Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00545)

Pedro and all,

Form your point of view are any core teachings in theosophy?

If yes then what constitutes them to be such, what is the criteria to 
make this judgment?

The reason I ask is as you know many people join the society and 
thinking theosophy is `any thing and everything'then feel it
is there right to use it (the society) as a vehicle to promote any 
philosophy that they are attached too or want to promote in the TS.

This has been an ongoing issue with the society as you know.

I personally feel a sense of duty to present the teachings the 
Mahatma's as they gave them out, not because I believe them or
think they are infallible but because to deliberately change the 
teachings of an established tradition such as the Mahatma's belong 
to, is to me the height of not only arrogance but complete disrespect 
for that tradition.
It is in this context I ask is it ethical to change these teachings?

This does not mean that I don't try and study other different 
traditions & compare them with the Mahatma's.

I find theosophy reflected in movies, novels, and just everyday 
discussions with people, some of whom are just 
intuitively `theosophical' without ever reading a
theosophical book.

It would be arrogant and wrong on my part if I was to suggest that 
only studying HPB and the Mahatma letters can develop 
a `theosophical' mindset.

Still the "original" theosophical writings do offer some
differences 
in teachings from other teachings. 
(that dose not mean they are "true" or right, just different)

Would you Pedro for example say theosophy teaches that a human being 
can reincarnate into an animal form, but rather puts forward a 
teaching on metempsychosis?

If yes then is this not then a distinct teaching that makes it 
different from other teachings on the same issue?

I am trying to follow a rational here and see if it holds any 
validity, and work through issues without playing games or side 
tracking.



Perry