Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00138)

July 14 2002

Re U L T practices and rumors

Dear Bart, Leon and Friends:

I am glad to see some straightening out of rumors by facts
by one who was there.


DUES VS. CONTRIBUTIONS


In U L T all contributions are anonymous and carry no
special weight.

But Bart, do you have any actual reference where H P B said
she preferred "dues" to "contributions ?"

There was a lot of debate in the early days in THEOSOPHIST,
PATH and LUCIFER (in their Supplements and Correspondence
columns) as to whether the Branches ought to be kept closed
( as with the Masons ) or "open" and their proceedings be
opened to the general public. It ended with the continuing
of "annual dues." And in many cases, the Branch Meetings
were made open to the public. Much of the "history" is to
be found in those areas.


U L T WORK -- its DECLARATION

Yes, the purpose of the U L T as spelled out in its
Declaration is the sustain and maintain the "original
Literature." All of us attracted Theosophy owe what we know
to H P B's sacrifices. Then, of course to Olcott, Judge and
others of the early students who supported H P B and studied
"her theosophy."


OPINIONS on THEOSOPHICAL DOCTRINES

Writings that arose which contradicted while pretending to
improve and add to what H P B taught -- specially those
after her death and that of Mr. Judge, stand or fall on
their coherency with the THEOSOPHICAL Philosophy and its
doctrines. Have any of those been proved deficient or
incorrect ? If so I would be interested as I have been a
student of theosophical and analogous literature for over 60
years. I have seen and read many diverging opinions, but
none that improve or even contradict H P B's Theosophy in
any serious manner. But I could be wrong, of course.


T S HISTORY

The documented history of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY makes a
very interesting study and serves as a review of the motives
that the students of those days debated and espoused.
Several writers have attempted to make of this a matter of
record, but in many cases I found those books tainted by the
opinions of their writers, and not always quite clear and
definite. Of course there will always be some controversy
in interpreting the past.

My recollection of the By Laws and Rules of the T S does in
now way make it appear that "contributors" would have any
particular force or power when compared with "members." Do
you have any direct references ?

Historically, I do know the By Laws and Rules were
frequently changed by Olcott when there were loopholes to be
filled. Have I missed something ?

Dal

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Bart
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2002 3:47 PM
To:
Subject: Re: Seth/Enos (Enoch) U L T and T S Practices

leonmaurer wrote:
> >dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:


> >> There are no "caps" ever placed on discussion and
> >> consideration of any subjects in Theosophy or at the U
L Ts.
> >> How can there be? The DECLARATION of U L T encourages
only
> >> that free aspect of study that volunteers alone
generate.
> >> Those are the terms of BROTHERHOOD.
> >
> > Then the ULT in New York City is in violation; I have
heard many people
> >claim that they were thrown out of meetings for asking
questions that
> >were not part of some official list.
>
> Please let us know how many and who are such people that
have made such
> claims? And, what were the questions asked?

While I was at the New York Lodge on a day-to-day
basis (1994-2000),
about 6-8 people came to me personally with similar
complaints. I don't
remember the questions, but I do remember they would be
considered
fairly innocuous at a TS/Adyar meeting. And I did point out
to them (as
I stated in another message) that, in my opinion, the ULT
was there more
to present the ideas of Blavastsky & Judge than to study new
ideas.

> As for as an "official" list of permissible questions, I
never heard of such
> a thing during my family's 40 odd years of attending
teachers meetings,
> lectures, and study classes.

That is a persistant rumor; I'm glad to hear it's
incorrect. The
precise rumor is that presenters are taught a specific
speech, with
specific prepared questions and answers.

> Can't remember how many times, I argued with a lecturer
that they answered a
> theosophical question wrong, offered a contradictory
answer reinterpreting
> HPB, and didn't get thrown out.:- )

That is the sort of thing the people CLAIMED got
them thrown out.

> "Everything that needs to get done will get done." Is it
any wonder, then,
> why ULT has one of the most comfortable and pleasant
meeting places and
> extensive library in a luxurious upper East Side town
house neighborhood --
> without any officers, dues or collections?

H. P. Blavatsky was in favor of paying dues rather
than asking for
contributions, for fear that the large contributors would
get too much
say in what Theosophy was.

Bart Lidofsky