Theos-Talk Archives (July 2004 Message tt00407)

July 28 04

Dear Friend:


Your points are appreciated and very well taken. Many thanks. 

If there is worth and value you perceive in the writings you regard as
important, I am sure we will all enjoy receiving quotations from them to
consider alongside with those made by HPB, and the Masters.  

Experience down the years is that in all cases Theosophy, when presented,
defends itself by its clarity and logic, also its coherence with all other
basic statements.

For instance, you offer some statements and quotations by HPB, but where are
the "source references -- pages, or names of relevant articles" to verify,
and discover the nature of the historical context in which they were made?
If you can help us in this important matter, we all will be glad to consider
them in reference to such other quotes as you find appropriate. I note HPB
died in May 1891, this was from her pen but not edited by her. (A fact is
that it was published over a year after her death. This, of course, may have
no significance. But later on, some of her writings, issued posthumously,
were "edited by someone" and we may assume that HPB did NOT review them for
final publication -- this is only a note of caution for students.)

You quote form the "Key," from the section on Education ( p. 271):

"...we should aim at creating FREE men and women, FREE intellectually, 
FREE morally, UNPREJUDICED IN ALL RESPECTS." ......? [ p. 271]

And, may I add, to complete this quote, what H P B also adds there:

"...AND ABOVE ALL THINGS UNSELFISH." ( p. 271)

This is not a debate (as far as I am concerned ) about our motives, but a
review of what Theosophy says, and that which HPB and the Masters TEACH.

How do other writers (and their actions) measure up to the ORIGINAL
TEACHINGS and to the stated ideals of Theosophy? -- that is our quest.  

How do the actions of others who have "lead" the T S, measure up to the
ideals of practical Theosophy that H P B exemplified? Did they amplify or
detract from her effort?

That is why I wrote as I did. Plainly.

In other words, I am trying to get us all on the "same page." Or, on a
"level field" where there are no innuendos, secrets or special meanings
reserved from each other. As I see it, facts remain -- but opinions and
special events will stand out on their own inherent merit. They do not need
interpretation. Or rather we are interpreters for ourselves. We may seek
consensus, but we can not demand or enforce it. There is a universal moral
plane of behaviour, and that is the realm of KARMA. We are its subjects.
It is educative and not punitive, in response to our free choices. 

Yes, we all have the freedom to read, analyse, and decide. We are not bound
by creeds or political postures (unless we freely adopt them) -- in matters
of history and truth there can be only the facts and the documents, which
all can read and study together. Our unity is not challenged, it is
reinforced by such strict probity and common, trustworthy work.

Yes, we are all fellow humans, we are in fact: Immortal Pilgrims, as each of
us is a Divine Monad [ATMA-BUDDHI]. And we have lived together before and
will do so in the future without any doubt. Also, this is a Universe of
exact LAW -- not injustice, whim or chaos. We are all interdependent Units
of IT. 
[The Hubble telescope pictures tend to show us that, even physically, we
live in a vast immeasurable SUN -- bathed in continual sheets of innumerable
radiation, from every point of the vast SPHERE, near and far, old and new,
we are in effect the inhabitants of A CENTRAL SPIRITUAL SUN. It is stunning
to our ordinary brain-minds to consider that as a possibility. Yes we are
very much UNITED. Now if Karma, Reincarnation and our common evolutionary
journey as immortal Spiritual Beings, can be proved as convincingly, it
would be wonderful. Theosophy would then receive further vindication.]

Of course we are all fellow "theosophists," or rather to put it exactly: we
are all "Co-STUDENTS of Theosophy." I (for myself) hold that the only
"THEOSOPHISTS" are the Masters. 

So (I would say) we must be strict and accurate with each other and
ourselves, and with what we say and do together and for each other, so as to
keep that bond of our true unity pure and definite for all.

Best wishes,

Dallas

PS	see a few notes below in your text

D
 
==============================

-----Original Message-----
From: ariel
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:38 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: Have Open Discussions on Groups


Dear Dallas,

You are asking very important questions and I will definately think 
upon them. 


But suppose someone is not just giving an opinion but has 
actually read Annie Besant and CWL and would like to give an educated 
agruement against some of what they say? 


And some group on the internet (I will refrain from mentioning the actual
group or moderator) refuses to post his agreements?

=====================

DTB	THEN EVERYONE LOOSES, don't they? Why beat a "dead horse?" 
If such isolation is desired , then let them do exactly that.

=====================

I think there is also something to be said for freedom of speech, 
that everyone is free to express their view point however dumb and 
pointless it may be. But I digress...

Part of brotherhood is to help and correct faults in our fellow 
brother if he should fall. 

=============================

DTB	I hesitate to say "correct faults in our fellow brother"  

At best we can present facts and let those carry the burden of making a
point valid. But it is seldom that such presentation is welcomed, especially
if some opinion has been espoused, or some sectarian "politics" have
polarized a section of thought.

==============================


Here is what HPB says in an issue of 

	
LUCIFER FROM SEPTEMBER 1892:

=================================

DTB	
================================


"Mutual criticism is a most healthy policy, and helps to establish 
final and definate rules in life - practical, not merely 
theoretical." - HPB [WHERE, WHEN ? PAGE, ARTICLE ?]


"Criticism is the sole salvation from intellectual stagnation. It is 
the beneficient goad which stimulates to action the heavy ruminants 
called Routine and Prejudice..." - HPB	[WHERE, WHEN ? Page? ]


We should give the benefit of the doubt that as theosophists, we all 
have only the best of intentions. Unfortunately, we can help our 
brothers only if they are willing to help themselves. If they are 
going the wrong way (not by their opinion but their reaction to 
opposing opinion mind you) wouldn't it be our duty to point it out? 
Doesn't HPB tell us in the Key to Theosophy that:

"we should aim at creating FREE men and women, FREE intellectually, 
FREE morally,UNPREJUDICED IN ALL RESPECTS." ......?

Are we not all as theosophist dedicated to finding truth, come what 
may as to where it falls?

There is a danger when someone sets himself as an "authority" AND 
REFUSES TO LEARN OR EVEN LISTEN to another view point. In the same 
Lucifer article quoted from above, HPB says:

"For what is an 'authority' upon any question, after all? No more, 
really, than a light streaming upon a certain object through one 
single, more or less wide, chink, and illuminating it FROM ONE SIDE 
ONLY." - HPB

This is why we as theosophist should have open discussions. Otherwise 
we may become closed and dogamtic, and not the "independent thinkers" 
that the Masters hoped would come out of the Theosophical Movement. 
Anyway, I'm glad that this is not the case in this group.

In the meantime I'll think about the WHY, HOW, WHEN, WHERE, and WHO 
in my own self education. Thanks Dallas.

Ariel