Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00166)

Feb 72005


RE: : HPB, Authority and Theosophy

Dear P C:

May I break in to offer and inquire?  

As I understand it, in THEOSOPHY there are no restrictions as to what to
study, or whose writings to read.

Have we in any way defined our own interest in THEOSOPHY ? 

If one desires to know what THEOSOPHY teaches, then where to go?

We can:

1	Either go to the Source we all know of ( HPB and the Masters'
writings) or

2	Wander here and there culling various opinions.

In either case, we will have to spend time sorting over our findings, and
deciding what are useful and what not. 

Do we have any sure basis for making such decisions?  

I have observed in myself that I seem to respond favourably to some ideas
and others may annoy, or appear illogical to me. (Personally, I then set to
work trying to secure a full grasp of what is said or presented. That gives
me a better sense of what is valuable. What then is valuable to me ? I
look for relations to the basic ideas: 

(1)Universal spiritual immortality.  

(2) Universal and impersonal cooperative and sensitive Law acting
impartially everywhere in the world and universe,  

(3) a progressive scale for the development of intelligence, and a grasp of
the rules of good living, and fairness, and freedom for all intelligent
beings, without exceptions, in a range that I can at present grasp: (from
the sub-atomic to the extra-galactic). 

(4) I recognize that there are limits of form whereby interaction and
cooperative effort between intelligent beings build structures and in those,
an intelligence is at work, uniting "matter" to "Spiritual Consciousness" in
a harmonious manner. 

(5) there is evidently a Master Plan that includes all beings everywhere.  

(6) there are sub-divisions of work and programs of development for every
being that is alive in place, and these have been working for aeons. 

(7) Logically there is an "immutable, even inscrutable, "background" that
serves as a unifying synthesis for this diversity, and of necessity, it has
to be involvement-free, as well as a detached "Observer," of all that
proceeds from IT.

[The best description I have so far found is in the BHAGAVAD GITA, where
Krishna states: "All this universe is pervaded by me in my invisible form;
all things exist in me but I do not exist in them...myself causing things to
exist and supporting them all but dwelling not in them." [Ch. IX, v. 4, 5
-- p. 64]

Elsewhere [Ch. VIII, v. 20,21 --p. 61] Krishna says: "...there is that
which upon the dissolution of all things else is not destroyed; it is
indivisible, indestructible, and of another nature from the visible. That
called the unmanifested and exhaustless is called the supreme goal...it is
my supreme abode." 

[Ch. X, v. 20 -=- cp. 73] "I am the Ego which is seated in the hearts of
all beings; I am the beginning, the middle, and the end of all existing
things." 

Who are "We" who thinks, and may make such decisions about our studies?

The problem as I see it is in each of us: What do we desire to do? 

Are we serious or merely curious?

Have we, in our own study, drawn up a series of conclusions? I mean, on what
we wish to know about or to learn?

How would we go about doing that? 

In what way is THEOSOPHY different (or the same as) other lines of
philosophy, or religion, or science?  

What can we benefit from it?

Do we know what it offers? 

Where does it start? In what way is it different or similar to other
systems of religion or philosophy?  

Important is also:  

Is THEOSOPHY the property of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY ?  

Does anyone benefit from joining the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY?  

If so, what is or are those special benefits?  

If one should study THEOSOPHY without being a "member of the THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY" what difference does it make to their Karma and the continuity of
their lives? 

Does anyone need an organization? Next incarnation will the THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY still be there? If not, what will exist in its place? How will we
find it then? What links can we set up now for that future? 

I think and wonder. 

Best wishes,

Dallas

=================
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Perry 
Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2005 6:03 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: HPB, Authority and Theosophy



Hello Pedro,

You wrote:

"A question naturally arises: if hers are the one true
authoritative teachings on Theosophy, is any study and
investigation of Theosophy possible outside her works
and her Teachers' letters?"


This is the key issue in the TS imo.

To present to the public and members/students the original teachings 
of HPB and the Mahatma's as being the "authoritative teachings on 
theosophy" to me does not therefore mean we only study these works.

But rather a comparative study type of approach can be used as HPB 
does though most of her writings comparing different traditions 
(religion, philosophy, science) with those of the Mahatma's 
tradition.

This is in keeping with the comparative study encouraged in the 
second object.

Students are of course allowed to challenge, and pursue any path or 
point of view they feel a leaning towards as long as it is not 
imposed on any other student.

To present the original teachings as be the closest representation 
of the Ancient Wisdom teachings we have to date, does not therefore 
and should never mean dogmatic blind belief and acceptance.

People blindly following and believing HPB and the Mahatma's is 
still just another blind belief mindset.

Theosophy in my experience tries to get us out of that mindset and 
into a free and open mind.

To point out the differences between theosophy and neo theosophy is 
to me just a simple educational responsibility.

People are still at liberty to study any philosophy or tradition 
they choose.

However the Mahatma's teachings need to be represented accurately 
and not confused with other traditions or other teachers points of 
view.


Perry 




--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Pedro Oliveira <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> In a crucial letter to Olcott (1888), K.H. wrote:
> 
> 
> "To help you in your present perplexity: H.P.B. has
> next to no concern with administrative details, and
> should be kept clear of them, so far as her strong
> nature can be controlled. But *this you must tell to
> all:-With occult matters she has everything to do*. We
> have not abandoned her; she is not `given over to
> chelas'. She is *our direct agent*."
>  
> 
> In another letter to Dr Hubbe Schleiden (1885), the
> same Adept wrote:
> 
> 
> "The present is simply to satisfy the Dr. that - "the
> more proof given the less believed". Let him take my
> advice and not make these two documents public. It is
> for his own satisfaction that the undersigned is happy
> to assure him that *The Secret Doctrine* when ready,
> will be the triple production of M..., Upasika and the
> Doctor's most humble servant [K.H.]."
> 
> 
> Such passages clearly establish the solid authority of
> HPB's writings, more particularly THE SECRET DOCTRINE.
> 
> 
> If one considers, for example, the exchange between T.
> Subba Row and HPB in "The Theosophist", in the early
> 1880s, on their different approaches to the
> clasification of principles in the human constitution,
> and the fact that the septenary division was the one
> adopted both in THE SECRET DOCTRINE and THE KEY TO
> THEOSOPHY, the same consolidation of authority can be
> seen.
> 
> 
> A question naturally arises: if hers are the one true
> authoritative teachings on Theosophy, is any study and
> investigation of Theosophy possible outside her works
> and her Teachers' letters?
> 
> 
> Pedro  
> 
>