Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tt00135)

Lmhem111@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-02-15 03:48:22 EST, you write:
>
> << Does the President of the TS have the authority to unilaterally
>  throw out members and sections? >>
>
> Canadian Section was excommunicated several years ago, an issue which has been
> discussed on theos.talk previously. Was this the action of the Int'l President
> alone or in conjunction with the Adyar BOD? Wasn't the Swedish Section
> jettisoned from the TS as well? And when one is thrown out, does one have to
> do penance before getting back in?

    The Canadian Lodges were thrown out on a technicality. In order to maintain
tax-exempt status, they had to remove language from their by-laws that they were
part of the TS in Adyar, which meant that Adyar had to amend (or ignore) TS
by-laws in order to keep Canada in. If I were a director at Adyar, I probably
would have vociferously recommended that the amendment be passed. I would be
greatly surprised if the reason the action was not made was political in nature.
On the other hand, the Canadian Lodges seem to be doing fine without Adyar.

    In the American Section, I have studied the by-laws regarding this carefully
(although I don't know the power of Adyar to override). If a simple majority of
the BOD decides that a Lodge is not properly representing the Theosophical
Society, they must inform the Lodge of the specific problems that the Lodge has,
and the Lodge has 6 months in which to correct this behavior (It takes 2/3 of the
BOD to expel a member; I have VERY strongly recommended to the BOD that it be made
AT LEAST as hard to dissolve a Lodge as to expel a member, and recommended that it
take unanimity minus one do do so).

    As nearly as I can tell (and correct me if I'm wrong), the major political
hotspot is Alice Bailey. Essentially, she seems to have created a Theosophical
religion, which is at odds with the other Theosophical religion, the E.S. (this is
not a put-down; in the Mahatma letters, it is specifically stated that the TS
should have a separate section for those who wish to follow their teachings as a
religion).

    Unfortunately, there are far more people out there who want someone to tell
them what the truth is, and to tell them what to do, than people willing to figure
it out for themselves. The Alice Bailey books, being much more specific and
detailed than even Besant and Leadbeater, appeal far more (but certainly not
exclusively) to people who want others to do the thinking for them. There are
plenty of people who are willing to do the work in the search for Truth who are
also followers of Alice Bailey's works; those of that type whom I know in the TS
contribute as much as any who follow their own religious teachings, but are
willing to learn and discuss those of others. The problem comes in when you have
Alice Bailey fundamentalists, who do not have respect for the beliefs of others,
who get visibly offended if someone does not believe that Alice Bailey channeled
the Tibetan, or anybody else, and feels that the E.S. is a waste of time. Put that
person in conflict with an equally fundamentalist Theosophist, and you have a very
untheosophical political divide.

    In a given Lodge, the problem can be fixed if you have enough people who
really believe in the 3 objects, and who accept the fact that there are many
correct paths to the Truth, and that the Mahatmas were telling the truth when they
said that each person must seek the truth through their own religion. Also
required is an UNDERSTANDING of theosophical principles, and realize that ahimsa
is an impossible goal, and that you must MINIMIZE harm, even if it requires
disturbing the peace every now and then. Finally, people must learn
DISCRIMINATION, and learn to tell the difference between what is important and
what is not important, and (at the risk of quoting Ann Landers), don't sweat the
small stuff.

    Bart Lidofsky