Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00144)

Art:

>The contact with others, the realization of a more than provincial
>understanding of God, and spiritual failure and external persecution
>resulted in the more open perspective. Universalism and tolerance is moved
>forward by these principles. I would wonder if the same historical
>preconditions lead to a more tolerant perspective on the part of
>Theosophists?

Intolerance is an unfortunate trait in human nature. We can deal with it
in the face of aversity, or take it on using our own initiative. An
intolerant attitude in members of the theosophical groups is not something
that is taught them, but is something that overtakes people while unaware.

>I have read a few hundred pages in Cranston's Biography and
>saw that HPB was considered a heretic and a flake my many in her 19th
>Century. The great imposter so to speak. This could to lead to a defensive
>rigidity or toward a stronger position. Acceptance by society at large is
>an unlikely partner to expanded consciousness.

I don't think she cared a bit regarding her status and public esteem.
How many of us dare speak out which what we truly believe, regardless
of the public outcry?

>Arthur: When there is a movement toward a higher consciousness the "sacred
>writings" of any group has to be filtered through a contemporary grid. It
>is necessary to develop and apply different interpretive tools make the
>necessary adaptation to culture and social change. Once the founding
>fathers and mothers are dead and gone, then the disciples tend to band
>behind one or another of them and advocate different schools of thought.

That would happen in the theosophical movement when there are no people
left with some sense of living connection with the Teachings. Then it's
original inspiration will have departed and it will be a matter of
consolidation what has been given. I'd suggest that the time has not past
when any of us are able to -- if we engage the spiritual process within --
come in touch with the same source of Teachings that Theosophy sprang from.

>In order to avoid utter chaos a movement determines what writings will
>consolidate the experience for the continuing group. This is called the
>"canon" and is like a yard stick of spiritual experience. Both leadership
>and the group itself works together to decide what is authoritative for
>themselves.

Agreed that a definite form needs to be given to the exoteric or dead-letter
side of Theosophy. But that form should not be so rigid that it precludes
the student from engaging the necessary companion spiritual process. And it
should be always realized that a single word-formulation of the Truths is
not the final word on them.

>You mentioned that, "there is much to the writings that is either hidden
>behind blinds or veils, or requires the student to "go beyond the words" to
>get to the real meanings." The method of interpretation you are applying is
>very good and stands in the long line of allegorical interpretations that
>have been used in many traditions. But it is important to remember that
>there are principles of interpretation that we bring to the text and the
>discussion of these is essential to mutual understanding.

We'll have to explore things, and see where it takes us.

>Inflation happens when the
>boundaries collapse and the differentiation of consciousness between an
>archetypal entity and a human being are not acknowledged. In the extreme
>cases this takes on such an abnormal state that it is deemed "insanity"
>like when David Koresh said he was the Messiah.

Agreed.

>Eldon, I think that your desire to distance from the term "inflation" is
>because of its pathological implications.

I tend to dislike the word because of its negative connotations. It's
descriptive of a psychological process, and I don't see the main aspect
of what's happening to someone being in the realm of the psychological.

>But woe be to the one who does the turning
>of the cart. Their motives are questioned, their name is maligned and there
>competence challenged. I have studied the church's reaction to those who
>started using critical methods on the Scriptures. They were driven out of
>the church, and by the way out of the context of those who could help
>refine and apply their thoughts, into the universities, where they tended
>to get more and more radicalized but in reaction and anger to their
>critics. I think revisionist views ought to be welcomed.

Radical innovators are attached at first, before winning recognition and
popular acceptance. Fresh thought is always welcome, of course, but its
initial acceptance depends upon whether it comes in the guise of an attack
or that of an evolution or enhancement. I'd see at the heart of the theosophical
Teachings key concepts that are true, and would expect radical changes to be
in the form of deeper understandings as to what they were about. (The deeper
Truths are like ice bergs, with 90 percent hidden, awaiting discovery, rather
than like trees with roots that are too short, waiting to be toppled over
by a strong gust of wind.)

>Arthur: I don't think there is a dispute about the value of the Masters
>only the basis of their "reality". What's real? I may not be understanding
>right but I am not sure that Paul's idea of the disjuncture between the
>historical as opposed to the symbolic is as great as what first appears.

The same is true of any idea of philosophy. But the fact that there is a
dispute does not prove, per se, that there are no such people, only that
their actual existence is not commonly agreed to.

-- Eldon