Theos-Talk Archives (December 1997 Message tt00112)

Dec 23rd 1997

Dallas TenBroeck writes:


Concerning whether HPB was or taught as a "deist, theist" or not.

Depends on your understanding of the word deist or theist.


Theosophically there is as an eternal background a single SOURCE from which
all emanates.  IT is impersonal non-dimensional, and indescribable.  It is
for us a philosophical necessity, a logical construct.  Our minds cease
functioning when confronted with "universals."  But, we do sense that there
is something in us which can transcend the barriers of thought.  My feeling
is that this is an expression of the "Higher Self" of ATMA-BUDDHI, and that
this is resident in me as it resides equally in all else.  If that were not
there, these concepts as IDEAS would be impossible.

When the mind is pushed back to some "beginning," it realizes that there is
a point at which it is faced with a finality, and yet the present existence
must have a logical SOURCE.  Call it the DEIFIC PRINCIPLE.  Does that make
it "theism ?"

Through ISIS, the SD and all her articles, HPB indicates consistently that
THAT is the one thing [ a DIVINE UNITARY SOURCE ] which cannot be
eliminated from any conception.

She is also most careful to indicate that this in no way can be made
coincident with any sectarian idea of a "Personal God."

She flouts the idea of any logic which places a "personal God" in place,
and indicates that the rigid justice of invariable and impersonal LAW under
which all existence is possible, demands that there be an impersonal,
rather than a limited and "personal" SOURCE [ or a private "God" ] for
manifestation.

In no place have I found HPB employing the concept of a personal god.  The
logic of Theosophy rejects that concept.

A good reference to start with is that in SD I pp 14-18, where the "First
Fundamental Proposition, and the 2nd and 3rd. are discussed.  In fact from
p. 1, SD Vol. I, to p. 155,  HPB gives information which develops the
concept of the DEIFIC and IMPERSONAL PRINCIPLE.

Reference to the INDEX of the SD under the headings of GOD, DEITY,
PRINCIPLE, LAW, will be found to yield all the information needed.

ISIS UNVEILED is devoted to demonstrating that all the ancient religions
and philosophies have taught the same unitary basis -- none of them in
their root form ever put forward the concept of a Personal God.  Priests
and theologies that evolved after the reform ideas were instituted,
gradually degraded the grand idea into the limited concept of a "Personal
God" who had all the human emotions greatly magnified, and resident in Him.
 If one examines carefully the various definitions that are current in
theologies the actions of such a God are usually quite cruel.  Why ?

Later theologians seeking to enslave the minds of the ignorant and the
thoughtless or lazy populace -- who are not taught independence or how to
think for themselves -- had the Personal God, prayer, petition, praise,
etc...
foisted on them.   They were taught to fear independent inquiry, to believe
blindly and to trust in the statements of authority made by their priests,
and the threats of dire consequences to themselves or family, or community
if those were disregarded.  From such ideas arose the horrors of
sectarianism and religious persecution, culminating in past centuries in
Europe in the horrors of the Inquisition.

This situation will be found historically to be universal.

Even the philosophy of Theosophy has been under such an attack, and its
main ideas and concepts gradually distanced from inquirers in the last 110
years.

The opinions are entirely mine and I will be glad to amplify them if need
be.

						Dallas

		Dallas TenBroeck

dalval@nwc.net                        (818) 222-8024
                   23145 Park Contessa,
            Calabasas, Ca., 91302, USA.

> From: "Daniel H Caldwell" <blafoun@azstarnet.com>
> Subject: Re: Theism in ISIS UNVEILED
> Date: Tuesday, December 23, 1997 8:56 AM
>
> I have asked my friend for specific passages from ISIS.
>
> I am going away for Christmas and will not be back to
> Jan. 4.  Hopefully by then I will have the desired passages
> and will post on theos-Talk.
>
> Daniel
>
> >I would be interested in knowing what passages led you friend to
> >conclude that HPB taught theism in IU.
> 			<  SNIP  >