Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00346)

Feb 14 2005

Re: ACCURACY OR ERROR ? 


Dear Krishtar:

Sorry if you extracted from what I write any arrogance. I am not intending,
nor am I interested in that.

I realize if I speak plainly, or quote from the "original teachings," (which
have always been available) it rubs some the "wrong way."  

I present, as far as I am able, what THEOSOPHY says. If there are any faults
they are of course mine. They are not of THEOSOPHY. 

But I would encourage all to really study THEOSOPHY. It is so valuable.

You are right that we all study at our own chosen pace. And we all chose to
adopt such aspects of the philosophy as please us. But such individual
choosing may leave "gaps," and later on, those become clearer. 

Just cast an eye at the last 50 or 100 years during which there has been an
intense review the history of the development of Christian sects, protests
and divisions -- and, the well known fact, that it is now difficult after
some 2,000 year to secure original texts.  

The Nag-Hemadri and the Dead-Sea scrolls have embroiled scholars for years
now. Further, as old texts (gospels and "orthodox" MSS, were copied or
translated, amendments and changes of meaning were introduced. (When
compared to older versions.)

In the past 125 years of THEOSOPHY we have seen, on a small scale, similar
things happening. Analogies and comparables. 

Facts don't repair "ruptures" but people do, if they consider that they may
have accepted information that was inaccurate for some time. Now is a chance
to verify and alter such conclusions, or protest them. 

You seem to protest my method of offering comments, but not the facts in
themselves? Am I right ? I am truly sorry if in any way I have annoyed or,
ruffled anyone, as I would rather be the one that is "ruffled," if I am in
error. But, I notice that 2 other persons were involved in this exchange:
Konstantin and Frank. 

I only present what I have discovered and let those facts tell their own
tale. I don't think anyones' guesses make up for inaccuracies and incorrect
opinions. I can only go to the documents and the records made by
contemporaries. I don't think any "hate" is involved. Annoyance at
inaccuracies -- yes, but not "hate." All adjustments of facts ought to be
conducted dispassionately. 

I considered what you said a good time ago and felt that it was better to
provide accurate information that all could check, rather than let
misinformation (of course in my opinion) continue, unremarked. I am always
open to correction and welcome it. 

Thank you for your mind consideration.

Dallas

===================================
 
-----Original Message-----
From: krishtar 
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 9:12 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: hate Leadbeater? mind realms arrogancy


Dallas 

I thank you for the documentation that you sent us.

Notice please that according to the answer I myself gave to you at that
time, I meant that the rupture or the split, as you said, I was referring
were the different focus on many spiritual aspects between the original
theosophy from HPB/Masters and the new aproaches which came from Leadbeater
and " his band " .

I am aware that William Q. Judge and others were involved in a series of
incidents which I donīt need to detail now but I donīt intend as you
supposed, to rewrite the history.

People like you who seem to have studied more theosophy than many of us
together should - imo - avoid the atmosphere of arrogancy that these
repplies sometimes transmit.

If a very deep study of theosophy and its history will transform me into an
arrogant person, full of myself, I sincerely prefer to remain an average
reader.

Krishtar

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

----- Original Message ----- 
From: W.Dallas TenBroeck 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 9:51 AM
Subject: RE: Theos-World Re: hate Leadbeater? mind realms!



Feb 12 2005

Thank you Frank:

Hope K will review the history and documents.


Dallas
=====================
   

-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Reitemeyer [mailto:ringding777@t-online.de] 
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 7:06 AM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: hate Leadbeater? mind realms!


Konstantin wrote:

"Pardon me, but even if all you wrote were true, it was W.Q. Judge who
is responsible for the first split of the theosophical movement. As
far I know, he wasn't expelled but has himself divided the Society.

Other numerous splits were just the echoes of the first and main one.
If Besant, Olcott and Leadbeater were wrong, he could say that they
are wrong, they are fools, they are villains and black magicians, and
maybe they would even hate him for that and expell him, but no one
could accuse him in split. In Buddhism the split of the sangha is
regarded as one of the greatest falls, and it far overweights all the
sins of the other side, real and imaginary, whatever they could be.

This principle is quite applicable to the TS, for the brotherhood is
its first object while other objects are subsidiary.

Remember that Leadbeater didn't held any important office in the
Theosophical Society. The difference of opinion and preaching wrong
teaching is not a sin at all. To accuse people in that is just
ridiculous for those who call themselves theosophists."
K

------------------------------------------------


frank writes:


Konstantin, 


I can't follow your logic.

The split was produced by the egoists Besant & 
Olcott. Judge was the victim, not the culprit.

Furthermore, the split is not to be regarded as 
the cause of the problem, but as the effect of it.

The split was the last means of the Masters to 
protect the cause and their true chelas.

>From one point of view it was an occult testing.

The split itsself was not the problem, as methods 
of outer organizations are less important.

More important was the spirit was attacked.

The split was a kind of spiritual defense of the 
Masters against those Judases which turned against it.

Not he, who organizes the split is responsible for 
the split, but rather he, who gives the first cause for it.

To give you an example: In military history 
according to Clausewitz not that nation is 
responsible for war which gave the first shot, but 
that nation which gives reason for it.

That cause and effect is nearly always intermixed 
is the reason why we earthlings have so many 
problems and produce more and more every day.

It is the female spirit of kali yuga. It is for 
that reason that HPB appeared as a woman to teach 
brotherhood (and not sisterhood).

Frank