Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00415)

Thanks Paul for your comments,
Unfortunately Pasadena or ULT don't have any group here in Perth which
is on the West coast of Australia but there is a Pasadena society in
Melbourne which is on the other side of the country.

The decision to resign was a process over a couple of years and even
then I still was not 100% that it was the right one...as with all
things you need to be open to different rationale but at some stage
you need to make a decision.
Myself and a couple of other members decided to form an independent
study group which we are now running.

I hope the society can change for the better but my concern is it will
eventually become a kind of new age society with Reiki, healing,
crystals and aura reading ... and be a theosophical society in name only.

My lament is that HPB offered us such a storehouse of Occult knowledge
that is largely ignored but which could offer all the `new agers' ect
a deeper insight into the occult processes involved in all these areas
like healing or crystals... so they can not only become more aware of
the dangers in carelessly developing psychic abilities or manipulating
psychic energies but also help them to understand the Spiritual
principles needed to be developed before venturing into what is for
most people unknown territory also simply for the vastly interesting
and profound nature of what she had to say.

Still the society is a democratic body and what the members decide to
do is in the end up to them.
I would always be willing to help the society with the process of
change if the invitation was extended in what ever small way I could,
but as I just saw a pig flying past the window,
I think the Adyar society and need to say our farewell's.

Thanks again Paul for your comments they were much appreciated !
Regards 

Perry


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@y...>
wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> 
> wrote:
> > Hello Eldon,
> > I enjoyed your post it covers many of the points I've been tussling
> > with myself since my discovery of all these issues in the TS.
> > Do I stay or do I go was a big issue for me.
> 
> Dear Perry,
> 
> Is there the option of non-Adyar Theosophical affiliation? Pasadena 
> and ULT are represented in Australia too-- ever encountered them?
> 
> > The initial emotion responce is you feel outraged and see an 
> injustice that you want to see it addressed. 
> > After all "there's no Religion higher than Truth".
> > Then you realise how much history is involved and the massive 
> amount of careful overhauling the society would have to go though in 
> order to address these issues.
> 
> The above precisely describes the clerical sex abuse issue in the RC 
> Church, doesn't it?
> 
> > This would take the pro-active co-operation of the leadership. 
> > 
> Ditto.
> 
> > We can't I feel ignore the influence of the LCC in this respect 
> while its influence is not really present prima facie in the Lodges 
> I still think quite a few people of influence within the TS are also 
> involved in the church even if on the periphery (anyone who knows 
> differently please correct me) People involved in the LCC work very 
> hard in the Church (I know I was involved for a period myself) they 
> are lovely people and very committed, so if the info about CWL and 
> AB was to come under serious challenge in the TS by default this 
> would inpact in the LCC and to a lesser degree Co-Freemasonry, 
> although there numbers are dwindling the stalwarts may still have 
> plenty of influence at higher levels in the society.(interested to 
> see what others think)
> 
> What I think is that both major TSes have leaders of advanced age 
> and will not alter their current paths until a new generation of 
> leadership emerges. From my observation, Adyar members are much 
> less satisfied than Pasadena members and therefore a new generation 
> of leadership has more potential for changing direction.
> 
> Is CWL sacred to Indian Theosophists? If so he can never been 
> gotten past, I fear, since they dominate the Adyar TS.
> 
> > 
> > So all these considerations come in to play.
> > As Ive said before not an easy ask at all.
> > 
> > The so-called 'back to Blavatsky-ites' are seen as narrow minded
> > Blavatsky dogmatists which to me is a complete and utter red 
> herring.>
> 
> Not to me.
> 
> > But back to what your post was saying is it 'better' for someone 
> like myself who has seen though the deception of CWL to defer and 
> stand aside and vote with my feet or do I take a pro-active stance 
> within the society? 
> > 
> What's the potential for success? Don't waste time in a psychic 
> sinkhole.
> 
> > For me its been a real dilemma, I feel a certain sense of duty to 
> not so much the society but to the teachings to make sure that 
> members are aware that CWLs and ABs theosophy is not only different 
> but infact contradicts those originally given out.
> > 
> The majority of publications on the subject acknowledge that so 
> people won't be fooled for long even if they start out reading CWL.
> 
> > Not in any kind of paternalistic or dogmatic way at all but simply 
> to offer and show the original from the alternitive versions and 
> leave it up to members to decide.
> > 
> My number 1 complaint about historical evasiveness in Adyar is the 
> unavailability of The Durbar in Lahore, an original work by HPB that 
> was my most crucial evidence for a particular nexus of Sikh and 
> Hindu spiritual leaders with whom the Founders were involved. Why 
> should a book by the chief founder be left unavailable? (Boris de Z 
> translated it in the 60s in the Theosophist, but it's his 
> translation from Russian, still under copyright at TPH.)
> 
> What set off that tangent was "alternative versions" is that HPB in 
> Russian is quite a different author than HPB in English, and when 
> they're writing about the same people and situations the question 
> constantly arises of which one is more authentic. (Kudos though to 
> whomever recently published a translation of People from The Blue 
> Mountains which I have in French.)
> 
> > My decission to resign was really after feeling that the task is to
> > great without the support of the Leadership who seem to be 
> completely disinterested in these issues and you are only met with 
> either silence or denial.
> 
> And if you persist in raising uncomfortable questions, displays of 
> negative emotions they evoke.
> 
> > When I resigned knowone asked me why or showed any concern and I 
> was a very active member.
> 
> You were in the wrong place then. Sorry it was so cold, but that 
> says all that needs to be said about whether leaving was the right 
> thing.
> 
> > So maybe moving on is the only way?
> > 
> > Perry 
> 
> Consider my option: you always have the possibility of rejoining the 
> TS if conditions change. Thus being an ex- and possibly-future 
> Theosophist. Pasadena Theosophists are not in denial about CWL-- 
> and vastly more successful as publishers of HPB. So check out your 
> local options. 
> 
> 
> Paul
> > "You can't speak truth to power"
> > (Noam Chomsky)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Eldon B Tucker <eldon@t...> 
> wrote:
> > > Paul:
> > > 
> > > For a group to grow and evolve, it must allow new ideas to be 
> heard.
> > This 
> > > is not just regarding the history of its earlier leadership, but
> > especially 
> > > about its fundamental assumptions and key ideas. People in a
> > current 
> > > leadership role with a vested interest in the status quo would
> > resist 
> > > change, unless they make an effort to keep flexible and open 
> minded.
> > > 
> > > How an organization responds to new ideas depends upon its 
> purpose,
> > as 
> > > perceived by its leadership. A theosophical group dedicated to
> > promoting 
> > > those ideas found in the writings of HPB and Judge would be less
> > likely to 
> > > consider historic or philosophical issues that question their
> > special 
> > > occult status or authoritative nature of their writings. A group
> > dedicated 
> > > to promoting one's personal spiritual quest, regardless of where 
> it
> > may be 
> > > found, would be more likely to question everything and less
> > challenged by 
> > > any particular viewpoint.
> > > 
> > > It is perfectly fine, I think, that different theosophical and
> > spiritual 
> > > groups exist, each with its own approach and perspective. Each 
> group
> > offers 
> > > something different to its members and society. If there are 
> enough
> > various 
> > > groups, everyone should be able to find one to fit in with and 
> feel
> > at home.
> > > 
> > > Some groups may focus on promoting a certain body of 
> theosophical 
> > > doctrines, those with a particular focus, like 
> Besant/Leadbeater, 
> > > Krishnamurti, Judge, MAHATMA LETTERS, or Purucker variants of 
> the 
> > > doctrines. Each focus may have distinctive ideas, some traceable 
> to 
> > > Blavatsky's writings and others that are first given voice in the
> > later 
> > > writers.
> > > 
> > > Despite questions of theosophical history, the Besant/Leadbeater
> > ideas are 
> > > popular. Consider the rapid growth of Anand Gholap's Yahoo Groups
> > list, 
> > > "theosophical," which in two months of existence has matched
> > theos-talk's 
> > > number of subscribers. (It just reached 263.)
> > > 
> > > What makes a group, magazine, or list popular is the consistence 
> in
> > view, 
> > > content, and expected behavior of members. If someone wants to 
> hang
> > out 
> > > with people of like mind, they'll seek out places where that 
> belief
> > is 
> > > espoused, not where it is under attack and thought ill of.
> > > 
> > > A theosophical group that takes the approach that not only are a
> > certain 
> > > body of doctrines true, but the outlook of its current leadership
> > defines 
> > > the group's purpose, will take challenging views as a political
> > threat. If 
> > > you question Leadbeater's spiritual status, for instance, in a
> > group 
> > > dedicated to promoting his ideas, you may find yourself pushed to
> > the 
> > > sidelines. Regardless of issues of what may be true historically,
> > you'd be 
> > > seen as a threat to the group and treated accordingly.
> > > 
> > > In a different group, not dependent upon a particular belief in 
> > > theosophical history and having a leadership not making any 
> claims
> > to 
> > > special status for themselves, your historic investigations 
> would 
> > fit in 
> > > without making waves.
> > > 
> > > A basic question with a group is, "What is the purpose for which
> > this group 
> > > exists?" If it is to promote a certain belief system, any inquiry
> > that 
> > > undermines that belief, or is disruptive to people expressing 
> ideas
> > in 
> > > terms of that belief, would be opposed. The questioning of the
> > belief would 
> > > be considered as not in accord with the group's stated purpose,
> > being "off 
> > > topic" and inappropriate.
> > > 
> > > If a group is to promote a certain open inquiry into the 
> spiritual, 
> > > regardless of one's belief, there would be no belief system to 
> be 
> > > undermined and the only disruptive behavior would be when someone
> > stifles 
> > > another's feeling of belonging and willingness to express and 
> share
> > his or 
> > > her ideas. (That is, in terms of a mailing list, to treat other 
> and
> > their 
> > > beliefs with respect, even as we may disagree and offer 
> dissenting
> > views.)
> > > 
> > > Theosophists are free to form their own groups, magazines, web
> > sites, 
> > > mailing lists, study classes, etc. with or without official
> > sanction of 
> > > some major theosophical groups. We're free to explore life 
> without
> > being 
> > > subject to organizational politics as perhaps we were in the 
> past.
> > With the 
> > > advent of the Internet, we have the means to continue our 
> studies of
> > deeper 
> > > materials and further our spiritual quest without having to do so
> > according 
> > > to someone else's rules, regulations, or decision to grant us a
> > membership 
> > > card or lodge charter.
> > > 
> > > With theos-talk, there's a experiment in progress. How well can 
> we
> > coexist 
> > > with people with widely-different views without giving up or 
> blowing
> > up in 
> > > anger? Can we all learn from each other, rather than simply 
> harden
> > our 
> > > positions and become more dogmatic about what we previously 
> believed
> > in? 
> > > And can we become more skillful in exploring issues of deep
> > philosophy, 
> > > uncovering new insights for both ourselves and others to learn 
> by?
> > It's a 
> > > challenge.
> > > 
> > > -- Eldon