Theos-Talk Archives (August 2006 Message tt00374)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Nigel,
> Before I respond, I notice that you hail from Oz.  I was wondering 
if you know of the whereabouts of a great theosophist, Joe Bzelke who 
was at the Melbourne Lodge.
> Cass

Dear Cass
Joe's name is not familiar to me. Was he with the Pasadena or Adyar 
Melbourne centre?
Kind regards
Nigel 




> nhcareyta <nhcareyta@...> wrote:                                  
Dear Cass
>  A few thoughts:
>  
>  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@> wrote:
>  >
>  > Perry,
>  > I would like to pose a question to the group.
>  > 
>  > "Are we still holding on to old thinking in that we are 
>  emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually in need of a society 
to 
>  belong to?"
>  > 
>  > What is it about humans that they need to belong to "groups?".
>  
>  My previous post to Perry addresses some answers to your above 
>  questions. Problems with groups are not the fault of the group as 
an 
>  entity. It will be evident that initially groups form as a means 
for 
>  improved chances of survival in all its forms. In survival based 
>  groups, whether they be tribes, countries or international 
alliances 
>  there are usually those individuals who are stronger and/or 
smarter 
>  to meet any physical threat. This reality usually transforms the 
>  group into leaders and followers which becomes accepted as 
>  the "natural" order of things.
>  Furthermore, in less threatening times, throughout our schooling 
we 
>  become accutely aware of how much we don't know, and how much the 
>  teacher does. This further prepares us well to be followers. 
>  It seems some problems arise when, despite our physical survival 
>  being relatively assured as in a theosophical organisation, humans 
>  still play the old game of "survival of the strongest" or smartest 
>  and people continue to manifest the leader/follower mindset. The 
>  followers are just as much complicit in this as the leaders. 
>  Followers defer "naturally" to the leaders for many reasons 
including 
>  the still perceived need for security, stability and 
predictability, 
>  thereby safety; feelings of inferiority from school and other 
>  conditioning; and simple laziness, including laziness to think for 
>  oneself.
>  I believe that, because of this often instinctual deferral, it is 
>  incumbent on leaders to encourage wherever and however possible 
the 
>  independent thinking of their sisters and brothers. This was a 
>  primary motivating factor of Blavatsky.
>  Sadly, this rarely occurs. For numerous reasons, some involving 
the 
>  demands of lower ego superiority as well as the need to be a 
>  rescuer/protector, leaders oftentimes see it as their natural 
right 
>  or even obligation to "care" for their flock, and the followers 
>  willingly comply.
>       
>  In saying the above, in spite of the necessity for, and value of 
>  individual study, group learning can often generate far greater 
and 
>  more accelerated learning and awakening of awareness than 
individual 
>  effort alone. Where all participants are encouraged to think for 
>  themselves and share their perspectives openly, all in the group 
can 
>  benefit. This works well when there are no stated leaders or 
>  authorities. Of course, some will be more informed in certain 
areas 
>  than others, particularly in matters of a more technical or 
>  terminological nature. A person such as this can be invaluable in 
a 
>  group as long as she/he doesn't in any way convey a sense of 
>  authority requiring compliance.
>  
>  > I realise the first question coming from this is, 'how will the 
>  ancient teachings be spread without a unified body".  
>  > 
>  > Perhaps the answer is a Hall of Knowlege that encompasses all 
>  truths, accessible to all through the internet, a central United 
>  Nations of seminal religious thought, co-relational but 
independant.  
>  A synthesis of all truths.
>  
>  Whilst the internet has many advantages, with a broad range of 
>  contributors, it seems the natural, cautionary, interactive 
behaviour 
>  usually exercised by those attending physical theosophical groups 
is 
>  not so evident where cyberspace is concerned. The very nature of 
the 
>  verbal assaults of the past few of months on t/talk, however well 
>  intentioned, would immediately destroy most physical groups.
>  So, an internet based "United Nations of seminal religious 
thought, 
>  co-relational but independant.  A synthesis of all truths." is, to 
>  me, a wonderful idea and one would hope it would operate perhaps a 
>  little more respectfully in terms of openness, honesty and decorum 
>  than some of us have demonstrated here lately.
>  
>  Regards
>  Nigel
>  
>  > 
>  > Awaiting others comments.
>  > 
>  > Cass
>  > 
>  > plcoles1 <plcoles1@> wrote:                                  
>  Hello Marie,
>  >  Thanks for your comments !
>  >  Since 2004 I have been posting here at theos-talk you can read 
my 
>  >  first posting below.
>  >  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/17453
>  >  
>  >  I actually had resigned from the TS (I resigned in 2001 I 
think) 
>  of 
>  >  my own accord and was trying to raise some issues I had with 
the 
>  >  Adyar TS and create dialogue on these here at theos talk.
>  >  
>  >  To cut a long story short I reached a point where I thought 
that 
>  >  perhaps I may rejoin the Society despite my issues with the TS 
and 
>  do 
>  >  what ever work I could within it.
>  >  
>  >  However earlier this year my application to re-applying for 
>  >  membership was rejected by National Section in Australia 
>  unanimously
>  >  
>  >  I was invited to re-apply for membership in twelve months  "if 
you 
>  >  find that you have a genuine compatibility with the ethos, 
>  official 
>  >  statements and broad scope of the teachings of the TS with its 
>  >  headquarters at Adyar".
>  >  
>  >  This implied that I didn't a `compatibility with the ethos, 
>  official 
>  >  statements and broad scope of the teachings of the TS with its 
>  >  headquarters at Adyar' and had to acquire one.
>  >  
>  >  I suppose you'd have to read my postings to see if you concur 
with 
>  >  the decission or not.
>  >  
>  >  Cheers
>  >  
>  >  Perry
>  >  
>  >  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, MarieMAJ41@ wrote:
>  >  >
>  >  > Perry, could you elaborate a bit about your "expulsion" from 
the 
>  >  Adyar TS?  
>  >  > When, why, etc. Of course, if you do not wish to dredge it 
up, I 
>  do 
>  >  understand. 
>  >  >  But if it was a matter of censorship, was it under Algeo's 
>  reign?
>  >  >  
>  >  > I can hardly believe that I am affiliated with a society that 
>  has 
>  >  so little  
>  >  > tolerance for freedom of thought and expression. But I should 
>  have 
>  >  know when I 
>  >  >  found that books in the Library were taken from the shelves, 
or 
>  >  not put on 
>  >  > at  all. All this was done under the guise of placing the 
books 
>  >  into "archives" 
>  >  > to  which almost noone had access without obtaining 
permission, 
>  >  from you 
>  >  > guessed it,  the power that be.
>  >  >  
>  >  > Marie
>  >  >  
>  >  > 
>  >  > 
>  >  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>  >  >
>  >  
>  >  
>  >      
>  >                        
>  > 
>  >    
>  > ---------------------------------
>  > Do you Yahoo!?
>  >  Next-gen email? Have it all with the  all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
>  > 
>  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>  >
>  
>  
>      
>                        
> 
>  		
> ---------------------------------
> Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>