Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00646)

----------
> From: K. Paul Johnson <pjohnson@leo.vsla.edu>
> 
> What I don't understand and would like to throw out for
> discussion is how Theosophy has become so stale and dry as a
> movement, so dominated by judgment and lacking in perception.
> I cannot think of a really fresh outlook or stirring new
> perception that has emerged in Theosophical literature in
> decades.  And yet the movement began with a person who was much
> more an intuitive than a thinking type.  Somewhere along the
> line, maybe in the wake of Krishnamurti's defection, the
> intuitive side seems to have shriveled up and died.  What
> happened?

Perhaps it was a delliberate move NOT to stir the waters, because that
would have put the movement in the possible danger of looking
too avant-garde.  And it was deemed better to look conservative by
raking over the coals of the past rather than stirring up any new
flames.  Being conservative and historical looked dignified, rather the
possibility of looking foolish if the innovative failed.  Maybe when K left TS, there was
so much pain and discreditation of what so many had put their hopes
on, no one wanted to take the chance of exploring anything new.

Not having that much knowledge about TS history I wonder what the
public's reaction was to K's resignation and how TS was viewed from
their angle.  Maybe it cut a wound so deep that no one want to go in
that direction, for fear it will happen again.

-AEB