[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX] |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Sep 06, 2006 12:45 PM
by danielhcaldwell
Carlos, You write: "What applied to HPB in 1875-1891 does not have to apply to the average truth-seeker in the early 21st century!" Well, who said that this was the comparision being made??? Who was advocating that what applied to HPB MUST apply to "the average truth-seeker"? You may not find HPB's words helpful or insightful but others may. The average truth-seeker? Who is this? I don't believe anyone on this forum has suggested that any of this material - one way or the other- is necessarily for the "average truth-seeker." May not even for the "average" Theosophist!! Maybe some will find it very helpful and inspiring; others may not. Let each seeker - whether average or not - use the material if he or she finds it helpful or inspiring. Who is to say what is "appropriate" for anyone - especially the "average truth-seeker." You also write: "We also should carefully examine the 1900 Letter...." Well, yes we should carefully examine it. But a number of very knowledegable students (for example, Dallas, Walter, Vernon) have serious reservations about it coming from the real KH. And that maybe should give us pause about too readily accepting it. But of course each of us will have to decide about the letter if we choose to do so. Again you write: "Masters are NOT their 'personalities'." Again I don't think anyone here is claiming that they are. But they do use those personalities, etc. etc. And to have some undertanding of their personalities may be helpful especially when also grappling with all the conflicting claims about these same Masters made after HPB's death. To give a concrete example, if Leadbeater students knew more about the original personalities, work, etc. of the Masters as found in the original literature then they might have a better perspective if not some reservations about what CWL later wrote about these same Masters. Again you comment: "Adoring Masters personalities or portraits is harmful..." Adoring? Who has been advocating ADORING the Masters' personalities or portraits? Not anyone that I am aware of. But that doesn't mean that the Masters' personalities and/or portraits can't be uplifting and even inspiring to some Theosophical students. Daniel http://hpb.cc