Theos-Talk Archives (February 1997 Message tl00516)

RI:
>Theos-l has 100+ individuals;
>is there some common thing which we all stand for which can be
>"communicated in words"?
	I certainly would hope so.  The 3 propositions in the SD, if
nothing else.  I slightly reworded these in my Enochian Physics,
and called them the Three Fundamental Laws of Magick, giving
HPG credit, of course.  This doubtless caused ripples of
apoplexy in some TS arenas, and may be the reason that
everything I write for any TS is instantly rejected (?).  Anyway,
I call them (1) the law of duality, (2) the law of periodicity,
and (3) the law of identity.  I would think that any magican,
occultist, theosophist would adhere to these "laws" in some
fashion.


>I don't know about you, but I take serious exception
>to the circumstance that my teachings may start to be even more
>"filtered-out" because I do not see THE SECRET DOCTRINE (and related) in
>entirely the same literal way as the entrenched powers within the Society.
	I have never been "in" and so filteration is not necessary for me.


>For example, the last article I submitted (a couple years' ago) was the
only
>one which the AT has ever rejected (if my memory serves me).
	I have loved your articles, being the sole attempt of Wheaton
to address humor at all.  The AT seems to take things too seriously most
of the time.


>My intention
>with "The Next Messenger" was to somewhat amusingly start introducing what
I
>believe to be the most important component of HPB's Cosmogenesis and
>Anthropogenesis:  that embedded within their "possibly semi-figurative"
>content is a very startlingly practical ~Theosophcal Magical System~
which,
>in my opinion, is clearly in advance of the time-honored visualization
etc.
>approaches.
	If your trying to get "magic" out of HPB, then your name has
probably been placed on the same list as mine as Chuck.  IMHO magic
is the natural fallout of trying to put the SD into practical application.


>Rejection of "The Next Messenger"
>stopped me in my tracks, however, for it even further confirmed my
suspicion
>that the TS may now just as soon prefer ~not~ to have a growing edge--even
if
>it is possibly HPB's edge.
	I already figured this out.  They rejected my book on how to
visit the Globes of HPB's planetary chain or Gupta Vidya Model even
though it is fully referenced throughout by the theosophical literature.
They wouldn't even consider looking at the typescript.  Theory is in,
practice is out.

>So, what is my next move?  Try to start my own organization called IS
>(Invisible Sun)?  Present the material in little
disappearing-upon-reading,
>unpolished cyber-snippets on theos-l?
	I have the same problem, and have not yet decided.


Jerry S.
Member, TI