Theos-Talk Archives (November 2004 Message tt00279)

Pedro,
I am not considering writing of HPB useless. It was first attempt to 
give a broad outline of Theosophy. Future occultists were meant to 
give details on each topic. Leadbeater has written that if he was to 
give all details of astral plane which he saw, it would become 
encyclopedia. However many people are so obsessed with HPB's writing 
that they forget it is outline and we are supposed to know details of 
each topic. As you know AB wrote 300 books and CWL 40 books 
explaining number of topics which were only touched in SD. 
So I would rather study details instead of just broad outline. 
Anand Gholap

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "prmoliveira" <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand Gholap" 
<AnandGholap@A...> 
> wrote:
> 
>  
> > Mahatma Letters (ML 20, 
> > > chronological):
> > > 
> > > "The Occult Science is not one in which secrets can be 
> communicated 
> > > of a sudden, by a written or even verbal communication. If so, 
> all 
> > > the "Brothers" would have to do, would be to publish a Hand-
book 
> of 
> > > the art which might be taught in schools as grammar is. It is 
the 
> > > common mistake of people that we willingly wrap ourselves and 
our 
> > > powers in mystery — that we wish to keep our knowledge to 
> > ourselves, 
> > > and of our own will refuse — "wantonly and deliberately" to 
> > > communicate it. The truth is that till the neophyte attains to 
> the 
> > > condition necessary for that degree of Illumination to which, 
and 
> > for 
> > > which, he is entitled and fitted, most if not all of the 
Secrets 
> > are 
> > > incommunicable. The receptivity must be equal to the desire to 
> > > instruct. The illumination must come from within."
> > 
> > I fully agree with this paragraph from the Master. This phase of 
> > giving Truth in paradoxical language continued till 1890. Later 
> > principles were given in clear language. That is why I don't read 
> > much what was written before 1890.
> 
> Anand:
> 
> Both Annie Besant and C. W. Leadbeater considered "The Secret 
> Doctrine", which was published in 1888, as the source text of 
modern 
> Theosophy and did refer to it in their books. The fact that they 
> opted for a simplified rendering of the theosophical teachings does 
> not mean that they did not recognise the value of HPB's original 
> exposition.
> 
> You are, of course, entitled not to want to read theosophical 
> literature published before 1890 but you may have to remember that 
> that was the primary exposition of the teching and that both AB and 
> CWL studied it.
> 
> The word "paradox" is illuminating: it is a composite word from 
> Greek: "para", beyond, and "doxa", opinion. A paradox is that which 
> can take you beyond accepted, common opinion. In other words, an 
> insight. Sounds theosophical, doesn't it?
> 
> 
> Pedro