Theos-Talk Archives (February 2012 Message tt00016)

Amen!

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:40 PM, Cass Silva <silva_cass@1cY42UhbNclZkzvM2avONDly18lpByoMM-hVe4lkPGBYPJr9wnTGQ87oft68gDESJkrZCKaYmi3Q-_oaMdE.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Didn't Kuthumi tell us that they would only present themselves while HPB
> was their messenger and that after her demise all 'public' contact would be
> lost.  So my thinking is that those that stated they were visited by a
> Master (or a Chela) were simply using it as a ploy to retain the
> credibility of what they were saying - the boss said it and backs up my
> claim'. Whether they, the masters, came to them intuitively is well up for
> grabs, but what was emphasised was that they appeared to them in full
> dress!  Don't believe it. If you want to change the world you don't do it
> through a channeller.
> Cass
>
> >>________________________________
>
> > From: paulobaptista_v <paulobaptista_v@Bups7fjB55LC1gF6XxCEDaGW7moL1MVIkBBZh3AHn5isVHoiK6qefw5JrNX2ClLWgtiQp7t8z41DZcvAn3m1PlgJ.yahoo.invalid>
> >To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >Sent: Sunday, 5 February 2012 6:50 AM
>
> >Subject: theos-talk Re: Reply to Govert and questions about Emma Britten
> and AÃvanhov
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Dear Govert,
> >
> >As I said before, I am satisfied with my present opinion about HPB.
> Currently, I am more concerned with grasping theosophical concepts, not so
> much with the evaluation of personalities.
> >
> >Besides, it is hard to spend money in a book with factual errors. I
> stumbled across the following excerpt just now, while trying to find a bit
> more about Meade's book.
> >
> >"In all, about nine or ten persons testified to having seen the Mahatmas:
> Annie Besant, Henry Olcott, Damodar Mavalankar, Isabel Cooper-Oakley,
> William Brown, Nadyezhda Fadeyev, S.R. Ramaswamier, Justine Glinka and
> Vsevolod Solovyov. Franz Hartmann said that while he never actually saw
> them, he felt their presence." Marion Meade in her biography Madame
> Blavatsky, The Woman Behind The Myth, 1980, p. 497.
> >
> >I remember reading this statement by Meade some fifteen years ago and
> exclaiming to myself, "Oh Marion Meade, you haven't done your homework!"
> Off the top of my head, I could count at least twenty-five people who
> testified to having seen the Mahatmas during H.P.B.'s lifetime. And despite
> Meade's statement to the contrary, Hartmann had testified that he had
> actually seen one of the Mahatmas. Apparently Meade had never carefully
> read two of the titles listed in her own bibliography: Geoffrey Barborka's
> The Mahatmas And Their Letters (1973) and Franz Hartmann's Report Of
> Observations, etc. (1884); both titles prove Meade didn't know what she was
> writing about concerning Hartmann."
> >
> >D. Caldwell
> >
> >http://www.blavatsky.net/gen/refute/caldwell/johnson2.htm
> >
> >PB
> >
> >--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@...>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Paulo,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I think you might be too negatively influenced by Carrither's rhetoric.
> He
> >> makes good points, but also less good points, and gives the impression
> that
> >> the books in question are worthless and that therefore HPB stands
> >> vindicated. I do not agree. Meade and Williams also make good points,
> and
> >> lesser points, and are indeed quite straightforward in their disbelief
> of
> >> HPB. Meade does not proceed from an axiomatically held materialist
> position.
> >> She acknowledges that there were psychic phenomena connected with HPB
> but
> >> also thinks there was enough trickery by HPB to conclude that she was a
> >> fraud. I think every Theosophist should read the Meade book (and then
> the
> >> Carrithers review) to make up their own mind.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com] On
> >> Behalf Of paulobaptista_v
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 3:06 PM
> >> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >> Subject: theos-talk Re: Reply to Govert and questions about Emma
> Britten and
> >> AÃvanhov
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Govert,
> >>
> >> I understand your approach and I would have liked that Meade, Peter
> >> Washington and others, who have portrayed a negative image of HPB, had
> done
> >> just that, a comparison of the favorable and the unfavorable views, but
> >> without preconceptions. I have never read Meade, Williams or
> Washington's
> >> biographies of Blavatsky, but I am familiar with the replies written by
> some
> >> theosophists. It still surprises me how difficult it seems to be (even
> for
> >> some who are scholars) to analyze a certain subject without some
> >> preconceptions like "Psychic phenomena does not exist so HPB was a
> fraud" or
> >> "The existence of Mahatmas with strange powers is something that cannot
> be
> >> real, so they are a product of her imagination". That's not a very
> >> scientific approach and even for a journalist those assumptions are
> >> incorrect starting points. The number of inaccuracies in the
> unfavorable HPB
> >> biographies is very high (dates, places, etcâ) and this only happens
> because
> >> some of those authors were not primarily concerned in producing a
> rigorous
> >> work. They prefer to simply give their personal views, based on
> >> interpretations (sometimes distorted) of pre-selected events that can
> >> suggest that their preconceived ideas are correct.
> >> In the links below you can see examples of the kind of mistakes that
> these
> >> authors have in their books:
> >>
> >> http://blavatskyfoundation.org/abstractionfromtbf.htm
> >> http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/theos/baboon.htm
> >>
> >> I am not interested in wasting my time reading books that follow this
> line
> >> of thought, that's why I made that remark about Meade's book.
> >> I read some biographic accounts concerning HPB (Cranston, Overton
> Fuller,
> >> Olcott, Cleather, Goodrick-Clarke, Neff, Wachtmeister, Kingsland) and
> I'm
> >> satisfied with my current perspective of who she was. HPB was not
> perfect of
> >> course, but people seem to prefer focusing on her faults instead of
> trying
> >> to understand some of her actions and the conditions she had to face to
> >> achieve her goal. Most important of all, they forget about the message
> and
> >> teachings that she brought to the world.
> >>
> >> I think that a definitive biography has not been made yet, and if
> someone
> >> wants to take that enterprise, of course he/she has to take in account
> those
> >> who were against her. All possibilities must be considered, but lies
> must be
> >> discarded.
> >>
> >> I think that I got no answer to my questions about Emma Britten, so I
> will
> >> try again.
> >> Blavatsky and Emma became enemies right after the release of Art Magic?
> When
> >> did Emma leave the TS?
> >>
> >> I would also like to get some opinions from the members of theos-talk
> >> concerning Omraam MikhaÃl AÃvanhov. He is rather popular here in
> Portugal in
> >> some circles (for example amongst some of the teachers of Lisbon's
> biggest
> >> astrology school) and it seems that the same happens in France. DonÂt
> know
> >> if the same applies to the English-speaking world. Is he in some way
> >> connected to theosophy? His master, Peter Deunov used a lexicon that
> seems
> >> to have something in common with theosophy. Deunov also had some sort of
> >> connection with K, after the end of Order of the Star of the East. What
> is
> >> your opinion about AÃvanhov?
> >>
> >> PB
> >>
> >> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <mailto:theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> ,
> >> "Govert Schuller" <schuller@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Dear Paulo,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You bring up a lot of interesting issues. Though I can't deal with
> them
> >> all,
> >> > I only like to suggest that two negatives don't make a positive in
> this
> >> > investigation of HPB. The criticisms by HPB apologists of the works
> by HPB
> >> > skeptics do not amount automatically to a vindication of HPB. Though
> their
> >> > methodologies might be faulty, they still might be right. Besides
> that,
> >> even
> >> > Daniel admits that one can learn a lot, though with caution, from the
> HPB
> >> > biographies by Meade and Williams. As a Theosophist one might not find
> >> them
> >> > palatable, they're still important to read, even if only to get
> familiar
> >> > with what's out there fundamentally critiquing HPB.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > From: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <mailto:theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com
> >
> >> [mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <mailto:theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> ]
> >> On
> >> > Behalf Of paulobaptista_v
> >> > Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2012 2:35 PM
> >> > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <mailto:theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> >> > Subject: theos-talk About Emma Britten and the torch-bearer of truth
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thank you Govert for all you wrote about K.
> >> >
> >> > I do not agree with your perspective on Blavatsky. My ideas about her
> are
> >> > closer to Daniel's.
> >> > I was appalled to see Marion Meade's biography about Blavatsky
> mentioned
> >> as
> >> > a good book, when her statements on this video
> >> >
> >> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vThc0c1WIug
> >> > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vThc0c1WIug
> >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vThc0c1WIug&feature=related>
> >> &feature=related>
> >> > &feature=related
> >> > (check also parts 1, 3 and 4)
> >> >
> >> > confirm the warnings made by Carrithers
> >> > http://blavatskyfoundation.org/abstractionfromtbf.htm
> >> >
> >> > I see no use in reading a book based on older books that are known to
> >> depict
> >> > lies.
> >> >
> >> > For me, the most interesting biography about Blavatsky is "Blavatsky
> and
> >> her
> >> > teachers", by Jean Overton Fuller. Although not a biography in a
> strict
> >> way,
> >> > Daniel's "The Esoteric World of Mme Blavatsky" is also extremely
> helpful
> >> if
> >> > you want to know the arguments of those who were for and against the
> Old
> >> > Lady.
> >> >
> >> > I donÂt have a good impression about Elizabeth Claire Prophet,
> although I
> >> > admit I do not have enough information on her. I know that in
> alpheus.org
> >> > there are some articles about Prophet, and I intend to read them. She
> won
> >> > the Ig Nobel prize in 2011 for predicting the end of world in the
> year of
> >> > 1990 and some of her sons have strongly criticized her. Check what
> one of
> >> > them had to say in 2006:
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://www.blacksunjournal.com/elizabeth-clare-prophet/150_happy-birthday-mo
> >> > m_2006.html
> >> >
> >> > In a previous post someone mentioned Emma Hardinge Britten. As far as
> I am
> >> > aware, Emma Britten was one of the first members of the TS. In 1876
> she
> >> > published "Art Magic", a book which was recently re-edited by Marc
> >> Demarest.
> >> > Yesterday I was searching for that passage about the "torch-bearer of
> >> truth"
> >> > in the Portuguese version of the "Key to Theosophy" and in the
> previous
> >> page
> >> > I found strong criticism by Blavatsky about "Art Magic".
> >> >
> >> > She wrote: "The cycle of "Adepts," used as sledge-hammers to break the
> >> > theosophical heads with, began twelve years ago, with Mrs. Emma
> Hardinge
> >> > Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and Ghost-Land, and now ends with the
> >> "Adept"
> >> > and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a work written by Spiritualists
> >> against
> >> > Theosophy and its teachings."
> >> >
> >> > "The spiritualistic author of Art Magic, etc., may or may not have
> been
> >> > acquainted with such an Adept [Louis, who according to Emma Britten,
> gave
> >> > much of the information contained in the book]â and saying this, I
> say far
> >> > less than what that lady has said and written about us and Theosophy
> for
> >> the
> >> > last several years â that is her own business."
> >> >
> >> > Blavatsky and Emma became enemies right after the release of Art
> Magic?
> >> When
> >> > did Emma leave the TS?
> >> >
> >> > About the 20th century "torch bearer of truth", I found these two
> articles
> >> > written by Carrithers:
> >> >
> >> > http://blavatskyfoundation.org/torch.pdf
> >> >
> >> > http://blavatskyfoundation.org/hasdamodarreturned.pdf
> >> >
> >> > and also this one published in the Winter of 2008 in Fohat
> >> >
> >> > http://www.theosophyonline.com/ler.php?id=298
> >> >
> >> > which are of some interest, concerning this subject.
> >> >
> >> > When we look to the last quarter of the 20th century we see a
> >> popularization
> >> > of the concepts of karma and reincarnation, mainly through the hands
> of
> >> men
> >> > of science. We have Raymond Moody Jr's "Life after Life" released in
> 1975
> >> > about NDEs. In 1977, the first academic article by prof. Ian Stevenson
> >> about
> >> > reincarnation was accepted by a medical journal (his work gave strong
> >> > support to the advocates of reincarnation). We could even add Brian
> Weiss'
> >> > books about past lives, the first being published in 1988. Buddhist
> >> > teachings spread widely in the West during the 1975-2000 period.
> >> >
> >> > In astrology, we had the resurge of ancient techniques, with the
> >> translation
> >> > of valuable old books by astrologers like Robert Hand, Robert Zoller
> and
> >> > Robert Schmidt, all of them with an extensive knowledge of Greek
> or/and
> >> > Latin. This had a tremendous impact in the Art.
> >> >
> >> > It is quite clear for me that the common man of our Western societies
> has
> >> > heard a lot about karma and reincarnation in the last 35 years. Movies
> >> (and
> >> > even soap operas) used them as plot devices. Despite of all that
> happened
> >> in
> >> > the 60's I guess that those concepts were not that popular in 1975 as
> they
> >> > are now.
> >> > There was not an intervention of a "torch- bearer of truth", nor did
> the
> >> TS
> >> > had an important role in the 1975-2000 period. Taking HPB words
> literally,
> >> > we can hypothesize that the course of events led to a change of
> strategy,
> >> > and the option was to popularize two core concepts, benefiting from
> the
> >> > visibility and credibility that men of science have. Of course we
> could
> >> > discuss some of their methods, especially in the case of Brian Weiss.
> >> >
> >> > I am sure that all that happened in the TS after Blavatsky's death
> surely
> >> > impeded the TS of being the body that could continue the work of its
> >> > Founders. I certainly agree with Carrithers and Redfern on this.
> >> >
> >> > Blavatsky's words were:
> >> > "Towards the close of each century you will invariably find that an
> >> > outpouring or upheaval of spirituality â or call it mysticism if you
> >> prefer
> >> > â has taken place. "
> >> >
> >> > And the question that has to be asked is if this happened in the last
> >> > quarter of the 20th century or not. In my opinion, yes, it has.
> >> >
> >> > PB
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > No virus found in this message.
> >> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> > Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4757 - Release Date:
> 01/21/12
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> No virus found in this message.
> >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4781 - Release Date:
> 02/02/12
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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