Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00656)

In my very first message, I mentioned that in my view there was a very broad
chasm that has developed between those of us (admittedly a minority) who
view theosophy as a process, and those who see Theosophy as based on a "Core
Doctrine" which brings it very close to a religion.
Now as we know this is a development very much feared by HPB who said that
"If theosophy takes a wrong turn and becomes a religion, it is doomed."

Today there is a message on this list from Christopher Allen who is
lamenting a lack of "Core Doctrines" being taught in the vicinity of the
American Headquarters.The chasm is clearly there, and so I thought I would
provide a definition of "theosophy as process" for those who have perhaps
never before thought of it that way.

What was it that made those of us who view theosophy as a process
theosophists? It was four things. The motto of the society: "There is no
Religion Higher than Truth" (SATYAT-NASTI-PARO-DHARMA) and The Three
Objects". I'll assume everyone knows what those are and therefore not use up
space re-typing them.

Now to us, it seems that in the process of utilizing the fullest efforts at
the three objects one arrives eventually at a synthesis of all three objects
which is, at least, an approximation of "truth." This is particularly valid
if one accepts that "reality" is the only true definition of "truth".

Theosophy, therefore is a process of self-transformation, through personal
action. Now as the three objects are what they are, and as the first of the
objects essentially entails helping to bring about a condition of planetary
amity and planetary equality and those conditions require absolute liberty,
it means and requires far more than sitting around and meditating or reading
theosophical books. It absolutely requires action out in the world to bring
about the desired conditions. the thing I call "theosophy as process"
creates a thing I call "theosophists as transactional activists". Yelena
Blavatskaya was a radical revolutionary and an iconoclast, and so too is the
activist theosophist.

One might interpret the second object as an injunction to "ivory tower
intellectuality". But that's not how I see it,  the process is comparative
and synthesizing. It's an activist approach to the study and comparisons of
religions, philosophies, and all the sciences in an inter and intra
disciplinary manner. Each discipline compared with others like it and then
cross-disciplinary comparison.

And lastly, and most important of all if the others are to be realized: an
attempt to become aware of the greater reality outside of physical reality
by way of a personal quest of paranormality.

All of this is active, all of this is radical, all of this is revolutionary.
I view myself as a philosophical and theological anarchist, I view Yelena
Blavatskaya as a philosophical and theological anarchist too.

If Theosophy (note the big "T") devolves into a study group devoted entirely
to the reading and re-reading of a few old books, which may or may not be in
any way valid in our temporal context, and devotes itself to the religious
view of those books and the iconization of their authors, then as HPB
predicted, her movement is dead.

Alexis dolgorukii