Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt00369)

Daniel H. Caldwell wrote:

<<Furthermore, why did the Masters want 
HPB to write all of this material if it 
was to be superseded and supplanted 
within a relatively short period of time 
by the writings of Bailey, Judge, de
Purucker, Besant, Leadbeater, Ballard, 
etc.? >>

I suspect that, in many cases, where the 
extraction of wisdom might be an 
interest, then "reading between the 
lines" might not always be enough. Also 
I feel that one could interpret writings 
in general in terms of possible related 
or alternate meanings that an author 
might not even have thought of. In any 
case, I don't see how any kind of 
esoteric topics could be literally 
interpreted without misunderstandings 
about "esoteric aspects." I suspect 
that the Catholic Church has made the 
mistake of literally interpreting the 
Esoteric/Wisdom Tradition, with the 
result that, eg, Pope John Paul II has 
approved cults like Focolare, 
Neocatechumenate, Liberation and Communion.

I just read in Gordon Urquhart's THE 
POPE'S ARMADA that Catholic cults have 
totalitarian, fundamentalist, extreme 
right-wing administrators. The author 
spent nine years at one of those cults 
(Focolare). Quoting from page 67:

<<Our minds, attitudes and beliefs were 
to be radically changed, not through a 
gradual process of learning and growth 
of personal conviction but through an 
intensive barrage which would often be 
quite openly referred to, jokingly, as 
brainwashing.>>

Not that one person's brainwashing, 
importance, comfort, usefulness, 
Theosophical writings, etc, might not be 
another's whatever.

Speculatively,
Mauri