Theos-Talk Archives (July 2007 Message tt00405)

Hello Cass & Nigel,
I personally can't see how the intent is that much different, 
perhaps I am not seeing something staring me in the face, but if the 
society is only there to study Blavatsky's teachers writings, the 
Mahatma letters and commentaries on them, where is this clearly 
stated anywhere by the founders?

If this was what they intended then it should have been clearly 
stated in the original objects of the Society.

Cheers

Perry


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Perry,
>   Why when it has been changed half a dozen times?  It shouldn't 
have been changed in the first place should it.?  Would you have 
joined if the objects had been the same as the original objects?  
Did you join because you saw a link between your belief system and 
theosophy?  Unfortunately the 1896 version flies in the face of the 
original version and totally distorts the truth of the objects.
>    
>   Warm regards
>   Cass
> 
> plcoles1 <plcoles1@...> wrote:
>           Hello Nigel,
> Thanks for raising this as a point of discussion.
> As I see it, the clock cannot be turned back, when I first joined 
the TS, I joined because of 
> the 3 objects (as they are now) this was what I saw the society as 
being there to promote.
> People have been joining the society for many years now based on 
this understanding, 
> and as I see it the Society is duty bound to stick to that.
> I am interested to hear your perspective.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Perry
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all
> > 
> > In light of recent statements and their implications for the 
> > Theosophy of Madame Blavatsky and her teachers the following may 
be 
> > of some interest.
> > 
> > At the time of Madame Blavatsky's death in 1891 the second 
object 
> > said nothing about the study of "comparative" religion.
> > 
> > It read:
> > "To promote the study of Aryan and other Eastern literatures, 
> > religions, philosophies and sciences, and to demonstrate their 
> > importance to Humanity."
> > 
> > The implications are obvious. She was to be the "connecting 
link" 
> > between "esoteric" Tibetan philosophy, elsewhere described as 
the 
> > Aryan, Chaldeo Tibetan tradition, and the Western traditions. 
> > The passage "...and to demonstrate their importance to Humanity" 
> > clearly shows that she and her teachers had something specific 
they 
> > wanted brought to the West.
> > 
> > This object became diluted only in 1896 when it was changed to 
read:
> > "To encourage the study of comparative religion, philosophy and 
> > science."
> > 
> > This permitted her and their dharma to be compromised by 
admitting 
> > all religion and philosophies as equal in value. Whether they 
are or 
> > not is a mute point however their wishes were clear.
> > 
> > In fact in 1878 the object read:
> > "The objects of the Society are various?to acquire an intimate 
> > knowledge of natural law?study to develop his latent powers?
exemplify 
> > the highest morality and religious aspiration?to make known 
among 
> > western nations?facts about oriental religious philosophies?and 
> > disseminate a knowledge of that pure esoteric system of the 
archaic 
> > period, and finally and chiefly, aid in the institution of a 
> > Brotherhood of Humanity?"
> > 
> > So it can be seen that the later theosophical leaders and 
decision 
> > makers in the Adyar Society, including Dr Besant and Bishop 
> > Leadbeater, changed the object for their own reasons, thereby 
> > diluting and diverting the real purpose of the original impetus.
> > 
> > It is for each to decide whether this was a wise decision or not 
and 
> > what ramifications flowed from it.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Nigel
> >
> 
> 
> 
>          
> 
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your 
pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>