Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00387)

> Avoid the Theosophists:
> Scholars never have followed Theosophists, though they have frequently 
> equaled
> or excelled Theosophists in divine wisdom.
> Scholars can do this because they do not regard Theosophy as an end 
> but
> as something useful: with the advantages and limitations corresponding to 
> this function.
> Theosophists, quite often, do not show signs of understanding that there is 
> anything beyond
> theosophy, and therefore they are incapacitated -- while they remain at 
> this stage -- from
> being able to have a higher objective. One must always have an aspiration 
> higher
> than one's actual status in order to rise, even in an existing field.
>
>  Such Theosophists, because they cannot move beyond their conception of 
> theosophy, are
> driven to believe and to practice two things:
>        1. They tend to make themselves believe that theosophy is of. the 
> highest nature among things and that Theosophists are a high, even special, 
> product with some kind of property-interest in truth or even a peculiar, 
> perhaps unique, capacity to perceive it. The historical records of Theosophists 
> in this respect, not to mention their individual experiences in being 
> refuted by events, do not daunt them.
>        2. Because they know inwardly that this posture of theirs is not 
> true, those of them in the appropriate field are compelled to resort to the 
> study of the work, of their opponents (the Scholars ). This is why 
> Theosophists study the works of Scholars, but Scholars do not have to 
> study the works of Theosophists, as one Scholar has cogently remarked.
>
> So it is certainly NOT important to the scholarly Seeker after Truth to 
> adopt such ideas like "Theosophy is KING"!
> I do hope the readers can agree upon this.
>
>
>   
>