Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00613)

Bart -- I have time to answer your questions a little more fully, 
now that my shopping is done.

1.  What will the TSA achieve if they win the lawsuit?  

ANSWER:  Greater authority for the territory they have named as 
their domain, which is theosophy in America.  Justification for 
their existence, by demonstrating that Theosophical lodges need 
authority and supervision and that the TSA's spin on theosophy is 
right.  Market domination.  These are common human behaviors that 
have driven much human history.  Certainly, you do not suggest that 
TSA is free of ignorance and territoriality.  

The TSA members that Wheaton financed in the lawsuit took it upon 
themselves to file new bylaws in October 2005.  Betty Bland had 
asked John Scott to revise the Lodge's bylaws on several occasions, 
and he refused.  I'll betchya the bylaws the TSA members attempted 
to file with the Secretary of State are very much what Betty Bland 
wants in lodges.  There's a good chance that the bylaws may be a 
template form the TSA provides.  (I don't know this for sure.  It is 
an educated guess.)


2.  Bart wrote:  I don't understand Tacoma's [explanation].  

ANSWER:  It is regrettable that you do not understand Tacoma's 
desire for autonomy.  John Adams' argument before the Supreme Court 
n the Amistad case is as valid now as it was nearly 200 years ago.  
You may recall that the case involved claims made by rescuers that 
that Blacks they rescued became their property recovered cargo in a 
shipwreck.  The Amistad case involved arguments about the basic 
nature of humanity.  Tacoma's explanation is as simple.  

HPB abolished Adyar (TSA's daddy's home) as the parent organization 
and declared lodges autonomous in 1887.  TSA has no legal claim to 
theosophical lodges other than the authority lodges voluntarily 
accept.  

Tacoma has never relinquished its autonomy to the TSA at Wheaton.  
For 60 years, Tacoma has protected its autonomy.  The Lodge elected 
to not revise its bylaws on several occasions since 1941, because it 
did not want to relinquish the autonomy provided it by the existing 
bylaws.  

What Tacoma accomplishes by winning the lawsuit is the authority to 
determine its own membership and conduct its own business.  The 
officers of the lodge will clear their names from the accusations of 
wrongdoing that TSA has leveled with no substantive evidence.

Personally, I elected to not pass on the drivel that TSA dishes out 
in the guise of theosophy.  John Scott feels that he has a moral and 
ethical responsibility to deal with TSA.  While this may not seem 
like plausible reasoning to you, it makes good sense to me.

Best regards,
Krsanna


  


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Steven Levey <sallev1@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry Bart-But if this whole business still is not clear, and you 
can't see the "ground" which Tacoma stands on to fight against the 
TSA, then there is really nothing I can say to convince you. In 
truth its not important to me whether or not what I say convinces 
you of anything, but it is important that you rread the evidence and 
whatever you come up with, is what you come up with.
>    
>   Steve
> 
> Bart Lidofsky <bartl@...> wrote:
>   Let's assume for the moment that those who run the TSA are not 
> arbitrarily evil. What, in your opinion, will they achieve if they 
win 
> the lawsuit which they would not have been able to achieve without 
it? 
> By the way, I am telling your in advance that I will ask for more 
detail 
> if I believe your answer translates to "they are abirtrarily 
evil." In 
> other words, please don't interpret it as trying to browbeat you 
down.
> 
> You see, I understand (but do not have enough evidence to accept) 
the 
> TSA's explanation about the reason for the lawsuit. I don't 
understand 
> Tacoma's.
> 
> Bart
> 
> Steven Levey wrote:
> 
> > Bart
> > 
> > The problem, as I see it, re: Tacoma and the TSA, is that the 
TSA has become so politcally motivated that this is what determines 
their action regarding the existence of other Lodges. This really 
corporate behavior on the part of TSA, to me, is the problem. 
Theosophy as a philosophy and movement, standing for Brotherhood as 
it was intended by definition, is therefore being tarnished in this 
kind of trial. In other words, if Tacoma, as an entity in itself 
wants to do and be what they are, this should have nothing to do 
with TSA. Even if the Tacoma Lodge became a foolish and non-
theosophically oriented group of anti-HPB folks, they still have the 
right afforded to all human beings to be that. Yes, the TSA can 
write them off as no longer under the TSA umbrella, so to speak. But 
so what and how hypocrital. The TSA has shown itself to be run by 
particularly non-theosophically minded folks, and in that sense no 
longer represent theosophical thought in their own actions. 
> Yes, this
> > is the thought of one student, but it is how I feel, after 
following this from the beginning.
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > Bart Lidofsky wrote:
> > krsanna wrote:
> > 
> >>If you are interested in more information about this case, I 
suggest 
> >>you do what the "Aquarian Theosophist" did. Make written 
> >>inquirities. It saves much speculation.
> > 
> > 
> > Except that I am very much aware of the history that Rodolpho 
Don has 
> > with the Theosophical Society in America. He published an early 
web page 
> > (which, by the way, I frequently used as an example of an 
excellent web 
> > site). John Algeo had two major problems with it, however. The 
first was 
> > that it represented itself as the official website of the 
Theosophical 
> > Society in America. The second was that it revealed rather 
publicly 
> > certain information about the TSA which could be used to help in 
a 
> > hostile takeover. He requested that Rodolpho put in a statement 
that his 
> > site was not the official site of the TSA, and also pointed out 
that 
> > posting the fiscal information was probably a bad idea, but did 
not go 
> > as far as requesting its removal. Rodolpho was furious, and 
contended 
> > that any member of the TSA was entitled to speak for the entire 
> > organization, and posted John's rather polite letter in lieu of 
putting 
> > in the simple disclaimer that John asked for. As such, I find 
Rodolpho 
> > to be a highly prejudiced source.
> > 
> > According to Wheaton, the lawsuit has to do with financial 
> > improprieties, and violation of the organization's publicly 
filed bylaws 
> > on the part of its officers.
> > 
> > One thing that I find interesting is Rodolpho's accusation that 
Wheaton 
> > intends to keep the resources for itself. I recall a time when 
Wheaton 
> > had published a new version of the bylaws which would have 
property of a 
> > dissolved lodge revert to Wheaton. It was pointed out that the 
key 
> > language that required that the resources stay in the area of 
the Lodge, 
> > and not be moved, was no longer there. All sorts of conspiracies 
were 
> > imagined. As then chairman of the bylaws committee of the New 
York 
> > Theosophical Society I gave John Algeo a call. According to him, 
this 
> > was the first he had heard of this, that it was entirely 
unintentional, 
> > and that had I called 48 hours later, there would not have been 
enough 
> > time to fix the wording. As it was, there was enough time, and 
the 
> > wording was changed. But what impressed me was that, for all the 
> > complaining, there was so much faith that the leadership of the 
TSA was 
> > the embodiment of evil that nobody thought to actually try to 
fix the 
> > problem.
> > 
> > This is not to say that the TSA board has not taken numerous 
actions 
> > over the years to keep its oligarchical status (notably taking 
the 6 
> > regional districts and combining them into 3, as well as de-
emphasizing 
> > individual lodge membership in favor of member-at-large 
membership, as 
> > well as setting up a pseudo "National Lodge"). But it is to say 
that I 
> > will take any representation of them as the embodiment of evil 
with a 
> > grain of salt.
> > 
> > Bart
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Mail
> > Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> ---------------------------------
>  Yahoo! Mail
>  Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>