Theos-Talk Archives (January 1995 Message tl00228)

Jerry Hejka-Ekins,

Thanks for your extended response headed "replies to AB and MS",
dated 24 Jan 1995.  I'd like at this stage to be face-to-face or
at least one-to-one with you to explore some of the issues we've
raised here further, so my comments here will be fairly brief.

> > MS: I suspect that what younger people find off-putting about the
> > old books is not just the language.
>
>             Younger people (and some older ones too) seem to have
> little sense of historical perspective, and it negatively affects
> their ability to understand what they are reading.  ....
>        It is precisely because of that lack of sophistication,
> that I feel that it is important to write those theosophical
> books at least every ten years in order to keep the language
> current.

I'd agree.  All we need are more writers who are available,
willing and capable.

I'd like to see the means of communicating theosophy and its
values extended more often, for instance to drama.  I've done a
little in this area and found that simple short readers' theatre
pieces, for example, can make for a night of fun as well as of
instruction, for a wider range of ages than the average
theosophical lecture.  The pieces can be interspersed with
discussion.  It makes for a nice alternation of modality and
group dynamics that keeps interest at a very high level.

> To use a Jungian paradigm, IMHO this is the TS's shadow side.
> That is why it is so sensitive.

An important issue, nearly always overlooked.

> The TS was founded under a completely different mentality, and
> originally appealed to seekers, not followers.

Good point.  I still see a good number of seekers, though.
Perhaps more today than in the past, if the growing number of
highly gifted and seriously-enquiring young people is anything to
go by.

> The lack of awareness of most students of this syncretism creates
> confusion and animosity between the "Back to Blavatsky" and the
> "neo-Theosophy" advocates.

Yes, I think so too.  A case where better knowledge would help
healing.

> > MS: So, we could give a thought or two to the collective healing
> > the TS
>
>    I agree.  But to heal, we must expose the wound.  To expose
> the wound, one must first convince the patient that the wound
> exists and where it is located.  As you have observed from the
> Leadbeater discussion, it is an uphill battle.

Indeed.  Sometimes, obviously, the wound is extremely painful -
ie threatening to a world view or a deeply-felt loyalty.  We need
to have more than one way to open wounds, perhaps, and use the
one best suited to the case.


Re CWL:-

> -- thus they [the children] were put into a moral conflict.

That is clearly so, at least in these cases.

I keep wondering about CWL's motives, and feel that they were
high-minded as in other areas of his life, but that he was
somehow oblivious to the detrimental effects of what he did in
these instances.  I don't know.

> > MS: The whole psychic aspect of sexuality needs to be considered,
> > too, but not here and now.  I have in mind the pathways that
> > universal creative energy may be considered to flow through the
> > several planes or principles of a person, and how those pathways
> > can be formed or deformed in childhood
>
> Yes this would be an interesting topic, but let us not confuse
> CWL's moral violations with theoretical occultism.

I offered this thought as the beginnings of a way to understand,
on the basis that understanding is an important element in
healing - especially as the TS offers very little to help in
understanding our sexuality.

> > MS: ...  I've seen close at hand how people can or can not
> > believe that somebody they know and love has done something they
> > would consider impossible for that person to do.
>
> How painfully true.  And that is why the motto of the TS no
> longer has meaning for it.

I'm not that pessimistic, actually.  The threat is there, but I
see signs of hope!

Murray Stentiford