Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00652)

> 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?

I will take a liberty and assume you also mean non-experiential.

I can only speak from the perspective of people I know who are sympathetic to
theosophy, but not wanting to become affiliated with theosophical
groups. Their main complaint is that theosophy is too cerebral. It fails to
feed the devotional side - no rituals, no spiritual practices. While giving
some truths, no attempt is made to translate truths into meaning - emotional
meaning as well as intellectual meaning. Without this translation it is
difficult to know what to do practically with theosophical knowledge. It is
too concentrated.

When truths are not put into action of some sort, inner or outer (and I do not
mean mental gymnastics), they become dead.