Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00116)

Rich:

>Well, I don't know how you define core teachings. I define them for myself
>as the teachings of HPB, William Q. Judge and the Mahatma Letters.

I am with you here Rich. I don't know how Theosophist define core
teachings. I have an idea about Primary Source material in Theosophy some
you mentioned above. But how is the source material approached and
interpreted. Like I mentioned in my long post to Eldon. Are the teachings
true literally, spiritually, devotionally, for faith and practise?

>In all that body of literature, I don't believe the words "group soul" ever
>appear, nor can I seem to locate other words which mean "group soul."

Here is an example of one of the difficulties I find. Group soul, assume
hypothetically -it is not in source documents. Does that make is untrue?
Are there things that point to it in the source documents. Do the source
documents contain exhaustive spiritual truth? In what sense are they true.
That is the central question. How can these writings be honored and
utilized without being worshipped?

BTW, I like the metaphor of Group Soul. I connect it to the Platonic
tradition and maybe gnostic thought. Is that older tradition of Plotonius
or Ammonius (Key p.5) to be considered authoritative too?

Under the Mercy,

Arthur Paul Patterson