Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00031)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Eldon B Tucker <eldon@t...> wrote:

> We don't have to answer everything we don't like, because over 
time the 
> effort would wear any of us down. We're in a cosmopolitan meeting 
place and 
> get exposed to many more different people and ideas than we might 
in going 
> to our favorite theosophical, religious, political, or scientific 
meetings.

Eldon:

As always your posts are sobering. However, on reading this last one 
and aware of the current postings on theos-talk, I realized 
something that may be a structural problem on this list. The theos-
talk website says:

"Discussion on topics regarding Theosophy (or theosophy) and its 
realization in the modern world. (Note that you must be subscribed 
to THEOSOPHY WORLD, e.g. theos-world@yahoogroups.com, before you'll 
be added to this list.) 

Now the editorial line of THEOSOPHY WORLD is clearly established 
around the Blavatsky-Mahatmas-Judge tradition, with very few 
exceptions. The overwhelming majority of the *vocal* participants in 
theos-talk resonates to the same line mentioned above. And yet the 
invitation on the website does not declare that, but carries a 
general (and inclusive) statement about "discussion on topics 
regarding Theosophy (or theosophy) and its realization in the modern 
world."

Unless one studies Theosophy (or theosophy) one does not become 
aware of the differences in approaches to it, if such differences 
are possible at all. So perhaps many newcomers may join the list in 
the hope of sharing, for example, their understanding of the 
writings of Besant and Leadbeater, among other authors. The 
statistics from amazon.com posted by Daniel recently clearly 
indicate that both Besant and Leabeater continue to be identified, 
in the public mind, as belonguing to the field of Theosophy (or 
theosophy).

Is it possible to state the nature of this discussion list more 
specifically? What is the point of advertising it as a general 
discussion list on Theosophy when a number of its active 
participants will probably never accept any approach to Theosophy 
(or theosophy) that does not come from the Blavatsky-Mahatmas-Judge 
line?

Unimportantly,

Pedro