Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00093)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "John Plummer" <jplummer@b...> 
wrote:
> I've also found this a helpful way of thinking about these 
matters. 
> To me, one of the most important things, with a topic like this, 
is to look at a lot of the different angles, in a wondering way, 
without being sure that any of them tell the whole story. Same 
reason that I avidly read HPB, CWL, Bailey, Steiner, Fortune, 
Krishnamurti, Gurdjieff, etc -- and have genuine admiration for all 
of the above, but without being a camp follower of any.
> 
> Take care -
> John

Your words here, and Pedro's in his gracious remarks about 
Blavatskyan theology, reveal both of you to be adherents of 
multiperspectivalism. Although the term may be recent, HPB 
certainly practiced it in her writings and activities. She was 
simultaneously dealing with Christians, Buddhists, Free Thought 
adherents, Hindus, Sikhs, Freemasons, appealing to them all to join 
and support the TS. The early Theosophist is a highly multivocal 
publication in a quite unprecedented way. Her successors have been 
far less committed to inquiry, not just the successors who call 
themselves Theosophical e.g. Besant/Leadbeater, but Steiner, Bailey, 
on down to the Prophets etc. Maybe someone should start a 
Multiperspectivalist Society and get back to the original spirit of 
what HPB was trying to do.

Cheers,

Paul