Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00509)

Dear Konstantin,

Thanks for your reply, one area that I think really needs to be looked at in the movement 
is that of what actually is constructive debate.
While I totally agree that we need to try and find that which unites rather than that which 
divides, this method can be very superficial, depending on how it is approached.

In platonic terms we could say we are searching for "the good" or the true now even a 
cursory look at Socrates dialectic approach shows the absolute necessity of opposing  
points of view being, looked at from different angles, critiqued, and (yes the dreaded word 
it seems in the new age ) argued.

HPB and the Mahatmas certainly supported this approach and even if they didn't or I 
should say especially if they didn't, I do or would.

The Jehovah's Witnesses always used to say `look at the unity we have as an organization, 
this plainly shows we are Gods people'.
I had this drummed into my head as a child and young adult, however this so-called 
`unity' is merely conformity through fear.

Yes they can be very "nice" to each other but the underlying glue that keeps their "unity" is 
submission to authority and a closed mind.

To be sure the art of debate has to follow certain rules of decency but I tend to think that 
often the new age approach can really  become quite superficial.

Truth is a never ending quest and in order to help facilitate that we need some process of 
being able to rigorously question and challenge.
The trouble is when the debate turns into personal attacks, and then we have to ask what 
defines an `attack'…..

This approach to me gets us to a deeper level of beginning to understand what unity and 
brotherhood actually are.

Often perhaps we are really seeking comfort or acceptance rather than truth.
Truth can be a bitter pill and no we should never force our truth onto someone else, 
however some things need to be discussed frankly and openly and I can only conclude that 
given some of the troubling information on CWL and that period of TS history it must be 
why people like myself are then perceived as "aggressive" .

You wrote :

"Key to Theosophy" is very elementary book for the beginners. Does it
need the study group? Everyone should better to study it for himself.
Moreover, such study groups often became a factories for
manufacturing dogmatically thinking people. Such was probably their
line of thought."

I don't agree rather I have always found `the key to theosophy' to have many levels to it 
but if you find it elementary then your miles ahead of me.

HPB imo is actually trying to break down the dogmatic mindset in "the key" rather than 
building it up.

I have always found the groups I've been involved with,  if facilitated in an empowering 
way provide very deep questioning and long discussions, often only reading small 
passages at a time.

But I do agree self study is very important, however some people I have found really find 
group work of great benefit.


Cheers

Perry

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Konstantin Zaitzev" <kay_ziatz@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Perry,
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "plcoles1" <plcoles1@> wrote:
> 
> > I had re-thought my decision to not be involved with the society, 
> > The 3 objects are of course objects that I support fully.
> 
> I can try to reconstruct their line of thought.
> If one leaves the Theosophical Society, they probably thought, he is 
> probably supports its objects no more, especially the first one. For 
> if he thinks that Society has deviated from original objects, he can 
> say it aloud and try to improve Society. (until he will be 
> expelled ;). 
> 
> Also they may afraid that some persons could infiltrate to Society 
> not to promote its objects but pursue their own ends. There was a 
> case with New Acropolis members who have done so. To oppose it 
> several lodges were unchartered and practically entire national 
> section was ruined. It was like to treat headache by cutting the head 
> off.
> Since then they are much cautious in accepting new members; I've 
> experienced it myself.
> 
> > Also I hoped that perhaps at some point, I could facilitate a 
> > reading / study group as I used to do with the `Key to Theosophy' 
> 
> "Key to Theosophy" is very elementary book for the beginners. Does it 
> need the study group? Everyone should better to study it for himself. 
> Moreover, such study groups often became a factories for 
> manufacturing dogmatically thinking people. Such was probably their 
> line of thought.
> 
> > Below is the letter I received from the National Secretary of the 
> > Australian section for your perusal, it reads as follows :
> 
> There is not uncommon when an individual member comes into confilct 
> with a national section. There were precedents, though I'm not sure, 
> where in such cases the aspirant applied for unattached membership. 
> And if you shall be rejected once more on the level of international 
> HQ, then it will be a big problem but not now.
>