Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00070)

Would somebody on this list like to discuss some of the really significant
issues that K. Paul Johnson brought up (a couple of them are quoted below)
and leave the ad-hominem mode of operation where it belongs?

The question of whether - and if so, how - the Adepts can be approached
today is one of the most serious issues facing the organizational T.S. today.

Come on, David Green, Nicholas Weeks and others. How about some thoughtful
comments, insights, questions, quotes etc on this one? I think you guys can
see things other than spades in this world, and know their names too.

Murray


Quoting K.P.J.
>In short she takes an *abundant*
>cultural resource and redefines it in terms of extreme scarcity
>and inaccessibility-- while positioning herself in the catbird
>seat as the only intermediary between the remote authorities and
>their aspiring chelas.
> [snip]
>When HPB becomes the go-between for aspiring chelas of *her*
>particular gurus, a whole different set of circumstances is
>found.  The identities of the gurus are secret, access to them is
>tightly controlled and under mysterious circumstances (i.e. the
>astral post office), there are no clearcut social norms defining
>mutual obligations and roles, in short very little of the
>relationship between Sinnett and K.H., for example, corresponds
>to any historical precedent of guru/chela relations.  It is only
>to be expected that such a relationship, wrenched out of every
>traditional context, was unworkable in virtually every case in
>which it was tried.