[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

ES Discussion (Ref: TS Corrruption)

Dec 18, 1996 01:03 PM
by James S Yungkans

(Beginning of an ES discussion)


>In my opinion, the ES should be exactly what it was supposed to
>be in the first place, according to the person writing as K.H.
>(who may have actually been K.H.): A special section of the TS
>for people who wanted to live exclusively by the tenets of the
>Mahatmas, as opposed to people who wished to reach the Truth
>through their own religion (as everybody must do, according to
>the same letter).


> Which letter are you quoting Bart? Do you believe that the ES is
> "exactly what it is supposed to be in the first place"? If not,
> how is it different?

Knowing nothing of the post-HPB ES, I thought the ES, as defined,
was to be a separate organization from the TS.  to quote HPB in
"Comments on the theosophical society and HPB", Lucifer Feb.

> I gladly give room to the protect which follows...a member of the
> E.S.  who receives instructions emanating from the Masters of the
> Occult Philosophy, and doubts at the same time the genuineness of
> the source, or the honesty of the humble transmitter of the old
> esteric doctorines - lies to his own soul, and is untrue to his
> pledge...From the very beginning it's [the E.S.'s]second rule
> stated, that the "esoteric section has no official or corporate
> connection with the Exoteric Society.

In comparision, quoting H.T. Patterson, in the same article:

> when it is said 'If there are no Masters, the Theosophical
> Society is an absurdity, and there is no use in keeping it up', a
> misstatement is made...The honest materialist, the honest
> agnostic, the honest spiritualist, the honest
> christian-scientist, the honest dogmatic christian, may be an
> honest disbeliever in HPB and the masters, and an honest member
> of the Theosophical Society too, provided he is elisted in the
> cause of humanity.  HPB endorsed this position as "Expressing
> my [HPB's] feelings."

The above seems to state (A) that the ES was NOT meant to be a
special section of the T.S., but entirely separate from it, and
(B) that Theosophical doctorine (Dogma) was not to be an
overriding emphasis of the T.S.  This emphasis seems to have
started with Besant, as implied within the text of the article,
and continued to the current T.S.  Leadership (I.E.  Burnier and
company), based upon prior evidence presented during Theos-L

3 participants in discussion. Next?

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application