Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00270)

Monday, August 27, 2001

Re: Opinions in the Theosophical Family

What is the value of any quarrel ?


Dear Friends:


I quite agree with Eldon's statements.

None of us were present when various past events took place. We
have only documents to rely on. It is the interpretation that is
placed on them that ends up troubling us. This gives the various
"Theosophical" organizations a "tradition" and the history of
interpretation that is associated with such. Are we here to
study THEOSOPHY or to wrangle over the past that none of us can
undo. And why ought any of us expect others to adopt our views?

Lets ask this: Can a careful study of the past decisions ever
help us to our present comprehension of THEOSOPHY ? What is
essential, thinking over metaphysics or rehashing mistakes (or
right actions) and opinions (true, false or confused) which we
never participated in? I say that an active study and a proving
of the validity or fallacy of Theosophy is a useful occupation
for me. I am not really interested in how others review
history -- that is when it ceases to be factual and develops
aspects of fiction which originate in a mind bent of explaining
the inexplicable -- another's decisions. The only evidence we
can trust at this stage are documents.

If we set aside party and other prejudices, and look at the
documents, then we will be on a level field. Lets say that
opinions are all personal conclusions, and no one will ever
totally subscribe to any "party line." That's where politics
fall down. They seek adherence to a uniform agreement, an IDEAL
concerning which every "member" has developed, and is still
developing, his own opinions.

But who brought up this whole "mare's nest" anyway, and for what
reason?

The amity that now subsists between the various "organizations"
or "associations" that owe their life and philosophy to Theosophy
has grown, because of a persistent focus on the PHILOSOPHY alone,
and not on doctrinal or traditional differences.

Suffice it to say that those who study THEOSOPHY as H P B
recorded it (she DID NOT INVENT IT, nor is it a patch work
accretion of ideas and views from dozens of religious
philosophies) will agree that each of the several "organizations"
are, in their own way, studying and working on the same lines.
The labels alone separate the true and diligent students form
those who only superficially have acquired a nodding acquaintance
with Theosophy, and have still to study the KEY TO THEOSOPHY
(HPB). After all, 300 pages is a week's reading at most, but the
study of the book and its doctrines can take a lifetime.

Who has any quarrel with UNIVERSAL SPACE?

Who objects to the life supporting LAWS that NATURE has provided
for us all? And which Science so diligently studies and proves?
They operate invisibly -- probably using the astral lattice work
of electro-magnetic affinities that pervade the unlimited
UNIVERSE. We, here, on our Earth, are a very small affair
indeed. But we talk s though we had the keys to the Universe --
and constantly shift their combinations, as new facts emerge that
disprove earlier hypotheses.

Who objects to Evolution as a universal process? I think we
would rather trust NATURE than a description of a PERSONAL GOD
who manipulates his creations randomly and is as wilful as an
undeveloped child. Own who advocates VIRTUE and permits VICE,
LIE and misrepresentation to continue to proliferate. And why
do they? Who feeds them? Who defiles sincerity and honesty?

Ah. Here comes the problem. How and or Who guides and manages
all this? Is this agent to be pictured as A POWER, or a Force,
or A WAYWARD GOD, or a SUPER-MAN ?

Is this "Agent" to be endowed with the faults and foibles of
humanity at large, or is HE (or IT) to be granted a UNIVERSAL
WISDOM that transcends ALL IMPERFECTIONS ?

Who knows most about the realm of SPACE, the LAWS of the
Universe, and the PROCESS OF EVOLUTION ?

How is any human to ascertain the truth of these things? If we
were not immortals at our INNER CORE, then why are we concerning
ourselves with these searches and definitions?

What tools shall we use? Do we have any?

Are we placed as slaves or as free-men and free women able to
determine our own destiny?

If so, what effect do we have on others ?



Anyone who has really read ISIS UNVEILED or / and The SECRET
DOCTRINE will know that H.P.Blavatsky's sources were not
ORDINARY, and much of what is there is not from any libraries
currently available in here times.

Let THEOSOPHY be seen to stand on its own feet. Approach it.
Study it. Try to destroy it using the scientific tools of logic,
examination, correlation, and such shards of history and
literature as may be available for examination. Examine its
SCIENCE. Examine the research into the origin of all the great
World-religions. Examine its account of the LAWS that underlie
Nature and her operations.

Examine the information offered on both COSMOGONY and
ANTHROPOGONY and see if those can be destroyed by any information
or discoveries that Science and Philosophy during the past 125
years has been able to evolve. In fact you will find that those
have been readjusted to reflect concept that Theosophical
literature made public back then.

But enough of this, let's get back to studying our environment
and GREAT NATURE which provides us with living space and all the
tools we need to discover her mysteries.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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


-----Original Message-----
From: adelasie [mailto:adelasie@thegrid.net]
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 1:44 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World angry words and historic claims

Dear Eldon,

Very well said! Thanks for putting the matter into such clear and
balanced perspective.

Adelasie

On 27 Aug 01, at 13:04, Eldon B Tucker wrote:

> At 12:01 PM 8/27/01 -0400, you wrote:
> >Adelasie,
> >I also agree with your and Peter's assessment of the
situation. Part
> >of it may be Frank's difficulty with the language, but
attacking
> >Dallas personally reflects on Frank. lurker, Bill
>
> I think that we all have times when we may
> irritate others. There may be times when the
> irritation persists to the point that someone
> gets angry and responds in that anger.
>
> Dallas has been fairly persistent in presenting
> and representing the particular slant on
> theosophical history that comes out of the ULT
> old guard. This view of history is not binding
> on ULT members, and is subject to amendment
> based upon new information.
>
> Each theosophical group has its own favorite
> secondary authors, following HPB. Each group
> also teaches a history that paints itself in
> a positive light, and often paints the other
> groups negatively. I belive those sectarian
> histories need to make way for a history that
> is not dominated by any theosophical group (and
> having a conflict of interest situation where
> it has to promote its sponsoring group in the
> best possible light).
>
> Early ULT history may conflict with early
> Point Loma history regarding the roles of
> Robert Crosbie and Katherine Tingley in the
> history of the Movement. As long as members
> of the groups require a slant on the history
> that makes them special, and may put down
> the other groups, we'll continue divided
> from one another by a spirit of sectarianism.
>
> I think that after all the feedback, Frank
> is aware that his anger wasn't helpful. The
> other side to this is also important. We need
> to be aware that any sectarian (one-sided,
> organization-specific and sponsored) slant on
> history is going to be found offensive to
> members of the other groups in our theosophical
> family.
>
> The era of put down's is over, I think. In
> the 1920's, the theosophical groups were into
> attacking each other. Moving Theosophy into
> the future, we need to accept the positive in
> all the groups, put aside the historic differences,
> and accept the best that we all have to offer.
>
CUT