Theos-Talk Archives (January 2009 Message tt00285)

Dear friends

My views are:

The Founders should set an example. And they do so even from their graves.
What about the present day leaders of theosophical groups are they good examples?

Will any of them e-mail Theos-talk and call C. W. Leadbeater a GOOD example?


H. P. Blavatsky - The Key to Theosophy, p. 282 - about Money and theosophy:
"ENQUIRER. But why could not both she and Colonel Olcott do as othersâ notably many Theosophists â do: follow out their respective professions and devote the surplus of their time to the work of the Society? 

THEOSOPHIST. Because by serving two masters, either the professional or the philanthropic work would have had to suffer. Every true Theosophist is morally bound to sacrifice the personal to the impersonal, his own present good to the future benefit of other people. If the Founders do not set the example, who will?"
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm



M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Raquel RodrÃguez 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 7:30 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge



  Nigel
   
  Your statement, sounds pure common sense to me. 
  However, I myself would rather desire that the name of leadbeater does not get confused with Theosophy, as I do not think is the same thing. To me it is clearly the seed of perversion of the Truth, generously given from the founders. 
  Still, his work would be recommended, by members of the society, for reasons far beyond my comprehension, this can not be avoided unlikely. I do not belong to the TS, but I understand itÂs importance and itÂs preservation is necessary.
  I have been highly appreciating this didactic labor from some members on this forum and I understand it is necessary to keep doing for the newcomers and I am even sorry, this constant tiring work keeps being necessary.
  Still sometimes it gets more like a war and I think this energy corrupts the main aim, witch is to preserve Truth from contamination. However  in this case and again unlikely, war is better than silence.
   
  Best Regards and Thank you
   
  Raquel

  --- El sÃb, 10/1/09, nhcareyta <nhcareyta@yahoo.com.au> escribiÃ:

  De: nhcareyta <nhcareyta@yahoo.com.au>
  Asunto: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge
  Para: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
  Fecha: sÃbado, 10 enero, 2009 12:46

  Dear Paul, Morten and All

  Morten, your strong views desiring to stop production and sales 
  of the works of Bishop Leadbeater are well stated. 

  Paul, you write, "Taking people's books away from them, even 
  when I think their books are silly fantasies, goes against my grain 
  after thirty years as a public librarian. Leadbeater and Bailey no 
  worse than a lot of other authors, sad to say."

  My position with this highly contentious issue has always been one 
  concerning truth and credibility rather than outright censorship.

  It is well recognised by all but blind devotees that Bishop Leadbeater
  was a pathological liar and sexual deviant. Newcomers need only take 
  these comments and read through previous theostalk postings via 
  yahoo's search engine to verify for themselves the veracity of this 
  statement.

  Surely the question we must all ask is, in whom do we place our 
  confidence in matters spiritual and occult, where we feel ourselves 
  in need of direction and support?

  If it is well known that a particular author has the credentials of 
  Bishop Leadbeater, a spiritual organization publishing and promoting 
  his works has a bounden duty to inform its visitors and members of 
  the facts surrounding this man. 

  From my perspective, to not so do constitutes a gross violation of 
  truth and trust. 

  To my knowledge, Dr Besant, Alice Bailey, George Arundale and 
  Sri Ram were neither pathological liars nor sexual deviants, although 
  some of these and others were certainly "parasitical and delusional" 
  to quote Paul. 
  Indeed they were perhaps only guilty of blindly following some of 
  Bishop Leadbeater's teachings, with the exception of Sri Ram later in 
  his presidency.

  For those who find constant repetition of these issues tiresome 
  and perhaps non-productive, please note there are numerous 
  new members to theostalk each week, including those belonging 
  to the Adyar Theosophical Society. 

  They, like myself many years ago, might like to hear about the
  deceptions and betrayals which followed Madame Blavatsky's 
  passing.
  Some in the Adyar Theosophical Society hierarchy might profess 
  freedom of thought and "No Religion Higher Than Truth" but when 
  one attempts to compare and criticise the works of Bishop 
  Leadbeater and his clones strong pressures are often brought to 
  bear on the transgressor.

  Freedom in its purest form permits the liberty to think, speak and 
  write however one chooses within due bounds of legality and 
  decorum. 
  It should not be used to suppress debate or to protect a cult's 
  dogma as often occurred, from my experience, by some leading 
  members of the Adyar Theosophical Society.

  The Society performs an important function in today's world where 
  prejudice and hardening of attitudes is becoming increasingly 
  pervasive. 
  However it can greatly improve its role by simply being more open 
  and honest about some of its teachers and their teachings. 

  Regards
  Nigel

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@ ...> 
  wrote:
  >
  > Dear Morten,
  > 
  > Thanks for your comments. You know I agree 100% with you about the 
  > value of the writings of Bailey and Leadbeater compared to those of 
  > HPB. One reason I don't want to belong to the TS is because there 
  > are so many competing versions of reality, the ES, LCC, etc., a 
  > chaotic cacaphony of voices. But somehow from outside it I can 
  > accept that it was destined to be what it is, and try to be a 
  > wellwisher to all factions and individuals in it. Taking people's 
  > books away from them, even when I think their books are silly 
  > fantasies, goes against my grain after thirty years as a public 
  > librarian. Leadbeater and Bailey no worse than a lot of other 
  > authors, sad to say.
  > 
  > I'd rather put my energy into recommending other authors like 
  > Hardinge-Britten, Bunsen, Burton, Aurobindo, who tie meaningfully 
  > into the work of HPB, than worry about discouraging people from 
  > reading authors whose books are connected with hers in a 
  parasitical 
  > and delusional way.
  > 
  > You know who I mean :) but let's not denounce them,
  > 
  > Paul
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
  > theosophy@> wrote:
  > >
  > > 
  > > Dear Paul and friends
  > > 
  > > My views are:
  > > 
  > > I am happy to read this email.
  > > 
  > > My views are, that I myself aught to be better at formulating 
  > myself, so not to be disrespectuful to those who for some reasons 
  are 
  > lacking the open compassionate heart, that makes them immune in 
  > letting themselves being hurt when reading disrespectful words 
  > written in e-mails.
  > > I will work on it.
  > > 
  > > I will how ever also refer to what H. P. Blavatsky said in the 
  book 
  > The Key to Theosophy.
  > > Because it is here I find a great difference between theosophists 
  > and a great number of those would-be spiritual groups around the 
  > globe.
  > > 
  > > 
  > > H. P. Blavatsky said in the Key to Theosophy:
  > > 
  > > "IS IT NECESSARY TO PRAY?
  > > 
  > > ENQUIRER. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray?
  > > 
  > > 
  > > THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We ACT, instead of talking."
  > > 
  > > http://www.phx- ult-lodge. org/aKEY. htm#p66
  > > 
  > > The word is emphasized by me and HPB.
  > > 
  > > 
  > > M. Sufilight
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > From: kpauljohnson 
  > > To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com 
  > > Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 10:23 PM
  > > Subject: Theos-World Taking offense, seeking revenge
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Greetings.
  > > 
  > > During the runup to the November election, an article appeared 
  in 
  > > Slate that made me think of Theosophists:
  > > http://www.slate. com/id/2202303/
  > > 
  > > Not just the regular dustups here at theos-talk, but also the 
  > latest 
  > > organizational brouhaha in Adyar and Wheston, reminds me that 
  > > Theosophists are extraordinarily disrespectful to one another. 
  > Not 
  > > just those in one organization attacking those in another, but 
  > within 
  > > the Adyar TS even more so. I wonder if people realize just what 
  > kind 
  > > of impression of the entire movement is created when people 
  snark 
  > one 
  > > another in a public forum like this. Bad enough when mere 
  members 
  > do 
  > > so; far worse when an elected national leader makes a big 
  display 
  > of 
  > > arrogance and aggression.
  > > 
  > > Yet at the local level over two decades I never noticed any 
  > > difficulty whatsoever for Theosophists agreeing to disagree. 
  > There 
  > > was always a great diversity of views in any group I ever 
  > attended, 
  > > in several states. And no one to my recollection got all 
  offended 
  > > that someone else had a different estimation of various 
  authors. 
  > But 
  > > at the national and international levels there seems to be far 
  > less 
  > > of that live-and-let- live attitude. I renewed my TSA membership 
  > > after a ten-year lapse in 2008, but was hugely relieved to see 
  it 
  > > expire last week. 
  > > 
  > > The conclusion of the linked article is worth considering here. 
  > > The "empty boats" notion would be well applied to most of the 
  > > disputes here. Simply to express one's opinion is to risk 
  > personally 
  > > offending someone else, even if there was no such intention. 
  And 
  > the 
  > > person thus unintentionally offended will often deliberately 
  > > retaliate with a personal attack, as if the other person's 
  > opinion 
  > > somehow invades their personal space.
  > > 
  > > Like any body of literature, the Theosophical writings contain 
  > mixed 
  > > messages. You can use HPB the same way Christians use the 
  Bible, 
  > to 
  > > justify both sides of every dispute. Pedro's quote indicates 
  that 
  > it 
  > > is untheosophical to take offense at differing views and seek 
  > revenge 
  > > on those who express them. Morten's quote indicates that it is 
  a 
  > > theosophical duty to do so. HPB said both; you choose which HPB 
  > to 
  > > emulate.
  > > 
  > > PJ
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > [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]