Theosophical libraries
May 10, 2005 04:40 PM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Dear Nigel, Perry and all
Perry writes:
Another question maybe is it anybodies role to disallow any
information or writer from being in a theosophical library even if
that information is known to be questionable?
I think there are two questions implied here. 1) Whether or not an item
is appropriate for a Theosophical library 2) Whether it is practical to
include a certain item in a Theosophical library. The first question
concerns one's view of what constitutes Theosophy. The second, is a
matter of space.
Personally, if you showed me a random issue of Penthouse magazine, I
would probably find something in it which is (I believe) Theosophically
relevant. But, the reality of the matter is that every library has
space limitations. Therefore, specialty library collections, as a
matter of practicality, has to set limits and priorities based upon
their overall understanding of what Theosophy is.
Jerry
Perry Coles wrote:
Hi Nigel and all,
The points you raise are very valid ones in my opinion and of course
depending on which way the balance leans in our own assessment of
things.
Working in a library myself, it is not my responsibility or role to
censor what goes into a library.
Although faculty staff decide what books are needed for a particular
unit.
Our Education subject area contains books that would contain
information no longer appropriate to be used in schools however they
still have historical value.
How people use and process information is their own responsibility
and work.
In the University library I work at we have a small selection of
theosophical works.
These include the Secret doctrine, Isis unveiled, key to theosophy
and also some other theosophical writers like CW Leadbeater, A
Beasnt , I.K Taimni Shirley Nicholson, I.S Cooper, Robert
Ellwood..... as well as some critical works like 'Madame Blavatsky's
baboon'.
For me the principle holds the same for a theosophical library.
Another question maybe is it anybodies role to disallow any
information or writer from being in a theosophical library even if
that information is known to be questionable?
I would say no, as the information has at very least historical value.
If it is questionable and people still choose to believe it, that is
their choice.
A protestant Christian may say a catholic catechism is not true
Christianity for example.
In the end it's up to the reader to decide for themselves.
In democracies we can debate and critique any writer, opinion or
claim made.
And this to me is the key to maintaining that dogma, superstition or
claimed authority are kept in check.
This is my main issue.
I am sure our discussions on this will continue for years to come, it
is a shame that these types of discussions are seen as being negative
by some but as I am sure you'd agree they are essential in
maintaining free and open enquiry and strike to the core of what
freedom of thought really is.
Regards
Perry
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@y...> wrote:
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...>
wrote:
Hi Nigel,
It's a difficult question and as you know one that can be viewed
in
different ways.
For me at this stage in my reasoning the Society is going to
attract
people into its doors who are on a search for knowledge of a more
expansive and hopefully mind opening kind.
The TS libraries and book shops tend to cover the A - Z of occult
and
esoteric material, from the most perhaps naïve and even
fraudulent
channeled information to the other end of the spectrum with very
deep
and profound writings from various different traditions.
TS lodges hold lectures on various esoteric subjects some of
which
to
me is not suitable or relevant to a theosophical lodge, none the
less
most of the subjects are related to the 3 objects in some way.
Most of the members I've come across in the TS seem to me to be
genuine truth seekers and support freedom of speech and the
concept
of brotherhood.
While I do not support Leadbeater or his pronouncements, I do
support
members rights to study these works in a TS branch if they so
choose
to do so.
I personally believe Leadbeater teachings needs to be seriously
compared, challenged and critiqued by students and hope this
happens
more and more as time goes by and I hope that this will happen at
some point in the official publications.( this maybe a "forlorn
hope")
These are some reasons why I have now come to think the Society
is
still worth supporting even with all its problems.
Best wishes
Perry
Dear Perry
"Difficult question" indeed, as we have ourselves discovered over
the
last few years of discussion.
It raises issues of relativism, absolutism and pragmatism, to say
nothing of dogmatism!
When you write "of a more expansive and hopefully mind opening
kind"
does this mean expanding and opening up to anything and everything
as
actually occurs? Were Theosophical centres really intended to be
clearing houses for all manner of subjects? Were they to be places
where "perhaps naïve and even fraudulent channeled information"
were
to be promoted through libraries and lectures? And were they to be
places merely of relativism and political pragmatism?
Given the Mahatmas', Chohan's and HPB's oft repeated statements
this
was certainly not the intention behind their efforts. Not that they
were necessarily the final and absolute word on Truth but they were
the real founders of the "modern" Theosophical movement and they
did
adopt the motto as their desired and directional ethic.
For me Theosophy is a body of profound teachings intended to help
explain a moral imperative which might hopefully assist humanity as
a
whole towards a more considerate, selfless and harmonious way of
life
in an atmosphere of complete freedom of thought.
Too often for me this ideal of "freedom" has been misinterpreted
and
has been used as an excuse to turn Theosophical centres into
playgrounds for the current new age flavour of the month,
stimulating
kama/manas in its innumerable self-gratifying guises.
Moreover, from my perspective, it has been used to permit
circumstances and "teachings" to go unchallenged to the extent that
the Adyar TS now finds itself in a political minefield, forced to
defend the indefensible and unable to extricate itself, even if it
so
chose, for fear of offending and losing thousands of "true
believers."
From my perspective, were the Adyar TS to rename itself as "The
Eclectic Spiritual Development Society" it would fulfil that
mandate
to perfection. There are many well intentioned and compassionate
members in the various Lodges and Branches throughout the world who
work tirelessly for the good of all beings. But there are many
other
organisations whose role it is to do just this.
For me the TS was entrusted with a different dharma which might
indeed one day lead its members and all humanity towards supporting
these other organisations, without losing its original raison
d'etre,
that of building "a new continent of thought" based in mindful,
conscious awareness of the great mysteries of life.
Very best wishes
Nigel
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
