Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00470)

Hi Pedro & All,
For me the theosophical journey is about deepening our understanding 
of life the universe and everything and our interrelatedness to all 
things and the society should be a place to help facilitate that 
process.

One way to deepen that understanding is by studying the writings and 
teachings of sages philosophers, mystics, scientists, 
philosophers ......
I like the idea of theosophy continually evolving and not simply 
using the early theosophical writers in our studies.

We have access to a wide number of valuable and credible resources 
which can be used.
Science provides much new information such as the super string theory 
and the Gaia theory....
Mystics such as Bede Griffiths for example have written fantastic 
commentaries on comparing world scriptures. 

There is very good scholarship in most fields now related to 
theosophical studies that can and should be utilized,the list could 
go on.

We need to expand and grow, I was told by someone that they had heard 
that the Dalia Lama who when asked by a scientist 'what would 
Buddhists do if science was able to disprove some aspect of Buddhist 
teachings' he replied something like 'well then we will have to 
change our philosophy'.
That to me shows a truly theosophical mind one that is willing to 
change its perspective regardless of what emotional investment may 
have been placed in the previous one.

There are similarities and differences in the many and varied 
different traditions and teachings.
Blavatsky tells us her writings only try and 'lift the corner of the 
veil'.

The Mahatmas give their findings and rationale as to how the cosmos 
operates from their findings that they say have been checked and 
rechecked by generations of initiated seers.
(interesting that they are not beleived and regurgitated but checked 
and rechecked by experiance)

This does not therefore mean it is the final word or correct howver.
These findings and rationale may differ from others and it's up to us 
to what if any rationale we resonate more or less with.

As would be theosophists we need to think, observe and intuit for 
ourselves and not blindly accept any said authority.

So we need the freedom to present our ideas and insights regardless 
of what may have been stated by others including Mahatmas.
(As long as we state clearly these are our own ideas insights and 
intuitions and don't expect others to accept our ideas insights or 
intuitions as the final word.)

Open challenge and comparison to the ideas and perspectives in 
Blavatsky's and the Mahatmas writings or any other theosophical 
author with our own should simply be part of the process.

No one has a right to stop us from this process in a genuine 
theosophical school.

Science may shatter some things written in our literature and if this 
is the case we need to openly and honestly acknowledge this when or 
if it happens hopefully without throwing the baby out with the bath 
water or trying to cover up any thing that may be in the literature 
that may be a source of embarressment.

Intellectual freedom and honesty is necessary in order to maintain 
freedom and integrity.

We as either individual students or members of one of the Societies 
need to try and promote this type of open and enquiring mindset and 
enable it to find expression.

Regards

Perry 


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "prmoliveira" <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> There is evidence in the body of the writings of both HPB and her 
> Teachers that the teaching being given therein was not the complete 
> Occult Doctrine as known by them. There is also indication that 
> whatever was given out by them took into consideration the 
> evolutionary stage of human mind at that time (1880s).
> 
> Below are some possible relevant passages that may indicate that 
> Theosophy, as a teaching given out by both HPB and her Teachers, 
may 
> be seen as a work in progress. Personally, I view them as pre-
emptive 
> of any absolute interpretations of the theosophical teaching, while 
> at the same time emphasizing inquiry, self-study and ongoing 
> discovery.
> 
> I apologise for the length of this post.  
> 
> 
> "These truths are in no sense put forward as a revelation; nor does 
> the author claim the position of a revealer of mystic lore, now 
made 
> public for the first time in the world's history. For what is 
> contained in this work is to be found scattered throughout 
thousands 
> of volumes embodying the scriptures of the great Asiatic and early 
> European religions, hidden under glyph and symbol, and hitherto 
left 
> unnoticed because of this veil. What is now attempted is to gather 
> the oldest tenets together and to make of them one harmonious and 
> unbroken whole. The sole advantage which the writer has over her 
> predecessors, is that she need not resort to personal speculations 
> and theories. For this work is a partial statement of what she 
> herself has been taught by more advanced students, supplemented, in 
a 
> few details only, by the results of her own study and observation. 
> The publication of many of the facts herein stated has been 
rendered 
> necessary by the wild and fanciful speculations in which many 
> Theosophists and students of mysticism have indulged, during the 
last 
> few years, in their endeavour to, as they imagined, work out a 
> complete system of thought from the few facts previously 
communicated 
> to them. 
> 
> It is needless to explain that this book is not the Secret Doctrine 
> in its entirety, but a select number of fragments of its 
fundamental 
> tenets, special attention being paid to some facts which have been 
> seized upon by various writers, and distorted out of all 
resemblance 
> to the truth." (THE SECRET DOCTRINE, Preface)
> 
> 
> "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." (MAHATMA LETTERS 
> TO A. P. SINNETT, 20, chronological)
> 
> "You share with all beginners the tendency to draw too absolutely 
> strong inferences from partly caught hints, and to dogmatize 
> thereupon as though the last word had been spoken. You will correct 
> this in due time. You may misunderstand us, are more than likely to 
> do so, for our language must always be more or less that of parable 
> and suggestion, when treading upon forbidden ground; we have our 
own 
> peculiar modes of expression and what lies behind the fence of 
words 
> is even more important than what you read. But still — TRY." (ML 
111, 
> chronological) 
> 
> 
> pedro