Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00038)

At 12:27 PM 5/1/96 -0400, you wrote:
>This hasn't come back in about a day, so I'm resending it.
>
>-- Eldon
> Eldon:
this is the one I saved to disk, but WHERE on the disk appears to be one of
the "greater mysteries".
>----
>

>>I am explicitly referring to th ULT which I consider to be the
>>most "Hasidic" of Theosophical groups in the exclusivity.
>
>They tend to stick to the strictest intellectual standards of study
>and research of the theosophical literature. Because of this, their
>members tend to be the most knowledgable of the three theosophical
>groups. On the other hand, they therefore run the greatest risk of
>being *only intellectual*.

They run a greater rsik than that. For they have so encysted themselves in
one or two authors and their works, that the rest of the world and many
really important ideas and concepts are lost to them.

This is a danger, but I know many ULT
>members that I would personally consider as good people, awake and
>alive to the spiritual, and eager to help the world. One such member
>was a co-member of the Point Loma Publications Board, and worked with
>me for a number of years to help that organization do as much good as
>it could. And in places like Santa Barbara, there are many active
>members of college age, not just old folks, or middle-aged, like
Adyar T.S. members and many on theos-l.

Eldon, I know many fundamentalist Christians (John's sister for one) who are
truly wonderful people, "alive to the spiritual and eager to help the world"
but their doctrines are self-limiting and they would, with the best of
intentions, inflict those limitations on everyone.
>
>>On both this list, and in Theosophy International, people from these
>>groups are not in a position to enforce ther exclusivity.
>
>True. Not any more than any other view can dominate the list. There
>are perhaps half-a-dozen distinct views of Theosophy and the world
>on theos-l, and these views sometimes directly contradict one another.
>Pity the poor beginner to Theosophy, wanting to learn about it for
>the first time!

Well then perhaps we should (somehow) post a warning that this list is
distinctly not for beginners, except for those who enjoy intellectual
challenges.
>
>>They have every right to be as exclusive as they please within their
>>own paradigm but they have no right to impose their ideas on others.
>
>Yes. Some of us may quote HPB or "The Mahatma Letters" and use that
>as our proof to others that accept Theosophy the way that we do. Others
>would ignore that proof as unconvincing, not accepting Theosophy to be
>that way. Some would talk of spirits and of their out of the body
>experiences, and use that as proof to others that accept the world the
>way that they do. And some people would ignore that proof as unconvincing
>to them.

Ihave two things to say here. Relying on Quotations as one's proof is what I
call hypothetical belief and is really only a "desre to believe". As to
"advetures in spirit", your position on this is well known, and of course,
without experience, it is totally "unconvincing" as you put it. But,
believe, me Eldon, if we ever meet, and if you should choose to consent to
it, I will make it expereintial for you, and then you'll have to re-think.
>
>
>
>I grant that you are a sincere person, but think that at times you
>could pick the words you express yourself in with greater care. You
>can get your ideas across better if you don't start off by getting
>people mad at what you say. If you want to bring someone to another
>way of thinking, it's much better to paint your ideas in beautiful
>colors and dazzle someone with their beauty. That's much better an
>approach than to simply tell people how sorry a state that they're
>in and how their ideas are totally worthless. It's much more effective
>to seduce with beauty than it is to shame and cower people with your
>wrath!

Eldon: I think I'll leave the "beauty" to my art, which expresses theosophy
in its own way, and stick to clarity of thought in my speech (both written
and spoken)..this all reminds me of poor old Hrry Truman who said: "Give me
hell? I don't give hell, I just tell them the truth and it feels like
hell!". I don't think that (with one possible exception) I have ever told
anyone on this borad that thy're in a sorry state, or that their ideas are
totally worthless. What I have done is state my ideas and compare them with
theirs. If the result is that they feel I've said that, then perhaps they'd
best look at their ideas.
>
>You can give a historic context to your views. I like to think of
>my ideas as tapping into a *living tradition* that is rooted in
>Mahat or the universal mind. That is, I picture my best thinking
>as soaring far above what I could come up with in my ordinary
>thinking, a visit to greater realms of thought that I'm enabled
>to do because of my thought life being rooted in the theosophical
>doctrines. I don't associate my viewpoint or stance as based upon
>a particular organization or time period, but rather upon an inner,
>living process that I nurture within.
>
>>My "cut-off" is particularly intense in 1891 when HPB died. From then
>>on I think there has been nothing but variance and revisionism. It
>>may be rigid, it may even be limited, but it's hardly heretical.
>
>Okay. You're happy with the particular presentation of Theosophy
>as it stood up to that time. For me, the high point would have been
>the years when Purucker was actively teaching and writing, since I
>feel I've received the greatest spiritual benefit from him, although
>he doesn't have the quantity of materials or vastness of depth that
>can be found in HPB's works.
>
>>It may interest you to know that while I totally reject CWL, I don't
>>reject G de P at all, while i don't agree with everything he says, I
>>own, and have read a great many of his books.
>
>Here is one point where you agree with Bee. She also likes de Purucker,
>as does Jerry Schueler and a number of others on the list. I find
>Purucker as complimenting HPB in a way that is useful to me. Others
>may not, and may be satisfied with the works of other writers and
>students after HPB's time.
>
>>I do reject the ULT as I find their actions and attitude too
>>fundamentalist for me. But that does not mean I reject WQJ, his books
>>are some of the best written on later Theosophy. I've even got two
>>copies of Robert Crosbie's book and he makes a lot of sense even if
>>those who followed him don't.
>

>>To make what I'm saying totally unequivocal, I will say that I
>>believe that everything HPB wrote about attitude and goals is valid,
>>about the rest I am totally uncomfortable with some of it, and more
>>than a little unsure about much of it. That is all.
>
>As to the literal, dead-letter of the texts, I also feel that something
>is lacking. But then I feel I've had the experience of "going beyond
>the words" and finding something that really makes sense and is very
>special. The words were true, it was just that there are deeper meanings
>to them. And with some doctrines I've noticed several layers of meaning,
>each one building upon the last, all of them true but each newer one
>a bit *more true* than the last.

That Eldon is what one is supposed to garner from the teachings of
theosophy, but I submit to far too many people it's all "dead letter theosophy".
>
>>I also, as I'm sure you know, think that each person must develop his
>>or her own version of any existential philosophy, relying on trust or
>>faith in the perceptions of others is, I believe, a very dangerous
>>"rubber crutch". likely to fail the person in extremity.
>
>I would agree that each person has to take on the challenge by
>themselves. Wisdom is self-acquired, it is not a gift. The words
>and initial ideas in the books are only the starting point, a
>springboard off of which we can dive to realize truly great insights!
>They are not the one-and-only-way to Truth, but I've found them to work
>wonders in their application in my life, and feel obligated to work on
>sharing what I feel I've been blessed to see and understand.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>-- Eldon

Equally best wishes

alexis
>
>
>