Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tt00007)

>From: "Marshall Hemingway III" <sutratman@aol.com>
>Date: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 9:24 AM
>Subject: Teaching self-help is also compassion


>In a message dated 98-01-20 00:10:55 EST, you write:
>
>Keith Price wrote:
>
><< I think that what passes for theosophy is a combination of Esoteric
>Buddhism and Victorian morality from the Christian tradition. The hospitals
in
>the East are practically all run by the dreaded Christians because the
>Buddhists have a "let them escape suffering through meditation attitude"
and
>let the poor people work out their karma without my earning bad karma
through
>interfering with their karma (that is helping them with a Christian
handout!).
>>>
>
>This is always the dilemma. How much charity should be offered and when is
>enough, enough. Even the current welfare system has been modified and
welfare-
>for-work has been adopted by many states to get families off the dole who
have
>been dependent for generations on government largess. The same concern
arises
>with third world nations. Do the more affluent countries give them fish or
>teach them how to fish? And which is more compassionate in the long run? I
>would have to say the latter. Currently, many would say that the IMF is
>providing welfare to fiscally irresponsible countries.
>
>In case of dire famine, richer countries would have to intervene
immediately
>with food and medicine but the big picture solution would have to deal with
>the causes of famine and destitution by helping people come up with their
own
>solutions. The same principle applies on a smaller scale when focusing on
>impoverished neighborhoods. Although food kitchens provide temporary
relief,
>the long-run solution would embrace the notion of the poor alleviating
their
>karma by modifying that karma themselves through the principle of
self-help.
>This is certainly in tune with the idea of "self-induced and self-devised
>efforts" presented the Third Fundamental Principle of the SD.
>
>Lmhem111
>hy.com.


Keith:  We have two choices
1) Crisis management due to over-population and consumerism: that is we have
to give them fish in Sarejevo, Lebenon, Cuba, Viet Nam, and Africa because
we have the systems to do so and they have the empty stomachs.  This has
been going on for a long time, but many have seen the development of SYSTEMS
in everything since World War II which has never really ended. The whole
idea of really doing what one wants by growing one's own food and trading in
the local marketplace has given way to the extreme specialization that leads
the females and even the children back into the systemized marketplace of
service industries and the monstrous day care systems that creates nothing
but brats (check the research for yourself in any psych 101 book)  This
whole system installs nothing but a scarcity mentality that can never be
appeased and the whole problem of addictions that are evident as never
before in the developed countries  (look at Elvis, MM, Karen Carpenter, Di,
they had it ALL according to the popular press!)

2)  Inner management:  a few can do the tough inner work to get to the place
where one can rises above receiving to receive like plants, giving to give
like moralistic injunctions, giving to receive as in trade, to a place of
receiving the Limitless Life to bestow and give to all
The inner works seems to require continuous works.

Would it be to much to ask that Clinton step down and give a group of
Philosopher Kings a chance at WORLD GOVERNMENT he thinks is so necessary.
The question is not who could pass the spiritual test, but who would give
them?  Jousting anyone??

Namaste
Keith