Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00107)

Dear Erica and all

My views are:

>From the below quotes by H. P. Blavatsky it rest on the President of
the TS. And the President should listen to its members! This is the
duty of the President - else the President aught to reconsider his og
her conscience, and whther he or she is fit for the job. But the
President has the word. Each branch is autonomous in it self as long
as it follows the objects.

But if you ask me the organisational structure of TS has to follow the
ORIGINAL Programe. And it does not do that today as far as I know. And
that is the problem as far as I am concerned.
E.S. aught not to be connected with TS like it is today.
The Counsil should be a bit more responsible and adress the problems
in their Magazines like HPB did in the below in Lucifer.


LETTER No. C by HPB to Sinnett:
"
Now Christianity is the same Theosophy, only in masquerade dresses,
this cycle of ours being the carnival period of the greater cycle,
that of our sub-race. Don't let us do as the Christians do. Our
Society was established to bring together people as searchers after
truth, independent thinkers, one having no right to force his opinion
on the other: or meddle in his religious views. Therefore we cannot
force Mohini and his party to follow "Olcott Blavatsky's" programme;
or as a dissenter from it, to drive him out of the Society, since he
is a real theosophist in one of the aspects of divine Wisdom
"theo-sophia." Now Babaji is quite another thing. He is a liar, a
traitor, a selfish ambitious wretch, who first sold us?Olcott and
myself, and is now selling his ex-Masters. Against him every true
theosophist ought to rise; and those who do not are certainly
dangerous and cannot remain in your Society, or any of those who
remain true to Master and the original programme. This is Olcott's
business to expel him from the Society, and you may tell him that if
he does not, then Babaji will ruin every Branch he approaches."
......
"A group or branch, however small, cannot be a theosophical
Society?unless all the members in it are magnetically bound to each
other, by the same way of thinking at least in some one direction;
therefore, as you will never agree with Mohini or he with you, propose
two distinct Branches; I will be with yours and, if you succeed, the
Master will begin writing again which He will not do not even through
me, so long as the Society is instead of a Brotherhood a political
Bulgaria. I have sent Vol. I of the S.D. to Adyar and am now on Vol.
II?the Archaic. This alone with the new information in it will be more
than you will be able to digest in 25 years with the explanations
promised?if you succeed in forming a Society of your own, faithful to
the original programme and doctrine and the Masters, or their teaching."

"These are the only hints I am permitted to give. Action can save the
Society; inaction on your part?will kill it; as showing animosity to
Mohini and his group would. Consult with them in a friendly way. Let
them form their own Branch within or outside the T.S. If they do the
former, all right and good. If they do the latter and outside the
Masters and their protection they will only prove that it was personal
ambition and love of selfish ideas that made them drift away. It will
perhaps be better."
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/Letters%20of%20HPB.htm


These were the difficulties.
A. P. Sinnett appearently partly failed and H. P. Blavatsky created
the Blavatsky Lodge and E.S.

And if you ask me:
When one is interested in the TRUTH, no two persons will agree, and we
know this.
So let each form their own branch. BUT, What binds the branches
together - will have to be - in accordance with the original programe.
When it is not possible, we need to get on the right track again and
not the wrong one. Find the leaders capeable to keep the to the right
track - i.e. the ORIGINAL programe. Form a branch and work to make the
counsil follow it.


The ORIGINAL programe was then one given by the Masters through H. P.
Blavatsky in her time. H. S. Olcott agreed on that until he appearntly
defected in 1888 or before. Look at the below words...


- - - - - -


   Blavatsky said - A PUZZLE FROM ADYAR
[Lucifer, Vol. IV, No. 24, August, 1889, pp. 506-509]:


"That the E.S. had never any pretensions to "boss the T.S." stands to
reason: with the exception of Col. Olcott, the President, the Esoteric
Section has nothing whatever to do with the Theosophical Society, its
Council or officers. It is a Section entirely apart from the exoteric
body, and independent of it, H.P.B. alone being responsible for its
members, as shown in the official announcement over the signature of
the President-Founder himself.* It follows, therefore, that the E. S.,
as a body, owes no allegiance whatever to the Theosophical Society, as
a society, least of all to Adyar.2nd. It is pure nonsense to say that
"H.P.B. . . . is loyal to the Theosophical Society and to Adyar" (!?)
. H.P.B. is loyal to death to the Theosophical CAUSE, and those great
Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole Humanity into one
Brotherhood. Together with Col. Olcott, she is the chief Founder and
Builder of the Society which was and is meant to represent that CAUSE;
and if she is so loyal to H.S. Olcott, it is not at all because of his
being its "President," but, firstly, because there is no man living
who has worked harder for that Society, or been more devoted to it
than the Colonel, and, secondly, because she regards him as a loyal
friend and co-worker. Therefore the degree of her sympathies with the
"Theosophical Society and Adyar" depends upon the degree of the
loyalty of that Society to the CAUSE. Let it break away from the
original lines and show disloyalty in its policy to the CAUSE and the
original programme of the Society, and H.P.B. calling the T.S.
disloyal, will shake it off like dust from her feet."........"There is
no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished
and replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all
autonomous
.." ........"H. P. Blavatsky will always bow before the decision of the 
majority of a Section or even a simple Branch; but she will ever 
protest against the decision of the General Council, were it composed 
of Archangels and Dhyan Chohans themselves, if their decision seems 
to her unjust, or untheosophical, or fails to meet with the approval
of the 
majority of the Fellows. No more than H. P. Blavatsky has the 
President-Founder the right of exercising autocracy or papal powers, 
and Col. Olcott would be the last man in the world to attempt to do so. 
It is the two Founders and especially the President, who have virtually 
sworn allegiance to the Fellows, whom they have to protect, and teach 
those who want to be taught, and not to tyrannize and rule over them.
And now I have said over my own signature what I had to say and that 
which ought to have been said in so many plain words long ago. The 
public is all agog with the silliest stories about our doings, and the 
supposed and real dissensions in the Society. Let everyone know the 
truth at last, in which there is nothing to make any one ashamed, and
which alone can put an end to a most painful and strained feeling.
This truth is as simple as can be.
The acting editor of The Theosophist has taken it into his head that
the Esoteric Section together with the British and American Sections,
were either conspiring or preparing to conspire against what he most
curiously calls "Adyar" and its authority. Now, being a most devoted
fellow of the T.S. and attached to the President, his zeal in hunting
up this mare's nest has led him to become more Catholic than the Pope.
That is all, and I hope that such misunderstandings and hallucinations
will come to an end with the return 
of the President to India. "
(H.P.B. C.W. Vol. Xl, p. 381).
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v11/y1889_049.htm


If you ask me:
The Parent Society will only be there, when one is following the
Original Programe!


M. Sufilight







--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Erica Letzerich <eletzerich@...> wrote:
>
> Who shall be the one in our world to say this person is able to do
this and this person is not able to do that? What will be their
criteria? Will be this limited to the decision of a council that will
act according to their own limited interest and views? Such structure
is for the wise not for persons who lack good judgment  The latter
will create closed groups within the council  representing their
personal interests and will act accordingly. Such system is extremely
dangerous in the hands "children". By "children" here I mean imature
souls. 
> 
> Erica
> 
> 
> --- On Sun, 10/5/08, Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
> From: Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@...>
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Victorian?
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, October 5, 2008, 4:53 AM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     
>             My views are:
> 
> 
> 
> I say that as far as I know the Himalayan Lodge operates through
another method than electing people through ordinary democratic processes.
> 
> 
> 
> Not everyone are enrolled, and not everyone should be.
> 
> Remember how strict A. P. Sinnett was when W. C. Leadbeater applied
to be a member.
> 
> 
> 
> "How I Joined
> 
> 
> 
> The Secretary was Mr. Kirby (not the Mr. Kirby so well known in
later years in connection with the Society's work in Italy, but the
Kirby of Kirby and Spence's Entomology, a book which I had studied in
my boyhood). I promptly wrote to him, pointing out that I wished to
join, but had not the pleasure of the acquaintance of any of the
existing members; what was I to do? Again I had to wait a long time
for an answer, for Mr. Kirby also was abroad-I think climbing peaks in
Switzerland; but at length he replied austerely that the rules were
inviolable, and that no exception could be made, but suggested as an
afterthought that I might call upon either Mr. A. P. Sinnett or Mr. G.
B. Finch.
> 
> 
> 
> I adopted this suggestion and wrote a note to Mr. Sinnett, hardly
daring, however, to hope that he could really be the author of the
book which had impressed me so deeply. His reply soon set that point
at rest, and invited me to come up to London to see him. He had only
recently returned from India, and was then staying temporarily at the
house of his mother-in-law, Mrs. Edensor, in Royal Crescent, Notting
Hill. He received me with the greatest kindness and cordiality, and of
course we talked much of his books (for by that time I had found
Esoteric Buddhism also) and the wonderful revelation which they
contained. The more I heard of Theosophy the more anxious I became to
learn all that could be told to me; but when I spoke of joining the
Theosophical Society Mr. Sinnett became very grave and opined that
that would hardly do, seeing that I was a clergyman!
> 
> 
> 
> I wondered rather why the Society should discriminate against
members of the cloth; and at last I ventured timidly to put the
question. Mr. Sinnett replied:
> 
> 
> 
> "Well, you see, we are in the habit of discussing every subject and
every belief from the beginning, without any preconceptions whatever;
and I am afraid that at our meetings you would be likely to hear a
great deal that would shock you profoundly."
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.singapor elodge.org/ htctm.htm
> 
> 
> 
> M. Sufilight
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> 
>   From: Erica Letzerich 
> 
>   To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com 
> 
>   Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2008 10:31 AM
> 
>   Subject: Re: Theos-World Victorian?
> 
> 
> 
> Anand,
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly because the T.S. is a democratical organization that they
were able to do it. In fact democracy is an enemy of itself! Some
mentioned here the structure of the T.S. is victorian. Is it victorian
members to chose their General Secretaries and their International
President? Is it victorian the International Council be basic composed
by General Secretaries who were elected by members? The International
President be elected by the members? I can't see anything victorian on
it. In fact I see a very fair structure.
> 
> 
> 
> Erica
> 
> 
> 
> --- On Sat, 10/4/08, Anand <AnandGholap@ gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>   From: Anand <AnandGholap@ gmail.com>
> 
>   Subject: Re: Theos-World Anand Gholap formula for General Council
composition
> 
>   To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
> 
>   Date: Saturday, October 4, 2008, 8:05 PM
> 
> 
> 
> Theosophical Society gives much freedom to National Sections. If John
> 
> 
> 
> Algeo, Kim Dieu wanted to do something good, they could have done in
> 
> 
> 
> their sections. Nobody was stopping them.
> 
> 
> 
> But facts show that their record of work in their own sections is not
> 
> 
> 
> impressive, membership there is declined. TS there is on oxygen. Now
> 
> 
> 
> after failing in their own sections, they want to control the TS and
> 
> 
> 
> fail international TS also. 
> 
> 
> 
> Protests, rallies, strikes, fasts, these are some more ways to show
> 
> 
> 
> members' disagreement with unethical disenfranchisement proposal
> 
> 
> 
> brought by those four individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> Best
> 
> 
> 
> Anand Gholap 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, MKR <mkr777@> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> > As they say, the cat is out of the bag. The whole move, it appears
> 
> 
> 
> to me,
> 
> 
> 
> > has been in the works behind the scenes for quite some time. It does
> 
> 
> 
> > not take much intelligence to see thru what is going on.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > TS was organized in the most autonomous manner and I recall there
was a
> 
> 
> 
> > statement somewhere that the role of the international is to step
in and
> 
> 
> 
> > resolve any disputes between sections.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > I would like to know who came up with the idea to "run" it like a
> 
> 
> 
> > corporation or a business to direct and control what goes on at
various
> 
> 
> 
> > levels comes from. The real strength of TS comes from the fact that
> 
> 
> 
> no one
> 
> 
> 
> > tells anyone what they should or could do so long as the activities
> 
> 
> 
> are to
> 
> 
> 
> > further the interests of three objects without violating the
> 
> 
> 
> international
> 
> 
> 
> > rules.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > It is time to proponents to step up to the plate publicly and
> 
> 
> 
> convince us
> 
> 
> 
> > that disenfranchisement and radical changes are for the good of
> 
> 
> 
> humanity.
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > mkr
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > On 10/3/08, Anand <AnandGholap@ ...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> > > Efforts are being made by few individuals in present General Council
> 
> 
> 
> > > to hijack the TS. They also want to remove members' right to vote in
> 
> 
> 
> > > the election of President. I am totally against such a change. I
want
> 
> 
> 
> > > members to elect the President directly as they did earlier.
> 
> 
> 
> > > Right now the present constitution is such that it might enable some
> 
> 
> 
> > > officers in the GC to unethically remove voting rights of people. I
> 
> 
> 
> > > want to ensure that such attempts don't succeed now and in future.
> 
> 
> 
> > > Amendments in the General Council were suggested by me for two
> 
> 
> 
> reasons.
> 
> 
> 
> > > 1) To make constitution just. Each country should have
representatives
> 
> 
> 
> > > only in proportion to the membership that country has. In GC if one
> 
> 
> 
> > > vote is given to a country with 13000 members and one vote is
given to
> 
> 
> 
> > > country with 90 members, then that is unjust. If we are to preach
> 
> 
> 
> > > justice in the world, our own TS constitution must be just. That is
> 
> 
> 
> > > why voting rights to each country according to proportion of members
> 
> 
> 
> > > in that country are necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> > > 2) Another reason why I suggested proportional representation is
this
> 
> 
> 
> > > new system will stop any future attempts by few individuals to
remove
> 
> 
> 
> > > voting rights of people and hijack the TS. You can see that
there are
> 
> 
> 
> > > few General Secretaries elected by just a few hundred members. And
> 
> 
> 
> > > these few General Secretaries venture to hijack TS because they are
> 
> 
> 
> > > given too much rights as compared to membership they represent.
So by
> 
> 
> 
> > > proportional representation and by increasing the size of the
General
> 
> 
> 
> > > Council we want to ensure that such attempts by few officers to
hijack
> 
> 
> 
> > > TS won't succeed in future.
> 
> 
> 
> > > Best
> 
> 
> 
> > > Anand Gholap
> 
> 
> 
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> > > 
> 
> 
> 
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
>     
>     
> 	
> 	 
> 	
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 	
> 	
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>