Theos-Talk Archives (August 1995 Message tl00404)

>If we start out with the position that there is a problem
>needing attention, all too often the immediate reflex is to
>assign blame.

Offering blame is only useful if people need to have their anger
aroused, and rally behind someone ready to do battle! Certainly
this is not generally the case. Historic figures do not need
to be opposed for anything. In politics we see petty dictators
blaming foreign superpowers for the problems of their nations,
to distract people from their poor, oppressed conditions at home.
It's a great distraction that allows people to stay in power,
although things don't improve for anyone.

In an historic context, we may want to understand why something
happened. But to assign blame to a single individual for a
problem is to oversimply. It's a political explanation rather
than an attempt to get at the complete truth.

>What I tell myself when this mood of "Theosophy's been ruined
>and it's THEIR fault" strikes, is that THEY are US. It may be
>that a fair number of 19th century players on the TS scene are
>back among the living. In any case I get the distinct
>impression that the reactions aroused by my own work are karma
>of the MOVEMENT and not just of myself or the particular
>players reacting. Perhaps one of you knowledgable about
>Buddhism could comment on dependent origination and how it
>applies to the whole cycle of blame.

Theosophy cannot be ruined even if people manage to take over
and kill all our theosophical organizations. The Wisdom Tradition
is preserved by the Mahatmas, not by the theosophical groups, and
they will continually use what they know to better the world.
A particular wave from the ocean may crest, then withdraw, but
there's plenty of more water where it came from!

>There's no harm that I can see, and much potential good, in
>examining the question of "how did Theosophy get where it is,
>and where should it go from here?" But the more we can do with
>without resorting to blame, the more productive the process can
>be.

The question, I'd say, comes down to the two uses of Theosophy in
western society. First is as a sort of spice to liven up the "flavor"
of popular thought. Second is as a pure form of some fragments of
the Mystery Teachings, to act as a "junior college" to the real
Mysteries, for the few ready to benefit therefrom. I think that both
goals can be successfully pursued regardless of the state of affairs
in our contemporary theosophical groups. When the groups and their
publications are healthy and true to the original message, they can
greatly assist in the work, but the work goes on, regardless...

-- Eldon