Theos-Talk Archives (March 2011 Message tt00108)

Dear friends

My views are:

If we remember Blavatsky words about Oloctt's "superlatively idiotic idea of a Temple of Humanity or Universal Brotherhood" in a Blavatsky letter to Sinnett, it seems that TS Adyar might have avoided reaching a higher level since those days...But maybe I am wrong?
(Just have a look at all the statues of various theosophists of old in TS America 1875-2000 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szt_x1IS-WA)


Here is the letter by Blavatsky to Sinnett - LETTER No. LXV:
"Private.
MY DEAR MR. SINNETT,

When the first letters had gone to you the Countess who had told me that D. N. boasted of having in his possession a document to prove our criminal forgery of a letter of Mah. K. H. asking for money and promising to cure a son of Hurrissingjee, 1 I sat thinking what could be his foundation for such a horrid lie. Then the idea flashed upon me that about 3 months ago, when I received a letter from Hurrissingjee (the copy of which I now enclose for you to keep safely till need comes to use it  2 )-- D. N. who read all my letters was furious. He then raved against Olcott and I was mad too. For it was his fault, his eternal American flapdoodle and idiotic plans and schemes for Adyar. This is what took place: --

You have perhaps heard, that Hurrissingjee (Thakur of Baunagarâs cousin) took it into his head to build a shrine for the portraits of the two Masters and meant to spend over it 10,000 rupees. He several times asked Master; He would not answer. Then he asked Olcott, who bothered Mah. K. H. through Damodar, as I had refused point blank to put such questions to Masters. Then the Mahatma answered âLet him talk with the chelas about it I do not careâ or something to that effect. Well Damodar and Chundra Coosho I think and others went to work to make a plan of the shrine. Even the dirty Coulomb, was called in for his draughtsmanâs capacities. We were in Europe then. But as soon as we were gone came the Coulomb row. When we returned, Hurrissingjee, to show that the exposure had no effect on him, wanted to sell a village and build the shrine quand meme. The day after my return Mahatma told me to write to Hurrissingjee that He expressly forbid spending such amount of money. That it was useless and foolish. So I wrote. Then came the anniversary and Hurrissingjee sent a delegate for himself as he was sick. When the superlatively idiotic idea of a Temple of Humanity or Universal Brotherhood came into Olcottâs pumpkin, the delegate, when the others were subscribing, was asked by Olcott and he said (in full convention in the Pandala before hundreds of people, âI believe His Highness wants to subscribe Rs. 1,000 --â I said to Olcott âtoo muchâitâs a shameââbut he pitched into me for my trouble and as I was then sitting there in the light of a prisoner in dockâI shut up. Well; Olcott came
1 âUnfortunately he said to the Countess that he had left it at Wurzburg, and asked her not to tell me as I would hunt for and destroy it!â
2   see Letter No. LXVa.âED.



âââ 164    THE LETTERS OF H. P. BLAVATSKY   âââ

one day and said, âDo ask Master to permit me to have money (generally) subscribed for the Temple.â So I sent his temple and himself to a hot place and said I would not. Then he went to Damodar, and D.âasked I think, for two or three days after I heard through Damodar that the prohibition to Hurrissingjee of spending money on such flapdoodles had been removed and that Hurrissingjee had a letter to that effect. I remember as though it was to day Dj. Khoolâs voice laughing and saying âHe will catch it with his temple, the gallant Colonel.â Next time D. K. I asked why was the prohibition removed when the very idea of the temple was stupid, and some people went against it. He saidââWell you ought to know that when there is a strong desire on both sides Masters never interfere. They cannot prevent people from hanging themselves.â I paid no great attention to these words then, I thought they referred to the foolishness of the âtemple.â I understand them now.

Three or four months ago I received from Hurrissingjee the letter the copy of which is enclosed. This is the great document and proof of our joint crime. Mr. D. N. said on reading it that Col. Olcott alone desecrated Masterâs name by mixing them with money matters and I agreed with him. Now he comes out, and says that I must have precipitated that letter since the Master (he KNOWS it!!) could never condescend to mix his name with such a disgusting money-matter, âsonsâ and other things. Now I ask you what is there of so incriminating in the words of Master as quoted by Hurrissingjee? He had foolishly attributed the birth of his son to the Masterâs âblessings.â He had bothered Master to permit him to subscribe at least for a bit of the âTempleâ if not for a whole shrine and received these words in answer. âIf you so rejoice over the birth of a sonâthen you may, if you choose subscribe, and then one day you may be able to bring to us also your son.â What have I to do with this? -- Does Master guarantee his life in them? Master ordered him to come to Adyar and bring his newly born son there foreseeing that the malaria in Bhownuggar would kill the baby if he remained. This was said beforehand. Hurrissingjee never brought his son, never gave anything towards the temple (very luckily) -- and wrote me this desperate and foolish letter. But now, when according to D. N.âs theory Hurrissingjee was terribly mad with us for itâthis same mad prince, was at the Anniversary and subscribed 2,000 rupees toward expenses at Adyar, and see how reverentially he writes to me. Well keep this âdamagingâ document if you please, in case of my death, or to confound Mr. D. N. He has made a horrible cruel mischief but I pity him. I had no answer yet from him to my threats to expose him. Very likely he will



âââ 165    THE  LETTER  OF  HURREESINGHJEE   âââ

give me back âcheekâ and impudence. I am prepared for all. I have indeed become a corpse inside and now come what may.
                                                                                                                                                      Yours,
                                                                                                                                                           H. P. B."
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/Letters%20of%20HPB.htm


- - - - - - -
And we may repeat the words by D.K::
"He saidââWell you ought to know that when there is a strong desire on both sides Masters never interfere. They cannot prevent people from hanging themselves.â"



M. Sufilight says:
Well, that is not to say, that I my self claim that I have nothing to learn with regard ot the use or non-use of money. (smile.)

But to turn a Society such as The Theosophical Society, which original aims in 1875-1891 was to be NON-secterian - into - something secterian is a bore and even a sham - and the guilt rest as I seem it on past events and on the very present leadership of the Society today.
(Just watch this online video on The Theosophical Society America website:
The Theosophical Society in America: An Illustrated History: 1875-2000
http://www.theosophicalinstitute.org/medialibrary/viewtitle.php?titleid=B26DD187-6333-11D6-9AE9-003048223922 - or seek it out on Youtube or elsewhere...)

If you as a member of the TS, and who has seen the above video can explain to me, why the Theosohical Society today year 2011 is not promoting itself as a secterian body - be my guest. Can you explain this to the mebers on this forum?

Was and is the aim not altruism - that is NON-secterian altruism?
And how can secterian altruism ever promote the ORIGINAL aim of the Theosohical Society given in 1875-1891 by Blavatsky and others. - The ORIGINAL aim included that the Theosohical Society has the aim "to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities." (The Key to Theosophy, p. 2-3)
 - I ask how can that be promoted by such a secterian movie like the above?
Is it not a bit saddening or even very much saddening to see something like this being promoted by what people call brilliant minds - while the forget to mention the non-secterian aspect of the TS as it was given already in 1875?

But maybe I have misunderstood it all?
But since nobody will give an answer to this, I find more and more that I am on right track.





M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: MKR 
  To: theos-talk 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 2:34 AM
  Subject: theos-talk Update on GC Meeting Minutes - Handling of Finances in the International Fund in the USA


    
  In the version of the GC December 2010 meeting minutes I saw in cyberspace,
  there was one item that caught my eye. It is the statement:

  âThe Secretary presented the report and stated that no details of the
  International Fund held in USA were received despite reminders.â

  This would raise a serious red flag to anyone who has a business and
  accounting background. Not only obviously no information seems to be
  forthcoming - mind you the money does not belong to the American Section, it
  belongs to the TS, Adyar that the issue was serious enough to be put into
  the minutes. Any reading of the minutes would tell you that minutes was not
  meant to give much detailed transparent information to keep the members
  fully informed,

  This should cause serious concern about the account and transactions
  therein, because the highest paid employee at Wheaton is the man keeping the
  books. (Thanks to IRS requirement to disclose compensation info) In
  addition, the account books are audited every year (even though after the
  Enron debacle, no one has confidence in any audited financial information)
  and hence the details should be readily available and in this day and age of
  computers and Internet. Information can be sent instantaneously to anywhere
  in the world.

  Troubles in many organizations originate in the handling of money and recent
  history of the debacles that the country has faced should convince anyone
  that some thing may be amiss when financial details are not forthcoming when
  requested by parties who have a legitimate right to the information.

  Any student of the Mahatma Letters has a sense of very strict rules that are
  imposed on Chelas in matters of money. I am sure this was due to many
  experiences the Mahatmas may have seen on the kind of troubles money can
  cause.

  I think the elected leaders may want to quickly disclose all the financial
  details and clear up any cloud that would hang if they choose to adopt
  silence as the answer.

  MKR

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



  

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