Theos-Talk Archives (March 2011 Message tt00099)

IMO, a true altruist is driven by compassion for others regardless of the consequences to self. One cannot make or teach a person to be altruistic, life and all its hurdles and suffferings do that. One is either altruistic or one is not and imo, no amount of brain stormingÂwill change it.
Â
Cass



--- On Wed, 16/3/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid> wrote:


From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Wednesday, 16 March, 2011, 3:01 AM


 



Dear Cass

My views are:

Yes.
But, first be...then understand (or philosophies), then action.
Action without building on a rock is futile.

If you want secterian behaviour instead of what the Original Theosophical Society offered, you will get that very thing. And that will not promote altruism - and help to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities. The last is one of the primary aims of the Original Theosophical Society given in 1875-1891, and must necessarily be so - because altruism is the main aim of it.

Yet, these are of course just my views.

- - - - - - -
The Masters have seen planets come and go.
They have seen Atlantis come and go etc.

The following by Blavatsky might be helpful to remember...
Orloc (Fate, destiny, whose agents were the three Norns, the Norse Parcae.)
Skuld ( the third Norn Sister, the Soul-Ego - also known as the Future)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote in KARMIC VISIONS:
"He is suddenly transported into what looks a fairylike Hall, lit with most glowing lights and built of materials, the like of which he had never seen before. He perceives the heirs and descendants of all the monarchs of the globe gathered in that Hall in one happy family. They wear no longer the insignia of royalty, but, as he seems to know, those who are the reigning Princes, reign by virtue of their personal merits. It is the greatness of heart, the nobility of character, their superior qualities of observation, wisdom, love of Truth and Justice, that have raised them to the dignity of heirs to the Thrones, of Kings and Queens. The crowns, by authority and the grace of God, have been thrown off, and they now rule by âthe grace of divine humanity,â chosen unanimously by recognition of their fitness to rule, and the reverential love of their voluntary subjects.
All around seems strangely changed. Ambition, grasping greediness or envyâmiscalled Patriotismâexist no longer. Cruel selfishness has made room for just altruism, and cold indifference to the wants of the millions no longer finds favour in the sight of the favoured few. 

Page 338

Useless luxury, sham pretencesâsocial and religiousâall has disappeared. No more wars are possible, for the armies are abolished. Soldiers have turned into diligent, hard-working tillers of the ground, and the whole globe echoes his song in rapturous joy. Kingdoms and countries around him live like brothers. The great, the glorious hour has come at last! That which he hardly dared to hope and think about in the stillness of his long, suffering nights, is now realized. The great curse is taken off, and the world stands absolved and redeemed in its regeneration! . . . . 
Trembling with rapturous feelings, his heart overflowing with love and philanthropy, he rises to pour out a fiery speech that would become historic, when suddenly he finds his body gone, or, rather, it is replaced by another body. . . . Yes, it is no longer the tall, noble Form with which he is familiar, but the body of somebody else, of whom he as yet knows nothing. . . . . Something dark comes between him and a great dazzling light, and he sees the shadow of the face of a gigantic timepiece on the ethereal waves. On its ominous dial he reads:
âNEW ERA: 970,995 YEARS SINCE THE INSTANTANEOUS DESTRUCTION BY PNEUMO-DYNO-VRIL OF THE LAST 2,000,000 OF SOLDIERS IN THE FIELD, ON THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE GLOBE. 971,000 SOLAR YEARS SINCE THE SUBMERSION OF THE EUROPEAN CONTINENTS AND ISLES. SUCH ARE THE DECREE OF ORLOG AND THE ANSWER OF SKULD. . . . .â
He makes a strong effort and- is himself again. Prompted by the Soul-Ego to REMEMBER and ACT in conformity, he lifts his arms to Heaven and swears in the face of all nature to preserve peace to the end of his daysâin his own country, at least.
. . . . . . . .
A distant beating of drums and long cries of what he fancies in his dream are the rapturous thanksgivings, for the pledge just taken. An abrupt shock, loud clatter, and, as the eyes open, the Soul-Ego looks out through them in amazement. The heavy gaze meets the respectful and solemn face of the physician offering the usual draught. The train stops. He rises from his couch 

Page 339

weaker and wearier than ever, to see around him endless lines of troops armed with a new and yet more murderous weapon of destructionâready for the battlefield. 
SANJNA. *

ââââââââââ
* [A nom-de-plume used by H.P.B. only once, and which stands most likely for one of the five skandhas in Buddhist philosophy, namely samjÃÃ, which means perception. It also means agreement, mutual understanding, harmony, consciousness, clear knowledge.âCompiler.]"
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v9/y1888_048.htm

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cass Silva 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 1:44 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications

Altruism is not a concept - it is an action.
Cass

--- On Tue, 15/3/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Tuesday, 15 March, 2011, 3:17 AM

Dear Cass and friends

My views are:

What kind of political slant are you referring to, and in what manner is it a problem to you?

Do you disagree with H. P. Blavatsky's view which I quoted in my previous email?

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"ENQUIRER. Do you take any part in politics?

THEOSOPHIST. As a Society, we carefully avoid them, for the reasons given below. To seek to achieve political reforms before we have effected a reform in human nature, is like putting new wine into old bottles. Make men feel and recognise in their innermost hearts what is their real, true duty to all men, and every old abuse of power, every iniquitous law in the national policy, based on human, social or political selfishness, will disappear of itself. Foolish is the gardener who seeks to weed his flower-bed of poisonous plants by cutting them off from the surface of the soil, instead of tearing them out by the roots. No lasting political reform can be ever achieved with the same selfish men at the head of affairs as of old."
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 231) 
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm

Yes. Something happens in Japan. And other events happen in other parts of our universe, also Pakistan.
What I am concerned with is not primarily materialistic societies and materialistic mindsets - but primarily altruism and its promotion. What is important to greedy business is maybe not important in the same manner to me and others. We may wonder whether some greedy persons and companies benefit from catastrophes. But of course suffering aught to be alleviated as far as possible.

I find that altruism is not oriented towards a promotion of materialistic behaviour.
Altruism - is closely connected with the exact science on psychology.

Those who are concerned about the Law of Karma and Reincarnation - are concerned with the karmic need of the individual and humanity as a whole.

What appearntly is the proper thing to do might not be so.
I think one aught to carefully consider whom they help, and how they help, and why etc.

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Cass Silva 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 1:49 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications

Morten, with respect, but all your posts seem to have a political slant to them. Japan is sinking - the world is in colossal climatic change cycle - the poles may be shifting, and you are concerned with obtaining copies of theosophical literature.
Cass

--- On Mon, 14/3/11, M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid> wrote:

From: M. Sufilight <global-theosophy@yRpGbUsMHwvmocS1S5cqpdrUBCDFhic54kuHlpjn9Eyy7AjDR3Lw4P7_5YHBeTUapEqep8ydI1HSI8QLNuJiYgTthmE.yahoo.invalid>
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Received: Monday, 14 March, 2011, 1:19 AM

Dear friends

Nobody find it important to post any real answers to the below email by me?
I am a bit amazed, that the below email by me, appearntly, is not being taken seriously
I thought that you were taking your theosophical efforts seriously.

Please, understand that the email in the below, was not meant as a harsh criticism or anything like that. It was meant as a clarification of what is going on, and what has been going on for some decades with regard to deviations from the Original Constitution of the Theosophical Society in various later theosophical branches, the later Theosophical Society included at least since 1908.

The Theosophical Society originally had the motto:
THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN THE TRUTH

Appearntly this motto is not important any longer.

- - - 
Martin expressed some agreement with me.
But for sure there must be many others with a view on this very important issue?

- - - 

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"Abolish the oath in Courts, Parliament, Army and everywhere, and do as the Quakers do, if you will call yourselves Christians. Abolish the Courts themselves, for if you would follow the Commandments of Christ, you have to give away your coat to him who deprives you of your cloak, and turn your left cheek to the bully who smites you on the right. "Resist not evil, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you," for "whosoever shall break one of the least of these Commandments and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven," "
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 55) 
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"ENQUIRER. Do you take any part in politics?

THEOSOPHIST. As a Society, we carefully avoid them, for the reasons given below. To seek to achieve political reforms before we have effected a reform in human nature, is like putting new wine into old bottles. Make men feel and recognise in their innermost hearts what is their real, true duty to all men, and every old abuse of power, every iniquitous law in the national policy, based on human, social or political selfishness, will disappear of itself. Foolish is the gardener who seeks to weed his flower-bed of poisonous plants by cutting them off from the surface of the soil, instead of tearing them out by the roots. No lasting political reform can be ever achieved with the same selfish men at the head of affairs as of old."
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 231) 
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: M. Sufilight 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications

Dear Konstantin

My views are:

I find it a question about how to understand the aims - and - whether one has understood them at all.
And what the implications of the main aim called altruism - necessarily implies. Thos who do NOT will perhaps without hesitation delete the Article XIII given in the 1890 Constitution of the Theosophical Society. Those who do, will not delete it. These are my views and I will try to explain them a bit further in the below.

I will ask the following questions to you:
So why was Article XIII removed from the 1890 Constitution of the Theosophical Society?
And do not we see a great number of the later theoosphical groups, the main Society included at least since 1908, have a blurred stance on exactly the content of this article?

How can one say that the objects of the Theosophical Society have been upheld since the time that various theosophical groups disregarded this article XIII?

Is it not true that many of the various later theosophical groups at least since 1908 have operate with a positive view on the involvement with politics or a secterian stance? 

*** A ***
Take Annie Besant administrative leader of the Theosophical Soceity, (which she turned secterian with a Messiah Craze and also turned political with her outlets) and leader of an Esoteric Section, which never was meant to "boss" the Theosophical Society. Annie Besant whom the Theosophical Society - even today - claim to have taken a great lead in Theosophizing politics - ie. to apply the light of Theosophy to politics. But, the truth is that politics are politics a the lowest of ethics when compared to altruism. It is based on deceit and lies. And The Original Theosophical Society in 1875-1891 had no doctrinas on such a thing. - Therefore Article XIII was written. That is how I view it.

I ASK: But did Annie Besant as the administrative leader of the Theosophical Society after 1908 and as a Messiah promoter in fact not politicise Theosophy?
The Theosophical Society in Adyar and the papers written by Annie Besant in her time seem to confirm this view and the above views.

*** B ***
And take Alice A. Bailey's - organisation, the Lucis Trust, which cannot be called an esoteric section in the sense of the word since it uses the Alice A. Bailey corpus as a main Bible or similar with its mundane political statements - and in fact operates as a sect with an Alice A. Bailey doctrine while it involves its Triangle Section scheme with mundane politics - and - are open for members who all of them are being taught the same secterian doctrine.
This was in opposition to the Constitution of the Theosophical Soceity given in 1890. Yet Alice A. Bailey's Lucis Trust has nothing to do with the Theosophical Society as it was during Annie Besants time --- and as far as I am concerned neither with The Theosophical Society as it mainly operated in 1875-1891.
The Lucis Trust website and the papers written by Alice A. Bailey in her time seem to confirm my views.
Secterian it is. And therefore it cannot followm the aims given in the Constitution of the Theosophical Society in 1890. So why this attempt to ignore the Constitution of the Theosophical Society given in in 1890 - if this organisation does not serve another aim? Namely to - more or less consciously - avoid to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities.

*** C ***
Not even some of the ULT groups understand the importance of Article XIII in the 1890 Constitution of the Theosophical Society - if we have a look at their websites. Their content seem to aim at a secterian promotion.

*** D ***
The Pasadena Theosophists are perhaps the ones who come closests to the original aims. But one will have to dig oneself through a maze of pages to find it hidden in various pages and articles, - and more than one of them you can find. (Try for instance the constitution given in 1875 http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/gfkforum/ourdir.htm and also Franz Hartman, (who later went a bit astray if I am asked about it), on the three objects. He wrote: "Owing to the many misconceptions existing within and without the ranks of the Theosophical Society in regard to its nature and object, this non-dogmatic and unsectarian character of the Society can hardly be asserted and insisted on with sufficient emphasis. The idea of a society having no dogma and no creed is too grand to be grasped by the average mind accustomed to see itself surrounded by innumerable circles, each of which has a certain accepted thought, but no real self-knowledge for its centre." - THE
THREE OBJECTS OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY IN AMERICA: I)

But I find the Pasadena Theosophical Society's avoidance of holding the content of Article XIII high as a lamp for everyone to see a bit disturbing. And its HQ website is not clearly stating the same thing and in fact has a tendency to secterian promotions instead. And this make me wonder about what its members and its organisations real aims are compared to the Constitution of the Theosophical Society given in 1890.

- - - - - -
I know, that I might provoke some readers emtions or intelluctual blockages. But, please bear in mind that I am just seeking the truth here. And I am prefectly aware that I might be in error. But if I am, I will gladly invite anyone to show me why.

Altruism is the corner-stone, and was the aim of the Theosophical Society given in 1875-1891.
One of the aims, the primary one was altruism, ie. to form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or colour. - And by this - to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities. Mentioned in the theosophist in 1879 and also in The Key to Theosophy by its co-founder Blavatsky. 

This noble task cannot be achieved when a theosophical group allow itself to politicise Theosophy, as if the Theosophical Society had any political doctrinas being taught on behalf of the Society!
This noble task cannot be achieved when a theosophical group allow itself to turn a non-secterian Society into a secterian one!

This must be the truth.

Any comments?
Anyone?

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Konstantin Zaitzev 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: theos-talk Digital files of publications

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...> wrote:

> But, which - objects - of the Theosophical Society are we talking
> about?

I mean those which are in use nowdays and which remain unchanged already for 100 years. But I would also agree with the objects given in the Rules of 1890, the last edition made during the life of H.P. Blavatsky. Generally, they don't contradict to the modern ones.

[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]









      

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