Theos-Talk Archives (January 2011 Message tt00153)

Perhaps anyone can put forward a hypothesis but if it
is in disagreement with original teachings or ancient
wisdom it must not be signed off by the TS.
Â
We are devaluing the teachings given to us by the
Masters through HPB, if we accept anyone's interpretation
of those teachings. It would be akin to me self evaluating
the teachings, and then publishing a treatise on what, imo,
those teachings represent. As I said, it creates confusion
in the minds of new seekers.
Â
Cass


--- On Tue, 11/1/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid> wrote:


From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: theos-talk A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Tuesday, 11 January, 2011, 8:03 PM


 




Dear Cass

As I understand it, it was so that, "no doctrinas" was to be forwarded by any member HPB and HSO included in behalf of the Society, but hypotheises by each members was welcome. HPB created her own hypothesis with an interesting quality and showed clear signs on ESP - and people got very curious. (She said in the Key to Theosophy, that she wanted to inculcate certain eternal truths, and that was why the TS was created - but others views was to be welcomed equally. ). Then the Hodgson report came, and the interested was lost a bit for a certain period, but came back when the Secret Doctrine was released. Others followed Olcott's, Sinnett's or Subba Row's or others work more closely, HPB was after all a woman in the 19th century culture - no doubt still marked by a bit of male-chauvanism. - All the time the emphasis was on comparative studying - on Eastern philosophies - among people from a wide variety of religions and ideologies. No dogmas was allowed
 inside the TS - only hypothesises. 

Yet, the editor of the Theosophist decided what was written and what not. And this was of importance back then in 1875-1891. And yes the emphasis was never on turning the Society into a Messiah cult in these days 1875-1891 - because non dogmas was promoted or allowed, a universal brotherhood of humanity was logically not created by such a cultish activity - as it seems to have been doing since 1909 and even until today - if we read the Adyar website. (http://www.ts-adyar.org/content/j-krishnamurti-1895-1986#Annie_Besant_and_Krishnamurti - Besant wrote to Leadbeater: 'It is definitely fixed that the Lord Maitreya takes this dear childâs body. It seems a very heavy responsibility to guard and help it, so as to fit it for Him, as He said, and I feel rather overwhelmedâ. And in the Annie Besant section, it is said, that Besant did a great lead in politics etc. etc.)

On top of that the persons behind the present day International Theosophical Society (Adyar) website claims that they (certianly) still do not impose any doctrines on the members on behalf of the Society as written here: "The Society imposes no belief on its members, who are united by a common search for Truth and desire to learn the mean-ing and purpose of existence through study, reflection, self-responsibility and loving service.". (http://www.ts-adyar.org/)
And this is of course self-contradiction, unless they are able to explain why the above words can lead them to the proclamation of Krishnamurti as a Messiah and Besant as a great lead in politics - because both points of views opposes the words on the front-page given just above - as well as - the constitution given in 1875-1891.

But, I can only have the hope that the members of Adyar will refuse to be silent - and - instead help us, who are standing at their doorstep and who HONESTLY seek to understand these huge self-contradictions coming from the authors behind the Adyar TS website. After all, why not seek to promote altruism - and a Brotherhood of Humanity; - ie. the core idea behind the Theosophical Society?

I do not mind small biographies for instance of all the authors to the Theosophist through 1875-2011, but they aught to be stating facts - and not beliefs, - ie. just like we in the old days 1875-1891 found, that beliefs in the Masters was left freely open to all members to reject or accept.

To members at the Council of the International Theoosphical Society (Adyar):
I just write this to help you at Adyar and so to help you let the idea of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity and altruism flourish.
Allright?

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cass Silva 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 3:15 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society

Morten,
This reads to me that No fellow, etc should promulgate or maintain any doctrine - being that advanced or advocated by the Society. As this was released in January 1981 and 
she died in May of the same year, I would think that she was making it clear that her
particular works (teachings) were not to be advanced by any member or Council.

Cass

ps Clearly Besant and Leadbeater totally
ignored this constitutional law.

Constitution of January 1891: "No Fellow, Officer, or Council of the Theosophical Society, or of any Section or Branch thereof, shall promulgate or maintain any doctrinas being that advanced, or advocated by the Society. " 

[6] So one might say, that each member of the Theosophical Society forwarded their very own views, and they did not forward them on behalf of the Theosophical Society, a Society against dogmas and secterian behaviour. More info on this in the last reference.[7]

--- On Mon, 10/1/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: theos-talk A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Monday, 10 January, 2011, 8:54 PM

Dear Cass

You surprise me.
Can you please elaboreate on this view?

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cass Silva 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 2:37 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society

Morten,
Perhaps without realising it, you yourself have broken the
first law by "shall promulgate or maintain any doctrinas being that advanced, or advocated by the Society. "
Quite frankly I do not believe you have the knowledge nor the authority to do so.
Cass 

--- On Mon, 10/1/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@ojcGerrBKrF1h6i4RPak2leB9V1yvZJn1e8w3yKgdSEAWbCWeEXtWM234nKsfBoOlmIXSOtUk4oExoTVaJRNChx1ny51.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: theos-talk A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Monday, 10 January, 2011, 12:46 AM

Dear friends

I just added the following on Wikipedias page for the Theosophical Society 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosophical_Society:

A non-dogmatic and non-secterian Society
According to the Constitution of the Theosophical Society in the period 1875-1891 we find the following in the Constitution of January 1891: "No Fellow, Officer, or Council of the Theosophical Society, or of any Section or Branch thereof, shall promulgate or maintain any doctrinas being that advanced, or advocated by the Society. " [6] So one might say, that each member of the Theosophical Society forwarded their very own views, and they did not forward them on behalf of the Theosophical Society, a Society against dogmas and secterian behaviour. More info on this in the last reference.[7]

The below words about various beliefs among the Theosophists are only correct so far as they have been given by some of the members of the Theosophical Society is concerned. Those who did not follow such philosophical views as the below were free as members of the original Theosophical Society in 1875-1891. This was however changed somewhere after the year 1891 among many of the later offshoot branches and break-away groups, - and according to some also within the Theosophical Society itself, when affiliated branch the Order of the Star in the East was formulated around the year 1910 or 1911 and later. The Theosophical Society's website January 2011 says the following: "The Society imposes no belief on its members, who are united by a common search for Truth and desire to learn the mean-ing and purpose of existence through study, reflection, self-responsibility and loving service." [8]

Maybe it needs som polishing?
What do you readers think?

---
I have also created similar changes on the following wiki-pages:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_race
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theosophy

But they seem to need approval first.

What about other wiki-pages in other countries?'

M. Sufilight

[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]

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









      

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