Theos-Talk Archives (June 1998 Message tt00255)

June 12th 1998

Dear Alan:

Your observation about the present situation in the TSes is
partially true.

To the extent that they have departed from the original plan and
have become political in management, and are concealing things
from the membership, etc... they have failed very seriously.

If the membership is not interested in seeking to revitalize them
along the original lines (for whatever reason:  indolence,
ignorance of Theosophical doctrines and objectives, blind belief
in "authority,"
etc...) they will continue on their divergent way.  It is the
membership alone that can bring about a change.  If individuals
do not agree with present policies and management, and are
unable, democratically, to make changes, then they can exercise
their right to resign.  [ It seems obvious to me that if the
"officers and management" of any T. S. set themselves/itself up
to preserve its power as a management group, it is violating the
democratic, patriarchal and service aspect of Theosophy, and is
in fact degrading it.  It is changing liberality into
authoritarianism:  "My rule -- right or wrong.  I know better
!" ]

No "body" ever completely succeeds, when you look at it, as a
"body."  In the final analysis it is individuals who compose a
group of whatever size.  And it is the individuals who will have
as individuals to agree to follow the aim, purpose and goal of
the "philosophy" of Theosophy (outlined in detail by HPB in THE
KEY TO THEOSOPHY).  There is only one use for any truly
Theosophical "body."  It is the maintaining of the purity of the
original teachings,l so that they can be transmitted unfiltered
to those who inquire.  Those in their turn will have to evaluate
them and adopt whatever they decide they will use in their lives
and for the regulation of their affairs.  A Theosophical "body"
would then consist of volunteers who would provide publishing,
library, meeting rooms, etc., for those who may desire to
acquaint themselves with Theosophy and discuss their individual
study without making any imposition on their fellows.

You may tell me that this makes for a very unstable situation and
that the "growth" which all "bodies" are expected to foster will
be stunted or retrogress.  I would answer that this is true.
Since the original objects as declared in the T S do not include
the acquisition of a vast set of "numbers," any Lodge of the T S
exists to afford the means to those who seek the opportunity of
contacting THEOSOPHY as originally set out by the Masters and HPB
as their Agent.  In this Mr.
Wm. Q. Judge, as HPB's closest collaborator, in charge of the
largest individual Section (America) of the TS is also to be
recognized as a chief "builder."  HPB was the cement that held
the T S together, and she also provided the material that members
could learn from and discuss.  After her death, and in time,
starting in December 1893 there was political resistance
generated among the "Officers and managers" of the TS that
started in Adyar.  As a result we have historically the "Judge
Case" -- which was adjudicated in his favor in mid year 1894. By
end of 1894 the attack was restarted.  Seeing this, the members
of the "American Section T S" as a group in which the members
were truly democratic and autonomous determined to separate
themselves politically from the incubus of the "Parent Body."
They wanted to study and practice Theosophy.

Accordingly, at the end of April in 1895 the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY
IN AMERICA, was started in the Boston Convention of the
Theosophical Society (American Section) .  The details are fully
set out in the Reports issued then.  It was done legally.  Then
to make sure that the spirit of the Theosophical Movement ( not
"Society") was sustained and maintained, "Resolutions" were
passed of continued brotherly affiliation with the Theosophical
Society with HQ in Adyar, and with its Sections and Lodges and
Members in other places.  It is a matter of history how those
advances were treated, also that it was Col. Olcott, acting as
President Founder, who declared that the Theosophical Society in
America had "seceded" from the "parent T S" and proceeded to
"excommunicate" all those members and Lodges of the American
Section which had participated in the change.  He rejected the
"affiliation" offered -- contrary to the First Object of the
Theosophical Society.  This has been repeated since.

That was the first official split--the result of a political
base.  Theosophy had neither been understood, nor was it applied
!

Judge's death in March 1896 caused a crisis in the thinking of
the members of the Theosophical Society in America who were close
to him in the management of the affairs of the Society, and
instead of following his advice "There should be calmness.  Hold
fast.  Go slow."  They rushed into giving away effective
"control" to a person (Mrs. Tingley) who had less than 3 years
experience with Theosophy and who was "untested" by time.  The
result of the changes that were selected and then made by such an
"authority" derailed the work of Judge in short order.  By 1898
most of those who had participated in the election of Mrs.
Tingley resigned in protest.  Historically we then witness that
the career of the T S in A proceeded in a completely different
direction, Though retaining the surface appearance of the body
started in April 1895, the internal direction and its succeeding
politics have emphasized the divergence from the original
objects.  In some ways it began to pattern itself after the
Olcott managed T S in Adyar and its Sections -- not in detail,
but the trappings of "Authority" came to the fore.  The focus and
purpose of the T S in America was altered and the result is that
today, as I look at it, except for its honoring and respecting
Judge and his work and writings, there is very little
difference -- everything depends on the focus and direction
chosen by its "leader (s)."

By and large in the past decade or so there has been at the level
of individuals of the TS (Adyar), the TS (Pasadena), and the ULT
a reaproachment, a tolerance that tends to make relations more
harmonious.  But the political differences, and the individual
objectives of these three bodies are very much continuing in the
lines they have adopted.

Of the three, the ULT alone is non-political.  It adheres to and
objectivizes its 'motto' :  "To spread broadcast the  teachings
of Theosophy as recorded in the writings of H. P. Blavatsky and
Wm. Q.  Judge."

All its meetings are free and open to any and all who desire to
attend.  Theosophy (as originally recorded) alone, is the object
of its working.  It tries to make it available to all.  It is an
"association" of volunteers, and not a "membership" affair with
the usual paraphernalia of politicized management, fees, rules,
officers, etc....  Those ULT associates resident in any one area
make independent but consultative decisions concerning the
conduct of their "Lodge," or "Study Group."  Each "associate" is
automatically an associate of the ULT anywhere.  No questions are
ever asked as to previous or current associations of those who
desire to become "an 'Associate' of the ULT."  The "Declaration
of the ULT" is the sole document to serve as the bond between
associates in all ULT work. In other words, the ULT exists for
service to all, associates or non-associates, and takes no
cognizance of any other motive or procedure.  It is the practice
of Theosophy alone that makes for the bond between all
associates.  It is a "similarity of aim, purpose and teaching"
put into practice.  Admittedly it is an experiment.  It has been
in active existence for 89 years as of this date. More detail
about the ULT can be had from a booklet titled "The ULT Its
Mission and Future."

I offer this is as an addition to what I wrote earlier and also
to make the historical events and objectives as applied, as clear
as I see them -- and I may be also quite wrong in some of my
characterizations.  I have tried to base myself in what I write
on actual historical events and current facts.

Best wishes,        Dallas.

> Date: Thursday, June 11, 1998 8:20 PM
> From: "Dr A M Bain" <guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: ICQ Theosophy Group

>W. Dallas TenBroeck <dalval@nwc.net> writes
>>Mr. Judge in one of his articles  THE CLOSING CYCLE  (IRISH
>>THEOSOPHIST, January 1895) says:  :"H.P.Blavatsky has clearly
>>pointed out in the KEY, in her conclusion, that the plan is to
>>keep the T S alive as an active free, unsectarian body during
all
>>the time of waiting for the next great messenger, who will be
>>herself beyond question...And in all this time of waiting the
>>Master, "that great Initiate, whose single will upholds the
>>entire movement," will have his mighty hand spread out wide
>>behind the Society."  [ ULT Ed. Judge Articles Vol. 2, p. 153 ]
>
>The TS is, however, a fragmented, disputative, sectarian group
of
>bodies, disunited behind various historical persons who dared to
>disagree.
>
>I guess the plan failed.
>
>Sorry, Mr. Judge.
>
>Alan                SNIP