Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00871)

Why would a professing theosophist NOT be a vegetarian?

Seems to me that what "theosophy" is today
(if I can extrapolate rationally) is (by OPERATIVE definition
rather than conceptual definition) the sum total of what
is done by those who choose this as a primary identification,
and therefore changes with history.

IF the early theosophists were all vegetarians, and many
today just want a little more cognitive latitude, then what
we are seening is PEOPLE who want cognitive latitude
and chance upon theosophical societies and therefore
opt to stay around, calling themselves theosophists
according to their own understanding.

The questions I would have are:
        How much are such people "in dialogue with" the
        earliest founders of the theosophical movement, and
        how is nonvegetarianism justified in a context in which
        recognition of the personal status of each jiva is
        crucial to the meanings theosophists espouse?
        (Or is this meaning lost, and the movement is
        perhaps rapidly becoming a place to read
        the books about esoteric theories about the
        supposed intentions of the practitioners of
        rituals and concepts?)

Tell me if this seems true to your observations and experience?

                        - Maynard S. Clark

At 01:44 AM 4/21/96 -0400, you wrote:
>At 03:43 PM 4/20/96 -0400, you wrote:
>>Are theosophists vegetarians?
>>
>>I always thought so.
>>If that has changed, I'm on the wrong list.
>>
>>Please RSVP with a positive response.
>>(My reflection is that negative responses would be wrong.)
>>
>>- Maynard S. Clark
>>
>>Mr. Clark:
>
>Some Theosophists are vegetarians, and some are not. Theosophists have no
>"required status".
>
>alexis dolgorukii
>
>
>