Theos-Talk Archives (August 2005 Message tt00250)

Daniel,

> For example, my cousin is a member of the Jehovah's
> Witnesses. I think that those JW teachings have made
> my cousin a better human being. So by your definition,
> I guess those teachings are "good" for my cousin....
Yes. Exactly. So, for your cousin, where he is at this time, he is 
where he should be. There is a Jehovah's Witness who knocks on my door 
about twice a month. He is a wonderful old man and we have great talks 
together. I would not dream of challenging his religion. Sometimes he 
will raise a point which I will disagree, but it is always pleasant. He 
often brings his wife and/or children to visit too. 
> But are the JW teachings true? 
They are true to him. That is what matters here. Faith based religions 
are not philosophies which are up for debate. They are, well, faith 
based religions. I would not dream of handing him a copy of, say, the 
Key to read. I know from talking to him over the years that he would 
not be able to grasp the ideas. He just isn't in that place.

> I think the Eck
> teachings have made my friend a better person....and
> maybe therefore the teachings are "good" for my friend....but so 
> what? 
The so what is that Eck is making him a better person. I think that in 
itself is wonderful.

> There are literally hundreds if not thousands of diverse and 
> contradictory teachings [including what we will call anti-
> theosophical teachings]out there in various religions, cults, 
> new age movements, etc. that probably make people "better" people, 
> more giving, more moral, etc., etc.
Great.

> HPB even speaks of similar people:
>
> "WERE it possible, we would keep this work out of the hands of many 
> Christians whom its perusal would not benefit, and for whom it was 
> not written.
Yes, exactly.

> We have personally known such God-fearing priests and 
> clergymen, and we have always avoided debate with them, lest we 
> might be guilty of the cruelty of hurting their feelings; nor would 
> we rob a single layman of his blind confidence, if it alone made 
> possible for him holy living and serene dying." 
Yes, well said. 
> So by your definition, even these orthodox Christian teachings 
> would be deemed "good teachings" for those people.
Right.

> But in the same preface, HPB goes on to say:
>
> "The clergy apart, none but the logician, the investigator, the 
> dauntless explorer should meddle with books like this. Such delvers 
> after truth have the courage of their opinions."
>
> Seems to me she is appealing to DELVERS AFTER TRUTH. I would think 
> this is the kind of person she was hoping to attract to her writings.
>
> Are students of Theosophy DELVERS AFTER TRUTH or ......????
Ideally, yes. A couple of hours ago Pedro posted a message quoting Hugh 
Shearman. Forgetting for a moment why Shearman wrote the article 
itself, and what he was trying to accomplish, there was one passage that 
really rang out to me:

> Theosophy, of which all these things are expressions and sign-
> postings, has to be sought out in experience by each individual. It 
> is not something that has been found by somebody else and can be 
> taught to others. ...
I understand Shearman as saying here that the written teachings in 
themselves are not the truth, but "expressions and sign-postings" of a 
truth which he have to seek out in our own experiences. I think this 
passage really points back to the spirit of Theosophy HPB was trying to 
get across. Bible thumping is for faith based groups. I hope that 
Theosophists can do better than that. 
Jerry






Daniel H. Caldwell wrote:

> Jerry, 
> You wrote:
>
> "My position is that any teaching that makes for a 
> better human being is a good teaching for that person, 
> whether that teaching contradicts HPB or not."
>
> I don't know if you are trying to limit the definition
> of "any teaching" to only Theosophical teachings or not,
> but what you say although it makes sense on one level,
> on another level it also makes little sense.
>
> For example, my cousin is a member of the Jehovah's
> Witnesses. I think that those JW teachings have made
> my cousin a better human being. So by your definition,
> I guess those teachings are "good" for my cousin....
>
> But are the JW teachings true? Do they have any basis
> in reality? Is Jesus Christ literally coming to earth
> to establish his kingdom?? etc. etc.
>
> I have a friend who is in Eckankar. I think the Eck
> teachings have made my friend a better person....and
> maybe therefore the teachings are "good" for my friend....but so 
> what? 
> There are literally hundreds if not thousands of diverse and 
> contradictory teachings [including what we will call anti-
> theosophical teachings]out there in various religions, cults, 
> new age movements, etc. that probably make people "better" people, 
> more giving, more moral, etc., etc.
>
> HPB even speaks of similar people:
>
> "WERE it possible, we would keep this work out of the hands of many 
> Christians whom its perusal would not benefit, and for whom it was 
> not written. We allude to those whose faith in their respective 
> churches is pure and sincere, and those whose sinless lives reflect 
> the glorious example of that Prophet of Nazareth...These have 
> ennobled Christianity, but would have shed the same lustre upon any 
> other faith they might have professed -- for they were higher than 
> their creed...They are to be found at this day, in pulpit and pew, 
> in palace and cottage....Their charity, and simple, child-like faith 
> in the infallibility of their Bible, their dogmas, and their clergy, 
> bring into full activity all the virtues that are implanted in our 
> common nature. We have personally known such God-fearing priests and 
> clergymen, and we have always avoided debate with them, lest we 
> might be guilty of the cruelty of hurting their feelings; nor would 
> we rob a single layman of his blind confidence, if it alone made 
> possible for him holy living and serene dying." Isis Unveiled, Vol. 
> II, preface.
>
> So by your definition, even these orthodox Christian teachings 
> would be deemed "good teachings" for those people.
>
> But in the same preface, HPB goes on to say:
>
> "The clergy apart, none but the logician, the investigator, the 
> dauntless explorer should meddle with books like this. Such delvers 
> after truth have the courage of their opinions."
>
> Seems to me she is appealing to DELVERS AFTER TRUTH. I would think 
> this is the kind of person she was hoping to attract to her writings.
>
> Are students of Theosophy DELVERS AFTER TRUTH or ......????
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links