Re: Phillip Lindsay: "who decides or has decided what teaching does not . . . ."
Jan 13, 2003 10:12 AM
by Phillip Lindsay " <email@example.com>
Apologies to those who tried to answer me and had bounced emails, my
new ID should be working now.
I am still waiting for NW to answer this question:
"So who decides or has decided what teaching does not'share the
KEY or BASIC tenets of HPB & her Gurus' - what great authority, TS
or otherwise claimed it thus?"
My argument is that basic assumptions are made and prejudices are
held, and therefrom many prodeed in error. No doubt you would level
the same criticism at me.
In many cases no reasonable examination has been conducted by
critics of AAB's teaching. When there has been more in depth
examinations it has usually been from the angle of extreme prejudice
or knee-jerk reaction, and therefore to discredit through cunning
rationalisations and deep attachemnt to current beliefs.
NW's "Theosophy's Shadow" article is an example of such sleight of
hand. This is a classic case of projection IMHO, where
undiscriminating and prejudiced minds within the entity of the TS,
dare I say behemoth, attack the very teaching to which they claim to
be devoted. There is a non- recognition of a new phase of the
teaching which the Great Ones are well and truly behind.
The irony is breathtaking,and the cloak of crystallised lower mental
substance around such 'thinkers' is so thick it prevents any vision.
It is said by some occult commentators that the materialistic forces
had much success creating divisiveness, strife and prejudice within
the TS. They did not have much trouble in doing that, as they simply
left it to some of the unredeemed aspects of many personalities
As to the quote below from DC, it was written well before AAB was a
twinkle in the ashram's eye. Perhaps HPB was referring in that piece
to people like Steiner?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "D. H. Caldwell <info@b...>"
> Phillip Lindsay wrote:
> "So who decides or has decided what teaching does not'share the
> KEY or BASIC tenets of HPB & her Gurus' - what great authority, TS
> otherwise claimed it thus?"
> This is a good question. In 1889 Mme. Blavatsky herself pointed
> that certain teachings did NOT "share the KEY or BASIC tenets" of
> what she and her Masters taught. HPB wrote:
> ". . . A new and rapidly growing danger. . . is threatening . . .
> spread of the pure Esoteric Philosophy and knowledge. . . . I
> allude to those charlatanesque imitations of Occultism and
> Theosophy. . . . By pandering to the prejudices of people, and
> especially by adopting the false ideas of a personal God and a
> personal, carnalized Saviour, as the groundwork of their teaching,
> the leaders of this 'swindle' (for such it is) are endeavoring to
> draw men to them and in particular to turn Theosophists from the
> ". . . A close examination will assuredly reveal. . . materials
> largely stolen . . . from Theosophical writings. . . [and]
> and falsified so as to be palmed off on the unwary as revelations
> new and undreamed of truths. But many will neither have the time
> the opportunity for such a thorough investigation; and before they
> become aware of the imposture they may be led far from the
> Truth. . . . Nothing is more dangerous to Esoteric Truth than the
> garbled and distorted versions disfigured to suit the prejudices
> tastes of men in general." H. P. Blavatsky, E.S. Instruction No.
> 1889. Quoted from:
> Notice HPB's words:
> ". . . the FALSE ideas of a personal God and a personal,
> Saviour. . . . "
> And Master K.H. wrote in 1882:
> "I dread the appearance in print of our philosophy as expounded by
> Mr. H[ume]. I read his three essays or chapters on God (?)
> and glimpses of the origin of things in general, and had to cross
> nearly all. He makes of us Agnostics!! We do not believe in God
> because so far, we have no proof, etc. This is preposterously
> ridiculous: if he publishes what I read, I will have H.P.B. or
> Khool deny the whole thing; as I cannot permit our sacred
> to be so disfigured. He says that people will not accept the whole
> truth; that unless we humour them with a hope that there may be
> a 'loving Father and creator of all in heaven' our philosophy will
> rejected a priori. In such a case the less such idiots hear of our
> doctrines the better for both. If they do not want the whole truth
> and nothing but the truth, they are welcome. But never will they
> us -- (at any rate) -- compromising with, and pandering to public
> prejudices." Master Koot Hoomi, The Mahatma Letters, 2nd ed.,
> Quoted from:
> Looks to me like HPB and KH decided.....
> A question for Phillip Lindsay:
> Do you believe that there really are:
> "charlatanesque imitations of Occultism and Theosophy. . . ."?
> Do you agree with HPB when she warns her Esoteric students:
> "Nothing is more dangerous to Esoteric Truth than the garbled and
> distorted versions disfigured to suit the prejudices and tastes of
> men in general."
> Daniel H. Caldwell
> BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application