Comment

Comment by Susan Thomas on June 26, 2009 at 8:58pm

Mikhayl, the question about why we seek the truth has always been a thorn for me. I think i have shared with you before that I don't have the burden of a questioning or seeking nature. I would love for someone to really find the reason some people seek the truth.

Comment by Martin Euser on June 23, 2009 at 2:36am

@Mikhayl Von Riebon

You are confusing Leon's posting with mine.

'i take "the light of true reason" to be a purely subjective experience, and therefore lacking in any outward proof'

That's why one needs the brain-mind to formulate the objective counterpart to the "subjective" experience.
Our best scientists work like that. Science progresses through the interplay of the "subjective insight" with objective means.

As to theosophy: that provides starting points, not as dogmas, but as principles to work with and hone.

Comment by Mikhayl Von Riebon on June 23, 2009 at 12:05am

"The point is always that most Western philosophers don't understand a thing about Buddhi, the light of true Reason. So, they continuously err in their judgments. Plato called that level of thinking doxa. (opinion, etc.) " thank you for your comments leon, but i would hardly agree with this. firstly i take "the light of true reason" to be a purely subjective experience, and therefore lacking in any outward proof. and thats the point for me really. pure perception is beyond all discriminating qualities, and therefore detached from making any real difference in the world except for the being who attains it. so many 'enlightened beings' have come before and we cannot really say whether they have made a shred of difference or not. what is for certain is that we still suffer and we still play around with the same old questions and politics, bickering amongst ourselves. and so what does theosophy set out to do? to end man's suffering? to enlighten him? none of these things are possible save for that man's own efforts. perhaps it is a society providing the space for man to discover and rediscover his own 'truths', free from persecution. now this is something that we can provide. theosophy is not to give answers but to promote men to find their own, but i notice this becomes hindered when we have members that choose to promote blavatsky or leadbeater, not just as starting points, but as corrective tools. that if one's views dont match the views of the founders, then their views must be wrong. for me that is the fundamental difference here.

Comment by Charles Cosimano on June 22, 2009 at 11:37pm

Richard, it was your article so many years ago that got me into the TS in the first place. Talk about events going full circle!

Comment by Richard Ihle on June 22, 2009 at 10:28pm

I was prompted to join this group because of your comments, Charles. Nice job. Incidentally, I put the following "epistemological gearshift" on all my Theosophically related emails and encourage everyone interested in testable, ground-breaking THEOSOPICAL PSYCHOLOGY rather than shaky, who-really-has-seen-a-Lemurian? Theosophical anthropology do the same:

Theosophy: "Intuitive knowledge or wisdom resulting from direct experience of one's Transcendent Nature."
Microcosmic Theosophy: "Practical application of intuitive knowledge or wisdom at the human level, especially psychological insights and tools for the transformation of ordinary life into extraordinary life."

Godward,

R.

Comment by Martin Euser on June 22, 2009 at 7:32pm

@Mikhayl
"To continue the trail of thought, and some of the questions already previously asked on the site... why have a TS at all? if we are pursuing truth, then why?"

The traditional true-false dichotomy in logic seems a bit outdated to me. There are also multivalent logics, fuzzy logic, etc. I would rather say pursue understanding or insight into the essence of things. This is not a thing of the brain-mind but of intuition, or buddhi.

"do we seek 'truth' for power? security? pleasure? perhaps there is some 'higher' purpose or drive that pushes us towards the idea of truth. what is this drive?"

Evolution of the spirit, I'd say.

" what authority do we have to determine what is truth in the first place?"

No outer authority, but inner authority: the clear awareness of buddhic perception.
Once you experience clear consciousness, you know it is from within and you know that it is as it is.
You know the essence of a situation because your psyche has become one with it.
Not something that occurs daily..


" do we feel that there are core truths that all men should abide by in order to live happily?
Noone lives happily all the time - this is impossible in real life. The pairs of opposites always work, one can learn to be not overwhelmed by them. Core truths? I think so, as "laws" or patterns manifesting through the divine worlds. The seven "jewels" of wisdom can certainly be considered core truths as far as we understand these.
It is not the end of wisdom, of course. Always more to discover.


" how do we define or identify what these core truths are?"
See above reply.

"(coincidentally) looking into Humanism vs post structuralism, i seem to notice that the Grand narratives that the TS was setup on in the first place are now under scrutiny. our purpose is no longer felt as valid, and without that we have no reason to continue on. any one else have any comments?"

Post-modernism is already on its return, I believe. It will destroy itself. Extreme relativism such as "all is but relative", means that such "philosophies" as post-modernism are but relative too. It negates itself. Philosophers are beginning to understand this slowly, I believe.

The point is always that most Western philosophers don't understand a thing about Buddhi, the light of true Reason. So, they continuously err in their judgments. Plato called that level of thinking doxa. (opinion, etc.)

Comment by Mikhayl Von Riebon on June 22, 2009 at 12:01am

To continue the trail of thought, and some of the questions already previously asked on the site... why have a TS at all? if we are pursuing truth, then why? do we seek 'truth' for power? security? pleasure? perhaps there is some 'higher' purpose or drive that pushes us towards the idea of truth. what is this drive? what authority do we have to determine what is truth in the first place? do we feel that there are core truths that all men should abide by in order to live happily? how do we define or identify what these core truths are? (coincidentally) looking into Humanism vs post structuralism, i seem to notice that the Grand narratives that the TS was setup on in the first place are now under scrutiny. our purpose is no longer felt as valid, and without that we have no reason to continue on. any one else have any comments?

Comment by Susan Thomas on June 21, 2009 at 4:32pm

It is a very interesting concept "to have done once and for all with the notion of leaders." As children, many people realize that you say one thing to the parent or guardian of the day, whilst they have no idea what is really going on in the child's mind. I guess that is how I "have done once and for all..." No society or government will ever take the thoughts that are in my heart and mind and twist them into their own reality without my consent. Thus theosophy and the teachings of Blavatsky are in my heart, with my own warped views of course. No "teacher" in the theosophical movement has ever struck me as having a better handle on applying theosophy in my daily life. At one conference in Krotona, we were all assigned to create some sort of theosophical project embodying something wholistic. Amazingly enough, several groups tried make their projects stand on simply study and meditation, without regard to service. Even the conference leaders were a little mystified when I pointed that out after the presentations. We were supposed to be at our theosophical peak, using "Study, Meditation and Service," as models for group leaders. Of the twenty or so of us that were there for the week being "trained" as leaders, only one has emerged as an international presence. And we were the cream of the crop, so to speak. (In all fairness, though, I believe about 5 were recruited for the ES.)
In short, there is no reason to formally join the TS, because you will not find a teacher there, who can get you started on the path of yoga. The minute you have a question about any experience that comes up when you start following the teachings, everyone just looks at you and says, "I don't know."
I think a more poignant question might be, "Why would we want them to join if their experience will be like ours?"

Comment by Charles Cosimano on June 21, 2009 at 1:09pm

If what I have recently seen is any indication it is what is unique about the TS that makes people NOT want to join. I think we really need to have done once and for all with the notion of leaders.

Moderator Comment by M K Ramadoss on June 21, 2009 at 12:53pm

In ML to APS, it was clearly stated that unless you live the right life, you are not going to have an understanding of Truth, since it cannot be written down like a book on grammer. Besant, in her last public lecture emphasized the need to live theosophy in our daily lives.
--
In the minds of many members, the level of trust they have in their leaders is very low, not unlike how the public feels about the politicians. This is simply the result of the actions or non actions in the recent days.
--
Unless bold actions relating to critical current matters, which may bring about strong reaction from the public, are resorted to by the leaders, TS will be viewed by the public just as another cult with its own beliefs and dogmas, and thus do not attract the attention of open minded public, especially, younger generation.
--
So the simple question would be, what is so unique about TS that an average public would want to join.
-
MKRamadoss

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page