Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00344)

Dear Krishtar,

That is a prove that he is having a infant reaction and I do not 
really believe he mean what he says. I have asked him in a private e-
mail to stop with this reaction. Reacting like this he will not help 
the theosophical cause. But we have to understand that for personal 
reasons everybody has its own up and downs. 

Above of all I believe all of us independent of our personal 
preferences and connections we are great family. We all are involved 
in some level with the theosophical cause and everybody in it's own 
level of understanding, believes to be acting right and doing what 
has to be done.

We have different positions and point of views and this is what 
makes everything interesting. Imagine if everyone of us would be 
repeating the same things all the time. 

We can't forget that behind these lines posted here are human 
persons with dreams, with problems, with hopes struggling also in a 
such difficult world and everyday problems. 

If we try to develop a spirit of love for all and try to understand 
that everyone in it's own level is trying to give a contribution 
maybe the animosity that exist will be reduced in some level. To say 
what I am saying it is easy, but always difficult to transform into 
reality. But maybe as theosophists independent of the organization 
we are connected too, this is one of our great trial. Because wish 
or do not wish we are all related it is not accidentally that we 
find inside of this forum members of different theosophical 
organizations. It is because we are a great family! 

If we keep the family image in our mind it will be much easier to go 
on. In a family always there are conflicts and problems, different 
views, different ages, different level of understanding. But there 
is something which united them all and this is love. If we can 
extend such attitude to the external circle of our family and to 
imprint it into our second larger family, for sample, things are 
going to be more easy and productive.

A nice beginning would be to follow the very wise advice of 
Blavatsky that I will repeat here again and this apply also to me:

"No Theosophist should blame a brother, whether within or outside 
the association; neither may he throw a slur upon another's actions 
or denounce him, lest he himself lose the right to be considered as 
a Theosophist. For, as such, he has to turn away his gaze from the 
imperfections of his neighbor, and center rather his attention upon 
his own shortcomings, in order to correct them and become wiser. Let 
him not show the disparity between claim and action in another, but, 
whether in the case of a brother, a neighbor, or simply a fellow 
man, let him rather ever help one weaker than himself on the arduous 
walk of life." 

Erica








--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "krishtar" <krishtar_a@b...> 
wrote:
> Erica
> Very oportune the excerpt you, Erica, send us, taken from the 
HPBīs pen.
> The most intriguing in all this situation of defending our points 
of view is that , at least in my own case, I can face my limitations 
in accepting each other faults and sometimes, each other different 
approaches and points of view.
> You once said that there are Yin and Yang people here, 2 sides of 
the same coin, and that is very interesting. 
> I donīt have nothing against diferent povīs but what I know is 
that everybody find enormous difficulties in dealing with diferent 
aproaches in a aplacid, pollite way, when the other part not uses 
his sincerity and gives no supports for the opinions.
> Anandīs way of accusing and writing ugly things about HPB and 
showing no support for his POVīs and even not answering, not 
replying the great majority of posts is what creates this strange 
and tense atmosphere, in my view.
> I sometimes donīt know if I should make a break in these 
discussions or just ignore them.
> 
> K
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Erica Letzerich 
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 10:22 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: superficial fundamentalism of Anand
> 
> 
> Excuse me I do not wish to open a war here of course. But there 
are 
> some persons here that indeed are very fundamentalist. But this 
is 
> their choice and I am not going to judge or to name them others 
> already have done it. 
> 
> I do not wish to defend Anand but I remember in the very 
beginning 
> he got into this forum he sent me a private e-mail and he was 
deeply 
> shocked with the inquisition tribunal about CWL going on here. 
> 
> Of course he did not mention with me that he was in shock, but I 
> understood and I felt reading his private e-mail for me. Anand 
is 
> just exactly the other side of the coin as we have Blavatskyans 
now 
> we have a Ledbetarian. So simple. 
> 
> Now what he is having is an ugly and non sense childish reaction 
and 
> he is becoming a fundamentalist as much the others (from 
Blavatsky 
> side). By the way for those who are more Bakti it is a perfect 
> natural reaction. 
> 
> Here to remember a teaching of Blavatsky that seemed to be 
forgotten 
> by her followers that read and keep in mind only what is 
convenient 
> for them. And that is good for you also Anand.
> 
> "No Theosophist should blame a brother, whether within or 
outside 
> the association; neither may he throw a slur upon another's 
actions 
> or denounce him, lest he himself lose the right to be considered 
as 
> a Theosophist. For, as such, he has to turn away his gaze from 
the 
> imperfections of his neighbor, and center rather his attention 
upon 
> his own shortcomings, in order to correct them and become wiser. 
Let 
> him not show the disparity between claim and action in another, 
but, 
> whether in the case of a brother, a neighbor, or simply a fellow 
> man, let him rather ever help one weaker than himself on the 
arduous 
> walk of life."
> 
> Erica Letzerich
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "krishtar" <krishtar_a@b...> 
> wrote:
> > Dear Nigel
> > Just a brief comment.
> > Many people regret about many aggressive and rough repplies 
many 
> of us send to Anand, but he always does it, he seldom or never 
show 
> any basis for his statements and claims.
> > He calls Dan and Dallas fundamentalists although being him the 
> most fundamentalist member I have ever met here.
> > Maybe we are dealing with a Bishop from the same line 
Leadbeater 
> was, and thus, heīll always defend his gurus.
> > 
> > Krishtar 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: david-blankenship@c... 
> > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 5:48 PM
> > Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Those who study Blavatsky's 
writing 
> become fundamentalists
> > 
> > 
> > Nigel,
> > It is not that simple a choice between a black CWL and a 
white 
> HPB. I nearly left Theosophy when I found out about the fake 
> master's letters under HPB. Her followers like CWL's followers 
say 
> nothing was ever proven against either her or him. But like the 
Abu 
> Graib(sp?) prison scandal, there is such a thing as command 
> responsibilities and in CWL's case, the appearance of 
impropriety.  
> Neither comes out very well. Fortunately my adherence is to 
> mysticism and I stayed. You seem to be stacking the deck.
> > 
> > David B.
> > -------------- Original message -------------- 
> > 
> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand Gholap" 
> > > wrote: 
> > > > Nigel, 
> > > > You wrote 
> > > > "Like many, my Theosophical studies began with an open 
mind, 
> with 
> > > > predominant exposure to Leadbeater, Besant, Hodson, 
> Jinarajadasa and 
> > > > their commentators' information. After a number of years 
as 
> a 
> > > serious 
> > > > and committed student I began lecturing for the Adyar 
> Society and 
> > > > even constructed and ran an introductory course for 
> newcomers for a 
> > > > number of years, based in part on the above authors' 
> teachings. 
> > > After 
> > > > considerable work, this course was published and 
distributed 
> > > > throughout Adyar Lodges in Australia, now very, very 
much to 
> my 
> > > > regret." 
> > > > That means when you supported those authors you believed 
you 
> were 
> > > > right. Now you don't think so. So truth is for most of 
the 
> students 
> > > > is subjective or relative. You should say " I now 
think .... 
> is 
> > > right 
> > > > but I may be wrong because at other moment I believed 
> opposite views 
> > > > were right" More thought on this is perhaps required. 
> > > > 
> > > > Anand Gholap 
> > > 
> > > Dear Anand 
> > > You have not replied to my answer to your above comment! 
You 
> have 
> > > simply repeated the above exchange. Did you not notice my 
> response to 
> > > your comment? I am most interested in your comments so my 
> response is 
> > > herein repeated. 
> > > Regards 
> > > Nigel 
> > > 
> > > >Dear Anand 
> > > >Thank you for your reply. 
> > > 
> > > You wrote: 
> > > > That means when you supported those authors you believed 
you 
> were 
> > > > right. Now you don't think so. So truth is for most of 
the 
> students 
> > > > is subjective or relative. You should say " I now 
think .... 
> is 
> > > right 
> > > > but I may be wrong because at other moment I believed 
> opposite 
> > > views 
> > > > were right" 
> > > 
> > > You say: 
> > > >"you believed you were right". 
> > > 
> > > Never was this the case. How could my mind be remotely 
correct 
> when 
> > > compared with these teachers whose esteem was, and still 
is, 
> so high 
> > > in the Adyar Society. 
> > > On the contrary it was my trust that I was studying and 
> conveying the 
> > > teachings of honest and honourable people that was my 
biggest 
> mistake. 
> > > 
> > > You say: 
> > > > So truth is for most of the students is subjective or 
> relative. 
> > > >You should say " I now think .... is right but I may be 
wrong 
> > > because at other moment I believed opposite views were 
right". 
> > > 
> > > For me, these are wise words to which we might all aspire 
> although 
> > > with respect, you don't often appear to represent them in 
this 
> forum. 
> > > You seem utterly convinced as to the rightness of your 
belief 
> in the 
> > > pronouncements of Leadbeater and Besant, and the 
worthlessness 
> of 
> > > those of H P Blavatsky. 
> > > Both Leadbeater and Besant have been proven far and beyond 
any 
> > > reasonable doubt to have lied, and to have manipulated and 
> deceived 
> > > their followers on many occasions and in many ways. 
> > > At this stage, the same cannot be said of Blavatsky with 
any 
> degree 
> > > of proof. 
> > > 
> > > This certainly does not mean to me that Blavatsky is an 
> infallible 
> > > guru, although some of us on this forum are accused of 
> believing 
> > > this, which is yet another dishonest attempt to avoid the 
real 
> issues 
> > > and to libel us in spite our continued protestations to 
the 
> contrary. 
> > > Nor does it mean that Leadbeater and Besant were wrong in 
all 
> that 
> > > they said and did. 
> > > It is simply that Blavatsky has far greater credibility as 
a 
> teacher 
> > > of Theosophy and occultism as far as most of us can 
ascertain 
> at this 
> > > stage. 
> > > However, it seems to me we should still maintain an ever 
open 
> mind 
> > > and heart to new perspectives, an attitude she 
demonstrably 
> supported. 
> > > However, even in this, the same cannot be said for 
Leadbeater 
> and 
> > > Besant who almost demanded obedience from their followers 
and 
> > > unfortunately succeeded and still succeed beyond all 
measure. 
> > > 
> > > Regards 
> > > Nigel 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >Nigel wrote: 
> > > 
> > > >Dear Leon and all 
> > > >Leon, you wrote in part to Anand Gholap: 
> > > > Don't know why I even bother writing this -- since I see 
no 
> one on 
> > > this forum 
> > > > are suckers for this kind of nonsense. But, maybe it 
will 
> alert 
> > > some lurking 
> > > > newcomer who might take this subject seriously. :-) 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >    
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >    
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
>    
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]