Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00542)

Pedro,

Thanks for your comments below.

I will try to reply to some of your
statements soon.

Daniel

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "prmoliveira" <prmoliveira@y...> 
wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell" 
> <danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:
> 
> 
> > "Let us say that the two of us agreed to write such
> > an introduction."
> 
> 
> Oh, I see. But why me? You know English is not my native language. 
> Besides, which publishing company would seriously consider 
publishing 
> an introductory book on Theosophy containing selected quotes, for 
> example, from Besant and Leadbeater, which I would like to include? 
> Theosophical University Press, Point Loma Publications, Theosophy 
> Company? Not a chance. Quest Books, TPH? Maybe but not necessarily 
> so. Then there is the karma of the caste I belong to. Why would you 
> expose yourself and your established reputation as a published 
author 
> and admired student of Theosophy by co-authoring a book on 
Theosophy, 
> for Parabrahman's sake, with a priest!!! 
> 
> Incidentally, your post and its questions have created a bit of a 
> domestic problem for me. Today being Sunday, after I come back from 
> church I usually have to wrestle with full basket of ironing. It is 
> my post-service karma yoga and it has now been delayed in order to 
> answer your post!
> 
> 
> > Let us say that [under certain circumstances] the two of us 
[MIGHT] 
> > agree to write such an introduction to Theosophy.
> 
> 
> In this case, I would really need a watertight contract. In the 
> history of business relations between Brazil and the US, guess 
which 
> part has had most considerable advantages? I would, of course, 
agree 
> to use the alphabetical order on the cover, with your name coming 
> first. Also, I would very much like the Foreword written jointly by 
> Bart and Chuck, and the Afterword written by Steve Stubbs with his 
> comments (and notes) on every single concept in the book. Then, of 
> course, there is the question of the title. Here are some 
suggestions:
> 
> "Theosophy - A Negotiated Introductory View"
> 
> "Theosophical Gleanings: An Introduction to Theosophy by Authors 
with 
> Different Leanings"
> 
> "A Dualistic View of Theosophical Monism"
> 
> "Walking Where Devas Fear to Thread: Bridging the Theosophical 
Divide"
> 
> "Introduction to Theosophy: A Splintered View"
> 
> 
> > [In this hypothetical situation,] I write a draft chapter that 
> reads 
> > in part:
> > 
> > ====================================================
> > 
> > Our planet Earth forms part of a chain of septenary globes.
> > But the other six globes are not on the same plane of
> > objectivity as our physical earth or world. We cannot see these
> > other globes because they are outside our physical
> > means of perception.
> > 
> > ======================================================
> > 
> > 
> > Another draft chapter contains the following statement:
> > 
> > ==========================================================
> > 
> > According to Theosophy, when most people die, there is no 
conscious
> > existence for them in the Kamaloka (the psychic realm, the so-
called
> > astral world or plane). Most do not traverse the various planes of
> > the astral realm in consciousness. For the majority of persons who
> > die, they are not aware of either the physical world or the astral
> > world. They remain unconscious until they awaken in their 
respective
> > Devachanic states.
> > 
> > =========================================================
> > 
> > IF [in this hypothetical situation] I sent this material to you 
for 
> > your input and feedback as the co-author of the book, how would 
you 
> > respond to the above material?
> 
> 
> 1) I think it is irrelevant to include in an introductory book on 
> Theosophy a discussion of the planetary chains. It would only 
confuse 
> the newcomer to the subject. Also, if we value modern science's 
view 
> on the evolution of the cosmos, the teaching on planetary chains, 
> both in the SD and in subsequent works, does not seem to resonate 
> with it at all.
> 
> 2) I have no problem in accepting that there are degrees of 
> unconsciousness after death, as mentioned. But I would never 
> absolutise this point for the Perennial Philosophy, in its 
> universality, attests to the fact that in several traditions, like 
> the Bardo Todrol Chenmo (Tibetan Book of the Dead), the Egyptian 
Book 
> of the Dead, the Kabbalah, the Hermetic Tradition, the Vedas, the 
> Gnostic Gospels, the Christian Mystical tradition, the human 
> consciousness that survives the transition of death undergoes 
several 
> changes and transformations, with varying degrees of awareness. 
> 
> 
> > Would those quotes from your 18829 posting really have any 
> relevance 
> > in trying to state some of the teachings of Theosophy in this 
> > hypothetical book?? If so, how?
> 
> 
> I think they would, Daniel, in the sense of acting as benchmarks 
> towards an exposition of Theosophy that is free from dogmatism, 
that 
> encourages the newcomer to it to seek answers for himself or 
herself, 
> suggesting that perhaps the most important aspect of Theosophy is a 
> living realisation that its core principles are indeed universal 
> facts in Nature, thus avoiding encouraging a view of Theosophy "in 
> which a narrow and stereotyped creed would take the place of the 
> living and breathing spirit of Truth and an ever growing Knowledge."
> 
> 
> Pedro