Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00176)

>faith. In the case of the Theosophical "core teachings" one must have faith
>in those who first propounded them, who put them together from their own
>experiences and cultural outlooks, and who passed them on to us through
>Blavatsky. One must also have faith that Blavatsky passed them onto us
>correctly. As just one example, look at sex and the strong emphasis given
>on its abstinance. Blavatsky was taught that sexual celibacy is "necessary"
>for any real spiritual Path. This idea is in total disagreement with many
other
>spiritual Teachers (including Buddhist Tantricism or Vajrayana), and with
>my own experiences. Therefore, I do not see this as a "core teaching" but

Jerry, that Vajrayana has anything to do with sexuality is new to me.
Seems that you have faith in those writers who claim to pass their
information onto us correctly.
What will you do if some day it turns out that HPB is right and the others
are wrong?
Would that mean that HPB meant a different thing when she used the term
"spiritual"?
Perhaps "progressive" writers just intermix it with "psychic"?
HPB never wrote that its impossible to gain occult powers together with
sexual activity.
All she said was that celibacy is a proposition to that school she
represented and that is
the Esoteric Chaldeo-Aryo-Tibetan Arhat Brotherhood of which she was a
member.
In Occultism that school is regarded as a white magic one.
Doctrines which deal with the development of the lower self in opposite to
the higher Self are usually regarded as black magic.
Frank