Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00212)

In a message dated 12/03/02 9:00:49 PM, jjhe@charter.net writes:

>Leon Maurer asserts that "the leaders and those who bought [brought?]
>their system had culpability." Then asks: "But, is that any reason to
>condemn the whole worldwide group of true theosophists or their
>teachings itself for their actions?" Leon, I agree that guilt by
>association ought not be condoned. However, I'm not sure what you mean
>by "true theosophists or their teachings." Isn't it the job of the
>leadership to promulgate and make available what they believe to be true
>theosophy and true teachings? This question also raises another in my
>mind: what is true theosophy and who is a true theosophist? Who is to
>make that determination? 

In my opinion, there is no need for "leadership" to determine what is and 
what is not a "true" view of theosophy. What such "leaders" "believe" is no 
criteria for finding truth for oneself. Any "organization" has a tendency to 
distort the truth to serve the power-maintaining needs of its leadership. 
Therefore, whatever they say about their interpretation of, or addition to 
HPB's presentation of theosophy, must always be taken with a grain of salt by 
a "true theosophist," who can accept no authority except his/her own higher 
Self. We each must be the sole judge, after careful consideration, of the 
truth or falsity of anything told to us. Such, second hand "revealed" truths 
must stand or fall on their own merits, or inherent reasonableness when 
tested against the "Fundamental Principles" -- upon which there can never be 
any argument.

What "leadership" in what "organization" gave HPB her view of theosophy that 
enabled her to write the SD so as to present the fundamental principles and 
the metaphysics of theosophy in a perfectly rational and consistent manner -- 
while still maintaining her vows as a Chela of the Masters who taught her? 

Naturally, as a true 'initiated' occultist (which is also a "true 
theosophist") she couldn't and didn't tell everything -- and even had to 
fabricate a bit -- since she had obligations to her teachers (and her higher 
Self) not to indiscriminately give out the higher (inner) levels of the 
(powerful and dangerous) occult teachings to the non-initiated. 

But, she did say, after many of her obscure and complex statements (loaded 
with notational and punctuation hints) -- where the truth was covered over by 
subtle "blinds" and misdirection's (obvious "white" lies, if you will) -- 
that the "intuitive student," by "reading in the words and between the 
lines," would know what she really meant. In addition, she never claimed 
that the teaching in the SD were more than the first four keys to a seven 
fold mystery, and that the rest would have to be attained solely by the "self 
devised and self determined efforts" of the individual Chela. Such teachings 
must come from the inside out, rather than the outside in, as is the case 
with the normal schooling that we are all used to. Therefore no 
determination of the "true" meanings of the theosophical teachings can be 
gotten through the "leaders" of any theosophical organization. For, as HPB 
said (which included herself) -- "Theosophy can have no authorities, since 
each student is their own authority." 

This need for "independent study" to arrive at the "true theosophy" was why 
the ULT, an association of independent students of original theosophy as 
presented by HPB and WQJ, was founded -- without any official organization or 
leadership -- by Robert Crosbie after he broke with the TS. It's entire 
basis of existence and the obligations of its associates is fully covered in 
its public "Declaration." This was why I, myself, as well as all associates 
of ULT, and some other independent "true theosophists" choose not to become a 
member of any particular organized theosophical society or religious cult or 
sect, or accept any of their "authorities" as infallible. The "true 
theosophy," then, can only be understood and judged by each such student, 
individually, for themselves. And, if such "understanding" is in turn, taught 
to others, those others have the freedom to judge its truth, or not, for 
themselves. 

LHM