Jul 01, 1997 03:03 PM
by JOSEPH PRICE
Gail and Dara:
. There needs to be a genuine ability to forget old antipathies such
as the Leadbeater/Besant criticisms; the Krishnamurti dissensions; the
Judge/Besant hiatus; the notion that Blavatsky was the only 'giver of
wisdom'--and so on.
There are some assumptions
implicit in it, though, assumptions that are not always aggreed to by
everyone joining our theosophical groups.
Some of the assumptions are:
* There are Mahatmas. They are genuinely more evolved than the typical
seeker or person we might run across in our everyday lives.
* They have an occult hierarchy, with a lineage of teachings or knowledge
passed down from one generation of Adepts to the next.
* Blavatsky was a bona fide representative of them, and accurately
presented some of their knowledge.
* The material presented by Blavatsky was as least in part literally true.
It did not consist completely of blinds, metaphor, and veils.
* The materials presented were dealing with the timeless philosophy, and
not with now out-of-date references to the science of the 1800's.
* There is something special or precious about the doctrines, something
that makes it a public service for us to learn and share it with others.
I am not going to make personal attacks on anyone living or dead anymore,
except maybe a joke or two. I am not trying to attack Theosophical
fundamentalists or new age let's tolerate everyone's opinion whether it makes
sense or not. But I do think a new period of inclusiveness, a kind of
rainbow coalition of theosophical organizations is in order. Has anyone
thought of a Parliment of Theosohpical Groups, now that will curl your hair or
straighten things out? I am not sure which, but I really can't believe that
we can include the general public into the ANCIENT WISDOM if we INSIST that
Blavatsky had a corner on the market!
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application