Re: doctrinal and historical approaches
Oct 20, 1995 03:00 PM
>From Jerry S. writing to Jerry H-E:
" So far, we can't even
agree on what are the "source teachings" let alone what
are the "source doctrines." And, maybe it really
doesn't matter (?)."
I would gently suggest that it does matter: without a focus, Theosophical
energies in the world will scatter and be absorbed and diluted.
There should be a way to lay out a core philosophy and a core set of ideas
without making them dictatorial, enforceable, etc.
To look to Buddhism for parallels, there are a number of schools, each with
very specific texts, teachers, and meditation techniques. However,
participation in those traditions is VOLUNTARY, and nothing is enforced.
However, if you want to belong to a school of Buddhism, you are expected to
believe what that school believes, practice what it practices, etc.
Otherwise, switch school, right?
Likewise, I hope that Theosophy will be reconized as a distinct, clear
tradition with specific doctrines and approaches. No one is forced to accept
such doctrines and approaches, but they also can't say that they don't exist.
Being a Theosophist seems to me a VOLUNTARY thing, but the student who calls
him/herself a Theosophist can not go about saying "I am a Theosophist and
whatever I do and believe is Theosophy."
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application