Theos-Talk Archives (January 1995 Message tl00298)

To Jerry and Allan but not necessarily in that order:

Frankly I have shyed away from Kaballa althought I keep
traversing its path (poor, very poor).  ;)

It seems (IMHandUniformedO) to have a very mixed aura (for me).
Have you read Stephan Hoeller's "The Royal Road" (I would think
probably yes).  Have you met Stephan? He is a fascinating
speaker, and that's putting it mildly.  The book was written
around 1970, I believe, and is a sort of hippie invitation to
explore the sephiroth with various herbs, aromas, minerals, gems
and dare I say "medicianals".

Another book on "Angels" pointed out that there was an angel
associated with each sephira and the negative quilpoth (sp.?) had
fallen angels.  Metaron is a biggie.

It almost semed like a never ending staircase.  The malkuth of
one is the crown on the next going up and down forever like the
planetary chains.

Without pointing fingers, there are white magicians, black
magicians and those that are somewhat gray.  I read somewhere
that high evil looks somehow "good".  I'm not saying that the
Kaballa is evil high or low, I don't know that much about it.
Anyway, since you are most knowledgeable, I would like to hear
how Kaballa fits into theosophy, it cerainly seems to be a source
for HPB and others.  And AB seems to suggest that to understand,
one must have personal experience, yeah probably, and Jerry talks
about personal experience as the acid test also.

To Jerry: I think you said a lot of important things and to me.
Your post was very well thought out and I appreciated it and I
hate it when someone finds something to pounce on and ignores all
the good in a post.  Well, you know from that I'm going to
pounce, a little.

Since you are familiar with Jung, I'll cut to the chase.  There
seems to be certain psychological type that is attracted to
theosophy.  These people I believe are mostly introverted
thinking types with intuition as a secondary function or
introverted intuition types with thinking as a secondary
function.  The first seems more likely.  I took the Myers-Briggs
and I was the first type although I thought I would be the
second.

This means (IMHO) that we don't seem to honor the other
functions, maybe because the sensation and feeling functions are
so heavily honored elsewhere.  Art is a really big sensation
thing.  And feeling, well the less said the better.  So what
about your post? There seems to be a certain solipcism that goes
along with this " I create my world and take it with me and you
create your world and take it with you" idea, even though it seem
"right" to me in some ways.  In other words, one might be
inclined to read a lot of books, do a lot of meditating, defend
one's position with outrageous polemics, discount society and
group consencess (the fundamentalist crowd, how gauche) and even
seek Nirvana for oneself.  Anybody identify besides yours truly?

Has anybody read Bruce Cambell's "Ancient Wisdom Revived: A
history of the theosophical movement"? It has some pretty
important criticisms about why the T.S.  doesn't have mass
appeal.

Namasate

Keith Price