Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt00205)

Anand,

You wrote:

> I found that some members of even 
> Adyar TS in America have created dogma and created atmosphere that 
> HPB was right and all others are foolish.
My 42 years of first hand observation of TSA have brought to me a 
different conclusion. TSA members represent a mixture of a lot of 
different viewpoints. I would say, that in general, TSA members are 
respectful of HPB, though, for the most part, ignorant of her 
teachings. For instance, most would be hard put to explain the 
difference between Egos and Monads. I might add that most members are 
also respectful of CWL. Nevertheless, most TSA members do not belong to 
a local Lodge and are rather ignorant of Theosophical teachings in 
general, whether they be those of HPB or CWL. Those in management are 
more familiar with the Theosophical terminology developed some eighty 
years ago, and for the most part, are only vaguely aware, if at all, 
that there are differences between the teachings of HPB and CWL. Of 
those who are aware, I have found hardly a hand full of members who 
understood the differences well enough to clearly explain them. For 
instance, the difference between HPB's Linga Sharira and CWLs Etheric 
Body. The study material TSA promotes is primarily based upon the 
terminology and ideas developed under Annie Besant's presidency--it is 
what some people call "neo-Theosophy." Check out the study materials 
TSA is offering, and you will see what I mean. Yes, I have met TSA 
members who reject CWL's teachings, but they are not in the majority, 
nor are they part of the management. 
> I know atmosphere in many coutries but I am disappointed with the 
> situation of Theosophy in America. This sect, cult is created by Non-
> Adyar TS organization but it infected American Section of Adyar TS in 
> America.
I'm afraid that you completely lost me here. In what manner is TSA a 
"cult?" What do you mean by the word "cult"? In what manner has the 
non-Adyar TS Organizations "infected" the American Section? I'm afraid 
that for this discussion to become meaningful and productive, who will 
need to become more specific about your meanings of provocative words 
like "cult." You will also need to be more specific concerning your 
conclusions and the evidence you have to back them up. Unless you begin 
to write in reference to your own personal experience from which you can 
give examples, or from documentation which you can cite, I'm afraid that 
people here will begin to get the impression that you are just being an 
ideologue and that you do not really know what you are talking about. 
Best wishes,
Jerry



Anand Gholap wrote:

> > It is the bitter and cultish-like closed mindedness and resentments from too many present day members in any of the Theosophical Organizations (including Adyar) that continues to spew forth its poisons of bigotry, arrogance and pretentiousness which ruins the Theosophical cause. 
>
> I agree with you on this point. I found that some members of even 
> Adyar TS in America have created dogma and created atmosphere that 
> HPB was right and all others are foolish. If Truth can be known by 
> only one person then what was the point in giving so much information 
> about Masters, on discipleship, on the path of occultism. Reason why 
> so much information is given by the Masters about discipleship is it 
> is possible for considerable number of people to know Truth directly. 
> I know atmosphere in many coutries but I am disappointed with the 
> situation of Theosophy in America. This sect, cult is created by Non-
> Adyar TS organization but it infected American Section of Adyar TS in 
> America.
> Anand Gholap
>
>
> > Anand Gholap wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Jerry,
> > > Real problem as I see is there are more than three so called 
> > > Theosophical organizations. And members of them consider other 
> > > organization as competitor. America is very unfortunate as far as 
> > > Theosophy is concerned. Split did ruin Theosophical movement in 
> > > America to much extent. If you are in management, then why don't 
> you 
>
> > > try to merge other small organizations in TSA.
> > > Anand Gholap
> > >
> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@c...> 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Anand,
> > > >
> > > > One works cooperatively by collaborating with others on projects 
> > > which 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > all parties involved feel are for the general good. The manner 
> > > which 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > the project is carried out would be according to the agreed upon 
> > > > "policies or wisdom", as you put it, of each individual. 
> > > > To give an example: When I was invited to participate in the 
> > > planning 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > committee for the Pasadena TS's 1988 networking convention, I 
> > > learned 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > that their system of planning was for everyone to participate in 
> > > each 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > step of the planning process, including the wording of letters 
> and 
>
> > > > fliers. The Chairship was rotated at each meeting, so, sometimes 
> > > > members of other Theosophical Organizations (such as Adyar and 
> ULT) 
>
> > > > chaired the meetings. Each chair had their own style of 
> conducting 
>
> > > >
> > > the 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > meeting, and did so according to their own wisdom. The event was 
> > > very 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > successful. 
> > > > An example where TSA rejected a proposal of collaboration 
> concerned 
>
> > > > Point Loma Publications. Emmett Small, then President of Point 
> > > Loma 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Publications proposed to TSA that they co-publish a particular 
> > > > Theosophical book. I believe the book he proposed was "Wind of 
> the 
>
> > > > Spirit." which is not about Theosophical doctrines, but 
> > > Theosophical 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > wisdom. He received a reply from Dora Kunz who rejected the 
> > > proposal. 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > The reason she gave was that the book is "too Theosophical." 
> She 
>
> > > >
> > > did 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > not propose an alternative book for co-publication. 
> > > > If policies are of such a nature that they prevent work to be 
> done 
>
> > > >
> > > for 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > the general good of humanity and prevent solidarity between 
> fellow 
>
> > > >
> > > human 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > beings, then I suggest that such policies need to be reviewed. 
> TS 
>
> > > > Pasadena's policy of involving everyone into the decision making 
> > > process 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > and rotating the Chairperson ship in the meetings was a policy 
> > > which 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > produced a very well run networking conference which everyone was 
> > > happy 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > to have been a part of. TSA's policy of rejecting the co-
> operative 
>
> > > > publication of a Theosophical book on the grounds that it is "too 
> > > > Theosophical" raises questions in my mind. What is your opinion?
> > > >
> > > > Jerry
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anand Gholap wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Jerry,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > No, the networking we tried to promote does not mean adopting 
> > > > > another 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > organization's policies. It means respecting other's 
> > > differences, 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > extending a hand of fellowship, and working cooperatively with 
> > > > > others 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > who share the ideals of world solidarity. 
> > > > > When actions are guided by wise policies or wisdom then only 
> they 
>
> > > > > become helpful to others. So when you say 'working cooperatively 
> > > with 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > others', what policies guide those actions is important. 
> > > > > Anand Gholap 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links