Theos-Talk Archives (March 1998 Message tl00059)

Mar 24th 1998			Dallas at dalval@nwc.net

Dear Bart:		On:  'belief' and 'fact.'

When I see the two words "belief" and "fact" I get very interested in
definition, as to me, "belief" is either blind (as 'credo' or
'tenets' in some dogmatic religion, or as the acceptance of a
scientific hypothesis as TRUE without being able to verify either of
those oneself) or,
it is "enlightened," because we have proved to ourselves that such or
such is accurate, repetitive, and therefore reliable (insofar as any
'relative truth' can be a 'fact.').

I define 'fact, or facts' as above -- something that anyone at any
time and in any place can verify as accurate and reliable.  [  Mme.
Blavatsky wrote on this subject a remarkable article WHAT IS TRUTH ?
which she published in LUCIFER, Vol. I, p. 425  -- Feb. 1888  --  ULT
edition of HPB Articles, vol. I, p. 1 ]

Either way, if you think that members of a group subscribe either in
speech or writing to certain 'beliefs,' they may do so in public, or
by speech.  But what they do independently, in private, or
spontaneously, may be at variance with those beliefs publicly
expressed.

No matter that the organization may be, the individuals who make it
up do not abrogate their individual responsibility for decisions from
moment to moment when they feel, think or act.
Its the same thing for our "theosophical bodies" and their
membership.  Therefore the "independent loyalty" to theosophy, once
one has assured themselves of its veracity ought to be stressed, and
non 'membership/ in any particular body.

I say this because to me it is a fact, and the veneer of 'belonging'
is only a veneer which is either reinforced or abraded every time on
has contact with others or takes a responsible position.  But I think
you know this as well as I do, and perhaps I am overstepping the
bounds of acquaintance in mentioning all this.

If so, excuse me.		Dallas