Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00010)

Sep 1 2004



Dear Bill:



You are not misunderstood.



Some are convinced (by their own study that THEOSOPHY is what HPB and the
Masters have published (as per ORIGINAL) -- NO "editing" please. [Of course
in antiquity THEOSOPHY had other names. But the thread is there and can be
grasped - BHAGAVAD GITA, Dhammapada, Patanjali, Sermon on the Mount, etc..]



Everyone is free to entertain, study, probe, question. Discover if true or
false, etc. that makes for vital study between interested students - the
life of the T M is there. 



However don't waive "authorities" say-so's around. They are opinions and
stand only on their own logic and merit. As my study has extended over 60 or
more years, I would say that THEOSOPHY is monolithic. But why take my word
for it? Invulnerable is also a good word. [Some writings that claim to be
theosophical don't stand comparison, probing or verification.]



Each has to study and verify. In the meantime, how many of the basics and
fundamentals are reasonable? 



Are they well identified?



How do they interlink?



Do the provide food for thought?



Do they offer ideas that can be used in daily practical life? 



In other words do the Ideals of THEOSOPHY have value? 



Can that be proved or identified or targeted ? 



Best wishes, 



Dallas



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill 
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 3:19 PM
To: theosophia@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [theosophia] Re: posts



Hi Richard. Yes I agree with the spirit of your comments below. I also
fear that an ultimate veneration for HPB may cause us to develop tunnel
vision regarding theosophy i.e. if HPB didn't say it then it's not really
theosophy. Some folks like to split the theosophical hair, so to speak, by
referring to "original" theosophy as that of HPB and "neo" or "pseudo"
theosophy as almost all else. Others like to capitalize the "T" in
theosophy to mean the "true" HPB version and to leave the "t" small when
generalizing about theosophy. 



Now, before Dallas and others get the wrong impression, let me say that I
have no quarrel with HPB or the masters. Each of us is challenged by HPB to
write our own secret doctrine. It is our very own wondering, seeking,
asking, testing, verifying, sharing and questioning that is at the heart of
theosophy. It is a way of life much more so than it is a set of books. As
such theosophy was around for "thousands of generations" before HPB wrote
down her understanding of it. If we demand that our theosophy use a narrow
set of terms and a particular language then through such divisiveness we may
be missing the living theosophy that permeates the each and all. 



Personally, I look forward to the discussions on this list.



"The intuition of the moral sentiment is an insight of the perfection of the
laws of the soul. These laws execute themselves. They are out of time, out
of space, and not subject to circumstance. Thus, in the soul of man there
is a justice whose retributions are instant and entire. ... A man in the
view of absolute goodness, adores, with total humility. Every step so
downward, is a step upward. The man who renounces himself, comes to himself
by so doing."



Ralph Waldo Emerson - The Divinity School Address



regards,



Bill 

CUT



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]