|
|
| [MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |
| [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
May 08, 2001 06:27 PM
by dalval14
|
Tuesday,
May 08, 2001 Dear Jerry: Best wishes for WHITE LOTUS DAY. Preaching to the “choir” --
seems to be universal. Even if we
echo certain ideas to each other there is at least the benefit that if we go
wrong in our thinking, some friendly hand or voice will help set us straight
again. I believe that this was the original intention for the T.S. Lodges
(Branches) -- to assist as a forum for students to check and verify their study
results. To some extent this
INTERNET phenomenon has served this purpose. I see that Reed reports over 2,200 members for BLAVATSKY
NET. Quite impressive. That is an indication of growth. Also, probably, of independence -- as the
“Censor” is not “looking.” You have studied our recent Theos. History and know that the past (from
the time of H.P.B.) shows that only a very few responded to, and understoodthe
inclusive nature of Theosophy -- not as a series of dogmas or revelations, but rather, as a description of the
facts of Universal Law (Karma) in
action. Are not all of us, just as
H.P.B. was, independently dependent?
(A Paradox). Since these statements concerning scientific matters, laws of Nature, etc. (in the S.D. andin
Her articles) have not had the seal of approval from our present Academies,but
have been disputed, most students
have become uncertain, and their time given to research and proof has seen
attrition. What they do not
realize is the effect of ISIS UNVEILED on the INTELLIGENTSIA of her time. They (the professors and religious
leaders) recognized the genius
there -- the wide historical and factual embrace presented as proof of the
invisible astral Nature that underlies the physical was important to them. Look at the mass of proofs advanced and
scattered through the S.D. -- in all departments of learning and ask yourself
if anyone today could begin to equal such a cohesive and comprehensive sweep. It is not no wonder that people feel
overwhelmed when they encounter the S.D. Few have the Academic education to appreciate it. No one will accept or use the statements in Theosophy unless they prove
to themselves their value, accuracy and practicality in habitual daily use I do not care much about “organizations,” and have used,or associated
myself with those which seem to more carefully adopt and embody the ORIGINAL
THEOSOPHY that H.P.B. and Masters taught.
So much for my views and independence. Why should I pledge allegiance to any society or group which
has great ideals and then fails to practice them -- yet, demands that I do or not
do this or that ? I have always
felt it worthwhile to stand on my own intellectual feet, and the study of
Theosophy, which I started when I was around 18, (60 years or so, ago) has enlarged my understanding and knowledge
enormously. I very humbly, believe
me, give tribute to THEOSOPHY and to H.P.B. and the Masters for anything that I
may be today. And for this reason
when I “speculate” I am very careful to give notice. Other statements, when used, I quote the source so others
may also verify my accuracy or conclusions. We are all students in this together and brotherhood
dictates that we assist, and do not mislead anyone. Let me add some notes below. Let me also ask how is the family -- your wife and children -- I do
recall our talking when you came to one of Caroline’s “get-togethers” years
back. My health is deteriorating,
so I cannot travel -- and I recall your kind invitation extended several years
ago -- to visit you --- to or from the meetings at Brookings in Oregon -- but I
have not been able to go since the 2nd. Thanks and best wishes, Dal ============================= -----Original Message----- Dallas, I think
you are preaching to the choir on this point, and I appreciate your
idealism. However, as one who has worked with three different
Theosophical Organizations over the last forty years, I have observed that
there is a great deal of difference between the ideals they preach and their
practices. --------------------------------------------- DTB INEVITABLE as the
INDIVIDUALS have to be independently devotes to their study. The ”societies,” “lodges,” etc… are
just forums for mutual discussion and conferencing -- the presentation of ideas
-- and they ought to serve no other purpose. But attendance ought to fire up those who come so that their individual
study widens and deepens. ------------------------------ To my
mind, personal responsibility is the key here, as you suggest. This
is why I'm interested in learning about different Theosophist's
views concerning what they believe their responsibilities are. I’m
frankly not interested in being told what "theosophy
teaches." I have all of the books, and like you, have read them over
and over and discussed them alone and in study groups for years. I'm
primarily interested is in the many different ways that people have come to
understand these teachings and how they apply them. ------------------------------- DTB I do not think
the “Theosophical Bodies” are able to enforce anything -- so whatever the “membership” may be,
the individual action and decision-making will be final so far as individual
Karma is concerned. If one finds
ones’ self amid “sheep” then the position of leader fallsto the “Goats” which
the careful shepherd always puts in a flock -- they are independent and make
good decisions -- which the sheep follow.
But that is the flock situation and mankind ought to have transcended
it, or will have to during the remaining part of the cycle. { see MOMENT OF CHOICE S.D. I 247, 265, 639, S.D. II 149. 240, 261, 300-1; ML 47; H.P.B. Articles
(ULT) Vol. III 272, 289. } The only reason I say “theosophy teaches” is because
it takes me, as a person, out of the equation as far as possible. I try to let H.P.B. and the Masters
speak to the correspondent and therefore let him draw his own conclusions,
without interference from my personal “filter.” ------------------------------------------- Ramadoss
recently quoted Radha as saying that "we have as a TS such a low
level because we have not better members." In light of your point
about personal responsibilities and individual karma, she is right. On
the other hand, there is also group karma, which begs the question
whether sixty years of leadership by the same family and a political
system that keeps potential leaders who are outside of the click from
running, might have something to do with the TS's low level. But thisis
not just the Adyar TS, I have made the same general kinds of observations
(though the details differ of course) in ULT and Pasadena, which are, I
believe, also at a low level. ======================= DTB Numerically
correct. -- But that does not mean Theosophy is wrong. Nor does it mean that the impact of
Theosophy is not potent. If
Einstein could profit from the S.D., there are others who are using right now
and profiting (even if they do not acknowledge it), I think there are cycles when more Egos responsive to
Theosophy seem to incarnate in the race / races. For instance we have in the past 3 or 4 years witnessed a
large increment in interest arise in the Spanish speaking group of people who
live around the Lodge -- and thanks to several able bi-lingual students, their
needs and their studies have been assisted. I believe at least one of our students is assisting the
Pasadena T.S. in a similar program in that area. Looking back historically from whatever fragmentsare
still available concerning early Christianity and the Gnostics, one wondersif
there is not a parallel going on here and now? You may be able to see a broader horizon than I do. But, I would observe that wherever a, or several,
students, bestir themselves to provide a center of study the accretions
begin. Brookings in Oregon is the
most recent example. Yet nowthat
Willie Dade died, I do not notice the vitality continuing there as before. We asked Willie about that beginning, and all she said was, she put an ad in the
local paper in the classifieds, and had responses -- and from that the activity grew. She was excellent at “follow-up” and from that interest
arose. She was also a very good
student and could explain. I suppose that is the way in which Judge initiated
and supported the growth of the T.S. from 1896 to 1891 after he had been
through lean times after the departure of H.P.B. and Olcott for England and
India in 1879 -- it is reported that he was the only one at some of the
meetings of the early T.S. called in New York. So I suppose we can emulate that -- one has to view these
things as tests of our own enthusiasm, persistence and creative ability. Anyway, if 2,000 or so years ago we may have met in
Plato’s Academy or been a friend and pupil of Ammonias Saccus in the Library at
Alexandria, or part of the Ebionite,
Essenian, or Nabathean groups in and around Palestine, or learned from
Buddha, Lao-Tze or Pythagoras -- what may we expect to meet in another cycle,
when we reincarnate again, and our present work may have been supported to
maturation. Not every “spiritual”
effort has succeeded or been supported -- and so many failures are
noticed. Also we can see howthe
potency was diverted -- and the recent 125 years show this again and again. I ask you, unless (in the 1910-30s) the ULT
associates had not published H.P.B.’s books, articles and Judge’s would they
not by now, be almost totally unknown?
As I look over the scene I see the effect has been to force the various TPHs
and TUPs to reprint those original texts so as to appear not too
out-of-line. This means thattheir
current membership have profited from this fact and this has partially set the
MOVEMENT back on track. You speak of the “follow-the-leader” effect. One of its faults, as I see it, is that
it tends to cause irresponsibility among the “members.” They “rely” on othersto do the work
and let their efforts dry up, or slip and disappear. I believe our responsibility to H.P.B. and Masters -- at
least to respect their work and forward their purposes -- is very important. But it has to be self-generated. Sympathy is fine. Self-study is fine.
But it isolates the student from his contemporaries. It ends isolating Theosophy from those
who need it, and may have been waiting for it -- and for whom it is important
and an “awakener.” Promulgation is
the only way -- and we ought not be “seeking for immediate or visibleresults.” Throw out the seed. Some will root and the response from the INNER MAN the
spiritual INDIVIDUAL will occur sooner or later. An old friend of mine, when years ago I said something like
that -- about results being slow in appearing -- said I was forgetting the
power of Devachanic meditation.
What was “heard, or read” in this life could cause a germination that
would manifest in succeeding life or lives. Thanks for your comments -- see what they have evoked? Hope we will continue this dialog. If all the TSes and ULTs drop their parochialisms
then we will have THEOSOPHY triumphant and set forward (not as someone’s
interpretation, but in the ORIGINAL for it was delivered -- this is important)
-- as it ought to be. But wehave
to do the work. We ought not to wait for someone else to do it. And as for interpreters (myself included, please)
they ought to be set aside once that the window or doorway to original
THEOSOPHY is accessed. The problem
with all interpreters is that they looked (or look) at Theosophy with the
filters of their own minds and experience. To that extent, as they may express it, THEOSOPHY then
becomes colored. This does not
mean they ought to be abandoned as many among us have profited from their work
-- but we ought to start evaluating it (I mean their writings and thoughts)and
checking it / them for accuracy with the ORIGINAL TEACHINGS (there I go again). I don’t mean the writing soof HPB and
the Masters ought to be set up as a kind of “Biblical” limit. But their ideas and principles ought to
be so studied that each one of us, individually, knows from personal testing
whether they are worth relying on. We ought to be living in this world withour
eyes and ears wide opened so that we may draw in the information that science
and philosophy are daily advancing.
Treat THEOSOPHY as a touchstone, if possible, and if we have verified
its logic and principles for reasonable accuracy.. Only those who become true students and enthusiasts
will succeed in this long incarnation-after-incarnation battle. We ought to cross check the ETHICS and
MORALS that Theosophy elevates with those of Jesus in THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT,
with Krishna’s BHAGAVAD GITA and with Buddha’s DHAMMAPADA ( Footfalls of the
Law). And with Plato’sDIALOGS. How else can we VERIFY Is there a common thread? On what kind of logic are they set out
?of the Law).nd MORALS Theosophy
elevates with those of Jesus in THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT, with Krishna' It is good that we have incarnated now when the
Philosophy was so recently made available, and we can still contact and usethe
ORIGINALS ( Sorry if I keep
emphasizing this.) jhe --------------------------------- DTB Theosophy, if
anything teaches the individual to be responsible only to the PRINCIPLES and
not to any “authorities.” The sole authority for each
is his own HIGHER SELF. The T.S.
is a body dedicated originally to
study and promulgate the Natural Truths that anyone could discover and prove
for themselves. The value of an
organization was / is that individuals could mutually consult and arrive at
some joint ideas, which were then to be used (or not) by the INDIVIDUALS. Our KARMA is always
INDIVIDUAL. By joining a TS we
surrender nothing of our personal responsibilities. ------------------------------------------
|