Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00149)

Wednesday, September 17, 2003


Re: Principle of Impersonality = ANONYMITY.


Dear Friends:

I can only say that what I write below is as I, myself see it. It may
not satisfy.

Concerning the "anonymity" of U L T, enough has been posted to explain
that is exists AS A POLICY solely to prevent any personal assumption of
AUTHORITY.

UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS exists since 1909 (94 years) on this basis.
It presents the Philosophy, and not a "Person or Persons" as "authority"
or "interpreter" thereof. 

It therefore puts forward the original form in which the philosophy was
recorded. It avoids personal views, provides information in the Light
of the Philosophy, and lets articles, notes, answers, etc. stand on
their own merit -- something to be decided on by the readers thereof.

In its application, it says, in brief:  

Let THEOSOPHY stand on its merits.  

Let no person or authority stand as a filter, lens or prism between the
ORIGINAL TEACHINGS and the modern student.


The present inquiries are of benefit to us all. They strip away any
mystery and focus on the purpose of anonymity as observed by the U L T.

This departure from the usual method of conducting an association and
publishing, has been objected to earlier, the same answers have been
provided since then. As I see it, it is a policy now proved by 94 years
of existence to be valuable, that will not be changed or dropped under
the pressure of curiosity or irony. 

The U L T does not seek a mass of new adherents, but it offers a refuge
to those students who desire to study, discuss and apply THEOSOPHY as
originally recorded.

As an illustration, if we were attempting to watch an eclipse of the Sun
we would shield our eyes by using very dark films or glasses. The
"original teachings" are like these protective dark glasses. Behind them
stands the SUN of the Eternal Philosophy -- the eternal Laws of Nature
-- the "Sanatana Dharma." 

Probing further:

We have in writing, in their original form teachings certified to be
from Masters and HPB. We find reference to this collaboration given in
the magazine The PATH, Vol.. 8, pp. 1-3; in the form of certificates the
Masters gave to Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden. Later, an independent certificate
was given by Master K H to Col. Olcott, PTS [LETTERS FROM THE MASTERS
OF WISDOM , 1st series, 1918, p. 54] This reads in part:  

"I have also noted, your thoughts about the "Secret Doctrine." Be
assured that what she has not annotated from scientific and other works,
we have given or suggested to her. Every mistake or erroneous notion,
corrected and explained by her from the works of other theosophists was
corrected by me, or under my instructions. It is a more valuable work
than its predecessor, an epitome of occult truths that will make it a
source of information and instruction for the earnest student for long
years to come."

The value of making these TEACHINGS available in an undistorted shape
was understood by Mr. Crosbie. Thus, anonymity in U L T work was
determined on to serve as a kind of prophylaxis, and, an antidote to any
"authority." This includes the unmarked editing of H P B's writings
after her death.

Of what possible difference does it make who says anything? Whether
this involves the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS, or any other group or
person? Does attaching a name to some writing invest it with greater
worth?  
If so is it personal or impersonal? Suppose a "nom-de-plume" were used?
What then is the result? Further doubt and suspicion?

I say: Has the thing in itself any worth? And have we THOUGHT about
it? And by worth, I define this as universal and eternal principles.
Anything less, limits it, and adds to its uselessness in my esteem..

Either the matter is worth considering on broad impersonal lines or it
is not.

In any case, why not let Theosophy speak for itself, which is what the U
LT work does as impersonally as possible. 

As for myself, as an "old" associate I have repeatedly said that I am
not a "spokesperson" for the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS. If I appear
to answer these probes, it is because the principle of putting THEOSOPHY
forward is to me supremely important. Other apparently have other view,
and some are incomprehensible to me.

I took in mind the need for offering reasons before you who inquire. I
have, accordingly published in the last week Mr. Crosstie's introduction
to the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS .

Then I published H P B's WHAT IS THEOSOPHY and WHAT ARE THE
THEOSOPHISTS.

If those are read the reason for anonymous work for THEOSOPHY that
characterizes the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS work ought to become
clear.

Best washes,

Dallas

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