Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00274)

Dear Perry
You wrote to Jerry:

>Maybe the best way you can work within the society is to stay out of 
>the politics as best you can and simply present the theosophical
>teachings in courses or reading groups...

This is one option although unfortunately change doesn't occur 
without engaging the political dimension. And even with this, as 
Jerry stated recently, the prognosis is not good.
Moreover, where the "politics" are sufficiently dishonourable, how 
does one in good conscience continue to support an organisation which 
continues to support such hypocrisy, whose motto is "There is no 
religion higher than Truth. And would one really wish to attract 
people to such an organisation in the name of Theosophy?
Best wishes
Nigel



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

> Hi Jerry,
> It's a tangled web isn't it, maybe all we can do is discuss and 
> explore these issues in whatever limited way we can and theos talk 
> may be that vehicle for this point in time.
> 
> We can only do what we can as an individual I suppose and that may 
be 
> precious little but at least the issues are discussed openly 
> somewhere.
> 
> Maybe the best way you can work within the society is to stay out 
of 
> the politics as best you can and simply present the theosophical 
> teachings in courses or reading groups...
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> "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."
> 
> Yes sorry I meant letters to the editor or opinion pages.
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Perry
> 
> 
> -- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Hejka-Ekins <jjhe@c...> 
wrote:
> > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >