Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt00595)

Carl,

Thank you for your sincere views on the ULT as an organization. I respect your testimony. 

Mohini Chatterjee made once a brilliant text against HPB's and Olcott's theosophical society, too. He got all the limitations of the society, true and  imaginary --   and 'proved' in a public document that it was a "monarchy", a false brotherhood, and so on.

In response, HPB wrote her "Original Programme" text, something most important even today.  

Once people cut themselves from the inner side of things, or from the feeling of communion with the other,  they can see all they want to see in any human being, and in any human group/organization. 

Look at divorced people for an example.  Where were all those shortcomings in one's wife or girl-friend, before we left her,  or before we were left by her?  

Love shows us some things --  and it conceals others. But hatred and frustration does the same. 

So we must try and seek the equilibrium between our feelings and a clear mind in order to find that portion of truth and wisdom we are entitled to achieve in this lifetime.

Usually, if we part from something, there is an emotional need to get all negative arguments about that, to prove to ourselves our decision was right. 

Then time gives as a more balanced view of things. 


Best regards,   Carlos.   






De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Fri, 10 Nov 2006 03:52:13 -0000

Assunto:Theos-World Re: Daniel Most Updated

> Carlos,
> 
> As you self has admit, you have never been present during a ULT 
> meeting. So do know how these are, and what are said during this? 
> And, Carlos, have you even in person meet another ULT-associate? 
> Just, asking.
> 
> You are claiming that the ULT criticism on the TS Pasadena and the 
> TS Adyar was back in 1925 and/or 1925. That is sternly not true. The 
> ULT-people are still very much against both this societies (and the 
> so call Point Loma groups too), and the normal jargon within the ULT 
> is to have negative nicknames on in particularly Tingley, de 
> Purucker and Long, as well on Olcott, Besant and Leadbeater. 
> 
> The ULT Declaration is saying; ". . . and therefore has neither 
> Constitution, By-Laws nor Officers". Is that true? Maybe that was 
> Mr. Crosbie original intention or a dream of the ULT, but it not 
> like that in the real world. 
> Carlos, you wrote; "The ULT is no corporation. It has no officers." 
> Do you remember the yellow card you signed to become an associate? 
> On one side was the Declaration, and on the other side you 
> read; "Being in sympathy with the purposes of this Lodge, as set 
> forth in its "Declaration," I hereby record my desire to be enrolled 
> as an Associate, it being understood that such association calls for 
> no obligation on my part, other than that which I, myself, 
> determine." Do you remember? Under this was the line where you wrote 
> your name, and under that was two lines. Under the left line was the 
> word "Secretary" and under the under the right one "Secretary 
> General". No officer? No, of course not!?
> 
> Where is it said that new associates have to sign the yellow card? 
> That there is it said that the ULT have a "Secretary General"? And 
> where are the lodges Secretaries coming from? They are ether elected 
> (don't ask me where), or appointed by someone. The process of this, 
> must be regulated some where! And so on. Of course ULT 
> have "Constitution, By-Laws', but probably called something else.
> 
> Carl
> 


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