Re: Individuals and the Movement
Apr 26, 2006 02:15 PM
Carlos points to a significant point. The SD was to have a Volume III
on the lives of Adepts. Such a volume would have been very instructive
as to what kinds of details HPB and the Masters felt were appropriate
when dealing with the lives of these great Spirits. Why was that volume
pulled? By all accounts it was ready for printing at the same time as
Vols I & II. Is it because it was necessary that we learn for ourselves
how to treat not only the lives of Adepts, but how to respectfully treat
the lives of all people?
Again, I don't deny there is value in understanding the life of HPB, but
again there is no version of that life that can ever become a creed for
theosophists. We are obligated to treat her life with respect and to
avoid demonstrating ingratitude towards her. Claims that she would be
okay with us repeating the slanders of the past are silly. During her
life this was not okay, the same principle that made it not okay then
makes it not okay now. Cranston's biography expressed both respect and
gratitude. However, other than this idealized life that Cranston
presents, HPB's life is not really up for debate by theosophists. That
is not to say that the idealized version is not pretty accurate, just
that barring further facts there is little more to be said. Cranston
does put forward arguments that can openly be debated, but the general
facts concerning HPB's life are what they are.
Morten has been trying to tie in the Jesuits to this debate and I think
he has a point. There is an article going around the internet
concerning the Jesuits:
The article describes the oath taken by certain inner members of the
order. This dovetails pretty closely with what HPB had to say about
this order. It also gives a pretty big clue as to how the jesuitical
mindset goes about sowing the seeds of dissension causing division among
groups and nations. Do people really believe that there is not a group
or groups alive today using this understanding for their own selfish
gains? It is understanding this mindset and how it goes about keeping
us apart that is the key to overcoming its power.
I am happy to debate the followers of Leadbeater and Besant on the
philosophies espoused by these thinkers as long as part of their
argument is not that they were Chelas. The philosophy put forward by
HPB does not hinge on whether she was a Chela or not. As long as we put
too much importance on the personal lives of these people, there will be
those using this to divide and weaken the influence of theosophy.
--- In email@example.com, "carlosaveline" <carlosaveline@...>
> Chuck, Friends,
> No doubt, Sylvia Cranston's book on HPB, which is a long biography,
has a great value, just as Ernest Pelletier's book on William Judge
(1,000 pp.) also has.
> And Tillett's book on Leadbeater, and Olcott's "Old Diary Leaves",
> I guess Bruce's point is that we should also be able to discuss the
philosophical aspects of the movement; its teaching, its message, its
wisdom, its future.
> Bruce is right in the sense that we have been discussing too much of
personalities and too litlle of contents.
> You are rightin the sense that understanding personality is an
important part of the business.
> By the way, HPB's intended third volume of the "Secret Doctrine" was
to pay a lot of attention to Lives of Adepts -- individual lives,
therefore. There is something of that material in the "Collected
Writings", volume XIV. But she estudies lives of people with a
philosophical approach. Keeping to gossips and personality clashes is
> Yet even worse than keeping stuck to gossips about theosophical
leaders, is to circulate wild and proved slanders about them, under the
pretext of "letting people to decide for themselves".
> Now, studying their lives and learning from their experiences is
> Regards, Carlos.
> Data:Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:57:43 EDT
> Assunto:Re: Theos-World MKR, Bruce, Chuck and the Movement
> > In a message dated 4/25/2006 7:50:10 PM Central Standard Time,
> > carlosaveline@... writes:
> > Some discussion is inevitable and even healthy, as Chuck says.
> > It is more than that, it is necessary. Theosophy did not spring from
> > void, nor did the Angel Gabriel look down on HPB and say, "Get to
> > Theosophy is not something set in stone, depending upon some holy
writ that is
> > unchanging and infallible. It is a process, a continuous
development. And it
> > is not a movement. The only movement we find in Theosophy usually
> > from the head or the heart but from another part of the anatomy.
> > Ideas have their roots in the experience of those who expound them.
> > the interminable wordiness of HPB, the wackiness of CWL, the
> > lunacy of Annie Besant, the bizarre imaginings of Katherine Tingley
etc. All have
> > contributed and all have their weaknesses as well as strengths,
> > as well as wisdom. But it is only studying the people behind the
> > we can judge and understand the ideas.
> > To ignore the personalities of Theosophy would reduce us to
> > bibliolators, worshipping the words with no understanding of what
> > Chuck the Heretic
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> > Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> > Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 25/04/2006 / Vers?o:
> > Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application