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

approached in the right way

Oct 18, 1993 01:00 PM
by eldon


    Regarding the undoing of the "split" in the Pasadena T.S., the
    split that I was talking about was between the E.S. and T.S.,
    originally between HPB and H.S.Olcott in directing the society,
    something that Jerry H-E initially pointed out.

    The split was undone when Long was assuming control of the T.S.,
    then at Covina, when the E.S. was dissolved, and he wrote about
    the esoteric becoming exoteric and the exoteric becoming esoteric.
    The organization was much different after he was through with it.
    The remaining membership did have lodges or an E.S. to belong to,
    but rather were to consider themselves as having a direct
    "partnership" with Long, and presumable through him to the Masters.

    Not being a member, I cannot say much about what happened within
    the organization over the years since then, other than noting
    that lodges have started opening up under the name of "library
    centers" and "Sunrise" started using the word "theosophy" and
    printing theosophical articles again.

    You'd have to tell me again if there is a separate E.S. again
    in the Pasadena T.S. If in the regular activities of membership
    you are required to keep secret your studies and activities,
    and if you consider them a spiritual practice, then I'd say that
    the organization is still an E.S. rather than a T.S. Are you
    permitted to talk openly about things at Pasadena to non-members?
    I don't want to ask you any questions that you are not allowed
    to answer.


    Regarding endlessly quoting the past writings, there are a
    number of possible uses for quotes. To use stray quotes, possibly
    taken out of context, to add support to an opinion that won't
    stand on its own is not good. It would be a false appeal to
    authority, like a preacher said "God says ..." when he should
    really say "I think, as I read the Bible, that ..."

    Another use of quotes is to express an idea that we have in much
    better words than we can. There might be an exceptional, truly
    inspired passage that is uplifting, poetic, and of remarkable
    clarity. Some passages from "The Mahatma Letters" qualify in
    this regard. But its abuse is to not put things in our own words,
    to become book rewriters rather than people expressing the
    deeper truths from our own understanding. When we don't have
    our own words for an idea, we really haven't gotten it yet.

    Qutoes tend to be fragmentary, not exhaustive, and may have an
    idea concealed under a blind or with a specific slant for a
    particular audience.

    Quotes can be used in a debate, where someone says "this proves
    me right" and another tries to come up with a counter quote.
    In the final analysis, you cannot prove the deeper teachings,
    much less even communicate a simple understanding of them, by
    just telling someone something, by giving them quotes.

    This is not to say that the theosophical classical literature
    is without merit. The opposite is true. It's study is a
    spiritual practice that I would equate to the learning that
    one would find in any valid school of the Lessor Mysteries,
    *if approached in the right way*.

                                 Eldon Tucker

[Back to Top]

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