Theos-Talk Archives (May 1997 Message tl00114)

Dear Titus and all,

I agree completely with the observation that Theosophy is
sparse indeed in giving practical guidance to members, and
rests on a plane of abstractions that isn't very nurturing to
many people.  But this is a problem only if one tries to make a
complete diet of Theosophy, when it is nutritionally inadequate
in itself.  One needs to supplement it with commitments
elsewhere to more practical paths.  HPB and Olcott chose
Buddhism; later Adyar leaders chose Liberal Catholicism; I
choose the very pragmatic Cayce material.

Some Theosophists (more in the Judge branch of the movement and
among ES members) regard Theosophy alone as a completely
fulfilling source of spiritual nourishment.  But the majority
don't, in my observation, combining it with other paths that
are less topheavy with intellectualism.

While the sparseness of the daily-useful aspects of Theosophy
is not a problem for the individual members, who can get those
needs met elsewhere, it *is* IMO a real problem for the organizations,
which tend to an ivory-tower attitude.  One finds it easier to
care about and get involved in a group that is doing practical
good works than a group that is entirely theoretical in focus.

Cheers,
Paul