Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00245)

> > PL:Reasoned dialogue with unreasonable declarations?
I repeat:
PL: So who decides or has decided what teaching does not'share the
KEYor BASIC tenets of HPB & her Gurus' - what great authority, TS or
otherwise claimed it thus?

> Authority you say? I thought the Aquarian keynote was individual 
freedom from such Picean strictures? I gave a few reasons and a 
little evidence in the article. You declared (based on 
clairvoyance, perhaps) I knew nothing or was
> prejudiced or confused etc. In short you only repeat or 
paraphrase notions from those silly Blue Books.

PL: You say 'I thought the Aquarian keynote was individual freedom 
from such Picean strictures?' - yes agreed, but you and some in the 
TS hide behind the glamour of HPB's authority, compounding that with 
personal declarations and assumptions. I bow down to HPB's 'author-
ity' but also recognise other teachers or 'author-ities'.

> One of the main reasons for writing "Theosophy's Shadow" was to 
provide a guideline or two on how to critically examine the two sets 
of teachings.Since most devotees of any persuasion are not capable 
of self-criticism, much less criticism of their own beliefs, 
philosophy, religion etc.; they ( and so far, you) can only see the 
article as a mean-spirited attack.

Well if its not mean spirited, it primariy lacks discrimination and 
is coloured by assumptions, biases, attachments and theosophical 
fundamentalist conditioning. As a result one can rationalise white 
as black and vice versa.
Agreed on your criticism point, but beware the shadow of the 
critical mind and its tendency to separation, unalloyed with 
intuition or wisdom. 
The Virgo square Gemini part of the zodiac illustrates this well - 
dwell too much in these polarities and their Pisces-Sagittarian 
counterparts will miss the bigger picture.

> Talk about "unreasonable declarations" - yipes!
As mentioned earlier we can each accuse the other of the same 
tactics.