Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00460)

Bruce
   
       Nicely done. Thanks. It always helps to clear the mud a bit. 
       I think that it is a good idea to ask ourselves what we think we are defending when we take offense and then strike back. We cannot effect HPB, Judge, or CWL and AB in our offense and defense. The writings speak for themselves and any genuine student with a little effort can see where the deviations from the Path laid down by HPB and the Mahatmas occurred in the writers to follow her. So, are we defending writings? Are we defending the honor of those whose honor was and is beyond defense? Yes, the Teachers must be defended, but not with personal indignity, but with their writings which reveal their perspective,  otherwise weare acting only for our own personality. I think we need to ask ourselves whose pride is hurt and therefore defended. We dare not take personal offense over the stance of another student. If there is argument it belongs in the realm of clarification of personal views, not to be confounded with the philosophy. Its unfortunate that that happens, and it would
 be quite different if people could meet face to face, but the on-line meetings allow for a dangerous anonymity, with which can hide and just say whatever. looking in another's eyes is quite different and hiding less possible.
      However, our duty might be to put forth the teachings as we find them and let the offended and the defenders simply have their day. Now, perhaps one can see why Dallas often simply quotes verbatim from the writings. If one doesn't, another student invariably attacks with their view, in contradistinction, when one does quote directly, there is really nothing to be said. So, recently, when letters of the past or present are published, I think that they should let to stand on their own. They should not be aimed as persoal weopons. To me this goes for all of the disputents, regardless of "side".
      Having said the above, HPB left no provisions for such doctrinal twists as presented by the Adyar Society after her death. So, anything that really deviates from that needs to be looked at with discrimination by students to see if they "hold water" when compared to what she left as her legacy. The Philosophy was aimed at the amelioration of human suffering, not for the creation of pseudo-occult practice and society's which either stand or fall depending upon whether or not they reflect a humane teaching which allows for all to practice.
      Some further thoughts provoked by Bruce.

robert_b_macd <robert.b.macdonald@hotmail.com> wrote:
  &#65279;HPB in the "Key" describes the Three Objects as follows:

"(1.) To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity
without distinction of race, colour, or creed. (2.) To promote the
study of Aryan and other Scriptures, of the World's religion and
sciences, and to vindicate the importance of old Asiatic literature,
namely, of the Brahmanical, Buddhist, and Zoroastrian philosophies.
(3.) To investigate the hidden mysteries of Nature under every aspect
possible, and the psychic and spiritual powers latent in man
especially." (Key, TUP, 39) 

HPB describes the first object as the principle through which we
remove selfishness from humanity. The remaining two objects are the
means by which we verify the truth behind the efforts to achieve the
first object. They are one object in three parts. It is interesting
how we are going to understand various religions, by contrasting them
with Asiatic literature. It is this literature that expresses best
the idea that the root of mankind is one. Most religions express
this, but not all, HPB points out that:

"What is also needed is to impress men with the idea that, if the root
of mankind is one, then there must also be one truth which finds
expression in all the various religions -- except in the Jewish, as
you do not find it expressed even in the Kabala." (Key, TUP, 45)

HPB points out that nowhere does the Jewish religion express that "the
root of mankind is one", and if the Kabala implies it, it does not
openly express it. The Jewish religion has found expression through
Christianity and Islam, and it is these three religions that are
involved in much of the strife involved in the world today. The
Jewish religion has an openly separatist doctrine, they are a people
apart, etc. It is clear then that not all religions are equal, some
are closer to the theosophical ideal of brotherhood than are others. 
Theosophist have to learn to discriminate.

HPB points out on the practice of brotherhood the following:

"Therefore, we say, that unless every man is brought to understand and
accept as an axiomatic truth that by wronging one man we wrong not
only ourselves but the whole of humanity in the long run, no brotherly
feelings such as preached by all the great Reformers, pre-eminently by
Buddha and Jesus, are possible on earth." (Key, 47)

HPB points out the following on duty:

"No Theosophist should be silent when he hears evil reports or
slanders spread about the Society, or innocent persons, whether they
be his colleagues or outsiders." (Key, 250)

"ENQUIRER. But suppose what one hears is the truth, or may be true
without one knowing it? 
THEOSOPHIST. Then you must demand good proofs of the assertion, and
hear both sides impartially before you permit the accusation to go
uncontradicted. You have no right to believe in evil, until you get
undeniable proof of the correctness of the statement." (Key, 250)

&#65279;"No working member should set too great value on his personal
progress or proficiency in
Theosophic studies; but must be prepared rather to do as much
altruistic work as lies in his
power. He should not leave the whole of the heavy burden and
responsibility of the Theosophical
movement on the shoulders of the few devoted workers. Each member
ought to feel it his duty to
take what share he can in the common work, and help it by every means
in his power." (Key 252)

"To be ever prepared to recognize and confess one's faults. To rather
sin through exaggerated
praise than through too little appreciation of one's neighbour's
efforts. Never to backbite or
slander another person. Always to say openly and direct to his face
anything you have against
him. Never to make yourself the echo of anything you may hear against
another, nor harbour
revenge against those who happen to injure you." (Key, 253)

If anyone has fault with the above, then what are your counter arguments?

The above is an altruistic expression of what members of the
Theosophical Movement are trying
to achieve. No one expects us to do the foregoing well as our entire
education when young and
outside influences since then have been to understand ourselves as
separate from humanity. But
every time we follow the above suggestions, we come closer to
understanding the First Object of
the Movement.

Theosophists do not repeat evil or allow it to go uncontradicted. 
Lies are evil. Theosophists err by excessive praise rather than by
too little appreciation of effort. Whatever else can be said about
TMR, it can hardly be described as excessive praise. Daniel reprints
Lies. Leadbeater wants us to believe that he can psychically divine
who a World Teacher is and use the Theosophical Society to foist this
figure as an authority on the rest of us, and nonsense more outrageous
if ultimately less dangerous (and really, Leadbeater was the least of
our problems during his time). All this and more, and we are
seriously having a debate as to whether these individuals and those
who follow their lead are being hard done by?

I appreciate the sympathy we have for those affected, sympathy should
temper our defence of HPB and the Movement. After all it is a
distasteful duty to tell people that their behaviour is injurious to
the Movement and to Humanity. If some people are too aggressive in
their defence of HPB, I think it is fair to argue that point. 
However, it must be understood that this aspect of Theosophy,
performing one's duties, is much more important than understanding
Rounds and Races. Precisely because the officers of the various
Societies have allowed or participated in the repetition of these
ongoing lies, we find ourselves at this unfortunate juncture. The
cure would be to elect officers of your various Societies who will
have the courage to stand up for HPB and Judge and end once and for
all this endless cycle of sniping. It does not matter whether you
believe in HPB and the Masters, without proof, what has been done to
them is wrong. Sitting on the fence is not an option. Make your
leaders take a public position, this will help to clarify everything
and move this towards a conclusion once and for all. Stir the pot.

These are arguments as to why this painful rehashing of the past
continues to be current. I am curious as to why some think that it is
better to sweep it all away? The fact that we continue to be plagued
by these issues seems to indicate that some essential principle has
not been understood by all parties. If it is not the ignoring of our
Theosophical Duties then what is it?

Sincerely,
Bruce






Yahoo! Groups Links








		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze. 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]