Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00007)

Sept 1st 1998

Dear "Jack" B. :

I'll interject some comments in your queries


Dal

> From: "Brant Jackson" <bjack5259@aol.com>
> Sent:	Tuesday, September 01, 1998 4:12 PM
> Subject: Re: Mahatmas, the T S, Theosophy & HPB -- What can we
do ?

Dallas:
    You offered some very worthy comments, but you started with the
assumption
that "if we want to know what the T.S. was started for, we have to look at
what was said [written?] when it was started."  Please pardon the
paraphrase,
I still don't know how to cut and paste exact quotes yet.

     Questions:
	(1)   Why do you assume that an esoteric organization just making an
appearance in a hostile and skeptical environment would publish each and
every
one of its plans and/or purposes for all the world to see?

Id not say that the TS was or was not an "esoteric body."  In the beginning
there was a process of initiation, and entry into the society was by
invitation and accreditation.

As far as I know the minute something is written or said, it is no longer
"esoteric" but becomes exoteric where a speaker and a listener are
concerned.

	(2)   Why do you assume that the absence of a public statement to the
contrary is positive evidence that no other purpose to the T.S. than the
three
objects?

I would say that those Objects that were made public are those three.  Now
if one decides to analyze the reason why those three were chosen, and
whether others are implied - would seem to me to indicate that the process
of self-education r that individual.  In LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME
published in the PATH by Mr. Judge and then put into book form by his friend
Jasper Niemand there will be found an important hint under the title TO
ASPIRANTS FOR CHELASHIP.  (p, 51, ULT Edition )  The book is full of
valuable hints.

I would also conclude that studying theosophy reveals an inwardness to
objective events and circumstances and sharpens the attention of the
observant student.  What each one makes of these things is his own work and
doing.

	(3)	 Is the T.S. an esoteric organization or is it an exoteric
organization?  If it is an esoteric organization, then is it not likely that
its leaders and  "initiates", like those initiates of  earlier esoteric
organizations, have  taken an oath not to discuss certain aspects with those
not so initiated?  De Purucker, in his works, constantly alludes to such an
oath.

What De Puruker may have meant had meaning for him and those whom he .  It
would be difficult to reconstruct exactly what was meant and why it was
said.  But I would say that any obervant and attentive student can look for
the causes and the meanings behind any statement and seek for their
relevancy.

	(4)	Why would you not expect an organization to grow and adapt to changing
circumstances?  After all, the T.S. demonstrates a major, if not drastic
change, in the way the ancient widom was presented and studied.  As recently
as Eliphas Levi, esoterism was written on a code, known only to a relavtive
few.   H.P.B. was critized by some esotericists for making public what was
traditionally kept private.  ____ the hindu who died so young, refused to
help
her edit the S.D. for this reason.

Why Subba Row refused to help edit the SD is explained by the exchange of
their letters.  It is a matter of history, not of speculation.

As time passes student move into areas of speculation that may have nothing
to do with the original intent of the founders.


	(5)	Can different aspects of  Theosophy not be explored at different times,
and /or  alternative aspects of it explored, each in their own time?  I
understand that the various yogas, or methods of union, each have their own
time and their own percent of humanity that can benefit from each of them,
according to their stage of development.  Why couldn't the Masters use
Theosophists in the 1920's and 1990's to focus on aspects of theosohy
different from those aspects emhasized in the 1870's?

Certainly exploration can be made.  But on what basis ?  If we use the basis
first offered, we may well dovetail with the intent of the founders.  But if
we flounder about and speculate we may well strand ourselves and waste a lot
of time in vague seekings.  What is preferable.?

	(5)	Why are H.P.B. and Judge the last word in Theosophy?  Why did the
inspiration stop with them?
     With respect,  and in anticipation of an interesting response!

No one said that the inspiration stopped with either HPB or Judge.  But if
one desires to learn about a particular science there is always a begging
with  the ABCs.  Can we claim that we are past those ?  If so, it would not
be difficult to find easy exchange of ideas and concensus.  At present there
are 64 different sets of ideas floating about, so a return to some focus
would seem to me to be desirable.

Why not start with the beginning ?  why think that we are somewhere ahead of
it, and its tenets and furthermore have a curious refusal built into our own
perception that requires that we think we are somewhere "ahead" of those
simply because wee are born and live later ?

I hope this is helpful, even in rather boldly expressed.

Dallas


     Brant Jackson