Theos-Talk Archives (August 2007 Message tt00077)

Tibetan Buddhism (Vajrayana) has several schools (four main ones, and 
many other sub-schools). They have different lineages of Masters, 
different techniques, different approaches, and still they have a 
certain sense of unity. They don't declare one school to be higher 
than the other, nor do they blame other's Masters (although some of 
them were very close to black magic). They consider that karma takes 
you to a particular school, and many monks were in several schools 
until they found that which suited them best. The Dalai Lama even 
includes Theravada and Mahayana Schools as part of the integral 
Buddhist path.
Is it possible for the Theosophical movement to have such an 
inclusive (shall we say, theosophical?) attitude, so that the 
different societies may work together?
Of course, to do that, the only way I see is accepting the other 
(society) as they are (just as it happens in our daily life with 
people). If, for example, the condition is that non-Adyar TS should 
read Leadbeater, or that Adyar TS shouldn't, then it is not possible 
any work together. Whether we like it or not, the current societies 
already have their own lines of work and development. It is useless 
(and from my point of view, erroneous) to try to change them. 
How can we talk about the unity of religions and the spirit of 
tolerance between them if we are not an example of that? Sadly, to 
me, the Buddhist movement is morally much more entitled to teach that 
that the theosophical movement. 
Let's present to the world a united theosophical movement, based on 
those theosophical foundations that are tolerance, brotherhood, and 
freedom of thought. 
It is not that you have to identify yourself with every society 
(although that'd be a big step forward) but if someone asks about the 
different societies you can say something like: "they are working on 
one aspect of the theosophical work, our society on other. I feel 
more attracted towards this kind of work and approach."
Of course, being "continually at each other's throats" should end. I 
know that for some people it may be hard to understand, but I don't 
see the necessity of declearing this or that leader saint or sinner. 
That is a hero worshipping we should be get rid of within the 
theosophical movement.
Is that working together possible?
p


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@...> wrote:
>
> From what I can gather, everyone hated each other.  They were 
continually at each other's throats.  There was arrogance concerning 
the esoteric and exoteric leadership, all in all it was an unholy 
mess.  Are the different societies finally working together?  If this 
can't be established, what hope is there for the real teachings.
>    
>   Cass
>    
>   ps the quitting smoking is getting to me!!!
> 
> danielhcaldwell <danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>           BELOW is what Robert Crosbie (the founder of the United 
Lodge of 
> Theosophists) wrote about Mrs. Katherine Tingley in 1907. 
> 
> Crosbie's words follow ---
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "...I am slow to turn back from any task I have set myself, and am
> prone to excuse inconsistencies and deviation in others, so that
> although I had begun to doubt, and to see, it was more than a year
> afterwards before I saw so clearly and unmistakably that I took
> occasion to tell Mrs. T. [Tingley] the facts as I saw them, and to
> state my intention to withdraw from all connection with her. She
> tried of course in every way to change my determination, but finding
> me unchangeable, she let me go, and as I afterwards heard, gave out
> that she had sent me away for "bad conduct" - just what I do not
> know. This of course, to "save her own face" as the Chinese say. I
> am quite will aware of her capacities in the above direction form 
the
> history of others who had discovered her real character, and left;
> there is no slander too low or mean for her to use in such cases to
> justify herself. Sorry as I am to say it, such is the character of
> Katherine Tingley, the Leader of the Theosophical Movement 
Throughout
> the World, as she styles herself - (there is more of it that is
> simply too nauseating to write.) It was a hard schooling for me, but
> it had its good uses and effects. I feel no enmity towards her; I
> truly pity her and would help her do right any time it might be in 
my
> power. I also feel most deeply towards those who are held in mental
> bondage by her; but nothing can be done - they must open their own
> eyes, they are not in a condition to have them opened by anyone 
else.
> 
> . . . Katherine with a large number of her "students" are in this
> city this evening giving the play of "A Midsummer Night's Dream"; It
> will be beautifully staged, and everything will be done to give a
> fine impression - undoubtedly with success.
> 
> She will also speak in Belasco Theater on Sunday eve on "Some
> Practical Lessons in Human Life", and will doubtless present a fair
> picture to the mind's eye; and yet she is as I have said. Those who
> see these pictures would not believe anything different from what
> they see - and she knows it, and preys upon the best and noblest in
> human nature for her own ends. I tremble for the Karma she
> invokes. . . . "
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Quoted from:
> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/his/dtb_7.htm#bionotes
> 
> One might compare Crosbie's words with those of G. de Purucker which
> can be found at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/37738
> 
> But see also Crosbie's PRE-1907 views of Mrs. Tingley which can be 
> found at:
> 
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/stokescrosbie.htm
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
> 
> 
> 
>          
> 
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! 
Travel. 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>