[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Response to Jerry H-E

Sep 29, 1993 04:15 AM
by Gerald Schueler

To All.  I would like to say that I agree with Jerry H-E that HPB
taught there are "theosophical teachings" and that doctrines
differ from dogmas.  In the proem to The Secret Doctrine, she
gives us three major doctrines - that of cycles, duality, and
identity, which I modified slightly (in Enochian Physics) into
three Laws - the Law of Cycles, the Law of Duality, and the Law
of Identity.  She also describes Beness, which seems to be
similar to the Hindu idea of "Not-This Not-This" and the Buddhist
idea of Suchness.  These three laws/doctrines, together with the
Gupta-Vidya Model, all of which are in The Secret Doctrine (as is
the Doctrine of Monads), comprise core teachings or a set of
doctrines that any theosophist would be hard pressed to refute
and still claim to be a theosophist.  However, these loose
doctrinal teachings can be further defined/refined or detailed in
many ways - and it is in the process of defining and describing
them that dogma can creep in.  These core teachings (much like
the so-called "pith" teachings of Tibetan Buddhism) are the
skeleton or framework around which theosophical writers and
teachers work through embellishment.  Otherwise, what would
separate a theosophist from anyone else (you can join any TS
without agreeing to these doctrinal teachings, but why anyone
would want to is beyond me.)?

Concerning the question of what comprises a "genuine mystery
teaching" let me throw out this:  Everything in our universe is
alive.  Is not this simple statement a genuine mystery teaching
(ie, it is not observable/provable to the physical senses and, on
the surface at least, its truth is a mystery to us)?  Before we
can come to grips with such a teaching, we must look deep into
the meaning of its words - many mystery teachings take the form
of a paradox and appear incomprehensible, because of our assumed
definitions of words.

To Jerry H-E.  Thank you for the quote from HPB.  Her stand
against drugs is one of the things that attracted me to
theosophy.  I have heard a lot from people who advocate drugs as
a means of altering consciousness.  I have always preferred yoga.
My impressionable years (from about 12 to 22) were as a
practicing Christian Scientist, and their firm stand against
drugs of any kind has remained with me (I still feel guilty
taking aspirins for my arthritis!).

To MRM.  Your article is interesting and I enjoyed reading it
(though I suspect the fog index will be a bit high for most
readers).  Have you uploaded it to the New Age Forum yet?  If
not, you should do so (or have it published).

                                    Jerry S.

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application