From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:42:29 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The November THEOSOPHY WORLD is out Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971031084229.007d4300@imagiware.com> The November issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "The Path of Self-Reliance" compiled by Nicholas Weeks "Cycles and Unconditioned Consciousness" by Eldon Tucker "New Zealand News" by Bee Brown "Studies in 'The Voice of the Silence', Part III, The Mind of the Renouncer, by B. P. Wadia "New Age Defended" by Paul Johnson "Spirit and Universal Brotherhood" by Dallas TenBroeck "Great Theosophists: The Rosicrucians" "No Dreamworld" by Eldon Tucker "The Dreamworld" by Gerald Schueler "Sowing Fresh Spiritual Seeds" by Einar Adalsteinsson "Masters, Adepts, Teachers, and Disciples" by Dallas TenBroeck THEOSOPHY WORLD is a free Internet monthly available via email (about 100,000 bytes in size). To subscribe, write to editor@theosophy.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:42:29 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The November THEOSOPHY WORLD is out Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971031084229.007d4300@imagiware.com> The November issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "The Path of Self-Reliance" compiled by Nicholas Weeks "Cycles and Unconditioned Consciousness" by Eldon Tucker "New Zealand News" by Bee Brown "Studies in 'The Voice of the Silence', Part III, The Mind of the Renouncer, by B. P. Wadia "New Age Defended" by Paul Johnson "Spirit and Universal Brotherhood" by Dallas TenBroeck "Great Theosophists: The Rosicrucians" "No Dreamworld" by Eldon Tucker "The Dreamworld" by Gerald Schueler "Sowing Fresh Spiritual Seeds" by Einar Adalsteinsson "Masters, Adepts, Teachers, and Disciples" by Dallas TenBroeck THEOSOPHY WORLD is a free Internet monthly available via email (about 100,000 bytes in size). To subscribe, write to editor@theosophy.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:39:31 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Alleged "Squelching" Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971031213931.0119aa40@mail.eden.com> Here is an interesting msg. mkr >Date: Fri, 31 Oct 97 15:34:09 EST >From: "K. Paul Johnson" >Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Alleged "Squelching" According to M K Ramadoss: > > One thought occurs to me. Was the writer of the msg from Atlanta, in any > shape or form, either directly or indirectly, suggested or recommended > or encouraged or provided info or ideas, edited, scripted by *anyone* in > the TSA Administration in Olcott to write the response? If so, I would > in the least be surprised!!!! Doss, I realized after asking that BJack must be Brant Jackson, author of the letter about the mysterious/infamous Boston Lodge imbroglio that caused such a firestorm on theos-l last year. (Due to its accusation of personal profiteering motives on the part of the "out" group in Boston. Rich, I recall, was an eyewitness to these events and was furious about Brant's unsubstantiated claim.) At that point there was certainly speculation about his being an unofficial mouthpiece for Dr. Algeo and the TSA administration. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 15:42:43 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Alleged "Squelching" Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971031214243.00de4e44@mail.eden.com> Here is a followup msg I posted on theos-talk. May interest some. mkr ===================================================== At 11:51 AM 10/31/97 EST, K. Paul Johnson wrote: >According to BJack5259@aol.com: >Since you are being so free with such personal criticism it >would be nice to know who you are. > >PJ Paul: I hope BJack5259@aol.com does come out and identify himself/herself, as most people on theos lists do. I did a search on Internet White Pages of Atlanta and came up with the following match: There is a Brant Jackson Jr living at 5259 Sanlee Lane, Atlanta. It is quite likely that BJack5259 is a combination of name and street #. Hopefully, he/she will clarify who he/she is. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 16:34:43 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Unconditional love Message-ID: <199711010034.QAA21564@palrel1.hp.com> Nicole wrote: > People who seem to be able to love unconditionally do seem a little > obsessed. [snip] > Why should one love unconditionally without self-interest? I'm 100% sure of your point, but maybe the following addresses it ... I can't claim to love unconditionally, but I think I have witnessed something close to it, which doesn't resemble the sentimentalized versions you sometimes see caricatured. It can sometimes mean releasing a person who needs to experience life's lessons elsewhere, but wishing them the best. Sometimes it means adopting a stern countenance, but without hate. It definitely doesn't imply being a doormat. I had read of an incident where Yogananda was pacing back and forth, reprimanding a student. When he faced the student, he looked stern, but while walking away others saw his face soften and he winked, as if to say, "Sometimes a lesson has to be salted, not sugared!" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 20:45:00 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Dreck Message-ID: <971031204458_358536986@emout10.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-10-31 15:15:31 EST, you write: >Let us all pray that things change for the better soon (even though I >personally don't believe in prayers, it is still worth a try!) > >mkr > I'm thinking more in terms of human sacrifice at the moment, starting with that incredible bore! (except the gods may throw her back) Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 02:02:40 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Error Msg Message-ID: A routine nessage from ti-l was bounced by the system today for sharp@sys.uea.ac.uk and for Jeff Needle. If you are out there, please advise. AB From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 23:06:07 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Cremation and Roman Catholic Church Message-ID: <345AB8BF.1E4F@eden.com> Here is an interesting msg I saw. .......mkr >Date: 1997/09/29 >From: Barry Hardy >Subject: News: Vatican Changes Policy On Cremation (Infallability Not Effected) >Message-ID: <19970929.005004.2063.2.barryhardy@juno.com> Copyright 1997 The Kansas City Star Co. THE KANSAS CITY STAR September 28, 1997 Sunday METROPOLITAN EDITION SECTION: OPINION; Pg. M2 LENGTH: 282 words HEADLINE: A policy change on cremation The Vatican shows flexibility on difficult matter. BYLINE: BILL TAMMEUS BODY: A recent Vatican action no doubt will bring comfort to millions of American Roman Catholics at a time of grief. Catholic bishops have received final approval to allow for the full celebration of funeral rites in the presence of cremated remains of the deceased. The National Conference of Catholic Bishops announced recently that the Vatican has approved the liturgical texts to be used in such funerals. This has been a difficult matter for many in the church. Historically the church opposed cremation, though it granted permission in 1963 as long as it was not understood as a sign denying Christian teaching, especially about what the Apostles' Creed calls resurrection of the body. Twenty years later that permission was made official in church law, though the church still recommended burying of bodies. Even so, the church continued to deny permission to have the cremated remains present for a full funeral and asked that bodies not be cremated until after a funeral Mass is celebrated. This led at times to considerable awkwardness and occasional hard feelings. All the while, cremation has become a widely practiced option among Catholics. The Cremation Association of America says about 30 percent of Catholic funerals now include cremation. In March the Vatican approved the practice of allowing cremated remains to be present at the funeral. Now it has approved the liturgical language to be used. Many Catholics will be grateful to the church for showing flexibility in this sensitive matter. Sincerely, Barry L. Hardy barryhardy@juno.com Georgia State University School of Law, 2L From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:43:42 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The November THEOSOPHY WORLD is out Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971031084342.007b3210@imagiware.com> The November issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "The Path of Self-Reliance" compiled by Nicholas Weeks "Cycles and Unconditioned Consciousness" by Eldon Tucker "New Zealand News" by Bee Brown "Studies in 'The Voice of the Silence', Part III, The Mind of the Renouncer, by B. P. Wadia "New Age Defended" by Paul Johnson "Spirit and Universal Brotherhood" by Dallas TenBroeck "Great Theosophists: The Rosicrucians" "No Dreamworld" by Eldon Tucker "The Dreamworld" by Gerald Schueler "Sowing Fresh Spiritual Seeds" by Einar Adalsteinsson "Masters, Adepts, Teachers, and Disciples" by Dallas TenBroeck THEOSOPHY WORLD is a free Internet monthly available via email (about 100,000 bytes in size). To subscribe, write to editor@theosophy.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997 00:04:16 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Isis Unveiled Abridged Message-ID: <345AC660.63A0@eden.com> Here is a quote from cyberspace. 27. Forthcoming almost immediately from Quest, Wheaton, will be Michael Gomes's long-awaited abridgement of H.P.B.'s Isis Unveiled. The work is not a paraphrase and remains in H.P.B.'s own words, but the omission of the digressions and asides for the first time permits the reader to appreciate easily the theses and plan underlying the work. As always, the Mr. Gomes's work is meticulous and brilliant. ============================ MKR: Has anyone seen the book? Also why one needs an abridged book? Have you seen any abridgement of Shakespeare, etc. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 09:54:55 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Dreck Message-ID: Chuck: >Now just how in the bloody hell are we going to compete with these folks for >the hearts and minds of humanity if all we can offer is a series of crashing >bores and new age dunderheads? I say we lock the nice, boring people in >their offices, let them shuffle paper and eat cucumber sandwiches, which is >what they do best, and create some people who can hold an audience, or least >keep them awake! > >Chuck the Heretic Excuse my rusty writing hand... Last night I went to a lecture given by Maya Angelou, and it was uplifting and exciting. That woman had wisdom, a sense of humor, and lots of attitude. She was herself and totally unapologetic about it. I dread attending "New Agey" groups because of the pious atmosphere. It's usually in such atmosphere that I feel my "shadow", horns and goatee growing, and evil mischievousness. I would rather hang out with people who are totally themselves and see the sacred in them. Oh well, maybe I would never be in a spiritual group, only in the spiritual group of mankind. Now, I bet HPB would be one interesting woman to observe. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 11:03:39 -0700 (MST) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: Cremation and Roman Catholic Church Message-ID: <199711011803.LAA24601@mailmx.micron.net> Doss contributed a news article: > Historically the church opposed cremation, though it granted >permission in 1963 as long as it was not understood as a sign denying >Christian teaching, especially about what the Apostles' Creed calls >resurrection of the body. This is a bit confusing. If one really believes that the body is resurrected, how can one endorse cremation? And how does the declaration that it is not a "denial" or evasion of "Christian teaching" make it all better? > All the while, cremation has become a widely practiced option >among Catholics. The Cremation Association of America says about 30 >percent of Catholic funerals now include cremation. I have always found it interesting how one can belong to a faith - such as Catholicism - and yet "go against" some of the most fundamental teachings, such as: cremation; abortion; divorce; birth control, etc. . . What do they think? I wonder if they think that perhaps God is more understanding then the Church? That's a positive sign. I wonder if it's a case of simply wanting to belong? I know that some Catholics, after having an abortion or violating some other Church law, live with the belief they are going to hell, but hold on to a chance of salvation by just ending up in purgatory. To live with such a fear, to me, is terrible. . .what kind of a life can one really have fearing such a destiny? Some have mused that humanity needs threats of such destinies (karma would fall into this category) to keep itself from living lives of complete debauchery. Hmmm. Anyway, I wonder if most Catholics, and every other faith and denomination, know the "belief system" in which they consider themselves belonging to. To say "I am a Catholic" or "I am a Muslim" is to say something about yourself. . .or is it? "I am a theosophist one day, and something else the next day" - yes, I guess that does say something about who I think I am. . .it's going to be a long night. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997 14:36:41 -0500 From: libidia Subject: Re: Theosophy World Message-ID: <345B84C9.2D03@globalserve.net> theos-buds@vnet.net wrote: > > THEOS-BUDS Digest 260 > > Topics covered in this issue include: > > 1) The November THEOSOPHY WORLD is out > by Eldon B Tucker > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- When I read this I fleetingly thought, "oh Oh, another 200 messages to plough through after!". But quickly decided that your magazine is great and the debates that ensue are well worth reading and participating in. Many thanks for the effort. Annette From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 13:42:19 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Mondrian Message-ID: Hi Eiichi, Did Mondrian form his theory of rhythm during the time of his early abstract art, or during the time of his geometric compositions of later years? You can find what Mondrian is referring to (no-time, non-repetition) in ideas older than the Secret Doctrine, in Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact, it's pretty basic Yoga. As far as I can see, there are no direct references to rhythm indexed in the major works by Blavatsky that we have. However, the idea of rhythm expressed by Mondrian in your quote is not rhythm as we generally know it, but rhythm in terms of finding the stillness of equilibrium to liberate ourselves from Maya. When the Secret Doctrine discusses about Pralaya, Laya centers, cycles, and illusion, there are plenty of ideas from which to build such a theory. In the Stanzas of the Secret Doctrine, you can see references to time and space being illusion, and how we evolve to free ourselves from Maya. From that, you can see where Alice Bailey got her ideas about rhythm. For example, in Yogic and Buddhic meditation, the purpose is to still the vibrations of the senses, the emotions, and the lower mind. By doing that, you can find the Laya center, and slip through to experience the higher nature. Mondrian was trying to express that in terms of art. I think that is what he meant by "point of perfect balance and of equilibrium." Having rhythm in a "no-time and non-repetition basis" is holding the stillness. Thus, he was creating symbols of Laya centers in his art and was quite Yogic in his approach to art, whether he knew it or not. Here are some references you might want to look at: An Art of Our Own (The Spiritual in Twentieth Century Art) by Roger Lipsey, Shambhala Publications, Inc., ISBN 0-87773-496-8 (pbk.) The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890-1985 by Maurice Tuchmann, Abbeville Press Publishers, ISBN 0-7892-0056-2 We'll be very interested in reading the final paper if you're willing to publish it. Have a great one. Thoa and Mark :o) >Dear subscribers, > >I am writing Ph. D thesis about Piet Mondrian (Dutch painter 1872-1944), >especially about his theory of rhythm, at Melbourne University. > >He is famous for a theosophist painter and was very much influenced by >theosophist writings, for example, Mme Bravatsky, J. Krishnamurti, M. H. >J. Schoenmaekers (Dutch philosopher and theosophist) and others. > >I am tracing Mondrian's theory of rhythm. It is quite unusual one. He >contested that rhythm should occur on no-time and non-repetition basis >and it should be attained by the equilibrated point of two extreme >opposite elements. > >So far the phrase I have encounter among theosophist writings concerning >rhythm is Alice A. Bailey's in her book A Treatise on Cosmic Fire (Lucis >Publishing Company, New York, 1925, p. 158): "Rhythm, or the attainment >of the point of perfect balance and of equilibrium." > >This concept is quite similar to Mondrian's, but Mondrian wrote about >his theory of art and rhythm from 1917. So he obviously did not read >Bailey's book. Then there is a question: from where he got the idea of >rhythm. > >If the theory of rhythm is quite common among theosophist, where can we >find the similar phrases in Mme Bravatsky's or J. Krishnamurti's >writings (or any theosophical writing before 1917) as we see above in >Bailey's book? > >If someone knows this resources about rhythm in writings of those above >mentioned, please let me know. I am living Melbourne City (originally >from Osaka Japan), so I can go to the library of Melbourne Theosophy >Society and reference the resources. > >Thank you for your attention. > >Fondly, > >Eiichi Tosaki From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 22:19:23 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: One day at a time ... Message-ID: In message <199711011803.LAA24601@mailmx.micron.net>, kymsmith@micron.net writes >"I am a theosophist one day, and something else the next day" - yes, I guess >that does say something about who I think I am. . .it's going to be a long >night. Pleasant dreams! Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997 17:19:25 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Oops Message-ID: <199711020119.RAA11596@palrel1.hp.com> Oops! Nicole, I meant to say I'm *not* 100% sure of what you meant. Sometimes what you say is not what you mean. Reminds me of the following taken from actual signs across the U.S.: At a Santa Fe gas station: "We will sell gasoline to anyone in a glass container." In a New York restaurant: "Customers who consider our waitresses uncivil ought to see the manager." On the wall of a Baltimore estate: "Trespassers will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. On a long-established New Mexico dry cleaners: "38 years on the same spot." In a Los Angeles dance hall: "Good clean dancing every night but Sunday." In a Florida maternity ward: "No children allowed." In a New York drugstore: "We dispense with accuracy." In the offices of a loan company: "Ask about our plans for owning your home." In a New York medical building: "Mental Health Prevention Center" On a New York convalescent home: "For the sick and tired of the Episcopal Church." On a Maine shop: "Our motto is to give our customers the lowest possible prices and workmanship." At a number of military bases: "Restricted to unauthorized personnel." On a display of "I love you only" Valentine cards: "Now available in multi-packs." In the window of a Kentucky appliance store: "Don't kill your wife. Let our washing machine do the dirty work." In a funeral parlor: "Ask about our layaway plan." In a clothing store: "Wonderful bargains for men with 16 and 17 necks." In a Tacoma, Washington men's clothing store: "15 men's wool suits, $10. They won't last an hour!" On a shopping mall marquee: "Archery Tournament -- Ears pierced" Outside a country shop: "We buy junk and sell antiques." In the window of an Oregon store: "Why go elsewhere and be cheated when you can come here?" In a Maine restaurant: "Open 7 days a week and weekends." [EdNote: this one seen in Yankton, SD] On a radiator repair garage: "Best place to take a leak." In the vestry of a New England church: "Will the last person to leave please see that the perpetual light is extinguished." In a Pennsylvania cemetery: "Persons are prohibited from picking flowers from any but their own graves." On a roller coaster: "Watch your head." On the grounds of a public school: "No trespassing without permission." On a Tennessee highway: "When this sign is under water, this road is impassable." Similarly, in front of a New Hampshire car wash: "If you can't read this, it's time to wash your car." And apparently, somewhere in England in an open field otherwise untouched by human presence, there is a sign that says, "Do not throw stones at this sign." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 02 Nov 1997 12:23:11 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Dreck Message-ID: <199711022023.MAA16215@palrel1.hp.com> thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) wrote > I dread attending "New Agey" groups because of the pious atmosphere. It's > usually in such atmosphere that I feel my "shadow", horns and goatee > growing, and evil mischievousness. I would rather hang out with people who > are totally themselves and see the sacred in them. Oh well, maybe I would > never be in a spiritual group, only in the spiritual group of mankind. > Now, I bet HPB would be one interesting woman to observe. Welcome back, Thoa! Without you there's been no one to give me a hard time. ;) Well, at least not with the flash and flair you do. ;) Tease. Tease. I have also seen that kind of "piety" and share your disdain for it. But let me talk about the flip side. For the last few years I've observed a kind of worshipful or sabbath day on my own, though at intervals (usually when travelling), visiting other groups. From what I've seen there are three kinds of piety: the frozen, plastic, hypocritical kind; an "honest hypocritical" kind (how's that for an oxymoron?); and genuine kind. Before I describe them I'll add that my conclusions come from a fair amount of observation. A sample of the groups I've visited: Roman Catholic, Islamic, Methodist, Swedenborgian, Thai Buddhist, Unity, Ramakrishna Order Vedantin, Synagogues, Southern Baptist, Tibetan Buddhist, Science of Mind, Russian Orthodox, Self Realization Fellowship, Manly P. Hall, Anglican, Ananda, Sai Baba, ... etc ... etc. Most of them I wouldn't go back to, but some have an admirable presence to them - usually in the congregation, not the leadership. Amidst the babbling New Agey's I've met people with a contageous and genuine reverence. They spark some kind of remembrance or knowing in the soul. These are the types you hope would be on the altars. Appreciation for that genuine kind of reverence in a receptive person prompts a clumbsy attempt to recover and apply that knowing. This is what I called, improvising on the spot, "honest hypocrisy". Like the inferior function described by Jung, the undeveloped clumbsy faculty seeking to come out contains the richest seeds of new growth and original creation. Unlike the polished but well-worn superior function, it abounds in new possibilities. But it is initially awkward. Imagine what an olympic racer looked like when he or she rode their first bike. The genuine and the "genuine imitation" are different from the out and out hypocritical. For every good thing, there seems to be a force that seeks to cheapen it and pervert it. I think this must be what the Valentinian Gnostics called the Antimimon Pneumatos or counterfeit spirit. The moment an esoteric truth becomes exoteric, there is always the cheap imitation coming forth. Part of the price you pay, but the "genuine imitation" turning into genuine makes it worth it. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 20:48:17 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Signs Message-ID: "Reading this sign is prohibited. Penalty $100" Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 13:49:21 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 1305 Message-ID: <345D3BB2.6F09@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Dear Thoa, Thank you for your very interesting quick reply to Mondrian's rhythm. I myself reread my contributed mail again and found several English mistakes (my first language is Japanese) and difficulties to understand my question, but you generously skimmed my points and, more than that, gave me a delightful possibility to trace back to ancient concept of Yoga. Thoa Tran wrote: > Did Mondrian form his theory of rhythm during the time of his early > abstract art, or during the time of his geometric compositions of later > years? Actually there is no obvious documentation written by him about rhythm before 1917. But the earlier version of the long essay titled "The New Plastic in Painting" was originally intended to publish in the magazine of Theosophy society in Holland in 1914 but was rejected. And in his postmortem publication of his sketchbooks 1912-1914 there is no direct reference of rhythm. So we can say that he developed his idea of rhythm rudimentally between 1914-1917, when his painting was in transition from natural referential abstract painting to non-natural referential geometric painting. > > You can find what Mondrian is referring to (no-time, non-repetition) in > ideas older than the Secret Doctrine, in Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact, > it's pretty basic Yoga. As far as I can see, there are no direct > references to rhythm indexed in the major works by Blavatsky that we have. Yes, there is no indexed reference of rhythm in the major works by Blavatsky, but in her book "Studies in Occultism" (Sphere Books Limited, 1974, ISBN 0 7221 1701 9) there are several parts concerned rhythm mentioned: "the rhythm of nervous vibrations" (p. 42), "it [the flame] will dance and sing in rhythm with sounds." But those do not relate to the main concept of rhythm in Mondrian. > However, the idea of rhythm expressed by Mondrian in your quote is not > rhythm as we generally know it, but rhythm in terms of finding the > stillness of equilibrium to liberate ourselves from Maya. When the Secret > Doctrine discusses about Pralaya, Laya centers, cycles, and illusion, there > are plenty of ideas from which to build such a theory. In the Stanzas of > the Secret Doctrine, you can see references to time and space being > illusion, and how we evolve to free ourselves from Maya. From that, you > can see where Alice Bailey got her ideas about rhythm. For example, in > Yogic and Buddhic meditation, the purpose is to still the vibrations of the > senses, the emotions, and the lower mind. By doing that, you can find the > Laya center, and slip through to experience the higher nature. > This is precious information dedicating the understanding of Mondrian's rhythm. In the grocery attached to "The Secret Doctrine Commentary" Maya and Pralaya mean (but no item of "Laya centers" so if you explain the term it will be appreciated): Maya (Sans.) Illusion; the cosmic power which renders phenomenal existence and the perceptions thereof possible. In Hindu philosophy that alone which is changeless and eternal is called reality: all that which is subject to change through decay and differentiation, and which has, therefore, a beginning and an end, is regarded as MAYA -- illusion. Pralaya (Sans.) Dissolution, the opposite of Manvantara, one being the period of rest and the other of full activity (death and life) of a planet, or of the whole universe. Those terms are pretty important to genealogical trace of Mondrian's unusual concept of rhythm and reality, and so far, within my small knowledge, no art historian has referred to this. > Mondrian was trying to express that in terms of art. I think that is what > he meant by "point of perfect balance and of equilibrium." Having rhythm > in a "no-time and non-repetition basis" is holding the stillness. Thus, he > was creating symbols of Laya centers in his art and was quite Yogic in his > approach to art, whether he knew it or not. > Mondrian's theory of rhythm is enigmatic, quite difficult to understand. Especially realization of rhythm in stillness, while rhythm, in normal sense, directly associates with movement. Now I feel I get a clue to follow Mondrian's argument. Thank you. > Here are some references you might want to look at: > > An Art of Our Own (The Spiritual in Twentieth Century Art) > by Roger Lipsey, Shambhala Publications, Inc., ISBN 0-87773-496-8 (pbk.) > I will see in the university library catalogue. > The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890-1985 > by Maurice Tuchmann, Abbeville Press Publishers, ISBN 0-7892-0056-2 > I already got one copy of this (IQ(J there is no extended arguments of rhythm, though. > We'll be very interested in reading the final paper if you're willing to > publish it. Have a great one. > I will. I will do my best. Thank you for your encouragement. Fondly, Eiichi Tosaki My former mail to this site had several grammatical and terminological mistakes so I will cite the corrected version: Dear subscribers, I am writing Ph. D thesis about Piet Mondrian (Dutch painter 1872-1944), especially about his theory of rhythm at Melbourne University. He is famous for a theosophist painter and was very much influenced by theosophist writings, for example, Mme Bravatsky, J. Krishnamurti, M. H. J. Schoenmaekers (Dutch philosopher and theosophist). I am tracing Mondrian(IU(Js theory of rhythm. It is quite unusual one. He contested that rhythm should occur on no-time and no-repetition basis and it should be attained by the equilibrated point of two extreme opposite elements. So far the phrase I have encounter among theosophist writings concerning rhythm is Alice A. Bailey(IU(Js in her book A Treatise on Cosmic Fire (Lucis Publishing Company, New York, 1925, p. 158): (IR(JRhythm, or the attainment of the point of perfect balance and of equilibrium.(IS(J This concept is quite similar to Mondrian(IU(Js, but Mondrian wrote about his theory of art and rhythm from 1917. So he obviously did not read Bailey(IU(Js book. Then there is a question from where he got the idea of rhythm: If the theory of rhythm is quite common among theosophist, where can we find the similar phrases in Mme Bravatsky(IU(Js or J. Krishnamurti(IU(Js writings (or any theosophical writing before 1917)? If someone knows this resources about rhythm, please let me know. I am living Melbourne City (originally from Osaka Japan), so I can go to the library of Melbourne Theosophy Society and reference the resources. Thank you for your attention. Eiichi Tosaki From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 02 Nov 1997 23:15:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Sri Ramalingam Swamy - Biography Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971103051547.00d5719c@mail.eden.com> Sri Ramalingam Swamy (1823-1874) is the only known person who was privy to the plans of the Real Founders much before even HPB herself was told of the plans to go to USA and find HSO and founded TS and then moving the HQ to India. Due some people having shown some interest in him, I am compiling biographic information and some of it is very interesting. Please keep tuned in and will be posting it as soon as time permits. BTW, following is my signature lines which I append to drum up subscription to theos-l when I send msgs to other maillists. Peace to all living entities. mkr --------------------------------------------------------------- M K Ramadoss 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 (210) 615-7373 e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com ------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any organization and unmoderated where you will find information and help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. -------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 01:46:06 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Isis Unveiled Abridged Message-ID: <345D732E.3E18@sprynet.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > Here is a quote from cyberspace. > > 27. Forthcoming almost immediately from Quest, Wheaton, will be Michael > Gomes's long-awaited abridgement of H.P.B.'s Isis Unveiled. The work is > not a paraphrase and remains in H.P.B.'s own words, but the omission of > the digressions and asides for the first time permits the reader to > appreciate easily the theses and plan underlying the work. As always, > the Mr. Gomes's work is meticulous and brilliant. > > ============================ > > MKR: Has anyone seen the book? Also why one needs an abridged book? Have > you seen any abridgement of Shakespeare, etc. I have seen it. I also was watching over Michael's shoulder frequently while he was assembling it. It gives the guts of Isis Unveiled, and makes an excellent INTRODUCTION to the real thing. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 03:13:12 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Isis Unveiled Abridged Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971103091312.011d78d0@mail.eden.com> At 01:49 AM 11/3/97 -0500, you wrote: >ramadoss@eden.com wrote: >> >> Here is a quote from cyberspace. >> >> 27. Forthcoming almost immediately from Quest, Wheaton, will be Michael >> Gomes's long-awaited abridgement of H.P.B.'s Isis Unveiled. The work is >> not a paraphrase and remains in H.P.B.'s own words, but the omission of >> the digressions and asides for the first time permits the reader to >> appreciate easily the theses and plan underlying the work. As always, >> the Mr. Gomes's work is meticulous and brilliant. >> >> ============================ >> >> MKR: Has anyone seen the book? Also why one needs an abridged book? Have >> you seen any abridgement of Shakespeare, etc. > > I have seen it. I also was watching over Michael's shoulder frequently >while he was assembling it. It gives the guts of Isis Unveiled, and >makes an excellent INTRODUCTION to the real thing. > > Bart Lidofsky > I would be looking forward to seeing the book when published and perhaps look for the day when a book like this would be available on-line on Internet. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 03:30:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Free e-mail program with filters Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971103093047.006e60f8@mail.eden.com> At 11:12 AM 11/2/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote commenting on a prior msg: > My bet is that 90% of viewers are not interested in seeing the same >multiple submissions by the same persons everyday. I'm not. Depending upon your email program, you may be able to filter out or set aside to a different folder all submissions from selected individuals. You could read the rest of the postings and optionally get to the rest later. MKR: I use Eudora Light 3.0, a freeware program which can be downloaded on the web for free and used for free and it runs on Windows. It has the ability to filter msgs and sort them into several user defined folders and mailboxes. The web address is www.eudora.com. The filtering ability helps me to deal with a couple of hundreds of msgs I get each day and night, especially when I use e-mail both for my business and personal (theosophical and other) purposes. If anyone has difficulty in downloading the freeware, I can provide free help unless I am swamped with too many requests. In the latter case, we have to find a different solution. You have to use it to see the power of filters. Peace to all living entities. mkr --------------------------------------------------------------- M K Ramadoss 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 (210) 615-7373 e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com ------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any organization and unmoderated where you will find information and help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. -------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 16:06:18 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Dreck/HPB's article Message-ID: To doss: ">And mine has three volumes and an index and counts by lucky chance >2478 pages. It has been printed in The Netherlands. It is possible that the size of the type may have made the difference and I think both have the same book." No, I don't think so - (jokingly - mind you, your's lacking all about Krishnamurti!) >Thanks ...............doss You are welcome, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 16:24:27 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Dreck Message-ID: To Chuck: "Because it is almost impossible to really visualize peace," Could you please explain why? (It's hard to understand for me, because the pure word "peace" put's instantly many symbols into my thoughts, i.e. sparkling, bright, wight light, the Phi-sign, doves of peace, a white candle, a piecefully country szene ... ) "while a child playing Doom will put out far more energy, and more effective energy in the opposite direction" Do you refer to aggression with "energy in the opposite direction"? "than an entire monastery full of Bhuddists" Thank's for the undertone - fullfilling the dharma! Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 17:30:52 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Unconditional love Message-ID: (> Why should one love unconditionally without self-interest?) To Titus: "It can sometimes mean releasing a person who needs to experience life's lessons elsewhere, but wishing them the best." That's a very good sample. "Sometimes it means adopting a stern countenance," I first try it gently, but sometimes one comes accross persons, who seem only to understand rougher tones and others seem to understand nothing at all because they don't wish to. "but without hate" I thought about what hate might be and think it's root's are a very disappointed form of love which turned into a "sickness" called "hate". Therfore I watch the disappointments live gives to me at it's very beginning and ask myself why do I feel disappointed about something. In most cases it ends up with an outburst of laughter about myself! "It definitely doesn't imply being a doormat." No, that would be the contrary of it. "Sometimes a lesson has to be salted, not sugared!" I don't feel that I am able to give lessons to somebody else at all. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 17:58:47 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Oops Message-ID: To Titus: "Oops! Nicole, I meant to say I'm *not* 100% sure of what you meant." No promblem. Can one be able to be 100% sure of what another person means? Something to think about. "Sometimes what you say is not what you mean." I hear this for the first time in my life and have to think about it. Maybe I have sometimes difficulties to create the words to properly express what I mean? Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 18:53:53 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Unconditional love/shield/surveys Message-ID: To Cpickar: Greetings: "It is either personal or learned or both." I agree to this - though to me it doesn't change anything at all - it's just another point of view to look at it. "obsessive" Maybe we should first try to make sure, what each of us considers the above expression to be. To me "obsessive" means to "think and feel that another person belongs (as if one had been buying a human beeing in a store) to a person, as if the other person would be an article out of material and not a lifing beeing. Do you define "obsessive" in the same way? "Higher Self or Spirit HAS no limitations and is shared, therefore no shields or borders." To me Higher Self sometimes is shared and sometimes is not. There are also boarders for one's own spiritual well being. It's upon me to decide what I share and what I won't - it's all out of my free will. "One should do what one feels from ones inner self." I agree. "... most of us our focused on ourselves and could stand a good dose of a loss of self interest..." I guess I know what you are trying to say here, but then isn't it also just a question of h o w one is intested in oneself. I mean if the interest is used for learning and working that's different from being used for saying "wauw I am one great myself" (reminds me of P. Ustinov in its movie role Nero). "getting us to drop these limitations and be more inclusive" Yes and now - if dropping the limitations is used to make out a team of a hierarchy it's a creative way to become more inclusive but if to become more inclusive is done under pressure I don't consider it to be a good way. "The subject of unconditional love lends itself to the subject of unity of spirit." Could you give me a sample of a situation you have in mind, which makes you say "unconditional love lends itself to unity of spirit". I am learning a lot while trying to discuss with you. Thank you for that. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 14:13:24 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Dreck Message-ID: <971103132535_1736349336@mrin39> In a message dated 97-11-03 11:22:00 EST, you write: >Could you please explain why? (It's hard to understand for me, because >the pure word "peace" put's instantly many symbols into my thoughts, >i.e. sparkling, bright, wight light, the Phi-sign, doves of peace, a white >candle, a piecefully country szene ... ) > >"while a child playing Doom will put out far more energy, and more effective >energy in the opposite direction" > >Do you refer to aggression with "energy in the opposite direction"? > Well, what you are getting is a personal series of references to the word, which do not really translate very well into effecting the outside world. Feeling good creates a form of stasis which is not the same as absence of conflict. Now, when someone plays a video game, they can easily find themselves in a state of total concentration that would make most experienced meditators extremely jealous because the mental dynamic of the game is doing the work. And, as that concentration is on violent action, as opposed to stasis, it will have an immediate impact on the mental atmosphere of anyone who is open to it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 14:54:55 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: E-mail Filter Feature Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971103205455.00dd4904@mail.eden.com> Words mean different things to different people. One such thing is the e-mail *filter* feature. Based on our experience with coffee filter, water filter, etc., if one has not used the e-mail filter capability in e-mail program, one is likely to think that the filters filter msgs. It is not really so. The e-mail filter may more correctly may be termed as sorting ability or feature. That is how the *filter* is used. For example, I get mails from a couple of theos-xxxx maillists, theos-world maillist, aspartame maillist, CD-R Maillist, Pentax Camera maillist in addition to other mail that is sent to my by other entities including my clients and customers. The daily volume of mail average between 200 and 300, seven days of the week. If all of them are in one pile, it is going to be very time consuming to sort them out and one has to look atleast at the subject header of each msg to decide what should be done. To speed up this process, I have set up within the e-mail program several mailboxes. For example, I have In Out Pentax Theosophy Aspartame CD-R Listening The In mailbox is the default mail box if a msg cannot be sorted into one of the other mail boxes. The out has all the msgs I have sent out. When I pickup my incoming mail, the program transfers all the mail to my computer and as soon as tranfer is over, the program looks at the header info in each e-mail and sorts them in the above mailboxes and if they cannot be specifically identified and sorted the are deposited in the In box. So as soon as I download all msgs, the first thing I look into are the msgs which are in the In mailbox, which has all the msgs which may require immediate attention. When time permits I look at other mailboxes and in some of them I don't even read any of the msg, just look at the subject and see if interests me. If for example there is a lot of interesting conversation going on relating to Theosophy, then the second mail box I will be looking into will be Theosophy mailbox. I guess the above gives some flavor of how the *filter* capability works. Peace to all living entities. mkr --------------------------------------------------------------- M K Ramadoss 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 (210) 615-7373 e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com ------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any organization and unmoderated where you will find information and help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. -------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 14:42:20 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: E-mail Filter Feature Message-ID: <199711032143.OAA01631@umt.umt.edu> There was some talk on another list about volume of messages - and filtering - just thought I'd let everyone know that Microsoft offers its POP3 client free of charge ... its a mail program ... the version that came out with Explorer 4 (just released) is called "Outlook" ... and its one of the better email programs I've ever used, very convenient & user friendly ... its available now in Windows95 and Windows NT versions. Those with Macs can use Microsoft Mail (the email program that came with Explorer 3). Both mail programs can be downloaded from the Internet Explorer site on the web (they are part of the Internet Explorer package, but can also be downloaded without the browser). Go to Regards, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 17:47:45 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Mondrian Message-ID: Hi Eiichi, Since I am out with a cold today, I have the time to scan the Secret Doctrine I & II to see where Mondrian got his ideas. By the way, I highly recommend reading the chapter on Mondrian in An Art of Our Own: The Spiritual in Twentieth Century Art. The author gave a detailed understanding of Mondrian's philosophy, although there's nothing on rhythm. If you cannot find the book, I would be happy to copy that section for you. I will send that and any other info. if you would privately e-mail me your address. Mark and I had a great time playing Sherlock Holmes in trying to figure out Mondrian's intent. First, before we bring the SD I & II, let's look at some clues. It may at first look like a stir fry, but hopefully it will turn out to be a tasty dish. *************** CLUES: I won't state Mondrian's work too much in detail because you probably studied it in more detail than I did. Mondrian stated that "(p)lastic art affirms that equilibrium can only be established through the balance of unequal but equivalent oppositions" and compared that with human life, that although we are in "disequilibrium", we are "based on equilibrium." Mondrian's later works is reminiscent of an asymmetrical mandala. The composition is off-balance and yet it is very static, a "dynamic equilibrium". He used his limited expressions of colors, tones and lines to express universality. He believed that art, like the process of exercises such as meditation, should be a path of speedier evolution for the artist. He wants "(t)he subjectivization of the universal in art (to) bring the universal downward on the one hand, while on the other it helps raise the individual toward the universal." (His writings quoted by Lipsey.) Before we go on, let's define Laya-Center. 1. According to G. de Purucker's Occult Glossary: A laya-center is the mystical point where a thing disappears from one plane and passes onward to reappear on another plane. 2. There is more definition, but that is the gist of it. To visualize it, think in terms of a sine wave that extends from highest spirit (where it vibrates very quickly) to densest matter (where it vibrates imperceptibly slow), and the laya centers between planes are located on a straight line that passes through the center. The center of the sine wave is the point of equilibrium. By quieting the vibrations of the body, the emotions, and the lower mind, the Yogi is able to go to the laya center to experience the higher nature. A good book on that would be "A Geometry of Space-Consciousness" by James S. Perkins, Theosophical Publishing House, ISBN 0-8356-7006-6. It is a small book and I would be happy to copy that for you also. Also, the Theosophical Pub. House has a book on modern art and theosophy. I'm not sure of it's exact title, but you might want to request a catalog from them. 3. Here's a passage (The Mental Body, A.E. Powell, The Theosophical Publishing House, p. 160) regarding laya center that might help clarifying its relation to Yoga: "...as the mental body is stilled, the consciousness escapes from it and passes into and out of the 'laya centre,' the neutral points of contact between the mental and the causal body. 4. In the SD I, p. 147, starting from the last paragraph, is a detailed explanation of the Laya center. 5. A laya center works both ways. You can go up through them, or draw down through them. Mondrian's stated intent was that he was trying to draw the universe down through his painting. His work is an outer representation of his inner ability to attune. The Secret Doctrine is very difficult to follow. You can read writings by G. de Purucker to help you understand the SD. From his Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy (a commentary on The SD), Point Loma Publications, ISBN 0-913004-70-7, you might want to read some pages pertaining to your study: p. 89, regarding force in equilibrium, not latent. p. 322-323, starting with the third paragraph, regarding laya-center. p.401, regarding laya-center. In addition, in the SD I, you may want to read p. 36, Stanza I(#2, 3, 4, 9). Also peppered in the SD I are discussions regarding forces, Pythagorean theory, and numerology that may spark some ideas. You may also want to look up books on mandalas. There is one, Mystery of Mandalas by Heita Copony, The Theosophical Publishing House, ISBN 0-8356-0649-X. Let me quote what is written on p.3 and you can see the relation to Mondrian's work: "The mandala in its entire expression refers to dimensions beyond outer appearances. Here human experience of being and intuition come together and something unspeakable is expressed in an image that can be perceived by the senses. We may also understand the mandala as a model of principles of reality, of which humanity is a part, of an order of the cosmos projected into three-dimensional space. Just as unimaginable worlds of other dimensions unfold beyond the world of space and time in which we mortals live, so the mandala's statement and levels of meaning are multidimensional and often full of paradox. On one hand, for example, the mandala is an image of humans in the limitations of space and time. On the other hand, it leads from the human realm to the cosmic and spiritual and joins the two levels. So it is personal and suprapersonal at the same time-microcosm and macrocosm, spirit and matter, the finite and the infinite pervading each other." Now, to me, that seems a whole lot like what Mondrian was trying to do. In studying mandalas, you can see that Mondrian's work is basically an asymmetrical modernist mandala. Lastly, you might want to look up the processes of Samkhya-yoga, which is practiced through stillness. ********* I hope I'm not confusing you too much. After all, this is a man's life time study of theosophy from various sources. Thus, you can see that the point of equilibrium is the laya center, or "rhythm, the attainment of the point of perfect balance and of equilibrium" (AB), the processes of attaining that equilibrium through exercises such as meditation or creation of mandalas. From that, you can see that this is rhythm in a "no-time and non-repetition basis", achieved through holding the stillness. Thoa :o) >Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 13:49:21 +1100 >From: tosaki >Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 1305 >Message-ID: <345D3BB2.6F09@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> > >Dear Thoa, > >Thank you for your very interesting quick reply to Mondrian's rhythm. I >myself reread my contributed mail again and found several English >mistakes (my first language is Japanese) and difficulties to understand >my question, but you generously skimmed my points and, more than that, >gave me a delightful possibility to trace back to ancient concept of >Yoga. > >Thoa Tran wrote: >> Did Mondrian form his theory of rhythm during the time of his early >> abstract art, or during the time of his geometric compositions of later >> years? > >Actually there is no obvious documentation written by him about rhythm >before 1917. But the earlier version of the long essay titled "The New >Plastic in Painting" was originally intended to publish in the magazine >of Theosophy society in Holland in 1914 but was rejected. And in his >postmortem publication of his sketchbooks 1912-1914 there is no direct >reference of rhythm. So we can say that he developed his idea of rhythm >rudimentally between 1914-1917, when his painting was in transition from >natural referential abstract painting to non-natural referential >geometric painting. > >> >> You can find what Mondrian is referring to (no-time, non-repetition) in >> ideas older than the Secret Doctrine, in Hinduism and Buddhism. In fact, >> it's pretty basic Yoga. As far as I can see, there are no direct >> references to rhythm indexed in the major works by Blavatsky that we have. > >Yes, there is no indexed reference of rhythm in the major works by >Blavatsky, but in her book "Studies in Occultism" (Sphere Books Limited, >1974, ISBN 0 7221 1701 9) there are several parts concerned rhythm >mentioned: "the rhythm of nervous vibrations" (p. 42), "it [the flame] >will dance and sing in rhythm with sounds." But those do not relate to >the main concept of rhythm in Mondrian. > >> However, the idea of rhythm expressed by Mondrian in your quote is not >> rhythm as we generally know it, but rhythm in terms of finding the >> stillness of equilibrium to liberate ourselves from Maya. When the Secret >> Doctrine discusses about Pralaya, Laya centers, cycles, and illusion, there >> are plenty of ideas from which to build such a theory. In the Stanzas of >> the Secret Doctrine, you can see references to time and space being >> illusion, and how we evolve to free ourselves from Maya. From that, you >> can see where Alice Bailey got her ideas about rhythm. For example, in >> Yogic and Buddhic meditation, the purpose is to still the vibrations of the >> senses, the emotions, and the lower mind. By doing that, you can find the >> Laya center, and slip through to experience the higher nature. >> > >This is precious information dedicating the understanding of Mondrian's >rhythm. In the grocery attached to "The Secret Doctrine Commentary" Maya >and Pralaya mean (but no item of "Laya centers" so if you explain the >term it will be appreciated): > >Maya (Sans.) Illusion; the cosmic power which renders phenomenal >existence and the perceptions thereof possible. In Hindu philosophy that >alone which is changeless and eternal is called reality: all that which >is subject to change through decay and differentiation, and which has, >therefore, a beginning and an end, is regarded as MAYA -- illusion. > >Pralaya (Sans.) Dissolution, the opposite of Manvantara, one being the >period of rest and the other of full activity (death and life) of a >planet, >or of the whole universe. > >Those terms are pretty important to genealogical trace of Mondrian's >unusual concept of rhythm and reality, and so far, within my small >knowledge, no art historian has referred to this. > >> Mondrian was trying to express that in terms of art. I think that is what >> he meant by "point of perfect balance and of equilibrium." Having rhythm >> in a "no-time and non-repetition basis" is holding the stillness. Thus, he >> was creating symbols of Laya centers in his art and was quite Yogic in his >> approach to art, whether he knew it or not. >> > >Mondrian's theory of rhythm is enigmatic, quite difficult to understand. >Especially realization of rhythm in stillness, while rhythm, in normal >sense, directly associates with movement. Now I feel I get a clue to >follow Mondrian's argument. Thank you. > >> Here are some references you might want to look at: >> >> An Art of Our Own (The Spiritual in Twentieth Century Art) >> by Roger Lipsey, Shambhala Publications, Inc., ISBN 0-87773-496-8 (pbk.) >> > >I will see in the university library catalogue. > >> The Spiritual in Art: Abstract Painting, 1890-1985 >> by Maurice Tuchmann, Abbeville Press Publishers, ISBN 0-7892-0056-2 >> > >I already got one copy of this (IQ(J there is no extended arguments of >rhythm, though. > >> We'll be very interested in reading the final paper if you're willing to >> publish it. Have a great one. >> > >I will. I will do my best. Thank you for your encouragement. > >Fondly, > >Eiichi Tosaki From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 17:48:34 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Dreck Message-ID: Hi Titus, >Welcome back, Thoa! Without you there's been no one to give me a hard time. ;) >Well, at least not with the flash and flair you do. ;) Tease. Tease. Well, let me get out my dominatrix uniform!:o) You got my respect for your flexible responses to my "flash and flair." And I'm glad someone is still posting jokes that has nothing and everything to do with theosophy. >Amidst the babbling New Agey's I've met people with a contageous and genuine >reverence. They spark some kind of remembrance or knowing in the soul. These >are the types you hope would be on the altars. Appreciation for that genuine >kind of reverence in a receptive person prompts a clumbsy attempt to recover >and apply that knowing. This is what I called, improvising on the spot, >"honest hypocrisy". Like the inferior function described by Jung, the >undeveloped clumbsy faculty seeking to come out contains the richest seeds of >new growth and original creation. Unlike the polished but well-worn superior >function, it abounds in new possibilities. But it is initially awkward. >Imagine what an olympic racer looked like when he or she rode their first >bike. >The genuine and the "genuine imitation" are different from the out and out >hypocritical. For every good thing, there seems to be a force that seeks to >cheapen it and pervert it. I think this must be what the Valentinian Gnostics >called the Antimimon Pneumatos or counterfeit spirit. The moment an esoteric >truth becomes exoteric, there is always the cheap imitation coming forth. Part >of the price you pay, but the "genuine imitation" turning into genuine makes >it worth it. This reminds me of what Maya Angelou was saying about that we are complete just as we are. We don't need outside trappings to make us complete. In her last speech, she made a statement regarding not wanting "boring goody two shoes", but folks who are willing to put themselves out just as they are, willing to be out there and to be courageous. That is a powerful statement, because there is something in each one of us that says we are not good enough to express ourselves as we are. Imagine how much could get accomplished if we were all courageous. I know I feel like a clumsy oaf a lot of the times. In the words of Waynes World movie, "I'm not worthy!" Maybe it is the clumsiness in myself, but I actually prefer to be around clumsy people. People who are too perfect and smooth arouses suspicion in me. Have fun, Titus! P.S. I know I left the list to put up a web site, but ended up doing lots of painting. I love it! Oh, well, it only takes a good weekend to put one up, anyway. I just have to take lots of pictures. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 20:57:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Prepared speeches on Theosophy Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971104025747.00daf53c@mail.eden.com> Hi, here is a request I received. Does anyone have any material they can e-mail to me at ramadoss@eden.com so that I can forward them? ================================================================== I am a member of the Unitarian Fellowship in Houston, started by Theosophical Author, Earnest Woods. I have been asked to give several talks on Theosophy, Blavatsky, Eastern thought,etc. Do you have any prepared speeches you could send me over the Internet that are appropriate for novices (members of the Fellowship). Looking forward to hearing from you ==================================================================== Peace to all living entities. mkr --------------------------------------------------------------- M K Ramadoss 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 (210) 615-7373 e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com ------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any organization and unmoderated where you will find information and help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. -------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 15:40:08 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: "Penalty" Message-ID: "Sometimes someone very subtly tries droping anchors on the Briatic level" Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 17:44:34 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Dreck Message-ID: To Chuck: "Well, what you are getting is a personal series of references to the word, which do not really translate very well into effecting the outside world." "Personal series of references" to me are some of my personal associations with the word peace and simply mean that I use a word in a creative way. I do it because I love words and feel good with my associations. "Feeling good creates a form of stasis which is not the same as absence of conflict." I tried to look up the word "stasis" in my dictionnary but couldn't find it. Could you please explain it to me? "Now, when someone plays a video game, they can easily find themselves in a state of total concentration..." You are quite right here. "...that would make most experienced meditators extremely jealous because the mental dynamic of the game is doing the work." I have never come accross anybody who said he/she was an experienced meditator and can therefore not judge if they are getting jealous or not. That "the mental dynamic of the game is doing the work" is quite clear. "And, as that concentration is on violent action, as opposed to stasis, it will have an immediate impact on the mental atmosphere of anyone who is open to it." Again the stasis - sorry before I don't know the correct meaning of this word I can't say anything. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 14:25:46 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Dreck Message-ID: <971104133805_526638772@emout07.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-04 10:52:32 EST, you write: >Again the stasis - sorry before I don't know the correct meaning of this word >I can't say anything. > >Nicole > Stasis is a state in which nothing moves, not even sub-atomic particles. I use the word to describe a state in which nothing changes. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 15:07:25 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Internet Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971104210725.00db3194@mail.eden.com> I just saw the news announcement that the Judge in the Mass child murder case has informed that his decision will be posted on the Internet for everyone to read. This is the first time any Judge has decided to release his judgement on Internet before releasing it in any other medium. While individual TS members saw the power and future role of Internet as a tool of communications, it appears that the TSA leadership is too slow to recognise it. It can be seen from the fact that I don't know of any elected member of the Board of Directors has an e-mail address (other than theos@netcom.com) and nor have we seen *any* of them in the cyberspace. It also appears that we will have to wait until the current younger generation takes over leadership role for things to change. With the current bylaws, by the time that happens, most of us would be dead and ready to incarnate. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 23:47:39 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: sound familiar? Message-ID: <971104234407_2025370346@mrin45.mail.aol.com> I found this in the Chicago Tribune. It sounds vaguely like something we all know about. Chuck the Heretic >Date: Tuesday, November 4, 1997 >Source: Eric Zorn. >Section: METRO CHICAGO >Parts: 1 Copyright Chicago Tribune CLAMPING DOWN ON DISSENT WAS GROUP'S 1ST ERROR Reduced to a number, the answer to the question, "What's ailing the Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precinct Organization (IVI-IPO)?" is 2.005. That's the designation of a bylaw adopted in February by the board of the 53-year-old good-government organization. On its face, Bylaw 2.005 is ordinary enough. It restricts access to the IVI-IPO membership list to those doing authorized work on behalf of the organization. Many, if not most, interest groups are protective of their membership lists, for obvious reasons. But what makes Bylaw 2.005 a big deal here--and the first issue raised in a 33-page civil complaint pending in Cook County Circuit Court filed by former leaders of IVI-IPO against the current leaders--is that it is irreconcilable with a key provision of the organization's constitution, Article 3 Section 7a. That section makes meaningful the lofty language in IVI-IPO's statement of purpose: "We believe that those who are affected by the decisions of government must be consulted by those who govern . . . (and elected officials should be) responsive to those who gave them office." The section says that any decision of the board of directors can be overturned by the membership, and to begin this process, a member must file a petition signed by 5 percent of the membership. Yet, obviously, a dissenting member will have a hard time passing a petition among his fellow members when the membership list is confidential. Put another way, 2.005 + 3:7a = Catch-22. When I shared the results of my math with IVI-IPO state Chairman Robert Bartell and his administrative Vice Chairman, Marc Lipinski, I received an earful of complaints about the complainers, who include former state Chairman Jerome Meites and several alternate board members: They filed suit because they're bitter over losing a power struggle, the leaders said. They're obsessed. They were bothering the other members with their endless whining. New rules were needed to keep them from the draining internal agitating that lately has cut both fundraising proceeds and membership ranks in half. The plaintiffs have their own litany of grievances: The IVI-IPO has been taken over by a power-hungry cabal that has made a mockery of the spirit of the organization by clamping down on internal dissent and changing long-standing rules and procedures to practice rank political cronyism that has rendered the once-treasured IVI-IPO endorsement meaningless. Membership has dropped to less than 800 due to disgust with leadership. It would take far more than one column to sort out the relative truth of the specifics behind these claims. Indeed, I am looking forward to a lengthy treatment of the controversy scheduled to be the cover story in this week's Reader. But even if everything the current leadership says is true, it remains an inadequate excuse for their imposition of Bylaw 2.005. The IVI-IPO--which traces back to a voters' association founded in the mid-1940s by Adlai Stevenson II, Leo Lerner and Paul Douglas (then a Chicago alderman, later a U.S. senator)--always aspired to reform petty partisan bickering, machine-style politicking and brute governance. It's known for promoting a generally liberal ideology, and its endorsements still play a role in guiding voters through judicial elections. Internal fighting about changes several years ago in the IVI-IPO's endorsement process for judges appears to be a major cause of the organizational rift, which will be back in court for motions Thursday. What's clear from the passage this year of Bylaw 2.005 and the recent refusal of leadership to give opposition viewpoints space in the member newsletter is that it's easier to praise "popular democracy," as the IVI-IPO does in its constitution, than to practice it during times of group disharmony. The risk to both parties is that the public squabbling will dilute IVI-IPO's influence on the electorate. The loyal liberal in me dreads this and, Rodney King-like, begs them to all just get along. But the cynic in me looks with suspicion at any group with virtually no membership restrictions and no action agenda other than ballot endorsements that claims for its membership worthy and reliable political insight. Reduced to a gesture, the answer to the question, "What's ailing IVI-IPO?" is a shrug. ---------- MORE ON THE INTERNET: News archives on the IVI-IPO and reader correspondence at www.chicago.tribune.com/go/zorn Keywords: ISSUE GROUP Document ID: S730819f From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 19:33:05 +0100 From: wichm@xs4all.nl Subject: Theosophy inspired painters Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971104193305.0071df90@mail.xs4all.nl> Two other Dutch painters who had a Theosophical upbringing are my brother Cornelius Rogge and Auke Sonnega. I have devoted on my site pages two both of them. Incidentally, it is Mondriaan (Piet) and not Mondrian. Mondriaan published articles on the theoretical background of his paintings in the Dutch magazine 'De Stijl" (1917-?) Five were published in German as a Bauhaus book. Michael http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 17:26:31 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Stasis Message-ID: To Chuck: "Feeling good creates a form of stasis which is not the same as absence of conflict." "Stasis is a state in which nothing moves, not even sub-atomic particles. I use the word to describe a state in which nothing changes." Shock! Phew, some of these Bacon TS's create a psychic blocking. I only know very very little about atoms or sub-atomic particles but I happened to learn some about psychology. As I understand it, a feeling always flows - like water. If the feeling doesn't flow anymore a person starts to feel blocked. It's important to feel good, but I would consider feeling good a basis for the psyche and not a stasis. According to my opinion the stasis belongs more to the body where the atoms etc. can be found. If you do feel good inspite of the presence of a conflict, that's wonderful. "And, as that concentration is on violent action, as opposed to stasis, it will have an immediate impact on the mental atmosphere of anyone who is open to it." Except to the "stasis", I agree. It's also a very good example: when one is close to a violent action it feels as if the violent force flows through walls and doors etc. which it couldn't if it would be a stasis. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 17:48:36 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: sound familiar? Message-ID: To doss: "It also appears that we will have to wait until the current younger generation takes over leadership role for things to change. With the current bylaws, by the time that happens, most of us would be dead and ready to incarnate." Sometimes things may change faster. An example: I am working for the Swiss Federal Institut of Technology. Here everyone has to learn that there is no leadership anymore and each individual is responsible for him/her- selves. A professor is here to inspire his student. Students judge freely if the liked the course of lectures, what could have been done better ... Professors or other people who do not wish to follow this new system are talked to and sometimes they have to go to economy or getting retired earlier or what- ever solution can be found for the individual person. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 18:18:54 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Niklaus von der =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fl=FCe?= Message-ID: To Titus: You were interested in english text's about Switzerland's "Chlaus-Nick" (that's the way we call him here) and I have checked that with the Central Library. Unfortunately writings were only done in German (most of it), French and Italian. Nobody ever did a thesis in English about him. The real worthful original printings can only be read under supervision of the chaplain in Fluelirand, which also means that I, as a woman, would not be allowed to read it at all. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:31:40 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Stasis Message-ID: <971105132349_1724872851@emout06.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-05 10:31:24 EST, you write: >If you do feel good inspite of the presence of a conflict, that's wonderful. > Actually, conflict makes me feel good. >"And, as that concentration is on violent action, as opposed to stasis, it >will have an immediate impact on the mental atmosphere of anyone >who is open to it." > >Except to the "stasis", I agree. It's also a very good example: when one is >close to a violent action it feels as if the violent force flows through >walls and doors etc. which it couldn't if it would be a stasis. > >Peace, > >Nicole True, the energy fields expand exponentially and everyone in the vicinity of a good argument, for example, will feel the effect even some time after the event has passed. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 18:32:20 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: sound familiar? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971106003220.006cbe98@mail.eden.com> Hi It sounds very familiar. It would be very interesting to see what the IL Courts have to say. I hope they don't consider the membership list as a sacred one nor a secret one. Please post any follow-up on the litigation. In regard to the non profit organizations in IL, the statutes are clear in that any member in good standing has access to it. mkr =================================================== At 11:48 PM 11/4/97 -0500, Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: >I found this in the Chicago Tribune. > >It sounds vaguely like something we all know about. > >Chuck the Heretic > >Date: Tuesday, November 4, 1997 >Source: Eric Zorn. >Section: METRO CHICAGO >Parts: 1 >Copyright Chicago Tribune > >CLAMPING DOWN ON DISSENT WAS GROUP'S 1ST ERROR > > Reduced to a number, the answer to the question, "What's ailing the >Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precinct Organization (IVI-IPO)?" >is 2.005. > That's the designation of a bylaw adopted in February by the board of the >53-year-old good-government organization. > On its face, Bylaw 2.005 is ordinary enough. It restricts access to the >IVI-IPO membership list to those doing authorized work on behalf of the >organization. > Many, if not most, interest groups are protective of their membership >lists, for obvious reasons. But what makes Bylaw 2.005 a big deal here--and >the first issue raised in a 33-page civil complaint pending in Cook County >Circuit Court filed by former leaders of IVI-IPO against the current >leaders--is that it is irreconcilable with a key provision of the >organization's constitution, Article 3 Section 7a. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 18:32:22 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Quest Books 1997 Holiday Gift Catalog Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971106003222.006ce5f0@mail.eden.com> Some of us got the 1997 Quest Books Holiday Gift Catalog in the mail. In it, John Algeo, National President writes: ===================== Dear Friend of Quest Books: The books and audios in this catalog come from the publishing arm of the Theosophical Society, a nondenominational organization devoted to helping its members: x realize their inner potentials and seek out the mysteries of the universe x reconcile the truths of science, religion, and philosophy in East and West, and x promote unity among ethnic groups, sexes, social classes, and adherents to belief systems. >>>>>>>>>>>> clip <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< The above looks familiar like the three objects of the Theosophical Society. What is intriguing is that in all instances in the past when anytime TS is introduced, the first object is the one not only explicitly first mentioned, but also emphasis is placed and explained that it is the primary objective of the TS. One only needs to look at ML to APS and other early literature where the Real Founders again and again try to make it clear that the first object is all important. The above statement in the Quest Catalog, it appears that "realize their inner potential and seeking out the mysteries of the universe" is first focus. To my novice mind, such an endeavour seems like a very selfish pursuit, however laudable and widely acceptable in today's world. Is it possible that shifting the focus/priority from the first object to that of "realizing the inner potential" might change the direction to a wrong one. Is TS(Adyar) changing direction? Just my 0.02. YMDMV. Peace to all living entities. mkr --------------------------------------------------------------- M K Ramadoss 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 (210) 615-7373 e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com ------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any organization and unmoderated where you will find information and help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. -------------------------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 01:49:26 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Welcome! Message-ID: <$XPZu7AmISY0EwOK@nellie2.demon.co.uk> Theosophy International welcomes Catherine Pickar! (CPickar965@.aol.com) Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 07:17:26 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Quest Books 1997 Holiday Gift Catalog - Followup Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971106131726.006cc8c0@mail.eden.com> Hi I have sent a msg to John Algeo by e-mail, fax and First Class Mail on the topic. Will let you all know when I receive a response. mkr At 07:35 PM 11/5/97 -0500, you wrote: >Some of us got the 1997 Quest Books Holiday Gift Catalog in the mail. > >In it, John Algeo, National President writes: > >===================== > >Dear Friend of Quest Books: > >The books and audios in this catalog come from the publishing arm of the >Theosophical Society, a nondenominational organization devoted to helping >its members: > > x realize their inner potentials and seek out the mysteries of the >universe > > x reconcile the truths of science, religion, and philosophy in East >and West, > and > > x promote unity among ethnic groups, sexes, social classes, and >adherents to > belief systems. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> clip <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > >The above looks familiar like the three objects of the Theosophical Society. > >What is intriguing is that in all instances in the past when anytime TS is >introduced, the first object is the one not only explicitly first mentioned, >but also emphasis is placed and explained that it is the primary objective >of the TS. One only needs to look at ML to APS and other early literature >where the Real Founders again and again try to make it clear that the first >object is all important. > >The above statement in the Quest Catalog, it appears that "realize their >inner potential and seeking out the mysteries of the universe" is first focus. > >To my novice mind, such an endeavour seems like a very selfish pursuit, >however laudable and widely acceptable in today's world. Is it possible that >shifting the focus/priority from the first object to that of "realizing the >inner potential" might change the direction to a wrong one. Is TS(Adyar) >changing direction? > >Just my 0.02. YMDMV. > > Peace to all living entities. > > mkr >--------------------------------------------------------------- > M K Ramadoss > 4203 Gardendale, Suite 226 > San Antonio TX 78229-3137 > (210) 615-7373 > e-mail: ramadoss@eden.com >------------------------------------------------------------- >Subscribe to theos-l, the premier and leading edge maillist discussing *all* >aspects of Theosophy/Theosophical Organizations, totally not connected to any >organization and unmoderated where you will find information and >help you will find nowhere else. To subscribe send a msg to >listserv@vnet.net containing the single message line: > >subscribe THEOS-L XXXXXXXXXX > >where XXXXXXXXXXX is your real name. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 18:08:32 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Stasis Message-ID: To Chuck: "Actually, conflict makes me feel good." To me that depends on the form of the conflict. If a conflict is like a thunderstorm in summer it can be a refreshing gift. If we have the form of a conflict each power struggle is based onto and the conflict starts to feel like "Dreck" it doesn't make me feel good anymore but poisoned. ">Except to the "stasis", I agree. It's also a very good example: when one is >close to a violent action it feels as if the violent force flows through >walls and doors etc. which it couldn't if it would be a stasis. True, the energy fields expand exponentially and everyone in the vicinity of a good argument, for example, will feel the effect even some time after the event has passed." You are talking about physics, I am talking more about "chemistry" and we are lacking the physical-chemistry. Maybe you can help me here? Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 18:25:59 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: sound familiar? Message-ID: To doss: "realize their inner potentials and seek out the mysteries of the universe" "Is it possible that shifting the focus/priority from the first object to that of "realizing the inner potential" might change the direction to a wrong one" In the third book ( = Esotherik) I have about HPB there are minutes on discussions between HPB and Franz Hartmann in which it is recorded through HPB herself that "realizing the inner potential" might change the direction to a wrong one. She is explaing it in a bit a different way though simply saying that when someone starts to work with theosophy the truth is coming out of him/her. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 13:16:07 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: sound familiar? Message-ID: <971106131607_1079346453@mrin45.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-05 19:53:41 EST, you write: >Please post any follow-up on the litigation. > If it gets in the paper, I will. The case has a very real bearing on the TS. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 14:00:19 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Stasis Message-ID: <971106135408_901288741@emout10.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-06 11:16:38 EST, you write: >You are talking about physics, I am talking more about "chemistry" and we are >lacking the physical-chemistry. Maybe you can help me here? > >Nicole Well, not physics as it is usually understood. The field that is expanding is the astral body and as that is not limited by things like walls and doors it impinges on the astral bodies of anyone who walks into it. Now, if we consider the bodies as carriers of certain types of information and the astral body as a carrier of emotional information, when one body is excited and bumps into another, an exchange occurs, causing the second one to pick up the information and pass it on through the system finally causing something to occur in the physical brain which produces certain biochemical reactions, such as a tightening of the stomach muscles. Thus we instinctively know that something unpleasant has happened, but we don't quite know what. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 97 15:18:29 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Fwd: fw: fwd: zodiac joke (fwd) Message-ID: <199711062018.PAA04023@leo.vsla.edu> > << >> > >> How many members of your sign does it take to change a light bulb..... > >> > >> > >> ARIES: > >> Just one. You want to make something of it? > >> > >> TAURUS: > >> One, > >> but just try to convince them that the burned-out bulb is useless > >> and > >> should be thrown away. > >> > >> GEMINI: > >> Two, but the job never gets done -- > >> they just keep arguing about who > >> is supposed to do it and how it's > >> supposed to be done! > >> > >> CANCER: > >> Just one. But it takes a therapist > >> three years to help them through > >> the grief process. > >> > >> LEO: > >> Leos > >> don't change light bulbs, although sometimes their agent will get > >> a Virgo > >> in to do the job for them while they're out. > >> > >> VIRGO: > >> Approximately > >> 1.000000 with an error of +/- 1 millionth. > >> > >> LIBRA: > >> Er, two. Or maybe > >> one. No-on second thought, make that two. Is that > >> OK with you? > >> > >> > >> SCORPIO: > >> That information is strictly secret and shared only with the > >> > >> Enlightened Ones in the Star Chamber of the Ancient Hierarchial Order. > >> > >> > >> SAGITARIUS: > >> The sun is shining, the day is young, we've got our whole lives > >> ahead > >> of us, and you're inside worrying about a stupid burned-out light > >> bulb? > >> > >> CAPRICORN: > >> I don't waste my time with these childish jokes. > >> > >> > >> AQARIUS: > >> Well, you have to remember that everything is energy, so... > >> > >> > >> PISCES: > >> Light bulb? What light bulb? > >> > > >> > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 12:38:17 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Theosophy inspired painters Message-ID: Michael: >Two other Dutch painters who had a Theosophical upbringing are my brother >Cornelius Rogge and Auke Sonnega. I have devoted on my site pages two both >of them. >Incidentally, it is Mondriaan (Piet) and not Mondrian. >Mondriaan published articles on the theoretical background of his paintings >in the Dutch magazine 'De Stijl" (1917-?) Five were published in German as >a Bauhaus book. > >Michael >http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ Great site! Thank you. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 17:22:07 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: WWW of Schiller Message-ID: <3462511F.6275@eden.com> Here is a msg I saw on theos-talk. mkr ============================== >Subject: Theos-World Update esoteric history website >Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 15:21:04 -0600 >From: "SCHULLER" To whom it might concern, Changes have recently been made to the Alpheus website at . The following items have been added: 1) The full text of "A Message to the Members of the Theosophical Society from an elder Brother" read at the Golden Jubilee of the TS in December 1925, with some annotations. This seems to be the last great communication from the Mahatmas coming through and to the TS. 2) A letter from Jean Overton Fuller and my reaction. Mrs Fuller takes a very interesting position regarding Krishnamurti and the Masters, but is not free of some serious anomalies. 3) An annotated bibliography of publications a) cited at the website and b) used in "Krishnamurti and the World Teacher Project." Yours Sincerely, Govert Schüller P.S.: Those interested in the I AM movement and its place in the history of the theosophical movement are invited to read "The Masters and Their Emissaries: From HPB to Guru Ma" at Alpheus. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 17:27:24 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Update esoteric history website Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971106232724.00be6730@mail.eden.com> At 03:21 PM 11/6/97 -0600, you wrote: >To whom it might concern, > >Changes have recently been made to the Alpheus website at > . The following items >have been added: I just visited Schuller's website and he has done a wonderful job. One thought occurred to me when I read the material he has re: Krishnamurti. >From the time Krishnamurti started speaking, TS(Adyar) never had a prominent speaker and even today I do not see any one on the horizon even though there are a number of scholars and highly educated Theosophists with all kinds of higher academic degrees. Is this concidental or is it that as part of the grand plan, there was supposed to be no competition? Who knows? mkr M K Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 16:57:35 -0600 From: JRC Subject: New Element Discovered Message-ID: <199711062358.QAA06321@selway.umt.edu> Another one in the category of "Sound Familiar?" (-:), -JRC >>The heaviest element known to science was recently discovered by >>physicists at the University of California, Berkeley. The element, >>tentatively named Administratium, has no protons or electrons and >>thus has an atomic number of 0. However, it does have: >> >> 1 neutron >> 125 assistant neutrons >> 75 vice neutrons, and >> 111 assistant vice neutrons >> >>This gives it an atomic mass of 312. The 312 particles are held together >>by a force that involves the continuous exchange of meson-like particles >>called morons. >> >>Since it has no electrons, Administratium is inert. However, it can be >>chemically detected as it impedes every action with which it comes in >>contact. According to the discoverers, a minute amount of Administratium >>caused one reaction to take four days to complete when it would have >>normally occurred in less than one second. >> >>Administratium, like all trans-Uraninimic elements (those past Uranium) >>is radioactive. It has a normal half-life of approximately three years, >>at which time it does not actually decay, but instead undergoes a >>reorganization in which assistant neutrons, vice neutrons, and assistant >>vice neutrons exchange places. Some studies have shown that atomic mass >>actually increases after each reorganization. >> >>Research at other laboratories indicates that Administratium occurs >>naturally in the atmosphere. It tends to amass at certain points such as >>government agencies, large corporations and universities and can usually >>be found in the newest, best appointed, and best maintained buildings. >> >>Scientists point out that Administratium is known to be toxic at any >>level of concentration and can easily destroy any productive reaction >>where it is allowed to accumulate. Attempts are being made to determine >>how Administratium can be controlled to prevent irreversible damage, but >>results to date are not promising. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 00:04:44 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Theos-World Update esoteric history website Message-ID: <3462A16C.2AF8@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > I just visited Schuller's website and he has done a wonderful job. Strange coincidence department: At the Annual Meeting, I heard Govert Schüller speaking about Dutch names. I got in a conversation with him, and discovered we attended the same school in Amsterdam at the same time. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 22:12:57 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@azstarnet.com (Caldwell/Graye) Subject: The Fallacy in Another Johnsonian Argument: Part I Message-ID: <199711070512.WAA20465@mailhost.azstarnet.com> I am attaching below a very rough draft of an article I have just finished writing. Some students of Theosophy may find my observations of some interest. ______________________________________________ The Fallacy in Another Johnsonian Argument: Part I by Daniel H. Caldwell In his GNAT article, K.Paul Johnson writes as follows in an attempt to rebut one of my HOUSE OF CARDS criticisms: "A summary paragraph in *The Masters Revealed* [TMR] explains the crucial elements of the evidence presented thus far: 'There were two points in the history of the TS at which the Masters Morya and Koot Hoomi appeared as solid historical personages rather than elusive semi-ethereal beings. At both of these points, the same triangular configuration is apparent: the Founders of the TS, the Maharaja Ranbir Singh, and an Amritsar Sikh Sirdar are found working in collusion. In October and November 1880, the Founders' trip to the Punjab to meet these figures coincided with the beginning of the Mahatma correspondence. In November 1883, Olcott's trip to Lahore and Jammu again involved Punjabi Sikh Sirdars and the Maharaja of Kashmir.' [Then Johnson elaborates on the TMR quote:] Several factors distinguish the quality of this evidence [as cited above from TMR] from the alleged visits *to* the TS Founders *by* M. and K.H. cited as counterevidence by Mr. Caldwell. It is far more feasible to follow known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means than to follow unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means which are allegedly miraculous in some cases. I have followed HPB and Olcott to Northern India and determined as best I could whom they met there and why (having literally retraced their steps when possible); I welcome and invite alternative explanations of these journeys and relationships. But instead Mr. Caldwell offers only "evidence" which is entirely useless in identifying prototypes for M. and K.H., which in some cases sounds more like apparitions or stage magic than normal encounters, and which therefore is more truly a "house of cards" than anything I have proposed. . . ." [End of Johnson's comments] My analysis of some of his comments is as follows: ________________________________________________ What is K. Paul Johnson's argument? As I read Johnson, part of his argument goes something like this: Johnson attempts to establish two different and separate categories of evidence. The FIRST CATEGORY involves evidence of the Masters appearing as "solid historical figures." Johnson has included in this category evidence of "known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means." In other words, Johnson writes that he has "followed HPB and Olcott to Northern India and determined as best I could whom they met there and why." He asserts that "in October and November 1880, the Founders' trip to the Punjab [was] to meet these figures [i.e. Maharaja Ranbir Singh and an Amritsar Sikh Sirdar]. . . .In November 1883, Olcott's trip to Lahore and Jammu again involved Punjabi Sikh Sirdars and the Maharaja of Kashmir." The SECOND CATEGORY involves evidence of the Masters appearing as "elusive semi-ethereal beings." Into this category Johnson places the "alleged visits *to* the TS Founders *by* M. and K.H. cited as counterevidence by Mr. Caldwell." This evidence (Johnson contends) involves "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means which are allegedly miraculous in some cases. . . . Mr. Caldwell offers only 'evidence' . . . which in some cases sounds more like apparitions or stage magic than normal encounters. . . ." Now I ask the reader, are these two categories legitimate or artificial? I must admit that Johnson is quite clever in coming up with ingenious rebuttal arguments. But does this Johnsonian argument hold water or just alot of hot air? I have appended at the end of this article EIGHT CASES involving Colonel Olcott's encounters with the Masters. Cases A through F were cited in my last article and I add too additional cases which are essential to Johnson's present argument and my analysis thereof. Two of these cases fall under Johnson's first category of evidence: CASE G: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING A MASTER AT THE GOLDEN TEMPLE IN AMRITSAR ON OCTOBER 26, 1880 and CASE H: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MASTER KOOT HOOMI IN NOVEMBER, 1883 ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF LAHORE, INDIA I assume that Johnson would put 5 of the remaining 6 cases in the second category consisting of "alleged visits *to* the TS Founders *by* M. and K.H. cited as counterevidence by Mr. Caldwell." Those 5 cases are: CASE B: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MORYA IN CEYLON CASE C: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MORYA AT BOMBAY CASE D: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF SEEING MORYA AT BOMBAY WITH SIX OTHER WITNESSES CASE E: MORYA COMES TO BOMBAY ON AUGUST 4, 1880 CASE F: CASE F: MORYA COMES ON HORSEBACK TO BOMBAY IN JULY, 1879 The only remaining case is: CASE A: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING OOTON LIATTO IN NEW YORK CITY Into what category would Johnson place the "Ooton Liatto" case? This is a good question and I would love to know Johnson's answer and his reasoning. I will return to this question at the end of this article. So far, I have attempted to elucidate what Johnson's argument is and I have tried to illustrate it with the relevant cases. Now I will attempt to show that his argument is fallacious and that the two categories of evidence are artificial and really don't hold up to close scrutiny. As I go through my analysis, I ask the reader to refer to the details of each case as given at the end of this article. By looking at each case in some detail, the reader can determine whether Johnson's argument is convincing or falls apart "like a house of cards" and whether my own counterargument is convincing or "full of holes." In the FIRST CATEGORY, Johnson maintains he used only evidence involving "people [Olcott & HPB/Olcott, Damodar & Brown] making documented journeys [from Bombay or Adyar] to known locations [Amritsar, Lahore] by known means [train, carriage, on foot, etc.]." And he assures us that he has "determined AS BEST I COULD [???] whom they met there and why." In the SECOND CATEGORY Johnson asserts that Caldwell used evidence involving "alleged visits *to* the Founders [Olcott, HPB] *by* M. and K.H.", i.e., "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means [what about on horseback?? See Case F]" to Bombay or Colombo. First some general observations for the reader to think about and then I will turn to some of the cases and ask relevant questions. In the FIRST CATEGORY of evidence, Johnson says he is including "known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means." This sounds very impressive but what does it really mean? The one person Johnson's statement applies to in each case considered is Henry Olcott. And in all eight cases appended to this article, the sole witness or principal witness to the Master was Olcott. Therefore, *does it really matter where Olcott was physically*? Does it really matter whether Olcott was at Bombay, Amritsar, Colombo or Lahore? In ALL of these cases, we can DOCUMENT historically the time, the place and the means of transportation by which Olcott got to the LOCATION where the encounter with a master took place. . For example, in Case E, Olcott and HPB had returned on July 24, 1880 to Bombay from a journey to Ceylon. Olcott states that he meet Morya in HPB's room on August 4, 1880. In other words, we can historically document Olcott's and HPB's movments and whereabouts for this encounter. It is true that we don't know the real name of this Master or how he travelled to Bombay on that occasion. [But compare Case F where Olcott said the same Master came "in full day light, and on horseback." Here we know the means of transporation used by the Master.] But let us COMPARE AND CONTRAST this August 1880 meeting with Olcott's encounter with "one of the Masters" at the Golden Temple at Amritsar on Oct. 26, 1880. This case (G) is in Johnson's FIRST CATEGORY. But as I pointed out in my HOUSE OF CARDS, Johnson has no historical documentation to confirm Thakar Singh's presence at the Golden Temple that day. In fact, he has no historical records indicating that Thakar Singh was even in Amritsar on Oct. 26th. And even if Thakar Singh was in the city, does this mean that this "unnamed Master" at the Golden Temple WAS Thakar Singh? Even Johnson concedes (?) in his GNAT article the following: "I absolutely do not assume that these passages refer to Thakar Singh Sandhanwalia, as is proven in the very passage in which Mr. Caldwell accuses me of that. How could I write "One might find dozens of names to choose from" while assuming that the passages refer to a particular person? I very explicitly made the point that I OFFER ONLY A HYPOTHESIS, that other candidates are possibilities, but that there are reasons to consider Thakar Singh the most likely. This is one of several cases where my world of infinite shades of grey gets caricatured by translation into Mr. Caldwell's world of black and white." Caps added. And where did this Master come from? And how did this "unnamed Master" travel to the Golden Temple? Does Johnson know the Master's mode of transporation? Johnson has no knowledge of how the Master travelled to the Golden Temple. Where is Johnson's evidence and documentation? Unproven hypotheses and speculation are not evidence. It seems to me that Olcott's "meeting" with this "unnamed Master" could just as easily be placed in Johnson's SECOND CATEGORY of "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means." In other words, the Master's appearance at the Golden Temple is as "undocumented" as the other Master's appearances at Bombay. Let us now examine Case H involving Olcott's account of meeting Master K.H. in November, 1883 on the outskirts of Lahore. Which category does this case belong in? Johnson would probably place it in the FIRST CATEGORY. But I contend that it could just as easily be placed in the SECOND CATEGORY of "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means." How did the Master KH come to Olcott's camp on the outskirts of Lahore? And where did he come from? He was reported to be walking up to the tents but other than that Johnson can say nothing based on evidence. And who was this Master KH visiting Olcott, Damodar, and Brown? Johnson has nothing called "evidence" or "documentation" to show that Thakar Singh was the Master "K.H." visiting the three Theosophists. Was Thakar Singh even in Lahore on that date? Johnson has no evidence; but he only has suppositions of "infinite shades of grey". David Pratt in his recent critique aptly describes Johnson's "method": "Johnson's search for evidence sometimes takes on an air of desperation, and at times he indulges in what John Algeo calls 'Wonderland logic', whereby lack of evidence becomes evidence (Theosophical History, July 995, p. 244). For example, a report in the January 1884 Theosophist reports that when Olcott, Damodar, and W.T. Brown arrived in Lahore on 18 November 1883, 'His Highness Raja Harbans Singh and other Sirdars sent their conveyances to bring the party to their quarters'. Johnson says that the reference to 'other Sirdars' is 'most intriguing', and that 'the lack of any mention of Thakar Singh's name seems inevitable if he was indeed the Master K.H.' (TMR 160) Does this mean that if Thakar Singh's name had been mentioned, Johnson would have regarded it as a contradiction of his hypothesis?! Johnson has no difficulty believing that Mahatma M is based on the Maharaja of Kashmir, even though the latter is mentioned by name on several occasions by HPB, Olcott, and Damodar." And even Johnson in his GNAT "reply" admits: "In his passage about the visit of Olcott, Brown and Damodar to Lahore, Mr. Caldwell states that I 'believe Olcott's testimony at face value.' Not quite; for example I have strong suspicions about how a message formed in the palm of Olcott's hand. Furthermore, Mr. Caldwell's passage 'Of course, it was Thakar Singh' is a total misrepresentation of the spirit of my work; the passage in question contains no such words. I have simply stated that Thakar Singh is, to date, the most likely candidate I have found. What I do contend is that a visit occurring during a journey that is well grounded in historical evidence, documented by three [Theosophical] witnesses who portray the Master as arriving and departing in a quite corporeal manner, is much more solid evidence relevant to identifying K.H. than is found elsewhere in Theosophical literature. Furthermore, the coincidence of Olcott, Brown and Damodar spending their days in Lahore in the company of Sirdars and Singh Sabha leaders, then receiving nocturnal visits from Koot Hoomi and Djual Kul, suggests a link between the Singh Sabha and these Masters." Notice the various phrases used by Johnson: "the most likely candidate" . . . "the coincidence of Olcott, Brown and Damodar" . . . "suggests a link", etc. It appears to me that Case H could just as easily be placed in the SECOND CATEGORY of "UNKNOWN persons [i.e. KH] making UNDOCUMENTED journeys [to Lahore from ?] by UNKNOWN means [okay, he was walking up to the encampment but beyond that we know nothing of how he travelled to the encampment!]." Now let us consider Case A (the Ooton Liatto case). K. Paul Johnson, writing on this case in TMR (p. 62), affirms: "The names Ooton Liatto and Hilarion Smerdis have been equally impossible to find in biographical and historical reference books. While both may be pseudonyms, THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT TWO REAL ADEPTS VISITED OLCOTT IN NEW YORK." Caps added. Into which of the two categories discussed in this article would Paul Johnson place this Ooton Liatto case? Does this "Ooton Liatto" case fall into the FIRST CATEGORY of Masters appearing as "solid historical figures" and of "known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means"? Were Olcott and HPB "known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means"? They were both at *home* in their New York apartments when Ooton Liatto and his brother adept dropped in. (Isn't this similar to the Founders being at *home* in Bombay when the Master Morya dropped by?) Were Ooton Liatto and his brother adept "known people making documented journeys to known locations by known means"? I don't think so! Or does this case fall into the SECOND CATEGORY of Masters appearing as "elusive semi-ethereal beings" and of "alleged visits *to* the TS Founders *by. . . [adepts] cited as counterevidence by Mr. Caldwell. . . [;]. of unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means which are allegedly miraculous in some cases. . . [; of] some cases . . .[sounding] like apparitions or stage magic than normal encounters. . . "??? I would place the "Ooton Liatto" case in CATEGORY TWO. And yet, Johnson can write that "THERE IS LITTLE DOUBT THAT TWO REAL ADEPTS VISITED OLCOTT IN NEW YORK." In light of these observations, it is hard to believe that Johnson can seriously write (regarding Cases B through F) that "Mr. Caldwell offers only 'evidence' which is entirely useless in indentifying prototypes for M. and K.H. [and ] which in some cases sounds more like apparitions or stage magic than normal encounters, and which therefore is more truly a 'house of cards' than anything I have proposed. . . ." !!!!!!! In summary, Johnson's two so-called separate categories of evidence collapse like HOUSES OF CARDS. In ALL eight cases under discussion, Olcott's whereabouts can be historically documented. Concerning Case A readily accepted by Paul Johnson, we find that the CATEGORY TWO definition fits perfectly. All eight cases can roughly fall into the "category" of "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means which are. . . . [possibly] miraculous in some cases. . . ." Concerning Cases G and H, we find that Paul Johnson has no evidence that the Master in these two encounters was really Thakar Singh. Johnson has only suppositions and suggestions but no evidence worthy of the name. He has only "unknown persons making undocumented journeys by unknown means." (Continued in Part II) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 22:15:39 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@azstarnet.com (Caldwell/Graye) Subject: The Fallacy in Another Johnsonian Argument: Part II Message-ID: <199711070515.WAA21251@mailhost.azstarnet.com> The Fallacy in Another Johnsonian Argument: Part II _________________________________________________ I append below Cases A through H for ease of reference and comparison for those who actually want to cross check and compare material in order to see the validity of Johnson's argument and the reasonableness of my counterarguments in Part I. _________________________________________________ CASE A: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING OOTON LIATTO IN NEW YORK CITY "...I was reading in my room yesterday (Sunday) when there came a tap at the door---I said 'come in' and there entered the [younger] Bro[ther] with another dark skinned gentleman of about fifty....We took cigars and chatted for a while....[Then Olcott relates that a rain shower started in the room. Olcott continues the account:] They sat there and quietly smoked their cigars, while mine became too wet to burn....finally the younger of the two (who gave me his name as Ooton Liatto) said I needn't worry nothing would be damaged....I asked Liatto if he knew Madam B[lavatsky]....the elder Bro[ther]...[said] that with her permission they would call upon her. I ran downstairs---rushed into Madams parlour---and---there sat these same two identical men smoking with her and chatting....I said nothing but rushed up stairs again tore open my door and---the men were not there---I ran down again, they had disappeared--- I . . . looked out the window---and saw them turning the corner...." (Olcott's account is given in full in Theosophical History, Jan., 1994.) _________________________________________________ CASE B: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MORYA IN CEYLON "...on the night of that day [Sept. 27th, 1881] I was awakened from sleep by my Chohan (or Guru, the Brother [Morya] whose immediate pupil I am)....He made me rise, sit at my table and write from his dictation for an hour or more. There was an expression of anxiety mingled with sternness on his noble face, as there always is when the matter concerns H.P.B., to whom for many years he has been at once a father and a devoted guardian. . . ." (Quoted in Hints On Esoteric Theosophy, No. 1, 1882, pp. 82-83. _____________________________________________________ CASE C: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MORYA AT BOMBAY In his diary for Jan. 29, 1882, Colonel Olcott pens this brief entry: "M[orya] showed himself very clearly to me & HPB in her garden.... she joining him they talked together...." _____________________________________________________ CASE D: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF SEEING MORYA AT BOMBAY WITH SIX OTHER WITNESSES "We were sitting together in the moonlight about 9 o'clock upon the balcony which projects from the front of the bungalow. Mr. Scott was sitting facing the house, so as to look through the intervening verandah and the library, and into the room at the further side. This latter apartment was brilliantly lighted. The library was in partial darkness, thus rendering objects in the farther room more distinct. Mr. Scott suddenly saw the figure of a man step into the space, opposite the door of the library; he was clad in the white dress of a Rajput, and wore a white turban. Mr. Scott at once recognized him from his resemblance to a portrait [of Morya] in Col. Olcott's possession. Our attention was then drawn to him, and we all saw him most distinctly. He walked towards a table, and afterwards turning his face towards us, walked back out of our sight...when we reached the room he was gone....Upon the table, at the spot where he had been standing, lay a letter addressed to one of our number. The handwriting was identical with that of sundry notes and letters previously received from him...." The statement is signed by: "Ross Scott, Minnie J.B. Scott, H.S. Olcott, H.P. Blavatsky, M. Moorad Ali Beg, Damodar K. Mavalankar, and Bhavani Shankar Ganesh Mullapoorkar." (Quoted from Hints On Esoteric Theosophy, No. 1, 1882, pp. 75-76.) >From Olcott's diary for Jan. 5, 1882, "Evening. Moonlight. On balcony, HPB, Self, Scott & wife, Damodar....[etc]...M[orya] appeared in my office. First seen by Scott, then me....Scott clearly saw M's face....M left note for me on table in office by which he stood...." _____________________________________________________ CASE E: MORYA COMES TO BOMBAY ON AUGUST 4, 1880 On August 4, 1880, Olcott writes that: ". . . a Mahatma visited H.P.B., and I was called in to see him before he left. He dictated a long and important letter to an influential friend of ours at Paris, and gave me important hints about the management of current Society affairs. I left him [the Mahatma] sitting in H.P.B.'s room...." [Old Diary Leaves, Volume II, 1972 printing, p. 208]" And Olcott's actual handwritten diary for August 4, 1880 reads: "M [orya] here this evening & wrote to Fauvety of Paris. He says 5000 English troops killed in Afghanistan in the recent battle. . . ." _________________________________________________________ CASE F: MORYA COMES ON HORSEBACK TO BOMBAY IN JULY, 1879 "This same Brother once visited me in the flesh at Bombay, coming in full day light, and on horseback. He had me called by a servant into the front room of H.P.B.'s bungalow (she being at the time in the other bungalow talking with those who were there). He [Morya] came to scold me roundly for something I had done in T.S. matters, and as H.P.B. was also to blame, he telegraphed to her to come, that is to say, he turned his face and extended his finger in the direction of the place she was in. She came over at once with a rush, and seeing him dropped to her knees and paid him reverence. My voice and his had been heard by those in the other bungalow, but only H.P.B. and I, and the servant saw him." (Extract from a letter written by Colonel Olcott to A.O. Hume on Sept. 30, 1881. Quoted in Hints On Esoteric Theosophy, No. 1, 1882, p. 80.) "[I] had visit in body of the Sahib [Morya]!! [He] sent Babula to my room to call me to H.P.B.'s bungalow, and there we had a most important private interview...." (Extract from Olcott's handwritten diary for Tuesday, July 15, 1879.) _________________________________________________ CASE G: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING A MASTER AT THE GOLDEN TEMPLE IN AMRITSAR ON OCTOBER 26, 1880: "'...at a shrine where the swords, sharp steel discs, coats of mail, and other warlike weapons of the Sikh warrior priests are exposed to view in charge of the akalis, I was greeted, to my surprise and joy, with a loving smile by one of the Masters, who for the moment was figuring among the guardians, and who gave each of us a fresh rose, with a blessing in his eyes...." (Old Diary Leaves, Volume III, pp. 254-255, 1974 printing.) In Olcott's own handwritten diary, the entry for October 26, 1880 reads: "...In the afternoon we went to the Golden Temple again & found it as lovely as before. Saw some hundreds of fakirs & gossains more or less ill-favored. A Brother there saluted H.P.B. and me & gave us each a rose." ___________________________________________ CASE H: OLCOTT'S ACCOUNT OF MEETING MASTER KOOT HOOMI IN NOVEMBER, 1883 ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF LAHORE, INDIA. "I was sleeping in my tent, the night of the 19th, when I rushed back towards external consciousness on feeling a hand laid on me.. . . I clutched the stranger by the upper arms, and asked him in Hindustani who he was and what he wanted. It was all done in an instant, and I held the man tight, as would one who might be attacked the next moment and have to defend his life. But the next moment a kind, sweet voice said: 'Do you not know me? Do you not remember me?' It was the voice of the Master K.H. . . .I relaxed my hold on his arms, joined my palms in reverential salutation, and wanted to jump out of bed to show him respect. But his hand and voice stayed me, and after a few sentences had been exchanged, he took my left hand in his, gathered the fingers of his right into the palm, and stood quiet beside my cot, from which I could see his divinely benignant face by the light of the lamp that burned on a packing-case at his back. Presently I felt some soft substance forming in my hand, and the next minute the Master laid his kind hand on my forehead, uttered a blessing, and left my half of the large tent to visit Mr. W.T. Brown, who slept in the other half behind a canvas screen that divided the tent into two rooms. When I had time to pay attention to myself, I found myself holding in my left hand a folded paper enwrapped in a silken cloth. To go to the lamp, open and read it, was naturally my first impulse. I found it to be a letter of private counsel. . . On hearing an exclamation from…[Brown's] side of the screen, I went in there and he showed me a silk-wrapped letter of like appearance to mine though of different contents, which he said had been given him much as mine had been to me, and which we read together. . . .The next evening. . .we two and Damodar sat in my tent, at 10 o'clock, waiting for an expected visit from Master K.H. . . .We sat on chairs at the back of the tent so as not to be observed from the camp: the moon was in its last quarter and had not risen. After some waiting we heard and saw a tall Hindu approaching from the side of the open plain. He came to within a few yards of us and beckoned Damodar to come to him, which he did. He told him that the Master would appear within a few minutes, and that he had some business with Damodar. It was a pupil of Master K.H. Presently we saw the latter coming from the same direction, pass his pupil. . .and stop in front of our group, now standing and saluting in the Indian fashion, some yards away. Brown and I kept our places, and Damodar went and conversed for a few minutes with the Teacher, after which he returned to us and the king-like visitor walked away. I heard his footsteps on the ground. . . .Before retiring, when I was writing my Diary, the pupil lifted the portiere, beckoned to me, and pointed to the figure of his Master [K.H.], waiting for me out on the plain in the starlight. I went to him, we walked off to a safe place at some distance where intruders need not be expected, and then for about a half-hour he told me what I had to know. . . There were no miracles done at the interview. . .just two men talking together, a meeting, and a parting when the talk was over. . . ." (Old Diary Leaves, Volume III, pp. 37-39, 43-45, 1972 reprinting.) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 06 Nov 1997 23:28:41 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Update esoteric history website Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971107052841.012bae34@mail.eden.com> At 12:07 AM 11/7/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> I just visited Schuller's website and he has done a wonderful job. > > Strange coincidence department: At the Annual Meeting, I heard Govert >Schüller speaking about Dutch names. I got in a conversation with him, >and discovered we attended the same school in Amsterdam at the same >time. > > Bart Lidofsky > Strange things happen to all of us from time to time. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 22:20:19 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 1307 Message-ID: <3462F972.36BF@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Hi Thoa, Sorry for late to reply to you. Thoa Tran wrote: > Since I am out with a cold today, I have the time to scan the Secret > Doctrine I & II to see where Mondrian got his ideas. By the way, I highly > recommend reading the chapter on Mondrian in An Art of Our Own: The > Spiritual in Twentieth Century Art. The author gave a detailed > understanding of Mondrian's philosophy, although there's nothing on rhythm. > If you cannot find the book, I would be happy to copy that section for > you. I will send that and any other info. if you would privately e-mail me > your address. > Thank you for your generous proposal. I fourtunately found the book in Melbourne Uni. library and I read half of the part conc. Mondrian. Yes. it is very useful book. I wonder why I had not encounter the book. One reason is I had been occupied with Mondrian's practical painter's side and for a while put aside the ocult part. Lipsey efficiently summarizes Mondrian's idea about art with the relation to Theosophy, especially the early Neo-plasticism. > CLUES: > I won't state Mondrian's work too much in detail because you probably > studied it in more detail than I did. Mondrian stated that "(p)lastic art > affirms that equilibrium can only be established through the balance of > unequal but equivalent oppositions" and compared that with human life, that > although we are in "disequilibrium", we are "based on equilibrium." > Mondrian's later works is reminiscent of an asymmetrical mandala. "An asymmetrical mandala"! I haven't heard the word. Is there any materials explaining or illustlate this? If so, I definitely go for it! > Before we go on, let's define Laya-Center. > 1. According to G. de Purucker's Occult Glossary: A laya-center is the > mystical point where a thing disappears from one plane and passes onward to > reappear on another plane. > > 2. There is more definition, but that is the gist of it. To visualize it, > think in terms of a sine wave that extends from highest spirit (where it > vibrates very quickly) to densest matter (where it vibrates imperceptibly > slow), and the laya centers between planes are located on a straight line > that passes through the center. The center of the sine wave is the point > of equilibrium. By quieting the vibrations of the body, the emotions, and > the lower mind, the Yogi is able to go to the laya center to experience the > higher nature. A good book on that would be "A Geometry of > Space-Consciousness" by James S. Perkins, Theosophical Publishing House, > ISBN 0-8356-7006-6. It is a small book and I would be happy to copy that > for you also. So far I could not locate the book, but I am sure I can find the book, especially in the Theosophy Library in the city. Also, the Theosophical Pub. House has a book on modern art > and theosophy. I'm not sure of it's exact title, but you might want to > request a catalog from them.$B!!(JThe phrase "A thing disappears from one plane and passes onward to$B!!(Jreappear on another plane." is very interesting because this seems to suggest somewhat movement or occilating in a equilibrated point. > > 3. Here's a passage (The Mental Body, A.E. Powell, The Theosophical > Publishing House, p. 160) regarding laya center that might help clarifying > its relation to Yoga: "...as the mental body is stilled, the consciousness > escapes from it and passes into and out of the 'laya centre,' the neutral > points of contact between the mental and the causal body. This is like a starting point of Astro Travel. > > 4. In the SD I, p. 147, starting from the last paragraph, is a detailed > explanation of the Laya center. > > 5. A laya center works both ways. You can go up through them, or draw > down through them. Mondrian's stated intent was that he was trying to draw > the universe down through his painting. His work is an outer > representation of his inner ability to attune. That it! One of the most difficult parts is to understand the relationships between the subjective and the objective, and the individual and the universal. The objective and the universal should grow in the subjective and the individual reciprocally, not by annihilating each other, but by prioritize the latter and finally reach the equillibrated point, which is stasis but still occilating quickly, in Mondrinan's term, 'fast'. The earlier neo-plastic painting the traits of stasis is spotlighted but later in New York period, 1914-44, the energized traits are emphasised. Then whether rhythm functions within the subject or outside the relationship between the subjective and objective, or the individual and the universal is the problem. > > The Secret Doctrine is very difficult to follow. You can read writings by > G. de Purucker to help you understand the SD. From his Fundamentals of the > Esoteric Philosophy (a commentary on The SD), Point Loma Publications, ISBN > 0-913004-70-7, you might want to read some pages pertaining to your study: > > p. 89, regarding force in equilibrium, not latent. > p. 322-323, starting with the third paragraph, regarding laya-center. > p.401, regarding laya-center. > > In addition, in the SD I, you may want to read p. 36, Stanza I(#2, 3, 4, > 9). Also peppered in the SD I are discussions regarding forces, > Pythagorean theory, and numerology that may spark some ideas. > > You may also want to look up books on mandalas. There is one, Mystery of > Mandalas by Heita Copony, The Theosophical Publishing House, ISBN > 0-8356-0649-X. Let me quote what is written on p.3 and you can see the > relation to Mondrian's work: > > "The mandala in its entire expression refers to dimensions beyond outer > appearances. Here human experience of being and intuition come together > and something unspeakable is expressed in an image that can be perceived by > the senses. We may also understand the mandala as a model of principles of > reality, of which humanity is a part, of an order of the cosmos projected > into three-dimensional space. The part "into threee-dimensional" is extremely interesting because Mondrian intended to realize his idea of Neo-plasticism and,and, I think, rhythm as well, into his studio. If you went to last years exhibition held at MOMA in New York, you could have seen the reprica of Mondrian's studio. Just as unimaginable worlds of other > dimensions unfold beyond the world of space and time in which we mortals > live, so the mandala's statement and levels of meaning are multidimensional > and often full of paradox. On one hand, for example, the mandala is an > image of humans in the limitations of space and time. On the other hand, > it leads from the human realm to the cosmic and spiritual and joins the two > levels. So it is personal and suprapersonal at the same time-microcosm and > macrocosm, spirit and matter, the finite and the infinite pervading each > other." > > Now, to me, that seems a whole lot like what Mondrian was trying to do. In > studying mandalas, you can see that Mondrian's work is basically an > asymmetrical modernist mandala. Zutalours! Defenitely I have to know more about it. > > Lastly, you might want to look up the processes of Samkhya-yoga, which is > practiced through stillness. > I will. > > I hope I'm not confusing you too much. After all, this is a man's life > time study of theosophy from various sources. Thus, you can see that the > point of equilibrium is the laya center, or "rhythm, the attainment of the > point of perfect balance and of equilibrium" (AB), the processes of > attaining that equilibrium through exercises such as meditation or creation > of mandalas. From that, you can see that this is rhythm in a "no-time and > non-repetition basis", achieved through holding the stillness. Thanks again there seems big clue to open the enigma of rhythm in Mondrian. I will try my best. Eiichi p.s. I enjoyed Mark's site very much. There I found the CD cover design of Gavin Bryars'. He is one of my favourite composers. How did Mark get that job from? Is he or are you aquaintance of Gavin? Actually I attended one of his series of concerts in Melbourne couple of week ago. "Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet" is fantastic! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 22:41:42 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 1308 Message-ID: <3462FE77.1C20@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Michael wrote: brother > Cornelius Rogge and Auke Sonnega. I have devoted on my site pages two both > of them. > Incidentally, it is Mondriaan (Piet) and not Mondrian. > Mondriaan published articles on the theoretical background of his paintings > in the Dutch magazine 'De Stijl" (1917-?) Five were published in German as > a Bauhaus book. Hi Micheal, Mondrian changed his name intentionally after 1907 from Mondriaan to Mondrian. Please see Michel Seuphor, "Piet Mondrian: Life and Work", Themes and Hudson, London, 1956, Appendix 'Mondrian's Signatures'. This change is reported to be because of his intention to be international painter and some scholar argues that he wanted to sever the bondage with his stringent Calvinist father. I browsed your homepage. Looks very interesting. Thank you. > > Michael > http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 08:03:20 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: MKR - Holiday Quest Message-ID: <971107080315_1212306197@mrin54.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-06 08:49:09 EST, you write: To MKR: << What is intriguing is that in all instances in the past when anytime TS is introduced, the first object is the one not only explicitly first mentioned, but also emphasis is placed and explained that it is the primary objective of the TS. One only needs to look at ML to APS and other early literature where the Real Founders again and again try to make it clear that the first object is all important. >> Hi mkr, I appreciated the point you are trying to make. IMO, we need to talk more about Brotherhood and unity. Since you are quite accurate in your statement. The whole reason TS was founded is to create an altruistic movement. In this category we seem to be falling short in the last few years. IMO, TS hasn't really been talking about service and brotherhood. An organization I have observed who is very proactive along these lines is the Institute of Noetic Sciences. Perhaps we need to take a tip. A favorite text of mine is "Key to Theosophy" reiterates the point of brotherhood and altruism. It speaks of the importance of international relations. IMO, another word for or the development of Brotherhood and unity. It seems to me we could focus on this topic without being overtly political. crp From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 08:56:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: MKR - Holiday Quest Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971107145635.01306c20@mail.eden.com> At 08:04 AM 11/7/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-11-06 08:49:09 EST, you write: > >To MKR: > ><< > What is intriguing is that in all instances in the past when anytime TS is > introduced, the first object is the one not only explicitly first mentioned, > but also emphasis is placed and explained that it is the primary objective > of the TS. One only needs to look at ML to APS and other early literature > where the Real Founders again and again try to make it clear that the first > object is all important. > >> > > Hi mkr, > > I appreciated the point you are trying to make. IMO, we need to talk more >about Brotherhood and unity. Since you are quite accurate in your statement. > The whole reason TS was founded is to create an altruistic movement. In >this category we seem to be falling short in the last few years. IMO, TS >hasn't really been talking about service and brotherhood. An organization >I have observed who is very proactive along these lines is the Institute of >Noetic Sciences. Perhaps we need to take a tip. > A favorite text of mine is "Key to Theosophy" reiterates the point of >brotherhood and altruism. It speaks of the importance of international >relations. IMO, another word for or the development of Brotherhood and >unity. It seems to me we could focus on this topic without being overtly >political. > >crp > Hi I agree with what you say. At this time, TS(Adyar) is has the largest membership and perhaps the richest. It is very important that we do attract those interesting the universal unity and not those who are attracted by "self-improvement". In these New Age days, we all know all kinds of self-improvement based organizations thriving. One has just to visit your local book store and look at the range of topics covered. So if the altruistic aspect is not emphasized very very clearly, it is likely we attract some charismatic people who can see a good opportunity to make use of the money and the publishing base. While there may be safeguards built-in the bylaws, these can be changed very easily. With about 55% of the membership being at large, it would be very easy to push through another so called "housekeeping" changes. It would take time -- a couple of years -- may be 10-15 years, and that is not a long time. Any such changes would be irreversible and could be fatal. At least some of us here on the maillists are able to visit these issues without any vested interest in position or power or money or any other personal gain. May be Internet might ultimately be the salvation for the problem. Peace mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 17:35:39 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Stasis Message-ID: To Chuck: "Well, not physics as it is usually understood. The field that is expanding is the astral body and as that is not limited by things like walls and doors it impinges on the astral bodies of anyone who walks into it." Very true. "Now, if we consider the bodies as carriers of certain types of information and the astral body as a carrier of emotional information when one body is excited and bumps" No "bumps". "into another, an exchange occurs, causing the second one to pick up the information and pass it on through the system finally causing something to occur in the physical brain which produces certain biochemical reactions, such as a tightening of the stomach muscles." That knowing is only for Himalayan masters and it is forbidden to talk about! "Thus we instinctively know that something unpleasant has happened, but we don't quite know what." But you can learn to analyze what your own "instinct" is trying to say to you. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 17:54:47 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: sound familiar? Message-ID: To doss: Thank you for the Administratium - it's great! Some scientists even found an new name for it - they call it marketing. It doesn't work out at all in the end but least but not last we have a concept, know that we are using more money than we did in the past, are aware that we have strategies which don't work and feel very important because we found "reasons" to "produce" workless people. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 13:52:56 EST From: Drpsionic Subject: Re: Stasis Message-ID: <8a323911.34636358@aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-07 10:42:24 EST, you write: >That knowing is only for Himalayan masters and it is forbidden to talk about! > Whoops! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 13:54:46 EST From: Drpsionic Subject: Re: New Element Discovered Message-ID: <5d896292.346363c6@aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-07 11:07:19 EST, you write: >Scientists point out that Administratium is known to be toxic at any >>>level of concentration and can easily destroy any productive reaction >>>where it is allowed to accumulate. Attempts are being made to determine >>>how Administratium can be controlled to prevent irreversible damage, but >>>results to date are not promising. > I can see it now! The Administratium Bomb! Cool! Can I put it in a landmine? Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 1997 14:04:58 -0700 (MST) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: I need an "Idiot's Guide to Theosophy" Message-ID: <199711072104.OAA18272@mailmx.micron.net> I'm confused (indeed a rarity, I know). In "A Study in Consciousness" by my dear friend Annie Besant, she talks about how occultists often caution those who love animals to not, through their actions, end up bringing the now-individual animal monad into a human incarnation too soon. She doesn't say exactly what actions would do this - if she does, it whizzed by me. Now, how would that be possible? What physical or mental action could cause a monad to incarnate into a form when not ready? I know there's much discussion on this - but it still eludes me. Sometimes, I read poetry to one of my cats, Lillith - she loves it. . .bad thing? The neighbor next door dresses her little dog in frilly pantaloons. . .tacky, yes. . .but it this going to send this dog into "humandom?" Sometimes, I feed my dogs "human" food - makes them a bit chunky around the middle. . .but am I causing a cosmic rumble? And, how is it possible for anything to incarnate prematurely - would not the vibes of the monad and the form have to mesh? And if they can, how do they ever "catch-up?" And, isn't someone minding the store here? Who's going to help those who shouldn't be here yet - the Elementals? - and where were they before this mess happened? If even God if unable to construct a universe where things can't slip through the cracks, nay, a universe that doesn't even have cracks. . .how can I possibly trust anything? Time for cupcakes. . .one always thinks more clearly after consuming this oh-so-tasty lump of lard. Sometimes, I think. . .that commercial bakery, Hostess, is the only one who really cares. . . Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 07 Nov 1997 22:23:12 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Action Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971108042312.00cee150@mail.eden.com> One of the questions that sometimes comes up is the issue of intent and action. In a very simple way, in the letter to Francesca Arundale, Treasurer of London Lodge, Master KH explains: "*Intentions* -- you may tell your fellow-members -- and kind words count for little with us. Deeds are what we want and demand." It is the same msg the Krishna gave Arjuna in Gita where he emphasizes how critical that action is. Also when we consider all the Adepts have a very tough job to do and have to answer to their Bosses, it is just common sense that they want action from anyone who wants to help the "orphan Humanity." I think if each one of us try to get into action and get something done in that direction, that would be the practical application of Theosophy. Surely many times we may find the actions we have embarked on may be foolish in retrospect, but if we don't act, we may never have a chance of *doing* something for the cause we all hold dear to our hearts. YMDMV My 0.02 MKR PS: It is obvious that They don't care what we think about Them personally. What they are looking forward is action and results. A very business like expectation. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 08:31:44 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: Unconditional love/obsession/unity Message-ID: <971108083139_746731997@mrin46.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-03 11:59:58 EST, you write: To Nicole: Greetings! Nicole, I am sorry for the delay in answering. You ask such good thought provoking questions and comments I must strain my brain to think of the reply. << "obsessive">> Maybe we should first try to make sure, what each of us considers the above expression to be. To me "obsessive" means to "think and feel that another person belongs (as if one had been buying a human beeing in a store) to a person, as if the other person would be an article out of material and not a lifing beeing. Do you define "obsessive" in the same way?>> I think in more inclusive terms about obsession. I totally agree with you but I include an interest or focus on one specific person or point beyond rationality. i.e. black & white thinking. I think many issues in life are gray and contextual and therefore can not be one way or another or pat answers. A possible scenario is the person who shows no self esteem allowing the person to treat them badly because they are *obssessed* by them. *Example: A woman may stay in an abusive relationship with a man or her husband for years because she is *obsessed* with her love for this person. Allowing him to be irresponsible. i.e. financial problems, no sense of commitment to her but expecting commitment from her. * This is not, IMO, unconditional love (her) but obsession (lunacy). This may not be an case of ownership although ownership is the more common trait exhibited. They're are probably more examples where ownership isn't key to the obsession but at the moment they allude me. Thinking more along the lines of unconditional love the *unconditional love* from the Higher Self will aid the person's growth. It may look unlike *love* but serves as a motivation to help the person develop spiritually. << "Higher Self or Spirit HAS no limitations and is shared, therefore no shields or borders." To me Higher Self sometimes is shared and sometimes is not. There are also boarders for one's own spiritual well being. It's upon me to decide what I share and what I won't - it's all out of my free will.>> While I agree with you about free will I still hold what I said about the Higher Self. In the "Key to Theosophy" facsimile edition (I have found the "Key" an excellent study source and point of reference) it clearly speaks of different levels of Souls. Human, Individual/Ego or that which incarnates, and Spiritual Soul. I think it depends on which one we are talking about. It is clear the Higher Self or Buddhi-Atma is shared. The Ego on the plane of Manas is individual. The implication is we are in a shared state at that level. The Alice Bailey books make it pretty clear "There is no me and thee Soul but a shared Soul". In the Ocean of Theosophy by William Judge, he speaks about the "Higher Self" being Atma, Buddhi. Manas as the "Divine Ego" P57. It is all seems very complicated and I found it good information to reflect over. <<"getting us to drop these limitations and be more inclusive" Yes and now - if dropping the limitations is used to make out a team of a hierarchy it's a creative way to become more inclusive but if to become more inclusive is done under pressure I don't consider it to be a good way.>> Amen! Total agreement. Pressure, after it builds up, creates an explosion. And where would we be then!! << "The subject of unconditional love lends itself to the subject of unity of spirit." Could you give me a sample of a situation you have in mind, which makes you say "unconditional love lends itself to unity of spirit".>> This ties into earlier comments on Atma-Buddhi and Higher Self. There is a point we reach, usually, momentary where we KNOW we are a shared consciousness. Example: Sometimes, it's through awareness of what is going on with the other person. Sometimes known as telepathy perhaps empathy or compassion is closer but doesn't really describe it. (I think the moment of shared consciousness must be very similar to states of Samadhi written about in books.) Another example: I have read (still only a conceptualization) we are shared at Buddhi- Atma. Then the realization my friend or neighbor doesn't irritate me any more because I KNOW we share the same Divinity or Higher Essence and this is there way of expressing it (which may show a lack of growth on one or more of our parts) and my PERSONAL experience or likes and dislikes causes me to like or not like their behavior. Then you start to let some of the petty things in life go. You recognize their right to be who they are. Even if their an ASS! And you accept them for it. (Sorry for the profanity, I'm trying to make a point). We could discuss more on the subject of unity if you like. I'm trying to be brief. <> Ditto! Remember, I'm still learning. This is only where I am at now. Subject to change. Namaste! crp (Catherine) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 08 Nov 1997 09:19:55 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Brotherhood & Unity Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971108151955.00f94634@mail.eden.com> At 08:04 AM 11/7/97 -0500, CPickar965@aol.com wrote: > > I appreciated the point you are trying to make. IMO, we need to talk more >about Brotherhood and unity. Since you are quite accurate in your statement. > The whole reason TS was founded is to create an altruistic movement. In >this category we seem to be falling short in the last few years. IMO, TS >hasn't really been talking about service and brotherhood. An organization >I have observed who is very proactive along these lines is the Institute of >Noetic Sciences. Perhaps we need to take a tip. > A favorite text of mine is "Key to Theosophy" reiterates the point of >brotherhood and altruism. It speaks of the importance of international >relations. IMO, another word for or the development of Brotherhood and >unity. It seems to me we could focus on this topic without being overtly >political. > >crp > Hi, Last time when I responded, I was in a bit of hurry. Last couple of days, I was looking at this issue of Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood)and Unity and how they are the foundation on which the modern Theosophical movement is founded. Have you seen the letter from KH (usually called the Maha Chohan' letter) which everyone from HPB onwards have considered to be the charter for TS and it was in response to A P Sinnett's opinion as to what TS should do to attract world's attention and spread Theosophy. I will post it as soon as I find a copy which is somewhere on the computer. If we go back to the early days of TS, physical level activities aimed at the improving the conditions of people was going on hand in hand with propagating the doctrines of Theosophy. When HPB & HSO settled down in Adyar, HPB was instrumental in starting the first school to teach Sanskrit and both of them were behind the first school started for the exclusive benefit of the kids in slums -- kids coming from the Untouchable classes. In Ceylon, a massive effort was made to establish a chain of locally funded Buddhist Schools -- for which even today HSO is recognized in Ceylon. Later on when Annie Besant came to India, she got involved in encouraging the population to educate the girls, who were traditionally not sent to school but married off in a very young age 14-16 years or sometimes even younger. She also got involved, of course all in her personal capacity, in the Indian Political movement fighting for Independence from England and also was instrumental in establishing a chain of educational institutions, several of them today are higher educational institutions. Later on, Rukmini Arundale was very active in the animal welfare movement for which she was well known and was even appointed to the upper House of Indian Parliament. She was also responsible for the revival of dance and music and the institution she started is a National University today. Times may have changed and needs may have changed. But we need to keep the focus of the fundamental objective of Theosophy and keep reminding membership where we are all going. If we are going in the direction of "self-improvement" then we need to join Self-Improvement Society not TS. Once we are reminded of the focus, then it is up to each one of us has to find opportunities where we can do something -- not for ourselves -- but others. It does not matter whether what we try to do is going to help one person or 1000 persons. From my personal experience I find that in all these opportunities, when you get involved in matters in which you have no personal axes to grind, the results can be outstanding. As someone mentioned sometime ago, we can find and share creative ideas to work on. Key to Theosophy is also my favorite. "Key to Theosophy", even after a century is still the premier FAQ on Theosophy and cannot be improved. In these days of Internet we call them FAQ and HPB (or who ever was behind the production) used the idea of FAQ long before it is popular. I do refer to it from time to time and it clarifies a lot of things and gives us an idea of how issues were seen from her standpoint. >From an organizational point of view, there appears to be too much passivity. There are two trends we see. One is gradual falling of membership coupled with low retention rate. Second is the increase in the members at-large ie. those not connected to a lodge/branch/study center who have rarely any interaction with other members. The situation is so serious that your neighbor may be a member and neither you nor your neighbor is aware of it. These trends need to be looked at and underlying issues addressed from an organizational point of view. It may be going on. But none of us have seen any long term plan which has been laid out and feedback sought. Top down approach may have been ok in the days Initiates headed organizations, but not today, at least in my opinion. In such a situation, more members speak about, honestly and freely and without any fear of any sort, sooner or later attention of the leaders will be drawn and openly discussed. Peace MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 08 Nov 1997 09:31:14 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: New Age Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971108153114.006ca830@mail.eden.com> Hi, I saw the following in Theosophy Usenet group. What do you all think? mkr was: Re: New Age FAQ now: New Age-what it is [pt 2] >New Age FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions >by Andrew Lutts >What Is The New Age? > I feel that most all New Age topics have one >basic underlying theme. That theme is personal spiritual >development. > waking up > to the knowledge, understanding and realization of who > they really are, where they came from, and why they are > here. > the New Age movement is dynamic, > rapidly-growing, and gaining momentum. >What About Metaphysics? > popular metaphysical topics often include > discussion and analysis of subjects beyond the physical > third dimension. Some examples of metaphysical topics > include: free energy out of body experiences UFOs psychic phenomenon alternative healing >Are There Any Common New Age Beliefs? >Here's an unofficial list >1. You create your own reality and destiny. >2. You have certain challenges to face and overcome in this lifetime. If you don't learn your lessons this time, you'll get them again. >3. There is no such thing as coincidence. >4. There is more to life than meets the eye, much more. >5. Nothing really matters in this life unless it is done > for the benefit of others. >6. We are not alone. >7. We are multidimensional beings currently having a human > experience. >8. We are all receiving more help than we know, from > angels, spirit guides, ascended masters and others. >9. We can heal ourselves, our society, and our world. >10. The ultimate transformation for mankind is ascension. The article is excellent! I appreciate seeing this posted. ============================================================= From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 97 11:52:52 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: Another warning dream Message-ID: <199711081652.LAA26086@leo.vsla.edu> Thanks to Judith, Lorraine and Johanna for comments on the dreams I reported. In response to your comments: Judith, you're too generous. I certainly can't *always* not react negatively to negativity. But Johanna asks what happened in this particular case, and it was a deja vu and intense recognition that I was *right back where I had been two years ago* feeling the same feelings about the same people, because *their* attitudes hadn't changed. Whereas these two years for me had been spent immersed in the readings, and my attitude had changed a lot, so why was I suddenly back in the old very uncomfortable spot, arguing with the same people? And simply seeing that broke the spell. The message "Why do you care what we think?" provided a necessary jolt, since the answer was "for no good reason." Upon reflection, I came up with a sort of psychic explanation for why I'd suddenly be obsessed with Theosophy, reactions to my books about it, etc., after two years of getting away from all that. It was that suddenly there were scores or hundreds of new people reading that book in its new edition, and the psychic impact of all that attention being directed my way (even from India) stirred all those embers of hurt feelings from the past. Plus, perhaps at some level I was aware (the dream indicated so) that the longest and strongest attack on the work was about to be unleashed, further awakening "sleeping dogs." Becoming an author creates major ego problems for anyone, I'd think, because suddenly all these strangers are reacting to their image of you, which really packs a wallop if it's a strongly negative image. Which it is with readers whose belief systems are challenged by what you write. But, as Lorraine says, we can free ourselves from the cycle of negative reactivity. Oh-- the new book, just typeset, will be out in late spring or early summer. It's called Edgar Cayce in Context, subtitled The Readings: Truth and Fiction. I don't really think A.R.E. people are inclined to get bent out of shape by the idea that there are mistakes in the readings; after all Hugh Lynn and Edgar Evans Cayce wrote a book devoted entirely to the subject of such mistakes! Whereas Theosophists can regard it as "fighting words" if you suggest that anything Blavatsky ever said was wrong. BTW-- sneak preview of the book: although I find the readings very valuable and reliable in a number of areas, there's a peculiar pattern discernable in many cases where they conflict with science and history. It appears that overwhelmingly this kind of mistake parrots the contents of books read *not by Cayce but by the recipients of readings*. So when he made a trance connection with someone he "downloaded" if you will the misinformation in their minds as well as truths about them and the subjects that interested them. That's my hypothesis anyhow (one of many.) Hope that's not "fighting words" to many folks. Cheers, Paul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 12:10:17 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Another warning dream Message-ID: <971108121014_506527541@mrin79> In a message dated 97-11-08 11:54:04 EST, you write: >Becoming an author creates major ego problems for anyone, I'd >think, because suddenly all these strangers are reacting to >their image of you, which really packs a wallop if it's a >strongly negative image. Good grief Paul! I've been called everything from a Dugpa to a fraud to an Agent of the Antichrist for my books and I actually rather find it entertaining. After my first book on Psionics came out a couple of good ESers had a number of little talks with Gerda warning her that I was probably doing nasty experiments on her soul. The first thing Dorothy Abbenhouse did after she took office was to take my book out of the Olcott Library. And one idiot reviewer took me to task for not including reams of statistics to back my work. I nailed her! It comes with the territory! But then I like to stir the pot. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 08 Nov 1997 12:24:53 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Using Fear Message-ID: <3464AE75.14EA@eden.com> Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 97-11-08 11:54:04 EST, you write: > > After my first book on Psionics came out a couple of good ESers had a number > of little talks with Gerda warning her that I was probably doing nasty > experiments on her soul. I cannot but laugh at anyone who thinks anyone can do experiments on someone else's soul. It may be an indication that anyone who is thinking like that needs some very serious counseling. It is one more scare tactic, and many will fall prey to scare tactics. One time I remember someone we all know very subtly tried to tell me how serious karmic consequences could be for some of our actions. Since no one dares to tell me directly, this subtle approach was tried and you know the results. Religions have used fear to control their followers with good results for a long time. I guess people take a leaf out of the time tested fear techniques used by Religions to get their way and make followers comply. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 16:37:57 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Idiot's Guide to Theosophy Message-ID: Kym: >I'm confused (indeed a rarity, I know). In "A Study in Consciousness" by my >dear friend Annie Besant, she talks about how occultists often caution those >who love animals to not, through their actions, end up bringing the >now-individual animal monad into a human incarnation too soon. She doesn't >say exactly what actions would do this - if she does, it whizzed by me. > >Now, how would that be possible? What physical or mental action could cause >a monad to incarnate into a form when not ready? I know there's much >discussion on this - but it still eludes me. Sometimes, I read poetry to >one of my cats, Lillith - she loves it. . .bad thing? The neighbor next >door dresses her little dog in frilly pantaloons. . .tacky, yes. . .but it >this going to send this dog into "humandom?" Sometimes, I feed my dogs >"human" food - makes them a bit chunky around the middle. . .but am I >causing a cosmic rumble? Oh, my. Then, I, too, am guilty. I finally figured out how to get rid of the pesky mice. I purchased a humane mouse trap that looked like a little house. Now, will these mice develop a taste for housing? So far, I'm guilty of rushing about 5 mice into possible premature human incarnation. Surrounding them with masterpiece artwork and eloquent music is no help, either. Hmmm, mice with a taste for housing and the fine arts.... Oh, BTW, Mark told me he once got his cat high. Another drug addict in the world, my gosh, he'll burn in hell!!! (snip) >If even God if unable to construct a universe where things can't slip >through the cracks, nay, a universe that doesn't even have cracks. . .how >can I possibly trust anything? > >Time for cupcakes. . .one always thinks more clearly after consuming this >oh-so-tasty lump of lard. Sometimes, I think. . .that commercial bakery, >Hostess, is the only one who really cares. . . My all time favorite, cupcakes with whip cream on top lining a hunk... P.S. They have tons of books for dummies out there. Maybe someone will write "Theosophy for Dummies." Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 16:38:10 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Mondrian Message-ID: Hi Eiichi, Eiichi wrote: >it is very useful book. I wonder why I had not encounter the book. One >reason is I had been occupied with Mondrian's practical painter's side >and for a while put aside the ocult part. Of the reviews of Mondrian that I've seen, the authors are either unbalanced toward the artistic or the occult part. It's tough enough that there are people writing about art who have never experienced the process of making art, but try to find a reviewer who understands the process of art making AND theosophy! Oh, well, artists aren't usually writers, and I guess we need someone to communicate for us or put words in our mouth. As you probably can see, Mondrian is a very dry writer, sort of like trying to understand the Secret Doctrine. >"An asymmetrical mandala"! I haven't heard the word. Is there any >materials explaining or illustlate this? If so, I definitely go for it! That was done through deductive reasoning, my dear Watson.:o) The process of mandala making, like Yoga, is older than Theosophy. Since my own thesis project only involved having an exhibition of my paintings, I'm not familiar with what is involved in a written thesis project. Do they allow for some deductive reasoning, or does everything have to be backed up with a published source? My sources were descriptions of Mondrian's purpose, the process of mandala making, Alice Bailey's definition of rhythm, and the fact that Alice Bailey was basically describing the Yogic process in her definition. All of those can be backed up with written sources. >The phrase "A thing disappears from one plane and passes onward to >appear on another plane." is very interesting because this seems to suggest >somewhat movement or occilating in a equilibrated point. Yes. This is a movement in a no-time, no-space sense, or quoting Alice Bailey, "the end of time and space as we understand it", moving while being still! >> 3. Here's a passage (The Mental Body, A.E. Powell, The Theosophical >> Publishing House, p. 160) regarding laya center that might help clarifying >> its relation to Yoga: "...as the mental body is stilled, the consciousness >> escapes from it and passes into and out of the 'laya centre,' the neutral >> points of contact between the mental and the causal body. > >This is like a starting point of Astro Travel. Same process. It all starts from the same laya point. It just depends on what level or plane you want to get to and how you're going to sustain the frequency of the vibration in order to act on that plane. Just tell the elevator operator what floor you want to get off on! :o) >That it! One of the most difficult parts is to understand the >relationships between the subjective and the objective, and the >individual and the universal. The objective and the universal should >grow in the subjective and the individual reciprocally, not by >annihilating each other, Yes, that's the whole point of theosophy. The evolution of man to god-man and beyond. You've heard of the familiar saying, "We are all one," right? >but by prioritize the latter I'm not sure about this statement or what you mean by prioritizing the subjective, unless you're talking about the individual's exercise to get in touch with or be aware of their relation to the universal. >and finally reach >the equillibrated point, which is stasis but still occilating quickly, The laya center contains the potential of all frequencies. Think of that metaphorical image of the sine wave again. Suppose you were to look at the sine wave from one of its ends, like looking into a cone, you would see a line with a point in the center of it (the laya center, center of equilibrium). That's the center to all frequencies, a common point for all the planes of existence (physical, astral, mental, etc.). Since this is a point of stasis, it is a common doorway to all the planes. Which plane you try to reach depends on your ability to attune to its frequency. By creating ways to find a point of equilibrium, Mondrian was making doorways through which the transcendant universal can come through. This is a glimpse at the theory of the occult art and science of mandala making. It is ritual art making at it's best and has been practiced by aspirants for centuries. We say asymmetrical mandalas because traditionally mandalas have taken on forms of bilateral symmetry (i.e. Tibetan Buddhist, tantric or Native American religious paintings). While functionally the same, Mondrian chose to express the theme of a laya center through asymmetric means. As you well know, he did that through his arrangements of colors, tones, and lines. >in Mondrinan's term, 'fast'. The earlier neo-plastic painting the traits >of stasis is spotlighted but later in New York period, 1914-44, the >energized traits are emphasised. Then whether rhythm functions within >the subject or outside the relationship between the subjective and >objective, or the individual and the universal is the problem. Yes, in his earlier neo-plastic paintings, his work was more of what we were discussing, an asymmetrical mandala intent on "drawing the universe down." However, in his NY period, he somewhat abandoned that idea of static equilibrium, and became more concerned with the NYC vibes. >The part "into threee-dimensional" is extremely interesting because >Mondrian intended to realize his idea of Neo-plasticism and, I >think, rhythm as well, into his studio. If you went to last years >exhibition held at MOMA in New York, you could have seen the reprica of >Mondrian's studio. Are you implying that Mondrian was trying to realize his theory of rhythm in painting into the physical space of his studio? If so,then he is scratching the surface of sacred architecture. If Mondrian was trying to realize his 2-dimensional theory into a 3-dimensional form, then you might want to look into related ideas such as those found in Plato. Plato, in the "Timaeus", had worked out a progressive sequence where an invisible point (laya center) manifests into the physical through a series of regular geometric volumes (tetrahedron, octahedron, cube, dodecahedron, and icosahedron), and eventually form a perfect 3-dimensional sphere. He's basically describing the laya center in 3-dimensional space and time. This work and others related to it have formed the basis of what could be called the study of sacred geometry and have been used by architects both east and west to produce buildings in which the universe can be drawn downward, i.e. cathedrals, churches, temples, the great pyramids, etc. Some books you might want to look up: 1. The Mathematics of the Cosmic Mind by L. Gordon Plummer. The Theosophical Pub. House, ISBN 0-8356-0030-0 2. Sacred Geometry by Robert Lawlor Thames and Hudson, London, Copyright 1982 3. Music Forms by Geoffrey Hodson The Theos. Pub. House, ISBN 0-8356-7519-X This first part of this book describes the work of the Swiss researcher Hans Jenny to "suggest possible comparisons between cymatic effects of vibration transmitted to physical substances, solid and liquid and those produced by music upon superphysical matter." It's a little off the track with relation to your work on Mondrian, but it's interesting in the sense that it provides clues to the workings of nature in manifesting rudimentary physical forms from a point of vibrational stasis (laya center, etc.). 4. Sufi by Laleh Bakhtiar Thames and Hudson, Copyright 1976 The sufis, a sect of Islamic mystics, were forbidden by the Koran to make anthropomorphic representations of Allah. However, they understood sacred geometry. Thus, they created a form of geometrical decorative art in their architecture and cultural objects that expressed pure devotion. For example, most of their prayer rugs contain geometric imagery (again, traditionally based on bilateral symmetry and very mandala-like). They were intended to create a sacred space within which they could perform their ritual of prayer, where they could, in essence, "draw down the universe" (like Mondrian!). As an aside, but related to Plato's sacred geometry, vibrations, etc., I read recently in the current issue of Wired magazine, regarding the research into storing digital information in crystals. Using laser light and prisms, they are able to holographically encode and retrieve binary information into and from a crystal. That's amazing. Just think, we can take the simplest form of information, pluses and minuses (the basic principles of any vibration), and store them in the most rudimentary physical geometric forms (crystals). By slightly changing the angle that the laser hits the crystal, you can store almost infinite planes of information. Plato would have loved that! Even before this most recent development, you can see that we depend on crystals in our daily life. Look at the silicon chip, it's sand, which is crystal. The earliest radios were dependent on crystals to tune into frequencies. Basically, the information was in the air, but you needed a way to tune into it and then manifest it in a way that can be perceived by your senses. There's a relation there to practical occultism and sacred geometry. >> Now, to me, that seems a whole lot like what Mondrian was trying to do. In >> studying mandalas, you can see that Mondrian's work is basically an >> asymmetrical modernist mandala. > >Zutalours! Defenitely I have to know more about it. Zutalours...is that an Australian expression? :o) There are plenty of stuff written on mandalas, and plenty are exhibited in museums. >Thanks again there seems big clue to open the enigma of rhythm in >Mondrian. I will try my best. You're welcome. I've learned a few things from this study, too. >Eiichi > >p.s. I enjoyed Mark's site very much. There I found the CD cover design >of Gavin Bryars'. He is one of my favourite composers. How did Mark get >that job from? Is he or are you aquaintance of Gavin? Actually I >attended one of his series of concerts in Melbourne couple of week ago. >"Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet" is fantastic! I'll let Mark write to you about that. --------------------------------------- Hi Eiichi, Mark here. I got that job through PolyGram records, who distribute all of Gavin Bryars albumns. He records on PolyGram Classics and Jazz. At the time, our objective was to create a hybrid CD that included a multimedia track on it (that could be played through a CD-ROM drive) as well as the music. Gavin was chosen along with a few other artists (i.e. Vanessa Williams and Bob Marley) because we were trying to sell the idea of enhanced CD to PolyGram's family of record labels. It was felt that the subject matter of his record "The Sinking of the Titanic" would give us a lot of great material to make a multimedia product from, and they were right. The piece has since gone on to win some interactive design awards and was generally considered a design (if not commercial) success. I never actually got to meet Gavin Bryars. He was in the UK and I am in San Francisco. The closest I got was to meet our go between at the PolyGram offices in New York. I'm glad that you liked the work on my web site. Good Day, Mate! Thoa & Mark :o) ;)> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 20:31:55 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Using Fear Message-ID: <971108203154_1861824284@mrin83.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-08 13:43:25 EST, you write: >It is one more scare tactic, and many will fall prey to scare tactics. >One time I remember someone we all know very subtly tried to tell me how >serious karmic consequences could be for some of our actions. Since no >one dares to tell me directly, this subtle approach was tried and you >know the results I sure do. Keep giving them hell. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 08 Nov 1997 21:10:31 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Using Fear Message-ID: <34651B97.7113@dmv.com> ramadoss@eden.com wrote: > > Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > > > > In a message dated 97-11-08 11:54:04 EST, you write: > > > > After my first book on Psionics came out a couple of good ESers had a number > > of little talks with Gerda warning her that I was probably doing nasty > > experiments on her soul. > > I cannot but laugh at anyone who thinks anyone can do experiments on > someone else's soul. It may be an indication that anyone who is thinking > like that needs some very serious counseling. > At the risk of being laughed at, I am one who knows something about modification of the soul. The soul can undergo changes, and it really is part of the practice of some metaphysicians. Furthermore, the soul is sometimes modified by spiritual experiences which have occured not by design. Sometimes one makes use of methods to modify one's own soul, or undergoes an initiation that makes modification. This all really very ordinary, althought, occult. Peace be with you... Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 14:32:26 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: Theosophy inspired painters Message-ID: <34652ECC.467@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Dear Michael, I found in your homepage a lot of treasures. Especially writings by Auke Sonnega concerning Java culture. Mondrian was closely acqainted with Dutch painter Jan Toorop around 1900. Jan Toorop was also obviously influenced by occultism and what is more interesting thing is that his mother was Javanese and he took titles of his paintings from music a lot: for$B!!(Jexample "Organ Sound", "Song of the Times", etc. When you think of the$B!!(Jepoch-making influence of Javanese Gamelan music to European contemporary$B!!(Jmusic scene$B!!(Jthe late 19c, the interest about the relationship between$B!!(Jartists and music at that time will be accumulated,especially from the point of view of occult and Javanese and Asian culture. I also found Cornelius Rogge's work very interesting. I appreciate his conceptual approach to sculpture. Those works are very inspiring. Thank you again. Fondly, Eiichi From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 01:21:34 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Nasty things to your soul Message-ID: Speaking of psionics, I was too cheap to purchase things from Radio Shack to build my helmet. So I used items I had hanging around the kitchen. I took a colander, some tin foil, a couple of forks, and garbage bag ties, and created a headpiece that was an effective amplifier. In fact, I think I was the one that shorted out power grid 12B in San Francisco last Thursday. Chuck, how do I control this crazy thing? Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 09:17:55 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Using Fear Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971109151755.00ec43d0@mail.eden.com> At 09:10 PM 11/8/97 -0500, you wrote: >ramadoss@eden.com wrote: >> >> Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: >> > >> > In a message dated 97-11-08 11:54:04 EST, you write: >> > >> > After my first book on Psionics came out a couple of good ESers had a number >> > of little talks with Gerda warning her that I was probably doing nasty >> > experiments on her soul. >> >> I cannot but laugh at anyone who thinks anyone can do experiments on >> someone else's soul. It may be an indication that anyone who is thinking >> like that needs some very serious counseling. >> >At the risk of being laughed at, I am one who knows something about >modification of the soul. The soul can undergo changes, and it really is >part of the practice of some metaphysicians. Furthermore, the soul is >sometimes modified by spiritual experiences which have occured not by >design. Sometimes one makes use of methods to modify one's own soul, or >undergoes an initiation that makes modification. This all really very >ordinary, althought, occult. > >Peace be with you... > >Vincent One of the problems I do have when we talk about all matters that we do not have first hand knowledge is that all we can do is to speculate. As a practical matter we all change with time. Some dramatically, some incrementally and may be some don't. But how one can injure someone else's soul is quite far fetched to me at least. And somebody being sure such a thing is going on is even more far fetched (until I personally find out or a real Adept explains to me how it is done, which is not going to happen because, They have other more important things to take care of!) In all matters of these kinds, I try to do two things. One keep an open mind and two keep my common-sense alert all the time as much as possible. I don't mind being laughed at by any one. When you see so much problems around, if it gives a sense of relief to someone, it is ok. Thanks for feedback. Anyone with any other ideas? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 09:21:53 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nasty things to your soul Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971109152153.00f1748c@mail.eden.com> At 04:23 AM 11/9/97 -0500, you wrote: >Speaking of psionics, I was too cheap to purchase things from Radio Shack >to build my helmet. So I used items I had hanging around the kitchen. I >took a colander, some tin foil, a couple of forks, and garbage bag ties, >and created a headpiece that was an effective amplifier. In fact, I think >I was the one that shorted out power grid 12B in San Francisco last >Thursday. Chuck, how do I control this crazy thing? > >Thoa :o) > You have made it too easy!!!! Everyone is going to run to their kitchens and build helmets and hurting Radio Shack business. Anyone having RS stock should sell them first thing on Monday before the market takes dive!. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 13:41:35 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Nasty things to your soul Message-ID: <971109134135_161615241@mrin46.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-09 04:25:04 EST, you write: >Speaking of psionics, I was too cheap to purchase things from Radio Shack >to build my helmet. So I used items I had hanging around the kitchen. I >took a colander, some tin foil, a couple of forks, and garbage bag ties, >and created a headpiece that was an effective amplifier. In fact, I think >I was the one that shorted out power grid 12B in San Francisco last >Thursday. Chuck, how do I control this crazy thing? > >Thoa :o) You don't! That's half the fun of it! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 11:14:30 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Self-development and service Message-ID: <199711091914.LAA06181@palrel1.hp.com> It seems to me that these self-development and service are difficult to separate and certainly belong together. How can you truly be of service to others if you haven't corrected your own errors? You would be the "blind leading the blind". And how can you correct your own errors if you don't learn how in the school of the world? - and that means motivating your search for healing techniques out of compassion for others. Self-development need not be selfish. As we have discussed before, the difference is motive. Jung said (approximately), "The ocean is made up of individual drops. It takes grains of sand to make the Sahara desert. And you are helping make the ocean better when you become a better drop of water." When I apply myself to spiritual disciplines, I try to think of it as better qualifying myself to help others. One must, of course, be scrupulously self-honest about it. Selfishness can disguise itself quite cleverly in an outward appearance of selflessness. It can hide motives of egotism, love of power, love of praise or flattery .. etc. We have to teach and learn at the same time. And by the way, I don't mean "teaching" to imply being in any superior position - only having some knowledge to benefit others with. Neither do I mean it to be doing their work for them. As Lao Tzu said, "When the sage has done his work, the people say, 'We did it.'" For the Socratic method, too, depends on knowing what questions to ask, otherwise again your promptings would be pointless and lead others "into the ditch." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 14:23:52 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Object of TS - Chohan's View Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971109202352.00a4b7fc@mail.eden.com> In the light of the recent traffic relating to the First Object of TS, here is a msg written in 1880. It may give some idea about what the "Inner Founders" had in their mind when the TS was started. This letter is considered by every Theosophical leader from HPB onwards as the most important letter ever received from the Adept Teachers as it communicates the views of the Great Master as regards the role of Theosophy and Theosophical Society. May be it would help some of us to remind ourselves that the primary object of the TS/Theosophy is not so much to turn itself into an occult training school for future Adepts as some may erroneously believe. mkr PS: While we may want to add the modify the term brotherhood as brotherhood/sistehood/siblinghood, but the main thrust does not change in any way. ============================================================================= Following is from Nicholas Weeks (and credit is due to him): THE GREAT MASTER'S LETTER _________________________________________________________________ [This article was printed in Lucifer without signature as "An Important Letter," prefaced by the statement that it "was circulated by H.P.B. among many of her pupils, and some quotations from it have been published from time to time." The Letter belongs to the early days of the Theosophical Society in India and was part of the correspondence received (through H.P.B.) by A. P. Sinnett and A. O. Hume from the Theosophical Adepts. His Adept-teacher introduced the letter to Mr. Sinnett as "an abridged version of the view of the Chohan on the T.S. from his own words as given last night"--in reply to objections about the conduct of the Society and especially to the "Brotherhood plank." Although the text of the complete letter was not published until after H.P. Blavatsky and Wm. Q. Judge had left the scene, both provided a setting for the statements made, and both quoted in their magazines some passages for particular attention.--Eds.] *************************** The doctrine we promulgate being the only true one, must--supported by such evidence as we are preparing to give--become ultimately triumphant, like every other truth. Yet it is absolutely necessary to inculcate it gradually; enforcing its theories (unimpeachable facts for those who know) with direct inference, deduced from and corroborated by the evidence furnished by modern exact science. That is why Col. H. S. Olcott, who works to revive Buddhism, may be regarded as one who labours in the true path of Theosophy, far more than any man who chooses as his goal the gratification of his own ardent aspirations for occult knowledge. Buddhism, stripped of its superstition, is eternal truth; and he who strives for the latter is striving for eternal truth; and he who strives for the latter is striving for Theo-Sophia, divine wisdom, which is a synonym of truth. For our doctrines to practically react on the so-called moral code, or the ideas of truthfulness, purity, self-denial, charity, etc. , we have to preach and popularize a knowledge of Theosophy. It is not the individual and determined purpose of attaining Nirvana--the culmination of all knowledge and absolute wisdom, which is after all only an exalted and glorious selfishness--but the self-sacrificing pursuit of the best means to lead on the right path our neighbour, to cause to benefit by it as many of our fellow-creatures as we possibly can, which constitutes the true Theosophist. The intellectual portion of mankind seems to be fast dividing into two classes: the one unconsciously preparing for itself long periods of temporary annihilation or states of non-consciousness, owing to the deliberate surrender of intellect, and its imprisonment in the narrow grooves of bigotry and superstition--a process which cannot fail to lead to the utter deformation of the intellectual principle; the other unrestrainedly indulging its animal propensities with the deliberate intention of submitting to annihilation pure and simple, in case of failure, and to millenniums of degradation after physical dissolution. Those intellectual classes, reacting upon the ignorant masses--which they attract, and which look up to them as noble and fit examples to be followed--degrade and morally ruin those they ought to protect and guide. Between degrading superstition and still more degrading brutal materialism, the White Dove of Truth has hardly room whereon to rest her weary unwelcome feet. It is time that Theosophy should enter the arena. The sons of Theosophists are more likely to become in their turn Theosophists than anything else. No messenger of the truth, no prophet, has ever achieved during his life-time a complete triumph--not even Buddha. The Theosophical Society was chosen as the cornerstone, the foundation of the future religions of humanity. To achieve the proposed object, a greater, wiser, and especially a more benevolent intermingling of the high and the low, the alpha and the omega of society, was determined upon. The white race must be the first to stretch out the hand of fellowship to the dark nations, to call the poor despised "nigger" brother. This prospect may not smile for all, but he is no Theosophist who objects to this principle. In view of the ever-increasing triumph, and at the same time the misuse, of free thought and liberty (the universal reign of Satan, Eliphas Levi would have called it), how is the combative natural instinct of man to be restrained from inflicting hitherto unheard-of cruelty and enormous tyranny, injustice, etc., if not through the soothing influence of brotherhood, and of the practical application of Buddha's esoteric doctrines? For everyone knows that total emancipation from the authority of the one all-pervading power, or law--called God by the priests, and Buddha, Divine Wisdom and enlightenment or Theosophy, by the philosophers of all ages--means also the emancipation from that of human law. Once unfettered and delivered from their deadweight of dogmatism, interpretations, personal names, anthropomorphic conceptions, and salaried priests, the fundamental doctrines of all religions will be proved identical in their esoteric meaning. Osiris, Krishna, Buddha, Christ, will be shown as different means for one and the same royal highway to final bliss--Nirvana. Mystical Christianity teaches Self-redemption through one's own seventh principle, the liberated Paramatma, called by the one Christ, by others Buddha; this is equivalent to regeneration, or rebirth in spirit, and it therefore expounds just the same truth as the Nirvana of Buddhism. All of us have to get rid of our own Ego, the illusory, apparent self, to recognize our true Self, in a transcendental divine life. But if we would not be selfish, we must strive to make other people see that truth, and recognize the reality of the transcendental Self, the Buddha, the Christ, or God of every preacher. This is why even esoteric Buddhism is the surest path to lead men towards the one esoteric truth. As we find the world now, whether Christian, Mussulman, or Pagan, justice is disregarded, and honour and mercy are both flung to the winds. In a word, how--since the main objects of the Theosophical Society are misinterpreted by those who are most willing to serve us personally--are we to deal with the rest of mankind? with that curse known as the struggle for life, which is the real and most prolific parent of most woes and sorrows, and all crimes? Why has that struggle become almost the universal scheme of the universe? We answer,--because no religion, with the exception of Buddhism, has taught a practical contempt for this earthly life; while each of them, always with that one solitary exception, has through its hells and damnations inculcated the greatest dread of death. Therefore do we find that struggle for life raging most fiercely in Christian countries, most prevalent in Europe and America. It weakens in the Pagan lands, and is nearly unknown among Buddhist populations. In China during famine, and where the masses are most ignorant of their own or of any religion, it was remarked that those mothers who devoured their children belonged to localities where there was none; and where the Bonzes alone had the field, the population died with the utmost indifference. Teach the people to see that life on this earth, even the happiest, is but a burden and an illusion; that it is our own Karma [the cause producing the effect] that is our own judge--our Saviour in future lives--and the great struggle for life will soon lose its intensity. There are no penitentiaries in Buddhist lands, and crime is nearly unknown among the Buddhist Tibetans. The world in general, and Christendom especially, left for 2,000 years to the regime of a personal God, as well as to its political and social systems based on that idea, has now proved a failure. If the Theosophists say we have nothing to do with all this; the lower classes and the inferior races (those of India, for instance, in the conception of the British) cannot concern us, and must manage as they can, what becomes of our fine professions of benevolence, philanthropy, reform, etc.? Are those professions a mockery? And if a mockery, can ours be the true path? Shall we devote ourselves to teaching a few Europeans--fed on the fat of the land, many of them loaded with the gifts of blind fortune--the rationale of bell-ringing, of cup-growing, of the spiritual telephone, and astral body formation, and leave the teeming millions of the ignorant, of the poor and oppressed, to take care of themselves, and of their hereafter, as best they can? Never! perish rather the Theosophical Society with both its hapless Founders, than that we should permit it to become no better than an academy of magic, and a hall of occultism! That we, the devoted followers of that spirit incarnate of absolute self-sacrifice, of philanthropy, divine kindness, as of all the highest virtues attainable on this earth of sorrow, the man of men, Gautama Buddha, should ever allow the Theosophical Society to represent the embodiment of selfishness, the refuge of the few with no thought in them for the many, is a strange idea, my brothers! Among the few glimpses obtained by Europeans of Tibet and its mystical hierarchy of perfect Lamas, there was one which was correctly understood and described. The incarnations of the Bodhisattva Padmapani or Avolokiteshvara, of Tsong-ka-pa, and that of Amitabha, relinquished at their death the attainment of Buddhahood--i.e., the summum bonum of bliss, and of individual personal felicity--that they might be born again and again for the benefit of mankind. In other words, that they might be again and again subjected to misery, imprisonment in flesh, and all the sorrows of life, provided that they by such a self-sacrifice, repeated throughout long and weary centuries, might become the means of securing salvation and bliss in the hereafter for a handful of men chosen among but one of the many planetary races of mankind. And it is we, the humble disciples of these perfect Lamas, who are expected to allow the Theosophical Society to drop its noblest title, that of the Brotherhood of Humanity, to become a simple school of philosophy! No, no, good brothers, you have been labouring under the mistake too long already. Let us understand each other. He who does not feel competent to grasp the noble idea sufficiently to work for it, need not undertake a task too heavy for him. But there is hardly a Theosophist in the whole Society unable to effectually help it by correcting erroneous impressions of outsiders, by himself actually propagating this idea. Oh! for noble and unselfish men to help us effectually in that divine task! All our knowledge, past and present, would not be sufficient to repay him. Having explained our views and aspirations, I have but a few words more to add. The true religion and philosophy offer the solution of every problem. That the world is in such a bad condition, morally, is a conclusive evidence that none of its religions and philosophies, those of the civilized races less than any other, has ever possessed the truth. The right and logical explanations on the subject of the problems of the great dual principles, right and wrong, good and evil, liberty and despotism, pain and pleasure, egotism and altruism, are as impossible to them now as they were 1880 years ago. They are as far from the solution as they were; but to these problems there must be somewhere a consistent solution, and if our doctrines will show their competence to offer it, then the world will be the first to confess that there must be the true philosophy, the true religion, the true light, which gives truth and nothing but the truth. [Lucifer, August, 1896] ******************************* From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 14:37:19 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Self-development and service Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971109203719.00c170f4@mail.eden.com> At 02:14 PM 11/9/97 -0500, Titus Roth wrote: >It seems to me that these self-development and service are difficult to >separate and certainly belong together. How can you truly be of service to >others if you haven't corrected your own errors? You would be the "blind >leading the blind". And how can you correct your own errors if you don't >learn how in the school of the world? - and that means motivating your search >for healing techniques out of compassion for others. > >Self-development need not be selfish. As we have discussed before, the >difference is motive. Jung said (approximately), "The ocean is made up of >individual drops. It takes grains of sand to make the Sahara desert. And you >are helping make the ocean better when you become a better drop of water." >When I apply myself to spiritual disciplines, I try to think of it as better >qualifying myself to help others. > >One must, of course, be scrupulously self-honest about it. Selfishness can >disguise itself quite cleverly in an outward appearance of selflessness. It >can hide motives of egotism, love of power, love of praise or flattery >.. etc. > >We have to teach and learn at the same time. And by the way, I don't mean >"teaching" to imply being in any superior position - only having some >knowledge to benefit others with. Neither do I mean it to be doing their work >for them. As Lao Tzu said, "When the sage has done his work, the people say, >'We did it.'" For the Socratic method, too, depends on knowing what questions >to ask, otherwise again your promptings would be pointless and lead others >"into the ditch." > I think that there are a lot of opportunities to serve (help) others and many of them may not need any special training. In the course such activities, if self-improvement takes place, however one defines it, it is ok. I feel that self-improvement may be a by product of the service/help. I think all of us have enough (self) improvement that we can provide some service and such service would definitely have an effect on the needy. So I would jump in and act in any service if I see it as an opportunity to help/serve without watiting for the day when I am self-improved. Just my 0.02 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 15:02:00 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Sai Baba's Teachings Message-ID: <346624C8.61D5@eden.com> Nicholas Weeks wrote: > > Suggest you read more widely in Sathya Sai Baba's works. Sai Baba has > always presented a path of stages -- running from dualism to the highest > Truth -- impersonal non-dualism. For example: > Just last night I was discussing the good work Sai Baba has initiated in India. In three counties, his devotees have established treated water systems and the State Government is now considering helping similar projects in other counties which does not at present have such drinking water system. The Government's view is that the work done by Sai Baba's devotees is a work of real devoted service to Humanity and hence there was no corruption of the middlemen. Whenever any project is directly funded and managed, invariably there is a lot of corruption in the process. Government feels that letting Sai Baba's devotees handle the project with much financial aid from State Government will ensure that the money will be efficiently spent with no corruption the common man and women will get every penny's worth. When you see Sai Baba's effect in motivating individuals to service and the accomplishments thereof, it is pure service to Humanity which is the prime objective of the launch of modern theosophical movement. While his specific philosophy may not be the same as that HPB propounded, as far as the objective is concerned, what he is doing is indeed implementation of pure Theosophy. mkramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 21:52:13 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Action Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971108042312.00cee150@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >PS: It is obvious that They don't care what we think about Them personally. >What they are looking forward is action and results. A very business like >expectation. Curious - why are "They" and "Them" capitalised? Did they not tell us not to elevate them? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 22:00:56 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Another warning dream Message-ID: In message <971108121014_506527541@mrin79>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >I've been called everything from a Dugpa to a fraud to an >Agent of the Antichrist Boasting again, huh? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 22:04:46 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Idiot's Guide to Theosophy Message-ID: In message , Thoa Tran writes >P.S. They have tons of books for dummies out there. Maybe someone will >write "Theosophy for Dummies." Dear Thoa. They probably already have, but called it something ponderous including the words "ancient wisdom" and stuff like that. Alan :=) [Recovering from local power outage and PC withdrawal symptoms] From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 23:52:21 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Defining Soul Message-ID: In message <34651B97.7113@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >At the risk of being laughed at, I am one who knows something about >modification of the soul. The soul can undergo changes, and it really is >part of the practice of some metaphysicians. Furthermore, the soul is >sometimes modified by spiritual experiences which have occured not by >design. Sometimes one makes use of methods to modify one's own soul, or >undergoes an initiation that makes modification. This all really very >ordinary, althought, occult. What is your definition of "soul" -? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 19:57:45 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Action Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971110015745.00ff89e4@mail.eden.com> At 05:12 PM 11/9/97 -0500, you wrote: >In message <2.2.32.19971108042312.00cee150@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss > writes >>PS: It is obvious that They don't care what we think about Them personally. >>What they are looking forward is action and results. A very business like >>expectation. > >Curious - why are "They" and "Them" capitalised? Did they not tell us >not to elevate them? > >Alan Ok. let us change to *they* and *them*. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 21:49:34 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul Message-ID: <3466763E.4301@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <34651B97.7113@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall > writes > >At the risk of being laughed at, I am one who knows something about > >modification of the soul. The soul can undergo changes, and it really is > >part of the practice of some metaphysicians. Furthermore, the soul is > >sometimes modified by spiritual experiences which have occured not by > >design. Sometimes one makes use of methods to modify one's own soul, or > >undergoes an initiation that makes modification. This all really very > >ordinary, althought, occult. > > What is your definition of "soul" -? Well, soul really is not something that is very well approached by definitions. Soul is within the observations experienced in the higherself. You can understand what soul is through several types of peak experience. One experience of this type may not provide you with a very secure understanding, but as variety of such experience is gained one becomes asured. In a nutshell there is a overarching spiritual principle which is all pervasive. All objects and substances in creation are virtual. This applies to all physical substance. As you already must know the Hindu aphorism, that the world is illusion. Well, knowing this truth by way of experience, confirms the virtual nature of all things. Most ordinary use of the word soul has the meaning "spiritual-soul". This soul is the essential you, it has structure, and within the structure your entire self is reproduced complete with consiousness. The substance of this 'organism' is spirit. A spiritual substance which when felt and seen has been likened to fire, wind and water. The aura is a swelling of the soul; a luminous atmosphere that emanates from the body seemingly blooming from the heart. When someone is in such a state of grace, the body has a degree of transparency. Transparency when profound renders the corpreal body ephemeral; referred to as the "rainbow body" by some Buddhists. If this seems to be complete unbelievable, your younger than you know. take care... Vincent > > Alan vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 05:47:38 -0500 From: jim meier Subject: on definition of Soul (Browning) Message-ID: <199711100547_MC2-2795-69E9@compuserve.com> Three souls which make up one soul; first, to wit, A soul of each and all the bodily parts, Seated therein, which works, and is what Does, And has the use of earth, and ends the man Downward; but, tending upward for advice, Grows into, and again is grown into By the next soul, which seated in the brain, Useth the first with its collected use, And feeleth, thinketh, willeth, -- is what Knows; Which, duly tending upward in its turn, Grows into, and again is grown into By the last soul, that uses both the first, Subsisting whether they assist or no, And constituting man's self, is what Is -- And leans upon the former, makes it play, As that played off the first; and, tending up, Holds, is upheld by, God, and ends the man Upward in that dread point of intercourse, Nor needs a place, for it returns to Him. What Does, what Knows, what Is; three souls, one man. -- Robert Browning, A DEATH IN THE DESERT From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:34:23 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: Sound familiar? Message-ID: <971110063423_-1575912623@mrin79> In a message dated 97-11-06 08:49:09 EST, you write: To Nicole: Greetings, << Sometimes things may change faster. An example: I am working for the Swiss Federal Institut of Technology. Here everyone has to learn that there is no leadership anymore and each individual is responsible for him/her- selves. A professor is here to inspire his student. Students judge freely if the liked the course of lectures, what could have been done better ... Professors or other people who do not wish to follow this new system are talked to and sometimes they have to go to economy or getting retired earlier or what- ever solution can be found for the individual person. >> I'm going to contribute my .02 (as some one else says). This is an overall trend in many companies in America, also. In a sense, it is an experience that will help actualize the potential of the individual (to the benefit of the company or group). I find this a very Aquarian or New-Age concept verses the "authoritarian leadership" or Piscean leadership of the past. Many people find this difficult, from managers who are not use to having to treat employees as equals with respect, and employees who prefer not to make decisions and be responsible, i.e. use to being told what to do and it's the line of least resistance for them. The IDEA of it comes out in literature for team work, the work of business guru Stephen Covey, and William Glassers work on the "Quality School" or quality concept. Although, Glasser did some very good work, especially along the lines of school, the quality concept was initiated by W. Edwards Deming, whom I greatly admire. There may be others whose work I don't know. IMO, this ties into the theosophical concept of equality and brotherhood. It, also, creates right relations between people allowing for service and self-improvement. I enjoy finding people or situations who are not Theosophy and seeing Theosophical principles at work, especially when it can be applied to day to day life. Namaste, crp From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:45:55 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: What is the color of love? Message-ID: <3466F3F2.7751@dmv.com> Please post a response. There was a study done that found that the color was, for the majority, chosen from only one of two colors. Give it a little thought and post a color. Of course you might want to post your choice and suggest the identity of the other color. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:48:33 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: Self-development and service Message-ID: <971110064832_1347438675@mrin51.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-09 14:17:31 EST, you write: To Titus, Greetings, << It seems to me that these self-development and service are difficult to separate and certainly belong together. How can you truly be of service to others if you haven't corrected your own errors? You would be the "blind leading the blind". And how can you correct your own errors if you don't learn how in the school of the world? - and that means motivating your search for healing techniques out of compassion for others. >> Your point is well made. I agree we need to do both and both are important. My earlier commentary was based on a limited observation in my area. America has traditionally been known to promote the individual with the "What's in it for me syndrome". This is not all bad and at times even appropriate. Hence, the interpretation of self-improvement as individualistic (not group motivated). The trend I have observed is to not talk about motives and the role they play in humanhood (traditionally brotherhood). The observations made have led me to conclude we are becoming more intellectual and there is a need for more concentration on the subject of humanhood (brotherhood) and unity or heart centered issues and how to apply them in day to day life and importance of talking about how we feel, how we treat others, etc... and in general "right human relations." You are quite right in talking of motives. Appearances can be deceiving and NONE of us can know another's true motives. <> The point which you succinctly made regarding self-improvement as a means of service has a good base in psychology from more than Jungian point of view. It seems to me it is commonly accepted unless you have a degree of self-esteem and self respect (based on reality, of course) you are not going to like (esteem) or respect others. As we are able to "actualize" respect and esteem, it seems to me, we are more able to develop genuine liking or compassion for others leading to the "brotherhood" syndrome. Self improvement is an excellent means of developing self respect and esteem. The Jungian line of thought has been suggested by more than one person that as we improve ourselves we not only improve the quality of humanity but the Logos, as well. Namaste, crp From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:00:56 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: I need an "Idiot's Guide to Theosophy" Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971110120056.00eec7d4@mail.eden.com> At 04:06 PM 11/7/97 -0500, kymsmith@micron.net wrote: >I'm confused (indeed a rarity, I know). In "A Study in Consciousness" by my >dear friend Annie Besant, she talks about how occultists often caution those >who love animals to not, through their actions, end up bringing the >now-individual animal monad into a human incarnation too soon. She doesn't >say exactly what actions would do this - if she does, it whizzed by me. > >Now, how would that be possible? What physical or mental action could cause >a monad to incarnate into a form when not ready? I know there's much >discussion on this - but it still eludes me. Sometimes, I read poetry to >one of my cats, Lillith - she loves it. . .bad thing? The neighbor next >door dresses her little dog in frilly pantaloons. . .tacky, yes. . .but it >this going to send this dog into "humandom?" Sometimes, I feed my dogs >"human" food - makes them a bit chunky around the middle. . .but am I >causing a cosmic rumble? > >And, how is it possible for anything to incarnate prematurely - would not >the vibes of the monad and the form have to mesh? And if they can, how do >they ever "catch-up?" And, isn't someone minding the store here? Who's >going to help those who shouldn't be here yet - the Elementals? - and where >were they before this mess happened? > Dear Kym: One reference I was able to find is in some Oral Teachings published in "The Esoteric Writings of HPB" by TPH (also the so-called 3rd/5th vol of SD). "People bestow great affection upon animal pets are ensouling them to a certain extent, and such animal souls progress very rapidly; in return such persons get back the animal vitality and magnetism. It is, however, against Nature thus to accentuate animal evolution, and on the whole is bad." mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 06:06:58 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: B P Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971110120658.00f483e0@mail.eden.com> I believe B P Wadia, was a member of TS(Adyar) and left it and formed ULT. If there are any historians who know the background post some info? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 97 9:32:27 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Dreams (Oops!) Message-ID: <199711101432.JAA12435@leo.vsla.edu> Sorry, folks, I'd copied a post to this list but it seems not to have gotten here, so the followup made no sense. The gist of the original post was describing two dreams and my tentative interpretation. First dream, I'm driving along a highway at a high speed when suddenly I brake and come to a stop, not because of any sign or known reason but just because something tells me to stop. The moment I come to a halt, a train comes racing across the road, a long, heavy, high-speed [coal, probably] train coming from the right. There were no markings for a RR crossing and it was dark. Second dream, same pattern, night driving, slow down and stop for no obvious reason, and the moment I do a car comes racing through an unmarked intersection. In both cases if I hadn't stopped the crash would probably have been fatal. Background: this was the week after I had learned TMR was out in India, and for some reason I had spoken up (and gotten piled on of course) on theos-talk, poking at various people for hateful things they'd said two years ago or more. The immediate subject at hand was whether or not there was such a thing as theosophical fundamentalism; when someone denied it I started citing all the evidence shown me by various people including several on the list. The day after the second dream, Daniel announced the publication of David Pratt's 136 [web] page denunciation of everything I ever wrote about the Masters, the longest such thing to date. Just that day I had gone through a strange change of heart, suddenly stopping caring what any of these people thought about the books due in part to a rather rude comment made by someone on the list. So the gist of my dream interpretation is that I was being warned that an unforeseen force was heading straight for me, and that if I didn't stop what I was doing [e.g. caring what fundamentalist Theosophists think about the work and arguing with them] that there would be a big wreck. I don't think it was accidental that the train and car were both heading at me from the right, given the fundamentalist nature of the attacks. Reading Pratt's stuff was a revelation as for the first time such an attack provoked absolutely no reaction in me. It was such a relief to know that there was no reason to reply to this one. Not as eloquent as the lost post, but it should explain the followup. Lorraine, Judith and Johanna are all on the netsfg list to which the original post went. Cheers, PJ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 17:59:42 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: New Element Discovered Message-ID: To Chuck: "I can see it now! The Administratium Bomb! Cool! Can I put it in a landmine?" Maybe you wish to put it in a cristal ball, but step aside from what's washed out and don't meditate about it! Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 18:15:10 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: I need an "Idiot's Guide to Theosophy" Message-ID: To Kym: "I need an "Idiot's Guide to Theosophy"" I don't think you need such a Guide at all! "Sometimes, I read poetry to one of my cats, Lillith - she loves it. . .bad thing? If Lillith loves it - how can it be bad then? I feel the only "animal" who can behave like a real "animal" is the so-called human-beeing. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 08:56:04 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Message-ID: <199711101656.IAA11823@palrel1.hp.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > I think that there are a lot of opportunities to serve (help) others and > many of them may not need any special training. The outer work may indeed be trivially simple. But how far do people go in acting on what they say they believe and what portion of themselves do they give or reserve? What are the inner barriers? There is a hidden sea of inner troubles behind the most benign looking people, as the statistics on broken marriages, depression, white collar crime ... etc show. When life is comfortable, the surface of most people appears calm, but when in crisis watch out! To be honest, I am only too well acquainted with selfishness, materiality, and anger in my own nature. I honestly wonder if the collective inner sea I've described is ready to upheave some surprising and shocking ways as happened in Nazi Germany. The wave of terrorism, gangs, and militia groups starting to appear in our country is possibly a foretaste of such an upheaval and reflects the inner turmoil of the average Joe and Jane. As Peter, we need to walk on the water of our own unexplored astral sea. > In the course such activities, if self-improvement takes place, however one > defines it, it is ok. I feel that self-improvement may be a by product of > the service/help. I think all of us have enough (self) improvement that we > can provide some service and such service would definitely have an effect on > the needy. For most of us, self-improvement comes through life itself, which places boulders in front of us that engage our whole being to move or find a way around. People who have dynamited their own boulders of inertia, procrastination, unforgiveness, materiality are the ones who give in apparently "simple" ways. > So I would jump in and act in any service if I see it as an opportunity to > help/serve without watiting for the day when I am self-improved. As I said, I don't think one should "wait", but rather that self-improvement (if it is not of the selfish kind) must proceed side-by-side with service. My impression, Doss, is that you are a rare jewel. Perhaps you have been pushed to your limits in this or past lives and it has given you more motivation to apply yourself in the "simple" ways. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 11:31:02 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Re: What is the color of love? Message-ID: Hi Vincent, Vincent: >Please post a response. There was a study done that found that the color >was, for the majority, chosen from only one of two colors. > >Give it a little thought and post a color. Of course you might want to >post your choice and suggest the identity of the other color. > >Vincent >-- > >vincent@dmv.com > >http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ The color of love, to me, is lilac. Lilac is as light as cloud, which is soft and fluffy, suggests a sweet smell, and is a cousin to purple, a spiritual color (to me). I think most people would choose red as the color of love, as suggested by red roses and red hearts. However, that's too darn bloody for me, and those roses have thorns! Perhaps that would be more appropriate in describing obsessive love. Love and light, Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 18:50:39 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: SD on Sex Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111005039.00f3585c@mail.eden.com> Has any one seen the following pamphlet. "The Secret Doctrine" on the Problem and Evolution of Sex. Compiled with Notes and Comments by Basil Crump. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 18:57:16 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Voice published in Peking Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111005716.00f4c0f8@mail.eden.com> Has anyone seen a copy of Voice of Silence published by the Chinese Buddhist Research Society of Peking? It was printed in Peking and Tientsin, China in 1927 and edited by Alice Leighton Cleather and Basil Crump. An interesting feature of the book is it has a Foreward by H. H. Tashi Lama and appears to have some interesting material. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 02:23:52 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Action Message-ID: <5CpILCA4AnZ0EwWB@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <2.2.32.19971110015745.00ff89e4@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >>Curious - why are "They" and "Them" capitalised? Did they not tell us >>not to elevate them? >> >>Alan > >Ok. let us change to *they* and *them*. Agreed! Alan :-) --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 20:33:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111023347.011a8b90@mail.eden.com> At 12:01 PM 11/10/97 -0500, Titus Roth wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: > >> I think that there are a lot of opportunities to serve (help) others and >> many of them may not need any special training. > >The outer work may indeed be trivially simple. But how far do people go in >acting on what they say they believe and what portion of themselves do they >give or reserve? What are the inner barriers? There is a hidden sea of inner >troubles behind the most benign looking people, as the statistics on broken >marriages, depression, white collar crime ... etc show. When life is >comfortable, the surface of most people appears calm, but when in crisis watch >out! To be honest, I am only too well acquainted with selfishness, >materiality, and anger in my own nature. I honestly wonder if the collective >inner sea I've described is ready to upheave some surprising and shocking ways >as happened in Nazi Germany. The wave of terrorism, gangs, and militia groups >starting to appear in our country is possibly a foretaste of such an upheaval >and reflects the inner turmoil of the average Joe and Jane. > I tend to disagree that outer work may indeed be trivially simple. Some things may be simple, others not. I have seen some outer work demanding all the creativity and all the energy and all the resources to find a solution. We are going to see selfishness, envy, and all the base characteristics show up all the time in men and women, until such time we are able to find an Adept who has evolved beyond all of it. Recently a friend told me that to make show up their real natures, just given them power directly or indirectly or put them under a lot of stress. We have to live with all the limitation we see around us. Again from my little experience, many of the problems that most people get into can be traced to causes created by themselves in this life itself. >As Peter, we need to walk on the water of our own unexplored astral sea. > >> In the course such activities, if self-improvement takes place, however one >> defines it, it is ok. I feel that self-improvement may be a by product of >> the service/help. I think all of us have enough (self) improvement that we >> can provide some service and such service would definitely have an effect on >> the needy. > >For most of us, self-improvement comes through life itself, which places >boulders in front of us that engage our whole being to move or find a way >around. People who have dynamited their own boulders of inertia, >procrastination, unforgiveness, materiality are the ones who give in >apparently "simple" ways. > >> So I would jump in and act in any service if I see it as an opportunity to >> help/serve without watiting for the day when I am self-improved. > >As I said, I don't think one should "wait", but rather that self-improvement >(if it is not of the selfish kind) must proceed side-by-side with service. > >My impression, Doss, is that you are a rare jewel. Perhaps you have been >pushed to your limits in this or past lives and it has given you more >motivation to apply yourself in the "simple" ways. > Thanks for the commendation. I am just a very ordinary human being using ordinary common sense. (I am neither a scholar nor a professor with a PhD). It is quite possible I may have been pushed in the past lives or just I have started using my common sense. That is not really important. It is important to note that people helping people can make heaven on earth here and now (figuratively speaking). But all that needs is one to TRY -- as a great man once exorted. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 20:33:50 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Self-development and service Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111023350.011ab2d4@mail.eden.com> At 06:51 AM 11/10/97 -0500, CPickar965@aol.com wrote: >You are >quite right in talking of motives. Appearances can be deceiving and NONE of >us can know another's true motives. Some times men and women act with *wrong* motives; but there appears to be the hidden hand moving events in the right direction. Here is an interesting anecdote. In 1875, when the Independent State of Texas was established, the founders felt that it is in the best interests to set up a State supported University. So the University of Texas was chartered with 50,000 acres of fertile land in South Texas. The legislators later thought that very fertile land should not have been given to the school and made a change -- they endowed couple of millions of acres of land in West Texas hill country where nothing grows -- only some cattle can graze in exchange for the 50,000 acres of fertile land. The legislators thought they had screwed the school with the deal. What they did not know was that under the West Texas country was oil and gas, which was discovered in 1916. Today the UT, Austin is the second richest endowed school in the USA. Wonder what the legislators are thinking from Devachan or whereever they are. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 19:39:17 -0700 (MST) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: On dreams and stuff - Paul Message-ID: <199711110239.TAA16502@mailmx.micron.net> Paul wrote: > [Lorraine?] The message "Why do you care what >we think?" provided a necessary jolt, since the answer was "for >no good reason." [snip] >Becoming an author creates major ego problems for anyone, I'd >think, because suddenly all these strangers are reacting to >their image of you, which really packs a wallop if it's a >strongly negative image. Which it is with readers whose belief >systems are challenged by what you write. But, as Lorraine >says, we can free ourselves from the cycle of negative >reactivity. I think the question "Why do you care what we think?" posed to an author is a kind, but misguided, gesture. When people write, especially those who write with the goal of publication, they are trying to communicate. . .of course, they are going to care if their message is heard, and, hopefully, understood. When penning a book with the purpose of "helping" a particular group, it is particularly distressing if it is 'thrown back in your face' by that same group. The feeling is similiar to offering someone a blanket, one you had laboriously sewn yourself, because you perceived them to be freezing in an icy wind - yet, they turn around and hurl your beloved little blankie right back in your face. Feelings of confusion and hurt are a natural reaction. Then, if that's not enough, the person then goes and tells someone else that you tried to give them a blanket, and they joke about how ugly the blanket was, and what a weirdo you were for doing it, and they tell someone else and that person whoops it up with laughter and passes this perception of you on, and so on and so on - and then you have an entire group of people jeering and snorting at you simply for doing what you really believed would be seen for what it was - a heartfelt contribution to society. So now, you find yourself trying to explain why you offered the blanket in the first place, because who the hell wants to be misunderstood or mocked or thought of as a dunderheaded dork, but some never seem to understand nor stop the snorting - so YOU BLOW THEIR HEADS OFF! - oh, sorry, got carried away. . .anyway, in order to cope with what seems a ridiculous state of affairs, you begin to build a source of protection for yourself - be it anger, withdrawal, bitterness, depression, etc. . .. And then, you hear from those who love you - "get over it." Part of being creative seems to be having a very "thin skin." Yet, it is that "thin skin" that makes poets, writers, artists, (and looney folks) what they are. Yes, Paul, I do think you need to learn to accept the "world of the author" which includes people telling you that 'your very soul stinks.' But for people to wonder why you care "what people think" haven't, in my NEVER humble opinion, given your plight enough thought. Oh, and by the way, I talked to someone who knew about dreams and told them about yours. . .apparently, dreaming about railroad crossings isn't real good, Paul. . .I'd tell you more of what he said. . .but it was just too horrible. . .just dastardly. . .but, hey now. . .you let me know how it goes. All righty? Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 02:44:32 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul Message-ID: In message <3466763E.4301@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >Most ordinary use of the word soul has the meaning "spiritual-soul". >This soul is the essential you, it has structure, and within the >structure your entire self is reproduced complete with consiousness. The >substance of this 'organism' is spirit. No. This organism is *informed* by spirit. The soul has a sense of "self" while the informing spirit has a certainty of Being, of I- dentity. If this seems to be complete unbelievable, you're younger than you know. Alan --------- THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Working for a New Age: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ E-mail: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 02:50:38 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: I need an "Idiot's Guide to Theosophy" Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971110120056.00eec7d4@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >One reference I was able to find is in some Oral Teachings published in "The >Esoteric Writings of HPB" by TPH (also the so-called 3rd/5th vol of SD). > >"People bestow great affection upon animal pets are ensouling them to a >certain extent, and such animal souls progress very rapidly; in return such >persons get back the animal vitality and magnetism. It is, however, against >Nature thus to accentuate animal evolution, and on the whole is bad. Whether or not HPB wrote this (some would claim not) it is, IMO, nonsense. All animals have souls, for without them they could not function. The soul in the domestic animal responds to the love we give it, which comes from our own. As for "evolution" - there is no clear evidence to support the idea of accentuating either that of animals or ourselves. The usual model of "evolution" is a linear one, whether in the Darwinian sense or the theosophical sense of a repetition of lives. But ... and here is a topic for discussion ... perhaps the true "evolution" [I prefer "development"] is vertical ... Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 02:39:42 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: on definition of Soul (Browning) Message-ID: In message <199711100547_MC2-2795-69E9@compuserve.com>, jim meier writes >What Does, what Knows, what Is; three souls, one man. > > -- Robert Browning, A DEATH IN >THE DESERT Thank you for that, Jim! My definition would be that what Does is Body, what Knows is Soul, and what Is, is Spirit. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 00:18:30 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul Message-ID: <3467EAA6.4E62@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <3466763E.4301@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall > writes > >Most ordinary use of the word soul has the meaning "spiritual-soul". > >This soul is the essential you, it has structure, and within the > >structure your entire self is reproduced complete with consiousness. The > >substance of this 'organism' is spirit. > > No. This organism is *informed* by spirit. The soul has a sense of > "self" while the informing spirit has a certainty of Being, of I- > dentity. > > If this seems to be complete unbelievable, you're younger than you know. We are probably in agreement, all that is is spirit. When one senses spirit it does inform, and can in many ways, conveying color, feeling, idea, etc.. My use of the word organism was meant only to say that the spiriual-soul is a spiritual structure. Although, I don't see how "spirit", which I understand as substance, can have being apart from the host or soul. Certainly spiritual emanation conveys knowledge of the being of it's source, but the source must have structure and not only substance. Well, anyway, when we divide anything into parts it can always collapse into an infinite regression which defeats our understanding of the parts themselves. We really have only our experiences to reflect on ultimately, which makes the mystery of mysteries an explanation of what the substance of our sensations is. It is all Yesod, in otherwords, and made transcendental in Kether. What is the substance of blue, hot, cold, or the fragrance of a rose? These are experience; a rose is a rose, is a rose. Notwithstanding, my take is that the roses are the sephirot. So please describe your understanding of spirit. If we experience spirit as having qualities then isn't structure implied? How do you deduce this structure and with what system of words? Why isn't soul synonomus with being? Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 22:08:46 -0800 From: Mark Kusek Subject: Secret Doctrine and Sex Message-ID: <3467F66B.3EF4@withoutwalls.com> > Has any one seen the following pamphlet. > "The Secret Doctrine" on the Problem and Evolution of Sex. > Compiled with Notes and Comments by Basil Crump. No, but if someone finds it, please put it up on the list. I'd love to see that subject discussed. Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 16:51:31 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Unconditional love/ obsession/unity Message-ID: To Catherine: Greetings! "Nicole, I am sorry for the delay in answering." That doesn't matter at all. "You ask such good thought provoking questions and comments I must strain my brain to think of the reply." Sorry, didn't want to be provoking. "i.e. black & white thinking" I agree, obsessed persons seem to think like this. " *Example: A woman may stay in an abusive relationship with a man or her husband for years because she is *obsessed* with her love for this person. Allowing him to be irresponsible." That's a very good example to discuss and here I feel we come to the point I thought we might have misunderstood. That example-woman is not at all *obsessed* with love, but might unconsiously feel that the example-he doesn't love her though hates her because his own personality didn't have the chance to develop properly. It's not o n l y the woman allowing him to be irresponsible, it's also him preferring to be irresponsible because it allows him to feel protected through her as he was as a child through his mother while hiding his feelings of fear from women in general. If you compare the above to history, Nero, Julius Cäsar, Stalin, Hitler etc. were like this while Goethe for example was not. Rudolph Steiner for instance was also a fearer but compensated through religion and this might be a reason why HPB didn't come along with him anymore. I think its exactly the above fear where the wars, sects and dogmas are coming from. One can even not condemn them in the end or do you condemn someone because he/she is afraid of something and compensates his/her fears? "This ties into earlier comments on Atma-Buddhi and Higher Self. There is a point we reach, usually, momentary where we KNOW we are a shared consciousness." I agree. "Remember, I'm still learning. This is only where I am at now." I feel the very same way here. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 16:58:31 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Sound familiar? Message-ID: To Catherine: "I'm going to contribute my .02" Thank you for them. "It, also, creates right relations between people allowing for service and self-improvement. I enjoy finding people or situations who are not Theosophy and seeing Theosophical principles at work, especially when it can be applied to day to day life." So do I and very much! Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 17:04:20 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: What is the color of love Message-ID: To Vincent: I would say its the colors of rose quartzes. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 09:09:59 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Secret Doctrine and Sex Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111150959.00e778b0@mail.eden.com> At 01:09 AM 11/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >> Has any one seen the following pamphlet. > >> "The Secret Doctrine" on the Problem and Evolution of Sex. > >> Compiled with Notes and Comments by Basil Crump. > >No, but if someone finds it, please put it up on the list. >I'd love to see that subject discussed. > >Mark According to the reference I have, they were available in 1927, ie 70 years ago, from: 1. The "HPB" Library, Victoria, British Columbia. 2. The "O.E." Library, 1207 Q St. NW., Washington DC 3. The Blavatsky Association, 26 Bedford Gardens, Campden Hill, London W 8. 4. China Booksellers Ltd., Peking and Lientsin. Hope this helps someone to track this pamphlet down. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 09:13:14 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Sound familiar? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111151314.00e98a7c@mail.eden.com> At 09:58 AM 11/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >To Catherine: "I'm going to contribute my .02" > >Thank you for them. > >"It, also, creates right relations between people allowing for service and >self-improvement. I enjoy finding people or situations who are not >Theosophy and seeing Theosophical principles at work, especially when >it can be applied to day to day life." > >So do I and very much! > >Nicole > Here is something I do whenever opportunitites arise. Usually when I am introduced to someone, I am introduced as M K Ramadoss with the appendage of my profession from which I make livelyhood. I usually correct it to say that I am in that profession only when I am sitting at my desk and working on a task related to the profession. All other times, I am just an ordinary human being like everyone else in the world. This has helped me to better communicate with others because we are all on a "level". mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 09:20:08 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Request from Krishnamurti List Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971111152008.00aa7ffc@mail.eden.com> The following is a request from Krishnamurti list and if anyone interested in Krishnamurti knows of anyone in Chicago area please e-mail directly. mkr ========================= From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 10:15:23 -0500 (EST) From: CanListen@aol.com Subject: Chicago area meeting Any one live in/near the Chicago Illinois USA area? We get together for discussions. If interested contact me. - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 18:20:45 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Development Message-ID: To Alan: "No. This organism is *informed* by spirit. The soul has a sense of "self" while the informing spirit has a certainty of Being, of I-dentity." That's great and very true. And it leads me to another question. Could you please explain to me, why people are getting sick? "But ... and here is a topic for discussion ... perhaps the true "evolution" [I prefer "development"] is vertical ..." I feel development can be vertical (and is in much cases) but mustn't. It depends onto the direction of the development. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 13:57:48 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: rules and games Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971111135748.0084b3f0@imagiware.com> MKR: >Usually when I am introduced to someone, I am introduced as M K Ramadoss >with the appendage of my profession from which I make livelihood. I usually >correct it to say that I am in that profession only when I am sitting at my >desk and working on a task related to the profession. All other times, I am >just an ordinary human being like everyone else in the world. This has >helped me to better communicate with others because we are all on a "level". In a way, we're often functioning in two modes. One is in terms of role playing. You could be a postal clerk selling me stamps. I could be dad to a little girl, reading her a book. Someone else could be an barber, giving someone a hair cut. Yet another person could be a book critic, writing a review of a popular work. In each role, we're playing a game according to certain rules. These games are part of the drama of human life. Life can become challenging due to the complexity of some of the games, combined with the number we may be playing at any moment! You're saying that apart from any role that we may be playing, we are just people, and need to appreciate each other as such. I'd agree and say that this awareness that we're dealing with real, flesh-and-blood people, is a dual mode of functioning. This is really a special case of seeing the divinity in all things, including animals, plants, and the rest of mother nature. Even though we are all people, and need to keep aware of this, this does not invalidate the games or roles or functions in life. They aren't, I think, simply something to be left behind as people become spiritual and learn better ways to interact. On the contrary, I'd expect the things we do, the roles, games, and activities to become increasingly differentiated, challenging, and sophisticated. True, a Guru may keep things very simple in teaching others. This is the way that *that* role, the role of Guru, may effectively be played. And I also realize that Chuck will happily let us know how rules are meant to be broken -- by him. But even he is following rules, playing a certain game, that of the trickster or heckler, and quite predictable when playing that role. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 17:10:10 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <3468E5D2.628E@eden.com> Eldon B Tucker wrote: > > MKR: > > >Usually when I am introduced to someone, I am introduced as M K Ramadoss > >with the appendage of my profession from which I make livelihood. I usually > >correct it to say that I am in that profession only when I am sitting at my > >desk and working on a task related to the profession. All other times, I am > >just an ordinary human being like everyone else in the world. This has > >helped me to better communicate with others because we are all on a "level". > > In a way, we're often functioning in two modes. One is in terms of > role playing. You could be a postal clerk selling me stamps. I could > be dad to a little girl, reading her a book. Someone else could be > an barber, giving someone a hair cut. Yet another person could be a > book critic, writing a review of a popular work. There is another aspect which frequently interferes effective and efficient communication between human beings. Usually our professions along with the power of wealth, many of which bestow a certain status confuses the issue. It is that I am trying to avoid or minimize. For example I may be introduced as Professor Ramadoss or Dr. Ramadoss, or something like that to embellish my perceived relative status generally seen in the world. It is that I am trying to eliminate when we communicate with each other just as two human beings. In many cases other accomplishments in academic or professional fields do not transfer itself to the task at hand. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 16:50:26 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971111165026.00829bd0@imagiware.com> MRK: >> In a way, we're often functioning in two modes. One is in terms of >> role playing. You could be a postal clerk selling me stamps. I could >> be dad to a little girl, reading her a book. Someone else could be >> an barber, giving someone a hair cut. Yet another person could be a >> book critic, writing a review of a popular work. > >There is another aspect which frequently interferes effective and >efficient communication between human beings. Usually our professions >along with the power of wealth, many of which bestow a certain status >confuses the issue. It is that I am trying to avoid or minimize. For >example I may be introduced as Professor Ramadoss or Dr. Ramadoss, or >something like that to embellish my perceived relative status generally >seen in the world. It is that I am trying to eliminate when we >communicate with each other just as two human beings. In many cases >other accomplishments in academic or professional fields do not transfer >itself to the task at hand. This is not, I think, saying that roles/games are bad, just that they can interfere with each other, so that we have to downplay one role in order to play another. You can't be Dr. Ramadoss when that role gets in the way of the one you want to play. On the other hand, there may be times when you need the role of Professor because that is what you are doing at the moment. I think your basic point is that we want to establish rapport with people of different backgrounds, and to communicate something of the spiritual, we must become transparent, putting aside all extraneous roles, becoming completely responsive. This is a technique that is often useful. Of course, there are exceptions, times when we need to be ourselves in certain ways regardless of how others react. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 03:14:21 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Self-development and service Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971111023350.011ab2d4@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >Today the UT, Austin is the >second richest endowed school in the USA. Wonder what the legislators are >thinking from Devachan or whereever they are. If they are thinking what they might have thought here, then they ain't in devachan ... Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 03:18:31 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: On dreams and stuff - Paul Message-ID: In message <199711110239.TAA16502@mailmx.micron.net>, kymsmith@micron.net writes >Part of being creative seems to be having a very "thin skin." Yet, it is >that "thin skin" that makes poets, writers, artists, (and looney folks) what >they are. Looney folks of the world, unite! We need each other! (See TS first object). Alan :-\ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 23:27:50 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: color of love Message-ID: <971111232749_76420989@mrin44.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-11 05:16:19 EST, you write: << >Please post a response. There was a study done that found that the color >was, for the majority, chosen from only one of two colors. > >Give it a little thought and post a color. Of course you might want to >post your choice and suggest the identity of the other color. > >> I think the color of love must be white light. It seems to me, white includes all colors within it. True love would include all colors - *good* and *bad* - negative and positive. Traditionally, I think rose is the color of love. Paler rose not shocking pink. crp From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 23:39:48 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <971111232816_62622387@mrin84.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-11 05:16:19 EST, you write: To mkr, Greetings, << I believe B P Wadia, was a member of TS (Adyar) and left it and formed ULT. If there are any historians who know the background post some info? >> I assume you mean by ULT the United Lodge of Theosophists. I'm not sure of the role of B. Wadia, if he/she even played a role in it's founding. ULT was founded by Robert Crosbie, in 1909. Mr. Crosbie, being totally disgusted with the shenanigans of Besant and Judge, for authority and control of the TS after HPB's demise felt it was drifting from it's original purpose in the dissemination of the teachings. It seems Crosbie drew heavily from Judge's teaching, which are much more easily read and expressed in simpler terms than HPB's. Part of the principles and policies statement reads: "The policy of this Lodge is independent devotion to the cause of Theosophy, without professing attachment to any Theosophical organization. It is loyal to the great Founders of the Theosophical Movement, but does not concern itself with dissensions or differences of individual opinion. The work it has on hand and the end it keeps in view are too absorbing and too lofty to leave it the time or inclination to take part in side issues. That work and that end is the dissemination of the Fundamental Principles of the Philosophy of Theosophy, and the exemplification in practice of those principles, through a truer realization of the SELF; a profounder conviction of Universal Brotherhood. " Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." ULT's publishing houses publish some excellent material, unabridged. Addresses are: The Theosophy Company Theosophy Hall, 245 W. 33rd Street Los Angeles, Ca. 90007 USA The United Lodge of Theosophists 347 East 72nd Street New York, NY 10021 USA Namaste, crp From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 23:51:18 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971112055118.01009894@mail.eden.com> At 11:40 PM 11/11/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-11-11 05:16:19 EST, you write: > >To mkr, > >Greetings, > ><< > I believe B P Wadia, was a member of TS (Adyar) and left it and formed ULT. > If there are any historians who know the background post some info? > >> > >I assume you mean by ULT the United Lodge of Theosophists. I'm not sure of >the role of B. Wadia, if he/she even played a role in it's founding. ULT was >founded by Robert Crosbie, in 1909. Mr. Crosbie, being totally disgusted with >the shenanigans of Besant and Judge, for authority and control of the TS >after HPB's demise felt it was drifting from it's original purpose in the >dissemination of the teachings. It seems Crosbie drew heavily from Judge's >teaching, which are much more easily read and expressed in simpler terms than >HPB's. Part of the principles and policies statement reads: > > "The policy of this Lodge is independent devotion to the cause of >Theosophy, without professing attachment to any Theosophical organization. > It is loyal to the great Founders of the Theosophical Movement, but does not >concern itself with dissensions or differences of individual opinion. > > The work it has on hand and the end it keeps in view are too absorbing and >too lofty to leave it the time or inclination to take part in side issues. > That work and that end is the dissemination of the Fundamental Principles of >the Philosophy of Theosophy, and the exemplification in practice of those >principles, through a truer realization of the SELF; a profounder conviction >of Universal Brotherhood. " > >Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and >Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a >hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by >Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." > >ULT's publishing houses publish some excellent material, unabridged. > Addresses are: > The Theosophy Company > Theosophy Hall, 245 W. 33rd Street > Los Angeles, Ca. 90007 USA > > The United Lodge of Theosophists > 347 East 72nd Street > New York, NY 10021 USA > >Namaste, > >crp > Thanks for the info. I was trying to find out the background to B P Wadia and the events surrounding his departure from TS(Adyar). mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 01:18:03 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <971112011802_1592736817@mrin47> In a message dated 97-11-11 17:25:07 EST, you write: >And I also realize that Chuck will happily let us know how >rules are meant to be broken -- by him. But even he is following >rules, playing a certain game, that of the trickster or heckler, >and quite predictable when playing that role. > >-- Eldon > As long as I am willing to break my own rules as well, which I do quite often. And one of the joys of being predictable is that when one breaks the pattern it can have fascinating results, usually in the minds of people around me. For example, for years I would make at least one afternoon trip out to Olcott to dig in the library, invariably on Wednesday. But then I decided to change and went out on a Tuesday. For several days the Olcott staff could not remember what day it was! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 10:50:26 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Salt Message-ID: To Vincent: "At the risk of being laughed at ..." "Tell me what salt tastes like. Can you tell me what salt tastes like. Can you? Can you describe to me the taste and sensation of salt? You may say that it is a white crystalline solid, chiefly composed of sodium chloride. You may also say that its chemical composition is NaCl. But I tell you this: until you first place some salt on your tongue you will not know the taste of salt. So, what do we need to do? We need to take a pick and head to the salt mines!" >From Dr. Stylianos Ateshlis, Strovolos, Cyprus Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 12:22:16 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Sound familiar? Message-ID: To doss: "Usually when I am introduced to someone, I am introduced as M K Ramadoss with the appendage of my profession from which I make livelyhood. I usually correct it to say that I am in that profession only when I am sitting at my desk and working on a task related to the profession. All other times, I am just an ordinary human being like everyone else in the world. This has helped me to better communicate with others because we are all on a "level"." Pheeewww! Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 12:34:50 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: rules and games Message-ID: To Eldon: "Of course, there are exceptions, times when we need to be ourselves in certain ways regardless of how others react." I can not understand that because I always need to be myself in all ways. Maybe you wish to explain? Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 12:59:26 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: rules and games Message-ID: To Chuck: "For example, for years I would make at least one afternoon trip out to Olcott to dig in the library, invariably on Wednesday. But then I decided to change and went out on a Tuesday. For several days the Olcott staff could not remember what day it was!" Hi, hi, hi - that's great (laughs)! It's exactly the same thing I did and still do when I am learning (for example) psychology. I take out some topics of a book and try them out the very next day (I am terrible because I always have to try out something). Aha, breaking the pattern you call that - well this makes a new point of view I wasn't aware of before. I am just having fun doing it. Without-bumps-Inc. anonymous From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:56:19 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971112135619.00d200bc@mail.eden.com> At 01:20 AM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-11-11 17:25:07 EST, you write: > >>And I also realize that Chuck will happily let us know how >>rules are meant to be broken -- by him. But even he is following >>rules, playing a certain game, that of the trickster or heckler, >>and quite predictable when playing that role. >> >>-- Eldon >> >> > >As long as I am willing to break my own rules as well, which I do quite >often. And one of the joys of being predictable is that when one breaks the >pattern it can have fascinating results, usually in the minds of people >around me. > >For example, for years I would make at least one afternoon trip out to Olcott >to dig in the library, invariably on Wednesday. But then I decided to change >and went out on a Tuesday. For several days the Olcott staff could not >remember what day it was! > >Chuck the Heretic > Every rule will be broken and broken appropriately. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:57:56 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971112135756.00d3c31c@mail.eden.com> At 05:35 AM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >To Eldon: "Of course, there are exceptions, times when we need to be >ourselves in certain ways regardless of how others react." > >I can not understand that because I always need to be myself in all ways. >Maybe you wish to explain? > >Nicole > I agree. If we are not ourselves all the time, then we have a problem, a serious one at that. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:58:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Sound familiar? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971112135835.00f158ec@mail.eden.com> At 05:34 AM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >To doss: "Usually when I am introduced to someone, I am introduced as M K >Ramadoss with the appendage of my profession from which I make livelyhood. >I usually correct it to say that I am in that profession only when I am >sitting at my >desk and working on a task related to the profession. All other times, I am >just an ordinary human being like everyone else in the world. This has >helped me to better communicate with others because we are all on a "level"." > >Pheeewww! > >Nicole > But it works for me!!!! All the time!!! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 08:00:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971112140047.00f2d194@mail.eden.com> At 06:00 AM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >To Chuck: "For example, for years I would make at least one afternoon trip >out to Olcott to dig in the library, invariably on Wednesday. But then I >decided to change and went out on a Tuesday. For several days the Olcott >staff could not remember what day it was!" > >Hi, hi, hi - that's great (laughs)! It's exactly the same thing I did and still >do when I am learning (for example) psychology. I take out some topics >of a book and try them out the very next day (I am terrible because I always >have to try out something). > >Aha, breaking the pattern you call that - well this makes a new point of view >I wasn't aware of before. I am just having fun doing it. > >Without-bumps-Inc. anonymous > When one does not have a pattern, people find it very difficult to deal with them because no one is sure how one will react to a particular situation. Humans generally like a steady pattern so everything becomes mechanical. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 97 9:48:39 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Wadia Message-ID: <199711121448.JAA23924@leo.vsla.edu> Actually, Wadia was a stalwart supporter of Annie Besant for some years after ULT was founded in America in 1909. He was interned with her by the British in WWI. It was sometime later, 1919 if I recall correctly, that he went over to ULT. He quickly became the leading figure in that group and remained so until his death in the 1950s. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:39:10 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: rules and games (reply to Nicole) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971112073910.007b2900@imagiware.com> Nicole: >To Eldon: "Of course, there are exceptions, times when we need to be >ourselves in certain ways regardless of how others react." > >I can not understand that because I always need to be myself in all ways. >Maybe you wish to explain? When I mention being ourselves regardless of how others react, I'm referring to situations where we have to act a certain way, to behave in a certain role, to do certain things even though there may be a battle of wills, a conflict with the other person. An example would be when a parent says to a child "you must go to bed at 8 PM!" Another would be when a rude or offensive person is finally told to shut up or hold their temper. A third would be when a Guru responds to a disciple in totally unexpected and shocking ways. When being ourselves, regardless of how others react, we're taking on roles that may create conflict. This is different than, say, always just being what the other person wants. You're right in a deeper sense that we are always ourselves, regardless of who we're with and how we're responding to them. My comment was not looking at it as deeply, but rather referring to how we tend to be a certain way in life, living out certain roles -- like father, husband, employee, etc. -- and then dropping or putting those roles aside in some situations. But there are other situations where we *don't* drop or put aside certain roles, even if others don't like it. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 07:06:39 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: rules and games (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971112070639.007ed4a0@imagiware.com> Chuck: >As long as I am willing to break my own rules as well, which I do quite >often. And one of the joys of being predictable is that when one breaks the >pattern it can have fascinating results, usually in the minds of people >around me. Being true to the style of living that you've created for yourself is being predictable. And you do, I hope, mostly follow and participate in the rules and games of society. When you go into a restaurant, for instance, you'd sit down at an empty table, order from a menu when the waiter appears, eat the food, and pay the bill before leaving. This is all in accord with the rules of an "eating out at the restaurant" game. You wouldn't break the rules without good cause, or unless you were making an effort to change the game (e.g. make a new game for people, "eating out at the restaurant according to Chuck". You wouldn't go into the kitchen and cook your own food, eat it on the floor of the restaurant, take money from the cash register rather than paying a bill, and perhaps shoot some people there with a shotgun! >For example, for years I would make at least one afternoon trip out to Olcott >to dig in the library, invariably on Wednesday. But then I decided to change >and went out on a Tuesday. For several days the Olcott staff could not >remember what day it was! Little changes like those can help wake us up! But we all have our routines, our ways of doing things in our lives, which include even the smallest things in life like how we get dressed in the morning or schedule our daily routines. There's nothing wrong in this. It lets parts of our lives continue automatically, allowing us to devote our awareness and intelligence to more significant things. Once something has become routine, it is easy, and we can devote our efforts elsewhere. We can even see this in brain studies. A subject's brain lights up when faced with a challenging task. If someone knows mathematics, and is given a math problem, their brain won't light up much, compared to the brain of someone struggling with the same math problem. Our whole childhood is to learn how to function in society, so that commonplace things become routine and we're not challenged by simply things like tying our shoes in the morning or keeping the food on the spoon as we try to feed ourselves. Much in life becomes routine because we need to master it and make it simple and easy so we can devote more of our energies to subtler things. Someone could get lazy, stop thinking, stop learning and growing, and sink into a sort of unconscious existence, where they do entirely routine things *and nothing else*. In that case, what you mention -- being unconventional to them -- make serve to wake them up. But this is only useful to other people if you're aware of their situation and are acting in response to it. Acting as the trickster when it's not needed is not being helpful, it's rather a plea to be noticed and loved and appreciated by people unaware of one's existence. The point here is that one's actions should be dynamically responsive to the other people and the current situation, and not always the same way. We put on different hats at different times, and are not always stuck in a single role. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 97 11:03:02 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Theos-World Scholars and jackals (fwd) Message-ID: <199711121603.LAA03427@leo.vsla.edu> According to K. Paul Johnson: >Date: Wed, 12 Nov 97 9:33:02 EST >From: "K. Paul Johnson" >Subject: Theos-World Scholars and jackals >Message-Id: <199711121433.JAA21891@leo.vsla.edu> In response to a question about why people appreciate Besant and Judge despite their flaws, several people offered suggestions. Mine, for example, were frank in describing Besant's flaws as perceived by virtually every author who has written about her life, but also her accomplishments. Meanwhile, the Ballards have been taking quite a beating with strong language being used to condemn them. Not long ago, Leadbeater was a bone of contention. Now, we have three posts agreeing that unnamed "critics" of these "great ones" are wicked people who have only the basest motives for saying anything less than high words of praise for all these paragons. Throw in anyone who criticizes HPB into the bargain. While we're at it, let the Baha'is weigh in saying anyone who criticizes a decision of their Universal House of Justice is an evil person with no redeeming virtues. And the Eckists can chime in that any criticism of the proven deceptions of Paul Twitchell is evidence that the speaker/ writer is evil. The Net is absolutely full of people making such statements, while missing out on the obvious fact that *they themselves* (often behind a passive-aggressive mask of not naming their targets) are quite bitterly denouncing others. In fact their attacks are usually far more sweeping and personal than the criticisms of the historical "great ones" who are perceived as needing this kind of "defense" by attacks on their critics. Is there really any unanimity here, though? I feel sure that Brenda is including the CWL and the Ballards as "maligned great ones" in her remarks, and that Dallas, ostensibly agreeing with her, is not. Perhaps if people were more explicit about what subjects they were talking about and what criticisms are perceived as evil, there would be more light and less heat created by this discussion. The gist of the remarks made by people defending several different historical figures as "beyond criticism" would, if carried out in practice, totally prevent any objective scholarship at all. The whole point of studying history and biography is to *understand* people, the whole complex mixture of light and shadow that we all, great and small, manifest. To denounce as evil any criticism of anyone perceived as "great" by some partisan faction seems to amount to saying "I don't want scholars to analyze, weigh, evaluate this person. Anything less than absolute adoration (or total silence) is unacceptable." That would lump the majority of writers who have ever written about HPB, Besant, Leadbeater, the Ballards, ad infinitum, into the same category of "wicked denouncers of departed great ones." But very few of them were out to denounce anyone. They were all, with a few exceptions, simply doing their best to understand them. I salute them all, including the ones whose conclusions I mostly reject. They at least made a creative effort to share their understanding of the nuances and complexities of history. That's a lot nobler than dividing the human race into three categories: "great ones," those who "malign" them, and those who "defend" them by bitter attacks on the "maligners." -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com Letters to the Editors, and discussion of theosophical ideas and teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 08:31:24 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971112083124.007a8d80@imagiware.com> Hi. I'm writing a brief piece on intellectual rights and the ethics of mailing lists. Following is a draft of some early thoughts. I'm posting it to both theos-talk, theos-l, and ti-l for comments from the three respective groups of writers, because I'd appreciate feedback from writers on these lists. -- Eldon A posting is the intellectual property of its writer. When someone submits an article to a magazine, the magazine gets copyright for use of the article as part of an integral whole. It may not reuse the article separately nor in other contexts. These other rights to the article belong to the author. Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an article to a magazine. The author has implicitly given copyright to the list to publish the work. That includes the initial posting, the quoting in replies, and the inclusion of the piece in the list archives. Reposting an piece to another list, or on a news group, is effectively reprinting an article in another magazine. This is something that should not be done without the author's permission. Sometimes there may be *implicit* permission. That is, it is clear by what is written that it is fine with the author to repost (republish) the work. Whenever it's not clear-cut, it's always best -- and quite easy -- to write the author. It's also acceptable to cite small portions of a work in a critical review. When that review is held on another list or news group, though, there's the question of intellectual honesty. The small portions quoted from a single message in an on-going discussion can easily be out-of-context, and wildly misrepresent the nature of the discussion and what the writer was saying. This can range from a mild misrepresentation of the author's views to bitter back-stabbing in a place where the author is not present to defend themselves. If someone wants a similar discussion on a different list, it's quite easy to simply make a few statements, perhaps including some ideas that they disagree with, and let things go from there. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 11:13:36 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Krishnamurti Maillist Message-ID: <3469E3C0.257F@eden.com> Here is some new info on Krishnamurti Maillist -- Listening-L mkr ============== >Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 17:08:56 +0100 >From: Dirk Lutzebaeck >Subject: ADMIN NOTE: un/subscription address changed !!! < P L E A S E S A V E T H I S > Dear Listeners, as already announced the mailing list server software of this list has now changed from LISTSERV to MAJORDOMO. The main consequence is that the mail address to unsubscribe or subscribe to listening-l has changed: * To UNSUBSCRIBE please send: >To: >Subject: -none- >unsubscribe listening-l * To SUBSCRIBE please send: >To: >Subject: -none- >subscribe listening-l To inquire about additional commmands and features for this mailing list software please send 'help' in the mail body to . Addtional information will follow as soon as possible. Greetings, Dirk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 13:28:42 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <971112132842_1016161047@mrin86.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-12 06:12:17 EST, you write: >Hi, hi, hi - that's great (laughs)! It's exactly the same thing I did and >still >do when I am learning (for example) psychology. I take out some topics >of a book and try them out the very next day (I am terrible because I always >have to try out something). > >Aha, breaking the pattern you call that - well this makes a new point of view >I wasn't aware of before. I am just having fun doing it. > >Without-bumps-Inc. anonymous > That's one of the things that gets the mind working. When a simple change occurs the whole mindset may follow. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 13:42:36 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: rules and games (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: <971112134235_935657371@mrin47> In a message dated 97-11-12 12:01:21 EST, you write: >You wouldn't go into the kitchen and cook your own >food, eat it on the floor of the restaurant, take money from the >cash register rather than paying a bill, and perhaps shoot some >people there with a shotgun! > Not since my wild and misspent youth. Seriously, I understand your point. I have a sign in my office that says "Learn the rules-Break the rules." And the point of being a career trickster is to keep things interesting. Now that does not always work and every once in a while a "whoops" occurs and one wishes that one had kept one's big mouth shut, or not planted the pumpkin mine in that particular location, or whatever, but that is part of living. Most of what I do is the result of an often-vain attempt to get the idea through people's skulls that there is always another way of seeing things. Now they might not like what that other way is, but it's there. Somebody has to come along every once in a while and poleaxe the sacred cow. It may not always seem helping, in fact it rarely does, and sometimes it completely backfires, but it's a hell of a lot of fun. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 14:10:22 PST From: "Estela LariosLuna" Subject: Hi gang!! missing you!! Message-ID: <19971112221023.17038.qmail@hotmail.com> Hi friends again, following you since late october, but i got so fill'up with mails that only now i begin to start reading them-erasing them!! >P.S. They have tons of books for dummies out there. Maybe someone will write "Theosophy for Dummies." Thoa :o) Glad to see you, Dear friend Thoa!! :P Hoping i will read ALL my mail, and then i'll begin writing well the mails in correct time!! bye Estrella P.S. Glad to see Chuck's comments on these anxious days!! P.S.S. And Please!! dear mr.Dallas, could you PLEASE write more short letters? and not SO complicated stories? is difficult following your letters!! ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 17:39:06 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346A300A.1E58@sprynet.com> CPickar965@aol.com wrote: > Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and > Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a > hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by > Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." Who pays for the electricity? Who decides when the meetings are scheduled? Who designs the advertisements, and decides where they are going to be placed? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 20:13:16 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113021316.00f4f90c@mail.eden.com> At 08:31 AM 11/12/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >Hi. I'm writing a brief piece on intellectual rights and the >ethics of mailing lists. Following is a draft of some early >thoughts. I'm posting it to both theos-talk, theos-l, and >ti-l for comments from the three respective groups of writers, >because I'd appreciate feedback from writers on these lists. > >-- Eldon > > A posting is the intellectual property of its writer. When someone > submits an article to a magazine, the magazine gets copyright for > use of the article as part of an integral whole. It may not reuse > the article separately nor in other contexts. These other rights > to the article belong to the author. > > Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an > article to a magazine. The author has implicitly given copyright > to the list to publish the work. That includes the initial posting, > the quoting in replies, and the inclusion of the piece in the > list archives. > > Reposting an piece to another list, or on a news group, is effectively > reprinting an article in another magazine. This is something that > should not be done without the author's permission. Sometimes > there may be *implicit* permission. That is, it is clear by what > is written that it is fine with the author to repost (republish) > the work. Whenever it's not clear-cut, it's always best -- and > quite easy -- to write the author. > > It's also acceptable to cite small portions of a work in a > critical review. When that review is held on another list or > news group, though, there's the question of intellectual > honesty. The small portions quoted from a single message in > an on-going discussion can easily be out-of-context, and > wildly misrepresent the nature of the discussion and what > the writer was saying. This can range from a mild misrepresentation > of the author's views to bitter back-stabbing in a place where > the author is not present to defend themselves. If someone > wants a similar discussion on a different list, it's quite > easy to simply make a few statements, perhaps including some > ideas that they disagree with, and let things go from there. The whole issue of intellectual property rights on Internet and etiquette (if any) is still very much in evolution. Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. ..mkr... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 02:29:23 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: In message <3.0.3.32.19971112083124.007a8d80@imagiware.com>, Eldon B Tucker writes > Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an > article to a magazine. The author has implicitly given copyright > to the list to publish the work. That includes the initial posting, > the quoting in replies, and the inclusion of the piece in the > list archives. I find it impossible to agree with this proposition, as a mailing list, by definition, is sent to all the subscribers to that list. To try to exercise the kind of control suggested in your complete post would make an unmoderated mailing list unworkable, as we would all have to continually ask each other for permission to quote each other when replying or commenting on postings which are, by intent (so far as theos-l and ti-l are concerned, I am certain) intended to promote discussion, comment, and a general openness among all subscribers. So - for the record - as far as I am concerned, all my postings to theos-l and ti-l are to be considered as being freely avalable to the public at large, and may be freely quoted, in whole or in part, as is also the case with some of my writings on the website below. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 02:39:18 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: In message <346A300A.1E58@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >CPickar965@aol.com wrote: >> Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and >> Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a >> hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by >> Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." > > Who pays for the electricity? Who decides when the meetings are >scheduled? Who designs the advertisements, and decides where they are >going to be placed? > > Bart Lidofsky An interesting question. Presumably, on the basis of the quote from CP, the individuals who want to do things. This, if true, suggests a curious arrangement whereby any one who is a kind of [non]member of ULT can do or say whatever they please, all in the name of ULT, which could lead to some curious results. Having read writings of ULT members, however, it is also clear that each one writes only as an individual student, and makes no claims on behalf of ULT, which paradoxically suggests that the "United" part of ULT means only that members are united only insofar as being able to say whatever they like. It seems confusing to me, if indeed there is no kind of constitutional basis for it at all. At least with Thesosophy International (which clearly shares the desire for individual freedom) there is a written "Statement of Intent." Maybe ULT has something similar, and one of the members thereof could advise us of it? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 02:43:45 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Busy Message-ID: Some recent postings which need a response from me have not had one for a few days. I am unusually busy right now, as well as having suffered from a recent power failure. I expect to catch up in a few days, minimum. Apologies where appropriate. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 23:27:34 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <346A81B6.2D83@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > I find it impossible to agree with this proposition, as a mailing list, > by definition, is sent to all the subscribers to that list. To try to > exercise the kind of control suggested in your complete post would make > an unmoderated mailing list unworkable, as we would all have to > continually ask each other for permission to quote each other when > replying or commenting on postings which are, by intent (so far as > theos-l and ti-l are concerned, I am certain) intended to promote > discussion, comment, and a general openness among all subscribers. I think you misunderstand. Eldon was talking about requiring permission for cross-posting. In other words, if someone writes a message on theos-l, then somoene should not post or quote in on theos-world without permission of the original writer; after all, if the original writer had wanted it on theos-l, s/he could have posted it him/herself. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 23:29:16 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <346A821C.1939@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > The whole issue of intellectual property rights on Internet and etiquette > (if any) is still very much in evolution. > > Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is > sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. There is a big difference between what is legal and what is right. As Theosophists, we should always try to do what is right, even if doing what is wrong is legal. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 23:36:04 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346A83B4.2F43@sprynet.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > It seems confusing to me, if indeed there is no kind of constitutional > basis for it at all. At least with Thesosophy International (which > clearly shares the desire for individual freedom) there is a written > "Statement of Intent." Maybe ULT has something similar, and one of the > members thereof could advise us of it? There is a ULT branch in New York City which has a bookshop, a library, an active schedule of meetings, advertises in major newspapers (but never charges for public meetings), and where they recite rehearsed pre-written speeches with rehearsed questions and rehearsed answers (if you ask a question that is not part of the script, you will get thrown out). I find it hard to believe that an anarchical organization can run such a thing, or that the State or City of New York would allow such an organization to own land and buidlings. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 22:37:39 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113043739.00f870e8@mail.eden.com> At 09:56 PM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >In message <3.0.3.32.19971112083124.007a8d80@imagiware.com>, Eldon B >Tucker writes >> Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an >> article to a magazine. The author has implicitly given copyright >> to the list to publish the work. That includes the initial posting, >> the quoting in replies, and the inclusion of the piece in the >> list archives. > >I find it impossible to agree with this proposition, as a mailing list, >by definition, is sent to all the subscribers to that list. To try to >exercise the kind of control suggested in your complete post would make >an unmoderated mailing list unworkable, as we would all have to >continually ask each other for permission to quote each other when >replying or commenting on postings which are, by intent (so far as >theos-l and ti-l are concerned, I am certain) intended to promote >discussion, comment, and a general openness among all subscribers. > >So - for the record - as far as I am concerned, all my postings to >theos-l and ti-l are to be considered as being freely avalable to the >public at large, and may be freely quoted, in whole or in part, as is >also the case with some of my writings on the website below. > >Alan > Today's maillists evolved from BBS days and continue to do so. I agree with Alan 1000%. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 22:40:39 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113044039.00fb9910@mail.eden.com> At 09:56 PM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >In message <346A300A.1E58@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes >>CPickar965@aol.com wrote: >>> Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and >>> Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a >>> hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by >>> Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." >> >> Who pays for the electricity? Who decides when the meetings are >>scheduled? Who designs the advertisements, and decides where they are >>going to be placed? >> >> Bart Lidofsky > >An interesting question. Presumably, on the basis of the quote from CP, >the individuals who want to do things. This, if true, suggests a >curious arrangement whereby any one who is a kind of [non]member of ULT >can do or say whatever they please, all in the name of ULT, which could >lead to some curious results. > .................clip............. >Alan >--------- I used to go to a lodge in India, where no money was ever collected and no one donated any money. When any expenditure came up, some one picked up the tab. One time a new roof was needed and there was someone who said he will take care of it. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 22:43:32 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113044332.00ead448@mail.eden.com> At 11:36 PM 11/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> The whole issue of intellectual property rights on Internet and etiquette >> (if any) is still very much in evolution. >> >> Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is >> sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. > > There is a big difference between what is legal and what is right. As >Theosophists, we should always try to do what is right, even if doing >what is wrong is legal. > > Bart Lidofsky What is right for one person may not be right for another. Again a lot of it is subjective. I agree that each one of us do what each feels right. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 1997 23:33:51 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Busy Message-ID: Hi Alan, Sorry about the power failure. I stuck some salad tongs in my colander helmet to greatly increase its range. Unfortunately, I was aiming toward Baghdad but ended up hitting Cornwall by mistake. What's a girl with a terrible sense of direction to do? No hard feelings, okay? Thoa :o) Alan: >Some recent postings which need a response from me have not had one for >a few days. I am unusually busy right now, as well as having suffered >from a recent power failure. > >I expect to catch up in a few days, minimum. Apologies where >appropriate. > >Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 00:08:24 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Hi gang!! missing you!! Message-ID: Hi Estrella, mi amiga, Como esta? And if you think I can speak Spanish after this, you'll be greatly disappointed! :o) Welcome back. I just came back to the list myself. It has changed greatly. Everyone must be out playing tennis. Thoa :o) Estrella: >Glad to see you, Dear friend Thoa!! :P >Hoping i will read ALL my mail, and then i'll begin writing well the >mails in correct time!! >bye From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 07:51:05 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Zombies Message-ID: <199711131349.IAA11552@mcfeely.concentric.net> There is a ULT branch in New York City which has a bookshop, a library, an active schedule of meetings, advertises in major newspapers (but never charges for public meetings), and where they recite rehearsed pre-written speeches with rehearsed questions and rehearsed answers (if you ask a question that is not part of the script, you will get thrown out). I find it hard to believe that an anarchical organization can run such a thing, or that the State or City of New York would allow such an organization to own land and buidlings. Bart Lidofsky Anarchy is defined as political disorder and confusion. What the ULT seems to be doing is exactly the opposite. There is safety in doing the same thing, all the time. These people are afraid of making the wrong moves. As for the legality of ownership, can Ramadoss address this? A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 07:44:04 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: What's right? Message-ID: <199711131349.IAA11540@mcfeely.concentric.net> M K Ramadoss wrote: > The whole issue of intellectual property rights on Internet and etiquette > (if any) is still very much in evolution. > > Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is > sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. There is a big difference between what is legal and what is right. As Theosophists, we should always try to do what is right, even if doing what is wrong is legal. Bart Lidofsky That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, but, in the minds of some people it may be very wrong. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 08:46:33 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113144633.01055784@mail.eden.com> At 08:54 AM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: > >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> The whole issue of intellectual property rights on Internet and etiquette >> (if any) is still very much in evolution. >> >> Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is >> sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. > > There is a big difference between what is legal and what is right. As >Theosophists, we should always try to do what is right, even if doing >what is wrong is legal. > > Bart Lidofsky > >That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, but, in >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. > >A. Safron > Here is another angle. If what I am doing is not harming anyone, then it does not matter whether it is right or wrong in some one else's view (which of course may be colored by tradition, philosophy, experience etc.) ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 08:46:34 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Zombies Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971113144634.010574b4@mail.eden.com> At 08:54 AM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: > There is a ULT branch in New York City which has a bookshop, a library, >an active schedule of meetings, advertises in major newspapers (but >never charges for public meetings), and where they recite rehearsed >pre-written speeches with rehearsed questions and rehearsed answers (if >you ask a question that is not part of the script, you will get thrown >out). I find it hard to believe that an anarchical organization can run >such a thing, or that the State or City of New York would allow such an >organization to own land and buidlings. > > Bart Lidofsky > >Anarchy is defined as political disorder and confusion. What the >ULT seems to be doing is exactly the opposite. There is safety in >doing the same thing, all the time. These people are afraid of >making the wrong moves. > >As for the legality of ownership, can Ramadoss address this? > >A. Safron > I am *not* a lawyer. But let me try. It could be that they have incorporated an organization which has obtained tax exempt status, which is very easy. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 07:39:37 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971113073937.0082b6d0@imagiware.com> Bart: [writing to MKR] >> Right now, anything goes is what is going. Even if the rights issue is >> sorted out, enforcement of any violation is going to be impossible. > > There is a big difference between what is legal and what is right. As >Theosophists, we should always try to do what is right, even if doing >what is wrong is legal. You bring up an important point. There may be a big difference between what is against the law and what is right to do. The law may be based upon what is enforceable and have low standards at times. This does not mean that we lower our standards. The end result of only doing what is required by law is the "what we can get away with" mentality, which leads individuals and major corporations to do terrible things in the world, things that are technically legal but morally offensive. Our standards *should* be based upon a sense of what is the right thing to do, according to well-defined ethics, taking into account the rights and needs of others. Enforcement is a non-issue, from an ethical standpoint. An ethical person acts out of a sense of right even when it's not in that person's best interest, even when the majority may not be doing the right thing. The issue of rights and the author's intent still need to be sorted out, as MKR mentions. There are too many people doing things on the Internet to police everything, and not everyone is educated nor scrupulous. What will be the status quo in the future is yet to be seen. The basic idea, as I see it, is that a writer still retains intellectual rights to their materials. What needs defining are the ground rules for using Internet publishing, like news groups, mailing lists, and Web pages, where it's clear-cut what rights the author is giving up in putting materials online in different ways. There are a number of articles by ACM (a professional computer association) dealing with these issues. An example point would be that to give a URL is like citing someone's work, while including the actual text of their writings in your web page would constitute republication, and require permission if the work was not in the public domain. Perhaps a discussion of what are the types of Internet publishing and what their ground rules should be might be useful. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 07:15:06 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971113071506.0082b100@imagiware.com> Alan: >> Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an >> article to a magazine. The author has implicitly given copyright >> to the list to publish the work. That includes the initial posting, >> the quoting in replies, and the inclusion of the piece in the >> list archives. >I find it impossible to agree with this proposition, as a mailing list, >by definition, is sent to all the subscribers to that list. To try to >exercise the kind of control suggested in your complete post would make >an unmoderated mailing list unworkable, as we would all have to >continually ask each other for permission to quote each other when >replying or commenting on postings which are, by intent (so far as >theos-l and ti-l are concerned, I am certain) intended to promote >discussion, comment, and a general openness among all subscribers. You misunderstand my statement. I think I say elsewhere in the same message that quoting and replying to messages posted on a list is part of the publication of that list, which is something fine to do. Some lists are quite specific about reposting not being allowed, like the arcana list, which I was on for a while a couple of years ago. In the USA, the author retains rights to their works regardless of whether they add a copyright notice. I'd see the need for permission existing when someone's writings are taken out-of-context, being placed on lists or newsgroups that they weren't writing on. It's fairly easy to ask someone if they're online, if it's ok to repost on another list. I compare a mailing list to a magazine because the postings go to a well-defined audience chosen by the author. And the postings are in the context of the discussions going on in that list. Someone writes for a magazine because of its audience and its other content. When someone writes an article for a magazine, they've given the magazine the right to use the article *as part of an integral whole*. Within the context of the magazine, the article may be used in any manner. Apart from the magazine, as a separate piece or as a part of something else, like another magazine, the rights still belong to the author. Permission is needed of the author, for instance, for the article to be printed on its own or to reprinted in another magazine. The exception is short excerpts in critical reviews. I see a direct analogy between the above -- which is the current copyright law in America, as I understand it -- with mailing lists. >So - for the record - as far as I am concerned, all my postings to >theos-l and ti-l are to be considered as being freely available to the >public at large, and may be freely quoted, in whole or in part, as is >also the case with some of my writings on the website below. That's good to know. But because you choose to put all your writings into the public domain does not mean that it's right to treat the writings of others as being in the public domain. That choice is made by the individual writer. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 10:51:44 -0500 (EST) From: CPickar965@aol.com Subject: Re: unconditional love,obssession Message-ID: <971113105143_540679398@mrin41.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-11 10:15:35 EST, you write: To Nicole, Greetings: << "You ask such good thought provoking questions and comments I must strain my brain to think of the reply." Sorry, didn't want to be provoking.>> Being provoked is one of our best ways to learn lessons. Thank you. <<" *Example: A woman may stay in an abusive relationship with a man or her husband for years because she is *obsessed* with her love for this person. Allowing him to be irresponsible." That's a very good example to discuss and here I feel we come to the point I thought we might have misunderstood. That example-woman is not at all *obsessed* with love, but might unconsiously feel that the example-he doesn't love her though hates her because his own personality didn't have the chance to develop properly. It's not o n l y the woman allowing him to be irresponsible, it's also him preferring to be irresponsible because it allows him to feel protected through her as he was as a child through his mother while hiding his feelings of fear from women in general. If you compare the above to history, Nero, Julius Cäsar, Stalin, Hitler etc. were like this while Goethe for example was not. Rudolph Steiner for instance was also a fearer but compensated through religion and this might be a reason why HPB didn't come along with him anymore. I think its exactly the above fear where the wars, sects and dogmas are coming from. One can even not condemn them in the end or do you condemn someone because he/she is afraid of something and compensates his/her fears? >> Excellent point that FEAR. Fear is usually the root of most problems, oddly enough. The undercurrent I detected, correct me if I'm wrong, is fear issues based on the need for control or ego problems in male/female relationships. This is a definite problem in interactions. I have discovered that unless the female is willing to behave subserviently or allow the man to direct her there is an altercation. But this shouldn't be confused with the issue of unconditional love. We all have a lower nature and frequently women WANT to give their power away to another. When a woman exhibits her *own power* she than is subject to a whole slew of other problems and epithets. The prognosis for relationships with both people being able to share equal power is not good. Not impossible. It takes an exceptional man and woman to interact at that level. It seems to me we need to transmute these lower natures and problems to be able to develop unconditional love without those emotional strings or games. This can be a whole subject relating to spirituality and relationships but I'm not sure if we should explore that here. Namaste, Catherine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 10:38:55 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346B1F0F.7361@dmv.com> CPickar965@aol.com wrote: > Part of the principles and policies statement reads: > > "The policy of this Lodge is independent devotion to the cause of > Theosophy, without professing attachment to any Theosophical organization. > It is loyal to the great Founders of the Theosophical Movement, but does not > concern itself with dissensions or differences of individual opinion. > > The work it has on hand and the end it keeps in view are too absorbing and > too lofty to leave it the time or inclination to take part in side issues. > That work and that end is the dissemination of the Fundamental Principles of > the Philosophy of Theosophy, and the exemplification in practice of those > principles, through a truer realization of the SELF; a profounder conviction > of Universal Brotherhood. " > > Another interesting feature is it's lack of Constitution, By-Laws and > Officers. Everything is done by individuals without backing of a group or a > hierarchical position. Favored studying material appears to be anything by > Crosbie, Judge or the "Key to Theosophy." > > The Theosophy Company > crp Sorry I haven't been reading all of the e-mail, I thought I might be of some help solving the ULT mysteries, since I am a member. Well, the above quote from crp really sums it up. To become a member one signs a card that states that you are in sympathy the above purposes of the lodge. They are the most conservative Theosophists and there really are some odd things about the ULT. For instance lodge member refrain from using anyones name in the lodge especially first names. This they say this avoids the developement of a cult of personality. The humility of the lodge is that every member agrees that he is only a student and never teacher of theosophy. In one meeting the term Theosophist was singled out as being reserved for the founders of Theosophy only, and it was held as pompus to refer to oneself as a Theosophist. One elder member of the lodge succumed to a shouting fit when I had offered to donate some of my books to the lodge, which I found quite shocking since he had never behaved that way before I had offered the books. They seem to believe that all wisdom is neatly canned in the books of the founders. However, most of my experience with the lodge was extreemly good, and the study groop was quite a wonderful thing to experience. One elder woman member said to me after many years that I was somehow at the same time completely physical, and completely mystical. Oblique, but a compliment I suppose. As to how the bills are paid etc., certain members seem to simply appoint themselves to supply the need of the lodges. There is somekind of loose organization, but it is completely hidden in order that the promulgation of Theosophy not be hindered. BTW, the lodge meetings are not recitations of a theosophical catechism. The titles of lectures come from a fixed standard list, but each lecture is an orginal expostion of an advanced students understanding of the Theosophical founders. It is true that the lodge through the year is always covering the same ground, but the purpose of the lodge is to broadcast the meaning and message to anyone who comes to explore Theosophy. Well, when I began to attend TS meetings in Balitmore the members of my lodge were so terribly curious that they began to regularly attend TS meetings in D.C. and with their donations to the collection plate saved the Washington lodge from closing. It's been a long while since I have visited the ULT lodge. I had been unable to attend since I had moved from the Washinton area several years ago. Currently, the closest lodge is the TS which is 150 miles away from Salisbury MD where I am now. So, I guess theosophy will have to be the internet for me while I am here. The internet is not very supernatural though, so it's hard to get used to. ttfn... Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:34:43 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971113133443_-1139662561@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-13 12:54:10 EST, you write: > An >ethical person acts out of a sense of right even when it's >not in that person's best interest, even when the majority >may not be doing the right thing. Ethics has no place in any endeavor involving human intelligence. I cannot conceive of an instance where a rational individual would refrain from an action merely because it violates some principle. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:46:09 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971113134609_-1975693631@mrin39> In a message dated 97-11-13 12:55:58 EST, you write: >That's good to know. But because you choose to put all your writings >into the public domain does not mean that it's right to treat the >writings of others as being in the public domain. That choice is >made by the individual writer. > >-- Eldon At the risk of seeming to contradict myself in a previous post, I have always found it gratifying the you always ask my permission to put something in Theosophy World. It is not an issue of principle with me, being pretty unprincipled myself and therefore in no position to criticize others on the matter, but as a writer, who actually tries to make a living at it, I do appreciate the consideration. It's got nothing to do with right or wrong, but to be asked if something I write can be used in something you edit is a compliment that no writer can resist. It's like a big warm fuzzy thing. And as a writer who is an unprincipled pragmatist I have to face the reality that the internet may make copyright as an enforceable matter obsolete. I won't steal material from another author (not because of ethics, but because of ego, it ain't mine!) but the reality is others will and no doubt they will steal from me if they think it serves their purposes and all the talk of ethics in the world will not change that. How we will all adapt to this new world order is yet to be determined. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:05:59 -0700 (MST) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <199711132005.NAA20186@mailmx.micron.net> Eldon wrote: > A posting is the intellectual property of its writer. When someone > submits an article to a magazine, the magazine gets copyright for > use of the article as part of an integral whole. It may not reuse > the article separately nor in other contexts. These other rights > to the article belong to the author. A magazine is making a monetary profit due to your submission and pays you for it via money or copies - this is entirely different than someone who is posting something without compensation. Putting something out in the public domain leaves it open for use - example: when a news organization is videotaping a "street scene" they need not get the "OK" from those walking down the street or anyone else in the background - it is understood that being in a "public domain" as being implicit permission to be "seen." Nor do the news companies have to pay these "background" people. The magazine may not use your article void of your permission for reasons of further financial gain - but a READER who wants to quote from your article, as long as citation is given, is protected by law. Remember the "300 word" limit? > Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an > article to a magazine. I do not see how you can draw this conclusion. > Reposting an piece to another list, or on a news group, is effectively > reprinting an article in another magazine. This is something that > should not be done without the author's permission. Sometimes > there may be *implicit* permission. That is, it is clear by what > is written that it is fine with the author to repost (republish) > the work. Whenever it's not clear-cut, it's always best -- and > quite easy -- to write the author. Again, the write to quote is implicit in the law. I need not ask permission of any author whose writings I utilize from the Web as long as I stay within copyright laws. > It's also acceptable to cite small portions of a work in a > critical review. When that review is held on another list or > news group, though, there's the question of intellectual > honesty. The small portions quoted from a single message in > an on-going discussion can easily be out-of-context, and > wildly misrepresent the nature of the discussion and what > the writer was saying. Although this can often be true, the author is the one responsible for taking legal action - or writing a response themselves - if they feel they have been misrepresented. There are many people who have been quoted who later wish they hadn't - made them look bad; however, this is no reason to halt the right to quote others. People have the right to understand in their own way what an author is saying - and unless 'genuine malice' is evident - the author takes that chance every time they pen something. > This can range from a mild misrepresentation > of the author's views to bitter back-stabbing in a place where > the author is not present to defend themselves. ". . .bitter back-stabbing?" Need we always look at humanity so negatively? > If someone > wants a similar discussion on a different list, it's quite > easy to simply make a few statements, perhaps including some > ideas that they disagree with, and let things go from there. What you mean is unclear to me here. Are you saying a person should write in their words only any disagreements they may have with a writer of a post on a different list? What if they agree with the writer? Does the same apply? Although I concur that would be ideal - I don't see that happening in the real world - "criminal honor" is hard to come by now. I understand this particular passage you've offered, being it the only thing I have to go on, as an attempt to limit free speech/writing. Your arguments don't have legal standing - I don't think. I resent (and I am a published author so this affects me too) your notion that the right to quote should be taken away. Is this your intention? Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 97 15:25:42 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: ULT Message-ID: <199711132025.PAA11486@leo.vsla.edu> There is something called the Declaration which ULT members agree to when they join, which serves as a statement of principles. The group is run by the board of the Theosophy Company, which publishes the books, pays the lights, etc. at the headquarters in LA; dunno how the local branches relate the Theosophy Company. I have to say I've been to couple of NYC ULT programs and while they did have a "canned" feeling indeed, the questions certainly didn't seem to be rehearsed. There were clearly some new people there who asked unexpected questions, and no one got thrown out. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 12:34:43 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <199711132034.MAA29502@palrel1.hp.com> Somebody wrote: >> An ethical person acts out of a sense of right even when it's not in that >> person's best interest, even when the majority may not be doing the right >> thing. Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > Ethics has no place in any endeavor involving human intelligence. I cannot > conceive of an instance where a rational individual would refrain from an > action merely because it violates some principle. But hearing about that principle may remind us of something we know inwardly, but don't have full conscious access to yet. Or sometimes we *do* know in our heart of hearts we are acting against our conscience, but because "everyone else does it" we compromise our better knowing. BTW, Chuck, your serious side seems to be coming out lately. I personally find that refreshing. Tricksters are great for stirring up the stodgy old prim and proper folks now and then, but too much trickery is tiring. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:10:50 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics (reply to Kym) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971113131050.008c3210@imagiware.com> Kym: Thanks for taking the time to reply and offer your ideas on the subject. >A magazine is making a monetary profit due to your submission and pays you >for it via money or copies - this is entirely different than someone who is >posting something without compensation. I'm writing from the standpoint of a writer, attempting to define the writer's rights to the materials produced. If I submit something to be included in a magazine, and the magazine doesn't pay me for it, do I have any less rights to my piece? Is submitting an article to a magazine that pays nothing to be considered as intentionally placing the article in the public domain? >Putting something out in the public >domain leaves it open for use - example: when a news organization is >videotaping a "street scene" they need not get the "OK" from those walking >down the street or anyone else in the background - it is understood that >being in a "public domain" as being implicit permission to be "seen." Nor >do the news companies have to pay these "background" people. I think the analogy here is stretched a bit too far. An author has rights to their writings. They can voluntarily transfer or give up those rights. Unless they take a definite action placing the work in the public domain, they retain the rights. Someone walking on the street has a right to privacy. There are situations where a newsworthy event can be reported without needing their permission. But they retain rights to their likenesses, etc. You can't take someone's picture, then use it to advertise a product, without a release from them. >The magazine may not use your article void of your permission for reasons of >further financial gain - but a READER who wants to quote from your article, >as long as citation is given, is protected by law. Remember the "300 word" >limit? Short quotes come under "fair use". But not copying the entire article. Being not for financial gain is a partial shield against copyright violations, but is used, if I remember it right, in determining damages to be awarded to the author whose work was stolen, not as a justification for taking copyrighted materials without permission. >> Posting something to a mailing list is effectively submitting an >> article to a magazine. > >I do not see how you can draw this conclusion. My basic reason is that it is not being put in the public domain, because it was submitted to a specified group of subscribers in the context of a specific discussion for the purpose of participation in that discussion. >Again, the write to quote is implicit in the law. I need not ask permission >of any author whose writings I utilize from the Web as long as I stay within >copyright laws. Yes, you can quote. But quoting is not the same as republishing. >> It's also acceptable to cite small portions of a work in a >> critical review. When that review is held on another list or >> news group, though, there's the question of intellectual >> honesty. The small portions quoted from a single message in >> an on-going discussion can easily be out-of-context, and >> wildly misrepresent the nature of the discussion and what >> the writer was saying. >Although this can often be true, the author is the one responsible for >taking legal action - or writing a response themselves - if they feel they >have been misrepresented. This is true if the quoting is on the same mailing list that the person wrote on. If it's on a different list that they are not on, it can be unfair to that person, being unable to defend themselves, and may be taken out-of-context, misrepresenting what the other person has said and believes. It becomes, then, at best, talking about someone behind their back. >There are many people who have been quoted who >later wish they hadn't - made them look bad; however, this is no reason to >halt the right to quote others. People have the right to understand in >their own way what an author is saying - and unless 'genuine malice' is >evident - the author takes that chance every time they pen something. The quoting itself is not bad. And people do understand things differently, as for example, the exchanges between Daniel Caldwell and Paul Johnson. As to the issue of intellectual rights, there may be a gray area where something is more than merely quoting someone, and becomes republication in violation of their copyright. >> This can range from a mild misrepresentation >> of the author's views to bitter back-stabbing in a place where >> the author is not present to defend themselves. > >". . .bitter back-stabbing?" Need we always look at humanity so negatively? That's the extreme, and fortunately the exception. >> If someone >> wants a similar discussion on a different list, it's quite >> easy to simply make a few statements, perhaps including some >> ideas that they disagree with, and let things go from there. >What you mean is unclear to me here. Are you saying a person should write >in their words only any disagreements they may have with a writer of a post >on a different list? What if they agree with the writer? Does the same >apply? Although I concur that would be ideal - I don't see that happening >in the real world - "criminal honor" is hard to come by now. I'm trying here to sound out different approaches to transferring a discussion to another list. One approach is, as I mention, to mention some of the general issues on the new list. Another is to quote the person from the other list. What approach is actually taken depends upon the common sense and sense of fairness of the person involved, the person wanting to transfer the discussion. >I understand this particular passage you've offered, being it >the only thing I have to go on, as an attempt to limit free >speech/writing. Not really. My two concerns here are (1) the author's intellectual rights and (2) what is fair when quoting someone out-of-context, especially if one is only presenting a single slant to a discussion held elsewhere. >Your arguments don't have legal standing - I don't think. I'm posing a discussion on intellectual rights. I'm concerned that people may jump the gun and assume things are in the public domain when they're not. I'd like to see the issues discussed and hear the various arguments, including yours. As far as what has legal standing, we'd have to go to copyright law and legal rulings concerning it. I don't think the final word has yet been said. Apart from what the law says, which is the legal equivalent of "what we can get away with," I'd like to discuss the ethics involved, which is "what is fair and right that we do". >I resent (and I am a published author so this affects me too) >your notion that the right to quote should be taken away. > >Is this your intention? No. You can still quote. But I believe that you have rights to your works that cannot be taken away from you, and that others shouldn't presume that your writings are in the public domain and free for the taking, when you may not have taken any action to put them there. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 14:37:15 -0700 (MST) From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Correction Message-ID: <199711132137.OAA27386@mailmx.micron.net> Kym wrote - or, at least, tried: > the write to quote is implicit in the law. Make that "the RIGHT to quote. . ." - it will take weeks for me to get over this. . .I hate that. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 13:51:56 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: rules and games Message-ID: <199711132151.NAA24942@palrel1.hp.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > When one does not have a pattern, people find it very difficult to deal with > them because no one is sure how one will react to a particular situation. > Humans generally like a steady pattern so everything becomes mechanical. True. This is why we search for the Rules behind the rules. On the maya plane, Rules are clothed in infinite variety and become situational rules. Part of the fun and the frustration. Each of Maya's veils shows a different facet of the One. From the interestingly variegated manifest, we get a glimpse of the simple yet grand Unmanifest. As Ann Ree Colton said, "Divine Mother complicates things to make them simple." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 17:27:58 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <346B7EEE.690F@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > What is right for one person may not be right for another. Again a lot of it > is subjective. I agree that each one of us do what each feels right. There are very few moral systems where stabbing someone in the back is considered to be right. I would hope that nobody here subscribes to such a moral system. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 17:31:04 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <346B7FA8.6E8D@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > Today's maillists evolved from BBS days and continue to do so. I agree with > Alan 1000%. I was very active in the BBS networks when they were strong. I was on the bylaws committee of RIME (and wrote their confernece host manual), and was active in the management of several other BBS networks. In all of them, cross-posting a message without explicit permission from the author was strictly forbidden. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 17:55:30 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <346B8562.63B0@sprynet.com> A. Safron wrote: > That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only > wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, but, in > the minds of some people it may be very wrong. I am having difficulty understanding what you are saying. Perhaps you have some photographs you can post here to clarify this issue. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 18:10:50 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <346B88FA.6E30@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > Here is another angle. If what I am doing is not harming anyone, then it > does not matter whether it is right or wrong in some one else's view (which > of course may be colored by tradition, philosophy, experience etc.) But when you quote someone from one mailing list in another, you don't know whether or not you are doing harm, regardless of your beliefs. You can shoot a gun into a street, not knowing whether or not someone will get hit by the bullet. But you are still culpable. Cross-posting a message without permission can easily harm people's reputations. If you don't wish to cause harm, then why not simply ask permission before you cross-post. If you don't, then that means that you believe the answer might be "no", and therefore you are disregarding the possibility of harm. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 18:12:10 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Zombies Message-ID: <346B894A.374A@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > It could be that they have incorporated an organization which has obtained > tax exempt status, which is very easy. Legally, corporations require a hierarchy, human beings who can be held accountable for the actions of the corporation. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 18:21:51 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: ULT Message-ID: <346B8B8F.121C@sprynet.com> K. Paul Johnson wrote: > I have to say I've been to couple of NYC ULT programs and while > they did have a "canned" feeling indeed, the questions > certainly didn't seem to be rehearsed. There were clearly some > new people there who asked unexpected questions, and no one got > thrown out. Many people who have been thrown out end up at the NYTS. I defend the ULT by stating that they are there for presentation, not discussion, and that I consider the groups to be complementary rather than in opposition. Unfortunately, those who answer the phones for the ULT do not feel the same; if someone accidentally contacts the ULT for a program at the NYTS, the ULT will not refer them to us, while we have a policy of always referring people to the ULT if the case is reversed. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:00:46 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114010046.01148a48@mail.eden.com> At 05:35 PM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> Today's maillists evolved from BBS days and continue to do so. I agree with >> Alan 1000%. > > I was very active in the BBS networks when they were strong. I was on >the bylaws committee of RIME (and wrote their confernece host manual), >and was active in the management of several other BBS networks. In all >of them, cross-posting a message without explicit permission from the >author was strictly forbidden. > > Bart Lidofsky Thanks for the info. As for Internet Usenets and Maillists, the issue is still evolving and how they ultimately turn out to be no one knows. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:00:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Zombies Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114010047.0114a264@mail.eden.com> At 06:39 PM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> It could be that they have incorporated an organization which has obtained >> tax exempt status, which is very easy. > > Legally, corporations require a hierarchy, human beings who can be held >accountable for the actions of the corporation. > > Bart Lidofsky In most jurisdictions, for non profit corporations at a minimum three individuals are needed to setup and operate a non profit corporation. It could be different in New York. Any NY Attorneys or Accountants here who can clarify? ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:00:49 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114010049.0114ba00@mail.eden.com> At 06:39 PM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >K. Paul Johnson wrote: >> I have to say I've been to couple of NYC ULT programs and while >> they did have a "canned" feeling indeed, the questions >> certainly didn't seem to be rehearsed. There were clearly some >> new people there who asked unexpected questions, and no one got >> thrown out. > > Many people who have been thrown out end up at the NYTS. I defend the >ULT by stating that they are there for presentation, not discussion, and >that I consider the groups to be complementary rather than in >opposition. Unfortunately, those who answer the phones for the ULT do >not feel the same; if someone accidentally contacts the ULT for a >program at the NYTS, the ULT will not refer them to us, while we have a >policy of always referring people to the ULT if the case is reversed. > > Bart Lidofsky > Glad NYTS has a positive policy regarding ULT. Some years ago, someone whom I closely know visited Krotona, Ojai and while visiting asked the person at the front desk of Krotona, directions to Krishnamurti Foundation and the person would not give directions. Ojai is not a large city like NY for someone not to know Krishnamurti Foundation's location. So even some TS is not immune to problems. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:00:51 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114010051.0114d3b4@mail.eden.com> At 06:39 PM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> Here is another angle. If what I am doing is not harming anyone, then it >> does not matter whether it is right or wrong in some one else's view (which >> of course may be colored by tradition, philosophy, experience etc.) > > But when you quote someone from one mailing list in another, you don't >know whether or not you are doing harm, regardless of your beliefs. You >can shoot a gun into a street, not knowing whether or not someone will >get hit by the bullet. But you are still culpable. Cross-posting a >message without permission can easily harm people's reputations. If you >don't wish to cause harm, then why not simply ask permission before you >cross-post. If you don't, then that means that you believe the answer >might be "no", and therefore you are disregarding the possibility of >harm. > > Bart Lidofsky > My response is very simple. I am going to do what *I* think is right, no matter what anyone else thinks. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:22:33 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <199711140121.UAA14730@mcfeely.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Vincent Beall > Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia > Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 12:09 PM > > CPickar965@aol.com wrote: I had been unable to attend since I had moved > from the Washinton area several years ago. Currently, the closest lodge > is the TS which is 150 miles away from Salisbury MD where I am now. So, > I guess theosophy will have to be the internet for me while I am here. > The internet is not very supernatural though, so it's hard to get used > to. Really enjoyed your post about ULT, since I know almost nothing about it. As for any theosophical organization on the internet, I think they are still sorting it out. What works and what doesn't. Today I got really excited about getting a book via the Internet. I was afraid I would get ripped off, but I filled in the screen form, gave Access:New Age my credit card number and several days later got my book on R. Steiner delivered to my door by UPS. It works! Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. Access: New Age has a very nice page: http://www.AccessNewAge.com/#DIRECTORY From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:34:25 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346BAAA1.74FC@eden.com> A. Safron wrote: > > Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. Let us all pray for that day! ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:09:52 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <1li8QIAgT6a0Ew9H@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <3467EAA6.4E62@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >when we divide anything into parts it can always collapse >into an infinite regression which defeats our understanding of the parts >themselves. We really have only our experiences to reflect on >ultimately, which makes the mystery of mysteries an explanation of what >the substance of our sensations is. It is all Yesod, in otherwords, and >made transcendental in Kether. What is the substance of blue, hot, cold, >or the fragrance of a rose? These are experience; a rose is a rose, is a >rose. Hurrah for Gertrude Stein ... > >Notwithstanding, my take is that the roses are the sephirot. So please >describe your understanding of spirit. If we experience spirit as having >qualities then isn't structure implied? How do you deduce this structure >and with what system of words? Why isn't soul synonomus with being? >From The Teaching: Understanding is awareness in consciousness. Knowledge is consciousness. Knowledge is Being. Understanding is recognition through awareness. Knowledge is recognition AS. The key to understanding is awareness. There are degrees of Awareness. At some times we are more aware than at others. The key to knowledge is understanding. Knowledge is consciousness. Understanding is awareness in consciousness. Because of this the first step toward knowledge is awareness of consciousness. This is the highest degree of awareness. It is Self-awareness, for we ARE consciousness. Many people, some of them teachers of others, confuse Self-awareness with Self-knowledge. I am aware of the cat, but I am not the cat. If I KNOW the cat, I AM the cat, and I am at one with God. True knowledge of this order is very rare, but we all have some part of it at some period of our lives, so that we shall recognise it, through awareness, when we meet it again. This is a paradox, for such true knowledge is Being itself, is "I Am." We are born knowing, but unaware. If you seek to know, then seek to understand. If you seek to understand, then seek to be more aware. If you seek to be more aware, then look about you at what IS, for what IS is Being, and Being is Knowledge. All this if, and only if. In Spirit is consciousness. -------------------------- AB From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:05:06 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Defining Soul (1) Message-ID: In message <3467EAA6.4E62@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >I don't see how >"spirit", which I understand as substance, can have being apart from the >host or soul. Certainly spiritual emanation conveys knowledge of the >being of it's source, but the source must have structure and not only >substance. Spirit is eternal, while soul and body die. Maybe my perception of spirit is close to the theosophical concept of monad. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:21:37 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Development Message-ID: <+1S+UQAhe6a0Ewcg@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , Nicole Suter writes >To Alan: "No. This organism is *informed* by spirit. The soul has >a sense of "self" while the informing spirit has a certainty of Being, >of I-dentity." > >That's great and very true. And it leads me to another question. >Could you please explain to me, why people are getting sick? Getting sick is part of the experience of all physical life. For new life to appear, other life must make room for it. The mechanism of Nature, unfortunately, does not appear to be "just" according to human standards of justice. So: Nature is not human. This is why I choose the approach of Kabbalah. It is pragmatic, and recognises what is, and seeks out the *laws* of being. Follow the laws, and we do better than if we try to igonre them. >"But ... and here is a topic for discussion ... perhaps the true >"evolution" [I prefer "development"] is vertical ..." > >I feel development can be vertical (and is in much cases) but mustn't. >It depends onto the direction of the development. It is probably both at once, and what we *believe* will influence how we behave. So we must continually ask ourselves, "is what we believe entirely *true*?" And where it is found not to be true, we must seek out the truth of the matter concerned. > >Peace, Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 21:12:32 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <346BB390.7A15@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > My response is very simple. I am going to do what *I* think is right, no > matter what anyone else thinks. And no matter who gets hurt. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:52:31 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: In message <346B1F0F.7361@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >BTW, the lodge meetings are not recitations of a theosophical catechism. >The titles of lectures come from a fixed standard list, but each lecture >is an orginal expostion of an advanced students understanding of the >Theosophical founders. How is an "advanced student" recognised ??? Alan :-\ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:30:33 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: In message <346A83B4.2F43@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes >There is a ULT branch in New York City which has a bookshop, a library, >an active schedule of meetings, advertises in major newspapers (but >never charges for public meetings), and where they recite rehearsed >pre-written speeches with rehearsed questions and rehearsed answers (if >you ask a question that is not part of the script, you will get thrown >out). I find it hard to believe that an anarchical organization can run >such a thing, or that the State or City of New York would allow such an >organization to own land and buidlings. > > Bart Lidofsky I agree. So can you find out who *does* own it, and by what authority they are able to speak "in the name of" something called ULT? I am sure we would all like to know! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:43:47 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: In message <199711131349.IAA11540@mcfeely.concentric.net>, "A. Safron" writes >That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, >but, in >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. Not me, not me! Alan ;-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:42:59 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: In message <3.0.3.32.19971113073937.0082b6d0@imagiware.com>, Eldon B Tucker writes >Perhaps a discussion of what are the types of Internet >publishing and what their ground rules should be >might be useful. Well now, if I put something on my website, I consider I am inviting anyone who visits the site to do what they will with the contents, else why put it there? Even if I put a copyright notice on something, I do not realistically expect any web-surfer to take any notice of it. Commercial organisations on the web use a "secure site" option to prevent things such as software piracy (viz., URLs beginning https://) so presumable there is a way for people who wish to preserve their copyright to do the same? I recently visited the Theosophical History website, where I discovered that if I wish to read anything published by them which is not on the site, I must send them the appropriate fee for the publication concerned. It seems to me, therefore, that the Internet is already developing its means of protection for copyright material, and those who worry about it will need to adopt a security strategy to avoid copyright infringement. My own writings which are available on the internet are freely avalable to anyone who cares to download them. If I don't want them to do this (or anything else after having downloaded them) then I had better not put them there in the first place. To adapt an old precept, "Let the poster beware." Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:00:12 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Busy Message-ID: <4e$IsPAsC7a0EwPf@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message , Thoa Thi-Kim Tran writes >Hi Alan, > >Sorry about the power failure. I stuck some salad tongs in my colander >helmet to greatly increase its range. Unfortunately, I was aiming toward >Baghdad but ended up hitting Cornwall by mistake. What's a girl with a >terrible sense of direction to do? Don't follow Chuck's recipes. Maybe putting spaghetti sticks into selected holes would improve the direction finding? Knitting needles? Paintbrushes? Chuck's $%"^!?? > >No hard feelings, okay? None at all. Baghdad have asked me why they receives the burnt remains of some salad tongs .... > >Thoa :o) Alan (tee hee) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:28:54 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: In message <346A81B6.2D83@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky writes > I think you misunderstand. Eldon was talking about requiring permission >for cross-posting. In other words, if someone writes a message on >theos-l, then somoene should not post or quote in on theos-world without >permission of the original writer; after all, if the original writer had >wanted it on theos-l, s/he could have posted it him/herself. Not if the original writer did not subscribe to theos-l, or had no knowledge of theos-l. In any case, in the real world of cyberspace, people are forwarding messages and e-mail all the time. I could say, for example, that this e-mail is entirely my copyright, and that you may not, under any circumstances, quote it in your reply, notwithstanding that all the subscribers to theos-l will have been able to read it. You could forward it to any other mailing list I know nothing about, and I would probably not discover that you had done so. Technically, when we quote an e-mail which itself contains a quote, which could also contain yet another quote, we are cross-posting *within* the list. Do you (or Eldon) think we should not be able to do this? The various mailing lists are, IMHO, vehicels for free and open discussion. If any one of them is not, it should state the fact clearly. If, OTOH, it *is* - then why should the listconcerned, or any of its subscribers, object to their contributions being cross-posted to other (possibly) interested parties? ?????? Does someone have a problem here ?????? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 00:12:32 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114061232.00e5d64c@mail.eden.com> At 10:15 PM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >In message <346A83B4.2F43@sprynet.com>, Bart Lidofsky > writes >>There is a ULT branch in New York City which has a bookshop, a library, >>an active schedule of meetings, advertises in major newspapers (but >>never charges for public meetings), and where they recite rehearsed >>pre-written speeches with rehearsed questions and rehearsed answers (if >>you ask a question that is not part of the script, you will get thrown >>out). I find it hard to believe that an anarchical organization can run >>such a thing, or that the State or City of New York would allow such an >>organization to own land and buidlings. >> >> Bart Lidofsky > >I agree. So can you find out who *does* own it, and by what authority >they are able to speak "in the name of" something called ULT? I am sure >we would all like to know! > >Alan All corporate incorporation documents are public record and also ownership records are. But it is also possible the corporation totally unrelated officially to ULT may make the premises to be used by ULT. The info can be obtained with a little time and money. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 01:17:59 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul (1) Message-ID: <346BED17.39D5@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <3467EAA6.4E62@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall > writes > >I don't see how > >"spirit", which I understand as substance, can have being apart from the > >host or soul. Certainly spiritual emanation conveys knowledge of the > >being of it's source, but the source must have structure and not only > >substance. > > Spirit is eternal, while soul and body die. Maybe my perception of > spirit is close to the theosophical concept of monad. Leibntz has defined monads as simple souls, so the question is; what is the substance of the monad. I believe it is a spiritual being, which referres to it having structure(soul) and composed of spirit(substance). Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 02:58:56 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <346C04C0.65F2@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <3467EAA6.4E62@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall > writes > >when we divide anything into parts it can always collapse > >into an infinite regression which defeats our understanding of the parts > >themselves. We really have only our experiences to reflect on > >ultimately, which makes the mystery of mysteries an explanation of what > >the substance of our sensations is. It is all Yesod, in otherwords, and > >made transcendental in Kether. What is the substance of blue, hot, cold, > >or the fragrance of a rose? These are experience; a rose is a rose, is a > >rose. > > Hurrah for Gertrude Stein ... > > > >Notwithstanding, my take is that the roses are the sephirot. So please > >describe your understanding of spirit. If we experience spirit as having > >qualities then isn't structure implied? How do you deduce this structure > >and with what system of words? Why isn't soul synonomus with being? > > >From The Teaching: > > Understanding is awareness in consciousness. Understanding(Binah) should be dubbed Intellegence; havind the nature of being understood... having "being". > Knowledge is consciousness. Knowledge(Daath) is the combining of Understandings to form a simple system of understanding, a system which gives place for the existance of Honor(Hod); the meaning of Knowledge is in Hod... Mind(Chokmah) is built from Knowledges(Daath's). > Knowledge is Being. The most elementary notion of being is Binah which is Gertrudes rose. > Understanding is recognition through awareness. The outer form of awareness is Chokmah informed by Kether. The inner form is the meaning held in Chessed informed by Chokmah. > Knowledge is recognition AS. > > The key to understanding is awareness. There are degrees of > Awareness. At some times we are more aware than at others. > > The key to knowledge is understanding. Very true. > > Knowledge is consciousness. I don't agree. >Understanding is awareness in consciousness. Conciousness is awareness, Understandings are the "is's" that we are aware of... the objects we must assume to really be in order that we have thoughts at all. Something like, Understanding is the 'word' or object of thought in consciousness. > Because of this the first step toward knowledge > is awareness of consciousness. This is the highest degree of > awareness. It is Self-awareness, for we ARE consciousness. To know you are aware is very mundane. It is at the lowest level of what is human. Perception of the higher reality through Kether is to actually be aware of the true meaning,; Kether is in Malkuth(the Kingdom). > Many > people, some of them teachers of others, confuse Self-awareness > with Self-knowledge. I am aware of the cat, but I am not the > cat. If I KNOW the cat, I AM the cat, and I am at one with God. Saints and such have "funny" ego boundaries. God is; so when we afirm our own existance we commune with Him; to pray effectively is to experience this, (to use an example which can be problematical) HPB in The Key to Theosophy states that the prayer of the Theosophist is an expression of "will". > > True knowledge of this order is very rare, but we all have some > part of it at some period of our lives, so that we shall > recognise it, through awareness, when we meet it again. This is > a paradox, for such true knowledge is Being itself, is "I Am." > > We are born knowing, but unaware. The objects of infantile consciousness are holographic and not concepts pinched into 'words'. Awareness is the very nature in infantcy; Binah and Daath come later. > > If you seek to know, then seek to understand. If you seek to > understand, then seek to be more aware. If you seek to be more > aware, then look about you at what IS, for what IS is Being, and > Being is Knowledge. All this if, and only if. > > In Spirit is consciousness. For me the masculine Sephirot are the "happy" soul (Heart, Soul, Mind, Strength, Sense) Tipareth, Chessed, Chokmah, Netzak, Kether.... these are in the order that they emanate from the center of being; the direction of self toward Kingdom, the direction of giving. Peace be with you, Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 04:15:12 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346C16A0.6FFD@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <346B1F0F.7361@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall > writes > >BTW, the lodge meetings are not recitations of a theosophical catechism. > >The titles of lectures come from a fixed standard list, but each lecture > >is an orginal expostion of an advanced students understanding of the > >Theosophical founders. > > How is an "advanced student" recognised ??? > Well, the lodge that I attended was small, so it seemed that one simply quieried some of the regular members that were performing the duties of the lodge if one wanted to deliver a lecture. Although, one of the elder members of the lodge did ask me to read something before the lodge. I was never curious about organizational structure and was glad that is wasn't bothersome to the functioning of the lodge. I was very content to listen to lectures and participate in the questions afterward, and spontanious questions can be asked by anyone, it is a public meeting. This all makes for a very service oriented presence. However, I really do appreciate the free exchange of ideas offered in other theosophical organisations, and I don't think that a ULT lodge could be an internet venture, it is much more personal than that which is more a failing of the internet than a special virtue of the ULT. Actually gathering together with other theosophists is much more satisfing than reading and typing. Someone made a comment about anarchy in theosophy; well, the ULT members are very largely in favor of order in the universe and Theosophy itself, although, privately and in some ways in the study group there is a very magical effect from interaction with members. Many are seeking adept understanding. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 04:33:40 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <346C1AF4.1C67@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > The various mailing lists are, IMHO, vehicels for free and open > discussion. If any one of them is not, it should state the fact > clearly. If, OTOH, it *is* - then why should the listconcerned, or any > of its subscribers, object to their contributions being cross-posted to > other (possibly) interested parties? > > ?????? Does someone have a problem here ?????? Not me...... Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 05:25:03 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <346C26FF.1677@dmv.com> A. Safron wrote: > > > Really enjoyed your post about ULT, since I know almost nothing about it. > As for any theosophical organization on the internet, I think they are still > sorting it out. What works and what doesn't. Welcome back! Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 07:33:48 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (1) Message-ID: <199711141335.IAA10313@newman.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Vincent Beall > Subject: Re: Defining Soul (1) > Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 1:26 AM > > Leibntz has defined monads as simple souls, so the question is; what is > the substance of the monad. I believe it is a spiritual being, which > referres to it having structure(soul) and composed of spirit(substance). > It is the being behind the mask. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 07:30:01 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <199711141335.IAA10304@newman.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Dr. A.M.Bain > Subject: Re: What's right? > Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 9:15 PM > > In message <199711131349.IAA11540@mcfeely.concentric.net>, "A. Safron" > writes > >That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only > >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, > >but, in > >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. > > Not me, not me! > Alan, have your energies returned? A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 09:44:49 -0800 From: techndex@pacbell.net Subject: Re: Hi gang!! missing you!! Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19971114094449.006aa888@pacbell.net> At 03:09 AM 11/13/97 -0500, you wrote: >Hi Estrella, mi amiga, > >Como esta? And if you think I can speak Spanish after this, you'll be >greatly disappointed! :o) Welcome back. I just came back to the list >myself. It has changed greatly. Everyone must be out playing tennis. > >Thoa :o) Thoa, Out playing tennis? Oh, I wish!!! ;-D This is my first post since September when I unexpectedly left in the middle of a discussion to go off and have another heart attack, along with congestive heart failure, pneumonia, and finally bypass surgery. Am still recovering from bypass surgery and can't type very much (especially being that they slashed one of my arms to get an artery to replace a blocked coronary). So I've been quietly lurking since I've been out of the hospital. It's good to see you back here!! I just loved reading your remarks on Mondria(a)n. ;-D It's good seeing you back here, too, Estrella! Lynn *********************************** Lynn Moncrief (techndex@pacbell.net) TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing *********************************** From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 09:46:00 -0800 From: techndex@pacbell.net Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: <3.0.2.32.19971114094600.006aa888@pacbell.net> At 08:54 AM 11/13/97 -0500, A. Safron wrote: >That's true, Bart. If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is legal, but, in >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. > >A. Safron I just couldn't resist responding to this!!!! Now that I have a big "zipper" incision going down my chest, I guess I can't go back to professional belly dancing where I really did wear a navel jewel. (This was years ago.) ;-D But, come to think of it, I could start a new career as stripper and call myself "The Stripper with the Zipper". ;-D Glad to see you back here too. Lynn *********************************** Lynn Moncrief (techndex@pacbell.net) TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing *********************************** From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:19:08 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971114131907_1152887669@mrin45.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-13 16:55:06 EST, you write: >But hearing about that principle may remind us of something we know inwardly, >but don't have full conscious access to yet. Or sometimes we *do* know in >our >heart of hearts we are acting against our conscience, but because "everyone >else does it" we compromise our better knowing. > >BTW, Chuck, your serious side seems to be coming out lately. I personally >find that refreshing. Tricksters are great for stirring up the stodgy old >prim and proper folks now and then, but too much trickery is tiring. > I'm inclined to think that much of the stuff we term "ethics" is the result of conditioning and becomes instinctive. Other things are just practical. For example, it is much less work to be honest. C.S. Lewis was of the opinion that the values of his day were part of some natural order and as a result his Mere Christianity is based on arguments that are fundamentally flawed only because he died in 1963 he did not live to see the flaws exposed by the passage of time. The nature vs. nuture argument has been around for ages and will continue long after we have reincarnated. I'm glad someone enjoys my serious side. I find it terribly pompous and boring so I try to keep it well hidden. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:26:08 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971114132605_259255115@mrin84.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-13 23:54:40 EST, you write: > There are very few moral systems where stabbing someone in the back is >considered to be right. I would hope that nobody here subscribes to such >a moral system. > > Bart Lidofsky > I can think of lots of such systems. And if it were to serve my purposes... To quote the Book of Lord Shang, "When you are willing to do that which others are ashamed to do, therein lies an advantage." Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:32:39 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971114133239_138601080@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-14 05:06:11 EST, you write: >My own writings which are available on the internet are freely avalable >to anyone who cares to download them. If I don't want them to do this >(or anything else after having downloaded them) then I had better not >put them there in the first place. To adapt an old precept, > >"Let the poster beware." > >Alan My feelings as well. I operate under the assumption that anything I put on the net is far game because no matter what security system I would use, someone would be able to crack it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:53:16 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: ethical systems Message-ID: <971114135316_-1173398405@mrin47> In a previous post I made reference to C.S. Lewis and the concept of moral law as an innate tendency in humans. I used Lewis as an example because his book is the most easily accessible and readable work on the subject. And like I said in that post, he did not live long enough to see events refute all of his examples. As I have said before, there are any number of ways of looking at things and ethics is no exception. So, in good theosophical fashion, let me define the term. Ethics is a system, any system, by which an individual or group makes a judgement as to the propriety of a given action or set of actions. Now that means that a person may be acting perfectly ethically within his own framework while simultaneously violating every precept of somebody else's. This will, of course, cause great trauma in the psyche of the other person if he finds out about it, but unless there is a significant personal connection to the first person, that individual will not be bothered at all. Case in point. I am heavily into S/M, as everyone who knows me knows because I'm something of an activist in that area. If my grandparents were alive, it would cause them great distress, so while they lived I hid my interests from them. But it is of no importance to me that the person down the block does not approve because that person has no vital connection to me that I do not wish severed. On the contrary, I may enjoy rubbing his face in the fact merely to annoy him, because, as Oswald Spengler once said, "When one has an opportunity to annoy people, one should do so." Now that statement will actually cause a great number of my S/M comrades great upsetness because they do not believe that one should be that open. And at that point an impasse occurs because they cannot stop me and I don't care if they approve or not, so they have the choice of shutting up or venting their impotent fury. The situation is likewise true in the TS. The TS, for lots of weird, historic reasons, objects officially to people learning to do psychic stuff, but I write books specficially teaching that. The powers that be are not happy, but do I stop writing because of that? Of course not. The fact is that the ethical system of one individual or group is never binding on any other unless the first has the power to enforce their will. Lacking that power, all that is left is the force of persuasion and that only works on those who are willing to be so persuaded. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:04:49 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114190449.00b7e3c4@mail.eden.com> At 04:14 AM 11/14/97 -0500, Vincent Beall wrote: >Actually gathering >together with other theosophists is much more satisfing than reading and >typing. > When this is feasible, it has been my experience too. Tha't is why I have more than once mentioned that we need to find ways to get more of the MOL's to attend local groups when feasible. ..M... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 13:08:08 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: ethical systems (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971114130808.0086c1c0@imagiware.com> Chuck: >Ethics is a system, any system, by which an individual or group makes a >judgement as to the propriety of a given action or set of actions. Agreed. It's an attempt to put the action in the context of a bigger picture. The action is weighed and balanced for various standards like fairness, justice, appropriateness, consistency, etc. There's an attempt to relate the external event to various ideals and standards, even though a perfect conclusion cannot always be arrived at. >Now that means that a person may be acting perfectly ethically within his own >framework while simultaneously violating every precept of somebody else's. Ethics are similar to thought. Someone arrives an idea about something using mind, while an ethical judgement uses values. Someone may say ethically "this is right or better" and mentally "this is a true idea or closer to the truth". Two people, from different cultural backgrounds, may come to different ethical values; they may also arrive at different ideas about what is going on. I'd say that in terms of opinion or thought, it's possible to arrive at ideas that are closer to the truth -- not all opinions are equally in accord with reality, even if everyone is free to believe whatever they want. The same is true, I'd continue, with ethics -- not all judgements or values are equally in accord with what is truly right, even though everyone is free to value things in their own way. > This will, of course, cause great trauma in the psyche of the other person >if he finds out about it, but unless there is a significant personal >connection to the first person, that individual will not be bothered at all. The only trauma that I can see is where someone refuses to acknowledge that people value things differently, just as they think differently. The only source of conflict here is with regard to the troublesome area of intervention. If someone else is involved in something clearly wrong, when and how should we intervene in their free will and belief that what they're doing is fine? Do we report shoplifters? Do we get involved in stopping domestic abuse? Do we say anything when a politician openly lies to us on television? The other person may be doing what *they think is right*, whereas from our viewpoint we see them as doing something dead wrong. When is their right to operate by their own ethics become our problem? >Case in point. I am heavily into S/M, as everyone who knows me knows because >I'm something of an activist in that area. If my grandparents were alive, it >would cause them great distress, so while they lived I hid my interests from >them. But it is of no importance to me that the person down the block does >not approve because that person has no vital connection to me that I do not >wish severed. On the contrary, I may enjoy rubbing his face in the fact >merely to annoy him, because, as Oswald Spengler once said, "When one has an >opportunity to annoy people, one should do so." That'll only be a problem -- your preferences -- if you involve young children. Why a problem with children? Because they may not be able to tell the difference between right and wrong yet, they don't have sufficiently developed ability to judge and apply ethics to look out for themselves. >Now that statement will actually cause a great number of my S/M comrades >great upsetness because they do not believe that one should be that open. They're probably preferring caution since being open about this could bring down the wrath of conservative Christians upon one. >And at that point an impasse occurs because they cannot stop me and I don't >care if they approve or not, so they have the choice of shutting up or >venting their impotent fury. Yes, you can do what you like, even if it pissed off or outrages or flusters others. Again, people will be making two decisions: Is this right or wrong? And if wrong, is this so terrible that intervention is needed? If so, you have a fight on your hands. >The situation is likewise true in the TS. > >The TS, for lots of weird, historic reasons, objects officially to people >learning to do psychic stuff, but I write books specifically teaching that. > The powers that be are not happy, but do I stop writing because of that? Of >course not. I'm not sure that the reasons are "weird and historic", but the whole issue of when is good or helpful to cultivate them and when it's best to do away with them -- the issue is complex and has been discussed on theos-l in detail before a number of times. We could pick a type of knowledge that all of us might agree is harmful, and consider what we'd do about it. If someone wants to publish a book on ways to easily make bombs, or a book on ways to commit murder and never get caught, should we allow it? The Internet does. Plato wouldn't, I think. I'd be against it as a general principle. Take the example of scientists creating devices of mass destruction. Should they decline to invent them on ethical grounds? >The fact is that the ethical system of one individual or group is never >binding on any other unless the first has the power to enforce their will. True. And that will is enforced by our legal system and by peer pressure in society. Things that are generally considered to be the most fair, just, equitable, etc. are promoted, although no social system is bug free -- there are always exceptions and numerous examples of unfairness, injustice, etc. in spite of the best intentions of the people working in the system. > Lacking that power, all that is left is the force of persuasion and that >only works on those who are willing to be so persuaded. Also true. Sometimes things are on an honor code, rather than controlled by physical force. A simple example is a newspaper vending machine that takes a single quarter and *assumes* you'll only take one newspaper out of it. Another is the idea of a line at a movie theater, with the assumption that it's most fair that the first people to arrive are the first to enter and pick their seats, with the assumption that you'll get in line rather than cut the line in front of everyone. The most basic and simple rule of ethics is the golden rule, to treat others as you'd have them treat you, and it provides a good starting point for developing more sophisticated ethics and better skills in handling the events of life. Most people, I think, avoid having to consider ethics too closely for the same reason that they avoid thinking too thoroughly about things: they don't want to face internal contradictions and bugs in their values, standards and in their opinions and beliefs. We're not most people, though, and I'd expect us seekers to question everything, continually working on and reworking our ever-growing ethical standards and ideas about life. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 14:00:05 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Hi gang!! missing you!! Message-ID: Hi Lynn: Lynn: >Out playing tennis? Oh, I wish!!! ;-D This is my first post since September >when I unexpectedly left in the middle of a discussion to go off and have >another heart attack, along with congestive heart failure, pneumonia, and >finally bypass surgery. Am still recovering from bypass surgery and can't >type very much (especially being that they slashed one of my arms to get an >artery to replace a blocked coronary). So I've been quietly lurking since >I've been out of the hospital. I'm glad you're back, Lynn. This is the same Lynn that was on the Wildefire@aol.com, right? It's nice to read your warm tone.:o) If there's anything that I'm a sucker for, it's warmth. A person can always wrap me around his/her finger just by oozing warmth. I was just going to lurk, then had to respond to Eiichi (who else is going to talk about art?), and also made some brief remarks here and there. If this warmth keeps up, I'm going to be a typing maniac again. Boy, will all those theosophists be irritated! >I just >loved reading your remarks on Mondria(a)n. ;-D Eiichi and I have moved our posts off the list since it was getting heavily art-oriented. If you're reading this, Eiichi, I will respond to your last e-mail this weekend, when I have the time to type a good response to it. Recuperate fully, okay, so that you can play tennis!:o) Thoa From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 16:20:53 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114222053.006aa160@mail.eden.com> At 09:49 AM 11/12/97 -0500, K. Paul Johnson wrote: >Actually, Wadia was a stalwart supporter of Annie Besant for >some years after ULT was founded in America in 1909. He was >interned with her by the British in WWI. It was sometime >later, 1919 if I recall correctly, that he went over to ULT. >He quickly became the leading figure in that group and remained >so until his death in the 1950s. > Thanks for the info. Was curious about the circumstances of his leaving TS(Adyar). mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 16:28:00 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Dreams (Oops!) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971114222800.00c829b4@mail.eden.com> At 09:32 AM 11/10/97 -0500, you wrote: > >So the gist of my dream interpretation is that I was being >warned that an unforeseen force was heading straight for me, >and that if I didn't stop what I was doing [e.g. caring what >fundamentalist Theosophists think about the work and arguing >with them] that there would be a big wreck. I don't think it >was accidental that the train and car were both heading at me >from the right, given the fundamentalist nature of the >attacks. Reading Pratt's >stuff was a revelation as for the first time such an attack >provoked absolutely no reaction in me. It was such a relief to >know that there was no reason to reply to this one. > Another angle/interpretation. Some force bigger than the train, is guarding and protecting you and alerting you to just watch out lest the dumb train trashes the nice car and its more precious occupant(s). As I have pointed out again and again, those beings who are much ahead of us in evolution does not care if we make mistakes (which we are bound to from time to time) in any of our judgments and conclusions, but always are supportive and grateful for anyone who is helping the "orphan Humanity" in any little way possible it is all that matters. In a matter of business like manner, it is the results that count. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 15:33:29 -0800 From: Titus Roth Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: <199711142333.PAA21121@palrel1.hp.com> Well you artist types are a little beyond me, but here's my contribution to the general culture: Recently a guy in Paris nearly got away with stealing several paintings from the Louvre. However, after planning the crime, getting in and out past security, he was captured only 2 blocks away when his Econoline ran out of gas. When asked how he could mastermind such a crime and then make such an obvious error, he replied: (brace yourself) (this is going to hurt.) (really bad.) "I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh." (Oooh, those flying rotten tomatoes are messy .... dodge ... duck) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 16:17:28 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: AAAAAggggghhhhhh-ha-ha-ha!!!! Snort, snort...:oD My dear Titus....you're killing me!!! >Well you artist types are a little beyond me, but here's my contribution >to the general culture: > >Recently a guy in Paris nearly got away with stealing several paintings >from the Louvre. However, after planning the crime, getting in and out >past security, he was captured only 2 blocks away when his Econoline ran >out of gas. When asked how he could mastermind such a crime and then >make such an obvious error, he replied: > >(brace yourself) > >(this is going to hurt.) > >(really bad.) > >"I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh." > >(Oooh, those flying rotten tomatoes are messy .... dodge ... duck) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:16:06 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Hi gang!! missing you!! Message-ID: In message , Thoa Thi-Kim Tran writes >If this warmth keeps up, I'm >going to be a typing maniac again. Boy, will all those theosophists be >irritated! Not all, not all ... Alan - and welcome back! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:27:32 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: In message <199711142333.PAA21121@palrel1.hp.com>, Titus Roth writes >"I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh." > >(Oooh, those flying rotten tomatoes are messy .... dodge ... duck) AAAAAAARRRRRGH! Alan [lobs ancient pineapple] From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:02:59 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (1) Message-ID: In message <346BED17.39D5@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >Leibntz has defined monads as simple souls, so the question is; what is >the substance of the monad. I believe it is a spiritual being, which >referres to it having structure(soul) and composed of spirit(substance). Ah. There we differ. While I aould accept that spirit *may* have substance, the word "substance" would have to be used in a highly specialised sense, and would, I propose, be of a ver fine substance not discernable to us while in incarnation. Over ..... Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:14:43 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: In message <346C04C0.65F2@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes and quotes (>> lines): >Understanding(Binah) should be dubbed Intellegence; havind the nature of >being understood... having "being". It is also "insight of a discriminatory kind" - a multifaceted word! > >> Knowledge is consciousness. > >Knowledge(Daath) is the combining of Understandings to form a simple >system of understanding, a system which gives place for the existance >of Honor(Hod); the meaning of Knowledge is in Hod... Huh? Have you downloaded my "keys"? Maybe from there we could take some agreed definitions ... > >Mind(Chokmah) is built from Knowledges(Daath's). Nope. > >> Knowledge is Being. > >The most elementary notion of being is Binah which is Gertrudes rose. > >> Understanding is recognition through awareness. > >The outer form of awareness is Chokmah informed by Kether. The inner >form is the meaning held in Chessed informed by Chokmah. I really cannot follow your concepts here at all. They are like no Kabbalah tthat I have ever studied. > >> >> The key to knowledge is understanding. > >Very true. At least we agree on something! > >> >> Knowledge is consciousness. > >I don't agree. Pity. > >>Understanding is awareness in consciousness. > >Conciousness is awareness, Understandings are the "is's" that we are >aware of... >the objects we must assume to really be in order that we have thoughts >at all. Something like, Understanding is the 'word' or object of thought >in consciousness. Consciousness is a condition, awareness is an activity. they cannot be the same thing. > >> Because of this the first step toward knowledge >> is awareness of consciousness. This is the highest degree of >> awareness. It is Self-awareness, for we ARE consciousness. > >To know you are aware is very mundane. It is at the lowest level of what >is human. You have changed the meanining of the words here. > Perception of the higher reality through Kether is to actually >be aware of the true meaning,; Kether is in Malkuth(the Kingdom). And Malkuth is in Kether; cf. the serpent of wisdom in the TS logo. What you are trying to say here escapes me. > >> Many >> people, some of them teachers of others, confuse Self-awareness >> with Self-knowledge. I am aware of the cat, but I am not the >> cat. If I KNOW the cat, I AM the cat, and I am at one with God. > >Saints and such have "funny" ego boundaries. > >God is; so when we afirm our own existance we commune with Him; to pray >effectively is to experience this, (to use an example which can be >problematical) HPB in The Key to Theosophy states that the prayer of the >Theosophist is an expression of "will". Then I am a theosophist, but not a Theosophist! >> > >For me the masculine Sephirot are the "happy" soul (Heart, Soul, Mind, >Strength, Sense) >Tipareth, Chessed, Chokmah, Netzak, Kether.... these are in the order >that they emanate from the center of being; the direction of self toward >Kingdom, the direction of giving. > This is, I regret to say, gobbledegook to me. No offence intended. > >Peace be with you, And with you. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:22:49 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: In message <199711141335.IAA10304@newman.concentric.net>, "A. Safron" writes >If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only >> >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is >legal, >> >but, in >> >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. >> >> Not me, not me! >> >Alan, have your energies returned? > No, just my memories ... Hehehehehehe! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 20:09:59 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <346CF666.5373@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > > >For me the masculine Sephirot are the "happy" soul (Heart, Soul, Mind, > >Strength, Sense) > >Tipareth, Chessed, Chokmah, Netzak, Kether.... these are in the order > >that they emanate from the center of being; the direction of self toward > >Kingdom, the direction of giving. > > > This is, I regret to say, gobbledegook to me. No offence intended. > > > >Peace be with you, > > And with you. Well, I am sorry that my ideas are rather opague, but I am reinterpreting the Tree. I have been told that the Tree is open to interpretation, and that the system of correspondences absorbs all symbolic systems. My view is definitely non-traditional as I would replace or append to the diagram of the Tree a fractal composed of Platonic Solids. It is terribly dfficult to communicate why this new geometrical interpretation should be taken seriously. The solids, their compound forms, and the fractal itself require study for a lengthy period in order that they be imagined, and the relationships that they have to each other and Kabbalah be understood. Reinterpreting the five parts of the soul to be the five masculine sephirot is a product of reflecting on the many correspondences between the Tree and the geometry. I know what I have said probably doesn't resovle anything for you, but I would like your help in contemplating the masculine sephirot. If we ignore the names of the traditional parts of the soul: Yechidah, Chayah, Neshamah, Ruach, Nefesh... simply agree that the soul has five parts, and look for those parts in the commandment to love G-d where He is to be loved with all heart, soul, mind, strength (adding to this the senses) the I see a refection of the masculine sephirot. Tipareth-beauty= Heart Chesed-mercy/love= (spiritual)soul Chokmah-wisdom= mind Netzach-victory= strength Kether-crown= (supernatural)senses I think this is a major reinterpretation , but a coherent one which also reflects a natural geometry (which is unfortunately difficult to illustrate). Please give me some thoughts about how well such an interpretaion might be tolerated. I may be the king lemming on this, but everyone need not go off the cliff with me. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 20:43:27 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: <346D6EBE.48D1@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Thoa wrote: > > Hi Lynn: > > Lynn: > >I just > >loved reading your remarks on Mondria(a)n. ;-D > > Eiichi and I have moved our posts off the list since it was getting heavily > art-oriented. If you're reading this, Eiichi, I will respond to your last > e-mail this weekend, when I have the time to type a good response to it. > > Recuperate fully, okay, so that you can play tennis!:o) > > Thoa > Hi Lynn, Thank you for your attention to our artie exchange of neo-plastic square ideas. We will be back soon! Drpsionic wrote: "Oswald Spengler once said, 'When one has an opportunity to annoy people, one should do so.'" Let's do that! Hi Thoa, Do not worry about it, thoa. We can take our time. Life is long but very very short like a splash of breaker on the seashore. A moment can contain eternity. We have enormous time. Let's spend our time in cosmic time. > Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 15:33:29 -0800 > From: Titus Roth > Subject: Re: Mondrian > Message-ID: <199711142333.PAA21121@palrel1.hp.com> Titus wrote: > > Well you artist types are a little beyond me, but here's my contribution > to the general culture: > > Recently a guy in Paris nearly got away with stealing several paintings > from the Louvre. However, after planning the crime, getting in and out > past security, he was captured only 2 blocks away when his Econoline ran > out of gas. When asked how he could mastermind such a crime and then > make such an obvious error, he replied: > > (brace yourself) > > (this is going to hurt.) > > (really bad.) > > "I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh." > > (Oooh, those flying rotten tomatoes are messy .... dodge ... duck) > > ------------------------------ > I think the guy should have entered the Louvre restoration department first and got a skill, and then make a fake Monet to to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh.$B!!(J^-^; From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 14:49:44 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <199711151338.IAA07436@cliff.concentric.net> ---------- > From: ramadoss@eden.com > Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia > Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 7:48 PM > > A. Safron wrote: > > > > Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. > > Let us all pray for that day! > It is something I've had on my mind for quite some time. But I don't know what kind of tech knowledge, software, hardware, and personnel are necessary to operate a system where you can purchase items off the net and have them UPS'd (private mail service in the US). All or part of this may be beyond the resources of TSA at this time. But I could see many book providers using this method in the future. It works for me, since I don't have to leave my keyboard and can keep working. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 07:52:49 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <199711151351.IAA09000@cliff.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics > Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 12:28 PM > > In a message dated 97-11-13 23:54:40 EST, you write: > > > There are very few moral systems where stabbing someone in the back is > >considered to be right. I would hope that nobody here subscribes to such > >a moral system. > > > > Bart Lidofsky You can hope . . . but it's really none of your business if they do subscribe to spying, trolling, manipulating a mailing list that doesn't belong to them, trying to get people to post incriminating statements, besides the more bloody and graphic act of stabbing people in the back. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 08:19:03 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971115141903.01172fa4@mail.eden.com> At 08:39 AM 11/15/97 -0500, you wrote: >---------- >> From: ramadoss@eden.com >> Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia >> Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 7:48 PM >> >> A. Safron wrote: >> > >> > Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. >> >> Let us all pray for that day! >> >It is something I've had on my mind for quite some time. >But I don't know what kind of tech knowledge, software, >hardware, and personnel are necessary to operate a system >where you can purchase items off the net and have them >UPS'd (private mail service in the US). All or part of this >may be beyond the resources of TSA at this time. > >But I could see many book providers using this method in >the future. It works for me, since I don't have to leave my >keyboard and can keep working. > >A. Safron I don't know. First they should have a direct e-mail so the potential buyers can contact them direct. Couple of weeks ago when I called TPH I was told by the person who answered that all their mail goes thru the TSA e-mail address. I don't know if this is to make sure that someone centrally sees all e-mail traffic to Olcott or they have not gotten to setting up an email access. In my city, it costs $10.00/month for unlimited Internet access with FTP and all the bells and whistles. Let us all continue to pray (I personally do not believe in prayers, but it can cause no harm!!!) for the day when on-line purchase is possible. ..M... PS: With the competition heating up, there is going to be a price discount war on Internet. Also the book dealers dont like publishers trying to sell directly to customers at a discount. So we will have to see how it all develops. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 10:36:58 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: UFOs & the Meaning of Life: Myth or Fact? Message-ID: <199711151635.LAA14421@marconi.concentric.net> I logged onto Theos-l at this time to purposely comment on an article in the Winter Issue of Quest Magazine, titled, "UFOs and the Meaning of Life", by Mr. Ronald Story. I will log off soon after posting this, as this is a very busy time for me. The article is packed with many good points, which have been expressed many times before. One in particular was, "Think for yourself." I would like to take off from his article and present some other ideas perhaps worth considering. Mr. Story quotes Jung as saying UFOs "Have become living myths". Yet many individuals claims to be abducted, have alien implants from their bodies removed, scoop marks on their bodies, psychological trauma from examinations and some even claim to have their fetuses removed for inter-planetary breeding purposes. Myth or fact? Hodson, many years ago, wrote of fairies, nature spirits and angels, usually considered the subjects of children's books, rather than real entities. They could only be seen if one was clairvoyant, which was suspect itself. This same idea was echoed by the Findhorn Community in Scotland in the 60's. Peter and Eileen Caddy communicated with the "devas" and nature spirits, while another member was even privileged to talk to Pan himself. Myth or fact? CW Leadbeater wrote in his book, "Science of the Sacraments", of working with the angelic kingdom. Of orders of angels that only exist to do the Lord's bidding and sending healing out to the world. Myth or fact? And now for the big one. Many people have claimed that highly advanced beings exist, helping humanity and taking on pupils and disciples to help them in their work. They call them the "Masters." Myth or fact? The late, great Carl Sagan had his project SETI antennas aimed at the stars - listening. For one sign that there was life beyond this planet. As a scientist, he scoffed at those who readily accepted the idea of aliens and UFOs, claiming he was looking for that "smoking gun", that alien ashtray that someone brought back from an abduction episode. Jumping back to Mr. Story's original idea, we must all think for ourselves on these issues. Fairies, elves, sprites, aliens, angels, Masters. Quite a cast of characters. If the God/Goddess is writing this novel, they're pretty damn good writers. Most people that have seen a UFO or been abducted are labeled as kooks. There were demonstrations in downtown Chicago last year, where these very people marched to demand respect. Because of my research, I have had dreams of being on spaceships and meeting aliens. I am not ashamed to say they scared the piss out of me. Personally, I think the idea of relegating UFOs, spaceships, aliens, beings from other planets, or even other dimensions, to simple myth rather sad. That means we are terribly alone in this universe. Over and out . . . A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:14:43 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: In message <346C04C0.65F2@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes and quotes (>> lines): >Understanding(Binah) should be dubbed Intellegence; havind the nature of >being understood... having "being". It is also "insight of a discriminatory kind" - a multifaceted word! > >> Knowledge is consciousness. > >Knowledge(Daath) is the combining of Understandings to form a simple >system of understanding, a system which gives place for the existance >of Honor(Hod); the meaning of Knowledge is in Hod... Huh? Have you downloaded my "keys"? Maybe from there we could take some agreed definitions ... > >Mind(Chokmah) is built from Knowledges(Daath's). Nope. > >> Knowledge is Being. > >The most elementary notion of being is Binah which is Gertrudes rose. > >> Understanding is recognition through awareness. > >The outer form of awareness is Chokmah informed by Kether. The inner >form is the meaning held in Chessed informed by Chokmah. I really cannot follow your concepts here at all. They are like no Kabbalah tthat I have ever studied. > >> >> The key to knowledge is understanding. > >Very true. At least we agree on something! > >> >> Knowledge is consciousness. > >I don't agree. Pity. > >>Understanding is awareness in consciousness. > >Conciousness is awareness, Understandings are the "is's" that we are >aware of... >the objects we must assume to really be in order that we have thoughts >at all. Something like, Understanding is the 'word' or object of thought >in consciousness. Consciousness is a condition, awareness is an activity. they cannot be the same thing. > >> Because of this the first step toward knowledge >> is awareness of consciousness. This is the highest degree of >> awareness. It is Self-awareness, for we ARE consciousness. > >To know you are aware is very mundane. It is at the lowest level of what >is human. You have changed the meanining of the words here. > Perception of the higher reality through Kether is to actually >be aware of the true meaning,; Kether is in Malkuth(the Kingdom). And Malkuth is in Kether; cf. the serpent of wisdom in the TS logo. What you are trying to say here escapes me. > >> Many >> people, some of them teachers of others, confuse Self-awareness >> with Self-knowledge. I am aware of the cat, but I am not the >> cat. If I KNOW the cat, I AM the cat, and I am at one with God. > >Saints and such have "funny" ego boundaries. > >God is; so when we afirm our own existance we commune with Him; to pray >effectively is to experience this, (to use an example which can be >problematical) HPB in The Key to Theosophy states that the prayer of the >Theosophist is an expression of "will". Then I am a theosophist, but not a Theosophist! >> > >For me the masculine Sephirot are the "happy" soul (Heart, Soul, Mind, >Strength, Sense) >Tipareth, Chessed, Chokmah, Netzak, Kether.... these are in the order >that they emanate from the center of being; the direction of self toward >Kingdom, the direction of giving. > This is, I regret to say, gobbledegook to me. No offence intended. > >Peace be with you, And with you. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 01:22:49 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: What's right? Message-ID: In message <199711141335.IAA10304@newman.concentric.net>, "A. Safron" writes >If I want to do a strip-tease, till I'm only >> >wearing a navel jewel, in my living room, for my lover or husband, it is >legal, >> >but, in >> >the minds of some people it may be very wrong. >> >> Not me, not me! >> >Alan, have your energies returned? > No, just my memories ... Hehehehehehe! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 20:09:59 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <346CF666.5373@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > > > >For me the masculine Sephirot are the "happy" soul (Heart, Soul, Mind, > >Strength, Sense) > >Tipareth, Chessed, Chokmah, Netzak, Kether.... these are in the order > >that they emanate from the center of being; the direction of self toward > >Kingdom, the direction of giving. > > > This is, I regret to say, gobbledegook to me. No offence intended. > > > >Peace be with you, > > And with you. Well, I am sorry that my ideas are rather opague, but I am reinterpreting the Tree. I have been told that the Tree is open to interpretation, and that the system of correspondences absorbs all symbolic systems. My view is definitely non-traditional as I would replace or append to the diagram of the Tree a fractal composed of Platonic Solids. It is terribly dfficult to communicate why this new geometrical interpretation should be taken seriously. The solids, their compound forms, and the fractal itself require study for a lengthy period in order that they be imagined, and the relationships that they have to each other and Kabbalah be understood. Reinterpreting the five parts of the soul to be the five masculine sephirot is a product of reflecting on the many correspondences between the Tree and the geometry. I know what I have said probably doesn't resovle anything for you, but I would like your help in contemplating the masculine sephirot. If we ignore the names of the traditional parts of the soul: Yechidah, Chayah, Neshamah, Ruach, Nefesh... simply agree that the soul has five parts, and look for those parts in the commandment to love G-d where He is to be loved with all heart, soul, mind, strength (adding to this the senses) the I see a refection of the masculine sephirot. Tipareth-beauty= Heart Chesed-mercy/love= (spiritual)soul Chokmah-wisdom= mind Netzach-victory= strength Kether-crown= (supernatural)senses I think this is a major reinterpretation , but a coherent one which also reflects a natural geometry (which is unfortunately difficult to illustrate). Please give me some thoughts about how well such an interpretaion might be tolerated. I may be the king lemming on this, but everyone need not go off the cliff with me. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 20:43:27 +1100 From: tosaki Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: <346D6EBE.48D1@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> Thoa wrote: > > Hi Lynn: > > Lynn: > >I just > >loved reading your remarks on Mondria(a)n. ;-D > > Eiichi and I have moved our posts off the list since it was getting heavily > art-oriented. If you're reading this, Eiichi, I will respond to your last > e-mail this weekend, when I have the time to type a good response to it. > > Recuperate fully, okay, so that you can play tennis!:o) > > Thoa > Hi Lynn, Thank you for your attention to our artie exchange of neo-plastic square ideas. We will be back soon! Drpsionic wrote: "Oswald Spengler once said, 'When one has an opportunity to annoy people, one should do so.'" Let's do that! Hi Thoa, Do not worry about it, thoa. We can take our time. Life is long but very very short like a splash of breaker on the seashore. A moment can contain eternity. We have enormous time. Let's spend our time in cosmic time. > Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 15:33:29 -0800 > From: Titus Roth > Subject: Re: Mondrian > Message-ID: <199711142333.PAA21121@palrel1.hp.com> Titus wrote: > > Well you artist types are a little beyond me, but here's my contribution > to the general culture: > > Recently a guy in Paris nearly got away with stealing several paintings > from the Louvre. However, after planning the crime, getting in and out > past security, he was captured only 2 blocks away when his Econoline ran > out of gas. When asked how he could mastermind such a crime and then > make such an obvious error, he replied: > > (brace yourself) > > (this is going to hurt.) > > (really bad.) > > "I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh." > > (Oooh, those flying rotten tomatoes are messy .... dodge ... duck) > > ------------------------------ > I think the guy should have entered the Louvre restoration department first and got a skill, and then make a fake Monet to to buy Degas to make the Van Gogh.$B!!(J^-^; From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 14:49:44 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <199711151338.IAA07436@cliff.concentric.net> ---------- > From: ramadoss@eden.com > Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia > Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 7:48 PM > > A. Safron wrote: > > > > Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. > > Let us all pray for that day! > It is something I've had on my mind for quite some time. But I don't know what kind of tech knowledge, software, hardware, and personnel are necessary to operate a system where you can purchase items off the net and have them UPS'd (private mail service in the US). All or part of this may be beyond the resources of TSA at this time. But I could see many book providers using this method in the future. It works for me, since I don't have to leave my keyboard and can keep working. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 07:52:49 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <199711151351.IAA09000@cliff.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics > Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 12:28 PM > > In a message dated 97-11-13 23:54:40 EST, you write: > > > There are very few moral systems where stabbing someone in the back is > >considered to be right. I would hope that nobody here subscribes to such > >a moral system. > > > > Bart Lidofsky You can hope . . . but it's really none of your business if they do subscribe to spying, trolling, manipulating a mailing list that doesn't belong to them, trying to get people to post incriminating statements, besides the more bloody and graphic act of stabbing people in the back. A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 08:19:03 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971115141903.01172fa4@mail.eden.com> At 08:39 AM 11/15/97 -0500, you wrote: >---------- >> From: ramadoss@eden.com >> Subject: Re: ULT & B. Wadia >> Date: Thursday, November 13, 1997 7:48 PM >> >> A. Safron wrote: >> > >> > Maybe someday TSA will be able to provide this kind of service. >> >> Let us all pray for that day! >> >It is something I've had on my mind for quite some time. >But I don't know what kind of tech knowledge, software, >hardware, and personnel are necessary to operate a system >where you can purchase items off the net and have them >UPS'd (private mail service in the US). All or part of this >may be beyond the resources of TSA at this time. > >But I could see many book providers using this method in >the future. It works for me, since I don't have to leave my >keyboard and can keep working. > >A. Safron I don't know. First they should have a direct e-mail so the potential buyers can contact them direct. Couple of weeks ago when I called TPH I was told by the person who answered that all their mail goes thru the TSA e-mail address. I don't know if this is to make sure that someone centrally sees all e-mail traffic to Olcott or they have not gotten to setting up an email access. In my city, it costs $10.00/month for unlimited Internet access with FTP and all the bells and whistles. Let us all continue to pray (I personally do not believe in prayers, but it can cause no harm!!!) for the day when on-line purchase is possible. ..M... PS: With the competition heating up, there is going to be a price discount war on Internet. Also the book dealers dont like publishers trying to sell directly to customers at a discount. So we will have to see how it all develops. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 10:36:58 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: UFOs & the Meaning of Life: Myth or Fact? Message-ID: <199711151635.LAA14421@marconi.concentric.net> I logged onto Theos-l at this time to purposely comment on an article in the Winter Issue of Quest Magazine, titled, "UFOs and the Meaning of Life", by Mr. Ronald Story. I will log off soon after posting this, as this is a very busy time for me. The article is packed with many good points, which have been expressed many times before. One in particular was, "Think for yourself." I would like to take off from his article and present some other ideas perhaps worth considering. Mr. Story quotes Jung as saying UFOs "Have become living myths". Yet many individuals claims to be abducted, have alien implants from their bodies removed, scoop marks on their bodies, psychological trauma from examinations and some even claim to have their fetuses removed for inter-planetary breeding purposes. Myth or fact? Hodson, many years ago, wrote of fairies, nature spirits and angels, usually considered the subjects of children's books, rather than real entities. They could only be seen if one was clairvoyant, which was suspect itself. This same idea was echoed by the Findhorn Community in Scotland in the 60's. Peter and Eileen Caddy communicated with the "devas" and nature spirits, while another member was even privileged to talk to Pan himself. Myth or fact? CW Leadbeater wrote in his book, "Science of the Sacraments", of working with the angelic kingdom. Of orders of angels that only exist to do the Lord's bidding and sending healing out to the world. Myth or fact? And now for the big one. Many people have claimed that highly advanced beings exist, helping humanity and taking on pupils and disciples to help them in their work. They call them the "Masters." Myth or fact? The late, great Carl Sagan had his project SETI antennas aimed at the stars - listening. For one sign that there was life beyond this planet. As a scientist, he scoffed at those who readily accepted the idea of aliens and UFOs, claiming he was looking for that "smoking gun", that alien ashtray that someone brought back from an abduction episode. Jumping back to Mr. Story's original idea, we must all think for ourselves on these issues. Fairies, elves, sprites, aliens, angels, Masters. Quite a cast of characters. If the God/Goddess is writing this novel, they're pretty damn good writers. Most people that have seen a UFO or been abducted are labeled as kooks. There were demonstrations in downtown Chicago last year, where these very people marched to demand respect. Because of my research, I have had dreams of being on spaceships and meeting aliens. I am not ashamed to say they scared the piss out of me. Personally, I think the idea of relegating UFOs, spaceships, aliens, beings from other planets, or even other dimensions, to simple myth rather sad. That means we are terribly alone in this universe. Over and out . . . A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 11:54:41 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: ethical systems (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: <971115115440_-1975444431@mrin54.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-14 23:12:03 EST, you write: >That'll only be a problem -- your preferences -- if you involve young >children. Why a problem with children? Because they may not be able to >tell the difference between right and wrong yet, they don't have >sufficiently developed ability to judge and apply ethics to look out >for themselves. > I agree. But in my case the issue of children is totally moot in my case as I have none and the folks I know that are so afflicted to great lengths to make sure their kids don't get involved. >>Now that statement will actually cause a great number of my S/M comrades >>great upsetness because they do not believe that one should be that open. > >They're probably preferring caution since being open about this >could bring down the wrath of conservative Christians upon one. > I eat conservative Christians! Seriously, I would love nothing more than such a confrontation simply because the free PR would make me lots of money. >>And at that point an impasse occurs because they cannot stop me and I don't >>care if they approve or not, so they have the choice of shutting up or >>venting their impotent fury. > >Yes, you can do what you like, even if it pissed off or outrages or >flusters others. Again, people will be making two decisions: Is this >right or wrong? And if wrong, is this so terrible that intervention >is needed? If so, you have a fight on your hands. > And I love a good fight. >>The situation is likewise true in the TS. >> >>The TS, for lots of weird, historic reasons, objects officially to people >>learning to do psychic stuff, but I write books specifically teaching that. >> The powers that be are not happy, but do I stop writing because of that? >Of >>course not. > >I'm not sure that the reasons are "weird and historic", but the whole >issue of when is good or helpful to cultivate them and when it's best >to do away with them -- the issue is complex and has been discussed >on theos-l in detail before a number of times. > I know. I've been in the middle of them! >We could pick a type of knowledge that all of us might agree is harmful, >and consider what we'd do about it. If someone wants to publish a book >on ways to easily make bombs, or a book on ways to commit murder and >never get caught, should we allow it? The Internet does. Plato wouldn't, >I think. I'd be against it as a general principle. Take the example of >scientists creating devices of mass destruction. Should they decline to >invent them on ethical grounds? > Since I am in the process of testing a psionic device that has real potential as a weapon of mass destruction I naturally would disagree with Plato. >>The fact is that the ethical system of one individual or group is never >>binding on any other unless the first has the power to enforce their will. > >True. And that will is enforced by our legal system and by peer pressure >in society. Things that are generally considered to be the most fair, >just, equitable, etc. are promoted, although no social system is bug free >-- there are always exceptions and numerous examples of unfairness, >injustice, etc. in spite of the best intentions of the people working >in the system. > >> Lacking that power, all that is left is the force of persuasion and that >>only works on those who are willing to be so persuaded. > >Also true. Sometimes things are on an honor code, rather than controlled >by physical force. A simple example is a newspaper vending machine >that takes a single quarter and *assumes* you'll only take one newspaper >out of it. Another is the idea of a line at a movie theater, with the >assumption that it's most fair that the first people to arrive are the >first to enter and pick their seats, with the assumption that you'll >get in line rather than cut the line in front of everyone. > >The most basic and simple rule of ethics is the golden rule, to treat >others as you'd have them treat you, and it provides a good starting >point for developing more sophisticated ethics and better skills in >handling the events of life. Most people, I think, avoid having to >consider ethics too closely for the same reason that they avoid >thinking too thoroughly about things: they don't want to face internal >contradictions and bugs in their values, standards and in their >opinions and beliefs. We're not most people, though, and I'd expect >us seekers to question everything, continually working on and >reworking our ever-growing ethical standards and ideas about life. > >-- Eldon > I've never had much use for the Golden Rule myself. I infinitely prefer Lord Shang. To make it sound terribly pompous and boring, I come out of the school of what is called ethical skepticism, which means I don't put a lot of stock in pre-existing norms and while I have mellowed a lot with age, I can still do lots of things that would set even my radical libertarian friends' teeth grinding. And I do, I do and enjoy every minute of it. My feeling in the end is that Captain Nemo is winning, slowly but surely. Now, for those reading this who don't understand the reference, in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Professor Arronax has his first meeting with the Captain. They argue and the Captain threatens to submerge the Nautilus and let them swim. The Professor says that that is not the action of a "civilized man," whereby the Captain responds, "Professor, I am not, what you call, a 'civilized man.'" As society moves in that direction, where no rule can be enforced because no one will agree on the rule, it creates some fascinating problems for the philospher and interesting times, possibly in the sense of the ancient Chinese curse, for the rest of us. Hang on my friends, it's gonna be a wild ride. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 11:57:29 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World feedback on intellectual rights and ethics Message-ID: <971115115729_-2096627129@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-15 08:54:00 EST, you write: >You can hope . . . but it's really none of your business if they do subscribe >to spying, trolling, manipulating a mailing list that doesn't belong to them, >trying to get people to post incriminating statements, besides the more >bloody >and graphic act of stabbing people in the back. > >A. Safron Ann, What lists are you reading?????????? I'm missing something interesting. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 14:00:13 -0600 From: "A. Safron" Subject: Re: ethical systems: private post Message-ID: <199711152003.PAA23799@cliff.concentric.net> ---------- > From: Drpsionic@aol.com > Subject: ethical systems > Date: Friday, November 14, 1997 12:54 PM > > Case in point. I am heavily into S/M, as everyone who knows me knows because > I'm something of an activist in that area. > > Now that statement will actually cause a great number of my S/M comrades > great upsetness because they do not believe that one should be that open. > And at that point an impasse occurs because they cannot stop me and I don't > care if they approve or not, so they have the choice of shutting up or > venting their impotent fury. Go for it, Chuck. The principles of S/M, as I see it, are the basic structure of the universe as it acts in duality. S/M makes it very clear and easier to see. Better than 10 volumes of HPB, as far as I'm concerned. It's certainly helped me sort out my relations and see where I was getting screwed, when I didn't want to be. > > The situation is likewise true in the TS. > > The TS, for lots of weird, historic reasons, objects officially to people > learning to do psychic stuff, but I write books specficially teaching that. > The powers that be are not happy, but do I stop writing because of that? Of > course not. > That's one reason I wrote that post about the Quest article. "Think for yourself." Yeah, sure. As long as you think like me, dress like me, read what I read, act like me and eat those damn veggies like me. That article wanted to put the issue of UFOs in some kind of floaty, intellectual, Jungian cloud that has no reality. Reality? "We don't need no stinkin' reality here, at TSA." I also think it might have been a whitewash because Applewhite's female companion was a Theosophist. Nice publicity there. Till next time, A. Safron From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 14:22:09 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: An Interesting Msg - 2/2 Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971115202209.006d77cc@mail.eden.com> continued from 1/2============================ What I found out, however, was that while there are effectively very strong "techniques" in which you effectively exteriorize, or other techniques that creates very strong spiritual perceptions and states of being, or even effective liberation from emotional distresses, eventually, at the end of the day, it doesn't achieve what it promises. There is always something missing, and, even though your consciousness has been stretched somewhat, you basically remain the same ignorant self you are. Even worse, the cultic mindset of the combined effect of the leader's influence and the group's dynamic get onto you and you run the risk of becoming fanaticized, and many did become fanaticized, just like I was. It took me a while, and I guess some luck too, to free myself from the conditioning and limitation I allowed myself to drown into while in the group, but I also learned quite a few things from it, both from the experience and from freeing myself from the experience. I probably learned about as much as I did in the previous years. How could I become involved when I was already knowledgeable about K's teachings, you ask? As a matter of fact, believe it or not, K's teaching actually helped me to get involved. It helped me to resolve the theoretical and theological conflict and contradictions between Theosophy and Scientology. K seemed to have himself ridden of the limitations of Theosophy, and, furthermore, I found some striking similarities between some of his teachings and some of Scn's one. The similarity was especially the notion that in Scn is called "as-is". This is, I believe, the central notion of Scn, around which its whole technology is built. It is based on the notion, to put it crudely, that what you "view" exactly disappears. This is the reason why the Scn "auditing" sessions bring the patient to view exactly the traumatic incidents of his past, including incident from his past lives. The claim to be effectively able to view one's past lives was, BTW, another of those things that initially attracted me. The notion of "as-is" is linked to the other Scn notion that "what you resist, you become". In other words, that resistance was really what was maintaining an undesirable condition in place. This could be an emotional condition, in which you unconsciously resist to a negative picture, for example, but also spiritual, in which you unconsciously resist to things that maintains your awareness level down. While K's teaching thus unwittingly helped me to initially join the movement, it also helped me to get out of from it. Not only K's teaching, but my previous studies of Theosophy or similar teachings. These are the type of things I recount in the story on my web page. After I quite Scn, I discovered the New Age movement, with groups like Findhorn and others, and several other esoteric teachings, like the Rosicrucian's or the Alice Bailey's one. All the while, however, and even if I hold Alice Bailey's teaching as the highest form of esoteric teaching around, I seemed to draw my own light from within. K, in this respect, is still the stronger "influence" (he would hate this word). He helped me to find my strength and purpose from within, not relying on anyone or anything else, all the while being fully opened to everything, without fearing to put in question my deepest convictions. That the Truth, if such a "thing" exist, should be allowed to reveal itself. There was another aspect I got interested in as I came out of Scn, though. This was the mechanisms by which someone could be forcefully made to change his beliefs. IOW, the phenomenon of deprogramming, in which someone is kidnapped and harangued day and night until he recants and adopts his kidnappers' explanation instead. Was it a form of brainwashing, or was it on the contrary a form of liberation from brainwashing induced by the "cults"? Is there something as "mind-control" to start with? I spent most of the 80s to try and find out, all the while "rebuilding" my life as well, picking up on jobs, settling down, and so on. My conclusion on this issue is that neither the cults nor deprogramming are really brainwashing, although deprogramming, involving physical coercion, contrary to the cults, is definitely closer to what could be called brainwashing. It isn't possible, however, to somehow magically change someone else's belief at will. "Mind-control", as it is being defined by the anti-cult faction, or as the cults alleges its opponents to practice, simple doesn't exists. There certainly exists a form of "mind-control", if you want, in which fear, hope, guilt, is used in order to influence someone into accepting a belief. Such is, for example, the fundamentalist's approach in which fear of eternal hell is being played upon you, while you are harangued into confessing your sin and while you are being promised eternal heaven if you conform, but there is a huge gap between this form of "mind-control" and the type of "mind-control" promoted by fanatical cult opponents in which they claim the freedom of choice of the individual is effectively being overwhelmed and which justify a coercive intervention. There simply is no such thing. Even under actual hypnosis, it has been shown that the basic individual responsibility and freedom cannot be annihilated. These topics have been raging, sometimes extremely violently, in alt.religion.scientology, in which I post since almost two years. Some rather clear lines have emerged, though. I will attempt to summarize them on my web page if I can free up enough time. Lastly, the page is also aimed at warning about the danger of the fanatical anti-cultism, headed by the fallacious doctrine of mind-control. Strangely enough, anti-cultism has turned into a cult in its own right, which once more tend to prove that what you resist, you become. Much of my own 80s decade was also spend trying to fight the abuses and dangers of this anti-cult movement (acm). Believe it or not, we passed 1984 very closely to the type of things that what was predicted by Orwell. The acm, indeed, almost succeeded to pass a law in which one could be incarcerated and psychologically abused into conformity. All things that I will document in due time, for those interested. Luckily, by the end of the 80s, the acm has been overall defeated, but its a long story and I believe not quite the topic of this list. Democracy and human rights prevailed, and once again, I gained considerable insight in these matters through this issue. While both cults and anti-cults do have a part of truth just as well, they nevertheless constitute extremes and are actually not that interesting beyond what they can teach us. This is why I plan to add a third dimension to my web page. A spiritual one, either as an integral part or a separate one. At the end of the day, all of these are but some aspects of the spiritual search, and the many pitfalls, idiocy, and illusions, we can fall into. The spiritual search and the freeing of the thousands of illusions we can get into is still what is, IMO, the most important issue of all. Is there such a thing as Truth and infinite intelligence, infinite wisdom, infinite love? I believe yes, but it doesn't always manifests itself under the form of what we conceive spirituality to be. It isn't just enough to delight oneself in abstract light and sensations, however beautiful it is. Such intelligence, wisdom and love needs to find its way in action, and through action, attention and observation, constant learning and unearthing, to discover for ourself what is so precious, so valuable, and so subtle, that it constantly escapes the thousands forms in which we would like to hold and capture it. Bernie __________________________________________________________________ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 14:22:29 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: An Interesting post on Usenet ( 1 of 2) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971115202229.006dc538@mail.eden.com> >From: bern@arcadis.be (Bernie) >Date: 1997/11/07 >Message-ID: <347363ce.26255064@snews.zippo.com> >Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology I found a very interesting mailing list on Krishnamurti. This means that my output to ars risk to be significantly reduced. I wrote a small (not!) introduction on myself for this occasion. I thought that it summarizes rather well some of the points I have been making in this newsgroup over the last two years. Here it is. _________________________________________________________________ Hello Everybody, I am afraid I made my entry in this list a bit louder than I had wished. Indeed, I first sent a message to the list with the subject "Subscribe", which was not the right way to subscribe. Then, I also let, by mistake, the wrong signature. Not that it matters too much, but I thought that the web site to which it pointed to was rather irrelevant for this list. I received some nice feedback though, so you can never really tell what is good and what is bad at the end of the day. I will even use this opportunity to, instead of lurk heavily before posting, give a short description as to where I come from, since I already feel rather at home on this list, although it may be a bit early to say. I remember when I was about 16 years old, writing something very much along the materialist line that you can't have matter without spirit and, reversely, you can't have spirit without matter, and so, it is logical that when the matter is no more, there isn't spirit left either. So, it can't be said that I had an early spiritual vocation. If the circumstances were to be slightly different, I may be sitting now in the atheists or skepticals newsgroups. That's not how it turned out, though. For some reasons, I started to develop an interest in spiritual matters. I believe that most of it came through reading. In the beginning, it all seemed completely incredible, though. I remember standing in a book shop, scanning books around, and hitting a book in which the author explained how his son, who met an accidental death, was speaking to him. This made no sense at all for me. If his son was death, were was he sitting? How could he speak at all? I could not conceive at all that someone could exist without body. I guess that this must be how materialists, atheists, skeptics, etc, feel as well. A friend and colleague of mine was asked someday, by some other friend of mine who was rather spiritually oriented, if he believed in a life after death, reincarnation, etc. He thought about it for a while, and answered "I really would like to believe in it, but I just can't". This stroke me as an honest and even wise answer. There seem to be people who, indeed, just cannot conceive of anything else than what they see here and now. They aren't necessarily different than those who do. They just can't conceive of it, like I could not conceive of it before either. I am glad that, through this phase of mine, I am better able to understand what may be their position. My interest grew, though, and I started to read more and more along spiritual lines. Circumstances also seemed to push me towards this orientation. For example, as I was waiting at the hairdresser, I read a magazine article about a women who was driving away spirits from an haunted house. The article was well written, and it caught my interest. I decided to buy one of the books mentioned. I got it wrapped in present paper to be open only at the end of my ongoing school examinations. Of course, I couldn't wait, so, instead of studying, I read the book. I must have read it over the night. Couldn't lift my nose from it. At the end, my interest spear headed upward about tenfold. I guess I really got convinced at that time, and the universe did seem to shift, in a kind of world-shattering way, in another new and considerably larger dimension. I also got influenced through comic strips telling stories about UFOs. One night, I made a strange dream about it, heard some strange bells and woke up. I couldn't move at all, no matter how hard I tried. Yet, I was without a shade of fear. After a lot of effort, I succeed to move, though. This happened several times thereafter, but it is only many years later that I realized that this was a condition in which I was able to leave my body without effort. So, instead of trying to move with all my strength, I started to lift up higher and higher. The return in the body was made without effort after awhile, and I then could move normally. But this all is much later. For now, I finished the book, and still passed my examinations and was done with school. What would I do next? What higher studies would I pursue? I had no ideas. However, by then, my interest for spiritual issues was so big that I started to read a lot on this toic. I read a book about parapsychology wonders in the URSS. I became very interested in the subject and decided that this was the type of study I would do next. At the time, in 1974, there was nothing of the sort, though. So I took up psychology instead. It didn't interest me so much, too materialist. Didn't take the spirit into account, didn't even take the possible psychic influence of the experiencer on the experiences. Most of my time I spent, rather than follow the courses, with my nose in books. I read a lot. Lobsang Rampa, Spiritism, Edgard Cayce, Swedenborg, you name it. I even read a book, well written, though, that claimed that Humanity evolved out of cannibalism! Of course I was also reading a few of the psychological and philosophical books recommended by the curriculum. I was also following some courses. One that I never missed was the philosophy course. It was given in an outstanding way as well. During this course, I understood more about mathematics, as the teacher explained how the exponential function evolved out of the philosophical theory of Leibniz, than I learned in preceding years of school about it. It is only when I started to get into Theosophy that things began to make sense and that the puzzle got together. I started to frequent the Theosophic quarters. In there, I saw a portray of someone I found amazingly beautiful and obviously of high spiritual elevation. This was Krishnamurti. So much passed through his eyes and his every being, that years of teachings would not even give a glint of it.This, alone, was a revelation on its own. The Theosophical Society featured some weekly lecture, some courses, and also had an amazing library. You could find there books that are nowhere in print anymore, and that would dig into very deep and interesting spiritual and philosophical dimension. I got advised as to which books were the best by some of the many old ladies to be found there, and of course Annie Besant was an amazing writer. It is only later that I came on Krishnamurti, through a bibliography of his. I remember reading in it poems he made to express his enlightenment. It was so beautiful and hit something so deep within me that I believe I cried. I posted one of these poems some time ago in alt.meditation. It starts with " Oh! Listen, I will sing to thee the song of my Beloved. Where the soft green slopes of the still mountains Meet the blue shimmering waters of the noisy sea, Where the bubbling brook shouts in ecstasy, Where the still pools reflect the calm heavens, There thou wilt meet with my Beloved. " and goes through, among many paragraphs: " In the shadows of the stars, In the deep tranquility of dark nights, In the reflection of the moon on still waters, In the great silence before the dawn, Among the whispering of waking trees, In the cry of the bird at morn, Amidst the wakening of shadows, Amidst the sunlit tops of the far mountains, In the sleepy face of the world, There thou wilt meet with my Beloved. Keep still, O dancing waters, And listen to the voice of my Beloved. In the happy laughter of children Thou canst hear Him. The music of the flute Is His voice. The startled cry of a lonely bird Moves thy heart to tears, For thou hearest His voice. The roar of the age-old sea Awakens the memories That have been lulled to sleep By His voice. The soft breeze that stirs The tree-tops lazily Brings to thee the sound Of His voice. " and finishes with: " In the sacred temple, In the halls of dancing, On the holy face of the sannyasi, In the lurches of the drunkard, With the harlot and with the chaste, Thou wilt meet with my Beloved. On the fields of flowers, In the towns of squalor and dirt, With the pure and the unholy, In the flower that hides divinity, There is my well-Beloved. Oh! the sea Has entered my heart, In a day, I am living an hundred summers. O, friend, I behold my face in thee, The face of my well-Beloved. " From there, I became extremely interested in him. I was wondering. How can someone, who have been raised in such a protected environment, taught no doubt the many facets of the fascinating Theosophical cosmogony and philosophy, can shred all of it? Surely, if there was anyone who would know what Theosophy was about, it would be K. I started to read his writing, although I didn't quite understand too much of it at the time. In the meantime, I also got to meet, sometimes through friends, sometimes by chance, several spiritual groups. One friend was in DLM and preached to me the holiness of their own type of meditation in which they tasted some nectar. Another in the Sufi movement and meditated rather harshly and intensely. One group was teaching that everything was Satan, while my University neighbors tried to convince me that if I confessed my sins and surrendered to Jesus, I would be "saved". Still other emphasized the importance of prayer to avoid eternal hell. The only ones who didn't seem to want to convert me to their own religions were my own parents. They were of Jewish confession but didn't seem to bother about it very much. My mother believed in some kind of vague higher intelligence, and my father was really an atheist. One of the rare times I spoke about spiritual matters with him, he said that he saw so much suffering during the war that, for him, there just can't be a God. It was examination time again, University ones this time, and I decided to take one day off a week from my intensive study and do nothing. I decided for Saturday, just to "test" out the idea contained in the Sabbath, in which you just don't do anything special (my adapted interpretation, of course). I went in town and walked idly around. It is then that I was approached by a young man who proposed me to pass some psychological test. I accepted without after thoughts because I was used to it. In a small University town, and in a psychological section, you are regularly asked to serve as guinea pigs for all kinds of experiments (memory, etc). The young man, however, wasn't a psychology student. He was a Scientologist. My interest in Scientology (Scn) got quickly awakened. I already was looking around to all kinds of spiritual groups, and this one didn't seem as odd as the other ones. It believed in reincarnation and OBEs, like I did. It didn't have some kind of strange meditation practices, but what seemed like a scientific technique, and it also offered me something the others didn't seem to offer: a meaningful mission in life and society, something useful to do. That appealed strongly to me, even more so since I wasn't really interested in any kind of existing job types. and found my studies boring and very limited. It didn't take long before I dropped my studies and joined the young and cheerful local team. That's where the story I recount in my web page starts, moreover. I recount how I got involved in Scn and eventually got out from it. How I got involved in what I now call the "cultic mindset" and how I evolved out from it. One of the reasons that attracted me initially to Scn was that it seemed to offer a concrete method to effectively achieve spiritual powers and spiritual states. Theosophy was very nice, but seemed to end in an dead-end. Once you have assimilated the basic elements of its philosophy, what do you *do*? Scn seemed to offer something valuable and effective to do, a potent method to exteriorize and travel around without body. I figured that once I would be able to do that, I would also be able to travel to places like Tibetan monasteries and expand my knowledge of spiritual issues. Part of the reason I thought that Scn effectively achieve these result is because the framework is such that this is constantly and affirmatively repeated, and the original appearance of a religious science, or a scientific religion gives this impression. =================== continued in 2/2========================= From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 01:54:04 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ethical systems (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: In message <971115115440_-1975444431@mrin54.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >I eat conservative Christians! Raw, I suspect .... Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 11:45:09 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: VOS - 1927 Edn. Published in Peking Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971116174509.006ce2a4@mail.eden.com> Recently I came across the Voice of the Silence by HPB which was published Peking, China in 1927. This is the first time I saw this edition and it appears interesting. It has a frontispieces of Tashi Lama and has notes and comments by Alice Leighton Cleather and Basil Crump. I thought the following forward of the book may be interesting to some. ..M... ================================================================ EDITORIAL FOREWORD. The present reprint has been undertaken largely because the original edition has been out of print for many years, while those issued since H.P.B.'s death in 1891 contain errors and even, in some cases, deliberate alterations and omissions. Our aim has, therefore, been to restore to its original integrity the most beautiful and poetical volume of H. P. Blavatsky's great literary bequest. In so doing we have not only striven for textual accuracy, but have sought to reproduce, as closely as local facilities permitted, the size, cover and make-up of the original. The type is a little larger, but the pagination is exactly the same. The circumstances under which the opportunity arose to effect this work of restoration were singularly fortunate. Reaching Peking in December, 1925, after studying for seven. years in India, we were privileged to come into close touch with H. H. the Tashi Lama, who had left Tibet in 1924 on a special mission to China and Mongolia. (See Note p. 100). As members of his Order, part of the work we undertook at his request for Buddhism was the present reprint, as the only true exposition in English of the Heart Doctrine of the Mahayana and its noble ideal of self-sacrifice for humanity. During many years of study and initiation In Tibet, H.P.B. spent a considerable time at Tashi-lhum-po, and knew the predecessor of the present Tashi Lama very well. The Golden Precepts here translated by her for the use of her pupils describe the processes of meditation and self-conquest by which the earnest disciple may hope in the course of many incarnations to become a Master of Wisdom, a Nirmanakaya who follows the Buddha on the Path of Compassion for suffering humanity, and remains "unselfish to the endless end." That such exalted beings exist as living men Is known to all Oriental mystics who belong to the various schools of Yoga to which H. P. B. refers in her Preface. In China and Mongolia, as in India, we find their existence taken for granted by those who have any knowledge of the Esoteric Philosophy. All the Tibetan terms and references have been checked with the assistance of members of the Tashi Lama's suite, and our Chinese friends have also given us every assistance; It is with very great satisfaction that we publish this edition under the auspices of the Peking Buddhist Research Society, who recognise in It the highest and most sacred teachings of their own "contemplative" schools. It was not until we came in contact with Chinese and Tibetan Buddhists that we obtained this striking confirmation of the truth and value of H. P. Blavatsky's work. The little book is now, therefore, reprinted with the strongest and most authoritative Tibetan and Chinese endorsement. A few printer's errors in the original have been corrected, but nothing else has been altered. In response to the requests of many students we have ventured to add some notes and comments on points which called for explanation in the course of study, together with a good deal of Information collected from Chinese and Tibetan sources. Having carefully verified the text, plates have been cast so as to ensure the accuracy of any future Impressions. Alice Leighton Cleather (One of H.P.B.'s Pupils) Basil Crump. Peking, China, May, 1927. ================================end=================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 11:57:29 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Birthday Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971116175729.00be1950@mail.eden.com> Let us all remember that it was on Nov 17 that TS was inaugurated and show our gratitude to everyone, not the least of which being the Founders, who made our lives richer by making T/theosophy accessible to all of us. ..MKR... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 13:55:24 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: ethical systems (reply to Chuck) Message-ID: <971116135523_1838595565@mrin41.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-16 01:09:54 EST, you write: >Raw, I suspect .... > >Alan Actually, I prefer them barbecued. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 13:58:42 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Birthday Message-ID: <971116135842_-1173132748@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-16 13:05:26 EST, you write: >Let us all remember that it was on Nov 17 that TS was inaugurated and show >our gratitude to everyone, not the least of which being the Founders, who >made our lives richer by making T/theosophy accessible to all of us. > >...MKR... While the Masters hang their heads in embarrassment. Just kidding! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 13:50:59 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Birthday Message-ID: <346F4EA3.A89@eden.com> Drpsionic@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 97-11-16 13:05:26 EST, you write: > > >Let us all remember that it was on Nov 17 that TS was inaugurated and show > >our gratitude to everyone, not the least of which being the Founders, who > >made our lives richer by making T/theosophy accessible to all of us. > > > >...MKR... > > While the Masters hang their heads in embarrassment. > > Just kidding! > > Chuck the Heretic About what we are all doing!! Just Kidding! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 18:23:33 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@azstarnet.com (Caldwell/Graye) Subject: Critiques of K.Paul Johnson's "Theories" on the Masters Morya and Koot Hoomi Message-ID: <199711170123.SAA05755@mailhost.azstarnet.com> Critiques of K. Paul Johnson's "Theories" on the Masters Morya and Koot Hoomi *************************************** K. Paul Johnson has written lately on Theos-Talk that he refuses to comment on David Pratt's critique of Johnson's Mahatmic theories. This may be viewed by some as unfortunate, but interested readers have Pratt's critique and can go over the material if they choose and make up their own minds. Hopefully, a few may go back to the original sources, compare Johnson with Pratt and gain a deeper understanding of the whole subject under discussion. Johnson's books and the critiques of his various "theories" give interested students of Theosophy a chance to THINK thorough the various issues involved. There has been too much "belief" or "disbelief" without a good grasp of the true facts. Far too many people are hesitant to think THROUGH the issues involved. Below are the Internet sites for my HOUSE OF CARDS critique of Johnson's books, David Pratt's critique, Johnson's reply to my HOUSE OF CARDS, etc. Daniel Caldwell __________________________________________ Critiques of Johnson's "Theories" on the Theosophical Masters are available on the WWW at: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/johnson.htm Included at this site are: ________________________________________ K. PAUL JOHNSON'S HOUSE OF CARDS?: A Critical Examination of Johnson's Thesis on the Theosophical Masters Morya and Koot Hoomi by Daniel H. Caldwell Contents: Part I: Johnson's Thesis in Light of Colonel H.S. Olcott's Testimony about the Masters Part II: Will The Real Master Morya Please Take His Turban Off Part III: Other Testimonies of Encounters with the Master Morya Part IV: Mohini Chatterji's Alleged "Deception" Part V: 'Saib Kashmere' = 'Saib Morya' = Ranbir Singh of Kashmir??? Part VI: Who's Pulling Whose Leg? Or How Can You Tell When It Is "Disinformation" or Not? Conclusion _____________________________________ STRAIN AT A GNAT, SWALLOW A CAMEL: A Reply to Daniel Caldwell's Criticisms by K. Paul Johnson Just click for this text at: http://weber.ucsd.edu/~dlane/pjimp.html This is Johnson's reply to Caldwell's HOUSE OF CARDS criticisms. ________________________________________ Methinks Johnson Has "Shot" Himself in the "Foot": Daniel Caldwell Replies to Some of Johnson's Rebuttal Remarks at: http://www.azstarnet.com/~blafoun/foot.htm Part I: K. Paul Johnson's "Definition" of the Paranormal and Its Bearing on Henry S. Olcott's Accounts of the Theosophical Masters Part II: The Fallacy in Another Johnsonian Argument More parts are in preparation and will be added from time to time in the coming months. ______________________________________________ The Theosophical Mahatmas: A Critique of Paul Johnson's New Myth by David Pratt at: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/johnson.htm CONTENTS: Abbreviations Introduction Fact vs. fiction The mahatma letters Chelas and confederates A "scheme of deception"? A "disinformation pilgrimage"? Fraudulent vs. genuine testimony Babaji and "the whole truth" Conclusion Part of David Pratt's conclusion is as follows: "Paul Johnson fails to produce any compelling, concrete evidence to refute the view that the portrayal of the masters by HPB, the masters themselves, and their chelas is essentially true. He exaggerates the discrepancies in theosophical accounts of the masters in order to dismiss most of what HPB said on the subject as lies and disinformation. He hypothesizes that the theosophical masters were based on well-documented historical figures, and points to a number of extremely tenuous and tentative links between Koot Hoomi and Thakar Singh and between Morya and Ranbir Singh. He admits that there is no conclusive evidence to support these "identifications". Many details concerning KH and M are reported in theosophical literature that contradict these identifications. In these instances, Johnson either speculates that a more plausible "historical" candidate may have been involved, or he dismisses the details as irrelevant, imaginary, or disinformation. His general position is therefore an unfalsifiable dogma rather than a testable hypothesis." "Johnson shows an astonishing willingness to dismiss all witnesses who offer testimony contrary to his pet theory as liars and frauds, but is happy to make use of anything reported by these same witnesses that seems consistent with his theory. He quotes out of context and twists statements to suit his beliefs. His interpretations lead to many inconsistencies, contradictions, and absurdities. He fails to account for the production of the mahatma letters, let alone their content. Nor does he satisfactorily account for the source of HPB's teachings or the wide knowledge she displayed in her writings. . . ." "Many of the deeper and more technical theosophical teachings are impossible for us to prove, and whether we consider them worthy of study will largely depend on whether we believe that HPB really was the messenger of the Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood. In a letter to Sinnett, referring to Hume's arrogant and combative attitude, M wrote: 'either we are what we claim, or we are not. [I]n the former case, however exaggerated the claims made on behalf of our powers still, if our knowledge and foresight do not transcend his, then we are no better than shams and impostors and the quicker he parts company with us -- the better for him. But if we are in any degree what we claim to be, then he acts like a wild ass.' (MLC 277 / ML 269)" ________________________________________ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 21:51:05 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: Dear King Lemming [joke]: In message <346CF666.5373@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >If we ignore the names of the traditional parts of the soul: Yechidah, >Chayah, Neshamah, Ruach, Nefesh... simply agree that the soul has five >parts, and look for those parts in the commandment to love G-d where He >is to be loved with all heart, soul, mind, strength (adding to this the >senses) the I see a refection of the masculine sephirot. The very essence of Kabbalah is that it is a recevied tradition. If, in other words, we ignore the names (and the significance thereof) of the parts of the soul (in which I would not include Yechidah) then we are not re-interpreting anything, but deriving a new hypothesis upon the foundation of an existing one. Nothing wrong in doing this, but the result cannot be called Kaballah, even though the inspiration for it comes from the same. > >Tipareth-beauty= Heart > >Chesed-mercy/love= (spiritual)soul > >Chokmah-wisdom= mind > >Netzach-victory= strength > >Kether-crown= (supernatural)senses > This does not work within Kabbalist inerpretation. Geburah is strength, not Netzach; and a crown (Kether) is *above* the head, and hence outside of the physical. Kabbalah defines "soul" as nephesh, and with sound reasoning, although it is a limited definition relating to the animal (mammalian) body, and a later use of "soul" equates more closely with the Jungian concept of Self, and would include the sephiroth from 'Hesed to Yesod (contained withing Malkuth, *on the scale of the human being*). There are other scales, such as the planetary or cosmic, and again the sub-atomic, etc., etc. One the planetary scale of Earth, for example, the human race has access only to Malkuth, Yesod, Hod, and the lower half of (the Earth's) Netzach. Beyond that we cannot see (not in this life, anyhow). >I think this is a major reinterpretation , but a coherent one which also >reflects a natural geometry (which is unfortunately difficult to >illustrate). > >Please give me some thoughts about how well such an interpretaion might >be tolerated. I may be the king lemming on this, but everyone need not >go off the cliff with me. My thoughts are that you may have found a useful analogy derived from Kabbalistic considerations, but that the analogy is not itself something that can be defined as "Kabbalah." Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 21:53:23 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ethical systems: private post Message-ID: In message <199711152003.PAA23799@cliff.concentric.net>, "A. Safron" writes >That's one reason I wrote that post about the Quest article. "Think for >yourself." Yeah, sure. As long as you think like me, dress like me, >read what I read, act like me I can see some very odd looking people turning up at Wheaton in their best dresses and navel jewels .... Hehehehehehehehe! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 16 Nov 1997 21:35:23 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Birthday Message-ID: In message <346F4EA3.A89@eden.com>, ramadoss@eden.com writes >> While the Masters hang their heads in embarrassment. >> >> Just kidding! >> >> Chuck the Heretic > >About what we are all doing!! > >Just Kidding! Who's kidding? The Masters From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 03:54:09 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <34700631.6611@dmv.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > My thoughts are that you may have found a useful analogy derived from > Kabbalistic considerations, but that the analogy is not itself something > that can be defined as "Kabbalah." Thank you for your observations. You are completely correct in that the whole of my findings are a discovery of the reflection of Kabbalistic "structure only" in natural geometry. I discovered a correlation between the Decalogue and ordered pairs of platonic solids during the course of meditating on "order" by way of drawing related geometric symbols in a blank sketch book. I've been pursuing this meditation as time has allowed for many years, having begun in 1986. There really are overwhelming numbers of correspondences between the "Tree" and the system of platonic solids that I have found. Although, I am in no way a Kabbalist, and I greatly appreciate your assistance in clarifying the limits to which Kabbalah can be bent. The "useful" quality of the whole is that the Tree of Life and the Decalogue can be seen as observations of a single natural structure. This is a very important concept in that many have remarked that Judaism in particular has divorced man from nature. However, there are some problematical things to consider regarding the "natural" nature of this finding. The most profound is that the natural structure which is "thought" to reflect the structure of "Kabbalah" can be visualized, which makes for "a" contemplation of a theosophy(Kabbalah) held to be transcendant, making the whole part of a mental realm. Well, my best thoughts about this are that what we have in geometry is really a transformation of Kabbalah (which we can regard as remaining separate) to a model of anthroposophy. Of course in Christianity the Gospels state that through Deliverance(Jesus) G-d has granted the power to men to become Sons of G-d, but how literally has this been taken in history or how literally might we take this. Suppose for a moment that my observations and assumptions are well founded and Kabbalah does indeed have such an offspring. Where might one go from here? The trouble would be in the area of aligning the whole of understanding with the microcosm, which may fall short of any big picture. Does the macrocosm sustain the microcosm, or will someone take the view that it is really a man or mankind that makes for cosmos. There is of course the complete compromise where they are sustaining each other, but suppose there is a practical side to the model. Frances Yates has written about "memory castles", and has described views from both traditional and Hermetic perspectives. Classical scholars were seeking a means to memorize vast amounts of information in order to deliver lectures at length on the complexity and breadth the their fields of study. At the same time Yates tells that magicians "apparently" used these memory structures to do theurgic works. The whole pursuit and use of "memory castles" came to a very abrupt end when the scholars declared them to be purely occult in nature, and according to Yates the study of mnemonics was never further investigated with the result that all knowledge of mnemonic systems known today have been handed down from that time. Perhaps I am digressing to much, anyway, I have contemplated the use of the "forms" as a means of achieving two quite divergent results one from the classical approach and one of course Hermetic. I was completely successful in classical application, but while my Hermetic experiment had a dramatic effect, and I was able to repeat the result of the experiment, the effect was not exactly what was intended... my current assumtion is that actually practicing magic is tampering with something not to be taken lightly. Well, I may not pursue this any futher in the magical sense, but there may be some wordsmithing that might come of it. until next time.... Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 12:44:42 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: My head went to Hawaii Message-ID: To all: I caught a graver infection and therefore can't concentrate myself on the discussions at the moment. I will be back when I have recovered. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 04:50:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: My head went to Hawaii Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971117105035.00ecf318@mail.eden.com> At 05:44 AM 11/17/97 -0500, you wrote: >To all: I caught a graver infection and therefore can't concentrate >myself on the discussions at the moment. I will be back when >I have recovered. > >Peace, > >Nicole > Hope to see back soon with godspeed. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 06:22:08 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: My head went to Hawaii Message-ID: <347028E0.1715@dmv.com> Nicole Suter wrote: > > To all: I caught a graver infection and therefore can't concentrate > myself on the discussions at the moment. I will be back when > I have recovered. > > Peace, > > Nicole God love you! I pray for the swift return of your health. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 01:29:02 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Macrocosm Message-ID: In message <34700631.6611@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >Does the macrocosm >sustain the microcosm, or will someone take the view that it is really a >man or mankind that makes for cosmos. There is of course the complete >compromise where they are sustaining each other, but suppose there is a >practical side to the model. I would argue here that there is only the macrocosm. What we choose to call the microcosm is simply the very small part of it available to us for observation. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 01:36:53 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Defining Soul (2) Message-ID: <+6fJlPA1EPc0Ew8Q@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <34700631.6611@dmv.com>, Vincent Beall writes >the Tree of Life and the >Decalogue can be seen as observations of a single natural structure. >This is a very important concept in that many have remarked that Judaism >in particular has divorced man from nature. I don't think this is true at all. Judaism, aside from, and including its theology, is a very pragnatic religion. So far as Kabbalah is concerned, it places human beings (and humanity) firmly within a setting as part of nature. > However, there are some >problematical things to consider regarding the "natural" nature of this >finding. The most profound is that the natural structure which is >"thought" to reflect the structure of "Kabbalah" can be visualized, >which makes for "a" contemplation of a theosophy(Kabbalah) held to be >transcendant, making the whole part of a mental realm. A trifle tautologous? In my understanding, the "mental realm" (you do not define it) is itself part of the natural order, part of nature on the larger scale. > Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 02:57:10 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Mondrian Message-ID: Hi Eiichi, My weekend turned out to be busier than I thought. My philosophy is that when there is an opportunity to have fun, do it! To continue with our Mondrian discussion. BTW, I think your apostrophes show up as funky letters on the Theos-L. I'll try to edit out as much of it as I could. Eiichi: >A semiotist Victor A. Grauer finds similarity between Mondrian's >dialectic and Adorno's 'negative dialectic'. (Victor A. Grauer, >'Mondrian and the Dialectic of Essence', Art Criticism, Vol. 11, No. 1, >State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY,1996, n. 65 >pp. 25-26 ). So I am interested in Adorno's 'negative dialectic'. >Zuidervaart explains Adorno's 'negative dialectic' in the book (Lambert >Zuidervaart, 'Adorno's Aesthetic Theory: The Redemption of Illusion', >The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England, 1991, >p.48) : > >"Adorno's arguments are dialectical in the sense that they highlight >unavoidable tensions between polar oppositions whose opposition >constitutes their unity and generates historical change. The dialectic >is negative in the sense that it refuses to affirm any underlying >identity or final synthesis of polar oposites, even though Adorno >continually points to the possibility of reconciliation. The main >oppositions occur between the particular and the universal and between >culture in a narrow sense and society as a whole." > >and quote: > >"It [Adorno's dialectical aesthetic] deals with reciprocal relations >between universal and particular where the universal is not imposed on >the particular 'but emerges from the dynamic of particularities >themselves." > >The similarity is quite evident when the above passage from Zuidervaart's >book is compared to a statement Mondrian put forward (below) >regarding the individual and the universal: > >Subjectivity remains subjective, but it diminishes in the measure that >objectivity (the universal) grows in the individual. > >To understand Mondrian's style of thinking and his idiomatic terminology >and turn of phrase, familiarity with the special kind of'dialectic' in >his dualistic arguments is requisite. An example which typifies Mondrian's >operation of dialectical logic can be found in 'Liberation from >Oppression in Art and Life' (1939-40) where he relates: > >"In the present moment, oppression is so clearly evident that everyone >must regard it as one of the greatest evils. But does everyone see this >evil in its real significance, in its positive and negative factors? >'Human life is oppressed by internal causes both physical and moral' >as well as by external factors. It is necessary to fight against both. >All that can help us to understand the evils of oppression is useful to >present and future. Therefore, it is essential to demonstrate that >plastic art can help to clarify this evil. We can conclude that plastic >art shows a double action manifested in life and in art: an action of >decay and an action of growth, a progress of intensification and >determination of the fundamental aspect of forms, and a decay through >the reduction of their external aspect." > >In this example of Mondrian's perception of dichotomy, in this case >'internal causes vs. external causes', it is a dichotomy not of conflict >'each element juxtaposed against the other' but of a dialectical >complexion. In Mondrian's dialectical dichotomy, one element can >transform the other by means of clarifying the discrimination between >both elements. And also I found common attitude facing things between >Mondrian and Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein said somewhere (sorry I do not >remember the reference ) something like this: I find that my own voice >is much more important than the other philosophers'." Both of them were >independent thinkers. Recently I found W. J. T. Mitchell's book "Picture >Theory" (The University of Chicago Press, 1994, ISBN: 0-226-53231-3) >very interesting (but unfortunately I can not find enough time to finish >the book). He is also Wittgensteian. I have also found a lot of >interesting books or essays about rhythm. If you are interested in the >theory of rhythm itself, I will be quite happy to introduce some of them >to you. Adorno's argument is very materialistic and rationalistic. Are you using the relation to Adorno as a way of drawing away from the mystical intent of Mondrian's art? I disagree that Adorno's rationalistic argument is similar to Mondrian's. In Adorno's argument, you have to see the particulars in order to guess at the universal, instead of turning away from the particulars and using intuition to turn to the universal, to something hidden and beyond the particulars (mystical). Basically, a rationalist looks at the known things, while a mystic turns away from the material world to look at the unknown. As an example, take a look at what Mondrian said: >Subjectivity remains subjective, but it diminishes in the measure that >objectivity (the universal) grows in the individual. That's a mystical, not a rationalist point of view. As an example, let me illustrate this relation to a yogic point of view. Before the initiate seriously practices yoga, s/he has a very subjective personal identity reference. By practicing yogic meditation, the core of the personal reference is seen to be identical with universal being which brings about the fundamental transformation of the personality, so that the person eventually starts to become an embodiment of the universal. For example, now I can say I'm Thoa Tran, artist, I wake up in the morning, I practice martial arts, etc., but after successful yogic practice, I realize that all of my identity is just a shell. I leave the worldly layer and look inward to see who I really am. I will see the interior light and realize that my being is different than my personification of it. Through that discovery, I begin to touch the spiritual, becoming more compassionate, etc. I reaffirm that Mondrian was not only trying to draw the universal down, but he was also trying to use his art as a way to draw his inward perception of self outward. He also thought that if he could shape this into cultural objects (and he was not alone in this endeavor), he could help form a utopian society. >There is some danger, I think, in describing Mondrian's mature style >geometrical painting as 'mandala'. Because he was a practical painter as >well and got a lot of influence from the other art movements, which is >not necessarily correlate to some religion (for example, Cubism), and >always seeked for the relationship between art and everyday life. In >this sense he was also one of the same avant-gardists as Peter B$B]H(Jer's >definition of 'avant-gardist' He wrote: > >"The European avant-garde movements can be defined as an attack on the >status of art in bourgeois society. What is negated is not an earlier >form of art (style) but art as an institution that is unassociated with >the life praxis of men." (B$B]S(Jger, Peter, Theory of the Avant-Garde, >Translation by Michael Shaw, Theory and History of Literature, Vol. 4, >the University of Minnesota Press (Manchester University Press), 1984, >p.49) > >But this view is refuted by Frederick R. Karl(Frederick R. Karl, Modern >and Modernism: The Sovereignty of the Artist 1885-1925, Atheneum, New >York, 1985, n. pp. 3-4) : > >"B$B]S(Jger(IU(Js point is that Modernism and the avant-garde are separate >phenomena. Modernism occurred as an attack on traditional language and >writing techniques, the so-called aesthetic movement; whereas the >avant-garde is intended to undermine and change 'institutionalized >commerce with art.' Modernism, he stress, is concerned with linguistic >strategies; the avant-garde is involved in historical conflict and >change, going much further than Modernism. B$B]S(Jger is driving a wedge >between the pure aestheticians and those who follow [Georgy] >Luk$B-D(Js(IU(Js >sense of art as a totality. If he accomplishes that, then Modernism >becomes a 'technical change,' a linguistic strategy, and the avant-garde >a deep-rooted adversary or subversive force against commercialization >and, generally, a bourgeois-oriented culture. But if we see that art in >the latter nineteenth century and thereafter has become almost purely >process, if we cite the proliferation of manifestoes that assault >traditional social forms of every kind, if we note linguistic strategies >as having social roles and forms, then B$B]S(Jger's distinctions are >weakened, even collapsed." > >I also find Frederick R. Karl is interesting writer. Mondrian's mysticism and the formal aesthetic influences of the time do not have to be mutually exclusive. Art has always been used as a vehicle to interpret mystical relationships even before it was used in a merely aesthetic or exclusively formal way. Primitive societies have used art in a mystical sense to find their place in the world. Their art is mystical and mythical. In morning times, the Cubists, for example, derived part of their work from African art which was mythic, fetishistic, and totemistic. African art also used effigies to relate to unconscious archetypes. Mondrian wasn't working in a vacuum. He was part of a cultural millieu that was utopian and trying to spirtualize and idealize the creative aspects of life. Look at the things that were going on to stimulate their ideas. It was a time of cultural phenomena, the discovery of the atom changed their ideas of physics, radical psychology from likes of Freud and Jung stimulated ideas of the unconscious and the "shadow", and, of course, Eastern ideas became more prevalent in the West through vehicles like Theosophy. It was more than Mondrian alone, it was the times. You would not have seen the effort to abstraction in art without the spiritualizing influence of those days. Spirituality was like a yeast in the culture. Granted, some artists took that influence and turned it into a more formal inquiry into the abstract princples of art making. >Here, it sounds becoming preaching style I stop here about this topic. It may be preachy in spoken language, but certainly not in the written language. Preaching in the spoken language means there's an audience forced to listen for hours but too polite to walk away. The written word offers the reader a choice to take it or leave it without hurting anyone's feeling. Am I boring you, yet? See, I can preach, too! My English is better than yours. Watch out!!! >> >I have been not so confident >> >about my knowledge about religion, though I once affiliated with one of >> >Tibetan Buddhist sect founded by a Taiwanese who now living in Seattle >> >and with Raja-Yoga mainly for those reasons I took trips to Seattle >> >and India 4 or 5 years ago. >> >> When you have the time, I would like to hear more about this. > >OK. My religious experiences are not theoretical ones, though. If not theoretical, what were they like? Okay, partner, the tennis ball is on your side! Namaste, Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:20:19 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971118112019.0084e100@imagiware.com> Fellow theosophical writers: As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the listowners of that list.) Any useful ideas or comments would be appreciated. Statements like "I always do what I believe is best," though, don't really say anything, and are ways of avoiding discussing any of the issues involved. The same is true of statements, I think, like "Anyone should write anything anytime they like; there should be no limits or standards whatosever!" What is right or wrong, and why? -- Eldon ---- >Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:07:27 -0400 >From: "L-Soft list server at Brown University (1.8b)" >Subject: Usage guidelines for ARCANA > >Welcome to ARCANA! > >PLEASE READ THIS MESSAGE CAREFULLY! It contains important information >about ARCANA's rules and the expected behavior of subscribers. These >rules are designed to maintain the usefulness and enjoyment of ARCANA. >The Listowners will enforce these rules and will unsubscribe continued >offenders. > >First and foremost, ARCANA is a forum for the serious and academic dis- >cussion of the occult by students, scholars, practictioners and inter- >ested parties. It is not intended to be a forum for the New Age, psychic >and paranormal phenomena, metaphysics, UFOs, neo-paganism, Wicca or other >religions, as such. While it is recognized that the discussions on ARCANA >will meander at times, plese keep your posts as on-topic as possible. > >With that in mind, there are only two specific rules which restrict the >content of on-topic posts: > >1) No ad hominem attacks on other listmembers. > >2) No attacks on any religion or esoteric belief system. > >The reason for these rules is simple: we do not want ARCANA to become a >battleground for fights about the two things most people are most likely >to feel obligated to fight over: their selves and their beliefs. While we >recognize that there may be legitimate grounds for some fights, we insist >that any such arguments be debated in private e-mail. > >Out of respect for the privacy of all subscribers, ARCANA is a closed >list. The list's archives are available only to other subscribers. You >MAY NOT forward anything posted to the list to non-subscribers without >the express permission of the author(s) of the postings, including quoted >material. > >Copyright laws should be obeyed and respected as written. This includes >the fair use of copyrighted material from other publications. While the >legal copyright of articles posted to other mailing lists and newsgroups >is still unclear, it is polite to seek the author's permission before >reposting their article to ARCANA. > >To facilitate communication between as many people as possible, the >official language of the list is English; we request that translations >of all posts and quoted texts written in other languages be provided. > >As not all mail readers will display the sender's address, please sign >all your posts with your name and e-mail address. For example: > > Caryn McLeod > mcleod@azathoth.miskatonic.edu > >Elaborate signature files are neither necessary or welcomed. Please limit >the length of your signature file to four lines or less. > >Messages are best kept short, about one subject and given a clear subject >header. If you change the subject of a discussion, please change the >subject header as well! Long messages are certainly valid, but please >indicate their lengthy nature in the subject header. The longest post >that LISTSERV will allow is 250 lines long. Anything larger will be >rejected by LISTSERV and returned. Long articles are best posted to the >list in smaller pieces. Alternatively, you could mention the long file in >a short note to the list and email the long file to interested parties or >make the file available on a World Wide Web site. > >Please refrain from excessively quoting messages in your replies. You >should retain enough of the message you are replying to to establish the >context of your reply, but not so much that there is significantly more >quoted text than new text. Quoting entire messages is particularly >frowned upon. > >Please refrain from "me-too" posts or "one-liners". Such posts are better >directed to the person you are replying to rather than the entire list. > >Please understand that these rules are meant to improve the quality of >the discussion on this mailing list. We do not feel that they are either >onerous or unreasonable. We hope you enjoy ARCANA and find it useful. > >The ARCANA Listowners >06/96 > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:09:13 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <199711182011.NAA32543@selway.umt.edu> >As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable >guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, >I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing >list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the >listowners of that list.) A quick question - Eldon, are you seeking feedback because you are contemplating some sort of rules for theos-talk, or is there some effort afoot to impose guidelines of some sort on theos-l? >Any useful ideas or comments would be appreciated. Statements >like "I always do what I believe is best," though, don't really >say anything, and are ways of avoiding discussing any of the >issues involved. The same is true of statements, I think, like >"Anyone should write anything anytime they like; there should >be no limits or standards whatosever!" > Anyone *should* write anything anytime they like - understanding that they will likely be responded to in a tone identical to the one in which they write. This, however, does not *avoid* discussion, but is at the very root of it: A "governed" list will always by necessity take on the character of the governer(s), an ungoverned list will take on the character of the participants ... their best and their worst. Given a choice, I'll always choose freedom over control. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 12:40:48 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: Hi Eldon, I appreciate your effort and can see your side. However, I would not participate in a list with such guidelines. I may lurk, but I absolutely would have no urge to put in my .02. My free time is limited. Thus, in order to feel compelled to write in, I would have to feel a rapport with my fellow writers. Mere intellectual discussions are very dry when they are without light-hearted chat, jokes, or poetry. It takes a lot of the light stuff to get a thesis out of me now and then. Otherwise, I would rather use my energy toward getting a doctorate (Forget it! I'm not going back to school!). It may not be for others, but for me, effort starts with love. Thoa :o) >Fellow theosophical writers: > >As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable >guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, >I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing >list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the >listowners of that list.) > >Any useful ideas or comments would be appreciated. Statements >like "I always do what I believe is best," though, don't really >say anything, and are ways of avoiding discussing any of the >issues involved. The same is true of statements, I think, like >"Anyone should write anything anytime they like; there should >be no limits or standards whatosever!" > >What is right or wrong, and why? > >-- Eldon > >---- > >>Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 18:07:27 -0400 >>From: "L-Soft list server at Brown University (1.8b)" >>Subject: Usage guidelines for ARCANA >> >>Welcome to ARCANA! >> >>PLEASE READ THIS MESSAGE CAREFULLY! It contains important information >>about ARCANA's rules and the expected behavior of subscribers. These >>rules are designed to maintain the usefulness and enjoyment of ARCANA. >>The Listowners will enforce these rules and will unsubscribe continued >>offenders. >> >>First and foremost, ARCANA is a forum for the serious and academic dis- >>cussion of the occult by students, scholars, practictioners and inter- >>ested parties. It is not intended to be a forum for the New Age, psychic >>and paranormal phenomena, metaphysics, UFOs, neo-paganism, Wicca or other >>religions, as such. While it is recognized that the discussions on ARCANA >>will meander at times, plese keep your posts as on-topic as possible. >> >>With that in mind, there are only two specific rules which restrict the >>content of on-topic posts: >> >>1) No ad hominem attacks on other listmembers. >> >>2) No attacks on any religion or esoteric belief system. >> >>The reason for these rules is simple: we do not want ARCANA to become a >>battleground for fights about the two things most people are most likely >>to feel obligated to fight over: their selves and their beliefs. While we >>recognize that there may be legitimate grounds for some fights, we insist >>that any such arguments be debated in private e-mail. >> >>Out of respect for the privacy of all subscribers, ARCANA is a closed >>list. The list's archives are available only to other subscribers. You >>MAY NOT forward anything posted to the list to non-subscribers without >>the express permission of the author(s) of the postings, including quoted >>material. >> >>Copyright laws should be obeyed and respected as written. This includes >>the fair use of copyrighted material from other publications. While the >>legal copyright of articles posted to other mailing lists and newsgroups >>is still unclear, it is polite to seek the author's permission before >>reposting their article to ARCANA. >> >>To facilitate communication between as many people as possible, the >>official language of the list is English; we request that translations >>of all posts and quoted texts written in other languages be provided. >> >>As not all mail readers will display the sender's address, please sign >>all your posts with your name and e-mail address. For example: >> >> Caryn McLeod >> mcleod@azathoth.miskatonic.edu >> >>Elaborate signature files are neither necessary or welcomed. Please limit >>the length of your signature file to four lines or less. >> >>Messages are best kept short, about one subject and given a clear subject >>header. If you change the subject of a discussion, please change the >>subject header as well! Long messages are certainly valid, but please >>indicate their lengthy nature in the subject header. The longest post >>that LISTSERV will allow is 250 lines long. Anything larger will be >>rejected by LISTSERV and returned. Long articles are best posted to the >>list in smaller pieces. Alternatively, you could mention the long file in >>a short note to the list and email the long file to interested parties or >>make the file available on a World Wide Web site. >> >>Please refrain from excessively quoting messages in your replies. You >>should retain enough of the message you are replying to to establish the >>context of your reply, but not so much that there is significantly more >>quoted text than new text. Quoting entire messages is particularly >>frowned upon. >> >>Please refrain from "me-too" posts or "one-liners". Such posts are better >>directed to the person you are replying to rather than the entire list. >> >>Please understand that these rules are meant to improve the quality of >>the discussion on this mailing list. We do not feel that they are either >>onerous or unreasonable. We hope you enjoy ARCANA and find it useful. >> >>The ARCANA Listowners >>06/96 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 16:13:37 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <34720501.1E7C@dmv.com> Eldon B Tucker wrote: > > Fellow theosophical writers: > > As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable > guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, > I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing > list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the > listowners of that list.) Eldon, I am in support of an unmoderated list, although, I do think rules of etiqute are good to follow. I am on an Alchemy list which is moderated, but for most of the time I have been subscribed persons broke the rules with no retribution taken. Of course the situation changed, a little while back, when the list gained a great firery energy from posts made by an intellegent but very phrenetic practical alchemist. He was quite the bombast. List members began by responding to him with lengthy refutations of his radical ideas which one might call Platonic or biased toward a spiritual metaphysics. Well, the materialists came out of hiding and there was a great war which ensued between the listmembers; physical versus spiritual. It was a bit of a nusance but there really were some Valcurian moments that were rather unforgettable. The listowner sadly put an end to it by making a system change which meant that posts sent to the list would wait at the server until he o.k.ed them and sent them to the list. The result of this action is that there is very rarely anthing posted to the list; "the thrill is gone" so to speak. This list and the Alchemy forum don't seem to get any 'tourists' so you might want to come up with some rules and make them available to list members, but I think that strict enforcement of the rules defeats a free exchange of ideas that people who subscribe to lists are looking for. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 13:55:22 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971118135522.00869a10@imagiware.com> JRC: At 03:16 PM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote: >>As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable >>guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, >>I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing >>list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the >>listowners of that list.) >A quick question - Eldon, are you seeking feedback because you are >contemplating some sort of rules for theos-talk, or is there some effort >afoot to impose guidelines of some sort on theos-l? This is partly to see if it's possible to formulate general guidelines for theos-talk. That's "guidelines" or recommended norms of behavior and not mandatory rules. As to theos-l, I don't think it's possible to impose any guidelines, unless John Mead were to do so, and I don't see any compelling reason for him to do so. Also, although I haven't posted a request for ideas and help yet, I'll be doing a one-day program on "Theosophy and the Internet" at Krotona in January, and the topic of mailing lists -- what they are, what you do with them, what you can give to or get out of them -- will come up. I'm looking for different ideas, not just what I can think up on my own. >>Any useful ideas or comments would be appreciated. Statements >>like "I always do what I believe is best," though, don't really >>say anything, and are ways of avoiding discussing any of the >>issues involved. The same is true of statements, I think, like >>"Anyone should write anything anytime they like; there should >>be no limits or standards whatosever!" >Anyone *should* write anything anytime they like - understanding that they >will likely be responded to in a tone identical to the one in which they >write. Even though there shouldn't, perhaps, be censorship and advance restrains (e.g. moderation) of postings, there are norms of behavior for various lists. These norms are the perhaps unspoken standards by which the list participants behave. There's nothing wrong with articulating them and attempting to understand what is going on. The norms for each mailing list may differ. It would be useful, I think, to understand them, to understand what is going on. >This, however, does not *avoid* discussion, but is at the very root >of it: A "governed" list will always by necessity take on the character of >the governer(s), an ungoverned list will take on the character of the >participants ... their best and their worst. >Given a choice, I'll always choose freedom over control. I tend to have the same preference, finding it easier to write something for an unmoderated mailing list than submitting something to a moderator for their decision if what I write is ok or not. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 97 17:27:04 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: What are attacks? Message-ID: <199711182227.RAA20731@leo.vsla.edu> In response to Eldon's question, I don't see that the Arcana guidelines would be any good in keeping Theosophists from attacking people or religions. Why not? Whoever does it always denies that attacking is what is going on. Often that denial is combined with a further attack on the already attacked-- for "taking things personally." As for attacking belief systems: some people, fundamentalist Theosophists certainly included, take any criticism or questioning of their beliefs as personal attacks. For example, someone recently posted on theos-talk the claim that someone's asserting there were "demonstrable errors" in HPB's writings was "fighting words." If a moderator starts to make judgments on what is attacks and what isn't, it would be very hard to keep his/her own personal beliefs from influencing that judgment. People by nature are much less tolerant of free speech of those who differ with them than of those who agree with them. They tend to turn a blind eye to the nastiness of those "on our side" while exaggerating that of "heretics." I am also concerned that you, Eldon, seem to have developed a heightened sensitivity to "attacks" and "backstabbing" of those not present, right after I finally, after two years of withholding the information, explained in a pretty dispassionate post the history behind John Algeo's negative reviews of The Masters Revealed. Why did I post that? In response to a lengthy and extremely personal attack on me, by a friend and supporter of his, that made wild unsubstantiated accusations about the subject. If your desire to establish rules is to some extent in order to protect Theosophical Authorities from criticism, then to that extent I think it is misconceived. They have been protecting themselves from it all too well for all too long, and the movement has suffered as a result. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 16:41:52 -0700 (MST) From: blafoun@azstarnet.com (Caldwell/Graye) (by way of blafoun@azstarnet.com (Caldwell/Graye)) Subject: Re: Guidelines for Theos-talk Message-ID: <199711182341.QAA14851@mailhost.azstarnet.com> One of the guidelines of the ARCANA list reads: "No attacks on any religion or esoteric belief system." What is the definition of "attack"? Some of Madame Blavatsky's writings might be considered as "attacks" on the Christian religion, Spiritualism, etc. Parts of Isis Unveiled and the Mahatma Letters contain pretty strong language against "Christianity" Spiritualism, and other religious belief systems. If Madame Blavatsky, M. and K.H. repeated some of the following "attacks" on Theos-talk, would the "moderator" censor these "critiques"? "Nay more he who reads our Buddhist scriptures written for the superstitious masses will fail to find in them a demon so vindictive, unjust, so cruel and so stupid as the celestial tyrant upon whom the Christians prodigally lavish their servile worship and on whom their theologians heap those perfections that are contradicted on every page of their Bible. Truly and veritably your theology has created her God but to destroy him piecemeal." "Look at India and look at Christendom and Islam, at Judaism and Fetichism. It is priestly imposture that rendered these Gods so terrible to man; it is religion that makes of him the selfish bigot, the fanatic that hates all mankind out of his own sect without rendering him any better or more moral for it. It is belief in God and Gods that makes two-thirds of humanity the slaves of a handful of those who deceive them under the false pretence of saving them. Is not man ever ready to commit any kind of evil if told that his God or Gods demand the crime?; voluntary victim of an illusionary God, the abject slave of his crafty ministers. The Irish, Italian and Slavonian peasant will starve himself and see his family starving and naked to feed and clothe his padre and pope. For two thousand years India groaned under the weight of caste, Brahmins alone feeding on the fat of the land, and to-day the followers of Christ and those of Mahomet are cutting each other's throats in the names of and for the greater glory of their respective myths. Remember the sum of human misery will never be diminished unto that day when the better portion of humanity destroys in the name of Truth, morality, and universal charity, the altars of their false gods. " "What have we, the disciples of the true Arhats, of esoteric Buddhism and of Sang-gyas to do with the Shasters and Orthodox Brahmanism? There are 100 of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis and Saddhus leading the most pure lives, and yet being as they are, on the path of error, never having had an opportunity to meet, see or even hear of us. Their forefathers have driven away the followers of the only true philosophy upon earth away from India and now, it is not for the latter to come to them but to them to come to us if they want us. Which of them is ready to become a Buddhist, a Nastika as they call us? None. Those who have believed and followed us have had their reward. Mr. Sinnett and Hume are exceptions. Their beliefs are no barrier to us for they have none. They may have had influences around them, bad magnetic emanations the result of drink, Society and promiscuous physical associations (resulting even from shaking hands with impure men) but all this is physical and material impediments which with a little effort we could counteract and even clear away without much detriment to ourselves. Not so with the magnetism and invisible results proceeding from erroneous and sincere beliefs. Faith in the Gods and God, and other superstitions attracts millions of foreign influences, living entities and powerful agents around them, with which we would have to use more than ordinary exercise of power to drive them away. We do not choose to do so. We do not find it either necessary or profitable to lose our time waging war to the unprogressed Planetaries who delight in personating gods and sometimes well known characters who have lived on earth. There are Dhyan-Chohans and "Chohans of Darkness," not what they term devils but imperfect "Intelligences" who have never been born on this or any other earth or sphere no more than the "Dhyan Chohans" have and who will never belong to the "builders of the Universe," the pure Planetary Intelligences, who preside at every Manvantara while the Dark Chohans preside at the Pralayas. Explain this to Mr. Sinnett. . . . -- tell him to read over what I said to them in the few things I have explained to Mr. Hume; and let him remember that as all in this universe is contrast. . . .so the light of the Dhyan Chohans and their pure intelligence is contrasted by the "Ma-Mo Chohans" -- and their destructive intelligence. These are the gods the Hindus and Christians and Mahomed and all others of bigoted religions and sects worship; and so long as their influence is upon their devotees we would no more think of associating with or counteracting them in their work than we do the Red-Caps on earth whose evil results we try to palliate but whose work we have no right to meddle with so long as they do not cross our path." These quotes are from The Mahatma Letters but we could give similar ones from Isis Unveiled, etc. dealing not only with religion, but also Spiritualism. Daniel H. Caldwell blafoun@azstarnet.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 16:10:47 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: New theosophical email addresses Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971118161047.0088faf0@imagiware.com> Following is news from the American Section of the Theosophical Society (with international headquarters at Adyar, India). This information is now available, and I understand a copy of the announcement will appear in the next issue of THE QUEST. -- Eldon Tucker ---- E-MAIL ADDRESSES AT OLCOTT Here are some addresses you can use to contact us electronically: General olcott@theosophia.org Membership natsec@theosophia.org Library library@theosophia.org Audio-Video av@theosophia.org Quest Book Shop questore@theosophia.org Discussion list olcott@theosophia.org National President president@theosophia.org We look forward to hearing from you over the ether. But if you are not electronically inclined, the old post office number still works. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:16:59 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <971118191658_1805311977@mrin39> In a message dated 97-11-18 16:33:57 EST, you write: >I appreciate your effort and can see your side. However, I would not >participate in a list with such guidelines. I may lurk, but I absolutely >would have no urge to put in my .02. Neither would I. I lurk on ts-l but the material on it is such boring dreck that it is not worth actively participating in. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:36:36 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119013636.00d07bd0@mail.eden.com> At 04:38 PM 11/18/97 -0500, Vincent Beall wrote: >It was a bit of a nusance but there really were some Valcurian moments >that were rather unforgettable. The listowner sadly put an end to it by >making a system change which meant that posts sent to the list would >wait at the server until he o.k.ed them and sent them to the list. The >result of this action is that there is very rarely anthing posted to the >list; "the thrill is gone" so to speak. > >This list and the Alchemy forum don't seem to get any 'tourists' so you >might want to come up with some rules and make them available to list >members, but I think that strict enforcement of the rules defeats a free >exchange of ideas that people who subscribe to lists are looking for. > >Vincent You are right on target. I am on listening-l, which has been running very actively with no guidelines or rules. As Krishnamurti stated Truth is a Pathless Land, listening-l is Ruleless maillist!!!! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:43:56 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What are attacks? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119014356.00d07bc8@mail.eden.com> At 05:38 PM 11/18/97 -0500, you wrote: >In response to Eldon's question, I don't see that the Arcana >guidelines would be any good in keeping Theosophists from >attacking people or religions. Why not? Whoever does it >always denies that attacking is what is going on. Often that >denial is combined with a further attack on the already >attacked-- for "taking things personally." > >As for attacking belief systems: some people, fundamentalist >Theosophists certainly included, take any criticism or >questioning of their beliefs as personal attacks. For example, >someone recently posted on theos-talk the claim that someone's >asserting there were "demonstrable errors" in HPB's writings >was "fighting words." > >If a moderator starts to make judgments on what is attacks >and what isn't, it would be very hard to keep his/her own personal >beliefs from influencing that judgment. People by nature are >much less tolerant of free speech of those who differ with them >than of those who agree with them. They tend to turn a blind >eye to the nastiness of those "on our side" while exaggerating >that of "heretics." > >I am also concerned that you, Eldon, seem to have developed a >heightened sensitivity to "attacks" and "backstabbing" >of those not present, right after I finally, after two years >of withholding the information, explained in a pretty dispassionate >post the history behind John Algeo's negative reviews of The >Masters Revealed. Why did I post that? In response to a >lengthy and extremely personal attack on me, by a friend and >supporter of his, that made wild >unsubstantiated accusations about the subject. > >If your desire to establish rules is to some extent in order to >protect Theosophical Authorities from criticism, then to that >extent I think it is misconceived. They have been protecting >themselves from it all too well for all too long, and the >movement has suffered as a result. > Paul: Your points are well taken. If there are any discussions or criticisms about any Theosophical Authorities or Organizational Elected officals in any maillist, they should be bold and courageous enough to come up and respond in the maillists which they have not done so far. No one need to or should protect anyone indirectly by implementing any rules, etiquette or moderation (or any other round about technique). Status-quo will serve us all well as it has done so far. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 19:46:37 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119014637.00735f14@mail.eden.com> At 11:20 AM 11/18/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >Fellow theosophical writers: > >As fuel for further possible discussion on what are reasonable >guidelines for participation in theosophical mailing lists, >I've included a copy of the guidelines for the ARCANA mailing >list. (The guidelines are reposted with permission from the >listowners of that list.) > >Any useful ideas or comments would be appreciated. Statements >like "I always do what I believe is best," though, don't really >say anything, and are ways of avoiding discussing any of the >issues involved. The same is true of statements, I think, like >"Anyone should write anything anytime they like; there should >be no limits or standards whatosever!" > >What is right or wrong, and why? > >-- Eldon I have posted the following response on theos-l where the above msg was also posted. The response is my .02 feedback. =================== >From day one, Theos-xxxx lists have never had any guidelines, rules or any restriction of any sort and had done very well. Varied topics on theosophy, theosophical organizations and theosophical personalities have been discussed at various times. While everything that goes on may be not have satisfied everyone, still it is serving its purpose very well. Also from time to time, due to the openness and lack of guidelines or rules, subscribers have posted information which are unavailable from *any* other source. Some of the information some may not want the world to know about it. But Truth needs no defenders and it can take care of itself. I am for status-quo, and if it is not broken, don't fix it. Let us not tinker it and possibly ruin it. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 01:41:57 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: In message , Thoa Thi-Kim Tran writes >It may not be for others, but for me, effort starts with love. > >Thoa :o) X X X X X X X X X X X Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 20:11:01 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119021101.00e19a68@mail.eden.com> >From day one, Theos-xxxx lists have never had any guidelines, rules or any restriction of any sort and had done very well. Varied topics on theosophy, theosophical organizations and theosophical personalities have been discussed at various time. While everything that goes on may be not have satisfied everyone, still it is serving its purpose very well. Also from time to time, due to the openness and lack of guidelines or rules, subscribers have posted information which are unavailable from *any* other source. Some of the information some may not want the world to know about it. But Truth needs no defenders and it can take care of itself. I am for status-quo, and if it is not broken, don't fix it. Let us not tinker it and possibly ruin it. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 20:11:57 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: New theosophical email addresses Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119021157.00e20b20@mail.eden.com> At 07:58 PM 11/18/97 -0500, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >Following is news from the American Section of the Theosophical >Society (with international headquarters at Adyar, India). This >information is now available, and I understand a copy of the >announcement will appear in the next issue of THE QUEST. > >-- Eldon Tucker > >---- > >E-MAIL ADDRESSES AT OLCOTT > >Here are some addresses you can use to contact us electronically: > > General olcott@theosophia.org > Membership natsec@theosophia.org > Library library@theosophia.org > Audio-Video av@theosophia.org > Quest Book Shop questore@theosophia.org > Discussion list olcott@theosophia.org > National President president@theosophia.org > >We look forward to hearing from you over the ether. But if you >are not electronically inclined, the old post office number still >works. > Thanks for Eldon posting this msg. What is going on at Olcott? This msg could have been posted by Olcott. Very puzzling. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 21:25:05 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: New theosophical email addresses Message-ID: <34724E01.406B@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > This msg could have been posted by Olcott. > > Very puzzling. They were too busy hiding on the grassy knoll. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 18 Nov 1997 20:29:12 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: New theosophical email addresses Message-ID: <34724EF8.288C@eden.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > M K Ramadoss wrote: > > This msg could have been posted by Olcott. > > > > Very puzzling. > > They were too busy hiding on the grassy knoll. > > Bart Lidofsky Glad you found out. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 00:12:29 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <971119001228_259790205@mrin53.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-18 22:58:19 EST, you write: >I am for status-quo, and if it is not broken, don't fix it. Let us not >tinker it and possibly ruin it. > >MKR The argument is academic in any event. The list is owned by John Mead and as long as he maintains his belief in an open list it is of no importance what anyone else thinks. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 00:33:00 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: What are attacks? Message-ID: <971119003259_-1475493112@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-18 23:56:53 EST, you write: >If your desire to establish rules is to some extent in order to >protect Theosophical Authorities from criticism, then to that >extent I think it is misconceived. They have been protecting >themselves from it all too well for all too long, and the >movement has suffered as a result. > See my answer to Ramadoss. If Eldon wishes to establish rules on a list of his creation that is his business. If he thinks that any other list is going to follow them he is wasting his time. And if anyone wants to see what a mailing list is like that has totally free discussion at all times, besides our happy home here, they should drop in on zee-list and see what the Chaos Magicians do. We really have fun there. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 07:27:48 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971119072748.007fb5c0@imagiware.com> MKR: >>From day one, Theos-xxxx lists have never had any guidelines, rules or any >>restriction of any sort and had done very well. > >Varied topics on theosophy, theosophical organizations and theosophical >personalities have been discussed at various time. While everything that >goes on may be not have satisfied everyone, still it is serving its purpose >very well. Also from time to time, due to the openness and lack of >guidelines or rules, subscribers have posted information which are >unavailable from *any* other source. Some of the information some may not >want the world to know about it. But Truth needs no defenders and it can >take care of itself. > >I am for status-quo, and if it is not broken, don't fix it. Let us not >tinker it and possibly ruin it. > >MKR Trying to understand how it works does not mean tinkering with it and possibly breaking it. There *are* guidelines or norms of behavior in operation. Because they haven't been articulated, they are implicit rather than explicit guidelines. They are established and maintained by the consistent behavior of the list participants. There's nothing wrong with attempting to articulate them, turning them from secret, underground, unconscious rules into something that can be understood and talked about. The only new argument against coming out into the open about how things are operating, that I've heard lately, runs something like this: "If you write a guideline about how theos-l operates you're externally imposing an authority on my freedom-loving soul that'll bring me to fight you or flee the list. But -- ha, ha! -- you can't because John Mead owns the list and would never let you!" I can't follow the logic in this line of thought since the attempt to understand implicit norms of behavior on the list *is not* the imposition of either guidelines (voluntary) nor of rules (mandatory). I've heard some discussion on theos-l in the past about how it has been a problem that theosophical organizations have implicit, unspoken rules and expectations of their memberships -- about how this is bad, how issues should be aired and worked out by people in the open. Is this something that we can only talk about when it deals with other people? A group -- lodge, organization, even mailing list -- tends to maintain its status quo. Many members are followers, listeners, lurkers at meetings. A handful like to monopolize the air time and control the direction of discussions and programs. That handful is the group's "leadership". It maintains the status quo by providing the group with programs along lines that it likes and by keeping the group "on topic" or resisting the introduction of new ideas by newcomers, if those new ideas give the group a new direction. (That new direction is perceived as a "takeover" since it may take power away from the existing leadership.) On a mailing list with no moderation and no explicit guidelines, the implicit guidelines are defined and enforced by the most-active participants. The statement "you can't tell us to change" in response to any questioning of the status quo is really saying "we're happy with how we're currently running things, so shut up!" The status quo (implicit guidelines) is enforced by both punishment -- a barrage of critical messages both posted and privately sent to the offender -- and by rewards -- a number of positive, glowing statements in response to people supporting the party line. So ... back to my original questions: What are the currently guidelines or norms? What are the pros and cons, the good and bad in them? Why are things the way they are? One point made was that there may be highly useful information that may come out, information that may have been censored or discarded as useless in an unmoderated list. This is given as an argument against moderation, with the assumption that a person moderating a list would not be bright enough to see how important something is, or would be too prejudiced to allow it out. An example of a guideline would be to not use language that might be considered as sexist and offensive to some members. This is a guideline since it's a recommended behavior, but not a mandatory rule, since no one would be kicked off the list if his writing failed inspection by the "language police". Another example of a guideline concerns the discussion of theosophical historic figures (e.g. Leadbeater). Some people were as pissed off and outraged at this discussion as others were about sexist language. At the time, there was a guideline established that the historic discussion move to theos-roots, so as not to appear on theos-l and be seen by and continue to offend them. This guideline held for a while and then was ignored. A third guideline is that the list not be exploited for the commercial gain of anyone, that it not be filled with ads selling products or soliciting funds. A fourth is that purely personal communications, being of little or no interest to the overall list, be sent as private email. What else do we see that is going on? -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 09:30:23 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971119093023.007e0720@imagiware.com> Paul: >In response to Eldon's question, I don't see that the Arcana >guidelines would be any good in keeping Theosophists from >attacking people or religions. Why not? Whoever does it >always denies that attacking is what is going on. Often that >denial is combined with a further attack on the already >attacked-- for "taking things personally." Perhaps there's a fine line here between disagreeing with and challenging someone's beliefs and treating that person respectfully. This could be on any issue -- the discussion of Leadbeater with a devotee, the questioning of someone's firmly held beliefs in the dogmas of a particular closed religion or group, or even the questioning of various aspects of your books by its critics. >As for attacking belief systems: some people, fundamentalist >Theosophists certainly included, take any criticism or >questioning of their beliefs as personal attacks. For example, >someone recently posted on theos-talk the claim that someone's >asserting there were "demonstrable errors" in HPB's writings >was "fighting words." This is a natural human reaction, which I'm sure you've felt as well, as your books (beliefs and conclusions regarding the Masters) have come under criticism. >If a moderator starts to make judgments on what is attacks >and what isn't, it would be very hard to keep his/her own personal >beliefs from influencing that judgment. People by nature are >much less tolerant of free speech of those who differ with them >than of those who agree with them. They tend to turn a blind >eye to the nastiness of those "on our side" while exaggerating >that of "heretics." Very true. And I've seen it at work on various lists. >I am also concerned that you, Eldon, seem to have developed a >heightened sensitivity to "attacks" and "back stabbing" >of those not present, right after I finally, after two years >of withholding the information, explained in a pretty dispassionate >post the history behind John Algeo's negative reviews of The >Masters Revealed. Why did I post that? In response to a >lengthy and extremely personal attack on me, by a friend and >supporter of his, that made wild >unsubstantiated accusations about the subject. A number of topics have come up at about the same time as your postings. I'm writing about the ones that interest me. The particular issues I'm most interested in are that of the rights of authors to their works and that of the workings of mailing lists. I've been interested in copyrights and the rights of authors for some time. As to how mailing lists operate, it's a topic I'll be trying to explain at my Saturday program at Krotona on "Theosophy and the Internet". >If your desire to establish rules is to some extent in order to >protect Theosophical Authorities from criticism, then to that >extent I think it is misconceived. No. I'm not interested in rules protecting them, you, or anyone from criticism of their ideas. I am interested in seeing what implicit rules are operating on existing mailing lists, and in seeing if some good *voluntary* guidelines might eventually be drafted for theos-talk. >They have been protecting >themselves from it all too well for all too long, and the >movement has suffered as a result. This is a somewhat different topic: the shortcomings of theosophical leadership and organizations and how to change things to become effective again in the future. It's important and has been discussed at times. Closer to the topic at hand, though, would be the shortcomings of mailing list leadership and how to change things to become more effective in the future. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 11:06:03 -0700 From: "John R. Crocker" Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <01bcf515$cc970960$17338396@lo201c.registrar.umt.edu> >The only new argument against coming out into the open about how >things are operating, that I've heard lately, runs something like this: >"If you write a guideline about how theos-l operates you're >externally imposing an authority on my freedom-loving soul that'll >bring me to fight you or flee the list. But -- ha, ha! -- you can't >because John Mead owns the list and would never let you!" And your response to that argument runs something like this: "No one is responding to me the way I think they should, they are not talking about what I want them to talk about, so I'm going to pout, get petty and vindictive, and characterize their responses as childish with a dismissive tone of voice." Just thought you might enjoy being being characterized as much as those you characterize do. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:37:03 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: <971119133702_-1877511758@mrin45.mail.aol.com> Eldon, Now we know what your are getting at and the blood-pressure is dropping accordingly. Hmm, let me see. As of now there are two guidlines that I don't regularly violate. I have to get to work on them. Can't leave any rules, you know. Bad form for a heretic. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:37:50 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: >In message , Thoa Thi-Kim Tran > writes >>It may not be for others, but for me, effort starts with love. >> >>Thoa :o) > >X X X X X X X X X X X > >Alan O O O O O O O O O O O tic-tac... From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:37:38 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: What are attacks? Message-ID: Chuck: >And if anyone wants to see what a mailing list is like that has totally free >discussion at all times, besides our happy home here, they should drop in on >zee-list and see what the Chaos Magicians do. We really have fun there. Besides riding on a magical cape, how do I get there? Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 10:37:23 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: Eldon: >Trying to understand how it works does not mean tinkering with it and >possibly breaking it. There *are* guidelines or norms of behavior in >operation. Because they haven't been articulated, they are implicit >rather than explicit guidelines. They are established and maintained >by the consistent behavior of the list participants. There's nothing >wrong with attempting to articulate them, turning them from secret, >underground, unconscious rules into something that can be understood >and talked about. There is nothing wrong with figuring out the dynamics of a list. However, implicit guidelines allow more openness and change, according to the dynamics of the list, than explicit guidelines. For example, a list with stodgy old-timers may be able to maintain its implicit rules for a while. On the other hand, the list may suddenly become inundated with young bloods and radical thinking, changing the rules for that list. Explicit rules allow little chance of that happening. We all learn by changes. And changes can be painful. Any time that the security of one's rules is broken, one will feel threatened and offended. For example, Theosophy and mainstream religions are losing members and not gaining young bloods because those institutions did not change with the times. The young bloods certainly do not want to go where their life styles (which seemed perfectly normal and innocuous to them) are criticized and confined. As Chuck somewhat said a while back, this is a time in which people often rebel against rules. IMO, it's not that people are anti-rules. It's just that they are following their individual rules. We just have to learn to understand and respect them. I see tomato, you see to-mah-to. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:41:59 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <971119134158_-1172768716@mrin44.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-19 12:30:26 EST, you write: > As to how mailing lists >operate, it's a topic I'll be trying to explain at my Saturday >program at Krotona on "Theosophy and the Internet". > Well, as I doubt many, if any, of us will be there to hear you (they would all commit suicide rather than let me near Krotona) it would be nice if you could digest and post your remarks so those of us so benighted will know what you did to those poor folk in the land of prunes and pickle juice. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:10:50 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for theosophy lists Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119191050.00c5a0c0@mail.eden.com> All the points and issued mentioned are appropriate. >From a novice point of view, I wish to add the following: 1. The lists all have a small subscription. So instead of telling every newbee the guidelines or whatever etiquette, telling him/her that the list is most open and feel free to post anything you decide to post is the most welcoming msg one is likely to hear. In the world where you usually hear about what one should or should not do, this is a very welcome change, especially the younger generation. 2. The openness and freedom of speech and action encourages a positive attitude to t/Theosophy, IMHO. 3. The unwritten etiquette develops and evolves over time. If there is some noise along the way, that is part of life. 4. Internet is a totally new medium and defies the traditional approaches. Don't we all recall when AOL (I think) barred the use of certain words as inappropriate, they ran into a ridiculous situation. One word barred was "breast" and suddently those women discussing breast cancer (and many of them were seriously ill) were shut off from posting any msg which contained the word breast and after a day or two the ban was lifted when the *banners* found the unforseen consequence. 5. Did we not see how difficult it is to even legislate any changes. The federal law was ruled unconstitutional when it tried to impose some restrictions on Internet. 6. In any real life activity, it is a fact that the a handful few who are responsible for much of the activity, not the masses. This appears to be a law of nature, one will find few participants posting majority of the msgs. It is not their fault. It is the lack of interest or time to post by the lurkers. So we have to live with it. 7. All the participants are grown up and mature ones. They are also intelligent to understand and act in the best manner they think appropriate and even their actions change over a period of time. 8. Changes are in the natural order of things. So if some changes are to be brought about, the question is how one goes about. But such principles as freedom is not subject to change. So I am all for free and open discussion. No one needs to be afraid of Truth and if Truth hurts at times, it is not the fault of truth, but ourselves. MKR PS: Even on this topic there were only a couple of responses. It would be nice to hear from more of the lurkers!!! At 07:27 AM 11/19/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >MKR: > >>>From day one, Theos-xxxx lists have never had any guidelines, rules or any >>>restriction of any sort and had done very well. >> >>Varied topics on theosophy, theosophical organizations and theosophical >>personalities have been discussed at various time. While everything that >>goes on may be not have satisfied everyone, still it is serving its purpose >>very well. Also from time to time, due to the openness and lack of >>guidelines or rules, subscribers have posted information which are >>unavailable from *any* other source. Some of the information some may not >>want the world to know about it. But Truth needs no defenders and it can >>take care of itself. >> >>I am for status-quo, and if it is not broken, don't fix it. Let us not >>tinker it and possibly ruin it. >> >>MKR > >Trying to understand how it works does not mean tinkering with it and >possibly breaking it. There *are* guidelines or norms of behavior in >operation. Because they haven't been articulated, they are implicit >rather than explicit guidelines. They are established and maintained >by the consistent behavior of the list participants. There's nothing >wrong with attempting to articulate them, turning them from secret, >underground, unconscious rules into something that can be understood >and talked about. > >The only new argument against coming out into the open about how >things are operating, that I've heard lately, runs something like this: > >"If you write a guideline about how theos-l operates you're >externally imposing an authority on my freedom-loving soul that'll >bring me to fight you or flee the list. But -- ha, ha! -- you can't >because John Mead owns the list and would never let you!" > >I can't follow the logic in this line of thought since the >attempt to understand implicit norms of behavior on the list *is not* >the imposition of either guidelines (voluntary) nor of rules >(mandatory). > >I've heard some discussion on theos-l in the past about how it >has been a problem that theosophical organizations have implicit, >unspoken rules and expectations of their memberships -- about how >this is bad, how issues should be aired and worked out by >people in the open. Is this something that we can only talk >about when it deals with other people? > >A group -- lodge, organization, even mailing list -- tends to >maintain its status quo. Many members are followers, listeners, >lurkers at meetings. A handful like to monopolize the air time >and control the direction of discussions and programs. That >handful is the group's "leadership". It maintains the status >quo by providing the group with programs along lines that it >likes and by keeping the group "on topic" or resisting the >introduction of new ideas by newcomers, if those new ideas >give the group a new direction. (That new direction is >perceived as a "takeover" since it may take power away from >the existing leadership.) > >On a mailing list with no moderation and no explicit guidelines, >the implicit guidelines are defined and enforced by the >most-active participants. The statement "you can't tell us to >change" in response to any questioning of the status quo is >really saying "we're happy with how we're currently running >things, so shut up!" The status quo (implicit guidelines) is >enforced by both punishment -- a barrage of critical messages >both posted and privately sent to the offender -- and by >rewards -- a number of positive, glowing statements in >response to people supporting the party line. > >So ... back to my original questions: What are the currently >guidelines or norms? What are the pros and cons, the good and >bad in them? Why are things the way they are? > >One point made was that there may be highly useful information >that may come out, information that may have been censored >or discarded as useless in an unmoderated list. This is given >as an argument against moderation, with the assumption >that a person moderating a list would not be bright enough >to see how important something is, or would be too prejudiced >to allow it out. > >An example of a guideline would be to not use language >that might be considered as sexist and offensive to some >members. This is a guideline since it's a recommended >behavior, but not a mandatory rule, since no one would be >kicked off the list if his writing failed inspection by >the "language police". > >Another example of a guideline concerns the >discussion of theosophical historic figures (e.g. Leadbeater). >Some people were as pissed off and outraged at this discussion >as others were about sexist language. At the time, there was >a guideline established that the historic discussion move to >theos-roots, so as not to appear on theos-l and be seen by >and continue to offend them. This guideline held for a while >and then was ignored. > >A third guideline is that the list not be exploited for >the commercial gain of anyone, that it not be filled with >ads selling products or soliciting funds. > >A fourth is that purely personal communications, being of >little or no interest to the overall list, be sent as >private email. > >What else do we see that is going on? > >-- Eldon > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 13:10:56 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971119191056.00c5d768@mail.eden.com> At 12:29 PM 11/19/97 -0500, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >A number of topics have come up at about the same time as your >postings. I'm writing about the ones that interest me. The >particular issues I'm most interested in are that of the >rights of authors to their works and that of the workings of >mailing lists. I've been interested in copyrights and the >rights of authors for some time. As to how mailing lists >operate, it's a topic I'll be trying to explain at my Saturday >program at Krotona on "Theosophy and the Internet". 1. The issue of copyrights and rights of authors in the Internet age is evolving and it would be interesting to see how things shape up because of the issue of freedom of expression, right to quote someone, and the varied laws of the countries of the world on these issues. 2. I am glad that you are taking the time to talk about Internet at Krotona. 3. It may be time for someone to give a lecture to the TSA Elected Officials none of whom I am yet to see in the cyberspace -- maillists and usenet groups. Writing about Internet in the official magazine does not translate into active dynamic participation in the cyberspace. Apart from the e-mail addresses at Olcott, I am yet to see e-mail addresses of the elected officials. Peace MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:44:13 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for theosophy lists Message-ID: <199711192345.QAA14972@server.umt.edu> >8. Changes are in the natural order of things. So if some changes are to be >brought about, the question is how one goes about. But such principles as >freedom is not subject to change. Yeas ... actually I personally think any talk of articulating guidelines or norms on the Internet is pretty much a useless exercise. virtually every list is going to have a set of "guidelines" that are sent to every new subscriber - but people pretty much ignore them (or, even if they don't they will always say their perspective is within the guidelines, while others may be breaking them) .... they are meaningless unless the list is moderated and the moderator exerts control. I have been on three or four lists that went from unmoderated to moderated .. and the funny thing is is that almost the same phenomena happened on each: they shrank in two stages ... the first being that the parties that were subject to "moderation" (and in every case I remember the push for moderation came about because of a few particularly lively discussion threads) simply unsubscribed ... resulting in the lists quieting down quite a bit. Over the next month or so, however, another larger segment unsubscribed ... they never said why, and many of them were just lurkers, but I suspect that most left because the lists became spectacularly dull. In no case have I ever seen a list move from unmoderated to moderated and *increase* its membership. It generally ... no matter what the topic ... leads to a certain faction or perspective (to which the moderator belongs) becoming the dominant voices on the list. ~Course there's nothing wrong with a group of people forming a list to talk about things they already agree about ... but the value of the list (IMO) almost invariably lessens as a result (especially on the lists I generally belong to ... scientific and spiritual - in both areas the chief *value* of the Internet is that one can engage people who think dramatically differently). -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:47:25 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Guidelines Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971120004725.01012844@mail.eden.com> Here is something which may be relevant! mkr ========================== >Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 00:14:52 +0100 >From: Jan Pieter Verhey >Subject: noise & silence Making noise about silence. K just whispered in my ear to suggest the whole list to take an email-free holiday for one week. No posts from listening-l for seven days, that would make a noise-reduction of about 300 dB...! (1dB / post) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 18:47:28 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971120004728.00fb0470@mail.eden.com> What a surprise when I opened the current issue of Quest. There is an article by Nancy Hiscoe Clark (a Unity Minister) on Princess Diana as the Great Mother. Most creative imagination to connect her death and the world attention to Great Mother. Here is a situation where Diana was killed by a driver who was DWI and trying to connect it to Great Mother. Don't we all remember that last time we heard about the World Mother. It was just prior to Krishnamurti's "Truth is a Pathless Land" statement when Apostles were created, some TS members were announced as Initiates and hurried thru Initiations, and Rukmini Devi was announced as representative of World Mother. The only person who did not know about all these developments was K, the vehicle of World Teacher. Later K commented that all were machinations of the fertile brain of George Arundale! Recently, I was at a gathering in which some homage was done to a Guru and during the gathering, the lights started flickering for a short time due to thunderstorms and rain. The flickering was explained as Guru trying to communicate with the gathering. Unbelievable explanation and some even believed it. These are highly educated individuals. We are in a strange period (Kali Yuga) and I guess anything goes. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 01:23:27 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for ARCANA Message-ID: In message <3.0.3.32.19971119072748.007fb5c0@imagiware.com>, Eldon B Tucker writes >A group -- lodge, organization, even mailing list -- tends to >maintain its status quo. Many members are followers, listeners, >lurkers at meetings. A handful like to monopolize the air time >and control the direction of discussions and programs. That >handful is the group's "leadership". It maintains the status >quo by providing the group with programs along lines that it >likes and by keeping the group "on topic" or resisting the >introduction of new ideas by newcomers, if those new ideas >give the group a new direction. (That new direction is >perceived as a "takeover" since it may take power away from >the existing leadership.) That doesn't happen on ANY of the theos-lists - try it and see! Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 01:18:54 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Welcome Message-ID: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL welcomes KALULIN! Private e-mail welcomes to: DMARX@prodigy.net (Not yet on theos-lists) Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 01:30:53 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for theosophy lists Message-ID: <+2fOEHBNL5c0Ew84@nellie2.demon.co.uk> In message <2.2.32.19971119191050.00c5a0c0@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >I am all for free and open discussion. No one needs to be afraid of Truth >and if Truth hurts at times, it is not the fault of truth, but ourselves. Well said. > >MKR > >PS: Even on this topic there were only a couple of responses. It would be >nice to hear from more of the lurkers!!! Yes - how about it, lurkers? We love you all (I think) Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:00:35 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for theosophy lists Message-ID: Alan: Doss: >>PS: Even on this topic there were only a couple of responses. It would be >>nice to hear from more of the lurkers!!! > >Yes - how about it, lurkers? We love you all (I think) > >Alan :-) X X X X X X X !!! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 16:01:23 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: What are attacks? Message-ID: <971119160122_-356437596@mrin85.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-19 14:51:53 EST, you write: >Chuck: >>And if anyone wants to see what a mailing list is like that has totally free >>discussion at all times, besides our happy home here, they should drop in on >>zee-list and see what the Chaos Magicians do. We really have fun there. > >Besides riding on a magical cape, how do I get there? > >Thoa :o) > No no no, You ride a magick carpet zee-list-request@eskimo.com empty subject line subscribe zee-list screen name Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:36:13 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <3473BE3D.52AD@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > 3. It may be time for someone to give a lecture to the TSA Elected Officials > none of whom I am yet to see in the cyberspace -- maillists and usenet > groups. Writing about Internet in the official magazine does not translate > into active dynamic participation in the cyberspace. Apart from the e-mail > addresses at Olcott, I am yet to see e-mail addresses of the elected officials. Do you want their home addresses and telephone numbers, as well? Also, they DO participate, in ts-l. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 23:36:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971120053635.00f6ff94@mail.eden.com> At 11:43 PM 11/19/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> 3. It may be time for someone to give a lecture to the TSA Elected Officials >> none of whom I am yet to see in the cyberspace -- maillists and usenet >> groups. Writing about Internet in the official magazine does not translate >> into active dynamic participation in the cyberspace. Apart from the e-mail >> addresses at Olcott, I am yet to see e-mail addresses of the elected officials. > > Do you want their home addresses and telephone numbers, as well? Also, >they DO participate, in ts-l. > > Bart Lidofsky I *do* have their home addresses and telephone numbers. Thanks mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 07:55:55 -0700 From: "John R. Crocker" Subject: Chaos Message-ID: <01bcf5c4$675a5660$17338396@lo201c.registrar.umt.edu> Hey Chuck, What exactly *is* "Chaos magic"? Some amalgram of modern science and Golden Dawn - style magick? -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 10:10:25 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Chaos Message-ID: So far, John, they're having a big discussion on LSD. There's also some discussion on going beyond the confines of the mental limit, some discussion of Kaos magick, Chinese/Japanese magick. The list certainly is alive. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:24:58 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <971120132458_-691415721@mrin42.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-20 03:08:51 EST, you write: > >What a surprise when I opened the current issue of Quest. There is an >article by Nancy Hiscoe Clark (a Unity Minister) on Princess Diana as the >Great Mother. Most creative imagination to connect her death and the world >attention to Great Mother. Here is a situation where Diana was killed by a >driver who was DWI and trying to connect it to Great Mother. > Nothing compared to my reaction! I took one look at the heading on the cover, unleashed a bellow of rage and threw the mag across the room like a frisbee, destroying the bell jar over the anniversary clock. I haven't reacted that way to anything since 1975! The Quest must go!!!!! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 13:41:21 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Chaos Message-ID: <971120134120_851336284@mrin42.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-20 12:50:33 EST, you write: >Hey Chuck, >What exactly *is* "Chaos magic"? Some amalgram of modern science and Golden >Dawn - style magick? -JRC > That's like asking "What is Theosophy?" Chaos Magick originally was based on the system of A. O. Spare and still uses much of his material, but has sort of expanded itself to include most forms of magick all mixed together into a delightfully eclectic mishmash. The best way to find out about it is to simply set a search engine to Chaos Magick and look at the multiplicity of web pages devoted to it. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 11:44:58 -0700 From: "John R. Crocker" Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <01bcf5e4$66c3fc40$17338396@lo201c.registrar.umt.edu> >>What a surprise when I opened the current issue of Quest. There is an >>article by Nancy Hiscoe Clark (a Unity Minister) on Princess Diana as the >>Great Mother. Most creative imagination to connect her death and the world >>attention to Great Mother. Here is a situation where Diana was killed by a >>driver who was DWI and trying to connect it to Great Mother. >> No kidding .,.. I wonder if it mentioned that the Great Mother probably should have tried the Great Seatbelt. Tee Hee, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 14:52:27 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Interesting Qns/Ans Message-ID: <3474A30B.3D79@eden.com> Recently reported in the Massachusetts Bar Association Lawyers Journal, the following are questions actually asked of witnesses by attorneys during trials and, in certain cases, the responses given by insightful witnesses: 1. "Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?" 2. "The youngest son, the twenty-year old, how old is he?" 3. "Were you present when your picture was taken?" 4. "Were you alone or by yourself?" 5. "Was it you or your younger brother who was killed in the war?" 6. "Did he kill you?" 7. "How far apart were the vehicles at the time of the collision?" 8. "You were there until the time you left, is that true?" 9. "How many times have you committed suicide?" 10. Q: "So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?" A: "Yes." Q: "And what were you doing at that time?" 11. Q: "She had three children, right?" A: "Yes." Q: "How many were boys?" A: "None." Q: "Were there any girls?" 12. Q: "You say the stairs went down to the basement?" A: "Yes." Q: "And these stairs, did they go up also?" 13. Q: "Mr. Slatery, you went on a rather elaborate honeymoon, didn't you?" A: "I went to Europe, Sir." Q: "And you took your new wife?" 14. Q: "How was your first marriage terminated?" A: "By death." Q: "And by who's death was it terminated?" 15. Q: "Can you describe the individual?" A: "He was about medium height and had a beard." Q: "Was this a male, or a female?" 16. Q: "Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?" A: "No, this is how I dress when I go to work." 17. Q: "Doctor, how many autopsies have you performed on dead people?" A: "All my autopsies are performed on dead people." 18. Q: "All your responses must be oral, OK? What school did you go to?" A: "Oral." 19. Q: "Do you recall the time that you examined the body?" A: "The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.." Q: "And Mr. Dennington was dead at the time?" A: "No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy." 20. Q: "You were not shot in the fracas?" A: "No, I was shot midway between the fracas and the navel." 21. Q: "Are you qualified to give a urine sample?" A: "I have been since early childhood." 22. Q: "Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?" A: "No." Q: "Did you check for blood pressure?" A: "No." Q: "Did you check for breathing?" A: "No." Q: "So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?" A: "No." Q: "How can you be so sure, Doctor?" A: "Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar." Q: "But could the patient have still been alive nevertheless?" A: "It is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law somewhere." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 02:15:56 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Great Chucker Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971120004728.00fb0470@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >We are in a strange period (Kali Yuga) and I guess anything goes. > So THAT'S how we got Chuck! Alan :-) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 01:27:35 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Usage guidelines for theosophy lists Message-ID: In message , Thoa Thi-Kim Tran writes >>Yes - how about it, lurkers? We love you all (I think) >> >>Alan :-) > >X X X X X X X !!! > >Thoa :o) Touche! (with accent on the 'e') Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 23:32:44 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great Chucker Message-ID: <971120233244_-1038694106@mrin51.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-20 23:21:28 EST, you write: >>We are in a strange period (Kali Yuga) and I guess anything goes. >> >So THAT'S how we got Chuck! > >Alan :-) Yep, I'm the list's very own avatar. Isn't you folks lucky? Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 22:33:15 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971121043315.008777b0@mail.eden.com> At 02:11 PM 11/20/97 -0500, John R. Crocker wrote: >>>What a surprise when I opened the current issue of Quest. There is an >>>article by Nancy Hiscoe Clark (a Unity Minister) on Princess Diana as the >>>Great Mother. Most creative imagination to connect her death and the world >>>attention to Great Mother. Here is a situation where Diana was killed by a >>>driver who was DWI and trying to connect it to Great Mother. >>> > >No kidding .,.. I wonder if it mentioned that the Great Mother probably >should have tried the Great Seatbelt. Tee Hee, -JRC > More surprises. The cover of Quest says "Princess Diana as Divine Mother" while the article title is "Princess Diana as the Great Mother". Someone trying to peddle Diana's name to sell Quest? If so a special issues within a few days of her accident would have been very successful. That is what Time Magazine did. MKR PS: Real Divine Mother, would be shocked to see Quest dragging her down!!!! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 01:26:52 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <971121012652_665188937@mrin54.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-21 01:21:18 EST, you write: >PS: Real Divine Mother, would be shocked to see Quest dragging her down!!!! > Nothing the Quest does would shock her any more. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 12:41:48 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Interesting Qns/Ans Message-ID: To doss: Thank you for Qns/Ans - I had great fun reading them and really needed it because I am still suffering from a very, very great shock since yesterday I happened to see the QUEST for the first time in my life. It looked so dull I didn't even touch it! BTW my Nissan is still in the garage waiting for his 4 x 4 power to come back though I wonder if at 95 one should drive at all. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 07:53:08 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Interesting Qns/Ans Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971121135308.00ba17a0@mail.eden.com> At 06:08 AM 11/21/97 -0500, you wrote: >To doss: Thank you for Qns/Ans - I had great fun reading them >and really needed it because I am still suffering from a very, very >great shock since yesterday I happened to see the QUEST for the >first time in my life. It looked so dull I didn't even touch it! > >BTW my Nissan is still in the garage waiting for his 4 x 4 power >to come back though I wonder if at 95 one should drive at all. > >Nicole > Hi You should open it and see. At least from my novice standpoint, the old Quest used to be difficult to understand -- the fog factor was very high -- and now it seems there is an attempt to capitalize on the fad of the day. As in another msg Rudy said, sailors would from time to time use their compass to check true north and like wise everyone should go back to some of the early material to get ourself reminded about the main reason why the modern theosophical movement was started, not bogged down by the so called inner aims etc and probably get bogged down by the details and dazzling other material that may sidetrack all of us. In theos-talk, I reposted the famous Maha Chohan letter and I will post it again here. Hope you will have your wheels back. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 07:53:15 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Why TS was launched? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971121135315.00ba3164@mail.eden.com> At 06:07 AM 11/20/97 -0800, Rodolfo Don wrote: > doss... go ahead and post it. I think that it is a good idea for all of us >to be reminded again and again what it is we're doing here. Just like >sailors in the middle of the ocean check their compass to find out where >true north is. > >Rudy ============================ MKR: Here is the letter I was referring to. It is from theos-roots theosophy maillist. It gives some idea about what the "Founders" had in their mind when the TS was started. This letter is considered by many to be the most important letter ever received from the Adept Teachers as it communicates the views of the Great Master as regards the role of Theosophy and Theosophical Society. Many things said in it seems to be appropriate in 1997 as it was in 1880. Parts of the letter has been widely quoted by every Theosophical leader from HPB onwards. It is also considered by many as the charter of modern theosophical movement. ================================================================= Following is the post by Nicholas Weeks (and credit is due to him): THE GREAT MASTER'S LETTER _________________________________________________________________ [This article was printed in Lucifer without signature as "An Important Letter," prefaced by the statement that it "was circulated by H.P.B. among many of her pupils, and some quotations from it have been published from time to time." The Letter belongs to the early days of the Theosophical Society in India and was part of the correspondence received (through H.P.B.) by A. P. Sinnett and A. O. Hume from the Theosophical Adepts. His Adept-teacher introduced the letter to Mr. Sinnett as "an abridged version of the view of the Chohan on the T.S. from his own words as given last night"--in reply to objections about the conduct of the Society and especially to the "Brotherhood plank." Although the text of the complete letter was not published until after H.P. Blavatsky and Wm. Q. Judge had left the scene, both provided a setting for the statements made, and both quoted in their magazines some passages for particular attention.--Eds.] *************************** The doctrine we promulgate being the only true one, must--supported by such evidence as we are preparing to give--become ultimately triumphant, like every other truth. Yet it is absolutely necessary to inculcate it gradually; enforcing its theories (unimpeachable facts for those who know) with direct inference, deduced from and corroborated by the evidence furnished by modern exact science. That is why Col. H. S. Olcott, who works to revive Buddhism, may be regarded as one who labours in the true path of Theosophy, far more than any man who chooses as his goal the gratification of his own ardent aspirations for occult knowledge. Buddhism, stripped of its superstition, is eternal truth; and he who strives for the latter is striving for eternal truth; and he who strives for the latter is striving for Theo-Sophia, divine wisdom, which is a synonym of truth. For our doctrines to practically react on the so-called moral code, or the ideas of truthfulness, purity, self-denial, charity, etc. , we have to preach and popularize a knowledge of Theosophy. It is not the individual and determined purpose of attaining Nirvana--the culmination of all knowledge and absolute wisdom, which is after all only an exalted and glorious selfishness--but the self-sacrificing pursuit of the best means to lead on the right path our neighbour, to cause to benefit by it as many of our fellow-creatures as we possibly can, which constitutes the true Theosophist. The intellectual portion of mankind seems to be fast dividing into two classes: the one unconsciously preparing for itself long periods of temporary annihilation or states of non-consciousness, owing to the deliberate surrender of intellect, and its imprisonment in the narrow grooves of bigotry and superstition--a process which cannot fail to lead to the utter deformation of the intellectual principle; the other unrestrainedly indulging its animal propensities with the deliberate intention of submitting to annihilation pure and simple, in case of failure, and to millenniums of degradation after physical dissolution. Those intellectual classes, reacting upon the ignorant masses--which they attract, and which look up to them as noble and fit examples to be followed--degrade and morally ruin those they ought to protect and guide. Between degrading superstition and still more degrading brutal materialism, the White Dove of Truth has hardly room whereon to rest her weary unwelcome feet. It is time that Theosophy should enter the arena. The sons of Theosophists are more likely to become in their turn Theosophists than anything else. No messenger of the truth, no prophet, has ever achieved during his life-time a complete triumph--not even Buddha. The Theosophical Society was chosen as the cornerstone, the foundation of the future religions of humanity. To achieve the proposed object, a greater, wiser, and especially a more benevolent intermingling of the high and the low, the alpha and the omega of society, was determined upon. The white race must be the first to stretch out the hand of fellowship to the dark nations, to call the poor despised "nigger" brother. This prospect may not smile for all, but he is no Theosophist who objects to this principle. In view of the ever-increasing triumph, and at the same time the misuse, of free thought and liberty (the universal reign of Satan, Eliphas Levi would have called it), how is the combative natural instinct of man to be restrained from inflicting hitherto unheard-of cruelty and enormous tyranny, injustice, etc., if not through the soothing influence of brotherhood, and of the practical application of Buddha's esoteric doctrines? For everyone knows that total emancipation from the authority of the one all-pervading power, or law--called God by the priests, and Buddha, Divine Wisdom and enlightenment or Theosophy, by the philosophers of all ages--means also the emancipation from that of human law. Once unfettered and delivered from their deadweight of dogmatism, interpretations, personal names, anthropomorphic conceptions, and salaried priests, the fundamental doctrines of all religions will be proved identical in their esoteric meaning. Osiris, Krishna, Buddha, Christ, will be shown as different means for one and the same royal highway to final bliss--Nirvana. Mystical Christianity teaches Self-redemption through one's own seventh principle, the liberated Paramatma, called by the one Christ, by others Buddha; this is equivalent to regeneration, or rebirth in spirit, and it therefore expounds just the same truth as the Nirvana of Buddhism. All of us have to get rid of our own Ego, the illusory, apparent self, to recognize our true Self, in a transcendental divine life. But if we would not be selfish, we must strive to make other people see that truth, and recognize the reality of the transcendental Self, the Buddha, the Christ, or God of every preacher. This is why even esoteric Buddhism is the surest path to lead men towards the one esoteric truth. As we find the world now, whether Christian, Mussulman, or Pagan, justice is disregarded, and honour and mercy are both flung to the winds. In a word, how--since the main objects of the Theosophical Society are misinterpreted by those who are most willing to serve us personally--are we to deal with the rest of mankind? with that curse known as the struggle for life, which is the real and most prolific parent of most woes and sorrows, and all crimes? Why has that struggle become almost the universal scheme of the universe? We answer,--because no religion, with the exception of Buddhism, has taught a practical contempt for this earthly life; while each of them, always with that one solitary exception, has through its hells and damnations inculcated the greatest dread of death. Therefore do we find that struggle for life raging most fiercely in Christian countries, most prevalent in Europe and America. It weakens in the Pagan lands, and is nearly unknown among Buddhist populations. In China during famine, and where the masses are most ignorant of their own or of any religion, it was remarked that those mothers who devoured their children belonged to localities where there was none; and where the Bonzes alone had the field, the population died with the utmost indifference. Teach the people to see that life on this earth, even the happiest, is but a burden and an illusion; that it is our own Karma [the cause producing the effect] that is our own judge--our Saviour in future lives--and the great struggle for life will soon lose its intensity. There are no penitentiaries in Buddhist lands, and crime is nearly unknown among the Buddhist Tibetans. The world in general, and Christendom especially, left for 2,000 years to the regime of a personal God, as well as to its political and social systems based on that idea, has now proved a failure. If the Theosophists say we have nothing to do with all this; the lower classes and the inferior races (those of India, for instance, in the conception of the British) cannot concern us, and must manage as they can, what becomes of our fine professions of benevolence, philanthropy, reform, etc.? Are those professions a mockery? And if a mockery, can ours be the true path? Shall we devote ourselves to teaching a few Europeans--fed on the fat of the land, many of them loaded with the gifts of blind fortune--the rationale of bell-ringing, of cup-growing, of the spiritual telephone, and astral body formation, and leave the teeming millions of the ignorant, of the poor and oppressed, to take care of themselves, and of their hereafter, as best they can? Never! perish rather the Theosophical Society with both its hapless Founders, than that we should permit it to become no better than an academy of magic, and a hall of occultism! That we, the devoted followers of that spirit incarnate of absolute self-sacrifice, of philanthropy, divine kindness, as of all the highest virtues attainable on this earth of sorrow, the man of men, Gautama Buddha, should ever allow the Theosophical Society to represent the embodiment of selfishness, the refuge of the few with no thought in them for the many, is a strange idea, my brothers! Among the few glimpses obtained by Europeans of Tibet and its mystical hierarchy of perfect Lamas, there was one which was correctly understood and described. The incarnations of the Bodhisattva Padmapani or Avolokiteshvara, of Tsong-ka-pa, and that of Amitabha, relinquished at their death the attainment of Buddhahood--i.e., the summum bonum of bliss, and of individual personal felicity--that they might be born again and again for the benefit of mankind. In other words, that they might be again and again subjected to misery, imprisonment in flesh, and all the sorrows of life, provided that they by such a self-sacrifice, repeated throughout long and weary centuries, might become the means of securing salvation and bliss in the hereafter for a handful of men chosen among but one of the many planetary races of mankind. And it is we, the humble disciples of these perfect Lamas, who are expected to allow the Theosophical Society to drop its noblest title, that of the Brotherhood of Humanity, to become a simple school of philosophy! No, no, good brothers, you have been labouring under the mistake too long already. Let us understand each other. He who does not feel competent to grasp the noble idea sufficiently to work for it, need not undertake a task too heavy for him. But there is hardly a Theosophist in the whole Society unable to effectually help it by correcting erroneous impressions of outsiders, by himself actually propagating this idea. Oh! for noble and unselfish men to help us effectually in that divine task! All our knowledge, past and present, would not be sufficient to repay him. Having explained our views and aspirations, I have but a few words more to add. The true religion and philosophy offer the solution of every problem. That the world is in such a bad condition, morally, is a conclusive evidence that none of its religions and philosophies, those of the civilized races less than any other, has ever possessed the truth. The right and logical explanations on the subject of the problems of the great dual principles, right and wrong, good and evil, liberty and despotism, pain and pleasure, egotism and altruism, are as impossible to them now as they were 1880 years ago. They are as far from the solution as they were; but to these problems there must be somewhere a consistent solution, and if our doctrines will show their competence to offer it, then the world will be the first to confess that there must be the true philosophy, the true religion, the true light, which gives truth and nothing but the truth. [Lucifer, August, 1896] ******************************* From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 10:17:57 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: Chaos is very civilized Message-ID: >From my limited observation of the Chaos list, they are busier and yet more civilized than the few theosophy lists I've been on. I'm not judging their civilization on the topics, but in how they treat each other. The tone was of friendly openness without condemnation or snobbishness. If someone had a differing opinion, s/he offered a different side of things without attacks. There also were no constant sickening imploring to brotherliness. Surprisingly, the brotherliness is expressed so well, it's not even noticeable! If any theosophist is worried about the future of t/Theosophy in getting the attention of the younger generation, s/he should log onto the zee list to observe the tone of the list. You'll have to do it without judgment of the topics. Some of the topics may not settle well in your stomach. The topics range from shit incense to Shakespeare. The ages on the zee list range from 18 to probably ancient. The knowledge level also has a wide range. If you can read countless e-mails (almost 100 a day) without feeling like protesting, you pass the test. IMO, the typical theosophy list is diseased with necrophilia (a constant rehashing and argument over dead Theosophists), an unfriendly tone (sometimes snotty), a mental arrogance (I'm smarter than you!), and preaching (this list must be reserved ONLY to spread brotherliness!). As an aside, regarding limiting conversations to only spreading brotherliness, we are fooling ourselves if that is the ony reason we log onto the theosophy lists. People, if they are inclined to, are already doing whatever they can to spread brotherliness, OUTSIDE of the computer. Whatever their inclination, a constant reminder is not going to help, but cause guilt and annoyance. I think the main reason theosophists log onto the lists is to be among theosophists, since there are not that many in our immediate vicinity. The staid Theosophists will congregate with staid Theosophists. Turning away and without drawing any newbies, they are not influencing anything, regardless of their constant reminder toward brotherhood. They are only reminding each other. Although one thinks that the mission is to spread enlightening messages on the internet, the motive is mostly selfish, arising from a need to be with like people. The attitude that pushes away people beyond your realm of positive influence reveals that the motive IS selfish. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 10:27:20 -0800 From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran) Subject: The Shadow! Message-ID: Anyone in the San Francisco area might be interested in a lecture at the California Institute of Integral Studies in SF. Connie Zweig "Romancing the Shadow: Illuminating the Dark Side of the Soul" will be speaking at 7 p.m. She also authored a book on that. Entrance fee is $10.00. For info., call (415) 674-5500, ext. 241. We'll be there! Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:36:02 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Interesting Qns/Ans Message-ID: <971121133601_1105433066@mrin85.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-21 08:45:16 EST, you write: >To doss: Thank you for Qns/Ans - I had great fun reading them >and really needed it because I am still suffering from a very, very >great shock since yesterday I happened to see the QUEST for the >first time in my life. It looked so dull I didn't even touch it! > >BTW my Nissan is still in the garage waiting for his 4 x 4 power >to come back though I wonder if at 95 one should drive at all. > >Nicole > The Quest is beyond dull. It is an abomination to the human soul, except for Jay Williams who is always interesting. At 95, one should not only drive, but should drive with abandon, knowing that the worst thing that can happen is something that probably should be happening any day now anyway and maybe you can take some pedestrians with you. (That's what I'm gonna do when I get ancient) Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 12:07:30 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971121120730.007dcc30@imagiware.com> Hello everyone. At the end of January I'll be giving a program on "Theosophy and the Internet" at the Krotona School of Theosophy in Ojai, California. I'm in the process of deciding what will go into the program, and thought I'd ask for suggestions, ideas, etc. from fellow theosophical students on the Internet. (I'm writing to several mailing lists since there's fairly little overlap between the lists, and I'll be able to get more ideas, suggestions, and things to include in the program.) There are five areas where help could be offered: 1. Does anyone have or could anyone write some personal stories about experiences on the Internet and how it might relate to one's learning, growth, spiritual awakening, etc.? (I may read excerpts from some of the more interesting ones at the program.) 2. What are everyone's favorite web sites, lists, hangouts? 3. What suggestions are good to offer newcomer Theosophists on utilizing the Internet? 4. What suggestions does everyone have as to things to mention or include in my four-to-five hour program? 5. What would be good live demonstrations to do? (Perhaps posting and getting live email to/from a list, going to some web pages, visiting an IRC, trying out Internet phone, etc.) -- Eldon Tucker From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 13:41:19 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Why TS was launched? Message-ID: <971121134119_1846593462@mrin38> That was for the benefit of the good Victorians, who were never short of hot air even in the coldest of winters. The truth, according to the Akashic CD-rom is much different. The Masters were terribly high one night on the local hashish and accidentally opened a hole in the space-time continuum, which was immediately plugged by the massive girth of our beloved HPB. Founding the TS was the only way they could extricate her and close the hole before the whole universe got sucked in. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 12:07:30 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971121120730.007dcc30@imagiware.com> Hello everyone. At the end of January I'll be giving a program on "Theosophy and the Internet" at the Krotona School of Theosophy in Ojai, California. I'm in the process of deciding what will go into the program, and thought I'd ask for suggestions, ideas, etc. from fellow theosophical students on the Internet. (I'm writing to several mailing lists since there's fairly little overlap between the lists, and I'll be able to get more ideas, suggestions, and things to include in the program.) There are five areas where help could be offered: 1. Does anyone have or could anyone write some personal stories about experiences on the Internet and how it might relate to one's learning, growth, spiritual awakening, etc.? (I may read excerpts from some of the more interesting ones at the program.) 2. What are everyone's favorite web sites, lists, hangouts? 3. What suggestions are good to offer newcomer Theosophists on utilizing the Internet? 4. What suggestions does everyone have as to things to mention or include in my four-to-five hour program? 5. What would be good live demonstrations to do? (Perhaps posting and getting live email to/from a list, going to some web pages, visiting an IRC, trying out Internet phone, etc.) -- Eldon Tucker From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 14:26:33 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <199711212128.OAA05795@umt.umt.edu> Eldon ... I've had to do more than my share of Internet seminars ... lemme ask you - 1. What level of knowledge are you assuming in your participants (i.e., are they people that have never even logged onto the Internet and need even the basic concepts of email, browsers & etc., or are they already computer competent, and your purpose will be to show them what resources exist for Theosophy as a specific subject)? 2. How many computers will you have in the seminar - i.e., will most be able to be at a keyboard and logged to sites & etc., or will you have one computer that everyone will be milling around? 3. What sort of demonstration software will you have - a couple different browsers, email programs & etc.? Or will you be stuck witha single computer with only one set of tools? Regards, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 17:57:26 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <971121175726_-1877225667@mrin40.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-21 15:10:04 EST, you write: >5. What would be good live demonstrations to do? (Perhaps posting > and getting live email to/from a list, going to some web > pages, visiting an IRC, trying out Internet phone, etc.) > A couple of years ago another organization I'm involved with did a program on using the interenet and the biggest problem we faced was getting a screen big enough that people could see what is going on. But if you can manage that (perhaps some sort of interface into a wide-screen tv) the best way to talk about the internet and mailing lists is to show them. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 18:05:46 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Chaos is very civilized Message-ID: <971121180546_-1138635968@mrin47> In a message dated 97-11-21 15:31:17 EST, you write: > The tone was >of friendly openness without condemnation or snobbishness. If someone had >a differing opinion, s/he offered a different side of things without >attacks. There also were no constant sickening imploring to brotherliness. >Surprisingly, the brotherliness is expressed so well, it's not even >noticeable! Well, you haven't seen them get mad, like last spring when one of the former members of the list and I were trying to kill each other. But for the most part you got it right. Since the bulk of the people on the list are quite proud of their amorality, any attempt at preachment inevitably results in howls of derision so they are free to be quite brotherly because they want to be, not because some superannuated old fart is going try to lecture them into it. And if they disagree, they have no bones about saying so, sometimes in rather strong and obscene ways. It's a fun list. And, like theos-l, I know a lot of the people on it which makes it a nice, convenient way to talk to old friends all at once. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 18:36:43 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122003643.00f6dc88@mail.eden.com> At 12:07 PM 11/21/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >Hello everyone. > >At the end of January I'll be giving a program on "Theosophy >and the Internet" at the Krotona School of Theosophy in Ojai, >California. I'm in the process of deciding what will go into >the program, and thought I'd ask for suggestions, ideas, etc. >from fellow theosophical students on the Internet. (I'm writing >to several mailing lists since there's fairly little overlap >between the lists, and I'll be able to get more ideas, >suggestions, and things to include in the program.) > Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: 1. What is the composition of the audience such as: top leaders workers others Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old people. 2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? 3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) 4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your presentation. Answers to the above would help to give you feedback on some ideas. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 18:40:02 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122004002.0067a274@mail.eden.com> At 11:43 PM 11/19/97 -0500, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >Also, they DO participate, in ts-l. > > Bart Lidofsky > Oh, DO they really! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 02:06:56 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971121043315.008777b0@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >PS: Real Divine Mother, would be shocked to see Quest dragging her down!!!! What is "Quest?" Divine Mother. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 20:38:39 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <347645AF.C50@eden.com> Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: > > In message <2.2.32.19971121043315.008777b0@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss > writes > >PS: Real Divine Mother, would be shocked to see Quest dragging her down!!!! > > What is "Quest?" > > Divine Mother. The official magazine of Theosophical Society in America. Divine Mouse From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 03:32:57 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: In message <347645AF.C50@eden.com>, ramadoss@eden.com writes >> What is "Quest?" >> >> Divine Mother. > >The official magazine of Theosophical Society in America. > >Divine Mouse Dear "Divine Mouse": Kindly squeak only when directly squoken to. Divine Mummy (informal address) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 22:43:15 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122044315.00f2c948@mail.eden.com> At 10:47 PM 11/21/97 -0500, you wrote: >In message <347645AF.C50@eden.com>, ramadoss@eden.com writes >>> What is "Quest?" >>> >>> Divine Mother. >> >>The official magazine of Theosophical Society in America. >> >> >>Divine Mouse > >Dear "Divine Mouse": > >Kindly squeak only when directly squoken to. > >Divine Mummy (informal address) > Dear "Divine Mummy": Don't you know the Divine Mouse? Here is the story. In Hindu Mythology, every God - human personification of powers or attributes in Nature has their own transportation, usually an animal or bird. Even the ancients recognized the importance of transportation. So the God of Wisdom, Ganesh or Ganesha, who was half animal and half man, has mouse as his animal of transportation even though physically the mouse cannot transport Ganesh. God of Wisdom is so smart that he can get his job done without moving an inch. And the concept of transplanting animal parts on humans is a very old one in Hindu Mythology. The God of Destruction, accidentally chops off the head of his son (and destroys it). Ganesh is his son and when he found out what he had done, he was ordered by his wife to fix it, and fix it immediately. Looking around for replacement head, a recently dead elephant was found its head was cut off and transplanted on the human torso. Tha't is the story. Hindus of every denomination and belief have one thing in common. They always pay homage and pray to Ganesha and request his blessings before any ritual or start of any critical activity, the principle appears to be that in that way we dont do stupid things and get into problems. Let us get back to our normal forms! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 23:50:43 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <971121235043_278430536@mrin79> In a message dated 97-11-21 23:05:20 EST, you write: > Oh, DO they really! > Of course they do. That way they can control the flow of ideas and prevent them from becoming too interesting. The Masters forbid that anyone in the TS should express an unauthorized thought! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 23:51:52 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <971121235152_-1940841912@mrin53.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-21 23:23:17 EST, you write: >Dear "Divine Mouse": > >Kindly squeak only when directly squoken to. > >Divine Mummy (informal address) > The Divine Mouse has been eaten. Divine Cat From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 23:08:38 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122050838.00cf809c@mail.eden.com> At 11:54 PM 11/21/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-11-21 23:23:17 EST, you write: > >>Dear "Divine Mouse": >> >>Kindly squeak only when directly squoken to. >> >>Divine Mummy (informal address) >> >> > >The Divine Mouse has been eaten. > >Divine Cat > The Divine Mouse has been Resurrected back to normal form. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 18:36:43 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122003643.00f6dc88@mail.eden.com> At 12:07 PM 11/21/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >Hello everyone. > >At the end of January I'll be giving a program on "Theosophy >and the Internet" at the Krotona School of Theosophy in Ojai, >California. I'm in the process of deciding what will go into >the program, and thought I'd ask for suggestions, ideas, etc. >from fellow theosophical students on the Internet. (I'm writing >to several mailing lists since there's fairly little overlap >between the lists, and I'll be able to get more ideas, >suggestions, and things to include in the program.) > Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: 1. What is the composition of the audience such as: top leaders workers others Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old people. 2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? 3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) 4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your presentation. Answers to the above would help to give you feedback on some ideas. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 11:34:58 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971122113458.00802960@imagiware.com> JRC: > I've had to do more than my share of Internet seminars ... lemme ask >you - > 1. What level of knowledge are you assuming in your >participants (i.e., are they people that have never even logged onto the >Internet and need even the basic concepts of email, browsers & etc., or are >they already computer competent, and your purpose will be to show them what >resources exist for Theosophy as a specific subject)? The backgrounds will be varied. The pool of people will be those that typically attend programs at Krotona, perhaps minus those afraid of computers and plus those with computers and a special interest in the topic. > 2. How many computers will you have in the seminar - i.e., will >most be able to be at a keyboard and logged to sites & etc., or will you >have one computer that everyone will be milling around? There will probably be a laptop and a desktop with a 20 inch montior. I'll have access to an overhead projector. I'd like to rent a lcd display for the overhead projector for a day if I can come across one. > 3. What sort of demonstration software will you have - a couple >different browsers, email programs & etc.? Or will you be stuck witha single >computer with only one set of tools? I'm not sure yet how much variety I'll have as to showing different kinds of software. I'd like both a computer demo and some talk about what is going on, with personal stories and a sampling of email to read, to give an impression of what one can experience and what one can do in terms of helpful things for others. There will be some talk of Theosophy and a philosophical slant; it won't all be technical training and demos. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 11:42:21 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971122114221.008028d0@imagiware.com> MKR: >Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: > >1. What is the composition of the audience such as: > > top leaders > workers > others This cannot be predicted in advance. The program is a one-day thing on the regular Krotona schedule, without any special promotion. > Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old >people. Typical programs at Krotona are older folks that may never have owned their own PC. For a program on this topic, though, the older folks that dislike computers will stay away, and more of the younger people on the Krotona mailing list will likely come. The percentage of younger people will be improved, but still be older than the average for the T.S. in general. >2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? Give a broad overview of what's out there, some show-and-tell, and related philosophical discussion of how one can benefit from and serve others on the Internet. >3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or >bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file >take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership >especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) This is not a training session for staff, it's a public program for anyone interested. >4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your >presentation. I thought it would be a good idea and volunteered to give the program. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 14:55:04 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <34773898.2897@sprynet.com> Eldon B Tucker wrote: > At the end of January I'll be giving a program on "Theosophy > and the Internet" at the Krotona School of Theosophy in Ojai, > California. I'm in the process of deciding what will go into > the program, and thought I'd ask for suggestions, ideas, etc. > from fellow theosophical students on the Internet. (I'm writing > to several mailing lists since there's fairly little overlap > between the lists, and I'll be able to get more ideas, > suggestions, and things to include in the program.) Have you seen my pamphlet? If not, I can email you a copy in Microsoft Word format. > There are five areas where help could be offered: > > 1. Does anyone have or could anyone write some personal stories > about experiences on the Internet and how it might relate to > one's learning, growth, spiritual awakening, etc.? (I may read > excerpts from some of the more interesting ones at the > program.) Many times. The most notable, however, was when I was giving a talk based on hypnotism and Theosophy, based largely on H.P.B.'s writings. The day before the talk, on the alt.hypnotism newsgroup, a historical piece about hypnotism in the late 19th century was published. I was able to quickly verify the veracity of this piece, and it made it clear that H.P.B.'s information about hypnotism was 3rd hand at best. It further made it clear that what we call "hypnotism" today is far closer to what she called "mesmerism", while what she called "hypnotism" is more akin to what we call "mind-control" (such as is practiced by many cult leaders). > 2. What are everyone's favorite web sites, lists, hangouts? Well, note that theos-world magazine was the only non-TSA site that was approved for inclusion in my pamphlet. But you know that already... > 3. What suggestions are good to offer newcomer Theosophists > on utilizing the Internet? I have been increasing my list of free and low-costs ways of getting on the Internet. I intend to expand my pamphlet into a book, and am awaiting comments from Wheaton on where to put the expansions. If you have received a copy, comments on your part would be especially appreciated. > 4. What suggestions does everyone have as to things to mention > or include in my four-to-five hour program? A) Why the Internet has suddenly become so popular. B) Why Theosophists should care. C) What the Internet is NOT. D) How to get on cheap (or even free). > 5. What would be good live demonstrations to do? (Perhaps posting > and getting live email to/from a list, going to some web > pages, visiting an IRC, trying out Internet phone, etc.) I have just gotten a new video accelerator card for my computer, which includes TV/VCR output. I was considering making videotapes of the NYTS web page in action for viewing by the NYTS members; perhaps, if you can be specific, I can create additional videotapes for you. Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 15:22:43 -0500 From: Bart Lidofsky Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <34773F13.72E4@sprynet.com> M K Ramadoss wrote: > > At 11:43 PM 11/19/97 -0500, Bart Lidofsky wrote: > > >Also, they DO participate, in ts-l. > > > > Bart Lidofsky > > > Oh, DO they really! Can you point out a place in any message that I have placed on this list where I have told a lie? Bart Lidofsky From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 15:34:11 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: What are attacks? (reply to Paul) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122213411.01019a88@mail.eden.com> At 03:26 PM 11/22/97 -0500, you wrote: >M K Ramadoss wrote: >> >> At 11:43 PM 11/19/97 -0500, Bart Lidofsky wrote: >> >> >Also, they DO participate, in ts-l. >> > >> > Bart Lidofsky >> > >> Oh, DO they really! > > Can you point out a place in any message that I have placed on this >list where I have told a lie? > > Bart Lidofsky It was just a surprise to me. I have never said all the time I have been on theos-l that *anyone* including you told a lie. Is it possible there could be an error? >From what I have seen, you have been very forthright and all of us had straight exchanges even though we may not agree on all things. Also I am in the habit of trusting people but at the same time try to verify if possible. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 15:49:22 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971122214922.00d047a8@mail.eden.com> At 11:42 AM 11/22/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >MKR: > >>Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: >> >>1. What is the composition of the audience such as: >> >> top leaders >> workers >> others > >This cannot be predicted in advance. The program is a one-day >thing on the regular Krotona schedule, without any special >promotion. > >> Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old >>people. > >Typical programs at Krotona are older folks that may never >have owned their own PC. For a program on this topic, though, >the older folks that dislike computers will stay away, and >more of the younger people on the Krotona mailing list will >likely come. The percentage of younger people will be >improved, but still be older than the average for the T.S. >in general. > >>2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? > >Give a broad overview of what's out there, some show-and-tell, >and related philosophical discussion of how one can benefit >from and serve others on the Internet. > >>3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or >>bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file >>take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership >>especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) > >This is not a training session for staff, it's a public >program for anyone interested. > >>4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your >>presentation. > >I thought it would be a good idea and volunteered to >give the program. > >-- Eldon Dear Eldon: As another subscriber indicated, a large screen projector is a "must" and also the place where the demo is going to be taken should be darkened so that the projected image of the crt screen is very legible for everyone to see. Based on my personal experience, I would try to concentrate on a few items to make the presentation simple. Topics I would concentrate are: 1. E-Mail: Example of how one can send and receive e-mail at no additional cost other than one's time. Emphasize on quickly sending mail to any part of world instantaneously. Use of maillists with e-mail: Explain how one's questions would be answered probably within hours by some one probably in another country who has answers and at no cost. 2. URLs: May want to visit some of them and show how info can be accessed and downloaded. 3. Applications: May want to show other applications of Internet. Like finding and ordering books, and other items, 24 hours of the day. Hope this helps. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 02:14:20 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: In message <2.2.32.19971122044315.00f2c948@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >Hindus of every denomination and belief have one thing in common. They >always pay homage and pray to Ganesha and request his blessings before any >ritual or start of any critical activity, the principle appears to be that >in that way we dont do stupid things and get into problems. Given the story, this makes sense! > >Let us get back to our normal forms! Which are what? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 02:11:58 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: In message <971121235152_-1940841912@mrin53.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >The Divine Mouse has been eaten. > >Divine Cat Dear Cousin, Thank you for your input [joke] - but where are you going to get your next meal from? It is possible that the Divine Chuck has a machine ... Divine Mum From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 22 Nov 1997 21:28:43 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <199711230429.VAA04125@umt.umt.edu> Eldon ... >> 1. What level of knowledge are you assuming in your >>participants (i.e., are they people that have never even logged onto the >>Internet and need even the basic concepts of email, browsers & etc., or are >>they already computer competent, and your purpose will be to show them what >>resources exist for Theosophy as a specific subject)? >The backgrounds will be varied. The pool of people will be those that >typically attend programs at Krotona, perhaps minus those afraid of >computers and plus those with computers and a special interest in the >topic. The hardest seminars I've had to do were those with mixed crowds - where some had a good deal of experience and others almost none ... to be useful to the second group means being completely beyond the understanding of the first. And to be useful to the first means boring the pants off the second. I actually did do a four hour seminar once with a mixed group ... don't know if it will be possible for you to do this, but .. I asked the people who had experience to take the first hour off ... and just worked with the group that needed the raw basics ... how to hook up a modem, how to find an ISP, how to configure the communications software, the basics of email, Internet addressing, POP servers, browsers, etc. ... the newbies felt much more comfortable asking "dumb" questions that they may not have mentioned with experienced users around. For the main body of the seminar it was then possible to assume that everybody had at least a basic understanding. >> 2. How many computers will you have in the seminar - i.e., will >>most be able to be at a keyboard and logged to sites & etc., or will you >>have one computer that everyone will be milling around? >There will probably be a laptop and a desktop with a 20 inch montior. >I'll have access to an overhead projector. I'd like to rent a lcd >display for the overhead projector for a day if I can come across one. For those who have a lot of time online, hands-on isn't really needed, the information is enough ... but for beginners (IMO) its almost essential for them to have at least one or two opportunities to actually hit a keyboard. In fact, I've found that teaching computer stuff is rather different than teaching almost anything else - most things have a sort of learning curve ... but computers have something more like learning "walls" - almost any single aspect, email, or getting used to lists, or using the web for research, etc., etc., generally seems impossibly complex to someone that's never done it, but after they've done it even a few times, seems like the easiest thing in the world. I wonder ... if you logged on at the beginning of the seminar, ... and had several people send greetings or questions to theos-l .. probably by the last half hour of the seminar several of us would have sent responses - kind of a nice positive feedback thing for participants to see. >> 3. What sort of demonstration software will you have - a couple >>different browsers, email programs & etc.? Or will you be stuck witha single >>computer with only one set of tools? >I'm not sure yet how much variety I'll have as to showing different >kinds of software. I'd like both a computer demo and some talk about >what is going on, with personal stories and a sampling of email to >read, to give an impression of what one can experience and what one >can do in terms of helpful things for others. The last sounds especially good in a group of Theosophists - explaining how the Internet might be used for service - things like the several people who have been putting TS texts online, the stuff Liesel was doing with communicating with that guy in Russia, etc., etc. On the whole, it sounds like an interesting seminar (I almost can't imagine the Net being taught at Krotona). Good luck, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 00:10:44 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Great Mother Message-ID: <971123001044_-2007686001@mrin43.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-22 22:21:43 EST, you write: > >Thank you for your input [joke] - but where are you going to get your >next meal from? It is possible that the Divine Chuck has a machine ... > >Divine Mum Thank you for your concern, but normally I eat Divine Cat Chow. Divine Cat From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 01:34:21 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Chaos is very civilized Message-ID: Chuck wrote: >Well, you haven't seen them get mad, like last spring when one of the former >members of the list and I were trying to kill each other. But for the most >part you got it right. I regret I'm going to have to miss any future bouts you may have. The volume was WAY too much for me. I can't keep up with 100 e-mails a day. Strangely, the instructions did not include how to unsubscribe. Let's see if my attempt is successful. Maybe I'm doomed to be stuck with Chaos forever. You can enter, but you may never leave! >It's a fun list. And, like theos-l, I know a lot of the people on it which >makes it a nice, convenient way to talk to old friends all at once. > >Chuck the Heretic Since my friends are on the theos-l, and I currently have no time to make new friends, this is where I'll stay. Thoa :o) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:27:41 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Chaos is very civilized Message-ID: <971123112741_1205286903@mrin42.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-23 04:53:08 EST, you write: > Maybe I'm doomed to be stuck with Chaos >forever. You can enter, but you may never leave! > True, once you have tasted the joys of Zee-list, you are never the same. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 10:35:33 -0600 From: "Mark A. Foster" Subject: Mind Control Message-ID: <199711231633.KAA26406@ultra.qni.com> Bart Lidofsky wrote: >It further made it clear that what we call "hypnotism" today >is far closer to what she called "mesmerism", while what >she called "hypnotism" is more akin to what we call >"mind-control" (such as is practiced by many cult leaders). Regarding mind-control (also popularly called "brain-washing"), this subject has been studied by social scientists and by psychologists over the years. The original idea came from Thomas Lifton and a few others, who based their idea of brainwashing (or "thought reform") on the supposed indoctrination practices in North Korean POW camps. It is now clear, for a variety of reasons, that this research was apparently flawed. For one thing, it was not longitudinal. That is to say, it did not consider how this supposed brainwashing affected former POWs over the long term. When a person converts to a respectable religion, it is called conversion, and behavior changes, which are generally in harmony with society's norms and civil religion, are regarded by most people as positive. However, when a person joins an alternative religious movement and changes her or his behavior, sometimes not in accordance with social norms, it is called brainwashing. Religious oppression and abuse, however, has been known to take place in both alternative and mainline religions. For instance, the People's Temple of Jim Jones was, if I remember correctly, a local congregation of the Disciples of Christ/Christian Church. ------ Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Prof. of Sociology * owner@sociologist.com http://galaxycorp.com/pageme (page me) * (913)469-8500, x3376 http://surf.to/mark or http://earthcorp.com/mfoster (my 3 sites) http://cyberjunkie.com/lists (Divine Philosophy Society's 5 email lists) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:25:14 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Practical Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971123172514.006d22d4@mail.eden.com> While reviewing the inventory of the audio/video and other archives at KFA, I discovered that when Jiddu Krishnamurti visited my city - San Antonio, TX in 1932 he had a couple of public lectures. What struck me was that he addressed persons of Hispanic origin in a separate meeting. In those days of segregation, it was against law to have gatherings and lectures allow them along with the whites. Same thing happened in Birmingham, AL where he addressed the colored people in a separate meeting. The organizers of these meetings were Theosophists and it is very clear that they wanted all segments of the population benefit by the lectures. Again it is a very heartening example of the application of the principle of brotherhood/sisterhood. After reading instances like the above, I am more and more convinced of the soundness and fundamental need to remind ourselves that practical brotherhood/sisterhood is a very key proposition and is key to the survival of Theosophical Movement over a century. mkr PS: I reviews the newspaper reports of K's visit to San Antonio, and in none of them the fact he addressed the Hispanics was mentioned. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:50:24 -0600 From: JRC Subject: Re: Practical Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood) Message-ID: <199711231851.LAA17156@umt.umt.edu> >After reading instances like the above, I am more and more convinced of the >soundness and fundamental need to remind ourselves that practical >brotherhood/sisterhood is a very key proposition and is key to the survival >of Theosophical Movement over a century. Yes! I have often thought that our First Object may be one of the most revolutionary statements made in the last century ... and looking at the world as it is now, with "race, religion and creed" being at the root of such an immense amount of discord and suffering on earth, it seems perhaps even more relevent today. I wonder, sometimes, what would have happened, what the world would look like today, if the Theosophical Society, instead of devolving into small groups of people studying esoterica, had become sucessful and reached the full fruition of what the founders intended. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 11:05:45 -0800 From: Mark Kusek Subject: A Collection of Images Message-ID: <34787E87.30D0@withoutwalls.com> Hi all, In light of some of the recent art related threads, I spent a few hours yesterday scanning and uploading some images that may be of interest to people on the list. They represent just a small fraction of a collection I've built up over the years. I've organized them into four folders: 1. Charts. These are images that relate to the teachings on the occult anatomy of Man, from a few theosophically related traditions.(I have lots more of these.) 2. I_AM. Here you'll find a funky little group of pictures from the 1930's that were sold through the I AM Movement. Masters, Angels, Meditation and Decree Focii, etc. 3.Masters. An assortment of images of a few of the Adepts, Cosmic Beings, etc. from the Esoteric Pantheon. (I have lots more of these, too.) 4. Visualizations. Miscellaneous theosophically related images for creating and working with thoughtforms. Check them out if you like. I have a lot, lot more. A good part of my collection is made up of the diagrams and illustrations that have been given to help articulate the more abstract teachings. I also have lots of pictures from different esoteric traditions, both East and West. Let me know if anyone is interested, and I'll continue to post them (I have a 25mb server partition, so I can get quite a few up there). If anybody has specific requests or is looking for something in particular, let me know, I just might have it around my studio somewhere. http://www.withoutwalls.com/artwork/ Have fun, Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 15:32:57 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Practical Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood) Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971123213257.00f5bf4c@mail.eden.com> At 01:52 PM 11/23/97 -0500, you wrote: >>After reading instances like the above, I am more and more convinced of the >>soundness and fundamental need to remind ourselves that practical >>brotherhood/sisterhood is a very key proposition and is key to the survival >>of Theosophical Movement over a century. > >Yes! I have often thought that our First Object may be one of the most >revolutionary statements made in the last century ... and looking at the >world as it is now, with "race, religion and creed" being at the root of >such an immense amount of discord and suffering on earth, it seems perhaps >even more relevent today. I wonder, sometimes, what would have happened, >what the world would look like today, if the Theosophical Society, instead >of devolving into small groups of people studying esoterica, had become >sucessful and reached the full fruition of what the founders intended. -JRC I think the founders were fully aware of the uphill task they have at hand. It is a very hard task to change the ingrained prejudices and beliefs of masses of human beings and that was why the First Object talked about the nucleus in the hope that the nucleus -- you and me and others interested in Theosophy will slowly but surely broadcast the msg by our actions in our daily lives. I think the founders saw some successes. At least in India, Mahatma Gandhi and the Nehrus were influenced by Theosophists and many of the later politicians were also affected by "theosophical" influence. For example one of the recent Presidents was a student of Krishnamurti School in Rishi Valley. Rest of the world, many in the fields of arts and entertainment were influenced in subtle ways by "theosophical" ideas even though they may not have formally joined any organizations. What all this points out is that there is a lot of practical uphill work is ahead and it is going to be the task and opportunity for some of us to recognize them and give our best TRY. Any amount of esoterica, while may be glamorous in the New Age, is not going to help. Any one who thinks that all the practice of mental gymnastics is going to help them or the world, IMHO, is going in the wrong direction and any amount of correction is not going to cut it since the fundamental direction itself is going the wrong way. My 0.02 MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 03:04:52 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Practical Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood) Message-ID: In message <199711231851.LAA17156@umt.umt.edu>, JRC writes >Yes! I have often thought that our First Object may be one of the most >revolutionary statements made in the last century ... and looking at the >world as it is now, with "race, religion and creed" being at the root of >such an immense amount of discord and suffering on earth, it seems perhaps >even more relevent today. I wonder, sometimes, what would have happened, >what the world would look like today, if the Theosophical Society, instead >of devolving into small groups of people studying esoterica, had become >sucessful and reached the full fruition of what the founders intended. -JRC Wonder you (and we) may, but sadly the founders and their successors were as captivated by the esoterica as most of those who followed them, with the current paradox that 3rd object ideas seem to "rule" the TS movement, while at the same time they are denied or decried by others in charge of parts of it, especially Adyar. I think I am saying that the founders and their successors were no better or worse than anyone else, and in consequence, had no chance of setting in motion the "successful and full fruition" you mention. :-( This, I guess, *has* to include the putative Masters. Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 22:14:37 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Is TSA heading in the wrong direction? Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971124041437.00718644@mail.eden.com> Recently a Theosophist commented: "Just like sailors in the middle of the ocean check their compass to find out where true north is. Sailors frequently check which is due North so that they are sure they are heading on the right direction. Theosophists also need to do the same." In the spirit of the above, I just re-read the famous Maha Chohan Letter, which many Theosophical Leaders from HPB onwards consider as the Charter for the Modern Theosophical Movement. In that letter, it was made very very clear that The First Object of TS == that of Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood) is the *all* important object. In the light of this, two of the recent writings coming as part of the official statements from Theosophical Society in America (TSA) causes a lot of concern to many. They raise the fundamental question -- is there is a policy change is the direction? ------- The first writing was in an serial article published in "The Messenger" - A Newsletter and Study Paper of the TSA and mailed to all at-large members. In the 2/96 (unsigned) article -- Chap 9 of Theosophy in a New Key titled Theosophy and the "New Age", there is a startling new statement. It says "The Society has three aims that it pursues, and those three aims, taken together, make it unique." The first aim "the Society teaches Theosophy -- not various related ideas like reincarnation and karma -- but a total world view that relates all our varied experiences to single vision of cosmic unity, order and purposefulness." The second aim of the Society is to offer its members a way of transforming themselves, of achieving the purpose of our evolution, of discovering who they really are. The third aim of the Society -- actually the first in importance -- is to bring together a group of people who are informed about the principles of the Wisdom Tradition, who have begun the work of self-transformation, and who are dedicated to cooperating with the elders and assisting in their work. [In reference to elders there is a discussion about the Mahatmas] The article goes on to say "the aims we have been discussing are really just a different way of looking at the Society's three objects. They are the inner side of those declared objects." ---------- The second published item is a statement in the 1997 Quest Books (TPH) Holiday Gift Catalog. It contains a letter from the National President of TSA which states: "Dear Friend of Quest Books: The books and audios in this catalog come from the publishing arm of the Theosophical Society, a non denominational organization devoted to helping its members -- realize their inner potentials and seek out the mysteries of the universe -- reconcile the truths of science, religion, and philosophy in East and West, and -- promote unity among ethnic groups, sexes, social classes, and adherents to belief systems. ------------ The above two official publications raises several questions: 1. First and foremost, it is my understanding from all the writings of every Theosophical Leader from HPB onwards, that primary focus has always been establishing "a nucleus of Universal Brotherhood(/Sisterhood/Siblinghood)". 2. Realizing one's inner potential and self-discovery has always been rarely pushed by all the leaders. This is again a selfish endeavor, IMHO. 3. The inner aims described is the *first* *time* anyone comes up this novel concept as if it has been all along hidden and has just been discovered by the unnamed writer. 4. The recent explanation of the objects of TSA as -- "helping members realize their inner potentials and seek out the mysteries of the universe" is likely to be misunderstood by the potential readers and potential future members. 5. In the current New Age thinking, due to the mistaken ideas of the public, it is more likely than not for readers to think that the inner potentials and seeking mysteries of the universe -- as understanding how the (hidden) inner potentials and mysteries of the universe can be exploited to improve ones health, wealth, happiness, love and sex life etc. etc. (And there is a great market demand.) This coupled with the explanation of the concept of Mahatmas could reinforce the wrong ideas the public have picked up regarding the gurus from the East who have invaded and exploited the Western followers. I think it is time that these issues be re-examined in the light of the statement of the Founders as to why TS was started and where it is supposed to be heading. Once this is done, the objective(s) should be explained in very very simple language that even a 7th grader could understand. It is all the more important, IMHO, so that every newbee knows very clearly where all of us are heading. Otherwise, we will be misleading the public about the mission of Theosophical Movement, which anyone who has read the early literature will surely take strong objection to. Let us all put in our 0.02. If it falls in deaf ears of the leaders we will at least have the satisfaction that we have done our duty. Peace MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:51:00 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: The Quest Message-ID: To doss: "You should open it and see. At least from my novice standpoint, the old Quest used to be difficult to understand -- the fog factor was very high -- and now it seems there is an attempt to capitalize on the fad of the day." I still don't consider the Quest worth to be opened. I simply had a special look on its cover page - it's like Bart's Bacon Theosophist. "Hope you will have your wheels back." Two of them came back over the weekend. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 10:59:40 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: x Message-ID: To Alan: Sometimes I do make typing mistakes by purpose. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 11:18:34 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Quest Message-ID: To Chuck: "The Quest is beyond dull. It is an abomination to the human soul..." I don't know since I am all happy never having read one but when it came out of the bag of that American Lady it looked so dreck-rosa. My stomach felt all strange and I thought if I wouldn't eat anything looking like this I shouldn't read anything like this. "... the worst thing that can happen is something that probably should be happening any day now anyway ..." I think that "worst thing" is an "advancement". "... maybe you can take some pedestrians with you." That's a good idea since it is always nice to help others - wauw, you can be selfless! Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 12:16:34 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Mind Control Message-ID: To Mark A. Forster: "However, when a person joins an alternative religious movement and changes her or his behavior, sometimes not in accordance with social norms, it is called brainwashing." That's a very interesting topic you mention here. I think a bit different about brainwashing. To me it means the reorientation of a person through psychical and physical pressure. It's the pressure, that matters the most. Just my opinion, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 12:37:04 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Mahatmas Message-ID: To all: Sometimes I can be very hertical since I only believe what I see and I have never seen a "Mahatma" in my life before. Is there anybody here who did? Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 05:41:06 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Mahatmas Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971124114106.01056bc4@mail.eden.com> At 05:37 AM 11/24/97 -0500, you wrote: >To all: Sometimes I can be very hertical since I only believe >what I see and I have never seen a "Mahatma" in my life before. >Is there anybody here who did? > >Nicole Hi, Nicole: You are not the only one. A lot of us are waiting. But even if a "Mahatma" appears before us, our problems and trials are still ours and we only can solve ours. Blind faith in anything is bad. The start of wisdom is to think for oneself from what one "knows". Take care. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 18:20:47 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Objects of TSA/TS Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971125002047.00ccd9dc@mail.eden.com> Hi This is a followup on my msg on the subject. I have written to John Algeo, National President, TSA for clarification. When I receive a response, I will post it here for everyone's benefit and information. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 22:48:29 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: The Quest Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971125044829.00bbbcd8@mail.eden.com> At 03:52 AM 11/24/97 -0500, you wrote: >To doss: "You should open it and see. At least from my novice standpoint, >the old Quest used to be difficult to understand -- the fog factor was very >high -- >and now it seems there is an attempt to capitalize on the fad of the day." > >I still don't consider the Quest worth to be opened. I simply had a special >look on its cover page - it's like Bart's Bacon Theosophist. > >"Hope you will have your wheels back." > >Two of them came back over the weekend. > >Peace, > >Nicole Glad that two came back over the weekend. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 12:17:30 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Re: Mahatmas Message-ID: Hi doss, "You are not the only one. A lot of us are waiting." I personally stop with waiting because I would feel terribly shocked if a Mahatma would appear in front of me. "But even if a "Mahatma" appears before us, our problems and trials are still ours and we only can solve ours." Very true. It's only me that can do something for me to feel well. "Blind faith in anything is bad. The start of wisdom is to think for oneself from what one "knows"." I agree. I have to think about what faith i s anyway. "Glad that two came back over the weekend." Thank you for that. Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 05:24:19 -0600 From: "Mark A. Foster" Subject: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: <199711251122.FAA14643@ultra.qni.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- At 04:40 AM 11/25/97 -0500,  Nicole Suter wrote: >That's a very interesting topic you mention here. I think a bit different >about brainwashing. To me it means the reorientation of a person >through psychical and physical pressure. It's the pressure, that matters >the most. Nicole and others, The following web page gives a good summary on this subject. It is a bit dated, however. For instance, it uncritically mentions hypnosis which has been shown not to be an effective tool for anything (including dredging up memories and alleviation of compulsive behavior patterns) other than relief from pain: http://www.inlink.com/~dhchase/ofshe.htm ------ Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Prof. of Sociology * owner@sociologist.com http://galaxycorp.com/pageme (page me) * (913)469-8500, x3376 http://surf.to/mark or http://earthcorp.com/mfoster (my 3 sites) http://cyberjunkie.com/lists (Divine Philosophy Society's 6 email lists) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 97 9:10:07 EST From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Seeing Mahatmas Message-ID: <199711251410.JAA25794@leo.vsla.edu> According to Cayce, probably we all have, but didn't recognize them. Theosophy has built up a more and more elaborate (and unrealistic, IMO) idea of what they are. HPB said they appeared as ordinary people to those around them; within a few years of her death Judge was writing that their physical bodies were so gloriously radiant that us ordinary folks couldn't bear the vibrations-- so they *had* to stay in seclusion to protect us. HPB wrote in a letter to Franz Hartmann: "...fanatics, who began calling them `Mahatmas', and, little by little, the Adepts were transformed into Gods on earth. They began to be appealed to, and made puja to, and were becoming with every day more legendary and miraculous...I saw with terror and anger the false track they were all pursuing [and still are to this day--PJ] The `Masters," as all thought, must be omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent...The idea that the Masters were mortal men, limited, even in their great powers, never crossed anyone's mind, although they themselves wrote this repeatedly." In a letter to Sinnett, K.H. said (paraphrase) "Think of us as simple men like yourselves, perhaps a little wiser as the result of special study, and the problem will be solved." You've seen that, haven't you? I have, lots of times. What a shame that this advice and HPB's comments above have been totally ignored in all branches of the movement. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 12:21:02 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: <347B08FE.74EA@dmv.com> Mark A. Foster wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --- > At 04:40 AM 11/25/97 -0500, Nicole Suter wrote: > > >That's a very interesting topic you mention here. I think a bit different > >about brainwashing. To me it means the reorientation of a person > >through psychical and physical pressure. It's the pressure, that matters > >the most. > > Nicole and others, > > The following web page gives a good summary on this subject. It is a bit > dated, however. For instance, it uncritically mentions hypnosis which has > been shown not to be an effective tool for anything (including dredging up > memories and alleviation of compulsive behavior patterns) other than relief > from pain: > > http://www.inlink.com/~dhchase/ofshe.htm > ------ > Mark A. Foster, Ph.D., Prof. of Sociology * owner@sociologist.com > http://galaxycorp.com/pageme (page me) * (913)469-8500, x3376 > http://surf.to/mark or http://earthcorp.com/mfoster (my 3 sites) > http://cyberjunkie.com/lists (Divine Philosophy Society's 6 email lists) I had attended a lecture at the University of Maryland given by a Dr. Moyle who claimed to have worked for many years with government agencies developing the use of hypnosis for the purpose of getting subjects to do things against their will. He claimed that they had achieved complete success in their experiments, but I don't think there are any published results to be found. He had also remaked that torture has been refined to the point that anyone can be made to confess. This maybe rather grim to think about, but I do think he may be reporting the truth about these issues. Certainly there are stranger things to be known. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 12:27:47 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: <347B0A93.145A@dmv.com> In the last post The Doctors name was Doyle, not Moyle; my memory slips a bit from time time to time. He told a story that involved a Moyle. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:37:58 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: <971125133757_982948679@mrin42.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-25 12:57:50 EST, you write: >I had attended a lecture at the University of Maryland given by a Dr. >Moyle who claimed to have worked for many years with government agencies >developing the use of hypnosis for the purpose of getting subjects to do >things against their will. He claimed that they had achieved complete >success in their experiments, but I don't think there are any published >results to be found. He had also remaked that torture has been refined >to the point that anyone can be made to confess. > True on all counts. The material has been published and there are a number of websites that contain quite a bit of it. Simply set the search engine to Mind Control and start digging. >This maybe rather grim to think about, but I do think he may be >reporting the truth about these issues. Certainly there are stranger >things to be known. > >Vincent There are a lot of popular myths about hypnosis, one of them being that person cannot be made to do anything they are socially programmed not to, like murder. But a skilled hypnotist, with a modicum of knowledge of human behavior, can work around any such block. True, the subject may not be willing to empty an automatic into a person knowing it will kill him, but if the subject KNOWS that it is only a water pistol he is going to be firing... Well, you can see how it works. And yes, the experiments were successful and I didn't do them. The really interesting stuff, however, is the work that has been done on and off over the years with long-range hypnosis, in which hypnotic induction is combined with telepathy. The best known researcher in this field was V. V. Vasiliev, but it was actually quite common about a hundred years ago and much of the material on mental healing of the time gives very clear instructions on how to do it. Most of that is kept in print by Yogi Publication Society. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 16:34:36 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: To Mark: "The following web page gives a good summary on this subject. It is a bit dated, however. For instance, it uncritically mentions hypnosis which has been shown not to be an effective tool for anything (including dredging up memories and alleviation of compulsive behavior patterns) other than relief from pain:" Thank you for the adresses of the web pages. I kept them and shall have a look at it later when there is time. I completly agree to what you are saying here about hypnosis. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:12:07 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Seeing Mahatmas Message-ID: To Paul: "According to Cayce, probably we all have, but didn't recognize them." Spontanously the above sentence reminds me to a tibetian priest who used to work for Rotary International as I did approx. 14 years ago and with whom I often shared very interesting discussions. There were other tibetian priests also working for RI but they were kind of different. It's hard to explain with words, kind of more "false earthy kings" (it's not meant to value them, it's just how I feel about it). "...fanatics," I immensly dislike everything fanatic! "Think of us as simple men like yourselves, perhaps a little wiser as the result of special study, and the problem will be solved." You've seen that, haven't you?" No, I have not seen that and thank you for writing it. Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:19:34 +0200 From: Nicole Suter Subject: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: To Vincent: "the use of hypnosis for the purpose of getting subjects to do things against their will" I can't follow you here - does a subject have a will? Could you please explain what you mean here? Peace, Nicole From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 20:17:12 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Sleep before 12.00 Midnight Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971126201712.00c46824@mail.eden.com> I just got my copy of Alice Leighton Cleather's book "HPB As I Knew Her". Alice was one of those twelve who were the members of the original Inner Group HPB formed. In the book, she writes: left"She (HPB) made me stay the night many a time, [after attending the Blavatsky Lodge Meetings] and sleep on the bed-sofa in her sitting room (the inner drawing room), close to the door leading into her tiny bedroom, and up against one of its walls. How often did I try to remain awake all night, feeling convinced that I should "see" much. But No, when midnight approached sleep became imperative, and I always had to succumb; never could I keep myself awake after midnight, and HPB would never explain why; though, later, she told us once that "Master goes His "rounds" at midnight," which threw some light on the reason of my enforced sleep at that hour. She was then referring to the students of the newly-formed ES, who had practically pledged themselves to Him, and was emphasizing the necessity for all of to be "in bed and asleep before midnight." Another thing she once said, I remember, was that *one* hour's sleep before midnight was worth four after it; owing to some magnetic change which takes place in the earth as midnight sweeps round its surface." =20 Question: Has anyone seen any other reference in HPB's writings about the pros and cons of sleeping before midnight? MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 20:33:11 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Anyone in Tulsa, OK Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971126203311.00cd794c@mail.eden.com> Hi Is there anyone in the maillist who lives in Tulsa, OK. Please contact me e-mail at ramadoss@eden.com. Thanks. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 11:31:01 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Sleep before 12.00 Midnight Message-ID: <971127113101_495761786@mrin38> In a message dated 97-11-27 04:54:53 EST, you write: << Another thing she once said, I remember, was that *one* hour's sleep before midnight was worth four after it; owing to some magnetic change which takes place in the earth as midnight sweeps round its surface." >> Midnight in what time-zone? Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 15:40:18 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: happy thanksgiving Message-ID: <971127154018_-87026552@mrin52.mail.aol.com> Just got these great ideas Uncle Chuckie Todays Jokes............ >Things To Do Thanksgiving Day If You Want To Leave Early > >- Announce that you would like to start a new family tradition, and >proceed >to take off your clothes at the dinner table. > >- Open the oven, shove hunks of Velveeta into the turkey while it cooks. >Tell mom it adds the coolest flavor. > >- Shoot olive pits at Grandpa's glasses (just pinch them in your fingers >and they FLY!) > >- Whenever someone at the table says a word beginning with the letter R, >make a loud "BUZZ"ing noise. > >- When it's your turn to state what you are thankful for, say " Fantasy >football and ESPN," or " Macy's and Neiman's " > >- Suck your cranberry sauce loudly through a straw. > >- Hold your nose while you eat. > >- Recite the tragic and abusive conditions known to exist at turkey >farms. > >-Mid-meal, turn to mom and say, "See mom, I told you they wouldn't >notice, >you were worried for nothing". > >- Load your plate up high, then take it to the kitchen, toss it all in >the >blender, and take your "shake" back to the table. Announce that you've >got >a new fear of choking. > >-Twitch a lot and nervously tell the person next to you, "THE SAFETY IS >OFF", while you hold your pocket. > >- When you arrive, promise that your date won't be more than an hour >late, >he/she just has to wait for the warden to get together all the necessary >release forms, and then they are free to go. > >-Sit at the "children's table" and suggest using Beavis and Butt-head as >good role models. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 15:45:16 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Truth is a Pathless Land Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971127154516.00f58df8@mail.eden.com> Rudy: I agree. It was in 1965 when I went to the International Convention in Adyar, that I attended a lecture by K across the river from TS HQ. During the convention, all the attendes attended his lectures and the TS schedule was so arranged that there was no conflict. In each lecture, the then President of TS, N. Sri Ram, father of Radha was always there, I think sending a subtle msg that all Theosophists should hear what K has to say and then make up their own mind. Even though I later attended several of his lectures in New Delhi and Bangalore, it was almost 20 years later when I started reading some of his stuff and saw some of the videos, that I started "thinking" on my own. It may be recalled that in the 1986 International Convention Lecture, Radha Burnier clearly stated that K's emphasis on questioning everything may have saved TS from shutting down as most similar organizations did not survive for a century. I think K's emphasis on living what you know is all important and all else is less relevant. Glad that you and I are on the same wave length. Peace mkr At 05:58 AM 11/26/97 -0800, you wrote: >The way I see it is that the theosophists who were living at that time, >when K. closed the Order of the Star, didn't understand the importance of >his action. That is the reason why in 1997 we still see discussion groups >discussing what Krishnamurti meant by "freedom" and how to attain "complete >freedom". Instead of living like free men and women, we act like sheep. >Dedicated to make a creed out of the teachings, and a church out of the TS. >But it's not too late in 1997. We still have time to fix the mess. > >Rudy > >> >>Krishnaji's statements and lectures have the effect of challenging the >>individual to be self-reliant and take on creative and activist role rather >>than blind following like a sheep. >> >>In HPB's msg I just posted she states: >> >>"For the extension of the theosophical movement, a useful channel for the >>irrigation of the dry fields of contemporary thought with the water of life, >>Branches are needed everywhere; not mere groups of passive sympathisers, >>such as the slumbering army of churchgoers, whose eyes are shut while the >>"devil" sweeps the field; no, not such. >>Active, wide-awake, earnest, unselfish Branches are needed, whose members >>shall not be constantly unmasking their selfishness by asking "What will it >>profit us to join the Theosophical Society, and how much will it harm us?" >>but be putting to themselves the question "Can we not do substantial good to >>mankind by working in this good cause with all our hearts, our minds, and >>our strength?" >> >>The spirit of the above statement is in line with Krishnaji's statement >>except that he goes one step further making us grow up and be self reliant. >> >>Peace >> >>MKR > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 16:04:34 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Truth Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971127160434.00f48024@mail.eden.com> ffff,0000,0000 It just dawned on me what a progress Internet has made. On all the maillists, we have T/theosophists belonging to every Theosophical Organization and T/theosophists belonging to no organization. We all have our personal preferences about philosophy, leaders and organizations, but the key factor which unites us all and makes us participate in exchanging ideas and opinions and provide information, is that all of us are interested in T/theosophy and we are all students thereof. What organizations have never been able to achieve in over 100 years, Internet is making headway and we all should be thankful on Thanksgiving day. My 0.02 MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 02:42:23 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Welcome! Message-ID: Theosophy International welcomes John Fisher! Personal welcomes to: JohnFisher@timewarp.co.uk Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 23:19:27 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: Theos-World Truth Message-ID: With my allergic reaction to any spiritual organization's rules, I probably would not have continued studying t/Theosophy if it wasn't for the theosophy lists. Perhaps without the internet, others would have abandoned their theosophical studies due to disillusionment with an organization. Definitely one way to separate "Truth" from "organization." Thoa :o) >ffff,0000,0000 > >It just dawned on me what a progress Internet has made. > >On all the maillists, we have T/theosophists belonging to every >Theosophical Organization and T/theosophists belonging to no >organization. We all have our personal preferences about philosophy, >leaders and organizations, but the key factor which unites us all and >makes us participate in exchanging ideas and opinions and provide >information, is that all of us are interested in T/theosophy and we are >all students thereof. > >What organizations have never been able to achieve in over 100 years, >Internet is making headway and we all should be thankful on Thanksgiving >day. > >My 0.02 > >MKR > > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 23:20:52 -0800 (PST) From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Thi-Kim Tran) Subject: Re: happy thanksgiving Message-ID: *Burp*...Aw, Chuckie, those are supposed to be jokes? I thought they were the official Thanksgiving dinner conduct! Some things you might want to do for that great holiday togetherness: Slap mashed potatoes in your arm pits to the tune of "Over the River and Through the Woods". Stick the wish bone in your nose and spike your hair with gravy for that Sex Pistol look. Fill the bathtub with mashed potatoes and gravy, call it the mash pit, and have a nude wrestling contest. Decorate your face with mashed potatoes. Gobs of mashed potatoes on your chin and you can be Santa Claus! Become the incredible snot family by running mashed potatoes down from your nostrils. Have a food fight! Use cranberry relish for that realistic gratuitous violence! Have a who can smile the grossest contest. Stuff your face with creative colorful concoctions and smile widely! A little forceful laughing can make it even more fun. Try them! Why force yourself to sit through another boring dinner conversation? I thought of and applied those things out of sheer desperation. I tell you, no more Prozac for me! Happy Thanksgiving. ;o) Thoa >Just got these great ideas > >Uncle Chuckie > >Todays Jokes............ > >>Things To Do Thanksgiving Day If You Want To Leave Early >> >>- Announce that you would like to start a new family tradition, and >>proceed >>to take off your clothes at the dinner table. >> >>- Open the oven, shove hunks of Velveeta into the turkey while it cooks. >>Tell mom it adds the coolest flavor. >> >>- Shoot olive pits at Grandpa's glasses (just pinch them in your fingers >>and they FLY!) >> >>- Whenever someone at the table says a word beginning with the letter R, >>make a loud "BUZZ"ing noise. >> >>- When it's your turn to state what you are thankful for, say " Fantasy >>football and ESPN," or " Macy's and Neiman's " >> >>- Suck your cranberry sauce loudly through a straw. >> >>- Hold your nose while you eat. >> >>- Recite the tragic and abusive conditions known to exist at turkey >>farms. >> >>-Mid-meal, turn to mom and say, "See mom, I told you they wouldn't >>notice, >>you were worried for nothing". >> >>- Load your plate up high, then take it to the kitchen, toss it all in >>the >>blender, and take your "shake" back to the table. Announce that you've >>got >>a new fear of choking. >> >>-Twitch a lot and nervously tell the person next to you, "THE SAFETY IS >>OFF", while you hold your pocket. >> >>- When you arrive, promise that your date won't be more than an hour >>late, >>he/she just has to wait for the warden to get together all the necessary >>release forms, and then they are free to go. >> >>-Sit at the "children's table" and suggest using Beavis and Butt-head as >>good role models. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 02:48:52 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Truth Message-ID: <971128024852_-871539794@mrin40.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-28 02:21:30 EST, you write: << With my allergic reaction to any spiritual organization's rules, I probably would not have continued studying t/Theosophy >> Fortunately the Theosophical Society has no rules to speak of. Which is a pity in a way because it makes my role as unofficial rule breaker very difficult. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 02:50:37 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: happy thanksgiving Message-ID: <971128025036_261050043@mrin52.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-28 02:23:20 EST, you write: << Try them! Why force yourself to sit through another boring dinner conversation? I thought of and applied those things out of sheer desperation. I tell you, no more Prozac for me! Happy Thanksgiving. ;o) Thoa >> After suffering through a thoroughly boring Thanksgiving dinner with my girlfriend's huge family, otherwise known as the Milwaukee Dweebfest, I wish I had really done some of those things! Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 16:57:44 -0600 From: ramadoss@eden.com Subject: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <347F4C68.FAA@eden.com> Queen's annual New Year Msg is going to be on the internet and there will even be a video version on Internet. One more indication that Internet is maturing and even very conservative individuals are taking note and moving with times. Wake up anyone who thinks that controlled print media is the ideal media for Thesophists and Thesophical Organizations. Many in the leadership still either don't understand Internet or don't want to understand and use Internet and e-mail. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 19:50:22 -0500 From: Vincent Beall Subject: Re: Brainwashing, etc. Message-ID: <347F66CE.784C@dmv.com> Nicole Suter wrote: > > To Vincent: "the use of hypnosis for the purpose of getting subjects to do > things against their will" > > I can't follow you here - does a subject have a will? Could you please > explain what you mean here? > > Peace, > > Nicole Hypnotists have found that if a suggestion is given which is in conflict with the subjects values the subject will not execute that suggestion, and may even "awaken" from the trance. Vincent -- vincent@dmv.com http://home.dmv.com/~vincent/ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 01:36:08 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Theos-World Truth Message-ID: In message <971128024852_-871539794@mrin40.mail.aol.com>, Drpsionic@aol.com writes >Fortunately the Theosophical Society has no rules to speak of. Which is a >pity in a way because it makes my role as unofficial rule breaker very >difficult. > >Chuck the Heretic Maybe someone will put a motion that unofficial rule-breakers are not allowed? Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 21:22:42 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <971128212242_1448239659@mrin47> In a message dated 97-11-28 21:03:22 EST, you write: << Queen's annual New Year Msg is going to be on the internet and there will even be a video version on Internet. >> Oh who cares? What is she going to say? How to find frumpy hats? Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 21:24:04 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-World Truth Message-ID: <971128212403_-19740878@mrin39> In a message dated 97-11-28 21:09:41 EST, you write: << Maybe someone will put a motion that unofficial rule-breakers are not allowed? Alan >> But if the did that, then they could not congratulate themselves on how tolerant of obnoxious people they are. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 20:37:06 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971128203706.0106da4c@mail.eden.com> >Oh who cares? > >What is she going to say? How to find frumpy hats? > >Chuck the Heretic > No body may care. Point is even the most conservatives are now using Internet. All hear about the ban of notebook computers in US Senate? They don't want to change the tradition. Not a single one of the Senators would be elected without using a computer. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 20:55:41 -0800 From: Martin Leiderman Subject: Re: On organization Message-ID: <347FA04D.1884@lainet.com> Organizations, like friends, families, communities, cities, countries and our globe are a fact of life and an important aspect of learning. They are not perfect, nor there is any perfect thing or being in life. IMO it is time for all to understand that we cannot get perfection out of imperfection. Out of the interaction we learn and become wiser, this wisdom in time will liberate us . . . This is the Path towards the land of Truth. A slow process but a extraordinary process. Unpredictable it is as we do not have all the factor. It is a beautiful process: being paret of it and able to observe it as an outsider is a worderful experience. So am very happy to be part of an TSA organization, imperfect yes, with friends in it, yes. With people who are totally different from me, like Chuck the Heretic, yes. But I still have fun with Chuck at Olcott. What are we learning as part of an organization: brotherhood, harmony, goodness, etc. Failure to do that brings pain, suffering - adharma. The internet is an organization, and is getting more organized everyday. If any thinks is not organized, try to get an URL without applying for it, try to get an email without paying for an email address ( unless someone else pays for it). The thinking that "not belonging to" is alien to a social being. I like what Plato says about it in his republic. Martin From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 02:32:05 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <971129023205_140412715@mrin51.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-28 21:48:43 EST, you write: << All hear about the ban of notebook computers in US Senate? They don't want to change the tradition. Not a single one of the Senators would be elected without using a computer. mkr >> >From what I hear it's not so much about tradition as the possibility of the C-SPAN camera catching one of them playing games on the machines. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 02:34:18 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: On organization Message-ID: <971129023417_1973027755@mrin83.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-29 00:06:49 EST, you write: << So am very happy to be part of an TSA organization, imperfect yes, with friends in it, yes. With people who are totally different from me, like Chuck the Heretic, yes. But I still have fun with Chuck at Olcott. >> As Chuck does with you. And it's a damned good thing we are all different or we would become terribly confused wondering who was saying the same thing all the time. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 03:33:33 -0800 From: Mark Kusek Subject: More, more, more Message-ID: <347FFD8B.312F@withoutwalls.com> Hey Folks, I just put a bunch more pictures up. Topics like: 1) Charts: Lots of teaching images and illustrations that articulate various facets of abstract concepts. 2) Masters: A few more pictures of reputed beings in the esoteric pantheon. 3) Visualizations: Meditation focii. 4) I AM: Pictures from that funky '30s movement. 5) Depth Psychology: Imagery for individuation process. 6) Inspirations: Art of the wondrous Nicholas Roerich. 7) Sacred Architecture: Mandala in three dimensions and the idea of building as manifest sacred geometry. 8) Mystic Pedagogy: Diagrams of teachings and schematics from diverse traditions that point to similar referents. 9) Traditions: Small cross-cultural survey of sacred and ritual art traditions. http://www.withoutwalls.com/artwork/ Keeping a pictoral record. Lots more available. Let me know your thoughts, Yours, Mark -------- WITHOUT WALLS: An Internet Art Space http://www.withoutwalls.com E-mail: mark@withoutwalls.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 09:24:30 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129092430.00f558c0@mail.eden.com> At 02:33 AM 11/29/97 -0500, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-11-28 21:48:43 EST, you write: > ><< All hear about the ban of notebook computers in US Senate? > They don't want to change the tradition. Not a single one of the Senators > would be elected without using a computer. > > mkr >> > >>From what I hear it's not so much about tradition as the possibility of the >C-SPAN camera catching one of them playing games on the machines. > >Chuck the Heretic I personally prefer their playing games on the machines so they will do less political damage! mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 09:46:16 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: On organization Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129094616.00f56598@mail.eden.com> At 12:02 AM 11/29/97 -0500, Martin Leiderman wrote: >Organizations, like friends, families, communities, cities, countries >and our globe are a fact of life and an important aspect of learning. No one says we do not need organizations. We do need organizations to take care of physical level activities. But when it comes to matters not belonging to physical activities, I see organizations are a hindrance simply because each individual is very unique. At the physical level, when we do need organizations, the organizations need to be watched relating to the actions they take. With all the best of intentions, actions taken by the organizations and its leaders can be dead wrong. This is especially so with organizations dealing with philosophical (or spiritual related) matters. We all should be vigilant and observant and when we see something not ok in our perception, we should take on an active role and speak up. Many times, people belonging to the above type of organizations don't speak up either due to timidity or fear of one type or another -- fear in this world or the next world. It is not unknown that organzations use indirect means of control usually working thru fear. In this context, all organizations have the natural tendency to protect their territories and usually will try every means to do so and many time with the simple rule that end justifies the means. In the present day and age, vigilance on the part of people would make the organizations in many cases more responsible in their actions. Once we take this balanced view, no one will have any problems with organizations. As for our search for Truth, which many see as an individual's quest, organizations can and do such purely mechanical functions as publishing, broadcasting, holding property to use for individuals to meet and so on. Whether an organization can guide one to Truth (like a bunch of sheep with blind belief and not personal knowledge) is something that each individual has to decide for himself or herself. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 11:23:33 -0500 (EST) From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Queens of England's New Year Msg on Internet Message-ID: <971129112332_-871401772@mrin83.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-11-29 11:13:17 EST, you write: << I personally prefer their playing games on the machines so they will do less political damage! mkr >> I agree. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 17:43:30 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Free E-mail Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129174330.00a6e1c4@mail.eden.com> Some of you know about the free e-mail service provided by Juno in the United States and Canada. Like network television which is paid for by advertisers, Juno gets its money from advertisers. The users get e-mail capability at no cost. All you need is a PC computer which runs Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 and has a modem. Juno has local access telephone numbers in most major cities. So in effect the cost is the cost of a local phone call. The setting up an e-mail account is very simple. You need a copy of their e-mail software. You can download it from www.juno.com, you can get a copy from your friend or get a copy mailed to you for the handling cost of less than $10.00. >From then on, the whole setup process is very simple and anyone with no expertise can do it. What free e-mail is going to do is to make e-mail accessible to everyone. This is going to impact the world of communications in ways unthinkable. Just wanted everyone to know. MKR From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 01:20:11 +0000 From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Free E-mail Message-ID: In message <3.0.3.32.19971129174330.00a6e1c4@mail.eden.com>, M K Ramadoss writes >Some of you know about the free e-mail service provided by Juno in the >United States and Canada. > >Like network television which is paid for by advertisers, Juno gets its >money from advertisers. The users get e-mail capability at no cost. > > >What free e-mail is going to do is to make e-mail accessible to everyone. >This is going to impact the world of communications in ways unthinkable. .. and give your e-mail address to thousands of advertisers who will - guess what - e-mail you! > >Just wanted everyone to know. Hmmmmm ...... Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:27:02 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Free E-mail Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129222702.01077658@mail.eden.com> At 09:38 PM 11/29/97 -0500, Dr. A.M.Bain wrote: >In message <3.0.3.32.19971129174330.00a6e1c4@mail.eden.com>, M K >Ramadoss writes >>Some of you know about the free e-mail service provided by Juno in the >>United States and Canada. >> >>Like network television which is paid for by advertisers, Juno gets its >>money from advertisers. The users get e-mail capability at no cost. >> > >> >>What free e-mail is going to do is to make e-mail accessible to everyone. >>This is going to impact the world of communications in ways unthinkable. > >.. and give your e-mail address to thousands of advertisers who will - >guess what - e-mail you! All the e-mail goes thru the central site. I doubt very much massive e-mail is going to show up. The situation is more like what you see when you use free browser like Netscape where there are some frames showing ads. Will let you all know when I find out more. >> >>Just wanted everyone to know. > >Hmmmmm ...... > >Alan .............. doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:33:49 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129223349.011c1814@mail.eden.com> Eldon: You need to look up www.juno.com and see if one of the 805 area code access numbers is a local call for Ojai. Then it may be worthwhile to provide them with info on free e-mail from Juno. Also you can have some diskettes with Juno software that can be handed out for free to anyone interested. Juno is encouraging distribution of software with no strings attached. If you like, I can arrange to duplicate and send you diskettes for distribution. You may want to consider about incorportating the above in your presentation at Ojai. ........mkr At 11:42 AM 11/22/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >MKR: > >>Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: >> >>1. What is the composition of the audience such as: >> >> top leaders >> workers >> others > >This cannot be predicted in advance. The program is a one-day >thing on the regular Krotona schedule, without any special >promotion. > >> Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old >>people. > >Typical programs at Krotona are older folks that may never >have owned their own PC. For a program on this topic, though, >the older folks that dislike computers will stay away, and >more of the younger people on the Krotona mailing list will >likely come. The percentage of younger people will be >improved, but still be older than the average for the T.S. >in general. > >>2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? > >Give a broad overview of what's out there, some show-and-tell, >and related philosophical discussion of how one can benefit >from and serve others on the Internet. > >>3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or >>bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file >>take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership >>especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) > >This is not a training session for staff, it's a public >program for anyone interested. > >>4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your >>presentation. > >I thought it would be a good idea and volunteered to >give the program. > >-- Eldon > >-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com > >Letters to the Editors, and discussion of theosophical ideas and >teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of >"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:42:44 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Request for Information, Suggestions, Help Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971129224244.00efb9a8@mail.eden.com> Eldon: One more thought. How about preparing a one page write up on theosophy maillists - theos-talk, theos-xxxx, ti-l, ts-l and instructions on how to sign up for them. It would be very handy for newbees. When I was looking for theos-xxxx maillists, a kind soul who picked up the handout prepared by Don DeGracia faxed it to me and it helped me to subscribe to theos-l and related maillists. ........mkr At 11:42 AM 11/22/97 -0800, Eldon B Tucker wrote: >MKR: > >>Following on what JRC has indicated, could you tell us: >> >>1. What is the composition of the audience such as: >> >> top leaders >> workers >> others > >This cannot be predicted in advance. The program is a one-day >thing on the regular Krotona schedule, without any special >promotion. > >> Again in the above groups any idea of the proportion of young and old >>people. > >Typical programs at Krotona are older folks that may never >have owned their own PC. For a program on this topic, though, >the older folks that dislike computers will stay away, and >more of the younger people on the Krotona mailing list will >likely come. The percentage of younger people will be >improved, but still be older than the average for the T.S. >in general. > >>2. What are the objectives, if any has been formulated? > >Give a broad overview of what's out there, some show-and-tell, >and related philosophical discussion of how one can benefit >from and serve others on the Internet. > >>3. Getting the audience appreciate and use Internet, is top-down or >>bottom-up approach is going to be taken? (How eager and fast rank and file >>take to Internet may depend on the attitude and enthusiasm of the leadership >>especially because Krotona is the HQ of the Esoteric Section.) > >This is not a training session for staff, it's a public >program for anyone interested. > >>4. Can you tell us some background of how and who initiated setting up your >>presentation. > >I thought it would be a good idea and volunteered to >give the program. > >-- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 18:52:32 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The November THEOSOPHY WORLD is out Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19971130185232.00838660@imagiware.com> The December issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "Opening Sacred Celebrations" "Theosophical Resources Announcement" by Wesley Amerman "Studies in 'The Voice of the Silence', Part III, The Virtuous Mind, by B. P. Wadia "Historic Forces That Affect Our Lives" by Eldon Tucker "Ethics is a Part of Life" by Eldon Tucker "A Problem With Ethics" by Gerald Schueler "The Question of Ethics" by April Hejka-Ekins "Research That is Destructive of Belief Systems" by Paul Johnson "New Theosophical Email Addresses" "Conference on Theosophy and Modern Science" by Alan E. Donant "Chaos is Very Civilized" by Thoa Tran "Monk Gloats Over Yoga Championship" -- Anonymous "The Natural Process of Spiritual Development" by Eldon Tucker "Transplants?" by Richard Hiltner, MD "Manuscripts from the Gobi" by Mark Jaqua "Discussions on the Theosophical Philosophy" by Jerry Hejka-Ekins "On Science and Religion" by Annette Rivington "The Theosophical First Cause" by Eldon Tucker THEOSOPHY WORLD is a free Internet monthly available via email (about 100,000 bytes in size). To subscribe, write to editor@theosophy.com.