Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01219)

At 11:47 AM 4/27/96 -0400, you wrote:

>These ideas, though, are the most basic and simple of the occult
>doctrines, and are not being popularized in what I'd consider their
>pure and accurate form. They could be considered fourth, fifth,
>or sixth generation Theosophy, which much added and taken away.

In this connection I'd like to remind you of William of Ockham's maxim,
which paraphrased say's ;"The simplest answer is usually the best answer".
Perhaps the simplifications, provided they aren't over-simplifications, are
better, and more prone to comprehension than the perhaps over-elaborated
"originals".
>
>Why would I care if the ideas change as they take hold in western
>society? Because of my belief that they are based upon a Wisdom
>Tradition, that they are doctrines that express some of the
>knowledge about life carried by the Mahatmas, Bodhisattvas, and
>Buddhas, the elect of mankind.

The problem, as I see it, is that what you're saying here is, as you put it,
"Because of my belief". But Eldon, I submit to you that belief isn't
knowledge, and almost never is. The "Mahatmas", Bodhisattva" and "Buddhas"
as a putative "spiritual hierarchy" ( a term I believe to be an oxymoron)
are only speculations. They are things you "believe in" but do not "know" to
be real. They're like "Angels" and "Saints" to the Christians, and I
personally think, a reflection of humanity's need for a "Deus ex Machina" to
solve their problems. This is where we must agree to disagree. Much real
knowledge about the nature of the human condition has been passed down from
antiquity, but a "Wisdom Tradition" in a religious application of the term,
is only speculation. Now, to me, personally any "tradition" that leads to
the use of phrases like "The Elect of Mankind" is deplorable and, obviously,
elitist by definition. It is true that evolution itself (and it matters not
whether we speak of the evolution of consciousness or the evolution of
forms) is clearly "elitist", but philosophies shouldn't be so.
>
>
>Annie Besant and the Adyar T.S. did get involved in Indian
>politics, and there was good that resulted from their efforts.
>Earlier, Col. Olcott helped reform Buddhism in Sri Lanka,
>earning himself the status of national hero; he is still held
>in high regard for the work that he did.

 From an non-Theosophist Indian Point of view, the work of the Theosophical
Society was primarily political, and of major importance to the attainment
of liberation for the Indian Peoples. Philosophically, most Non-Theosophist
Indians (those who have heard of any of this, of course, for with India's
population most of this is moot to most Indians) also respect the T.S. for
helping Indians to regain their self-respect. As to Colonel Olcott, his work
in Sri Lanka was not so much a reform of Buddhism, but a restoration of
Buddhism. I am told that in Sri Lanka, he is the only European
(intrinsically Caucasian-Americans are Europeans) who is regarded as both a
Saint and Saviour to the people of that Island. But oddly enough, either of
these phenomena have little to do with the "Wisdom Tradition" to which you
refer. The Congress Party was purely a political activity and Olcott became
a very powerful advocate of Hinayana Buddhism.
>
>What we need in the western world is the same efforts to
>apply Theosophy in the world. This includes religious reform
>as well as social, political, and lifestyle reform (and yes,
>even a movement towards the gradual introduction of
>vegetarianism).

Eldon, as far as I am concerned, that paragraph could have been written by
someone like Pat Robertson. If you choose to be a vegetarian, well and good,
more power to you. But to feel called upon to (even "gradually") inflict
your moral-ethical beliefs (and vegetarianism is only valid IMO as a
moral-ethical system) on others, no matter how kindly intended, is simply
oppressive. For Theosophy to involve itself in any kind of "reform" whether
social, political, "lifestyle", or dietary, would make it as intrusive and
as oppressive as Christianity. The theosophical movement in the West was
intended to re-introduce long forgotten concepts, and to give interested
people new ideas about the nature of the Human Condition and that is all it
was meant to do. No "crusades" on behalf of "the elect of mankind".

>
>What is needed? Brotherhood, including a sense of tolerance
>for the differing views and lifestyles of others. Unselfishness
>including the willingness to help others, not by politicians
>with their hands in your wallet, but by people feeling generous
>and willing to share what they have on their own initiative.
>And people setting the example and encouraging others to
>take self-initiative in their lives, taking personal responsibility
>to reform themselves economically, psychologically, socially,
>and spiritually.

That's all very nice Eldon, and I'm sure Newt Gingrich would agree with you,
and optimally that's what SHOULD BE. But, there are far too many people who
are not in a position to take personal responsibility to "reform" themselves
economically, psychologically, socially, and spirituality. And why is it, I
wonder, that you choose to use the term "reform"? That would imply that you
see some basic "wrongness" about the less fortunate. The kind of stuff you
wrote in that paragraph is all too easy for comfortable, middle class white
guys to write. But you know what? It has no relationship with the very
unpleasant realities of the real world. You'd feel differently if you got
"downsized" and found yourself huddled in a doorway. I'd hate to be a poor
Black woman with children waiting for some white guy to "feel generous".
It's all too easy for middle and upper-middle class people to talk about
"setting examples" but it's hard to accept their "examples" when you're
hungry and cold and frightened! And you know what else? Theosophy, as
presently formulated, and especially as seen by people like you, has
absolutely nothings to say to these people. Speculative philosophy is only
for the well-off.

>
>People are not stupid puppets waiting to be told what to do
>and think by their political/religious leaders, but get that way
>out of laziness and because they were never taught to be self-sufficient.

"Laziness" eh? Eldon, do you know how much that sounds like David Duke?
Don't you realize that there are enormous numbers of people all over the
world who would give anything to be in a position to even think about
self-sufficiency? Society, and politics, hasn't made puppets out of them,
it's made them irrelevant and extraneous, and even worse unnecessary and
unwanted.
>
>>But it's been accomplished.
>
>The ideas are accessible now. It's possible to go into a bookstore
>or library and find materials, and one can read in the local
>newspaper of programs and classes to go to, held by many different
>organizations. It's in the open now -- but I would submit that
>the Gnosis is still not available to the common person, because
>most people can still go through life and not have enough
>exposure to it to feel an attraction. There's a long way to go
>before a majority of people find their lives changed by the
>theosophical movement.

The "Gnosis", if by it you mean absolute knowledge of what is, was, and
always will be,  and not some putative "ancient wisdom" is not, never was,
and never will be available in Bookstores. It's certainly not available in
T.S. Books, and if what I see on this list is any example,it hasn't even
been defined by most Orthodox Theosophists. As to the "common person" they
are far more absorbed in attaining nourishment and shelter than they are in
speculative theology, and that Eldon is what the kind of Theosophy you
preach is: Speculative Theology.


>Lastly Eldon, I'd like to say this, If you truly believe Theosophy to be a
"Mystery School" you're going, in time, to be sadly disappointed. It isn't,
it wasn't and as things are now, it never will be. Right now it's just an
elitist group of people who gather around each other to tell each other how
grand they are, and how the "Masters" are with them. They will not be the
foundation for new religions because hopefully there will be no new
religions. The old one's have done quite enough harm thank you.

alexis dolgorukii MTI., FTSA
the eclectic theosophist
satyat-nasti-paro-dharma
Shaman, Healer, Psychic, Priest
Member: Gang of Five