Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01234)

Since it's been a day and a copy hasn't come back to me
yet, I'm reposting this message.

----

Rich:

[writing to Paul]

>But this is a THEOSOPHICAL list. Most participants are THEOSOPHISTS.
>This doesn't mean slavish adherence to one or another school of
>Theosophy, but an A PRIORI attitude that Theosophy is generally true,
>and worth investigating.

There are several stands that I see people taking. They include:

1. I know that Theosophy is not true because of my occult experiences,
   or own scientific studies, etc.

2. We can never know if Theosophy is true since it deals  with
   the transcendent and unknowable, but can only have a growing
   certitude of certain of its fundamental concepts.

3. I believe that Theosophy is literally true, in every statement
   of my favorite authors, regardless of their agreement with HPB.

4. I believe that Theosophy is a body of Mystery Teachings,
   partially expressed in open language, and partly veiled,
   behind the words of our theosophical texts.

I'm sure that there are many other positions on Theosophy as well.
Without requiring anyone to commit to a stand -- pro or con -- on
Theosophy, I'd suggest that we need to agree that it consists of
a definite body of doctrines and occult truths. That is, it is
possible to study Theosophy, recognize what it is, and distinguish
it from different ideas.

If we were a list dedicated to the study of those doctrines,
then it would be possible to say that this idea is someone's
personal opinion, that idea is in accord with the Teachings,
and the third idea is plausible, but not supported in the
literature, so we'd need to reserve judgment on it. Each idea
could be considered as being in accord with (or not in
accord with) the doctrines.

For those that don't accept the premise that there is such a
body of doctrines, we cannot convince them that such an
approach has merit. But we are then faced with a problem.
How can we study and teach Theosophy (the body of Mystery
doctrines) amidst many that deny there is such a thing?

It seems that a list dedicated to the study of Theosophy needs
to set the ground rules for discussion, regarding what is
this "Theosophy" that is to be talked about. That would be
different than theos-l currently does, since here anything
goes, from Theosophy being considered infallible divine
Truth in even its dead-letter writings, to Theosophy being
the work of the "devil" and evil anti-Christian propaganda.

>So yes, let me "come out of the closet" as a Theosophist
>who is inclined to accept HPB's teachings unless there is
>GOOD evidence that she was wrong about something or other.

For a serious study of Theosophy to occur, we don't need
to take that strong a position. We don't have to accept
Theosophy a priori as true, just agree that it is a
definite subject of study. We can study the philosophy and
learn it, even if we don't believe in it.

I'd agree with you and state I'm also inclined to accept
HPB unless there's strong evidence to the contrary. And
I'd expect that a strong belief is necessary if someone
is to make of Theosophy a spiritual practice.

>But people need not take my view of things. There is no
>enforcement of Theosophical orthodoxy (or even orthopraxy)
>here. In fact, a good number of people on the list seem to
>revel in iconoclasm. Good for them.

True. They're also on spiritual quests of their own, and
may not find a vein of gold in Theosophy the way that
we might. The question would be: How can we study Theosophy
and peacefully coexist with others that don't accept it
as having materials worthy of study.

>But I don't apologize for putting the burden of proof on
>those who hold positions disagreeing with HPB.

That burden is upon them if they want to make a case that
certain of the theosophical doctrines are ill-formed or
based upon inaccurate information. Whenever that can be
shown to be true, I'd be glad to improve my knowledge of
the world. But in the absence of someone making a strong
case for contrary ideas, I see no reason to change my
views.

>This doesn't mean that I am foolish enough to believe that
>scientists in the mass will tomorrow -- or ever !! -- come
>around to HPB's position.

And now we come to the question of authority. I'd accord
HPB's writings with the authority of the Mysteries, although
I certainly recognize the possibility of human error in
her writings and the fact that much is lost in getting put
into words. Based upon that authority that I confer on her,
when someone indicates that modern science is in disagreement
with her on a certain point, I'd need a strong argument for
the scientific viewpoint before I'd consider it as right.
Modern science is subject to change, and the conflict could
be because science hasn't gotten to the truth yet, or because
there's a veil or blind in the theosophical doctrine that
I'll see beyond, with further study on the subject.

>Nevertheless, to dismiss the anthropogenesis of HPB (and lest
>we forget, her Teachers) as "nonsense" out of hand with no
>SPECIFIC references, and ignoring current paradigm shifts in
>progress, seems shallow and near-sighted.

The dismissal would seem extreme, for someone according HPB
with occult standing. But for someone that views HPB in a
lessor light, they might not feel it worth the bother to
answer and disprove various statements of hers. They might
dismiss her and everything she wrote, not giving her a
serious consideration, because they look upon her personally
and upon the theosophical philosophy with far less admiration
and appreciation than we do.

-- Eldon