[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: Brigitte - to Dallas -- to Jerry: THEOSOPHY: Is it or Isn't it ?

Oct 16, 2001 04:18 PM
by dalval14

Tuesday, October 16, 2001

Dear Jerry:

Your observations make me ask further questions:

How ought we to make sure of reality? Is there any REALITY?

How do we assure ourselves of the continuity of anything?

Does the manifested Universe employ rules and laws with which to
self-regulate itself?

What is the purpose of life? and,

Why does the mind seek for Truths, and Facts?

Analogy (You used a Tree, I use a Diamond )

Theosophy and a Diamond: Lets look at an analogy so that I can
hope you will grasp and secure the meaning of what I wrote:

If I show you a diamond under strong light, and with instruments,
you will see its facets and part way into the stone. It is then
your memory and opinion concerning it that you will store and may
transmit to me or to others. For the physical plane we have a
group of converging similarities Is this not similar to your
"tree" analogy ?

But if we get into the study of mans psychology, his feelings,
desires, ambitions, defenses, thoughts, aspirations, we seem to
flounder in a welter of opinions concerning which there is
inadequate information until we come to use the 7-fold division
into "principles" of Man and Nature. Then things get related and
seem to make better sense.

I would call the inner (invisible and intangible planes)
concepts, ideas, and would give them the dubious value of my
personal opinion. Now, if I can link my opinion with many
similar opinions and if I can determine that the basis for those
views is similar, then perhaps, I have a chance of saying:
"There appears to be a Law operating.":

I am of the opinion that Theosophy comes under the second
heading. It is well out of the realm of personal opinion.

Theosophy does claim to be an expression recorded since the
beginning of manifestation of the processes used in Nature for
that development. It also claims to outline the basic laws under
which these changes take place -- their basis, cause, sequence
and the various intermediate results achieved -- up to now. I
think the evidence that H.P.Blavatsky has offered in ISIS
UNVEILED and The SECRET DOCTRINE (not to mention her numerous
articles and letters) is about as voluminous as is necessary to
at least demonstrate their presence. Now how are these to be

As to other planes, we need to either visit them or study reports
on them and objects or experiences there. On that basis we again
form our opinions and give them a measure of verity, or caution
as to a too close identification.

No one becomes a "final authority." All have opinions to
compare. How will a newcomer look at these if they are
interested? Will they seek the irresponsibility of adopting
another's opinion? Will they stand on their own feet and
research? Have they the patience to seek for truth?

In my analogy: The Diamond remains unaffected and can be viewed
by others.

Each frames their own opinion and gives it a degree of validity
according to their knowledge, experience and credence. No, two
see exactly the same thing. It is better to say "something
there, and it looks like....." and let the others go and study
and frame their own views.

Theosophy as you will have noticed presents a coherency. By all
means challenge it. But do not (as you wisely say) accept as
fact any description that might include an erroneous opinion.

The matter of practicing any aphorism or virtue depends on the
user. Doesn't it ?

If Theosophy is

1. an expression of the ancient history of the development
of worlds (as classes for experience and progress) and,

2. if it is also a description (as in a Text) of the
experiences and research of ancient and perhaps wiser students
than we are at present, what is the objection?

Theosophy does not expect to make converts. The students and
exponents of theosophy (like myself) offer its tents and
doctrines for study and critical review (as you so kindly

It does expect that those who approach it will do so as
critically as you do, but without prejudice or pre-formed
opinions. This does not mean criticism is not accepted, analyzed
discussed. It ought to be, The basis from which divergent views
arise ought to be discovered.

No matter what School or discipline (or none) a student may use,
he will build his own inevitable understanding on at least two

1. Reports on past experiment and experience,

2. His own work of study and verification, and, he may end
up breaking new ground.

Now this kind of approach is useful if we can agree that NATURE
works under rules and laws of her own, and if our study also
reveals that life under such a TUTOR leads to cooperation.

If we desire to remain isolated, then what will be the manner of
securing the sustenance for body, soul and spirit ?

The environment still provides the greatest skeptic with a
cooperative and inter-active environment. But, why should it if
it is rejected ? That is a puzzle, and seems to be reconciled by
the proposition that the ONE SPIRIT envelops and supports all,
also, that the purpose of life is to learn, and the Universe
exists for the educational progress of all "Mind/Souls."

All students will eventually have to frame their own texts and
alter their personal opinions into certainty. I don't think this
can be denied to them.

Best wishes,



-----Original Message-----
From: J---y S
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 9:09 AM
Subject: Re Brigitte - Dallas on Meaning of THEOSOPHY

<<<<[Dallas:] Dear Friends:

I am of the opinion that one can find a number of references as
to what theosophy is. The question is to find those that are
fundamental. One could try UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD...
It does not matter that Theosophists give a variety of versions
as to what they think THEOSOPHY is. They have their own
opinions. THEOSOPHY is a definite statement concerning the
operations of
nature, its history and the place and work of Mankind (here and
now) on and in and through it.>>>>>>>>>>>

Dallas, it seems strange to me that you can claim that Theosophy
is "fact"
and that it is "a definite statement" and at the same time admit
that each
of us "have their own opinions." You don't seem to realize the
illogic in
your statements.

DTB Theosophy is one thing. My opinions are another. If
they seem to diverge, the error is mine and not to be attributed
to Theosophy.

If I see a tree, and you see a tree, and 100 other people see a
tree, does
that "prove" that a tree exists? Are the physical senses "proof"
something exists? If so, then maybe materialists are right to
only accept
material reality? But perhaps mutual agreement in our
observations only
proves that we share similar interpretations of reality?

Universal Brotherhood does not equal Theosophy. Virtually all of
the great
world's religions teach that we are all "God's children" and so
they too
teach universal brotherhood. We can probably agree that universal
brotherhood is one of those root teachings shared by all
religions, but I
think Theosophy itself is more than that.

<<<The practice of celibacy is felt to the individual to adopt,
depending on his perception of some necessity embodied in that
discipline. Theosophy does not rise or fall or change because of

I was using the "need" for celibacy as an example to demonstrate
the fact
that Blavatsky's "core teachings" are not all universal. Some of
teachings are universal, and some are specific to her linage.
When you talk
about ancient "Sages" teaching Theosophy and so on, please
remember that
there were always numerous lineages throughout history. THERE HAS

DTB H.P.Blavatsky says there is ONE ANCIENT LODGE [ISIS
UNVEILED Vol II p. 98-103]. Apparently all the great ADEPTS by
whatever designation belong to it. Why would several be needed?

Regardless of what name has been pasted on the system in the past
or present, the BODY OF FACTS AND TRUTHS (I say) concerning
NATURE (as an interactive and cooperative WHOLE), are seen to be
ONE when one traces the sources of ancient religious philosophies
back to their prime commencement. Every scholar and student has
commented on these analogies and similarities found there in the
original and fundamental concepts.

In the course of time, and as exoteric religions were built of
traditions and recollections around those basic teachings, the
accretions of opinions moved them away from the clear an original
presentation -- thus they became changed. If one looks back at
the 125 years since H.P.Blavatsky and others launched the
THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT we will find today the average student
(like the Gnostics after Jesus) has espoused some one or other
opinions concerning the teachings of THEOSOPHY. Comparatively
few of them are really familiar with those teachings so as to
identify and locate sources for their expression in the "Original
Writings." It is not that the "original writings" are
sacrosanct, it is simply that they seem the best expressions of
the facts involved.

If it is a fact (as the Masters) wrote that They and
H.P.Blavatsky co-authored The SECRET DOCTRINE (and other
writings) then what's the problem? If you have read and studied
them as I have you will know of yourself whether they make sense.

The faults of students, and their opinions, do not reflect in any
Those differences and faults reflect the ability of students to

The changes in the renditions of THEOSOPHY, as seen today in
various divergent branches derived from the original, reflect
only the adoption of the opinions of the divergents. The faults
of the "followers" do not implicate the original teachings.

When Blavatsky talks about the "Esoteric Tradition" and so on,
she is talking about many small schools or lineages throughout
the world all more or less teaching similar messages but all
differing in many particulars.

DTB In my opinion, the "esoteric Tradition" is singular and
unified. When it has been taken and altered, then one discovers
the differences introduced. To my mind, these various "Schools"
mark the passing on (inaccurately) of the original teachings.
And if the differ externally and literally from one another they
still give evidence of an interior group of doctrines that are
unified. It's the old story of the inadequacy of the "head
doctrine" when compared with the Heart Doctrine. Those who
espouse the "Head Doctrine" become progressively unable to detect
the "Heart Doctrine, " because they are stuck on certain forms
and opinions and have not given themselves the freedom of
research and a fuller investigation. They are caught up in the
"short-cut" they have adopted. But, I think you may not agree to

<<<The main question here is : are nature's laws reasonable?
should we obey them?>>>>>>>

Dallas, my friend, please think about this: NATURE'S LAWS CANNOT
DISOBEYED. Do you know a single person who can defy gravity and
fly like

DTB No in this life time I have not seen that phenomena.
However H.P.Blavatsky refers to levitation seen and recorded in
ISIS UNVEILED. Individual levitation seems to be part of the Law
of Nature, rare though that be. She also reports on another rare
phenomena and that is a "protection" extended under Karma to rare
individuals. And there are also given by her, other historical
and eye-witness reports of this and other curious phenomena which
show the power of those Adepts who live in and work with nature..

It simply means (to my way of thinking) that a full knowledge of
the laws of attraction and repulsion provides physical bodies
with this faculty if needed. Gravity is only half a law. I have
with me two ring magnets of the super strength ceramic variety.
If I place them on a wooden dowel, in one position the attract
each other fiercely, in the reverse position they repel each
other fiercely by several inches -- illustrating the concentrated
strength of a MAGNETIC field. I hear of a train that will fly
between distant areas without friction, supported by the
repulsive effect of the magnetic fields imposed by electricity on
the rails.

Imagine what the strength of those field would be at the Atomic
and Molecular levels when the distance is so very small. The
power unleashed in the cyclotrons or the bevatrons, or the
super-colliders of these days, miles wide, is most difficult to
imagine, yet it is there. Who observes, adjusts and regulates
those small magnets in nature, so that we have physical bodies to
live in ?

Do you know anyone who can live without breathing air? This whole
notion of "obey" and "disobey" is pure manas, and has no reality
at all - we
can consciously obey or disobey our own man-made laws, but we
have no choice
but to obey Nature's laws. But Nature's laws are often not what
we think
they are (some are esoteric) and they do allow for our free will.

DTB I will say that while in India it was rather common to
hear people discuss the feats of certain Yogis who were observed
to survive days, weeks and months even without the air being
renewed in their cells. So there is something to this I believe,
if so commonly known, in antiquity and contemporaneously.

This I will agree to as we do not know everything, but is it not
the mind (Manasic) power to perceive, analyse and understand that
acts, and controls the potencies of the lower "principles ?" And
if that is true, we, like any other physical object, have to live
in harmony with those laws of electro-magnetism, etc.,
represented by the polar opposites of DESIRE / PASSION and WISDOM
/ KNOWLEDGE of the Facts of Nature.

Desire and passion form together a faculty (or principle)
incapable of self-regulating itself. It is only subdued,
channeled and driven to useful purposes by the superior power of
MANAS -- the human Mind-Soul. If the desires harness and capture
the Manas (so to say) then Kama Manas becomes a veritable demon
for evil. Some instances of this I have heard of and actually

The even higher power of BUDDHI-wisdom -- serves to give the
Higher Mind the leverage of experience and fact needed to guide
the lower mind (which is dominated by desire (KAMA).

DTB<<But the real effort was to redirect everyone's attention to
concepts as:

1. the immortality of the Human EGO, the SPIRITUAL IMMORTAL

i do not subscribe to any such "immortality." I believe that you
got this
idea (and many others) by taking Blavatsky's words out of
context. I do not
think that your continual promotion of this immortality business
is doing
anyone any good.

DTB you either know this for a fact, or it a reasonable
deduction, or it is an unfounded and unverifiable opinion. If
so where does anyone generate their concepts. I can point to
several clear references in the writing of Mme. Blavatsky that
declare that there are a number of factors that are IMMORTAL.

Some of these are, as I have read and thought abut them as
continuums: THE ABSOLUTE, SPIRIT, WISDOM, the power to THINK
inherent in the MIND, the cooperation and regulation of all
aspects of Nature. the atom viewed even by our materialistic
Science as a "perpetual Motion Machine," the endlessness of Time
merged in DURATION, the enormous educative facility for the
development of individual intelligence represented by the
UNIVERSE as a training ground for all Intelligence -- this,
culminating in the free and independent mind of MANKIND. And
there are dozens of other cases where "immortality" of the
resident Intelligence and SPIRIT is required to make sense of
present existence. Do not the fixed rules and regulations you
state are evident, give some evidence of a pre-arranged set of
parameters in which any evolution can or will take place? From
start to finish there is LAW and RULE. Why should there be no
continuity for the Spiritual Soul of man?

Of course if man's Soul and Spirit are denied, then you are
right. There is no immortality for the Personality (as defined,
the Kama-Manas, the passionate lower mend) Death terminates its
existence. But this is made clear in the KEY TO THEOSOPHY (HPB)
which no doubt you know well.

<<<<<<2. the UNIVERSAL PLANE OF CAUSES, (from the ATOM to

I do not subscribe to any such "universal plane of causes." The
teaching of
planes of causes and planes of effects is esoteric and very
relative, and to
jump to the conclusion that such planes exist as such in reality
is a wrong
interpretation. If such a plane actually existed, then
manifestation, an
effect, would not be maya, it would be reality.

DTB Exactly, behind the "maya" illusion we see, touch and are
limited by, is the causative plane or source for it. this is

If you deny its probability, then what can be substituted for it
? It is of course true that to the Personality and the Mind of
Desire, the spiritual and the permanent are anathema. If
accepted then their reform would be an almost unbearable change.

<<<<3. the LAWS, RULES and Regulations of Kosmos, Earth and

These are agreed to by us when we start out. These rules are
fixed and
firm so long as we remain here. There is no such thing as "obey
"disobey" - we are not given this choice. Life is like a great
game, and
one either plays by the rules or one quits, but one cannot cheat.
And part
of the game itself is discovering what these rules are.

DTB I guess we'll not be going anywhere until our accounts
are settled here. But this is partly admitting the concept of
Karma as an adjusting and an educative process.

<<<<<<4. the UNIVERSAL URGE to progress and the EVOLUTION
of all

This "urge" is our basic "thirst" or "desire" for life. It is
our inherent desire to play the game of life.

DTB	And I would dearly like to know where that came from? How
would mine differ from yours, etc...

<<<<<<<<<<5. the sameness of all basic teachings common at the
root of all

Except for love and the spiritual relationship between all living
beings, I
don't see a great deal of common ground between religions (God of
some kind,
life of some kind after death, and so on perhaps). Religions
stand or fall on their differences, not on their similarities,
and Theosophy
is not supposed to be a religion anyway.

DTB	As far as I can gather "religions" are constructed by priests
who have ambition and self-service as their motive. They use the
expressions of the "Good Law" to hoodwink and bewilder people
while preventing them from thinking their way out of dilemmas.
One need only consider the many ways in which the TRUE can be
falsified. H.P.Blavatsky studies this in both ISIS UNVEILED and
SECRET DOCTRINE We can benefit from that review.

>>> the possibility of reaching SUPREME PERFECTION for

Not for "man" no. Such a thought is impossible. The teaching of
and enlightenment is all about transcending our human condition
(esoteric - a Path we can tread today), not evolving later from
into gods (exoteric - a manas-oriented belief that waits for the

DTB	well I don't know what you define "man" as. The "human
condition" on the average today is one where the human
consciousness is a mixture of desire and knowledge. The
bewildered mind would gladly welcome some firm propositions on
which it can rest and do its job: that of considering what it
ought to do for the future. Your definitions of esoteric and
exoteric make no great sense to me. Is it possible to define
them ?
Why "impossible" What basis do you assume ?

<<<<7. the fact of the existence of an undying Race of Wise
preserve the knowledge and wisdom of our world and universe.>>>>>

Not a race as such, but many different and separate small groups
or lineages
all over the world passing down their teachings through the
generations to
those who are ready to understand them.

DTB	One, or Branches of One or many groups located around the
World for the benefit of those who struggle to learn -- seems to
me to be reasonable. yet, the Philosophy states that they are
united, by the study and application of the ONE PHILOSOPHY of the
SPIRIT. That is not a subject for divergence, but for Unity, I

Best wishes, Hope this may prove useful at least as another
point of view.


Jerry S.

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application