Theos-Talk Archives (November 1996 Message tl00347)

In message <199611192045.PAA17518@ultra1.dreamscape.com>, "liesel f.
deutsch" <liesel@dreamscape.com> writes
>>>Nasty mode on:
>>>     Was the convention before or after Jiddu started bopping his best
>>>friend's wife?
>>>Nasty mode off.
>
>GOOD GOD, ANOTHER ONE!
>
>For a spiritual group, methinks we have an inordinate amount of mud slingers.
>How's that for raising people's consciousness?
>
>Liesel
>
While I sympathise with Liesel's sentiment here, I feel that it is
important to raise (again, I know) the question that the value we place
upon the work of those who seek or have sought to lead or guide us can
sometimes be affected by the extent to which they are seen to practice
what they preach.  I know nothing of this story, but clearly the
implication is that JK may have slipped from his own standards at some
point.

So, no doubt, do we all - I know I have - and clearly due allowance
should be made for human frailties and weaknesses.  Having said that, if
I find that a revered teacher has lied to me (say) then how can I trust
other things the teacher has told me?

The standard teaching on this is simple: don't do it at all; work to
verify what you are taught for yourself, and if you obtain a different
result, then say so.

Theosophy, for me, is not about following a leader, or adopting a
teaching as if it were a creed or a religion - a view shared, I am sure,
by HPB - but an attempt to guide us towards a greater understanding or
reality on the basis that there is no religion higher than truth.

Those who went before us were fallible, as we are fallible.  They were
not gods any more than we are.  Sadly, all too many people in the
history of the theosophical movement have treated them as if they were,
if not gods, then saints.  Because of this, when their shortcomings are
brought to light, it can come as something of a shock.

When faced from time to time - as has often been the case since I signed
up for theos-l - with a most extraordinary kind of "Theosophical
Fundamentalism" then the historical facts behind the life and work of
those who have gone before us becomes a relevant issue.

The important thing, IMO, after having viewed the evidence and the
claims and the teachings in their various forms, is the validity or
otherwise of the teaching itself.

As a brief example, we can consider whether or not an out of the body
experience is what it is purported to be by those who claim that such a
thing is possible.  If we *really* want to *know* then we will need to
learn how to have one ourselves. Two or three would be even better.

There ain't no short cuts nor any quick fixes in this work.

Must be about 20 cents worth there ...

With goodwill to all,

Alan :-)
---------
THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL: Ancient Wisdom for a New Age:
http://www.nellie2.demon.co.uk/
E-mail: TINT@nellie2.demon.co.uk