Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00244)

--- In theos-talk@y..., "bri_mue" <bri_mue@y...> wrote:
> Thanks for the correction, it seems I am starting to spend to litle 
> time on typing (double checking/correcting)the mails I send to this 
> list,but thats no excuse.
> Brigitte
> 
Dear Brigitte,

My point was not to correct your English, which was fine, but rather 
to suggest that Theosophists have long been perceived as foolish for 
holding to "all religions are one" in a simplistic way. Other 
traditions of eclecticism/syncretism face the same problems, e.g. 
Cayce and the ARE. More so, the Baha'is who force Gautama into the 
pattern of monotheistic lawgiving prophet despite the protests of 
Buddhists.

"All religions are one" is an admirable perception at the level of 
the heart or the third eye: we feel ourselves one with followers of 
all religions, we intuitively sense the oneness of humanity and the 
cosmos. But at the level of the "eye doctrine" it's folly. That is, 
to take the "all one" belief as license for equating different 
teachings from different cultures (in a decontextualized manner) 
leads into great confusion and anachronism in terms of historical 
understanding.

Paul