similarsites.com

Hi everybody!

I came across an interesting website that searches for similar-sounding URL's. I typed in theosophy-forum.com and I found a couple of other Theosophical sites.

http://www.similarsites.com/site/theosophy-forum.com

It would seem there are quite a few theosophists out there (out here?) who want to talk about it. How come theosophy does not enjoy a higher profile? Perhaps we like talking to each other and we are reluctant to talk to non-theosophists. Pity.

Everything is relative. When I googled "Madame Blavatsky" I was quite impressed to see 126,000 hits, but when I googled "Charles Darwin" I got 5.4 million hits. HPB put forward a complete explanation of physical and spiritual evolution; Darwin expounded an incomplete theory of physical evolution, with big holes (or missing links). We modern theosophists might be good at talking to each other, but we haven't done justice to HPB.

Harvey,

Darwin did two things. First, he brought in the general idea of evolution (a revolutionary idea at that time). Second, and just as important if not more important, he challenged the church's authority and succeeded, something that had never really been done before (except for the Catholic-Protestant split). Sure, Copernicus and Da Vinci also challenged the church's authority, but if I remember correctly, both of them died in prison, basically as prisoners of the church. Darwin was part of the huge push that finally broke the back of the church's power. As recently as Darwin's time, the church still had the power to economically destroy members who strayed from the flock, something that many people today are not aware of. (In those days, an excommunication was practically a economic death sentence.)

HPB brought in a LOT more than just the idea of evolution and the idea that the church did not have the right to force religious beliefs on the people (and burn non-believers at the stake). She brought in ideas like reincarnation, karma, enlightenment, nirvana vs. heaven, multiple levels of consciousness that are higher than mental consciousness, kalpas and manvantaras, globes and rounds, the illusionary nature of our 'real' physical world, sub-atomic physics, a non-human-centered view of the universe, multiple universes, humans as parts of an ecosystem rather than exploiters of an ecosystem, etc., ideas that westerners in 1875 were just not ready for.

Both Darwin and HPB had roles to play, but very different roles.

Nick, perhaps the world wasn't ready in 1875 but now the world seems ready for string theory, so I'm sure it can cope with Dzyan's modest little concepts. My point was that we haven't done enough to promote theosophy's take on human and cosmic evolution. String theory is exactly that, a theory, but we get learned television documentaries about it. We could do with some documentaries on HPB's teachings on cosmogenesis and anthropogenesis.

Does some kind of 'universal truth' need promotion, or will it be truth regardless how many people give it the nod of approval?

I'm quite sure my grandfather will continue on, whether his son believes that- or not. And funny enough even Grandpa wasn't all that sure either- but sure enough he passed on conducting beautiful music that noone else could hear besides him and he sure made lots of appearances after.

Just trying to say- sometimes there is no point in promoting something to people who might not be ready to try to understand.

What do you often run into as soon you mention HPB? "Satanic Worship of Lucifer + Fraud".
Sad, but in a way those that want to hear probably will hear soon enough?

You are quite right, ML, the Ancient Wisdom survived for millennia before HPB appeared on the scene, and cannot be destroyed. But it can be forgotten. As science dominates more and more, and ethical and spiritual values seem to count for less and less, should the TS stand by while member numbers continue to dwindle? Or do theosophists have a duty to make the Ancient Wisdom more accessible to everyone ~ and therefore less forgettable?

I'm not suggesting promotion as in television commercials, but theosophy could (and should) have a higher profile.

I guess it is up to us to create documentaries. Hey Harvey, how good are you are writing scripts for documentaries..? When will your book, Oh Lanoo! come out as a animated DVD?

http://www.olanoo.com

It is said, "Do not cast pearls before swine," and there is some truth to that.

HPB was/is the most slandered woman of the 1800's. The church went out of their way to destroy her reputation, and they were wildly successful.

There are many themes in Theosophy. In my opinion, the most important theme in Theosophy is that world religions always start out as wonderful philosophies. But as the centuries go by, they are always eventually taken over by power-hungry leaders, who then change the religion, re-write the teachings, and turn the religion into something that is used to control the people. (And as a result, the original Ancient Wisdom teaching always get thrown out.) Theosophy fights against this, and I'm afraid we are presently fighting a losing battle. Fortunately, we are not letting this deter us at all.

Here is another idea in the ongoing debate as to whether Theosophy is a religion. I do not think the above mentioned use-it-as-a-way-to-control-the-people will ever happen with Theosophy. So that means Theosophy must not be a religion..?

HPB had no problem putting pearls in front of everyone. She didn't say "I don't want the swine to see them, so I'll keep them to myself."

I have looked at several options to follow up on O Lanoo! (including a children's version) but I would rather try to get to non-theosophists. O Lanoo! is a bit too complex for non-theosophists.

I have wanted to do a drama-documentary on HPB for a number of years, but that never seemed the right angle, either. Hence the latest approach: a modern psychological drama that features HPB and some of the more basic bits of O Lanoo!

But I'm just a lone voice. The TS is better placed than I am to get documentaries on TV.

Well, if theosophy is not a religion, no risk of that happening to us, although it seems that some of our powerful leaders are reluctant to make way for the next generation and new ideas. I completed my census form this week, and I was disappointed not to be able to claim theosophy as my religion.

She wrote whatever she considered necessary to be written in whatever way she considered appropriate. She certainly did her part. And it's up those interested to take it in.

Hm, I'm torn on that. Did the Ancient Wisdom 'live a life' in the shadow? Perhaps. But just the fact that some people even mention the words 'Ancient Wisdom' means the wisdom didn't go completely extinct.

I'm also rather torn on the whole domination of science. I don't view science as a bad thing- although I don't necessarily see the point of 'proving' the next few worlds beyond in a lab with scientific laws of this world. But I see science as way that slowly (maybe) catches up with spiritual truths. Sciences changes every 50 years- imagine talking to somebody through 'invisible impressions', the telephone... .
^^^Sounds so 'clairaudient'. Invisible impressions/signals that are being 'translated' into signals that you hear as a 'voice'.

Also for example from my rather subjective point of view I seem to observe the opposite- I see more and more people start viewing the world and their place in it from a more and more spiritual point of view. Maybe that is a matter of personal experiences?

Because I seem to encounter tons of people (and that might just have to do with the people I seem to run into) who suddenly discover their own strong intuition, that they have dreams that seem to predict the future, some discover themselves to be telepaths and I have been encountering boatloads of people who are suddenly exhibiting traits of 'inspirational mediumship' like other people play golf on the weekend.

They wonder about the planet and its changes, they wonder about themselves.

From personal experience I found Theosophy incredibly helpful to start with just trying to uncover the tip of the iceberg.

Should Theosophy be more available? Yes and no perhaps. It is available, but probably not as the handy package. I don't think the handy package exists and it probably shouldn't exist.

The great actor Oskar Werner said something interesting.

"…you can only understand things so much- as far as you have come along yourself. Nobody will spoon feed you a master piece overnight, that is something you have to work on for yourself.
That I know the [Mozart's] ‘Magic Flute’ by heart is a blessing- it also belong to me and not just [the director] Karl Boehm.”

^^^I tend to view Theosophy similarly.

I have many very spiritually interested friends- but only two or three feel any draw toward theosophical literature. The bigger number does not feel 'at home' in Theosophy and I wonder why that is.
They are not necessarily New Agers that are looking for a 'personal truth', either. We seriously scour books together in the hopes of finding the universal aspects in them. So I guess we're just doing that instinctually- looking for a universal truth.

For example, while I enjoy my membership (particularly because I can take advantage off the Olcott lending library by mail- that's HUGE for me!)- I don't truly feel at home either.
Partially because I feel that a certain dogmatism and fear is currently equally at home at churches, as it is in many theosophically inclined minds. (my personal experience).

If I were to tell you that a passed over being likes showing up not with just one alien guide- but 6 non-human guides- I might as well walk down to the next church and tell that tale- the reaction would be the same, I'm afraid.
If I told you that non-humans love to approach me on a plane, while I'm flying- because they think that's extremely funny to approach a human in a lame physically flying plane? (did I mention they are very humorous?)

Will I be excluded from current day Theosophy for using the word 'starseed'?

For some reason I often feel like having 'landed' far outside of the current theosophical scope.

Theosophy will always be as relevant as the issues posed are relative to it's members. I'm not sure a higher missionary profile would be entirely beneficial because those that are interested in Theosophy will certain find a wealth of material they can study if they chose so.
I think there is a difference between HPB offering her work to the world- to those who want to hear it- and presenting it to those that do not want to hear it, for one reason or another.

I'm actually very much in favor of modern day documentaries- those documentaries will reach their audience that is ready to encounter these documentaries.

Modulating Lights Posted on Mar 16 2011, 08:39 PM

Ah, but playing golf every weekend must be better for the soul. To inflict so much misery on yourself must be the modern equivalent of wearing sackcloth and ashes and doing penance

Modulating Lights Posted on Mar 16 2011, 08:39 PM

I know that theosophy doesn't speak to everybody, and I'm not suggesting we send missionaries into darkest Manhattan. But there could be many thousands of people 'out there' who are ready for theosophy and who haven't found it yet. We seem to hide our light under a bushel. Perhaps we should be more of a beacon.

"I think there is a difference between HPB offering her work to the world- to those who want to hear it- and presenting it to those that do not want to hear it, for one reason or another."

--> I feel this is a big (and painful) part of Theosophy and what HPB had to do. Quite frankly, I think the church has done some bad things over the centuries, and it was HPB's job to point them out. (Church members and leaders certainly did not want to hear it then, and don't want to hear it now.) Should we point out these things today, upset everyone, and deal with the resulting backlash that falls upon Theosophy? It is a difficult question with no easy answer.

I don't see that (other) religions are part of the equation. We don't need to challenge them.

Theosophy re-presents the history of our people. I see no reason why we should not promote this history (in very broad terms) to the world in general. There is much in the theosophical version of our history that does not fit snugly with established concepts (religious and scientific) but many ideas are put forward nowadays that don't fit snugly. I don't think theosophy will rock the boat unduly.

People (and religious leaders) will take on board what they want; they will assimilate that which they need; and they are free to reject the rest. We cannot control their reactions, but we have to decide the actions that we consider appropriate.

"I don't see that (other) religions are part of the equation. We don't need to challenge them."

--> I can see your point, but there is the other point of view, which says yes we should. I agree with the second point of view, and I think HPB did too. But HPB was sometimes way too abrasive in the way she challenged what she saw as nonsense in other religions. For example, she said that the idea of the Virgin Mary is blasphemy. Should she have said that? I say yes and no: I think she was right, but she was too abrasive in her phrasing. (Is the idea of the Virgin Mary blasphemy? If we think so, should we even say such a thing to devout Catholics?)

But I respect your point of view that we don't need to challenge (other) religions. Theosophy is all about learning to see things from the other person's point of view.

America is the LOCATION where the 6th Root Race is expected to emerge. I think H.P.B. (and I will add et'al) here) had a clear intent to PROVIDE a heretofore hidden wisdom to those in the proper place/at the right time, FOR THOSE WHO WERE READY FOR IT, ... not as a philosophy for general mass appeal. And, this would just be my opinion, or assessment. I did get some allusion to this fact from the Mahatma Papers sometime back. Theosophical writings can some times provide some interesting insights and portents, WHICH THEY ALWAYS obscure ... you have to have the mind for seeing these hidden agendas. I don't consider this negative at all, simply speaking on many levels, but where ultimately those who need to know, those who seek, those who are drawn, WILL get some much needed Theosophical support.