Theos-Talk Archives (May 1998 Message tt00460)

May 26th 1998

Deer Reed:

Many thanks for the corroboration re:  Kosmic / Cosmic in the
SD.

Perhaps more differences and difficulties will emerge as students
review the problems caused by changing from the Original 1888
publishing of the SD

It is good to be able to get back on to a stable platform of
work.

You realize that we are experiencing in 125 years (acceleration
?) many of the problems that have faced scholarly Christianity
and have come to a head about 1900 years later ! - I mean, --
splinter sects, alterations of original texts, divergences of
opinion, personal additions to the original teachings by
self-constituted "authorities,"  confusion of students:  Who
should be trusted ?  Are the "new teachings" to be trusted ?  Is
Theosophy an "evolving" system ?  HPB is accused of being "too
difficult,"  texts are allowed to go out-of-print, or are subtly
altered,

 [  HPB said it was History -- and the propositions offered were
the result of the study of the past of our World and the
Universe.  The future would be following some of the lines of the
past and evolving after and when we make choices -- Karma always
operates, but does not confuse ! ]  -- etc., etc.

We live in curious times.  Also, I imagine that they are quite
critical to the survival of Theosophy as originally presented by
the Masters and HPB.  I see the bulk of the students seem to have
been sidetracked and the talk we have is not so much about the
fundamental teachings as about some events of personal history.

Why not direct our attention to the operations of karma as
outlined by Theosophy and especially in our daily lives ?

Well, gotta go.  bye,  Dal.

> Date: Tuesday, May 26, 1998 8:58 AM
> From: "Reed Carson" <carson@tellworld.com>
> Subject: SD 3rd edition


>Dallas wrote:
>
>So I am, for the moment, at a loss to give you a precise
>quotation. It is possible that another student who reads this
>exchange may have something to say on the subject to assist you
>and me in this matter. It would be good to hear from others.
>******
>Just putting in two cents:  Independently of Dallas, I had also
noticed the
>difference in meaning of Kosmic, vs Cosmic.  Once one realizes
this
>distinction, suddenly mysterious languange becomes a step more
clear.
>On a number of occassions in the early pages of the SD, one can
start by
>letting Kosmos refer to the absolute and Cosmos refer to this
universe, then
>account for the context and add ones intuition.  Then one can
see her
>pushing the language to communciate - perhaps struggling with
the language -
>when her vocabulary of terms has not yet been developed, and
when the
>distinctions may be highly metaphysical in any case. One sees
her saying it
>this way, then saying it that way, in what one can easily
imagine as an
>attempt to jog the intuition of the student.
>         It would definitely be a loss to have this spelling
"corrected" by
>an academic. Sorry for not having page numbers  - just
confirming Dallas'
>observations independently.
>Reed Carson