Theos-Talk Archives (November 1998 Message tt00427)

>IMMORTALITY -- of course this cannot be proved objectively, only by thinking hard about it.  It is neither Hindu nor Buddhist.>

The problem is that most people think of immortality as time ticking on forever
and that is wishful thinking.
 
>Theosophy embraces not only these two but also all the rst of the great world religions and philosophies -- makes them impersonal and shows that they all originate from one source.>

Theosophy, as I and those other religions are concerned, embraces nothing. 
It simply picks out those things it likes best from all the world's religions and discards
what it doesn't like (much the same as I do myself). Why do you suppose the
world's religions have yet to embrace Theosophy?
 

>UNCERTAINTY -- UNCERTAINTY  I agree that they are a pair.   On the other hand we cannot read our own future, but we seem to muddle through those daily problems pretty well.>

The future is a realm of possibilities or probabilities that can be read 
only statistically. "Muddle" is a pretty good way of putting it.


>JUDGMENTS    -- Those concerning myself are agreeably subjective.  But I would not try to attempt or make the judging of another a practice.  The surface of all living is limited.  Only each person knows in his/her heart-of-heart what their motives are.>

Glad to hear you say this.
 
> THE INNER SELF --    each has to do this for themselves.  If we consider that all Theosphy offers are the propositions we might use if we want to, and, in addition lends the weight of testimony in regard to their application then we may find value in theosophy.  But we are all free to go and take up either our own way of thinking or to study and apply any other system.  >

Well, I certainly can't argue with any of this. Good. But what you 
say here kinda conflicts with your past use of "genuine Theosophy"
or "original Theosophy" which implies a more dogmatic approach.
 
>The only reason that I read and contribute to these talks is that I have found something in Theosophy that  is useful for me.  I share it in the hope tha others like you will respond and so we will all learn more together.  Of course my interpretation of what HPB says is my own, but I try also to impesonalize it and universalize it so that it is not too heavily charged with my opinions.>

I hope that we are all doing this.
 
KARMA  --  My view is that every physical action (thought, feeling, etc.) has its moral (ethical) and everlasting effect. And that these effects return to those who generate them in time.  I would say that by wronging anyone I would wrong myself as well as the rest of mankind -- in the long run.
[DALLAS ] 
   

Please think about what you are saying here. I know that this is
the Theosophical exoteric "party line" but it is really a terrible notion.
Any rational thought on this idea will conclude that the Wheel of
Life will turn forever and that there is no escape. If every act must
be repaid in kind, then we will always and forever have to return.
This is NOT the message of Buddhism, nor the message of
Vedanta, nor of Taoism (and I thought Theosophy embraced these
religions?).  Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism all teach the
possibility of ending karma and of transcending the Wheel of
Life. This is really the "Good News" of the East -- not the doctrine
of karma and reincarnation which are almost viewed as sin. For 
reasons best known to herself, HPB emphasized Karma and 
Reincarnation as doctrines and de-emphasized their transcendence.
Anyway, in order for transcendence to be possible at all, the awful
notion that every act must be repaid in kind can't be true. It may
seem to be true sometimes, but logically it can't be. There is a
logical flaw in the eye-for-an-eye teaching. I believe that Jesus
saw through this flaw and emphasized compassion and forgiveness
as the way of transcendence. How? Because compassion and
forgiveness are powerful enough, if sincere, to actually sever
karmic ties.

Jerry S.