Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00214)

Bill, I thought you made some relevant points in your post.

You wrote:<<One might wonder at Mauri's motives in 
attempting to dismiss BA G's point of view as some sort of 
RC in thin disguise.>>

Actually, believe it or not, I was attempting to speculate 
and attempting to question, primarily, rather than 
attempting to decisively dismiss anything as an "RC in thin 
disguise." Sorry about giving the "thin disguise" 
impression. Apparently it's difficult for me to express my 
curiosty about the motives of those who seem to come 
across as if they might be not just making helpful contrasts 
between Theosophy and ... whatever, but seem, to me, as 
if they might be trying to undermine the essence of 
Theosophy ... Sorry about that, I guess it's just that my 
instincts to protect Theosophic interests (as I tend to see 
them, at any rate) seems to surface at times, in spite of my 
efforts to maintain my cool, speculative exterior. Sorry.
That is, of course contrasts are contrasts, so ... one might 
learn from contrasts ... 

<<Any such wonderings at motives might give rise to a 
speculation that while one theosophist might find HPB's 
theosophy comfortable largely because it is NOT Roman 
Catholicism (the enemy of my enemy is my friend), 
another theosophist might seek to compare, contrast, and 
learn from the synthesis which is a central tenet of 
theosophy. One may certainly ask where the "divine" in 
the Divine Wisdom resides without being considered an
interloper.>>

Yes, our speculations and questions have a way of often 
giving rise to all kinds of things in the minds of those who 
are predisposed to give rise to ... whatever. Sorry if I gave 
anybody rise to confusions, problems. Yes, certain kinds 
of contrasts might tend to elicit interesting perspectives, or 
whatever, in some cases. For example, if one studies the 
contrasts between Dallas's and Gerald's post ... But then, 
such contrasts might confuse some people even more, so 
... what can I say ^:-)

<<In my opinion, "caring for HPB" has little to do with a 
sincere search for the truth.>>

I'm supposing that might be from:

<< BAG, I think most of us here know that the RC and
> Bhakti yoga practitioners and various people and groups
> did not, during HPB's time, and still don't, (apparently
> enough?), care for HPB or Theosophy. 

Yes, I tend to agree that whether one cares for HPB and 
Theosophy is a side issue in the sense that we all tend to 
gravitate toward whatever we see as most 
applicable/relevant to our self, and so, (obviously 
enough?), if one finds much sense in, say, Catholicism, 
than such a person would not likely (or am I going on a 
limb, again?) find HPB and Theosophy particularly 
relevant and applicable for them, in general ... I'm 
speculating.

Speculatively,
Mauri