Theos-Talk Archives (April 2009 Message tt00103)

Dear Ramadoss,

I imagine that after 130 years and having 30,000 members the TS should have at least few hundred members capable to fill, at any time, any position in the Society, including that most demanding. And none should be indivisibly tied to any office. Unfortunately, through the history we kicked or pushed out, as we weren't able to overcome the differences in views (to be gentle), hundreds of members, often those most enterprising, thoughtful and active. Is it not time that we start to ponder how to become more all-inclusive, or is this aspiration doomed to fail in advance? 

It is said that the Theosophical Society and the Esoteric Section are separate organizations.

Warmest regards,
Anton


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, MKR <mkr777@...> wrote:
>
> Are we seeing failures of Chelaship?
> 
> ====
> â??The lamentable issue of Bishenlal's rapid scramble up the Himalayas as
> would be chela has sadly complicated matters. And your eminent Simla
> correspondent has made matters worse. Tho' unaware of it he has helped
> precipitate Bishenlal's insanity and (here, consciously) is plotting and
> scheming in many ways to make us all into a holocaust from out whose vapours
> may loom the giant spectre of the Jakko. Already he tells you that Sinnett
> is a credulous imbecile to be led by the nose (pardon my worthy friend the
> bad taste which compelled me to duplicate for my "ward" A. P. Sinnett that
> last long letter of Mr. H. to yourself which you have at the bottom of your
> dispatch box and did not intend H.P.B. to see in full). I had it neatly
> copied and for your fiery colleague he has had a deadly mine long prepared.
> Mr. Sinnett is now able to verify my old warning that he meant to set all
> your friends in London against the Society. The turn of the
> Kingsford-Maitland party has come. The diabolical malice which breathes
> thro' his present letter comes straight from the Dugpas who provoke his
> vanity and blind his reason. When you open M.'s letter of 1881 you will find
> the key to many mysteries -- this included. Intuititve as you naturally are
> -- chelaship is yet almost -- a complete puzzle for you -- as for my friend
> Sinnett and the others they have scarcely an inkling of it yet. Why must I
> even now (to put your thoughts in the right channel) remind you of the three
> cases of insanity within seven months among "lay chelas," not to mention
> one's turning a thief? Mr. Sinnett may consider himself lucky that his lay
> chelaship is in "fragments" only, and that I have so uniformly discouraged
> his desires for a closer relationship as an accepted chela. Few men know
> their inherent capacities -- only the ordeal of crude chelaship develops
> them. (Remember these words: they have a deep meaning.)â?? Letter No. 67 â?"
> Mahatma Letter to A P Sinnett
> ====
> 
> As a rookie student of theosophy, after I read the above letter from Master
> KH to Colonel Olcott, I tried to reflect upon the events starting with the
> election nomination, electioneering and the subsequent events to date,
> within the above comments.
> 
> It is obvious that the ordeal of chelaship, the failure brings about
> insanity. As everyone knows, there are many varieties of insanity. The
> common underlying essence is the loss of rationality and illogical approach
> to issues of their lives and those individuals and entities they deal with.
> As the Master says, if it is a puzzle even to Olcott, we the beginner
> students of theosophy can only speculate.
> 
> Let us look at the past events very closely. The basic premise to defeat the
> sitting president was presenting to the membership the untruth about her
> health. Next was not recognizing the untruth, when incontrovertible proof
> became available challenging the untruth, and  not taking immediate action
> to fix the untruth. Again the object was the defeat the sitting president.
> 
> When election results based on world-wide voting by members were announced,
> there was no public congratulation from the losing candidate and the
> supporters, to the winner, as is traditional in all democracies. This seems
> to show an unwillingness to accept the results of world-wide election.
> 
> This was followed by allegations against the Indian Sectionâ??s handling of
> the voting. The Indian Section was very unhappy about these allegations and
> the Section publicly challenged the allegations. It was met with silence and
> not with provable evidence to substantiate the allegations.
> 
> Next came the bombshell. In greatest secrecy, a plan was developed to seize
> control of the presidency and the plan was to get it approved quickly and
> surprise the members. It was simple and very shrewd.  Disenfranchise all the
> members world-wide and a handful of GC members to take over the authority to
> nominate and appoint (even though euphemistically called elect) the
> president.
> 
> Luckily for TS and theosophy, some brave souls discovered this clever plan
> in time and with the help of Internet was disseminated worldwide and TS was
> saved in nick of time. Members worldwide were dismayed and shocked that
> anyone, especially long time experienced members, would even dream of
> secretly disenfranchising the members and seizing the presidency.
> 
> The prime object of TS is Universal Brotherhood and the motto is There is No
> Religion Higher than Truth. With this backdrop, each one of the above events
> is totally illogical.
> 
> With the backdrop of the Masterâ??s statement to Olcott, is it possible that
> the above events demonstrate failures in the crucible of chelaship?
> 
> 
> MKR
> 
> There is No Religion Higher Than Truth
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>