Theos-Talk Archives (February 2009 Message tt00194)

Dear Nigel,

Thanks for your understanding and encouragement.

The report/article onphenomenology I referred to is titled:

"The Relevance of Phenomenology for Theosophy" and can be found at:

http://alpheus.org/html/articles/philosophy/phen&theos.htm

The section on Heidegger might be a little dense as is the subject matter itself. One day I hope to explain better the relevance of Heidegger. I did post an article 
"Heideggerian Thinking and the Eastern Mind" by Rolf von Eckartsberg and Ronald S. Valle, from: Metaphors of Consciousness. 
http://alpheus.org/tsclass/MHandEast.pdf

This article might get somewhere in wetting Theosophists' appetite for the 'sage of the black forest.' 

Maybe also more on Popper one day. A title for that might be: "The Refutation of the Refutation of the Conjecture Called Theosophy." 

Best

Govert

 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: nhcareyta 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:13 AM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: 4th sub-race


  Dear Govert

  Thank you for your most interesting, explanatory response.

  You write, "Actually, my position is that all statements are 
  provisional and relative to an interpretive framework."

  Yes agreed, indeed they must be, given the complexities and 
  distortions of perception and epistemological definitions. 
  Hard and fast "absolutes" are perhaps in fact a little 
  tenuous.

  You write, "I'm just very interested to get an understanding 
  of the epistemological issues involved in the development and 
  transmission of the Masters' teachings. The issue of 
  contradictions, blinds, traps, translation and other 
  structures are part of that."

  From my experience, this can be so valuable, almost 
  indispensable. 
  Some time ago on this forum, I was extolling the virtues of 
  studying epistemology as somewhat essential, if only to assess 
  our particular mindset with its prejudices, predispositions 
  and motivations. So many of us provide our opinions, based 
  simply on what feels good to ourselves. 
  The Mahatmas and Madame Blavatsky provided occult, mystical, 
  revealed, rational and empirical information for variously 
  different concepts. 

  You write, "Since HPB western philosophy has made some 
  good progress in certain areas, especially philosophy of 
  science and phenomenology. I just like to put those 
  insights into play in the theosophical field and see how 
  far they go. I did report on the relevance of phenomenology 
  for theosophy..."

  I would be most interested to read that report if at all 
  possible?

  You write, "...and would like to do something similar with 
  philosophy of science, especially the contributions from 
  Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Bohm."

  A particularly interesting field of study, best wishes for 
  your investigations.

  Regards
  Nigel

  > If you will, I like to boost the philosophical part of the tri-
  partite synthesis of philosophy, science and spirituality. 
  > 
  > Govert
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: nhcareyta 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 3:41 AM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: 4th sub-race
  > 
  > 
  > Dear Govert
  > 
  > Thank you for your response and insightful possibilities.
  > 
  > There are many passages where the Mahatmas and Madame 
  > Blavatsky deal with this thorny subject and I actually 
  > prefer to use the word mystery, rather than dichotomy 
  > or even contradiction.
  > 
  > From my perspective, the teachings on globes, rounds, 
  > chains and races are profoundly occult and not necessarily 
  > intended to be accepted quite so literally and uncritically, 
  > although there may be some value in this for the initiate.
  > 
  > It seems one of the great challenges faced by the 
  > Mahatmas and Madame Blavatsky was to translate the meaning 
  > of virtually untranslatable abstract concepts into 
  > something at least approximating a similar meaning in the 
  > western analytical mind.
  > 
  > As the Mahatma KH writes, "First of all and again I will 
  > draw your attention to the tremendous difficulty of 
  > finding appropriate terms in English which would convey 
  > to the educated European mind even an approximately 
  > correct notion about the various subjects we will have 
  > to treat upon." 
  > ML 65 Chr. of George Linton and Virginia Hanson
  > 
  > And from the Mahatma M, "Our terms are untranslatable; 
  > and without a good knowledge of our complete system 
  > (which cannot be given but to regular initiates) would 
  > suggest nothing definite to your perceptions but only 
  > be a source of confusion..."
  > ML 46 Chronology of George Linton and Virginia Hanson
  > 
  > And again from the Mahatma KH, "Our mystic terms in their 
  > clumsy re-translation from the Sanskrit into English are 
  > as confusing to us as they are to you - especially to "M"." 
  > ML 66 Chronology of George Linton and Virginia Hanson
  > 
  > Therefore, once again from my perspective, many of the 
  > specific terms and passages used in their teachings were 
  > neither "blinds", dichotomies nor contradictions.
  > 
  > The strongly analytical western minds of Messrs Sinnett 
  > and Hume, and indeed many in this forum, needed and need
  > precise terms and categories to satisfy a need for 
  > certainty. But perhaps absolute certainty is not possible 
  > in matters spiritual and occult? 
  > 
  > Nevertheless, the Mahatmas' and Madame Blavatsky's dharma 
  > was to bring their eastern, occult teachings to the west and 
  > they often had to use a certain specificity of terminology to 
  > illustrate a hidden mystery, a terminology which might have 
  > little or no real basis in "fact."
  > 
  > For me, herein lies the value of their apparent dichotomies. 
  > They can cause some mystical minds to seek behind the written 
  > statement in an attempt to understand the otherwise mysterious 
  > meaning rather than focusing on the specific details.
  > 
  > Regards
  > Nigel 
  > 
  > > Dear Nigel,
  > > 
  > > Thanks for the quotes, which confirms the dichotomy between KH 
  and 
  > HPB
  > > as where they place the bulk of humanity:
  > > 
  > > HPB: V-5
  > > 
  > > KH: IV-7
  > > 
  > > Possible solution:
  > > 
  > > As 1) the Mahatma Letters were not meant for publication and 2) 
  > HPB's
  > > position is in her public writings, and 3) as there is this 
  idea 
  > that
  > > exact numbers can not be given, it is therefore possible that 
  the KH
  > > position has more merit than HPB's.
  > > 
  > > Any other solutions to this?
  > > 
  > > Govert
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Mahatma KH writes, ".the highest people now
  > > on earth (spiritually) belong to the first sub-race of the fifth
  > > root Race, and those are the Aryan Asiatics; the highest race
  > > (physical intellectuality) is the last sub-race of the fifth -
  > > yourselves the white conquerors. The majority of mankind belongs
  > > to the seventh sub-race of the fourth Root race, - the above
  > > mentioned Chinamen and their off-shoots and branchlets 
  (Malayans,
  > > Mongolians, Tibetans, Javanese, etc., etc., etc.) and remnants
  > > of other sub-races of the fourth - and the seventh sub-race of
  > > the third race.
  > >
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]