Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00277)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:

> Concerning the two extracts you gave from Mme. Blavatsky,
> I ask you how you would reconcile what Blavatsky says 
> in those extracts (which I have numbered as EXTRACTS
> 1 and 2 below) with the additional 5 extracts I also 
> give below from Blavatsky and Koot Hoomi.
> 
> Is Blavatsky saying contradictory things in EXTRACTS 1 
> and 2 when you compare them with EXTRACTS 3 thru 7?
> 
> Or are we comparing apples to oranges when looking at
> the meaning or various meanings of the 7 extracts?
> 
> Or should we view all of these extracts from some other
> vantage point?
> 
> It seems to me that on one hand that we should avoid setting
> up "dogmas" but to go to the other extreme of letting any
> vagary be called Theosophy or Theosophical is also not 
> desirable. 
> 
> I also call your attention to the three words WITHIN
> CERTAIN LIMITS in EXTRACT 2. Do these three words
> qualify the meaning of the extract overall? And if so,
> how?


Daniel:

The way I see it, there is no need to reconcile the different 
statements. Perhaps they need to be understood in their own merit and 
context. In the first two, HPB seems to be sounding a gentle warning 
to students of Theosophy and she clearly indicates that differences 
of opinion are not a problem. The expression "within certain limits" 
I interpret, in the context of the whole quote, as refraining from 
opinionatedness for that is, clearly, an unhealthy pattern that 
destroys the spirit of inquiry.

I find the tone of Extracts 6 and 7 quite forceful and in a way 
similar, in their philosophical standpoint, to the attack by Pope 
Benedict XVI, in his pre-election homily (which apparently decided 
the election in his favour), against the religious relativism that is 
growing in the world today. :)

>From my limited knowledge of the Mahatma Letters I reckon that the 
WHOLE Occult Doctrine was never revealed by them. There are a number 
of passages in the ML in which Sinnett pushes his luck only to be 
told: "enough and no more". I am not saying that the theosophical 
teaching in HPB's works and the ML is not solid, comprehensive and 
consistent. I am just suggesting that what was given out was indeed 
only "a corner of the veil".

If we take HPB's statement in Extract 7 literally, THE SECRET 
DOCTRINE automatically becomes the Alpha and Omega of Theosophy, a 
kind of theosophical "ring pass not", and all free and independent 
exploration would come to and end. On the other hand, in the "Bowen 
Notes" (BTW, do you have the text of the presentation by the 
Librarian of the TS in London, at the Theosophical History 
conference, that apparently questions their authenticity?), HPB 
suggests that the SD aims at "leading towards the Truth". I find this 
last statement perfectly resonant to her warning against orthodoxy.

I know am rambling, therefore I'll go.

pedro