Page 12 of 12

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:33 pm
by Will
binocular wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:27 pm
Will wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 3:43 pm
Whether Buddha 'arranged' or 'constructed' or radiated, I doubt any such distinction is 'drastic'. In any case, Theosophy is unique in many ways as page viii of The Secret Doctrine suggests:
It is needless to explain that this book is not the Secret Doctrine in its
entirety, but a select number of fragments of its fundamental tenets, special
attention being paid to some facts which have been seized upon by various
writers, and distorted out of all resemblance to the truth.

But it is perhaps desirable to state unequivocally that the teachings, however
fragmentary and incomplete, contained in these volumes, belong neither to the
Hindu, the Zoroastrian, the Chaldean, nor the Egyptian religion, neither to
Buddhism, Islam, Judaism nor Christianity exclusively. The Secret Doctrine is
the essence of all these. Sprung from it in their origins, the various religious
schemes are now made to merge back into their original element, out of which
every mystery and dogma has grown, developed, and become materialised.
This reads like when Tolkien fans insist that he did not write The Hobbit, LOTR, and so on, but that he merely translated them and prepared them for publication ...
Yes, bino has made an 'original', brilliant observation - which Blavatsky anticipated.
It is more than probable that the book will be regarded by a large section of
the public as a romance of the wildest kind ; for who has ever even heard of the book of Dzyan ?

The writer, therefore, is fully prepared to take all the responsibility for what
is contained in this work, and even to face the charge of having invented the
whole of it. That it has many shortcomings she is fully aware ; all that she
claims for it is that, romantic as it may seem to many, its logical coherence and
consistency entitle this new Genesis to rank, at any rate, on a level with the
“ working hypotheses ” so freely accepted by modern science. Further, it
claims consideration, not by reason of any appeal to dogmatic authority, but
because it closely adheres to Nature, and follows the laws of uniformity and analogy.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:53 pm
by binocular
Will wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:33 pm
Yes, bino has made an 'original', brilliant observation - which Blavatsky anticipated.
It is more than probable that the book will be regarded by a large section of
the public as a romance of the wildest kind ; for who has ever even heard of the book of Dzyan ?

The writer, therefore, is fully prepared to take all the responsibility for what
is contained in this work, and even to face the charge of having invented the
whole of it. That it has many shortcomings she is fully aware ; all that she
claims for it is that, romantic as it may seem to many, its logical coherence and
consistency entitle this new Genesis to rank, at any rate, on a level with the
“ working hypotheses ” so freely accepted by modern science. Further, it
claims consideration, not by reason of any appeal to dogmatic authority, but
because it closely adheres to Nature, and follows the laws of uniformity and analogy.
Anyone with some proficiency in the English language can make such claims.

"It closely adheres to Nature" -- you know how many things are said by how many people to "closely adhere to Nature"? Very many. Odd, that all kinds of things get to pass as "natural".

Writing a text that is logically coherent and consistent is something every student is supposed to be able to do.
In fact, if a religious text is fully logically coherent and consistent, there's reason to suspect that it was composed by a human as opposed to being divinely inspired. (That is actually an argument that some Indian Vaishnavas make against ISKCON -- ISKCON's doctrines are so internally consistent that they seem artificial. Traditional religious texts tend to have logical holes in them, some inconsistencies.)

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2019 8:29 pm
by Will
binocular wrote:
Tue Sep 10, 2019 6:53 pm

"It closely adheres to Nature" -- you know how many things are said by how many people to "closely adhere to Nature"? Very many. Odd, that all kinds of things get to pass as "natural".

Writing a text that is logically coherent and consistent is something every student is supposed to be able to do.
In fact, if a religious text is fully logically coherent and consistent, there's reason to suspect that it was composed by a human as opposed to being divinely inspired. (That is actually an argument that some Indian Vaishnavas make against ISKCON -- ISKCON's doctrines are so internally consistent that they seem artificial. Traditional religious texts tend to have logical holes in them, some inconsistencies.)
bino, the SD is online, read the Preface at least. The book is not 'a religious text'.

As I wrote above:
The subtitle of the book says - "The Synthesis of Science, Religion, And Philosophy". In very ancient times there was no separation as is now the case and when HPB's book was written.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:30 pm
by Will
For those who wish to become more familiar with theosophy as Blavatsky presented it, go over to this thread at Dharma Paths:

https://dharmapaths.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=227

I will not inform (that is, irritate) you folks here anymore, unless asked to.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:12 pm
by SDC
Will wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:30 pm
For those who wish to become more familiar with theosophy as Blavatsky presented it, go over to this thread at Dharma Paths:

https://dharmapaths.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=227

I will not inform (that is, irritate) you folks here anymore, unless asked to.
This thread has provided, at least, some good cross-ideaological conversations. I see no reason why it shouldn't continue, but it's your choice.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:26 pm
by Will
SDC wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:12 pm
Will wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:30 pm
For those who wish to become more familiar with theosophy as Blavatsky presented it, go over to this thread at Dharma Paths:

https://dharmapaths.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=227

I will not inform (that is, irritate) you folks here anymore, unless asked to.
This thread has provided, at least, some good cross-ideaological conversations. I see no reason why it shouldn't continue, but it's your choice.
Is "unless asked to" opaque? My choice is not to post unsolicited, but if solicited I will - kapish?

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:00 pm
by Nicolas
Will wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:26 pm
SDC wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:12 pm
Will wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:30 pm
I will not inform (that is, irritate) you folks here anymore, unless asked to.
This thread has provided, at least, some good cross-ideaological conversations. I see no reason why it shouldn't continue, but it's your choice.
Is "unless asked to" opaque? My choice is not to post unsolicited, but if solicited I will - kapish?
I can't speak for SDC, but it sounded like your decision to stop posting (unless asked to) was based off of your perception that others were irritated. It doesn't appear to me that others are irritated here, so it makes sense to invite you to continue to post unsolicitedly if one thinks your decision was based on that.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:04 pm
by SDC
Will wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:26 pm
SDC wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:12 pm
Will wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:30 pm
For those who wish to become more familiar with theosophy as Blavatsky presented it, go over to this thread at Dharma Paths:

https://dharmapaths.com/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=227

I will not inform (that is, irritate) you folks here anymore, unless asked to.
This thread has provided, at least, some good cross-ideaological conversations. I see no reason why it shouldn't continue, but it's your choice.
Is "unless asked to" opaque? My choice is not to post unsolicited, but if solicited I will - kapish?
That was me asking you to continue - capeesh?

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:25 pm
by Will
SDC wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:04 pm

That was me asking you to continue - capeesh?
My previous language was opaque - I will only continue here if begged or bribed.

Or if the 'beggar' asks an intelligent question, with no contentious intent, based on a passage from the writings of HPB or WQ Judge.

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:14 am
by chownah
Nicolas wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 2:00 pm
Will wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:26 pm
SDC wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:12 pm


This thread has provided, at least, some good cross-ideaological conversations. I see no reason why it shouldn't continue, but it's your choice.
Is "unless asked to" opaque? My choice is not to post unsolicited, but if solicited I will - kapish?
I can't speak for SDC, but it sounded like your decision to stop posting (unless asked to) was based off of your perception that others were irritated. It doesn't appear to me that others are irritated here, so it makes sense to invite you to continue to post unsolicitedly if one thinks your decision was based on that.
It sounds a bit different to me. This thread seems to be mostly (not completely) a series of advertisements for theosophy (and other philosophies which Will sees as being related). There is really nothing (or being very generous I could say "not much") of a conncection to theravada buddhism presented. Since people here are mostly interested in thing related to theravada buddhism there is not much interest in this topic and since alot of the ideas presented are not seen by many to fit well into a connection with theravada buddhism the discussion often presents contrary opinions and is not consistent with the promotion of the "one truth" idea which Will seems to be promoting both here and in other topics. Thus there seems to be no progress being made by WIll on promoting his "one truth" idea.....
He says he wants to be begged?....or bribed? How can we beg or bribe him? "Oh please Will continue to post things which seem to have little to no relevance to theravada buddhism!"? or "OK Will we'll give you your own domain here on dhammawheel and give you the power to do as you Will!"?

....I guess.....don't know for sure.....
chownah

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:22 am
by chownah
I think the solution is simple: If there are ideas presented which seem to be relevantly connected with theravada buddhism it is perhaps likely that someone will enter into an acceptable discussion. It is necessary that someone present these ideas....generally speaking people intereseted in discussin theravada buddhism don't think about theosophy and people interested in discussing theosophy don't go to tharavada buddhism forums....they go to places where people discuss theosophy.......thus.....Will has an uphill battle....
chownah

Re: Theosophy

Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2019 12:33 pm
by binocular
To begin with, the OP was not formulated in line with the ToS. It should be reformulated, or closed.