Theos-Talk Archives (April 1999 Message tt00138)

Dear Arnaldo,

I'm sorry it came across that way.  I used your word "brotherly" because I
did indeed feel you had offered your thoughts in a sensitive and brotherly
way.  It was my way of acknowledging your intentions.

Nor did I think you interpreted the meaning of the word "Theosophy"
negatively.  Quite the opposite in fact, as you made it clear that for you
Theosophy is Altruism.  What I meant was this: - if what *I*  said had come
across so negatively then it is "fortunate" (rather than "unfortunate", to
use your words) that you objected to my way of writing.  It was a rather
clumsy way of agreeing with you, at least in part.  I'm not doing very well
at communicating, am I?!

As for the term "Theosophy" - on the first page of the Key to Theosophy, HPB
writes that "Theosophy is Divine Knowledge or Science."  Throughout the KEY,
HPB refers to Theosophy in that same way.  So I do believe it is appropriate
when refering to that "Divine Knowledge or Science" to say "Theosophy
states.." or "Theosophy teaches..".  In many places HPB says what Theosophy
is NOT - for example,  "Theosophy is not Buddhism".

HPB also refers to altuistic action as Theosophy.

Clarifying what is and what is not Theosophy (something that HPB and the
Mahatmas did) doesn't mean we are making sectarian statements, in my view.
And it might be a very good thing for the Theosophical Movement to do.

You say:
> As we can read in The Key to Theosophy, the TS
> is a philantropic and scientifical organization for
> the dissemination of the idea of brotherhood in
> PRACTICAL and not in theorectical terms.

I would say "Yes", if by that you mean we have to get on with it and not
just think about it.

Here is something that HPB writes in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY:

ENQUIRER. How do you expect the Fellows of your Society to help in the work?

THEOSOPHIST. First by studying and comprehending the theosophical doctrines,
so that they may teach others, especially the young people. Secondly, by
taking every opportunity of talking to others and explaining to them what
Theosophy is, and what it is not; by removing misconceptions and spreading
an interest in the subject. Thirdly, by assisting in circulating our
literature, by buying books when they have the means, by lending and giving
them and by inducing their friends to do so. Fourthly, by defending the
Society from the unjust aspersions cast upon it, by every legitimate device
in their power. Fifth, and most important of all, by the example of their
own lives.

ENQUIRER. But all this literature, to the spread of which you attach so much
importance, does not seem to me of much practical use in helping mankind.
This is not practical charity.

THEOSOPHIST. We think otherwise. We hold that a good book which gives people
food for thought, which strengthens and clears their minds, and enables them
to grasp truths which they have dimly felt but could not formulate -- we
hold that such a book does a real, substantial good. As to what you call
practical deeds of charity, to benefit the bodies of our fellow-men, we do
what little we can.... What the Theosophist has to do above all is to forget
his personality.

(KEY TO THEOSOPHY, p248-249)


Best wishes,

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> There is no reason why to put my word -- brotherly --
> like "brotherly". Just because we may not agree in
> some intelectual points, it does not mean, at all,
> that the opinion was not offered in a brotherly way.
> I am pointing this issue just because to our movement
> brotherhood in practice is central. All the rest comes
> in a second place.
>
> As to our intelectual differences, we just do not
> agree as  to the way we understand the meaning of
> the word Theosophy. And I do not experience it
> negatively, all on the contrary, for the way I
> understand it (as real Altruism) puts Theosophy in a
> far more elevated, or higher concept than Theosophy
> as a doctrine, or a set of teachings etc.
>
> But I do agree with you that "... she and They put an
> *enormous* amount of effort into getting these
> Doctrines across to the World." As I had previously
> explained, I just do not see as a wise attitude to call
> these doctrines as Theosophy, that is all. And I only
> insist on that point because I am convinced that it
> is not free from sectarianinsm, or to put it in another
> way, that it is not good for the attainment of the
> Object of the theosophical movement, i.e., the
> elevation of the condition of MAN.
>
> As we can read in The Key to Theosophy, the TS
> is a philantropic and scientifical organization for
> the dissemination of the idea of brotherhood in
> PRACTICAL and not in theorectical terms. (I am
> not quoting it verbatin, but if you want I can do so.
> Now I am mentaly translating it from the Portuguese
> back to the English, which was the original!)
>
> I thank you for your answer, and in spite of our intelectual
> differences, I send you my Best wishes, and I greet
> you as a brother.
>
> Arnaldo.
>
> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: Peter Merriott <caduceus@dial.pipex.com>
> Para: theos-talk@theosophy.com <theos-talk@theosophy.com>
> Data: Terça-feira, 6 de Abril de 1999 00:22
> Assunto: Theos-World Response to Arnaldo
>
>
> >Dear Arnaldo,
> >
> >Thank you for sharing your "brotherly" thoughts.
> >
> >You wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, or fortunately, I do not agree with that kind
> >> of statement:
> >>
> >> "Theosophy puts a more realistic view of human and spiritual
> >> evolution and progression than the one you propose."
> >> (or "This is what Theosophy states.")
> >
> >If it comes across as negatively as you experience it then it is probably
> >best to say "fortunately".
> >
> >I think I can see what you mean about that statement.   But it
> isn't meant
> >in a sectarian way.  It is used in the way you would refer to
> any 'body of
> >knowledge' in a debate.  For example, "Buddhism puts the view..." or
> >"Behavioural Psychology states..." etc etc.
> >
> >> Although I do agree with most of what you wrote, why
> >> not to say that dearest HPB, or dearest Master KH
> >> said so, or wrote so and so. Why to make it sectarian?
> >
> >I'm glad you found much to agree with.  When I say "This is what
> Theosophy
> >states", I mean these are the key assertions on a particular
> issue that we
> >would find in the writings of HPB and the Mahatmas.  Where ever
> I can I try
> >to be more specific about what those assertions are by giving a reference
> to
> >the source of those statements, or qouting a passage from that particular
> >text.  For me, "Theosophy states" is another way of saying "HPB
> or Master M
> >or KH state ...."  Quite often I do in fact write "HPB says..." etc.
> >
> >> Perhaps it is better not to say that Theosophy is a set of
> >> doctrines. To me Theosophy is Altruism ...
> >
> >I agree with you that practical Theosophy is Altruism and I confess to
> >having a long way to go to bring that fully into my daily life.  I also
> >think Theosophy is a 'body of Knowledge', hence HPB refered to it as The
> >Wisdom Religion.  Along with Altruism we need Discrimination and
> Wisdom, in
> >my view.   When we look back on the life of HPB under the
> direction of her
> >Teachers, she and They put an *emormous* amount of effort into getting
> these
> >Doctrines across to the World.  This involved presenting 'new' material,
> >validating ancient 'truths', pointing out the way esoteric doctrines had
> >been distorted in various spiritual traditions and so on.  HPB vigorously
> >and forcefully put forward and defended those Doctrines in the
> face of much
> >humiliation and slander directed against herself. I think this shows that
> >HPB, KH and M believed these Doctrines to be vitally important.
> >
> >> The theosophical movement is supposed to hear and
> >> to compare the different points of view, without being
> >> sectarian. Not to offer a new creed.
> >
> >I heartily agree with you, Arnaldo.  Theosophy as given out by HPB, M and
> KH
> >is not a new creed.  They tell us it is the Wisdom Religion that has been
> >the source of all the genuine spiritual traditions throughout the history
> of
> >humanity.  They offer much to help us assertain the truth of this, along
> >with offering 'knowledge' that will be helpfull to us on our spiritual
> >journey.
> >
> >As for different views, all I ask is that we examine these views on their
> >merits, and in the light of what HPB and the Mahatmas gave out,
> and not on
> >the basis of 'attitudes' that we attribute to those who disagree with us.
> >This is a Theosophy group after all.  When people claim that HPB and the
> >Masters' Teachings support their personal opinions and add that any
> >theosophist who doesn't hold that view suffers from "self defeating
> >attitudes" etc, then this is something that should be questioned, in my
> >view.
> >
> >I believe that HPB and her Teachers offered us a fabulous base
> of knowledge
> >upon which we could build.  Its a also a yard stick, or 'plumb
> line' if you
> >like.  I believe the sincere student will find that knowledge 'living
> >inside' himself, and not simply on the pages of their written works.
> >
> >Arnaldo, I notice this is the second time you have raised this
> point.  So I
> >will take your thoughts to heart and see what stirs therein.
> >
> >Best wishes
> >
> >Peter
> >
>
>
>
> -- 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.
>


-- 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.