Theos-Talk Archives (November 1998 Message tl00087)

from

>Nov 13th
>Dallas Offers:
 =

>"The Astral body is the desire body:  -- stated by AB/CWL
>But this is not the original teaching of HPB.
  (clip)

>The reason I respect and use what HPB taught is that it is
>fundamental to the whole structure of psychology and history that
>THEOSOPHY represents, as I see it, myself.  In some measure it is
>like saying:  "Don't bother with Euclid, geometry has progressed
>far further than his basic work."  Then, what DO WE BASE
>OURSELVES ON ?

That's not a bad analogy.

A mathematician might well answer, "We can base our geometry upon Euclid,=

but we certainly know things now that he did not, then.  Non-Euclidian
geometry, for example.  And if we limit our understanding of mathematics =
to
only the laws of Euclid, we forego a part of Reality that can be known an=
d
understood."  =

In a later comment, =

>Is it our intention to introduce further changes because we
>presume to think we understand what She and They meant ?  =

>At best we can, as student-teachers, point to the sources from
>which we have learned.
>Have the Masters commissioned us to improve on what they wrote ?

Well, yeah, they have.  =

Modern esotericists owe a debt to Mdm. Blavatsky that can never be repaid=
. =

But with all due respect to the grande dame of modern theosophy, I think
she'd be apalled at the idea that theo-sophia equated to HPB-sophia (or t=
o
see her pronoun capitalized).  =

No organic form can adequately express the indwelling life at this stage =
in
evolution.  So how could we think that the expositions of 100+ years ago
are "perfect"?  Rather, all things grow -- or they crystalize, and the fo=
rm
shatters so that the life may have expression in a more-evolved,
more-appropriate form.  =

Jim