From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 13:54:17 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The March THEOSOPHY WORLD Is Out The March issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "The Path is Life Itself," Part II, by Eldon Tucker "The New Leader," from THE THEOSOPHICAL FORUM "Humanity in Evolution," by Richard Hiltner "Atom, Man, Star," by L. Gordon Plummer "Atma-Buddhi, the Manas, and the Higher Self," by Dallas TenBroeck "Blavatsky Net Update," by Reed Carson "The Secret Doctrine: Awakening a New Mode of Thought," by Joy Mills 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: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 13:54:39 -0800 From: Eldon B Tucker Subject: The March THEOSOPHY WORLD Is Out The March issue of THEOSOPHY WORLD just came out. It's contents are: "The Path is Life Itself," Part II, by Eldon Tucker "The New Leader," from THE THEOSOPHICAL FORUM "Humanity in Evolution," by Richard Hiltner "Atom, Man, Star," by L. Gordon Plummer "Atma-Buddhi, the Manas, and the Higher Self," by Dallas TenBroeck "Blavatsky Net Update," by Reed Carson "The Secret Doctrine: Awakening a New Mode of Thought," by Joy Mills 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: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:38:58 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Pasadena Secret ES? Feb 3rd 1999 Dear Frank: Did I send you a copy of the book THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT 1875 - 1950 ? It is documentary history of the movement and takes into account all the main aspects of events between those years. If I did not, then would you like me to send you a copy ? No one who writes for Theosophy receives any consideration because of any "authority." Truth does away with external authority. The only "authority" is entirely internal. Each one makes up his own mind as to what is true. If you are interested, I can send you some pages of quotations from Theosophical sources that speak to this effect. I have read many writers on theosophical matters, or those who claimed to be able to interpret the meaning of some of the more obscure statements. Some do illuminate or draw our minds to correlations and analogies, others seem to obscure thought, direct it to themselves and their particular views, and fail to provide students with adequate referencing, so that they can do their own research. I tend to be very cautious about those who refrain from giving SOURCES. They may be right or wrong, but I have to see corroboration. As to the preservation of the "Original Writings." There is no question but the issuing of COLLECTED WORKS, BLAVATSKY is most valuable. Boris de Zircov and those who assisted him did a magnificent job. TPH ought to be commended for that. The only problem with that work is its high price. The average student cannot afford the set. I would like to point out to you that historically around the 1920s all the "original writings" had gone OUT OF PRINT. It is true that some of the books had been reprinted, but most of those reprinted editions had been changed and edited by those who claimed "successorship", or "authority" to do so. In effect they were no longer "accurately true to the originals." One of the primary tasks of the United Lodge of Theosophists was to make the ORIGINALS again available, widely, and at the most reasonable price, as close to actual cost, so that students could have those to use and work on. THEOSOPHY monthly magazine began publishing in 1912 and the reprinting of HPB's articles (by then only in library editions of THEOSOPHIST, LUCIFER and PATH) were again made available to students. In India, starting in 1930, THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT began doing this also (published under the auspices of the ULT in Bombay.) Both magazines continue that work today. In the 1920s the larger task of reprinting a photographic version of THE SECRET DOCTRINE, ISIS UNVEILED, THE KEY TO THEOSOPHY and the New York version Me. Judge had issued in 1893 of THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE was commenced and carried out. This was necessary for the reason that the copies being printed and sold by other Theosophical bodies no longer gave students the unchanged ORIGINALS. I write this so you will be aware of the history of these books. Adyar TPH was not one of those who left the original writings untampered with. In fact today you can but a copy of PRACTICAL OCCULTISM said to be by HPB and which I found was done by a mosaic of authors, all heavily edited, and some articles were by orthodox Brahmins and professed credal methods and rites, which HPB never endorsed. I an send you if you are interested my findings on this. I wrote Adyar TPH and protested, and head nothing, nor has the book been withdrawn. Best wishes as always, Dallas. PS [ Incidentally: Were you able to send something to Reed on the German translations of Theosophical texts that might be available. I too am interested to have that information. ] From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 20:11:52 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Internet and Theosophy In 1875, TS was launched to spread Theosophy so that it could affect people which in turn would lead to a better Humanity, no mortal could have imagined in their wildest dreams what technology is going to do speeding up the ability to communicate. Last couple of years has seen such a sudden expansion of the use of Internet, no one can predict what where it would be and how it will impact in the next few years. All of us has seen the impact of Internet, at least in this country. One thing it has done is to do away with the intermediaries in the transmission of information. It is human nature to control flow of information by filtering, changing, distorting due to various reasons -- some consciously and some unconsciously -- this has gone on for thousands of years. Now we have the unique situation that undistorted and unedited information can be broadcast and the the receivers can do what they want to do with it. Looking at Internet, I saw an article today titled "Cheaper, or even no-cost Internet access not far off". The article mentions of the British Freeserve (which gives free access) has signed up 1 million users and has already surpassed America Online as Britain's most popular Internet access provider. Also NetZero, had a stampede which gave away ad rigged computers with free Internet access and has signed up 400,000 customers since October. If the free access is found to be successful, one can expect it would become a throw-in like PC software or rust-proofing for a pick up truck. With the above background, how things have changed since last century. The Founders had to travel around the world by sea and land and had to establish TS centers around the world. Today from air travel we have come to instant communication. The question that come up is two fold. First: How can this technology be used to spread Theosophy wide world fast and quick. Second is the theosophical organizations going to be extinct as we know it because its necessity and usefulness as it was in 1875 is no longer there. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:24:08 +0000 (GMT) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 19, 1999 Why do we seem to repel others, PS... Hazarapet@aol.com wrote: > I see I was not completely clear in last post because the original post was > directed to Katrina. My reflections were in no wise directed to Katrina. I > don't think she is the "teachy, preachy" one. If, Katrina means me (Katinka) then, thanks, I was indeed a bit puzzled if I was teachy and preachy. I do have that tendency, I think, but I try to keep it down, exactly for the reasons that Dallas and yourself have mentioned. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:30:19 +0000 (GMT) From: hesse600 Subject: teaching? morals? ethics? > Dallas responds: > Dear Grigor: > If the desire to teach is to secure "personal recognition," you > would be certainly right in characterizing the motive as selfish, > and as directing attention to ones' self as an "authority." > There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all > knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be > unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because > there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse > knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the > moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives > information to the "wrong" person. I do have a problem with that argument. I have heard it befor: it is one of the arguments for secrecy in the E.S.. My objection to the idea is that the information involved is not really ours in the sense that we could have discovered it ourselves. We were given the information by H.P.B. and others and then extract those portions that we understand. If we suppose (which is most likely) that we are not so different from our fellowmen/women, morally speaking, then why should we try and judge wether or not they are morally ready to receive the information. Aside from that: mostly people are not ready even to think/contemplate these issue's to the degree that 'theosophists' do. So usually judging wether or not someone is morally ready or not is not relevant in my oppinion. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 07:15:05 -0800 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? >> There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all >> knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be >> unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because >> there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse >> knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the >> moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives >> information to the "wrong" person. > >I do have a problem with that argument. I have heard it >befor: it is one of the arguments for secrecy in the E.S.. >My objection to the idea is that the information involved >is not really ours in the sense that we could have >discovered it ourselves. We were given the information by >H.P.B. and others and then extract those portions that we >understand. If we suppose (which is most likely) that we >are not so different from our fellowmen/women, morally >speaking, then why should we try and judge wether or not >they are morally ready to receive the information. Exactly right. Its the height of arrogance to think that the ES possesses anything other than the published writings of HPB. The continual babbling about "secrets" that seems to fill occult circles looks increasingly ridiculous in this day and age. My own opinion is that there *are* no "secrets" that can be written down. The "hidden knowledge" can't just be written down for the "ethically corrupt" to steal and misuse. A person needs to have arrived at some level of interior development before a "secret" would even make any sense. If someone's intent is truly evil, they sure as hell don't need occultism - there are a thousand different and much easier means of doing evil in the modern age. Why spend (for instance) ten years learing how to gain control of another person's will by "occult" means when one can just slip a tiny drug into someone else's drink? The whole thing reminds me of something Crowley said when speaking of his first induction into the Golden Dawn ... "They swore me to secrecy with terrible oaths and threats of death, and then revealed to me the Hebrew alphabet ...". The *hint* that one has secret information of some sort has long been used by people with god complexes to elevate their own self-importance, and to control people they've brought into their organization. The further hint that *theosophists* somehow need to be "careful" about who they give their precious "knowledge" to would be an enormous joke, if that thought wasn't so widespread, and wasn't doing so much to *ruin* modern theosophy. There probably *are* occult secrets, but the *inner state of awareness* required to even begin to understand them means the people who possess them 1) are *not* gonna go around trumpeting the fact that they have "secrets" to the world, and worrying endlessly (and publically) about whether others are "ethically" ready to receive them; and 2) that the people who *do* that not only most assuredly *don't* have any secrets, but probably wouldn't recognize one if it came up to them and bit them in the ass. Tee Hee, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:23:19 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 99-03-05 06:30:31 EST, you write: << Aside from that: mostly people are not ready even to think/contemplate these issue's to the degree that 'theosophists' do. So usually judging wether or not someone is morally ready or not is not relevant in my oppinion. >> I have to get in one comment on this one. Years ago after my first book on Psionics came out, I was occasionally asked by the naive and well-meaning what would happen if the stuff I was working on fell into the wrong hands. I would look strangely at them, give a little laugh and tell them that it was too late, the wrong hands wrote the book. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 08:32:32 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 99-03-05 08:21:25 EST, you write: << There probably *are* occult secrets, but the *inner state of awareness* required to even begin to understand them means the people who possess them 1) are *not* gonna go around trumpeting the fact that they have "secrets" to the world, and worrying endlessly (and publically) about whether others are "ethically" ready to receive them; >> But that would take all the fun out of it for them!!! Why else would they sit around in boring meetings listening to inane babble about things they already know waiting for the MASTER to drop a note on their heads? The only justification the ES has is that it gives its members some sort of psychological boost by making them think that they are somehow part of the Inner Circle that really runs the world, this in spite of the fact that not one of them has ever even seen a black helicopter. Were it not for its poisonous effect on the internal politics of the TS, the ES would be a joke and an embarrassment. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 09:26:31 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Internet and Theosophy May 5th 1999 Dear Doss: I POSTED THIS TO THEOS-TALK AND THEOS-L TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE ANY RESPONSE. CAN YOU SEND ME ANY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRITISH FREESERVE ? AS TO THE OFFER FOR 10,000 FREE COMPUTER SETS - I CAN SEE WHERE PEOPLE WOULD SNATCH FOR THEM, AND PERHAPS THIS MAY BE MADE REALLY CHEAP AND FREE ACCESS MAY PREVAIL IN A FEW MONTHS OR YEARS. OF COURSE THE CURSE OF ADVERTISING WILL ALSO BE THERE. ANY MORE GOOD IDEAS ? DAL What you write about the opportunity to spread Theosophy (or at least a knowledge as to its availability) is important. All of us ought to see if there is some way in which such information can be made more readily available. As a base, and a short synopsis we have Mr. Judge's EPITOME OF THEOSOPHY. I have been re-reading it and if anyone is interested I can send them a copy as an attachment. In the compass of about 32 pages it covers that main ideas that theosophy offers. Do let me know and I will be glad to send it as an attachment for reading and review with this in mind. Dallas ========================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:08:19 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? This issue of "secrets" and conditions prescribed by the leader (who is assumed to possess them) go much beyond secrets. It goes into the heart of the question of control -- control over another person's life. I do not quarrel with many (highly intelligent and scholarly persons) who find it easy to blindly take orders from the leader in the hope of getting "secrets" or creating closer (previleged) relationships with Adepts or the hope of opportunities in future lives, or even have control over other lesser "knowledgeable" followers or what ever other reason, as it is their life and if they are happy and comfortable in their knowledge or delusion, let us not spoil their happiness. On the other hand, what bothers me is the elitist thinking as if those possessing or going to possess whatever "secrets" -- real or imaginary, is that they are somehow "advanced" or superior to the common man/woman in the streets. The second area of concern is trying to control other activities the follower may involve in. A case in point was the apparent prohibition of members belonging to the esoteric section by Annie Besant from joining Gandhi's peaceful non-cooperation movement. I recall that one of the reasons why B P Wadia resigned from TS was on this issue. By listening to Gandhi, the people of India speeded up their Independence from Britain. mkr At 07:15 AM 3/5/1999 -0800, you wrote: >The *hint* that one has secret information of some sort has long been used >by people with god complexes to elevate their own self-importance, and to >control people they've brought into their organization. The further hint >that *theosophists* somehow need to be "careful" about who they give their >precious "knowledge" to would be an enormous joke, if that thought wasn't so >widespread, and wasn't doing so much to *ruin* modern theosophy. > >There probably *are* occult secrets, but the *inner state of awareness* >required to even begin to understand them means the people who possess them >1) are *not* gonna go around trumpeting the fact that they have "secrets" to >the world, and worrying endlessly (and publically) about whether others are >"ethically" ready to receive them; and 2) that the people who *do* that not >only most assuredly *don't* have any secrets, but probably wouldn't >recognize one if it came up to them and bit them in the ass. > >Tee Hee, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:12:53 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: RE: Theos-World Internet and Theosophy Dear Dallas: Thanks. The info I saw was a brief writeup in my local paper. When I find more, will post. Please send me the "Epitome". ...mkr At 09:26 AM 3/5/1999 -0500, Dallas wrote: > >I POSTED THIS TO THEOS-TALK AND THEOS-L TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE >ANY RESPONSE. > >CAN YOU SEND ME ANY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRITISH FREESERVE From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:15:42 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: RE: Theos-World Internet and Theosophy Dear Dallas: Thanks. The info I saw was a brief writeup in my local paper. When I find more, will post. Please send me the "Epitome". ...mkr At 09:26 AM 3/5/1999 -0500, Dallas wrote: I POSTED THIS TO THEOS-TALK AND THEOS-L TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE ANY RESPONSE. CAN YOU SEND ME ANY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRITISH FREESERVE From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:16:28 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-World Internet and Theosophy ======================== Dear Dallas: Thanks. The info I saw was a brief writeup in my local paper. When I find more, will post. Please send me the "Epitome". ...mkr At 09:26 AM 3/5/1999 -0500, Dallas wrote: > >I POSTED THIS TO THEOS-TALK AND THEOS-L TO SEE IF THERE WOULD BE >ANY RESPONSE. > >CAN YOU SEND ME ANY MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE BRITISH FREESERVE From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:19:02 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: ==== Re: teaching? morals? ethics? At 11:30 AM 3/5/1999 +0000, you wrote: Dallas responds: Dear Grigor: If the desire to teach is to secure "personal recognition," you would be certainly right in characterizing the motive as selfish, and as directing attention to ones' self as an "authority." There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives information to the "wrong" person. I do have a problem with that argument. I have heard it befor: it is one of the arguments for secrecy in the E.S.. My objection to the idea is that the information involved is not really ours in the sense that we could have discovered it ourselves. We were given the information by H.P.B. and others and then extract those portions that we understand. If we suppose (which is most likely) that we are not so different from our fellowmen/women, morally speaking, then why should we try and judge wether or not they are morally ready to receive the information. Aside from that: mostly people are not ready even to think/contemplate these issue's to the degree that 'theosophists' do. So usually judging wether or not someone is morally ready or not is not relevant in my oppinion. Katinka ===================== Real spiritual knowledge, in my opinion, has to be "experienced" and not given or taught. If something can be taught, it can be put down in writing or in video. What one person can teach another are some physical techniques. This moral issue varies very widely based on person to person. Again, in the famous 1900 letter from KH, much of the critical parts were withheld from members for a long time, the Adept was very clear on the issue of who can be admitted to esoteric section. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:20:00 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: ===Re: teaching? morals? ethics? This issue of "secrets" and conditions prescribed by the leader (who is assumed to possess them) go much beyond secrets. It goes into the heart of the question of control -- control over another person's life. I do not quarrel with many (highly intelligent and scholarly persons) who find it easy to blindly take orders from the leader in the hope of getting "secrets" or creating closer (previleged) relationships with Adepts or the hope of opportunities in future lives, or even have control over other lesser "knowledgeable" followers or what ever other reason, as it is their life and if they are happy and comfortable in their knowledge or delusion, let us not spoil their happiness. On the other hand, what bothers me is the elitist thinking as if those possessing or going to possess whatever "secrets" -- real or imaginary, is that they are somehow "advanced" or superior to the common man/woman in the streets. The second area of concern is trying to control other activities the follower may involve in. A case in point was the apparent prohibition of members belonging to the esoteric section by Annie Besant from joining Gandhi's peaceful non-cooperation movement. I recall that one of the reasons why B P Wadia resigned from TS was on this issue. By listening to Gandhi, the people of India speeded up their Independence from Britain. mkr At 07:15 AM 3/5/1999 -0800, you wrote: The *hint* that one has secret information of some sort has long been used by people with god complexes to elevate their own self-importance, and to control people they've brought into their organization. The further hint that *theosophists* somehow need to be "careful" about who they give their precious "knowledge" to would be an enormous joke, if that thought wasn't so widespread, and wasn't doing so much to *ruin* modern theosophy. There probably *are* occult secrets, but the *inner state of awareness* required to even begin to understand them means the people who possess them 1) are *not* gonna go around trumpeting the fact that they have "secrets" to the world, and worrying endlessly (and publically) about whether others are "ethically" ready to receive them; and 2) that the people who *do* that not only most assuredly *don't* have any secrets, but probably wouldn't recognize one if it came up to them and bit them in the ass. Tee Hee, -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:48:06 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/5/99 5:30:31 AM Central Standard Time, hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: << > There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all > knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be > unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because > there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse > knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the > moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives > information to the "wrong" person. >> This miscontrues the nature of an esoteric teaching. Secret in Sanskrit, ancient Persian, Tibetan, and Chinese is not merely witheld information. It is a quality of being or of awareness that one cannot "possess" without being it. Or, secret to surfing is not some information but the skilled ability to surf. Nobody can get real secret without becoming qualified. And process of becoming qualified makes it no longer secret to them for they have realized it. True teacher merely assists in birth of potency latent in student. To teach surfing, you have student develop their surfing skills. In spirituality, higher states are ipso facto higher cognitive and ethical skills. You can't get one without other anymore that you can get blue without getting a color or a square without getting a shape. The real secrets are within oneself. They emerge when one qualifies oneself. A teacher has no role in judging whether one is qualified to receive secret. Qualification and secret emerge together as one. Teacher is only mid-wife and coach in training you to be your true self. Or is pseudo-teacher of masonic and fraternity nonsense with passwords and funny handshakes being the, shhh! (looking both ways), ready?, "s-e-c-r-e-t-s. Don't tell! Grigor Ananikian From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:13:28 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/5/99 7:21:27 AM Central Standard Time, jrc@texas.net writes: << Exactly right. Its the height of arrogance to think that the ES possesses anything other than the published writings of HPB. The continual babbling about "secrets" that seems to fill occult circles looks increasingly ridiculous in this day and age. My own opinion is that there *are* no "secrets" that can be written down. The "hidden knowledge" can't just be written down for the "ethically corrupt" to steal and misuse. A person needs to have arrived at some level of interior development before a "secret" would even make any sense. >> I say exactly right also. Real secrets are not information but realizations. Lots of people with big inferiority complex are running around looking for ways to feel extra-special in newer and fancier garb that is refined version of what one teenager told me a "high school click" is. So, secret that can be written down or given or not given to someone was invented as chip in vanity and control game. Game's purpose is to have way to feel more special than another in order to overcome and compensate for profound inner sense of not being special. Such is the sad pathlogy of pseudo-occultists, both the so- called students and so-called teachers in a mutual bond of hype masking co- dependency. Tis nothing but initiation into deluded program of self-esteem crisis management through co-dependently playing to each other's vanity. Tis initiation into deeper pathology with oak-leaf clusters and comes with your choice of a secret kabalah decoder ring or a glow in dark picture of master with luminous eyes that is also excellent sacred night light. Grigor Ananikian From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:19:21 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/5/99 10:08:19 AM Central Standard Time, ramadoss@eden.com writes: << On the other hand, what bothers me is the elitist thinking as if those possessing or going to possess whatever "secrets" -- real or imaginary, is that they are somehow "advanced" or superior to the common man/woman in the streets. >> There are advanced beings. They just don't wear it on their lapel. But they are not superior to common person but morally equal because common person is advanced being in potential. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:21:41 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: ==== Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/5/99 10:18:59 AM Central Standard Time, ramadoss@eden.com writes: << ===================== Real spiritual knowledge, in my opinion, has to be "experienced" and not given or taught. If something can be taught, it can be put down in writing or in video. >> I agree but with modification. Real spiritual knowledge is experience, and thus, cannot be given or taught. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:51:53 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: ===Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/5/99 10:19:53 AM Central Standard Time, ramadoss@eden.com writes: << The *hint* that one has secret information of some sort has long been used by people with god complexes to elevate their own self-importance, and to control people they've brought into their organization. The further hint that *theosophists* somehow need to be "careful" about who they give their precious "knowledge" to would be an enormous joke, if that thought wasn't so widespread, and wasn't doing so much to *ruin* modern theosophy. >> I say theosophy can't be ruined even if Theosophical Society can be. And idea that TS is about secrets is extremely funny. Moreover, I make another observation. Silly boobs that are into the hocus pocus of "hinted" secrets can't keep even their pseudo-secrets, even if they wanted to. First of all, they inadvertently give themselves away all the time. Who they are isn't even a secret. They are the incapable. They are the needy moved by the forces of the environment playing on their neediness. Given right conditions, one can make them geek. They have no inner force, no character, and no inner moral strength. They are puppets. Their sense of identity, to the extent it is something other than their neediness (which is what they don't want to be and thus it is not part of their false sense of identity they like to see themselves to be) is merely the inner effects of the external social lottery of ever shifting statuses and roles and petty slights and social hurts. As such, they are more internalized effects of outer causes than self initiated causes. They are not powers but the effects of powers. Thus, they are powerless to truly possess "secrets" as being secret on their own without environmental forces permitting it. If circumstances change, they have no power to do anything but tell their "empty secrets." Further, since their neediness is to be perceived by others or recognized as "special," their neediness compells them have to "hint." No "hint," no lure to win the recognition their neediness needs. As Buddhists say they are the shades enslaved by their own tanha. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 6 Mar 1999 14:34:34 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: FW: EPITOME by W. Q. JUDGE AN EPITOME OF EVOLUTION SOURCE OF THEOSOPHY The theory of nature and of life which Theosophy offers is not at first speculatively laid down and then proved by adjusting facts or conclusions to fit it. It is an explanation of existence, cosmic and individual, derived from knowledge reached by those who have acquired the power to see behind the curtain that hides the operations of nature. Such Beings are called Sages, using the term in its highest sense, also, Mahatmas and Adepts. The power to see and absolutely know such laws is surrounded by natural inherent regulations which must be complied with as conditions precedent; and it is not possible to respond to the demand of the worldly man for an immediate statement of this wisdom until those conditions are fulfilled. As this knowledge deals with laws and states of matter, and of consciousness undreamed of by the "practical" Western world, it can only be grasped, piece by piece, as the student pushes forward the demolition of his preconceived notions, that are due to inadequate or erroneous theories. A false method of reasoning has for many centuries prevailed, resulting in an almost universal habit of mind which causes men to look upon many effects as causes, and to regard that which is real as the unreal, putting meanwhile the unreal in the place of the real. FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS The following are some of the fundamental propositions of Theosophy: The SPIRIT in man is the only real and permanent part of his being; the rest of his nature being variously compounded. And since decay is incident to all composite things, everything in man but his Spirit is impermanent. The UNIVERSE BEING ONE AND NOT DIVERSE, and everything within it is connected with the whole and with every other thing. Upon the upper plane there is a perfect record continuously made. No act or thought occurs without each portion of the great whole perceiving and noting it. Hence, all being and humans are inseparably bound together by the tie of Brotherhood. THE UNITARY SOURCE OF LIFE This first fundamental proposition of Theosophy postulates that the universe is not an aggregation of diverse unities but that it is ONE WHOLE, denominated "Deity" or "Para-Brahm." It may be called the Unmanifested, containing within itself the potency of every form of manifestation, together with the laws governing those manifestations. It is taught that there is no "creation" of worlds; but their appearance is due strictly to evolution. When the time comes for the Unmanifested to manifest as an objective Universe, it emanates a Power or "The First Cause"-so called because it itself is the rootless root of that Cause, and called in the East the "Causeless Cause." Process of Manifestation The first Cause we may call Brahma, or by any name we please. The projection into TIME of the influence of universal Life (Jiva), called also the "out-breathing of Brahma," causes all the worlds and the beings upon them to gradually appear. They remain in manifestation just as long as that influence continues to proceed forth in evolution. After long aeons the outbreathing, evolutionary influence slackens, and the universe begins to go into obscuration, or pralaya, until, the "breath" being fully indrawn, no objects remain, because nothing is but Brahma the manifested Logos. This breathing-forth is known as a Manvantara, or the Manifestation of the world between two Manus (from Manu, and Antara "between"), and the completion of the inbreathing brings with it Pralaya, or the dispersal of all forms (destruction Spirit and Matter For the purpose of a Manvantara two so-called eternal principles are postulated, that is, Purusha (Spirit),and Prakriti (Matter) because both are ever present and conjoined in each manifestation. Purusha is not the unmanifested, nor is Prakriti matter as known to science; the Sages therefore declare that there is a higher spirit still, called Purushottama. The reason for this is that at the night of Brahma, or the so-called indrawing of his breath, both Purusha and Prakriti are absorbed in the Unmanifested. Universal Evolution This brings us to the doctrine of Universal Evolution. The Spirit, or Purusha, proceeds from Brahma through the various forms of matter evolved at the same time, beginning in the world of the spiritual from the highest and in the material world from the lowest form. The lowest form is one unknown as yet to modern science. Thus, therefore, the mineral, vegetable and animal forms each imprison a spark of the Divine, a portion of the indivisible Purusha. These sparks struggle to "return to the Father," or in other words, to secure self-consciousness and at last come into the highest form, on Earth, that of man, where alone self-conscious-ness is possible to them. The period, calculated in human time, during which this evolution goes on embraces millions of ages. Each spark of divinity has, therefore, millions of ages in which to accomplish its mission--that of obtaining complete self-consciousness while in the form of man. Self-Consciousness By this is not meant that the mere act of coming into human form of itself confers self-consciousness upon this divine spark. That great work may be accomplished during the Manvantara in which a Divine spark reaches the human form, or it may not; all depends upon the individual's own will and efforts. Each particular spirit thus goes through the Manvantara, or enters into manifestation for its own enrichment and for that of the Whole. Goal of Evolution Mahatmas and Rishis are thus gradually evolved during a Manvantara, and become, after its expiration, planetary spirits, who guide the evolutions of other future planets. The planetary spirits of our globe are those who in previous Manvantaras-or days of Brahma- made the efforts, and became in the course of that long period Mahatmas. Each Manvantara is for the same end and purpose, so that the Mahatmas who have now attained those heights, or those who may become such in the succeeding years of the present Manvantara, will probably be the planetary spirits of the next Manvantara for this or other planets. This system is thus seen to be based upon the identity of Spiritual Being, and, under the name of "Universal Brotherhood," Is all Theosophical teaching and work done. Spirit is Universal The Sages say that this Purusha (spirit) is the basis of all manifested objects. Without it nothing could exist or cohere. It interpenetrates everything everywhere. It is the reality of which, or upon which, those things called real by us are mere images. As Purusha reaches to and embraces all beings, they are all connected together; and in or on the plane where that Purusha is, there is a perfect consciousness of every act, thought, object, and circumstance, whether supposed to occur there, or on this plane, or any other. For below the spirit and above the intellect is a plane of consciousness in which experiences are noted, commonly called man's "spiritual nature;" this is frequently said to be as susceptible of culture as his body or his intellect. This upper plane is the real register of all sensations and experiences, although there are other registering planes. It is sometimes called the "subconscious mind." Theosophy, however, holds that the "spirit" is only "cultivated" in the sense of having a vehicle prepared for its use, into which it may descend. It is held that the real man, who is the higher self-being the spark of the Divine before alluded to-overshadows the visible being, which has the possibility of becoming united to that spark. Thus it is said that the higher Spirit is not in the man, but above him. It is always peaceful, unconcerned, blissful, and full of absolute knowledge. It continually partakes of the Divine state, being continually that state itself, "conjoined with the Gods, it feeds upon Ambrosia." The object of the student is to let the light of that spirit shine through the lower coverings. Spiritual Cultivation - the Goal of Evolution This "spiritual culture" is only attainable as the grosser interests, passions, and demands of the flesh are subordinated to the interests, aspirations and needs of the higher nature; and this is a matter of both system and established law. This spirit can only become the ruler when the firm intellectual acknowledgment or admission is first made that IT alone is. And, as stated above, it being not only the person concerned but also the whole, all selfishness must be eliminated from the lower nature before its divine state can be reached. So long as the smallest personal or selfish desire- even for spiritual attainment for our own sake--remains, so long is the desired end put off. Hence the above term "demands of the flesh" really covers also demands that are not of the flesh, and its proper rendering would be "desires of the personal nature, including those of the individual soul. " When systematically trained in accordance with the aforesaid system and law, men attain to clear insight into the immaterial, spiritual world, and their interior faculties apprehend truth as immediately and readily as physical faculties grasp the things of sense, or mental faculties those of reason. Or, in the words used by some of them, "They are able to look directly upon ideas;" and hence their testimony to such truth is as trustworthy as is that of scientists or philosophers to truth in their respective fields. In the course of this spiritual training such men acquire perception of, and control over, various forces in Nature unknown to other men, and thus are able to perform works usually called "miraculous," though really but the result of larger knowledge of natural law. [Extracts from: "An Epitome of Theosophy" by W. Q. Judge.] offered by Dallas. Mar 6th 1999 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 23:58:53 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Theosophical Adepts I have followed with interest the traffic on the issue of esoteric lineage etc etc. When one reads historical material relating to early days of TS, one finds that the Adepts corresponded/sent msgs to many people and even were met by some. There was also various reports of sightings especially in India. Consider the situation in 1999. The last known letter from one of the Adepts was in 1900, almost 100 years ago. We have not heard from any of them till now. Nor has anyone come out and stated with corroboration of being in communication with any of them or having seen or heard from any of them. Even when Geoffrey Hodson mentions about his communication with Adepts, the names he refers to, not a single one of them being the Adepts who were known to be active at the founding of TS. All this makes one wonder if the real work of the TS is over. Is TS on autopilot with the purely mechanical job publishing the works written in early days, the copyrights to all of them having expired is now in public domain. Any ideas? mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 17:17:51 -0500 (EST) From: "Frank Reitemeyer" Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? Dear Doss, all you wrote is of course well said and true. Please permit me say to you - as I understand it - have your own experiences with a faked ES, playing theatre with no real higher spiritual powers and obviously no closer connection to higher worlds. Insofar your critisism is right, I do follow your thought. Furthermore comes the old saying to my mind that every coin has TWO signs. Could this implicate that if a false ES is in existence, that then a true, original ES must be there (no matter for the moment where to be found and how to be checked), because the fiormer would be in philosophical logic not possible without the latter? And if yes, could it be, that Boris had the latter in mind on his Anniversary lecture in NY 1975? Or do you believe, to the best of your knowledge, that only impostors, liars and faked groups are to be found and that a real ES, in the true sense of the word, is impossible? Only a question for consideration. Frank > > >>This issue of "secrets" and conditions prescribed by the leader (who is >>assumed to possess them) go much beyond secrets. It goes into the heart of >>the question of control -- control over another person's life. >> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 22:10:11 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: FW: Theos-World Re: More thoughts about monads, etc Mar 9th 1998 Dallas: This posting just came to me and I thought it would be of interest to others who read our contributions. I found it scientifically and mathematically difficult to grasp, and yet it does offer a point of view that ought to be taken advantage of. It shows how close mathematical and scientific though is growing to the propositions that HPB gave us in THE SECRET DOCTRINE Best wishes, Dallas -----Original Message----- > From: On Behalf Of LeonMaurer@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 3:21 PM > Subject: Re: More thoughts about monads, etc Leon Maurer writes: Please forgive any duplication, in case you have already seen this, but I thought this might be of interest to ALL theosophists. If not... Well, that's life.;-) If so, then I hope it helps us realize that theosophy is still a dynamic force in the world, and that the Secret Doctrine is still a modern work of science that will live through the next century. In a message dated 3/4/99 Mr. "S S" writes (in part): >I believe Mulaprakriti is the circle in the >point-in-circle diagram. Initially, it appears the point is the >Absolute and the circle Mulaprakriti. But it also occurs to me that >when the mineral monad (she says there is only one) forms, causing >Mulaprakriti to pass from the undifferentiated to the differentiated >state, then the same diagram at least presents itself to our >consciousness. In this case the mineral monad is a point and the >surrounding Mulaprakriti seems to be suggested by the circle. > >There are some things about all this which I am unable to fathom. For >example, are there innumerable human monads or only seven? There seem >to be indications of both. If the innumerable human monads represent >a further differentiation from the original seven, that explains the >problem, but then we have to ask whether these innumerable monads are >really monads, or whether they are "souls" (manases). > >Another, if anyone has any thoughts on this: she says that one of the >pralayas leaves the astral photographs undisturbed, while the physical >reality disappears. The maha pralayas apparently dissolve EVERYTHING. > This seems to suggest that as we proceed from minor to maha pralayas >we ascend the scale of seven kosmic principles. If Mulaprakriti is to >be understood as co-eternal and co-existent with The Absolute, then it >would appear Mulaprakriti is not dissolved out of existence, but >merely returned to an undifferentiated (non-atomic) state. If this is >so, though, how can there be motion, which we are told persists even >during pralaya? Also, if this means the monads cease to exist as >discrete entities within the field of Mulaprakriti, how can we explain >the teaching that the karma of these monads continues? One solution >of course is that some of these teachings relate to something less >than the maha-pralaya. If that is the case (and I think it is an >unsatisfactory solution since we would have to assume an error in >editing the SD to make this case) then the problem goes away. > >These are weaknesses in my thought experiment, which I was aware of >when I posted it. I fully expected it to be challenged, and rightly >so, since I have not been able to come up with one which is 100% >satisfactory. > >It should also be said that HPB seemed to believe the maha-pralaya is >a MYSTERY which we cannot, ex hypothesi, hope to penetrate. It may >be, then, that at this level we are not intended to understand. RESPONSE: Maybe we could think of it this way? HPB said that motion never ceases, and that even the Absolute can be considered as "abstract motion." If so, and if it's motion alone that carries experiential information (in the form of holographic interference patterns, perhaps), then, no matter what pralaya we talk about, the mother/father field that gave it birth would still exists, and we can assume that the experiential information tied up in its initial motion (akashic energy) also continues to exist throughout that pralaya. Since there are a series of descending and ascending pralayas prior to the maha pralaya, and since each pralaya can be considered as "a temporary retreat from manifestation" or a "returning to the Absolute," we might also consider, then, (according to the philosopher Mac Truong) that "the absolute is relative and the relative is absolute." This conforms with HPB's statement that the idea of "eternity" is also relative... (There is no paradox, since the total time of any manvantara can be considered eternity from our point of view... Just as any self existent perfection beyond the possibility of measurement or perception on any level of our consciousness can be considered as absolute.) The Absolute, then, would be "relative" depending on our point of view, since it would always be outside any "space" we would be considering it from. While relativity would be "absolute" in the sense that all observers would always be at the immovable center of everything else-since, they are always at the common, "non local" zero-point which observes everything from within outward... Just as we observe the outer world from the zero-(laya) point within our own heads. >From a scientific point of view, awareness, then, could be considered a fundamental attribute of the zero-point... With consciousness (memory, mind) being the characteristic of the inner fields adjacent to the positive pole of the surrounding primal "mother" field... While matter (form, mass) would be the characteristic of fields adjacent to its negative pole. This illustrates how everything in the universe could have latent consciousness... Only waiting to be experienced in varying degrees-as nature slowly evolves the complex bioneurological forms necessary to act as intermediary image "transducers" between the various levels of the material fields and the consciousness fields. This biological evolution could be carried out through the medium of holographic *morphogenetic fields* (that are linked resonantly to each other through the non-local zero-point) as described by Rupert Sheldrake in his book, _A New Science of Life_ Accordingly, since the motionless zero-point center of any field can carry no information, and since all surrounding energetic vibrational patterns carrying information must eventually run down at the end of "parabrahm's life," it would appear that the final mahapralaya would have its memory wiped clean (from the point of view of its previous mahamanvantara). But, since everything always starts from zero... And between zero and one there must always be infinite divisions-who are we to say what information patterns can be retained through Brahma's after death states-let alone Parabrahm's? Maybe the old teachers were wise to say we shouldn't speculate too deeply on the nature of the absolute-which must contain both the ultimate simplicity and the infinite complexity which are beyond the understanding of finite mind. Cantor's mathematics or set theory speculates that there can be an infinite set of infinities... And, post quantum cosmological physicists speak of multidimensional universes held together by "strings" in the form of "bubbles" and "membranes"-linked by quantum fields and governed by indeterminacy, etc., etc. So, I think we should leave such mind boggling ideas about "pralayas", or what came before the first primal emanations, to confound the mathematicians and the post-quantum physicists. (As theosophists, it's good to know that both science and mathematics might eventually verify the existence of these sub-quantum fields and thus confirm all theosophical ideas.) But, in any event, I don't think it will be too long before HPB will be totally vindicated-especially since science is now up against a brick wall trying to explain conscious experience by empirical methods. It won't be long before they give up and accept some form of holographic field theory that is now beginning to come into the mainstream. All such theories (including my AB C theory) have been presaged in the SD-as was all the new post classical scientific theories that have developed since Einstein first intuited E=mc^2 from the SD. < http://users.aol.com/unIwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/einstei n.html > But, as theosophists, we certainly can speculate on the nature of manifestation between pralayas. The first step is to understand how the energy carrying all the information of previous manvantaric experience, absorbed during the pralaya, emanates out of the relative Absolute at the beginning of each new manvantara. One way to visualize this, is to imagine a 3-dimensional sphere containing 7 layers, "shells," or inner spheres of descending frequency orders of energy-ranging from the almost infinitely fast spiritual vibrations (consciousness) at the positive pole to the slowest material vibrations (matter) at the negative pole... With each such "field" forming a 3-cycle endless triple field loop spinning around a "ZERO-POINT" (which is everywhere). Thus, this Zero-point (or "laya-point"), having complete stillness or non-motion in itself, would represent pure *inertia* or "tamas". The initially pure fields of eternal harmonious spin-motion around it would represent "sattva". And, the intelligent "electrical" energy carried by these endlessly spinning fields would be one of the fundamental natures of FOHAT-representing the *active* basis of force, or "rajas". A corresponding analogy can be seen in the spherical magnetic lines of force endlessly circulating (in and out of its two opposite poles) through and around the Earth. This pattern could also be pictured as circulating in and through any bar magnet and represents the perfect balance of attractive and repulsive forces related to any similar fields-including the analogous fields constituting each of the seven fold natures of man, those of the "Builders" or Dhyan Chohans, as well as those of the entire cosmos itself. We can imagine that this "zero-point" around which these fields spin is dimensionless, motionless, takes up no space, and is everywhere. Therefore, each such hyperdimensional spherical field would appear, when expanded, as if it were spinning around its own zero-point-which, in turn, would *appear* to be separated from other zero-points within an apparently measurable distance in space. (Could that be related to the "illusion" of Maya, or separation, spoken of by the Vedantans?) Not only is each such commonly derived 3-dimensional field spinning around its own zero-point (HPB calls them "laya points" since they always retain their own individual identity)--but, each polarized sub field is always part of a pair of fields that touch their "mother" or surrounding field at its outer "zero-points" (which are the center points of even larger mother fields, etc. Thus all fields are energetically linked to each other through the chain of zero points at both their center and their circumference-with one pole of every spherical field being positive and the other negative. These polarities are simply based on the direction of motion of the field lines of force as they enter and leave their spherical forms. This accounts for the characteristic of like poles repelling and unlike poles attracting. (See " chakrafield diagram" at the web site shown below.) Since there is no way to imagine this structure when completely compressed into the Absolute zero-point-as that is a non-dimensional "emptiness" having no being, (although still a "beness") and existing outside of our highest spiritual consciousness-we can pick it up, however, at the first "moment" after initial expansion or awakening. For our present manvantara, scientists (seeing only the last and material evolution) would call this, "the first "moment" of inflation (Hubble Time) after the big bang". Cosmologists would call it "the 'basin' of the time cone." Patanjali might call it the "ultimate division of time." I would say, it's the time it takes the initial pralayic spin-energy to radially move from the primal zero-point to complete the first 3 cycle spherical field of consciousness (or spiritual) energy. This might be considered as the time it would take to complete the first manifest form. Pythagorus would say "the Universe geometrizes" from that moment on. Interestingly, the 6 directions of space emanating from any initial zero-point would confirm this. The primary geometric form superscribed on its 3 center crossed polar axes, (Up-Down, N-S, E-W) and inscribed within the first emanated spherical field-would be the six-pointed "diamond" or octahedron. Thus, the "diamond heart" (the shape if the carbon and the silicon crystal) is the geometrical root of all subsequent form, and carries within it, as does the "triune sphere," every symbol of fundamental truth used by every religion and mystical teaching since the beginning of TIME. It not only contains the entire root of Euclidean and Pythagorean geometry-point, line, triangle, cube, tetrahedron, octahedron, icosahedron, dodecahedron, etc., but also the root of all later non Euclidean geometries related to 3-dimensional space, and the multi-(or hyper-)dimensional spaces within and around it. All these spherical fields within fields ("wheels within wheels" as the Ancient Brahmin Masters might say) are very difficult to imagine-as our minds are only trained to visualize in two dimensions... Therefore, as a study aid, I have made a simplified cross sectional diagram of this multidimensional spherical energy flow-along with theosophically correlative labels-which enables us to visualize the following characteristics: (See the "chakrafield diagram" at: http://members.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/ chakrafield.h tml ) 1) How all flows of energy in each successive hyper-field or sub-field, originates or emanates out of primal spin around (and passing through) what is essentially the same primal zero point. 2) How the "lines of force" of all spin energies, from the most subtle consciousness fields to the most gross material fields follow an endlessly repetitive path around and through each field in a manner identical to every other field. 3) How each successive field frequency order grows out of the initial mother sphere of spinning lines of energetic force-which can contain or encompass (based in its fundamental cyclic nature governed by both stillness and motion) all the holographic image interference patterns describing the entire universal evolution previously experienced by all the latent zero point individualities of every potential being. 4) How the process of evolutionary growth is self replicating ad infinitum-through the interpenetration of all fields through their zero-points-and how this energy flow might symbolically reflect itself in the structure and code of the DNA molecule. ("As above, so below") 5) How each sub-field radiating out of its mother/father field's zero-point center reflects its own zero-point center which is an exact mirror image of the primal zero-point center. 6) How the fundamental laws of cycles and periodicity are maintained by the endless flow of the initially expanded, inflated or emanated lines of spinning energies ("spinergies"). We can look at it this way: (referring to the diagram) Imagine or visualize that the primal outer shell of spinning energies, containing 6 inner shells of geometrically (but not energetically) identical spinergies, represents the manifested universe in its seven aspects or principles. When the universe goes into pralaya each of these seven layers collapse into their zero-point-sacrificing all their metric spatial dimensions-but not losing any angular momentum or vectorial energy. The resulting *condition* of absolute harmony is represented solely as "abstract spin" on an infinite number of rotational axes around a stationary zero-point of no dimensional characteristic. Since the previous expanded spin-energy-created dimensional fields of vibrations were capable of being modulated with image information (in the form of holographic interference patterns), these patterns would also still remain in the "seven layers" of the "relatively absolute" zero-point spinergy after collapse into pralaya. In scientific terms related to our material sphere, this would be analogous to the invisible compressed electromagnetic energy circulating within the circumference surrounding a black hole"... Or, in theosophical cosmological terms, it could be described as "the eternal parent wrapped in her seven invisible robes..." (see: Book of Dzyan, stanza 1) Each layer (robe, or field frequency order) then, would experience it's own pralaya. And, after all successive layers have resolved themselves into harmonious wholes and gone to their individual pralayas, the entire mother/father containment field would collapse into its mahapralaya... All, occurring in the exact reverse order of the initial inflation into sequential minor manvantaras and their ultimate mahamanvantara. Remember, however, that Brahma has cycles of days, months, years and lifetimes, even as we do-and that each of these great cycles can be considered to pass through both a series of progressively longer manvantaras and pralayas and ultimate mahapralayas, etc. But, how can we know how many lifetimes Brahma has before its "Universe" goes into its maha-mahapralaya? Can there EVER be an end-or beginning-if the Universe can be considered as ETERNAL in ANY of its relatively absolute and absolutely relative states? According to this picture of how primal energy cycles work, and based on the Master's teaching that abstract motion never ceases, "emptiness must always lead to "fullness"-and vice versa. Therefore, any meditation and visualization on the formation of these "coadunate but not consubstantial" fields and their relationships to each other can proceed to any degree of complexity or be reduced to any simplicity desired. (But, I would take HPB's advice and not try to go beyond the planetary solar system level when considering pralayas or manvantaras.) The rest of such considerations about the origin and evolution of these fields and their correlations, correspondences and relationships to consciousness, mind and matter may be deduced by scientifically minded theosophists through further meditation. It may also help to refer to my preliminary notes at: ht tp://www.t ellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/ That's how I see the Secret Doctrine correlated with a new postmodern and post quantum scientific paradigm... One, that is entirely consistent with all previous expressions of classical, modern and postmodern physics. Not only does this graphical-energy concept of field generation and organization help explain the nature and evolution of monads, unity of all in all, rounds, globes, races, pralayas and manvantaras, the seven principles of man and the universe-and verifies by analogy and correspondence the principles and operation of the fundamental laws of nature-but it also shows us the interconnections and interdependence of the various "coenergetic" fields and their non-local linkages with the zero-point centers of "awareness" (and of "Will") that enables us to better understand the "psychical powers latent in man," along with our abilities to achieve alternate states of consciousness. When Science will someday acknowledge that this self-replicating, globular, coenergetic field structure is the fundamental framework of the universe, as well of the cause of its evolution, those who follow scientists as their gurus will begin to accept the teachings of HPB-and her life's work may finally be vindicated. As an attempt to include in the "synthesis of science, religion and philosophy" a valid (imaginable) alternative scientific paradigm that links ancient science with both the classical science (referred to by HPB) and the modern science that has evolved since Einstein's E-mc^2--I hope I've presented these "food for thought" ideas clearly enough so as not to confuse too many beginning or intermediate students of the Secret Doctrine. I would be interested in any comments or suggestions, and all questions would be welcome. Best wishes, Leon leonmaurer@aol.com Copied by Dallas TenBroeck for reading and studying From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:53:56 +0100 From: Mittelberger Martina Subject: Theosophical Adepts Dear M.K.R: In my opinion it was an experiment started by K.H.. When you read the mahatma letters you will find passages which point to this circumstance. The other masters did not believe in the success. And in the end - what has been the success? All were only interested in phenomens, not in the real brotherhood, they wanted to discuss not to listen, the Mahatmas and HPB were accused of humbug. All these big waves hit the karma of the Mahatmas and in the last letters they announced to retire and continue their work in the background. Nowadays there is no need to get instructions by letters from the masters. Esoteric and spiritual knowledge is no longer kept in the secret. Everyone can find his way and I am sure, if someone is ready for scholarship he will meet his own master and teacher. Theosophy was necessary to open the minds for esoteric wisdom, but I think, the great time is over now. It is working on itself and the starters are no longer needed. Martina From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 06:16:02 -0800 From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: theos-l digest: March 09, 1999 = WORK OF THE ADEPTS AND MAHATMAS March 10th 1999 Dear Doss: The very fact that the Theosophical Movement has spread and is continued to be studied by an increasing number of student all over the world is significant. One of the first things we ought to consider is that Theosophy is the ancient Wisdom-philosophy of the Rishis and the Mahatmas - no doubt it is much less in its expression that the originals, but nevertheless it is said to be that basic and starting base of the TRUTH such as can be assimilated by the conscientious man of our civilization and age. We have been so educated that our conception of antiquity has been dwarfed. Our authorities of various kinds with about 2 to 300 years of study, have all come to the conclusion that the records they see and read or touch do not prove physically an antiquity of over 10,000 years, and for fossils the period is now being pushed back into about 3 million years. But the theories are based on scanty materials and prejudiced and partial views as can be ascertained by intensive investigation into the roots of their data and that which has been systematically concealed. They do not believe the evidence of the myths and legends of old. This is what ISIS and the SD came to dispel. It is an explanation of existence, cosmic and individual, derived from knowledge reached by Those Rishis and Mahatmas who have acquired the power to see behind the curtain that hides the operations of nature from the ordinary mind. Such Beings are called Sages, using the term in its highest sense. Of late they have been called Mahatmas and Adepts. In ancient times they were known as the Rishis and Maharishis. There being of necessity various grades among the students of this Wisdom-Religion, it stands to reason that those belonging to the lower degrees are able to give out only so much of the knowledge as is the grade they have reached permits, and they therefore depend, for further information upon students who are higher yet. It is these higher students for whom the claim is asserted that their knowledge is not mere inference, but that it concerns realities seen and known by them. While some of them are connected with the Theosophical Movement and members of the various Theosophical Societies, they are yet above it. The power to see and absolutely know such laws is surrounded by natural inherent regulations which must be complied with as conditions precedent; and it is, therefore, not possible to respond to the demand of the worldly man for an immediate statement of this wisdom, insomuch as he could not comprehend it until those conditions are fulfilled. How and what kind of knowledge is to be acquired by the inquirer? As this knowledge deals with laws and states of matter, and of consciousness undreamed of by the "practical" Western world, it can only be grasped, piece by piece, as the student pushes forward the demolition of his preconceived notions, that are due either to inadequate or to erroneous theories. It is claimed by these higher students that, in the Occident especially, a false method of reasoning has for many centuries prevailed, resulting in a universal habit of mind which causes men to look upon many effects as causes, and to regard that which is real as the unreal, putting meanwhile the unreal in the place of the real. As a minor example, the phenomena of mesmerism and clairvoyance have, until lately, been denied by Western science, yet there have always been numerous persons who know for themselves, by incontrovertible introspective evidence, the truth of these phenomena, and, in some instances, understand their cause and rationale. The following are some of the fundamental propositions of Theosophy: The spirit in man is the only real and permanent part of his being; the rest of his nature being variously compounded. And since decay is incident to all composite things, everything in man but his Spirit is impermanent. The spirit in Nature is the only real and permanent base of all ex-istence. The whole Univese, says Patanjali (Book 2, v. 18) "including the visible and the invisible, the essential nature of which is compounded of purity, action, and rest [Sattva, rajas and tamas], and which consists of the elements and organs of action [gnyan-indriyas and karma-indriyas] exists for the sake of the soul's experience and emancipation." This first fundamental proposition of Theosophy postulates that the universe is not an aggregation of diverse unities but that it is one whole. This whole is what is denominated "Deity" by Western Philosophers, and "Para-Brahm" by the Hindu Vedantins. It may be called the Unmanifested, containing within itself the potency of every form of manifestation, together with the laws governing those manifestations. There is no creation of worlds; but their appearance is due strictly to evolution. When the time comes for the Unmanifested to manifest as an objective Universe, which it does periodically, it emanates a Power or "The First Cause"-so called because it itself is the rootless root of that Cause, and called the "Causeless Cause." The first Cause we may call Brahma. The projection into time of the influence or so-called "breath of Brahma" causes all the worlds and the beings upon them to gradually appear. They remain in manifestation just as long as that influence continues to proceed forth in evolution. After long aeons the outbreathing, evolutionary influence slackens, and the universe begins to go into obscuration, or pralaya, until, the "breath" being fully indrawn, no objects remain, because nothing is but Brahma. Care must be taken by the student to make a distinction between the impersonal Parabrahm, and Brahma the manifested Logos. This next makes us cons the doctrine of Universal Evolution as expounded by the Sages of the Wisdom-Religion. The Spirit, or Purusha, they say, proceeds from Brahma through the various forms of matter evolved at the same time, beginning in the world of the spiritual from the highest and in the material world from the lowest form. Thus, therefore, the mineral, vegetable and animal forms each imprison a spark of the Divine, a portion of the indivisible Purusha. These sparks struggle to "return to the Father," or in other words, to secure self-consciousness and at last come into the highest form, on Earth, that of man, where alone self-conscious-ness is possible to them. The period, calculated in human time, during which this evolution goes on embraces millions of ages. Each spark of divinity [that is "you" and "me"] has, therefore, millions of ages in which to accomplish its mission--that of obtaining complete self-consciousness while in the form of man. The mere act of coming into human form of itself confers no immediate self-consciousness upon this divine spark. That great work may be accomplished during the Manvantara in which a Divine spark reaches the human form, or it may not; all depends upon the individual's own will and efforts. Each particular spirit thus goes through the Manvantara, or enters into manifestation for its own enrichment and for that of the Whole. Mahatmas and Rishis are thus gradually evolved during a Manvantara, and become, after its expiration, "planetary spirits," who guide the evolutions of other future planets-as explained in SD I we, our Earth is the child, or rather the reincarnation of the Moon chain of globes on which we all had been evolving up to the time of the last maha-pralaya. The planetary spirits [Rishis, Mahatmas, Adepts] of our globe are those who in previous Manvantaras-or days of Brahma- made the efforts, and became in the course of that long period Mahatmas. Each Manvantara is for the same end and purpose, so that the Mahatmas who have now attained those heights, or those who may become such in the succeeding years of the present Manvantara, will probably be the planetary spirits of the next Manvantara for this or other planets which then will be the reincarnations of this one. This system is thus seen to be based upon the identity of Spiritual Being, and, under the name of "Universal Brotherhood," constitutes idea of the Theosophical Society, whose object is the realization of that Brotherhood among men. The Sages say that Purusha [Spirit] is the basis of all manifested objects. Without it nothing could exist or cohere. It interpenetrates everything everywhere. It is the reality of which, or upon which, those things called real by us are mere images. As Purusha reaches to and embraces all beings, they are all connected together; and in or on the plane where that Purusha is, there is a perfect consciousness of every act, thought, object, and circumstance, whether supposed to occur there, or on this plane, or any other. For below the spirit and above the intellect is a plane of consciousness in which experiences are noted, commonly called man's "spiritual nature." This upper plane [Akasa] is the real and universal register of all sensations and experiences, although there are other registering planes. It is sometimes called (as one of its attributes) the "subconscious mind." Theosophy, however, holds that the real object to be kept in view is to so open up or make porous the lower nature that the spiritual nature may shine through it and become the guide and ruler. it is held that the real man [Atma-Buddhi-Manas], who is the higher self-being the spark of the Divine before mentioned overshadows the visible physical being, which has the possibility of becoming united to that spark. Thus it is said that the Higher Spirit (Atma) is not in the man, but above him. It is always peaceful, unconcerned, blissful, and full of absolute knowledge. It continually partakes of the Divine state, being continually that state itself, "conjoined with the Gods, it feeds upon Amrita (Ambrosia)." The object of the student is to let the light of that spirit shine through the lower coverings. This spirit can only become the ruler in us, when the firm intellectual acknowledgment is first made that IT alone is. And, as stated above, it being not only the person concerned but also the whole, all selfishness must be eliminated from the lower nature before its divine state can be reached. So long as the smallest personal or selfish desire-even for spiritual attainment for our own sake-remains, so long is the desired end put off. Demands, or desires of the personal nature, including those of the personal soul or Kama-manas have to known, understood and controlled by placing foremost the consideration of universal brotherhood. If we all belong to the family of Man, then we cannot afford to treat anyone unfairly. Such a motive only invokes the karma of delay and confusion and it will react on us in due course and retard our progress. We all know this in our heart of hearts. You will, I hope excuse this long preliminary set of ideas because it all leads to the essential answer that you seem to seek. The Mahatmas, Rishis and Adepts are always in the world. With individuals and organizations. They do not want to be recognized, because if they were, their work would be hampered by the importunities and the impertinences of the average curiosity seeker. So it is most probable that the Mahatmas and their chelas have been working steadily with those individuals who show that their heart is set on treating all around them as brothers and offering the help that the ancient Wisdom-Religion can always offer. Does it not start with a knowledge of ones' self and capacities and potentials? Then that is developed into the right channels for using them. So wherever thought is struggling to be free, and wherever the consideration of spiritual welfare as superior to personal wants and desires is being taught, there you can discern the hand of the Wise Ones who Never Sleep. The Theosophical Societies and all individuals who act as brothers to mankind receive the kind of active help which they merit from the Adepts. You have to read and consider all that is available in our literature and see what are the hallmarks of the true devotees. No progress was ever achieved by altercations and the conflict of personalities that makes for a constructive work. Is this not what Gandhiji taught, and look how it brought freedom after many years of selfless struggle and sacrifice to India. The actual work was done by the millions of Indian people who were inspired by the simple expressions of age-old truth which Gandhiji offered as a basis for their self-determined action. Anyone who spurs others to act truthfully, honestly and not to follow "leaders" blindly, does good work for humanity. And look around many who have worked and who have not seen the results of their effort create small but growing problem in themselves, by seeking to see certificates and receive some show of accolade. Do we really need that to keep on going? [ Did I not send you sometime ago, a copy of the Letter that Sri Lahiri had sent to Mr. Judge ? -- the one is which, after the death of HPB, a Brahmin pilgrim had met one of the Mahatmas near Lake Manasasarover ? --and the urging to work for Theosophy that it contained ?] If you cannot find it let me know and I will be glad to send a copy. It is an example of how important meanings can be discerned in what appear as ordinary letters. Occultism and wisdom do not operate in that way. The evidence is always in the offering of help and assistance to any one who desires to secure those for their retransmission to others. How can we say that we are not helped--invisibly it is true--and is not the burden of ascertaining the actuality of such help to be traced by our developing and more acute perception of how karma is operating, even in small things, all around us ? We alone, each one of us, can prove that the Adepts exists, and we alone know when we have been "helped." I would say that this is a part of the developing awareness of the disciple who is trusted by the Adept to find his own dharma and perform it with and in the world. We can only offer ourselves. And our constant endeavor ought to be to improve our nature and quality so that we may deserve greater responsibility and trust. But, then we ought not to be looking for "signs" or "certificates." Perhaps this is not the appropriate time for the Adepts to manifest as they did 125 years ago to certain persons who had deserved the privilege and who had determined to offer their services unreservedly for the promoting of the Theosophical Society and the Theosophical Philosophy. Are we able to say we are approaching that level of devotion ? When a person undertakes systematically to train themselves in accord with the aforesaid system and law, men attain to clear insight into the immaterial, spiritual world, and their interior faculties apprehend truth as immediately and readily as physical faculties grasp the things of sense, or mental faculties those of reason. Or, in the words used by Patanjali, "They are able to look directly upon ideas;" and hence their testimony to such truth is always something that each who receive it can test for inherent accuracy, harmlessness and universality. When it meets the tests of impersonality and practicality then only can it be said that it is as trustworthy as is the experimental results of honest scientists or philosophers who speak of the truth to be found in their respective fields. In the Kali-Yuga we are hypnotized by the effect of the immense body of images in the Astral Light that surrounds us. It as an electro-magnetic register, is compounded of all the deeds, thoughts, and so forth of our ancestors, whose lives tended in a material direction. These images influence the inner man-who is conscious of them-by suggestion. In a brighter age the influence of such images would be towards Truth. The effect of the Astral Light, as thus molded and painted by us, will remain so long as we continue to place those images there, and it thus becomes our judge and our executioner. Every universal law thus contains within itself the means for its own accomplishment and the punishment for its violation, and requires no further authority to postulate it or to carry out its decrees. I mention this because it is so vital to recognize that our past inclinations and acts could have served to delay us, or to obscure the acuity of our perception. Fortunately all this can be changed by right choices and brotherly actions done in our present and future. I think this is already too long. But your queries evoked my thoughts and with the help of some of Mr. Judge's words I send those to you to consider. We have so much to gain that pausing for anxious moments in indecision ought to be recognized as the melancholy barrier that it is. Best wishes as always to you, Dallas ======================= From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:23:23 -0800 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 09, 1999 = WORK OF THE ADEPTS AND MAHATMAS >The very fact that the Theosophical Movement has spread and is >continued to be studied by an increasing number of student all >over the world is significant. Would be significant if it were true. Its not. Its being studied by less and less people. Memberships are either barely holding steady, or falling, often precipitously. It no longer has the magnetic core that drew people a century ago. And most of its leaderships have become little cliques who, instead of considering the loss of membership to be a problem requiring creativity and dynamism to address, instead now openly state that numbers don't matter. Theosophy as a system is not a movement, its now simply an old man on a cane, wobbling along, speaking the words of the glory days of the past when it made a difference, and avoiding the notion of its own death. The "ancient wisdom" is still around (it was before humans were even around ... all it is is a statement of principles that govern reality) - and I personally believe adepts exist - but save for a few small lodges with a little light, I doubt the Theosophical Society is of much use to them. The minds are too closed and the attitudes governing it too arrogant. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 08:20:53 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 09, 1999 = WORK OF THE ADEPTS AND MAHATMAS Your observation is on target. Has anyone seen any plans - long and short range ? It looks like a rudderless ship heading no where, while passengers (travellers ?) are jumping off the ship. What a difference a century makes. We saw a vibrant world wide movement expanding to every country in spite of slow modes of physical transportation and communication. Now with all the modern modes of transportation and communication we do not see such vibrancy. When theosophy was introduced in 1875, the Founders saw a need for both spreading theosophy and establishing TS. Had they seen spreading theosophy as the sole objective, then HPB could have stayed in NY and written all the writings she did and could have saved her a lot of trouble. On the other hand she travelled to India and Europe in spite of her very bad health. In this background, one wonders. My 0.02. At 07:23 AM 3/10/1999 -0800, you wrote: |>>The very fact that the Theosophical Movement has spread and is |>>continued to be studied by an increasing number of student all |>>over the world is significant. Would be significant if it were true. Its not. Its being studied by less and less people. Memberships are either barely holding steady, or falling, often precipitously. It no longer has the magnetic core that drew people a century ago. And most of its leaderships have become little cliques who, instead of considering the loss of membership to be a problem requiring creativity and dynamism to address, instead now openly state that numbers don't matter. Theosophy as a system is not a movement, its now simply an old man on a cane, wobbling along, speaking the words of the glory days of the past when it made a difference, and avoiding the notion of its own death. The "ancient wisdom" is still around (it was before humans were even around ... all it is is a statement of principles that govern reality) - and I personally believe adepts exist - but save for a few small lodges with a little light, I doubt the Theosophical Society is of much use to them. The minds are too closed and the attitudes governing it too arrogant. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 18:31:08 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 09, 1999 = WORK OF THE ADEPTS AND MAHATMAS In a message dated 99-03-10 09:21:09 EST, you write: << What a difference a century makes. We saw a vibrant world wide movement expanding to every country in spite of slow modes of physical transportation and communication. Now with all the modern modes of transportation and communication we do not see such vibrancy. >> My thoughts are that it has less to do with the TS as an organization than the nature of the world itself. The sort of people who gravitated to the TS a hundred years ago simply no longer exist and the underlying social forces that aided it's growth are long gone. Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 22:41:37 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Update on Internet users Here is an interesting info on the net. What this indicates is the segment of the population with which we have to deal with in marketing whatever we market. mkr ======================================= Web surfers aren't just young techie males anymore March 10, 1999 Web posted at: 4:53 p.m. EST (2153 GMT) by Maryann Jones Thompson (IDG) -- In the early days of the Web, Net surfers were largely young, techie or upscale males - not exactly every marketer's target audience. These days, while the online population has changed drastically, it remains a fairly elite group. Demographics from Mediamark Research show that Web surfers are approximately twice as likely to have high household incomes, college degrees and management positions than the overall U.S. population. They are also more likely to be young, single and Asian. Looking back to 1996, it is encouraging that the educational, age and gender profile of the online population is approaching that of the U.S. More distressing is the lack of change in the income profile. But an optimist would point out that as the number of surfers doubled during the past three years, growth in Net use among less-affluent demographic segments has kept up with that of the upper crust. Geographically, Web users can be found in all corners of the U.S. But according to researcher Inteco, the level of Net use in several major metro areas exceeds the U.S. average. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 08:38:20 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 09, 1999 = WORK OF THE ADEPTS AND MAHATMAS In a message dated 3/10/99 5:35:17 PM Central Standard Time, Drpsionic@aol.com writes: << The sort of people who gravitated to the TS a hundred years ago simply no longer exist and the underlying social forces that aided it's growth are long gone. >> They still exist but the TS has become quaint. It drew top quality, successful, intelligent, and academically astute people. I think of G.R.S.Mead. He was very top scholar in his day. Or Evans Wentz is another example. It does not draw people like these any longer because it insists on out-dated scholarship to fit with HPB views. Ever since Dalai Lama revealed it, we know Stanzas of Dzyan are Dzog chen Zhung Zhung text. HPB mentions hidden libraries of Tarim basin. Those have been found, cataloged, and are in process of being translated. Yet, some of fantasies theosophists weave about the alleged contents of these libraries are reidiculous. TS and HPB had bad translation as can be and has been established. But it resists such findings. In old days, HPB would have adopted new findings as she did with findings of Evans Wentz and G.R.S. Mead. Also, TS tries to interpret other traditions as tacit form of theosophy in crude way so that talk of astral bodies can be found in Christian tradition or other such nonsense as Leadbeater's activities in shaping Liberal Catholicim. Bunk! So to, you have incident that Zoroastrians still mad at when Leadbeater tried to make Zoroastrians believe Theosophy was the esoteric core of their religion. Then you have same with Christianity by others. So, people who seek honest research in improving information base, who have accurate and expert knowledge of traditions, find themselves at odds with TS no matter how sympathetic to its aims they may be. I see this as similar to Krishnamurti case. Those who sincerely are committed to there is no religion higher than truth find this commitment to be at odds with institutional aims of TS. Those talented and level-headed spiritual seekers still exist, but TS no longer lives up to its aims. It abandoned itself. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:58:39 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Inspirational Mar 11th 1999 Dear Lori: That is a lovely analogy and illustration of brotherhood Many thanks for sharing it. Dallas Subject: Inspirational Heaven and Hell - The Real Difference A man spoke with the Lord about heaven and hell. The Lord said to the man, "Come, I will show you hell." They entered a room where a group of people sat around a huge pot of stew. Everyone was famished, desperate and starving. Each held a spoon that reached the pot, but each spoon had a handle so much longer than their own arm that it could not be used to get the stew into their own mouths. The suffering was terrible. "Come, now I will show you heaven," the Lord said after a while. They entered another room, identical to the first - the pot of stew, the group of people, the same long-handled spoons. But there everyone was happy and well-nourished. "I don't understand," said the man. "Why are they happy here when they were miserable in the other room and everything was the same?" The Lord smiled, "Ah, it is simple," he said. "here they have learned to feed each other." By Ann Landers from A 2nd Helping of Chicken Soup for the Soul From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:58:45 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: "Original Teachings of theosophy" - why perpetuate them ? Mar 11th 1999 Dear Jerry: Your post on "slander" and provocation is a fine one. What an excellent definition - and in line with harmlessness and brotherhood. As to my contention that there is merit in perpetuating the "original message." Let me offer you an example elsewhere. Now what I am going to say is not an "attack" on the Teachings of Jesus, but, if anything I am taking up the practice of some of the branches of Christianity and asking the following questions. [ I could do this easily with Hinduism, or Buddhism, or any groups in the world where a "religion" has been built up around the words and teachings of a reformer and made a barrier between the people and their "savior." And those saviors, may be Buddha, Lao-Tse, Muhammad, Jesus, or anyone that one believes represents a high moral Leader. ] I note how much of a scramble is on nowadays among biblical Scholars to find the original sources of the BIBLE and Hebrew and Gnostic texts. Careful translations and comparison with contemporary texts show that there have been a series of alterations made in expressing the original teachings. Alterations, elisions, and perversions of meaning are now being show up in many areas. The effort to restore and purify the text that are given to the people have produced a flood of literature and new translations. Yet, the "Gideon Bible" of the King James version" can be found in the bedside drawer of most hotels and motels. I have noted in some cases that something on Buddhism has been also placed thee, but, why not on Islam, Confucianism, Zen, theosophy etc. ... ? I also find that attempts to review and revise ancient texts from India, Tibet, Mongolia, China, Persia, etc., are in process but that the Christian overlay that rules our "Western" scholarship seems to stifle them somewhat. There is excellent work being done to correlate and codify the texts by many and Richard Taylor among those who are also students of theosophy, has been doing this work so well, as an example. Peter Marriott just posted a note explaining how the variations in transliterating oriental words and adjusting them to pronunciations using Latin letters, occurred historically. This helps us all. Back to my example using Christianity as an example of Church teaching vs. Jesus' teachings. They find after almost 2,000 years that they need those for accuracy. At least the scholars do. The average person is willing to let the minister, priest, etc. do the interpreting for them. How many can say anything about the sermon in say 15 minutes after it is over ? Are the parishioners being taught to think about the teachings given there? What happens to parishioners who have a sense of right, and who questions seriously some of the practices and doctrines or dogmas of their church ? How are the teachings being applied in every-day life ? do they give respect and regard for others' religions and teach tolerance, or are they intolerant of other religions, and if so why ? in our age, those who inquire broadly, have found that the same code of ethics prevails and is taught in each religion perhaps in slightly different words. But the key and basic ideas and recommendation for practice seem to derive from the one fundamental: Brotherhood. "Do unto others, as thou would'st have them do unto you." So, in all this diversity who wins ? Where is one to place one's faith? Should one uninquiringly accept a belief in the sense of a set of teachings. It is the illogical and unethical applications and the gaps in logic that have ended up in putting upright people on the thinking seat. If they find that their Church teaches something else than the prophet in applications, and no sense is to be made for the change, then maybe they go to the scholars, or to theosophy if they hear of it, and, they will find in both cases that they are asked to think out who they are and what they can do. That usually makes Theosophy appear "cold and unpopular." It also speaks of ethics as something you can reason out for yourself. Very few priests or ministers will take to that well, as their purpose and authority has to change. They tend to discourage the person from becoming "a priest unto himself." If no one pays for the priest's services, then where and how will he find work ? Theosophical philosophy takes the idea of universal SPIRIT, and of a Universal omnipresent GOD, and states for that reason, man's soul is a part of IT and is therefore immortal. It (immortality) is not something one can gain be adhering to a faith or observing rituals. It also speaks of the OMNISCIENCE of GOD. The all-knowingness not only comes from universality and universal awareness, but because GOD's LAWS are self administering and self-adjusting. There is no "remission of sins." And logically everyone is responsible for their choices. God does not, and cannot play favorites at the expense of all the rest of the universe and conserve his/its integrity. And if the evidence of "miracles" is advanced, Theosophical knowledge about the operation of the secret side of nature and the laws that operate there quickly provides an answer. Many such answers are to be found in ISIS UNVEILED, and THE SECRET DOCTRINE. Also in many of the articles that HPB wrote. They have to be looked for and catalogued. But they are there. And if one adds to that OMNIPOTENCE, then Man being a portion of God, can, by his own self-determined efforts and aims, raise himself to know all that GOD already knows. And why should God be worried. If it is a personal God it/he/she will welcome the help. Thus the burden of administration is spread among thousands and millions of willing helpers. If one accepts as a hang-over from Judaism the idea of Jehovah (the angry, wrathful, whimsical, God that enjoys torturing its subjects for no reason). I ask you what kind of a God is it that allows the phrase "Lead me not into temptation..." -- as though a God that the poor, weak, defenseless, women, little children and the oppressed trust and honor, would do, or allow that ! ] It is not Christianity alone that has turned the teachings of moral equity advocated by the gentle reformed Jesus into a mockery but also the responsibility of all who have allowed that to happen. And, it is the same if every religion that has been formalized and in which a priesthood has gown to claim intermediacy between man and God. Show the people that the closest place to GOD is in their own Heart, and a great light will dawn and the mind be turned to self-control and self-reform. Apply this now to the statements made by any of the "followers" an "successors" of HPB who write or try to interpret Theosophy and please include myself). Everyone of those writers has a view-point (so do I). It may be a very good one, or it may be flawed. How does one determine the value of someone's words? By the mind-held touchstone of universality. Is what is said true at all times, in all places and for all persons, or is it only limited in its accuracy and partially applied. The search for TRUTH demands universality, impersonality, and impartiality. It has to stand up to the test of logic, of reason and be capable of applications in a way which harms no one. Compare the statements made with those of HPB. Then you can and anyone can decide for themselves which through the greatest light on any subject considered. All writers will shed some light and also appeal to a certain group of people, but the question is more of universality than of personal or group preference. I think this is enough to expose my views so you can understand them. Best wishes, Dallas -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of > Gerald Schueler > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 7:51 AM > Subject: Theos-World Response to Dallas <> Dallas, I understand your feeling here, but there is another side to it. It is vitally important to keep the Teachings alive. If we just keep the original writings and work only from them, we will soon have a dead letter. Someone recently posted a long quote from G de Purucker to the effect that words alone will reduce the TSs to just another religion, and that it is necessary to keep the spirit of the Teachings alive. This is done primarily by living the words, but also by communicating them in newer words. Truth has to be re-clothed in new expressions or it dies. I have yet to hear you give examples as to how the original message is "diverted" or abused by later writers, although I would agree that CWL tended to Christianize Theosophy, which is not good. What other writers do you think have adversely "filtered" the original message? de Purucker? Just curious. Jerry S. -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com Letters to the Editor, 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: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 17:58:52 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Is the TS on Autopilot? == All gliders eventually land or crash ! Mar 11th 1999 Who said that our lives would be easy ? But if we do have to work, let us do so constructively. Can we find where and how ? Why not look on the TS and the theosophical world as being dynamic. We are waiting for what ? Someone to do our work for us ? Why? Look at the 3 OBJECTS do they way "wait" or "work" ? The T S was established so people would have an unfettered, non-dogmatic forum for concentrated work - it offers no "pathway to heaven " to members. It offers an opportunity to study and work together. ABOVE ALL IT SPEAKS OF "brotherhood" AND OF THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH. And that means we have to work for it. If we neglect that then we "fail" in assisting the Masters in their work of seeing that theosophy is spread about in the world. We loose an opportunity for advancement, and the world is left somewhat drearier. Hope this is of help. Dallas ============== -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of > Gerald Schueler > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 1999 8:26 AM > Subject: Theos-World Is the TS on Autopilot? >>Is TS on autopilot with the purely mechanical job publishing the works written in early days, the copyrights to all of them having expired is now in public domain. Any ideas? mkr>> I think that the TSs are in pretty much the same position as the early Christian church. The church was on auto-pilot waiting for the Second Coming. The TSs await the return of HPB's next incarnation. In both cases there is the very real problem of possibly not recognizing the founder's return when, and if, it does happen. I think it quite possible that Jesus and HPB could both reincarnate and not be recognized or accepted by their respective organizations. Jerry S. -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com Letters to the Editor, 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: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 18:34:30 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: February 15, 1999 In a message dated 2/16/99 12:00:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, theos- l@list.vnet.net writes: << I don't know. You'd have to ask him. On the other hand, he probably eats duck, chicken and pork. >> He sounds like a "quack".... Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:34:28 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? Dear CHuck, you wrote: > Were it not for its poisonous effect on the internal politics of the TS, > the ES would be a joke and an embarrassment. I agree more and more with that. The effect the E.S. has on the internal politics of the T.S. is the most worrysome of its negative (side)effects. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:53:01 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? I wrote: << > There is, of course, need for great discrimination, as all > knowledge is not for those who are ethically known to be > unworthy." I mean to stress the idea of "ethically," because > there is always the potential for a person to selfishly abuse > knowledge. And if a teacher unwisely gives information, the > moral burden descends on that "teacher" who so unwisely gives > information to the "wrong" person. Grigor writes: > This miscontrues the nature of an esoteric teaching. Secret in Sanskrit, > ancient Persian, Tibetan, and Chinese is not merely witheld information. It > is a quality of being or of awareness that one cannot "possess" without being > it. Or, secret to surfing is not some information but the skilled ability to > surf. Nobody can get real secret without becoming qualified. And process of > becoming qualified makes it no longer secret to them for they have realized > it. True teacher merely assists in birth of potency latent in student. To > teach surfing, you have student develop their surfing skills. In > spirituality, higher states are ipso facto higher cognitive and ethical > skills. You can't get one without other anymore that you can get blue without > getting a color or a square without getting a shape. The real secrets are > within oneself. They emerge when one qualifies oneself. A teacher has no > role in judging whether one is qualified to receive secret. Qualification and > secret emerge together as one. I don't think I misunderstand the nature of esotheric teaching. The ethical question comes up very legitimately, in my oppinion, when the question of speeding up evolution comes up. The mahatma's choose to help people speed up their evolution if there was exactly that purity of motive that theosophists talk about at infinitum. As far as I am concerned theosophists are mistaken in thinking that we (as ordinary humans) also have that need to judge other peoples motives. If I have seemed to say the opposite, I am sorry. But again: I do think the Mahatma's have the duty and the right to judge motive, before they teach people to *surf*. And yes of course: they can only guide, we have to TRY as they often stressed. This is as true for surfing (which I am sure I could not easily learn in this incarnation ;-) ) as it is for occultism. I agree with that part of what you were saying. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:00:03 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? > There are advanced beings. They just don't wear it on their lapel. But they are not superior to common person but morally equal because common person is advanced being in potential. > Grigor I do not agree with the last part of that. To put it bluntly: I do think a person like Hitler hides his moral potential so well that he is in a different leage from someone like Mother Teresa. I do agree that we are all potential Buddha's, but that does not mean that we are so in practice. Since I think occultism (the *white* type) starts in practice, I should think that there is also where we would find the first differences. Differences in intelligence, clair-voyance and the like are not (it seems to me) the most important differences between the adept and the ordinary person. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:45:02 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? Frank Reitemeyer wrote: > Furthermore comes the old saying to my mind that every coin > has TWO signs. Could this implicate that if a false ES is in existence, that > then a true, original ES must be there (no matter for the moment where to be > found and how to be checked), because the fiormer would be in philosophical > logic not possible without the latter? And if yes, could it be, that Boris > had the latter in mind on his Anniversary lecture in NY 1975? Or do you > believe, to the best of your knowledge, that only impostors, liars and faked > groups are to be found and that a real ES, in the true sense of the word, is > impossible? Only a question for consideration. I think that something like the E.S. is only possible in the true sense of the word when someone like H.P.B. is in charge, of whom most of us seem to agree she stood out in insight and practical knowledge. Only if that condition is met, can something like the E.S. be justified, in my oppinion. Otherwise it can only become what it is now. So, the E.S. should have stopped functioning at her death; or when Krishnamurti asked it to be stopped, it should have stayed out of function. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 14:09:18 +0100 (Romance Standard Time) From: hesse600 Subject: RE: Inspirational > That is a lovely analogy and illustration of brotherhood > > Many thanks for sharing it. > Dallas > > Subject: Inspirational >> Heaven and Hell - The Real Difference A man spoke with the Lord about heaven and hell. The Lord said to the man, "Come, I will show you hell." They entered a room where a group of people sat around a huge pot of stew. Everyone was famished, desperate and starving. Each held a spoon that reached the pot, but each spoon had a handle so much longer than their own arm that it could not be used to get the stew into their own mouths. The suffering was terrible. "Come, now I will show you heaven," the Lord said after a while. They entered another room, identical to the first - the pot of stew, the group of people, the same long-handled spoons. But there everyone was happy and well-nourished. "I don't understand," said the man. "Why are they happy here when they were miserable in the other room and everything was the same?" The Lord smiled, "Ah, it is simple," he said. "here > they have learned to feed each other." > By Ann Landers > from A 2nd Helping of Chicken Soup for the Soul>> I have already heard this story. Guess where? The T.S. in Adyar. So again I say: it does do some things well. And again, for the pessimists: It does indeed also do things less expertly. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 17:44:30 +1300 From: Murray Stentiford Subject: Re: Theosophical Adepts Replying to MKR A quick look at Hodson's "Light of the Sanctuary" reveals a goodly number of references to contact with the Master Morya and a smaller number to Koot Humi - the two principal TS inner Founders. The most frequently-mentioned Teacher figure is Polidorus Isurenus. I noticed when with Hodson, that when he said something about the Masters, he would support it by referring to some known piece of writing in TS literature, rather than saying that he had more intimate knowledge. >From the vantage point of having had extended contact with him, it has struck me that it's hard for others to form an entirely realistic impression of a figure like him. This is through no fault of their own; it's just that they haven't had the chance to be with him and see for themselves. It must be much more so, with regard to the Beings of greater stature we glimpse in theosophical and other literature. For that reason, I try to keep an open and alert mind on this subject. Murray >When one reads historical material relating to early days of TS, one finds >that the Adepts corresponded/sent msgs to many people and even were met by >some. There was also various reports of sightings especially in India. > >Consider the situation in 1999. The last known letter from one of the >Adepts was in 1900, almost 100 years ago. We have not heard from any of >them till now. Nor has anyone come out and stated with corroboration of >being in communication with any of them or having seen or heard from any of >them. Even when Geoffrey Hodson mentions about his communication with >Adepts, the names he refers to, not a single one of them being the Adepts >who were known to be active at the founding of TS. > >All this makes one wonder if the real work of the TS is over. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 19:26:57 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Why the TSs are Falling Apart This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE6C98.769297E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mar 12th Dear Jerry and Frank: I have been reading your postings, and somehow Jerry, I did not get that out of Frank's posting. Agreed that the T S is a free forum and has no dogmas. Therefore anyone's ideas or questions can be asked. But: Why should anyone then call another to question for those? They are either answered or not. I could observe that we all have strong opinions. If we are going to try to learn from each other then we ought to ask such questions as "draws the other fellow out, so that the real meaning is made clear." We would not be involved in Theosophy if we did not have great independence. We also have the ability to think and seek to understand each other. As to one thing that is quite clear to me: THEOSOPHY is quite different from the work and organization of any T S. The various "theosophical bodies" only exist for the convenience of those who are seeking to find more of the truths and facts of our World and Universe. They are not sectarian, nor can they exercise any persuasive force on their members. If their by-laws seem to say this, then the members still do as they please and to please their own conscience first of all. There can be no compulsion in a philosophical system that posits the independence and freedom of Mind in every Human. And then logically demonstrates that this has to be so. It is also quite true that we have various ways of asking or doing this. But the questions ought to be considered. If there are obviously several ways to go, then, does it not help to show the probable results of adopting one or another, or all ? I think that is helpful, and also would be "theosophical." No one ought to "demand" anything. Asking is quite different from attributing motives to another, and leaves the respondent free to answer or remain quiet for whatever reason. How can any one of us presume to interpret the "policy" of either the Adepts or of HPB ? We can study their recorded writings (avoiding the commentaries and qualifications of interpreters) so that we can make up our own minds. And I think that is self-growth. I find many instances in HPB's articles and her writings and those of the Adepts which are available for us to read, that their policies are clear, and they welcome any sincere and honest approach or question. In a way we can say that all of us, whatever we may think or are, are their pupils at some level or another of progress. And the level of that "progress" is always self-determined, each by and for themselves. So let us leave the way open to the Adepts to do what they do best -- a quiet and strong influence that pervades all sincere students and inquirers wherever they may be. I would not presume to tell another how to think or act, nor would I give an exclusive opinion. HPB time and again, offers principles and recommends that we investigate them and adopt them if they suit us. Any conclusion we may arrive at depends on the history and nature of the inquiry and the enquirer. I would hold that to be important for all of us. If the TSs "fall apart" it is due to the waywardness of the "members," not to the PHILOSOPHY which remains undisturbed. But, by impairing the work of other "members" may we not be transferring our attention from the ACTUAL STUDY OF THE PHILOSOPHY to side-issues of personalities and an attempt to assign to them motives and purposes which we are not directly concerned with. How does any body of students work? Are there not always the "few enthusiasts" who shoulder much of the organizational work -- which others are glad to be relieved of ? In so doing, do not the members (who do little or nothing) either accept the limits or the broad frontiers of the mental capacity of those "doers." If the "do-nothings" launch protests one might legitimately ask why have they waited so long to pay strict attention to the business of being a member? I say this not to daunt any such inquiry, but rather to observe that: "The price of Freedom, is Eternal Vigilance." If one looks around at the course of various "religions" (the 'joiner-together' groups-- as "re-ligiere" in Latin means to "bind" or "tie together") as the years roll by, one can see this unfolding as the do-nothings are usually made the eventual victims of the personal schemes of the "doers." Occasionally a rebellion starts, around some valiant figure who demands that the ancient and universal principles of truth and equity be freely applied. Jesus, who came to "minister to the lost sheep of the tribe of Israel" was one such. Paul then took those treasured ethical injunctions and showed how even the Gentiles could apply and use them. Later it took Bishops such as Eusebius, and Tertullian to make the free churches into a dogmatic group and of the freedom to think into the rigidity of a credo -- a faith, the transgression of which brought torture, repression, compulsion, coercion an death. What is past is past. We cannot undo that. If documents exist, then their reading gives an inkling of the decision that a person has reached. It says little about the debates that may have preceded that. What subsequent actions may have been taken are the responsibility of the recipient of such decisions, and so on and on. In my opinion the T Ses do themselves no good in focusing on pleasing personalities. If you are able to compare the contents of the early magazines like LUCIFER, THEOSOPHIST, PATH for the period between 1879 and 1895 -- compare those writings with the quality of current contributions to the currently published magazines such as the THEOSOPHIST, Adyar; QUEST, Wheaton; CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST, Toronto; ENGLISH THEOSOPHIST, London; INDIAN THEOSOPHIST, Benares; NEW ZEALAND THEOSOPHIST, New Zealand; AUSTRALIAN THEOSOPHIST, Australia; THEOSOPHY magazine, Los Angeles; FOHAT, Edmonton; THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT monthly, Bombay; the HIGH-COUNTRY THEOSOPHIST, Boulder; PRTOGONUS, THEOSOPHY WORLD, Los Angeles, SUNRISE, Pasadena, DE THEOSOOF, The Hague; LA THEOSOPHIE, Paris, etc., -- the comparison is interesting and each shows where the present focus is and where the current general interest of students and members lies. Add to this set of comparisons the quality and nature of the INTERNET postings in which many practice their editorship by sending observations, questions, criticism and answers -- which all can see, almost daily, at "theos-talk;" Theos-World, theos-l; blavatsky.net SD Study Group, etc. -- the comparisons are very interesting to study. It is also clear that everyone is quite free to join/not join, contribute/remain silent, question/answer, criticize, encourage, and, sometimes protest. In any case we all are living and growing together and the eventual minor discordance smoothed out and we all profit. I am venting some of my own views and really have no one in particular in mind. I did think, Jerry, that you were a little too strong in characterizing Frank. But I am also sticking my "oar" into your waters and perhaps I should now "shut up." Best wishes, Dallas Dallas TenBroeck dalval@nwc,net -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of Jerry Schueler > Sent: Friday, March 12, 1999 4:57 AM > To: Theos World > Subject: Theos-World Why the TSs are Falling Apart >>No, I am in the contrary of the opinion that it is not only the right, but it is the duty for every true Theosophist, for every student of the pukka Theosophy of which HPB was the direct agent, to speak out - the more when there are sideways and traps or even lies which are smuggled into the Theosophical Movement to destroy the work of HPB and her teachers. No one is free of the risk to get criticized, if it seems he/she is wrong doing, no matter if he/she is alive or dead, except he/she is claims to be an incarnated god beyond any criticism. >> Frank, your rationale here is exactly why the TS are fragmented today, and will probably die out in the future. While you certainly have the right to think this way, it is completely against the turn-the-other-cheek policy of real Adepts and of what HPB herself tried to inspire in her followers. You are, like so many others, projecting your own narrow sense of truth and "lies" onto others. Ah well... Jerry S. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE6C98.769297E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mar=20 12th
 
Dear=20 Jerry and Frank:
 
I have=20 been reading your postings, and somehow Jerry, I=20 did not get that out of Frank's posting.
 
Agreed=20 that the T S is a free forum and has no dogmas.  Therefore anyone's = ideas=20 or questions can be asked.  But: Why should anyone=20 then call another to question for those?  They are either answered = or=20 not.
 
I could=20 observe that we all have strong opinions.  If we are going to try = to learn=20 from each other then we ought to ask such questions as "draws the = other=20 fellow out, so that the real meaning is made clear."  We would = not be=20 involved in Theosophy if we did not have great = independence.
We also have the ability to think and seek to = understand each=20 other.
 
As to=20 one thing that is quite clear to me:  THEOSOPHY is quite=20 different from the work and organization of any T S.
 
The=20 various "theosophical bodies" only exist for the convenience = of those=20 who are seeking to find more of the truths and facts of our World and=20 Universe.  They are not sectarian, nor can they exercise any = persuasive=20 force on their members.  If their by-laws seem to say this, then = the=20 members still do as they please and to please their own conscience first = of all.=20 There can be no compulsion in a philosophical system that posits the=20 independence and freedom of Mind in every Human.  And then = logically=20 demonstrates that this has to be so.
 
It is=20 also quite true that we have various ways of asking or doing this.  = But the=20 questions ought to be considered.  If there are obviously several = ways to=20 go, then, does it not help to show the probable results of adopting one = or=20 another, or all ?  I think that is helpful, and also would be=20 "theosophical."  No one ought to "demand"=20 anything.  Asking is quite different from attributing motives to = another,=20 and leaves the respondent free to answer or remain quiet for whatever=20 reason.
 
How can=20 any one of us presume to interpret the "policy" of either the = Adepts=20 or of HPB ?
We can=20 study their recorded writings (avoiding the commentaries and = qualifications of=20 interpreters) so that we can make up our own minds.  And I think = that is=20 self-growth.
 
I find=20 many instances in HPB's articles and her writings and those of the = Adepts which=20 are available for us to read, that their policies are clear, and they = welcome=20 any sincere and honest approach or question.  In a way we can say = that all=20 of us, whatever we may think or are, are their pupils at some level or = another=20 of progress.  And the level of that "progress" is always=20 self-determined, each by and for themselves.
 
So let us leave the way open to the = Adepts to do what they do best -- a quiet and = strong=20 influence that pervades all sincere students and inquirers = wherever they may=20 be.  I would not presume to tell another=20 how to think or act, nor would I give an exclusive opinion.  HPB time=20 and again, offers principles and recommends that we investigate them and = adopt=20 them if they suit us.
 
Any conclusion we may arrive at = depends on the=20 history and nature of the inquiry and the enquirer.
 
I would hold that to be important = for all of=20 us.
 
If the TSs "fall apart" it = is due to=20 the waywardness of the "members," not to the PHILOSOPHY which = remains=20 undisturbed.  But, by impairing the work of other = "members" may=20 we not be transferring our attention from the ACTUAL STUDY OF THE PHILOSOPHY to side-issues of=20 personalities and an attempt to assign to them motives and purposes = which we are=20 not directly concerned with. 
 
How=20 does any body of students work?  Are there not always the "few = enthusiasts" who shoulder much of the organizational work -- which = others=20 are glad to be relieved of ?  In so doing, do not the members (who = do=20 little or nothing) either accept the limits or the broad frontiers of = the mental=20 capacity of those "doers."  If the = "do-nothings" launch=20 protests one might legitimately ask why have they waited so long to pay = strict=20 attention to the business of being a member?  I say this not to = daunt any=20 such inquiry, but rather to observe that:  "The price of = Freedom, is=20 Eternal Vigilance." 
 
If one=20 looks around at the course of various "religions"  (the=20 'joiner-together' groups-- as "re-ligiere" in Latin means to=20 "bind" or "tie together") as the years roll by, one = can see=20 this unfolding as the do-nothings are usually made the eventual victims = of the=20 personal schemes of the "doers."  Occasionally a = rebellion=20 starts, around some valiant figure who demands that the ancient and = universal=20 principles of truth and equity be freely applied.  Jesus, who came = to=20 "minister to the lost sheep of the tribe of Israel" was one=20 such.  Paul then took those treasured ethical injunctions and = showed how=20 even the Gentiles could apply and use them. Later it took Bishops such = as=20 Eusebius, and Tertullian to make the free churches into a dogmatic group = and of=20 the freedom to think into the rigidity of a credo -- a faith, the = transgression=20 of which brought torture, repression, compulsion, coercion  an=20 death.
 
What is past is past.  We = cannot undo=20 that.  If documents exist, then their reading gives an inkling of = the=20 decision that a person has reached.  It says little about the = debates that=20 may have preceded that.  What subsequent actions may have been = taken are the=20 responsibility of the recipient of such decisions, and so on and=20 on.
 
In my=20 opinion the T Ses do themselves no good in focusing on pleasing=20 personalities.  If you are able to compare the contents of the = early=20 magazines like LUCIFER, THEOSOPHIST, PATH for the period between 1879 = and 1895=20 -- compare those writings with the quality of current contributions to = the=20 currently published magazines such as the THEOSOPHIST, Adyar;  = QUEST,=20 Wheaton;  CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST, Toronto;  ENGLISH THEOSOPHIST, = London;=20 INDIAN THEOSOPHIST, Benares; NEW ZEALAND THEOSOPHIST, New = Zealand; =20 AUSTRALIAN THEOSOPHIST, Australia;  THEOSOPHY magazine, Los = Angeles; =20 FOHAT, Edmonton; THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT monthly, Bombay; the = HIGH-COUNTRY=20 THEOSOPHIST, Boulder;  PRTOGONUS,  THEOSOPHY WORLD,  Los=20 Angeles,  SUNRISE, Pasadena, DE THEOSOOF, The Hague;  LA = THEOSOPHIE,=20 Paris, etc., -- the comparison is interesting and each shows where the = present=20 focus is and where the current general interest of students and members=20 lies. 
 
Add to=20 this set of comparisons the quality and nature of the INTERNET postings = in which=20 many practice their editorship by sending observations, questions, = criticism and=20 answers -- which all can see, almost daily, at = "theos-talk;" =20 Theos-World,  theos-l; blavatsky.net SD Study Group, etc. -- the=20 comparisons are very interesting to study. 
 
It is=20 also clear that everyone is quite free to join/not join, = contribute/remain=20 silent, question/answer, criticize, encourage, and, sometimes=20 protest.
 
In any=20 case we all are living and growing together and the eventual minor = discordance=20 smoothed out and we all profit.
 
I am=20 venting some of my own views and really have no one in particular in = mind. =20 I did think, Jerry, that you were a little too strong in characterizing=20 Frank.  But I am also sticking my "oar" into your waters = and=20 perhaps I should now "shut up."
 
Best wishes,
 
Dallas
          &nbs= p;  =20 Dallas=20 TenBroeck
          =    =20 dalval@nwc,net


 
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com=20 [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com]On Behalf Of Jerry=20 Schueler
Sent: Friday, March 12, 1999 4:57 AM
To: = Theos=20 World
Subject: Theos-World Why the TSs are Falling=20 Apart

>>No, I am in the contrary of the opinion that it is not only = the=20 right, but
it is the duty for every true Theosophist, for every = student of=20 the pukka
Theosophy of which HPB was the direct agent, to speak out - = the=20 more when
there are sideways and traps or even lies which are = smuggled into=20 the
Theosophical Movement to destroy the work of HPB and her = teachers. No one=20 is
free of the risk to get criticized, if it seems he/she is wrong = doing,=20 no
matter if he/she is alive or dead, except he/she is claims to be=20 an
incarnated god beyond any criticism. >>
 
Frank, your rationale here is exactly why the TS are = fragmented
today, and will probably die out in the future.  While you=20 certainly
have the right to think this way, it is completely against = the
turn-the-other-cheek policy of real Adepts and of what HPB = herself
tried to inspire in her followers. You are, like so many = others,
projecting your own narrow sense of truth and "lies" onto = others.=20
Ah well...
 
Jerry S.
 
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01BE6C98.769297E0-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 05:48:59 -0600 (CST) From: M K Ramadoss Subject: HAPPY99.. HOW TO GET RID! (fwd) I found that I had the above virus in my attachment directory. If you find it you need to take action before it causes a lot of trouble M K Ramadoss =========================== Just yesterday I was informed about the existance of this virus (worm). Browsing Symantecs page, I found the following that might be usefull to get rid of the happy99.exe virus. By the way, it is supposed to be harmless. ***************************************** NORTON ANTIVIRUS RESEARCH CENTER Happy99.Worm VirusName: Happy99.WormAliases: Trojan.Happy99, I-Worm.HappyLikelihood:CommonRegion Reported:US, EuropeKeys:Trojan Horse, Worm Description: This is a worm program, NOT a virus. This program has reportedly been received through email spamming and USENET newsgroup posting. The file is usually named HAPPY99.EXE in the email or article attachment. When being executed, the program also opens a window entitled "Happy New Year 1999 !!" showing a firework display to disguise its other actions. The program copies itself as SKA.EXE and extracts a DLL that it carries as SKA.DLL into WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory. It also modifies WSOCK32.DLL in WINDOWS\SYSTEM directory and copies the original WSOCK32.DLL into WSOCK32.SKA. WSOCK32.DLL handles internet-connectivity in Windows 95 and 98. The modification to WSOCK32.DLL allows the worm routine to be triggered when a connect or send activity is detected. When such online activity occurs, the modified code loads the worm's SKA.DLL. This SKA.DLL creates a new email or a new article with UUENCODED HAPPY99.EXE inserted into the email or article. It then sends this email or posts this article. If WSOCK32.DLL is in use when the worm tries to modify it (i.e. a user is online), the worm adds a registry entry: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunOnce=SKA.EXE The registry entry loads the worm the next time Windows start. Removing the worm manually: 1.delete WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SKA.EXE 2.delete WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SKA.DLL 3.replace WINDOWS\SYSTEM\WSOCK32.DLL with WINDOWS\SYSTEM\WSOCK32.SKA 4.delete the downloaded file, usually named HAPPY99.EXE Safe Computing: This worm and other trojan-horse type programs demonstrate the need to practice safe computing. One should not execute any executable-file attachment (i.e. EXE, SHS, MS Word or MS Excel file) that comes from an email or a newsgroup article from an unknown or a untrusted source. Norton AntiVirus users can protect themselves from this worm by downloading the virus definitions updates released on Jan 28, 1999 or later either through LiveUpdate or from the following webpage: http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/download.html Write-up by: Raul K. Elnitiarta January 28, 1999 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 14:33:10 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/12/99 5:53:14 AM Central Standard Time, hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: << k I misunderstand the nature of esotheric teaching. The ethical question comes up very legitimately, in my oppinion, when the question of speeding up evolution comes up. >> Okay. <> There is another form of same mistake. Not even God can speed up evolution of those who don't have purity of motive. Purity of motive is what makes speeded up evolution possible. So, no moral decision there for mahatma to weigh. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 14:44:59 EST From: Hazarapet@aol.com Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? In a message dated 3/12/99 6:01:04 AM Central Standard Time, hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: << > There are advanced beings. They just don't wear it on their lapel. But they are not superior to common person but morally equal because common person is advanced being in potential. > Grigor I do not agree with the last part of that. To put it bluntly: I do think a person like Hitler hides his moral potential so well that he is in a different leage from someone like Mother Teresa. I do agree that we are all potential Buddha's, but that does not mean that we are so in practice. >> What is there to disagree with in last part? All I said was superior beings are not above real morality. In that, they are like everyone else. Are you saying for some, crime is not crime or that some do not have moral status? That is what Hitler was. Some don't morally count. Jews were not persons. Ordinary souls say in their practice others count less than me. Superior beings are, I say, morally superior to us in their service to all for all. They are nevertheless equally obligated to all to respect all as we all are. Their main superiority is they practice what they preach, we don't. So, they excell in treating each equally as all ought to be treated. Grigor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 16:34:00 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? At 02:33 PM 3/14/1999 EST, you wrote: >In a message dated 3/12/99 5:53:14 AM Central Standard Time, >hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: > ><< k I misunderstand the nature of esotheric > teaching. The ethical question comes up very legitimately, > in my oppinion, when the question of speeding up evolution > comes up. >> > >Okay. > >< their evolution if there was exactly that purity of motive > that theosophists talk about at infinitum. >> > >There is another form of same mistake. Not even God can speed up evolution of >those who don't have purity of motive. Purity of motive is what makes speeded >up evolution possible. So, no moral decision there for mahatma to weigh. > >--- I do not know if you call it purity of motive or something else. Growth is self driven. A gardner can water the plants, but the plants have to grow and flower. Any amount of any input or help from Mahatma's can help anyone unless they are willing to open up their spiritual eyes and able to assimilate and understand and act. my 0.02 mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 07:50:43 +0100 From: Mittelberger Martina Subject: Vajra Image Sorry to disturb your discussions, but maybe someone can help me. I need an digital image (with a high resolution) of the VAJRA (tib. dorje). It should show the crossed Vajra (4 ends). You can send it compressed to: martina.mittelbergerqvlr.gv.at Thanks a lot ... Martina From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 12:51:05 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Interesting Court Case It is reported that a law suit citing God as a defendant has been dismissed. The suit said Defendant God is the sovereign ruler of the universe and took no corrective action against the leaders of his Church and his Nation for their extremely serious wrongs, which ruined the life of the plaintiff. Plaintiff wanted God to return his youth and grant him the guitar-playing skills of famous guitarists, along with resurrecting his mother and his pet pigeon. If God failed to appear in court, federal rules of civil procedure say he must lose by default, it was argued. Brothers have always kept their anonymity and had any of them been identified, they may end up as defendant in lawsuit by a disappointed ex-member of TS. Once again it shows that the decision to keep anonymous is a very sound and practical one. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 22:45:20 -0000 From: "Peter Merriott" Subject: RE: Interesting Court Case Hi Doss, That reminds me of Woody Allen's words which went something along the lines of.. "It's not that I don't believe in God; lets just say if God does exist, then he's an under-achiever." ..Peter > It is reported that a law suit citing God as a defendant has been > dismissed. The suit said Defendant God is the sovereign ruler of the > universe and took no corrective action against the leaders of his Church > and his Nation for their extremely serious wrongs, which ruined the life > of the plaintiff. > > Plaintiff wanted God to return his youth and grant him the guitar-playing > skills > of famous guitarists, along with resurrecting his mother and his pet > pigeon. If > God failed to appear in court, federal rules of civil procedure > say he must > lose by default, it was argued. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 11:45:55 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Internet WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, March 16) -- Saying "I don't believe in business as usual, and I don't believe in politics as usual," Steve Forbes kicked off his second run for the GOP presidential nomination Tuesday in an address on the Internet. "This is going to be a new, information-age campaign about great ideas and enduring values," Forbes said. The multimillionaire publisher also promised "a major announcement" Tuesday during an afternoon State house news conference on the first leg of a two-day trip to New Hampshire. "I am happy to announce the beginning of my campaign for president of the United States of America," Forbes told users visiting his Web site.Forbes2000.com. "Today marks the beginning of a national crusade to restore Ronald Reagan's vision of hope and prosperity for all Americans. "You and I are entering the information age, and Washington politicians are stuck in the Stone Age." ================================================================== What struck me in the above announcement today is the last sentence. Can we say the same thing about Theosophical politicians? ...mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:27:14 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Some Great Ideas to be found in THE SECRET DOCTRINE == Hidden Hints Mar 16th >From Theosophical literature: These statements are offered as evidence of the great unity that the Secret Doctrine advances for us to consider. Some are easy to grasp and others may require much thought and considerations as we seek to fit them in the entire mosaic of Universal Evolution. Often one hears the question: "What is the cause of all this?" "Why am I here?" If one puts together in various relationships the key ideas - hidden like pearls in the uncouth oysters of words and ancient usage, the unifying aspects of statement and though become clearer. At no time can be a "quick study." All statements are made in sincerity and with the desire that they be thought over analyzed, and verified. WE have to do this independently. It is not safe to take the explanation or the word of "another," however learned or "authoritative" they may seem. TRUTH has to be learned and appreciated by each, as it is present in his or her own heart. We all share equally in the potentials of knowledge. Our progress and contribution is verification, and application of the facts perceived in our own lives. -------------------- "The pivotal doctrine of Esoteric philosophy admits no privileges or special gifts in man, save those won by his own Ego through personal effort and merit throughout a long series of metempsychoses and reincarnations." SD I 17 "Occultism can neither be taught nor learned in a "few easy lessons" - it has to been proposed to begin at the foundations and reconstruct our entire knowledge of Nature and of man; to show the unity and fundamentals of the world's religions; to eliminate from Science all its "missing links;" to make Agnosticism gnostic; and to place the science of psychology and the nature an laws of mind and soul over against "Mediumship." WQJ Articles I 35 "...the one fundamental law in Occult Science: "The radical unity of the ultimate essence of each constituent part of compounds in Nature-from Star to mineral Atom, from the highest Dhyan Chohan to the smallest infusoria and whether applied to the spiritual, intellectual, or physical worlds." SD I 120 "The Doctrine teaches that, in order to become a divine, fully conscious god,--aye, even the highest-the Spiritual primeval INTELLIGENCES must pass through the human stage. [those who "have reached the appropriate equilibrium between matter and spirit], as "we" have now, since the middle point of the Fourth Race of the fourth Round [Atlantean Race, a little over 18 million years ago] was passed. Each entity must have won for itself the right of becoming divine, through self-experience." AS I 106 "...for every atom in the Universe has the potentiality of self-consciousness in it, and is, like the Monads of Leibnitz, a Universe in itself, and "for" itself." SD I 107 "...Nature geometrizes universally. In all her manifestations. There is an inherent law...by which Nature correlates her geometrical forms...and in which there is no place for accident or chance. It is a fundamental law in Occultism that there is no rest or cessation of motion in Nature." SD I 97 "...in order to obtain clear perception of it [the Great Mystery] one has first of all to admit the postulate of a universally diffused, omnipresent, eternal Deity in Nature; secondly, to have fathomed the mystery of electricity in its true essence; and thirdly, to credit man with being the septenary symbol, on the terrestrial plane, of the one Great UNIT (the Logos), which is Itself the Seven vowelled sign, the Breath crystallized into the word." SD I 79 "Light is matter, and DARKNESS pure Spirit. Darkness, in its radical, metaphysical basis, is subjective and absolute light; while the latter (light) in all its seeming effulgence and glory, is merely a mass of shadows, as it can never be eternal, and is simply an illusion, or Maya." SD I 70 "Above, the Son is the whole Kosmos; below, he is MANKIND." SD I 60 "The Boundless can have no relation to the bounded and the conditioned. In the occult teachings, the Unknown and the Unknowable MOVER, or the Self-Existing, is the absolute divine Essence. And thus being ABSOLUTE Consciousness, and ABSOLUTE Motion-to the limited senses of those who describe this indescribable-it is unconsciousness and immoveableness. Concrete consciousness cannot be predicated of abstract Consciousness, any more than the quality wet can be predicated of water...Consciousness implies limitations and qualifications; something to be conscious of, and someone to be conscious of it. But ABSOLUTE CONSCIOUSNESS, contains the cognizer, the thing cognized and the cognition, all three in itself and all three ONE." SD I 56 "The idea that things can cease to exist and still BE, is a fundamental one in Eastern psychology." SD I 54 "Paranishpana...is the "summum bonum," the Absolute, hence the same as Paranirvana. Besides being the final state it is that condition of subjectivity which has no relation to anything but the one Absolute Truth (Para-martha-satya) on its plane. It is that state which leads one to appreciate correctly the full meaning of Non-Being, which, as explained, is ABSOLUTE BEING... The condition of Paranishpanna, without Paramartha, the Self-analysing consciousness (Svasamvedana), is no bliss, but simply extinction (for Seven Eternities). SD I 53 "Only the liberated Spirit is able to faintly realize the nature of the source whence it sprang and wither it must eventually return. . . As the highest Dhyan Chohan, however, can but bow it ignorance before the awful mystery of Absolute Being...the Finite cannot conceive the Infinite, nor can it apply its own standard of mental experiences, how can it be said that the "Unconscious" and the Absolute can have even an instinctive impulse or hope of attaining clear self-consciousness?. . .the Occultist would say that it applies perfectly to the awakened MAHAT, the Universal Mind already projected into the phenomenal world as the first aspect of the changeless ABSOLUTE, but never to the latter. "Spirit and Mater, or Purusha and Prakriti are but the two primeval aspects of the One and Secondless," we are taught." SD I 51 "The Secret doctrine carries this idea into the region of metaphysics and postulates a "One form of Existence" as the basis and source of all things...The Puranic commentators explain it by Karana-"Cause"-but the Esoteric philosophy, by the IDEAL SPIRIT OF THAT CAUSE." SD I 46 "What is time, for instance, but the panoramic succession of our states of consciousness?" SD I 44 "The Secret Doctrine teaches the progressive development of everything, worlds as well as atoms; and this stupendous development has neither conceivable beginning nor imaginable end. Our "Universe" is only one of an infinite number of Universes, all of them "Sons of Necessity," because links in the great Cosmic chain of Universes, each one standing in the relation of an effect as regards its predecessor, and being a cause as regards its successor." SD I 43 "...the upward progress of the Ego is a series of progressive awakenings." SD I 40 "Nothing is permanent except the one hidden ABSOLUTE EXISTENCE, which contains in itself the noumena of all realities...all things are relatively real, for the cognizer is also a reflection, and the things cognized are therefore as real to him as himself...Whatever plane our consciousness may be acting in, both we and the things belonging to that plane are, for the time being, our only realities." SD I 39-40 "Mind is a name given to the sum or the states of Consciousness grouped under thought, Will, and Feeling...the "UNIVERSAL MIND" remains as a permanent possibility of mental action, or of that abstract absolute thought, of which mind is the concretion." SD I 38 "Time is only an illusion produced by the succession of our states of consciousness as we travel through eternal duration, and it does not exist were no consciousness exists in which the illusion can be produced, but "lies asleep." The present is only a mathematical line which divides that part of eternal duration which we call the future from that part which we call the past. Nothing on earth has real duration, for nothing remains without change-or the same-for the billionth part of a second; and the sensation we have of the actuality of...the present, comes from the blurring of that momentary glimpse, or succession of glimpses of things that our senses give us, as those things pass from the region of ideals, which we call the future, to the region of memories that we name the past." SD I 37 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 10:12:54 +0100 From: Douwe Boschma Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? > In a message dated 3/12/99 5:53:14 AM Central Standard Time, > hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: >=20 > << k I misunderstand the nature of esotheric > teaching. The ethical question comes up very legitimately, > in my oppinion, when the question of speeding up evolution > comes up. >> >=20 > Okay. >=20 > < their evolution if there was exactly that purity of motive > that theosophists talk about at infinitum. >> >=20 > There is another form of same mistake. Not even God can speed up evolu= tion of > those who don't have purity of motive. Purity of motive is what makes = speeded > up evolution possible. So, no moral decision there for mahatma to weig= h. I am sorry to react on this message so late (it was written on the 14th) but lately I hardly ever have the time to read them trough, but now I luckily did.. The problem with talking about evolution, is that one may think of evolution as simply a material process. True evolution is not a material process but it is a process of a shift from material to spiritual, within which everything grows towards its tru= e spiritual goal.=20 Speeding up evolution would imply that evolution as we know it would naturally envelope to this very same spiritual height, while this is impossible, seen the nature of nature. It would also mean that one could hang on to this cycle and discard the Path, because evolution would bring him to the True Source anyway. This is not true... There is a point where the materialization becomes so dense that the spiritual counterpart in man, the Seed, or the Jewel, is too far from him to be ever reached again= , so that the Seed will return to its source (unreveiled), and the microcos= m will dissolve in some sort of fermentation process, in which the consciou= s inhabitant will feel a great grieve, pain, and loss, from where there is no return.=20 There is the Spiritual and the Natural... If one opens the Lotus and find= s the Jewel, the Jewel which is identical to the New Man, the personality has to harmonize to the resonation of the unearthly luster this Jewel which is Christ, and in this the true Evolution starts, an evolution in which there is a resurrection from the dead (this material world), to Lif= e (which is the Spiritual world)... This is why the St. John says... 'The One (spiritual man) has to Wax, while the other (the natural man) has to wane.'=20 Now the question is... How do I find the Jewel??? the answer is simple... The personality is a dreamer... stop dreaming, and live Now...the dreams weave cloths around you, every fantasy every hope and fear takes your attention away from the Momentum Hodie, the moment which is Now. There is no meditation or form of yoga which is better, because they often are cloth weavers too. just keep your mind from wandering to future or past, because both are not real, the only moment which is real is Now. Most of us know it, but only a few practice it... while it is the only wa= y to unveil the Jewel in the Lotus, the Jewel which is veiled by our numerous dreams and reflections, how spiritual and positive they may even seem. This last point is the stumble stone to most spiritually developed people. Most people that think of themselves as adepts, are locked up in this, because it is easier to let go of something nasty, then of perfect 'enlightened' dreams. But if you recognize yourself in this, then let go of your lofty, spiritual dreams and wanderings... let them go as an offering, discard the pain it gives to let go of it. This offering is the greatest you can give, because it will make you smaller and more humble then ever, and it will make you stand in the revelation in full clarity, not in dreams that always have the sense of a river bringing you differen= t items of knowledge all the time. The clarity is deepest one, because it sees trough all and everything all the time, because it is undefined. No one enters trough the Port whilst standing erect. (f.i. One has to crawl trough the tunnels of the Great Pyramid, and step over a portal and bend his head when one enters the tomb where the dead is brought to Eternal Life). Most kind regards, Douwe. P.S. To Hesse (Friesl=E2n ???) From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:10:09 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Robert Crosbie: Does He Have A Special Status in the U.L.T.? In 1998, Dr. James Santucci, editor of THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY, in an encyclopedia article on the U.L.T., penned the following in regards to the U.L.T. founder, Mr Robert Crosbie--- "Even Crosbie himself claimed no special status, although he is naturally held in high esteem by [U.L.T.] associates." THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CULTS, SECTS AND NEW RELIGIONS, Prometheus Press, page 504. U.L.T. associates certainly hold Mr Robert Crosbie in high regard but the U.L.T. elite have declared (both implicitly & explicitly) the unique & special status of the U.L.T. founder. A few quotes will suffice for this forum---- In 1915, Mr Robert Crosbie made a special claim about W Q Judge--- "After her death in 1891, the Esoteric Section--now School [the Second Section] -- was reorganized. Mr. Judge was looked to and accepted by all as the LINK between the School [2nd Section] and the Masters [1st Section], and between the School [2nd Section]and the Society [3rd Section]. It is clear in our minds that the last phrase of H.P.B.: 'KEEP THE LINK UNBROKEN; DO NOT LET MY LAST INCARNATION BE A FAILURE,' *referred directly to Mr. Judge.*" THEOSOPHY magazine, JUNE 1915, page 371 Some four years later, in 1919, Mr John Garrigues declared in Mr Crosbie's obituary in THEOSOPHY magazine--- "Robert Crosbie preserved unbroken the link of the Second Section [the Esoteric School] of the Theosophical Movement from the passing of Mr. Judge in 1896, and in 1907--just eleven years later--made that link once more Four Square amongst men. In the year 1909 the Third Section was restored by the formation of the United Lodge of Theosophists...." THEOSOPHY magazine, Volume 7, page 289. Compare Mr Garrigues' claim with Mr Crosbie's claim about W Q Judge. The implication is that Mr Crosbie followed in Mr Judge's footsteps, that Mr Crosbie was the "successor" to Mr Judge, that Mr Crosbie somehow safeguarded the Esoteric School. Mr Garrigues' statement brings several questions to mind. How did Mr Crosbie preserve the "link" of the Esoteric School during the years 1896 through 1907? And how was that link made "once more Four Square amongst men"? How did Mr Crosbie preserve unbroken the Esoteric link from 1896 to 1904 when he was a devoted follower & vigorous defender of the claims of Mrs Katherine Tingley, whom Crosbie had repeatedly acknowledged as the true Outer Head of the Second Section? Again in 1925, Mr Garrigues and other ULT associates of the inner circle wrote--- "There is never any failure on the part of the Masters of the First Section, or their Messengers and other agents of the Second Section. . . . [H.P.B.'s] mission has not closed, nor have the chelas of the Second Section, old and new, ceased their labors, albeit they work in 'secrecy and silence' until 1975. . . ." [How does Mr Garrigues know this? Is he referring to the work of Mr Crosbie and the U.L.T.'s Esoteric School?] ". . . .Quite apart from the continuous work of the Disciples of the Second Section amongst those to whom they are sent. . . [Compare this claim with what Wane Kell writes below.] there are those signs by which the thoughtful and reverent layman. . . may recognize the unbroken continuity of even the Third Section of the Theosophical Movement." "Out of India . . . has come to the West another true student of the wisdom of the 'Secret Doctrine', B.P. Wadia. . . ." "In the United States, Mr. Robert Crosbie. . . who for many years had the benefit of direct training and instruction from both H.P.B. and Mr. Judge, established in 1909 at Los Angeles, California, the parent United Lodge of Theosophists, after witnessing the final dissolution of the work left at Mr. Judge's death [in 1896]. Mr. Crosbie was imbued with the conviction that the model set in the Preliminary Memorandum [of the Esoteric (Second) Section] by H.P.B. was the true and enduring modulus for Theosophical study and work after her heart. . . .He died in 1919, but during his entire period of active Theosophical work, he labored to restore the calumniated reputations of H.P.B. and Mr. Judge, convinced that until their unique status was recognized by Theosophists at large, no return to the Source of the Movement and no continuity of the original effort could succeed. . . ." THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT, 1925, pages 698-703. Mr Garriques et al fail to mention that from 1896 to 1904 Mr Crosbie was also laboring "to restore the calumniated reputation" of Mrs Tingley. Nor do the U.L.T. writers mention that during the time period in question Mr Crosbie was equally "convinced" of Mrs Tingley's "unique status". Also note that another claim is made *without any evidence whatsoever* that Mr Crosbie "had the benefit of direct training and instruction from both H.P.B. and Mr. Judge." In recent years, Wane Kell, U.L.T. biographer/apologist for Mr Crosbie has written: "Considering the CLOSE relationship that existed between Mr. Crosbie and Mr. Judge, and the SPECIAL position that Mr. Crosbie occupies in the Theosophical Movement of modern times, one wonders whether Mr. Crosbie might not be considered a 'shepherd' who was following his straying 'flock" [i.e., Mrs Tingley's Point Loma TS and its members???]. And when that 'flock' dispersed [i.e., when Crosbie was expelled by Mrs Tingley???], the 'shepherd' went in search of a new one [the parent United Lodge of Theosophists which Crosbie founded???]." Is this not an excellent example of revisionistic history? Compare Mr Kell's description of Crosbie as a "shepherd" with Mr Garriques' 1919 assertion. I venture to suggest that the U.L.T. has claimed a "special status" for Mr Robert Crosbie. I've other quotations in support of this thesis from THEOSOPHY magazine that will be incorporated into my final essay on Robert Crosbie and the U.L.T.'s Esoteric School. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:14:08 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Robert Crosbie: More on His Special Status in the U.L.T. In a previous posting I quoted from an encyclopedia article by Dr. James Santucci. He wrote the following about the U.L.T. founder, Mr Robert Crosbie--- "Even Crosbie himself claimed no special status, although he is naturally held in high esteem by [U.L.T.] associates." THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CULTS, SECTS AND NEW RELIGIONS, Prometheus Press, page 504. For scores of years, the inner circle in the U.L.T. Los Angeles has declared (both implicitly & explicitly) the unique & special status of the U.L.T. founder. Here are two more quotes to supplement what has already been given--- "[Mr Crosbie]. . . identified himself with the DZYAN [Esoteric] section of the Theosophical Movement and the T.S., and was for many years the devoted and close Companion of William Q. Judge, and an occult pupil of H.P. Blavatsky. . . ." "Theosophy" magazine, 1919, Volume 7, page 320 Here a special claim is given without any evidence that Mr Crosbie was a "close Companion" of Mr Judge as well as an *occult* pupil of Madame Blavatsky. No explanation is given of what is meant by the words "close Companion" or "occult pupil." How many occult pupils did H.P. Blavatsky have? How unique was Crosbie's pupilage? The U.L.T. writer doesn't supply such relevant details. In "Theosophy" magazine for November 1929, a U.L.T. writer proclaims "the glorious example of Masters' Messengers to the world, the Transmitters of the Wisdom-Religion. Among These, and in our own time and country: H.P. Blavatsky, William Q. Judge, and Robert Crosbie. . . ." Here in no uncertain terms Mr Crosbie is declared one of "Masters' Messengers to the world" along side Mme Blavatsky & Mr Judge! A pretty unique status! Additional quotes of a similar nature will be found in my completed paper. In my next contribution I will describe certain aspects of the U.L.T.'s Esoteric School & quote relevant statements from various esoteric documents issued from U.L.T. headquarters in Los Angeles, California. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:15:20 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Mr Richard Taylor's Comments on Esoteric, Private Groups Mr Richard Taylor wrote------ > >Frank, I do *not* believe there is a "private study group" in the Pasadena- >based Theosophical Society. > >But *IF* there were, I still don't think it's any one's business, especially >for purely historical reasons. The Theosophical Society shouldn't exist for >historical purposes, but for spiritual ones. Thus, only a spiritual motive >for joining esoteric study could be justified. > >Besides which, don't people have a right to associate how and where they will? >In America freedom of assembly is a fundamental right of all citizens. I am >not a member of Pasadena's T.S., I don't claim to know their inner workings, >nor would it be any of my business. But if they had or have private study, >it's their right, good for them. Mr Taylor---- Are your sentiments the same regarding the U.L.T.'s "Dzyan Esoteric Section"? You wrote-----"I still don't think it's any one's business, especially for purely historical reasons." Applied to D.E.S., are you stating an "outsider" has no business or right inquiring about the existence or the claims of the U.L.T.'s esoteric group? Especially for purely historical reasons? That no one should examine or criticize the inner workings or claims of the D.E.S.? If this is your view, then please explain why U.L.T. writers including Mr Robert Crosbie for decades consistently & harshly criticized the Esoteric Schools of Mrs Besant, Mr Hargrove & especially Mrs Tingley. In the U.L.T. 1925 history, chapter is written to expose the inner workings of Judge's E.S.T. after his death. This history quotes voluminously from private esoteric papers. What business was it of John Garriques et al to criticize the inner, private workings of Mrs Tingley's esoteric school? Critical account appeared to be for purely historical reasons. & Mr Crosbie also harshly criticized in pages of "Theosophy" the various esoteric groups & their claims. Was this any of his business? Did these groups have the right to conduct their private studies etc without some "outsider" meddling with their business? Again Henry Geiger of U.L.T. LA in updated edition of "Theosophical Movement" continued tradition of criticizing these esoteric sections & groups. For example, Mrs Tingley's & Dr de Purucker's esoteric claims. Many of Geiger's statements are vitrolic & inflammatory. And the Theosophy Company still sells this volume. I've seen the book on ULT tables. Mr Dallas TenBroeck has consistently advertised this volume on theostalk. You haven't spoken out against these U.L.T. books. Why? Yet when Frank or I criticize Pasadena or ULT about their esoteric groups and claims, you get on your soap box & high horse & proclaim "It's none our business. Leave those groups alone. It's America." David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 08:18:37 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Robert Crosbie, the Esoteric (Second) Section & the United Lodge of Theosophists I'm preparing an essay on "Robert Crosbie, the Esoteric (Second) Section & the United Lodge of Theosophists." Any theosophical student with information on this subject is asked to contact me. I'm basing much of my essay on material kindly sent to me last March by John Cooper of Australia. Also Greg Hansen has given me his insights on the Dzyan Esoteric Section, the U.L.T.'s Esoteric Group. I'll post the completed essay on theos-l within the next month or two. Plans are also underway to post the essay and accompanying documents on a web site for the benefit of interested inquirers & theosophical students. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:08:30 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Does Robert Crosbie Have A Special Status in the U.L.T.? Does Robert Crosbie Have A Special Status in the U.L.T.? In 1998, Dr. James Santucci, editor of THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY, in an encyclopedia article on the U.L.T., penned the following in regards to the U.L.T. founder, Mr Robert Crosbie--- "Even Crosbie himself claimed no special status, although he is naturally held in high esteem by [U.L.T.] associates." THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CULTS, SECTS AND NEW RELIGIONS, Prometheus Press, page 504. U.L.T. associates certainly hold Mr Robert Crosbie in high regard but the U.L.T. elite have declared (both implicitly & explicitly) the unique & special status of the U.L.T. founder. A few quotes will suffice for this forum---- In 1915, Mr Robert Crosbie made a special claim about W Q Judge--- "After her death in 1891, the Esoteric Section--now School [the Second Section] -- was reorganized. Mr. Judge was looked to and accepted by all as the LINK between the School [2nd Section] and the Masters [1st Section], and between the School [2nd Section]and the Society [3rd Section]. It is clear in our minds that the last phrase of H.P.B.: 'KEEP THE LINK UNBROKEN; DO NOT LET MY LAST INCARNATION BE A FAILURE,' *referred directly to Mr. Judge.*" THEOSOPHY magazine, JUNE 1915, page 371 Some four years later, in 1919, Mr John Garrigues declared in Mr Crosbie's obituary in THEOSOPHY magazine--- "Robert Crosbie preserved unbroken the link of the Second Section [the Esoteric School] of the Theosophical Movement from the passing of Mr. Judge in 1896, and in 1907--just eleven years later--made that link once more Four Square amongst men. In the year 1909 the Third Section was restored by the formation of the United Lodge of Theosophists...." THEOSOPHY magazine, Volume 7, page 289. Compare Mr Garrigues' claim with Mr Crosbie's claim about W Q Judge. The implication is that Mr Crosbie followed in Mr Judge's footsteps, that Mr Crosbie was the "successor" to Mr Judge, that Mr Crosbie somehow safeguarded the Esoteric School. Mr Garrigues' statement brings several questions to mind. How did Mr Crosbie preserve the "link" of the Esoteric School during the years 1896 through 1907? And how was that link made "once more Four Square amongst men"? How did Mr Crosbie preserve unbroken the Esoteric link from 1896 to 1904 when he was a devoted follower & vigorous defender of the claims of Mrs Katherine Tingley, whom Crosbie had repeatedly acknowledged as the true Outer Head of the Second Section? Again in 1925, Mr Garrigues and other ULT associates of the inner circle wrote--- "There is never any failure on the part of the Masters of the First Section, or their Messengers and other agents of the Second Section. . . . [H.P.B.'s] mission has not closed, nor have the chelas of the Second Section, old and new, ceased their labors, albeit they work in 'secrecy and silence' until 1975. . . ." [How does Mr Garrigues know this? Is he referring to the work of Mr Crosbie and the U.L.T.'s Esoteric School?] ". . . .Quite apart from the continuous work of the Disciples of the Second Section amongst those to whom they are sent. . . [Compare this claim with what Wane Kell writes below.] there are those signs by which the thoughtful and reverent layman. . . may recognize the unbroken continuity of even the Third Section of the Theosophical Movement." "Out of India . . . has come to the West another true student of the wisdom of the 'Secret Doctrine', B.P. Wadia. . . ." "In the United States, Mr. Robert Crosbie. . . who for many years had the benefit of direct training and instruction from both H.P.B. and Mr. Judge, established in 1909 at Los Angeles, California, the parent United Lodge of Theosophists, after witnessing the final dissolution of the work left at Mr. Judge's death [in 1896]. Mr. Crosbie was imbued with the conviction that the model set in the Preliminary Memorandum [of the Esoteric (Second) Section] by H.P.B. was the true and enduring modulus for Theosophical study and work after her heart. . . .He died in 1919, but during his entire period of active Theosophical work, he labored to restore the calumniated reputations of H.P.B. and Mr. Judge, convinced that until their unique status was recognized by Theosophists at large, no return to the Source of the Movement and no continuity of the original effort could succeed. . . ." THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT, 1925, pages 698-703. Mr Garriques et al fail to mention that from 1896 to 1904 Mr Crosbie was also laboring "to restore the calumniated reputation" of Mrs Tingley. Nor do the U.L.T. writers mention that during the time period in question Mr Crosbie was equally "convinced" of Mrs Tingley's "unique status". Also note that another claim is made *without any evidence whatsoever* that Mr Crosbie "had the benefit of direct training and instruction from both H.P.B. and Mr. Judge." In recent years, Wane Kell, U.L.T. biographer/apologist for Mr Crosbie has written: "Considering the CLOSE relationship that existed between Mr. Crosbie and Mr. Judge, and the SPECIAL position that Mr. Crosbie occupies in the Theosophical Movement of modern times, one wonders whether Mr. Crosbie might not be considered a 'shepherd' who was following his straying 'flock" [i.e., Mrs Tingley's Point Loma TS and its members???]. And when that 'flock' dispersed [i.e., when Crosbie was expelled by Mrs Tingley???], the 'shepherd' went in search of a new one [the parent United Lodge of Theosophists which Crosbie founded???]." Is this not an excellent example of revisionistic history? Compare Mr Kell's description of Crosbie as a "shepherd" with Mr Garriques' 1919 assertion. I venture to suggest that the U.L.T. has claimed a "special status" for Mr Robert Crosbie. I've other quotations in support of this thesis from THEOSOPHY magazine that will be incorporated into my final essay on Robert Crosbie and the U.L.T.'s Esoteric School. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 09:11:12 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Robert Crosbie's Special Status in the ULT Robert Crosbie's Special Status in the ULT In a series of articles appearing in "Theosophy" magazine, the U.L.T.'s official journal, Mr Robert Crosbie made a series of claims about W Q Judge, about the various esoteric sections then in existence & about the true School of the Masters. The following excerpts give some indication of Crosbie's claims--- "H.P. Blavatsky and W.Q. Judge, in their capacity of Messengers, cannot be separated; They stand or fall together. . . ." "Theosophy," February 1915. "H.P.B. and W.Q.J. came from *another world*, separated from human consciousness by a great gulf. They established a bridge between their world and ours. They were in constant connection and communication with the Lodge . . . ." "Theosophy," July 1915. ". . . Those who represented the Masters of the Great Lodge were not casual students attracted to a philosophy, nor mere tyros in occultism, but Initiates-----masquerading in the mortal garments known as H.P. Blavatsky and William Q. Judge. This is a matter of knowledge to living persons today." "Theosophy," April 1915. In regards to Crosbie's last sentence, who were these "living persons" about whom Robert Crosbie was writing? How does he know about this? Was Mr Crosbie one of those "living persons"? ". . . the various theosophical societies and esoteric sections of the day are in no sense representative of the School of the Masters or the Theosophical Movement. . . .The Anciently universal Wisdom-Religion, the School of the Masters and the Theosophical Movement are in unbroken continuity of existence to-day as always. . . .Now, as always, they have their representatives and agents among men, who cannot be found out by any but those who have earned the right to know them. . . ." "Theosophy," February 1915 Who are these agents, one might ask? "Today, after a quarter of a century, there are no less than three widely heralded ---and a half dozen lesser known---'outer heads,' 'esoteric sections,' 'visible agents,' and what-not, all issuing 'orders,' 'instructions,' and 'teachings,' professedly emanating from the Masters of H.P.B. and from H.P.B. herself. . . .No Brahmanism, no Catholicism, no Jesuitry, has ever exceeded the arrogance of its pretensions to spiritual authority on the part of its leaders. . . ." "Theosophy," July 1915. Notice that Mr Crosbie is not shy in dishing out harsh criticism of the various Esoteric Sections of Mrs Besant, Mrs Tingley, Mr Hargrove & others. These various esoteric sections were private organizations. Why was it Mr Crosbie's business to harshly criticize what was going on in private groups? Was it any of his business? Would our presentday Mr Richard Taylor chastise Mr Crosbie for commenting on things which were really none of his business? Again how does Robert Crosbie know these "facts"? These are "big" claims & strong words on Mr Crosbie's part. "If, then, the true Theosophical Movement, and the true Chelas of the School of the Masters are not to be found among those who have lost the point of contact with the Masters, while yet loudly proclaiming themselves Initiates and Outer and Inner Heads of this, that, and the other theosophical society and esoteric section, where may they be discerned? . . ." "Theosophy," March 1915 Yes, tell us Mr Crosbie, how may they be discerned? ". . . the actual name of the School of the Masters [is not] used by any of the so-called esoteric sections of the now numerous Theosophical Societies." How does Robert Crosbie know this? Does he have "inside" information? "Much of the instructions and communications in connection with the Esoteric Section of the Theosophical Society, and much regarding its history, are necessarily of such a pledged or sacred character that they cannot be made public. But enough is believed to be of public record to make possible a clear tracing of the lines of cause and effect for the benefit of all students, and definite indices for all who may come in touch with the private papers of the Section." Who are the persons "who may come in touch with the private papers of the Section"? To what is Crosbie really referring? Is Mr Crosbie actually referring in a veiled way to the members of his own esoteric school called by the name "The Dzyan Esoteric School"? "After her [H.P.B.'s] death in 1891, the Esoteric Section--now School [the Second Section] -- was reorganized. Mr. Judge was looked to and accepted by all as the LINK between the School [2nd Section] and the Masters [1st Section], and between the School [2nd Section]and the Society [3rd Section]. It is clear in our minds that the last phrase of H.P.B.: 'KEEP THE LINK UNBROKEN; DO NOT LET MY LAST INCARNATION BE A FAILURE,' *referred directly to Mr. Judge.*" THEOSOPHY magazine, JUNE 1915, page 371 How does Mr Crosbie know all of this? Even more importantly, what happened to the LINK at Mr Judge's death? In 1896 was the link finally broken? Mr Crosbie doesn't directly tell us any of this information. Yet some four years later, in 1919, Mr John Garrigues declared in Mr Crosbie's obituary in THEOSOPHY magazine--- "Robert Crosbie preserved unbroken the link of the Second Section [the Esoteric School] of the Theosophical Movement from the passing of Mr. Judge in 1896, and in 1907--just eleven years later--made that link once more Four Square amongst men. In the year 1909 the Third Section was restored by the formation of the United Lodge of Theosophists...." THEOSOPHY magazine, Volume 7, page 289. In regards to the "Third Section" said to be restored by the formation of the U.L.T., Mr Crosbie had written four years previously--- "The Theosophical Society as a whole---meaning thereby the 'Third Section' of the original foundation---definitely broke off its connection with the Masters at the period of the Coulomb conspiracy in 1884-5. . . ." "Theosophy," June 1915. Mr Garrigue goes on to make the following claims---- "H.P. Blavatsky, as all know, was the Mother and Creator of the Theosophical Movement of the nineteenth century. . . . [Concerning W Judge] H.P.B.'s statements [are clear] that he was the Preserver of Theosophy and the Heart and Soul of the Second [Esoteric] Section. Upon her death Mr. Judge was compelled by the exigencies of the Movement to stand in her stead. . . ." "There is always one Witness on the scene. After the death of Mr. Judge, Robert Crosbie kept the link unbroken. . . .None at the time suspected, and none has to this day suspected, that the quiet, earnest, steadfast man whose heart and soul were assimilated to the nature of H.P.B. and W.Q.J. was to be in fact the agent for the regeneration of the Theosophical Movement on the lines laid down from the beginning by the Masters. H.P.B. was the Creator, W.Q.J. was the Preserver, and Robert Crosbie was the Regenerator of pure Theosophy." This is quite an astounding claim made by Mr Garriques. How did Mr Crosbie keep "the link unbroken"? ". . . The hints she [H.P.B.] gave in relation to Mr. Judge were not grasped by the ambitious, the greedy for occult preferment. . . .The hints Mr. Judge gave in regard to Mr. Crosbie were not perceived by those whose only thought was their own advancement or their own position. After the death of H.P.B., Mr. Judge gave out such statements in regard to her nature and mission as, if taken, would have shown the students where to find the link of the Dzyan. So, in like manner, after the death of Mr. Judge, Robert Crosbie gave out such statements in respect of Mr. Judge as, if taken, would have preserved the unity of all the student body of Theosophists." ". . . In the years from 1896 to 1906, Mr. Crosbie did what could be done for those whose lack of discrimination placed them at the mercy of claimants and self-styled agents of the Masters. Through the long roll of passing years he remained faithful and true without variableness or the shadow of turning, to Masters, Their Message and Their Messengers. When the time of trial was over he found grateful and loyal comrades to hold up his hands in the gigantic task of restoring that which had become lost and obscured. The work [was] revivified in 1906 . . . ." >From the above it is obvious that Mr Garriques is making special claims about Robert Crosbie as well as giving Mr Crosbie a very unique status. These claims were believed in at least by the inner circle of the Los Angeles U.L.T. Mr Garriques fails to tell his readers that between 1896 and 1904 Mr Crosbie was one of those who also lacked discrimination and had placed himself at the mercy of one claimant, Mrs Katherine Tingley. Mr Garriques also fails to mention that during the years in question Mr Crosbie had proclaimed his undying allegiance to Mrs Tingley, and had defended her in the strongest of terms as the true & only successor to H.P.B. and W.Q.J. But by 1915 Mr Crosbie was writing a very different history concerning H.P.B., W.Q.J. & K.T. Mrs Tingley was no longer in the picture. And behind the scenes, various claims were being made by & about Mr Crosbie as the agent, as the link, etc. to the School of the Masters. My completed paper will also chronicle Mr Crosbie's strong allegiance & defense of Mrs Tingley. This information is very important when reading & evaluating what Mr Crosbie was claiming in the pages of "Theosophy" magazine or what Mr Garriques et al would assert in their 1925 "Theosophical Movement" volume. David Green From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 13:21:36 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Internet Internet is slowly becoming primary mode of distribution of info. Just saw the following: WASHINGTON (AP) -- Long-distance companies would have to post information about current rates on the Internet under a plan approved Thursday by federal regulators. AT&T, MCI WorldCom and Sprint say they already voluntarily provide information about rates on their corporate Web sites. But the FCC plan, adopted in a 4-1 vote, would force the companies to do so. The companies would have to provide information on domestic rates -- including the terms and conditions of service -- in a "timely manner and updated regularly." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 09:12:41 +0000 (GMT) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? > < their evolution if there was exactly that purity of motive > that theosophists talk about at infinitum. >> > > There is another form of same mistake. Not even God can speed up evolution of > those who don't have purity of motive. Purity of motive is what makes speeded > up evolution possible. So, no moral decision there for mahatma to weigh. I suppose it is very simple: I just do not agree. It makes a difference for a child what kind of food it gets. THe Mahatma's have the ability, as I picture it, to make sure that a person does get the right kind of food. If a child does not get the right kind of food, certain parts of the body will not develop properly. This goes for the chela too, I would imagine. Current society does not (in my view) have the right kind of ethical *food*. In fact I grew up feeling that it was logical and natural to be unselfish and unkind. Theosophy has helped me gain the more natural base of feeling that to live and try to live ethically is a respectable way of living. I would think that people who do fight the social predudices like that (in even stronger ways) do get some support from *higher* levels. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 09:15:07 +0000 (GMT) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: teaching? morals? ethics? On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 14:44:59 EST Hazarapet@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 3/12/99 6:01:04 AM Central Standard Time, > hesse600@tem.nhl.nl writes: > > > > There are advanced beings. They just don't wear it on their lapel. > But they are not superior to common person but morally > equal because common person is advanced being in potential. > > Grigor > Superior > beings are, I say, morally superior to us in their service to all for all. > They are nevertheless equally obligated to all to respect all as we all are. > Their main superiority is they practice what they preach, we don't. So, they > excell in treating each equally as all ought to be treated. I agree on that, so I suppose there is only a communication difficulty . Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:33:16 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: Some musings on the theosophial Movement -- Metaphysics and Physics March 19th Dallas offers: Thought on Theosophical metaphysics can lead us to thinking about the great Theosophical Movement as it may be traced, now and in the past. There is a great difference between the Theosophical Movement and any Theosophical Society. The movement is "moral, ethical, spiritual, universal, invisible save in effect, and continuous." A society or a "body" however constituted is formed for theosophical work, and is a visible organization. It is the resultant, the effect of a cause. It is a kind of "machine" for the conservation of energy and putting it to use. It cannot be said to be universal, or continuous. It is brought into being by those who want to cooperate, to study, to inquire of each other, and to offer help to others. But even so, it is only an "outer shell," and must change eventually, and, as the great underlying spiritual movement compels such changes. And that comes under our continuing observation. The Theosophical Movement, being continuous, is to be found in all times and in all nations, though perhaps working under other names. But it can be traced by the principles, all of which are common and are: universality and brotherhood, teaching the laws of the universe and personal assistance to the needy, it is always to be found inspiring study in all departments of nature, and therefore it is the foe of ignorance and bigotry wherever those are found. It stands for the freedom of the individual and recommends cooperation as the strongest basis for individual and joint progress. "Wherever thought has struggled to be free, wherever spiritual ideas as opposed to forms and dogmatism have been promulgated, there the great movement is to be discerned." Wherever Brotherhood has been advanced, there the great movement thrives. At times it is well-known and then at other times its thread of life is sustained by a few valiant individuals who pursue its practices and try to inspire others to find and use them also. To worship an organization, is to worship a "form." Worship can easily turn into dogmatism and an imposition of singular views. Our portion of the Theosophical Movement, spearheaded by Mme. Blavatsky, strove to overthrow such a view and practice. To worship an organization, however wonderful as to aim and objects can lead to a nullification of brotherhood at the first strain. HPB declared self, that it were better to do away with the Society than to forget and destroy brotherhood. It has been said that the Source of all beings is ONE, and that the Goal is also that ONE. Put in practice the "Path" varies and is shaped by each Pilgrim-soul. We are all at some one step in our own evolution where we are presented with one or another of the steps (it is our own Karma that does such presentation) that can lead us towards our chosen goal, or, if neglected, can delay us. We must remember that it is our own HIGHER SELF (the ATMA within, or rather, "above" us) that is luring us ever on to success. And this Atma, the Higher Self, is one with all the Higher selves of that vast multitude of intelligences of every degree that are the uncountable "children," the "sons" of the great Mother. This figurative Mother some represent to themselves as our UNIVERSE. And the "Father" is the ever-present but never to be identified CENTRAL SPIRITUAL SUN from which all force, all life radiates on every one of us, from Atom to Galaxy. The "Bhagavad Gita" is a book that can be inspiring. It can give us food for meditation for many a day and night. In the night its ideas are digested and returned partly the next day to the mind. It is said to be the study of Adepts. How does Karma operate. We see it dimly. If we direct ourselves to the struggle of overcoming our past Karma the struggle intensifies and is tremendous because the old habits of thought and action resist the alteration. The load of old errors rushes forward and events sued each other with great rapidity seeking to unsettle our resolve. The whole fabric of our life groans and rocks, and as said in ancient books, one may go through the appointed course of life change in 700 births in 7 years or in 7 minutes. But always the imperishable SELF - the divine Ego - survives. In the Gita (chapter 12) we read: "Freedom comes from a renunciation of self-interest in the fruit of one's actions." Self-interest is always a matter of thinking. We can have no "attachment" for anything we do not think abut, nor can we have dislike for a thing we do not think about. If we find that confronting us are things that are right and proper to be done, we should do them, regardless of whether they promises or failure as mean measure those things. Krishna says that final emancipation immediately come from such renunciation, thus, He places "complete renunciation" as the highest goal. He also states that "renunciation" is superior to meditation. This is because it is by "meditation on the end in view," that renunciation comes. It comes from an understanding of our own immortality, of the immortality of all beings in nature, and of the immutability of the great law of Karma which envelops every being and harmonizes the fact of our joint living in this world. We all depend on the rest. We share and draw and exchange our lives with them constantly. In this may meditation is superior to knowledge because "right-knowledge" produces "right-meditation." And, Knowledge (of facts and events and potential results) is better than "constant practice" because it is practice that begets knowledge. A complete chain. I think this is one way in which we can trace the merging of physics into metaphysics, of the life we lead in our every-day being with that of the Mind that can soar way beyond the humdrum and the ordinary - which have their own place and deserve our attention and guidance. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:33:31 -0500 (EST) From: "Jerry Schueler" Subject: Seven More Lifetimes? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BE71F9.C37D0B60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>Do you think HPB, KH or M would not know if they were on their 'seventh life' - even if this whole notion was valid and not an esoteric blind?<< I think that they would neither know nor care. But all of those you = mention did TRY and did DARE and would have remained SILENT in any case. =20 And yes, I think the 7-more-lifetimes business is a blind. I have never=20 seen this anywhere except in HPB's writings, and she was masterful=20 at discussing occult truths from oblique angles. Jerry S. ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BE71F9.C37D0B60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>Do you think HPB, KH or M would not know if they were = on
their=20 'seventh life' - even if this whole notion was valid and not = an
esoteric=20 blind?<<
 
I think that they would neither know nor care. But all of those you = mention
did TRY and did DARE and would have remained SILENT in any = case. =20
And yes, I think the 7-more-lifetimes business is a blind. I have = never=20
seen this anywhere except in HPB's writings, and she was masterful =
at discussing occult truths from oblique angles.
 
Jerry S.
------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01BE71F9.C37D0B60-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:33:37 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Psychology == various views and angles March 19th All I would like to add to what Rich has said is that anyone who is a student of Theosophy is also one who stays well abreast of the advances in all departments of Science and development. A look at the current issues of THEOSOPHY Magazine (Los Angeles) or THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (Bombay) will show that there are articles and "paragraphs" which direct attention to significant advances in thought and discovery that scientists and academics make. Broadly, one cannot be a true student of Theosophy without also being keenly aware of the world around him or her, and its progress. It is but natural that these discoveries will be checked with ?Theosophical doctrines in the ever continuing attempt made by every free-willed individual to arrive at TRUTH for him or herself. The only thing that it will be difficult to change are the "fundamental principles" and the main doctrines of Theosophy the immanence of the Universal spirit in Man, rendering him an "immortal;" the operations of universal Karma; the process of reincarnation; the unity of the Great Cause of human Brotherhood; and, the doctrines concerning the Psychology of the soul ] . All the changes in the world of science, thought, and technology will be found on examination to still fall within those parameters mentioned in theosophy. And in the past 125 years I have not noticed anything significant that has either attacked or breached the "fundamentals" as originally presented. In Sylvia Cranston's biography of HPB (latest revised edition is 1998, Tarcher, New York-1991--) a good deal of space has been reserved to show how discoveries and findings since her death in 1891 have served to reinforce Theosophical doctrines and demonstrate their viability and continue usage. Not the reverse. This does not mean that there are no theosophical "ostriches". But to characterize all as self-limiting, is also not quite fair, as the principles that HPB advanced on behalf of the Masters and the Lodge of Adepts (the MAHATMAS) contain, admittedly, the principles which once learned and understood, can be universally applied. The applications are incapable of being enforced, as the process of self-development entails self-regulation and the entire freedom to choose. Each human is entirely free-willed and as such each determines their own procedures and speed of change and direction. It as about as unfair to characterize with a broad brush all students of theosophy, as it is for a Malay to try to characterize an "American." Or, for an Amazonian "Indian" to speak of and characterize the many sects and practices of "Buddhism." All broad statements have to be modified by noting their exceptions, and the thousands of individual differences that represent personal criteria adopted for living, study, recreation, etc... I may have misunderstood what Rich says, and if so I apologize, but felt it might be good to offer a slight modification to it. Best to all, Dallas ================================ -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of > Richtay@aol.com > Sent: Friday, March 19, 1999 12:34 PM > To: theos-talk@theosophy.com > Subject: Re: Theos-World Psychology In a message dated 3/19/99 4:07:36 PM, Jerry wrote: <> Jerry, I have discovered that however articulate one may be about defending modern research, one will still be attacked by those who want *nothing* studied, practiced or preached which does not come from Theosophy books. There is some deep-rooted prejudice against *any* field of study which is not mentioned in HPB's writing, and which appears to have anything to offer Theosophy. I think I know why this is: because HPB was allegedly the "great teacher" of our cycle--so the argument goes--she knew everything of value. What she didn't mention, doesn't have value. Thus, readers of Theosophy assure themselves, modern physics, psychology, comparative religion, chemistry, linguistics -- all of these are stupid wastes of time. (Which also has the unfortunate side effect of keeping the faithful in ignorance of modern thought, whatever its value or lack thereof.) This reminds me of the attitude of some early Muslims, that all one needed to know was in the Qur'an. As soon as these Muslims were in power, they burned everything else, including the Alexandrian library (which of course had already been burned by the early Christians the first time.) Rich -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com Letters to the Editor, 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, 20 Mar 1999 06:45:43 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Supposed Denigration of Mr Robert Crosbie & other U.L.T. items Leon Maurer wrote--- "I'm pretty sure you are quite 'serious' about looking for ways to denigrate the one [Mr Robert Crosbie] who made that original statement." I'm not looking for ways to denigrate Mr Crosbie. But I'm interested in examining whether Mr Crosbie made "occult" claims & exactly what those claims were. I find it somewhat ironic that U.L.T. associates are generally very skeptical & even sometimes disdainful of the claims of Mrs Tingley, Mrs Besant, Mr Hargrove, Mr Leadbeater, Mrs Bailey &c, but apparently accept without question Mr Crosbie's claims. (Many associates naively believe that Mr Crosbie made no claims. I've published several citations documenting some of Mr Crosbie's claims & also documenting that writers of U.L.T.'s publications have made special claims for Mr Crosbie.) I'm even more puzzled & quite interested in the type of hysterical response many U.L.T. associates have to any questioning of the claims of Mr Crosbie & U.L.T. Mr Richard Taylor's latest effusion on the subject & his harsh words directed towards me are the most recent example of this quite (IMO) paradoxical & even somewhat bizarre behavior. Examining U.L.T. publications, one finds considerable amount of historical material in which annoymous authors have harshly criticized & (some would say) have denigrated other Theosophical societies & their leaders. Examine---- [1] series of articles "Masters and Their Message: Some Chapters from Theosophical History" written by Mr Crosbie & published in "Theosophy" magazine, 1914-1915. [2] series of articles "The Theosophical Movement" written by Mr Garriques et al & published in "Theosophy" magazine 1920-1922. Reprinted in book form same title 1925. [3] series of articles "Aftermath" published in "Theosophy" magazine 1935. These articles contain snide, sarcastic & vitrolic language in their denunciation of all other Theosophical groups, officials & leaders. It is hard for me to conceive how I or anyone else could write more negative or partisan material than what is found in this 1935 series. [4] updated edition of "The Theosophical Movement" by Mr Henry Geiger. Still sold by The Theosophy Company. I've seen the book for sale on ULT tables. [5] Numerous other "negative" articles appearing in the pages of "Theosophy" magazine especially in the time period 1920-1950. Let me make myself clear---above material on Theosophical history is valuable in many respects. At same time there's harsh criticism, vitrolic statements, sarcasm, etc. in much of this writing. And all of it was written annoymously. As far as I can determine, "Theosophy" magazine during years in question never allowed other side to respond in either articles or letters to the editor in their publication ["Theosophy" magazine]. This is in sharp contrast to the editorial methods of Mrs Blavatsky. She allowed her critics equal time to respond in her magazines "The Theosophist" & "Lucifer". Again Mrs Blavatsky didn't attack her opponents under the cloak of annoymity. Mrs. Blavatsky's editorial practices stand out in sharp contrast to those of "Theosophy" magazine. Why? In regards to esoteric groups & material, Mr Crosbie, Mr Garriques, Mr Geiger & other annoymous U.L.T. writers have heaped harsh criticisms & scorn upon esoteric schools, esoteric leaders & esoteric claims of other Theosophical organizations. All of the above sources contain such negative material. These U.L.T. writers also show no hesitation in quoting (sometimes volumiously) from esoteric material written by Mrs Blavatky, Mr W Judge, Mrs K Tingley, etc. In U.L.T.'s harshly worded "expose" on Mrs Tingley, many esoteric douments marked "private and confidential" are quoted with sometimes snide & sarcastic commentaries added. Who gave U.L.T. authors the permission to use in a very public manner material marked "private and confidential"? Yet when I mention in a very general way that U.L.T. has had for decades its own esoteric school, Mr Richard Taylor starts foaming at the mouth. And I haven't *yet* published any of the esoteric material issued by U.L.T.'s esoteric group. Yet where is Mr Taylor's indignation toward Mr Crosbie, Mr Garriques & Mr Geiger for invading the privacy of other esoteric groups & publishing for public view various esoteric documents? No, Mr Taylor saves his "venom" for me. Why? Also on this theos---talk forum, I've read fairly constant stream of postings (usually Mr Dallas Tenbroeck's) "advertising" United Lodge of Theosophists. In his "pitch" Mr Tenbroeck has made number of questionable statements. In one posting Mr Tenbroeck wrote that the Thesophical Societies (Pasadena & Adyar) engage in politics but the U.L.T. doesn't. As far as I can determine, this is a patently false statement. What organization or society or association consisting of human beings doesn't have its own share of "politics"? I've received various accounts & documents showing that United Lodge of Theosophists has had its share of "politics". For example, in the 1930s when Mrs Crosbie, the widow of the founder, & a group left Los Angeles U.L.T. A court battle ensued. Another example. The politics, bickering, & power struggles during the time of Grace Clough. A Mr Victor Endersby (see citation in Dr Bruce Campbell's theosophical history), a U.L.T. associate & writer for "Theosophy" magazine, recounted some of the internal struggles & politics he was involved in within the U.L.T. Los Angeles. Why does Mr Tenbroeck whitewash all of this and maintain that his U.L.T. is different (& better?) than other Theosophical organizations? Mr Tenbroeck may be quite sincere in what he wrote; but such unrealistic & unfounded statements should be questioned by any thinking human being. I'm still working on next email dealing with certain aspects of U.L.T.'s esoteric group. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 13:00:18 -0700 From: kymsmith@micron.net Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 19, 1999 Katinka wrote: >In fact I grew up >feeling that it was logical and natural to be unselfish and >unkind. Theosophy has helped me gain the more natural base >of feeling that to live and try to live ethically is a >respectable way of living. I do not believe that MOST people are raised to believe that it is "logical" and "natural" to be selfish (I am assuming 'unselfish' was a typo?) and unkind. This is not to say that your personal experience is not true - but my point is that most people, if asked, do at least know or believe that being unkind and selfish is in error. Certain circumstances may give rise to such actions, but humans have an innate sense of a psychic battle going on between "good" and "bad." I believe that most people desire to be "good" - to be seen as "good" - to think themselves "good" and "doing good for others." Capitalism, religious fundamentalism, and other such philosophies do try to suggest that being unselfish or forgiving or tolerant will eventually lead one to be the last in line for the ever-elusive goodies. But if such philosophies (like fundamentalism) were "natural" to the human mind and soul, there would not be such rampant depression, anger, fear, and sadness we now see and experience. It is because we KNOW what is "good" and we KNOW the path we are on is destructive. Breaking the cycle is what is needed - and Theosophy does not have the one single answer for every person (nor does any other faith) - if they did, they would have taken hold of each person's heart who had been exposed to these belief systems and the world would not be as it is. Until I HAVE BECOME what I believe all people should become, I cannot expect others to do so. Some of the actions of the "Mahatmas" I find cruel and unkind - but I must be tolerant of them too since I have flapped about "getting the beam out of my own eye." Bummer. The closer I get to 40, the more I realize that other humans are not simply "ME" in funny clothing. >I would think that people who do >fight the social predudices like that (in even stronger >ways) do get some support from *higher* levels. I think even those who do NOT fight social prejudices get support and attention from "higher" levels. No one is left behind or ignored. Kym From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 21:57:48 +0100 From: Douwe Boschma Subject: Re: Seven more Lifetimes? >>>Do you think HPB, KH or M would not know if they were on >their 'seventh life' - even if this whole notion was valid and not an >esoteric blind?<< > >I think that they would neither know nor care. But all of those you= >mention >did TRY and did DARE and would have remained SILENT in any case.=20 >And yes, I think the 7-more-lifetimes business is a blind. I have never=20 >seen this anywhere except in HPB's writings, and she was masterful=20 >at discussing occult truths from oblique angles. > >Jerry S. I also know of this from Zen-Buddhist (I believe it is even Bodhidharma who talks of this) and Taoist sources, that one needs 7 lifes at least from the beginning to the end of the path. I also remember Rudolf Steiner saying of this, when talking of a person becoming Bodhisattava. Personally I would not be surpised, because there are seven stages, connected to the seven rays, if one would be connected to the highest ray at a sudden a t the start of the path, then the body would not be able to cope the radiation. It is hard enough to cope the shift from one ray to the other one in one life , left allone all of them at once in the first life on the path... In the seventh life one will have to go trough all six former ones, stage by stage, but in this paticular case the body has been prepared for it. ( I also rememer Steiner saying something similar) I think that they knew their incarnation well enough... There is a point at which you choose from within, this choice is a YES without any desire or whatever. It is just formed by knowledge (Gnosis) which makes it no more then logic to say Yes. Upon this Yes, there is no need for a return. (unless one desires to do so, as in many cases happens). Kind regards, Douwe From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 16:50:08 PST From: "David Green" Subject: [1] Dzyan Esoteric School, the U.L.T.'s Esoteric Group The Dzyan Esoteric School is the official name of the esoteric section or school of the United Lodge of Theosophists. According to an esoteric paper of the D.E.S.--- "The active Agent of the School is known as the 'Secretary, D.E.S.' All communications should be addressed to that agent, and all communications, instructions and directions, to applicants and members will be issued by that office and over the signature 'Secretary, D.E.S.'. . ." "Every application for entrance into this School must be sent to the Secretary, D.E.S." The office of the "Secretary, D.E.S." was first located in the Headquarters of the United Lodge of Theosophists at 504 Metropolitan Building, Los Angeles, California. This address was at the intersection of Broadway at Fifth Steet. Later when the U.L.T. Headquarters was moved to a new location & building at 245 West 33rd Street, the D.E.S. office was also transferred to new location. This West 33rd Street address is still the headquarters of the U.L.T. Los Angeles. Members of the D.E.S. corresponded with the Secretary & received their esoteric instructions and documents through the U.S. Mail. At the West 33rd Street Headquarters of the U.L.T., an "Esoteric Room" was reserved exclusively for meetings of D.E.S. members. This room housed the two portraits of Masters Morya & Koot Hoomi. This was the situation as of the late sixties & early seventies. Whether this setup is still in existence is uncertain. One of my U.L.T. informants promises to obtain more information about the setup & possibly a photograph of the D.E.S. office. Where did the name "Dzyan Esoteric" School or Section originate? In "Theosophy" magazine, February 1915, p. 188, Mr Robert Crosbie declared----- "...The actual name of the School of the Masters [is not] used by any of the so-called esoteric sections of the now numerous Theosophical Society." One might infer from this statement that Mr Crosbie believed he *knew* the actual name of the School. Mr Crosbie & his U.L.T. colleagues derived the name of the D.E.S. from at least two sources. One source was a "Charter of The Dzyan Esoteric Section of the Theosophical Society" issued to the Boston Esoteric Lodge when Crosbie lived in Boston. This was during the life of William Q Judge. All local esoteric groups of the E.S.T. were issued *similar* charters during both Mrs Blavatsky's and Mr Judge's lifetimes. A facsimile of one such charter can be seen in Blavatsky's "The Original Programme of the Theosophical Society," published by The Theosophical Publishing House---Adyar, Madras, India. Edited by Mr C. Jinarajadasa. More in Part [2]. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 21:49:26 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World == What is MAYA ? -- This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01BE7306.D7EA3100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mar 20th 1999 Dear Gerry: Years ago I found that Damodar K. Mavlankar, one of HPB' earliest and most devoted students in India wrote something very interesting on the understanding of MAYA. I reproduce it below: "There is only one eternal infinite existence, call it either spirit or matter. I will, however, call it by the latter name, as that is most suited in its common understanding for what I am to state. Matter, as you know, we call Maya. Some say that this thing does not really exist; but I do not agree to that. In my opinion it is called Maya simply on account of these transformations. It is never steady. The process is ever working. The one infinite agglomeration of matter is in some of its modes becoming grosser,while in others becoming more sublimated. The circle is ever turning its round. Nothing goes out of that circle. Everything is kept within its bounds by the action of the centripetal and centrifugal forces. The forms are changing, but the inner substance remains the same. The action of the centripetal force keeps us to our gross forms, and if we have to etherealize ourselves, we must supply the centrifugal force, which is our will. And this is the first principle in Occultism. We must study and know the forces of nature. Every result must be in proportion to the cause producing it. We are every minute emitting and attracting atoms of matter. Now a person who is not an occultist will have various desires, and unconsciously to himself he will produce a cause which will attract to him such atoms of matter as are not suited for his higher progress. The same way, when he is emitting others, he may give them such a tendency that they will mix with others evilly inclined; and thus other individualities, which are thus formed, will have to suffer for no fault of theirs. But an occultist directs both. He is the master of the situation. He guides them, and by knowing their action he produces such conditions as are favorable to his obtain "Nirvana." But what is Nirvana? By Nirvana I mean a state, and not a locality. It is that condition in which we are so etherealized that instead of being merely a mode of the Infinite Existence, as at present, we are merged in totality, or, we become the whole. Another thing about the advanced Occultist is that he is in a better position to benefit humanity. The particles of which I am formed have always existed; yet I donot know in what form they existed before. Probably they have passed through billions of transformations, [ That all the particles of the matter of our universe have passed through millions of transformations, and been in every sort of form, is an old assertion of the Adepts.] Why do I not known these? Because I [as the indestructible individuality] did not supply the force that would have prevented the disintegration of my [personality in this birth]. I will, if I attain Nirvana, remain there till the action of the force that put me there ceases; the effort being always in proportion to the cause. The law of Exhaustion must assert itself. In passing through this process of etherealization, you all along give a certain tendency to the particles of which you are composed. This tendency will always assert itself; and thus in every cycle, or reincarnation, you will have the same advantages, which you can always utilize to soon be free. And, by remaining longer in the Nirvana state that the generality of humanity, you are comparatively free. [The comparison made is with the general run of men in all races. They are not free at any time.] So every consciousness, which has been once fully developed, must disintegrate, if not prevented by the purity of its successive egos till the Nirvana state is attained. Now I believe that the full development of my consciousness as [a "Krishna" -- Atma-Buddhi-Manas] is possibly only on this earth, and therefore if I die before that is done, I must be reborn here. If I reach Nirvana state, even though I am in another body, I shall know myself as {a "Krishna"--the universal Higher SELF.}." >From a Letter written by D. K. Kavlankar and printed by Wm. Q. Judge in PATH Magazine, New York, in January 1896. Offered by Dallas ======================== -----Original Message----- > From: Jerry Schueler > Sent: Saturday, March 20, 1999 10:44 AM > Subject: Theos-World Good News! ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01BE7306.D7EA3100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mar=20 20th 1999
 
Dear=20 Gerry:
 
Years=20 ago I found that Damodar K. Mavlankar, one of HPB' = earliest and=20 most devoted students in India wrote something very interesting on the=20 understanding of MAYA. I reproduce it below:
 
 
"There is only one eternal infinite existence, = call it=20 either spirit or matter.  I will, however, call it by the latter = name, as=20 that is most suited in its common understanding for what I am to=20 state.
 
Matter, as you know, we call Maya.  Some say that = this=20 thing does not really exist;  but I do not agree to that.  In = my=20 opinion it is called Maya simply on account of these=20 transformations.  It is never steady.  The process is = ever=20 working.  The one infinite agglomeration of matter is in some of = its modes=20 becoming grosser,while in others becoming more sublimated.  The = circle is=20 ever turning its round.  Nothing goes out of that circle.  = Everything=20 is kept within its bounds by the action of the centripetal and = centrifugal=20 forces.  The forms are changing, but the inner = substance=20 remains the same.
 
The=20 action of the centripetal force keeps us to our gross forms, and if we = have to=20 etherealize ourselves, we must supply the centrifugal force, which is = our=20 will.  And this is the first principle in Occultism.  = We must=20 study and know the forces of nature.  Every result must be in = proportion to=20 the cause producing it.  We are every minute emitting and = attracting atoms=20 of matter.
 
Now a=20 person who is not an occultist will have various desires, and = unconsciously to=20 himself he will produce a cause which will attract to him such atoms of = matter=20 as are not suited for his higher progress.  The same way, when he = is=20 emitting others, he may give them such a tendency that they will mix = with others=20 evilly inclined;  and thus other individualities, which are thus = formed,=20 will have to suffer for no fault of theirs.  But an occultist = directs=20 both.  He is the master of the situation.  He guides them, and = by=20 knowing their action he produces such conditions as are favorable to his = obtain=20 "Nirvana."
 
But=20 what is Nirvana?  By Nirvana I mean a state, and = not a=20 locality.  It is that condition in which we are so etherealized = that=20 instead of being merely a mode of the Infinite Existence, as at present, = we are=20 merged in totality, or,  we become the = whole.
 
Another thing about the advanced Occultist is that he is in a = better=20 position to benefit humanity.
 
The=20 particles of which I am formed have always existed;  yet I donot = know in=20 what form they existed before.  Probably they have passed through = billions=20 of transformations, [ That all the particles of the matter of our = universe have=20 passed through millions of transformations, and been in every sort of = form, is=20 an old assertion of the Adepts.]  Why do I not known these?  = Because I=20 [as the indestructible individuality] did not supply the force that = would have=20 prevented the disintegration of my  [personality in this=20 birth].
 
I=20 will, if I attain Nirvana, remain there till the action of the force = that put me=20 there ceases;  the effort being always in proportion to the = cause. =20 The law of Exhaustion must assert itself.
 
In=20 passing through this process of etherealization, you all along give a = certain=20 tendency to the particles of which you are composed.  This tendency = will=20 always assert itself;  and thus in every cycle, or reincarnation, = you will=20 have the same advantages, which you can always utilize to soon be = free. =20 And, by remaining longer in the Nirvana state that the generality of = humanity,=20 you are comparatively free.  [The comparison made is with the = general run=20 of men in all races.  They are not free at any time.]  So = every=20 consciousness, which has been once fully developed, must disintegrate, = if not=20 prevented by the purity of its successive egos till the Nirvana state is = attained.  Now I believe that the full development of my = consciousness as=20 [a "Krishna" -- Atma-Buddhi-Manas] is possibly only on = this=20 earth, and therefore if I die before that is done, I must be reborn = here. =20 If I reach Nirvana state, even though I am in another body, I shall know = myself=20 as {a "Krishna"--the universal Higher=20 SELF.}."
 
From a=20 Letter written by D. K. Kavlankar and printed by Wm. Q. Judge in PATH = Magazine,=20 New York, in January 1896.
 
Offered by Dallas
 
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry = Schueler
Sent:=20 Saturday, March 20, 1999 10:44 AM
Subject: Theos-World Good=20 News!

 
------=_NextPart_000_001C_01BE7306.D7EA3100-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 19:00:07 PST From: "David Green" Subject: "Colonel Arthur L. Conger" by Alan Donant Mr Frank Reitemeyer wrote----- >>The Donant article is biased and full of misconception and gives hardly a >>true view of history. Mr Jerry Schueler wrote------- >There are always at least two sides to history (which is why history >is so much fun for historians). Yes, I "really believe" Alan's article. Mr Alan Donant's article "Colonel Arthur L. Conger" is quite onesided in its presentation. This is regrettable because the article first appeared in "Theosophical History"--- a scholarly journal edited by Dr James Santucci. I would've believed a more balanced assessment should have appeared in such a scholarly publication. Regarding Colonel Conger's "role in the dismissals from the headquarters staff at Covina," Mr. Donant wrote [page 45]------- "On October 22, 1945, Colonel Conger was elected by the Cabinet as the Leader of the Theosophical Society. At this time he was confined to a wheelchair by Parkinson's disease. It was a prejudice against this illness that lay at the heart of the turmoil to come." Mr. Donant doesn't support this contention about the prejudice with one iota of evidence & testimony. Nothing. Now review these two statements by Mr Donant----- "Resignations from positions of respon- sibility of these and other members of Colonel Conger's administration were asked for after nearly eight months of their continuous, public expression of dissatisfaction." "Some of these individuals did have strong differences with Colonel Conger and his Theosophic policies. Some even attempted to become more organized in their dissatisfaction." Surprisingly, no details, no evidence & no testimony are given to document the "dissatisfaction". Why was there "dissatisfaction"? Dissatisfaction about what? It is all a mystery in Mr Donant's article. And how do the strong differences & dissatisfaction relate to the alleged prejudice against Colonel Conger's illness? Mr Donant doesn't answer this question either. Mr Donant takes pages to refute the observations of Dr Gregory Tillett, who was not a participant & eyewitness to the 1946 turmoil. Yet Mr Donant fails to quote extremely pertinent passages from an account by an actual participant in the events. Mr Donant refers to this account as "Appendix IV of the Point Loma Publications edition (1975) of C. J. Ryan's book 'H.P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Movement'." He quotes one extract from this essay but fails to mention that the appendix that is titled "Later Point Loma History" was written by W. Emmett Small. This appendix reflects the views of Mr Small as well as those of Mr Iverson L Harris. Both Mr Small & Mr Harris were participants in the "turmoil". Both were on the Cabinet of the TS & both voted to elect Colonel Conger as Leader. And both were dismissed months later by Colonel Conger. According to Mr Small's account, the turmoil, the dissatisfaction, etc. etc had nothing to do with a prejudice against Colonel Conger's illness. Mr. Small writes----------- "The position that Colonel Conger was elected to fill, it should be emphasized, was one of purely exoteric and administrative authority. An E.S. Council at the time was directing the activities of the Esoteric Section. . . . . . . . Within three months of his election Col. Conger assumed headship of the E.S., declaring he held the same status as H.P.B. did. Within the next few months he had summarily dismissed from office all who did not immediately acknowledge him in this capacity, even though they had conscientiously asked for more time to give it careful and full consideration. Those so uncharitably and swiftly deprived of former duties and responsibilities included, among others, the Chairman (Iverson L. Harris) and the Secretary (W. Emmett Small) of the cabinet. . . . . . . . . . ." pages 363-4 The omissions indicate that Mr Donant's essay is a biased, onesided account of the turmoil surrounding Colonel Conger's TS administration. I don't take sides in this controversy but ask for a more thoughtful, balanced essay on the subject than Mr Donant's. David Green I thank several theosophical students for their observations which I've incorporated into my comments. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 20 Mar 1999 19:02:01 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Mr Alan Donant changes his Conger "Story" In Mr Alan Donant's article "Colonel Arthur L. Conger", as first published in "Theosophical History", one finds the assertion----- "On October 22, 1945, Colonel Conger was elected by the Cabinet as the Leader of the Theosophical Society. At this time he was confined to a wheelchair by Parkinson's disease. It was a prejudice against this illness that lay at the heart of the turmoil to come." page 45 In my recent criticism of this statement, I pointed out that Mr Donant gave no evidence to support his claim about the "prejudice". I went on to contend that what really "lay at the heart of the turmoil to come" was in fact Mr Conger's claims in regards to being the new head of the Covina T.S. Esoteric School. I quoted Mr Emmett Small's testimony (*ignored* by Mr Donant) which reads---- "The position that Colonel Conger was elected to fill, it should be emphasized, was one of purely exoteric and administrative authority. An E.S. Council at the time was directing the activities of the Esoteric Section. . . . . . . .Within three months of his election Col. Conger assumed headship of the E.S., declaring he held the same status as H.P.B. did. Within the next few months he had summarily dismissed from office all who did not immediately acknowledge him in this capacity, even though they had conscientiously asked for more time to give it careful and full consideration. Those so uncharitably and swiftly deprived of former duties and responsibilities included, among others, the Chairman (Iverson L. Harris) and the Secretary (W. Emmett Small) of the cabinet. . . . . . . . . . ." It is quite interesting to find that in the newly revised edition of the Conger article recently posted on the TUP Online website, Mr Donant has *changed the statement* (quoted at the beginning of this post) to read----- "For a few, it was a prejudice against this illness and his being head of the ES that lay at the heart of the turmoil to come." In the revised article, Mr Donant does *not* indicate why he has made this significant change from the original version in "Theosophical History." Also Mr Donant doesn't provide any new evidence in the revised version to support this change in his thesis. Why is he totally silent on this issue? No doubt, he has full access to many firsthand documents that would clarify this significant change he has made in his thesis. Very curious & strange! David Green From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 12:01:39 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Robert Crosbie---Devoted Follower & Loyal Defender of Mrs Katherine Tingley Robert Crosbie---Devoted Follower & Loyal Defender of Mrs Katherine Tingley The following documents (which will be completely referenced in later postings) clearly show that during the years 1896-1904----- (a) Mr Robert Crosbie fully accepted Mrs Katherine Tingley as the true successor to William Quan Judge; (b) Mr Crosbie asserted that Mr Judge had high praise for Mrs Tingley; (c) Mr Crosbie truly believed & made public pronouncements to that effect that Mr Judge had appointed Mrs Tingley as his successor. (d) Mr Crosbie was "heart and soul" with and for Mrs Tingley. (e) Mr Crosbie personally knew Mrs Tingley, worked closely with her and wrote warm, devoted & personal letters to Mrs Tingley. (f) Mr Crosbie vigorously defended in no uncertain terms Mrs Tingley against the attacks of various "wayward" theosophists (such as Ernest T. Hargrove, Alexander Spencer and C.A. Griscom, Jr. in 1898). These documents by Mr Crosbie *sharply contrast & contradict* the false, revisionistic account of Mr Crosbie's association with Mrs Tingley published by the United Lodge of Theosophists in their 1923 pamphlet "The United Lodge of Theosophists, Its Mission and Its Future." The U.L.T. version was that Mr Crosbie was "half-hearted" in his support of Mrs Tingley or remained in Mrs Tingley's Society from 1896-1904 for "reasons of expediency." The documents below clearly indicate how misleading & false such U.L.T. claims were. [1] A PLEDGE (dated May 22, 1897) TO MRS KATHERINE TINGLEY SIGNED BY MR ROBERT CROSBIE "I . . . recognizing the person called Purple [Mrs Tingley] as being the agent of the Master I serve . . . do hereby unreservedly pledge myself, by my Higher Self, to unquestioning loyalty, devotion and obedience to her and to her support and defence as such agent, under any and all circumstances and conditions to the extent of my available means, utmost exertion, and with my life if need be. . . . So Help me my Higher Self. (Signed) Robert Crosbie Witness my hand, this 22d day of May, Eighteen hundred and Ninety-seven." [2] A LETTER (dated Feb. 2d 1898) FROM MR ROBERT CROSBIE TO MRS KATHERINE TINGLEY "ROBERT CROSBIE 24 MOUNT VERNON STREET BOSTON, MASS. Feb. 2d 1898 Dear P[Purple, Mrs Tingley]: I received your good long letter of Sunday, it was a good one indeed. . . . I will arrange a "Friends in Counsel" for Boston, and have them get to work along the lines suggested and hope to start on Saturday. . . . I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection. During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . . All is well here. We are steady, confident and patient, yet ready to act at the word. With heart's love yours as ever Robert" [3] EXCERPTS FROM AN ARTICLE (dated April, 1898) BY ROBERT CROSBIE DEFENDING MRS TINGLEY FROM THE 1898 ATTACKS BY ERNEST T. HARGROVE, ALEXANDER H. SPENCER AND C.A. GRISCOM "THE SIFTING PROCESS by Robert Crosbie . . . The first great Leader . . . [was] H.P. Blavatsky. . . . The second great Leader . . . [was] Wm. Q. Judge. . . . The third great Leader, Katherine A. Tingley, established [February 1898] the organization called 'Universal Brotherhood,' or 'The Brotherhood of Humanity,'. . . . It is not difficult to see what 'An Ark of Safety' the Universal Brotherhood is for the work, and to realize the wisdom of the Leader [Mrs Tingley] in sounding the key-note, when it was not generally known that the dark forces of disintegration were so close to us, and which aroused us to action, and disclosed the imminent danger. . . . Foolish are those who are attempting by legal technicalities to hinder the work. . . who never were workers in the true sense; for all who know the Leader [Mrs Tingley] best, who have worked the closest to her, are the ones who are most energetic in carrying on the work at Headquarters, and the most unswerving in their allegiance to the Leader, and certainly their judgment is worthy of the most weighty consideration, for no others are so well qualified to judge. Some names, like those of Messrs. Spencer and Griscom, Jr., have appeared in print so often in connection with the New York activities, that it might be supposed that they were workers of the Headquarters' staff, and being now connected with the disintegrating faction, it might appear that the staff was weakened by their disaffection, but they were not part of the staff, nor were they workers in the true sense, especially since the return of the Leader [Mrs Tingley] from the Crusade [around the world]. . . . It seems necessary to call attention to this point, for the part taken by them in the attack upon our Leader, (for no matter how much it is disguised, that is the real issue), might lead members to suppose that they were very essential to the work, and person whose opinions might appear to be of more weight than they really are. . . ." (4) AN APRIL 1901 ADDRESS BY ROBERT CROSBIE IN SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA IN WHICH MRS TINGLEY IS HIGHLY PRAISED ". . . Mme. Blavatsky was the first leader, by the force of her wisdom and power of leadership, and all the true students of Theosophy accept her as such. And when she appointed William Q. Judge as her successor, his leadership was accepted for the same reason---and so, too, with Katherine Tingley, who was appointed by William Q. Judge as his successor. . . . These [theosophical] results . . . will continue to grow, and remain as lasting monuments to the life-work of the immortal three---H.P. Blavatsky, William Q. Judge and Katherine Tingley." (5) ADDRESS (published May 1902) OF ROBERT CROSBIE AT A POINT LOMA CELEBRATION IN WHICH MRS TINGLEY IS AGAIN HIGHLY PRAISED ". . . we who have the privilege of assembling at this place and taking part in this ceremony of sweet and grateful remembrance---know that the establishment of this great Center [by Mrs Tingley at Point Loma, Calfornia] is a realization of what William Q. Judge lived for, worked for, hoped for, and we cannot but feel deep in our hearts that he knows and rejoices with us today. We feel that he knows of the self-sacrificing efforts made by the faithful ones, and that those efforts have been called forth by his chosen successor [Mrs Tingley], of whom he said, "she is true as steel, as clear as diamond, and as lasting as time." By her work has she [Mrs Tingley] shown to all men her fitness to demonstrate the principles laid down by H.P. Blavatsky and W.Q. Judge, by making them pratical in the daily life of mankind. Her [Mrs Tingley's] work and our work stand today as an offering of gratitude and love to that noble soul and loving human heart, whom we knew as W.Q. Judge." More to come. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 19:51:09 +0100 From: "Frank Reitemeyer" Subject: Is a Theos. Leader appointed? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01BE73D4.2A625160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Theosophy World #33, March 1, 1999 (Part I) re-issues: "THE NEW LEADER = from THE THEOSOPHICAL FORUM, September, 1929, 8-12]". In the first = paragraph we read: "Appointment of Dr. Gottfried de Purucker to succeed = the late Madame Katherine Tingley as Leader and Official Head of the = Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society was announced yesterday = at the International Headquarters of the Society on Point Loma. = Appointment of her successor had been made by Katherine Tingley before she died..." =20 OTOH, James Long declared that KT never appointed GdeP, and the more = never any Leader appointed any successor; to be found The Leaders Tour = in Europe, pp. 25-28. Now, who is right? Any idea? ------=_NextPart_000_001B_01BE73D4.2A625160 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Theosophy World #33, March 1, 1999 = (Part I)=20 re-issues: "THE NEW LEADER from THE THEOSOPHICAL FORUM, September, = 1929,=20 8-12]". In the first paragraph we read: "Appointment of Dr. = Gottfried=20 de Purucker to succeed the late Madame Katherine Tingley as Leader and = Official=20 Head of the Universal Brotherhood and Theosophical Society was announced = yesterday at the International Headquarters of the Society on Point = Loma.=20 Appointment of her successor had been made by
Katherine Tingley = before she=20 died..."
 
OTOH, James Long declared that KT never = appointed=20 GdeP, and the more never any Leader appointed any successor; to be found = The=20 Leaders Tour in Europe, pp. 25-28.
 
Now, who is right? Any = idea?
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_001B_01BE73D4.2A625160-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 20:46:57 PST From: "David Green" Subject: New Web Site: Robert Crosbie, United Lodge of Theosophists & Their Esoteric Scho NEW Critical Web Site on Robert Crosbie, United Lodge of Theosophists & their Esoteric School Finally I've created web site in rough draft at http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/Links.html for my postings on above subject. As I do rough draft of each section I'll post them to Theos-Talk & then post to web site. At this juncture I'll offer to post on same site any legitimate criticisms of my postings. Readers will be better informed. Any one interested in posting their comments & criticisms please email to me stating you want your comments on my site. David Green From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 05:34:01 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Phone Scam - USA/Canada Here is a msg I just got. mkr ================= Below is a message about a phone scam. I received it from a friend here in Toronto. Have no idea how widespread it may be. Hermann ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hi everyone: Got this from a friend recently. > Subject: Phone Scam This can happen at home and at work, everyone should be aware...I've sent this to all my friends last Friday night and I've already had 3 email me and say that it's already happened to them. I received a telephone call from an individual identifying himself as an AT&T Service Technician that was running a test on our telephone lines. He stated that to complete the test we should touch nine (9), zero (0), pound sign (#) and hang up. Luckily, we were suspicious and refused. Upon contacting the telephone company we were informed that by pushing 90# you end up giving the individual that called you access to your telephone line and allows them to place a long distance telephone call, with the charge appearing on your telephone bill. We were further informed that this scam has been originating from many of the local jails/prisons. I have verified with UCB Telecomm that this actually happens. I called GTE Security this morning and verified that this is definitely possible and DO NOT press 90# for ANYONE. It will give them access to your phone line to make long distances calls, ANYWHERE!!!! The GTE Security department told me to go ahead and share this information with EVERYONE I KNOW!!! Could you PLEASE pass this on. If you have mailing lists and/or newsletters from organizations you are connected with, I encourage you to include this information. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:35:09 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Mr Crosbie's Revisionistic Account of His Association with Mrs Tingley---Part I Mr Robert Crosbie in his AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL NOTE (written sometime between 1904 and 1919 *after* he was expelled from the Point Loma Theosophical Society) gave an account of his association with Mrs Katherine Tingley. This account contains a number of erroneous & misleading statements. In Part I, I'll give Mr Crosbie's own words. In Part II, I'll quote various excerpts from Mr Crosbie's account & point out his misstatements by comparing with other writings including his own. Part I---Mr Crosbie's Revisionistic Account "Two or three of the New York members--notably E.T.Hargrove and E.A.Neresheimer--obtained possession of Mr. Judge's keys and went through his private papers; in these they found reference to a certain "chela," whom Neresheimer determined to be Mrs. Tingley whom he had known for about a year, and whom he had brought to Judge's notice. The idea being in their minds that there must of necessity be an occult successor, and concurring in the opinion that Mrs. T. was indicated, they sent out a circular to the E.S. that Judge had appointed her as such. The minds of all, being in the receptive condition I have mentioned, accepted everything as stated by the few in New York. The attitude assumed by Mrs. T. soon began to estrange those members who were brought in close touch with her in New York, but those at a distance had no inkling of the true state of affairs and kept on in full confidence. Those who found that they had made a mistake in the first place in foisting Mrs. T. upon the organization were in too doubtful a position to attempt explanations; one of them only -- Mr. Neresheimer --(who had introduced her to Judge)-- remaining her supporter...his support was sufficient to offset any withdrawal of the others in New York." "Mrs. T. took advantage of the situation, and most plausibly and shrewdly strengthened her position for two years after her advent, then formed the "UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD" with herself as absolute dictator; carrying with her by far the greater number of the members throughout the country. A year later she went to Point Loma and established the institution there." "As to my part in it--I was in Boston, and saw no reason to doubt the statements of those in N.Y. whom I believed to be sincere and of good training and judgment. I should have known by other means the true state of affairs...when Judge passed out of life, I lost touch with him; doubtless I relied on him too much, and had not exercised my own intuition; from later events my comprehension is, that this loss of touch was purposely done in order that I might strengthen my weakness in that direction. I went to Point Loma at Mrs. T's urgent request to assist in the proposed work, and was there two years, helping to prepare the way for the expected developments, before I began to get back the touch I had lost. I am prone to excuse inconsistencies and deviations in others, so that although I had begun to doubt, and to see, it was more than a year afterwards I saw so clearly and unmistakably that I took occasion to tell Mrs. T. the facts as I saw them, and to state my intention to withdraw from all connection with her. She tried of course in every way to change my determination, but finding me unchangeable, she let me go, and as I afterwards heard, gave out that she had sent me away for 'bad conduct'--just what I do not know." Part II---to follow ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Thu, 25 Mar 1999 19:02:00 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Commentary on Mr Crosbie's Post-1904 Account of his Association with Mrs Tingley Part II---Commentary on Mr Crosbie's Post-1904 Account of his Association with Mrs Tingley Mr Crosbie wrote---- "As to my part in it [the Tingley 1896-99 affair]--I was in Boston, and saw no reason to doubt the [positive] statements [about Mrs Tingley] of those [T.S. members] in N.Y. whom I believed to be sincere and of good training and judgment. I should have known by other means the true state of affairs...." "The attitude assumed by Mrs. T[ingley] soon began to estrange those members who were brought in close touch with her in New York, but those at a distance had no inkling of the true state of affairs and kept on in full confidence...." The impression which Mr Crosbie apparently wanted to convey in these two statements is that he was *not* in "close touch" with Mrs Tingley in New York. Since he lived "at a distance" in Boston, Mr Crosbie (so he contended) "had no inkling of the true state of affairs and kept on in full confidence [with Mrs Tingley]." I've previously quoted several documents that appear to negate Mr Crosbie's revisionist account. These documents show that Mr Crosbie personally knew Mrs Tingley, worked closely with her, wrote warm, devoted & personal letters to her, and vigorously defended Mrs Tingley in 1898 against the attacks of Hargrove, Spencer and Griscom, Jr. There is more evidence to negate Mr Crosbie's post-1904 assertions of not "being in close touch" with Mrs Tingley during the years 1896-1899. The entire evidence will be included in my finished paper. I quote only selected items at this point. (1) In 1898 Mr Crosbie in a letter to Mrs Tingley recounted his first personal encounter with her in these words--- "I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection. During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . ." This memorable day in Mr Crosbie's life must have occurred *prior* to the public disclosure of Mrs Tingley as the Outer Head of the E.S. Preliminary study leads me to conclude that public disclosure of Mrs Tingley's status occurred around May 17 or 18, 1896. (New York Tribute, May 18, 1896). Also disclosure of Mrs Tingley's status as Outer Head was published in "Theosophy" magazine, June 1896, pp 67-69. (2) On June 7, 1896, Mrs Tingley and the other members of her worldwide Crusade were at a meeting held in Boston at the Tremont Theatre. "Mr. Robert Crosbie, President of Boston T.S., presided at the meeting, and introduced as the first speaker Mr. A.H. Spencer. . . .[Later after several other speakers had given their lectures, ] Mrs. Tingley followed with a paper on the 'Blessings of Theosophy.' This was listened to with the utmost attention, and evoked great applause." "Theosophy" magazine, July, 1896, p 127. (3) The next year, on May 22, 1897, Mr Crosbie and a few other E.S. members took pledges of "unquestioning loyalty, devotion and obedience" to Mrs Tingley. Did Mr Crosbie take such a momentous oath to a person about whom he knew so very little? The pledge reads---- "I . . . recognizing the person called Purple [Mrs Tingley] as being the agent of the Master I serve . . . do hereby unreservedly pledge myself, by my Higher Self, to unquestioning loyalty, devotion and obedience to her and to her support and defence as such agent, under any and all circumstances and conditions to the extent of my available means, utmost exertion, and with my life if need be. . . . So Help me my Higher Self. (Signed) Robert Crosbie Witness my hand, this 22d day of May, Eighteen hundred and Ninety-seven." (4) In Mr Crosbie's later revisionist account, he wrote--- "Mrs. T[ingley] took advantage of the situation, and most plausibly and shrewdly strengthened her position for two years after her advent, then formed [in early 1898] the "UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD" with herself as absolute dictator; carrying with her by far the greater number of the members throughout the country." Mr Crosbie conveniently forgot to mention a number of important facts which would have thrown a different light on this portion of his post-1904 account. Dr Emmett A. Greenwalt in "California Utopia: Point Loma: 1897-1942," 2nd revised ed. (1978) described an important meeting that occurred in connection with the new society "UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD." "Upon hearing of a plot to challenge her control of the Society, Katherine Tingley decided not only to defeat her foes in the convention, but to make it impossible for such a situation to arise again. Her version of how she came to rewrite the Society's constitution is interesting. . . . "In mid-January, 1898, about a month before the convention, she called in ten influential members who had shown no signs of wavering, and revealed the constitution in its entirety. It was received, as she had hoped, in a devotional spirit. 'Never shall I forget the solemnity of that night...,' wrote Fussell, one of the faithful. 'Although the Constitution of the Universal Brotherhood may appear ironbound, yet all who know our Leader will realize that her one desire is to give freedom to all and to aid the progress of the work.' " Besides J.H. Fussell, who were the other nine "faithful" members who attended this important & private meeting at Mrs Tingley's home? Last year in his article on "Colonel Arthur L. Conger, " Alan Donant revealed more names of the persons at this January 1898 meeting--- "...On January 13, 1898, a constitution for a new theosophical organization was presented to a meeting of prominent Theosophists at the home of Katherine Tingley. The new organization was called The Universal Theosophical Brotherhood, which a month later was changed to the Universal Brotherhood. Among the signators were Basil Crump, E. August Neresheimer, Robert Crosbie, Joseph H. Fussell, and Arthur L. Conger, Jr.. . . .[From the original minutes of the January 13, 1898, meeting and the Resolutions, Preamble and Constitution of the Universal Brotherhood adopted at the Chicago Convention of February 18, 1898.]" Mr Donant's account discloses that Mr Robert Crosbie was one of the prominent Theosophists invited to Katherine Tingley's home. This event shows Mr Crosbie's personal involvement with Mrs Tingley as well as Mr Crosbie's intimate knowledge of Mrs Tingley's activities. Some twelve days later, back in Boston, Mr Crosbie wrote the following devoted letter to Mrs Tingley--- "ROBERT CROSBIE 24 MOUNT VERNON STREET BOSTON, MASS. Feb. 2d 1898 Dear P[Purple, Mrs Tingley]: I received your good long letter of Sunday, it was a good one indeed. . . . I will arrange a "Friends in Counsel" for Boston, and have them get to work along the lines suggested and hope to start on Saturday. . . . I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection. During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . . All is well here. We are steady, confident and patient, yet ready to act at the word. With heart's love yours as ever Robert" The Chicago Convention of the Theosophical Society was held some sixteen days later (February 18, 1898). At this convention most of the members in attendance voted to adopt the new constitution. As Mr Crosbie related in his revisionist account, Mrs Tingley carried "with her by far the greater number of the members throughout the country." She certainly "carried" Mr Crosbie who became one of her staunchest defenders in the months ahead. On the other hand, Mr Hargrove, Mr Spencer, Mr Griscom, Jr. & a small minority "bolted" the convention. Finally they went to court contending that what had transpired at the convention was illegal. In the April, 1898 (first) issue of "The Searchlight", a pro-Tingley magazine, Mr Crosbie defended Mrs Tingley in an article "The Sifting Process". In the course of the article he attacked the motives of the "bolters"---linking them to "the dark forces of disintegration." Mr Crosbie's relevant words are--- "The third great Leader, Katherine A. Tingley, established [February 1898] the organization called 'Universal Brotherhood,' or 'The Brotherhood of Humanity,'. . . . It is not difficult to see what 'An Ark of Safety' the Universal Brotherhood is for the work, and to realize the wisdom of the Leader [Mrs Tingley] in sounding the key-note, when it was not generally known that the dark forces of disintegration were so close to us, and which aroused us to action, and disclosed the imminent danger. . . . Foolish are those who are attempting by legal technicalities to hinder the work. . . who never were workers in the true sense; for all who know the Leader [Mrs Tingley] best, who have worked the closest to her, are the ones who are most energetic in carrying on the work at Headquarters, and the most unswerving in their allegiance to the Leader, and certainly their judgment is worthy of the most weighty consideration, for no others are so well qualified to judge. Some names, like those of Messrs. Spencer and Griscom, Jr., have appeared in print so often in connection with the New York activities, that it might be supposed that they were workers of the Headquarters' staff, and being now connected with the disintegrating faction, it might appear that the staff was weakened by their disaffection, but they were not part of the staff, nor were they workers in the true sense, especially since the return of the Leader [Mrs Tingley] from the Crusade [around the world]. . . . It seems necessary to call attention to this point, for the part taken by them in the attack upon our Leader, (for no matter how much it is disguised, that is the real issue), might lead members to suppose that they were very essential to the work, and person whose opinions might appear to be of more weight than they really are. . . ." Compare these statements with Mr Crosbie's revisionist account quoted at the beginning of this posting. In my next email I'll analyze more misleading statements found in Mr Crosbie's post-1904 account of his association with Mrs Tingley. David Green From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 10:15:24 PST From: "David Green" Subject: More Web pages on Robert Crosbie I've updated my web pages on "Robert Crosbie, Founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists." I've added photo of Mr Crosbie & added links to Mr Kell's bio on Crosbie. http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/Links.html I've also added new web page on "Mr Crosbie's Revisionist Account of His Association with Mrs Tingley." Article includes Mr Crosbie's account & my preliminary analysis of his statements. http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/revisionist.htm Two ULT students have emailed me this morning thanking me for this article. But they said they're stunned by all of this. None of this information was available from ULT sources, they report. Another five or six ULT assoiates have privately written me deploring everything I have written on the subject but not one of them brought forth any evidence or arguments to counter what I've written. I'll continue to research and write more on subject. Articles will be posted on theos-talk & then on web site. David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 13:02:35 -0600 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: More Web pages on Robert Crosbie >I'll continue to research and write more on subject. Articles will be >posted on theos-talk & then on web site. > >David Green Er, why? What's your point? -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 06:34:24 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: More Quotations of importance from Theosophical Texts March 27th 1999 What is the nature of Theosophical study and work ? "When anyone is regularly accepted as a chela on probation the first and only order he receives is to work unselfishly for humanity - sometimes aiding and aided by some other chela - while striving to get rid of the personal idea" PATH Vol. 3, p. 107 "The 'esoteric work' does not appear, and cannot appear because it is between the individual member and a "source" which reaches him only through his own inner consciousness." PO 55 "Experience in Occultism and in trying to live the "higher Life" has conclusively shown...that we are placed by Karma wherever we may be, and that we cannot gain by trying to "alter mere surroundings," we thus run away from the very test given us for the object in view." PO 61 "We postulate that the good of others is our own, since we are a part of the integral whole." OP 73 Masters define Their duty and work: "Our prime duty [is] of gaining knowledge and disseminating through all available channels such fragments as mankind in the mass may be ready to assimilate." Mahat. Letters p. 385 "The first lesson taught in Esoteric philosophy is that the incognizable Cause does not put forth evolution whether conscious or unconscious, but only exhibits periodically different aspects of itself to the perception of finite Minds. [That which is finite cannot be "perfect."] Now the collective Mind of the Universe-composed of various and numberless Hosts of Creative Powers, however infinite in manifested Time, is itself finite when contrasted with the unborn and undecaying Space in its supreme essential aspect. Therefore there are inferior Beings among those Hosts, but there never were any "devils," or "disembodied angels," for the simple reason that they are all governed by Law. The Asuras who incarnated...followed in this a law as implacable as any other." SD II 487 "A "thing" can only exist through its opposite." SD II 490 "The one process is to inquire into and attempt to understand the law of spiritual unity." HD 82 "To are, to will, to achieve and keep silent, is the motto of the true Occultist." HPB Art. 511 "[It is] a law inexorable, by which man lifts himself by degrees from the state of a beast to the glory of a God...The student who desires to enter upon Occultism takes some of nature's privileges into his own hands, by that very wish, and, soon discovers that experiences come to him with double quick rapidity...he is under a new and swifter law of development." HPB Articles I p. 76-7 These quotes are a few that might be mulled over and considered as we proceed all together on the conjoint path of progress. If there are observations and comments on these they will be useful for all to see. Best wishes, Dallas ======================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 10:47:33 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Mr Crosbie's Knowledge of Mrs Tingley was not based on Second Hand Reports In 1896 Mr Crosbie's knowledge of Mrs Tingley was not based solely on second hand reports from leading theosophists in New York but on his own personal experiences with Mrs Tingley. Regarding the death of W Q Judge & the esoteric succession of Mrs Katherine Tingley, Mr Robert Crosbie in his "Autobiographical Note" observed--- ". . . E.T.Hargrove and E.A.Neresheimer . . . went through his [W Q Judge's] private papers; in these they found reference to a certain "chela," whom Neresheimer determined to be Mrs. Tingley. . . . The idea being in their minds that there must of necessity be an occult successor, and concurring in the opinion that Mrs. T. was indicated, they sent out a circular to the E.S. that Judge had appointed her as such. The minds of all, being in the receptive condition I have mentioned, accepted everything as stated by the few in New York." In reading his account, one should note that Robert Crosbie's mind was "in the [same] receptive condition" too; he also believed "that there must of necessity be an occult successor." The documents below illustrate this point. In the last sentence of above account, Mr Crosbie implies that because he lived in Boston, he too "accepted everything as stated [about Mrs Tingley] by the few in New York." But Mr Crosbie's own attitude, mindset & involvement in all of this can be found in what *he wrote soon after W Q Judge's death*. In the May 1896 issue of THEOSOPHY, Mr Crosbie penned these words about Mr Judge *as well as about the coming "great messenger"*. "A FRIEND OF OLD TIME AND OF THE FUTURE" "The first Theosophical treatise that I read was his [Judge's] Epitome of Theosophy; my first meeting with him changed the whole current of my life. I trusted him then as I trust him now and all those whom he trusted...trust is the bond that binds, that makes the strength of the Movement, for it is of the heart. And this trust he called forth was not allowed to remain a blind trust, for as time went on, as the energy, steadfastness and devotion of the student became more marked, the "real W.Q.J." was more and more revealed, until that power radiated through him became in each an ever present help in the work. As such, it remains to-day, a living power in each heart that trusted him, a focus for the Rays of the coming "great messenger." . . . . The lines have been laid down for us by H.P.B., W.Q.J., and Masters, and we can take again our watchword, that which he gave us at the passing of H.P.B., 'Work, watch and wait.' We will not have long to wait." What is Mr Crosbie referring to in the last sentence of the article---"We will not have long to wait"? I would suggest that Mr Crosbie believed that he & the American theosophists would not have long to wait before the coming "great messenger" appeared. This, no doubt, was Mrs Tingley. In the same issue of THEOSOPHY, Mr Claude Falls Wright, a theosophist who had been close to W Judge, wrote on a similar theme--- ". . . While the spiritual energy he [Mr Judge] exercised was at his death distributed among all members and workers, nevertheless his inner powers centred in one. "A new Messenger has come to us, to carry on the work of the spiritual revivifiers. . . . They crucified Blavatsky; they crucified Judge; who shall say if we can protect from the powers of darkness our latest helper." In the next issue of THEOSOPHY, Mrs Tingley was revealed as the new Outer Head. Because of its relevance to Crosbie's May 1896 THEOSOPHY article, I again quote Crosbie's letter in which he mentioned to Mrs Tingley his first personal encounter with her. His experience must have occurred sometime before May 18, 1896. "I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection. During that day you and I were the only ones in the E.S. room, and you came and sat down at the table at which I was working, and told me a great many things, saying that you did not know why you told me these things but that it was doubtless for some purpose. . . ." These documents show that Mr Crosbie considered Mrs Tingley as the "great messenger" (as he phrased it in his May 1896 THEOSOPHY article). Mr Crosbie was not some distant bystander in Boston having to rely & accept "everything as stated [about Mrs Tingley] by the few in New York." In the events immediately after Judge's death, Mr Crosbie was a participant in the events. This is clear from his own personal words about Mrs Tingley--- "I remember that the day I first saw you, I recognized you as the O[outer] H[ead] without hint or instruction as such, and in spite of the fact that I was not looking for a woman's form in that connection." The above material is in sharp contrast & contradictory of Crosbie's post-1904 account in which the impression is given that he was not in New York, had no personal knowledge of Mrs Tingley during these crucial months of 1896 & merely "accepted everything as stated by the few in New York." Mr Crosbie's "Autobiographical Note" doesn't give the reader full access to all relevant material. I've tried to supply a few more pieces of the omitted material. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 08:53:41 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Melissa Virus Here is the newest virus info: Machines with Microsoft Word 97 or Word 2000 Any mail handling system could experience performance problems or a denial of service as a result of the propagation of this macro virus. At approximately 2:00 PM GMT-5 on Friday March 26 1999 we began receiving reports of a Microsoft Word 97 and Word 2000 macro virus which is propagating via email attachments. The number and variety of reports we have received indicate that this is a widespread attack affecting a variety of sites. ====================================================== For more info, visit the Carnegie Mellon site: http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-99-04-Melissa-Macro-Virus.html mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 09:49:35 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Melissa Virus According to a report in the local newspaper, the virus has shut down several e-mail servers in large corporations. One recipient received 500 msg a day. It is reported that the virus propogates itself as an attached Word macro with the file name list.doc which is 40k in size. When this is opened using Word program, it starts its devastating task. The advise, according to the newsreport is: Just don't open the document. Just delete it if you find it. mkr From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 22:46:10 EST From: Cybercmh@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 11, 1999 In a message dated 3/11/99 11:59:58 PM Eastern Standard Time, Jerry writes: << I think it quite possible that Jesus and HPB could both reincarnate and not be recognized or accepted by their respective organizations. >> Interesting comment. I had a conversation with my mother recently, where she was arguing that Jesus was conservative (she's a conservative Republican...) So I pointed out all the ways in which he was decidedly not conservative in his times, but was in fact radical and challenging, and asked her, what if Jesus Christ himself showed up right now and knocked on your door, would you let him in or would you consider him a kook? She thought a long time, and answered that she would probably not let him in (not knowing who he was, of course). I doubt that I would let him in either - I would be too fearful and suspicious of his motivations, and probably would assume he belonged to some cult or other. Probably also why Jesus was not recognized by many in his own time. Christine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 00:55:46 EST From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 11, 1999 In a message dated 99-03-28 22:46:25 EST, you write: << what if Jesus Christ himself showed up right now and knocked on your door, would you let him in or would you consider him a kook? She thought a long time, and answered that she would probably not let him in (not knowing who he was, of course). I doubt that I would let him in either - I would be too fearful and suspicious of his motivations, and probably would assume he belonged to some cult or other. Probably also why Jesus was not recognized by many in his own time. Christine >> Hell, I wouldn't have let that nutcase near me! Chuck the Heretic From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 12:27:11 +0200 (Romance Daylight Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: Supposed Denigration of Mr Robert Crosbie & other U.L.T. items Dear David Green, > I'm even more puzzled & quite interested in the type of hysterical > response many U.L.T. associates have to any questioning of the claims of > Mr Crosbie & U.L.T. Mr Richard Taylor's latest effusion on the subject > & his harsh words directed towards me are the most recent example of > this quite (IMO) paradoxical & even somewhat bizarre behavior. > > Examining U.L.T. publications, one finds considerable amount of > historical material in which annoymous authors have harshly criticized & > (some would say) have denigrated other Theosophical societies & their > leaders. As a member of the T.S.A. (A stands for Adyar not America) I am a bit releaved that the Theosophical group that is being critisized is not the T.S.A. for a change. Thank you David! I suppose all theosophical organisations have characteristics that can be critisized. Katinka Hesselink ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 12:43:29 +0200 (Romance Daylight Time) From: hesse600 Subject: Re: theos-l digest: March 19, 1999 Dear Kym, I wrote: > >In fact I grew up > >feeling that it was logical and natural to be selfish > >and unkind. Kym wrote: > I do not believe that MOST people are raised to believe > that it is > "logical" and "natural" to be selfish (I am assuming 'unselfish' was a > typo?) and unkind. This is not to say that your personal experience is not > true - but my point is that most people, if asked, do at least know or > believe that being unkind and selfish is in error. You are right: I did not mean what people say or are raised to think, but about what is implicit in relationships and actions. Maybe also the relative lack of religious upbringing in my country (the Netherlands)shows its ugly face, though of course it has the upside that I was not raised to believe in miracles that go against the laws of nature, or that there is a GOD out there who has a beard and likes personal vengiance and is yet also loving. >> Certain circumstances may give rise to such actions, but humans have an innate sense of a psychic battle going on between "good" and "bad." I believe that most people desire to be "good" - to be seen as "good" - to think themselves "good" and "doing good for others." >> yes, probably. I agree with most things in your e-mail especially: > Until I HAVE BECOME what I believe all people should become, I cannot > expect others to do so. Yes, that has been the basis of what eventially brought me to theosophy. I was not trying to suggest that the T.S. or any other nominal Theosophical society is the place for everyone. When I talk about the blessings of theosophy, perhaps I should have clarified that everything that leads to wisdom and helps one to become unselfish is theosophy for me. > >I would think that people who do > >fight the social predudices like that (in even stronger > >ways) do get some support from *higher* levels. > I think even those who do NOT fight social prejudices get support and > attention from "higher" levels. No one is left behind or ignored. I do not agree with that. I think we get what we deserve. That also means that effort is rewarded. Katinka ---------------------- NHL Leeuwarden hesse600@tem.nhl.nl From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:57:39 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Purucker on United Lodge of Theosophists The Dialogues of G. de Purucker, Meeting 14 "There is today an association of theosophists who now call themselves The United Lodge of Theosophists. As far as I have been able to gather, they apparently think that all esoteric inspiration and all receiving of new esoteric light stopped when HPB and WQJ died -- that all the esoteric wheels stopped then and there, and that there remains nothing in the world for men to live up to or aspire to in the way of a stream of illumination and teaching excepting the books that these two messengers wrote and left behind them. Yes, The United Lodge of Theosophists are in fact bibliolaters, book worshipers. Because they have HPB's and WQJ's books, the situation is not so bad; but is not this situation just what the sects in Christianity have degenerated into? Now these good and earnest people otherwise deserve credit for their splendid loyalty to HPB and to Judge, yet if they don't know it themselves intellectually, they are instinctively conscious of the fact that they have cut themselves off from the living stream of inspiration flowing from the Great Lodge; that their whole dependence is on books. They disclaim any teachers. Our own holy school is a Mystery-school. It is a strictly esoteric one; and therefore rites, ceremonials, and rituals, are conspicuous by their absence. In the exoteric-esoteric, or esoteric-exoteric, Mystery-schools of Greece, for instance, a great deal was made, both in Samothrace and Eleusis, of ritual and ceremonial, and these rituals and ceremonials were very happily conceived and successfully carried out for ages. The difficulty and danger of course were that they distracted the attention of the neophyte away from the essential truths, from the heart-light behind the ritual and the ceremonial. What were these rituals and ceremonials? Representations in dramatic form of the teachings given orally and in secret in the higher degrees, and without ritual and ceremonial." ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 19:23:16 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Papa Virus - Like Melissa *********alert*********** Hi Here is the virus update. ======================= Network Associates has discovered an e-mail virus similar to the Melissa virus that company officials said they believe is even more dangerous than its predecessor. Dubbed Papa, the new virus is an Excel virus that sends itself in the same manner as Melissa, but sends itself to the first 60 people in a user's address book compared to 50 with Melissa. In addition, Papa sends an e-mail out every time the virus is activated. Melissa only sends the message the first time it is opened. This time the subject line claims the message is from "all.net and Fred Cohen." The body of the e-mail, which contains an attached document titled "path.xls," then instructs the user not to disable the macros, which is how the virus is activated. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 23:30:04 -0600 From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TS Organizations Hi There was a discussion/comment on TS organizations and there was a response from Rich. I have posted the following reply and I am posting it here as it may be of some interest to the subscribers. This is an issue that IMHO is an important one for the future of TS mkr =========== Dear Rich: I appreciate your response and glad to see it. Yes, I have repeatedly pointed out the lack of *any* participation by any elected national/international officials and it is a fact you agreed with. I feel that we should all be reminded of it frequently because I think it is a great missed opportunity for theosophy, especially when the membership in organizations is dwindling. It is good to know that what is discussed on the lists are fedback to the leaders and I hope it does some good in that it provides them with the kind of feedback they cannot normally get from other sources. While your reasons for their non participation may be true, it is my opinion that they may be only one of the many contributing factors and probably the minor ones. While their jobs are demanding, I am sure many of the participants here also have more than full time jobs and other heavy responsibilities making great demands on their time and in spite of which they find time to read msgs and respond with detailed responses as needed all because of their interest in theosophy. I still hold the view that I do not think leadership still see the untapped power of the maillists as a tool; In my own experience, while I grew up with the computer industry, until I spent a lot of time having hands on experience with Internet for some months, I did not realize its power and its enormous potential as a tool. Since most of the leaders have grown up in pre computer era, IMHO they still have not comprehended the power of Internet as a tool. Added to this is the unusual nature of the medium. The traditional print medium put out by the organizations is easy to control. The leaders can feed the membership what they want them to be fed. That is not so with Internet maillists. So it is very likely that they are at a loss as to how to deal with the maillists. Traditional control techniques such as editing/censoring does not work well. For example one of the large Theosophy organizations launched a "moderated" = censored/edited/controlled - maillist with dismal results. There is not a single msg on the maillist since the end of January. Just compare that to the traffic here and in other "unmoderated" lists. The msg is loud and clear. While many of the msgs on the lists may be trivial not warranting responses from the leadership, there are substantive items in the msgs from time to time which are very important from doctrinal, organizational and for long term survival of theosophical organizations. They, IMHO, warrant serious engagement by the leadership. As for the number of members on the list at this time; maillists are still in their infancy. It is when the current generation which is growing up in the Internet environment comes of age you will see the massive subscriptions. The current trend, at least in one Theosophy organization is that more and more are *not* interested in in-person interaction as shown by the rapid growth in the "members-at-large" who are not attached to any branch. It may take time; but I expect to see in-person membership slide as more and more branches are closed. Recently a subscriber in a private msg mentioned that when he went to a meeting of the branch in one of the largest cities in the country, he found five old women attending the meeting - a dismal number considering the population of the city. So the trend is not in favor of more in-person meetings. In person interaction will continue; but the maillist participation is about to take off; only is how soon. Organizational barriers have two aspects - inter organizational cooperation and interaction; and cooperation and interaction between people interested in theosophy whether they formally belong to one or more of the organizations or none. The former is not going to breakdown that easily. The latter - interaction between people is increasing. The latter type of interaction is not likely to take place when either the member has some vested interests in an organization (or in a related/parallel activity) and that vested interest or threat (explicit or subtle) to the interest prevents him/her from going against the tradition and/or unwritten code of the leadership of the organization. Internet maillists are acting as a catalyst in breaking down the barriers at the individual level and I am confident that we all will be witnessing the maillist breakthrough in the next few years. ....mkr At 04:21 PM 3/21/1999 EST, you wrote: > >In a message dated 3/21/99 5:53:50 PM, you wrote: leaders have avoided getting involved in any discussions that go on on >this maillist as well as on other theosophical maillists, and thus it >appears that the pre Information Technology mentality continues even in >the age of Information Technology.>> >Doss, > >You have made this statement umpteen times on this list, but at last I feel I >have to say a little in defense of the "leaders" of various organizations. >You are right that we have yet to see a high office-holder in the T.S. make >comments on this list. But I know for a *fact* that they get regular reports >on what is said here, who said it, and what the result was. Just this weekend >I spoke with the leaders of not one but TWO different associations, and BOTH >persons referenced this list and recent conversations. >>>>>>>> clip <<<<<<< >>Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 19:23:07 -0500 (EST) From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #801 Mar 30th Dear Mika: No I do not think that Tson-ka-pa used our calendar. But whatever calendar he used when translated into the calendar that we use puts this 25 years of effort into the "last quarter of the century" according to our Julian calendar. I am familiar with several calendars which work on different cycles than our Julian calendar, such as the Jewish (Kabalistic), the Arabic (Koranic), the Irani (Zoroastrian), and the Hindu (Vikram Samvat). Most of them are based on a longer cycle than he arbitrary one which we currently use all over the world. I believe that the Chinese and the Japanese have their own traditional and ancient calendars. And in Central America the Mayas, Toltecs, etc., and in So. America, the Incan, had theirs. Once that a specific astronomical date is established, by an eclipse or some other well known astronomical event the relation is easy. In the Secret Doctrine, Vol 1, beginning page 647, HPB writes on the question of the Zodiacal clock and the way in which cycles are recorded and used. This section continues up to p. 668 and is very interesting. Best wishes to you, Dallas ================ -----Original Message----- > From: owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com > [mailto:owner-theos-talk@pippin.imagiware.com] On Behalf Of mika perala > Sent: Monday, March 29, 1999 5:21 AM > To: theos-talk@theosophy.com > Subject: Theos-World Re: theos-talk-digest V1 #801 > From: "W. Dallas TenBroeck" : > > Dear Mika: > > This cycle is keyed to our present calendar used every day and > not to any other. Did Tsong-Kha-Pa use our calendar too? Buddhists have their own calendar and their 'las quarter of the century' does not much with ours, right? Bear me if I ask silly questions. And yes, you may send me your 'attachment'. Thank you. Mika > Se -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com Letters to the Editor, 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, 31 Mar 1999 07:23:49 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Dzyan Esoteric School---Esoteric Instructions Issued on Whose Authority? In ULT's Dzyan Esoteric School, esoteric instructions of Madame Blavatsky are *reissued* to members under a pledge of secrecy. Blavatsky's instructions were not to be discussed or shown to regular ULT associates or to other non-members of the DES. Anyone who violated this oath was expelled from DES. The essential question to ask is--- On whose authority were Madame Blavatsky's instructions reissued by the DES? During Blavatsky's & Judge's lifetimes, these instructions were given to new members by the authority of Blavatsky & Judge as Outer Heads of the E.S. directly representing the Masters who were the Inner Heads. Each member took a pledge not to discuss or show the documents to non-members. Robert Crosbie was an esoteric member during the lifetimes of Blavatsky & Judge. Mr Crosbie had taken the same pledge not to reveal any of these esoteric papers. After Mr Judge's death & at the formation of the ULT's DES, *by whose authority* were the instructions reissued with a new pledge of secrecy? Did Mr Crosbie violate his own original pledge by allowing the reissue of Blavatsky's esoteric instructions under a new pledge of secrecy? It is clear Blavatsky & Judge issued the instructions at the direction of the Masters. Who gave Mr Crosbie the authority or right to violate his original pledge & reissue the instructions to *new students* under an oath of silence and secrecy? Did Mr Crosbie believe that he was following in the esoteric footsteps of Blavatsky and Judge? In the last month I've received several emails from ULT associates suggesting that if I publish the contents of any DES material I'm opening myself & those who read the contents to *esoteric* or *occult* harm. This is the essential reason (I'm told) why the U.L.T. has been so adamant *against* the public release of Blavatsky's ES instructions. Those who are not ready & haven't taken the appropriate pledge, etc. could be subject to some sort of negative occult influence. So goes this type of reasoning. A correspondent wrote that Mr Henry Geiger, one of the more recent "leaders" of the Los Angeles ULT, was very much against Mr Boris de Zirkoff's proposal to publish Blavatsky's esoteric instructions in the "Collected Writings" series. When Mr de Zirkoff finally published them in Volume XII of the series, the ULT leadership was extremely upset. This is part of the underlying reasons for the ULT not mentioning in their publications the "Collected Writings" or using any of the CW material in their study of Blavatsky's teachings, so I'm told. This negative reaction by the ULT to Mr de Zirkoff's publication of Blavatsky's esoteric material appears ironic (even hypocritical)in light of the fact that the ULT leadership issued (through DES) the same material to their chosen ULT associates. Who gave them the authority to disseminate this esoteric material to *new people* while at the same time condemning Mr de Zirkoff for publishing the material for new people? David Green ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:37:49 -0600 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: Dzyan Esoteric School---Esoteric Instructions Issued on Whose Authority? To what end do you question these things? I can certainly understand well researched criticisms of current organizations - it is an essential function that keeps leaderships honest and improves and refines organizations - Why is "the essential question to ask" the authority of re-distribution? Why is it essential? You seem intent on blasting people long dead, who cannot neither answer your "essential questions", nor defend themselves against your charges. > > In ULT's Dzyan Esoteric School, esoteric instructions of Madame > Blavatsky are *reissued* to members under a pledge of secrecy. > Blavatsky's instructions were not to be discussed or shown to regular > ULT associates or to other non-members of the DES. Anyone who violated > this oath was expelled from DES. > > The essential question to ask is--- > > On whose authority were Madame Blavatsky's instructions reissued by the > DES? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 08:25:08 PST From: "David Green" Subject: Re: Dzyan Esoteric School---Esoteric Instructions Issued on Whose Authority? >From: "JRC" >Reply-To: "Theosophy Study List" >To: "Theosophy Study List" >Subject: Re: Dzyan Esoteric School---Esoteric Instructions Issued on Whose Authority? >Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:37:49 -0600 > >To what end do you question these things? I can certainly understand well >researched criticisms of current organizations - it is an essential function >that keeps leaderships honest and improves and refines organizations - Why >is "the essential question to ask" the authority of re-distribution? Why is >it essential? You seem intent on blasting people long dead, who cannot >neither answer your "essential questions", nor defend themselves against >your charges. What about the "current" organization---the United Lodge of Theosophists? Attitudes of living ULT associates on these same subjects? Many of the "old" & "dead" attitudes are still alive, well & present in that organization & its associates, in their teaching methods, selection of material & "attitudes" towards other theosophical associations & publications. Also in their Dzyan Esoteric Section of today. "Blasting people long dead". Thumb through ULT's history "The Theosophical Movement" 1951. Volume is in print & this volume is full of "blasting people long dead." Blasting Mrs Tingley & hinting if not more that she & small number of W Judge's most trusted colleagues "faked" her successorship. Blasting Mrs Besant & Mr Leadbeater. Blasting Mr Hargrove. If my criticisms bother you, why don't you also protest ULT's continual sale of this volume? Mr Dallas TenBroeck constantly recommends this title. Isn't he indirectly "blasting people long dead" by recommending this volume? Where are your comments on him? David Green Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 10:51:33 -0600 From: "JRC" Subject: Re: Dzyan Esoteric School---Esoteric Instructions Issued on Whose Authority? > "Blasting people long dead". Thumb through ULT's history "The > Theosophical Movement" 1951. Volume is in print & this volume is full > of "blasting people long dead." Blasting Mrs Tingley & hinting if not > more that she & small number of W Judge's most trusted colleagues > "faked" her successorship. Blasting Mrs Besant & Mr Leadbeater. > Blasting Mr Hargrove. If my criticisms bother you, why don't you also > protest ULT's continual sale of this volume? Mr Dallas TenBroeck > constantly recommends this title. Isn't he indirectly "blasting people > long dead" by recommending this volume? Where are your comments on him? Your criticisms don't bother me - I stopped reading them. Dallas may be indirectly blasting people (hard to tell, usually he just seems like he's preaching) - but you are doning it directly. And when someone does it as single-mindedly as you are, it makes me wonder what the underlying intention is. Are you trying to accomplish a specific end? Trying to reform the ULT? Get people to quit? Is there a *present* goal in your blasting of the dead? If so, why not criticize those you see as currently holding the attitudes of which you speak? They can at least answer your charges.