Theos-Talk Archives (July 2002 Message tt00146)

Dear Everybody:

I lived several decades in India. In none of the branches of every 
denomination of theosophical organizations, everyone was welcome and no 
money was charged for any meetings or study classes. All funding needed was 
met by volunteers who were mostly kept a low profile. In addition, all 
meetings of branches were open to everyone, man, woman and child -- yes 
child. It was not unusual to see three or four generations present in 
meetings. Likewise, everyone one of the lectures of Krishnamurti was free 
and open to everyone - man, woman and child, not one time anyone talked 
about funding. Donor unasked took care of. May be India is "old" fashioned!

mkr

PS: No plates were passed around in meetings either!

At 01:20 PM 7/14/02 -0700, dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:
> July 14 2002
>
>
> Dear Bart:
>
> I know nothing of Yoruba. Buddha argued against animal
> sacrifices and shamed Brahmins *( who had become perverted
> from continuing them overtly). Theosophy does likewise, and
> adds that the attempt to fasten, by the misuse of will-power
> the "sins" of any one on an animal or a person, etc// is
> sorcery. The motive is wrong.
>
> Just applying what we are taught about Karma, brotherhood
> and the e=immortality of all Monads and Skandhas ought to
> tell us that the concept is wrong and anti-life.
>
> At least that's my reasoning.
>
> The secondary consideration is the power placed on a Lodge
> by a "contributor." I say in such a case GOOD BYE
> CONTRIBUTOR.. Theosophy does not need such support.
> Theosophy cannot be bought nor can any special place be
> reserved for its promulgation.
>
> I expect this is not quite in tune with this age, but I
> think it is in tune with the history of spiritual work.
>
> Dal
>
> ======================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bart Lidofsky [mailto:bartl@sprynet.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2002 8:12 AM
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World RE: Re: U L T practises and rumors
>
> dalval14@earthlink.net wrote:
> > 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 ?"
>
> It is in the Collected Writings, an article
> explaining why the TS
> started charging dues (I believe it was 1 pound a year). I
> came across
> this article about 8 years ago; the New York Lodge was
> charging
> ridiculously low prices for classes, so low that, based on
> contemporary
> American standards, people thought the classes were garbage,
> and the
> only people showing up were those for whom money was the
> primary
> consideration. So I researched the Collected Writings, the
> Secret
> Doctrine, the Mahatma Letters, to demonstrate that there was
> no problem
> with using programs to raise money, and that we need to run
> the Lodge to
> conform with the society around it, not some society which
> existed on
> another continent a century ago.
>
> I don't have a copy of the Collected Writings handy
> at the moment, but
> I do remember I was looking up in the index things like
> money, fees, and
> Lodges.
>
> > 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 ?
>
> Consider: A lodge has a bookstore. It carries books
> on Yoruba. A major
> contributor to the Lodge says that, as Yoruba involves
> animal sacrifice,
> books on the subject should not be in the bookshop, and s/he
> will stop
> the contributions if the book remains in the bookshop. What
> do YOU think
> will happen?
>
> Bart Lidofsky