Friendly greetings to all readers.

This is my first post at this forum.
My english could be better, but I do hope you understand the below.

There are more than one book which I find importnt. The one mentioned in the below are among the most important ones to little me.

The book Learning How To Learn by Idries Shah (d. 1996) has been fascinating me for the last eight years or so. And I am still contemplating its content and various passages in it.

I use some time comparing it to the writings of H. P. Blavatsky.

One of my main studies these days is The Middle East contra The West, with India and the East hovering in the background.

I study H. P. Blavatsky's views upon the Christian Jesuits (often understood as "deceivers" or even Dugpas), which she called the worst enemies of Theosophy. I today compare her views with various authors, theosophical authoers and - also Idries Shah's views upon this issue.
I alos compare the issue with socalled theosophical writers like Annie Besant, C. W. Leadbeater, W. Q. Judge, H. S. Olcott, Alice A. Bailey and others. Strangley enough, none of them wrote much against the Jesuits and Christianity.

Som sincere and honest Seekers after wisdom and compassion today believes that Idries Shah was what we in theosophical terms call a Mahatma.

I think his writings show evidence of him being at least a Chela.
There are content in his writings some readers do not understand. The reason often being, that they forget about the Seven Keys mentioned my H. P. Blavatsky, - Keys also mentioned at least in part by Idris Shah himself.

Dead-letter teachings was not highly valued by H. P. Blavatsky.
I would rather guess, that provoking a theosophical experience in her listeners and readers was important to her.

I do certainly not consider Blavatsky a fraud, quite the opposite is my view.

Another interesting book is "The People of The Secret" by Ernest Scott, which in fact mentions H. P. Blavatsky and the Mahatma's

Another acitivity of mine is studying the issue called "Brainwashing". An issue, which was'nt talked much about in the early theosophical days. Psychology and esoteric psychology was in its early stage back then. I study the difference between Brainwashing, cults and Theosophy.

Hi, Khidr7, and welcome to the Forum.

You have read a lot of interesting books. I am surprised to see these books that are so similar to traditional Theosophical books.

Have you studied any Theosophical books?

You mentioned the book, Learning How To Learn. Are there philosophical ideas in it?


I see you are familiar with the Mahatmas. As a matter of fact, I am reading the book called The Mahatma Letters.

I have also read a great deal of C.W.Leadbeater's descriptions of the Mahatmas. That is how I first got started in Theosophy, many years ago.

You mentioned Chelas and Mahatmas. Are you yourself on the Path that Blavatsky talked about?

I am looking forward to discussing Theosophy with you. Which Theosophical concepts do agree with, and which ones do you not agree with?

To Nick the Pilot and other readers

You asked me a few questions.

When someone asks me about something, I always consider why they ask, and why they ask those questions and not other questions.
And I consider whether they spiritually need an answer to the questions or they just simply desires and wants answers to the questions, - or if there are other issues and motives involved.


I will answer you.

1.
Nick the Pilot asked:
"Have you studied any Theosophical books?"
"You mentioned the book, Learning How To Learn. Are there philosophical ideas in it?"


Sure, Yes many books. But, I have also studied nature, people and life.

My views is, that Theosophical teachings, and sometimes keys to it, are sometimes embedded in quite other material, not recognisable as theosophical at all to the uninitiated. Many of these teachings are really meditation-themes. They have deep function almost unknown to the pedestrian conventionalists, enthusiasts, theosophical imitators or occultist.


Here are a few words rewritten a bit from a chapter of the book 'Learning How To Learn':

"*
There are some things which you have to do for yourself.
These include familiarising yourself with study-materials given to
you. You can only really do this - and thus aquire real qualities
- if you suspend the indulgence of desire for immediate satisfactions.


*
Anybody or anything may stand between you and knowledge if
you are unfit for it.


*
What you may take to be attractive, or even spread out by us
to be attractive to you, may well not be intended in this manner at
all. That which attracts you, or others, about us may be that
which is laid down by us as a tool which enables us to regard
you (or others) as unsuitable.


*
We claim, that you can learn more in a half hour's direct contact
with a source of knowledge (no matter the apperent reason for the
contact or the subject of the trasaction) than you can in years of
formal effort.

*
The role of the teacher is to provoke capacity in the student, to
provide what there is when it will be useful, to guide him towards
progress. It is not to impress, to give an impression of virtue,
power, importance, general information, knowledge or anything
else.


*
To learn something, you, may often have to be exposed to it
many times, perhaps from different perspectives; and you also
have to give it the kind of attention which will enable you to learn.
In our experience, people fail to learn from our wise materials for
the same reason that they do not learn other things - they read
selectively.
The things that touch them emotionally, or which they like or
are thrilled by, they will remember or seek in greater quantity
and deepth.

*
Systematic study or behaviour is valuable when it is of use.
When it is not, it can be poisonous.


*
If you seek illumination or understanding when what you really
need is information or rest from pressures, you will get none of
these things. If you know what you want, you should go and get it.

*
If you confuse your wants and needs, and call your wants
the same as needs, and say that clairvoyance,
telepathy and extra ordinary perception is my needs, when they
really are your wants, then you most often get nowhere.


*
You cannot carry the habit of judging things into an area where it
does not apply, you will judge in a manner which will not correspond
with your needs.


*
You cannot work on a higher level entirely with the concepts,
laguage and experiences of a lower level. Higher level work is
in a combination of manners and relationships.

*
The ultimate absurdity, incapacitating from real learning beyond
the stage you have reached, is to imagine that one thing is
another. If you think that a book is a sandwich, you may try to
eat it, and will not be able to learn what a book can teach. If, too,
you imagine that you are only playing a social game, you will learn
nothing. The people who refuse to play that game with you will
also, of course, sooner or later annoy you.

*
If you do not know already the difference between fact and opinion,
you can study it in the daily and weekley newspapers."


What are your views about the above words?


2.
Nick the Pilot asked:
"You mentioned Chelas and Mahatmas. Are you yourself on the Path that Blavatsky talked about?"

Blavatsky mentioned more than one Path. Which one do you refer to?
But, yes I am on a Path. And yes, The Mahatmas are real.
One who tastes knows.

Nick the Pilot asked:
"I am looking forward to discussing Theosophy with you. Which Theosophical concepts do agree with, and which ones do you not agree with?"

I would say, that it depends on what you call Theosophical concepts?
My view is however, that a number of socalled Theosophists aught to be aware of not
to mistake emotional states for spiritual states. There is a big difference between the two.

(PS: I have earliere on written a lot of emails at Theos-Talk Forum.)

I do hope this was helpful.

Khidr7,

Some of the quotes are general advice for all people. For example, "To learn something, you, may often have to be exposed to it many times, perhaps from different perspectives...." applies to everyone, not just Theosophists.

Which brings up an interesting topics. What would a list of Theosophical topics look like? I will see what I can come up with.

To Nick the Pilot and all readers:

Thank you for your answer.

Nick the Pilot wrote:
"Some of the quotes are general advice for all people. For example, "To learn something, you, may often have to be exposed to it many times, perhaps from different perspectives...." applies to everyone, not just Theosophists."

A few comments by M. Sufilight:
I come to think of, what the wise ones have said many times, and what was written on The Emerald Tablet by Thoth; (Thoth translates into Edris, Idris or Idries, something also mentioned by Blavatsky).

It has been said often:
"What is below is like that which is above, and what is above is similar to that which is below to accomplish the wonders of the one thing."

Even so we will have to keep in mind, that even analogical views have their limitations in cosmos. Being exposed many times to spiritual energies and experiences are ceratinly not the same as being exposed to ordinary daily earthly life.
The advice given is for all people, namely "being exposed to something many times so that you may learn", but that which they are getting exposed to is certainly not adviceable for everyone. We also say, Too much Sun will burn the skin, and too little will keep your skin in the shadows. Yet, there will almost always be exceptions, that cannot be avoided.

The Emerald Tablet have been written in many versions, and yet even when we know H. P. Blavatsky had a different view upon it than most of the writers about it, there are som interesting facts in this link in the below. There is a Blavatsky version and also an Idries Shah verison in the link, as well as other versions:
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/emerald.html

The Divine Pymander in an ancient Phoenician-like writing:





Nick the Pilot asked:
"What would a list of Theosophical topics look like?"

I wonder why you asked that question. I am not quite sure I understood it.


I do hope this was helpful.