Theos-Talk Archives (February 1999 Message tt00122)

Dear Rich:

In my opinion is is both of factual and historical interest. In various
Circulars from Pasadena on my desk James Long and Grace Knoche described
often why they choosed to destroy the Point Loma-Covina HQ ("I was working
as a shiva"), describing the Point Loma policy and spirit as "elitism" and
against the needs of the time. OTOH, the Pasadena policy is described as
"partnership".
Now, what are the facts? If the ES of Pasadena is not labeled as "ES" but as
"privately study group", then comes the question to my mind if and why this
policy is better for students than the old. In Point Loma times every member
of the TS has had the right to enter the ES (there was no fear of
"invaders" - Rich's word) and learn the teachings. This was the policy under
G. de Purucker, as well as it was under Judge, K. Tingley and HPB, and also
under Helen Harris (after GdeP's death). The ES has had an address and its
existence was known to all.
Today a student seems not to have a right to know of the existence of such a
"private" group or were he can go. So it may be for some researchers of
historical interest if the description of the Point Loma TS and ES is true -
or not. This is the more of interest as the official books printed by
Pasadena are not verbatim reprints of the PL books, they are "edited",
sentences, paragraphs and the least in one case a whole chapter are deleted.
So I wonder if the "private group" of the Pasadena TS is studying the same
texts which they have for the public or if they are studying the real texts.
I see some contradictions and I ask for any light about this to decide if
the judgement of Long and Knoche about the Point Loma era is true or not.
When an ES, its existence known to all, and open to all, is labeled as
"outmoded", "elitism" etc. and a secret group, whose existence is not known
publicy and were texts are studied which were formely relatively open and
were not restricted to persons which are "chosen" in an unknown fashion
which are labeled as "democratic" and "partnership"  - then I am remembered
to George Orwell's "Animal farm".
Speaking from my own experience the theos. teachings and the historicals
events can hardly divided. It deals also with the question if such a group
is lead by humans or super humans. From the time of HPB onwards up to H.
Harris a potencially member was not choosen by any humanmade fashion or a
personal feeling of sympathy or anti-sympathy, but only by its own inner,
higher Self.

For those on the list who email me privately wondering if I attempt to hurt
any persons or organizations I may point out that I am searching for truth.
In the past I was critical too to other TS'ies as well and would have this
questions as well if the matter would have been belong to any other
organization. The motto runs not: There is no religion higher than the TS
XXX" but "..than truth". That's all. Hope that helps to clarify my position
as a theosophical student with interest in historical details. And my lesson
was not to believe any labelings or namings, but to look was is behind it.
An analogy may: Today some countries have the word "democratic" in their
country names, but often they are far less democratic than other countries.

Frank

>Along with Jerry S., I can say that I strongly doubt Pasadena has an
esoteric
>section any longer.  I am friends with Grace Knoche, Will Thackara, Alan
>Donant, and other leaders at their headquarters, and I have asked them
>privately and sincerely if there were now such a thing.  They assured me
there
>was not.
>
>Beyond this, all I can say is that if a group of individuals chooses to
study
>privately by themselves, what business is it of mine?  Is the subject of
>"esotericism" interesting only because it is secret?  I would not feel
>comfortable invading someone's private study and trying to publicize it.
>
>Rich




-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.