Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tt00060)

>> 	When the TS was launched, it was very clear in the minds of the Real
>> Founders that its mission is to form a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity.

This is incorrect.  The idea in the first object is misstated and
misunderstood by Ramadoss because he is shortening the form of it.  It is
not to form a Universal Brotherhood or to accent the "Brotherhood of
Humanity" as the Maha Chohan states, but to "form a nucleus of the
Universal Brotherhood."

When I form a nucleus, not all existing parts of society are included in
this nucleus, some elements of the TS may exist in the electrons and some
foreign elements may exist alongside our "atom," but not be considered part
and party of our "atom."

Please don't misstate the first object by saying  it is: Brotherhood,
Brotherhood of Man, or Universal Brotherhood, because it is not.


>> In the early days of TS, the question whether the Universal Brotherhood
>> mission of TS was the right one was raised from time to time. At one
>> juncture, A P Sinnett raised it with one of the Real Founders. In
>response,
>> the Maha Chohan, who was the Boss of the Founders was consulted. His
>> response was put down in a letter. This letter is considered as one of
>the
>> most important by every leader of TS starting with HPB onwards. It is
>> considered as the Charter for TS. In it is stated:
>>
>> 		"And it is we, the humble disciples of these perfect Lamas, who are
>> expected to allow the Theosophical Society to drop its noblest title,
>that
>> of the Brotherhood of Humanity, to become a simple school of philosophy!
>> No, no, good brothers, you have been labouring under the mistake too long
>> already. Let us understand each other. He who does not feel competent to
>> grasp the noble idea sufficiently to work for it, need not undertake a
>task
>> too heavy for him. But there is hardly a Theosophist in the whole Society
>> unable to effectually help it by correcting erroneous impressions of
>> outsiders, by himself actually propagating this idea. Oh! for noble and
>> unselfish men to help us effectually in that divine task! All our
>> knowledge, past and present, would not be sufficient to repay him."

>From John Mead's letter:

>It seems clear that the TSA now wants to have a different purpose for the
>TSA than that of the original founding Brotherhood??!!
>
>I think the TSA leaders should spend several weeks with someone who really
>lives and believes in the First Object... like maybe the Dalai Lama???
>
>(Is it relevent to point out that the ES also ignores (in fact is *defined*
>to ignore) the first and foremost Object also?   maybe not...
>Hmmmm... the Dalai Lama doesn't even meet their requirements.  we would
>have to find someone more spiritual and worthy that would/could meet their
>requirements).