Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00257)

Dear Adelasie,

The issue is of much broader concern than just intra-Theosophical 
problems. Every spiritual tradition I'm familiar with is riven by 
conflicts of one kind or another, rooted in historical events. And 
they do tend to get reexamined continually-- as for example the 
great interest in the Gnostics that we see in current publications. 
The rise of orthodoxy and the suppression of gnosis was clearly 
a "past failure" of Christianity that is important to continue to 
examine. No resolution is in sight but people feel compelled to 
keep reexamining what happened and why.

As to why we feel compelled to do this, I think of a metaphor from 
massage therapy. Old injuries cause can current pain and tension, 
and when someone works skillfully on the problem area it causes 
temporary discomfort but eventual release of tension and healing. 
With old injuries like the persecution of Gnostics or the 
Judge/Besant/Olcott feud, it seems to take an endless amount of 
massage before any tension is released or any healing can take place.

But as long as old injuries produce pain and tension, people will 
want to do something for relief. For some, the "answer" is to avoid 
the subject and try to keep others from examining it. For others, 
the answer is keep working on the sore spot. As to which approach 
is right, it seems to be based on how one views history. Is 
historical understanding a necessary precondition for resolving 
tension and pain? Some feel that if we would just forget the past 
the tension and pain would go away.

I've recently discovered, to my considerable surprise, that the US 
Civil War continues to arouse intense passions and regional 
antagonisms. There are a lot more Americans who hate Southerners in 
general than I ever imagined (as seen in hundreds of posts on 
liberal websites after the Bush victory.) If that seems awfully 
long ago to produce such passions, think about the Sunni/Shia 
hatreds and how long ago the "injury" took place. Or, stranger yet, 
my impression from visiting Europe is that the French and English 
dislike one another over historical grievances more than either 
dislike the Germans. How could this be in light of two world wars 
in living memory? Apparently the Hundred Years War and Napoleonic 
wars left a residue of mutual distrust that overrides more recent 
conflicts.

Turning toward more positive signals, I would point out the Truth 
and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa and the vast amount of 
horrific events that had to be worked through. Open and honest 
examination of the past seems to have been a healing force in that 
country. Another good example is the German self-examination after 
WWII, contrased to the poor example of the Japanese whose historical 
memory is horribly distorted and self-serving. Those who are 
willing to look into the abyss have come out ahead, IMO, of those 
who resolutely avoid or deny any thought that their nation was ever 
guilty of atrocities.

Pardon my rambling,

Paul

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "adelasie" <adelasie@s...> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> I can't help wondering what work theosophists can do toward 
> establishing the consciousness of the Unity of all Life in the 
mind 
> of humanity when we cannot seem to accept such unity within the 
ranks 
> of theosophists. I wonder why it is so important to us to continue 
to 
> examine our past failures? Perhaps the idea is to get past them to 
> something more in tune with our philosophy? I know you are not a 
> theosophist, Paul, and apologize for jumping on my soapbox in your 
> post. It just happened to be the one in front of me when my 
comments 
> coalesced in my own mind. 
> 
> All the best,
> Adelasie
> 
> On 10 Feb 2005 at 15:14, kpauljohnson wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > Dear Erica,
> > 
> > There appears to be healthy cooperation between ULT and the 
Pasadena
> > TS HQ, but your experience parallels some of mine. At an event 
in the
> > Washington DC lodge in 1986, the ULT speaker gave a subtly anti- 
Adyar
> > talk, Dora Kunz gave a subtly pro-Adyar talk, and I came third 
and as
> > one person present put it "reduced the tension" with a talk that 
was
> > not even pro-Theosophy as much as pro-truthseeking.