|[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]|
|[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]|
Oct 08, 1996 02:07 PM
by Dr. A.M.Bain
In message <Pine.OSF.3.90.961007223942.4013A- email@example.com>, Maxim Osinovsky <firstname.lastname@example.org .edu> writes >Alan, > >This is not about jokes, this is about spiritual discrimination. Also, I >am not a native speaker of English, so my English at times is very poor >and may be difficult to understand. Sorry about it. Just ignore what I >said about jokes. I shall try to remember this, and I thank you for your clarification. > >Re: my SD quote. It was intended to support my previous statements, so it >seems to be relevant. > >What I intended to communicate is that theosophy cannot be all things for >all people. It does NOT embrace teachings of people like A.Cr. It includes a >very clear, distinct perspective on white vs. black magic, evil, and so >forth, and it is provable. Do you mean that it is provable that the teachings of theosophy have this clear distinction? If so, then of course *this* can be proved. What cannot be "proved" is that these theosophical teachings are totally correct. > >My message re: spiritual discrimination was written in the "IF ... THEN >.." format, i.e. IF one adopts the Ageless Wisdom as a guiding light >THEN indiscriminate search for knowledge is not good, certain >restrictions apply. This I like. All of the teachings of the various schools begin with "If." > >The Ageless Wisdom is the light of your, my, and everybody else's higher >self, that's why it is so uniform from man to man and throughout the ages. >Being awakened, it creates a sense of DIRECTION urging everybody to move >in the SAME direction--from darkness to light. This is *your* opinion about an Ageless Wisdom understood from *your* perspective. I too believe that there is an Ageless Wisdom, but I doubt the exactitude of its application as you appear to describe it. To follow (I hope) your approach: IF the Ageless Wisdom is 100% available and 100% able to be understood by incarnate human beings, THEN we need to watch out! IF the percentage of availability is less than 100%, and incarnate human ability to understand it is also less than 100% - THEN we still need to watch out! Part of your point (I think) is that such people as Crowley misinterpreted and/or misunderstood the Wisdom, creating confusion and distress for many students. However, it may also be true (another implicit "if") that the transmitters of the Wisdom may also have misinterpreted and/or misunderstood the Wisdom in varying degrees. This latter scenario seems to fit the evidence available. A good example from theosophical history is Leadbeater's description of life on Mars (CWLMARS.TXT) in the HISTORY directory in my homepage "Directory of Goodies" structure. Alan --------- Homepage: http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/ THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age: TI@nellie2.demon.co.uk, and from homepage above.