Theos-Talk Archives (August 1995 Message tl00248)

Rich,

The LCC is also a theosophical offshoot, as is Steiner's
movement. I think, Rich, the problem is that the United Lodge,
to which you belong, consists of purists who believe that
Theosophy consists of the writings of a few early Theosophists,
whereas Wheaton, for instance, (I don't know how Pasadena &
Point Loma feel about this) believes that later theosophical
members, including some who are alive today, have something
valuable & worth looking at to add to the theosophical
movement. This goes back to my statement of yesterday that I
firmly believe that if you codify & fossilize, you take the
life out of it.

 I think the idea, which I take to be part of Theosopy, that
one can be a Theosophist & belong to any of the world's
religions is a good one, & a viable one. My own inclination is
mostly Buddhist, Mahayana, as I know it, but I'm perfectly
willing for other Theosophists, like the LCC to express their
religiosity in terms meaningful, & agreeable to them. I love to
go to a Catholic Mass & watch the sacrament of "Receiving"
(that's not its formal name, which escapes me for now). It is a
very meaningful ritual to me because of some descriptions I've
read in Leadbeater. That's my bent. My main Buddha is
Avalokiteshvara, the embodiment of Compassion, which includes
empathy. To me, it also includes trying to understand where the
other person comes from. I differ with the beliefs of the
United Lodge, but I've had conversations with some of its
members, & what I find is that they're fellow Thesophists. So
why don't we now go on from there?

Liesel