Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00465)

HI perry,

>> 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.>>

I don't think the chances of that are very high. As I said in a
previous mail: Leadbeater is hardly referred to in its magazines
(neither positively, nor negatively). 

Katinka
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> wrote:
> 
> 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