Re: Theos-World Leadbeater & Pseudo-Theosophy addendum
Mar 06, 2007 06:45 PM
You wrote :
"If you wish to point to one or another individual and make them
wrong or to blame for what you
perceive is wrong, I submit that you are moving in the direction that
eventually produced the Inquisition in the Christian church."
I would ask you then how can someone interested in taking an
objective approach to theosophical history and teachings proceed?
It's my understanding that what the church tried to do during the
inquisition was to stifle any descent within the ranks and society at
That meant saying nothing critical about the church, its teachings or
the Pope's and Bishops pronouncements in other words they wanted
submission, conformity and obedience.
This is not so much the case now in academic circles within the
Church where there is a high level of academic standards and very
Scholarly criticism is necessary both for teachings and history if an
institution is to have any real credibility; this by default means
that critique is a necessary part of that process.
Diversity does not mean conformity it means allowing very different
and diverse opinions and points of view to be tolerated not
necessarily believed or liked but rather respecting the right for
each individual to have their own unique point of view without any
coercion or a feeling of the need to conform in order to avoid being
I hope I haven't misunderstood your point !
If I have perhaps you can clarify.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "adelasie" <adelasie@...> wrote:
> Altruism means putting the welfare of others above your own
> welfare and benefit. Karma is the law of balance, adjusting
> constantly the imbalances caused by humanity choosing to ignore the
> law of nature that determines everything. If you wish to point to
> or another individual and make them wrong or to blame for what you
> perceive is wrong, I submit that you are moving in the direction
> eventually produced the Inquisition in the Christian church. This
> not what theosophy is about. Quite the opposite. We need not
> ourselves with the iniquities of others. We have quite enough
> learning to control our own iniquitous behavior. HPB was a high
> adept, under the direct guidance of the Masters. Comparing our
> behavior to hers, or justifying ours by saying that this is what
> did, shows a lack of understanding of the message she was trying to
> get across. What would she say about one of her students saying
> it's ok to trash one of the early theosophists because that is what
> HPB would have done? Ridiculous. Theosophical history is full of
> turning the other cheek in her personal life. She had work to do
> we may as well try to follow what she taught. It would save a lot
> time and energy.
> On 6 Mar 2007 at 14:57, Cass Silva wrote:
> > Good point Adelasie, and one which I believe should have been
directed at Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater.
> > Altruism is selfless concern for the welfare of others.
> > Isn't Karma itself living life in ignorance, repeating or
repairing past judgements?
> > HPB had no concern for the welfare of the Roman Catholic Papacy
and others she considered to be a blight on human development.
> > I believe that before we can be altruistic to others we need to
understand what true altruism is. Besant created far more karma for
the theosophical society by introducing an altruistic approach to
> > Cass
> > adelasie <adelasie@...> wrote:
> > Where I live we say "Creeds disappear, Hearts remain."
This or that
> > creed is only the limited attempt to materialize the eternally
> > immaterial, which always results in some sort of distortion. But
> > would seem that karma decrees that humanity continue to make
> > out of eternal truth until we learn that spirituality cannot be
> > reduced to cant. Or, until we realize that our work in the world
> > altruism, rather than self-aggrandizement.
> > Adelasie
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application