Theos-Talk Archives (July 2009 Message tt00063)

As far as the pledge goes I have been looking at the Collected Writings and it seems to me that Anand is looking at this from a purely exoteric viewpoint.  What this means in the world.  Whereas what I can glean from CW is that the pledge is taken so that the Chela clearly understands the consequences and spiritual ramifications of breaking this pledge on his/her own spiritual journey.  They know from the outset what is involved in breaking the pledge, hence the reason, why it is witnessed before one's own higher self.

Cass 


>
>From: robert_b_macd <robert.b.macdonald@hotmail.com>
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tuesday, 7 July, 2009 1:14:15 PM
>Subject: Theos-World Re: Synthesizing Organizatonal Discussion 2
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Certainly, no one wants to be preached at, I suspect the president of a
>Society less so than anyone. However, didn't HPB play that role to some
>extent?
>
>HPB was always involved in publishing a magazine of some sort. She was
>the ever vigilant press that could not be bought off by anyone. I
>suspect Olcott knew this and was always careful, not that he needed much
>watching, he was a naturally honest man by nature. However, when he
>left Richard Harte in charge of The Theosophist, and Harte wrote and
>published material concerning the ES and possible political
>machinations, Blavatsky fired back with her article "A Puzzle From Adyar
><http://theosophy. org/Blavatsky/ Articles/ PuzzleFromAdyar. htm> ".
>
>It might be useful to the discussion as a whole as HPB seems to be
>dealing with many of the issues we are dealing with in Theos-Talk right
>now. She writes:
>
>1st. 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 of 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.
>
>And what does "loyalty to Adyar" mean, in the name of all wonders?
>What is Adyar, apart from that CAUSE and the two (not one Founder, if
>you please) who represent it? Why not loyal to the compound or the
>bath-room of Adyar? Adyar is the present Headquarters of the Society,
>because these "Headquarters are wherever the President is," as stated in
>the rules. To be logical, the Fellows of the T. S. had to be loyal to
>Japan while Col. Olcott was there, and to London during his presence
>here. There is no longer a "Parent Society"; it is abolished and
>replaced by an aggregate body of Theosophical Societies, all autonomous,
>as are the States of America, and all under one Head President, who,
>together with H. P. Blavatsky, will champion the CAUSE against the whole
>world. Such is the real state of things.
>
>HPB reminds readers of Lucifer of many things they might not have
>considered if there was not a vigilant voice for Theosophy that was not
>in control of the President of the Society.
>
>--- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@ ...> wrote:
>>
>> Robert, don't you think that a true theosophist is his own moral
>compass and as such requires no leadership?
>>
>> Cass
>>
>>
>> >
>> >From: robert_b_macd robert.b.macdonald@ ...
>> >To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
>> >Sent: Tuesday, 7 July, 2009 11:03:38 AM
>> >Subject: Theos-World Re: Synthesizing Organizatonal Discussion 2
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Anand, I think the question you ask requires us to bring all our
>knowledge of theosophy to focus on this subject. What I am thinking of
>is the two pillars, mercy and justice, moral and legal, the heart and
>the lower mind. Always two - do we take the correspondence further and
>claim a Society such as theosophy needs 2 leaders, a moral leader and a
>legal leader? This is what I am asking.
>> >
>> >I agree that we do not need an ES that demands obedience. Take that
>clause out all together. You are now left with no obedience "without
>cavil or delay". In this type of a School where the student practices
>morality according to theosophical doctrines, we don't have to call it
>an ES, but rather a school of practical theosophy, so in this type of
>school can moral attributes be developed that would be of benefit to the
>Society? Can we help to develop strong moral leadership. Is this not the
>complaint we have about our current leadership? Has this whole debate
>not stemmed from a concern over the integrity of that leadership?
>Clearly, what we are currently doing is not the answer. How do we change
>it? Maybe this is not the answer, if not how do we address morality in a
>Society that is all about morality?
>> >
>> >Robert Bruce
>> >
>> >--- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@ ...> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> It is true that organization helps individuals students of
>Theosophy. I am thinking whether ES objects can be achieved through TS,
>which is an organization.
>> >> While TS gives freedom of thought and implied freedom of action, ES
>demands obedience "without cavil or delay". While TS does not impose any
>ideas on members, ES demands faith in the Outer Head and faith in all
>actions, policies and ideas of that ES head. Aren't these contradictory?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "robert_b_macd"
><robert.b.macdonald @> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Dear Anand,
>> >> >
>> >> > Again your points are well taken. I don't deny that all this can
>be done by a serious student with the help of others. I would encourage
>such a course for those with the ability and inclination to do so.
>> >> >
>> >> > What my point in looking at this is to discuss whether the
>Society should have a legal power and a moral power. Could such a power
>arrangement reduce some of the abuse of power that some seem to think
>now exists.
>> >> >
>> >> > Organizations come into existence to help those wishing to do a
>certain kind of work, the organization gives structure to that work.
>Without the structure it is difficult to get things done. Self culture
>is also difficult as oftentimes we do not have the appropriate habbits
>when we enter into such an endeavour. What do we do next? What is
>important and what is not? I feel tired today, can I take the day off?
>This is where an organization helps. The ES should be trying to help
>people make themselves into moral adepts, the organization of the ES
>should simply be a tool for these people.
>> >> >
>> >> > Robert Bruce
>> >> >
>> >> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@ >
>wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "robert_b_macd"
><robert.b.macdonald @> wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > The ES would be a body of students who want to study the
>doctrine of the founders at a deeper level and who want to put the moral
>aspect of those teachings, as detailed in the pledge, into practice. It
>would be a life-long study. I think that all members should be members
>of the TS and the ES >should have no official standing with the TS.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > For the deep study of Theosophy and putting in practice moral
>aspect, you don't need the Esoteric School. Members of TS, whoever want,
>can do it. If anybody wants consultation, he can always ask questions to
>any serious members or officers in TS lodge. There is no need of
>separate ES for this purpose.
>> >> > > If somebody wants to make a pledge to follow Masters or to work
>for Theosophy, he can do it in his own heart or write on paper and keep
>that paper with himself.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Please tell your e-mail address. I had sent e-mail to you,
>which perhaps you did not get.
>> >> > > Best
>> >> > > Anand Gholap
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> 
>____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _\
>____________
>> Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere.
>> Show me how: http://au.mobile. yahoo.com/ mail
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Access Yahoo!7 Mail on your mobile. Anytime. Anywhere.
Show me how: http://au.mobile.yahoo.com/mail

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]