Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00105)

Hallo paul and all of you,

My views are:

Allright Paul.
My english is mybe not valid in USA court.

But I am in fact asking for your or any readers opinion.
I am sorry if my rusty english got eaten in a wrong manner.
(smile...)


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 8:17 PM
Subject: Theos-World Leading questions


> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
> theosophy@a...> wrote:
> > Hallo Paul and all of you,
> 
> Hi Morten,
> 
> I'm sorry not to have much more to offer on this, but the question 
> you're repeating just eludes me. Are you familiar with the 
> term "leading question"? It's forbidden in American courts-- that 
> is for a lawyer to make a long convoluted statement and then at the 
> end say "isn't that right?" or "don't you agree?" etc. Such 
> questions are a kind of bullying-- manipulating and controlling 
> discussion rather than simply asking for someone's opinion or 
> observation.
> 
> > My views are:
> > 
> > 1. I am not accusing you of anything. I was just asking a 
> question. 
> 
> An accusing question. Adopting the form of a question does not hide 
> the substance of accusation.
> > 
> > 2. But, what if Idries Shah had the same intentions with his 
> books - ie. that they were spiritual decoys - at least in part ?
> > We won't know that, because he didn't tell us did he ?
> > 
> Seems to me he "told" us in many ways that he was playing a 
> trickster role, as for example by publishing the book consisting of 
> nothing but empty pages.
> 
> > 3. What good does it do to contrast a page by Arvan Harvat, for
> > example on the lataif, that states "there is no unanimity regarding
> > the lataif" (its patterns/ordering) in authentic sources but then 
> on another dismisses Idries Shah's info on the subject to be "the 
> fictions of Idries Shah"?
> > 
> Sorry, I have no idea what you are asking here. 
> 
> > Harvat)
> > Do you disagree on this ?
> 
> Again, I cannot agree or disagree with a question (even if I 
> understood what was being asked.)
> > 
> > 4. There is more... now - today - only a few years after his death 
> he get dragged down with smear.
> > When he lived they didn't dare to accuse him.
> 
> ??? James Moore's article in Religion Today appeared in late 1986. 
> 
> > A possible reason is that some of the scholars - inwardly knew he 
> was right.
> > Namely, that they were what he called them: merely Scholars.
> > Which to him was the same as being Ignorant.
> > For sure Idries Shah created some enemies among the scholars when 
> he lived.
> 
> Seems to me that Moore's ire has to do with Shah's takeover of 
> Coombe Springs, manipulation and deceit associated with Shah's 
> general dealings with the Gurdjieffian heritage, and therefore have 
> more to do with Moore being a Gurdjieffian than a scholar. As for 
> other unnamed individuals, I cannot speculate.
> 
> > His writings tells a clear tale about that.
> > And because of that some of them now take revenge because he is 
> physically dead. I say this even when some of them would call it by 
> another name. Do you also disagree on that ?
> > 
> Another leading question. I cannot respond about the unknown 
> motivations of unnamed individuals-- how could one have an opinion 
> about "some" of "them" without any other clue as to whom is being 
> accused of what exactly? 
> 
> > You aught for sure to take spiritual dimensions into account if 
> you really want to be scientific. That was why Blavatsky and other
> > used the Akasha - the non-physical library to read the truth about 
> physical events from.
> > Not true ?
> > 
> Another leading question, and irrelevant distraction.
> > 
> > Emails are designs, which can be eyeopeners to the spiritual 
> Wisdom and Truth behind the curtains.
> > This email is such a design.
> > 
> It's clearly not a sincere attempt to communicate. So let's drop 
> it; I haven't time for your games.
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> theos-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
>