Theos-Talk Archives (August 2003 Message tt00031)

Sorry for the mis-impression. Rather than interpreting your remarks 
as quietism, I found them very fascinating...and as always, on the 
mark. My comments were directed more towards what I see as a 
tendency within the Theosophical movement that seemed to have its 
start after the Krishnamurti debacle in 1927 (which may have affected 
the PL and ULT folk in ways that they maybe didn't realize at the 
time). I have always been quite amazed at how we Theosophists can 
have all of the knowledge and wisdom that we do, but on the other 
hand be so insular with it that the world at large barely knows of 
our existence...the result of either excessive caution or lack of 
self-confidence, or loss of nerve on the part of the collective 
Theosophical movement.

Joe

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, <dalval14@e...> wrote:
> Monday, August 11, 2003
> 
> Dear Joe:
> 
> There appears to be some misunderstanding here. I do not
> understand your response.
> 
> If you look at the trend of my answers and suggestions, there is
> no question of "quietism." Dynamism is essential at this, as
> well as at any time, on behalf of the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT. We
> volunteer to be its heralds, doing this as best we can
> impersonally.
> 
> I certainly welcome the appearance of all assistance in the vast
> work of giving students and inquirers something sold to read and
> think over. If you will be doing that, I say: More power to
> you. It will be a welcome service.
> 
> Theosophy will benefit, and so will all those you touch. We need
> dedication along those lines, and great clarity, for the benefit
> of independent students who will be testing everything we say and
> do. The "fundamentals" have to always be emphasized.
> 
> At best we are "window openers" and "door keepers." We "pass on"
> the great philosophy, and add little of ourselves as persons.
> 
> I agree that the presentation of Theosophy ought to be done
> vigorously. It is incumbent on us who try to do this to KNOW it
> thoroughly. This is no insult to any one. It is a statement of
> fact.
> 
> I also agree we (as a civilization plunged and embedded in modern
> Materialism) are rapidly developing our own version of the
> Atlantean errors. A pity. In this regard review with me the
> reason that H P B gives for the presentation of Theosophy at her
> cycle in time: see H P B Articles III ( U LT published) p. 17
> {PERTINENT QUERIES, Editor's ANSWER. "Lucifer," Oct. 1888}.
> 
> If we are going to address this regrettable trend, we will assist
> many.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Dallas
> 
> ==========================
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jpfulton [mailto:jpfulton@y...]
> Sent:	Sunday, August 10, 2003 9:35 PM
> To:	theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject:	Re: Yours of Aug 6th 2003 -- Present and Future? 
What
> will it be ?
> 
> Dallas,
> 
> Thanks for the intro...
> 
> In all honesty, I feel that this dialogue needs to be really
> engaged
> by Theosophists to the "non-Theosophical" world. Our message is
> needed at least as urgently now as it was in the 1880's when HPB
> was
> battling the superstition of Spiritualism and the materialism of
> the
> science that today is fast moving us towards our own version of
> Atlantis.
> 
> Sorry...this is one Theosophist who does not, and never will,
> equate
> passivity ("Quietism - the paralysis of the soul" ML11) with
> spirituality.
> 
> Joe Fulton
> Tucson, AZ
> 
> 
> CUT