Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00106)

At 03:10 AM 6/2/96 -0400, you wrote:
>I have begun reading "Isis Unveiled," finding it a wonderful and fascinating
>read, although I have to have a dictionary lying next to me during these
>reading sessions.  I think this monograph will require many repeat readings
>in order to better understand it.  "The Secret Doctrine" is of course next -
>although it too looks daunting.

Alexis comments: An important thing to remember Kym, while you use your
dictionary, is that HPB was only just familiarizing herself with English
when she wrote "Isis". English wasn't her second language but far more
likely her seventh or eighth. If I might suggest something though, it
probably wouldn't be too good an idea to go directly from "Isis" to the
"Secret Doctrine", they are very different books and both of them are
difficult though in entirely different ways. The possible problem is "burn
out". Too much at once, can burn the most dedicated scholar out. It might be
a good idea to read some books about Theosophy from all sorts of viewpoints,
and then go back to the "hard stuff".
>
>Am I understanding "correctly" when Ms. Blavatsky states that incarnation
>into the physical more than once is an exception, rather than the rule?
>That surprised me; I have read a bit about theosophy but hadn't come across
>that viewpoint.  I had read that Theosophy espouses to long periods (over
>1000 years) between incarnations, but that would allow for many more
>incarnations than one or two.  Yet, also, the long period of rest between
>incarnations seems to go against Eastern philosophy which accepts even
>immediate re-incarnations.

Alexis comments: The second object of the theosophical movement is the
comparative study of religions, philosophies, and sciences. This is where
that object comes into play. One should make a study of what all the points
of view on the subject of incarnation and reincarnation are, and compare
them for points of contact.
>
>Is there a publication or source which could help clarify or suggest a
>consensus to these philosophies?  Perhaps I am premature in my confusion -
>will this be addressed in "The Secret Doctrine?"

Alexis comments: I don't think there is any one source available to answer
your questions in any kind of authoritative manner. But it's the study of
all of the various sources that is the most productive of the growth of
understanding. No one source is ever the "absolute truth", not Blavatsky,
not anyone, and she would have been the first to tell you this.
>
>Thank You,
>
>Kym
>
Best wishes in your adventure.

alexis dolgorukii
>