Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00158)

Dear Frank,

May I make some comments in response to your post? Perhaps I 
didn't state my position very clearly. I do not wish to personally 
attack you or anyone else, nor do I wish to evaluate the worth or 
lack of worth of any branch of theosophical study or endeavor. I 
merely wish to provide an alternate opinion to the one you state 
regarding the worth of different writers on the subject of theosophy. 
The reason I wish to do this is so that others on the list, possibly 
people who have found value in such writers, will not think that your 
opinion is the only one, or even the prevailing one. You are 
welcome to your opinion, but I do not share it. All my experience in 
theosophical study has led me to believe that everything that 
stimulates separatism is damaging to the purpose of theosophy, 
and that unity of thought is helpful to that purpose. However, since 
none of us completely knows the truth about this immense subject, 
from the point of view of the student, who is charged by the 
teachers to study all aspects and form his own understanding, 
multiple points of view are beneficial. It was primarily with that idea 
in mind that I wrote what I did. I do believe that it is possible and 
beneficial for students with opposing points of view to offer them 
respectfully, realizing that no one has all the answers, and that we 
can learn from each other. And finally, it is very useful, in matters 
of dispute, to stay out of the realm of the personal, concentrating 
instead on the principles involved, since it only does harm, to them 
and to ourselves, to attack our brothers personally, but it is usually 
illuminating to consider fairly the impersonal aspect of any issue 
that arises. 

Adelasie

On 14 Aug 01, at 10:49, Frank Reitemeyer wrote:

> Adelise:
> Just for the record I would like to say that no positive purpose is
> served by a statement such as the one quoted here. This is an example
> of the force that tries to keep Theosophists separate, to sabotage the
> work of bringing to the consiousness of humanity the unity of all
> existence.
> 
> Frank:
> I weep together with you. Obviously you know very well what a positive
> purpose is and what not. After you and other ULT'ers do obviously not
> find any serious counterarguments you try to persecute the person
> (instead of the wrong ideas). This experience I have made with all
> groups/ideologies which have a rigid view and allow no critic.
> 
> Just for the record too I would like to say I find a lot of positive
> purposes to discuss the ULT policy, and others too who email me
> privately. What for the one is negative may positive for another one,
> it depends on the personality.
> 
> As to your defamation of trying to separate and sabotage - stop for a
> minute. HPB regarded truth higher than even universal brotherhood. How
> can truth be dangerous, separate and sabotage? It can only be
> dangerous to a cardhouse of misinformation and lie.
> 
> Your kind of manipulation is very well known here in Germany and I
> have seen it for years with the Communists who always tried to block
> any unwished discussion by crying that the impertinent person who
> dared to question their received truth are against humanity and
> against peace. So of course all what you do is positive, helps
> humanity and unites the Theosophists. I only wonder what the ULT has
> done in the last 90 years.
> 
> Adelise:
> It is the opposite of the teachings of HPB to
> attack those one's fellows revere and follow.
> 
> Frank:
> Then you admit that the 90 ULT years of persecution of Katherine
> Tingley who is revered and loved by her pupils is against HPB? I
> heartily agree with you. You have made my day with that statement and
> it is a positive proof direct from a ULT'er that the ULT'ers misuse
> the names of both HPB and Judge in twisting the spirit of their
> teachings. Can you give a single source that HPB was against protest
> in case someone is unjust attacked? I don't think so, otherwise you
> would have given it. On the contrary HPB taught always her pupils to
> stand up and fight against pseudo-theosophy, slander and hypocrisy:
> 
> (1) "Friends and foes! Criticism is the sole salvation from
> intellectual stagnation." - B:CW 13:244
> 
> (2) "He who hears an innocent person slandered, whether a brother
> Theosophist or not, and does not undertake his defense as he would
> undertake his own - is no Theosophist." - B:CW 8:171
> 
> (3) "To the mentally lazy or obtuse, Theosophy must remain a riddle;
> for in the world mental as in the world spiritual each man must
> progress by his own efforts." - The Key to Theosophy, preface.
> 
> (4) "Pure sentimentalism overpowering their thinking faculties, which
> no true philanthropist or Altruist will ever accept." - Key 225.
> 
> So I think it is just your (mis-)interpretation who does harm to
> Theosophists, needed co-operation among Theosophists and the world in
> general.
> 
> Adelise:
> It is the opposite of
> the teachings of HPB to assume some platform of authority about
> occultism.
> 
> Frank:
> I am no authority and seek not for authority, I am just a Theosophist
> who does his duty and defends fellow Theosophists who are unjust
> attacked by ULT'ers since decades. OTOH, it seems as it is you (or the
> ULT in general) who seeks to have authority, otherwise you would not
> persecute those who disagree with your selfish, materialistic
> Theravada-INTERPRETATION of HPB.
> 
> 
> Adelise:
> It is the opposite of the teachings of HPB to judge
> anyone, much less those who struggled to bring the theosophical
> movement to birth and growth in its early years.
> 
> Frank:
> Agreed, it is wrong that the ULT'ers persecute and defame Katherine
> Tingley who built the theosophical school both HPB and Judge were
> dreaming of. And for that reason I protest against the slanders in
> hope that you in the aftermath will understand Point Loma better. What
> is wrong with that?
> 
> Adelise:
> Freedom of speech
> is a wonderful thing, and I have no desire to curtail it. But anyone
> 
> Frank:
> Amazing, that it is just you who claims that as I remember well your
> private emails last year regarding censorship on the BN basic list.
> But - donated, as I try not to meddle with personalities so much.
> 
> Adelise:
> reading statements such as those quoted here should also have an
> opportunity to see them for what they are. Conscious or not, they are
> egregious attempts to destroy what the theosophical movement has been
> able to accomplish. When the world is in such sore need of examples of
> unity of thought and action, why do we waste our precious time and
> energy on divisive sophistry and destructive separatism?
> 
> Frank:
> Depends on everyone's personal interpretation what is destroying and
> what is not. I now a lot of true Theosophists who have reason to
> believe that it is the ULT policy since 90 years which destroys the
> Theosophical Movement and who find lies, slanders and sophistry in
> their publications. And as your believe system and your political
> correct mind does not allow to question your beliefs it is quite
> natural form a psychological standpoint that you see your faults in
> those who contradict you. It seems as you want a co-operation among
> the lineages built on ostrich policy and hypocrisy. I want a
> co-operation built on the truth. No theosophical lineage is higher
> then truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>