Theos-Talk Archives (April 2007 Message tt00084)

Thanks Daniel for the quotes.  It is indeed clear that the Mahatma's 
had a doctrine and that it had things that made it distinct from 
other schools of thought and it is extremely important for people to 
know these distinctions. 

The area that has always stood out for me is that while the Mahatma's 
said they belonged to an esoteric school of Buddhism they rejected 
the idea of humans reincarnating into animals, a teaching that is 
very widely held and taught in Buddhism.

So there are these issues and paradoxes that we come across in the 
literature, what I think we need to consider is how we approach our 
discussion of these distinctions. (likewise the teachings of 
emptiness in Buddhism and of the Monad in theosophy)

A theosophist is able to believe in and worship `God' without feeling 
any contradiction as that persons individual conception of `God' is 
distinctly their own.

The 3 objects of the Society state that the society is there to 
encourage the study of religion philosophy and science, this is a 
very wide canvas and when I think back to when I first joined the 
society the thing that attracted me was the 3 objects.

The kind of dialogue we enter into within the Society should be able 
to be open, honest and considerate.

Whether we like Leadbeater's teachings or not we should be able to 
see what connects us and not allow differences of opinions to become 
barriers to our sharing different ideas together in a considerate and 
compassionate way.

Cheers
Perry  


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> Master K.H. on 
> the "disfigurement" of Theosophy     
> 
> Master K.H. wrote:
> 
> "I dread the appearance in print of our philosophy as expounded by
> Mr. H[ume]. I read his three essays or chapters on God (?) cosmogony
> and glimpses of the origin of things in general, and had to cross 
out
> nearly all. He makes of us Agnostics!! We do not believe in God
> because so far, we have no proof, etc. This is preposterously
> ridiculous: if he publishes what I read, I will have H.P.B. or Djual
> Khool deny the whole thing; as I cannot permit our sacred philosophy
> to be so disfigured. He says that people will not accept the whole
> truth; that unless we humour them with a hope that there may be
> a 'loving Father and creator of all in heaven' our philosophy will 
be
> rejected a priori. In such a case the less such idiots hear of our
> doctrines the better for both. If they do not want the whole truth
> and nothing but the truth, they are welcome. But never will they 
find
> us-- (at any rate) -- compromising with, and pandering to public
> prejudices."
> 
> Master Koot Hoomi, The Mahatma Letters, 2nd ed., Letter 54
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>