Theos-Talk Archives (April 2010 Message tt00132)

Dear Jeremy and friends

My views are:

Jeremy wrote with regard to newsletter no.2 year 2003 from Lucis Trust:
"Morten, the use of 'we' is done so in referring to 'humanity'. The
article clearly does not read in favour of the USA or the administration
at that time."

M. Sufilight asks:
Now, how do we know that?
And is such a manner of formulating oneself in this Lucis Trust Newsletter not deliberately promoting an impression, which easily lead the readers to another conclusion, than for instance the one mentioned by you, when we consider the time and hour the newsletter was written in and how many who supported the invasion of Iraq in USA and other (AAB) countries?

The exact words in the newsletter was:
"We did not rush blindly into war; instead it was considered deliberately
and passionately by all the many members
of the world community demonstrating a
noble attempt to solve this problem in
a more enlightened way. And although
we seemingly failed, nonetheless a process
was initiated. Some people also bemoan
the apparent failure of the United Nations
to effectively negotiate a resolution. But
when in recent times has the UN been
so highlighted on the world stage, so
turned to for guidance? These are the
positive results of this crisis and these
will endure."
........
""That is not to say that force is never justified for, as we well know, the transition period through which we are manoeuvring is fraught with tremendous difficulties of which we are all too vividly aware. The terrorist threat does not yield to facile or immediate solutions. And as much as we might long for the cessation of warfare, due to the dangerous world in which we live there are times when it is justified. "
http://www.lucistrust.org/en/media/files/wg_newsletters_pdf_files/2003_2


M. Sufilight says:
Was it considered by ALL the members of the world community?
I will hardly call that a promotion of visdom teaching were the word "we" clearly without doubt is being used in a manner where it is to be viewed as meaning "humanity". And that was why I wrote what I did, and I say that Lucis Trust were and is involving itself with political disputes in direct opposition to the original Programe as it was given by HPB and the Masters.

And I also wrote:
Politics is clearly Low-Ethics - even when the United Nations and AAB seek to throw another picture of it. Without exchanging views about the core doctrines about the Meaning of Life, how will any political activity be able to help humanity? 

*Will you please answer this question?*

And we could add the Eastern Doctrine on top of it in clear contrast to the Salvation Army attempts performed by various AAB followers by the use of the Great Invocation, while they promote political views.

>From the same Newsletter no.2 year 2003 from Lucis Trust:
"Some bemoan the perception that there is
an imbalance of power in the world. But looked at from a wider perspective, the present
situation has made it clear that the voice of the
public has the potential to become the greatest
power in the world."

M. Sufilight says:
No it has most certainly not.
This is a false view. The voice of the public did not show this potential in any clear-cut manner what so ever.
Instead we saw, how easily falseness and manipulation could lead people to view public opinion in a false manner and also how easily it could lead people astray, - and also how easy it was to do it, and how easy it still is.


>From the same Newsletter no.2 year 2003 from Lucis Trust:
"Related to this in
Alice Bailey's The Destiny of the Nations, pp. 97-98
we find a particularly insightful comment, "Hence
the conflicts everywhere to be found between the
varying ideologies, and the major conflict between
those who stand for the great ideal of world unity
brought about by a united effort of the Forces of
Light, backed by the cooperative effort of all the
democratic nations, and the separative materialistic
attitude of those who seek to keep the United States
from assuming responsibilities and her rightful place
in world affairs. This latter group, if they succeed
in their endeavour, will deny the United States her
share in the 'gifts of the Gods in the coming age
of peace which will succeed this point of critical
suspension,' as The Old Commentary phrases it."
.......
"The questions confronting humanity during
this transition period are not really between war and
peace, but rather, between peace and change. For
war is merely one aspect of change and the changes
needed at this time are far reaching in scope."


M. Sufilight says:
I wonder, if such words would not have been viewed by many a readers year 2003 as words in favour of the so-called democratic USA's invasion of Iraq? And this while viewing non-democratic countries as materialistic and democratic countries as non-materialistic, i.e. pure spiritual? 

A false view, but one often followed by many AAB followers.
Calling such a comment by the Lucis Trust insigthful while relating it to the War on Iraq, I will only call a disaster.

I would much rather say, that USA's (and its population's) rightful responsibility is to pull out and throw away this Christian-political branch - and all its various kinds of "Salvations Army" activities - which continously resides in the eyes of its population and many of the AAB followers; there is not doubt about this according to my views. 

In fact USA and its Iraq-invading-allied countries are more materialistic than many other countries on this planet - despite most of them are Christianized politically-democratic (i.e. following low-ethics). And the sooner these countries and the AAB followers realises it the better. But the population (and very many AAB followers included) in Christian countries like USA and others are sadly - so much - unaware of their own limitations and extreme ignorance about the Eastern Doctrine on Atma-Vidya, that they keep ignorantly telling themselves that they are ethically superiour to other nations and cultures on the globe. Conviction is not the same as fact.

Calling war the same as "change" will not make the ugly fact go away, that the "needed changes" referred to in the above are appearntly completely in accordance with the aim of the Jesuits, which was the opression of the Islamic religion; - and that USA's invasion of Iraq did in fact follow up on this aim very well and have in many respects done it even until this day.

Are my words too tough for your Christian and so very non-Eastern mind-sets?
Is it not easy to read or perhaps misread the Newsletter by Lucis Trust in the direction I have mentioned in the above?

- - -
But, of course the intentions were quite different than the ones I have given. And if so I will only have to say, that I find the content of this Newsletter and the manner it was formulated quite unlucky and unfortunate.
Yet, bear with me and try to understand why I view the Lucis Trust Newsletter no.2., 2003 like I am.

And remember, this was just one of the Newsletters given by the Lucis Trust, although I admit that it was one of the most awful ones I have ever read from this organisation.



M. Sufilight


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jeremy 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 9:58 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?


    

  "The questions confronting humanity during this transition period are
  not really between war and peace, but rather, between peace and change.
  For war is merely one aspect of change and the changes needed at this
  time are far reaching in scope. Once these changes begin to be
  implemented they will enable humanity to once and for all free itself
  from the grip and weight of its materialistic mindset and so move into
  the new age, an age which will be conditioned by the free sharing and
  distribution of all the world's resources and the slow transfer of
  the arms industry into those industries that support life."

  Morten, the use of 'we' is done so in referring to 'humanity'. The
  article clearly does not read in favour of the USA or the administration
  at that time. It goes on to highlight the fair distribution of the
  worlds resources and the transfer of the arms industry into a human
  industrious nature that supports life. Jeremy.

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen"
  <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear Jeremy and friends
  >
  > My views are:
  >
  > Yes.
  > I thank you for providing these extra quotes.
  > I do however not find that your quotes change the views I forwarded.
  >
  > Let us understand, that the Lucis Trust use of words in the quoted
  Newsletters (no.2 espeically) was stating that: "We did not rush blindly
  into war;" etc. - Using the word "We" as if the Lucis Trust was behind
  the invasion of Iraq.
  >
  > - And later the revealing words of failure by Lucis Trust: "But in the
  frenzy of the rush to war they were given scant attention and we all
  lost in the process." - Words which are very telling about Lucis Trust
  attitude towards Iraq and the invasion of that country; especially by
  the use of the word "we". And asking about what Lucis Trust find was
  "lost", one could read it as the Western countries lost their near and
  dear ones - or one could read it in the sense that Lucis Trust failed
  morally. What kind of loss are they talking about if neither of these
  remain unanswered. The words sound in the Newsletter no. 2 sounds very
  much like a support for a crusade, than the opposite.
  >
  > - And an invasion, which was clearly called illegal by a great number
  of leaders at the United Nations - the UN General Secretary included -
  as well by a huge number of Law-experts, the European Association of
  Lawyers and also the International Commision of Jurists.
  >
  > - And let us not forget, that the Original Programe of the TS given by
  H. P. Blasvatsky (BCW Vol. VII, p. 145-146) clearly stated, that the TS
  was not formed to involve itself with political disputes and issues. Not
  that I am involving myself with them, because I just trying to forward
  the point, that Lucis Trust have deviated from the Original Programe as
  given by HPB and the Masters, which Olcott endorsed initially.
  >
  > An example from HPBs Original Program for the TS:
  > "XIV. The Society having to deal only with scientific and
  philosophical subjects, and having Branches in different parts of the
  world under various forms of Government, does not permit its members, as
  such, to interfere with politics, and repudiates any attempt on the part
  of anyone to commit it in favor or against any political party or
  measure. Violation of this rule will meet with expulsion."
  > (BCW Vol. VII, p. 145-146)
  > http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm
  >
  >
  > An example is Wikipedia on - 2003 invasion of Iraq:
  > "The legality of the invasion of Iraq has been challenged since its
  inception on a number of fronts, and several prominent supporters of the
  invasion in all the invading nations have publicly and privately cast
  doubt on its legality. It is claimed that the invasion was fully legal
  because authorization was implied by the United Nations Security
  Council.[85][86] International legal experts, including the
  International Commission of Jurists, a group of 31 leading Canadian law
  professors, and the U.S.-based Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, have
  denounced both of these rationales.[87][88][89]"
  >
  > Also International Commision of Jurists - Legal Resource Center:
  > 20th March 2003
  > "The ICJ condemns the illegal invasion of Iraq in the clear absence of
  Security Council authority -this constitutes a great leap backward in
  the international rule of law."
  > ...
  > "The ICJ recalls the absolute prohibition of committing war crimes or
  crimes against humanity. Such crimes entail the individual
  responsibility of all involved persons, from the political masters to
  the foot soldier. "
  > http://icj.org/news.php3?id_article=2774&lang=en
  >
  >
  > H. P. Blavatsky wrote in 1886 - and I find it still to be so very
  true:
  > "We look in the midst of your Christian civilization and see the same
  sad signs of old: the realities of your daily lives are diametrically
  opposed to your religious ideal, but you feel it not; the thought that
  the very laws that govern your being whether in the domain of politics
  or social economy clash painfully with the origins of your religion"
  > (BCW Vol. VII, p. 145-146)
  > http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm
  >
  > Let me repeat, that my point is only to clearly show how much Lucis
  Trust have involved itself with political disputes - and thereby
  deviated from the Original Programe of the TS as it was given. I am not
  here judging about whether killing thousands of human beings were
  justified by either group involved in supporting the recent Invasion and
  War in Iraq. But since the TS Original Programe clearly seek to create a
  Universal Bortherhood of Humanity, we can only question the motives
  behind such an acitivity; and ask whether altruism governed Lucis Trust,
  when they posted their Newsletters, which have been quote in this thread
  at this forum.
  >
  > So I find it difficult to understand that any Master would support
  Lucis Trusts activities and calim to be in accordance with the Original
  Programe given by H. P. Blavatsky and the Masters.
  > If any followers of Lucis Trust find the opposite to be true - please
  let me (and others) know, so I and others might be able to follow the
  Path more easily.
  >
  > What are your views about this Jeremey? Others?
  >
  >
  > M. Sufilight
  >
  >
  > ----- Original Message -----
  > From: Jeremy
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
  > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 10:45 PM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S.
  deviate from the Original Lines?
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > JC: For corresponding secretaries this is true. The Lucis Trust
  comment
  > on world politics in the World Goodwill newsletter, and the two are
  > distinct and therefore different as is obvious. Below we will see
  > further comment not picked up by Morten in the same document.
  >
  > > Further we have from Alice A. Bailey's "Autobiography of Alice A.
  > Bailey":
  > > "Our secretaries are not permitted to enter into political or
  > religious arguments with the students they supervise. We seek only to
  > indicate the common goal, the universal field of service and the
  ancient
  > methods whereby human beings can pass from the unreal to the Real."
  (p.
  > 198)
  > >
  > > A comment:
  > > Yet in recent years we find the Lucis Trust to formulate itself in
  > more or less political tone of voice.
  > >
  > > Try the following newsletter from Lucis Trust, nr. 2, 2003:
  > > *** The War in Iraq ***
  > > "We did not rush blindly into war; instead it was considered
  > deliberately and passionately by all the many members of the world
  > community demonstrating a noble attempt to solve this problem in a
  more
  > enlightened way. And although we seemingly failed, nonetheless a
  process
  > was initiated."
  >
  > > "That is not to say that force is never justified for, as we well
  > know, the transition period through which we are manoeuvring is
  fraught
  > with tremendous difficulties of which we are all too vividly aware.
  The
  > terrorist threat does not yield to facile or immediate solutions. And
  as
  > much as we might long for the cessation of warfare, due to the
  dangerous
  > world in which we live there are times when it is justified. "
  > >
  >
  http://www.lucistrust.org/en/media/files/wg_newsletters_pdf_files/2003_2
  >
  <http://www.lucistrust.org/en/media/files/wg_newsletters_pdf_files/2003_\
  \
  > 2>
  >
  > The same referance also states the following, for contrast...
  >
  > "During times of crisis the world's leaders become the recipients of
  > much animosity and criticism. And whether or not we, as individuals,
  > agree or disagree with their policies we should hold in mind that our
  > leaders are merely the embodiments of the national life, the focal
  > points through which events work out. Our problems are the collective
  > responsibility of humanity as a whole and it is, therefore, right that
  > humanity resolve them collectively."
  >
  > "Perhaps our failure to resolve the Iraqi crisis without the use of
  > force was largely a refl ection of our inability to give serious
  > consideration to new ideas. There are quite a number of
  forward-looking
  > approaches to conflict mediation that would have been open to us had
  we
  > taken the time to seriously consider them. But in the frenzy of the
  rush
  > to war they were given scant attention and we all lost in the
  process."
  >
  > "Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at their
  > rightvalue; and unless a judge compares notes and hears both sides he
  > can hardly come to a correct decision." H.P. Blavatsky. The
  > Theosophist,July, 1881, p. 218.
  >
  > [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]