Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Theos-World SHOW MAHATMA LETTERS CONTAIN GENUINE TEACHINGS.

Expand Messages
  • samblo@cs.com
    Brian, You still manage to miss the crucial point. No one can through intention or good hearted desire come to make a Mahatma manifest just to satisfy your
    Message 1 of 5 , Nov 17, 2002
      Brian,
      You still manage to miss the crucial point. No one can through
      intention or
      good hearted desire come to make a "Mahatma" manifest just to satisfy your
      profound uncertainty, such things simply are not in the cards. The fact
      that you as
      well as "over 700 Scholars" you cite have not experienced said occurrence
      on a
      direct basis is irrelevant. There are people today in the world who have
      had this type
      of experience even if not by either Mahatma Master Takar Khoot Hoomi Lal
      Singh
      or Morya. the insistent statement of H.P. Blavatsky was that there
      Benevolent
      Guides to Mankind ever present. whether in the context of Catholic
      Visitations later
      recognized by the Pope, Sat Guru's of the Threadlines of the East, or
      Bodhisattva's
      manisfestions respective the various branches of Buddhism, or Sufi lift
      of Mind and
      revelation.
      What is your prime hope when you arrive at your last day and last breath
      in your
      future ?
      I suggest first you conduct a poll of all "700 Scholars" asking if they
      had ever met or
      through any means experienced the equivelant of a Mahatma.

      John
    • Morten Nymann Olesen
      HI Brian and all of you, Thanks for the invitation Brian ! I have joined the group. from M. Sufilight with peace... ... From: brianmuehlbach
      Message 2 of 5 , Nov 17, 2002
        HI Brian and all of you,

        Thanks for the invitation Brian !

        I have joined the group.

        from
        M. Sufilight with peace...


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "brianmuehlbach" <brianmuehlbach@...>
        To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 7:42 AM
        Subject: Theos-World SHOW MAHATMA LETTERS CONTAIN GENUINE TEACHINGS.


        > Let's Dallas/Daniel C. Caldwell and any other Theosophists on this list
        > present there evidence the next few hours on :
        >
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
        >
        > It is easy for Theosophists on this list to finally show us (and the
        > world ?) that "The Mahatma Letters" truly contain genuine oriental
        > teachings or not.
        >
        [CUT]
      • leonmaurer@aol.com
        I, for one, am getting tired of all your crap. What makes you think theosophists need you (an obscure historian with a personal hatred of theosophy who may be
        Message 3 of 5 , Nov 21, 2002
          I, for one, am getting tired of all your crap. What makes you think
          theosophists need you (an obscure historian with a personal hatred of
          theosophy who may be using this vendetta and these propaganda tactics solely
          for purposes of attaining personal notoriety) to show them how to "present
          their teachings to the world"?

          What hubris. It's almost sickening to what ends you will stoop to prove your
          negative, prejudicial, and entirely unverifiable OPINIONS about theosophy and
          its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even superficially)
          or nothing at all of its actual philosophically or scientifically
          unassailable metaphysical meanings, purposes, and ends in view.

          What a joke. Putting up this offer is just like your other propaganda tricks
          -- since you know, as well as all of us convinced, or even student
          theosophists, that there is no valid "evidence" (other than first hand
          experiential reports of credible people) that can "prove" (to each of us,
          individually) that the Mahatma letters are or are not "authentic," or whether
          or not the Masters, or "Mahatmas" who wrote them ever existed. In theosophy,
          we base all our judgments on what is said, rather than who said it. So,
          whatever your so called "experts" know about Indian civilization and their
          ancient religions, they can no more verify or deny the letters genuineness,
          whether of its writers or their message, as they can "prove" their own
          beliefs... Other than by blabbing the same worthless and prejudicial OPINIONS
          about them that you have. Since when do exoteric and blind religious beliefs
          have any weight in proving or disproving anything?

          The truth or validity of the Masters writings and teachings, whether in the
          Mahatma letters or in the SD, can only be judged by careful study of their
          inherent consistency with the fundamental teachings of ancient theosophy --
          that neither you nor your pundits can deny with any "evidence" or even by
          logical arguments based on the same "fundamental principles" that the SD is
          grounded on... And, which, I'll wager, all Indian philosopher/scientists of
          any honesty or integrity are in total agreement with.

          Therefore, I challenge you to come up with any "Indian" (or for that matter
          any other nationality's) pundits who will be able to deny the teachings of
          theosophy on unassailably valid scientific, philosophical, or religious
          grounds. Accordingly, I await your posting of their valid "proofs" or
          arguments (if any) in letters signed by them -- relating to the non existence
          of the Masters, and/or the invalidity of the theosophical teachings. What
          makes you think, after more than 100 years of just such "experts" trying to
          do so, that they can do so now?

          Wake up! And, get off our backs with your specious and opinionated,
          nonsensical harangues and phony, self-serving offers -- which I hope no other
          theosophists will take up. (Although, I can't speak or be responsible for
          anyone else but myself.)

          As a word of caution for the "other" members of "this list"... Theosophists
          are wise to stay out of arguments about the validity or invalidity of
          religious beliefs or metaphysics -- which is a total waste of their time and
          energy.

          LHM
          ----------------------------------
          In a message dated 11/17/02 2:43:37 AM, brianmuehlbach@... writes:

          >Let's Dallas/Daniel C. Caldwell and any other Theosophists on this list
          >present there evidence the next few hours on :
          >
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
          >
          >It is easy for Theosophists on this list to finally show us (and the
          >world ?) that "The Mahatma Letters" truly contain genuine oriental
          >teachings or not.
          >
          >Let us just have Daniel C. Caldwell, Dallas/Dalval, Leoanmaurer, or
          >however believes "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they are,
          >post there and we watch this for a day or two, or and all of us who think
          >they have found something genuine in The Mahatma Letters post it there
          >and see what the experts say to that. Anybody is llowed to post there
          >. Let Daniel C. Caldwell , Dallas, and so on post whatever they want us to
          >believe on "theos talk" on
          >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization the next day ore so.
          >With more then seven hundred (exactly 707) experts in the field of
          >ancient religions and civilisations on the Indian sub-continent. (Including
          >Tibetologists and so on)
          >
          >And lets see how many of the more then sevenhundred experts there
          >Daniel C. Caldwell and Dallas or however of those on theos-talk that
          >believe "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they are can get any
          >of these sevenhundred and more experts there to agree.
          >Lets Dallas/ Daniel/Leon/ and so on show us they are not just crackpot-
          >"believers."
          >
          > At least with such a large group of specialists in religions , history, and
          >archeology of the ancient Indian sub-continent (two or three ?) that
          >would confirm that what Dallas/Daniel and so on want us to (bamboos
          >into ?) "believing," is true.
          >
          >I am looking now,
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
          >
          >
          >
          > Brian
          >
          >PS I will place the complete postings as of this moment until in three
          >days from now appear on the subject of "the content and precipitation
          >of The Mahatma Letters" (with this very title) on my website in three
          >days, whatever appears the next three days on this subject. (except of
          >course those posters who let me know I should not place it on my web
          >site, otherwise the postings there are public domain, and of course I will
          >let as soon the matter takes of on
          >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization place a message there
          >with my intent so all there know )
        • brianmuehlbach
          OPINIONS about theosophy and its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even superficially)= or nothing at allBrian: If you know anything at
          Message 4 of 5 , Nov 22, 2002
            "OPINIONS about theosophy and
            its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even superficially)=

            or nothing at all"

            Brian: If you know anything at all yourself then start by showing us one
            by one a scolarly refutation of the few dozen "philosophical" points
            refuting the contents of for example the "Mahatma Letters" below, but
            do work trough it all the way to the end if you want to be worth your
            salt, and not just be looked upon by some as a crackpot polemicist:

            In these Letters, the Mahatmas have made great claims about
            their teaching authority. Others have accepted these Masters' claims to
            teaching authority as valid, and have thus based their entire
            world-view and life choices on the teachings of these Theosophical (T)
            Masters.
            For some this has been a life-enriching experience, which has
            inspired philosophical inquiry, intellectual growth, virtue, altruism, a
            sense of universal brotherhood and other good things in them. These
            Theosophists have extracted things from the teachings of the T
            Masters that reinforced their inherent goodness and encouraged their
            intellectual growth and moral development and intellectual-affective
            integration on many levels. Such a positive outcome is no-doubt what
            H.B. Blavatsky and other of the Theosophical leaders had in mind at the
            outset of their mission to create a global order devoted to their esoteric =

            studies.

            However, some of the central ideas contained in the T
            Masters' "Mahatma Letters" inspired malevolent, not
            benevolent people, and through the world-view and life-choices of these
            ill-motivated people, led to some persistently dangerous global
            ideologies and tragic outcomes in history. It is a given that the same can =

            =

            be said regarding some ideas contained in the Vedas, or the Bible etc.
            For example, in India, the Vedic and Puranic concept of the sacramental
            social body (Daiva Varnashram Dharma system) of the self-sacrificed
            cosmic Purusha (Rig Veda Purusha Sukta Hymn) was corrupted by the
            conscience-less powerful into the oppressive reincarnation-and-karma
            doctrine related birth-caste system. As in Protestant Puritanism, a
            happy privileged life was considered by the elite birth-caste Brahmins to
            be the result of cosmic favor or su karma / good karma. Those
            powerless persons suffering from poverty etc. were considered
            unworthy of anything better by virtue of their previous sinfulness and
            resultant cursed birth / vi-karma or bad karma. Thus this Vedic doctrine
            of varna interpreted by non racist people of benevolent good-will could
            result in a just and peaceful, progressive unifying social order. However
            the same doctrine could result in oppression and birth-class slavery
            when interpreted by racist persons of ill-will. In the same way the
            Christian mission to go out and save people may be the inspiration for
            either altruistic, benevolent and socially unifying acts that build
            non-sectarian human community, or the gospel mission may be
            misinterpreted as a mandate to forcibly "convert" humanity in colonial
            and muslim jihadi-like campaigns.

            Historical Denial Does Not Serve the Best Interest of Humanity

            It does not serve the best interest of humanity to ignore the
            historical relationship between the ideal of the Vedic Varnashram
            Dharma system doctrine and the horrific pathological reality of the birth-
            caste system. It does not help humanity to ignore the historical reality
            of=

            therelationship between the doctrine of Christian mission and its
            perverted manifestation, the doctrine of Euro-American global
            conquest. In the same way, it is not in the best interest of humanity to
            ignore or totry to cover-up / obscure the historical relationship of certai=
            =
            n
            Theosophical ideas to colonial 'white" Aryan racism, later nazi
            aryosophism,and the diffusion of these ideas into various other socially
            pathological, racist and scientistic movements. Ideas have history, and
            even the best of ideas are misunderstood and abused or corrupted over
            time and distance as they diffuse through various existing thought-
            systems and languages. Time and circumstance modify ideas. Even
            when an attempt is made to protect an idea from modification by
            doctrinalizing it, varying perspectives allow for doctrines to be
            interpreted in different ways.

            Thus a non racist and a racist reading the Purusha Sukta will see
            different doctrines in it. A doctrine or creed (credo=Shraddha), like
            beauty can exist "in the eye of the beholder," as well as codified in
            documents.

            As a result, persons of good-will and those of ill-will can seem to
            profess the same creed, but the content of the creed, the meaning of the
            words is not the same for them. The document is the same, the
            difference being in their perspective.

            Syncrestic Buddhism in the Mahatma Letters...The Masters Reject the
            Brahminical Scriptures of Hinduism

            Letter from H.P. Blavatsky to A.P. Sinnett. This letter includes a
            message from Master Morya.
            Dehra Dun. Friday. 4th.

            "It is useless for a member to argue `I am one of a pure
            life, I am a teetotaller and an abstainer from meat and vice. All my
            aspirations are for good' etc. and he, at the same time, building by his
            acts and deeds an impassable barrier on the road between himself and
            us. What have WE, the DISCIPLE of the true Arhats, of esoteric
            Buddhism and of Sanggyas to do with the SHASTERS and Orthodox
            Brahmanism? There are 100 of thousands of Fakirs, Sannyasis and
            Saddhus leading the most pure lives, and yet being as they are, ON THE
            PATH OF ERROR, never having had an opportunity to meet, see or even
            hear of us. THEIR FOREFATHERS HAVE DRIVEN AWAY THE FOLLOWERS
            OF THE ONLY TRUE PHILOSOPHY UPON EARTH AWAY FROM INDIA and
            now, it is not for the latter to come to them but to them to come to us if =

            =

            they want us. Which of them is ready to BECOME A BUDDHIST, a Nastika
            as they call us? None."

            BA G: In this quote, the "Shasters" (Shastras, Holy Sanskrit
            scriptures) of India are rejected, and the teachings of the T Masters and
            HPB are clearly identified with Theravadin (Southern or atheistic)
            Buddhism, centered in Sri Lanka, which was driven out of India during
            and subsequent to the reign of the Mahayana Buddhist emperor Asoka.
            Asoka's own Buddhist Master had an Ashram in Mathura, the ancient
            capital and educational university "Vatican City" of Royal
            Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, which the pure land tradition of Mahayana
            Buddhism is closely related to. The form of Buddhism "driven away"
            from India was that of Sri Lankan related Theravadin Buddhism.

            The TS teachings continually merge contradictory Mahayana and
            Theravadin Buddhist doctrines, especially in their combined use of
            Nepalese-Tibetan with Sri Lankan sources. However, they seem to
            contain no appreciation of the intimate historical relationship
            between Vaishnavism and Pure Land Buddhism, as is apparent from all
            the Sanskrit Buddhist texts, iconography and interdisciplinary evidence
            in ancient combined Vaishnava and Pure Land Buddhist centers of
            worship like Vrindavana-Mathura. Instead of correctly associating the
            Mahayana doctrines, rites, iconography etc. of Nepalese-Tibetan
            Buddhism with earlier theistic Krishna-centric Vaishnavism, the T S
            Masters generally ignore the profoundly important Vaishnava link, and
            instead focus on the "esoteric" deconstruction of other-power salvific
            Buddhist transcendentalism, and watering-down of the theistic
            associations with "Hinduism" to re-present N-Tibetan Buddhism as
            merely a covered form of Theravada.

            Of course this campaign of Theosophy reinforced the exoteric-theism-
            versus-esoteric-atheism dichotomy already in N-Tibetan Buddhism.
            Esoteric Voidism haunts Mahayana Buddhism in the same way that
            esoteric atheism haunts "Hinduism" in the form of extreme
            impersonal Advaita Vedanta, and esoteric gnosticism still haunts
            Christianity in the West. Thus while claiming a love of India and her
            sacred traditions,in fact, the Theosophists rejected her authentic
            traditions of salvific transcendental personalism, the dominant exoteric
            Bhakti traditions of Krishna-Vishnu, Shiva and Devi, to promote a form of
            exoterically Hinduized but esoteric, covered syncrestic Buddhism. The T
            Masters were not masters of the corpus of Sanskrit or Southern Indian
            Dravidian sacred Vishnu, Shiva, Devi and Marugan etc, literatures. They
            did not teach about the direct relationship between Pure Land Buddhism
            and Vaishnavism, and they seemed to know little about the great
            devotional, salvific traditions of either Northern or Southern India. They==


            presented themselves as the highest authorities on ancient wisdom, but
            apparently felt that honoring the sources of their wisdom, the
            "Shasters" that they disdained, was not necessary. Thus they presented
            their own system of thought, using language and teachings from various
            shastras without properly representing those texts, or their source, the
            Supreme Deity of the Vedas and Puranas, Upanishads, Samhitas, temple
            Archana Vigraha worship, Bhakti hymnology etc.

            The Eastern teachings of the T Masters are a concoction of doctrines
            drawn principally from Vaishnava and Buddhist sources, and they claim
            to be the "highest authority" of this "only true philosophy" on Earth.
            Blofeld, in his book on Tantric Mysticism In Tibet argued that the
            different schools of Buddhism are like different grades. We can see
            this same general attitude among Theosophists, who also consider the
            deity visualizations of Tibetan Buddhism to be like a high school level of =

            =

            Buddhism, while the no nama-rupa (no name-form) practice of Zen
            Buddhism is considered to be like the PhD program.

            Theosophy teaches that there are Planetaries (like the astrological
            planet regents or devas) and ascended Masters or their equivalent of
            bodhisattvas, but there is no transcendental supreme personality of
            Godhead, who is the source of such beings. In Theosophy the Dharma
            Kaya, or ultimate reality is totally impersonal, and personality only
            exists in a qualified state in the Nirmanya (or Sambhogya) Kaya. So the
            T S Masters are the highest authorities of the one true philosophy on
            earth, and clearly teach a Buddhism that rejects the original
            transcendentalism of the Vaishnava-related Mahayana Tri Kaya (trinity),
            with its authentic bodhisattva doctrine, in favor of a Sri Lankan and Zen
            related form of Theravadin Buddhism. Even so, the "absolute nothing"
            (see Maseo Abe for example) of orthodox Sri Lankan- related
            Theravadin Buddhism is not authentically and consistently represented
            throughout the letters of the Mahatmas.

            Now we have a general idea of the Masters' authority claims, the
            near nil extent of their Shastric knowledge-base (they reject the
            shastras) and the primarily syncretistic Buddhist Eastern aspect of their
            perspective. Their writings are full of thought-forms, language and
            references which clearly indicate a European higher education, so
            Theosophical lore takes this into account, through reference to their
            European education. Others (the Hare brothers etc.) have made textual
            studies of the Mahatma Letters for internal evidence of their
            authorship.

            However, I am not concerned with the Masters classical Western
            education in this series of comments on the Mahatma letters. I am
            concerned with whether or not the Letters accurately represent the
            Eastern traditions that the Masters claim to have mastered, and have
            so obviously drawn from.

            The Relationship Between The Masters and H.P.Blavatsky

            At this point, we come to the question of the claimed relationship
            between the Masters Koot Hoomi, Morya and Madame H.P. Blavatsky,
            who was considered their absolutely consistent representative. What
            authority is claimed for her ? Is she considered as equally
            infallible as some Theosophists consider the Masters K.H. and M? In the
            below, it is claimed that Madame Blavatsky was actually an incarnation
            of Serapis, the Master of K.H. and M themselves!

            Published by Blavatsky Archives. Online Edition copyright 2002.

            "Bear Witness!" Who Was the Real H.P.B. ?
            Compiled by Daniel H. Caldwell

            A Mighty Adept Using the Old Body Called H.P. Blavatsky

            "From the above material, it would appear that Serapis, one of
            the Chiefs or Chohans of the Occult Brotherhood, was the Superior or
            Teacher of both Master K.H. and Master M. Furthermore, Serapis (being
            a Nirmanakaya) had taken on his "present incarnation" using
            the "old body" called H.P. Blavatsky as a instrument for his "life of
            self-sacrifice."
            These insights help us to understand more fully the significance of
            KH's words about H.P. Blavatsky:
            "After nearly a century of fruitless search, our Chiefs had to
            avail themselves of the only opportunity to send out a European body
            upon European soil to serve as a connecting link. . . ."

            BA G: Thus while HPB was playing at being the student of her Masters
            K.H. and M, Theosophists teach that she was actually their Master.
            The whole scheme gets quite convoluted, with the cast of T Masters
            eventually being credited with human progress in general, through
            their astounding litany of previous incarnations.

            The Authenticity of the Theosophical Revelation

            The Mahatma letters are part of the larger body of Theosophical
            teachings, whose greatest early contributor was Madame HPB / her
            Masters. There are many claims made about the
            mystical "precipitation," automatic writing or"channeling" (modern
            term) of the Masters' teachings through HPB and others. Again I
            am not as concerned with these issues as I am interested in the use or
            misuse and misrepresentation of authentic, redacted / corrupted or
            concocted ancient Eastern source-works. Like Joseph Smith's
            "miraculous" translation of his invented Egyptian "Book of Mormon"
            tablets, or works claiming to be based on documents about Jesus found
            in a Tibetan Lamasery, or the claimed "Essene Gospel" of the bogus
            modern so-called Essenes, there is a pattern to the emergence and
            presentation of esoteric and neo-gnostic spurious "ancient" source
            works.

            These typically are miraculously produced translations of some hidden,
            lost or obscure text, inscriptions or other revelation, with built-in
            deniability when it comes to authentication of the source. There is
            always some reason why the original source-work cannot be produced.
            Perhaps it was taken back up to heaven by an angel. Maybe it was
            destroyed by Catholics, or hidden in the Vatican Library under guard.

            In any event, the original document must be unavailable so that others
            can not analyze it for authenticity, and compare the original
            text's "miraculous translation" for accuracy. In the case of the Mahatma
            letters, and the "Stanzas of Dyzan," the problem of authenticity has been
            avoided by claiming that these writings were produced through the
            spiritualistic mediumship of HPB.

            Before her career as a Theosophical revelator of ancient Eastern
            wisdom in India, she was a medium and conjuror in spiritualist
            séance and medium circles in America. She was extraordinarily well read,
            knew several languages, and was a great story teller and prodigious
            writer who once ran a writing shop, and was expert in just the skills she
            would need to take dictation from the invisible Masters. Although she
            seemed to overtly hate Judaism and Christianity, she could also be an
            outspoken champion for those she considered wronged or oppressed. A
            complex and brilliant women, HPB commanded respect even from some
            educated and powerful men, in an age when women were not expected
            to be the intelligent champions of anything. It should be kept in mind
            that the social evils that were later to manifest from some of her seeds
            of thought, were surely not anticipated or desired by her. (I obviously
            do not accept the idea that she was "Serapis," and thus an
            all-knowing Master, outside of the normal influences of time.) At some
            point in her conjuring and minor-league mediumship, she "got religion"
            so to speak, and embarked on a life-long mission to better the condition
            of humankind. She was no doubt well motivated, but produced a mixed
            work that was part genius and part nonsense and trickery. The
            question is ...why should people bandon the study of authentic ancient
            religious and philosophical source-works to accept her / the Mahatmas'
            synthesis / writings as the ultimate authority on the world's
            hidden mysteries?

            The Mahatma Letters.
            [Caps for emphasis in quoted text mine, BA G]

            "BTW—even if HPB STOLE HER IDEAS and theories from all the
            ancient and modern teachers of the hidden mysteries (including Hermes,
            Pythagorus, Plato, Buddha, Lao Tse, Vyasa, Patanjali, etc.) -- WHY
            SEND EVERYONE TO THEM to learn new languages and dig it out for
            themselves, covering the same tracks that Blavatsky did—when all
            of it was so CLEARLY AND ACCURATELY synthesized in the SD (along
            with other explanatory writings of HPB and associated scriptural
            confirmations) in the common language that most everyone of a
            thoughtful mind in the world, today, can understand?"
            "In any event, I'm satisfied that the ultimate truth, as
            close as we'll ever get to it (barring faith in the "revelations" of one's
            favorite guru or God) is in theosophy's corner where intuition and reason
            are the only Gods worth listening to."

            BA G: This is the crux of the problem as far as I am concerned. It
            is a matter of the basic integrity or reliability of the information that
            has been presented in the Mahatma Letters, and the acknowledged
            writings of H.P. Blavatsky and the other prominent personalities of the
            early Theosophical Society and movement. What valuable truth did the
            Theosophical Masters actually convey? Why should everyone go to the
            the Masters, instead of to the still extant authentic ancient sources
            of classical Eastern and Western wisdom? Did the Masters and H.P.
            Blavatsky always clearly and accurately synthesize and represent
            important ancient teachings and traditions in her work? Or were there
            serious omissions, contradictions, and other errors? Were some of
            their representations of ancient traditions seriously flawed, corrupted by =

            =

            extreme bias and / or even actually dishonest?

            Regarding Atheism in the Mahatma Letters...

            The above current Theosophist's view regarding "the only gods
            worth listening to," should be compared to the statement below, of
            Master Koot Hoomi himself.

            "Mahatma Letter No. 10
            http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-10.htm

            [Transcribed from a copy in Mr. Sinnett's handwriting.—Ed]

            Notes by K.H. on a "preliminary Chapter" headed
            "God" by Hume,
            intended to preface an exposition of Occult Philosophy (abridged).

            Received at Simla, 1881-? `82.

            [Caps for emphasis in the quoted text below are mine, BA G]

            "NEITHER our philosophy nor ourselves BELIEVE IN A God, least of
            all in one whose pronoun necessitates a capital G."

            ... "Therefore, we DENY God both as philosophers and AS
            BUDDHISTS. We know there are planetary and other spiritual lives, and
            we know there is in our system NO SUCH THING AS GOD, EITHER
            PERSONAL OR IMPERSONAL. Parabrahm is not a God, but absolute
            immutable law, and Iswar is the effect of Avidya and Maya, ignorance
            based upon the great delusion. The word "God" was invented to
            designate the unknown cause of those effects which man has either
            admired or dreaded without understanding them, and SINCE WE CLAIM
            AND THAT WE ARE ABLE TO PROVE WHAT WE CLAIM—i.e. the
            knowledge of that cause and causes we are in a position to maintain
            THERE IS NO God OR Gods BEHIND THEM." ...

            Confusion in the Master Results in Confusion in the Chela.

            One Theosophical Society leader demonstrated why attention should be
            paid to understanding Eastern thought and traditions, and individual
            texts and persons, from reliable, historically authentic sources. He
            profoundly erred in identifying myself (BA G) with ..."Vedantist
            and Buddhist sectarian and separatist teachings"....

            If he had acquired any knowledge about the subject in general from
            clear and accurate, reliable sources, he never could have confused me
            with a "Vedantist." If he had any understanding of the
            various real-world sources and traditions involved, and had read and
            understood my biographical sketch on the site where his comment was
            posted, he would not have confused me with "sectarian and separatist
            teachings." I am a person who has studied deeply in numerous
            traditions, having a distinguished history of service in non-sectarian
            interfaith activism. My own teachings are anything but "separatist." As a
            Shiksha (instructing) Master, in a lineage of Vaishnavism from which
            some of the Masters' / Blavatsky's teachings have been appropriated, I
            have some familiarity with the Sanskrit terms they used, as found in the
            real ancient source works. I also have a clear understanding of the
            differences between some of the various schools of "Hindu" thought. As
            a Master in a Bhakti Yoga lineage, it is laughable to hear myself referred =

            =

            to as a "Vedantist" in such a way.

            One of my main criticisms of the Theosophical Society teachings is
            that they misrepresent teachings from genuinely ancient theistic and
            atheistic sources by appropriating, distorting, re-contexting and
            misinterpreting them. For instance the Mahatmas' teachings sometimes
            make use of ideas from Vaishnava traditions, but make no proper
            reference to the theistic thought-systems from which the ideas have
            been acquired.
            Thus the cyclic Yuga (eon / age) rounds of a finite universe, emanations
            from Godhead and Shakti, days of Brahma and such ideas are presented
            without their proper context and meaning. For example, in the
            authentic Vaisnava sources, the world-age Yugas are associated with
            the Yuga Avataras of Hari, or Krishna-Vishnu (Amitabha-Lokesvara in
            Pure Land Buddhism) who is the transcendent Deity, and the source of all
            spiritual and material realms and worlds (Vyuhas and Lokas). However
            the T S Masters do not properly present the relationship of the Yugas to
            the transcendental Deity. While there is some emanationism in the
            Masters' doctrines, it is not presented accurately from either the
            Vaishnava or Vaishnava-related earliest forms of Pure Land Buddhism.
            Instead, the saving Deities of other-power Pure Land Buddhism are
            represented more as dependent-arising products of mind and dualism.
            Outside of 'visualization', and the highest, subtlest material states, the
            Deities have no transcendent personal existence in the Dharma Kaya.
            However, a depth study of Northern Buddhism from India to Japan
            reveals the DHARMA KAYA is HRIH / HARI, the original PERSON OF THE
            GODHEAD IN VAISHNAVISM. Thus the Dharma Kaya was not originally a
            state of Buddhist extinction or non-being.

            But the T Masters do not represent Buddhist Voidism or Advaita
            Vedantist impersonalism purely either. Their "Buddhism"
            seems a strained synthesis of Vaishnava doctrines and the teachings of
            several different traditions of Buddhism. They try to associate their
            amalgamated Buddhist teachings with Sri Lankan Theravada, Tibetan
            and Zen Buddhism, this creates a strange brew when the emanationism
            of Vaishnavism (without its Divine source) is added to the mix. When
            time cycles and the days of Brahma etc. are described, the origin of
            Brahma (Helios Phanes) in the personality of Godhead (Narayana) is
            not really stressed. In these and many other cases, the Mahatmas do
            not deliver to their students a "clear and accurate" synthesis of
            ancient teachings and scriptures. In fact they seem to have had an
            agenda to edit-out the theistic context and content of the ideas that they
            used.

            Thus their product (the Mahatma Letters) appropriates elements from
            both theistic and atheistic traditions and corrupts these, forming an
            attempt to harmonize elements of theistic cosmogonic revelation, with
            modern watered-down Neo-Vedantism and an equally corrupted form of
            syncretistic Neo-Buddhism. by creating such a non-historical hodge-
            podge of spuriously 'ancient' doctrines from various mis-used
            sources, the Theosophical teachers render their chelas incapable of
            clear, accurate, rational thought involving these matters. A basic
            knowledge of real Indic traditions would have insured that the author
            who called me a "vedantist" would not have accused a Vaishnava Bhakti-
            Yoginof atheistic advaitan teachings by using such a loaded sectarian
            term.

            Because the Masters and other T S writers frequently confounded and
            merged and misrepresented Indic thought and traditions, Theosophists
            typically have no real grasp of the most basic truths regarding these
            real-world traditions. Having accepted HPB's "Reader's
            Digest"-like condensed version and synthesis of the wisdom traditions,
            they have cheated themselves out of a more direct and authentic
            experience of the
            same.

            Humility is Just Honesty About Oneself...The Pathology of Needing to
            Concoct, or Following Self-Appointed or Spurious Masters

            This gets to the personality development and disciplinary aspect of
            the
            issue. Why would someone who really wants to understand something,
            choose not to go to the SOURCE and properly discipline themself in
            its
            understanding? Why would a person prefer to speculate about
            something from the outside, rather than studying it up-close in a
            scientific, disciplined manner? The problem is that certain kinds of
            people cannot submit to any real-world authorities and hate to be
            required to live by rules of conduct and standards of behavior. They
            don't want to discipline their inquiry into any kind of
            traditional approach.
            They don't want to be bothered with the facts that disagree with
            them,
            and they don't want to learn anything that requires real
            discipline
            or "surrender." Such people will typically make-up their OWN
            ALTER-
            EGO AUTHORITIES to validate themselves and / or give themselves
            credibility with others. Thus they can play at the humility and
            surrender
            game, without ever really submitting themselves for instruction to
            anyone. As a result we see the endless proliferation of "humble
            servants" and "messengers" of the invisible or
            conveniently inaccessible
            Masters, who never really require any surrender on "their"
            disciple's
            part. The "disciple' OF THE INVENTED MASTER becomes, as a
            messenger of their inaccessible Master (s), the REAL GURU / Master of
            others, who really do desire a real-world flesh-and-blood authority.
            Thus we can observe the endless innovation and diffusion of new
            esoteric and occult "spiritualities" based on the sincere surrendered
            following of some people, who blindly submit to those flesh-and-blood
            Masters who are themselves only the "servants" of a PROJECTED
            authority-figure of THEMSELVES. So, the problem is not that HPB and
            her real-world incarnate friends assembled a syncristic
            thought-system from a vast number and variety of sources. The problem
            is that they did not have the honesty about themselves, the humility to
            admit the genealogy of their ideas. THIS IS THE BASIC PATHOLOGY OF
            THE LACK OF INTEGRITY IN "SPIRITUAL BUT NOT RELIGIOUS" GROUPS.

            Organized Religion is Not a Bad Thing...GSS Traditions and the
            Authentic Preservation and Diffusion of Ideas

            Meanwhile in the exoteric Great Religions, real-world masters require
            real-world surrender, discipline (diksha) and sacrifices from their
            surrendered students, but IN RETURN THEY DELIVER THE AUTHENTIC
            TEACHINGS OF REALLY ANCIENT AND VENERABLE TRADITIONS. "You
            get what you pay for" ....in this case either the intellectual
            and devotional heritage of centuries of exoteric traditions, or the
            concoctions of modern era "esoteric" cheaters. Authentic ancient
            traditions still living have exoteric lineages, real examinable ancient
            scriptures, real ancient histories and preserve the legitimate teachings
            of their lineages doctrinally. etc. Such traditions are the real guardians =
            =

            of ancient scriptures and wisdom. It takes a lifetime of disciplined study =

            =

            to master even a tiny bit of what such traditions have to offer. But, the
            proud "gnostic" or undisciplined jnani who idolizes their own
            brain, will not usually be attracted to a life time of study in anything
            really demanding of them. It is difficult to learn when one thinks that
            they already know everything, and has an aversion to all kinds of real
            authority. The proud gnostic concocter would rather be self-educated
            than to actually plumb the depths of anything through real surrender
            and disciplined inquiry with an authentic master requiring their respect.

            This is the pathology of the Masters-channeling New Age movement. I
            have seen channeling groups that are nothing other than mutual-
            deification societies. Every member is in an unspoken agreement to
            validate each other's fantacies of cosmic specialness.
            Receiving "messages" from their Masters, or Master Beings,
            the chelas reinforce their mutual fantacies of previous illustrious
            incarnations, being angels, aliens, demigods and goddesses etc. Thus
            they feed on each others' proud dishonesty and manipulativeness.
            Usually because there really is no other authority than themselves,
            surrender to these imaginary "Masters" never really requires anything of
            them.

            The Scholarly Contributions of Such self-Delude People

            The result of such a person's scholarly endeavors usually shows
            their disdain for accountability to real world history and truth, the
            proper citation of previous authorities and scientific methodology. Such
            personstypically want so-called "spirituality" without
            "religion." They want to master science or history or some field without
            being actually trained in the disciplines of that field. They tend to be
            masters of everything in their own opinion, but instead they are not the
            real masters of anything. They tend to be dabblers, who are venerated
            as masters by gullible people with a poor fund of knowledge. Now, in
            my opinion, H.P Blavatsky and her friends, were both dabblers and the
            actual masters of something. Their prodigious efforts and sacrifices
            did produce something. What they did master is on exhibit for all to see
            in the Mahatma Letters and other primary Theosophical Society writings.
            It is not that these writings have no value, but one should approach
            them as what they are, and not confuse them with what they claim to be,
            the highest authoritative teaching of the only true philosophy on earth.

            So What Were the Theosophical Society Masters the Masters Of ?

            Theosophical Society and Movement Propositions From T S Sources

            1. The only true philosophy of the Earth, Theosophy identified as
            Buddhism, is found in the Mahatmas' Letters, and these Letters
            are the primary source of esoteric / occult or higher wisdom for
            Theosophists. Next to these letters, the "Stanzas of Dyzan" are of
            canonical importance to Theosophists.

            2. The Theosophical Masters, authors of the "Mahatma
            Letters," especially Koot Hoomi, Master Morya and Serapis, are the
            highest authorities who have revealed themselves to humanity.

            3. The Master of the Masters Koot Hoomi and Morya, is Serapis.

            4. H.P. Blavatsky is the rather hidden incarnation of Serapis.

            5. The brotherhood of Theosophical Masters has reincarnated
            throughout time, guiding the world (and evolution of the races). Thus
            all previous revelations, religions and advances in various fields, must
            be interpreted in the context of their supposed relationship to the T S
            Masters.

            6. The priests of dogmatic or doctrinal ORGANIZED RELIGIONS have
            corrupted their scriptures, so it is better to read the more
            authentic core of teachings contained in the "Stanzas of Dyzan" and the
            synthesized teachings of the Mahatmas and HPB. There is no need to
            learn languages and study the source works themselves, as HPB has
            provided a clear and accurate synthesis of everything in these that is
            significant to study.

            7. Sannyasis and Sadhus etc. are "on the path of error," and
            Theosophy has nothing to do with the Shastra of Brahminism.

            8. Koot Hoomi / Theosophy absolutely denies the existence of God or
            Gods.

            My additional assertions...

            9. There is an amalgamation of Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism
            with Advaita Vedantism and Vaishnava sources in the teachings of
            Theosophical "Buddhism."

            10. Madame Blavatsky was a very intellectually gifted and educated
            person, who was the central figure in the whole development of
            Theosophy. Whether or not she wrote the Mahatma Letters with the
            help of corporeal or incorporeal beings, may or may not be of
            importance in certain kinds of analysis of the letters. The actual
            content of the letters can be examined in relationship to real-world
            ancient textual and living traditions, to see if the Mahatmas'
            presentations are accurate with regard to those thought-systems.

            Let Us Now Consider Some of the Curious Facts Related to the Specific
            Mixture of Kashmiri Eastern and Western Esoteric Teachings in the
            Mahatma Letters.

            In one letter KH writes to Sinnett:
            ..."Our best, most learned. and highest adepts are of the races
            of the `greasy Tibetans'; and the Penjabi Singhs -- ..."...

            Most of the debates that I have seen regarding the T.S. Masters have
            focused on the Masters' identity, the "precipitation" of
            their letters, H.P. Blavatsky's or someone else's medium-ship or
            "channeling" of their thoughts / writings, textual analysis of their letter=
            =
            s
            forcontemporary or near-contemporary plagiarized material, stylistic
            elements, language or other clues to their identity. I do not intend to
            address any of these things, which have all been chewed before.
            Rather than chewing-the-chewed, like a cow not done with its cud, I
            want to provide a reading of the Letters from the perspective of a
            person familiar with some of the source-works and traditions that the
            Mahatmas used and / or claimed to be representing. Ideas and the
            words, written and spoken, and images or symbols and actions that
            convey them, have history. Innovations occur and get diffused. Ideas
            spark social movements that wax and wane. Thought-forms, like
            other "things" have certain time-and-space limitations.

            Communication is sent and received in specific forms and languages.
            Each word or symbol has a content actually intended by its sender,
            and any number of meanings imposed on it by receivers. Scientifically-
            minded historians (not historical-fiction writers) want to know what
            was actually meant by the creators or sender(s) of a document from the
            past. They want to understand the successive meanings giving to an
            original or earlier document by later translators and commentators.
            They want to peel-back the layers of time, and get at the original
            core of an idea. Such scientifically-minded persons do not want to
            impose meanings on history, they want to discover the real meanings
            already there in history. They don't want to "massage the data"
            to fit into preconceived notions of history, or to support an agenda of
            some kind.

            The real lover of truth wants to understand what really happened, who
            the real players were, and what their motives, means and actions, and
            the consequences were etc. Such investigators use scientific
            methodologies and means of inquiry designed to safe-guard the
            objectivity and integrity of their efforts. They try to avoid errors
            by rigorously identifying their sources, to be sure of authenticity.

            In the case of my own studies, from the very beginning I learned of
            the value of interdisciplinary research from my father (a research
            electrobiophysicist), who taught me that errors could be avoided and
            facts established beyond doubt by approaching a subject or question
            from a multiplicity of disciplines instead of only one. Thus my
            studies utilized every discipline that I could bring to bear on a particula=
            =
            r
            question. This has given me a well-rounded grasp of the main subjects
            of my historical inquiries.

            In Theosophical sources, the Master Koot Hoomi (K H) writes about the
            Tibetans and Penjabi Singhs, Mr. Sinnet says that K H was a native of
            the Punjab, H.P. Blavatsky says that Koot Hoomi is a Pujabi, and both
            Blavatsky and others identify K H with Kashmir. Thus, I begin my
            commentary on the Mahatma Letters with this fact, because I will be
            focusing quite a bit on the Kashmiri-like syncristic Vaishnava,
            Buddhist and related content of the Letters. There is a well-established
            connection between the Sikhs of Kashmir and Theosophy. What people
            don't realize is that the Sikhs often worship in Vishnu temples,
            because of their close historical connection to Vaishnavism. Tibetan
            Buddhism, Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Devi worship, Sufism, Sikhism and all
            the branches of these traditions have their own real world histories. For
            example, there is a traditional date for the entrance of Padmasambhava
            into Tibet, and thus an eighth century AD historical beginning to
            Tibetan Buddhism. The Advaita Vedantism of Sri Adi Shankaracharya
            has a history too, as do the successive waves of Ishmali and Sufi
            Mohammedanism into the Punjab and Kashmir. In the Mahatma Letters
            there is a curious mix of Atheistic and Theistic Vaishnava, Advaita
            Vedanta, Mahayana and Theravadin Buddhism, Sikh and Sufi
            reinterpretations of Vaishnava, Shaivite and Devi teachings, and
            other amalgamations which can be found ESPECIALLY in the region of
            Kashmir. In the religious melting-pot of Kashmir today for instance,
            there may be found Vaishnava-influenced Muslim Sufi brahmins who do
            not eat flesh, Tantric-influenced Sahajiya Vaishnavas, various Sufi-
            Vaishnava or Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid groups, and Sikhism,
            which as another Sufi-Vaishnava-Shaivite hybrid religion is of course
            related to the Vaishnava and Shaivite Kshatriya (warrior class) of the
            Punjab.

            Thus the Sikh name "Singh" is important in this connection.

            Pure Land Buddhism, as originally in Nepal and Tibet, has its
            historical origins in Vaishnavism, and so is connected to the strange
            Kashmiri mix in the thread of Vaishnava doctrines and practices running
            through the whole region. It is from this regional melting-pot of Indic
            and=

            Western (Sufi and Gnostic) traditions that the Masters K H and Morya
            seem to have acquired some of their unorthodox understanding of the
            Sanskrit Shastras (scriptures) and to have created their hodge-podge of
            an eastern thought system. Whoever they were, they were masters of
            something, but what was that something? To assess their competence
            as masters of eastern traditions, one would need themself to be
            qualified in such traditions. As an instructing master in the
            Vedic-based Tradition of Vaishnavism, I am qualified to assess the
            accuracy of the what the masters have presented from my own
            tradition. Since the oldest literary traditions in the region are clearly
            those of the Sanskrit Vedic Vaishnava-related texts, and the Masters
            refer to some doctrines from these texts, then it is reasonable to assess
            the Mahatmas' presentation of ideas from these texts to determine their
            accuracy.

            The Example of the Rig Veda and Proto-Mahayana Buddhism

            For example, the Rig Veda is by all estimations very much older than
            the Advaita Vedantan writings of Adi Sankaracharya, the beginning of
            Tibetan Buddhism (8th c AD), the Era of Asoka, or even the life of
            Sakyamuni Buddha Himself. The Purusha Sukta Hymn is considered by
            many scholars to be among the oldest surviving writings of humanity.
            The Purusha Sukta is found in a collection of Vedic Sanskrit Hymns,
            the Rig Veda. These hymns glorify God under a variety of Names and
            Forms, as these forms have appeared from the Cosmic Body of the
            universal self-sacrificed Purusha, Who is described in the Purusha
            Sukta.

            In later corruptions of this monotheistic tradition, the forms of
            Purusha, are demoted to a mere multiplicity of "gods." Thus
            polytheism, pantheism etc. eventually obscured the originality and
            supremacy of Purusha as the transcendent supreme Deity of the Rig
            Veda. Purusha assumed a cosmic form for self-sacrifice to create,
            sustain (as sacramental food / Prasadam) and redeem every world /
            cosmic manifestation. In the Purusha Sukta, and related Vedic texts, it is
            clearly understood that Purusha is VISHNU. The Purusha Sukta is still
            chanted today on Vaishnava altars as the Eucharistic PRASADAM
            offerings are being made. Another one of Vishnu's Vedic names is Asura
            (from the root meaning "being," "to be, exist"). In the
            "Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism," R. C. Zaehner identifies the
            cosmic Purusha with the Zoroastrian supreme Deity Ahura Mazda
            (Ahura=Asura).

            The Jagganatha or Universal Form of Vishnu as Purusha is sometimes
            called his Vishva Rupa or Virata Rupa. This is one of the theophanies
            of SRI KRISHNA that was revealed to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gita, The
            cosmic form of God in Jewish mysticism is definitely related to the
            revelation of Sri Krishna in the Gita. The universal Purusha is of
            course identified with the Purusha AVATARA FORMS OF VISHNU. In the
            Vedas, Vishnu is called by many names, including Asura and Purusha. It
            is Vishnu Who is worshiped in multi-form in the Vedic hymns. This is the
            tradition of the oldest stratum of Vedic so-called "Hinduism," and all of
            the principle Vedic Nama-Rupa name-forms of Vishnu are found many
            centuries later in Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan and related
            Nepalese Buddhism. There the very ancient Vedic names and forms of
            Vishnu-Purusha AS LOKSHEVARA, are connected to Vaishnava doctrines,
            rites, practices, sacramental social order etc.. So the foundation of
            Tibetan Buddhism is in the much earlier worship of Vishnu-Purusha,
            without any doubt. When the entire socio-religious cultural milieu in
            which Sakyamuni's Buddhism first developed was Vedic-Vaishnava,
            how is it reasonable to assume that the pervasive elements of
            Vaishnavism in Mahayana Buddhism are later, intrusions or corruptions?
            In fact, Mahayana Buddhism, including Tibetan Buddhism, uses the very
            Sanskrit Names of Krishna-Vishnu for the ADI BUDDHA, who is also
            called ADI PURUSHA, BHAGAVAN, PURUSOTTAMA etc. To claim that a
            younger tradition (Buddhism) owes nothing to its origins is ridiculous.
            THIS IS THE SUI GENERIS nonsense of Theravadin Buddhism. The
            extremely ancient Purusha Sukta related Forms of Lokesvara are those
            of Vedic Purusha or Vishnu. The same names and forms are there in
            both the Buddhist and Vaishnava traditions, and this is not peculiar to
            the Nepalese-Tibetan form of Buddhism either. Everywhere in Pure Land
            Mahayana Buddhism it is the same. The names, forms, doctrines, rites
            etc. of the salvific transcendent other-power tradition of Buddhism
            are closely related to those of Krishna-centric Vaishnavism. When we
            look at the Sanskrit sources for the Mahatmas' Hindu and Buddhist ideas,
            again the oldest of these are the Vaishnava and Vaishnava-related
            scriptures, litanies and prayers. For those accustomed to thinking of
            Sanskrit literatures in terms of some generic hinduism, no such thing
            existed in the ancient world. Scriptures were the testimony of specific
            traditions, such as the sattvic Vaishnava or Shaivite or tantric Devi
            worshiping traditions. In the "CULT OF TARA" by S. Beyer, the original
            Sanskrit texts for the Tibetan Buddhist rituals of Mother Tara are given. -=

            -- In theos-talk@y..., leonmaurer@a... wrote:
            > I, for one, am getting tired of all your crap. What makes you think
            > theosophists need you (an obscure historian with a personal hatred of
            > theosophy who may be using this vendetta and these propaganda
            tactics solely
            > for purposes of attaining personal notoriety) to show them how
            to "present
            > their teachings to the world"?
            >
            > What hubris. It's almost sickening to what ends you will stoop to
            prove your
            > negative, prejudicial, and entirely unverifiable OPINIONS about
            theosophy and
            > its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even
            superficially)
            > or nothing at all of its actual philosophically or scientifically
            > unassailable metaphysical meanings, purposes, and ends in view.
            >
            > What a joke. Putting up this offer is just like your other propaganda
            tricks
            > -- since you know, as well as all of us convinced, or even student
            > theosophists, that there is no valid "evidence" (other than first hand
            > experiential reports of credible people) that can "prove" (to each of
            us,
            > individually) that the Mahatma letters are or are not "authentic," or
            whether
            > or not the Masters, or "Mahatmas" who wrote them ever existed. In
            theosophy,
            > we base all our judgments on what is said, rather than who said it.
            So,
            > whatever your so called "experts" know about Indian civilization and
            their
            > ancient religions, they can no more verify or deny the letters
            genuineness,
            > whether of its writers or their message, as they can "prove" their own
            > beliefs... Other than by blabbing the same worthless and prejudicial
            OPINIONS
            > about them that you have. Since when do exoteric and blind religious
            beliefs
            > have any weight in proving or disproving anything?
            >
            > The truth or validity of the Masters writings and teachings, whether in
            the
            > Mahatma letters or in the SD, can only be judged by careful study of
            their
            > inherent consistency with the fundamental teachings of ancient
            theosophy --
            > that neither you nor your pundits can deny with any "evidence" or
            even by
            > logical arguments based on the same "fundamental principles" that
            the SD is
            > grounded on... And, which, I'll wager, all Indian philosopher/scientists =

            of
            > any honesty or integrity are in total agreement with.
            >
            > Therefore, I challenge you to come up with any "Indian" (or for that
            matter
            > any other nationality's) pundits who will be able to deny the teachings
            of
            > theosophy on unassailably valid scientific, philosophical, or religious
            > grounds. Accordingly, I await your posting of their valid "proofs" or
            > arguments (if any) in letters signed by them -- relating to the non
            existence
            > of the Masters, and/or the invalidity of the theosophical teachings.
            What
            > makes you think, after more than 100 years of just such "experts"
            trying to
            > do so, that they can do so now?
            >
            > Wake up! And, get off our backs with your specious and opinionated,
            > nonsensical harangues and phony, self-serving offers -- which I hope
            no other
            > theosophists will take up. (Although, I can't speak or be responsible
            for
            > anyone else but myself.)
            >
            > As a word of caution for the "other" members of "this list"...
            Theosophists
            > are wise to stay out of arguments about the validity or invalidity of
            > religious beliefs or metaphysics -- which is a total waste of their time =

            and
            > energy.
            >
            > LHM
            > ----------------------------------
            > In a message dated 11/17/02 2:43:37 AM, brianmuehlbach@y...
            writes:
            >
            > >Let's Dallas/Daniel C. Caldwell and any other Theosophists on this list
            > >present there evidence the next few hours on :
            > >
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
            > >
            > >It is easy for Theosophists on this list to finally show us (and the
            > >world ?) that "The Mahatma Letters" truly contain genuine oriental
            > >teachings or not.
            > >
            > >Let us just have Daniel C. Caldwell, Dallas/Dalval, Leoanmaurer, or
            > >however believes "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they
            are,
            > >post there and we watch this for a day or two, or and all of us who
            think
            > >they have found something genuine in The Mahatma Letters post it
            there
            > >and see what the experts say to that. Anybody is llowed to post
            there
            > >. Let Daniel C. Caldwell , Dallas, and so on post whatever they want
            us to
            > >believe on "theos talk" on
            > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization the next day ore so.
            > >With more then seven hundred (exactly 707) experts in the field of
            > >ancient religions and civilisations on the Indian sub-continent.
            (Including
            > >Tibetologists and so on)
            > >
            > >And lets see how many of the more then sevenhundred experts
            there
            > >Daniel C. Caldwell and Dallas or however of those on theos-talk that
            > >believe "The Mahatma Letters" are what they claim they are can get
            any
            > >of these sevenhundred and more experts there to agree.
            > >Lets Dallas/ Daniel/Leon/ and so on show us they are not just
            crackpot-
            > >"believers."
            > >
            > > At least with such a large group of specialists in religions , history,=

            and
            > >archeology of the ancient Indian sub-continent (two or three ?) that
            > >would confirm that what Dallas/Daniel and so on want us to
            (bamboos
            > >into ?) "believing," is true.
            > >
            > >I am looking now,
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Brian
            > >
            > >PS I will place the complete postings as of this moment until in
            three
            > >days from now appear on the subject of "the content and
            precipitation
            > >of The Mahatma Letters" (with this very title) on my website in three
            > >days, whatever appears the next three days on this subject. (except
            of
            > >course those posters who let me know I should not place it on my
            web
            > >site, otherwise the postings there are public domain, and of course I
            will
            > >let as soon the matter takes of on
            > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndianCivilization place a message
            there
            > >with my intent so all there know )
          • leonmaurer@aol.com
            There is only one polemicist in this forum. And, it certainly isn t myself or any of the others you are constantly argufying with. This is probably my last
            Message 5 of 5 , Nov 26, 2002
              There is only one "polemicist" in this forum. And, it certainly isn't myself
              or any of the others you are constantly argufying with.

              This is probably my last response to your long winded second hand arguments
              against the validity of theosophy and the credibility of its teachers based
              on quoting so called "experts" and "authorities" who use their revelations or
              opinions about the nature of reality to argue against other peoples
              revelations or opinions. So, let's get it straight for a change... You're
              barking up a tree.

              For one thing, I do not profess to be a historical "scholar." Secondly, I
              cannot speak as a member of any theosophical organization, society, group or
              religion connected or disconnected with theosophy. Thirdly, I couldn't care
              less whether or not the Mahatma letters were "authentic," or about the
              opinions, ideas, concepts, or religious beliefs of whoever wrote them. And
              lastly, I am not interested in arguing about anyone's religious beliefs or
              whether the "God" or "Gods" of any religion's exist or not. (Although, I
              have no problem studying ALL their ancient and modern scriptures for the
              wisdom and philosophical or scientific truths they may contain.)

              My sole interest is in finding a logically and scientifically valid
              understanding of the teachings of metaphysics put forth in the Secret
              Doctrine as a "synthesis of science religion and philosophy" -- which, in my
              view is entirely consistent with the fundamental teachings of all the ancient
              and modern philosopher-scientists and occultists (that I have been studying
              and correlating all my life). I do not believe in any of it, blindly, nor do
              I deny it, blindly. My mind has always been open to logical and consistent
              proof based on science, mathematics, and direct observation -- both
              subjectively and objectively. Therefore my interest lies in studying such a
              "theory" and, if correct, trying to prove it, and if incorrect, falsify it --
              on strictly logical and scientific grounds...

              Other than that, I have no interest in arguing about the opinions and
              conclusions of others, or proving anything pro or con about the religious
              ideals, or Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis teachings of theosophy -- other
              than from a scientifically valid ontological and epistemological standpoint
              -- based on fundamental principles.

              However, the religious aspects pertaining to true or false Gods, or racist
              interpretations are "side issues" that are not my current concern -- except
              to point out the foolishness of those who argue about them.

              Accordingly, I stand on my theory of ABC (that, coincidentally, does not
              contradict, and in fact confirms theosophical metaphysics) -- which can
              logically, scientifically and philosophically be argued as being a consistent
              means of explaining the involution and evolution of the UNIVERSE (and all the
              beings, things and their properties within it). This parsimonious
              explanation answers all the unanswered questions of cosmic origin, genesis,
              ontology and epistemology now baffling all disciplines of modern science --
              particularly, with respect to their studies of the connections and
              interrelationships between consciousness and matter, mind and brain, as well
              as explaining the "experience" of consciousness.

              If you or any of your "credentialed" experts wish to present arguments
              against this theory, or can offer up a better model that invalidates its
              and/or the theosophical metaphysics, that is consistent with the theories of
              relativity, quantum and Superstring/M-brane physics, as well as with
              fundamental principles (as a priori) -- I would be happy to review your
              dissertations on the subject, and present my counter arguments, if necessary.


              Beyond that, I have no further interest in hearing from you.

              LHM
              http://tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/ABC_bw.html
              http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/chakrafield.html
              http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/yinyang.html
              http://users.aol.com/uniwldarts/uniworld.artisans.guild/evolution2.html

              In a message dated 11/22/02 4:19:36 AM, brianmuehlbach@... writes:

              >"OPINIONS about theosophy and
              >its teachings -- of which you, apparently, know little (even superficially)=
              >or nothing at all"
              >
              >Brian: If you know anything at all yourself then start by showing us one
              >by one a scolarly refutation of the few dozen "philosophical" points
              >refuting the contents of for example the "Mahatma Letters" below, but
              >do work trough it all the way to the end if you want to be worth your
              >salt, and not just be looked upon by some as a crackpot polemicist:

              (Snip repeats of previous mailings from BAG, B/BM, etc.)
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.