Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00093)

Dear Dallas,

Your comments are so kind and I thank you. As far as I can tell, we 
are each one doing our best to study, comprehend, and manifest 
the ancient wisdom teachings as revealed in this cycle by HPB and 
her co-workers. Those who choose to view her and her writings with 
skepticism are simply exercising their right to choose how they 
approach this material. Someone posted recently that the correct 
approach to theosophical study is to read and then to meditate. I 
would add that putting these teachings to practice in our daily lives 
is also essential. If we take the statement, "Occultism is altruism," 
seriously, we have to decide how to express our thoughts in ways 
that do not attack others or attempt to make them wrong. A key to 
how to do this is the Golden Rule. Do unto others...But of course 
you know this.

I would say, however, that defending someone who is unjustly 
attacked is completely within the realm of the above maxim. I 
would definitely want to be defended if so attacked. In the case of 
HPB, I read the running "historical" debates about her validity with 
interest, since they give me a view into the world of theosophists of 
which I was previously ignorant. It seems there are those who limit 
their exposure to the intellectual approach, and who therefore miss 
the true significance of the life and work of this remarkable woman. 
As many times stated, theosophy cannot be understood with the 
mind alone. But how can I demand that others accept this 
statement? They have to find this out for themselves, and of 
course they will, in time. What bothers me now is that such wilfull 
avoidance of the essential nature of the teaching is like rocks in the 
stream. It causes turbulence, and takes attention away from the 
real purpose of the material. Humanity is in a very difficult cycle 
right now, and our future hangs in the balance. If we continue to try 
to understand with our intellect alone we simply give power to the 
materialisic age which is coming to a close, retarding evolutionary 
progress. If we learn to embrace the mind/heart approach to living, 
we add energy to the progress of our evolution, and help to bring 
the coming cycle closer. But of course, the latter demands 
renunciation of the lower ego and its clamoring desires, and most 
are just not ready to take that step. I wonder sometimes about 
people who say they are theosophists, but who seem quite able to 
ignore the first principle of theosophy, the unity of all life. When we 
attack others, we are subscribing to separateness, the opposite of 
unity. And our words are powerful. We actually augment the forces 
of negativity, which manifest in such things as war and natural 
disasters, by choosing to concentrate on differences instead of 
similarities. However, obvious as this seems to me, it is evidently 
not obvious to some. But I do find it surprising that theosophists 
would choose to manifest this type of behavior, since if anyone 
should be able to focus their attention on unity instead of 
separateness, it seems theosophists would be the ones. 

Thank you for the quotes from WQJ. He so often puts things just 
exactly the way I can grasp them. And may I say, you have shown 
over the few years I have been reading your posts, a very fine 
blending of mind and heart. I very much appreciate your excellent 
and comprehensive scholarship, and I have seen many times when 
you could have chosen a personal attack, but have refrained and 
concentrated instead on the underlying principle. Each time you do 
this it helps others like me to try to do so as well. It does sound as 
if your computer is "overshadowed," by some helping intelligences. 
I think sometimes mine is too, since it makes me be pretty careful 
somehow to say only what I am sure I mean. 

Best Wishes to you always, and keep up the wonderful good work 
you do, as if I needed to say that...

Adelasie

On 5 Jan 02, at 17:25, dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:

> Saturday, January 05, 2002
> 
> 
> Dear Adelasie:
> 
> I think that is well said -- they don't read.
>