Theos-Talk Archives (March 1999 Message tt00333)

In a message dated 3/20/99 2:44:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, Louis writes:

<<  Blavatsky-net, the HPB quote of the day was:
 
 <<Quote of the Day (for Mar 19):
 
 The same will be said [is a forgery , etc.] of the Secret Archaic
 Doctrine, when
 proofs are given of its undeniable existence and records. But it
 will take
 centuries [from 1888] before much more is given from it. ... In
 Century the
 Twentieth some disciple more informed, and far better fitted, may
 be sent by
 the Masters of Wisdom to give final and irrefutable proofs that
 there exists a
 Science called Gupta-Vidya [secret, esoteric knowledge]; and that
 like the
 once-mysterious sources of the Nile, the source of all religions
 and
 philosophies now known to the world has been for many ages
 forgotten and lost
 to men, but is at last found. -- Secret Doctrine Vol I intro page
 xxxviii. By
 Helena Blavatsky.>>
 
 Now that we have come to the end of it, who do we "century
 twenty"
 theosophists, think this disciple was or is. Or, is the emphasis
 still on "MAY
 COME."
 
 Louis
  >>


<<Mar 20th Dallas replies:


Dear Friend Louis, etc.:
Dallas says:
Hopefully this will never be announced.  It is something that
will be sensed by those who have made themselves "ready."

Those who are curious will search and probe, and as was done in
the very early days after HPB's death, the speculators may take
advantage of any prominence, or they may try to create one.
Personally, I think it is a part of the "testing" process,
whereby the motives of students are revealed TO THEMSELVES.
Theosophy, esotericism, occultism are all common-sense matters.
But seeking to grasp them fully with the hints and information
given, encourages the growth of our minds and their innate
powers.>>

Dallas,
Thank you for your quick feedback. As usual I find it thoughtful and well
stated. I do not however, in this particular case accept your explanation as
fully as others you have offered in the past.  I have heard this sort of
answer in various forms from many theosophists over the years. Dallas, I do
not mean any disrespect, however, I have found that, when a vague or evasive
answer is given to a direct question, the real answer is "I don't know" or
"I'm not saying." 

The reason that I am bewildered by this subject, along with the last 25 years
of a century scenario, is that, as theosophists, we are asked to satisfy
ourselves as to the existence of the great ones, and their involvement with
the theosophical philosophy as it has come down to us through HPB. Now we have
in the above quote, HPB herself saying, more will be forthcoming by one of
these remarkable beings in the 20th Century.

This narrows the possibilities to a precious few. Either HPB had it wrong, or
was toying with posterity. Or, the conditions during the last hundred years of
our spiritual development did not warrant such a visit. Or, perhaps, more
sadly yet, one HAS been and we knew him not!  How many on these lists are
familiar enough with other contemporary theosophical systems to say with
certainty that another installment of the ancient wisdom is not now amongst
us.

A final thought. For those of us who have a deep intuitional resonance with
our own  theosophy, a certain lightness of being, as we come near to the
majestic vistas revealed in HPb's legacy. It seems natural, to expect the same
ongoing evolutionary unfoldment that is part of the cosmos itself. I for one
would be very surprised if her more than ample hint, had not been filled. That
would leave the oversight as usual, once again, on us.

Louis

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.