Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00318)

Zack,

In your posting at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/10432

you write that HPB said that the Theosophical Society in the 20th 
Century might set up "hard-and-fast dogmas of its own". 

You then cite certain other relevant extracts from Bailey and ACIM 
and then summarize by writing:

"I think that HPB, AAB, and ACIM are telling us the same thing: 
namely, it is a mistake to turn any written doctrine into a hard-and-
fast dogma. . . ."

But consider the two extracts BELOW from the writings of KH and HPB.

HPB labels certain ideas as FALSE. KH writes that Mr. Hume has 
DISFIGURED the Theosophical philosophy.

Do you think HPB and KH in these extracts are in fact attempting to 
create "hard-and-fast dogmas"? 

The reason I ask is because it would appear that when Nicholas 
attempts to show that Bailey promotes false ideas (false in light of 
what HPB and the Mahatmas wrote in their writings)Nicholas is 
labelled a "fundamentalist" and the impression is given (indirectly 
if not directly) that Nicholas is trying to set up "hard-and-fast 
dogmas." But if Nicholas is guilty as charged, why not also HPB and 
KH? 

Daniel


EXTRACT 1

". . . A new and rapidly growing danger. . . is threatening . . . the 
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 true 
path."
". . . A close examination will assuredly reveal. . . materials 
largely stolen . . . from Theosophical writings. . . [and] distorted 
and falsified so as to be palmed off on the unwary as revelations of 
new and undreamed of truths. But many will neither have the time nor 
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 and 
tastes of men in general." H. P. Blavatsky, E.S. Instruction No. I., 
1889

EXTRACT 2

"I dread the appearance in print of our philosophy as expounded by 
Mr. H[ume]. I read his three essays or chapters on God (?) cosmogony 
and glimpses of the origin of things in general, and had to cross out 
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 Djual 
Khool deny the whole thing; as I cannot permit our sacred philosophy 
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 be 
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 find 
us -- (at any rate) -- compromising with, and pandering to public 
prejudices." Master Koot Hoomi, The Mahatma Letters, 2nd ed., Letter 
54