Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01098)

Two comments on my comparison between ARE appeared,
coincidentally from the two Jerrys on board.  First, Jerry S.
said that Theosophists have a complete worldview, whereas the
ARE does not provide such.  This suggestion is true in one way
but not another.  Actually, Cayce provides a *more* complete
worldview than Theosophy; he not only describes the origin and
destiny of humanity and the cosmos, he tells you what
vegetables to eat when, how to meditate, how to solve your
psychological problems, ad infinitum.  The range of subject
matter in the readings is immense, and one could become a real
fanatic about regulating every detail of life in accord with
them.  But perhaps *because* of this, there is vastly less
pressure to think or behave like other ARE members-- compared
to Theosophy.  I have never seen or heard the kind of
dogmatism, conflict, etc. in ARE circles that I have among
Theosophists.  This is not because they are any different as
people, but rather because Cayce insisted so continually that
you should *take what you can use and leave the rest alone.*
The overwhelming emphasis of the readings is pragmatic, and
pragmatists tend not to be dogmatists.  There is so much to
choose from that the overlap between any 2 ARE members'
interests in likely to be less than between any 2 Theosophists
in a given society.  This promotes a live-and-let-live policy.

Jerry H-E takes my comment about ARE people being more relaxed
to refer to my books about the Masters.  I have no basis for
comparison since the subject has never come up.  Of course they
would be likely to be sympathetic, since the readings are
fairly coherent with my overall approach to the subject.
What I do know, is that based on experience of
several different study groups, ARE members tend to disagree
harmoniously in comparison to Theosophists.  It's much more of
an attitude of "so we see it differently-- that's cool."  I
have NEVER seen people get mad over doctrinal issues in ARE
groups.  My comments about Theosophists being tense and rigid
were not based solely on my own unhappy experiences.  They were
also based on *what I have been like* when most influenced by
Theosophy and Cayce respectively.  And most of all, on the
interactions *among other people* which I have witnessed but
not been involved in.

As for what is threatening to Theosophists, vs. ARE members,,
vs. theos-l, etc.  I disagree that "people tend to be `relaxed'
as a natural state, until they are threatened."  In the
TS-Adyar, people in charge are *habitually tense and
threatened* about: the Masters, Krishnamurti, Leadbeater, the
LCC, etc. etc.  ULT and Pasadena folks tend to have their
chips-on-the-shoulder too, about various issues.  Perhaps
because HPB has gotten a lot of bad press, and Cayce a huge
amount of good press with little naysaying, ARE folks tend to
be confident and optimistic where Theosophists are defensive
and angry.  That is, on the subject of how the outside world
perceives "us."

What *might* threaten ARE people would be a sweeping dismissal
of the paranormal, a denial of even the possibility that there
was something genuine about the readings.  But the leadership
of the organization has made it very clear that the *official
position* is that OF COURSE Cayce made mistakes, everyone knows
it, noone pretends that the readings are infallible, and it's
up to us to try to sort out the wheat from the chaff.

When the Cayce Foundation funded research at the Great Pyramid
that ended up dating it at 2900 BC, and thus disappointing
those who were trying to prove the readings accuracy, what
happened?  The ARE's magazine Venture Inward *devoted three
cover stories* to analyzing the evidence, interviewing the
researcher, exploring implications.  Would ANY Theosophical
group either fund research that might prove HPB or the Masters
wrong about something important, or publish disappointing
results in such an upfront manner?  I can't picture it.

Of course, it will be some time yet before we see how ARE
reception of my book on Cayce compares to Theosophical
reception of my books on HPB.  But the level of cooperation and
encouragement that I have gotten *while writing it* is
so impressive that I can only hope things continue in this
way.

When you advise me, JHE, to enjoy the board that "better meets
my needs" and "Godspeed," what are you saying about my presence
on theos-l?  Can't quite tell; it seems like an invitation to
go away.