Theos-Talk Archives (November 1995 Message tl00377)

ET to Keith Price

It's good to see that you're thinking about things in a new and
original way. But there are two steps to the process. The first is
in analysis or in coming up with new ways of looking at things. The
second is in synthesis or coming back to the original unity. With
the second step we take our new ideas and see how they fit in with
the overall philosophy. As we do so we may end up with a better
appreciation of what it's about than we started with.

RI

However when a person considers the "overall philosophy" to be the result of
a Divine Dispensation of some sort "synthesis" may just be the throwing away
of the new perspectives which do not fit very well with the way the
philosophy was originally articulated. Could this be the underlying reason
why Paul's book continues to get such a sustained negative reaction from
certain people? I mean by suggesting that actual human beings were the
basis for the Masters does it not open up the possibility that the overall
philosophy-cum-verbiage "conveyed" by them through H.P.B. is not indefectible
enough to be in the category of Things Not to Be Changed?

I like Keith's attitude actually.