Theos-Talk Archives (October 2000 Message tt00288)

Greetings all,

I have just joined this group, so this will be the first message that 
I will post...

I think Art is correct on this subject. I am not too familiar with 
Thoesophy, although I have read The Secret Doctrine by Madame 
Blavatsky. You will notice on the title page (at least on the copy I 
own) that it says: "There is no Religion higher than Truth". This, I 
think, is (or should be) the mission of the Theosophical Movement. 
Therefore, if Bailey or Leadbeter have anything true to contribute 
(as I know many people feel), then their books should be approved of 
as well. Indeed, why should anything but the Truth (and all of it) be 
considered scripture?

Lucas of Brigid

--- In theos-talk@egroups.com, arthra999@y... wrote:
> Thanks Peter for your letter... I had almost overlooked it with all 
of 
> the missives flying around...
> 
> My concern is with the impression that there is a kind of 
> "orthodoxy" view of Theosophy... this view stresses the writings 
> of Madam Blavatsky and perhaps a few other writers and shuns 
> or disapproves of later views and contributions.
> 
> I think it's apparent from the topics on this list that there are 
> people on various sides..
> 
> I sense that Dallas is trying to posit that unless we are extremely 
> studied in these writings we really can't debate them or consider 
> other views, this I gathered from his sixth point as you recall.
> 
> What I dislike is making theosophy into a religion with prophets 
> and sacred scriptures. I think that's behind some of the issues 
> on this list. To me Leadbeater has worthwhile things to say as 
> does Rudolf Steiner and Alice Bailey and others, so i am making 
> a plea here to be theosophists with a small "t" as opposed to 
> Theosophists I think.
> 
> - Art