Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00053)

Monday, August 06, 2001

Dear Alwilli:

Your points are well taken.

These lists and exchanges were erected by and for those who
wanted to study and investigate THEOSOPHY.

It is only in the past 6 weeks we have had a flood of inquiry
into the affairs of those whose prime duty and attention was to
the preservation of THEOSOPHY and the discussion of the main
teachings thereof.

I am one of those who rose to the defence of the associations
which have offered THEOSOPHY for study.

I intend to devote my time to the study aspect of the work
hereafter.

Now, if a subject or questions are going to be asked on the
Philosophy, the Metaphysics and the Practical aspects of
Theosophy -- as it might be called: Theosophy in daily life -- I
will contribute thoughts and answers.

Best wishes,

Dallas

============================





-----Original Message-----
From: alwilli
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 11:51 AM
To:
Cc: basic@blavatsky.net
Subject: Theos-World Discussion of ULT, etc.

Hello fellows

I'm a fairly recent reader of these lists.

When I joined, enjoined by the spirit of enthusiasm and awe of my
new
discovery of a profound and plausible alternative philosphy to
the
establishment stock view, there was no inkling of the
undercurrents of a
roiling - in cases bitter, sometimes, between the lines, even
vicious, albeit outwardly polite - contest between different
"guardianships" of Theosophy.

I trust I was naive and only looking for fellowship and
enlightenment;
or help in understanding, the more practical expectation. However
that may be, I was completely, unpleasantly, surprised by the
"debate"
I am now daily subjected to.

You should ask why?. I should reply that contentious debate on
any
topic is acceptable so long as it might contribute to a better
understanding of this or that by a vigorous diamond-cutting and
buffing process of ideas resulting in a more polished and agreed
definition of this or that.

It is also necessary when any of the various wells wherein we
seek
succour might be adulterated or even poisoned from without.

However, even if we are used to drinking from one fount and see
someone drinking from another, very similar but different, is
that
difference alone legitimate cause to suspect: 1. that that fount
is
impure; 2. that those that drink from it are insincere?

In my view, so far, no incontrovertible evidence has been adduced
to
settle the question one way or the other.

In addition, this constant bickering about historical detail,
about
individual interpretation and the like, distracts and detracts us
all
from the deeply more difficult questions that demand our focused
attention.

Certain of the exchanges are replete with vengeful argument;
surely not an example in any forum; far less in a forum
purporting to
uphold such noble ideals as those espoused by Theosophy?

On the other hand the debate might still hold value, since these
conflicts must, by Karma if nothing else, be settled.

To this end, I suggest that a new list be created for
Theos-debate and
that everyone invested in that debate keep their postings there;
and
everyone who would follow it join that list so the rest can
continue
undestracted on their quest to unravel the exceptional, dense,
"true
though incomplete explanation" presented to mankind by HBP and
her
mentors.

--
Best regards,
alwilli
mailto:alwilli@iafrica.com