Theos-Talk Archives (October 2004 Message tt00236)

Oct 12 2004

Dear Jerry:

This is a quick answer:

I am not much influenced by the opinions of the "Societies," "Lodges," or
other "Theosophical bodies," and "authorities," any more than you seem to
be.

I also hold my own conclusions in some degree of distrust, since, after all,
it is always the Lower Manas through which we think and function. And I
adopt the position, and am always ready to modify them (my ideas and
conclusions) if some evidence is advanced that improves them. So one might
say that I am always tentative, and I do this because I strongly feel others
ought to have the freedom to consider and make up their own minds
independently of mine. 

In this matter, let me perhaps generalize, and offer a small diversion:

I say to myself: Let's ask ourselves if WISDOM exists and if it is ancient
and universal. What criteria can we adduce to verify the value and
impersonal universality of THEOSOPHY ?

If the SECRET DOCTRINE, The VOICE OF THE SILENCE, and H P B's and Masters'
writings are evidence to that, then what ought to be our attitude towards
Them who brought it, wrote it, discussed it, and offered it to us?  

No I say They are certainly not "dead." Their writings make them live. And
every student who goes to them awakens thereby, through his effort, the
inner life and meaning of living THEOSOPHY.

I strongly believe that the study of these works leads to a deeper and wider
perception of World history and philosophy than any of our so-called
philosophies, religions or sciences do. That is why I remain a devotee of
THEOSOPHY, and I consider it to be the perennial Philosophy of Life - and I
offer my respect and "devotion" to Those who made it available to us. 

I consider that all of us are Their students, devotees, disciples, in some
degree, whether we know of them or not, and, of those who do know Them. I
would say: we aspire, one and all, in some degree, to grasp a few elements
of the great wisdom they have so graciously, explicitly and generously
displayed for us to use. 

When I see their nature and character attacked I am forced to respond, and
attempt to bring back the subject of the proofs available, and,
consequently, of the respect due to Those who embody that Wisdom. That is
why I wrote as I did - now, as I have in the past. If slurs are cast on
their work and teachings and Their actuality, I respond in as strong terms
as I can. I point to the evidence. How many of us are able to think and
write even slightly as They did? How are we supporting the THEOSOPHICAL
MOVEMENT. Of course, all answers are to be made interiorly.

Let a few Names from the past be mentioned: Krishna, Gautama Buddha,
Pythagoras, Zoroaster, Lao Tse, Plato, Jesus, Apollonius of Tyanna, the
ancient Rishis and Mahatmas of India and Central Asia, and hundreds of
others could be mentioned -- who have left a trail of historical and
mystical evidence pointing to a consistent and undeviating body of Truth.
After all: What is Karma?

I agree with you that the SECRET DOCTRINE is not to be regarded as static or
that a closed mind approach to the writings of HPB and the Masters ought to
be adopted. I have looked at many selections of "quotations" made by eager
students down the years. All have added some increment of depth to my
understanding. I would say that they lend encouragement to those eager to
learn and extend their sense of assurance and trust in the Perennial
Philosophy. 

"Fundamentalism," I agree has no place in THEOSOPHY - but then how is
"fundamentalism" to be defined? Is it words, ideas, or is it some useful
ideas that give a basis for every individual to exercise their freedom to
think, to use the Intuition, and to probe the secret meaning of Nature and
her supportive self all around us ? 

We don't argue over the fundamentals of mathematics, chemistry, physics,
engineering, astronautics, biology, etc... we use them and they always
remain as a background to intelligent and constructive advances in those
departments of life and science. 

So why should philosophy or THEOSOPHY be denied the use and identification
of "fundamentals?" Are we going to argue over the 3 Fundamentals [S D I
14-9], or over the "7 Principles in Man and Universe [SD I 157; II 596]
, or over the existence and rigidity of Karma? Here we have three great
ideas that underlie the whole progression and evolution of Life in this
3-fold aspect [S D I 181].  

Karma is the great stumbling block - and priests of all religions have
inserted the idea of a "Personal God" (an oxymoron if ever there was one),
"Forgiveness and remission of sins," and a "Personal Devil" - outside the
nature of our own selfish, isolating personal desires and passions. But
Karma demands equity for all and restitution to the victims by all tyrants.


Is that unfair? How else would Nature and the Universe ever run itself
without exact justice for all? How would it be able to support the
universal evolution of all immortal Monads without that? No, there are
fundamentals that are invulnerable because logical and essential, and there
are false "fundamentals" which have no logic. And all of us have,
interiorly, the Higher Self -- to whom we can refer if in doubt.

If this Truth (as a way of living wisely -- virtue) is understood, it will
be seen to support a single method of personal sacred discipline and living
- an ethic and a morality - that is inherent, clear and direct in them all,
without any deviation. This need not be advertised, but its attempt, as
personal, virtuous application has to be innate to those who truly espouse
THEOSOPHY 

What is this? As I see it, it is a life-long discipline of care for others,
of generosity and brotherhood that leads to harmlessness and success in the
eternal life which we, as immortal Monads, all pursue individually. The
VOICE OF THE SILENCE give a definite set of instructions and directions (as
I see it) in this.

This includes, of course, in my mind, a constant respect for the Spiritual
Self [the ATMA] that is the innate Resident in each human being - the Real
"WE." If anyone "does wrong," it is not that Inner Devine Being that acts,
but only the Lower Self embroiled in paltry and mundane affairs of transient
value - and which, at the time of physical death, resolve into nothing of
continued worth or significance. Look at the BHAGAVAD GITA. Doesn't it
teach this throughout the book?

That is the reality of things, as I see it, and not merely a "formal shell"
of mind-destroying faith and blind belief, without any rationale or purpose.
I have to leave it to everyone (myself included) to stand before his or her
own Conscience - the Higher Self within - and answer at that bar, the
questions that the "Assessors" ask the departing Souls as depicted in the
"Book of the Dead," when the "heart" is weighed against the Feather of
Truth." 

Best wishes, 

Dallas
 
==============================

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry H E
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 1:51 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: Cayce's relevance to Theosophy/theosophy

----------------------

Hello Dallas,

You say of my opinions concerning "The Masters Revealed" that:

"This does not obviate the fact that in my opinion it is a fabrication -- a
construct designed to seem authoritative, and, in a way it will, like other
attempts, try to subvert the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT."

I don't know whether "The Masters Revealed" was an attempt to, as you 
say, "subvert the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT."  

Frankly, I see no merit whatsoever in that position. Based upon my forty
years of observation and participation in the various Theosophical
Organizations, I have sadly concluded that the pathologies that fester
within these 
organizations have done more to subvert the TM than has any book (or a 
dozen books) that has been published on the subject.  

I would say that the Marion Meades, Bruce Campbells, and Paul Johnsons, are
not attempting to subvert the TM, but rather, their books are, in a way 
merely reflects and/or stirs up the chaotic shadow sides of these
Theosophical Organizations.  

I often hear from so-called "Theosophists" unwilling to acknowledge this
shadow side, and answer with accusations that the Meades, and Campbells (and
Tillets for the Adyar Society) are "enemies" of the Movement, or "black
magicians" and other such nonsense. 

Until the people within these Theosophical organizations learn to 
recognize and own up to their organization's karma, and what part they 
may be contributing to it, this pattern of "us against them" is going to 
continue indefinitely.

Further, I would also differ with you in the opinion that The Masters 
Revealed is a "fabrication," if you mean by fabrication, that the author 
lied. I dialogued and debated with Paul Johnson, publicly, privately 
and in person when the book first came out, and while we agree to 
disagree on many points, I never once doubted that the author of TMR is 
genuinely convinced of his own arguments, absolutely sincere in his 
conclusions, and had no intentions to deceive anyone.  

BTW, my own view (based upon my reading of Blavatsky and my own 
observations and experiences) is that the so-called Theosophical 
Movement is a cycle that manifests when the conditions are right and 
withdraws when the conditions are not.  

While, I am convinced that HPB and her teachers sought to bring the
Theosophical Society into being in order to serve as a vehicle for the TM,
that does not mean that the TM is necessarily still expressing itself
through any of the Theosophical organizations, nor does it mean that it is
not finding a better 
expression through other, unrelated organizational efforts.


You ask:  

"Have you, or has anyone asked anyone in the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY in India
to give an opinion? They may probably not, as the subject of the Mahatmas
is sacred to every Indian. And not to be discussed with "strangers." But if
there have been, answers I would welcome them."


We have a theosophical study group that has been meeting for about ten
years. Two of the members were born and grew up in India, though they are
not otherwise related to each other. Both are about 60 years of age. One
was born in Karachi before it became a part of Pakistan. The other was born
and grew up in Madras. The one born in Karachi grew up in a Theosophical
family, the other, though she came from Madras, knew nothing of Theosophy
until she joined our group. Both are "Hindus." We had talked many times
about attitudes in India about the Masters. Both agree that the subject of
the Masters is indeed considered sacred among those who believe in them, but
both also agree that such a belief is not universal in India. 


You write: 


"I don't care a fig for the academic opinion of these things as it has not
yet developed, even in a few that I can discern, the capacity to envisage
ultimates and the metaphysics of that brotherhood that is rooted in all of
us (as the immortal Monads -- the Eternal Pilgrims) without any exception.
And if it has, where are the bold ones who sacrifice their "positions" to
advance such views as these? "


Yet, I recall reading in the Mahatma letters a statement from KH that
"Science is our best ally." While I concur with you that "academic opinion"
has its shortcomings, is often flawed by human error, and compromised by
political pressures, I also see that it has progressively led us to
incredible insights into the nature of ourselves and of the universe. Even
if all of those insights are somehow stated or encoded in the SD, the fact
that we have discovered these things for ourselves, make those discoveries
all the more valuable, and our understanding of them all the more genuine.


Are we to hang onto every word written by HPB and Judge, like
fundamentalists who endlessly quote from their "sacred books" and strangle
the life out of them by wrapping those discourses into some kind of a
theology? IMO, HPB met for the SD to be a springboard to help us into our
own investigations and discoveries. I submit that while The Secret Doctrine
is so titled, what HPB writes in that book is not "the Secret Doctrine."
Rather, she is only hinting at and pointing towards it. The Secret Doctrine
is not something to be found in books, but within, and through our own
efforts. And I submit, that the scientific methodology we have developed,
while it has its limits and flaws, is a useful and important tool when
applied towards that discovery. For one thing, a methodological approach
goes a long way to safeguard against the circular thinking and bogus
arguments that so often appear in this and other discussion boards.  


Best Wishes. 
Jerry


W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote:

>Thursday, October 7, 2004
>
>Dear Jerry:
>
>All you say may be quite true.  
>
>This does not obviate the fact that in my opinion it is a fabrication -- a
>construct designed to seem authoritative, and, in a way it will, like other
>attempts, try to subvert the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT.
>
>None of those conclusions can be made to stick in India. Out here, far
>away, we have little basis to compare or to criticize (other than the
>literature -- the books and letters -- themselves). Have you, or has
anyone
>asked anyone in the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY in India to give an opinion?
They
>may probably not, as the subject of the Mahatmas is sacred to every Indian.
>And not to be discussed with "strangers." But if there have been, answers
I
>would welcome them.
>
>In my opinion the subject of the Masters and Their Work is too noble, and
>valuable for anyone to deride, or attempt to belittle it. It also demeans
>Them, Their work and Their sacrifices -- and that, above all, I object to.
>
>Anyone who reads the MAHATMA LETTERS with the piercing intelligence of a
>devoted student will soon realize that what I say is quite accurate.  
>
>"There is no religion higher than TRUTH." 
>
>Yes, that was, and is the only "party-line." 
>
>THEOSOPHY stands for universality -- no parties, and the THEOSOPHICAL
>SOCIETY was commenced to establish a nucleus of Universal Brotherhood, not
>to destroy it, or stand passively by and let others do that. It is up to
the
>"members" (whether 'attached' or 'detached') to exercise their free-willed
>independence and decide whether they will continue in passivity, or seize
>the golden moment and discover for themselves what is the truth of things. 
>
>After all, why depend on anyone for unverified statements? In this case
the
>evidence lies before everyone: the MAHATMA LETTERS, the SECRET DOCTRINE,
>and ISIS UNVEILED.
>
>No compromise is possible between the arguments of the "Lower Mind," and
>those of Buddhi-Manas - the vehicle of the divine, Spiritual Higher Self in
>each of us. But who takes THEOSOPHY seriously?  
>
>Who has any respect for Those Immortal Slaves to Wisdom and to KARMA, who
>cherish the title of "Servants of Humanity," and who, aeon after aeon, seek
>patiently, by all legitimate means to get mankind to learn how to think,
>and be accurate and honest in everyday life to their inner "God," the
Higher
>Self?
>
>The very idea that there are eternal, immortal MONADS, who, like the very
>atoms and sub-atoms of our "Science," exist, become intelligent, and over
>the tremendous periods of time necessary, have achieved a perfection of
>vision, and a comprehension of the most recondite aspects of the common
>basic urge that unites and moves the entire Universe -- that is what the
>Maters of Wisdom, and the Mahatmas stand for in my humble view. Therefore
I
>protest. 
>
>Do our academicians, as a group, stand on their own integrity and
>independence for that? Like most highly intelligent minds they are adepts
at
>focusing on their own specialties. But the whole is vaster. Tearing apart
>statements made and evidence advanced is useful when dealing with false
>notions. But to what end? To construct and build a better human bond of
>brotherhood? Or, to destroy that? 
>
>Look around. It is the service of our World, solar-System and Universe to
>us that keeps us alive with the vast currents of life-force and the
>continual exchange of life-atoms -- something we do not yet know the laws
>of. There is in all Nature to be seen a continual give and take without any
>demand for reward or recognition. What kind of Overseers mange this? Do a
>few individuals treading the ancient dust of the "Five Rivers" -- the
>Punjab, do this? And they do not commonly speak Tamil or Telugu in the
>Punjab!
>
>That anyone dares to turn the Masters of Wisdom into trivial individuals of
>perhaps unblemished but ordinary lives is ridiculous and demands protest.
>The characters selected do not agree with the depictions made clear and
>inherent in the MAHATMA LETTERS.
> 
>I don't care a fig for the academic opinion of these things as it has not
>yet developed, even in a few that I can discern, the capacity to envisage
>ultimates and the metaphysics of that brotherhood that is rooted in all of
>us (as the immortal Monads -- the Eternal Pilgrims) without any exception.
>And if it has, where are the bold ones who sacrifice their "positions" to
>advance such views as these? 
>
>One may say that the writings of the Mahatmas (as in MAHATMA LETTERS), and
>the works they claim to be partly authored by them and H. P. Blavatsky:
>(ISIS UNVEILED and The SECRET DOCTRINE ) -- stand upon their own basis as
>invulnerable monuments. And if this sounds too fulsome, then let it be
>clearly understood that in years to come those monuments will continue to
>stand, and will serve future generations to overcome all carping critics,
>and attempts to demean them.
>
>Best wishes, and always in friendship,
>
>Dallas
>
>  
>





 
Yahoo! Groups Links