Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01202)

Alexis comments: But I do think that the differences between the
"experientialist-revisionists" and the "Literalist-traditionalists" is
probably unbridgeable. I, for instance, believe their is much of inestimable
value in the original programme of the theosophical movement circa
1875-1878-9, as it was expressed in the Motto of the society, and it's three
objects, and primarily in "Isis Unveiled". Like Rudolf Steiner and many
others, I am far less enthusiastic regarding the Mahayana Buddhist
orientation taken by the Society after its removal to India.
I am totally appalled by what is now being presented as "Core Theosophical
doctrine".
That is why I see the abyss as unbridgeable, when I mention that I do not
accept most of the Secret Doctrine as valid, it is just too much of an
assault on the sensibilities of the "Literalist-traditionalist" and they
regard my entire position as Anti-Theosophy, which in my eyes it isn't but
in their eyes it is.



M(artin)> While I do like Mahayana Buddhism, which BTW is being popularized
and rephrased nowadays, I *do* see a need for a new direction for theosophy
today. It may be important for all of us to realize that H.P. Blavatsky
herself foresaw that the people of today would develop psychic abilities
and she hoped that theosophy would be able to guide these people.
Now, obviously, in order to guide people with budding psychic abilities
one has to understand what's it all about and have at least some experience
in this realm oneself, isn't it? Theosophical teachings provide a little bit
of a framework for this (including some letters by W.Q. Judge, who seems
to have had some experience in this realm..), but it is not adequate enough
for this era. What is needed is a concerted effort by more or less
experienced people on this area who can act as a 'sounding board' for
the many confused people today.

To dismiss this need would not only be  close-minded or shortsighted, but
also show a lack of understanding of what's meant by the third objective.
This is my sincere conviction. To label such a view as 'theosophy bashing'
is either empty rethoric or naivety. There *is* a need to be fulfilled.


Alexis> As my Grandmother used to say: "Wie Kommt der Katz uber
        die wasser?"

M> On a boat?


Alexis: I couldn't have described my intentions for Alt.Theosophy better, or
more clearly. That's exactly what I dream of it being, no dogma, just
personal experience and 21st century ideas and language. Please come in and
help us in this endeavor.

M> Thanks. I will try my best and at least drop in at regular intervals.
   See also my reply to Liesel and Doss.


A(lexis)> Please ask Alan Bain for a copy of my monograph "RUMINATIONS ON THE
SUBJECT OF THEOSOPHY" This deals with the values of basic theosophy.


M>Well, Alan, could you sent me a copy? This is snail-mail, I suppose?


A>You may know that I am a very active Shaman and Healer, and have been
active in the
alternative religious community for some twenty years now. What I've been
trying to do all that while is introduce theosophy into those
movements

M> Now, THAT would be interesting to hear about. Please tell something
   of your experiences with the alternative religious community and how
   you tried to introduce theosophy there


A>That's why I am so glad about Alt.Theosophy and probably why I get
into so much "trouble" on this list.

M> You also find yourself getting support from a fair amount of subscribers..

A>But I do think it's necessary to
articulate a 21st century view in this 19th century venue.


M> Agreed.