Theos-Talk Archives (July 2001 Message tt00109)

Sorry to butt in, but I couldn't let this one go by without comment.

In a message dated 07/13/01 6:32:44 PM, ringding@blinx.de writes:

>>As to Frank: His point of view is that and ORGANIZATION is
>>essential. I don't think he gets the idea that one can be
>>INDEPENDENTLY DEVOTED TO THE CAUSE OF THEOSOPHY.
>
>Wrong, Dallas. You and everyone can do what they like.
>But I protest when the Hinayana way of the ULT is presented to the
>uninformed an untrained internet public as a favorable model.

Right, Dallas. 

What model? What is the "Hinayana way" of the ULT? How can a lodge (or a 
framework for study of ALL esoteric teachings) -- composed of independent 
students, studying the path toward the goal of "Self realization" or 
"enlightenment") that each, alone, is free to follow as he/she "self 
determines" -- have an overriding "organizational" goal, or be labeled as 
following ANY exoteric, (or esoteric) "way"?

Who guides it? Who enforces its will on its independent associates? Where 
and what are its objectives to "control" or steer the studies of its 
associates (other than its only published manifesto, the "Declaration of the 
ULT" -- which says it all)? 
>
>>He seems to want the support of an organized group that can tell
>>him what to do.
>
>That is only your porjection. Man, what kind of sect is that ULT that you
>learn such twisted thinking???

No. That is only a reasonable observation based on what you say. 

Since when can such a "lodge" (a voluntary association of "independent" 
students, not an organization) be a "sect" and have any separate beliefs or 
teachings that are not within the scope of the most ancient esotericism as 
taught by HPB at the root level of pure spirituality, along with the 
"fundamental principles" that are the ultimate foundation of all organized 
exoteric Buddhist "sects" such as the Hinayana, the Mahayana, or the 
Vajrayana? Isn't which way one goes in theosophical study or practice still 
a matter of individual choice?

Is there any such thing as an "esoteric" Buddhist sect -- or any "organized" 
sect for that matter? How can any "organization," with any agenda for study 
or practice, be "esoteric"? But, an "independent association" certainly can 
be -- depending on the individual choice of each student. So, where's the 
comparison? 

Doesn't HPB's theosophical teachings (that ULT points to, along with all its 
confirmations in ancient literature and Master's teachings) thoroughly cover 
ALL of those directions of thought and practice at their deepest levels? Are 
not its root teachings (resting on the most ancient esoteric document, the 
Book of Dzyan, or "Book of the Golden Precepts" -- upon which the entire 
commentaries in the SD are based) sufficient evidence that there are no 
overriding ideas attributable to a non-organization like ULT that can in any 
way "twist" the thoughts of its independent students -- who can study 
theosophy from any source, in any way they choose? What's to stop them or, 
who's to conform them?

Who, or what evidence "conditioned" YOUR prejudicial thoughts about the 
"activities" of the ULT -- that you have so little first hand knowledge 
about? 

Maybe, you still misunderstand that ULT, has no leaders or directors with any 
personal agendas that can influence any student who uses its facilities, 
study classes, lectures and libraries (without supervision, guidance or 
"obligation other than that which they themselves determine") to learn and 
practice whatever they can about theosophy, its metaphysical science, its 
esoteric occultism and its moral imperatives -- to whatever depth each wishes 
to penetrate -- under their own steam, using their own "self devised and self 
determined efforts." What's so Hinayana "cultish" about that?

Where and from whom did you hear any differently about the "aims and purposes 
of ULT"?
>
>>Remember that the ULT is a 6th ROUND concept
>
>Seems you are drunken. Do you really know what you speak?
>The ULT is only in the 6th round??
>I assumed the ULT is still on another PLANET.
>The ULT was, is and will ever be a purely exoteric organization. You never
>had the higher teachings.
>ULT can be compared with Theravada Buddhism.
>The same dead letter believe, the same proud about the own avidya and the
>same dogmatism if not fanatism.

That's a bold group of unfounded and pejorative statements that have no 
grounds in reality, misinform all the "uninformed an untrained Internet 
public," and which label you as an ignoramus about anything that has to do 
with the, aims, purposes and "ends in view" of the United Lodge of 
Theosophists. 

Such specious arguments based on opinionated nonsense, along with personally 
insulting comments to boot, add nothing to your credibility.

LHM