loud and clear, and special friendships can be formed. The Theosophical movement is made up of major groups defined by a common general vision and especially a common perception of a need to be met, a work to be done. Like everything else, they have developed their own subgroupings, different branches on the common trunk, and I see nothing wrong with this apparent fragmentation as long as there is a sense of kinship, the commonality kept in mind. All part of the richness of diversity. The reality has fallen short of this ideal, of course. I think the nucleus in the Object was meant to be a place where a new step towards actually realizing and doing the planetary human family could be taken, and where it could be promoted in ways that an individual could not achieve. To be an example as well as just a spreader of the ideas. People being what they are, the idea of being a nucleus can easily slip into one of being an elite in the separative sense, but I do not think this is what those who developed the Objects wanted! They more likely saw their nucleus as a centre through which life-giving energies could flow more freely to the rest of the organism and new patterns be introduced into it, somewhat as in a biological cell, but at more than one level. Theosophical organizations today are faced with the fact that they are no longer the only nucleus in this work of global transformation, no longer the sole pioneer. They are now a nucleus amongst other similar nuclei and from my viewpoint, the general organizational mindset is not keeping up with this fact, let alone the words. The global human family with all its groupings and subdivisions down to every single individual, is linked in many ways, ways that theosophy itself illuminates. The common cosmic origin, the common womb of Nature, the common substance and energy at all their levels, the underlying common light of consciousness embracing all, all of these and vastly more, are what our humble little concept of siblingship is trying to express. No wonder that we run out of words for the job. But it is in the realm of relationships that I believe our immediate work lies, relationships between all the groups and subgroups of system theory, and especially those between each individual and the rest. This is where the *real* work of forming a nucleus that meets the needs is to be done, hard as it often gets, and is where such a nucleus could serve the wider body of humanity as it struggles with that same challenge. The human-wide network of relationships is in a sense the global body of humanity, but just as enough heat and pressure can convert a pile of graphite into a diamond, so perhaps the conditions of today, with all the "nuclei" available, will help to take humanity that much further towards the inconceivably rich and sparkling diamond that it is undoubtedly destined to be. Murray Member TI and the TS in New Zealand From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:29:10 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: to Bart re AAB Message-ID: <199610282138.QAA04131@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Jim says >by Alice A. Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor issue in the series of teachings. Jim, I think you're right from the viewpoint of the contents of Alice Bailey's teachings, however, I think it would be very important to a homosexual each of the 4 times that it's mentioned. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:39:19 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: the stories about CWL Message-ID: <199610282148.QAA05437@ultra1.dreamscape.com> POPPYCOCK! Liesel >Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 14:50:47 +0000 >From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" >To: theos-l@vnet.net >Subject: Re: The 4 B's >Message-ID: > >In message <3272D6EB.13B7@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes >> I have a number of problems with Leadbeater, but I don't recall him >>admitting to child abuse (nothing was ever proven, in my recollection, >>and the only thing that was probably true was that he participated in a >>"circle jerk", at a time when it was considered standard behavior for >>English schoolteachers to teach their male charges about masturbation. >>For information about earlier that century, read TOM BROWN'S SCHOOLDAYS, >>and realize that "fagging" for an upperclassman included performing >>fellatio, which is why "fag" became slang for a homosexual. > >Depends how you look at it. A fag who is compelled under duress (which >is the truth of the situation) to perform acts of fellatio is a victim >of child abuse - as no doubt was his upperclassman in his own day. >SFAIK most of those affected and still living were in Australia, which >is how Gregory Tillet was able to get so much info for his book, "The >Elder Brother," being himself an inhabitant of Sydney with interests in >the LCC. Reading between the lines, there seems to be good reason to >suspect that some of these men are or were still traumatised by their >experiences. > >It is all thoroughly documented. Some of the info (which includes newly >discovered material) can be found in CWL.ZIP which should be in > >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/DIRECTORY/HISTORY/ > >There is also further material in the 1908 "Theosophic Voice" published >in Chicago (I have a DTP file of Issue 1, which contains some of the >information current at the time). JHE also has a great deal of >historical info, so don't be surprised if he chips in on this one. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk > >------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:51:50 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Forbidden notice Message-ID: In message <199610281730.MAA19691@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >---------- >> From: Drpsionic@aol.com >> Ann, >> Writers may never get paid what we are worth, but we still like to eat >and >> look much askance on people who think we should just give stuff away. > >Add to that comment those people called artists and I heartily agree. > >-Ann E. Bermingham My reply to this is copyright, and I don't expect Chuck to pay me for it. So is some of my own writing in my web pages, but that's me. My favorite notice reads: It is forbidden to read this notice. Penalty $50 payable to A.Bain. (I must be feeling tired ....) Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:47:42 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Aquarian Message-ID: In message <199610281728.MAA18583@cliff.cris.com>, "Ann E. Bermingham" writes >In our pursuit of the new (Uranus/Aquarius), do we throw out the >traditional (Saturn/Capricorn)? Could there be a balance or are >the forces for revolution too strong? Or are the forces for tradition >even stronger? Astrologically speaking, if we are truly moving into "Aquarius" mode, then Saturn/Capricorn will be replaced by Saturn+Uranus/Aquarius. I would interpret that as mening that the traditional (Saturn as first and original "ruler" of Aquarius) will act as a brake for the runaway Uranian energies that tend to suddenly and unexpectedly try to take us too far too soon into uncharted territory. But Uranus will - and probably already has - break up fossilised institutions. Recommendation: Keep the best and add the rest. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:35:51 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Feelings Message-ID: In message <961027195535_1913293126@emout12.mail.aol.com>, RIhle@aol.com writes >And, all in all, perhaps changing ~brotherhood~ in THE THREE OBJECTS won't >set the dominoes falling in the way I fear it might. Who knows? I'm not a >prophet; I'm just a guy, hmm . . . , who suddenly has a itchy tes. . . . I think I see what you were trying to get at [chews bottom lip thoughtfully]. Being in England, I don;t get the American Theosophist (no surprise there!) but I did see some of the dismay expressed by the "3 aims" item by JA which appeared on the list. So ... given the status quo rather than the quo some of us would prefer, yes, I take your point, which is, I think, that those in charge should play be the existing rules at the very least. Yes? Alan [drools into coffee cup] --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 21:23:23 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: brainstorming Message-ID: <199610290232.VAA03213@ultra1.dreamscape.com> It's my considered opinion that the first thing we need is less secrecy. The ES is secret. Our Board meetings are secret, and what we get to know comes late and partially, as it did with the last by-laws revisions. That is entirely unacceptable. The membership has to know what's going on, and has to have a say-so. I haven't as yet reconciled my own views with the fact that I prefer managing by concensus to managing by hierarchy, but at the same time see the need for someone to coordinate & steer things at the top. Nowadays such a person is called a facilitator. So maybe that's what I think we need, at the top, and after that, a loosely organized Society, with the top being a service organization that produces & distributes materials to help the units to fuinction, such as books, videos, speakers, suggested programs. We certainly don't want to be told what to do, in our units, nor how to run them. We need to be told in great detail what materials are available in Wheaton for Study Centers; but we need to be able to adjust our programs to what we like locally. On the other hand, I remember a time, when I was new as President, when I asked for some help in finding topics for study, and got very little help, except for a very old, dated 7 yellowed study guide of some sort from the NE Federation President. After several years of struggle, I happen to have landed in Wheaton & found that there was all sorts of material available which I didn't know anything about. Nowadays there are several resource catalogues available, so that, hopefully, people in the field know nowadays what's there to be borrowed from Wheaton, so it doesn't just sit on the shelves. Also, after another little while one of the conventions had a PR workshop for Lodges & Centers. At the time, Chuck Ponsonby gave a barrelful of good suggestions. I found that helpful, and I need to give Chuck credit, even if he assigned me to very inferior quarters, and I got a heat stroke. What I think was best about Chuck's workshop was that it fired the imagination. You went home and had a fistful of dynamic new ideas to try out. One thing Chuck taught was to try to get as many people involved as possible. In reality, I found that to be a 2-edged sword. I was under the impression that anyone who volunteered for a job in the Center would do it. But I found out that volunteering isn't necessarily doing. I don't know. Maybe I was doing something wrong, because I found that if someone didn't want to, that was it ... and about half my crew didn't want to. The other half tried it, and said it was too much work. Some'd say "yes, yes" and never did a stroke of work, or gave a talk without ever preparing for it. Like I had what I thought was a great idea to order books from the TPH to fit in with whatever subject was being taken up at the meeting. I got "yes ,yes" from the book agent, and then nothing. & etc ad nauseatum. Down in Miami and here in New York City they find enough people to run a variety of events. So, maybe that's something we could profitably discuss. Since it seems to be that people become more interested in Branch meetings if they take an active part in a phase of it, how do you get them to do it, in view of the known fact that usually an organization is run by a few people who break their butts, while the others just attend meetings. I think it might also be helpful, if we established a program ideas bank, possibly with bibliographies. As for making our by-laws more democratic & open, I have no idea as to how that can be done. It's like butting your head against a stone wall. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:47:34 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <32757E56.3B1@sprynet.com> Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > > ---------- > > From: Bart Lidofsky > > Jim Meier wrote: > > > Of the 24 volumes and 10,861 pages of esoteric philosophy by Alice A. > > > Bailey, homosexuality is mentioned only 4 times; this is a *very* minor > > > issue in the series of teachings. > > > > However, when I opened a couple of volumes at random, that was one of > > the first two things I saw. If you had a Jewish brother-in-law, and > > opened up a series of esoteric books, and the first thing you saw was > > how Hitler was correct in slaughtering the Jews, would you go much > > farther? > > That's entirely up to the reader. There are so many books and so > much material that I imagine any number of people could be offended. > Christians would be offended by the idea that Jesus was not > considered a personal savior. Jews and any number of other ethnic > groups mind be offended by some passages. There are several > nasty comments on TS. Whoever was writing it called it as they saw it. > Unvarnished and quite similar to some of the posts that grace this > mailing list. .. > If you or anyone else get their spiritual nourishment from other > sources, that's terriffic. Leave alone what doesn't do it for > you. If you recall, what I said in the first place was something on the order of that Alice Bailey had a lot to offer, but not for me personally, because of my prejudices created by a couple of her attitudes. I was then blasted for daring to take exception to these attitudes. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:59:48 -0800 From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re: theosophy and postmodernism Message-ID: <9610290859.AA13010@toto.csustan.edu> Max: I have the file, and would not mind uploading it and support the discussion, but I think "Theosophical World" is more appropriate for this material than theos-l. Also I would like to know that the editor of Bridging feels ok about reposting it into cyberspace so soon. Thanks for your interest. Jerry >Jerry Hejka-Ekins: > >This is regarding an interview with you published in Fall 1996 >issue of Bridging. Very interesting. > >I am interested too in the above issue, i.e. Theosophy and >Postmodernism. I wonder if you are willing to support this new >thread of discussion. If so, could you post the entire text of >the interview on Theos-L if it's available as a computer file? > >Thanks, >Max From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:39:56 -0600 From: "Ann E. Bermingham" Subject: Re: to Bart, RE: AAB (4B's) Message-ID: <199610291400.JAA18470@cliff.cris.com> Bart: > If you recall, what I said in the first place was something on the > order of that Alice Bailey had a lot to offer, but not for me > personally, because of my prejudices created by a couple of her > attitudes. I was then blasted for daring to take exception to these > attitudes. Think about it this way. Your commentary lit some fire directly under those who value the Bailey works - it was negative commentary that got our hackles up. It's a psychological defense to protect the material one believes in - because we believe in it, we want to think it is good. Maybe good to the last drop, whether it is or not. Speaking of blasting (KABOOM!), it seems to be a way of life on this list. Sort of a way for people to exercise their cybermuscles, occasionally. -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 16:32:31 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: brainstorming Message-ID: <8DppjLAfGjdyEwuQ@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199610290232.VAA03213@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >I haven't as yet reconciled my own views with the fact that I prefer >managing by concensus to managing by hierarchy, but at the same time see the >need for someone to coordinate & steer things at the top. Nowadays such a >person is called a facilitator. So maybe that's what I think we need, at the >top, and after that, a loosely organized Society, with the top being a >service organization that produces & distributes materials to help the units >to fuinction, such as books, videos, speakers, suggested programs. Sounds good to me. Another possibility that might need to be considered if (say) Wheaton cannot be "updated" or "reformed" is that all of this would, eventually, have to be done by a new organisation altogether. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:02:00 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: to Bart Re: AAB Message-ID: <199610301911.OAA15452@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Ann writes: >There are things I found in those >books that I could find no where else - even in traditional Theosophical >literature. Unless wasn't looking hard enough! > >At any rate, they were there for me when I needed them and I >appreciate the work that went into them, unvarnished as it is. > She's saying this about Alice Bailey's writings. It applies exactly to how I feel about Leadbeater's writings. verbatim! liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:28:13 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: brainstorming Message-ID: <199610301937.OAA17881@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Sounds good to me. Another possibility that might need to be considered >if (say) Wheaton cannot be "updated" or "reformed" is that all of this >would, eventually, have to be done by a new organisation altogether. > >Alan Agree, and I'm almost to the point where I believe it's going to be necessary to do it that way. Wheaton is being innovative with programs, but not in its structure. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 96 16:06 MST From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Foeticide and HPB Message-ID: Someone help me please! Attached below is the only discussion I can find on abortion from a Theosophical viewpoint - is there something else written that addresses this particular issue? Did Blavatsky ever write on this again? I am confused by many of her answers. She says the "fetus" doesn't have a soul, like "small animals," and seems to call for governments to doubly punish abortion. It would seem to follow through that the killing of small animals should be severly punished (which sounds good to this tree-hugger). How can it be "double suicide" if one is not yet viable? If "foeticide" is a crime against nature, how does it differ from other crimes against nature, or does it - Blavatsky seems to, on an emotional level, imply abortion is different. I understand the karma argument (I think), but I am puzzled a bit on the rest of her answer. Am I missing her point? Can one be pro-choice and a 'true' Theosophist? ****** . . .a reply by H. P. Blavatsky, from the THEOSOPHIST, August 1883 "*Editor's Note.*--: "At no age as under no circumstance whatever is murder justifiable!" and occult Theosophy adds:--"yet it is neither from the stand-point of law, nor from any argument drawn from one or another orthodox *ism* that the warning voice is sent forth against the immoral and dangerous practice, but rather because in occult philosophy both physiology and psychology show its disastrous consequence." In the present case, the argument does not deal with the causes but with the effects produced. Our philosophy goes so far as to say that, if the Penal Code of most countries punishes attempts at suicide, it ought, if at all consistent with itself, to doubly punish foeticide as an attempt to *double suicide*. For, indeed, when even successful and the mother does not die just then, *it still shortens her life on earth to prolong it with dreary percentage in Kamaloka*, the intermediate sphere between the earth and the region of rest, a place which is no "St. Patrick's purgatory," but a fact, and a necessary halting place of the evolution in the degree of life. The crime committed lies precisely in the willful and sinful destruction of life, and interference with the operations of nature, hence--with KARMA--that of the mother and the would-be future human being. The sin is not regarded by the occultists as one of a *religious* character,--for, indeed, there is no more of spirit and soul, for the matter of that, in a foetus or even in a child before it arrives at self-consciousness, then there is in any other small animal,--for we deny the absence of soul in either mineral, plant or beast, and believe but in the difference of degree. But foeticide is a crime against nature. Of course the skeptic of whatever class will sneer at our notions and call them absurd superstitions and "unscientific twaddle." But we do not write for skeptics. We have been asked to give the views of Theosophy (or rather of occult philosophy) upon the subject, and we answer the query as far as we know." ****** Thanks, Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 20:56:21 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: [Fwd: Telephone Scam Alert] Message-ID: <199610310205.VAA24231@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >X-Sender: kathied@postoffice.worldnet.att.net >To: liesel@dreamscape.com >From: Kathleen Delaney >Subject: [Fwd: Telephone Scam Alert] >Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:38:38 +0000 > >Liesel, > >Just received this and thought you would be interested. > >Jim > >>From: Peter Wynyard >>To: kathied >>Subject: [Fwd: Telephone Scam Alert] >>Organization: Licensed Real Estate Broker >>Date: Tue, 29 Oct 96 01:16:45 +0000 >> >>To: wynyard@worldnet.att.net >>From: JohnFairfield@nycnet.com (JohnFairfield) >>Received: from prozac.nycnet.com ([204.141.180.6]) >> by mtigwc02.worldnet.att.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) >> with ESMTP id AAA10234 for ; >> Sat, 19 Oct 1996 12:39:27 +0000 >>Received: from zoloft ([204.141.180.4]) by prozac.nycnet.com >> (post.office MTA v1.9.3 **** trial license expired ****) >> with SMTP id AAA82 for ; >> Sat, 19 Oct 1996 08:46:14 +0000 >>Subject: Telephone Scam Alert >>Message-ID: >>Path: nycnet.com!JohnFairfield >>Organization: NYC NET >>X-Gateway: NASTA Gate 1.02 for FirstClass(R) >>Date: Sat, 19 Oct 96 07:41:40 +0000 >>X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 >>Mime-Version: 1.0 >>Content-Type: Text/Plain; >> charset=ISO-8859-1 >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit >> >> >> >>Subject: ALERT!! >>Subject: Be careful and don't...!! >> >>All you have to do is NOT call any 809 phone number. Forwarned is fore >>armed!!! >> >>Subject: FW: Internet ScamBusters! Issue>#8 >>Date: Tuesday, October 08, 1996 6:28AM >> >>Internet ScamBusters! - - exposing what really works and what doesn't- >>Issue #8 October 7, 1996 >> >>******* SPECIAL ALERT >>******* >>SCAM: Don't Respond To Emails, Phone Calls, Or Pages Which Tell You To >>Call An "809" Phone Number >> >>This is a very important issue of Internet ScamBusters! because it >>alerts you >>to a scam that is: - spreading *extremely* quickly - can easily cost >>you $100 >>or more, and - is difficult to avoid unless you are aware of it. We'd >>like to >>thank Paul Bruemmer and Brian Stains for bringing this scam to our >>attention >>both will receive Internet ScamBusters! tee shirts. This scam has also >>been >>identified by the National Fraud Information Center and is costing >>victims a >>lot of money. >> >>There are lots of different permutations of this scam, but here is how >>it >>works: >> >>Permutation #1: Internet Based Phone Scam Via Email You receive an >>email, typically with a subject line of "*ALERT*" or "Unpaid account." >>The >>message, >>which is being spammed across the net, says: >> >> I am writing to give you a final 24hrs to settle your outstanding >>account. If we have not received the settlement in full, I will commence >>legal proceedings without further delay. If you would like to discuss >>this >>matter to avoid court action, call Mike Murray at Global Communications >>on +1 >>809 496 2700. >>-------------------------------------------------------- >>Permutation #2: Phone Or Pager Scam You receive a message on your >>answering machine or your pager which asks you to call a number >>beginning with area code 809. The reason you're asked to call varies: >>it can >>be to receive information about a family member who has been ill, to >>tell >>you someone has been arrested, died, to let you know you have won a >>wonderful >>prize, etc. In each >>case, you're told to call the 809 number right away. >> Since there are so many new area codes these days, people >>unknowingly >>return these calls. If you call from the US, you will apparently be >>charged >>$25 per-minute! Sometimes the person who answers the phone will speak >>broken English and pretend not to understand you. Other times, you'll >>just >>get a long recorded message. The point is, they will try to keep you on >>the >>phone as long as possible to increase the charges. >>Unfortunately, when you get your phone bill, you'll often be charged >>more >>than $100.00 >> >>Here's why it works: The 809 area code is located in the British Virgin >>Islands (the Bahamas). The 809 area code can be used as a >>"pay-per-call" >>number, similar to 900 numbers in the US. Since 809 is not in the US, >>it is >>not covered by US regulations of 900 numbers, which require that you be >>notified and warned of charges and rates involved when you call a >> "pay-per-call" number. >> There is also no requirement that the company provide a time period >>during which you may terminate the call without being charged. Further, >>whereas many US phones have 900 number blocking (to avoid these hinds of >>charges), 900 number blocking will not prevent calls to the 809 area >>code. >> >>We recommend that no matter how you get the message, if you are asked >>to call >>a number with an 809 area code that you don't recognize, investigate >>further >>and/or disregard the message. Be *very* wary of email or calls asking >>you to >>call an 809 area code number. >> >>It's important to prevent becoming a victim of this scam, since trying >>to >>fight the charges afterwards can become a real nightmare. That's >>because you >>did actually make the call. If you complain, both our local phone >>company >>and your long distance carrier will not want to get involved and will >>most >>likely tell you that they are simply providing the billing for the >>foreign >>company. You'll end up dealing with a foreign company that argues they >>have >>done nothing wrong. >> >>Please forward this entire issue of Internet ScamBusters! to your >>friends, >>family and colleagues to help them become aware of this scam so they >>don't >>get ripped off. >> Jerry R. Entwistle L. >> TEMUCO, CHILE, SOUTH AMERICA >> entwistl@chilepac.net >>This might be somthing you might want to take a look at and be on the >>lookout for. >> Cal >> >> >> >> >Kathie > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 21:08:39 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Healing, forwarded from Kay Ziatz Message-ID: <199610310217.VAA25283@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >To: liesel@dreamscape.com >Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 00:51:18 +0300 >From: Kay Ziatz >Reply-To: Kay Ziatz >Errors-To: Kay_Ziatz@p4.f360.n5020.z2.fidonet.org >Subject: Healing > > >Liesel, please fwd it to theos-l > > Hello! > >R>even without themselves consciously knowing how it works. This is one >more >R>side of Krishnaji. > >AB> I have known two people with this gift. One had never heard of >AB> theosophy, and the other (who I still know) thinks it's rubbish. >AB> Food for thought? > IMO the second one was exactly like Krishnaji, so he doesn't bring >us additional information ;) I also knew the women, who removed pain >even by persistance. When one looked at her, there was no pain, even >he looked at her through the window, and when she got outta sight the >pain renewed. Later she died from cancer. She was also talented painter >& writer. I think she also didn't knew about theosophy. > Healing by placing the hands has a pranic nature, imho, and, like >mediumusm, doesn't depend on grade of "spiritual developement". If >Krishnaji healed by only persistance, like that woman, without tou- >ching, but, unlike her, removed deserse forvever, it would be matter >to discuss :) > Is the book by Ramacharaka (aka Atkinson :) "Occult healing" known >to western theosophists? He discusses there different types of pranic >and mental healing, gives some practical advices and explains why it >can't be named "spitiual healing". Original of this book is written in >english, but i have only russian version (but in file). > > Konstantin, 2:5020/360.4 Fidonet. Moscow, Russia, Earth. > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 21:13:07 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Brotherhood & other terms Message-ID: <199610310222.VAA25683@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >To: liesel@dreamscape.com >Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:09:06 +0300 >From: Kay Ziatz >Reply-To: Kay Ziatz >Errors-To: Kay_Ziatz@p4.f360.n5020.z2.fidonet.org >Subject: Brotherhood & other terms > > >Liesel, please fwd it to theos-l to whom it may concern. Konstantin's computer programming has been changed. He can read theos-l, but he can't send any answers. Since he can get through to me, I told him I'd forward. So here it is. Liesel > > Hello! > > [I combine here many topics to spare net resourses] > > 1. English terms. >e>I'd say, then, keep the Sanskrit terms, and use more, when our English >e>equivalents are subject to misunderstanding. > Exactly right. Especially when we're speaking about principles - >the word buddhi is sometimes translated as mind, intellegence, >intuition, and both rupa & arupa-manas are also translated by >the first two terms, altrough it's clear that these are very >different things. Most translations of Bhagavad-gita are useless >because of incorrect translations of these terms. > Secondly, when speaking with ordinary people, the sanskrit terms >attract their attention. This is known from big experience of Soci- >ety for Krishna consciousness. It's important because now there's >many false "masters". Today i heard from a head of Moscow thosoph- >ists about a woman who held so called "seminars" where for 750000 >roubles ($135) taught people that if they will live non-spiritual >life, they'll reincarnate to scorpios & cuckroaches. Of cource, it's >impossible to distinguish false masters only by words used, but in >fact they normally don't know sanskrit terms, and when one hears >a restricted dictionary, where the most complicated words are "ast- >ral" & "bio-field", he decides that before him is again a humbug >like that. :) > > 2. Brotherhood. > BTW, if someone don't likes "brotherhood", i suppose to replace it >by "cousinehood" - it might affect both men & women :) > But i personally support the original term "brotherhood". Annie >Besant, who herself fighted for equal rights for women, never tried >to replace it by some other term. > > 3. El. Publishing >CH>In most cases, a simple read-only is sufficient. >CH>There are e-book programs that protect from easy copying > I don't understand at all what reason is to prevent copiing the theoso- >phical material. Contrary, we should give a people a possibility for the >further widespread. If christians kept copyright on their Bible, now >no one should know about Christ :) > > 4. Movies >BL> in point, let's take a look at GROUNDHOG DAY. > I also recommend to everyone to watch that nice film. > > 5. Gays >BL> I find her master quite inferior to the ones who wrote THE MAHATMA >BL> LETTERS, at least in my opinion. By the way, I found the homophobic >BL> reference: ESOTERIC HEALING, particularly around page 62-64. > Even Bible condemns homosexuality, so D.K. didn't invent smth. new. >We can accept in TS people of various sexual orientation, but "Esoteric >healing" is a treatise about healthy life. It's two different things - >if we say that meat is not a recommended meal for health, it doesn't >mean that we carrying on "anti-meat discrimination". > > Konstantin, 2:5020/360.4 Fidonet. Moscow, Russia, Earth. > > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 21:47:55 -0600 (CST) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Foeticide and HPB Message-ID: On Wed, 30 Oct 1996 kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > Someone help me please! > > Attached below is the only discussion I can find on abortion from a > Theosophical viewpoint - is there something else written that addresses this > particular issue? Did Blavatsky ever write on this again? As far as I know, this is the only writing on this issue I have seen from HPB. Thanks for posting here. > > I am confused by many of her answers. She says the "fetus" doesn't have a > soul, like "small animals," and seems to call for governments to doubly > punish abortion. It would seem to follow through that the killing of small > animals should be severly punished (which sounds good to this tree-hugger). > How can it be "double suicide" if one is not yet viable? If "foeticide" is a > crime against nature, how does it differ from other crimes against nature, > or does it - Blavatsky seems to, on an emotional level, imply abortion is > different. I understand the karma argument (I think), but I am puzzled a > bit on the rest of her answer. Am I missing her point? > > Can one be pro-choice and a 'true' Theosophist? Most are pro-choice and are "true" Theosophists. Who can judge if anyone is a "true" Theosophist. From a first hand experience, I can say when faced with a abortion decision, there are lot of factors involved and only those affected know them. So each one of us use our best judgement and decide and no one else could judge anyone else's decision. MK Ramadoss > > ****** > > . . .a reply by H. P. Blavatsky, from the THEOSOPHIST, August 1883 > > > "*Editor's Note.*--: "At no age as under no > circumstance whatever is murder justifiable!" and occult Theosophy > adds:--"yet it is neither from the stand-point of law, nor from any argument > drawn from one or another orthodox *ism* that the warning voice is sent forth > against the immoral and dangerous practice, but rather because in occult > philosophy both physiology and psychology show its disastrous consequence." > In the present case, the argument does not deal with the causes but with the > effects produced. Our philosophy goes so far as to say that, if the Penal > Code of most countries punishes attempts at suicide, it ought, if at all > consistent with itself, to doubly punish foeticide as an attempt to *double > suicide*. For, indeed, when even successful and the mother does not die just > then, *it still shortens her life on earth to prolong it with dreary > percentage in Kamaloka*, the intermediate sphere between the earth and the > region of rest, a place which is no "St. Patrick's purgatory," but a fact, > and a necessary halting place of the evolution in the degree of life. The > crime committed lies precisely in the willful and sinful destruction of life, > and interference with the operations of nature, hence--with KARMA--that of > the mother and the would-be future human being. The sin is not regarded by > the occultists as one of a *religious* character,--for, indeed, there is no > more of spirit and soul, for the matter of that, in a foetus or even in a > child before it arrives at self-consciousness, then there is in any other > small animal,--for we deny the absence of soul in either mineral, plant or > beast, and believe but in the difference of degree. But foeticide is a crime > against nature. Of course the skeptic of whatever class will sneer at our > notions and call them absurd superstitions and "unscientific twaddle." But > we do not write for skeptics. We have been asked to give the views of > Theosophy (or rather of occult philosophy) upon the subject, and we answer > the query as far as we know." > > ****** > > > Thanks, > > Kym > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 10:16:19 -0500 From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Foeticide and HPB Message-ID: <961031101619_220800096@emout13.mail.aol.com> Kym, As Theosophists, like doctors and lawyers, never agree on anything, of course one can be pro-choice and be a true theosophist. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:15:09 -0500 From: Jeszs Ernesto Cruz Martmnez Subject: Hola a todos!! Message-ID: <3278D08D.4BAD@planet.com.mx> Hola a todos los del foro!! Soy Jes=FAs de la Logia Unidad de M=E9xico, gracias a mi amigo Rodolfo Don, por haberme dado la direcci=F3n del foro de teosof=EDa en espa=F1ol,= la causa de que la comunicaci=F3n con ustedes se habia cortado, es que mi m=E1quina se contagi=F3 de un virus raro, que s=F3lo invadia mi conexi=F3= n de Internet, as=ED que bueno, pues tuve que darle "mate" y con esto tuve que estar fuera como 4 d=EDas, mientras ten=EDa tiempo de ver que ten=EDa la m=E1quina y c=F3mo corregir este error, luego tuve que presentar un ex=E1= men en la universidad y ya ven, hasta ahora puedo escribirles, creo que no han tenido ninguna acci=F3n por aqu=ED, as=ED que me gustar=EDa saber si = les interesa estar en el foro y participar, creo es muy importante, ac=E1 en M=E9xico, discutimos algunos de los escritos que nos llegaron del Theos World, y de la Logia en L=EDnea de Josh Carpentier, por favor visiten la p=E1gina de la Logia Unidad y m=E1ndenme sus impresiones, son muy valiosa= s, para Gabriel Hern=E1ndez, oye, ya habla mano, te comieron la Lengua los Ratones? :=3D), parece que hablo al vaciiiiooooooo.... Saludos a todos!! ------------------------------ Jes=FAs Ernesto Cruz Mart=EDnez unidad@planet.com.mx http://www.planet.com.mx/~unidad/index.htm