Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00870)

Dear John,

I don't agree with your picture. You say
>miniscule percentage of the population that happens to want to study a
>particular and obscure set of books are "pilgrims", and that theosophy
>needs to *protect* itself from that huge majority that (gasp) may
>actually believe *other* books - or for that matter, may not read at all

That's not the distinction I'd make between tourists & pilgrims. My idea has
very little to do with what set of dusty or paper back books you read, or
maybe none at all, mine has more to do with a dilettante vs. a serious
seeker. I've known a number of people who came to our lodge meetings who
just played with the material we were focusing on, which was very diverse, &
a few who tried to find the deeper meanings in what we were studying. We
never even studied HPB, or Besant, or CWL. I remember doing Hodson, &
Krishnamurti, out of body experiences, sacred geometry & biofeedback. For
some of us, knowledge deepened, others just said "isn't that interesting"
and went on.

Liesel