Theos-Talk Archives (October 2005 Message tt00022)

10/5/2005 4:27 AM

RE: The Resurgence of Pseudo-Theosophy

Dear Zakk:

Is "pseudo-THEOSOPHY" the result of deep study, or, of what ? 

I am indeed puzzled by this -- how can it be answered, unless one knows
ORIGINAL THEOSOPHY ?

You ask: "My inquiry of curiosity was in regards to your perspective of the
average theosophist and it's lodges."

May I offer a different view? I would prefer to say: We (as students of
THEOSOPHY) would generally reserve the use of the word "theosophist" to the
Masters of Wisdom - Those truly wise men who know and practice it exactly.
The rest of us, no matter how erudite they may seem, are all "students." 

Think of a UNIVERSITY and the "Professors", the departments and the vast
hierarchy of student-teachers therein. Do They ever stop studying, not only
their own fields or specialties, but those fields which abut and interlock
with theirs? In a working Universe there are such enormous possibilities
and variances that study has to be matter of continuous progress. 

We all have a great problem with the ideas of universality, impartiality,
rigid laws, the suggested "paths" to Perfection, Wisdom, Buddhas, etc... Is
it not because we live such seemingly short lives in any one "personality?"
Such brevity is idiotic, if the accumulation of thought and experience does
not lead to the retention of the "fruits" of study and work - we are forced
by logic to presume a continuity on some other plane (planes?) of
intelligence and competence than the merely continually disintegrating and
"mayavic" physical.

The laboratory of our own passing lives, memories, and "thoughts and
feelings," is where we are continually at experimental work. We seek to
"know ourselves" - as old wise Hermes bade his disciples. 

What do we study?

We try to find out how we fit into a scheme - or pattern - that appears to
be universal, impartial, all-collective, coherent and reasonable in scope.  

For instance, you will read in the SECRET DOCTRINE, Vol. I, p. 181 that the
Theosophical scheme is three-fold. spiritual, psychic and physical. The
rest of the book, when assimilated, reveals the observations (as "history")
of a devoted band of immortal scientists (and their students) who have
studied and participated in every department of Universal and Worldly
evolution. 

Unless one devotes time and effort to a well researched effort to understand
what the SECRET DOCTRINE teaches, it is futile to debate, or offer premature
alternative constructs. Questions are, however, always welcome. 

It recognizes the antiquity and unique nature of the human MIND. It speaks
of the "personal character" (the psychic nature) as mutable and ever
changing - and it holds personal opinions to usually be unsubstantial.  

It assumes that there is within and behind every "form" an INTELLIGENCE that
is not dissipated when the form is dissipated by death. [The scientist does
the same in regard to the nature of the non-material "atom" - a space of
specific energies and forces in continual, lawful, and rational movement. 

It is in this un-dying center that CONSCIOUSNESS manifests eventually as
INDIVIDUAL MIND [see S D II 79-80] - this leads to Karma and
Reincarnation as conjoined and rigid process in evolution that underlies the
merely physical, and the few fragments of bone or tools archaeologists
discover and theorize about. 

THEOSOPHY is neither a cult, nor a sect, nor a "religion." It invites no
"authority" and certainly no "faithful" or 'blind believers." 


In my opinion, the "opinions" of others do not count. I mean, of those who
say they know, or have met some older students, and know something of their
attitudes. I, for instance, do not think I need interpretation. 

I think I can fairly say: The real "student of THEOSOPHY is an individual
engaged in trying to make sure that the doctrines and principles of
THEOSOPHY are accurate and reasonable. He is a kind of 'perpetual motion'
enquirer. He gathers for use those ideas and principles that are impersonal
and universal in scope. He is continually looking for ideas that may
support the IDEALS : [see S D I 14 -19]

1	Deity (as Purity, Wisdom and SPIRIT) is impersonal and universal,
hence, we all "reside" within "God."

2	The Laws and Rules of the Divine, and the Material Universe are
impartial and provide both LIFE, and moral support for all beings of any
kind anywhere. All beings are therefore to be treated as "brother
immortals." 

3	Every being, (atom, plant, animal, human, World, Sun, Galaxy,
etc...) no matter how unimportant, large or small, is of an essence that is
fundamental and common to all.  

Since the "beginnings" and the "endings" of the program of living (for all
beings taken together) is indiscernible, the present cross-section of
existence may be found to reveal the operative processes and principles that
every "deathless life-atom" is undergoing, or has undergone so far. [Is it
possibly, that the "life-atom" is the "Monad ?" And the Universe is wholly
made up of these in its entity?] 


If one follows such a "path," then one is seeking "authority, and opinion"
within the evidence that is available for all, or anyone, to discover and
assess.   

I just read an excerpt from Einstein in which he advises anyone who consults
to limit themselves to what THEY HAVE READ (and thought about, using common
sense) and not base themselves on others' opinions.

What I said about your approach to a Lodge stands. I ask you to question
yourself :  

Do you desire to pose as an "authority?" Or do you desire to offer your
thoughts to others for their consideration?  

Are those thoughts the result of your own deep and full study of THEOSOPHY,
or not?

Most Lodges do not open their-platforms for debates. They are concerned
with promulgating the principles of THEOSOPHY and discussing their
relevance.

Are your thoughts opposed? If so, why ? Can you resolve that point?  

Can you offer a specific area of inquiry, and compare your discoveries or
opinions with comparative relevant statements made in Theosophical
literature? 

Your language (in my opinion) is it that of inquiry and conciliation, is it
to gain the attention of students who have gathered together to study
THEOSOPHY.

In some ways I detect a desire to debate - contention? -- which is not part
of a regular Theosophical presentation. If you desire to ask questions then
perhaps a Study-Group might be the best place to begin. But as you already
have contacts with theosophical students, ask them, and, as a preliminary,
engage several individuals in the areas and queries you are sure of. 

Questioning always elicits interest and assistance, in my experience.  

The imposition of a "VIEW" rarely is successful, unless there is included
the humility of inquiry.  

Best wishes, fellow pilgrim,

Dallas

=================================
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Zakk 
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:04 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: The Resurgence of Pseudo-Theosophy

ZD : I would ask a question of curiosity : If I was to go to a
lodge and present a perspective on some of the material,
would I be "kicked out" or similar response? I feel free in
expecting an honest answer as that is your nature.

DTB : As a matter of procedure I would first of all contact some member or
associate of any Lodge you desired to make a presentation to, and say
exactly what you write here. Have an outline ready to show and discuss. >

ZD	An individual stated to me that because I spoke more in modern day
terms and thoughtline, I was attempting to supplant the teachings that HPB 
presented and I would not be welcome at theosophical lodges (this is putting
it much more mildly than what was actually stated). 


ZD	This individual has visited your home and has participated on the
different theosophical sites. He bases his assessment on approx. 35 years of
being a theosophist and his knowledge gained from it.

ZD	Do you feel that his assessment, of how other theosophists would
respond to the manner of which I present different perspectives, as
accurate?

ZD	I understand that you and I have exchanged and shared as brothers
do and accept one another. I also do not perceive you as the average
theosophist.
My inquiry of curiousity was in regards to your perspective of the average
theosophist and it's lodges.