Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00155)

In the quote below, was Master KH trying to
establish some dogma, some infallible
"sacred philosophy"?

Is the Master telling Mr. Sinnett that
an exposition of Theosophy could "disfigure"
the true teachings of the Masters?

Could such a disfigurement be truly
called Pseudo-Theosophy?

If there could be "disfigurements" of
the Mahatmas' sacred philosophy in the 
1880s, why could this not occur again
in the 11 decades intervening between
then and now?

And how would the serious student of 
Theosophy determine whether a given
exposition of Theosophy is genuine or
"disfigured"?

Surely what the Master wrote should
spur the student to ask such questions
and try to gain some insights as to the
possible answers.

Daniel


"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