Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00716)

Hallo Daniel and all,

My views are given in the below using *******.

I suggest, that the reader could read
the below carefully, so that we perhaps may learn something
by the answers.


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 5:05 AM
Subject: Theos-World Garbled and Distorted Versions of Theosophy & Occultism


> I would suggest that the following extract from
> H.P. Blavatsky is as relevant today as it was
> when first written. In fact, every sentence of
> this extract is full of meaning and students
> would do well to ponder on the implications found
> in H.P.B.'s words.
>
> First the quote and then some questions:
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> ". . . 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."

*******
Some groups are "charlatanesque imitations of Occultism"
others are not even they might look like it.

Some groups are adopting "false ideas" of a personal God and a personal,
carnalized
Saviour.
Some groups are perhaps not. Try read the below comments.
*******



>
> ". . . 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 in "E.S. Instruction No. I.", 1889.
> Quoted from: http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/ests1p2.htm
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Notice that H.P.B. states that there are in fact
> "IMITATIONS of Occultism and Theosophy".




*******
Yes. Let us agree upon that they certainly exists.
But let us at the same time ponder on what function they have or can have
when viewed
from a spiritual point of view. Even though they can be considered
"DANGEROUS"
as our friend Blavatsky says.
What are your views on that my dear readers ?
You don't have any ?


I have before in a certain manner stated my views.
Try to read again:
http://theos-talk.com/archives/200210/tt00046.html

I quote from this link:
"So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to
support a system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements. This seems important to understand and know about."

---
And let us reformulate this quote a bit, so that its meaning might become
even clearer:

"So very important: The use of FOR INSTANCE BOOKS and WRITTEN MATERIAL of
ALL sorts
is to shape a man or woman, not to support a system - which is viewed in a
limited manner. This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements - LIKE FOR INSTANCE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.
This seems important to understand and know about."


The sooner the students of "PURE Esoteric Philosophy" learns this quote by
heart
the better.
What are your view my dear reader ?
What are your views on this Daniel ???


Blavatsky says in her book The Key to Theosophy - Section 2:
"ENQUIRER. Which system do you prefer or follow, in that case, besides
Buddhistic ethics?
THEOSOPHIST. None, and all. We hold to no religion, as to no philosophy in
particular: we cull the good we find in each. But here, again, it must be
stated that, like all other ancient systems, Theosophy is divided into
Exoteric and Esoteric Sections. "



Now some of the Exoteric Sections could be called DANGEROUS.
But never the less they exist.

The word "DANGEROUS" used by Blavatsky in the above quote given to us by
Daniel might have different levels interpretations
depending on the reader of the text.
Maybe the word "DANGEROUS" had the meaning DANGEROUS in the sense, that one
has
to watch out an be careful about how to relate to such groups at Blavatsky's
time of writing it.
Today, the meaning might be the same, but because we live in a different
time - in an information society -
the word might have received a different tone - even if the view is the
same. This we have to take into account.

The word DANGEROUS might also be viewed as something of imense importance,
which should be dealt with - both clearly and swiftly - and by the use of
protests and almost even lawsuits because of the misuse of
the Theosophical name if this was to be the what the protest was about.

Because Blavatsky writes further in her book The Key to Theosophy - Section
2:
"THEOSOPHIST. The members of the Theosophical Society at large are free to
profess whatever religion or philosophy they like, or none if they so
prefer, provided they are in sympathy with, and ready to carry out one or
more of the three objects of the Association. The Society is a philanthropic
and scientific body for the propagation of the idea of brotherhood on
practical instead of theoretical lines. The Fellows may be Christians or
Mussulmen, Jews or Parsees, Buddhists or Brahmins, Spiritualists or
Materialists, it does not matter; but every member must be either a
philanthropist, or a scholar, a searcher into Aryan and other old
literature, or a psychic student. In short, he has to help, if he can, in
the carrying out of at least one of the objects of the programme. Otherwise
he has no reason for becoming a "Fellow." Such are the majority of the
exoteric Society, composed of "attached" and "unattached" members. [An
"attached member" means one who has joined some particular branch of the T.
S. An "unattached," one who belongs to the Society at large, has his
diploma, from the Headquarters (Adyar, Madras), but is connected with no
branch or lodge.] These may, or may not, become Theosophists de facto.
Members they are, by virtue of their having joined the Society; but the
latter cannot make a Theosophist of one who has no sense for the divine
fitness of things, or of him who understands Theosophy in his own -- if the
expression may be used -- sectarian and egotistic way. "Handsome is, as
handsome does" could be paraphrased in this case and be made to run:
"Theosophist is, who Theosophy does."

So the DANGEROUS ones in the quote given by Daniel are those who do not
have --- the proper intentions --- with what they theosophically do.
That is what I read from all this.
Not true ?

Just to make my views clear, and because we have had a debate here at
Theos-Talk on the Bailey books recently, I would say:
Baileys books as such are not necessarily DANGEROUS, because they can be
said to be well-intentioned.
But they are DANGEROUS so far as their messages are being misused by groups
who use them together with Blavatsky's teachings.
And that happens all the time - these days - because Bailey mentions
Blavatsky in her books and relates her teachings to the Theosophical
Society.
Bailey's books can also be said to be DANGEROUS because of the lack their
content has on several areas of theosophical teaching.
And if one goes to the extremes anything is DANGEROUS - if it is not written
by Blavatsky.
But, that cannot be true.
Do the readers disagree ?

Should we not all "cull the good we find in each" - thought-system. Just lik
e Blavatsky said.
And should we not protest when we find faults or ill-intentions.
But only if we find it - and not if we think we do so wihthout knowing it.

We have to remember the following words by Blavatsky:
"We must remember the handicap of language."
- S. D., I, 197, 318. (The Aksha Records + The Seven Keys and the Mystery
Language)

Dead-letter interpretation of words written - even years ago - should not be
placed beneath the feet of Lucifer - if it can be avoided.


*******




>
> When H.P.B. contrasts "PURE Esoteric Philosophy
> and knowledge" with "garbled and distorted versions"
> of Esoteric Truth, what is the STANDARD by which
> she can judge that one was PURE while the other
> was GARBLED and DISTORTED?
*******
My view is: By using the STANDARD of the Seven Keys and the Akasha Records

*******
>
> How would a student of H.P.B.'s writings distinguish
> BETWEEN the pure and distorted versions?

*******
The ordinary student cannot.
But Blavatsky writes the following, which I think some of us we aught to be
familiar with as theosophists.
--- ON PSEUDO-THEOSOPHY ---
" If the "false prophets of Theosophy" are to be left untouched, the true
prophets will be very soon--as they have already been--confused with the
false. It is nigh time to winnow our corn and cast away the chaff. The T.S.
is becoming enormous in its numbers, and if the false prophets, the
pretenders (e.g., the "H.B. of L.," exposed in Yorkshire by Theosophists two
years ago, and the "G.N.K.R." just exposed in America), or even the
weak-minded dupes, are left alone, then the Society threatens to become very
soon a fanatical body split into three hundred sects--like
Protestantism--each hating the other, and all bent on destroying the truth
by monstrous exaggerations and idiotic schemes and shams. We do not believe
in allowing the presence of sham elements in Theosophy, because of the fear,
forsooth, that if even "a false element in the faith" is ridiculed, the
latter "is apt to shake the confidence" in the whole."
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/OnPseudoTheosophy.htm

Since Blavatsky the sad and true thing is, that what she feared so very much
has indeed happened. Theosophical Society has been divided into several
branches
and theosophical sects has araisen.
That is why I several times has used the above link and quote from the same
link:

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200210/tt00046.html

I did this, so to try to make you the readers understand that the times of
Blavatsky is
in the above sense all over.
We are indeed in a different situation, than when Blavatsky lived.

Let us have the quote again while we refer to Blavatsky's writings and her
written material:

I quote from the above link again:
"So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to
support a system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements. This seems important to understand and know about."

---
And let us reformulate this quote a bit, so that its meaning might become
even clearer:

"So very important: The use of FOR INSTANCE BOOKS and WRITTEN MATERIAL of
ALL sorts
is to shape a man or woman, not to support a system - which is viewed in a
limited manner. This is one way in
which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of
ideas and movements - LIKE FOR INSTANCE THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.
This seems important to understand and know about."


The sooner the students of "PURE Esoteric Philosophy" learns this quote by
heart
the better.
What are your view my dear reader ?
What are your views on this Daniel ???



from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...

********

>
> Why does H.P.B. use the terms DANGER and DANGEROUS
> to describe these IMITATIONS of Occultism and Theosophy?
>
> Notice that H.P.B. warns that many students "may be led
> far from the Truth." What is she referring to?
>
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>
>
>