Theos-Talk Archives (March 2001 Message tt00000)

Hello Dallas, I have inserted a few thoughts refarding your comments below. 
Louis.

In a message dated 2/28/2001 5:51:33 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
dalval14@earthlink.net writes:

> 
> Dallas observes:
> 
> One wonders how the study of theosophy can ever be called
> "tiresome."

I did not say that the study of theosophy is tiresome. I said that the 
polarized personalities involved in this unending debate about the correct or 
incorrect forms of theosophy is tiresome to many of us who have been 
listening to it for the last forty years or more. The constant rehashing of 
this matter saps valuable time and energy from the more important experience 
of free study and discovery. 

> If we seek truth, then we may use it as any other exposition and
> do the tracing to true or false conclusions.
> Would it not be better to say that the "tiresome debates" are
> really aspects of our own effort? If we seek within that of
> which we are a part (because it is universal) then some aspect of
> our won nature is making up this attitude Is it useful? What
> causes such a reaction? Can we determine this?

This is just another way of saying there is a true theosophy and a false 
theosophy. H.P.B, Judge, etc., is proper theosophy and worth studying. 
Besant, Leadbeater, Bailey, etc., is wrong and not worth the effort. I 
suggest that any theosophy which can produce intuitional resonance and 
inspirational vision is proper and worth the study effort, pure and simple.
> 
> In the meantime, are not all students going to follow their own
> "path?" Why should anyone expect a group of students / members
> to be patent copies of one-another?
> 
> Is the real "debate" about principles, bases, and logical
> conclusions, or is it about the "clash of opinions?"

It's about both Dallas. For the personalities that involve themselves in 
these affairs have a complex of traits, characteristics and agenda's that 
they bring to the table, some open and obvious others more subtle and 
indirect. It has appeared to me, for some time now, that the "ongoingness of 
the debate" is the really important thing. For I have never seen an honest 
attempt at resolution and release. The damage that was done during the 
Besant/Judge/Krishnamurti/Bailey etc. splits, remains unhealed to this day. 
Each camp has its adherents and defenders and no quarter seems to be given. 
> 
> Saying one view or another concerning Theosophy by students who
> followed HPB is only saying that they differ in their
> understanding. We still have as a core center the presentation
> of THEOSOPHY in its original words as written by H.P.B
> 
> Who is afraid of approaching that? In any case in this
> incarnation or some other one will come up against these basic
> ideas. If we use and develop them now we will probably save
> ourselves a lot of effort, and time. Karma presents us with this
> opportunity. Do we seize it? Each decides for themselves.
> 
There it is again. The inference is that if we explore other Theosophical 
writers and are illumined by them, the illumination will be impaired somehow 
because we did not get it from the correct source. Illumination, inspiration 
and Spiritual insight are conditions and experiences of our inner being. 
Their manifestation can occur without reading anything at all. or by reading 
everything there is. The incoming generations will have access to spiritual 
inspiration from a vast ocean of resources. How can we possibly judge the 
assimilative quality of another's life path? 


> It is valuable and instructive to note that H.P.B. says that the
> words used to covey Theosophical doctrines and metaphysics
> APPROXIMATE to the truth that lies in between the words, or
> behind them as seminal idea. I conceive that we develop our
> intuition as we seek to unravel the inner meaning that lies
> behind the words. Also I think that THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE if
> regularly used and read, and thought over -- as the moral link
> between appearances and causes -- tends to develop in us this
> abilit
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Dallas
> 

With all that said, Let me state for the record that my first and enduring 
love, ARE the writings of H.P.B. The wisdom that I have found in her work has 
inspired monumental transformations in my understanding of the human journey. 
But I have also read most of the other theosophical works, adjacent to, 
contemporary of, as well as currently emerging. I for one, am able to find 
true theosophy resonating in many different places. Let the lines of division 
decay and disappear. Let us embrace everyone whose karma has brought them to 
ANY study of theosophy because one day that study may inspire them to do 
great things. There is much work to be done. This perrenial bickering between 
ORIGINAL and PSEUDO theosophy keeps us from it, in one way or another.

Louis


> ====================== 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bart Lidofsky [mailto:bartl@sprynet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 5:46 AM
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Pseudo-Theosophy
> 
> teos9@aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Some observations regarding Wes Amerman's reply below:
> >
> > Again, we revisit this tired old debate. Ever since the death
> of the founders
> > of the Theosophical Movement as we know it today, this battle
> has raged on
> > between the various interested parties. Who has the correct
> interpretation of
> > Theosophy and who does not!
> 
> Of course, if one follows Blavatsky and the Mahatmas,
> then one knows:
> NOBODY has the correct interpretation of Theosophy. Yet. And for
> the
> foreseeable future.
> 
> Bart Lidofsky
>