Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00056)

Saturday, July 07, 2001


Dear Gopi:

I tried to make sure that the Names and Titles used are not
seized as true. They may have individual value, but they become
valueless if orthodoxy is imposed.

No one totally belongs to any organization. Norms and titles are
arbitrary, always. They are also the basis for hypocrisy.
Honesty is always an internal matter We alone know if we have
been true. "Those who Know, don't say. Those who SAY, don't
know."

Everyone is quite and utterly independent whenever they make
choices and decisions. Think about it. There is no actual UNITY
imposed on any one. Appearances do not tell you (or me) what a
persons desires or what he thinks -- that is only known to him
alone. But Nature is universal. Spirit is universal. Kama is
universal. A person may affiliate themselves with any or all
organizations, but any label adopted by ones self, or placed
mentally in categorization of another, is not necessarily TRUE.

The difference between right and wrong is not argument. It is
very simply this: NATURE HAS INSTITUTED LAWS OF COOPERATION and
for the preservation of the rights and privileges of the least as
well as the most valuable of its creatures. Might IS NOT right.
Compassion commands we protect the poor nd the weak and come to
the aid of all who need. Every Great Teacher has said this. But
who does it ?

Truth and right is OBEYING the impersonal and universal laws of
NATURE.

Evil is distorting, breaking them, tyrannizing over others,
making victims etc...The curious thing is that we always know
when we are breaking Nature's Laws and we pretend to be honest
and righteous -- as we speak (not as we do in secret).

If we actually thought of ourselves as immortals, ad all others
are also immortals, then there would not be any room for conflict
or personal claims. We would recognize and treat each other as
BROTHERS. What do charity, compassion, virtue, impartiality,
universality and humility actually mean? Are they hazy ideas, or
are they factual IDEALS?

Theosophy provides answers for these questions -- which the
average person does not know how to answer because he has no
PRINCIPLES on which to base his opinions or his thoughts and
actions. The average person does not easily distinguish between
a THOUGHT and a DESIRE.

We have not been taught how to think, or how to keep to a subject
without deviation. So how can we even argue successfully about
right and wrong? The first rule of LOGIC is a UNIVERSAL and
IMPERSONAL basis. This prevents any favoritism. Honest
relations are always true ones. No pretense, not for any reason.

Theosophy does not play nurse-maid to the personality, but
encourages strict accountability at the tribunal of one's
interior HIGHER SELF. Each one stands before his own ATMA	And
that ATMA is the universe as a whole in purity. All the rest is
descriptive details, which enable the mind to rationalize about
the inevitability of inescapable responsibility -- named KARMA.


Best wishes,

Dallas

=================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Gopi Chari [mailto:ekcvv@juno.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 9:36 PM
To: study@blavatsky.net
Cc: study@blavatsky.net; carson@blavatsky.net
Subject: [bn-study] Re: FW: RE: About Esoterism SENT AGAIN

Now that Unitarians and Quakers are close partners to
Theosophists;
Can we get a little closer to the Home Base and check out what if
any are
the differences between the various Theosophical organizations?

------------------------------------------
DTB	Differences are of "traditions." The focus of study is the
MESSAGE of the MAHATMAS sent through H.P.Blavatsky their
accredited agent.

After Her death various people then,. And even now, try to
pretend they know and knew more than she did and could correct
her (and by implication the MASTERS). THAT IS "DRIVEL AND
HUMBUG" to put it succinctly, because if their Message is studied
it is found to be coherent.

The moment I say DRIVEL and HUMBUG someone is bound to be
offended. Are they wise or ignorant? Am I wise or ignorant? We
can debate this for quite a while and it proved nothing. The
differences are inconsequential. What all of us can do is to
unite on the STUDY OF THEOSOPHY as originally issued and made
available to us. End of argument.

It is claims, authority and rigid ideas which make for
differences. UNITY demands extreme flexibility and also
tremendous rigidity as to the basis from which unity is to be
derived.

Best wishes,

Dallas

=================================

I am not saying that we should close the organizations and come
back
under one banner. Can we address the differences if any? Let us
not go
back historically to late 1800s and early 1900s when the
differences
happened. The personalities that separated are all dead by now!
In
today's world are there any differences between ULT and TS?

==========================================

DTB	It is not a matter of personalities. It is a matter of the
principles involved. What happened in the past is gone. Agreed.
What may happen in the future is hopefully not going to be a
repetition of the same kind of errors>
What you say about unity is good. Now what do students have to
UNITE ON ?

Get that straight and problems will indeed be solved.

==============================================

Of course if
there are none or almost none, I think we should say so, and if
there are
some we should enumerate them and address them one by one and see
if
there is any relevance to them. This type of activity may be very
useful
in this aquarian age of coming together!

=================

DTB	Have you made a study of that history? Do you know the ins
and outs and confusions? If you do not you will not know how to
answer inquiries abut them.
D
==================================



Thanks
Gopi