Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00517)

ET
There are a lot of things that the word "Theosophy" could be applied
to. Jerry H-E would probably ask us: "What did HPB intend when she
helped co-found the T.S. and coined the term?"

RI
I agree we need Jerry H-E here because I am pretty sure that HPB did not
*coin* the term *theosophy*.

ET
If everyone teachings whatever they care to believe as original
Theosophy sometimes without even having read the books and being
exposed to the ideas then the philosophy will be lost to the western
world.

RI
Perhaps it is merely my your and some of HPB's particular version of the
"philosophy" which has any danger of getting lost. *Philosophia Perennis*
Leibniz the "Perennial Philosophy" doesn't get lost--that is why it is
thus named. Right now the ideas you may be referring to--cosmogenesis and
anthropogenesis--are probably far more in jeopardy because of a general
rejection of theosophical epistemology rather than a lack of promulgation.
In other words intelligent people of the modern world are unfortunately now
not so willing to consider the possible validity of ideas which do not have a
firm basis in empirical science. This may be what needs to be changed first
in order to give all theosophical ideas a chance to flourish.

ET
This spiritual approach to *learning* emphasizes *process* and is fine.
We are not considering though whether this intuitive knowledge is
trained or untrained whether it is based upon exposure to gurus and
spiritual training or if it is based upon the normal course of one's
life without the benefit of hastened evolution.

RI
*Fine*? People know how to hurt me with anemic adjectives.

*Trained intuitive knowledge*? Some believe that authentic intuition is the
*trainer* not the *trainee*.

ET
But meditation goes hand-in-hand with
*content* and I'd say that much can be achieved using fragments of Mystery
Teachings as the content of our studies and contemplation.

RI
I'd say so too.

ET
>RI
>But also within the Theosophical Society we have the definition-#2 people.
>They are strong and getting stronger as the membership declines. They
>would like to firmly establish as a fact that the *Theosophical* in the
>Theosophical Society means definition #2.

I'd say that you're making a false distinction here. The type one process
deals with how we realize deep insights. The type two definition deals
with the specific systematic content of occult doctrine that is of great
benefit for our type one process. It is not an either/or situation.

RI
The discussion is about what the *Theosophical* in the Theosophical Society
really stands for. While I would agree that the process/content combination
you mention is a good one it perhaps does not offer a legitimate "middle
ground" between the either/or if the content-part is strictly limited to
"Real Theosophy" as defined by the definition #2 people.

Notwithstanding it is impossible for me to imagine a Theosophical Society
which is not strongly associated with THE SECRET DOCTRINE. That just seems
like a fact. That just seems like a given. Whatever shape the Society takes
in the future HPB's contribution to the "Mystery Tradition" as you say
will be there! there! there! there! Definition #2 people must relax about
this.

However what we may need most right now is a stong organization whose
general focus is the reassertion of theosophy as a legitimate category of
valid knowledge--and not just a brand name for a certain implied consensual
belief. If the Society cannot do this not only THE SECRET DOCTRINE but
many other things--like the aforementioned "religions astrology mysticism
esoteric writers not necessarily named Blavatsky etc."--may indeed more and
more start to get written off as merely "unsupported speculation."

I don't know . . . as a definition #1 inclusion-type person *theosophy*:
"any philosophical and religious system [add *and fact*] based on intuitive
knowledge of [add *or transcendental approach toward*] the divine." I am
starting to think I love HPB more than most because I keep coming back to her
again and again without believing that the *theosophical* in the Theosophical
Society officially suggests that I should. . . .

Best wishes

Richard Ihle