From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 02:10:46 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Theosophy Redefined (longish) Message-ID: THEOSOPHY REDEFINED (I) Theosophical textbooks and introductory articles almost alsways tell us that the word "theosophy' derives from the Greek words for 'God' (theos) and 'Wisdom' (sophia) respectively. Having done this, it is not uncommon that any suggestion of the involvement of a/any actual form of deity is dispensed with, and terms such as 'ancient wisdom" or 'perrenial philosophy' are used. This is hardly surprising in literature deriving from an organisation which by its own rules admits followers of any religion or none. To mention a specific kind of god would be certain to offend some. At one period, particularly the Annie Besant/Charles Leadbeater era of the nineteen-thirties, God was mentioned on a regular basis by such stalwarts asishop] Leadbeater andishop] Arundale and even the Indian theosophist C. Jinarajadasa. I know - I have their spoken recordings which contain this usage. This god is a male god, described as 'He' and has a 'plan' for humanity described by Jinarajadasa in ~First Principles of Theosophy~ as "God's Plan, Which is Evolution."hapter XVI]. These theosophists, in their writings, suggest that there is a kind of 'dogmatic' theology laid down by various 'masters' and held in trust by them in a kind of 'Great White Lodge' (Not Black or Pink) in some sort of association with an 'Inner Government of the World' which is clearly hierarchical, non-democtracic, and therefore liable, I would suggest, to be autocratic, oligarchical, and accountable to - ? God? Claim is laid by similar purveyors of the theosophical message to the life and work of one of the Theosophical Society's founders, Madame H.P Blavatsky, whose introduction the the 'Masters' first appeared in letters written by them (but as Mahatmas, which is not quite the same thing as Masters) in a large number of letters written by them and often transported by miraculous means, using involving Mme. Blavatsky, to ab occult researcher called A.P.Sinnett in the latter quarter of the nineteenth century. Much has been made of the Mathatmic Masters and their authority, but one major problem from the letters arises in the originally published letter number ten which begins: "Neither our philosophy nor ourselves believe in a God, least of all in one whose pronoun necessitates a capital H." Oh Dear. If Master Koot Hoomi and his fellow Mahatmas or Masters take this view, and they are also held up as the examplars who would-be theosophists should follow, so much so that some literature, when mentioning them, elevates 'them' to 'Them' and 'their' to 'Their,' thus lending a suggestion of divinity to the Mahatmas/Masters themselves. At the very least, one is inclined to the view that there must be some mistake, not least because of the fact that following the excitement at the time which surrounded these gentlemen and the famous madame, a number of occultists, including the three most often named, Blavatsky, Oclott, and Judge, decided to form the ~Theosophical~ Society in 1875, thus bringing (a) God firmly into the occult arena. >From thence, confusion has heaped itself upon confusion, and splinter groups and societies developed very early in the life of what is sometimes called the 'Theosophical Movement' - including one led by Judge, and original co-founder, and later by others such as Steiner, Purucker, Alice Bailey, and a number of less well-known luminaries in their own fields. So is there a consistent body of teaching which we may confidently describe as "theosophy" in a general sense? Not from the Mahatmic source it would seem, as the term is ruled out by them by definition. And yet, thousands of occult students have put their feet, less than firmly perhaps, upon the path to the knowledge of higher things, whatever such higher things may be. I am one of them, and *I* began, not by reading the words of the Mahatmas, nor of Blavatsky, but with the one-time International President of the Theosophical Society, Jinarajadasa, mentioned above. Now the difficulty is, as I look back over some forty years of study, practice, and research, that although the entire body of literature emanating from theosophical sources is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions, there is a great deal of truth to be discovered within it, though it is necessary to sort the wheat from the chaff, as the saying goes - and deciding for oneself which is which is not always simple. So, before I continue further with this article (if indeed I continue at all) I think it is necessary, in attempting to reach the spirit of the original founders' intent, to redefine the basic definition. In other words, if we are to talk and discuss something we wish to call 'theosophy,' we must begin by deciding what we understand by 'theos' [God] and 'sophia' [Wisdom]. Any offers? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 10:55:17 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: An Idea Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970402165517.006ec33c@mail.eden.com> Here is an interesting idea being implemented in listening-l maillist which is dedicated to Krishnamurti topics. In the past I have had situations where I had to resort to conventional telephone contact where some urgent contact had to be made in connection with theosophical matters. I would like feedback from everyone so that we can try to set up something similar for theos-xxxx subscribers.. Thanks. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 17:31:32 +0200 From: Dirk Lutzebaeck Subject: Announcement: Friends of Listening-l List Dear Listeners, as suggested by several people on the list (thanks Somendra) there is now a "Friends of Listening-l List" available via WWW. This is a list for people who join(ed) the mailing list and want to leave their cyber space and real world addresses. The purpose is to get known each other better and to have a repository if one looses someones addresses. To add yourself to the list use a WWW browser and connect to http://flp.cs.tu-berlin.de:1895/listening-l/html/friends.html In the case that you dont have access to a browser you might also send me a mail containing the following information: * NAME * EMAIL ADDRESS * HOMEPAGE URL * CITY/STATE * COUNTRY * PASSWORD OF YOUR CHOICE Note that this list does not provide you a homepage. If you like to get a homepage to be added to the list you might contact your nearest IP provider or set up a homepage on free providers like www.geocities.com hope everyone enjoys this list, Dirk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 13:42:58 -0500 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Meditation Message-ID: <199704021845.NAA04432@NetGSI.com> >Nor do I, but I think "a *little* meditation" is an understatement ... > >Alan :-) You may be right. At the outset, it may require some work, but this get easier as you go. All I am asking is that people TRY. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 13:39:33 -0500 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Experience Message-ID: <199704021845.NAA04418@NetGSI.com> >The point I was trying to highlight was the difficulty in trying to >bring down to physical level and explain some of the non > physical things that cannot be explained -- can only be >experienced. Doss, OK. I certainly agree that experience is the only way to understand things above the Abyss. The human mind can not cross this barrier, and the intellect cannot grasp anything on the other side. But I get testy when I hear anything that sounds like a need to wait for future lifetimes. The only one holding us back is ourselves. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 13:33:59 -0500 From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Compassion Message-ID: <199704021845.NAA04410@NetGSI.com> >I am wondering if ethics and compassion are to be developed >concurrently and if they could be treated as separate. Doss, they have to be in this order: ethics, and then comapssion. It won't work together or the other way around, because compassion is just a word to a person without ethics, and with compassion, ethics become automatic and spantaneous. Ethics, IMHO, are only important as a foundation for compassion. By themselves they are useful in keeping society together, but not much help on the spiritual path. However, compassion is absolutely essential on the spiritual path. Ethics are relatively easy to get, and most of us get this growing up. Compassion, a sincere and honest concern for others, is a lot more rare. The only real difference between the White Brotherhood and the Black Brotherhood (I wish they would invent new names for these!) is that White Brothers have compassion, while Black Brothers don't. There is no other difference. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 12:59:40 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Experience Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970402185940.00bdb714@mail.eden.com> At 01:50 PM 4/2/97 -0500, you wrote: >>The point I was trying to highlight was the difficulty in trying to >>bring down to physical level and explain some of the non >> physical things that cannot be explained -- can only be >>experienced. > > Doss, OK. I certainly agree that experience is the only >way to understand things above the Abyss. The human mind >can not cross this barrier, and the intellect cannot grasp anything >on the other side. But I get testy when I hear anything that >sounds like a need to wait for future lifetimes. The only one >holding us back is ourselves. > >Jerry S. >Member, TI > Jerry: I agree with what you say. Don't take too literally what I said about my waiting for the next manvantara. The point is very simple. My priorities at this time has put this topic at the tail end of items that need all my time and energies. hopefully I will get to it one of these days!!! .doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 13:02:57 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Compassion Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970402190257.00bda6fc@mail.eden.com> At 01:51 PM 4/2/97 -0500, you wrote: >>I am wondering if ethics and compassion are to be developed >>concurrently and if they could be treated as separate. > >Doss, they have to be in this order: ethics, and then >comapssion. It won't work together or the other way >around, because compassion is just a word to a >person without ethics, and with compassion, ethics >become automatic and spantaneous. Ethics, IMHO, >are only important as a foundation for compassion. >By themselves they are useful in keeping society >together, but not much help on the spiritual path. >However, compassion is absolutely essential on >the spiritual path. Ethics are relatively easy to get, >and most of us get this growing up. Compassion, >a sincere and honest concern for others, is a lot ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >more rare. The only real difference between the >White Brotherhood and the Black Brotherhood >(I wish they would invent new names for these!) >is that White Brothers have compassion, while >Black Brothers don't. There is no other difference. > >Jerry S. >Member, TI > You may be right. You hit the right chord when you said "a sincere and honest concern for others". Can we imagine what the world would be if we had more individuals who are atleast trying sincerely and honestly concern for others. I am a novice still trying my best on this issue and improving moment by moment. Thanks for sharing. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 11:36:52 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: Sounds good to me, Doss. We have a few nuts on this list, like Alan, but I'll take a chance. :o) Besides, he's all the way in Cornywall. For something like a telephone number and specific address, I would like to limit that to either TI members or those who have been on the list for a while. Thoa >Here is an interesting idea being implemented in listening-l maillist which >is dedicated to Krishnamurti topics. > >In the past I have had situations where I had to resort to conventional >telephone contact where some urgent contact had to be made in connection >with theosophical matters. > >I would like feedback from everyone so that we can try to set up something >similar for theos-xxxx subscribers.. > >Thanks. > > >mkr > >========================================================== > > >Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 17:31:32 +0200 >From: Dirk Lutzebaeck >Subject: Announcement: Friends of Listening-l List > > >Dear Listeners, > >as suggested by several people on the list (thanks Somendra) there is >now a "Friends of Listening-l List" available via WWW. This is a list >for people who join(ed) the mailing list and want to leave their cyber >space and real world addresses. The purpose is to get known each other >better and to have a repository if one looses someones addresses. To >add yourself to the list use a WWW browser and connect to > > http://flp.cs.tu-berlin.de:1895/listening-l/html/friends.html > >In the case that you dont have access to a browser you might also send >me a mail containing the following information: > >* NAME >* EMAIL ADDRESS >* HOMEPAGE URL >* CITY/STATE >* COUNTRY >* PASSWORD OF YOUR CHOICE > >Note that this list does not provide you a homepage. If you like to get a >homepage to be added to the list you might contact your nearest IP >provider or set up a homepage on free providers like www.geocities.com > >hope everyone enjoys this list, > >Dirk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 11:38:27 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Humor Message-ID: Now, as my philosophy is that humor is very healthy, even amidst tragedy, I am attaching some jokes. Of course, if the jokes aren't funny, then the humor is deadly.:o) > Job Openings in Rancho Santa Fe, CA Available immediately. Thirty Nine positions at Higher Source, a web site development and production house. Our business has really taken off like a comet and we now have quite a few positions to fill. The individuals at the core of our group have worked closely together for over 20 years. During those years, each of us has developed a high degree of skill and know-how through personal discipline and concerted effort. We try to stay positive in every circumstance and put the good of a project above any personal concerns or artistic egos. By sustaining this attitude and conduct, we have achieved a high level of efficiency and quality in our work. This crew-minded effort, combined with ingenuity an creativity, have helped us provide advanced solutions at highly competitive rates. Based in beautiful Rancho Santa Fe, California (near San Diego), we provide excellent opportunity for advancement to a higher place. In fact all of our employees have recently been promoted. We provide free clothing, Nike tennis shoes, pudding, apple sauce and vodka. You must supply your own Phenobarbitol. Every employee is issued a large purple cloth, the purpose of which will become clear. Free haircuts too. No experience is necessary. We will train you to work and think within our business model. ID is required. Abduction experiences a plus. We are looking for real team players. Please send resumes to bunchawackos@highersource.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 11:39:23 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Humor II Message-ID: by Charles Forsythe REDMOND -- Microsoft Corporation has announced plans to acquire the Website and Internet development corporation Higher Source for an undisclosed fee. "Higher Source has proven its commitment to strange mind-control cults and UFO religions," said Microsoft spokeswoman, Anita Klue,"Their willingness to kill themselves for the sake of their technology is the kind of dynamic that Microsoft wants to promote." In conjunction with the acquisition, Microsoft announced a new program called "Active Cult 97", which is expected to be in place by late 1998. Active Cult aims to make the use of Microsoft technology more of a religion-driven decision as opposed to a technology-driven decision. "This isn't expected to be a big change for Microsoft's customer base," explained Ms. Klue. Details of Active Cult were not disclosed, but it was suggested that instead of crashing with the infamous "blue screen of death" or "General Protection Fault", Microsoft's operating systems would merely display the message "Windows died for your sins." Mike S. Brown, who writes about the industry in his PC Weak column "M.S. Brown Knows" responded enthusiastically to the announcement. "This really raises the stakes for Internet development. IBM may be content to kill its own products, like OS/2, but Microsoft is willing to kill its own developers and maybe even some customers. That's the kind of bold difference that will make UNIX, OS/2 and the Mac completely irrelavent by the end of 1996!" When is was pointed out that 1996 was already over, Mr. Brown retorted,"No it's not! If it was, then Microsoft would be behind schedule on Windows 97 -- which it isn't." An IBM employee, who asked to remain anonymous due to the fact that the whole issue was "extremely silly," said that "IBM is committed to the future of network computing and OS/2 is an important part of that future." He added that,"IBM is not interested in promoting suicide. If you want to talk about promoting suicide, talk to Microsoft's ISVs. Can you say `Citrix'?" Reaction amongst Windows users was generally positive. Ben de Miover, CIO for a large company which recently switched its operations from the Apple MacIntosh to Windows 95, explained,"Windows is really cool because you can play Quake in, like, a window and stuff." He also cited a complete lack of Windows 95 applications for the MacIntosh. "How can modern business function without Windows 95 applications. Y'know, like Quake?" In addition, he was pretty sure that OS/2 and UNIX were "new wave bands from L.A." Linus Torvalds was unavailable for comment. > Date: Wed, 02 Apr 1997 16:04:50 -0500 > From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) > Subject: Re: Theosophy Redefined (longish) > Message-ID: <199704022120.QAA22404@ultra1.dreamscape.com> OK, I bite. That's a subject worth talking about. Most of what you state I agree with. I would like to go a little deeper into this business of the inner goverment of the world which is said to be hierarchical. I don't particularly cotton to hierarchical governments, of which there are many in today's world. How else could it be laid out, or do we discard it as oldfashioned? Or what? I don't object to Jinarjadasa saying 'God's plan, which is evolution". According to our tenets he can or cannot believe in God as he chooses. I also think Evolution is an idea accepted by most Theosophists. Since one of our beliefs is that everything originates in God, then so why not evolution? It *is* a plan of some sort. You can see plans right away if you look at human anatomy, or the cycles a tree goes through, or anything else in this world, to see that there is some sort of a plan. Whose is it? I don't know, so I call It God ... There seems also to be a plan which we understand under the concept of evolution, which originates from something beyond us. Evolution seems to be there. We can note certain parts of it unfolding. We are told that it will unfold further. Which is a Theosophical tenet we may or may not accept. I call that something beyond us which seems to me to be planning evolution, whatever it is, "God" because it's the accepted nomenclature ... and so I'm not offended by J. calling it that.. What I myself understand by the term is some Consciousness, much more sophisticated than my own, which lives & breathes in universes and all their components, all of which it has dreamt up out of its own stuff. That's a Theosophical concept, I think. I like to conform to convention when I can, so I call it God, instead of Logos or whatever? *I* know what I mean. Besides, anyone hearing the word "God" has their own image of what that is anyway, Theosophist or civilian. And doesn't it seem logical that whatever dreamt up this world, and its order, also dreamt up evolution? Then why not call it God? I don't understand what you mean by that the founding of the TS brings God into the occult arena. Barring that you imagine God as the man on a cloud with the white beard, whom I'd rather not have in the TS either, (but that's my personal choice) what makes you think that the Creator of the World isn't already in the occult arena? By this I guess you mean the arena thought of as occult by human beings. As I envision that point of view, to God those things are known and not occult. Best wishes Liesel .............................................................................. > THEOSOPHY REDEFINED (I) > >Theosophical textbooks and introductory articles almost alsways tell us >that the word "theosophy' derives from the Greek words for 'God' (theos) >and 'Wisdom' (sophia) respectively. Having done this, it is not >uncommon that any suggestion of the involvement of a/any actual form of >deity is dispensed with, and terms such as 'ancient wisdom" or >'perrenial philosophy' are used. > >This is hardly surprising in literature deriving from an organisation >which by its own rules admits followers of any religion or none. To >mention a specific kind of god would be certain to offend some. > >At one period, particularly the Annie Besant/Charles Leadbeater era of >the nineteen-thirties, God was mentioned on a regular basis by such >stalwarts asishop] Leadbeater andishop] Arundale and even the >Indian theosophist C. Jinarajadasa. I know - I have their spoken >recordings which contain this usage. > >This god is a male god, described as 'He' and has a 'plan' for humanity >described by Jinarajadasa in ~First Principles of Theosophy~ as "God's >Plan, Which is Evolution."hapter XVI]. > >These theosophists, in their writings, suggest that there is a kind of >'dogmatic' theology laid down by various 'masters' and held in trust by >them in a kind of 'Great White Lodge' (Not Black or Pink) in some sort >of association with an 'Inner Government of the World' which is clearly >hierarchical, non-democtracic, and therefore liable, I would suggest, to >be autocratic, oligarchical, and accountable to - ? > >God? > >Claim is laid by similar purveyors of the theosophical message to the >life and work of one of the Theosophical Society's founders, Madame H.P >Blavatsky, whose introduction the the 'Masters' first appeared in >letters written by them (but as Mahatmas, which is not quite the same >thing as Masters) in a large number of letters written by them and often >transported by miraculous means, using involving Mme. Blavatsky, to ab >occult researcher called A.P.Sinnett in the latter quarter of the >nineteenth century. > >Much has been made of the Mathatmic Masters and their authority, but one >major problem from the letters arises in the originally published letter >number ten which begins: > >"Neither our philosophy nor ourselves believe in a God, least of all in >one whose pronoun necessitates a capital H." > >Oh Dear. If Master Koot Hoomi and his fellow Mahatmas or Masters take >this view, and they are also held up as the examplars who would-be >theosophists should follow, so much so that some literature, when >mentioning them, elevates 'them' to 'Them' and 'their' to 'Their,' thus >lending a suggestion of divinity to the Mahatmas/Masters themselves. > >At the very least, one is inclined to the view that there must be some >mistake, not least because of the fact that following the excitement at >the time which surrounded these gentlemen and the famous madame, a >number of occultists, including the three most often named, Blavatsky, >Oclott, and Judge, decided to form the ~Theosophical~ Society in 1875, >thus bringing (a) God firmly into the occult arena. > >>From thence, confusion has heaped itself upon confusion, and splinter >groups and societies developed very early in the life of what is >sometimes called the 'Theosophical Movement' - including one led by >Judge, and original co-founder, and later by others such as Steiner, >Purucker, Alice Bailey, and a number of less well-known luminaries in >their own fields. > >So is there a consistent body of teaching which we may confidently >describe as "theosophy" in a general sense? Not from the Mahatmic >source it would seem, as the term is ruled out by them by definition. > >And yet, thousands of occult students have put their feet, less than >firmly perhaps, upon the path to the knowledge of higher things, >whatever such higher things may be. I am one of them, and *I* began, >not by reading the words of the Mahatmas, nor of Blavatsky, but with the >one-time International President of the Theosophical Society, >Jinarajadasa, mentioned above. > >Now the difficulty is, as I look back over some forty years of study, >practice, and research, that although the entire body of literature >emanating from theosophical sources is riddled with inconsistencies and >contradictions, there is a great deal of truth to be discovered within >it, though it is necessary to sort the wheat from the chaff, as the >saying goes - and deciding for oneself which is which is not always >simple. > >So, before I continue further with this article (if indeed I continue at >all) I think it is necessary, in attempting to reach the spirit of the >original founders' intent, to redefine the basic definition. In other >words, if we are to talk and discuss something we wish to call >'theosophy,' we must begin by deciding what we understand by 'theos' >[God] and 'sophia' [Wisdom]. > >Any offers? > >Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 08:39:10 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: Esoteric Astrology & Psychology (updated www page) Message-ID: <3343B2FB.2F89@earthlink.net> Hello, Esoteric Astrology & Psychology (updated www page) is http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html Shanti, Patrick Alessandra, Psy.D. -- *** A.Priori / 916 N.E. 65th St. #352 / Seattle, WA 98115 USA *** aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 00:40:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >Sounds good to me, Doss. We have a few nuts on this list, like Alan, but >I'll take a chance. :o) Pre-cracked. > Besides, he's all the way in Cornywall. And a very beautiful place it is. > For >something like a telephone number and specific address, I would like to >limit that to either TI members or those who have been on the list for a >while. Some of us have already exchanged home addresses and phone numbers via private e-mail. Seems to me this is good enough, and just like real life! Some TI members have chosen to put this info on the membership list, and I will gladly add it to any member's name who asks me to. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 02:34:18 -0500 (EST) From: DSArthur@aol.com Subject: The Soul Message-ID: <970403023417_774152123@emout12.mail.aol.com> I was interested to read some of the recent Digest comments concerning who or what the Soul may be. Blavatsky, in my view, is not particularly helpful in this area. Her definition (see Theosophical Glossary, page 306) reads: the vital principle or the breath of life. However, she also defines Prana in the same manner, i.e. Life Principle; the breath of life (see page 260 in the same reference work). Thus, she essentially defines them both in the same manner but nowhere else in her voluminous writings does she state (or even suggest) that to her the two terms are synonymous. Her view becomes even murkier when we read further (on page 306 of Theosophical Glossary) that: " ... the term "Soul" .. is applied only to Kama Manas..." My reading of Judge (see his Mesmerism and Hypnotism, page 14) offers a considerably broader view. Judge says (or at least strongly suggests) that the term Soul applies to "the septenary nature of man." He appears to equate Soul with what he refers to as "sheaths" surrounding the essential essence (presuma- bly that which Theosophists call Atma). He even goes so far as to list two of the soul sheaths: the physical and astral bodies. Thus, Soul is not Spirit but, rather, the vehicle (or, as Judge would have it, "sheaths") that enable Spirit to manifest at levels below the Atmic. D.S. Arthur From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 10:09:22 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: compassion Message-ID: <199704031525.KAA07954@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Jerry, I don't think having ethics is that uncomplicated. Sometimes when you're dealing with people, you need to know, for instance, what to talk about to your spouse, and what to keep confidential that someone else told you in confidence. Fair play, I think is part of ethics, and thatcan be tricky. Those just as examples. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 08:08:50 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: Alan: >Some of us have already exchanged home addresses and phone numbers via >private e-mail. Seems to me this is good enough, and just like real >life! Some TI members have chosen to put this info on the membership >list, and I will gladly add it to any member's name who asks me to. > >Alan >--------- >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: >http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ >E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk Hi Alan, Does the TI member info list gets published publicly or does that just get e-mailed privately to members? I'm sorry for my cautiousness. I received one too many crank calls. I even stopped writing checks at grocery stores since they contain my address and telephone number on them. I had a person get my telephone number off a check. Of course, the magnetic cash card is so much more convenient. Oh well, all I do is just terrorize the guy back by screaming at him, dialing *69 to call him when the coward hangs up, and then screaming at him some more. I make the guy feels as if he's being screamed at by a tyrranical and maniac mother. It works every time. I never get a call back. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 18:43:55 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Pupul Jayakar Dead Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970404004355.006c211c@mail.eden.com> Here is a news I picked up today... ..I would like to inform the group that Pupul Jayakar, the biographer who produced a biography of K (considered a seminal work) died on March 28th at Mumbai, India. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:38:08 -0800 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Hello to all!! :) Message-ID: <199704032337.SAA02979@elvis.vnet.net> > Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:17:50 -0800 > From: Romero Cortez D.Ma. > Subject: Hello to all!! :) > > Hello to all here! :) > I'm a young girl of 25 years and i'm interested in having friends from all > around the world, caring, who have interest in trying to change the world in > a positive way,and who have open minds to the phenomenoms of nature visible > and invisible,who believe than manckind can change, in a positive and > beautiful way! > i like to have especcialy friends about my age, with common interests (18- > 29 years) byut any age is welcome, the important thing is having a young heart, > and for that is not important the age of the body. > so please be free to write to me! > Estrella > P.S. there is no religion superior than truth From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 00:53:48 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: <0UhbmBAMMERzEw6u@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , Thoa Tran writes >Hi Alan, >Does the TI member info list gets published publicly or does that just get >e-mailed privately to members? I'm sorry for my cautiousness. Don't be sorry, be wise! I did occasionally post it to TI-L, and in the early days more widely on the lists, but have not done so for some time. Your post suggests to me that maybe in future I could post a general message from time to time telling members that a copy of the current list (66 signed up) can be posted privately on request. > I received >one too many crank calls. I even stopped writing checks at grocery stores >since they contain my address and telephone number on them. Huh? My bank would not dream of doing this. My name, yes, but that's all. > I had a person >get my telephone number off a check. Of course, the magnetic cash card is >so much more convenient. Oh well, all I do is just terrorize the guy back >by screaming at him, dialing *69 to call him when the coward hangs up, and >then screaming at him some more. I make the guy feels as if he's being >screamed at by a tyrranical and maniac mother. It works every time. I >never get a call back. Nice one. Here you dial 1471. Once I had someone [male] call me for no immediately obvious reason and let loose a horrendous scream down the wire. I guessed it was someone I had upset recently who saw himself as a 'black magician.' Having been around a long time (Aaaah) the only response he got from me was "How extraordinary." Not directly relevant of course, but I like telling the story :-) Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 18:48:10 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hello to all!! :) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970404004810.006c5c64@mail.eden.com> >Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 15:17:50 -0800 >From: Romero Cortez D.Ma. >Subject: Hello to all!! :) > >Hello to all here! :) >I'm a young girl of 25 years and i'm interested in having friends from all >around the world, caring, who have interest in trying to change the world in >a positive way,and who have open minds to the phenomenoms of nature visible >and invisible,who believe than manckind can change, in a positive and >beautiful way! >i like to have especcialy friends about my age, with common interests (18- >29 years) byut any age is welcome, the important thing is having a young heart, >and for that is not important the age of the body. >so please be free to write to me! >Estrella >P.S. there is no religion superior than truth > Glad to see your msg. If there is anything you want to write, post it here. Many of us are from various countries all over the world. I am from USA and live in San Antonio Texas. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 21:35:25 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Hello to all!! :) Message-ID: Estrella: >Hello to all here! :) >I'm a young girl of 25 years and i'm interested in having friends from all >around the world, caring, who have interest in trying to change the world in >a positive way,and who have open minds to the phenomenoms of nature visible >and invisible,who believe than manckind can change, in a positive and >beautiful way! >i like to have especcialy friends about my age, with common interests (18- >29 years) byut any age is welcome, the important thing is having a young heart, >and for that is not important the age of the body. >so please be free to write to me! >Estrella >P.S. there is no religion superior than truth Welcome, Estrella. I hope you enjoy the list. I've been on the list since late last year and have enjoyed it enormously. The list had its feisty time and quiet time depending on the topic and people's time to contribute. I gather that the hearts on this list are generally young, although with some you might have to tickle a little. :o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 21:36:07 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: Alan: >Huh? My bank would not dream of doing this. My name, yes, but that's >all. Most stores request an address and a telephone number in case a check ever bounces. To save the clerk time from having to copy the info. from my driver's license, I had it preprinted. Of course, it's been a while since I used a check in a store. Maybe the rules have changed since they can now also run the check through a machine to see whether it's good. >Nice one. Here you dial 1471. Once I had someone [male] call me for no >immediately obvious reason and let loose a horrendous scream down the >wire. I guessed it was someone I had upset recently who saw himself as >a 'black magician.' Having been around a long time (Aaaah) the only >response he got from me was "How extraordinary." Tell Chuckie that he needs to do better things with his time. :o) Nothing philosophical or theosophical in the brain lately. Writing about such things takes so much words and energy! It's easier doing volunteer work. H.P. Blavatsky. There, I said it. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 08:35:46 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: <334503B2.36F8@sprynet.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > Hi Alan, > Does the TI member info list gets published publicly or does that just get > e-mailed privately to members? Read the docs on the listserver. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 08:45:47 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Black Magicians Message-ID: <3345060B.789E@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Nice one. Here you dial 1471. Once I had someone [male] call me for no > immediately obvious reason and let loose a horrendous scream down the > wire. I guessed it was someone I had upset recently who saw himself as > a 'black magician.' I must admit that magic is one of the areas in which African Americans are currently greatly underrepresented. The top performers (David Copperfield, Blackstone, etc.) are all European descent. So perhaps the person you called was just frustrated at not being able to find any stage dates. You should have calmly suggested trying table magic at night clubs; the tipping can be quite excellent there. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 13:57:58 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Black Magicians Message-ID: <970404135757_-1503456995@emout19.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-04 09:00:57 EST, you write: > I must admit that magic is one of the areas in which African Americans >are currently greatly underrepresented. The top performers (David >Copperfield, Blackstone, etc.) are all European descent. So perhaps the >person you called was just frustrated at not being able to find any >stage dates. You should have calmly suggested trying table magic at >night clubs; the tipping can be quite excellent there. > > Bart Lidofsky That is very true. Whenever anyone accuses me of practicing Black Magick I always tell that I practice Italian-American Magick. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 14:29:46 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: an idea Message-ID: <199704041945.OAA09827@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Some TI members have chosen to put this info on the membership >list, and I will gladly add it to any member's name who asks me to. > >Alan >--------- I'd like to leave my TI entry just the way it is. I'd just as soon not have my address & phone number appear on the Internet, where any nut, cracked or other, can get at it. I've given it privately to a few people whom I know well enough by now. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 14:31:33 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: an idea Message-ID: <199704041947.OAA10237@ultra1.dreamscape.com> PS Doss, if you'd like to have my snail mail address & phone number, I'll send it to you on your private e-mail. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 14:48:01 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: an idea Message-ID: <199704042004.PAA13992@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Thoa, I agree with you. Crank calls are unpleasant & upsetting to say the least. I've had a few in my time. I'm glad you managed to scare him off. I usually hang up, & then unhook my phone for 1/2 hour. I once got a very graphic description on my answering machine from some nut who thought my friendly "please leave a message" meant I was a prostitute. For a while, a small girl with a filthy mouth left messages on my answering machine every few days. Also, she was going to come over & rape me. I felt really badly that a small child was doing this. It was a call for help, which I had no way of answering, since I didn't know who she was. So finally I disconnected my answering machine for a few months. Just so you don't think you're all alone in this. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 16:05:17 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: the soul Message-ID: <199704042121.QAA00408@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Arthur, I was taught the same thing you quote from dePurucker. That soul is more or less sinonymous with psyche, or some denser vehicles, and Spirit is the causal body and beyond. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 15:08:17 -0800 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Another grand salute :-) Message-ID: <199704042307.SAA00233@elvis.vnet.net> Hello again! i forgot saying more things about me, for each of us getting to knowing each other better. i'm a biology student, in Ensenada, B.C. Mexico, but i'm from Mexicali, B.C. Mexico. i know spanish, so , if someone here is well writer and talker" of spanish, can also comunicate w/me in the theos-span list. For now, one of my interests is int the way the body can heal itselve by the way occult, that is, by some unknown method described by Hodgson in its book "occult nature of diseases" is a really small book. for i had been with some persistant diseases for a while and i want to be cured, definetively. I'm also interested in the study of the chackras, the difrent bodies of the human (fisic, etheric,astral, mental,etc) and almost everything that theosophy involves. I'm very glad for your welcome treats to me, Thoa and M.K Ramadoss from San Antonio, TX. i also would welcome letters telling me more of personal stuff, like your age,sex,place you live/are from,studies, personal interests, etc. So, whatever r your interests, please be welcome to write me! whatever you like. i like to have friends,and for me is from a particular interest knowing that i have friends from so far away. bye be well and happy Estrella From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 00:04:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: an idea Message-ID: In message <199704041945.OAA09827@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >I'd like to leave my TI entry just the way it is. I'd just as soon not have >my address & phone number appear on the Internet, where any nut, cracked or >other, can get at it. I've given it privately to a few people whom I know >well enough by now. Never fear - it remains 'as is' Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 00:02:22 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Black Magicians Message-ID: In message <3345060B.789E@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >I must admit that magic is one of the areas in which African Americans >are currently greatly underrepresented. The top performers (David >Copperfield, Blackstone, etc.) are all European descent. Chuckle. > So perhaps the >person you called was just frustrated at not being able to find any >stage dates. You should have calmly suggested trying table magic at >night clubs; the tipping can be quite excellent there. He called me, and does a regular act at his local Lodge. Trouble is he believes it's for real. > Alan :-\ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 23:58:39 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >Tell Chuckie that he needs to do better things with his time. :o) > Chuckie - You need to do better things with your time. >Nothing philosophical or theosophical in the brain lately. Writing about >such things takes so much words and energy! It's easier doing volunteer >work. H.P. Blavatsky. There, I said it. > >Thoa You just don't give a damn, do you? Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 00:03:38 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Black Magicians Message-ID: In message <970404135757_-1503456995@emout19.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >That is very true. Whenever anyone accuses me of practicing Black Magick I >always tell that I practice Italian-American Magick. Keep practicing till you get it right. "Perseverance furthers." - I Ching. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 16:47:30 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: an idea Message-ID: Liesel: >Thoa, > >I agree with you. Crank calls are unpleasant & upsetting to say the least. >I've had a few in my time. I'm glad you managed to scare him off. I usually >hang up, & then unhook my phone for 1/2 hour. >I once got a very graphic description on my answering machine from some nut >who thought my friendly "please leave a message" meant I was a prostitute. >For a while, a small girl with a filthy mouth left messages on my answering >machine every few days. Also, she was going to come over & rape me. I felt >really badly that a small child was doing this. It was a call for help, >which I had no way of answering, since I didn't know who she was. So finally >I disconnected my answering machine for a few months. > >Just so you don't think you're all alone in this. > >Liesel Thanks, Liesel. From my experience, acting scared does not help, acting nice does not help, and plain hanging up doesn't help. I refuse to let such a person have any effect on my life. Thus, I decided I was going to have fun with it. I've adopted the tyrannical mother persona, the religious fanatic persona, and the person on vacation from mental hospital persona. I would advise any woman to not hesitate to be totally crazy, disgusting, or aggressive whenever the situation calls for it. The point is to be the one in control. I think the private exchanging of phone numbers and addresses is good. If anyone needs my info., let me know. If I don't give it to you, then you know I think you're a wacko. :o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 16:47:34 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Karma or what Message-ID: Liesel: >I would like to add to what Toa said about this person who got shot or shot >himself. I didn't read it, but I read Toa's comments. Hi Liesel, I didn't write the saying. It was E.J. Light. However, there are some comments I would like to make. I'm sorry it's taking so long to respond, but I'm finally taking the time to reflect. >"It is all in our heads". >Serge King's first Kahuna principle is "The world is what you think it is". >The whole Kahuna philosphy is built up on this principle, so it jives with >what Toa is saying. What we perceive of the world, of our surroundings, is >whatever reaches us via our senses, which is a little more distributed than >our heads, but I think Toa is speaking figuratively. This is similar to Plato's Parable of the Cave. We are all actually in the cave of our experiences, seeing only shadows of what is Real. Once in a rare while, we get an inkling of the essence that causes the shadow. >Serge's healing system >is then built up on that a good Shaman can change belief systems to agree >with whatever the healee believes, and that (s)he can then heal using that >system. The shaman has his (her) own belief system, though, and when using >another's system still has his own in mind 5% or so. I think agreeing with the healee's system is important for the healee to build faith in the unknown, and eventually be accepting of the illness, thereby enabling the healee to go on to the process of healing, instead of being held back by the negativity of nonacceptance. >Serge also teaches >several levels of viewing things. I don't remember the whole description >but, like first level is linear and contains linear time, most modern >inventions, allopathic medicine, and herbs for their medicinal values. The modern viewpoint is one of science and technology, seeable cause and effect. However, the Shaman system, to the modern mind, is of an irrational nature, a system beyond physics and chemistry. >The >second level contains spiral time, reincarnation. The soul, to the Shaman, has always existed and will always exist beyond a person's lifetime. By recognizing this, s/he can service the living in several ways. First, a Shaman can determine the type of soul that is entering a pregnant woman. The deeds or quality of a soul in a previous life or lives can determine the events of the present life. Second, this knowledge can also determine the cause of the illness, since in Shamanistic belief, the root of illnesses is in the soul. Balancing the soul is key to healing the body. Thus, one of the function of the Shaman is to have the ability to be in a "death" state, in which his soul can travel to the land of the dead. By walking through the land of the dead, the Shaman can act as a messenger for the living. Third, for those dying, the Shaman can assist the dying to have a peaceful journey to the land of the dead. >The third level contains >symbols, which includes herbs as symbols, like a 4 leaf clover for luck. This also includes words, chants and songs that can heal and bring changes. Symbolism is a way in which the Shaman can express connectedness with the indescribable, and is often used as a way of connecting with the world of phenomena. Also, drawing is another way of bringing about healing, such as the Taoist symbolic calligraphy for anything that might ail a person. >The >4th level uses identity, you identify with what you're trying to understand >or heal , again 95%, and then lovingly heal yourself. It's all in our heads. This goes with using imagery to heal the afflicted area. In the Spiritual Madness tape, she gave an example of a little boy with cancer who imagined himself in a baseball game (I think) with the cancer as the opposing team. Eventually, he was able to imagine himself winning the game and told his mother that he does not need treatment any more. >I echo seeking your own salvation. It's a Buddhist principle as well as a >theosphical one, and I like it, because it doesn't blame any one else, >including God or Karma or your parents for what eventually happens to you. >If you can figure out a way to resolve your dilemma the Karma changes. I was >taught that the Theosophical belief is that we are on earth to learn, to >learn just that, until we become godlike people. I often find that it sometimes is hard to learn in depth while juggling making a living, relationships, and career goals. Sometimes I feel like doing one thing, other time other things. I try to learn as much as I can, either through life experience, picking up a book, listening to a tape, or watching a movie. When life gets too busy, there are basics that I keep up. One is to pray daily as a way of staying connected to the unknown. The other is to stay in touch with my intuition, which is another way to stay connected with the unknown. During those times, when I don't have time to verbalize complex philosophies, I can just "feel" the indescribable. Sometimes I wonder whether the ultimate learning experience is just learning to "be." When I was studying engineering, my thought was that I would graduate to a good job and income. I realized that it's more important to do what I love to do. I decided to become an artist. When I was in art school, I got caught up in the craze that art has to make a big statement, a big New York sensation. I realized that that is not important. What's important to me is that art is an enjoyment. Making art should be a way of being, a way of connecting with the source, and not a way of developing an ego trip...chop wood, carry water. I just read in the newspaper today regarding a woman celebrating her 20 years working at MacDonald's. She was as happy and satisfied as she can be, and is looking forward to many more years. >Toa, I don't think the Path is narrow, because that's a limiting thought. >Seems to me that the Path must be as broad as there are people to tread it, >because each of us approaches it from a different angle. I haven't figured >out yet how that jives with being very loving and very ethical, needed >qualtities, which seem to narrow the path ... maybe it's because Love and >ethics need to be applied to the situation at hand, which is always >different. And sometimes what's ethical in one instance, isn't in another. > >When you say "It's not what is done, but the state of mind" I guess that >fits in with the end of my last paragrqaph. but there's also that the >Masters said "To us, motive is everything." > >You've raised a lot of good issues. > >Liesel That is why everything is a dance. We can't really take any one thing and make a hard fast rule about it. We have to rely on our intuitive sense to help us make our decisions. On the other hand, we need to apply the concept of distinction. We all need to make choices one way or another. Even those who claim to have no judgment whatsover have strong judgments. >I left out an important component of Serge King's second level: >Everything is connected, which makes ESP possible. ESP is not possiblee on >the 1st level. I totally agree with that. Without connectedness, we would be all alone in this world. Some philosophy believes that we came into the world alone and we die alone. That's kind of sad. The wonders of the unknown are nonexistent. It's easy to come to the conclusion that there is no meaning to existence. We are born, live, pay bills, and then we die. Kaput! Another bug on the windshield of life. O O \ / \ / \ ^^ / MM (* *) \ / ### / \ ### ######## / \ ######## ########### |******| ########### ##############|******|############## ########## |******| ########## ######## \ / ######## ### \ / ### \/ Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 00:13:26 -0500 From: Ken Malkin Subject: Black MAgic Message-ID: <3345DF76.EE5@gil.net> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > Nice one. Here you dial 1471. Once I had someone [male] call me for >no immediately obvious reason and let loose a horrendous scream down >the wire. I guessed it was someone I had upset recently who saw >himself as a 'black magician.' Bart replies; >>I must admit that magic is one of the areas in which African Americans >>are currently greatly underrepresented. The top performers (David >>Copperfield, Blackstone, etc.) are all European descent. So perhaps >>the person you called was just frustrated at not being able to find >>any stage dates. You should have calmly suggested trying table magic >>at night clubs; the tipping can be quite excellent there. Bart Lidofsky Bart et.al., Have I missed something here? Is the orginal post about African (Black) Americans? or any other Africans? What has "Colour" have to do with the practice of formoid magik(c)? Ken Malkin From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 01:19:14 -0500 (EST) From: DSArthur@aol.com Subject: Human Cloning Message-ID: <970405011912_-867362325@emout03.mail.aol.com> Liesel wrote> I'd like to know what you think of my objection that we don't know what diseases the clone is going to develop in its lifetime. Dennis replies> The objection is valid because at this point in the development of cloning technology there is no way to absolutely predict what diseases a clone may contract. However ... it seems reasonable to assume that a clone, being genetically identical with its donor, will tend to develop the same diseases as the donor under similar environmental conditions. Kym wrote> I don't believe it is ethical to use laboratory animals for medical research ... Dennis replies> I don't believe it is ethical NOT to use them. For example, Surgeons can learn to prefect their techniques on animals ... or they can learn to prefect them on humans. If laboratory medical research (on animals) was ever outlawed, I for one would not care to be the one some surgeon learned on. Actually, this whole issue is in the process of becoming moot. Virtual Reality tech- nology is advancing at such a stunning pace that soon those same surgeons will be learning their trade on virtual (i.e. elec- tronic) humans --- not out of compassion for animals but simply because it will be a more efficient alternative. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 08:46:44 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Black MAgic Message-ID: <334657C3.5708@sprynet.com> Ken Malkin wrote: > Bart et.al., > Have I missed something here? Is the orginal post about African (Black) > Americans? or any other Africans? What has "Colour" have to do with the > practice of formoid magik(c)? The original conversation was about crank calls. Dr. Bain mentioned being called by a black magician, and I replied, making the assumption that he was talking about African-Americans practicing stage magic. I am in the habit, however (and others SHOULD be) of making the subject of my messages have some resemblance to the message itself. If you want to find the thread, you can check the references. Bart Lidofsky ------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 08:04:32 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Human Cloning Message-ID: Your words are mitosing! Aaaah!!! Gene division is even hitting the internet! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 08:07:42 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Black MAgic Message-ID: Bart: >I am >in the habit, however (and others SHOULD be) of making the subject of my >messages have some resemblance to the message itself. If you want to >find the thread, you can check the references. > > Bart Lidofsky It's more fun to lure people into opening your e-mail with an enticing subject header, and then talk about clipping toenails. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 11:05:16 -0500 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: cloning Message-ID: <199704051621.LAA07145@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >that soon >those > same surgeons will be learning their trade on virtual >(i.e. elec- > tronic) humans --- not out of compassion for animals >but simply > because it will be a more efficient alternative. Hurray, for the more efficient alternative! It'll spare humanity all the rotten karma accumulated from torturing animals, regardless of whether it's better to torture animals rather than human beings or not. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 5 Apr 1997 12:20:13 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Black MAgic Message-ID: <970405122011_-800281955@emout01.mail.aol.com> IT'S A JOKE!! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 05 Apr 1997 13:54:40 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: cloning Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970405195440.006c134c@mail.eden.com> At 11:23 AM 4/5/97 -0500, liesel wrote: >>that soon >>those >> same surgeons will be learning their trade on virtual >>(i.e. elec- >> tronic) humans --- not out of compassion for animals >>but simply >> because it will be a more efficient alternative. >............................................................................... > >Hurray, for the more efficient alternative! It'll spare humanity all the >rotten karma accumulated from torturing animals, regardless of whether it's >better to torture animals rather than human beings or not. > >Liesel > Well put. All the effects of tortuing/causing pain and suffering to animals *for* the *benefit* of humans cannot disappear. I believe all of us pay the price. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 00:21:26 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Clipping toenails Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >> Bart Lidofsky > >It's more fun to lure people into opening your e-mail with an enticing >subject header, and then talk about clipping toenails. > >Thoa :o) Bart is and abbreviation for baronet in the UK. Like aristocracy. Have I lured anyone? [Slaps own wrist] Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 00:18:16 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Karma or what Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >We are born, live, pay bills, and then we die. Kaput! >Another bug on the windshield of life. .. and then we reincarnate and get splatted some more? Only kidding. Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 00:15:03 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: an idea Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >I think the private exchanging of phone numbers and addresses is good. If >anyone needs my info., let me know. If I don't give it to you, then you >know I think you're a wacko. :o) Not many people with your address, maybe ... ? Alan the Nutcracker From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 11:16:19 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Baronet Message-ID: Alan: >Bart is and abbreviation for baronet in the UK. Like aristocracy. Do I have to call him "Sir" from now on? I'm already having to call my martial arts instructor "sir". I don't live in a democratic country in order to call everybody "sir". Viva la revolution! Princess Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 11:16:40 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: An Idea Message-ID: Alan: >>Nothing philosophical or theosophical in the brain lately. Writing about >>such things takes so much words and energy! It's easier doing volunteer >>work. H.P. Blavatsky. There, I said it. >> >>Thoa > >You just don't give a damn, do you? > >Alan :-) Not one iota. Those of us who don't give a damn travels so much more easily through life. I did not get a couple of your e-mails, this referenced one included, through the undigest way. However, I saw them in the theos digest. I did notice advantages and disadvantages of not getting the digest form. In individual format, I get the e-mails as they come in. In the digest format, I get to see the group dynamic, which I prefer. However, the best thing about the individual format is that I get to miss some of your e-mails. :o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 11:15:48 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: The 32 Paths of Wisdom Message-ID: Alan, I've been trying to find information on the 32 Paths of Wisdom outside of your manuscript to no avail. However, I did find a couple of books by Halevi. I bought the one with more information. I enjoyed his book enormously. It's beautifully illustrated and clearly written. However, it contained no information on the 32 paths. My favorite metaphysical bookstore has one whole shelf dedicated to Magick, and one measly row to the Kabbalah. I did notice that the Hermetic Temple and Order of the Golden Dawn are making their books and tapes easily accessible by giving discounts, etc., in preparation for the millenium. Perhaps I should check with the bookstore to see whether they can order any books on the 32 paths for me. It's funny where our discoveries take us. I always thought I would just stick with eastern and tribal topics, particularly since I have an aversion for western religion due to having to sing "Jesus...Jesus...Jesus in the morning, Jesus in the night time..." in Sunday school that my mother foisted on me because she wanted me out of the house. However, exploring the fascinating Kabbalah is leading me to read *gasp* the Holy Bible! Nowhere in the Holy Bible did I see Tammy Faye Baker and the Evangelists! I'm convinced even more that all the western religions are siblings, all the eastern religions are siblings, all the tribal religions are siblings, and that they are all cousins. All are part of a circle. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 22:58:12 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: The 32 Paths of Wisdom Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >Alan, > >I've been trying to find information on the 32 Paths of Wisdom outside of >your manuscript to no avail. In *Sepher Yetzirah* by W. Wynn Westcott, pub. Weiser, NY, 1980 (and maybe later. Errors in 1887 edition corrected. In *The Holy Kabbalah* by A.E.Waite, various editions. In *The Book of Formation* by Knut Stenring, Rider,London, 1923. The last one is very scarce, and is my source for the names of the Paths in Hebrew. All are translations from the Hebrew. > However, I did find a couple of books by >Halevi. I bought the one with more information. I enjoyed his book >enormously. It's beautifully illustrated and clearly written. However, it >contained no information on the 32 paths. Which ones? His initial instruction came via a colleague of mine. > My favorite metaphysical >bookstore has one whole shelf dedicated to Magick, and one measly row to >the Kabbalah. I did notice that the Hermetic Temple and Order of the >Golden Dawn are making their books and tapes easily accessible by giving >discounts, etc., in preparation for the millenium. Perhaps I should check >with the bookstore to see whether they can order any books on the 32 paths >for me. I would imagine they can, most likely the Westcott will be easiest to get, as he was Golden Dawn. Mind you, so was Waite, but his is a very large book, and only a small part of it contains the 32 Paths. His writing style is like reading through treacle. > >It's funny where our discoveries take us. I always thought I would just >stick with eastern and tribal topics, particularly since I have an aversion >for western religion due to having to sing "Jesus...Jesus...Jesus in the >morning, Jesus in the night time..." in Sunday school that my mother >foisted on me because she wanted me out of the house. However, exploring >the fascinating Kabbalah is leading me to read *gasp* the Holy Bible! >Nowhere in the Holy Bible did I see Tammy Faye Baker and the Evangelists! Ther's probably a supplement in preparation ... sponsored by Coca Cola? >I'm convinced even more that all the western religions are siblings, all >the eastern religions are siblings, all the tribal religions are siblings, >and that they are all cousins. All are part of a circle. This seems increasingly probable as one gets older, IMO. However, the perverted twists that some of them take are horrendous. > Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 22:24:40 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: An Idea Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >However, the best >thing about the individual format is that I get to miss some of your >e-mails. :o) .. I love you too Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 06 Apr 1997 20:06:18 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: karma or what Message-ID: <199704070122.VAA06754@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Further discussion with Thoa For sure, Plato's cave is like Serge's first principle. But when you talk to Serge, he also implies that you can most often think up your own world as it suits you, and change it around to suit yourself. Somehow, this isn't 100% possible, because he also talks about a hurricane and a volcano having a mind of its own. It will sometimes do what you ask of it, if you know how to ask it, but sometimes it just has to do what it has to do. I suppose from the point of view of physics and chemistry a shamanic system is irrational. It's based on sometimes invisible factors, but I find that Serge's reasoning makes a lot of sense to me. There isn't much he asked us to accept on faith. He always had us trying out what he told us about, and it worked, sometimes for all of us, sometimes only for some of us. "The root of illness is in the soul". Harry Van Gelder, who healed people partly with homeopathic remedies, would always prescribe some remedies which worked on the spirit and some which worked on the body. One of the biofeedback researchers I read said that it doesn't matter where you tap into a system, you can start a healing. That made a lot of sense to me, because when you heal spirit it also helps heal the body, and when you heal the body, it also helps heal the spirit. Maybe starting with spirit is more effective, but there are those who can't heal that way, and I think rather than give up, they should start healing the way they know how. I think it helps heal. Maybe the trick is not to stop at one but to keep going till you've healed the whole human being as much as possible. I can tell the truth of that simply by my present experience. Since Harry has passed over, I've had to rely on what's at hand, which is often allopathic medicine. Right now I need dialysis. That's an absolutely physical thing. The machine cleanses my blood. But the thing is, for the past 6 months, I did nothing but eat and sleep, and nothing intellectual went in and out of my mind. The dialysis is working, and I can tell you, my soul too has perked up. But I'm working on that too. You talk about a shaman traveling to the land of the dead. One thing Serge touched on but I wish had taught us more about is traveling in Milu. You enter through a hole in the ground, and you go on a journey underground to help somebody. You meet and fight monsters, and think your way past all kinds of obstacles, and come back with an object or an idea retrieved to restore the person you're helping. I've learned too that shamans assist the dying, and newly dead. The technique of the little boy fighting cancer with a baseball team is considered third level, I think. He's changing what is in our world by changing symbols. When you change the symbols, you also change what they stand for. 4th level is more when you feel as one with something. For instance I've learned more about what makes my little cat tick by trying to walk in her shoes. I'm glad, since you're in college, that you find time to pray & etc. When I was that age, I was seeking but I didn't find anything to believe in. Also, I was too busy with secular matters to pray. Also, I didn't believe in it. Same in the first 15-20 years after I graduated, got a job, got married & had kids. I was too tied up with secular things. I'm glad you're getting to it early in life. It'll help you get further in the long run. Glad also that you found "learning to be". I know what it is, from watching my kitty, but haven't achieved it yet. Looks like you're out to become an artist. It's a wonderful profession, if you can find a way to make a livelihood. I came to it much later in life, through handicrafts. I was making puppets and wall hangings. In the last few years I've done acrylics. People say I'm good, but I dont' consider myself that swift. There are people in my art class who do lots better. But it's fun. Everything is a dance - agreed. Take care Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 17:43:45 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: An interesting fact re: Krishnamurti Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970407224345.006aedb4@mail.eden.com> In the recent book by Mary Lutyens (who had known K all her life and had written two biographies on K), there is a very interesting piece of information. '...was asked what would happen if his audiences disappeared to which he apparently answered, "I speak to live, if there were no more talks I would die".. He often mentioned this, meaning that it was his job to speak and that unless he could carryout his job those higher powers, in which he believed and which directed his life, would have no more use for him.' MKR Comment: When I read the above reference to 'those higher powers', it did not surprise me at all. This is one of the things that K had mentioned to those close to him and I had heard of it being mentioned by a very very reliable source several years ago. I have never seen anything written or heard any mention of K saying anything about the 'the higher powers'. Something to think about. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 15:54:52 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Very attent on your saying Message-ID: <199704072253.SAA14050@elvis.vnet.net> Hello to all the ones who write here. I was listening with attention all of your letters to this place. Seems that Thoa, you are very versed in issues of body healing, and you seem like a nice person , who is also very intelligent and wise, and also funny, the thing i like most of a person, because the world and the labor we have to do in this world is too serious for taking it seriously. hahahahaha! :) (with a "Peanuts" caracter like laugh) Also i find Liesel very versed in this kind of subjects. i enjoyed the \ digest of 97-3 (that's the name i got) with all the funny-replies to the pepole, talking about cutting the toenails and stuff like that, but also i want to talk of serious topic issues, really. my hunger of knowing is very intense, and i want to learn more, and especially, be a better person, acomplishing the profund topics of Theosophy, so i can enter the "narrow path" if, of course, i really deserve that,i think i do, so as the whole humanity. i couldn't be substracted to the fact that i was keeping an eye of the \ serious discussion of Thoa-Liesel about healing-native like healing (chaman of i don't know- what country ???) -kabalah-Golden Dawn-books-etc,etc,etc. Since you did'nt answer my question (an innocent one comming from a graduate student of biology) of who you are-where do you live etc,etc, i have to figure out that Thoa is a female-young girl no more than 30-student of Theosophy-Student of art,before,she was college student of Engeneering-it is right?? I don't know even from what country you are!! i did told u....at least i know that some human being called (itselve,because i don't know if is a she-he) M.K.Ramadoss (very funny and intelligent, that's what i like of some pepole here, the sense of humor) First: About healing, i don't know so much of it, i think i know nothing. but i know that the healer has to be in perfect state of health to can heal, because of if not, the sickness can be transported of the sick person to the healer. If is not the case, the healer,like every human being, especcialy in the occidental civilization, has some sickness, he has to GENERATE THE ENERGY from whithin him-her to can have enough to heal the pepole. if is not the case, the healer can get sick. Secound (about healing) In the Theosophy, we know that we have a diffrent quantity of bodies, the know that. but the point is that, to have real progress, the healing, it has to be, not first the spiritual and later the phisic, astral one, but ALL OF them at the same time, i know it is difficult, but with a lot of practice and will we all can achieve this. other: it is true, is very slow and it carries the risk of losing the control, but i think if it is all correlated, then, why we are making things by separate?? ALL IT IS, with and whithin, everything is part of the circle, inside and around,i really have some difficulty to explain this well, but i think is like this. for some pepole is more easy doing the healing of a body first then the other ones at a time, is valid also i\ Athink. Third: I'm not shure if The Golden Dawn order was ruled-founder of Diane Moon, i think was the name? Don Fortune, but that woman i think was part one time of the society of a magic order that was part of that the terrible Aleister Crowley, then, a dark magic order (I prefer the name "dark" or "obscure" for the black type of magic, in english, to evade racial subjects that only get us to a bad joke an a lost of time.) If the name is not that, or if i'm confusing the order, please tell me. in Mexico we don't get so much information of that kind. AFourth: About kabalah, i read in a book long time ago, that this person of the book divided the world-year (zodiac type division) that we all are ruled by 72 genies or angels that all their names are obtained from the sacred name of God (Jewish-Kabalah version) and that, like we have a certain personality depending the time hour and place of our birth,and the zodiac assign us a certain zodiac sign/ascendant, we have a certain genie/angel that rules/ protect us since our birth. Fifth: I was reading the other day the book of Edward Schure (the great initiates) is a very hard-to-digest book, very heavy stuff. in the Moses part, i read some explanations of the sacred name of God (Jewish version) and in that time, for me it seemed very clear. if you wish, you can read that part for getting a more clear point of view of that. Sixth: No point. (just a joke and a leap to the seventh) Seventh: I really enjoyed your discussions. if you have some material that can be intresting, i told you the themes of my interest in the later letter) be free to write. i'm at the haunt of knowledge and friends, especcialy. It is cool talking to pepole who have also the freedom to make themselves so much fun of itselves,and that makes you very important. remember that also Gandhi was well know for his jokes in time of distress. Very happy of considering your friend, Estrella P.S. Be free to write. no kidding., is from Texas!! ------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 7 Apr 1997 17:08:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Thoa Tran Subject: Re: Very attent on your saying Message-ID: <199704080008.RAA09354@proxy3.ba.best.com> Hi Estrella :o), It was very nice to read your friendly post. Okay, no more mystery. Here are my stats.: I was born on 8/17/64 at 1:45 a.m. GMT in Saigon, Vietnam out of wedlock. My only knowledge of my biological father is through a couple of pictures. My mom remarried an American when I was 4. I later had two half-sisters, and we all moved to the U.S. when I was 7 or 8. Then my half-brother was born. Since my stepfather was in the Air Force, we moved around from Louisiana, to Hawaii, and finally settled in Florida. I attended school in Florida, moved up to Boston for graduate school, moved to CT, then moved to Half Moon Bay, California, where I am. My education has been engineering, but ended up with a Masters of Fine Arts. I am 5'5" and 120 lbs., have black hair, dk brown eyes. As occupation, I juggle computer arts, silk painting, etc. I volunteer to teach art. My hobbies are running (5-10 miles 4 days/week), martial arts (T'ai-Chi, Kuk Sool Won, Wing Chun), cooking, sewing, reading on just about anything, and making fun of people. I, too, would hope that I am preparing myself to make a difference one day, however small, starting with just being a good person (trying to get better) and doing little things. I will type more on what you wrote. Right now, I have to go off to my class. Thoa :o))) At 07:05 PM 4/7/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hello to all the ones who write here. ... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 07 Apr 1997 20:04:54 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Very attent on your saying Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970408010454.006a9808@mail.eden.com> At 07:05 PM 4/7/97 -0400, you wrote: >I don't know even from what country you are!! i did told u....at least i >know that some human being called (itselve,because i don't know if is a she-he) >M.K.Ramadoss (very funny and intelligent, that's what i like of some pepole here, the sense of humor) >Estrella > >P.S. Be free to write. no kidding., Hi, Estrella: I am a man, living in Texas, USA and am a novice theosophist. Glad to know that at least some one is perceiving me as funny and intelligent!!! If I help to add a sense of humor, I am very glad to hear about it. Looking forward to you posts. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 00:50:19 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Krishnaji Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970408055019.0068d9c8@mail.eden.com> Here is some interesting reading. MKR Krishnamurti as I Knew Him Reproduced from "The Theosophist" December 1996 issue. (Talk at Adyar Convention 1995. Krishnamurti Birth Centenary Year) It was a very, very great privilege to have been associated with so great a personage as J. Krishnamurti. If you asked me, what has happened after thirty years or more in contact with him, I can only relate a little story in Paul Carus's The Gospel of Buddha. A rich brahmin, unaware of life's impermanence, had built himself a large house. The Buddha sent Ananda to this old man to find out why he has done this and teach him the four noble truths. Instead of listening to Buddha's teachings the brahmin just went on about the purpose of each of the many rooms in his house. As soon as Ananda left, the old man fell ill and died. And Buddha said that the brahmin was like a spoon that tastes not the flavor of the soup. Neither I nor any of my relatives were Theosophists. But my late wife Vina Visalakshi used to live in Madras and had many friends in the TS. She knew Krishnaji, so I also came to know him. Though the title of the talk is 'Krishnamurti as I knew him', how can I say I knew him? One does not know even one's friend or wife. However, I will share with you some reminiscences of that great man. I was a research scholar in the Indian Institute of Science and by nature a sceptic. I never sought out or met anyone. But somehow I met Krishnaji in 1947 with my wife. From the first day onwards he said to me a number of times, 'Balasundaram, I am your firend.' In work, in all kinds of situations, he was a friend, which came through in his presence and tremendous affection. When he came to India after the war, he was very affectionate and wanted to meet young people and get to know them. There used to be a pandal (awning) outside the house in Stirling Road, Madras, where he stayed and he used to sit there most of the time. One day I saw a gentleman in dhoti and kurta, with a purple cap and a bundle of detective stories under his arm, walking into his room. I looked and thought. 'This cannot be a holy man.' After some time this man came out and went away. As my curiosity got the better of me. I went quickly inside and saw the bundle next to Krishnaji. I asked: 'Sir, do you read these things?' He said: 'Yes, I do. But I am a slow reader.' Then I asked: 'Who was it who brought these books to you?' He said: 'Don't you know him? That was Jinarajadasa, the President of the Theosophical Society.' This was in 1947. In 1948, I was in Bangalore at the Institute of Science. Krishnaji did not go back that summer to Europe or America, but stayed in Ooty and came from there to Bangalore. We were looking after him, being with him most of the time. Then we asked Mr Maurice Frydman, who had known Krishnaji from his Ommen days, to stay with him in Vikram Sarabhai's house. I used to see Krishnaji every day. After the second or third day he said to me, 'Mr Balasundaram, I cannot walk with these chappals (sandals). Can you get me some Pathan chappals (the strapped ones like Roman sandals)?' So I got a Chinese cobbler to make them. The next morning, I walked to his place before breakfast and found him sitting in a corner, polishing the new sandals. I stood behind him in awe and said, 'Sir, I can do this for you, please.' He turned around, still polishing the sandals and said: 'You know who taught me to polish shoes? The shoeblack of King Edward the Seventh.' It was actually so; he was not telling me a story. This indicates the care and the regal way the TS had looked after him and brought him up. He never talked about the past, but suddenly something would flash up from the past in his consciousness. One day, Maurice Frydman and his friend Wanda Dynowska, who used to call herself Uma Devi and stayed here in the TS at Sevashrama, came to see him. She translated many theosophical works and also Krishnamurti's books and sent them through underground channels to Poland in the days when Communism was supreme. It was a tremendous work. Uma Devi's brother was killed during the War and in 1948 news was still trickling in and she had just heard that somebody else had died, which made her very unhappy. So Frydman, who always used to make things a little philosophical, said: 'What should one's attitude be to the dead?' Krishnaji answered: 'The Bible has it, Sir: Let the dead bury the dead.' That was all; nothing else. Some days before Krishnamurti left after a stay of six weeks, Frydman said: 'This chap Balasundaram should be put to work. He is very capable, but I cannot get him to work. Krishnaji, you are the only person who can persuade him. So, you should tell him to work with me, and we will start.' I knew Frydman had his own way of doing things. In 1950, for one year he was the Secretary of the Krishnamurti Foundation and also of its Rajghat Center. He turned it upside down. So, when Frydman said that I should work with him, I replied: 'I will never work with Maurice Frydman. He says one thing and does another. He is most unreliable.' Krishnaji just looked at me and responded: 'How can you say such a thing? He may have changed even at the last minute. What you say may be true, but he may have changed.' You see, this was so obvious. The teacher was thus teaching. His teaching flashed through even small things. In this case the lesson was that I should live without an image. It was a shocking lesson. Krishnaji remarked: 'I am just poking you to live, to become alive.' My wife was a musician and, as many people knew, she was going deaf in one ear. Towards the end of his stay, Krishnaji said: 'I am going away in a week. If you want me to help your wife I will see what I can do for her.' I did not know what he meant. Then he added: 'Amma (he always called Annie Besant amma or mother) always got up at four o'clock in the morning, made herself a strong brew of coffee, and then started her work. Often she had a nagging headache. So one day she said: 'Son, put your hand on my head; that might help.' I just put my hand on her head like this and her headache subsided. Then I realized that there was something in my hands. It sometimes works and sometimes does not. If you wish I will try it on Visalakshi.' He did, and it did not work. Suddenly I decided to retire from the Indian Institute of Science and go to America to make some money and then completely retire. But one day I received a telegram from Rishi Valley, 'Krishnaji wants to see you urgently.' I drove down in my old car thinking I would be back for work the next morning or evening, but I stayed for three days. Krishnamurti said: 'Are you going to America for research?' When I told him I would return in about three years, he said: 'Why don't you retire now and help these people?' That is how I went to Rishi Valley, and without having taught in any school or college became the principal of the School. Things always happened around him and there were always changes. The three-day session I had with Krishnaji jolted me completely out of the image I had of a religious man. Krishnaji lived in the world and took part in its life as you would have read in his Commentaries, but he was not of the world. He was totally out of it. Krishnaji could not bear the sun, for he had had sunstroke. He never went out for a walk before almost sundown. So I used to do a lot of driving with him during which we had a great many conversations. Sometimes they were trivial. At other times he was tremendously interested, for instance, in ancient history, in the sky, in astronomy, in the stars, and all kinds of things, and he would talk and say, 'Look at the Southern Cross'. Sometimes there would be more people in the car, sometimes only the two of us. Dick Balfour Clarke would sometimes come cycling down from the TS to see him off. Krishnaji was very well-informed, but he read very little and also slowly. I have never seen him read any religious books. Becoming very serious once when Life magazine produced a statistical table after the 1968 Olympics showing India at the bottom of the scale, he said: 'Has it occurred to you why this country has not produced one outstandingly creative individual in so many years in science, art, music, and so forth, and this for a country which has all these beautiful sculptures and temples? Why did it not produce a single truly creative individual lately who is internationally known?' He went on badgering me. He used to address me as 'Old boy', or 'Balasundaram', or 'Sir', it meant you were in for the cudgel. He continued 'Have you not thought about it? How can you educate people if you are not aware of this?' Then I threw the question back: 'What would you say?' He replied that it was an old trick to throw the question back, but added: 'I'll tell you, watch. Whenever there has been a great efflorescence of art, music, poetry, and so forth, it appears after a great religious period. What do we see after the Buddha appeared? The Ajanta and Ellora caves! If anyone creates nowadays something like that he would be acclaimed worldwide. Anonymous people did that!' He went on viewing the whole world and then said: 'True religious feeling is the mother of all creativity. This country has let it go.' He was very serious about it. He was affectionate, but could also be explosive at times. It was so when he said: 'You have to do something.' I replied: 'What can one man do?' Then he turned round and said: 'Do not ever say that again: What can one man do? Napoleon was one man. Hitler was one man, the Buddha was one man. So for good or evil things have been changed by one person. You have to go to the root. If you do not discover the root, you can do only something on the periphery. This goes for education and for everything.' Krishnaji had a great presence. I do not remember ever sitting with legs crossed in his presence. It is not that one was not consciously respectful; I just could not do it. It is like Rom Landau says in his book God is My Adventure, when he went to see Krishnaji in 1934. At that time he used to smoke regularly, but he wrote: 'I forgot to pick up a cigarette in those fifteen days, because I forgot that I was a smoker.' Krishnaji had a tremendous presence that affected some people that way. Other people were not affected in the same way, one cannot say why. Often I have seen villagers and people who did not know him at all stand back and bow to greet him when he walked by. Scriptures say that one of the major causes of man's illusion is dehãtma-bhãva, believing that you are the body. But in Krishnamurti this was never there. He used to treat his body as a separate entity which he had to look after, clothe, bathe, feed with the right kind of food and so forth. Krishnaji used to treat it as though it was a precious instrument to look after. There is much talk about what Krishnaji meant by freedom. He meant not doing whatever one likes to do or indulging oneself: but freedom from likes and dislikes. Once he told his nephew Narayan, 'If I had not subjected this body to such an amount of travel, it would have lasted four hundred years.' I asked: 'Did he say four hundred or a hundred?' Narayan repeated, 'four hundred'. Dr Parchure said to Krishnaji one day, 'Your liver is not at all right. Take bitter gourd juice every morning at breakfast.' And he did it without wincing -- no likes or dislikes. He lived only for delivering his message. When he was over eighty a friend of mine in Orissa said: 'There are so many places in India where he has not been, can you not persuade him to come here?' Krishnaji said: 'How can I travel for two days to go to some place? And after that travel, what am I supposed to do?' As I could be a little free with him, having known him long. I said: 'You could give darsan there.' He rejoined: 'Talking is my métier, and I will talk and talk until I drop down dead. Full stop!' And he did just that. He went through with his mission until physically he could not do it any more. That was the extraordinary zeal with which he lived. When he came to Rishi Valley, or elsewhere, he would say, 'I want to put hot coals underneath those people.' Although he had tremendous love, he would badger people in order to awaken them. Robert Linsson, in his book Living Zen, compares some of Krishnaji's teachings with those of Zen; he did not always treat people with kid gloves. I said to him once, 'Sir, you want constant revolution, like Mao in China. You are all the time changing things.' He answered: 'I want to create a crisis for you and for people. It is all in the program, but you will not have it, neither will they.' So his 'program' was not only his teaching, but his approach which could be like a tornado at times. 'I come like a storm,' he said, 'and when I go people are relieved.' When I was still young as a Principal of Rishi Valley School, one day Krishnaji arrived. After about two days he started to question me: 'Balasundaram, have you produced one boy who is different, who is in an other-worldly direction? And is there one teacher who is?' He was very insistent. At first I ofered some explanation that things were better, but nothing like that would do for him. He was at me during breakfast, lunch and dinner. On the evening of the third day we went for a walk. After about one kilometer he asked. 'Where is the new moon?' He seldom talked much or discussed serious matters during walks. We looked around, then suddenly he laughed and said, 'Balasundaram, this is like my walk with George Arundale. He was my teacher, and at one time in Wimbledon we were not on speaking terms. This was around the years 1919 or 1918. We used to walk four miles a day without a word being spoken. It was just like this walk, because we have not spoken a word either.' I did not think it was very funny and remained a little glum. Then he took both my hands and shook them while he questioned: 'Old boy, are you hurt by what I have been saying these three days?' I said: 'Maybe a little, Sir.' He dug his hand into my chest and said: 'Old boy, remember, if you are hurt, something is wrong with you!' He repeated that sentence three times. Krishnaji was such a great teacher, he taught not only through his talks, but through his discussions, and various other means. It was not only his words that affected people, but that something else which came through which entered one's blood like a vaccine. He had this extraordinary something which is not so apparent when studying his books. Why I did not change while I kept on listening to him, I cannot say. It is a mystery. He himself said towards the end of his life: 'I have spoken for so many years and people are not transformed. There are only a couple of people who are a little different.' His only concern over the last forty years of his life was that people should change fundamentally. We used to have performances, ballets and all that kind of thing in Rishi Valley, and many villagers would come. Every evening I used to take him out to the huge banyan tree in the campus. One evening, just after the meal he stood up and holding on to the table said: 'Balasundaram, they have started making tapes. Is it all going to stay in books and on tapes? Only that?' What could I answer? I was stunned. Then Krishnaji went to wash, and when he came back I took him in total silence to the banyan tree. After he passed away in 1990 they sent me to the International Trustees Conference in Brockwood which he had initiated in 1973. They put into our hands eleven series of 'Discussions' held in 1977, and we were told that these were given to us to read and meditate on. Their gist was: 'This man will be gone in ten years' time. What will you offer somebody who comes and asks about these teachings and about the man? Will you show him a videotape, or hand him a book? What will you Trustees show? Unless you yourself change, your witness unto truth is all in vain, as the Bible has it.' In 1995 I went to America for the birth centenary, and met many people, among them Professor Anderson. He was Professor Emeritus of Religion. Santiago University. He said he saw Krishnamurti only once during his dialogues in 1974. Then he remarked: 'The person is no more, but his spirit abides.' Many had been really touched in some way by his message, including a man who had been a prisoner in jail. Maybe people were not transformed as Krishnaji expected, but a great many were touched and affected by his teachings, which was noticeable in the conduct of their personal affairs and professional dealings. S. Balasundaram Dr. Balasundaram is a former Secretary of the Krishnamurti Foundation India From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 08 Apr 1997 03:21:24 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: to Estrella Message-ID: <199704080837.EAA01015@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Hi, Estrella, Welcome aboard. I hope you can really learn something from us. Sometimes we talk around in circles, but right now the conversations are interesting. There are always things to learn. I could only read the beginning of your messgage. At the end of it a lot of it didn't transcribe right, and so I couldn't understand it. You wanted to know who we are, and particularly you were interested in Thoa, Doss, and myself. We all live in the United States. I don't know where Thoa lives, but she's a college student, a very keen one, and I think her heritage is Vietnamese. She began her studies in engineering, but decided that art was more to her liking. so that's what she's doing now. Doss lives closer to you, in Texas. He's an accountant who came here a long time ago from India. I live in upstate New York, about 5 hours North West by car from New York City. I'm of German Jewish ancestry. I came to the US as a small child. I'm a retired government worker. I found jobs for people. We're all Theosophists, and love to talk about it. Doss is especially interested in Krishnamurti. I'm an Adyar Theosophist. Dunno what branch Thoa belongs to. There are Theosophists of all factions on this mailing list, so you can get all sorts of points of view. I would like to tell you an alternate solution to your statement that the healer has to be well. I've heard of that too, and I think healing works better, if the healer is well. I also think that not many people are absolutely well, and we need many of us to heal... the more the better. Serge King taught us not to send our healing messages directly to the healee, but to give them to a deva, or other symbol of your choice, and allow the deva to transport the healing energy. I decided to use Tinkerbell. The theory is that a spiritual being like that won't transport the negatives. I believe that this works, because Spirit only picks up the positives. I can't read the rest of what you wrote, so can't answer it. Write again. I think you do very well with English. Best wishes Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 97 08:32:05 -0700 From: Tim Maroney Subject: Re: Krishnamurti and higher powers Message-ID: <199704081533.IAA14076@scv1.apple.com> >'...was asked what would happen if his audiences disappeared to which he >apparently answered, "I speak to live, if there were no more talks I would >die".. He often mentioned this, meaning that it was his job to speak and >that unless he could carryout his job those higher powers, in which he >believed and which directed his life, would have no more use for him.' > >When I read the above reference to 'those higher powers', it did not >surprise me at all. This is one of the things that K had mentioned to those >close to him and I had heard of it being mentioned by a very very reliable >source several years ago. Please note that what you are responding to is interpretation by Mary Lutyens, and not a statement by Krishnamurti himself. She does not quote him as saying anything at all about higher powers. In fact, her interpretation seems to be an etherialization of a very earthly comment. Tim Maroney From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 11:54:32 -0400 (EDT) From: DSArthur@aol.com Subject: "The More Efficient Alternative" Message-ID: <970408115431_-1703781798@emout09.mail.aol.com> I grasp Liesel's comment ... but I'm not sure I understand her point. Is she suggesting that, somehow, it would be preferable for budding surgeons to prefect their skills first on cadavers (electronic or otherwise) or animals before attempting to perform them on humans? As for Karmic consequences, lower species of all kinds have been suffering at the hands of humans since the very dawn of humanity. I am not an advocate of suffering per se but I can't help but wonder what someone like Liesel does about, say, an infestation of mice in her kitchen. Does she put out "Mousepruff" (a very efficient rodent poison) or spring- loaded traps (either lethal or benign)? Or, instead, out of concern for Karmic consequence- quences, does she simply endure the infestation because "they have as much of a need to be there as we do." I am not trying to put Liesel (and others who may agree with her) on the spot but this is an issue that has perplexed philosophers for ages. I understand, for example, that even that towering theosophical personage, William Q. Judge, "had to have meat" in order to survive physically for as long as he did. So how many animals suffered and died for the express benefit of Judge? My point is that Theosophists need to look at "the big picture" before rushing to judgment about small segments of it. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 11:04:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Krishnamurti and higher powers Message-ID: On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Tim Maroney wrote: > >'...was asked what would happen if his audiences disappeared to which he > >apparently answered, "I speak to live, if there were no more talks I would > >die".. He often mentioned this, meaning that it was his job to speak and > >that unless he could carryout his job those higher powers, in which he > >believed and which directed his life, would have no more use for him.' > > > >When I read the above reference to 'those higher powers', it did not > >surprise me at all. This is one of the things that K had mentioned to those > >close to him and I had heard of it being mentioned by a very very reliable > >source several years ago. > > Please note that what you are responding to is interpretation by Mary > Lutyens, and not a statement by Krishnamurti himself. She does not quote > him as saying anything at all about higher powers. In fact, her > interpretation seems to be an etherialization of a very earthly comment. > > Tim Maroney It may be noted that the reason that I posted Mary's statement is because of I myself was told by a very very reliable source several years ago about a comment K made to this individual about his work and higher powers. While he has not made any comment in public, he did mention it in private and we may want to just make a note of it. Finally, the bottom line is, as far as myself is concerned, it is more important how his lectures and books have affected and helped me and many others. After all in the final analysis, we have to deal with our own problems and all of us have our share every day. Thanks for sharing you comment. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 16:30:16 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: karma or what Message-ID: Liesel: >Further discussion with Thoa > >For sure, Plato's cave is like Serge's first principle. But when you talk to >Serge, he also implies that you can most often think up your own world as it >suits you, and change it around to suit yourself. Somehow, this isn't 100% >possible, because he also talks about a hurricane and a volcano having a >mind of its own. It will sometimes do what you ask of it, if you know how to >ask it, but sometimes it just has to do what it has to do. That is why it is important to think in terms of mind/body/spirit working together. To deny any one would be to deny a factor that might help in the healing and health process. The linear principle is important in order to define the cause and effect of something. If you have a cut, then you need a bandage and topical solution to heal it. However, the mind and spirit is also important. For the mind, this includes the example of the imaging used by the boy pretending that his cancer was the opposing baseball team. Dr. O. Carl Simonton did experiments on using imagery to help cure illness. However, the technique is not as effective as conventional therapy, but it indicated that the mind does have influence over the healing process. Another mental process is just plain ole determination to not be defeated by sickness, the determination to get well and get on with life, a reason and passion for living. Also, the placebo effect is important. Believing that something will happen will most likely help more than believing that something will not happen. The mind connection also works on a subconscious level. I vaguely remember reading on an experiment done on mice in which mice were fed chemicals that lower their immune level at the same time that a certain scent was emitted. When they stopped feeding the mice the chemicals, but still emit the scent, the mice's bodies still reacted as if they had ate the chemicals. It worked in vice versa when they fed the mice things that made them feel stronger. Lastly, the spirit contributes to the healing process. It was shown that people who practice meditation have a lower stress level and a happier outlook on life. Meditation allows one to be in the present state, not thinking of distracting or stressful thoughts. Giving oneself a time to meditate is like giving your body/mind/spirit a time to rest and reflect. Another way of pausing is to just drop everything, such as when you did nothing but eat and sleep for months. I find that when I am stressed about something or wish something could be done about it, sometimes it is best to just not care. This does not mean that I let go of my responsibilities. It just means that I give myself time to not worry about it, to just sit down, have a cup of tea and read the National Enquirer for a good chuckle. Some people find that involving the spirit in healing includes going on a spiritual quest, doing things that connect oneself with God. Other spiritual healings include involving more love in one's life, loving one's family and friends, loving others through compassionate work, staying away from anything that is spiritually degrading, or just loving wonderful aesthetics, such as music and art. >I suppose from the point of view of physics and chemistry a shamanic system >is irrational. It's based on sometimes invisible factors, but I find that >Serge's reasoning makes a lot of sense to me. There isn't much he asked us >to accept on faith. He always had us trying out what he told us about, and >it worked, sometimes for all of us, sometimes only for some of us. What does he ask people to try? >"The root of illness is in the soul". Harry Van Gelder, who healed people >partly with homeopathic remedies, would always prescribe some remedies which >worked on the spirit and some which worked on the body. One of the >biofeedback researchers I read said that it doesn't matter where you tap >into a system, you can start a healing. That made a lot of sense to me, >because when you heal spirit it also helps heal the body, and when you heal >the body, it also helps heal the spirit. Maybe starting with spirit is more >effective, but there are those who can't heal that way, and I think rather >than give up, they should start healing the way they know how. I think it >helps heal. Maybe the trick is not to stop at one but to keep going till >you've healed the whole human being as much as possible. I can tell the >truth of that simply by my present experience. Since Harry has passed over, >I've had to rely on what's at hand, which is often allopathic medicine. >Right now I need dialysis. That's an absolutely physical thing. The machine >cleanses my blood. But the thing is, for the past 6 months, I did nothing >but eat and sleep, and nothing intellectual went in and out of my mind. The >dialysis is working, and I can tell you, my soul too has perked up. But I'm >working on that too. Yes, it is good that you are aware that the healing process is multi-dimensional, and that you are giving yourself time to rest and care for yourself. >You talk about a shaman traveling to the land of the dead. One thing Serge >touched on but I wish had taught us more about is traveling in Milu. You >enter through a hole in the ground, and you go on a journey underground to >help somebody. You meet and fight monsters, and think your way past all >kinds of obstacles, and come back with an object or an idea retrieved to >restore the person you're helping. Perhaps, in a way, this shamanic travel is symbolic of the shaman's contact with the cosmos. The shaman can do this as nobody else can because he/she has learned to connect. Being in contact with the cosmos, a person can come back with answers that were once obscure. This is like meditation, in which one meditates on something, mentally travels out of the physical realm, and then come back with an answer. The answer from the collective is greater than an answer from limited thinking. >I've learned too that shamans assist the dying, and newly dead. It's about time that the dying aspect is highly respected. Instead of full of anxiety and denial, the dying process should be celebrated as a ritual of graduation toward another realm (of course, this doesn't mean I agree with the Heaven's Gate philosophy. Killing oneself, IMO, is a cowardly way of escaping the lessons life has for us). Thus, I like the Tibetan and shamanic way of dealing with dying. Not only is this good for the living, but good for the dying. Although the body appears to be unconscious, I'm sure that the mind and spirit is still active for some time, even talking strictly at the linear level. >The technique of the little boy fighting cancer with a baseball team is >considered third level, I think. He's changing what is in our world by >changing symbols. When you change the symbols, you also change what they >stand for. 4th level is more when you feel as one with something. For >instance I've learned more about what makes my little cat tick by trying to >walk in her shoes. I agree, being in empathy with something, you can more correctly diagnose the ailment. Looking at the person's ailment, you can imagine the pain that the other person is going through, especially if you have had something similar. I'm sure that this is a critical part of a healer's skill. Instead of just saying, "You have a headache, take two aspirin and call me in the morning." The healer can individualize each illness by asking thorough questions of personal life style, stresses, etc. The more information the healer knows, the more the healer can empathize with the person's illness, and therefore devise a more original healing method. As far as miraculous healing where the healer can travel in the body, I don't know much about that. >I'm glad, since you're in college, that you find time to pray & etc. When I >was that age, I was seeking but I didn't find anything to believe in. Also, >I was too busy with secular matters to pray. Also, I didn't believe in it. >Same in the first 15-20 years after I graduated, got a job, got married & >had kids. I was too tied up with secular things. I'm glad you're getting to >it early in life. It'll help you get further in the long run. You can deduce by my last post that I'm out of college. Thank Goddess! I believe that people with experience in secular matters are more critical in positive contribution because they have more contact with the average Joe or Joanne, instead of holing up in a religious institution. >Glad also that you found "learning to be". I know what it is, from watching >my kitty, but haven't achieved it yet. I find that learning to be is just taking a moment to say that everything will be fine if I don't think about it for a while, if I just either sit there and do nothing, or sit there and do something just to enjoy without worrying about accomplishing anything. >Looks like you're out to become an artist. It's a wonderful profession, if >you can find a way to make a livelihood. I came to it much later in life, >through handicrafts. I was making puppets and wall hangings. In the last few >years I've done acrylics. People say I'm good, but I dont' consider myself >that swift. There are people in my art class who do lots better. But it's fun. It ain't an easy profession. You just have to agree that you can't count on anything and just go! >Everything is a dance - agreed. Okay, give me Strauss!!! >Take care > >Liesel You, too. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 16:38:00 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: The 32 Paths of Wisdom Message-ID: Alan: >In *Sepher Yetzirah* by W. Wynn Westcott, pub. Weiser, NY, 1980 (and >maybe later. Errors in 1887 edition corrected. > >In *The Holy Kabbalah* by A.E.Waite, various editions. > >In *The Book of Formation* by Knut Stenring, Rider,London, 1923. > >The last one is very scarce, and is my source for the names of the Paths >in Hebrew. All are translations from the Hebrew. Thank you. >> However, I did find a couple of books by >>Halevi. I bought the one with more information. I enjoyed his book >>enormously. It's beautifully illustrated and clearly written. However, it >>contained no information on the 32 paths. > >Which ones? His initial instruction came via a colleague of mine. Kabbalah: Tradition of hidden knowledge. Probably not one of his extensive one, but the other book was just hand book size. Not too much selection. >> My favorite metaphysical >>bookstore has one whole shelf dedicated to Magick, and one measly row to >>the Kabbalah. I did notice that the Hermetic Temple and Order of the >>Golden Dawn are making their books and tapes easily accessible by giving >>discounts, etc., in preparation for the millenium. Perhaps I should check >>with the bookstore to see whether they can order any books on the 32 paths >>for me. > >I would imagine they can, most likely the Westcott will be easiest to >get, as he was Golden Dawn. Mind you, so was Waite, but his is a very >large book, and only a small part of it contains the 32 Paths. His >writing style is like reading through treacle. Thanks, again. >>It's funny where our discoveries take us. I always thought I would just >>stick with eastern and tribal topics, particularly since I have an aversion >>for western religion due to having to sing "Jesus...Jesus...Jesus in the >>morning, Jesus in the night time..." in Sunday school that my mother >>foisted on me because she wanted me out of the house. However, exploring >>the fascinating Kabbalah is leading me to read *gasp* the Holy Bible! >>Nowhere in the Holy Bible did I see Tammy Faye Baker and the Evangelists! > >Ther's probably a supplement in preparation ... sponsored by Coca Cola? ..with plenty of Diet Coke containing LOTS of aspartame! >>I'm convinced even more that all the western religions are siblings, all >>the eastern religions are siblings, all the tribal religions are siblings, >>and that they are all cousins. All are part of a circle. > >This seems increasingly probable as one gets older, IMO. However, the >perverted twists that some of them take are horrendous. >> >Alan Yep! I read everything with the knowledge that a person wrote it. Even if the person did get divine inspiration, I would think that it has to go through the person's ego. Oh, and that Bible! So sexist! Luckily I didn't know that us women were condemned for starting that apple fiasco by having to go through that painful birth process and having to serve men for the rest of our lives. Talking about negativity of the birth process, and negativity of women in general. Thoa :o( From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 00:14:21 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Healing Message-ID: <8tiJYFANFtSzEwQB@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <199704080837.EAA01015@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f. deutsch" writes >Serge King taught us not to send our healing messages directly to the >healee, but to give them to a deva, or other symbol of your choice, and >allow the deva to transport the healing energy. I decided to use Tinkerbell. >The theory is that a spiritual being like that won't transport the >negatives. I believe that this works, because Spirit only picks up the >positives. What a good suggestion this is, and so very right! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 03:49:51 GMT From: ejlight@earthlink.net (E. J.) Subject: Ready Thyself (a tid-bit of interest?) Message-ID: <334e6343.8847885@mail.earthlink.net> Have you ever wondered what would happen if Noah was building the Ark for the Flood in today's times? What kind of problems might surface? Remember Bill Cosby's spoof(3 parts) on Noah. This is in the same Spirit. Enjoy: --------------- "Ready Thyself" And the Lord said unto Noah: "Where is the Ark which I have commanded thee to build?" And Noah said unto the Lord: "Verily, I have three carpenters off ill. The gopher wood supplier hath let me down - yea, even though gopher wood hath been on order for nigh unto 12 months." "What can I do, Oh Lord?" And God said unto Noah: "I want that Ark finished even after seven days and seven nights." And Noah said: "It will be so." And it was not so. And the Lord said unto Noah: "What seemeth to be the trouble this time?" And Noah said unto the Lord: "Mine subcontractor hath gone bankrupt. The pitch which Thou commandest me to put on the outside and on the inside of the Ark hath not arrived. The plumber hath gone on strike. Shem, my son who helpeth me on the Ark side of the business, hath formed a pop group with his brothers, Ham and Japheth." "Lord, I am undone." And the Lord grew angry and said: "And what about the animals, male and female of every sort, that I ordered to come unto thee to keep their seed alive on the face of the Earth?" And Noah said: "They have been delivered to the wrong address but should arriveth on Friday." And the Lord said: "How about the unicorns, and the fowls of the air by sevens?" And Noah wrung his hands and wept, saying: "Lord, unicorns are a discontinued line; thou cans't not get them for love nor money. And fowls of the air are sold only in half dozens. Lord, Lord, Thou knowest how it is." And the Lord in His Wisdom said: "Noah, my son, I knowest. Why else dost thou think I will cause a food to descend upon the Earth?" The above is from the ERA Journal of Eastern Region, Royal Institute of British Architects. (it is undated) ___ {o o} ~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~(_)~0oo~~~~~~~~~ Just for today, I will let go of anger, Just for today, I will let go of worry, Today, I will count my many blessings, Today, I will do my work honestly, Today, I will be kind to every living thing. Let There Be Light -- Always In All Ways, e.j. }`-`{ http://home.earthlink.net/~ejlight/index1.html "Temper is what gets most of us in trouble, pride is what keeps us there" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 01:30:03 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Titus wrote: >The conventions of acceptable behavior are not a reliable gauge of right or >wrong. After our twentieth century experiment and consequences I think they'll >change again. Alice Bailey had some interesting comments about the laxity of >sexual morals. She said that sex *solely* for the sake of personal >gratification attracts less evolved souls to be born. In many cases the timing >for their reincarnation was upset giving the danger of an over-concentration >of such souls. Looking at the karma in today's parenting and the morals of >children today, I would say we have such an over-concentration now. Oh, slapyournoodle...er...flapperdoodle...and some take on Blavatsky is that clones will be soulless and that the aborigines could possibly be a less evolved race. Also, what is moral and immoral? My gosh, I sure hope I was the product of great and lusty sex! It would be disappointing otherwise. I would harass you some more, Titus, but it's getting very, very late. Good night and sweet wet dreams. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 08:40:06 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Aborigines Message-ID: <335225A6.3D46@sprynet.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > Oh, slapyournoodle...er...flapperdoodle...and some take on Blavatsky is > that clones will be soulless and that the aborigines could possibly be a > less evolved race. Also, what is moral and immoral? My gosh, I sure hope > I was the product of great and lusty sex! It would be disappointing > otherwise. When discussing my belief that the shells of the 4th root race were not humanoid, Michael Gomes informed me that the Mahatams said that the Australian aborigines were remnants of the 4th root race. I double checked. Once again, some things in the letters cannot be interpreted because the Mahatmas didn't believe in quoting. However, the only clear thing that they said is that the remnants of the CIVILIZATION of the 4th root race exist in the Australian aborigines. That I find far more palatable. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 10:43:38 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Perhaps all the *rejects* of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest victims, the homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the clones, etc., are the unconscious or the anti-Christ. With the definition of Christ and anti-Christ being one and the unconscious a necessary part of the conscious, perhaps this coming out of the unconscious IS THE ONLY WAY that society can heal itself, move toward the *revelation*, and go to the Golden Age. And perhaps the development of the internet is a way that this *coming out* will be effective. Perhaps that is what actually is said in the Bible, other sacred texts and prophecies. Perhaps all the moralizing result of the Bible, etc., was because the Divine inspiration had to go through the receiver's conscious, which is the moralizer and suppressor of the unconscious. Perhaps the way to deal with this coming out of the unconscious, this anti-Christ, is to HEAL, and NOT to do more of the moralizing. Healing requires acceptance and understanding. I wonder whether the Bible, other sacred texts, and Blavatsky's writings need to be relooked at for clues. These texts need to be combined with today's knowledge of science, technology and sociology in order to get at the obscure meanings. Perhaps the jigsaw puzzle need to be taken apart and put back together with the knowledge that the original fit may not be right. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 11:35:06 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Please notice this detail Message-ID: <199704141837.OAA07139@jimi.vnet.net> Hello again I really enjoy writing/reading at this mail list, but for making it easy, for me, i will gladly ask you not to use to frequent initials in the letters (beside the initials of the names) because it is too difficult for me to understand what it meanns initials like BRB annd initials like that. still i have some difficults in spanish, ii could write also in the theosophic digeest in spanish, but it seems no one besides me writees there. thanking you for your gentleness, Estrella From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 13:55:32 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970414185532.00c0dbd8@mail.eden.com> At 01:47 PM 4/14/97 -0400, you wrote: >Perhaps all the *rejects* of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest >victims, the homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the >clones, etc., are the unconscious or the anti-Christ. With the definition >Thoa A good point. For me, the moment I consider all of us - everyone - a human being and be looked on and treated as such - solves most of the practical issues. May be I may change my mind when I *know* for first hand all about the unseen side of things. I fully accept that there are many many things on the non physical side that I know nothing of. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 12:03:35 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Blavatsky on Satan, evil ... etc. Message-ID: <199704141903.MAA04452@palrel1.hp.com> Doss wrote: > I do not know for certain if Bailey or anyone else is right. But, > historically, some of the well known geniuses were born out of wedlock. May > be they are exceptions. Just a thought. I suppose they would have to be considered case by case. Some claim that highly evolved souls have the ability to overcome or mitigate their childhood and ancestral baggage. Certainly I have seen different outcomes between nearly identical cases of childhood traumas. In one case a person is able to cope with their trauma, in another the person is a basket case. I attribute the difference to different past-life strengths. Also, not all works of genius are spiritual creation. I have known many intellectually brilliant people whose creation was for egos sake and who were a**holes. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 12:05:54 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Blavatsky, Satan and evil. Message-ID: <199704141905.MAA04682@palrel1.hp.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > However, she [HPB] uses Satan in two ways. One is as a Promethean figure > (one who defies the powers that be to aid humanity at a high personal cost). > She also uses Satanism as meaning (probably deriving from Eliphas Levi, and > certainly the way modern occultists interpret it) the rejection of the > spiritual in favor of the material (note that this is the modern > interpretation of the Devil card in Tarot, as well). The latter makes sense. "The love of money is the root to all evil." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 15:18:08 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Blavatsky on Satan, evil ... etc. Message-ID: Titus: >I suppose they would have to be considered case by case. Why do you have to consider whether souls from lusty unions are highly evolved or not? What about considering souls from well-bred, Leave It To Beaver families? I know of many from such families that did not seem to be much evolved, if not downright cruel, insensitive, selfish, and narrow-minded. By your support of that soul theory, you have basically said that souls born of third-world nations, war torn nations, suppressed minorities, and the poor and the disadvantaged are not evolved. Take any one of those souls, give him/her food, shelter, education and advantages that the people in the U.S. take for granted, and watch that person excel probably beyond anyone else. Disadvantaged souls have had to endure much. There are children whose mother doused them with alcohol and drugs when they were fetuses, causing them to develop attention deficit disorders and tendencies toward addiction. There are children who are forced to focus more on being street wise and staying alive than on school lessons. There are children beaten, neglected and abused. There are children deprived of nourishment that would help their brain and body grow. Any souls, advanced or not, that have to face these earth problems, are not going to be wonderful, developed souls. >Some claim that highly evolved souls have the ability to overcome or mitigate >their childhood and ancestral baggage. And some souls with all the advantages in the world since birth seem soulless. Just look at some souls in Ivy League schools and souls running corporations. >Certainly I have seen different outcomes between nearly identical cases of >childhood traumas. In one case a person is able to cope with their trauma, >in another the person is a basket case. I attribute the difference to >different past-life strengths. Perhaps it is from different past-life strengths. That I could not dispute. However, I've been friends and acquaintances with people with the best that their parents can give them, who have never had to face adversity, and they're psychological basket cases. They blame their parents for all their problems. Things that I would consider only a spoil brat would notice. They look at the world in terms of what they can get from the world, what the world owes them. They are so self-absorbed that they could never sympathize with anyone else. >Also, not all works of genius are spiritual creation. I have known many >intellectually brilliant people whose creation was for egos sake and who >were a**holes. That includes just about everybody. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:35:18 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky on Satan, evil ... etc. Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970415013518.00bf385c@mail.eden.com> At 03:08 PM 4/14/97 -0400, Titus Roth wrote: >Doss wrote: > >> I do not know for certain if Bailey or anyone else is right. But, >> historically, some of the well known geniuses were born out of wedlock. May >> be they are exceptions. Just a thought. > >I suppose they would have to be considered case by case. > >Some claim that highly evolved souls have the ability to overcome or mitigate >their childhood and ancestral baggage. > >Certainly I have seen different outcomes between nearly identical cases of >childhood traumas. In one case a person is able to cope with their trauma, >in another the person is a basket case. I attribute the difference to >different past-life strengths. > >Also, not all works of genius are spiritual creation. I have known many >intellectually brilliant people whose creation was for egos sake and who >were a**holes. > When I wrote about the geniuses, I had in mind such giants as Sage Shankaracharya who reformed Hinduism and Francis Bacon. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:35:20 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky, Satan and evil. Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970415013520.00bf53e8@mail.eden.com> At 03:08 PM 4/14/97 -0400, Titus Roth wrote: >Bart Lidofsky wrote: > >> However, she [HPB] uses Satan in two ways. One is as a Promethean figure >> (one who defies the powers that be to aid humanity at a high personal cost). >> She also uses Satanism as meaning (probably deriving from Eliphas Levi, and >> certainly the way modern occultists interpret it) the rejection of the >> spiritual in favor of the material (note that this is the modern >> interpretation of the Devil card in Tarot, as well). > >The latter makes sense. "The love of money is the root to all evil." > One aspect of which I saw in the 18year litigation of Krishnamurti Trusts in which funds donated for spreading K's teachings ended up making several high priced attorneys rich. The root of the litigation was accounting for funds donated by individuals and lack of disclosure by the Trustees when K asked them to account for them. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 20:35:21 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky on Satan, evil ... etc. Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970415013521.00bf6cc0@mail.eden.com> At 06:23 PM 4/14/97 -0400, Thoa Tran wrote: >Titus: >>I suppose they would have to be considered case by case. > >Why do you have to consider whether souls from lusty unions are highly >evolved or not? What about considering souls from well-bred, Leave It To >Beaver families? I know of many from such families that did not seem to be >much evolved, if not downright cruel, insensitive, selfish, and >narrow-minded. > No one can say whether a lusty union will bring about a highly evolved souls or not. >By your support of that soul theory, you have basically said that souls >born of third-world nations, war torn nations, suppressed minorities, and >the poor and the disadvantaged are not evolved. Take any one of those >souls, give him/her food, shelter, education and advantages that the people >in the U.S. take for granted, and watch that person excel probably beyond >anyone else. Disadvantaged souls have had to endure much. There are >children whose mother doused them with alcohol and drugs when they were >fetuses, causing them to develop attention deficit disorders and tendencies >toward addiction. There are children who are forced to focus more on being >street wise and staying alive than on school lessons. There are children >beaten, neglected and abused. There are children deprived of nourishment >that would help their brain and body grow. Any souls, advanced or not, >that have to face these earth problems, are not going to be wonderful, >developed souls. > Wealth and affluent conditions can be more distructive to the person in the long run than adverse conditions. How can adversity have any correlation with the development of the soul. When you look a the affluent conditions of USA and the high crime rate and the prisons overflowing with violent criminals and comparing it with the peaceful life that is led by the so called aborignes, I wonder which souls are more developed. The violent and destructive ones? >>Some claim that highly evolved souls have the ability to overcome or mitigate >>their childhood and ancestral baggage. > Again this a only a possibility. >And some souls with all the advantages in the world since birth seem >soulless. Just look at some souls in Ivy League schools and souls running >corporations. > HPB in Key to Theosophy did mention how the rich send their mediocre children to these expensive name brand schools to make them look sharp and intelligent. I remember seeing a cartoon in which an executive is shown and behind his desk is a chart with a high incline up. He says, this is the chart of those people he stepped on (and even ruined) while he climbed up the corporate ladder. This is the true situation. I agree with your comment. >>Certainly I have seen different outcomes between nearly identical cases of >>childhood traumas. In one case a person is able to cope with their trauma, >>in another the person is a basket case. I attribute the difference to >>different past-life strengths. > >Perhaps it is from different past-life strengths. That I could not >dispute. However, I've been friends and acquaintances with people with the >best that their parents can give them, who have never had to face >adversity, and they're psychological basket cases. They blame their >parents for all their problems. Things that I would consider only a spoil >brat would notice. They look at the world in terms of what they can get >from the world, what the world owes them. They are so self-absorbed that >they could never sympathize with anyone else. The so called past life strengths is again a possibility and perhaps a speculation. Impossible to know the real truth. >>Also, not all works of genius are spiritual creation. I have known many >>intellectually brilliant people whose creation was for egos sake and who >>were a**holes. > >That includes just about everybody. > Good to keep this in mind; it will preserve our sanity in the long run. >Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 07:29:20 -0500 From: "Patrick Alessandra Jr." Subject: Goodwill meditation www page Message-ID: <3353749F.4C4C@earthlink.net> Hello, Goodwill meditation www page is http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/service.html Cheers, Patrick Alessandra, Psy.D. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 09:28:54 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <199704151628.JAA17390@palrel1.hp.com> Whoah Thoah! You wrote: > Oh, slapyournoodle...er...flapperdoodle...and some take on Blavatsky is > that clones will be soulless and that the aborigines could possibly be a > less evolved race. Also, what is moral and immoral? My gosh, I sure hope > I was the product of great and lusty sex! It would be disappointing > otherwise. I said nothing about less evolved races. As to my paraphrased quotes of Bailey, please re-read them. I refered to sex *solely* for the purpose of gratification. Since you raised the attitude of looking on others as souless ... Countless women have been the victims of men who used them only for their own gratification and who then left after their bodies had fulfilled their usefulness. Under such situations, there is no permanence, no committment, no treatment of the other as a soul. > I would harass you some more, Titus, but it's getting very, very late. > Good night and sweet wet dreams. Harass away! > Perhaps all the moralizing result of the Bible, etc., was because the Divine > inspiration had to go through the receiver's conscious, which is the moralizer > and suppressor of the unconscious. Perhaps the way to deal with this coming > out of the unconscious, this anti-Christ, is to HEAL, and NOT to do more of > the moralizing. Healing requires acceptance and understanding. We have to draw the distinction between acceptance of the person versus his/her behavior. Morals (thou shalt not kill ... etc) are not bad - only a rigid interpretation of them. I can accept the rejects of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest victims, the homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the clones. I *do* have a Pisces Moon (or maybe "I'm half-human, Captain."), which gives me a sympathy for the outcasts. Furthermore I even have a sympathy for the perpetrators of crimes, not only the victims. But sympathy does not imply condoning behavior. > Healing requires acceptance and understanding. It is an insult to a person to accept behavior from him/her that he/she ultimately doesn't find acceptable to him/herself. Healing also comes from a person gaining self-respect. > I wonder whether the Bible, other sacred texts, and Blavatsky's writings > need to be relooked at for clues. These texts need to be combined with > today's knowledge of science, technology and sociology in order to get at > the obscure meanings. Perhaps the jigsaw puzzle need to be taken apart and > put back together with the knowledge that the original fit may not be > right. "Truth is not as complicated as men's opinions of it." I think we need less clever, convoluted thinking and more experience-near, common sense thinking. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 13:30:47 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <199704152029.QAA08993@elvis.vnet.net> Hello Bart Lidofsky said: the remains of the 4RTH ROOT RACE are THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINS" I believe that this is wrong. (the Mahatmas also could mistake in some details, you know) If we notice what Clara Codd said in her book, she mencions that the 3RD ROOT RACE , the live descendents of them, are the black race, and the 4RTH ROOT RACE, are the REMAINS OF THE RED RACE, then, and, if someone here knows something of Antropology, they will notice that The AUSTRALIAN RACE (considering it in Antropology sometimes as a separate race) is also include in the BLACK RACE, this is , in Theosophical writing, THE REMAININGS OF THE GREAT 3RD ROOT RACE. It may be sound arrogant of my side making this aclaration, but i think that we as students, we all have to be close to the side of the truth, even if that it makes us too close to minor details as this. Estrella P.S. A salute here to Thoa, MKRamadoss, and Liesel. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 13:49:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Thoa Tran Subject: Re: Blavatsky on Satan, evil ... etc. Message-ID: <199704152049.NAA08463@proxy3.ba.best.com> Doss wrote: > No one can say whether a lusty union will bring about a highly evolved >souls or not. Agree! > Wealth and affluent conditions can be more distructive to the person >in the long run than adverse conditions. How can adversity have any >correlation with the development of the soul. I'm not sure whether wealth or poverty will or will not affect a person. I think the main thing is the value taught. In wealth, if the value is placed on acquiring because you can have anything you want, then the person will be a selfish sort. In poverty, if the value is placed on acquiring because you are impoverished, then the person will be a selfish sort. A wealthy person can be taught to sympathize for other beings, and a poor person can be taught to develop self-respect, value education, and kindness. My thinking is that extreme poverty will have more of an influence than anything else. If any one of us suddenly had everything taken away, see how generous we'll be. An old roommate of mine, who was from a wealthy family, had everything taken away when Vietnam was taken over by the communists. She found herself in a situation in which a bowl of rice is precious. She said that although it is the Vietnamese tradition to offer your guests food when they visit, she found herself being very selfish about her food. > When you look a the affluent conditions of USA and the high crime >rate and the prisons overflowing with violent criminals and comparing it >with the peaceful life that is led by the so called aborignes, I wonder >which souls are more developed. The violent and destructive ones? The difference between the USA and the aborigines is that the poor in the USA know that they are poor. They see that there are plenty of people in better situations than they, they are angry, and they want those material things. The aborigines do not think that they are poor. They have always lived this way, their ancestors have lived this way, and their ways are respected in their clan. They had a tradition that supports them. Unfortunately, with the invasion of civilization, the aborigines, like the Native American Indians, are now plagued with alcoholism, etc. Sometime being rich or poor is a state of mind. I know people with a house and a sports car, and look at great envy at people with a boat. >>>Also, not all works of genius are spiritual creation. I have known many >>>intellectually brilliant people whose creation was for egos sake and who >>>were a**holes. >> >>That includes just about everybody. >> > > Good to keep this in mind; it will preserve our sanity in the long run. Socrates was forced to kill himself on charge of impiety. That due to the fact that he made people question their beliefs, people who were powerful politicians. He knew that he was ignorant, and had no patience with people who do not think that they are. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 13:49:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Thoa Tran Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <199704152049.NAA08772@proxy3.ba.best.com> Titus wrote: >Whoah Thoah! Okay, let me do some Anuloma Viloma, some T'ai-Chi, punch on the punching bag...ahhhhhh. >I said nothing about less evolved races. As to my paraphrased quotes of >Bailey, please re-read them. I refered to sex *solely* for the purpose of >gratification. Titus, you said: >Alice Bailey had some interesting comments about the laxity of >sexual morals. She said that sex *solely* for the sake of personal >gratification attracts less evolved souls to be born. In many cases the timing >for their reincarnation was upset giving the danger of an over-concentration >of such souls. Looking at the karma in today's parenting and the morals of >children today, I would say we have such an over-concentration now. Note the "sex *solely* for the sake of personal gratification attracts less evolved souls to be born." If that's the case, then you can look at those groups that I pointed out and say that, right there, within that group, are lots of less evolved souls even from the moment of birth. Unfortunately, souls born under unfortunate circumstances usually do not have a chance to prove themselves, since they are usually faced with environments that suppress their developments. Few are as lucky as myself, who are able to move out of such an environment, write and tell their side of things. Now, if the laws haven't changed and Martin Luther King was never taught to read and write, I bet general opinions would still be that African-Americans are inferior in intellect and development. There was an unfortunate joke posted way back stating that Puerto Ricans have no father. If that was the case, you can point at Puerto Ricans and say that THERE is an over-concentration of less evolved souls. See, Titus, read your statement again. I'm not crazy! Okay, emotional, but not crazy. >Since you raised the attitude of looking on others as souless ... > >Countless women have been the victims of men who used them only for their own >gratification and who then left after their bodies had fulfilled their >usefulness. Under such situations, there is no permanence, no committment, no >treatment of the other as a soul. Yes. In sex just purely for gratification, not considering the possibility of disease and emotional repercussions, women will always have to put up with the consequence of their action. There's no getting around it. Even with abortion or adoption, there are still consequences. With men, it's a squirt and a bye-bye if they choose to. Even if a man does not care for the woman, the consequence extends beyond the woman. The consequence could be a holy terror like me, and if I have kids, I pass on the terror, until we have a whole world populated with holy terrors. Of course, some souls refuse to pass on the terror. >Harass away! Okay, it's what I do best! >We have to draw the distinction between acceptance of the person versus >his/her behavior. Morals (thou shalt not kill ... etc) are not bad - >only a rigid interpretation of them. > >I can accept the rejects of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest >victims, the homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the clones. I >*do* have a Pisces Moon (or maybe "I'm half-human, Captain."), which gives me >a sympathy for the outcasts. Furthermore I even have a sympathy for the >perpetrators of crimes, not only the victims. But sympathy does not imply >condoning behavior. >It is an insult to a person to accept behavior from him/her that he/she >ultimately doesn't find acceptable to him/herself. Healing also comes from >a person gaining self-respect. True. When somebody whines about their past suffering, sometimes I feel like saying, "Okay, you're an adult now. What are you doing to do about it?" Actually, since we all mostly feel lost, it would be good if someone can point us in the right direction. However, there are some actions that should be clearly known as wrong, such as predatory acts. Although, I too, somewhat understand the predators. Of course, my sympathy weighs with the victims and I have a harsh view point on punishment. Now, when it comes to a case of a person who is not a predator, but who has a lifestyle that I don't condone, I usually try not to judge. Who am I to judge? Chances are, that person is quite unhappy with his/her life and needs a friend. Sometimes just having a friend who does not judge is enough for the person to gain self-respect, since that person's self-esteem has already been torn down by others who are judgmental. >"Truth is not as complicated as men's opinions of it." I think we need less >clever, convoluted thinking and more experience-near, common sense thinking. Agree, Captain! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 17:19:43 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <3353F0EF.DF@sprynet.com> Romero Cortez D.Ma. wrote: > > Hello > > Bart Lidofsky said: > > the remains of the 4RTH ROOT RACE are THE AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINS I believe that > this is wrong. I said that they were NOT the remains of the 4th root race. > If we notice what Clara Codd said in her book, she mencions that the 3RD > ROOT RACE , the live descendents of them, are the black race, and the > 4RTH ROOT RACE, are the REMAINS OF THE RED RACE, then, > and, if someone here knows something of Antropology, they will notice that > The AUSTRALIAN RACE (considering it in Antropology sometimes as a separate > (race) is also include in the BLACK RACE, this is , in Theosophical writing, > THE REMAININGS OF THE GREAT 3RD ROOT RACE. I have stated before that Clara Codd was a racist. Blacks, Native Americans, Australian Aborigines, etc. are all members of the 5th root race. Otherwise, the 1st object becomes, "To form a nucleus of the Brotherhood of humanity, with some humans being more human than others." Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:07:12 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: In message <3353F0EF.DF@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > I have stated before that Clara Codd was a racist. Blacks, Native >Americans, Australian Aborigines, etc. are all members of the 5th root >race. Otherwise, the 1st object becomes, "To form a nucleus of the >Brotherhood of humanity, with some humans being more human than others." In some theosophical circles this seems to be the *de facto* reality, from my observations. If they were to be considered in a Christian or Judaic context we might want to say of many of our 'brothers,' "These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me." Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 20:50:05 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Theosophy WWW Message-ID: <3354304D.4EE8@eden.com> Have your recently visited Rudy's www. http://www.garlic.com/~rdon/ This web page is a beauty and wonderful in contrast to the the drab and usually incestuous ones and has wonderful links. If you have not recently visited it, you may want to do it and you may like it. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 18:57:09 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Change in definition Message-ID: Titus, I made an error in definition in my last post: >Now, when it comes to a case of a person who is not a predator, but who has >a lifestyle that I don't condone, I always thought condone meant "to support," however, it means "to forgive, pardon or overlook (an offense)", which is not what I meant. I do not mean to "not forgive" or to "not pardon", but to "not support", or to "not go for". Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:07:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970415214945_973724405@emout06.mail.aol.com> OK, time for me to delurk, no longer able to resist participating in such a fascinating thread. ;-D When I read those passages in AAB years ago about lesser evolved races, I was discomfited to read them and remain objective. However, I decided that surely she (and the Tibetan) did *not* mean that all members of the so-called "lesser evolved races" are indeed less evolved souls. I think that the key to this entire quandry about races, socio-economic levels, lusty sex, etc. is that the soul (usually?) incarnates, IMHO, into whatever circumstances are required for its ongoing development and into a set of vehicles that are vibrating at right frequency for its point in evolution at conception. I may be wrong (as it's been wayyyy too long since I've read the Bailey books), but the vibration of the vehicles is not entirely (if at all) determined by the genetic parents but by the evolutionary state of the permanent atoms which remain with the soul until the causal body itself is destroyed, IMHO. The genetic parents in this scenario mainly provide the external set of circumstances that the incarnating soul has to experience in the three worlds. Thus a highly evolved soul (e.g., Martin Luther King) could easily incarnate into one of the "lesser evolved" races to perform a given task and this probably happens more often than we may think. Another factor that I believe governs where or into what type of body a soul incarnates into is karma. Being that karma often involves other souls, the process of discharging a karmic relationship may require incarnation into a particular race, etc. to put the soul into proximity with the souls with whom it has karmic relationships. But this isn't necessarily limited to discharging karma involving other souls but involves learning other karmic lessons as well. It is quite possible that a particularly urgent karmic lesson can only best be learned by incarnating in a specific place at a specific time and that this may at times override race, socio-economic status, etc. If, at any time in the 5th root race, anthropological race could be associated with a particular level of evolution, we are rapidly passing that point if we haven't already done so, IMHO. When AAB said that lesser evolved souls were born of sexual unions that were solely for the point of gratification, she may have been referring to the entire set of circumstances surrounding the lives of the parents and into which the soul would incarnate vs. the actual vehicles through which the soul would have to express itself. IOW, it's rather logical to assume that people who copulate merely in response to animal instincts are not as likely to provide an incoming soul with an environment enabling easy expression of its higher qualities, regardless of the quality of vehicles it spun. However, that does not necessarily preclude a more highly evolved soul from specifically selecting those circumstances as I discussed above. Furthermore, unless a soul is far along on the Path and is actively attempting to accelerate the discharge of its remaining karma, it is not likely that it will attempt to express all of its qualities to the fullest extent of their development in one particular incarnation anyway, IMHO. I agree that the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it does cause problems. I also feel that sexual promiscuity is a behavior that transcends races. However, I feel that humanity as a whole has a group karma and the AIDS epidemic may be a karmic effect of all of the manic coupling that had been going on and is tending to correct the situation by reducing the number of purely lust-driven unions occuring (not by the illness and death of those suffering from AIDS, but by the overall reduction in "thoughtless" sex and promiscuity.) I don't mean this statement to indicate any lack of compassion on my part or to make judgements about the karma of individual AIDS victims, BTW. I'm speaking only of humanity as a whole and group karma. Nor do I mean "punishment" by "karma", but simply "cause and effect". I think the major source of the gnarliness of this whole issue is that we are trying to make sense of it at the level of the personality from where we cannot see of the relevant karmic relationships/necessities nor determine the actual point in evolution of all of the souls involved. Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 02:31:23 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <33923715.233231268@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> Bart wrote: > I have stated before that Clara Codd was a racist. Blacks, Native >Americans, Australian Aborigines, etc. are all members of the 5th root >race. Otherwise, the 1st object becomes, "To form a nucleus of the >Brotherhood of humanity, with some humans being more human than others." >From what I recall, Annie Besant believed that these people, or at least a higher proportion of them than in other groups of people, were remnants of the 4th root race, as their slower development than other cultures would imply. I don't see the relevance to the 1st object of describing the remnants of the 4th root race as being less human than are members of the 5th root race. That some humans are less developed than others is no reason to exclude them from brotherhood. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 12:07:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: AAB/Theosophy study group (Seattle/Bellevue) Message-ID: <970415120611_1086801664@emout16.mail.aol.com> Hello, Study Group & Meditation based on the books of Alice A. Bailey & works of theosophy for the Seattle/Bellevue area. Call or write to Patrick Alessandra 1441C Bellevue Way NE Bellevue, WA 98004 USA (206) 455-9259 A.Priori / 1441C Bellevue Way NE / Bellevue, WA 98004 USA aprioripa@aol.com / http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/home.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 22:01:00 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970416030100.006d7f20@mail.eden.com> At 10:36 PM 4/15/97 -0400, you wrote: >Bart wrote: > >> I have stated before that Clara Codd was a racist. Blacks, Native >>Americans, Australian Aborigines, etc. are all members of the 5th root >>race. Otherwise, the 1st object becomes, "To form a nucleus of the >>Brotherhood of humanity, with some humans being more human than others." > >>From what I recall, Annie Besant believed that these people, or at least a >higher proportion of them than in other groups of people, were remnants of the >4th root race, as their slower development than other cultures would imply. I >don't see the relevance to the 1st object of describing the remnants of the 4th >root race as being less human than are members of the 5th root race. That some >humans are less developed than others is no reason to exclude them from >brotherhood. > A very good response. When you say Brotherhood/Sisterhood, it is most inclusive and by any stretch of imagination or logic you could not exclude any one for any reason. When you start excluding any one for any reason, it is the root cause of much of mischief and horror the world has seen for how ever many centuries we can count. I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. M K Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 21:19:18 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <199704160419.VAA20155@palrel1.hp.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > Okay, let me do some Anuloma Viloma, some T'ai-Chi, punch on the punching > bag...ahhhhhh. I could tell by the rest of your post that that helped. You were much more .. calm. Sattvic. In tune with the cosmos. > Titus, you said: >> Alice Bailey had some interesting comments about the laxity of sexual >> morals. She said that sex *solely* for the sake of personal gratification >> attracts less evolved souls to be born. In many cases the timing for their >> reincarnation was upset giving the danger of an over-concentration of such >> souls. Looking at the karma in today's parenting and the morals of >> children today, I would say we have such an over-concentration now. > If that's the case, then you can look at those groups that I pointed out and > say that, right there, within that group, are lots of less evolved souls > even from the moment of birth. "Rejects of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest victims, the homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the clones" ?? I fail to see how any of them apply except for possibly "bastards". There you might have a case. Actually, I try to treat each person as a special case - setting aside as best I can any notions based on their background. I am aware of certain statistical discrepancies between people of different gender, nationality ... etc, but if I pidgeon-holed people that way I would have to suspect each white male I met of being violent, emotionally unavailable - and a poor dancer! I have a personal interest in not doing that. > See, Titus, read your statement again. I'm not crazy! Okay, emotional, but > not crazy. Well, I think I see your point that you must allow a person to prove himself or herself. But I have to give Alice Bailey/Djwal Khul a thoughtful pause - especially when I see vast numbers of people with seemingly no conscience being born. In the volunteer work I did I saw parents who did not want to be parents; and I saw how badly their children turned out. Nature or nurture? If you say nurture entirely, I guess I can't really disprove it. > Now, when it comes to a case of a person who is not a predator, but who has > a lifestyle that I don't condone, I usually try not to judge. Who am I to > judge? Chances are, that person is quite unhappy with his/her life and > needs a friend. Sometimes just having a friend who does not judge is enough > for the person to gain self-respect, since that person's self-esteem has > already been torn down by others who are judgmental. I agree you begin with empathy. As long as you don't collude with a desire to perpetuate behavior he/she knows deep inside is harmful. Many well meaning people, who want to be liked by a person more than they want to help them, can fall into this trap. That is a disguised form of meeting one's own need before the other's. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 00:51:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <970416005121_873096466@emout20.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-15 21:44:29 EDT, you write: >In some theosophical circles this seems to be the *de facto* reality, >from my observations. If they were to be considered in a Christian or >Judaic context we might want to say of many of our 'brothers,' > >"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from >me." > >Alan Or, to use another old Christian ditty, "To live above with the Saints I love, Oh, that will be glory. But to live below, with the Saints I know, Now that's another story." Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 05:27:27 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <3395510e.239880159@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> >When you say Brotherhood/Sisterhood, it is most inclusive and by any >stretch of imagination or logic you could not exclude any one for any >reason. When you start excluding any one for any reason, it is the root >cause of much of mischief and horror the world has seen for how ever many >centuries we can count. > >I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. > >M K Ramadoss For me, it depends on the reason for the exclusion. All groups have definition and purpose, which means that they all exclude those who are incompatible with their definition and purpose. A table tennis club excludes people who aren't interested in table tennis. A group which says it puts brotherhood first excludes those who put any kind of selfish agenda ahead of brotherhood. But including all who put brotherhood first does not mean that the unequal development of its members should not be recognized. Competition and the making of comparisons are necessary for growth. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 1997 23:57:02 -0600 (MDT) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Root Races Message-ID: <199704160557.XAA21345@snowden.micron.net> I thought 'root race' meant stages of evolution in a particular 'round,' not actual references to physical human species. Is not 'root race' meant to denote varieties of consciousness and awareness? Some individuals on this list have been referring to definite physical races of people as symbolizing a 'root race.' If this is true, then, it is no wonder some well-known Theosophists were so easily dazzled by the Third Reich. . . Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 01:01:42 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970416060142.006c0ae0@mail.eden.com> At 01:30 AM 4/16/97 -0400, Tom Robertson wrote: >>When you say Brotherhood/Sisterhood, it is most inclusive and by any >stretch of imagination or logic you could not exclude any one for any >reason. When you start excluding any one for any reason, it is the root >cause of much of mischief and horror the world has seen for how ever many >centuries we can count. >> >>I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. >> >>M K Ramadoss > >For me, it depends on the reason for the exclusion. All groups have definition >and purpose, which means that they all exclude those who are incompatible with >their definition and purpose. A table tennis club excludes people who aren't >interested in table tennis. A group which says it puts brotherhood first >excludes those who put any kind of selfish agenda ahead of brotherhood. But >including all who put brotherhood first does not mean that the unequal >development of its members should not be recognized. Competition and the making >of comparisons are necessary for growth. > Let me try to clarify the simple point of view I have. I try to look at and deal with or treat everyone as a human being. To me that is the practical application of Brotherhood/Sisterhood. This approach has been very helful in many situations when I have to deal with others. May be I am trying a too simplistic approach. But after all I am still a novice in these things. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 01:19:24 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Root Races Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970416061924.006d0710@mail.eden.com> At 02:04 AM 4/16/97 -0400, kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > >I thought 'root race' meant stages of evolution in a particular 'round,' not >actual references to physical human species. Is not 'root race' meant to >denote varieties of consciousness and awareness? > >Some individuals on this list have been referring to definite physical races >of people as symbolizing a 'root race.' If this is true, then, it is no >wonder some well-known Theosophists were so easily dazzled by the Third >Reich. . . > > >Kym Your response seems ok to me. I guess we take a very simplistic view of a complex "fact" about which very little is known other than certain types of physical characteristics. No one can be sure of the non physical side of it. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 07:44:26 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: Root Races Message-ID: <339a7a1f.250392639@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> >I thought 'root race' meant stages of evolution in a particular 'round,' not >actual references to physical human species. Is not 'root race' meant to >denote varieties of consciousness and awareness? > >Some individuals on this list have been referring to definite physical races >of people as symbolizing a 'root race.' If this is true, then, it is no >wonder some well-known Theosophists were so easily dazzled by the Third >Reich. . . > >Kym As was the case with the Third Reich's emphasis on racial purity, from what I've read, physical characteristics are also relevant to root races. The physical vehicle (to use Heaven's Gate terminology) must have certain characteristics to be compatible with the ensouling life. I recall reading, probably in a book by Besant and/or Leadbeater, that, in the beginning of the 6th root race, no intermarrying with anyone of previous root races will be permitted for a while, for the sake of maintaining certain physical qualities in the new race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:25:32 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <3354E15C.52C1@sprynet.com> Wildefire@aol.com wrote: > > OK, time for me to delurk, no longer able to resist participating in such a > fascinating thread. ;-D When I read those passages in AAB years ago about > lesser evolved races, I was discomfited to read them and remain objective. > However, I decided that surely she (and the Tibetan) did *not* mean that all > members of the so-called "lesser evolved races" are indeed less evolved > souls. If you read HPB in the Secret Doctrine, you will see that while she tends to be cryptic in places, it is clear in the totality that the evolution of the shells of humanity (i.e. our bodies) and the human monads did not parallel each other. And evolution is not a ladder; it's a tree. When you read the physical descriptions of the root races, if you assume that their shells were our physical anscestors, you completely ignore the laws of physics. And to say that the laws of physics are incorrect and your (or Bailey's) personal interpretation of The Secret Doctrine is correct is to fall into the trap of fundamentalism. And if you choose to give me some postmodernist explanation about the laws of physics being incorrect, especially if you give me the "Male Eurocentric" crap, then you are saying that Truth is determined by the ego (which you are certainly free to believe, but I would think would be a rather controversial point of view in Theosophical circles, to say the least). > I think that the key to this entire quandry about races, socio-economic > levels, lusty sex, etc. is that the soul (usually?) incarnates, IMHO, into > whatever circumstances are required for its ongoing development and into a > set of vehicles that are vibrating at right frequency for its point in > evolution at conception. Certainly a reasonable point of view, and within the mainstream of Theosophical thought. > the causal body itself is destroyed, IMHO. The genetic parents in this > scenario mainly provide the external set of circumstances that the > incarnating soul has to experience in the three worlds. Thus a highly evolved > soul (e.g., Martin Luther King) could easily incarnate into one of the > "lesser evolved" races to perform a given task and this probably > happens more often than we may think. Assuming that there ARE "lesser evolved" races. > Another factor that I believe governs > where or into what type of body a soul incarnates into is karma. Being that > karma often involves other souls, the process of discharging a karmic > relationship may require incarnation into a particular race, etc. to put the > soul into proximity with the souls with whom it has karmic relationships. But > this isn't necessarily limited to discharging karma involving other souls but > involves learning other karmic lessons as well. It is quite possible that a > particularly urgent karmic lesson can only best be learned by incarnating in > a specific place at a specific time and that this may at times override race, > socio-economic status, etc. Also, it is important not to fall into the trap that, if one has karma coming to them, then another has the right to inflict the karma (in Christian literature, I believe the key lesson of the fate of Judas is to show that the opposite is in fact true; although Jesus had to be crucified, Judas still had the choice not to betray him, and chose to betray him anyway. That act had its own karmic consequences for Judas, independent of the necessity of Judas' actions). Blavatsky writes, quite to the contrary, that, when dealing with those who have been hit by harmful karma we should think of ourselves as doctors in a prison; we cannot release people from their karma, but we can and should act to minimize their suffering. > If, at any time in the 5th root race, anthropological race could be > associated with a particular level of evolution, we are rapidly passing that > point if we haven't already done so, IMHO. When AAB said that lesser evolved > souls were born of sexual unions that were solely for the point of > gratification, she may have been referring to the entire set of circumstances > surrounding the lives of the parents and into which the soul would incarnate > vs. the actual vehicles through which the soul would have to express itself. Or she was looking for a reason to continue social norms of thumbing noses at children born out of wedlock. > IOW, it's rather logical to assume that people who copulate merely in > response to animal instincts are not as likely to provide an incoming soul > with an environment enabling easy expression of its higher qualities, > regardless of the quality of vehicles it spun. However, that does not > necessarily preclude a more highly evolved soul from specifically selecting > those circumstances as I discussed above. Furthermore, unless a soul is far > along on the Path and is actively attempting to accelerate the discharge of > its remaining karma, it is not likely that it will attempt to express all of > its qualities to the fullest extent of their development in one particular > incarnation anyway, IMHO. Certainly a better statement than Bailey's. > I agree that the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large > number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it does > cause problems. What problems? And how do we cure them, by sending the "lesser evolved" souls prematurely to their next incarnation? Note which one of Blavatsky's students the Mahatma's said was the most advanced, evolutionarily speaking. > I think the major source of the gnarliness of this whole issue is that we are > trying to make sense of it at the level of the personality from where we > cannot see of the relevant karmic relationships/necessities nor determine the > actual point in evolution of all of the souls involved. Exactly. Then what is the reason to suppose that certain actions by the parents can allow one to pass judgement on the children? In all probability, to give onesself the moral license to do so. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:30:23 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <3354E27F.7C3D@sprynet.com> Tom Robertson wrote: > > Bart wrote: > > > I have stated before that Clara Codd was a racist. Blacks, Native > >Americans, Australian Aborigines, etc. are all members of the 5th root > >race. Otherwise, the 1st object becomes, "To form a nucleus of the > >Brotherhood of humanity, with some humans being more human than others." > > >From what I recall, Annie Besant believed that these people, or at least a > higher proportion of them than in other groups of people, were remnants of the > 4th root race, as their slower development than other cultures would imply. I What is slower development? Not figuring out how to kill people as efficiently? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:38:40 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <3354E470.764C@sprynet.com> Tom Robertson wrote: > For me, it depends on the reason for the exclusion. All groups have definition > and purpose, which means that they all exclude those who are incompatible with > their definition and purpose. A table tennis club excludes people who aren't > interested in table tennis. A group which says it puts brotherhood first > excludes those who put any kind of selfish agenda ahead of brotherhood. But remember that, even if they reject the idea of brotherhood, they are still our brothers. At least that's what Annie Besant said... Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:55:34 -0400 From: John E Mead Subject: # of mail-list subscribers it takes to change a light bulb. Message-ID: <01IHRVEMB9RI9XJW4Y@InfoAve.Net> hi - thought some may enjoy this. jem > >Q: How many internet mail list subscribers does it take > to change a light bulb? > >A: 1,331: > 1 to change the light bulb and to post to the mail > list that the light bulb has been changed > 14 to share similar experiences of changing light > bulbs and how the light bulb could have been > changed differently. > 7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs. > 27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about > changing light bulbs. > 53 to flame the spell checkers > 156 to write to the list administrator complaining about > the light bulb discussion and its inappropriateness > to this mail list. > 41 to correct spelling in the spelling/grammar flames. > 109 to post that this list is not about light bulbs and > to please take this email exchange to alt.lite.bulb > 203 to demand that cross posting to alt.grammar, > alt.spelling and alt.punctuation about changing > light bulbs be stopped. > 111 to defend the posting to this list saying that we > all use light bulbs and therefore the posts > **are** relevant to this mail list. > 306 to debate which method of changing light > bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, > what brand of light bulbs work best for this > technique, and what brands are faulty. > 27 to post URLs where one can see examples of > different light bulbs > 14 to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly, and > to post corrected URLs. > 3 to post about links they found from the URLs that > are relevant to this list which makes light bulbs > relevant to this list. > 33 to concatenate all posts to date, then quote > them including all headers and footers, and then > add "Me Too." > 12 to post to the list that they are unsubscribing > because they cannot handle the light bulb > controversey. > 19 to quote the "Me Too's" to say, "Me Three." > 4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ. > 1 to propose new alt.change.lite.bulb newsgroup. > 47 to say this is just what alt.physic.cold_fusion > was meant for, leave it here. > 143 votes for alt.lite.bulb. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 17:21:47 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: <339efe01.284154267@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> Bart wrote: > What is slower development? Not figuring out how to kill people as >efficiently? Yes, even assuming that is the only difference between, say, European culture and African culture, that is one aspect of slower development. The ability to kill is a good thing. If we didn't know how to kill viruses and vegetables, for starters, we could not live. The greatest event, for the world as a whole, in the 20th century, is that the United States developed the atomic bomb first. I wonder what access to Theosophical Society meetings we would have today if far more immoral countries than the United States, such as Nazi Germany, Japan, or the Soviet Union, had had a nuclear monopoly first. The ability to kill, as is the case with all other abilities, can be used for evil purposes, but there is no way around the often unpleasant fact that competition is necessary for evolution. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:29:47 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Titus: >I could tell by the rest of your post that that helped. You were much more >.. calm. Sattvic. In tune with the cosmos. I thought I was more in tune with the cosmos when I was hyper. Everyone assumes the cosmos is calm. >"Rejects of society, the orphans, the bastards, the incest victims, the >homosexuals, the gender confused, the drug addicts, the clones" ?? I fail to >see how any of them apply except for possibly "bastards". There you might have >a case. Okay, I didn't reread my other post. >Actually, I try to treat each person as a special case - setting aside as best >I can any notions based on their background. I am aware of certain statistical >discrepancies between people of different gender, nationality ... etc, but if >I pidgeon-holed people that way I would have to suspect each white male I met >of being violent, emotionally unavailable - and a poor dancer! I have a >personal interest in not doing that. However, in my experience, white males are all poor dancers. >Well, I think I see your point that you must allow a person to prove himself >or herself. But I have to give Alice Bailey/Djwal Khul a thoughtful pause - >especially when I see vast numbers of people with seemingly no conscience >being born. In the volunteer work I did I saw parents who did not want to be >parents; and I saw how badly their children turned out. Nature or nurture? If >you say nurture entirely, I guess I can't really disprove it. It depends on how extreme the nurture is weighed against the nature. It's like how much stress can you take. Some people crack under pressure that others thrive on. That doesn't necessarily mean that one is less evolved. It could just mean the right buttons were pushed. >I agree you begin with empathy. As long as you don't collude with a desire to >perpetuate behavior he/she knows deep inside is harmful. Many well meaning >people, who want to be liked by a person more than they want to help them, can >fall into this trap. That is a disguised form of meeting one's own need before >the other's. And how about people with a desire to help disguising their need to control. There are people who help in ways that are condescending, "THESE people need our help." I recall the missionaries thinking that they can help these PRIMITIVE (note the underlying INFERIOR) cultures. There are people who *help* because they are controlling, because they can't stand that someone is living differently than them. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:30:10 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Aborigines Message-ID: Mary Poppins wrote: >From what I recall, Annie Besant believed that these people, or at least a >higher proportion of them than in other groups of people, were remnants of the >4th root race, as their slower development than other cultures would imply. I >don't see the relevance to the 1st object of describing the remnants of the 4th >root race as being less human than are members of the 5th root race. That some >humans are less developed than others is no reason to exclude them from >brotherhood. Again, I'm confused as to the meaning of "development." Is it just cultural, mental, physical, what? I know, you're all going to say SOUL. >From what I've read of Australian Aboriginal culture before the encroachment of civilization, -They have Dreamtime myths that relates to the universe, the psychic, all creatures, and the earth. Thus, the universal and outside consciousness is related to the inner consciousness, the metaphysical and the physical are one. In their conception, the Aborigines do not think of linear time and space, instead they replace that with a model of movement from dream to reality and conscious (visible) and unconscious (invisible) space, representative of the creative universe. Like the theosophists and their monads, the Aborigines have a complicated system to explain the body and soul make up. For example, they believe that animal blood vibrates with the magnetic field of cosmic influences. Thus, their ceremonies often use blood to connect with the invisible energy world. This being in tune with magnetic fields is important for their connection with animals and for psychic abilities. -They relate the Dreamtime stories through metaphors. These are expressed through what used to be impermanent paintings, verbal stories, songs, and dance. There was a story of an Aborigine woman who could not read and write, and yet was able to lead her tribe to a water hole based on an ancient story. -They have a very close-knit family and clan system. Any new child is raised by the whole clan, although the child knows who the mother and father is. A child is taught from early on the relation of everybody in the clan to him/herself and the importance of being with the clan. The Aboriginal expression of a family member is not "my uncle", but "uncle/self". The child is encouraged to share with everybody from an early age. The child is usually not punished but disciplined by gentle coaxing. If a child is particularly bad, a form of punishment could be pointing to the child's shadow or pointing to a tree, say that it is the child, and whipping it. If a parent loses patience and ends up hitting the child, it is considered a great shame that the parent did not have enough self-control. No one but the parent is allowed to discipline a child. That would cause a fight within the clan. The child is allowed to express all of his/her emotions, even tantrums. The adult usually reacts with amusing laughter until the child tires. Thus, an Aboriginal child is often a spontaneous and happy child. -They have complicated initiation rites. This include male initiations dealing with circumcision, etc., female initiations, and betrothal initiations. These initiations have full participation of the clan. -Aborigines meditate, sometimes in stances similar to yoga. -All of life's physicals, including lust and anger, is not considered bad. In fact, in their myths, new life results from passion, either in lust or in anger. For example, a story of a battle could be the blood from a battle creating something else. Perhaps all this talk about unevolvement came from the lack of understanding regarding the Aborigine philosophy on linear time and space, and their sensual nature. In their non-linear time and space, movement *forward* by either acquisition of wealth, knowledge, or technology is unimportant. Also, Blavatsky may also have fallen for the Darwinian theory of random mutation and natural selection that have caused erroneous conceptions regarding the African race and the Aborigine race. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 10:29:32 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: >OK, time for me to delurk, Welcome, Lynn! Boy, I sound like the AOL intro. when you first log in. >no longer able to resist participating in such a >fascinating thread. ;-D Follow your impulses. >Thus a highly evolved >soul (e.g., Martin Luther King) could easily incarnate into one of the > "lesser evolved" races to perform a given task and this probably >happens more often than we may think. "Lesser evolved" races seem too harsh to describe a whole race. Also, all this talk about evolution, what does it mean? Does it mean genetic coding. Does it mean mental capacity? Or does it mean culturally? Even an inclusion of a whole race is too general. An Asian person in the industrialized section of a country is different from an Asian person in a tribal section of a country. If you are referring to a specific group that seem to be disadvantaged, maybe the best thing is to describe a specific group of a specific society, and perhaps realize how they got that way historically. >I agree that the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large >number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it does >cause problems. Maybe theosophists have this need to try to figure out everything in terms of soul. However, the answer is right in front of our face. Suppose you're in a group that was enslaved or immigrated from another country. Suppose the only option for you is to live in the very poor section of town, where there is a lot of violence and meanness. Suppose you are finally conditioned to realize that the safest route is to be cold to others, since befriending a person may lead to trouble if that person is a troublesome sort (and there are plenty of those in a bad neighborhood). And suppose you see that humanity is evil, that nobody cares about you, that no matter how hard you try, you will have days that you starve and daily you will fear for your life, that the government or those that could help you will not help, and that others look at you with disdain. And suppose this leads some of you to escape through drugs and alcohol, and some of you to empower yourselves by joining gangs. And suppose drugs and alcohol lead you to violent behavior, to not care about promiscuity, to not care about taking care of yourself, to not care about your children. Suppose your children grows up knowing all of that. Suppose your children attends a school where promiscuity is a badge, where violence is the norm, where teaching resources are not available, and where teachers are not enthusiastic. And suppose your children grows up not learning how to read and write, not able to make much money, has pregnancies through teen promiscuity, and addicted to drugs. Suppose that cycle continues. Add that to every deviancy associated with despair. I say all average human beings will not be able to transcend such an environment without help. Once in a while I hear of one who has. However, that is such a rarity that I see the same person on all the talk shows telling his heart-wrenching story regarding his addicted mother, his jailed father, his stepfather who stole all their belongings, and his being a surrogate father to his own brother. Maybe it has to do with very advanced souls who can transcend such things. But if you're going to talk about a group of souls, I say most souls will not be able to overcome such adversity. We are all very average. Just remember that all of us able to read and write has the advantage over those who were never in an environment to promote intellectual investigations. Thus, if adversity suddenly hits us, we can probably deal with it with some grace. >I also feel that sexual promiscuity is a behavior that >transcends races. However, I feel that humanity as a whole has a group karma >and the AIDS epidemic may be a karmic effect of all of the manic coupling >that had been going on and is tending to correct the situation by reducing >the number of purely lust-driven unions occuring (not by the illness and >death of those suffering from AIDS, but by the overall reduction in >"thoughtless" sex and promiscuity.) I don't mean this statement to indicate >any lack of compassion on my part or to make judgements about the karma of >individual AIDS victims, BTW. I'm speaking only of humanity as a whole and >group karma. Nor do I mean "punishment" by "karma", but simply "cause and >effect". What about the hemophiliacs, people with blood transfusions, etc. What is the meaning of karma to them? What is their lesson? I know you're saying group karma. But if you are going to say that lustful sex causes AIDS, then you have to say that having a blood transfusion causes AIDS. If we shouldn't have lustful sex because of AIDS, then we shouldn't have blood transfusions. >I think the major source of the gnarliness of this whole issue is that we are >trying to make sense of it at the level of the personality from where we >cannot see of the relevant karmic relationships/necessities nor determine the >actual point in evolution of all of the souls involved. Since we can't see the unseen, but just theorize. How about looking at what we can see? Seeing what we can see is a lot closer to the situation than theorize something to pieces. It's as I was taught in life drawing, look at your subject, don't look at the paper. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:02:52 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: It's true Message-ID: <199704162201.SAA09331@elvis.vnet.net> I just read what jem writed about the example of the light bulbs. perhaps is time we all change subjects and do some work. Estrella From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:34:07 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Please, another thing... Message-ID: <199704162234.SAA11352@elvis.vnet.net> Hello to all here Just to say few ,oore points: to the person called Wildefire@aol.com, just to say to him/her: I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND YOU ALMOST ANYTHING!! Please, as i said before, don't ABUSE of the abreviatures, for us not born in english speaking countries, and with some difficult still in english, it is too hard to understand so much abreviatures!!! IT ALMOST DID'NT MAKE SENSE AT ANY ORATION SAID, WITH SO MANY!!! Please, keep it in mind, please... Point 2: Still, in the controversy of the races, if they were the third or the fourth, i just can recall, like a great writer of Mexico said (Jose Vasconcelos) "We all are the 5 race, the cosmic race" (I do not know of any theosophical link of him, but he could) So, just don't bother if the Australian Aborigins are of the 3 rd or the 5 ft race, and don't care. in our time, now, with in America, the revindication of the native cultures, and in all the world, the REMAINS OF THE OTHER RACES (For "remains" i do not said "primitive" or "retarded" just only the pure unmixed breed, perhaps, with a rich knowledge and culture, that makes them a race, i DO NOT BELIEVE the think atribuited to Bessant or Cobb or Blavatski that says "in the begining of the 6th root race, races shall do not be mixed" Use common sense, pepole here, the pretending "purity" of races is a racist taught , and indign of a Great person as them . i believe that the interpretation strict of the sayings of the Theosophical leaders tends to make minds get to the mistake. I was begining to think that were some errors of understanding in Bart , but in his last posts, his "rebelty" make to me lot of sense. we don't have to folow theosophy postulates so literal, because in any taught of them, is include many senses of the same word. For example: (point 3) Of the "races" the 3rd, the 4rth, etc etc etc, i believe that , if they called the races by numbers, was because of THE TIME OF THE APARITION OF THE RACE, if we can remember what antropologists Leakey (both Leakeys) said "the first human being came from africa" that means and is, a comprobation of Blavatsky-Codd saying, The first human root race, the African, the first CIVILIZATION" and, pretending, like some say , that the firsts root races were "primitive" or a "savage culture" it is, obviously, a racist and facist taught. just because the arian swamis or mahatmas do not have testimonies of the great Black civilization,or, because of their rivality, minimize them, is not justification for not thinking and submiting ourselves to errror. Even i Believe that Blavatsky and Bessant and the others knew, but, because of the lack of information, i believe (they based mostly on the mahatmas information) they only could cite the most closely to what they got, and, even, they got infering that most of their information was in sometimes, a bit tendentious, i believe ,they, as pure souls, try to minimize the agresive racial enfasis in the scripts. And also i believe Clara Codd was not a racist. also beside their cultural knowledge and context (England) we have to include this. Fourth: And , just to remember:If now, in finish of the 20 century, we as "civilizied" beings, in the time of computers and tv and all that stuff, in US, the pepole still is touchy" in racial subjects (When are we going to learn?" as Jamiroquai said) and is prevalecient "political corectness" and stufflike that, Imagine , in that time, how could pepole had be? with all of the lack of information?? ??? (Homework assignment) I suggest that all of us excercise our minds, but most of all, our hearts. First the common sense, and also first, the common heart. (Mankind as a whole) Fifth: All the races are the same!! that one begin first that other, and another made mistakes, doesn't mean that the suffering descendants (like the poor american (ALL AMERICA, not just "North America" like some pepole say by mistake) indigenuos pepole) of the pure unmixed root races, have to be so severe jugge by somethings that their ancestrals (many of them i believe, now incarnated in other races) made in some sink continents that we do not know by now, is true, is too severe of us to judge pepole by their karma present, because almost none pepole knows of their past errors of their past lifes!! is true, we cannot do much in most cases, we cannot interfer with their karma, but, the most we can do to help (like the doctor or the priest in a jail like someione here said) is, our duty, because, the one who knows more, is,indeed, obligated to do more. Estrella P.S. I hope this letter can be read well, because i have to back to write it well many times, and this letter mail sistem is really gross. Bye!! Be well and happy everyone. :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 15:40:47 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Just to finish that point Message-ID: <199704162239.SAA11631@elvis.vnet.net> This letter is only to say that i consider, like the light bulb issue, saturaded. Let's try another subject friends! :P Estrella P.S. Salute to all here, be real good and well pals. (in all aspects) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:36:24 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: In message <970415214945_973724405@emout06.mail.aol.com>, Wildefire@aol.com writes >the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large >number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it does >cause problems. I wonder why this link is necessarily made. Might not a highly developed soul seeking incarnation choose to incarnate via a lust-driven (Aaargh!) union for reasons known only to itself? Possible reasons: 1. One or both of the lust-driven parents' dharma is such that they will move quickly on to a high degree of development themselves, and become an excellent parent (or two) for the new soul. 2. The incarnating soul is in a hurry, and can see that the body which will be produced will be in excellent shape for the forthcoming life. 3. The incarnating soul sees lust-driven unions as exactly what is needed for the full flowering of human potential. 4. The incarnating soul does nor give a damn how it gets here so long as it does - it has important work to do in a hurry. Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:49:35 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >What is >the meaning of karma to them? It might be the dangers of the tomato. Of all recorded deaths in the UK in 1996, it has been established that a minimum of 85% of the victims were regular eaters of tomatoes, thus proving that these tempting red fruits are a serious danger to health. Potatoes are, by the same standard, even worse. Ah, well ... no more fries ... Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 21:47:24 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970417024724.006df678@mail.eden.com> At 09:00 PM 4/16/97 -0400, you wrote: >In message , Thoa Tran > writes >>What is >>the meaning of karma to them? > >It might be the dangers of the tomato. Of all recorded deaths in the UK >in 1996, it has been established that a minimum of 85% of the victims >were regular eaters of tomatoes, thus proving that these tempting red >fruits are a serious danger to health. Potatoes are, by the same >standard, even worse. > >Ah, well ... no more fries ... > >Alan When statistically looked at, the most dangerous place to lie down is a bed. Most people die on a bed. So making a connection may be difficult. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 21:54:14 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970417025414.006e4770@mail.eden.com> At 08:43 PM 4/16/97 -0400, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >In message <970415214945_973724405@emout06.mail.aol.com>, >Wildefire@aol.com writes >>the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large >>number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it does >>cause problems. > >I wonder why this link is necessarily made. Might not a highly >developed soul seeking incarnation choose to incarnate via a lust-driven >(Aaargh!) union for reasons known only to itself? Possible reasons: > >1. One or both of the lust-driven parents' dharma is such that they will >move quickly on to a high degree of development themselves, and become >an excellent parent (or two) for the new soul. > >2. The incarnating soul is in a hurry, and can see that the body which >will be produced will be in excellent shape for the forthcoming life. > >3. The incarnating soul sees lust-driven unions as exactly what is >needed for the full flowering of human potential. > >4. The incarnating soul does nor give a damn how it gets here so long as >it does - it has important work to do in a hurry. > >Alan :-) A wonderful post. The only thing we know is something or some force or life is incarnating. All we can do is to speculate. How and why and what factors play a part in the process of incarnation may be more complicated than we can all imagine or speculate. In view of this how lustful union has any relevance to what incarnates we may never know. The best we can do is to continue to speculate. Looking forward to new ideas and theories and questions from everyone. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 00:37:51 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: In message <970416005121_873096466@emout20.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >to use another old Christian ditty, > >"To live above with the Saints I love, >Oh, that will be glory. >But to live below, with the Saints I know, >Now that's another story." Better the saint you know ... St. Alan the modest. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:22:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970417062242_1918575188@emout01.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-16 17:22:41 EDT, Thoa wrote: (quoting me) > >Thus a highly evolved > >soul (e.g., Martin Luther King) could easily incarnate into one of the > > "lesser evolved" races to perform a given task and this probably > >happens more often than we may think. > > "Lesser evolved" races seem too harsh to describe a whole race. Also, all > this talk about evolution, what does it mean? Does it mean genetic coding. > Does it mean mental capacity? Or does it mean culturally? Even an > inclusion of a whole race is too general. An Asian person in the > industrialized section of a country is different from an Asian person in a > tribal section of a country. If you are referring to a specific group that > seem to be disadvantaged, maybe the best thing is to describe a specific > group of a specific society, and perhaps realize how they got that way > historically. Hi Thoa, Thanks for the welcome!!!! I agree with you about the term "lesser evolved races" which is why I preceded it with and placed it in quotes in my post. I personally do not like it at all when applied to anthropological races. (And even anthropologists are debating whether "race" is at all useful in classifying humans, but that's another subject.) Whenever I used the term "evolution" or "evolved" in that post, I specifcally meant spiritual evolution or, more specifically, the progress that a soul makes in expressing itself through its vehicles and in mastering the three worlds. "Evolution" in that same context could also refer to a higher turn of the spiral where the spirit is increasingly expressing itself through the soul itself. What I was trying to say was that anthropological race, socioeconomic status, etc. should *not* be used to judge how far an indwelling soul has progressed along the Path. If we discussed, as you suggest, how disadvantaged groups historically became that way within this particular context, I think we would be again intertwining physical or anthropological races with spiritual evolution, which are the very two concepts I was trying to separate in my post. I don't think we are in actual disagreement on this issue, BTW. Am I right in believing that you don't agree with the concept of "lesser evolved races"? If you don't, then we are in agreement. :-) > > >I agree that the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a > large > >number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it > does > >cause problems. > > Maybe theosophists have this need to try to figure out everything in terms > of soul. However, the answer is right in front of our face. Suppose > you're in a group that was enslaved or immigrated from another country. Most of humanity has been looking mostly on the lower planes (what you say is "in front of our face") for answers to its problems for millenia. Have we solved them? I don't think so. So, what's wrong with exploring other methods, trying something else for a change? The problems that you listed, IMHO, result from selfishness and hatred. Selfishness and hatred, in turn, result from our ignorance of the true nature of the soul and the spirit. We see ourselves as totally separate from each other, an illusion fostered by being consciously aware of only the lower worlds. These are the same worlds that you are urging to me look at for the source of the solution to our problems. What is the logic of looking further into the mists of ignorance to solve problems resulting from that same ignorance (including my own)? This attempt to discover the inner causes of the societal ills we see around us is not at all an attempt to escape dealing with them. It is, IMHO, the only way we can find the means to effectively deal with them. Running around helter-skelter, born on transitory winds of emotional sentiment, slapping a band-aid here and there will not permanently solve anything, though it may give transitory comfort to a few who are suffering and to those who actually only need a band-aid. We cannot truly help humanity unless we truly love humanity (a principle that originates from above the emotional plane), IMHO, and that can only come by aligning the personality with the Soul. I do not see the utility of trying to manifest compassion for our fellow humans without also trying to become One with the principle of compassion itself. The two go hand in hand. Without this, we may do a bit of good here and there, but we mainly succeed in feeding our own egos, inwardly patting ourselves on the back for the "good" we've done. All we need to do is look at the sorry history of so-called reformers, revolutionaries, etc. who may have started their movements with the best of intentions and ended up inflicting all types of horrors, major and minor, on humanity. The usual scenario, IMHO, is "this social problem exists so let's solve it by forcing people [often by any means necessary] to do thus and such". The blood begins to flow, personal freedoms (which I think are essential to human growth) are lost, etc. Contrast this with Ghandi's non-violent, non-coercive philosophy which succeeded in liberating India from the British Empire. Or with Martin Luther King's similar philosophy and civil rights victories. Both were men who were motivated by selflessness and a true love of humanity, illustrating the point I hope I made in the preceding paragraph. > I say all average human beings will not be able to transcend such an > environment without help. Once in a while I hear of one who has. However, > that is such a rarity that I see the same person on all the talk shows > telling his heart-wrenching story regarding his addicted mother, his jailed > father, his stepfather who stole all their belongings, and his being a > surrogate father to his own brother. Maybe it has to do with very advanced > souls who can transcend such things. But if you're going to talk about a > group of souls, I say most souls will not be able to overcome such > adversity. We are all very average. Just remember that all of us able to > read and write has the advantage over those who were never in an > environment to promote intellectual investigations. Thus, if adversity > suddenly hits us, we can probably deal with it with some grace. Who are we to say that any number of those who we don't see on TV haven't "transcended their environment"? What does that actually mean anyway? What about the father who joins with other fathers, for example, to stop gang warfare in his neighborhood, not as a leader but simply a member of the group? This, in itself, may be an important accomplishment for him, yet he stays in that horrible neighborhood until the day he dies, still poor and totally unnoticed. For another, simply actively participating in the local storefront church could be a huge step. We can't just sit here and decide who has or has not transcended anything, IMHO, without knowing an individual's dharma and karmic issues to be resolved in a particular incarnation. > >I think the major source of the gnarliness of this whole issue is that we > are > >trying to make sense of it at the level of the personality from where we > >cannot see of the relevant karmic relationships/necessities nor determine > the > >actual point in evolution of all of the souls involved. > > Since we can't see the unseen, but just theorize. How about looking at > what we can see? Seeing what we can see is a lot closer to the situation > than theorize something to pieces. It's as I was taught in life drawing, > look at your subject, don't look at the paper. Yes, we need to look at the trees, but with the detachment born out of the realization that they are not the entire forest. We need to step back, transcending it, so to speak, to see it all. When you referred to "theorizing something to pieces", you apparently missed the main point of my message which was: we cannot make judgements without sufficient information. I've lived in the hard-core ghetto myself, BTW. I know those particular "trees" rather well. ;-D Being that this post has become pretty long, I'll respond to what you said about hemophiliacs with AIDS, group karma, etc. in another message. Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 06:22:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970417062246_-600608314@emout03.mail.aol.com> Thoa wrote (quoting me): > >I also feel that sexual promiscuity is a behavior that > >transcends races. However, I feel that humanity as a whole has a group > karma > >and the AIDS epidemic may be a karmic effect of all of the manic coupling > >that had been going on and is tending to correct the situation by reducing > >the number of purely lust-driven unions occuring (not by the illness and > >death of those suffering from AIDS, but by the overall reduction in > >"thoughtless" sex and promiscuity.) I don't mean this statement to indicate > >any lack of compassion on my part or to make judgements about the karma of > >individual AIDS victims, BTW. I'm speaking only of humanity as a whole and > >group karma. Nor do I mean "punishment" by "karma", but simply "cause and > >effect". then said: > What about the hemophiliacs, people with blood transfusions, etc. What is > the meaning of karma to them? What is their lesson? I know you're saying > group karma. But if you are going to say that lustful sex causes AIDS, > then you have to say that having a blood transfusion causes AIDS. If we > shouldn't have lustful sex because of AIDS, then we shouldn't have blood > transfusions. Thoa, I *do* feel that you misunderstood what I said here. I apparently was not clear enough about what I meant. My point had nothing to do with the individual karma of anyone suffering from AIDS, regardless of how it was contracted. How can you ask me about karmic lessons for hemophiliacs and other AIDS patients who contracted it from transfusions when I *explicitly* said I was speaking *only* of humanity as a whole? And, when you even acknowledge that I was speaking of group karma? If these individuals are part of humanity, wouldn't it be logical to assume that they are affected by the group karma of humanity? The individual karma of anyone suffering from AIDS, again regardless of how contracted, is a totally separate issue, IMHO. Secondly, I didn't intend to imply that lusty sex *causes* AIDs. What I truly meant was that promiscuous sex has caused the AIDS epidemic because it spread the HIV virus, which causes AIDS, far and wide. Any disease, IMHO, probably has underlying karmic causes that could have even originated in earlier incarnations. I don't see how those who've been infected by HIV via blood transfusions would be different than sufferers of any other disease or injury in this regard. Also, any widespread disease, such as heart disease, could have underlying karmic causes relating to humanity's group karma or the karma of the group of souls to which the individual sufferer belongs. However, having said that, I was speaking purely of the fact that a significant portion of humanity was having lustful sex (which, by implication, widely spread the HIV virus and thus caused the epidemic) and that the AIDS epidemic has forced a large significant portion of humanity to abstain from promiscuous sex. Humanity as a *group* is experiencing the results of the epidemic just as it will eventually experience the results of the return to relative chastity(?), IMHO. Karma is the Law of Cause and Effect. In "Esoteric Healing", the Tibetan said that the Law of Retribution (what we conceive of as punishment or lessons) is only one aspect of the Law of Karma. A big problem, IMHO, that arises from discussing things like group karma (which I guess I shouldn't have brought up no matter how carefully I tried to word it) is that it is so impersonal in its nature and operation. And because of this impersonality and its subtlty with the fact that as individuals we have no control over it, our minds rebel at the concept which threatens our very sense of having free will. So, regardless of whether the karma of those who've tragically contracted AIDS via blood transfusions is group karma or individual karma, I certainly wasn't suggesting that humanity abstain from blood transfusions. If the blood supply was really dangerous, then that could be reasonably considered. But, with a currently safer blood supply, I can't see drawing a parallel between lusty sex and blood transfusions. So, now having waded into deeper waters than I ever intended with my comments about AIDS, lusty sex, and group karma, I'm going to end this right here while I'm behind. ;-D Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:06:30 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: satan, devil, bastards Message-ID: <199704171523.LAA23846@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Thoa, I don't agree exactly with your`view of the unconscious. To me the unsconscious is not something bad to be suppressed, but a part of me that needs to be worked with. To be sure, it contains some negative qualities, but it also contains creativity. You, as an artist are using it to advantage. May I suggest a book to you that presents a less negative view of the unconscious? Serge King's "Mastering Your Hidden Self" Among other things, he's also a clinical psychologist. He tries to teach you what makes the unconscious tick, and how you can communicate with it, and tell it what you want it to do. He's of the opinion that the unconscious is mechanistic to a certain degree, and carries out whatever has been programmed into it. Weighing matters, and choosing are conscious acts. There are ways of getting your unconscious to often do what you'd like it to do consciously. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:34:21 GMT From: gbartle@uclink.berkeley.edu (Gregg Bartle) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <33564d4f.3477506@uclink> On Wed, 16 Apr 1997 21:00:08 -0400 (EDT),Alan Bain wrote: >In message , Thoa Tran > writes >>What is >>the meaning of karma to them? > >It might be the dangers of the tomato. Of all recorded deaths in the UK >in 1996, it has been established that a minimum of 85% of the victims >were regular eaters of tomatoes, thus proving that these tempting red >fruits are a serious danger to health. Well, yeah, but ..... have you noticed that 100% (!) of dead people *don't* eat tomatoes. See, that proves it's not the -eating- of the luscious red fruit that is linked to death but, rather, -stopping- eating them is the killer! Always keep a fresh tomato in arms reach, just in case - preferably, an organically grown one. Especially to be preferred (shameless plug ahead) are those grown on my brother's farm (Molino Creek Farm, Davenport, CA). Peace to all beings - Gregg Bartle, member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:46:15 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Alan wrote: >In message , Thoa Tran > writes >>What is >>the meaning of karma to them? > >It might be the dangers of the tomato. Of all recorded deaths in the UK >in 1996, it has been established that a minimum of 85% of the victims >were regular eaters of tomatoes, thus proving that these tempting red >fruits are a serious danger to health. Potatoes are, by the same >standard, even worse. > >Ah, well ... no more fries ... > >Alan A mother tomato, a father tomato, and a baby tomato were walking along. The baby tomato kept on being distracted and was lagging behind. The irritated father tomato walked back to the baby tomato, squished him, and said: "KETCHUP!!!" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:50:36 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: clarifying some probable mistake Message-ID: Mary Poppins: >Yes, even assuming that is the only difference between, say, European culture >and African culture, that is one aspect of slower development. The ability to >kill is a good thing. If we didn't know how to kill viruses and >vegetables, for >starters, we could not live. The greatest event, for the world as a whole, in >the 20th century, is that the United States developed the atomic bomb first. I >wonder what access to Theosophical Society meetings we would have today if far >more immoral countries than the United States, such as Nazi Germany, Japan, or >the Soviet Union, had had a nuclear monopoly first. The ability to kill, as is >the case with all other abilities, can be used for evil purposes, but there is >no way around the often unpleasant fact that competition is necessary for >evolution. And I say we should promote cannibalism!!! Since there are more humans on earth than anything else, and some of us would love a glorious suicide, some of us can chose to be sacrificial Shmoos. That would solve the food shortage, the population shortage, and environmental problems. We could promote unity by stating that, "Yes, we are one and the same because we all taste like chicken!" Thoa the gourmet "Soilent Green...it's made out of people!!!" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:50:54 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Lynn wrote: >Thoa, I *do* feel that you misunderstood what I said here. I apparently was >not clear enough about what I meant. My point had nothing to do with the >individual karma of anyone suffering from AIDS, regardless of how it was >contracted. How can you ask me about karmic lessons for hemophiliacs and >other AIDS patients who contracted it from transfusions when I *explicitly* >said I was speaking *only* of humanity as a whole? And, when you even >acknowledge that I was speaking of group karma? If these individuals are part >of humanity, wouldn't it be logical to assume that they are affected by the >group karma of humanity? The individual karma of anyone suffering from AIDS, >again regardless of how contracted, is a totally separate issue, IMHO. > >Secondly, I didn't intend to imply that lusty sex *causes* AIDs. What I truly >meant was that promiscuous sex has caused the AIDS epidemic because it spread >the HIV virus, which causes AIDS, far and wide. > >Any disease, IMHO, probably has underlying karmic causes that could have even >originated in earlier incarnations. I don't see how those who've been >infected by HIV via blood transfusions would be different than sufferers of >any other disease or injury in this regard. Also, any widespread disease, >such as heart disease, could have underlying karmic causes relating to >humanity's group karma or the karma of the group of souls to which the >individual sufferer belongs. > >However, having said that, I was speaking purely of the fact that a >significant portion of humanity was having lustful sex (which, by >implication, widely spread the HIV virus and thus caused the epidemic) and >that the AIDS epidemic has forced a large significant portion of humanity to >abstain from promiscuous sex. Humanity as a *group* is experiencing the >results of the epidemic just as it will eventually experience the results of >the return to relative chastity(?), IMHO. > >Karma is the Law of Cause and Effect. In "Esoteric Healing", the Tibetan said >that the Law of Retribution (what we conceive of as punishment or lessons) is >only one aspect of the Law of Karma. A big problem, IMHO, that arises from >discussing things like group karma (which I guess I shouldn't have brought up >no matter how carefully I tried to word it) is that it is so impersonal in >its nature and operation. And because of this impersonality and its subtlty >with the fact that as individuals we have no control over it, our minds rebel >at the concept which threatens our very sense of having free will. So, >regardless of whether the karma of those who've tragically contracted AIDS >via blood transfusions is group karma or individual karma, I certainly wasn't >suggesting that humanity abstain from blood transfusions. If the blood supply >was really dangerous, then that could be reasonably considered. But, with a >currently safer blood supply, I can't see drawing a parallel between lusty >sex and blood transfusions. Okay, Lynn. I can't argue with the point of view of the Law of Karma, since I am not a master of it. Don't we wish we all could be masters of it. >So, now having waded into deeper waters than I ever intended with my comments >about AIDS, lusty sex, and group karma, I'm going to end this right here >while I'm behind. ;-D > >Lynn Very brave, Lynn, very brave. I would have made my introduction to the list when the list was discussing fruitism. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 13:58:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970417135804_740856050@emout19.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-17 06:35:57 EDT, you write: >It might be the dangers of the tomato. Of all recorded deaths in the UK >in 1996, it has been established that a minimum of 85% of the victims >were regular eaters of tomatoes, thus proving that these tempting red >fruits are a serious danger to health. Potatoes are, by the same >standard, even worse. > >Ah, well ... no more fries ... > > Actually, it's breathing. Of all the recorded deaths in the US since 1963, every single person that died had been inhaling air since childhood. Chuck the Heretic ------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 11:03:25 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Evolvement. Liberty and justice for all. Message-ID: <199704171803.LAA22485@palrel1.hp.com> I am not tying the following discussion to root races. My posts, though nowhere even mentioning root races seemed lumped in with Blavatsky's writings on the subject. Anyway, what about the idea of different people (to avoid knee-jerk reactions, say within a group of white privileged upperclass males) having different levels of evolvement. Or let's compare me with Master KH. Is it unfair to me to say I am less evolved than him? If we were co-workers in the ashram would I be exploited and handicapped? My answer draws upon an analogy. A child is less developed in the context of one lifetime than an adult. Is he inferior? No. Is a tree that has just sprouted inferior to one that is presently 1000 years old? No. You have just seen them in a time-slice where one has unfolded certain latent potentials before the other. In some ways a child is more admirable than an adult. He or she is less jaded, more open to the wonder of life ... etc. Are we to treat all people as equal mathematicians? As equal poets? As equal artists? Does less developed mean inferior? What if you were one of those parents who had a mentally retarded child born to you? Would you love him or her less? Would or should you give him or her less effort or strive for less than the best? I think not. On a soul level are equal to God and all are precious. All will unfold into the same level of divinity. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:51:22 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: Lynn wrote: >I agree with you about the term "lesser evolved >races" which is why I preceded it with and placed it in quotes in my >post. I thought that might be the case, that you were just making fun of established definitions. I decided to give it a go, anyway, just to make sure. >Whenever I used the term >"evolution" or "evolved" in that post, I specifcally meant spiritual >evolution or, more specifically, the progress that a soul makes in expressing >itself through its vehicles and in mastering the three worlds. "Evolution" in >that same context could also refer to a higher turn of the spiral where the >spirit is increasingly expressing itself through the soul itself. What I was >trying to say was that anthropological race, socioeconomic status, etc. >should *not* be used to judge how far an indwelling soul has progressed along >the Path. True, true, you cannot judge the progress of a soul just by looking at the person in general terms. Some may be clearly perceived, most not so. We would like to say that a highly evolved soul is like Saint Alan :o). However, a highly evolved soul can be in the guise of a *primitive* who cannot read or write, or a person from the ghetto who's learning development was stunted but who has a wonderful heart. There are so much more unseen and unknown. How do we judge that a soul is highly evolved. Terrific intellect? Deep compassion? Great survival skills? And what about astonishing athletic ability, besides associated with the body, that also demonstrates skill and determination? A great dancer? >Most of humanity has been looking mostly on the lower planes (what you say is >"in front of our face") for answers to its problems for millenia. Have we >solved them? I don't think so. So, what's wrong with exploring other methods, >trying something else for a change? I agree that we need to explore other methods and not leave out any possibility. However, the lower planes have, IMHO (Estrella, that's "In My Honest Opinion"), not been adequately explored. As in the case of the soul exploration, the lower planes exploration have been saturated with terms that try to point out superiority and inferiority. Maybe what we need to change is not the plane focus, but our attitudes and ego. >The problems that you listed, IMHO, result from selfishness and hatred. >Selfishness and hatred, in turn, result from our ignorance of the true nature >of the soul and the spirit. We see ourselves as totally separate from each >other, an illusion fostered by being consciously aware of only the lower >worlds. These are the same worlds that you are urging to me look at for the >source of the solution to our problems. What is the logic of looking further >into the mists of ignorance to solve problems resulting from that same >ignorance (including my own)? True, the lower planes can result in separation. However, in my experience, when I talk to a person, I flow between my physical perception of the person and my intuitive perception of the person. That happens so automatically that it appears very real and *physical.* I don't see just the eyes, nose , mouth, I read their movements, their condition, etc. With the body, I don't just see a body. I see movements that express its mental states. I see the shape that the body is in that expresses its health. When I hear that person's speech, I hear how the words are spoken, what is being said, how the words are said, and the pitch and flow of the voice. With all that combined, I can pretty much read the person's attitude and general either soul or ego, or combined. Besides reading a person, my communication flows back and forth where I can feel the person as part of myself, that also helps in my perception. To use a very rough analogy, it's like looking at and smelling a cake, and then eating it. Of course, with that, when I encounter an almost evil person, I feel like purging myself. This, I'm sure you can relate to since everybody uses this in their perception, some more sensitive than others. When I hear or read of people in the media, I automatically imagine what they must be feeling, and try to imagine the subtleties of emotions associated with such a situation. I think that anybody who has been in any circumstance close to such a situation can easily empathize. I may not be in such situations, but mine is close enough that I can push the imagination a little further. Thus, I do not find the lower planes to be a separating factor. I find it to be very useful in gathering information. It becomes very connective when you can look at others and say, "them/self." Of course, that is also soul. >This attempt to discover the inner causes of the societal ills we see around >us is not at all an attempt to escape dealing with them. It is, IMHO, the >only way we can find the means to effectively deal with them. Running around >helter-skelter, born on transitory winds of emotional sentiment, slapping a >band-aid here and there will not permanently solve anything, though it may >give transitory comfort to a few who are suffering and to those who actually >only need a band-aid. We cannot truly help humanity unless we truly love >humanity (a principle that originates from above the emotional plane), IMHO, >and that can only come by aligning the personality with the Soul. I do not >see the utility of trying to manifest compassion for our fellow humans >without also trying to become One with the principle of compassion itself. >The two go hand in hand. Without this, we may do a bit of good here and >there, but we mainly succeed in feeding our own egos, inwardly patting >ourselves on the back for the "good" we've done. We must also avoid the "we and them." "We" help "them." It's better to think "we" are helping "we." Perhaps that is the answer. I analyze myself and try to figure out what would help me be enlightened. Certainly, education. Living without fear. Physical needs being met. Dealing with my negative emotions. Discipline. Responsible to my affairs and others, etc., etc. Perhaps if we analyze ourselves, try to imagine ourselves without our comforts, and then imagining ourselves with them on one at a time, we can get at what is needed. The answer is not to slap on a band-aid, but sweeping changes. That's going to involve politics, *shudder*. Note how many people came out from oblivion for a cause because they became the *them* that they see in the media. >All we need to do is look at the sorry history of so-called reformers, >revolutionaries, etc. who may have started their movements with the best of >intentions and ended up inflicting all types of horrors, major and minor, on >humanity. The usual scenario, IMHO, is "this social problem exists so let's >solve it by forcing people [often by any means necessary] to do thus and >such". The blood begins to flow, personal freedoms (which I think are >essential to human growth) are lost, etc. Contrast this with Ghandi's >non-violent, non-coercive philosophy which succeeded in liberating India from >the British Empire. Or with Martin Luther King's similar philosophy and civil >rights victories. Both were men who were motivated by selflessness and a true >love of humanity, illustrating the point I hope I made in the preceding >paragraph. We need to look at all sides and make choices. No choice is going to be without somebody feeling forced upon. When Gandhi liberated India, I'm sure there were a bunch of people feeling forced upon. He was assassinated by someone who felt forced upon by his policy of unification. Same with Martin Luther King. >Who are we to say that any number of those who we don't see on TV haven't >"transcended their environment"? What does that actually mean anyway? What >about the father who joins with other fathers, for example, to stop gang >warfare in his neighborhood, not as a leader but simply a member of the >group? This, in itself, may be an important accomplishment for him, yet he >stays in that horrible neighborhood until the day he dies, still poor and >totally unnoticed. For another, simply actively participating in the local >storefront church could be a huge step. We can't just sit here and decide who >has or has not transcended anything, IMHO, without knowing an individual's >dharma and karmic issues to be resolved in a particular incarnation. Agree. I was using just one example. I do see more and more examples in the media and I have read of your examples. Either that, or the media has wisened up and decided to post solutions instead of just problems. Not enough, IMO (In My Opinion). >Yes, we need to look at the trees, but with the detachment born out of the >realization that they are not the entire forest. We need to step back, >transcending it, so to speak, to see it all. When you referred to "theorizing >something to pieces", you apparently missed the main point of my message >which was: we cannot make judgements without sufficient information. I've >lived in the hard-core ghetto myself, BTW. I know those particular "trees" >rather well. ;-D > >Being that this post has become pretty long, I'll respond to what you said >about hemophiliacs with AIDS, group karma, etc. in another message. > >Lynn Alrighto! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 10:51:57 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: satan, devil, bastards Message-ID: Liesel: >Thoa, > >I don't agree exactly with your`view of the unconscious. To me the >unsconscious is not something bad to be suppressed, but a part of me that >needs to be worked with. To be sure, it contains some negative qualities, >but it also contains creativity. You, as an artist are using it to >advantage. May I suggest a book to you that presents a less negative view of >the unconscious? Serge King's "Mastering Your Hidden Self" Among other >things, he's also a clinical psychologist. He tries to teach you what makes >the unconscious tick, and how you can communicate with it, and tell it what >you want it to do. He's of the opinion that the unconscious is mechanistic >to a certain degree, and carries out whatever has been programmed into it. >Weighing matters, and choosing are conscious acts. There are ways of getting >your unconscious to often do what you'd like it to do consciously. > >Liesel Hi Liesel, Actually, I agree with your view of the unconscious. I was just trying to state that it is bad to suppress your unconscious, that "you can communicate with it, and tell it what you want it to do." That is, make friends with your unconscious, accept it, and love it. If there are any negatives in the unconscious, then that would be the way to heal it also. I think a lot of the problems came about because instead of going through the process of healing, people often go through the process of hating and condemning, of trying to pretend that anything they don't like do not exist. That was the point of my paragraph. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 12:37:58 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Satan, etc. Message-ID: Lynn, I just thought of something in relation to lustful sex and blood transfusions. Lustful sex can also be made to the point where there's little transmission of AIDS. I mean, I'm not hedonistic, just being somewhat objective. Some said that hedonism is fun.:o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:08:11 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Evolvement. Liberty and justice for all. Message-ID: <3356832B.3F96@sprynet.com> Titus Roth wrote: > Anyway, what about the idea of different people (to avoid knee-jerk reactions, > say within a group of white privileged upperclass males) having different > levels of evolvement. Or let's compare me with Master KH. Is it unfair to me > to say I am less evolved than him? If we were co-workers in the ashram would I > be exploited and handicapped? > > My answer draws upon an analogy. A child is less developed in the context of > one lifetime than an adult. Is he inferior? No. Is a tree that has just > sprouted inferior to one that is presently 1000 years old? No. You have just > seen them in a time-slice where one has unfolded certain latent potentials > before the other. In some ways a child is more admirable than an adult. He or > she is less jaded, more open to the wonder of life ... etc. However, people tend to treat children as if they are inferior; certainly, children are expected to obey adults. The problem is not that some people are more evolved than others. The assumption that causes problems is that we can tell how evolved a person is by looking at their skin color. The basic Nazi misinterpretation of Blavatsky was in assuming that the Aryans were the blond, Nordic type people and everybody else was sub-human. We must be careful not to step into the same trap. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 15:02:08 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Still, i insist... Message-ID: <199704172200.SAA12135@elvis.vnet.net> Hello again Since this women (Lynn) did'nt make herself notice of the thing i said,now, In thechnicolor-cinemascope Letters (also flourescent) I said to her!! P l E A S E! ! ! ! D O N' T A B U S E O F T H E A B R E V I A T U R E S ! ! ! The thing is, that, for me that i am from another country where english is NOT the common language, words like IMHO are so mysterious as the toughts of the sacred rishis of the karma. Estrella P.S. A dear and warm salute to Thoa, Liesel,M.K.Ramadoss, and to "Doc" Alan. :-P P.S.S. I also give to you a warm welcome, Lynn, and to all of new pepole writing here. P.S.S.S. Lynn, please, i beg you, don't abuse of the abreviatures!! ppplease.. (as Roger Rabbit could beg) :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 18:01:04 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: A new search facility to locate people Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970417230104.006eed7c@mail.eden.com> Here is something which may interest some. ...MKR Have you ever tried to find a critical contact person's phone number or e-mail address? AltaVista Business Card Directory (ABCD) is designed to do just that, as the newest public service from AltaVista. ABCD is your directory of directories - a reliable, master address book for business. You can enter information about a businessperson you need to contact and in a snap, ABCD searches through our directory and our Partners - Four11, InfoSpace, and WhoWhere? - weeds out duplicates and presents users with matches from the millions of entries in its combined directories. .... Check it out at http://altavista.directory.digital.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT) From: Thoa Tran Subject: Re: Still, i insist... Message-ID: <199704172351.QAA16670@proxy3.ba.best.com> Hi Estrella, I'm getting ready to step out for dinner but have to stop at such an urgent request! :o) Here are some abbreviations in case any newbies came in using them, and some us oldbies who forget. IMHO-In My Honest Opinion IMO-In my opinion BTW-By the way W/O- Without FYI-For your information ASAP-As soon as possible G de P -G. De Purucker HPB-Helena P. Blavatsky AAB-Alice A. Bailey AB-Annie Besant APS-A. P. Sinnett CWL- C. W. Leadbeater That's all I can think of for now. However, I'll avoid using them so that you won't have another dictionary you have to look up. Thoa :o) At 06:08 PM 4/17/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hello again >Since this women (Lynn) did'nt make herself notice of the thing i said,now, >In thechnicolor-cinemascope Letters (also flourescent) I said to her!! >P l E A S E! ! ! ! >D O N' T A B U S E O F T H E A B R E V I A T U R E S ! ! ! > >The thing is, that, for me that i am from another country where english is >NOT the common language, words like IMHO are so mysterious as the toughts >of the sacred rishis of the karma. >Estrella >P.S. A dear and warm salute to Thoa, Liesel,M.K.Ramadoss, and to "Doc" Alan. >:-P >P.S.S. I also give to you a warm welcome, Lynn, and to all of new pepole >writing here. >P.S.S.S. Lynn, please, i beg you, don't abuse of the abreviatures!! ppplease.. >(as Roger Rabbit could beg) :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 23:14:48 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <66A49FAYDqVzEwYu@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , Thoa Tran writes >A mother tomato, a father tomato, and a baby tomato were walking along. >The baby tomato kept on being distracted and was lagging behind. The >irritated father tomato walked back to the baby tomato, squished him, and >said: > >"KETCHUP!!!" G R O A N .......... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 21:51:56 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Blavatsky Letters Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970418025156.00676c08@mail.eden.com> While searching, I found the following List in Harvard Library. Does anyone know if these letters have been published. MKR Blavatsky Letters, 1885-1890 List of 18 letters received by Andover-Harvard Theological Library, written by H. P. Blavatsky to W. Q. Judge and Mr. Bridge. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 23:09:45 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19970417025414.006e4770@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes (in reply to Alan) >A wonderful post. True, true. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 97 3:55:04 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <199704180755.DAA21479@leo.vsla.edu> Dear Doss, The letters from Harvard have been published in the past several issues of Theosophical History magazine, with annotations by Michael Gomes. I believe our former listmember Rich Taylor had something to do with alerting the Theosophical world of their presence in that collection. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 06:45:57 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, K. Paul Johnson wrote: > Dear Doss, > > The letters from Harvard have been published in the past > several issues of Theosophical History magazine, with > annotations by Michael Gomes. I believe our former listmember > Rich Taylor had something to do with alerting the Theosophical > world of their presence in that collection. > > Cheers, > Paul Thanks for the info. I wonder if any of it is available on www for download? Have you or any one know. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:11:47 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <33576503.3934@sprynet.com> m.k. ramadoss wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > > Dear Doss, > > > > The letters from Harvard have been published in the past > > several issues of Theosophical History magazine, with > > annotations by Michael Gomes. I believe our former listmember > > Rich Taylor had something to do with alerting the Theosophical > > world of their presence in that collection. > > > > Cheers, > > Paul > > Thanks for the info. I wonder if any of it is available on www for download? > Have you or any one know. Probably not, but if I can get Mike's permission (I just printed out your letter to show him) and no other permissions are required, I will put them on the NYTS web page (http://www.dorsai.org/~nyts). From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 08:50:23 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970418135023.00c0e42c@mail.eden.com> > Probably not, but if I can get Mike's permission (I just printed out >your letter to show him) and no other permissions are required, I will >put them on the NYTS web page (http://www.dorsai.org/~nyts). Thanks for your help. I am sure many others also may like to see the letters and usually you will find some great gems hidden in some of these letters. Looking forward to hear from you. BTW, check to see if you can post these letters on theos-l as well. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:50:58 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: An interesting quote Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970418145058.006cfe64@mail.eden.com> HI Here is an interesting quote I just saw: There is only one way to find the Master, and that is by first finding our own special work. When one knocks at His door with the first fruits of the harvest of work, the door swings open ... ....What do you find? Master waiting to receive and reveal? ... ...No, what is revealed is more likely visions of greater service still... [Adapted/modified by a comment by CJ.] It was very refreshing to see the above at a time when many talk more about spiritual growth [and may be leading to initiations greater power, knowledge etc.] and what is badly needed a dedicated people to serve and help our fellow creatures. Every one of us can make a difference in the world. Just my 2 cents worth. Your direction and mileage may vary. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:00:22 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Evolvement. Liberty and justice for all. Message-ID: <199704181600.JAA05417@palrel1.hp.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > The problem is not that some people are more evolved than others. The > assumption that causes problems is that we can tell how evolved a person > is by looking at their skin color. The basic Nazi misinterpretation of > Blavatsky was in assuming that the Aryans were the blond, Nordic type > people and everybody else was sub-human. We must be careful not to step > into the same trap. Every truth can be misused or used to support some agenda. (See the congressional debates). Sometimes we are so used to a truth being used for some nefarious agenda that the truth and the agenda become confused with one another. We then avoid speaking about it and become "politically correct". From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:49:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Still, i insist... Message-ID: <970418124933_184031085@emout03.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-17 21:57:33 EDT, you write: > Hello again > Since this women (Lynn) did'nt make herself notice of the thing i said,now, > In thechnicolor-cinemascope Letters (also flourescent) I said to her!! > P l E A S E! ! ! ! > D O N' T A B U S E O F T H E A B R E V I A T U R E S ! ! ! > > The thing is, that, for me that i am from another country where english is > NOT the common language, words like IMHO are so mysterious as the toughts > of the sacred rishis of the karma. > Estrella > P.S. A dear and warm salute to Thoa, Liesel,M.K.Ramadoss, and to "Doc" Alan. > :-P > P.S.S. I also give to you a warm welcome, Lynn, and to all of new pepole > writing here. > P.S.S.S. Lynn, please, i beg you, don't abuse of the abreviatures!! ppplease. > . > (as Roger Rabbit could beg) :-) > > Estrella, Thanks for your warm welcome!! :-) I'm sorry about the abbreviations. I honestly forgot about your first request when I wrote my most recent posts to the list. Your second request, in response to an earlier message I posted, appeared after I sent those later messages. Because of the timing of things, it appeared that I was totally ignoring you (which I wasn't), leading to your third request. Anyway, I apologize to you (and to everyone else on the list if I have violated a convention here against using them). By the way, Troa, thanks for posting your list of spellouts. I was going to do the same and send them to Estrella by private email. Those abbreviations, by the way, are just as mysterious to native English-speakers when they first encounter them. Even though they are based on English words, most of them are used only here on the Internet (though apparently not on this particular list since I'm the only one you've asked to stop using them). Despite having been an Internet user for several years, occasionally I, too, encounter one that I haven't seen before and have to ask the writer what it means. However, I simply ask what it means instead of asking people not to use them. That way, I know what it means when I see it again. :-) So, it is not the fact that English isn't your native language that makes them so mysterious to you. It's just that apparently no one, before Troa, has ever provided you with a list explaining their meanings. ;-D Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:49:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970418124954_1616793439@emout20.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-17 15:08:51 EDT, Thoa wrote: > Lynn wrote: > >I agree with you about the term "lesser evolved > >races" which is why I preceded it with and placed it in quotes in > my > >post. > I thought that might be the case, that you were just making fun of > established definitions. I decided to give it a go, anyway, just to make > sure. Part of the "getting to know each other" process... ;-D We'll each probably do less of that as time goes on and we have a better idea of each other's points of view. I do appreciate your making sure! > True, true, you cannot judge the progress of a soul just by looking at the > person in general terms. Some may be clearly perceived, most not so. I wholeheartedly agree! >We > would like to say that a highly evolved soul is like Saint Alan :o). > However, a highly evolved soul can be in the guise of a *primitive* who > cannot read or write, or a person from the ghetto who's learning > development was stunted but who has a wonderful heart. I agree here, too, including with the Saint Alan part. ;-D It's fascinating that you mention this about the person from the ghetto who lacks educational opportunies. Just last night I saw something on TV about how, in Norfolk Virginia, they are going to the homes of disadvantaged children and teaching the parents how to teach them long before they start elementary school. In fact, they even visit pregnant mothers. Anyway, the program has been so successful that, once in school, these economically disadvantaged children are scholastically achieving above children from the wealthiest neighborhoods in the school district. I think this strongly supports what you and I (and many others) have been saying that there is no correlation between evolutionary development and race/socio-economic status. >There are so much > more unseen and unknown. How do we judge that a soul is highly evolved. > Terrific intellect? Deep compassion? Great survival skills? And what > about astonishing athletic ability, besides associated with the body, that > also demonstrates skill and determination? A great dancer? Good questions. I think that evolution *generally* follows the pattern of first the lower three vehicles, then the increased expression of the soul's three vehicles through them as the lower vehicles become refined enough to permit it. However, I think that it is a rather uneven process that varies among individuals and is often rather nonlinear. For example, an individual may have developed a pretty robust, active lower mind. However, the emotional vehicle (which in a purely linear scheme should develop earlier) is still too coarse for the mind to effectively control it, so only the lower quality emotions are expressed. To outward appearances, this person could be quite clever but is incapable, for example, of loving only those who love him/her. Another individual may not have a mind that appears to be quite as agile, but has such a refined emotional body that he or she is capable of demonstrating a more selfless quality of love and compassion. But, the relative states of development can't be but so far out of kilter simply because of the dynamics of the opening of the various centers/chakras and the flow of energy between them. At least, this is my take on it. I think it is almost impossible to judge an individual's overall point in evolution (except at the extremes at either end of what is expressed by the majority of humanity) unless the person doing the "judging" is so evolved that they can see the centers, the energy flow among them, and their actual degree of unfoldment (a Third Degree Initiate or higher maybe?). > > > I agree that we need to explore other methods and not leave out any > possibility. However, the lower planes have, IMHO (Estrella, that's "In My > Honest Opinion"), not been adequately explored. As in the case of the soul > exploration, the lower planes exploration have been saturated with terms > that try to point out superiority and inferiority. Maybe what we need to > change is not the plane focus, but our attitudes and ego. Interesting point! I hope I understand you correctly and please let me know if I didn't. I think that the fact that we explore the planes from the standpoints of inferiority and superiority is because we are not fully functioning yet in the higher mind, the lowest vehicle of the soul. The higher mind is needed to fully realize (more than just intellectually acknowledge) the principle of inclusiveness which counters the illusory notions of inferiority and superiority. Without the ability to function in the higher faculties, in other words, from the viewpoint of the soul, we cannot sufficiently grasp the occult laws that underly events and conditions on the lower planes. So, I agree that the lower planes need to be studied (and mastered). But we cannot fully study and truly master them without raising our consciousness to the higher planes. At the same time, we have to do what we can, in our limited understanding of the principle of inclusiveness, to put it into practice, applying it to the lower three planes. By constantly making the effort to do that, I believe that we'll continually refine the lower vehicles to the point that we will indeed truly realize (as in make Real) those higher principles. I think that we have to learn to look in both directions, plane-wise, simultaneously. ;-D > > True, the lower planes can result in separation. However, in my > experience, when I talk to a person, I flow between my physical perception > of the person and my intuitive perception of the person. That happens so > automatically that it appears very real and *physical.* I don't see just > the eyes, nose , mouth, I read their movements, their condition, etc. With > the body, I don't just see a body. I see movements that express its mental > states. I see the shape that the body is in that expresses its health. > When I hear that person's speech, I hear how the words are spoken, what is > being said, how the words are said, and the pitch and flow of the voice. > With all that combined, I can pretty much read the person's attitude and > general either soul or ego, or combined. Besides reading a person, my > communication flows back and forth where I can feel the person as part of > myself, that also helps in my perception. To use a very rough analogy, > it's like looking at and smelling a cake, and then eating it. Of course, > with that, when I encounter an almost evil person, I feel like purging > myself. This, I'm sure you can relate to since everybody uses this in > their perception, some more sensitive than others. Fascinating!! It sounds to me that you are seeing more of what underlies the illusory separateness we've been discussing. I do relate to what you're saying. With some individuals, you can feel your own vehicles resonating at a higher frequency merely by being in their presence. With others, you feel a dampening down, a heaviness that needs to be purged as soon as possible (along with the urge to escape their presence). Interesting that part of your analogy includes *smelling* a cake because, in my mind, I associate this kind of thing with the sense of smell, a very subtle type of smell one way or the other that does not enter through the nose as physical smells do. ;-D > > When I hear or read of people in the media, I automatically imagine what > they must be feeling, and try to imagine the subtleties of emotions > associated with such a situation. I think that anybody who has been in any > circumstance close to such a situation can easily empathize. I may not be > in such situations, but mine is close enough that I can push the > imagination a little further. The empathy you describe is, what I believe to be, an inclusiveness. I see your pushing your imagination further as an attempt to achieve more of that inclusiveness. After all, can we really "feel with" someone we see ourselves as totally separate from? :-) > > Thus, I do not find the lower planes to be a separating factor. I find it > to be very useful in gathering information. It becomes very connective > when you can look at others and say, "them/self." Of course, that is also > soul. I believe that you don't see the lower planes as a separating factor because you aren't using the viewpoint of the lower planes. You're looking at the lower planes but from the viewpoint of the higher planes. When I referred to the separateness of the lower planes I meant it as the result of viewing things only from the perspective of the lower planes, using only the lower mind. I don't think we actually disagree here at all but are having to wrestle with the difficulties of expressing these concepts in words and through the lower mind --> physical brain. Now, if we could toggle on telepathic mode... ;-D > > We cannot truly help humanity unless we truly love > >humanity (a principle that originates from above the emotional plane), IMHO, > >and that can only come by aligning the personality with the Soul. I do not > >see the utility of trying to manifest compassion for our fellow humans > >without also trying to become One with the principle of compassion itself. > >The two go hand in hand. Without this, we may do a bit of good here and > >there, but we mainly succeed in feeding our own egos, inwardly patting > >ourselves on the back for the "good" we've done. > > We must also avoid the "we and them." "We" help "them." It's better to > think "we" are helping "we." Perhaps that is the answer. Yessssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-D >I analyze myself > and try to figure out what would help me be enlightened. Certainly, > education. Living without fear. Physical needs being met. Dealing with > my negative emotions. Discipline. Responsible to my affairs and others, > etc., etc. Perhaps if we analyze ourselves, try to imagine ourselves > without our comforts, and then imagining ourselves with them on one at a > time, we can get at what is needed. The answer is not to slap on a > band-aid, but sweeping changes. That's going to involve politics, > *shudder*. Note how many people came out from oblivion for a cause because > they became the *them* that they see in the media. I think that, in terms of achieving enlightenment, the physical needs you mentioned are important only up to a certain point. Once one gets past a certain point on the Path, whether physical needs are met greatly lessens in importance. After all, there are yogis who achieve enlightenment in conditions that only barely sustain the physical body. (And, I'm not at all saying that we need to ignore the physical needs of us/us. Where's that telepathy toggle again?) As for politics, I think again that we need fully-realized people who are consciously on the Path if we're not going to perpetuate the same old ills (even if cloaked in different vestments). By saying that I'm not at all ignoring the good that is being done by individuals who are not consciously on the Path but are in fact on It, or by those who are consciously on the Path but are not yet fully-expressing souls. Before reaching the evolutionary point that I mentioned at the beginning of this paragraph, having physical needs met, education, etc. are indeed necessary if we as a group (humanity) are to be free to pursue more than basic survival issues in life. But the sweeping changes you mentioned must come from the subtler planes if they are to be changes that actually accelerate our evolution as a group. I think the ultimate goal is a purely impersonal one, that of human evolution and that of the other kingdoms. Ooops, left out the Devas. Oh heck. Whatever the Logos wants. OK, the Solar Logos to cover all bases... ;-D > > We need to look at all sides and make choices. No choice is going to be > without somebody feeling forced upon. When Gandhi liberated India, I'm > sure there were a bunch of people feeling forced upon. He was assassinated > by someone who felt forced upon by his policy of unification. Same with > Martin Luther King. OK. For now. ;-D I don't totally agree but need to think further on how to express what's bothering me about this. I'll be baaaaaaack. ;-D Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:50:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <970418124943_1684429535@emout12.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-16 22:57:15 EDT, Alan wrote: (quoting me) > >the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large > >number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it > does > >cause problems. > > I wonder why this link is necessarily made. Might not a highly > developed soul seeking incarnation choose to incarnate via a lust-driven > (Aaargh!) union for reasons known only to itself? Possible reasons: Alan, Thank you for forcing me to think this through further! As a result of your post, I have moderated my opinions on this. I agree with everything that you said. I formerly agreed with Bailey on it because I believed she meant that the circumstances surrounding "lusty unions" were probably more attractive to relatively unevolved souls than to more highly evolved souls. I think that she was basing it possibly on a belief that souls tend to be attracted to parents of similar emotional and mental vibration. I think that, at the time she wrote this, people who engaged in sex outside of marriage were commonly believed to be at a lower mental and emotional vibratory state than those who didn't. (Though, even during her times, this may have been too sweeping a generalization.) Without really thinking about it, I just went along with this. Even if that generalization was true, society has changed considerably since Bailey wrote. "Lusty unions", in my opinion, are far more widespread these days along with the types of environments available to an incoming soul attracted by the resulting conceptions. So, while I feel that, in many cases, an incoming soul is attracted to parents whose personality vehicles are at a similar level of vibration, this is not a) always the case (as your message so nicely illustrated); and b) the vibration of the vehicles of those engaging in purely lust-driven unions is not always a low one. Just in case anyone is wondering--this proposed attraction to parents of similar vibratory levels does not contradict statements I made in earlier posts about the my belief that the quality of an individual's own vehicles is not inherited from the parents, but resides in the soul's permanent atoms. In fact, Alan, your post supports that concept, too. Yet, I still would have to question the ability of the mental and emotional vehicles to control the instincts of the physical vehicle in someone who *repeatedly* engages in purely lust-driven sex. I mean this generally, not as being judgemental of specific individuals. I have a vague memory of reading something in the Bailey books to the effect of the stimulation of certain centers/chakras being involved in some cases, and I'm not referring to Trantric "yoga". But, this vague "memory" may be inaccurate. This is the very type of thing I hoped to gain by joining this list--the opportunity to grow by receiving the input of others on these topics. My thinking and reading along these lines before now have mostly been the vacuum of having only my own mind to work with. ;-D) Thank you!!!! Lynn From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:04:02 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Abbreviations and smileys Message-ID: <199704181804.LAA06285@palrel3.hp.com> For the benefit of our new users here is a tutorial. Like prehistoric cave dwellers, the devotees of electronic bulletin-boards and "e-mail" have struggled to find a new way to express themselves. Wall painting would not work. Words, it seems, are not enough. Inarticulate sounds cannot be displayed on screens. To make their messages feel more like personal contact, they have hit on using the punctuation marks on an ordinary keyboard in order to pull faces at each other. To read these signs, you have to put your head on your left shoulder. The basic unit is: :-) the "smiley", a standard smiling face. In context, this can mean "I'm happy to hear from you", or other pleasantries. The smiley can also wink: ;-) or frown: :-( among other things. The language can express many things about the user's appearance: 8-) :-{) 8:-) :-)-8 :-Q @:-) These signs mean, respectively, that the user wears sunglasses, has a moustache, is a little girl, is a big girl, smokes, wears a turban. The smiley can also indicate some subtleties of mood and response: :-D :-/ :-e :-7 :-X These mean that he is laughing, is sceptical, is disappointed, is wry, is keeping his lips sealed. Many of the signs (perhaps the majority in use on America's biggest computer networks) are simply absurd fun, verging on the unintelligible: :-F *:o) +-:-) @= The user is a buck-toothed vampire with one tooth missing, is a clown, holds religious office, is pro-nuclear. The hieroglyph of our title means that the user is a drunk, devilish chef with a toupee in an updraft, a moustache and a double chin. Now you know what electronic mail is used for. =*= Here's a smile directory - Hope it lightens you day. The Unofficial Smilie Dictionary -------------------------------- :-) Your basic smilie. This smilie is used to inflect a sarcastic or joking statement since we can't hear voice inflection over Unix. ;-) Winky smilie. User just made a flirtatious and/or sarcastic remark. More of a "don't hit me for what I just said" smilie. :-( Frowning smilie. User did not like that last statement or is upset or depressed about something. :-I Indifferent smilie. Better than a Frowning smilie but not quite as good as a happy smilie :-> User just made a really biting sarcastic remark. Worse than a :-). :-> User just made a really devilish remark. ;-> Winky and devil combined. A very lewd remark was just made. Those are the basic ones...Here are some somewhat less common ones: (-: User is left handed %-) User has been staring at a green screen for 15 hours straight :*) User is drunk [:] User is a robot 8-) User is wearing sunglasses B:-) Sunglasses on head ::-) User wears normal glasses B-) User wears horn-rimmed glasses 8:-) User is a little girl :-)-8 User is a Big girl :-{) User has a mustache :-{} User wears lipstick {:-) User wears a toupee }:-( Toupee in an updraft :-[ User is a Vampire :-E Bucktoothed vampire :-F Bucktoothed vampire with one tooth missing :-7 User just made a wry statement :-* User just ate something sour :-)~ User drools :-~) User has a cold :'-( User is crying :'-) User is so happy, s/he is crying :-@ User is screaming :-# User wears braces :^) User has a broken nose :v) User has a broken nose, but it's the other way :_) User's nose is sliding off of his face :<) User is from an Ivy League School :-& User is tongue tied. =:-) User is a hosehead -:-) User is a punk rocker -:-( (real punk rockers don't smile) :=) User has two noses +-:-) User is the Pope or holds some other religious office `:-) User shaved one of his eyebrows off this morning ,:-) Same thing...other side |-I User is asleep |-O User is yawning/snoring :-Q User is a smoker :-? User smokes a pipe O-) Megaton Man On Patrol! (or else, user is a scuba diver) O :-) User is an angel (at heart, at least) :-P Nyahhhh! :-S User just made an incoherent statement :-D User is laughing (at you!) :-X User's lips are sealed :-C User is really bummed :-/ User is skeptical C=:-) User is a chef @= User is pro-nuclear war *<:-) User is wearing a Santa Claus Hat :-o Uh oh! (8-o It's Mr. Bill! *:o) And Bozo the Clown! 3:] Pet smilie 3:[ Mean Pet smilie d8= Your pet beaver is wearing goggles and a hard hat. E-:-) User is a Ham radio operator :-9 User is licking his/her lips %-6 User is braindead [:-) User is wearing a walkman (:I User is an egghead <:-I User is a dunce K:P User is a little kid with a propeller beenie @:-) User is wearing a turban :-0 No Yelling! (Quiet Lab) :-: Mutant Smilie The invisible smilie .-) User only has one eye ,-) Ditto...but he's winking X-( User just died 8 :-) User is a wizard C=}>;*{)) Mega-Smilie... A drunk, devilish chef with a toupee in an updraft, a mustache, and a double chin Note: A lot of these can be typed without noses to make midget smilies. :) Midget smilie :] Gleep...a friendly midget smilie who will gladly be your friend =) Variation on a theme... :} - What should we call these? (what?) :) - Happy :> - what? :@ - what? :D - Laughter :I - Hmmm... :( - Sad :[ - Real Downer :< - what? :{ - what? :O - Yelling :C - what? :Q - what? :,( - Crying [] - Hugs and :* - Kisses |I - Asleep |^o -Snoring :-` smiley spitting out its chewing tobacco :-1 smiley bland face :-! " :-@ smiley face screaming :-#| smiley face with bushy mustache :-$ smiley face with it's mouth wired shut :-% smiley banker :-6 smiley after eating something sour :^) smiley with pointy nose (righty) :-7 smiley after a wry statement 8-) smiley swimmer :-* smiley after eating something bitter :-& smiley which is tongue-tied :-0 smiley orator smiley invisible man (:-( unsmiley frowning (:-) smiley big-face ):-) " ):-( unsmiley big-face )8-) scuba smiley big-face =:-) smiley punk-rocker =:-( (real punk rockers don't smile) +:-) smiley priest :-q smiley trying to touch its tongue to its nose :-e disappointed smiley :-t cross smiley :-i semi-smiley :-o smiley singing national anthem :-p smiley sticking its tongue out (at you!) :-[ un-smiley blockhead :-] smiley blockhead :-{ smiley variation on a theme :-} ditto {:-) smiley with its hair parted in the middle }:-) above in an updraft :-a lefty smilely touching tongue to nose :-s smiley after a BIZARRE comment :-d lefty smiley razzing you g-) smiley with ponce-nez glasses :-j left smiling smilely :-k beats me, looks like something, tho. :-l y. a. s. :-: mutant smiley :-\ undecided smiley :-| "have an ordinary day" smiley ;-) winking smiley :-< real sad smiley :-> y.a.s. :-z y.a.c.s. :-x "my lips are sealed" smiley :-c bummed out smiley :-v talking head smiley :v) left-pointing nose smiley :-b left-pointing tongue smiley :-/ lefty undecided smiley :-? smilely smoking a pipe .-] one-eyed smilely ,-} wry and winking 0-) smiley cyclops (scuba diver?) :-=) older smiley with mustache :u) smiley with funny-looking left nose :n) smiley with funny-looking right nose :< midget unsmiley :> midget smiley }:^#}) mega-smiley: updrafted bushy-mustached pointy nosed smiley with a double-chin :-) ha ha ~~:-( net.flame |-) hee hee O |-) net.religion |-D ho ho :-> hey hey 8 :-I net.unix-wizards :-( boo hoo X-( net.suicide :-I hmm E-:-I net.ham-radio :-O uh oh >:-I net.startrek :-P nyah nyah 3:o[ net.pets |-P yuk :-} beard :-{ mustache :-# braces :-X bow tie :-Q smoker <:I dunce (:I egghead @:I turban 8-) glasses B-) horn-rims 8:-) glasses on forehead :-8( condescending stare ;-) wink :-< mad Drama :-( Comedy :-) Surpise :-o Suspense 8-| Male :- Female >- Birth |-O Death 8-# Infinity 8 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 15:11:25 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <3357C75D.DBB@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > > > Probably not, but if I can get Mike's permission (I just printed out > >your letter to show him) and no other permissions are required, I will > >put them on the NYTS web page (http://www.dorsai.org/~nyts). > > Thanks for your help. I am sure many others also may like to see the letters > and usually you will find some great gems hidden in some of these letters. > Looking forward to hear from you. Mike tells me that they were published over a 8 issues of Theosophical History magazine. He recommends that you go to their new web page and get the back issues yourself, as their may be compilation copyright problems. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 16:05:40 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Political Correctness Message-ID: <3357D414.4A03@sprynet.com> Titus Roth wrote: > Sometimes we are so used to a truth being used for some nefarious agenda that > the truth and the agenda become confused with one another. We then avoid > speaking about it and become "politically correct". Over the last several months, I have been doing some additional research, which has only reinforced my opinion that "political correctness" is inherently untheosohpical. In the late 19th century, a philosophy called "postmodernism" was created. It started out as a method of criticism of the written word. Based on the fact that nobody is truly objective, it was used to analyze writings and recognize where the prejudices lay. But, like a child given a hammer, the postmodernists started applying their philosophy on everything. And, although a hammer is a very useful tool, applying it to a dirty window to make it clearer is not a useful solution. And although postmodernist thinking is a useful tool for things with clear subjectivity, the lower the amount of subjectivity involved, the less useful it becomes. Yet, many postmodernists feel that even if every iota of objective evidence says one thing, it can still be wrong. One philosopher, Jacques Derrida, theorized that what we consider objective is actually the result of arbitrary constructs of language, and that for every aspect of what we consider objective reality, there is another, equally valid aspect that has been quashed by a tyrannical majority. The key to all this is the belief that we create our own reality. In Communism, the concepts of postmodernism became integrated into the political system. Communism was the ideal system of government, therefore those living under a communist system were living ideal lives. To say, or even imply otherwise was therefore politically incorrect. Because Lysenko's genetics were more in keeping with Communist politics than Mendel's, Lysenko's genetics were made the basis of agricultural policy in the Soviet Union. This caused disasterous crop failures in the Ukraine. Hundreds of thousands of people starved to death in the most fertile area in the world, in the name of "political correctness". The ideas have even been applied to science and mathematics. 2 + 2 = 4 is not a mathematical fact, but a burden that the Eurocentric male puts on the community at large. In truth, 2 + 2 can equal anything. In radical postmodernist philosophy, there is no such thing as expertise. One person's opinion is as good as another's, regardless of training. Those who go to school to learn science are chumps. Of course, I would like to see a postmodernist go off a cliff in a plane that was designed by an untrained engineer who used her "intuition" to design the plane. Yet, in modern education, we have systems in place that place intuition at a higher level than knowledge, in the name of "self-esteem". What this all comes down to is that radical postmodernism, and political correctness in particular, comes from not just that we create our own reality, but that reality is a creation of the EGO. And therefore the individual ego is the most important aspect of reality. Now, certainly, theosophy allows for individual beliefs. But I would also daresay that the overwhelming majority of theosophists would consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be inherently untheosophical. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:03:15 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: in defense of money Message-ID: <199704190019.UAA13866@ultra1.dreamscape.com> I was a teenager with 3 school uniforms, and one blouse & skirt for when I didn't need to wear the uniform. When I got to the point of making my own money, I always valued it for what it could buy me, which included a certain amount of security. I still think money in itself means nothing, but whatever it can buy, does ... like theater tickets, and some pretty clothes to make me feel good, and a turquoise ring to enjoy looking at. Or when I got older I could afford the peridontist who saved my teeth for a while. Or now that I'm old I can afford a computer, also to hire some Home Health Aides to help me. As long as I can pay for that, I can stay here, where I'm considered an indivudual, and I love it. If I can't afford aides anymore, I'll have to go to a nursing home, where I'll be a number, and not considered very important anymore. I never had enough money to spoil me, but I value the things it buys me. I think what applies to money, as to everything else, is the Middle Way. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:15:52 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: probable mistakes Message-ID: <199704190032.UAA16406@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. > >M K Ramadoss > > >Not me either Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:18:48 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Nature or nurture? Message-ID: <199704190035.UAA16903@ultra1.dreamscape.com> I think it's some of both. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:57:13 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: probable mistakes Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419005713.008f119c@mail.eden.com> At 08:34 PM 4/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >>I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. >> >>M K Ramadoss >> >> >>Not me either > >Liesel >Thank you. We have atleast two who have the same principle on this issue. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 19:48:02 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: lucifer, santan & bastards Message-ID: <199704190104.VAA22104@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Looking forward to new ideas and theories and questions from everyone. Dear Doss, I'm just sitting back, and enjoying the repartee. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 22:42:58 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: lucifer, santan & bastards Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419034258.006dd6bc@mail.eden.com> At 09:10 PM 4/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >>Looking forward to new ideas and theories and questions from everyone. > >Dear Doss, >I'm just sitting back, and enjoying the repartee. > >Liesel Dear Liesel: >Me too. Have been busy till recently with 4/15 deadline. We need more traffic here. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 00:57:34 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Jesuit Training etc. Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419055734.0067556c@mail.eden.com> Here is a quote form ML to APS No: 30; Adyar 3rd Edition: You have once upon a time called us Jesuits; and, viewing things as you do, perhaps, you were right to a certain extent in so regarding us, since apparently our systems of training do not differ much. But it is only externally. As I once said before, they know that what they teach is a lie; and we know that what we impart is truth, the only truth and nothing but the truth. [hey work for the greater power and glory (!) of their order; we - for the power and final glory of individuals, of isolated units, of humanity in general, and we are content, nay forced - to leave our Order and its chiefs entirely in the shade. They work, and toil, and deceive, for the sake of worldly power in this life; we work and toil, and allow our chelas to be temporarily deceived, to afford them means never to be deceived hereafter, and to see the whole evil of falsity and untruth, not alone in this but in many of their afterlives. They - the Jesuits sacrifice the inner principle, the Spiritual brain of the ego, to feed and develop the better the physical brain of the personal evanescent man, sacrificing the whole humanity to offer it as a holocaust to their Society - the insatiable monster feeding on the brain and marrow of humanity, and developing an incurable cancer on every spot of healthy flesh it touches. We - the criticized and misunderstood Brothers - we seek to bring men to sacrifice their personality -a passing flash - for the welfare of the whole humanity,. hence for their own immortal Egos, a part of the latter, as humanity is a fraction of the integral whole, that it will one day become come. They are trained to deceive; we-to undeceive; they do the scavenger's work themselves - barring a few poor sincere tools of theirs - con amore, and for selfish ends; we - leave it to our menials - the dugpas at our service, by giving them carte blanche for the time being, and with the sole object of drawing out the whole inner nature of the chela, most of the nooks and corners of which would remain dark and concealed for ever, were not an opportunity afforded to test each of these corners in turn. Whether the chela wins or loses the prize - depends solely on himself. ===================================== What prompted my interest was the comment that "apparently our systems of training do not differ much." Secondly, the comment that they work for the sake of wordly power in this life. Have any of you seen or known anyone who has been trained as Jesuit and later became interested in theosophy? It appears to me that once someone has been trained as a Jesuit, it may be extremely difficult to get rid of the habits developed during training, they may last life long. A Jesuit trained is very likely to work for spiritual *power* now or in a future life, since the training could be so ingrained in the personality. Such motivation could be very powerful, as the personality has a predisposition to name and fame and wants to feel superior and cleverer and sharper than the rest of humanity. Any comments from your personal experience and or observation? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 01:00:35 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419060035.006e44f8@mail.eden.com> > Mike tells me that they were published over a 8 issues of Theosophical >History magazine. He recommends that you go to their new web page and >get the back issues yourself, as their may be compilation copyright >problems. > > Bart Lidofsky > Do you have a URL for Theosophical History? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 12:40:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Jesuit Training etc. Message-ID: <970419124031_-2070611393@emout15.mail.aol.com> Hmm, Somebody once asked me if I had ever been a Jesuit, a question I found puzzling as I am not now nor have I have ever been a Roman Catholic. I do know this, if you get into an argument with one, you had damn well better know your material. Maybe that's why I've never met a Jesuit that I didn't like. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 15:01:05 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <33591670.2F3F@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > > > Mike tells me that they were published over a 8 issues of Theosophical > >History magazine. He recommends that you go to their new web page and > >get the back issues yourself, as their may be compilation copyright > >problems. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > Do you have a URL for Theosophical History? I thought you were the one who posted it! Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 17:44:44 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Jesuit Training etc. Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419224444.006bd2a0@mail.eden.com> At 12:47 PM 4/19/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hmm, > >Somebody once asked me if I had ever been a Jesuit, a question I found >puzzling as I am not now nor have I have ever been a Roman Catholic. > >I do know this, if you get into an argument with one, you had damn well >better know your material. Maybe that's why I've never met a Jesuit that I >didn't like. > >Chuck the Heretic Chuck: I am least interested in their theology. What I am curious is the techniques taught to them when they are trained. One of the things I have noticed is their absolute obedience to their superiors -- I cannot say whether it is for real or just what they demonstrate. I am sure there may be some theosophists who may have been a jesuit (training or otherwise) in the past. Wondering about some feed back. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 17:46:18 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Blavatsky letters Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970419224618.006efbd4@mail.eden.com> >> Do you have a URL for Theosophical History? > I thought you were the one who posted it! > Bart Lidofsky Not that I recall. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 19:37:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Jesuit Training etc. Message-ID: <970419193749_284332128@emout13.mail.aol.com> Doss, The Spiritual Exercises use some pretty heavy visualization techniques so that may account for some of their characteristics as an organization. John Algeo tells the story that it was the Jesuits that first exposed him to the Theosophical Society, an irony if ever there was one. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 00:22:56 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: <3FRLiBAQPVWzEwyX@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <970418124954_1616793439@emout20.mail.aol.com>, Wildefire@aol.com writes >Whatever the Logos wants. asks "which Logos?"> Hello? Did someone call? Alan the Word From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 00:32:19 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Satan, devil, bastards and all that oughtn't Message-ID: In message <970418124943_1684429535@emout12.mail.aol.com>, Wildefire@aol.com writes >In a message dated 97-04-16 22:57:15 EDT, Alan wrote: > >(quoting me) >> >the frequency of purely lust-driven unions is attracting a large >> >number of lesser evolved souls prematurely into incarnation and that it >> does >> >cause problems. >> >> I wonder why this link is necessarily made. Might not a highly >> developed soul seeking incarnation choose to incarnate via a lust-driven >> (Aaargh!) union for reasons known only to itself? Possible reasons: > >Alan, > >Thank you for forcing me to think this through further! As a result of your >post, I have moderated my opinions on this. I agree with everything that you >said. Seemed reasonable to me to question this. > >I formerly agreed with Bailey on it because I believed she meant that the >circumstances surrounding "lusty unions" were probably more attractive to >relatively unevolved souls than to more highly evolved souls. I think that >she was basing it possibly on a belief that souls tend to be attracted to >parents of similar emotional and mental vibration. I think that, at the time >she wrote this, people who engaged in sex outside of marriage were commonly >believed to be at a lower mental and emotional vibratory state than those who >didn't. (Though, even during her times, this may have been too sweeping a >generalization.) Without really thinking about it, I just went along with >this. This is the problem, IMHO, with so many attractive teachings, Students say, "Hey! this is good stuff" and then swallow everything that is offered without looking into the matter closely enough. As I have said before on the list, my own approach to students has always been, "This is the Teaching as I have received it. Don't believe a word of it - check it out." > >Just in case >anyone is wondering--this proposed attraction to parents of similar vibratory >levels does not contradict statements I made in earlier posts about the my >belief that the quality of an individual's own vehicles is not inherited from >the parents, but resides in the soul's permanent atoms. In fact, Alan, your >post supports that concept, too. Maybe, but other assumptions may lie behind your remark (not necessarily false assumptions). Maybe it's a bit of each - like genetics will affect the body into which the soul arrives. > >Yet, I still would have to question the ability of the mental and emotional >vehicles to control the instincts of the physical vehicle in someone who >*repeatedly* engages in purely lust-driven sex. .. but this is a special case? >This is the very type of thing I hoped to gain by joining this list--the >opportunity to grow by receiving the input of others on these topics. True for all of us, I hope. I know I have learned things from others on the list. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 00:42:35 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: In message <3357D414.4A03@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > Now, certainly, theosophy allows for individual beliefs. But I would >also daresay that the overwhelming majority of theosophists would >consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be >inherently untheosophical. Interesting, but perhaps a little incomplete? I would be interested in your view (or definition) of "ego" before trying to follow this. I use the Jungian approach which sees "ego" as a psychological complex within the personal unconscious. And again, to suggest that something may be "un-theosophical" begs the question as to what is "theosophical". Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 00:56:33 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: probable mistakes Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19970419005713.008f119c@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >At 08:34 PM 4/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >>>I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. >>> >>>M K Ramadoss >>> >>> >>>Not me either >> >>Liesel >>Thank you. >We have atleast two who have the same principle on this issue. > >MKR > .. which is why I no longer belong to the TS in England. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 21:48:31 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <335975EF.3411@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <3357D414.4A03@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes > > Now, certainly, theosophy allows for individual beliefs. But I would > >also daresay that the overwhelming majority of theosophists would > >consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be > >inherently untheosophical. > > Interesting, but perhaps a little incomplete? I would be interested in > your view (or definition) of "ego" before trying to follow this. I use > the Jungian approach which sees "ego" as a psychological complex within > the personal unconscious. And again, to suggest that something may be > "un-theosophical" begs the question as to what is "theosophical". Ego as in lower self, kama manas and below. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 09:11:23 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: probable mistakes Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970420141123.006a5350@mail.eden.com> At 08:52 PM 4/19/97 -0400, you wrote: >In message <2.2.32.19970419005713.008f119c@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss > writes >>At 08:34 PM 4/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >>>>I would not have anything to do with any group which excludes anyone. >>>> >>>>M K Ramadoss >>>> >>>> >>>>Not me either >>> >>>Liesel >>>Thank you. >>We have atleast two who have the same principle on this issue. >> >>MKR >> >.. which is why I no longer belong to the TS in England. > >Alan That makes us three. Any more? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:41:11 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Jesuits Message-ID: <199704201841.LAA26146@palrel1.hp.com> Doss, >From my $0.50 tour of history: the Jesuits came into being through Ignatius Loyola and were part of the Catholic Church's attempt at self-reform in the face of Protestantism. They were famed for their educational programs which added classical and Renaissance subjects to Catholic studies and which were intended to form a young, militant, elite vanguard fiercely loyal to the pope. When you try to sort out religious movements, you find a tangle of contradictions, but it seems to me they were one of the attempts to reconcile a growing independent scientific movement with spiritual intuitions seemingly at odds with the findings of science. They had a kind of schizophrenic fear of and intrigue with science. Evidently their inner experience was not strong enough to squash their gnawing fear, hence their leaning on Catholic authority. (The "nothing but" attitude of science, which offers explanations of everything such as why birds sing and how the universe is just a machine, in some respects does fly in the face of intuition and emotional common sense. Until we gain greater consciousness to know what we intuit, we on occasion have to live in a state of tension, saying, "OK, but presently observed facts are not the whole story." Anyway, I digress ...) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 11:50:17 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: in defense of money Message-ID: <199704201850.LAA26467@palrel1.hp.com> Liesel, I agree. Money and temporary things are supports for our life in the physical world. There is nothing inherently wrong with them and they should be used in good stewardship, in enjoyment, and with gratitude. False austerity is just another fanaticism. Why make war on the body, when we were given bodies to use? St. Paul's words were meant, I think, to caution against looking on money as something other than a support, i.e., and end in itself. When gathering things is what you pursue for it's own sake, it leads to all sorts of possessivism, greed, selfishness, wars - and ultimately lack of inner development. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 22:57:05 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Ego Message-ID: <8ppJpDAxEpWzEwQM@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <335975EF.3411@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >theosophists would >> >consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be >> >inherently untheosophical. >> >> Interesting, but perhaps a little incomplete? I would be interested in >> your view (or definition) of "ego" before trying to follow this. I use >> the Jungian approach which sees "ego" as a psychological complex within >> the personal unconscious. And again, to suggest that something may be >> "un-theosophical" begs the question as to what is "theosophical". > > Ego as in lower self, kama manas and below. In other words, your view of theosophy is one that places another aspect of the human state as preceding (vide anthropogenesis) ego consciousness? I enquire about this, as some psycho/philosophical models use "ego" in the sense of ultimate human essence, and some readers might not be clear about different usages of the term. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:10:27 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <335AB073.42A8@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > In other words, your view of theosophy is one that places another aspect > of the human state as preceding (vide anthropogenesis) ego > consciousness? > > I enquire about this, as some psycho/philosophical models use "ego" in > the sense of ultimate human essence, and some readers might not be clear > about different usages of the term. I consider ego to be important, but only temporary. The primary part of self is the higher self, the part that lasts from incarnation to incarnation, and ultimately linked to everybody and everything else. One needs the lower self to reintegrate with one's higher self, but the lower self is ultimately discarded. The philosophies of political correctness hold that the individual ego is the most important part of the mind, and rejects the concept of a higher level of consciousness. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:23:06 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Jesuit training Message-ID: <199704210139.VAA10206@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Doss, >From my French background I know that the Jesuits say "Give us a child until he's 7, and he'll be ours forever", so I think youre right. Once they've trained someone that young, it's hard to reprogram them. or for them to reprogram themselves. Jesuit trained people are good students though. And if I recall correctly, Teilhard was a Jesuit. So maybe some people can break out of their very strict environment. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 20:23:01 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: re post modern world Message-ID: <199704210139.VAA10192@ultra1.dreamscape.com> >Now, certainly, theosophy allows for individual beliefs. But I would >also daresay that the overwhelming majority of theosophists would >consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be >inherently untheosophical. > > Bart Lidofsky > >------------------------------ I agree with you, Bart. I have a further problem with Theosophy. Theosophists are always talking about Reality. Lots of Theosophists. very learned ones, keep on talking about Reality. Well, what is it? And whose reality are we talking about? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 22:22:04 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Operational Definitions Message-ID: <335ACF4C.1E10@sprynet.com> liesel f. deutsch wrote: > I agree with you, Bart. > > I have a further problem with Theosophy. Theosophists are always talking > about Reality. Lots of Theosophists. very learned ones, keep on talking > about Reality. Well, what is it? And whose reality are we talking about? An important part of science is the concept of "operational definitions". Put simply, it means that you can't discover anything useful unless there is generally agreed upon definition of the topic on which you are talking. An operational definiton of "reality" gets very tricky, as it gets into the level of axioms. One basic question is whether or not what we detect with our senses is part of reality. The Primary Literature seems to state that it is, in fact, one aspect of reality, but certainly not the whole of reality. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 21:26:32 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Jesuit training Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970421022632.006c74cc@mail.eden.com> At 09:43 PM 4/20/97 -0400, liesel f. deutsch wrote: >Dear Doss, > >>From my French background I know that the Jesuits say "Give us a child until >he's 7, and he'll be ours forever", so I think youre right. Once they've >trained someone that young, it's hard to reprogram them. or for them to >reprogram themselves. Jesuit trained people are good students though. And if >I recall correctly, Teilhard was a Jesuit. So maybe some people can break >out of their very strict environment. > >Liesel > Dear Liesel: Thanks for your feedback. I donot have much of any knowledge of Jesuits apart from what I quoted. Chuck in a msg stated: "John Algeo tells the story that it was the Jesuits that first exposed him to the Theosophical Society, an irony if ever there was one." That is very interesting. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 21:27:41 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: re post modern world Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970421022741.006fb0b8@mail.eden.com> At 09:44 PM 4/20/97 -0400, you wrote: >>Now, certainly, theosophy allows for individual beliefs. But I would >>also daresay that the overwhelming majority of theosophists would >>consider any theory of reality that considers the ego precedent to be >>inherently untheosophical. >> >> Bart Lidofsky >> >>------------------------------ > >I agree with you, Bart. > >I have a further problem with Theosophy. Theosophists are always talking >about Reality. Lots of Theosophists. very learned ones, keep on talking >about Reality. Well, what is it? And whose reality are we talking about? > >Liesel > A good question. I recall a very interesting comment made by Olcott. In a meeting someone asked him a question about Solar Logos. His reply was that he is unable to say anything because he is *not on speaking terms with Solar Logos*. Again ego, at least for me, is just a theoretical concept. I am yet to run into someone who really knows first hand about ego. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 17:22:16 -0400 (EDT) From: HermesTris@aol.com Subject: THEOS-NEWS digest Message-ID: <970421172059_1455327809@emout18.mail.aol.com> Hello friends, the URL of the theosophical society (ADYAR) in Saarland, Germany is: http://members.aol.com/HermesTris you can send your comments to: HermesTris@aol.com would be pleased to hear form you and I'm willing to link this website to other good theosophical websites. HermesTris (Johannes M. U. van Driel). From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 16:13:17 -0700 From: petra@bluestar.com (Petra Michel) Subject: Re: THEOS-BUDS digest 207 Message-ID: Dear Mrs. Deutsch, This is a late reply to your friendly e-mail from February. As I have no e-mail system in Germany I took all the information with me to answer it from California. The intention to write a biography on Leadbeater is based on the simple fact that I think the work from Tillett (The Elder Brother) gives a totally misleading imagine of one of the greatest spiritual teachers of the last 100 years. I have already gathered a lot of material that will show a very different man than Tillett tried to characterize. What I am still looking for is material about the "unknown" years, i.e. the years before 1900. I have a very good relationship with Dora Kunz, but even she, who knew CWL quite well, could not help me with information about the early years. I would very much appreciate any support you could give. For me it would be easier to correspond by Fax. My Fax-Number in Germany is -49-8092-83581. Until May 3rd you can reach me also under this e-mail number at Bluestar. Thank you for your help and kind regards Peter Michel Petra Michel Bluestar Communications Corp., 44 Bear Glenn, Woodside, CA. 94062 ph: +1-415-851-5880 fx: +1-415-851-2339 e-mail: petra@bluestar.com web:www.bluestar.com Truth is a pathless land. Jiddu Krishnamurti From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 07:53:06 -0600 (MDT) From: JRC Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > The philosophies of political > correctness hold that the individual ego is the most important part of > the mind, and rejects the concept of a higher level of consciousness. > > Bart Lidofsky > Which "philosophies of political correctness"? It is not a philosophical tradition - its a political category created by right-wingers who want a return to the good old days when women and minorities knew their places. And so far as critiquing it because it is "ego"-based - well, so is virtually all of modern politics, economics, art, literature, a lot of science, etc., etc. shall we do away with all of that as well? The groups that complain most about "political correctness" - conservative republicans and christian fundamentalists - they are *not* "ego-based"? Really? And so far as being "untheosophical" - I might point out that HPB, a woman who travelled the world and insisted that some Asian religions were far superior to western Christianity - would be considered by todays fundamentalists as the very height of "politically correct". -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 13:16:16 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Jesuit Priests Message-ID: My only encounter with a Jesuit was seeing Jeremy Irons on "The Mission." I thought that he was such a babe. If I ever have kids, I was ready to make them all Jesuits. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 13:16:22 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: To Lynn Message-ID: Hi Lynn, I can't quote you because I left your post on the other computer. I pretty much agree with your statements. That means our telepathic mode must be on! (Spock fingers, "My mind to your mind..." :o)) On your comment regarding yogis, etc., I agree that as you move up on the Path, your physical needs lessen. However, I was thinking in terms of most of us shmucks. Actually, I see from my print out of your post that you and I also agree on this. Heck, then why am I writing? :oD (need to look for Titus' smiley faces and tape it on the computer). Lastly, about the weirdness of closely observing people, "smelling" them, Sherlock Holmes would have said, "All in a day's work!" Okay, so we agree, how boring. :o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 13:16:30 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: >On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >> The philosophies of political >> correctness hold that the individual ego is the most important part of >> the mind, and rejects the concept of a higher level of consciousness. >> >> Bart Lidofsky >> >Which "philosophies of political correctness"? It is not a philosophical >tradition - its a political category created by right-wingers who want a >return to the good old days when women and minorities knew their places. >And so far as critiquing it because it is "ego"-based - well, so is >virtually all of modern politics, economics, art, literature, a lot of >science, etc., etc. shall we do away with all of that as well? The groups >that complain most about "political correctness" - conservative >republicans and christian fundamentalists - they are *not* "ego-based"? >Really? And so far as being "untheosophical" - I might point out that HPB, >a woman who travelled the world and insisted that some Asian religions >were far superior to western Christianity - would be considered by todays >fundamentalists as the very height of "politically correct". > -JRC Well said, JRC! That was exactly my thinking. You saved me a few words in this post. In other words, under Bart's definition of political correctness, the T.S. is politically incorrect, therefore untheosophical, and just about anybody else. I'm not well-versed in the definition of post-modernism in relation to writing. It seems from Bart's definition, that it is the same as the art definition. Post-modernism came as a reaction to "Eurocentric" male vision of big, abstract, or minimal art. In architecture, the death of modernism is the death of idealistic, sharp, clinical space that does not support personal requirements of space-privacy, individuality, etc. Thus, art and architecture in post-modernism became personal, vibrant visions that also includes female and minority visions. Women, in particular, rebelled against the cold and aloof modernist vision. Women artists and critics embraced the warm personal visions. I remember some of my women teachers stating how in class, they had to paint these big, abstract pieces, while privately painting small, sensitive landscapes. Bart's example of the communist political system is absurd. Anybody who follows something without thinking it through is only a conformist, either that or afraid for his/her life. That goes for following any "Eurocentric" male vision, also. Bart's definition of political correctness just seem to be indicating a "Eurocentric" (not you, Bart, just general :o)) male's elitist point of view. We would all love it if everybody just shuts up and quietly follows our point of view. Now, in regards to Titus' statement on political correctness, what is wrong with considering people's feelings? What is wrong with analyzing a belief and to see its possible error? It's easy to make a general sweeping statement, but in some applications, it can be harmful. I hope this makes sense. I've got busy weeks ahead of me. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 17:48:13 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <335BE09D.4071@sprynet.com> JRC wrote: > > On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > The philosophies of political > > correctness hold that the individual ego is the most important part of > > the mind, and rejects the concept of a higher level of consciousness. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > Which "philosophies of political correctness"? It is not a philosophical > tradition - its a political category created by right-wingers who want a > return to the good old days when women and minorities knew their places. You obviously did not read my original message on the subject. If you wish a copy, I will email it to you. > And so far as critiquing it because it is "ego"-based - well, so is > virtually all of modern politics, economics, art, literature, a lot of > science, etc., etc. shall we do away with all of that as well? The groups > that complain most about "political correctness" - conservative > republicans and christian fundamentalists - Do you have stastical evidence to back that up, or are you just resorting to name-calling? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 17:59:17 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <335BE335.3E31@sprynet.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > Well said, JRC! That was exactly my thinking. You saved me a few words in > this post. In other words, under Bart's definition of political > correctness, the T.S. is politically incorrect, therefore untheosophical, > and just about anybody else. The T.S. is and should be politically incorrect. How does that make it untheosophical? > I'm not well-versed in the definition of post-modernism in relation to > writing. It seems from Bart's definition, that it is the same as the art > definition. Post-modernism came as a reaction to "Eurocentric" male vision > of big, abstract, or minimal art. In art. It is when it was misapplied to things like science and historical fact (as opposed to historical opinion; historical fact being, for example, that the U.S. dropped two nuclear weapons on Japan; historical opinion, which IS subject to postmodernist interpretation, would be whether or not the United States was justified in doing so). Note that I compared postmodernism to a hammer; quite suitable for some tasks, but worse than useless on others. > Bart's example of the communist political system is absurd. So is the communist political system, as practiced in China and the Soviet Union (as opposed to certain Roman Catholic monastic groups, where, although it is not named "communism", is, and has worked for centuries). > Anybody who > follows something without thinking it through is only a conformist, either > that or afraid for his/her life. George Orwell wrote about it. But, since the ideas were not palatable to the people of 1948, he pretended that he was writing about the future, and called it "1984". > That goes for following any "Eurocentric" > male vision, also. Bart's definition of political correctness just seem to > be indicating a "Eurocentric" (not you, Bart, just general :o)) male's > elitist point of view. Please explain how. > We would all love it if everybody just shuts up and > quietly follows our point of view. Now, in regards to Titus' statement on > political correctness, what is wrong with considering people's feelings? Nothing. > What is wrong with analyzing a belief and to see its possible error? Nothing. What IS wrong is presupposing a belief is in error because you don't like it, and assuming it is in error in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Just because an idea is politically correct does not automatically make it INcorrect. But if it is correct, then it does not need the adverb. And the adverb is ENTIRELY about ego. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 16:21:38 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Hi Message-ID: <199704212320.TAA20975@elvis.vnet.net> Hello to all, it's me again. I haven't been here for a while, because i got real sick of the troath, still i'm sick!! and also some fever. I just stopped to see the letters of you (i only could read till digest 994 something like that number i think) and i only wanted to say to you a few stuff. first, to Lynn, thank you for your kindly letter. i have follow your discussions, you seem like a nice girl like Thoa. a good person. Thoa, i have also "feeled" the same as i meet the pepole, it started i think in highschool, but my mom says it's before: i meet the persons , and i actualy can "feel the being, the self, from inside the person, by the sight , the eyes of the person, the expresion of the face, i don't know really, but that way i have evaded some problems with nasty pepole (or by the contrary, i had tried to frequent nice and beautiful souls) i don't know, i taught everybody had it, is something you can feel from inside. Also , since the lack of new subjects as Liesel (and i think M.K Ramadoss said too) said, i propose the subject of health, how a person studying theosophy can achieve good health,i know is difficult, but i think HPB and others had to said something at respect. i myself i'm beggining to suspect that the bad/good health is in relation of the chackra of the related organ/s of the body in question. If pepole here can say more about the question, please, i beg you to write something at respect (NOW that i'm sick i think could be useful) Estrella P.S. salute gently to all the pepole here. pardon me if i'm not so constant, but in my home i don't have computer. ------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 23:44:10 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Help ! Message-ID: Can anyone help? > Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 20:12:17 +0400 > From: Oleg > Subject: Help ! > > Dear Dr. A.M.Bain, > In June 21nd - 27th a congress of ufologists , astrologists and = > clairvoyants will be held in the vicinity of Chelyabinsk which is at the = > picturesque foothills of the Urals. The organizers of the congress want = > to find the address or the telephone number of Ibel Kingston and Jean = > Dickson (Dickinson). So that he could be invited to the Congress. He = > lives somewhere in Michigan. Could you help us to find him? We would = > very much appreciate it. > Avesta. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 19:05:21 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: Bart wrote: > The T.S. is and should be politically incorrect. How does that make it >untheosophical? Did I say "incorrect"? That's what I get for not bothering to proofread my writing. With all these indefinite terms, I knew one day I would mangle it! Blah, blah, blah. It's "politically correct". Anyway, to respond you properly, let me combine your recent post along with your post on postmodernism and political correctness. Your post of 4/18: > Over the last several months, I have been doing some additional >research, which has only reinforced my opinion that "political >correctness" is inherently untheosohpical. and in your example of Communism: > The key to all this is the belief that we create our own reality. In >Communism, the concepts of postmodernism became integrated into the >political system. Communism was the ideal system of government, >therefore those living under a communist system were living ideal lives. >To say, or even imply otherwise was therefore politically incorrect. >Because Lysenko's genetics were more in keeping with Communist politics >than Mendel's, Lysenko's genetics were made the basis of agricultural >policy in the Soviet Union. This caused disasterous crop failures in the >Ukraine. Hundreds of thousands of people starved to death in the most >fertile area in the world, in the name of "political correctness". Your Communism example indicates that any opposition to their "reality" is politically incorrect. Hence my correlation to the Theosophical Society. In the T.S., any opposition to their "reality" is wrong, or "politically incorrect." Thus, the Theosophical Society is untheosophical. Now, you may say that the T.S. has no such belief. That it's belief is the search for truth, no matter where it lies. However, from the grievances I observed on this list, that is untrue. Quoting myself: >> I'm not well-versed in the definition of post-modernism in relation to >> writing. It seems from Bart's definition, that it is the same as the art >> definition. Post-modernism came as a reaction to "Eurocentric" male vision >> of big, abstract, or minimal art. Bart's response: > In art. It is when it was misapplied to things like science and >historical fact (as opposed to historical opinion; historical fact >being, for example, that the U.S. dropped two nuclear weapons on Japan; >historical opinion, which IS subject to postmodernist interpretation, >would be whether or not the United States was justified in doing so). >Note that I compared postmodernism to a hammer; quite suitable for some >tasks, but worse than useless on others. True. Some analysis can be comical. It's like all these rumors of Elvis being alive. To not complicate my life further, I do accept that 2+2=4 and refuse to discuss that it may not be so. I have better things to analyze. > So is the communist political system, as practiced in China and the >Soviet Union (as opposed to certain Roman Catholic monastic groups, >where, although it is not named "communism", is, and has worked for >centuries). Marxism could work under certain conditions and sounds great on paper. However, when combined with the complexities of a huge society and economics, it fails. I don't think many people in the general population would want to have the subservient life of a monk. The problem with Communism is that in order to enforce its policy, it ends up having to force them on individuals. Myself: >> That goes for following any "Eurocentric" >> male vision, also. Bart's definition of political correctness just seem to >> be indicating a "Eurocentric" (not you, Bart, just general :o)) male's >> elitist point of view. Bart's response: > Please explain how. First, let me guess what a "Eurocentric male" is. Actually, you can probably define him as anything, and I could say that he is politically correct, by your definition of political correctness. Anyway, my definition is the general point of view that the white male is superior. Or...to use art analogy, the big, abstract or minimalist male art. Now, let me define political correctness as you have inadvertently or advertently defined. By your example of the Communist society, your definition of "political correctness" is any going along with a certain "reality." The "reality" of the "Eurocentric male" is that characteristics associated with the white, male (big art, patriarchal society, etc.) is superior. To go against that is politically incorrect. Thus, in a white male's elitist point of view, any other opinions is politically incorrect. Bart: > What IS wrong is presupposing a belief is in error because you don't >like it, and assuming it is in error in spite of overwhelming evidence >to the contrary. Just because an idea is politically correct does not >automatically make it INcorrect. But if it is correct, then it does not >need the adverb. And the adverb is ENTIRELY about ego. > > Bart Lidofsky True, true, and it is ENTIRELY about ego. Unfortunately, I don't see how we can avoid it. Thus, the argument regarding "postmodernism" and "political correctness" is a postmodernist argument. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 21:13:23 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hi Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970422021323.006f1b9c@mail.eden.com> At 07:26 PM 4/21/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hello to all, it's me again. >I haven't been here for a while, because i got real sick of the troath, still >i'm sick!! and also some fever. >I just stopped to see the letters of you (i only could read till digest 994 >something like that number i think) and i nonly wanted 2 to say to you a few >stuff. >first, to Lynn, thank you for your kindly letter. i have follow your discussions, you seem like a nice girl like Thoa. a good person. >Thoa, i have also "feeled" the same as i meet the pepole, it started i think >in highschool, but my mom says it's before: i meet the persons , and i actualy >can "feel the being, the self, from inside the person, by the sight , the eyes >of the person, the expresion of the face, i don't know really, but that way >i have evaded some problems with nasty pepole (or by the contrary, i had tried >to frequent nice and beautiful souls) i don't know, i taught everybody had it, >is something you can feel from inside. >Also , since the lack of new subjects as Liesel (and i think M.K Ramadoss said >too) said, i propose the subject of health, how a person studying theosophy >can achieve good health,i know is difficult, but i think HPB and others had >to said something at respect. i myself i'm beggining to suspect that the >bad/good health is in relation of the chackra of the related organ/s of the >body in question. >If pepole here can say more about the question, please, i beg you to write >something at respect (NOW that i'm sick i think could be useful) >Estrella >P.S. salute gently to all the pepole here. >pardon me if i'm not so constant, but in my home i don't have computer. Hi, sorry to learn you are sick and I hope when you receive this msg you feel better. I do not know much about theosophical approach to sickness. From a practical point of view, I try to use my common sense and use the traditionally available methods of curing sickness or reducing the suffering. By traditional, I mean it could be the western medicine or herbal or native or any other system of medicine. Secondly when one has some health problem, it helps if one can avoid thinking about it. When one is preoccupied with something else, you tend to forget you own sickness. Keep us informed how you are doing. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 17:37:03 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: THEOS-NEWS digest Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970421223703.006e6800@mail.eden.com> At 05:27 PM 4/21/97 -0400, HermesTris@aol.com wrote: >Hello friends, > >the URL of the theosophical society (ADYAR) in Saarland, Germany is: > >http://members.aol.com/HermesTris > >you can send your comments to: HermesTris@aol.com > >would be pleased to hear form you and I'm willing to link this website to >other good theosophical websites. > >HermesTris (Johannes M. U. van Driel). Glad to know you have a URL. There is a very interesting URL, which links to various other Theosophical Sites. You may want to visit and put a link in your URL. http://www.garlic.com/~rdon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 21:08:47 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: THEOS-BUDS digest 207 Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970422020847.006f3294@mail.eden.com> At 07:14 PM 4/21/97 -0400, Petra Michel wrote: >Dear Mrs. Deutsch, > >This is a late reply to your friendly e-mail from February. As I have no >e-mail system in Germany I took all the information with me to answer it >from California. The intention to write a biography on Leadbeater is based >on the simple fact that I think the work from Tillett (The Elder Brother) >gives a totally misleading imagine of one of the greatest spiritual >teachers of the last 100 years. I have already gathered a lot of material >that will show a very different man than Tillett tried to characterize. >What I am still looking for is material about the "unknown" years, i.e. the >years before 1900. I have a very good relationship with Dora Kunz, but even >she, who knew CWL quite well, could not help me with information about the >early years. I would very much appreciate any support you could give. >For me it would be easier to correspond by Fax. My Fax-Number in Germany is >-49-8092-83581. Until May 3rd you can reach me also under this e-mail >number at Bluestar. > >Thank you for your help and kind regards > Peter Michel > >Petra Michel >Bluestar Communications Corp., 44 Bear Glenn, Woodside, CA. 94062 >ph: +1-415-851-5880 fx: +1-415-851-2339 e-mail: petra@bluestar.com >web:www.bluestar.com > >Truth is a pathless land. > Jiddu Krishnamurti I would very much like your publishing material which contradicts or proves any of the factual material contained in Elder Brother to be erroneous or wrong. This is because I am yet to see any written material disputing any of the things discussed in Elder Brother. As far as pre 1900 years are concerned, I suppose the only place where something is likely to be available is at Adyar archives. Perhaps a personal trip to Adyar may be needed to accomplish this task and it would, in my opinion, well worth it. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 01:00:18 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Keys to Kabbalah Message-ID: FYI. Users of the theos-lists may be pleased to know that my book, "Keys to Kabbalah" is now available from the World Wide Web. Especial thanks are due to Martin Euser (TI), who has worked very hard on this project, and made the web space available. Both Martin and myself are using Windows95, and the text (with illustrations and some Hebrew terms) was formatted in WORD 7. Win 3.1 users may know of file viewers that can read this (Such as INSO corporation Quickview Plus) or the Microsoft Word Viewer which can be downloaded from the Microsoft Web Site for free. Copyright in "Keys to Kabbalah" remains with me, so that although the web version may be freely distributed, it is understood that the text as supplied on the internet shall not be altered in any way. Anyone who would *like* to make changes or add new data is, however, invited to contact me personally with their proposals. Who knows, this could be the first consensus-produced Theosophy International work to be launched upon the occult world! The basic self-extracting EXE file is 828K. Before downloading this, read the information on URL http://www.euronet.nl/users/euser/keysinst.htm Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 21 Apr 97 17:22:35 PDT From: "Mika Perala" Subject: Re: THEOS-BUDS digest 227 Message-ID: Petra Michel wrote: > Dear Mrs. Deutsch, > > This is a late reply to your friendly e-mail from February. As I have no > e-mail system in Germany I took all the information with me to answer it > from California. The intention to write a biography on Leadbeater is based > on the simple fact that I think the work from Tillett (The Elder Brother) > gives a totally misleading imagine of one of the greatest spiritual > teachers of the last 100 years. I have already gathered a lot of material > that will show a very different man than Tillett tried to characterize. > What I am still looking for is material about the "unknown" years, i.e. the > years before 1900. I have a very good relationship with Dora Kunz, but even > she, who knew CWL quite well, could not help me with information about the > early years > I would be very interested to know the birth date of Mr. Leadbeater. Tillett gave a date that differs 7 years from Leadbeaters own memory. Maybe it would be useful to check that out from birth register documents(or whatever they are called in English) in England? Same goes for his supposed brother. Mika From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:53:24 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <335CC2D4.13@sprynet.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > > Bart wrote: > > The T.S. is and should be politically incorrect. How does that make it > >untheosophical? > > Did I say "incorrect"? That's what I get for not bothering to proofread my > writing. With all these indefinite terms, I knew one day I would mangle > it! Blah, blah, blah. It's "politically correct". Are you saying that it is the policy of the Theosophical Society that if the observed facts disagree with one's politics, then the observed facts are incorrect? > Your post of 4/18: > > Over the last several months, I have been doing some additional > >research, which has only reinforced my opinion that "political > >correctness" is inherently untheosohpical. > > and in your example of Communism: > > > The key to all this is the belief that we create our own reality. In > >Communism, the concepts of postmodernism became integrated into the > >political system. Communism was the ideal system of government, > >therefore those living under a communist system were living ideal lives. > >To say, or even imply otherwise was therefore politically incorrect. > >Because Lysenko's genetics were more in keeping with Communist politics > >than Mendel's, Lysenko's genetics were made the basis of agricultural > >policy in the Soviet Union. This caused disasterous crop failures in the > >Ukraine. Hundreds of thousands of people starved to death in the most > >fertile area in the world, in the name of "political correctness". > > Your Communism example indicates that any opposition to their "reality" is > politically incorrect. Hence my correlation to the Theosophical Society. > In the T.S., any opposition to their "reality" is wrong, or "politically > incorrect." Thus, the Theosophical Society is untheosophical. Now, you > may say that the T.S. has no such belief. That it's belief is the search > for truth, no matter where it lies. However, from the grievances I > observed on this list, that is untrue. The grievances you have seen on this list are against individuals, and many of them presented entirely without evidence. Also note that when people gain power in organizations, they frequently end up working against the principles of the organization to maintain their power. That, for example is one of the dangers that the Mahatmas point out in a paid clergy. In the case of the Theosophical Society, the problem is clearly one of funding. Traditionally, we have been funded by contributions and bequests. There has also been strong feeling against using the activities of the Theosophical Society itself for raising money. The result has been that there has been self-censorship out of fear of offending the big contributors (frequently unnecessary, in my opinion; the big contributors whom I have met tend to be far more theosophical than they are given credit for). This has caused an extreme conservatism that tends to keep away new, younger members, which increases the average age of the big contributors, which completes the cycle. It is my opinion (not shared by many Theosophists) that I would much have the TS funded through the keeping of the 3 objects than through means that either ignore, or worse, go against the 3 objects. In any case, all organizations, including the Theosophical Society, have their share of hypocrites. That does not make the organizations themselves hypocritical. > Marxism could work under certain conditions and sounds great on paper. > However, when combined with the complexities of a huge society and > economics, it fails. I don't think many people in the general population > would want to have the subservient life of a monk. The problem with > Communism is that in order to enforce its policy, it ends up having to > force them on individuals. The way I generally put it is that Communism has a great concept: Everybody works as hard as they can, everybody gets everything they need. It starts to fall apart when somebody says, "That person is not working as hard as s/he can", or "That person is getting more than s/he needs". This creates a requirement of the creation of a job to make sure everybody is working as hard as they can, and everybody is getting what they need. Those that hold that job become the absolute rulers, totally destroying the system in the process. > Myself: > >> That goes for following any "Eurocentric" > >> male vision, also. Bart's definition of political correctness just seem to > >> be indicating a "Eurocentric" (not you, Bart, just general :o)) male's > >> elitist point of view. > > Bart's response: > > Please explain how. > > First, let me guess what a "Eurocentric male" is. Actually, you can > probably define him as anything, and I could say that he is politically > correct, by your definition of political correctness. Anyway, my > definition is the general point of view that the white male is superior. > Or...to use art analogy, the big, abstract or minimalist male art. Now, > let me define political correctness as you have inadvertently or > advertently defined. By your example of the Communist society, your > definition of "political correctness" is any going along with a certain > "reality." The "reality" of the "Eurocentric male" is that characteristics > associated with the white, male (big art, patriarchal society, etc.) is > superior. To go against that is politically incorrect. Thus, in a white > male's elitist point of view, any other opinions is politically incorrect. Yes, the concept of "political correctness" can in fact be applied to any point of view the opinions formed by the ego are considered to be more important than observed reality. Note, for example, that when you take political correctness to its extreme, you end up with the fundamentalist, which does make it funny when those who proudly call themselves fundamentalist speak against those who proudly call themselves politically correct. > Bart: > > What IS wrong is presupposing a belief is in error because you don't > >like it, and assuming it is in error in spite of overwhelming evidence > >to the contrary. Just because an idea is politically correct does not > >automatically make it INcorrect. But if it is correct, then it does not > >need the adverb. And the adverb is ENTIRELY about ego. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > True, true, and it is ENTIRELY about ego. Unfortunately, I don't see how > we can avoid it. Thus, the argument regarding "postmodernism" and > "political correctness" is a postmodernist argument. Your statement, "Unfortunately, I don't see how we can avoid it" is the key argument for the misapplication of postmodernism. In many fields, there ARE ways of avoiding it. In science, for example, experiments are not done only once. They are done many times, with many variables changed, all with the idea of eliminating subjectivity as much as is possible. Yes, there is inevitably some subjectivity left, but it is sufficiently small as to not have a major effect on the result. If that were not the case, there would be a LOT more airplane crashes. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:12:56 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Health Message-ID: Hi Estrella, I'm sorry to hear that you've been ill. :o( I hope that you are feeling better. I'm no health expert, but I can tell you my personal habits. I do notice changes in my resistance to the cold bugs that goes with my habits. When I am conscientiously running, I'm hardly ever sick. Running gets my whole system going, thereby cleaning it out faster. It also has a Pranayama effect, in which my breath eventually becomes controlled and regular after a certain distance. That's when my whole body feels like a well-regulated engine. The result of that exercise is that I become more alert and active, and require less sleep. Another thing that is critical to my physical daily routine is Hatha yoga exercises. This helps my flexibility, thereby smoothing out any tight muscles and preventing pinched nerves. Other days I practice T'ai-Chi to help my mobility and balance. As far as diet, I eat a solid 3 meals a day and snack in-between. I don't believe in driving my body crazy by skipping meals. I don't overstuff and I eat until it's just right. I try to eat non-greasy, light meals that will offer me all the basic nutrients, protein, vitamins, minerals, calcium, etc. Since I am an athletic person, I have to make sure my body gets what it needs, or else it will affect my workout. As far as stress, I try to minimize it. I have this awful habit of piling on things. I think that resulted from this feeling that I can do anything, take anything on. That's generally good as far as positive thinking, but in reality, I end up with too much to do. What I end up doing is that when my stress meter goes high, I clear my plate and focus on what's most important for me. Thus, what am I trying to say? I don't recommend that anybody follows my habits. Everyone has to have health habits that fits in with his/her needs. This is my take on a healthy daily routine. First are exercises that keep your body well oiled and tuned. That involves mobility exercises such as T'ai-Chi and Hatha Yoga. These can be modified to your physical needs. The great thing about these exercises is that they are combined with breathing exercises, which makes your qi flow, or move your prana. Since prana is a key link between the astral and physical, moving your prana is beneficial to your health. These exercises combined with other disciplines can help awaken Kundalini. When Kundalini comes in contact with each Chakra, it activates its energy, causing different consciousness states. As an example of movement of qi, my Kuk Sool Won instructor recently told me of a grandmaster who just had a liver transplant. When he saw him after the transplant, the grandmaster looked gaunt and sickly. When he saw him again, the grandmaster skin's look firm and healthy. The grandmaster attributed his regaining of his health to exercises that move his qi. Along with body is a healthy mind. I think that keeping a mind happy, simple and focused is good for the health. A calm mind indicates a calm stress-free body. Also, more scientific research is coming out that makes the body/mind connection. For example, a mental state can boost or depress the immune system or affect other parts of your body. It is like Doss' statement that he thinks himself not to get sick. Instead of thinking of yourself as sickly, think that it is natural that your body is healthy. Perhaps a thing to boost that mental state is to do a regular routine, such as T'ai-Chi or Yoga, that you associate with getting yourself healthy, and that you feel great after doing it. Having a daily feeling of "I feel great" might go a long way toward boosting your health. And then there's ole chicken soup! This is getting longish. Anyway, that's my general take on it. Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 09:34:59 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <199704221635.JAA16544@palrel1.hp.com> JRC wrote in response to a posting by Bart: > Which "philosophies of political correctness"? It is not a philosophical > tradition - its a political category created by right-wingers who want a > return to the good old days when women and minorities knew their places. I now regret using a term that has such a history and such emotions attached to it. It is kind of ironic that my original post was about confusing a concept with its popular misuse. Since I don't want to "return to the good old days when women and minorities knew their places", let me change "political correctness" to "aklsdhfklasdh". As Thoah pointed out, one has a certain responsibility when he communicates a concept such as Aklsdhfklasdh to explicitly differentiate it from any agenda attached to it. Along with my explication of Aklsdhfklasdh, I should have added a few words. So let me do so now ... You can speak frankly with a person, but you have to be sure of your motive. If your motive is *truly* on helping them rather than on being 'liked' this is a sign of respect. As Thoah rightly pointed out, there is a false kind of frankness, namely, indulging your own cantankerousness. You insult a person and say, "But it's for your own good." Or you violate their volition and say, "Do what I say. I know better than you or God who has placed you in your environment for a reason." This *is* unfortunately done a lot. When my saintly spiritual teacher died, one of her successors misused the concept of vajra and indulged her power trips under the guise of "holy concern" for us and a desire for us to have "spiritual discipline". I have met very, very, very few who truly use the vajra appropriately. Vajra means "thunderbolt" (paging Doss for a better translation). It means you blast away a roadblock in a persons path with plain-speaking when a sugar-sweet approach is inappropriate. It should be used very judiciously and with no sense of evil satisfaction. Thoah wrote, > Now, in regards to Titus' statement on political correctness, what is wrong > with considering people's feelings? I trust I have explained what I "really meant". Let me explicitly add one more thing that I left implicit: A corollary to frankness is reassurance. For every step of frankness you probably should have two of reassurance. OK? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 11:58:01 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970422165801.00c0de24@mail.eden.com> At 09:58 AM 4/22/97 -0400, Bart Lidofsky wrote: Bart: >Are you saying that it is the policy of the Theosophical Society that >if the observed facts disagree with one's politics, then the observed >facts are incorrect? MKR: Please give some example of "observed" "facts" you are referring to. Bart: >Also note that when >people gain power in organizations, they frequently end up working >against the principles of the organization to maintain their power. >That, for example is one of the dangers that the Mahatmas point out in a >paid clergy. MKR: Once more the Mahatmas have been right on their observation. I am very glad that you brought it up. I do not know if you have seen my posts surrounding what happened to Krishnaji. A time came when the Trust property which was purchased and maintained to help Krishnaji to Teach, he himself was shut out of using them in Ojai and Madras. The Trust and Trustees have to be sued by the Attorney General of California and the new KFA for mismanagement and it took 18 years of litigation and finally the litigation ended only after K died. In the course of litigation, at one point the Trustees sued Krishnaji personally for a multi-million dollars. Yes, Krishnamurti himself was sued by the Trustees of the Krishnamurti Trust. It is unbelievable, but it is true. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. There is more to the irony of the situation which very few in TSA know of. One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. It is with the background of the above historical matter, that I voiced great concern about the way the new bylaws of TSA read. In effect, the BOD of TSA can one day shut down TSA, sell all the property and put the proceeds into the Theosophical Investment Trust. Once this is done, no one, you or me will have any say in or even know what is going on in TIT and they have no legal requirement to disclose anything to anyone. This may sound very far fetched but in long term planning, when large sums of money is involved, (due to the frailties of human nature) extreme care and business judgement is needed to protect them at a future date when an unscrupulous charismatic leader may emerge and do this. And it will be too late at that time. I have been shouting on this issue to deaf ears ever since the bylaw changes were published. Do you know when I asked for a copy of the Trust Document and the Bylaws of the Trust, I am yet to receive them after almost more than a year. Secrecy of the Trust has already started. Nothing surprises me anymore. Bart: > In the case of the Theosophical Society, the problem is >clearly one of funding. Traditionally, we have been funded by MKR: I will post a detailed msg on this in next couple of days. Keep tuned in. Bart: >contributions and bequests. There has also been strong feeling against >using the activities of the Theosophical Society itself for raising >money. The result has been that there has been self-censorship out of >fear of offending the big contributors (frequently unnecessary, in my >opinion; the big contributors whom I have met tend to be far more >theosophical than they are given credit for). MKR: It quite some time ago I stopped measuring who is theosophical or who is not theosophical and to what degree. It is not uncommon to find the usage of "untheosophical" and "un brotherly" as code words used in theosophical circles to deal with those with whom one does not agree with either on doctrines or on administrative policy/philosophy. Bart: >This has caused an extreme >conservatism that tends to keep away new, younger members, which >increases the average age of the big contributors, which completes the >cycle. It is my opinion (not shared by many Theosophists) that I would >much have the TS funded through the keeping of the 3 objects than >through means that either ignore, or worse, go against the 3 objects. > MKR: I am with you 100%. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 21:06:36 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > > At 09:58 AM 4/22/97 -0400, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > Bart: > > >Are you saying that it is the policy of the Theosophical Society that > >if the observed facts disagree with one's politics, then the observed > >facts are incorrect? > > Please give some example of "observed" "facts" you are referring to. I am asking a question, not making a reference. > >Also note that when > >people gain power in organizations, they frequently end up working > >against the principles of the organization to maintain their power. > >That, for example is one of the dangers that the Mahatmas point out in a > >paid clergy. > > Once more the Mahatmas have been right on their observation. > > I am very glad that you brought it up. I do not know if you have seen my > posts surrounding what happened to Krishnaji. I have. Being ignorant about the matter, I chose not to comment. > There is more to the irony of the situation which very few in TSA know of. > > One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is > now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment > Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. > It is with the background of the above historical matter, that I voiced > great concern about the way the new bylaws of TSA read. In effect, the BOD > of TSA can one day shut down TSA, sell all the property and put the proceeds > into the Theosophical Investment Trust. > > Once this is done, no one, you or me will have any say in or even know > what is going on in TIT and they have no legal requirement to disclose > anything to anyone. As I have mentioned in the past, the solution is to try and get THOSE laws reformed. My personal problem with the new bylaws was that it is easier to dissolve a Lodge than it is to throw out an individual member, and the new bylaws take away a major part of the disincentive to dissolve a Lodge. But the solution is to make it harder to dissolve a Lodge. And, if what you say about the TIT is true, then we should take action to increase its accountability. BTW, there are definite limits on how the property of a dissolved Lodge may be used. > I have been shouting on this issue to deaf ears ever since the bylaw > changes were published. Do you know when I asked for a copy of the Trust > Document and the Bylaws of the Trust, I am yet to receive them after almost > more than a year. Secrecy of the Trust has already started. Nothing > surprises me anymore. Have you asked Nathan Greer (National Secretary) or Elizabeth Trumpler (chief librarian at Wheaton)? > > In the case of the Theosophical Society, the problem is > >clearly one of funding. Traditionally, we have been funded by > > MKR: > > I will post a detailed msg on this in next couple of days. Keep tuned in. > >fear of offending the big contributors (frequently unnecessary, in my > >opinion; the big contributors whom I have met tend to be far more > >theosophical than they are given credit for). > > It quite some time ago I stopped measuring who is theosophical or who is not > theosophical and to what degree. I used the term "theosophical" in the sense of willingness to accept that others have their own opinions, which is just as valid as their own. > It is not uncommon to find the usage of "untheosophical" and "un > brotherly" as code words used in theosophical circles to deal with those > with whom one does not agree with either on doctrines or on administrative > policy/philosophy. I generally think of the following opinions as "untheosophical": 1) That someone whose genetics would make them capable of producing fertile offspring with other humans is less than human. 2) That there is only one path to the Truth. 3) That anything that is not observable with our senses or detectable with our instrumentation does not exist. 4) That anything that IS observable with our senses or detectable with our instrumentation does not exist. In the case of the contributors, I believe that the 2nd opinion I mentioned was being attributed to them. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 21:09:44 -0500 (CDT) From: "m.k. ramadoss" Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: > > Bart: > > > > >Are you saying that it is the policy of the Theosophical Society that > > >if the observed facts disagree with one's politics, then the observed > > >facts are incorrect? > > > > Please give some example of "observed" "facts" you are referring to. > > I am asking a question, not making a reference. MKR: Thanks for the clarification. > > > >Also note that when > > >people gain power in organizations, they frequently end up working > > >against the principles of the organization to maintain their power. > > >That, for example is one of the dangers that the Mahatmas point out in a > > >paid clergy. > > > > Once more the Mahatmas have been right on their observation. > > > > I am very glad that you brought it up. I do not know if you have seen my > > posts surrounding what happened to Krishnaji. > > I have. Being ignorant about the matter, I chose not to comment. MKR: I just brought it up for information of everyone on this list and confirmation of the dangers. > > > There is more to the irony of the situation which very few in TSA know of. > > > > One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is > > now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment > > Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. > > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the > person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. > MKR: The details of the litigation only recently slowly started coming out in print as a result of the publication of Sloss's book on Krishnaji (Sloss's book was reviewed in Quest some time back). Well documented information has been published on the litigation and that is how I found out about the details. So there was no need to ask any one. BTW, according to the recent book, the controlling Trustee's wife even twice tried to kill Krishnaji - once by hitting him on his head with a spanner or wrench and another time by pushing K off a rail station platform. Truth is stranger than fiction. > > It is with the background of the above historical matter, that I voiced > > great concern about the way the new bylaws of TSA read. In effect, the BOD > > of TSA can one day shut down TSA, sell all the property and put the proceeds > > into the Theosophical Investment Trust. > > > > Once this is done, no one, you or me will have any say in or even know > > what is going on in TIT and they have no legal requirement to disclose > > anything to anyone. > > As I have mentioned in the past, the solution is to try and get THOSE > laws reformed. My personal problem with the new bylaws was that it is > easier to dissolve a Lodge than it is to throw out an individual member, > and the new bylaws take away a major part of the disincentive to > dissolve a Lodge. But the solution is to make it harder to dissolve a > Lodge. And, if what you say about the TIT is true, then we should take > action to increase its accountability. BTW, there are definite limits on > how the property of a dissolved Lodge may be used. > MKR: I would gladly support any effort by anyone who wants to initiate any attempt to modify the byelaws. It is my understanding that while there is some statement on the way the property of a dissolved lodge may be used, in practice, if the local members disagree with the National Office on how the funds in the custody of the National Office is to be used, there is nothing "in practice" can be done. In case of a disagreement, the National Office has to be sued and even in such a case the local funds will perhaps be expended (by National Office) by the time any legal resolution can be achieved. Again one has to just see how long the Krishnamurti litigation lasted - 18 years and how many millions of dollars were wasted in lining up the pockets of the lawyers. > > I have been shouting on this issue to deaf ears ever since the bylaw > > changes were published. Do you know when I asked for a copy of the Trust > > Document and the Bylaws of the Trust, I am yet to receive them after almost > > more than a year. Secrecy of the Trust has already started. Nothing > > surprises me anymore. > > Have you asked Nathan Greer (National Secretary) or Elizabeth Trumpler > (chief librarian at Wheaton)? MKR: I made a direct request to John Algeo, National President as he is ultimately responsible person on matters relating to TSA and TIT. He has not responded to date. Having addressed the request to him, I see no reason to contact anyone else. > > > In the case of the Theosophical Society, the problem is > > >clearly one of funding. Traditionally, we have been funded by > > > > MKR: > > > > I will post a detailed msg on this in next couple of days. Keep tuned in. > > > >fear of offending the big contributors (frequently unnecessary, in my > > >opinion; the big contributors whom I have met tend to be far more > > >theosophical than they are given credit for). > > > > It quite some time ago I stopped measuring who is theosophical or who is not > > theosophical and to what degree. > > I used the term "theosophical" in the sense of willingness to accept > that others have their own opinions, which is just as valid as their > own. > MKR: I completely agree with you. In all these matters no one can be sure and as such, I support any one to have any opinion they want. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:56:53 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TSA Funding Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970423045653.00763898@mail.eden.com> At 09:58 AM 4/22/97 -0400, Bart wrote: >In the case of the Theosophical Society, the problem is >clearly one of funding. Traditionally, we have been funded by >contributions and bequests. Here is the information on the Income and Expense of TSA based on recently disclosed information. 1. The total annual budget is 3.6 million dollars. 2. Income and Expense breakdown is: Category INCOME EXPENSE 1. Publishing 45.0% 48.0% 2. Kern Grants (Direct) 18.0% 3. Other(Fees, donations etc.) 15.0% 4. Support (Maintenance etc.) 16.0% 5. Programs 15.0% 6. Administration 11.0% 7. Quest Book Shop Sales 9.0% 9.0% 8. TIT Interest Income 7.0% 9. Membership Dues 4.0% 10. Annual Fund Member Donations 1.5% 11. Round-off 0.5% 1.0% -------- ------- 100.00% 100.00% (Source: The Messenger, 2/97) MKR Comments: 1. It can be seen that only 4.0% of the income is coming from membership dues. This is very significant. 2. Looking at the major source of income and major category of expense, Publishing accounts for nearly half the budget. This is good and bad. It is good in that even if all the members disappear, still TSA can continue to be a financial success. It is bad in the light of the fast changing publishing scene due to the advent of technology - primarily electronic publishing and Cyberspace publishing. Considering the fact that the copyright of almost all the Theosophical Classics have expired. So if the traditional paper based publishing (which the old generation relishes and may be, IMHO, addicted) demand goes south, it may have a significant effect primarily due to the overhead costs associated with publishing. 3. In the light of such low contribution of income from membership ship dues - just 4.0%, a good case can be made to *lower* the annual dues to say $10.00/year. This may attract a larger number of members and also help the poor dedicated older members (I am sure there are quite a few) who are on a low fixed income. 4. If the publishing income is just increased by 10%, membership dues can be eliminated altogether. Or, if the expenses of publishing can be reduced by 10%, then also membership dues can be eliminated altogether. 5. Since a very significant amount of funding is coming from Kern Foundation - 18% of the budget - Kern does have a lot of say in what activities and in what direction the activities are directed. After all, as the old saying goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune. From a practical point of view, no one should have any problem with this. Actually, Kern should be congratulated for the foresight in setting up the Foundation and funding it. 6. Looking at the membership dues contribution to the budget - just 4.0%, - don't be surprised if you don't find the leadership not very responsive to members needs or questions. 7. IMHO, you may see more emphasis on publication as well as the "Theosophical" certificate directed programs. 8. We are in an era of Kali Yuga, where fast changes are taking place. So don't be surprised at anything. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:37:23 +0000 From: Thoa Tran Subject: Aklsdhfklasdh Message-ID: <335D4BB3.527@withoutwalls.com> Titus wrote: >I have met very, very, very few who truly use the vajra appropriately. Vajra >means "thunderbolt" (paging Doss for a better translation). It means you blast >away a roadblock in a persons path with plain-speaking when a sugar-sweet >approach is inappropriate. It should be used very judiciously and with no >sense of evil satisfaction. But evil satisfaction FEELS SO GOOD!!!! }:-{> (devil face) >I trust I have explained what I "really meant". Let me explicitly add one more >thing that I left implicit: A corollary to frankness is reassurance. For every >step of frankness you probably should have two of reassurance. > >OK? Okay. Reassurance #1: You're a great dancer. Reassurance #2: Great smiley faces! Thoalight Zone P.S. The name's Thoa, not Thoahhhhhh. :o) Now, I have to come up with two more reassurances... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:39:30 +0000 From: Thoa Tran Subject: Political Correctness Message-ID: <335D4C32.3199@withoutwalls.com> Bart wrote: >Are you saying that it is the policy of the Theosophical Society that >if the observed facts disagree with one's politics, then the observed >facts are incorrect? The T.S.'s written policy is full blown search for truth, no matter where it may lie. However, what is the T.S.? It is an organization. What is an organization composed of, Grasshopper? It is composed of a body of people. Thus, if a body of people cannot avoid ego influence (those not influenced, please stand up!) and is therefore subjective, then the organization is subjective and influenced under political correctness, then the T.S. is influenced by political correctness. To use the correllary of 2+2=4 or any other established scientific fact is useless, since it mostly does not apply in the organization's policy of search for truth. Thus, the room for subjectivity is huge. Now, on the T.S. politics, I stay away from it with longer than a 10 foot pole. I suppose one day, if I ever wanted to get deeply involved, I will have to consider that. Right now, I have too much to learn. Thoalight Zone From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 23:40:38 +0000 From: Thoa Tran Subject: untheosophical Message-ID: <335D4C76.50DF@withoutwalls.com> Bart wrote: > I generally think of the following opinions as "untheosophical": > > 1) That someone whose genetics would make them capable of producing >fertile offspring with other humans is less than human. > > 2) That there is only one path to the Truth. > > 3) That anything that is not observable with our senses or detectable >with our instrumentation does not exist. > > 4) That anything that IS observable with our senses or detectable with >our instrumentation does not exist. > > In the case of the contributors, I believe that the 2nd opinion I >mentioned was being attributed to them. > > Bart Lidofsky I concur. Thoalight Zone From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:49:53 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Aklsdhfklasdh Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970423124953.006c67d0@mail.eden.com> Vajra means "thunderbolt" (paging Doss for a better translation). I missed the post. I will check on this. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:54:14 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Political Correctness Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970423125414.006e4470@mail.eden.com> >The T.S.'s written policy is full blown search for truth, no matter >where it may lie. In late twenties or early thirtees, a proposal was made to the General Council of TS, to replace the three objects with a single object - Search for Truth. But it was turned down. It was done during Annie Besant's time soon after Krishnaji made his "Truth is a Pathless Land" and the proposal had the full support of Annie Besant. Just for information. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 11:03:48 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: TSA Funding Message-ID: <335E24D4.36DA@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > Here is the information on the Income and Expense of TSA based on recently > disclosed information. > > 1. The total annual budget is 3.6 million dollars. > > 2. Income and Expense breakdown is: > > Category INCOME EXPENSE > > 1. Publishing 45.0% 48.0% > 2. Kern Grants (Direct) 18.0% > 3. Other(Fees, donations etc.) 15.0% > 4. Support (Maintenance etc.) 16.0% > 5. Programs 15.0% > 6. Administration 11.0% > 7. Quest Book Shop Sales 9.0% 9.0% > 8. TIT Interest Income 7.0% > 9. Membership Dues 4.0% > 10. Annual Fund Member Donations 1.5% > 11. Round-off 0.5% 1.0% > -------- ------- > 100.00% 100.00% > (Source: The Messenger, 2/97) > > MKR Comments: > 2. Looking at the major source of income and major category of expense, > Publishing accounts for nearly half the budget. This is good and bad. It is > good in that even if all the members disappear, still TSA can continue to be > a financial success. It is bad in the light of the fast changing publishing > scene due to the advent of technology - primarily electronic publishing and > Cyberspace publishing. Considering the fact that the copyright of almost all > the Theosophical Classics have expired. So if the traditional paper based > publishing (which the old generation relishes and may be, IMHO, addicted) > demand goes south, it may have a significant effect primarily due to the > overhead costs associated with publishing. Note that the publishing accounts for 45% of the income and 48% of the expenses. Now, I am not sure what the difference between the income and the profit of the TSA, but unless the profit is significantly greater than the income, publishing is at about a break-even level right now. > 3. In the light of such low contribution of income from membership ship dues > - just 4.0%, a good case can be made to *lower* the annual dues to say > $10.00/year. This may attract a larger number of members and also help the > poor dedicated older members (I am sure there are quite a few) who are on a > low fixed income. Or how about RAISING the annual dues, but having more tiers of membership (regular, family rate, student rate, low-income rate, etc.). A family rate makes special sense, as many couples who belong to the TS would just as soon do without duplicate membership materials. > 4. If the publishing income is just increased by 10%, membership dues can be > eliminated altogether. Or, if the expenses of publishing can be reduced by > 10%, then also membership dues can be eliminated altogether. Far easier said than done. If the bookstores like Barnes & Noble or Borders put the independents out of business, publishers like TPH are the next in line to fall. > 5. Since a very significant amount of funding is coming from Kern Foundation > - 18% of the budget - Kern does have a lot of say in what activities and in > what direction the activities are directed. After all, as the old saying > goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune. From a practical point of view, > no one should have any problem with this. Actually, Kern should be > congratulated for the foresight in setting up the Foundation and funding it. From a theoretical point of view, however, there should be a lot of problem with this. Right now, the directors of the Kern Foundation and John Sellon are, by and large, dedicated Theosophists who are willing to put the Truth in front of their own personal prejudices. But as they get older and die, who knows if the next generation will be as, well, theosophical? Finally, note that the programs are a large portion of the expense, but 0 on the income list. While I believe that members' programs should be free, or at worst done on a break-even basis, I do not feel the same about programs offered to non-members. There are two kinds of programs that can be presented to non-members: programs that introduce them to Theosophy, and programs that, while fulfilling the 3 objects, are not directly part of the theosophical system started by the Blavatsky, Olcott, Judge, and the Mahatmas. Giving programs in things like 4th Way, Feng Shui, Tarot, Astrology, and even Therapeutic Touch is, in my opinion, a valid activity for Theosophical Lodges, but should be considered to be a means of attracting potential members and gaining an income, and should not be the primary purpose of the Theosophical Lodges. One big mistake is to give substantial discounts to members for public programs; that is inviting a membership with little or no interest in Theosophy. I am also of two minds in terms of members accepting payment. I feel that, for members' programs, the presenters, whether they are members or not, should do so without a fee. With public programs, I feel they should receive the same fee as an outside instructor would; members should not be penalized because they are members. The one exception I see to this is in programs designed to introduce the public to Theosophy; those should be under the same general header as members' programs. Once again, this is MY opinion; your mileage may vary. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 97 11:35:44 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Postmodernist history Message-ID: <199704231535.LAA02719@leo.vsla.edu> A recent discussion I've observed on another list tends to support Bart's discomfort with the extension of postmodernist discourse into inappropriate places. On a list for discussion of Baha'i history and theology in a scholarly context, one non-Baha'i scholar (an eminent historian) has been attacked for saying that there are objective standards for historiography. The gist of the argument, wrapped in a lot of extremely fancy verbiage, was this: 1) all points of view are subjective and relative 2) you are falsely claiming that history can or should be approached objectively 3) therefore our uncritical hagiographies are just as good as any other kind of history, so stop criticizing them. An extreme example, of course, but one that illustrates Bart's point. There is certainly a strong tendency in Theosophical circles to reduce every history or biography to the alleged subjectivity of the author. And following the discussion of Eckankar in the newsgroup devoted to that subject, I have repeatedly seen vast amounts of incontrovertible evidence about the movement's founder casually dismissed as the subjective opinion of the scholar who unearthed it. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 00:53:51 +0100 From: Alan Subject: Re: THEOS-BUDS digest 227 Message-ID: In message , Mika Perala writes >I would be very interested to know the birth date of Mr. Leadbeater. >Tillett gave a date that differs 7 years from Leadbeaters own memory. Maybe >it would be useful to check that out from birth register documents(or >whatever they are called in English) in England? Same goes for his supposed >brother. Tillet's date is correct. He shows a photograph of Leadbeater's birth certificate as the first illustration in his book. It seems possible that Tillet (now dead) was unable to trace any evidence of the brother's existence (though this in itself does not mean he never lived). Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:55:57 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Re: THEOS-BUDS digest 207 Message-ID: <199704231512.LAA12714@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear Petra, I can't be of any help to you with CWL's early years... sorry about that. If you're in touch with Dora Kunz, that's about as good information as you can get. I'm really glad that someone other than Tillet is writing a biography of CWL. I think it's much needed. Good luck, and Godspeed Liesel >Dear Mrs. Deutsch, > >This is a late reply to your friendly e-mail from February. As I have no >e-mail system in Germany I took all the information with me to answer it >from California. The intention to write a biography on Leadbeater is based >on the simple fact that I think the work from Tillett (The Elder Brother) >gives a totally misleading imagine of one of the greatest spiritual >teachers of the last 100 years. I have already gathered a lot of material >that will show a very different man than Tillett tried to characterize. >What I am still looking for is material about the "unknown" years, i.e. the >years before 1900. I have a very good relationship with Dora Kunz, but even >she, who knew CWL quite well, could not help me with information about the >early years. I would very much appreciate any support you could give. >For me it would be easier to correspond by Fax. My Fax-Number in Germany is >-49-8092-83581. Until May 3rd you can reach me also under this e-mail >number at Bluestar. > >Thank you for your help and kind regards > Peter Michel > >Petra Michel >Bluestar Communications Corp., 44 Bear Glenn, Woodside, CA. 94062 >ph: +1-415-851-5880 fx: +1-415-851-2339 e-mail: petra@bluestar.com >web:www.bluestar.com > >Truth is a pathless land. > Jiddu Krishnamurti From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:51:27 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Aklsdhfklasdh Message-ID: <199704231651.JAA00439@palrel1.hp.com> Thoa Tran wrote: > Reassurance #1: You're a great dancer. An example of Aklsdhfklasdh! ;) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 12:05:52 -0600 (MDT) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: The world according to Bart Message-ID: <199704231805.MAA24296@snowden.micron.net> Bart wrote: > > I generally think of the following opinions as "untheosophical": > > 1) That someone whose genetics would make them capable of producing >fertile offspring with other humans is less than human. Your statement is referring to most humans. Is this your intention? Most people have genetics (egg or sperm) which makes them capable of producing fertile offspring (children) with other humans. I was unaware that these people were dealing with the problem of being thought of as "less than human." > 2) That there is only one path to the Truth. Perhaps, deep down, at the heart of it - there really is just one Path. > 3) That anything that is not observable with our senses or detectable >with our instrumentation does not exist. Are we to declare, then, that it DOES exist? Would this be theosophical? > 4) That anything that IS observable with our senses or detectable with >our instrumentation does not exist. Again, does this mean that it DOES exist? And since each of us have our own 'sense data' telling us different things - different colors, what's lovely and what isn't, etc - does all of it exist? Those who are colorblind say there is no color that they can observe, despite what others insist on telling them - are they being untheosophical in their opinion? Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:17:47 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The world according to Bart Message-ID: <335E6E6B.6D38@sprynet.com> kymsmith@micron.net wrote, twisting everything I said: > > 1) That someone whose genetics would make them capable of producing > >fertile offspring with other humans is less than human. > > Your statement is referring to most humans. Is this your intention? Most > people have genetics (egg or sperm) which makes them capable of producing > fertile offspring (children) with other humans. I was unaware that these > people were dealing with the problem of being thought of as "less than > human." I phrased it that way to avoid smart asses from twisting my words, saying, "what about eunuchs?" or "what about people who die before they reach puberty"? etc. And there are many who consider some humans less than others. > > 2) That there is only one path to the Truth. > > Perhaps, deep down, at the heart of it - there really is just one Path. And perhaps the Nazis were right, as well. But I don't call them Theosophical, either. > > 3) That anything that is not observable with our senses or detectable > >with our instrumentation does not exist. > > Are we to declare, then, that it DOES exist? Would this be theosophical? I am talking about those for whom the inability to sense or measure something is in itself proof of its non-existence. > > 4) That anything that IS observable with our senses or detectable with > >our instrumentation does not exist. > > Again, does this mean that it DOES exist? And since each of us have our own > 'sense data' telling us different things - different colors, what's lovely > and what isn't, etc - does all of it exist? Once again, and it was obvious to everybody but you, I was talking about those who are using our ability to sense something as PROOF that it does not exist. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:40:22 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: ego, reality Message-ID: <199704232157.RAA07232@ultra1.dreamscape.com> 1.) re ego I think the definiton of that word depends upon who's using it. Very often, it means the smaller, more selfish part of the human psyche, that's what it means to freud et al. I think to some theosophists the Ego is something akin to the Causal Body. So, now, have your pick. 2.) Re Reality What I'd like to know about is the Reality which the very enlightened folks talk about. They say that our every day is Maya, illusion, and when you're a very adept meditator you can perceive Reality. To them, that Reality is absolute, and I wonder about that. To me, whatever it is they perceive, even if very celestial, is still what they themselves perceive, and I can't see that this can be absolute. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 16:59:08 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: the messenger Message-ID: <199704232215.SAA19112@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Dear folks, I'm glad Jeff Gresko wrote up something about how we are different from a cult. I get that question all the time, and it's good that one of you in Wheaton asnwered it publicly. Apparently we also needed a restatement of what Theosophy is, for newcomers. I'm always in favor of how John Algeo expresses ideas. He's good at it. Now, here comes the "however". Both of you talk about our "democratically elected" officers. I beg to differ. Doesn't it say in the new by laws that an officer needs first to be a member of the Board? I don't think there's another way of nominating anyone, as for instance to have someone nominated from the Society at large with, perhaps, 20 Seconds. Also, even if you don't want to be reminded of it, the people in opposition to the by laws, our last elections, were not given free and equal access to the "American Theosophist". I don't think that any of this qualifies under "being democratic". I hope you print this in "The Messenger". That would be democratic. Liesel F. Deutsch From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 17:00:16 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: PS to the Messenger Message-ID: <199704232217.SAA19828@ultra1.dreamscape.com> PS to my message - I note the set of black hands on the small picture. Very brotherly! But how many black hands are there in the TS? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 01:03:36 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TS & Political Correctness Message-ID: <$FSJSBAYHVXzEw7b@nellie2.demon.co.uk> .. time to re-read John Crocker's work on http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/wisdom/JRC/ There is an HTM file and a TXT file version. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:39:08 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Naming names Message-ID: In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is >> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment >> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. > > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the >person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 18:41:23 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TSA Funding Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970423234123.006fcd48@mail.eden.com> At 11:09 AM 4/23/97 -0400, Bart Lidofsky wrote: MKR: >> 3. In the light of such low contribution of income from membership ship dues >> - just 4.0%, a good case can be made to *lower* the annual dues to say >> $10.00/year. This may attract a larger number of members and also help the >> poor dedicated older members (I am sure there are quite a few) who are on a >> low fixed income. > Bart: > Or how about RAISING the annual dues, but having more tiers of >membership (regular, family rate, student rate, low-income rate, etc.). >A family rate makes special sense, as many couples who belong to the TS >would just as soon do without duplicate membership materials. MKR: That is a question that may have to be addressed. But I see problems. How do you define family? If a father and son live in a residence, would they be considered as a family. How about, 20 individuals living in a communal setting. Would they be one family? What if they are celibate? What if they are not celibate and feel it is ok to enjoy all god given pleasures, no matter what any scripture or anyone else thinks? This issue goes on and on. It would make a very interesting discussion. May be it should be published in AT and members asked to send in their voting to TSA's CPA Firm just like they do in Oscars. The votes to be sent to CPA is to guarantee impartiality and confidentiality of the votes. Let us all have some fun. MKR: >> 4. If the publishing income is just increased by 10%, membership dues can be >> eliminated altogether. Or, if the expenses of publishing can be reduced by >> 10%, then also membership dues can be eliminated altogether. > Bart: > Far easier said than done. If the bookstores like Barnes & Noble or >Borders put the independents out of business, publishers like TPH are >the next in line to fall. MKR: The phenomenon like Barnes and Noble is a fact. What TPH and others can do is to find out how they can deal with the changed environment and survive. Also I hope there is some plan of action if the time comes when its business disappears due to the Barnes & Noble Juggernaut. This combined with Internet, is a very serious threat and may overtake TPH before it realizes. MKR: >> 5. Since a very significant amount of funding is coming from Kern Foundation >> - 18% of the budget - Kern does have a lot of say in what activities and in >> what direction the activities are directed. After all, as the old saying >> goes, he who pays the piper calls the tune. From a practical point of view, >> no one should have any problem with this. Actually, Kern should be >> congratulated for the foresight in setting up the Foundation and funding it. > Bart: > From a theoretical point of view, however, there should be a lot of >problem with this. Right now, the directors of the Kern Foundation and >John Sellon are, by and large, dedicated Theosophists who are willing to >put the Truth in front of their own personal prejudices. But as they get >older and die, who knows if the next generation will be as, well, >theosophical? MKR: What the next generation is going to do, no one can predict. Bart: > Finally, note that the programs are a large portion of the expense, but >0 on the income list. While I believe that members' programs should be >free, or at worst done on a break-even basis, I do not feel the same >about programs offered to non-members. > MKR I think there is income from programs. I need to look it up. It is included in another category. Bart: > There are two kinds of programs that can be presented to non-members: >programs that introduce them to Theosophy, and programs that, while >fulfilling the 3 objects, are not directly part of the theosophical >system started by the Blavatsky, Olcott, Judge, and the Mahatmas. Giving >programs in things like 4th Way, Feng Shui, Tarot, Astrology, and even >Therapeutic Touch is, in my opinion, a valid activity for Theosophical >Lodges, but should be considered to be a means of attracting potential >members and gaining an income, and should not be the primary purpose of >the Theosophical Lodges. One big mistake is to give substantial >discounts to members for public programs; that is inviting a membership >with little or no interest in Theosophy. > > I am also of two minds in terms of members accepting payment. I feel >that, for members' programs, the presenters, whether they are members or >not, should do so without a fee. With public programs, I feel they >should receive the same fee as an outside instructor would; members >should not be penalized because they are members. The one exception I >see to this is in programs designed to introduce the public to >Theosophy; those should be under the same general header as members' >programs. Once again, this is MY opinion; your mileage may vary. > MKR I think that the practice of members accepting payment is a unique US tradition. At least in San Antonio, we have never paid anyone for any program - membership or public. In India where I lived for several years, it is unknown. Also in India, no fee is charged for any program. Recently, I saw a msg that in Iceland the same is the case. I have in the past been to the lectures of several of the International Presidents and other well known Theosophists and Krishnaji and I have never paid a penny to attend their programs. Personally I do not believe in charging either for lecturing or having to pay to attend. If the question of collecting money for spiritual knowledge or help, is pursued logically, then we can see quite a good potential in raising a lot money by giving people training in meditation, concentration, visualization, sell mantras, teach practices in opening up the chakras and Kundalini and so on and so forth. These things can be sold at very high prices. Some time ago, I saw a message about a well known eastern 'teacher' selling a form of meditation for $45,000 (forty five thousand) and is in great demand. In the minds of rich people, there is a tendency to believe that higher the price, better is the product. Where do one draw a line? There are various issued involved in this and I do not think anyone has any answers. Just I thought I should share. Of course the mileage and direction of others may vary from mine. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 18:46:52 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Naming names Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970423234652.006efd04@mail.eden.com> At 07:25 PM 4/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes >>> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is >>> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment >>> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. >> >> Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the >>person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. > >A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but >although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose >identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? > >Alan Every member of the Board of Directors and all the Trustees of Theosophical Investment Trust know about this. I am sure everyone in Olcott is also privy to this public information. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 19:25:28 -0600 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: The world according to Bart Message-ID: <335EB67B.4C3F@micron.net> Bart, my cloven-footed friend: -You belched: I phrased it that way to avoid smart asses from twisting my words, Calling me a "smart ass" instead of a "dumb ass" was theosophical of you. Gives my self-esteem some wiggle room. Well, grab your toupee, Barto - I'm not done with you yet. Your original statement - "That someone whose genetics would make them capable of producing fertile offspring with other humans is less than human." - makes no sense, grammatically or rationally. Nor does your answer to my question - ("I phrased it that way to avoid smart asses from twisting my words, saying, "what about eunuchs?" or "what about people who die before they reach puberty"? etc. And there are many who consider some humans less than others.") Did you mean to say "incapable" instead of "capable?" Or are you saying that those who cannot produce fertile offspring deal with the problem of being thought of as less than human? Are you saying people who are childless suffer discrimination? -You wrote: 2) That there is only one path to the Truth. -I replied: Perhaps, deep down, at the heart of it - there really is just one Path. -You belched: And perhaps the Nazis were right, as well. But I don't call them -Theosophical, either. What I meant was the Path of Love, or Compassion. To me, there are different ways of finding Truth, but they may all converge, eventually, onto one Path - The Path of Love, or Compassion. What do Nazis have to do with this subject? -You wrote: 3) That anything that is not observable with our senses or detectable with our instrumentation does not exist. -I replied: Are we to declare, then, that it DOES exist? Would this be theosophical? -You belched: I am talking about those for whom the inability to sense or measure -something is in itself proof of its non-existence. This would be extreme 'objectivism' and I doubt very many people go that far, or are that arrogant. I am not implying that the reverse - my previous reply - was the correct alternative either. It would seem balance would be the most prudent course. -You wrote: That anything that IS observable with our senses or detectable with -our instrumentation does not exist. -I replied: Again, does this mean that it DOES exist? And since each of us have our own -'sense data' telling us different things - different colors, what's lovely -and what isn't, etc - does all of it exist? -You belched: Once again, and it was obvious to everybody but you. . . Excuse me, but Barto? I recall ONE person agreeing with you. This does not mean, however, that EVERYBODY does. I suggest that the next time you visit your psychiatrist you mention to her the above response of yours - she will find it quite intriguing. -(you continue). . .I was talking about those who are using our ability to sense -something as PROOF that it does not exist. I have heard of people saying that just because something can be sensed doesn't mean it exists, BUT, I have never heard of anyone saying that because something can be sensed means that it does not exist - which is what your above statement is saying. Your mastery of the art of non sequitur arguments is impressive, as is your subsequent, although predictable, temper tantrums when asked to clarify your often murky ramblings. Your inability to tolerate opposing viewpoints is a lesson for all Theosophists. Keep up the good work - and, hey, give my regards to Beelzebub. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:11:42 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: TS & Political Correctness Message-ID: <335ECF6E.160C@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > .. time to re-read John Crocker's work on > > http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/wisdom/JRC/ > > There is an HTM file and a TXT file version. I should clarify that, when I speak of "political correctness", I am not referring to those labelled "politically correct" by others, but to those who refer to themselves as "politically correct". As far as John Crocker goes, his history is a bit off. When the term was used by conservative columnists in the late 70's/early '80's, it was used to refer to a specific form of hypocritical censorship found in many universities, where derogatory statements against certain "protected" groups or members thereof were not allowed regardless of their veracity, while equally derogatory remarks about members of "unprotected" groups were encouraged, again regardless of their veracity. One early example was the editor of a student newspaper being expelled for calling a black professor racist, and backing it up with quotes from that professor, while another student paper called white professors racist without bringing forth a shred of evidence, and were encouraged to do so. For some reason, rather than look at the misapplied postmodernist origins of the term "political correctness", many people started wearing it as a badge of honor, even knowing that it meant judging truth and falsehood strictly in terms of political outlook. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:14:41 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Naming names Message-ID: <335ED021.3019@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes > >> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is > >> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment > >> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. > > > > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the > >person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. > > A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but > although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose > identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? I asked Michael Gomes about it. I will get the actual names when he can look up the proper spelling, but according to him, the situation was largely Krishnamurti vs. his business partner. The person who was involved with both trusts was not a trustee but in fact a lawyer, who was hired because of his familiarity with Theosophy. Finally, millions of dollars sounds like a lot of money, but remember that Krishnamurti was a BILLIONaire. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:21:22 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: The world according to Bart Message-ID: <335ED1B2.1D46@sprynet.com> kymsmith@micron.net wrote: > Your mastery of the art of non sequitur arguments is impressive, as is > your subsequent, although predictable, temper tantrums when asked to > clarify your often murky ramblings. Your inability to tolerate opposing > viewpoints is a lesson for all Theosophists. Changing the meaning of my statements into something else, and then disagreeing with the misinterpretations is: A) not an opposing viewpoint and B) worth being agry about. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:45:21 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Naming names Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970424044521.006cf574@mail.eden.com> At 11:21 PM 4/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky >> writes >> >> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is >> >> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment >> >> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. >> > >> > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the >> >person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. >> >> A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but >> although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose >> identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? > > I asked Michael Gomes about it. I will get the actual names when he can >look up the proper spelling, but according to him, the situation was >largely Krishnamurti vs. his business partner. The person who was >involved with both trusts was not a trustee but in fact a lawyer, who >was hired because of his familiarity with Theosophy. Finally, millions >of dollars sounds like a lot of money, but remember that Krishnamurti >was a BILLIONaire. > > Bart Lidofsky > The situation was very simple. According to the public records, the initial law suit was filed by the California Attorney General and some of the Trustees of the newly created Krishnamurti Foundation Inc and the defendants were the Krishnamurti Writings Inc. and perhaps one other Trust and the Trustees of the Trusts. Krishnamurti himself was *not* a plaintiff in this law suit. There was another lawsuit filed in Madras was by a group of leading citizens of India - two of them were retired State Supreme Court Chief Justices, one was a well known politician who later became the President of India, another later became the Attorney General of India and few other well known ones seeking to regain control of the property which was built for Krishnamurti to use. It finally won the control back to the newly created Krishnamurti Foundation of India so that Krishnamurti was again was able to use the premises for him to lecture whenever he was lecturing in India. Krishnamurti himself was not a plaintiff in this case as well. As a matter of fact the very last lecture he delivered before he died was from that property. BTW, it was at that location, I attended the first Krishnamurti lecture long time ago. All the funds that were expended in the litigation were from the Trust funds held by the Krishnamurti Writings Inc. (the one which was sued) and Krishnamurti Foundation Inc. These Trust funds were donated to the public charitable 501(c)(3) tax exempt trusts by individuals to help Krishnamurti Teach. He did not and cannot own any of these funds. Two different set of attorneys represented each party in the litigation. No single attorney represented both the parties. That is conflict of interest and no attorney could do it in a litigation as it would be professional misconduct and the attorney could lose his license. The attorneys representing both parties were some of the best litigators and who did not work for free. They may have been members of TSA and may have been familiar with Theosophy. Again my point was that donors intent was to help Krishnamurti teach and instead it ended up lining the pockets of these litigators, who of course did an excellent job for their clients over a period of 18 years. These millions spent is still a lot of money by any standard and should have gone to spread the msg of Krishnamurti, and not in litigation. BTW, litigation in the USA is not cheap. It would be interesting learn what Gomez is able to discover. I will be looking forward to hear. Thanks for your feedback. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 23:57:15 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Naming names Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970424045715.006ca354@mail.eden.com> At 11:21 PM 4/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky >> writes >> >> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is >> >> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment >> >> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. >> > >> > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the >> >person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. >> >> A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but >> although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose >> identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? > > I asked Michael Gomes about it. I will get the actual names when he can >look up the proper spelling, but according to him, the situation was >largely Krishnamurti vs. his business partner. The person who was >involved with both trusts was not a trustee but in fact a lawyer, who >was hired because of his familiarity with Theosophy. Finally, millions >of dollars sounds like a lot of money, but remember that Krishnamurti >was a BILLIONaire. > > Bart Lidofsky Another follow-up response: I have seen some members of TSA have tried to explain away or view and some time find it convenient to dismiss the whole litigation situation as *inter-necine* which it is *not.* Attorney Generals *do* *not* become plaintiffs in inter-necine matters. As a matter of fact, it is very rare that Attorney Generals get involved in civil litigation such as these. The further irony was that the old Trusts (KWI etc which were 501(c)(3) tax exempt) and *all* the Trustees of these Trusts sued several of the trustees of the Krishnamurti Foundation Inc as well as Krishnamurti himself for multi-million dollars. All these are in public records. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 16:06:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Thoalight@aol.com Subject: Definitions Message-ID: <970424160634_639804935@emout17.mail.aol.com> It seems we are having difficulties with definitions. In order to clarify a few things, I am posting a dictionary of obscure words: CARPERPETUATION (kar' pur pet u a shun) n. The act, when vacuuming,of running over a string or a piece of lint at least a dozen times, reaching over and picking it up, examining it, then putting it back down to give the vacuum one more chance. DISCONFECT (dis kon fekt') v. To sterilize the piece of candy you dropped on the floor by blowing on it, somehow assuming this will 'remove' all the germs. ECNALUBMA (ek na lub' ma) n. A rescue vehicle which can only beseen in the rear view mirror. EIFFELITES (eye' ful eyetz) n. Gangly people sitting in front of you at the movies who, no matter what direction you lean in, follow suit. ELBONICS (el bon' iks) n. The actions of two people maneuvering for one armrest in a movie theater. ELECELLERATION (el a cel er ay' shun) n. The mistaken notion that the more you press an elevator button the faster it will arrive. FRUST (frust) n. The small line of debris that refuses to be swept onto the dust pan and keeps backing a person across the room until he finally decides to give up and sweep it under the rug. LACTOMANGULATION (lak' to man gyu lay' shun) n. Manhandling the"open here" spout on a milk container so badly that one has to resort to the 'illegal' side. PEPPIER (pehp ee ay') n. The waiter at a fancy restaurant whose sole purpose seems to be walking around asking diners if they want ground pepper. PHONESIA (fo nee' zhuh) n. The affliction of dialing a phone number and forgetting whom you were calling just as they answer. PUPKUS (pup' kus) n. The moist residue left on a window after a dog presses its nose to it. TELECRASTINATION (tel e kras tin ay' shun) n. The act of always letting the phone ring at least twice before you pick it up, even when you're only six inches away. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 16:43:29 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Definitions Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970424214329.00c0b54c@mail.eden.com> >TELECRASTINATION (tel e kras tin ay' shun) n. The act of always letting >the phone ring at least twice before you pick it up, even when you're only >six inches away. This is necessary if you have caller id. The caller id number/name is transmitted between the first and second ring. In my office, which has a fax switch, it has been programmed to pickup the call on the third ring. Once it picks up the call, the switch automatically rings either the regular phone or the fax machine. For me at least this is something I have to live with. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 15:29:35 +0000 From: Thoa Tran Subject: Billionaire Message-ID: <335F7C5F.2B1A@withoutwalls.com> Although I usually let discussions about politics and money go over my head, I have a morbid curiosity regarding what Bart said about Krisnamurti being a billionaire. Is that true? If it is, what does he do with all that money? Or rather, what does the Krisnamurti Trust do with all that money, besides getting involved in lawsuits? If this is an erroneous question, then you know I never pay attention to politics and money. Curious George (the monkey) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 18:45:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Thoalight@aol.com Subject: My Kind of Guy! Message-ID: <970424184507_-467889556@emout13.mail.aol.com> >DARWIN AWARD WINNER FOR 1997 ANNOUNCED >> >> You all know about the Darwin Awards - It's an annual honor given to >> the person who did the gene pool the biggest service by killing >> themselves in the most extraordinarily stupid way >> >> The 1995 winner was the fellow who was killed by a Coke machine which >> toppled over on top of him as he was attempting to tip a free soda >> out of it. >> >> In 1996 the winner was an airforce sergeant who attached a JATO unit >> to his car and crashed into a cliff several hundred feet above the >> roadbed. >> >> And now, the 1997 winner: Larry Waters of Los Angeles-- one of the >> few Darwin winners to survive his award winning accomplishment. >> >> Larry's boyhood dream was to fly. When he graduated from high school, >> he joined the Air Force in hopes of becoming a pilot. Unfortunately, >> poor eyesight disqualified him. When he was finally discharged, he >> had to satisfy himself with watching jets fly over his backyard. >> >> One day, Larry, had a bright idea. He decided to fly. He went to the >> local Army-Navy surplus store and purchased 45 weather balloons and >> several tanks of helium. The weather balloons, when fully inflated, >> would measure more than four feet across. >> >> Back home, Larry securely strapped the balloons to his sturdy lawn >> chair. He anchored the chair to the bumper of his jeep and inflated >> the balloons with the helium. He climbed on for a test while it was >> still only a few feet above the ground. >> >> Satisfied it would work, Larry packed several sandwiches and a six- >> pack of Miller Lite, loaded his pellet gun-- figuring he could pop a >> few balloons when it was time to descend-- and went back to the >> floating lawn chair. He tied himself in along with his >> pellet gun and provisions. Larry's plan was to lazily float up to a >> height of about 30 feet above his back yard after severing the anchor >> and in a few hours come back down. >> >> Things didn't quite work out that way. >> >> When he cut the cord anchoring the lawn chair to his jeep, he didn't >> float lazily up to 30 or so feet. Instead he streaked into the LA sky >> as if shot from a cannon. >> >> He didn't level of at 30 feet, nor did he level off at 100 >> feet. After climbing and climbing, he levelled off at 11,000 feet. At >> that height he couldn't risk shooting any of the balloons, lest he >> unbalance the load and really find himself in trouble. So he >> stayed there, drifting, cold and frightened, for more than 14 hours. >> >> Then he really got in trouble. >> >> He found himself drifting into the the primary approach corridor of >> Los Angeles International Airport. >> >> A United pilot first spotted Larry. He radioed the tower and >> described passing a guy in a lawn chair with a gun. Radar confirmed >> the existence of an object floating 11,000 feet above the airport. >> >> LAX emergency procedures swung into full alert and a helicopter was >> dispatched to investigate. >> >> LAX is right on the ocean. Night was falling and the offshore >> breeze began to flow. It carried Larry out to sea with the >> helicopter in hot pursuit. >> >> Several miles out, the helicopter caught up with Larry. Once the crew >> determined that Larry was not dangerous, they attempted to close in for > >> a rescue but the draft from the blades would push Larry away whenever >> they neared. >> >> Finally, the helicopter ascended to a position several hundred feet >> above Larry and lowered a rescue line. Larry snagged the line and was >> hauled back to shore. The difficult maneuver was flawlessly executed >> by the helicopter crew. >> >> As soon as Larry was hauled to earth, he was arrested by waiting >> members of the LAPD for violating LAX airspace. >> >> As he was led away in handcuffs, a reporter dispatched to cover the >> daring rescue asked why he had done it. Larrry stopped, >> turned and replied nonchalantly, "A man can't just sit around." >> >> Lets hear it for Larry Walters, the 1997 Darwin Award Winner. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 18:30:24 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Billionaire Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970424233024.006dc1cc@mail.eden.com> At 06:45 PM 4/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >Although I usually let discussions about politics and money go over my >head, I have a morbid curiosity regarding what Bart said about >Krisnamurti being a billionaire. Is that true? If it is, what does he >do with all that money? Or rather, what does the Krisnamurti Trust do >with all that money, besides getting involved in lawsuits? If this is >an erroneous question, then you know I never pay attention to politics >and money. > >Curious George (the monkey) The Trusts (all of them are tax exempt 501(c)(3) or equivalent) in the USA, England and India do own real estate and perhaps not much of money. Each of them is independent. They run publishing activity and run schools. The US trust - Krishnamurti Foundation Inc. in addition has an archive. I do not know if you add all the property it would be a billion. Again, it is like saying the International President of TS is a billionaire. These funds can never be used to benefit any individual. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 18:31:10 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Funding Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970424233110.006e8210@mail.eden.com> Here is an excerpt from the well known book "Candles in the Sun" by Emily Lutyens. In the light of the funding by rich Theosophists, it might interest some here. ------------------- "Two very important recruits joined the T.S. that year. Miss Mary Dodge, and Muriel, Countess De La Warr. Miss Dodge was an immensely rich American and, without exception, the most nobly generous woman I have ever met. She was crippled with arthritis, and was in a wheel-chair all the time I knew her. She had known my husband before I met her. He had gone on a cruise with her in the Baltic in 1906. Soon after I joined the T.S. she invited me to come and see her at Warwick House, St. James's, which she had rented and shared with Lady De La Warr, her close friend. Miss Dodge had been interested in Spiritualism, and knew something of Theosophy. I gave her a glowing account of what it meant to me, and soon afterwards she and Lady De La Warr both became members. From that moment Miss Dodge poured out her fortune in the furtherance of Theosophy and in helping individual Theosophists. There was no limit to her kindness and generosity, but I regret to say that in my opinion her generosity was a great factor in the degeneration of the T.S. Until then, those who worked for the Society were inspired by a spirit of self-sacrifice Ä they worked for love but with the advent of Miss Dodge's fortune a new spirit crept in. The wildest schemes were financed by her and salaries were given to all who worked at headquarters. When, later, another recent convert to Theosophy, who was also an ardent Socialist, insisted on trade union rates of wages being paid to all workers, there began a scramble among Theosophists for lucrative jobs. This is not intended in any way as a slur on Miss Dodge, but merely as an example of how money can corrupt a spiritual organization." MKR Comments: It should be worth remembering that when in the early days of TS, the money was tight. It was in those days, much of the monumental work was accomplised. It was all done with the help of deidicated workers who worked in the spirit of self-sacrifice and I do not think any of them were even *re-imbursed* for out of pocket expenses. My 2 cents worth. Any comments. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 17:14:50 -0700 From: "Romero Cortez D.Ma." Subject: Hello again Message-ID: <199704250008.UAA13379@elvis.vnet.net> Hello to all friends! Thoa, i want to thank you for your kindly note (Health) trying to help me, also thank you M.KRammadoss for your aquotations.i will keep them in mind. I haven't read any posts recently, i will print them and read them in my house for being on schedule on time. and read the new ones then. Today is the first day i feel well, sort of. i want to tell you other thing: I have this problem, i really need the help of theosophy students for this, really. i kindly beg your attention to this. I don't know, probably because i'm Libra-Gemini, but i have this real problem trying to do things, i sometimes start the things but don't conclude them never, or with a lot of difficulty, Have a real problem with the concentration of my mind and my emotions. i think i know where is the problem, but i don't know how to manage with it. seems that the problem (as i was speculating in the last time i said , as is a relation with the chackras-bad health of the organs involved in the chackras region-place of their rule , is also the problem of the type of emotion-taught and the chackra involved, i presume. this problem , of my lack of concentration of energy ,has gone to a point where my self says "I want to do this" and my emotions said " but i want to do this and this and this and this also" and my mind is divagating, floating in a wave of taughts, i keep thinking and thinking and thinking , but seems i cannot focus on the problem of how to manage with the situation, even that now im concious of the problem,but it seems that i am too slow and too slow and too slow and other pepole here in school know how to manage the problem real easy and i keep being real desesperate and nervous and when i think i begin to manage the problem, something happens that distracts me, other person-problem (i lost a book, for example) i get sick or depressed (like last time, i was so tremendously depressed that i got sick) and when i get well finally i still am too way slow, and i want to focus my energy.....!WAH! @-* (me being real nuts and desesperate) So, please, if you know how to manage this, i will obviously take your help in great value ,of course. Thanks , of all, really. Estrella P.S. i'm really happy to talk to you. your place has really claryfied my mind in many questions, in others has maked my mind confirm my taughts. And forgive me my selfishness, but really , i feel so lone and desesperate, that i need i think "a little help from my friends" Thanks to all , thanks Thoa, Thanks, 'Doss, thanks all. really. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 21:38:32 -0400 From: smertae@webtv.net (Jeffrey Smart) Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 999 Message-ID: <199704250138.SAA15096@mailtod-101.bryant.webtv.net> I wish to be removed from this list. thanks From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 23:02:56 -0500 (CDT) From: cdgert@ripco.com (CDGertrude) Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 999 Message-ID: > I wish to be removed from this list. thanks Why? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:25:41 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Naming names Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970425142541.0069eb6c@mail.eden.com> At 11:21 PM 4/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >> >> In message <335D609C.4A78@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky >> writes >> >> One of the Trustees of K Trusts (who was a party to the litigation) is >> >> now on the Board of TSA as well as a Trustee of Theosophical Investment >> >> Trust which manages the Investments of TSA. >> > >> > Now here's the thing. The way I work is that, if I knew the name of the >> >person, I would directly ask him or her what the story was. >> >> A very good point. Doss has mentioned this many times on the list, but >> although asked directly, seems unwilling to name the person whose >> identity is so strongly hinted at. Well, Doss??? > > I asked Michael Gomes about it. I will get the actual names when he can >look up the proper spelling, but according to him, the situation was >largely Krishnamurti vs. his business partner. The person who was >involved with both trusts was not a trustee but in fact a lawyer, who >was hired because of his familiarity with Theosophy. Finally, millions >of dollars sounds like a lot of money, but remember that Krishnamurti >was a BILLIONaire. > > Bart Lidofsky > Update: The Trustees of KFA (new trust that was setup) (who along with the California Attorney General sued the Krishnamurti Writings Inc etc. and their trustees) were represented by separate law firms: Plaintiffs: (New K Trust and CA Atty General) 1. Kaplan, Livingston, Goodwin, Berkowitz & Selvin (LA Law Firm) 2. Cohen, Cearnal, England, Whitfield & Osborne 3. California Deputy Attorney General Defendants: (KWI etc and their trustees) 1. James D. Loebl 2. Wyman, Bautzer, Rothman & Kuchel (a prestigious Beverly Hills law firm) Still I would wait to know what you hear from Gomes. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 07:47:39 -0700 From: "Eldon B. Tucker" Subject: Re: My Kind of Guy! (There's others too) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970425074737.006b9714@imagiware.com> >>DARWIN AWARD WINNER FOR 1997 ANNOUNCED >>> And now, the 1997 winner: Larry Waters of Los Angeles-- one of the >>> few Darwin winners to survive his award winning accomplishment. >>> Back home, Larry securely strapped the balloons to his sturdy lawn >>> chair. He anchored the chair to the bumper of his jeep and inflated >>> the balloons with the helium. He climbed on for a test while it was >>> still only a few feet above the ground. >>> Satisfied it would work, Larry packed several sandwiches and a six- >>> pack of Miller Lite, loaded his pellet gun-- figuring he could pop a >>> few balloons when it was time to descend-- and went back to the >>> floating lawn chair. He tied himself in along with his >>> pellet gun and provisions. Larry's plan was to lazily float up to a >>> height of about 30 feet above his back yard after severing the anchor >>> and in a few hours come back down. >>> Things didn't quite work out that way. This reminds me of a couple I know in Oklahoma that tried the same thing. The two of them went up in a pair of attached lawn chairs. They planned better and their flight went off without a hitch. There's a picture of them aloft on the trip that was later published in their magazine. Perhaps the moral here isn't "don't do something stupid," but rather "do all your homework first before trying something dangerous"? -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 97 11:42:04 EDT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Weird lately? Message-ID: <199704251542.LAA06536@leo.vsla.edu> Hi gang, After one of the strangest nights at the library in history, with the computer system doing inexplicable things and several really odd encounters with patrons, I got home and called a friend halfway across the country. He started reeling off all the odd and disruptive things that were happening in his life lately (caught in a flood, for one) and in those of his friends. I could match the stories for strange and stressful oddities in my own life recently. And in those of friends. So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary configurations are at work. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 09:59:20 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: The 1997 Darwin Award Message-ID: <199704251659.JAA07564@palrel1.hp.com> Thoa, I'm sure the posthumous recipients of the award you listed were all worthy, but I would submit the following: There are many transmission lines that crisscross Connecticut. These are held up by Transmission Towers of various constructions. Those most commonly installed near urban areas are called "metal Ornamental Towers" (supposedly prettier than wood towers). Sometimes adventurous folks climb the towers in order to enjoy the view and the night air. Most stay away from the wires, and when they get bored, come back down. Apparently, a man who was forlorn after a recent spat with his girl- friend needed some fresh air to clear his head and decided to climb a tower. He stopped for a 6 pack to help clear his thoughts, went to a tower south of Hartford, next to I-91, and climbed it. Public Service employees later pieced the story together. The man sat there 60 feet above the highway, drank his beer and consoled his bruised ego. After 5 beers, he needed to do what people often need to do after 5 beers. It being such a long hike down, he unzipped and did his business right there off the tower. Electricity is a funny thing. One doesn't need to touch a wire in order to get shocked. Depending on conditions, 115,000 volt lines,like those supported by the tower, could shock a person as far away as 6 feet. When the man "whizzed" near the conductor (wire), the power arced up his "stream" (urine is an excellent conductor of electricity), traveled up to his private parts, and blew him off the tower. The guys at the power company noted a momentary outage on this line and sent repairmen to see if there was any damage. When they got to the scene of the accident, they found a very dead person, his fly down, what was left of his private parts smoking, and a single beer left on top. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:19:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Thoalight@aol.com Subject: removal Message-ID: <970425131812_-1099497624@emout15.mail.aol.com> Gertrude wrote: >Jeffrey Smart: >> I wish to be removed from this list. thanks >> >Why? The answer could be as simple as the volume was way too much. Some posts require a tremendous time to read them. Unless you have a desire to read them, it can be overwhelming. I had a friend who logged on but had to log off because it was too much for her. Of course, it could be because we're so darn obnoxious (paranoid meter goes up. Everyone starts to wonder, "What did I do?") :o) Anyway, this list is the way it is because of everybody's personality who joined in. No problemo. Good, bad. and indifference. Hey, it could be worse. On my Kuk Sool Won list that I never read or post, somebody replied to all the posts with the same paragraph requesting that his e-mail is too precious to be clogged with insignificant talks, and to only post when they have something better to talk about. Later his wife e-mailed in apologizing to everyone, stating that she enjoyed the talks. I personally enjoy these theosophy lists tremendously. I was starting to learn about t/Theosophy when I joined in. Now I'm hooked. I've gotten a lot of information, directions and laughs out of them. It's strenghtened my thinking and word mind. Sometimes, I feel like logging off so that I don't have to think in terms of words but just pictures. The problem with thinking in terms of pictures all the time is that you become inept at communication. Anyway, I won't be able to respond to any e-mails, private or otherwise, since I am off on vacation for 2 weeks. Have great weeks, folks. Thoa a.k.a. Thoalight Zone :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:44:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: My Kind of Guy! (There's others too) Message-ID: <970425134411_213718907@emout03.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-25 11:04:18 EDT, you write: >This reminds me of a couple I know in Oklahoma that tried the same >thing. The two of them went up in a pair of attached lawn chairs. >They planned better and their flight went off without a hitch. There's >a picture of them aloft on the trip that was later published in their >magazine. Perhaps the moral here isn't "don't do something stupid," >but rather "do all your homework first before trying something dangerous"? > Actually, I always thought it would be kind of fun to learn to levitate (my normal fear of heights notwithstanding), float up into the O'Hare glidepath to be reported by a passing jet, land quickly and watch the fun as the FAA tries to explain what happened and say to the press "Me? Fly without an airplane? Was I wearing blue tights and cape or just a business suit?" Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 13:45:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <970425134526_-1601346051@emout11.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-25 11:59:55 EDT, you write: >So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else >noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, >unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary >configurations are at work. It's the comet's fault. It's always the comet's fault. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 19:34:52 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: to estrella Message-ID: <199704260051.UAA08318@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Estrella, To help your concentration, try this old trick. Get a match box, or some other very simple object. Look at it from all sides, maybe inside too. Then close your eyes, and imagine the same match box or other object from all sides. When you miss, open your eyes again and refresh your memory. If you do that for a short while every day for a while, maybe it'll help. Don't use the same object all the time. Chnage objects before you get tired of them. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 02:17:00 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: In message <970425134526_-1601346051@emout11.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >It's the comet's fault. It's always the comet's fault. > >Chuck the Heretic Trying to shift the blame again? HUH! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 12:08:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <970426120847_-2103576400@emout17.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-04-26 05:08:44 EDT, you write: >Trying to shift the blame again? Oh, all right. It's Alan's fault! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 14:09:40 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: My Kind of Guy! (There's others too) Message-ID: <336244E4.30B9@sprynet.com> Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Actually, I always thought it would be kind of fun to learn to levitate (my > normal fear of heights notwithstanding), float up into the O'Hare glidepath > to be reported by a passing jet, land quickly and watch the fun as the FAA > tries to explain what happened and say to the press "Me? Fly without an > airplane? Was I wearing blue tights and cape or just a business suit?" Swami Beyondananda talks about learning to levitate while he was in high school. Unfortunately, he got in trouble for getting high in class. Bart Lidofsky P.S. Any other Beyondananda fans out there? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 14:55:25 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: My Kind of Guy! (There's others too) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970426195525.006f7814@mail.eden.com> At 02:15 PM 4/26/97 -0400, you wrote: >Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: >> Actually, I always thought it would be kind of fun to learn to levitate (my >> normal fear of heights notwithstanding), float up into the O'Hare glidepath >> to be reported by a passing jet, land quickly and watch the fun as the FAA >> tries to explain what happened and say to the press "Me? Fly without an >> airplane? Was I wearing blue tights and cape or just a business suit?" > > Swami Beyondananda talks about learning to levitate while he was in >high school. Unfortunately, he got in trouble for getting high in class. > > Bart Lidofsky > >P.S. Any other Beyondananda fans out there? > You have one here. He lives not very far from where I live and he is a patient of my dentist who is a "Theosophist". He gave me a video tape of Beyondananda. Have you seen the video? MKR PS: A quote from Beyondananda: Vegetarians eat vegetables. He is a humanitarian. Guess what he eats! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 17:05:37 -0400 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Swami Beyondananda Message-ID: <33626E21.47@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > >P.S. Any other Beyondananda fans out there? > > > You have one here. He lives not very far from where I live and he is a > patient of my dentist who is a "Theosophist". He gave me a video tape of > Beyondananda. Have you seen the video? No; I have heard a couple of tapes, and read his books. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 23:00:50 -0700 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <199704270600.XAA26464@palrel1.hp.com> On Fri, 25 Apr 97 11:42:04 EDT "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > After one of the strangest nights at the library in history, > with the computer system doing inexplicable things and several > really odd encounters with patrons, I got home and called a > friend halfway across the country. He started reeling off all > the odd and disruptive things that were happening in his life > lately (caught in a flood, for one) and in those of his > friends. I could match the stories for strange and stressful > oddities in my own life recently. And in those of friends. > > So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else > noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, > unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary > configurations are at work. Mercury has been retrograde since April 14th. Many times when Mercury was retrograde, I noticed weird things happen with the computers at work bordering on the supernatural. Speaking of planetary conditions, the first Full Moon in Taurus (Wesak or Buddha's birthday) was last Tuesday. My teacher told how Buddha and the Christ work together at this time of year. Is there any theosophical writing on Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written some). "The world is frenzied with hatred and torn with strife; Its ways are crooked, Of lust are its fetters. O Great Soul, save them Who long for thy re-birth. Bring to them the deathless message, And, nectar-filled, Let the lotus of Love unfold its petals. Serene, free, Immeasurably holy and merciful, Wipe away all stains from this earth." >From "Lord Buddhas Birthday" by Rabindranath Tagore From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 09:58:43 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Swami Beyondananda Message-ID: <199704271515.LAA21858@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Last thing I heard Swami Beyondananda made a racket flying a rocket to Europa. Maybe he found out that it was made of blue cheese, or Rocqueford? If there is water on Europa, there could be molds, but where the cows come from to give the milk for the blue cheese I never did find out. Maybe the blue cheese came to Europa in the form of flying saucers. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 21:47:24 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <3378be1f.22059033@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> Titus wrote: >Many times when Mercury was retrograde, I noticed weird things happen >with the computers at work bordering on the supernatural. My computer is so consistently erratic that I hardly even notice it anymore. My best theory for it is the possibility of the uniqueness of bursts of electricity. >Is there any theosophical writing on Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written >some). I recall its being mentioned in Leadbeater's "Masters and the Path." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 23:43:20 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: In message <3378be1f.22059033@mailhost.worldnet.att.net>, Tom Robertson writes >>Is there any theosophical writing on Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written >>some). > >I recall its being mentioned in Leadbeater's "Masters and the Path." Ernest Wood also mentioned it in connection with Leadbeater and Intitiation(s) in his "Is This Theosophy?" Supposedly all candidates for Intitiation into discipleship of the Masters [sic] would be present at this Occult [more sic] festival. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 01:22:30 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <33644226.2573@eden.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <3378be1f.22059033@mailhost.worldnet.att.net>, Tom Robertson > writes > >>Is there any theosophical writing on Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written > >>some). > > > >I recall its being mentioned in Leadbeater's "Masters and the Path." > > Ernest Wood also mentioned it in connection with Leadbeater and > Intitiation(s) in his "Is This Theosophy?" Supposedly all candidates > for Intitiation into discipleship of the Masters [sic] would be present > at this Occult [more sic] festival. > > Alan I believe there will be present also others (common folks even local ones) not yet ready for initiation etc. Did any one remember being there and seeing me or anyone else who is on theos-l or anyone else we know? Would be interesting information. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:51:36 GMT From: mdmgyn@worldnet.att.net (Tom Robertson) Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <33655e1f.1172648@mailhost.worldnet.att.net> Doss wrote: >I believe there will be present also others (common folks even local >ones) not yet ready for initiation etc. > >Did any one remember being there and seeing me or anyone else who is on >theos-l or anyone else we know? Would be interesting information. I was sworn to secrecy. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 09:24:52 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Ego Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970428142452.006b81e8@mail.eden.com> At 09:09 PM 4/22/97 -0400, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> >> At 09:58 AM 4/22/97 -0400, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >> >Also note that when >> >people gain power in organizations, they frequently end up working >> >against the principles of the organization to maintain their power. >> >That, for example is one of the dangers that the Mahatmas point out in a >> >paid clergy. >> >> Once more the Mahatmas have been right on their observation. >> >> I am very glad that you brought it up. I do not know if you have seen my >> posts surrounding what happened to Krishnaji. > > I have. Being ignorant about the matter, I chose not to comment. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is the normal response I get when I ask even long time TSA members about their knowledge of the litigation of Krishnaji trusts and it is one of the very well kept secrets, at least outside of Ojai. During the litigation, I believe the Ojai newspapers provided full coverage so Ojai residents in Krotona at that time should have known all about the litigation. It took me almost two decades to find out the details, that too by accident. It was the inaccuracies and the questionable comments and wrong conclusions in Sloss's book that triggered the outflow of the details of the litigation and Sloss should be thanked for opening up the issue. It was also by a sheer coincindence that I noticed that one of the K Trustees involved in the litigation was sitting on the TSA Board of Directors and also on the Theosophical Investment Trust with the full support and backing of the TSA Board of Directors, and I could not believe my eyes when I saw this. More of the interesting details of the litigation later, as some on theos-l may be interested. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 13:10:17 +0000 From: meta@vortex.is (Sveinn Freyr) Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 1002 Message-ID: <19970428131016270.AAA115@meta.treknet.is> On Fri, 25 Apr 97 11:42:04 EDT "K. Paul Johnson" >wrote: >> So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else >> noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, >> unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary >> configurations are at work. Some comments: It is a fact that we are and our planet is, experiencing a forceful period now. Extremely strong Solar storm has left the Solar corona. Our planetary magnetic field is, and will be for some time, affected by it. We know that it will affect electronic and radio communications. It may perhaps cause some minor increase of earthquakes. And it will for certain affect our pranic field and our etheric bodies. We will just have to watch and see - perhaps we will not notice anything on a large scale. >Mercury has been retrograde since April 14th. Many times when Mercury was >retrograde, I noticed weird things happen with the computers at work bordering >on the supernatural. > >Speaking of planetary conditions, the first Full Moon in Taurus (Wesak or >Buddha's birthday) was last Tuesday. My teacher told how Buddha and the Christ >work together at this time of year. Is there any theosophical writing on >Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written some). Regarding Wesak: For long, legends have been with us about Wesak. Some say that Wesak is a very ancient festival. Others say that that the Wesak Festival started with Buddha. It would be interesting to have comments on this. There was - not to long ago, a discussion going on about Albert Einstein. Therefore I want to write this: About forty years ago I was working on a repair work in the upper roof of the house of The Theosophical Society in Reykjavík. The upper roof had been used to store magazines which had been sent to the T.S. in Iceland. There were hundreds of magazines, from many countries. When I had put some order on things up there in the roof and put lights on, I took some time to look at the magazines. What puzzled me at that time, was to see articles written by Albert Einstein. It would be interesting to know if someone has compiled Theo-Philosophical articles written by Einstein. Herewith is a web-site: http://magna.com.au/~prfbrown/albert_e.html Best wishes, Sveinn Freyr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:31:47 -0400 From: liesel@dreamscape.com (liesel f. deutsch) Subject: Wesak Message-ID: <199704290548.BAA29270@ultra1.dreamscape.com> Titus asks >Is there any theosophical writing on >Wesak? (I think Alice Bailey has written some). Leadbeater has a description of the Wesak ceremony at Shambalah in "The Masters and the Path". He also has a very beautiful frontispiece of the ceremony displaying the immense aura of the Buddha as he blesses. As a matter of fact, I made a wall hanging of the frontispiece, which now hangs in the meeting place of the TS at Wahanganui, NZ, unless B Brown took it with her when she moved. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 22:15:11 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970430031511.0069dde4@mail.eden.com> I had my share of wierd things yesterday 4/28 triggered by an argument with a client of mine. May be the circumstances are right for weird things to happen. MKR PS: Another weird thing. This and other lists have been inactive. No postings. At 11:43 AM 4/25/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hi gang, > >After one of the strangest nights at the library in history, >with the computer system doing inexplicable things and several >really odd encounters with patrons, I got home and called a >friend halfway across the country. He started reeling off all >the odd and disruptive things that were happening in his life >lately (caught in a flood, for one) and in those of his >friends. I could match the stories for strange and stressful >oddities in my own life recently. And in those of friends. > >So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else >noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, >unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary >configurations are at work. > >Cheers, >Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 19:14:07 -0400 From: "Gerald Schueler" Subject: Vajra=Linga Message-ID: <199704302235.SAA20661@NetGSI.com> >Vajra means "thunderbolt" (paging Doss for a better translation). Yes, it does. It also means the same thing as linga, while padma is equivalent to yoni. Jerry S. Member, TI From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 18:07:16 -0500 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970430230716.006e7f20@mail.eden.com> I had my share of wierd things yesterday 4/28 triggered by an argument with a client of mine. May be the circumstances are right for weird things to happen. MKR PS: Another weird thing. This and other lists have been inactive. No postings. > At 11:43 AM 4/25/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hi gang, > >After one of the strangest nights at the library in history, >with the computer system doing inexplicable things and several >really odd encounters with patrons, I got home and called a >friend halfway across the country. He started reeling off all >the odd and disruptive things that were happening in his life >lately (caught in a flood, for one) and in those of his >friends. I could match the stories for strange and stressful >oddities in my own life recently. And in those of friends. > >So am posting with this rather vague question. Has anyone else >noticed that life seems a lot weirder than usual lately, >unpredictable, stressful? Am wondering if planetary >configurations are at work. > >Cheers, >Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 23:07:40 +0100 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Weird lately? Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19970430031511.0069dde4@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes > >PS: Another weird thing. This and other lists have been inactive. No postings. Very quiet, isn't it. It's probably all Chucks's fault. Or maybe it's all my fault :-) Alan