Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00255)

Dear Pery,
You wrote:

> This is very true and I think the reason I'd like to see critical 
> thinking encouraged more in the societies publications as the 
> general membership would be empowered by having a knowledge of some 
> of the issues that have shaped the theosophical movement.
Critical thinking in the Society's publications certainly would empower 
the members. But, why would TSA want to empower the members? Rather, 
the TSA bylaw changes over the last almost twenty years have 
disempowered the members. 
> If we are wanting to deepen our knowledge of the theosophia we need 
> to be able to develop discernment and I would say an ability to give 
> critique but also to take critique.
I agree.

> Some may argue that this is up to the individual member to do for 
> themselves and to publicly critique a writers perspectives 
> is "untheosophical".
Yes, especially when the critique challenges the predominate paradigm.

> Editorials are there for this reason and allow free and open 
> exchange of ideas and also allow a kind of pier review which 
> protects against dogmatism developing.
I don't follow. Do you mean opinion pages, like those found in 
newspapers or news magazine? Editorials are normally the views of the 
Editor or the President.

> This was the trap Adyar fell into with Leadbeater who took on the 
> role of oracle and who then became untouchable.
Yes, under Besant's endorsement he became an "oracle." She believed in 
him, and most of the membership believed in Besant. 
> At least with the advent of the internet the average member is 
> empowered to have their say.
Providing the average member owns a computer and has an interest in 
internet discussion groups. Yet, even the minority who do so, are only 
addressing each other. Notice also, that the Management of the 
Theosophical organizations do not participate in these discussions. One 
Board member made a post a few months ago, and we never hear from 
again. No doubt someone had a talk with him. TSA officials are 
discouraged from this kind of activity. Their participation would level 
the playing field--i.e. they would risk losing control of the rhetoric.

> My motivation in pointing these things out has been not to do damage 
> to the society, nothing could be further from the truth rather its 
> is my hope that the society can grow not necessarily in numbers but 
> in terms of grow as an organisation by facing some of these issues 
> and the movement as a whole can start to breathe together a little 
> more as a whole.
My motivations and my hope too. We've been working at it for twenty 
years and made some progress. My hope is that someday the membership 
will wake up and start working together for the common good of the TM. 
Once this happens, the Organizations, if they want to remain relevant, 
will have to recognize that the members are going in a different 
direction. Then, if the Organizations want to remain their leadership, 
they will have to run ahead of the crowd and convince everyone that they 
were going in that direction all of the time.

> We don't have to agree on everything in order to start to cooperate 
> together.
> This surely is the challenge that the truth of `Unity in diversity' 
> is trying to teach us.
We certainly don't have to agree about who is the greatest Theosophical 
writer, or which is the true Theosophical tradition. We do have to 
agree to work together for the Theosophical Movement, which is far more 
important than any Theosophical Organization. 
Jerry





Perry Coles wrote:

> Thanks Jerry,
> You wrote:
> "Unfortunately, most of the TSA membership are "at large" and
> neither know nor particularly care about what is going on at the 
> Lodge or the National level."
>
> This is very true and I think the reason I'd like to see critical 
> thinking encouraged more in the societies publications as the 
> general membership would be empowered by having a knowledge of some 
> of the issues that have shaped the theosophical movement.
>
> If we are wanting to deepen our knowledge of the theosophia we need 
> to be able to develop discernment and I would say an ability to give 
> critique but also to take critique.
>
> Some may argue that this is up to the individual member to do for 
> themselves and to publicly critique a writers perspectives 
> is "untheosophical".
>
> Editorials are there for this reason and allow free and open 
> exchange of ideas and also allow a kind of pier review which 
> protects against dogmatism developing.
>
> This was the trap Adyar fell into with Leadbeater who took on the 
> role of oracle and who then became untouchable.
>
> At least with the advent of the internet the average member is 
> empowered to have their say.
>
> My motivation in pointing these things out has been not to do damage 
> to the society, nothing could be further from the truth rather its 
> is my hope that the society can grow not necessarily in numbers but 
> in terms of grow as an organisation by facing some of these issues 
> and the movement as a whole can start to breathe together a little 
> more as a whole.
>
> We don't have to agree on everything in order to start to cooperate 
> together.
> This surely is the challenge that the truth of `Unity in diversity' 
> is trying to teach us.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Perry
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@c...> 
> wrote:
>
>
> > Dear Perry,
> >
> > Thank you for you well thought out comments. 
> >
> >
> > > This process of change I think needs to work from the ground up 
> > > rather than the other way around however a bit of support from up 
> > > above would be nice.
> > Yes, I think you are quite right. Changes do need to be made from 
> the 
>
> > ground up. Unfortunately, most of the TSA membership are "at 
> large" and 
>
> > neither know nor particularly care about what is going on at the 
> Lodge 
>
> > or the National level. For those who are active at the local 
> levels, 
>
> > TSA has a pattern of marginalizing the progressive individuals and 
> small 
>
> > groups. This had been very effective in preventing any meaningful 
> > progressive trends from spreading across the membership. Remember, 
> only 
>
> > the National Headquarters has the membership list. They not only 
> > control the rhetoric, but control the means of communication 
> directly to 
>
> > the membership. As for support from above: There have been 
> progressive 
>
> > Presidents. Over the last 42 years that I personally know of, 
> there 
>
> > have been two of them on the National level, and one progressive 
> > International President. However, once they were out of office, 
> the 
>
> > more conservative forces moved in to erase their accomplishments. 
> >
> >
> > > Internet groups like this one offer a forum to debate and discuss 
> > > these inter-organizational and historical points freely.
> > > I tend to think this will be a process that will need to be 
> walked 
>
> > > gently through within the society rather than using a 
> sledgehammer 
>
> > > which tends to leave people feeling defensive and antagonistic. 
> > > (rightly or wrongly)
> > The Internet is indeed a powerful force, and I suspect that we are 
> only 
>
> > beginning to recognize its impact. It greatest advantage is that 
> it 
>
> > allows a perfectly even playing field for communication. It's 
> greatest 
>
> > failing is that it allows a perfectly even playing field for 
> > cyber-pathology. The Internet is not our savior. But, perhaps we 
> will 
>
> > learn to use it as a tool to save ourselves. 
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Perry Coles wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > > Sorry not replying individually but hopefully I can cover the 
> some 
>
> > > general points in one post.
> > > Thanks Nigel for your comments and as you are aware these are 
> issues 
>
> > > that will need to be discussed and thought about long and hard as 
> by 
>
> > > students and we hope at some time some kind of progress will be 
> able 
>
> > > to be made.
> > >
> > > The historical baggage that comes with any person and 
> organization 
>
> > > is largely hidden until we scratch deeper. 
> > > The issues and points of view that have been put forward on this 
> > > forum have been quite upfront. 
> > > Some may not find this type of approach un-theosophical, I 
> however 
>
> > > find it to be in keeping with the type of criticism that is 
> needed 
>
> > > in order to stop any teacher or teaching from becoming either an 
> > > infallible Seer or holy writ that then becomes dogma.
> > >
> > > This seems to be somewhat of a luxury in organizations as it is 
> felt 
>
> > > they have to play things very diplomatically and try not to upset 
> > > their members too much.
> > >
> > > As MKR pointed out the internet has now become a vehicle to 
> > > distribute and share this information and I agree with him that 
> this 
>
> > > will make a large impact onto the actual organizations themselves.
> > > Internet groups like this one offer a forum to debate and discuss 
> > > these inter-organizational and historical points freely.
> > > I tend to think this will be a process that will need to be 
> walked 
>
> > > gently through within the society rather than using a 
> sledgehammer 
>
> > > which tends to leave people feeling defensive and antagonistic. 
> > > (rightly or wrongly)
> > >
> > > I can't claim to know the solution to these problems however it 
> > > maybe we can sometimes throw the baby out with the bathwater. 
> > > The Adyar TS may not be perfect but for me I am glad such an 
> > > organization still exists and as it does I feel offer something 
> > > unique and rare in the world even with its seeming unwritten 
> > > policies on not allowing criticism of C.W Leadbeater's teachings 
> in 
>
> > > its official publications.
> > >
> > > The apparent reason for this is that so many members are 
> supporters 
>
> > > and promoters of Leadbeater and it is perceived as encroaching 
> on 
>
> > > their right to support and promote him.
> > > I have never suggested this should be the case, I have simply 
> asked 
>
> > > that the right to make a critical comparison of his teachings 
> with 
>
> > > those of the Mahatma's and Blavatsky's be supported.
> > > At this stage as far as I've been able to ascertain this type of 
> > > article would not be allowed to be published in its official 
> > > publications.
> > >
> > > The other side is that the Adyar TS has branches all over the 
> world 
>
> > > and most members support and promote non dogmatism freedom of 
> > > thought.
> > >
> > > It offers libraries and bookshops of esoteric material. 
> > > It also offers opportunities for enquirers to get together and 
> > > discuss life's mysteries and most importantly it promotes the 
> idea 
>
> > > of Brotherhood.
> > >
> > > This process of change I think needs to work from the ground up 
> > > rather than the other way around however a bit of support from up 
> > > above would be nice.
> > >
> > > I'd like to encourage any Adyar members on this group to put 
> forward 
>
> > > their feelings and ideas on how these issues may be worked 
> through 
>
> > > or do you feel it is a non issue?
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Perry
> > >
> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@y...> 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dear Perry
> > > > Your summation of three Theosophical organisations is a 
> > > conciliatory 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > position given your many postings on your difficulties with 
> > > ongoing 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > censorship within the Adyar Society.
> > > > You write:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Adyar seems to have chosen to go more down the path of simply
> > > > > focusing on the 3 objects generally.
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Even if there is quite a lot of dis-function in some areas they 
> > > all
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > foster to a greater or lesser extent a spirit of inquiry...
> > > > Whilst as you suggest this is generally true, with the second 
> > > object 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > of the Adyar Society being "To encourage the study of 
> comparative 
>
> > > > religion, philosophy and science" there is still a great 
> struggle 
>
> > > >
> > > for 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > me to reconcile this admirable and essential statement of 
> > > principle 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > with its actual practice by that organisation's hierarchy which 
> > > you 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > have encountered and described. 
> > > > Study by comparison includes sharing of perceptions and opinions 
> > > > without fear or favour, both verbally and in print. As you have 
> > > shown 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > us, the Adyar Society hierarchy seems only to permit this in 
> print 
>
> > > >
> > > in 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > a highly selective manner. This "philosophical" selectivity, as 
> > > > opposed to that needed to ensure decency and decorum, does not 
> > > > support that organisation's "Freedom of Thought" statement nor, 
> it 
>
> > > > seems, their motto "There Is No Religion Higher Than Truth." 
> > > Whilst 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > their statement and motto may be viewed as ideals only, it is 
> > > > disappointing the hierarchy have not appeared to follow Madame 
> > > > Blavatsky's lead when she wrote and practiced "...Contrast alone 
> > > can 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > enable us to appreciate things at their right value; and unless 
> a 
>
> > > > judge compares notes and hears both sides he can hardly come to 
> a 
>
> > > > correct decision." H.P. Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, 
> p. 
>
> > > >
> > > 2
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > It is to be hoped that the Society's current and in my opinion, 
> > > > hypocritical position will be courageously addressed in the near 
> > > > future thereby potentially attracting and retaining an even 
> > > greater 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > number of sincere and honourable seekers such as yourself.
> > > > Very best wishes
> > > > Nigel
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links