theos-talk Re: THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
Apr 01, 2011 03:41 PM
by jdmsoares
Dear Sufilight, friends,
Sufilight thanks.
Brother, ou website www.TheosophyOnline.com
<http://www.theosophyonline.com/> is inspired by the non-bureaucratic
approach of the "ULT Declaration".
Best regards,
Joaquim
0000000000000000000000000000
The ULT Declaration
The Founding Document ofthe United Lodge of Theosophists, ULT United
Lodge of Theosophists 000000000000000000000000000000000000000 The
U.L.T., founded in 1909, has Lodges
throughout the world offering regularly scheduled
lectures and study classes that are free and open
to the public. In other areas there are smaller study
classes that also meet regularly to study the original
writings of Theosophy. A brief philosophic
declaration is its sole guiding document.
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Declaration The policy of
this Lodge is independent devotion to the cause of Theosophy, without
professing attachment to any Theosophical organization. It is loyal to
the great Founders of the Theosophical movement, but does not concern
itself with dissensions or differences of individual opinion. The work
it has on hand and the end it keeps in view are too absorbing and too
lofty to leave it the time or inclination to take part in side issues.
That work and that end is the dissemination of the fundamental
principles of the Philosophy of Theosophy, and the exemplification in
practice of those principles, through a truer realization of the SELF; a
profounder conviction of Universal Brotherhood. It holds that the
unassailable basis for union among Theosophists, wherever and however
situated, is "similarity of aim, purpose and teaching," and
therefore has neither Constitution, By-Laws nor Officers, the sole bond
between its Associates being that basis. And it aims to disseminate this
idea among Theosophists in the furtherance of Unity. It regards as
Theosophists all who are engaged in the true service of Humanity,
without distinction of race, creed, sex, condition or organization, and
It welcomes to its association all those who are in accord with its
declared purposes and who desire to fit themselves, by study and
otherwise, to be the better able to help and teach others. "The true
Theosophist belongs to no cult or sect, yet belongs to each and
all." 0000000000000000 The following is the form signed by
Associates of the United lodge of Theosophists: "Being in sympathy
with the purposes of this Lodge, as set forth in its 'Declaration,' I
hereby record my desire to be enrolled as an Associate, it being
understood that such association calls for no obligation on my part,
other than that which I, myself, determine." 00000000000000000000
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Joaquim and friends
>
> My views are:
>
> Although I appreciate your efforts and wellmeaning stance. I will have
to state that my aims - and I think with good reasons - are a bit
different.
>
> I will instead have to ask you, at www.TheosophyOnline.com , what
Constitution and Rules do you follow if any today?
>
> Show me your Constitution and Rules on your website, and then I might
listen.
>
>
> Let me seek to explain my aim and views further in the below...
>
>
> _______________
> The Theosophical Society was originally formed to be non-secterian in
the year 1875. And it was still non-secterian in 1886 and in 1891. Later
the term NON-SECTERIAN was removed from its constitution and rules.
>
> This is one central issue to consider when reading the content of the
website you mention.
> _______________
>
> THE KEY:
> To me the central question for many days now is not the various
opinions given by the various theosophical camps and offshoots, and TS
Adyar. Your articles at www.TheosophyOnline.com included.
>
>
> The main and central questions are and must necessarily be:
> - DOES A GIVEN THEOSOPHICAL GROUP FOLLOW THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION AND
RULES given in 1875-1891?
> - IF NOT, WHY NOT?
>
> - DOES A GIVEN THEOSOPHICAL GROUP FOLLOW THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION AND
RULES given in 1875-1891 - with regard to ARTICLE XIII given in the 1891
CONSTITUTION AND RULES?
> - IF NOT, WHY NOT?
>
>
> - DOES A GIVEN THEOSOPHICAL GROUP FOLLOW THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION AND
RULES given in 1875-1891 - with regard to being NON-SECTERIAN?
> - IF NOT, WHY NOT?
>
>
> - IF A GIVEN THEOSOPHICAL GROUP HAS DELETED - or - REFORMULATED
Article XIII given in the 1891 CONSTITUTION AND RULES, why have they
done that? And when?
>
> - IF A GIVEN THEOSOPHICAL GROUP HAS DELETED - or - REFORMULATED the
use of the word or term NON-SECTERIAN in their present day CONSTITUTION
AND RULES, why have they done that? And when?
>
>
> AND WHAT ROLE SHOULD WE - TODAY - GIVE "THE EXACT SCIENCE on
PSYCHOLOGY" ALSO NAMED "THEOSOPHY" by the founders of the TS, WHEN WE
REALISE THAT THERE ALSO IS a more or less materialistic SCIENCE ON
PSYCHOLOGICAL "MIND CONTROL" (the psychology about cults and sects etc.)
in EXISTENCE TODAY?
>
> - - -
> I find it of less importance what opinion a given person have or has
about the Besant-Judge case or split and other matters.
> I find the aims and the Constitutions of any given - (by themselves
named) - theosophical group to be the central issue. Building on a rock
seem to be important - and not secterian behaviour.
>
> When a given theosophical group can with honesty say, that they still
follow the Original Programe - the original Constitution and Rules of
the TS given in 1875-1891 by the founders - or - if they can
scientifically show me and others why any given changes have been
necessary - then, and first then I will find their aims to be healthy.
>
> - - -
>
> Therefore I will instead have to ask you, at www.TheosophyOnline.com ,
what Constitution and Rules do you follow if any today?
>
> Show me your Constitution and Rules on your website, and then I might
listen.
>
>
> All the above are of course as always just my views.
> And I do not claim myself to be infallible.
>
>
> M. Sufilight
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jdmsoares
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 1:06 AM
> Subject: theos-talk Re: THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
>
>
>
>
> Dear Sufilight, friends,
>
> Maybe you have not read carefully the article that MKR mentioned,
> "The Future of Adyar Society
>
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/10/future-of-adyar-society_18.h\
\
> tml> ".
>
> Let me leave here the invitation to those who feel interested to
visit
> our websites and read our texts.
>
> On the websites www.TheosophyOnline.com
> <http://www.theosophyonline.com/> and www.Esoteric-Philosophy.com
> <http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/> you will find two specific
> sections dealing in depth with the really important issues affecting
the
> Adyar Society, and the esoteric movement as a whole: "Truth and
> Falsehood in the Theosophical Literature" and "Theosophical
> Movement -- Its Past and Its Future".
>
> You will find there, very clearly, that to really revive Adyar TS is
> necessary to abandon the pseudo-theosophy of Annie Besant and
> Leadbeater, is necessary to rescue the original theosophy of HPB; is
> necessary to abandon the domain maintained by dogmatisms
> bureaucratic-ritualistic.
>
> Above all, is necessary to recognize past mistakes and fantasies so
to
> continue to persist in these same mistakes over and over again. They
are
> not personal mistakes, but pedagogical ones. They resulted,
basically,
> from the withdrawal of the genuine esoteric philosophy and from the
well
> intentioned adoption of a pseudo-theosophy placed at the service of
> rituals, hierarchies of power, etc.
>
> Best regards, Joaquim
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" global-theosophy@
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Joaquim
> >
> > My views are:
> >
> > Now I ask a few questions in the below to Joaquim.
> > other readers are heartily welcome to give some answers, of their
> heart of compassion are eager enough for it. Especially those who
claim
> that they value the promotion of altruism in the TS very very much.
TS
> leaders included!
> >
> >
> > Joaquim, you wrote:
> > "I think the differences between Sufilight positions and those we
> defend
> > in our websites are, from our point of view, secondary and of no
great
> > importance."
> >
> > M. Sufilight says:
> > Well, that might be true.
> > But I wonder whether it is unimportant, if the present day TS
operates
> a secterian body or not, when its original aim in 1875 until 1891
was
> most clearly to operate in a non-secterian manner?
> >
> > And I also wonder whether it is unimportant, if the present day TS
> operates with the same view as Annie Besant when she as a leader of
the
> TS and its Esoteric Section said the following in her very political
> book in the below excerpt.
> >
> > In the below Annie Besant made both H. P. Blavatsky and H. S.
Olcott
> guilty of political pormotions - even on behalf - of the
Theosophical
> Society. To this I must clealry protest, when one call it
unimportant or
> of no freat importance, even if TS Adyar do it....
> >
> > The Future of Indian Politics, 1922 (Printed at supposedly
> non-political Theosophical Publishing House)
> > "CHAPTER I
> > STEP BY STEP
> >
> > We begin with the words with which we
> > finished our " Bird's-Eye View " : " ultimate
> > freedom under her rule was inevitable " ; and
> > we must first note the great institution known
> > as the Indian National Congress, which laid,
> > well and truly, the foundations of Indian Free-
> > dom from December, 1885, to August, 1918,
> > both in Bombay.
> >
> > Some English critics, in the early days of
> > the War, angrily declared that India had taken
> > advantage of the War to press a new claim for
> > Dominion status. That was not so. The new
> > departure in 1913 resembled in one marked
> > way the new departure when the National
> >
> >
> > 26 THE FUTURE OF INDIAN POLITICS
> >
> > Congress was planned in 1884. The seed of
> > both was planted by the Theosophical Society.
> > It was at the Theosophical Convention of that
> > year that a small group of earnest Theo-
> > sophists - deeply concerned for the political
> > future of their country and aroused to a sense
> > of her past powers and her then present
> > impotence by the awakening crusades of
> > H. P. Blavatsky and Henry Steele Olcott,
> > stirring the educated to self-respect and res-
> > pect for their Nation - meeting in Adyar,
> > decided to make an effort for political
> > redemption; feeble as they seemed, they
> > felt strong in their belief that India's
> > ancient Rshis still watched over Their ancient
> > and ever well-loved land, and would aid their
> > efforts to bring about her political resurrection ;
> > so they gathered a small meeting in Madras
> > - there were only seventeen of them - and it
> > was there decided to begin " a National move-
> > ment for the saving of the Motherland "(How
> >
> > STEP BY STEP 27
> >
> > India Wrought for Freedom, p. 2). A list of the
> > seventeen is there given, quoted from the
> > Indian Mirror, and they were mostly delegates
> > to the Theosophical Convention from Calcutta,
> > Bombay, Poena, Benares, Allahabad, Bengal,^
> > Oudh and the Northwest Province (now the
> > United Provinces), and Madras. One of them,
> > Norendranath Sen, Editor of the (Calcutta)
> > Indian Mirror, says of them in his paper :
> > " The delegates who attended the [Theo-
> > sophical] Convention were most of them men
> > who, socially and intellectually, are the leaders
> > of the Society in which they move in different
> > parts of the country." They resolved that on
> > their return home, each would form a
> > Committee in his own town or Province, and
> > consult how to make their dream a reality. " In
> > March, 1885, it was decided to hold a meeting
> > of representatives from all parts of India at
> > the then coming Christmas " (Proceedings of
> > the First Indian National Congress) They
> >
> >
> > 28 THE FUTURE OF INDIAN POLITICS
> >
> > estimated that seventy delegates would be pre-
> > sent, and seventy-two attended, strengthened
> > by thirty friends. From that first meeting in
> > 1885 to that of Bombay in 1918 - with one
> > break-down at Surat in 1907 - the Congress
> > was truly National, and guided Indian Politics.
> > During all these years the National Congress
> > had awakened large numbers of the English-
> > educated classes to political self-consciousness,
> > and had trained them in political knowledge.
> > English names, Hume, Wedderburn, Cotton,
> > and others are found co-operating with the
> > Indian patriots. It met yearly and demanded
> > definite improvements in the system of
> > Government, definite changes in legislation,
> > definite reforms of abuses, definite limitations
> > of autocracy and enlargements of liberty."
> >
>
http://www.archive.org/stream/futureofindianpo00besarich#page/n3/mode/2u\
\
> p
> >
> > I repeat Annie Besant claim:
> > "The seed of
> > both was planted by the Theosophical Society."...ie. the political
aim
> for freedom of India, (to Besant this was freedom under the English
> Crown, the King)...etc. etc.
> >
> >
> > This is the past, which at present still looms over the
Theosophical
> Society, who in truth have not washed away this stain from its main
> spiritual aim of altruism.
> >
> > Those who find that turning the TS into a pseudo-arm and promoter
of
> politics a good idea, they support Annie Besant. Those who do not,
aught
> to change the Constitution and Rules of the present day TS, so they
> clearly rejects this stance - something the today very much
distorted
> 1891 TS Constitutions and Rules in fact do.
> >
> > But, please tell me why I am in error, when I - in the name of
> ALTRUSIM --- find the lack of emphasis on these to issues -
> non-political interference and non-secterian bahaviour to be lacking
in
> TS Adyar and its present day Constitutions. Will you please do that?
> >
> > All the above are as usual just my views.
> > And I might be in error.
> >
> >
> >
> > M. Sufilight
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: jdmsoares
> > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 12:35 AM
> > Subject: theos-talk Re: THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Sufilight, Konstantin, friends,
> >
> > I think the differences between Sufilight positions and those we
> defend
> > in our websites are, from our point of view, secondary and of no
> great
> > importance.
> >
> > Konstantin is deeply concerned about those who left the Adyar TS,
> and
> > believes that these become the "most bitter enemies".
> >
> > My dear brothers, I myself was for some years a member of Adyar
> Society
> > and like Sufilight and many others I also not hope to be
considered
> an
> > enemy.
> >
> > Theosophy is not confined to the Adyar TS.
> >
> > It is good to remember that HPB herself wrote:
> >
> > "It is pure nonsense to say ´H.P. Blavatsky . . . is loyal to
the
> > Theosophical Society and to Adyar` (!?) H.P. Blavatsky 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 the Cause. . . 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.
> Blavatsky
> > calling the Theosophical Society disloyal will shake it off like
> dust
> > from her feet."
> >
> > I took this excerpt - of the well know text of HPB - from a most
> > interesting article entitled "A Key to the Future of Adyar
> >
>
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/10/1922-statement-to-all-theoso\
\
> \
> > phists-and.html> ", which I think it is worth reading carefully.
> >
> > The theosophical movement itself as a whole needs a revived Adyar
> TS.
> >
> > Best regards, Joaquim
> >
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight"
global-theosophy@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Konstantin and friends
> > >
> > > My views are:
> > >
> > > Your post got me to think about my own role in this affair:
> > > Well, then I do certainly not hope that I am considered an enemy
> and
> > Jesuit, at least not more than Leadbeater was when he was
reinstated
> in
> > 1908 - well if you understand me in a positive manner.
> > >
> > > Well, either one is in sympathy with the aims of the Society or
> one is
> > not.
> > > I am very much in sympathy with the Original Constitution and
> Rules as
> > they were given in 1891, but not the present day ones. That is the
> main
> > difference i experience.
> > >
> > > What I through the years has experienced as highly problematic
is
> that
> > it is virtually impossible to exchange views with leading TS
members
> > about central issues like why deviation from the Original
> Constitution
> > of the Theosophical Society has been necessary - and why exchanges
> on
> > this is kept from the TS magazines, while it as a fact must be of
> the
> > greatest importance to consider in a Society where the primary aim
> is
> > something as important as ALTRUISM! And when we on top of that
talk
> > about the crisis that happened in the later years and the lacking
of
> > interest or rather understanding of the TS and its aims among
people
> in
> > all countries but India perhaps, - so we are told --- I find the
> > laziness og laissez-faire attutude publicly speaking to be lacking
> > compassion!
> > > Yet, there is a TS blog where some articles have been posted,
and
> we
> > have to be thankful for this.
> > >
> > > Maybe as HPB said in the link on SPIRITUAL PROGRESS I recently
> posted,
> > --- we all would do well in much more scientific research in the
> field
> > of Mesmerism (known today by many as Heartflow and Healing, or
> > Therapeutic Touch etc.)?
> > >
> > > There is, as I see it, a clear and pressing need for an
> explanation of
> > the aims of the Society - and a clear explanation of why its
> > Constitution and Rules are like they are today - and - that
compared
> > with the original one in 1875 and later versions, like the 1891
one.
> It
> > is important, if one really are taking this Society thing
seriously.
> If
> > it is not, then the present day attitude are understood much
better.
> But
> > calling it altruism I will not.
> > >
> > >
> > > TS has, as I see it, today not clearly defined its role towards
> New
> > Age groups - and the many later theosophical ofshoots - and that
is
> a
> > great failure. The same with TS relation to whether it is
secterian
> or
> > non-secterian. (The latter term, a term which has been thrown away
> from
> > the 1875 and 1891 Constitutions through the years). In the old
days,
> > something like that would not have happened - because back then
> altruism
> > and building the Society on a rock was considered to be important
-
> and
> > views based on facts and scientific research as well.
> > > And honesty was important as well - and an error commited, was
> > admitted when proven.
> > > And I find that this last sentence, perhaps is where the shoe
> pinches
> > mon Shaib (as Sinnett was told by Morya in the below).
> > >
> > > J. Krishnamurti's idea of abolishing all organisations is not
> really
> > what is helpful to the promotion of altruism, if you by this
> consider
> > dissolving the TS. And if it is a dissolving of the TS the present
> day
> > leadership aims at they seem very slow at promoting it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Mahatma Letter no. 47 by Morya to Sinnett:
> > > "Your last letter to me is less a "petition" than a protest, my
> > respected Sahib. It's voice is that of the war sankh of my Rajput
> > ancestors, rather than the cooing of a friend. And I like it all
the
> > more I promise you. It has the right ring of honest frankness. So
> let us
> > talk -- for sharp as your voice may be, your heart is warm and you
> end
> > by saying "Whether you decree that what seems to me right be done
or
> > not" you are ever ours faithfully etc. Europe is a large place but
> the
> > world is bigger yet. The sun of Theosophy must shine for all, not
> for a
> > part. There is more of this movement than you have yet had an
> inkling
> > of, and the work of the T.S. is linked in with similar work that
is
> > secretly going on in all parts of the world. Even in the T.S.
there
> is a
> > division, managed by a Greek Brother about which not a person in
the
> > Society has a suspicion excepting the old woman and Olcott"
> > > .......
> > > "You know K.H. and me -- buss! know you anything of the whole
> > Brotherhood and its ramifications? The Old Woman is accused of
> > untruthfulness, inaccuracy in her statements. "Ask no questions
and
> you
> > will receive no lies." She is forbidden to say what she knows. You
> may
> > cut her to pieces and she will not tell. Nay -- she is ordered in
> cases
> > of need to mislead people; and, were she more of a natural born
liar
> --
> > she might be happier and won her day long since by this time. But
> that's
> > just where the shoe pinches, Sahib. She is too truthful, too
> outspoken,
> > too incapable of dissimulation: and now she is being daily
crucified
> for
> > it. Try not to be hasty, respected Sir. The world was not made in
a
> day;
> > nor has the tail of the yak developed in one year. Let evolution
> take
> > its course naturally -- lest we make it deviate and produce
monsters
> by
> > presuming to guide it."
> > > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-47.htm
> > >
> > >
> > > Now, you may crucify me for saying what I am saying, but I am
> saying
> > it for the sake of a Society I am not even a member of these days.
> > >
> > > All the above are as usual just my views.
> > > And I might be in error.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > M. Sufilight
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Konstantin Zaitzev
> > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 11:02 AM
> > > Subject: theos-talk Re: THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Some months ago, an article on the topic of the Future of
Adyar
> > > > Society was published in a theosophical forum.
> > >
> > > The author is very prejudiced. He persistently calls
theosophical
> > society "Adyar society", ignoring the fact that other societies
> calling
> > themselves theosophical are decaying in much greater degree and
> hadn't
> > much prominence even in their best times.
> > > Information on his site is filtered and censored. Several months
> ago
> > he proposed me to make an interview, ensuring me in his
> "professional
> > journalism", "professional ethics" and other bla-bla-bla like
that.
> > > It took much time to write detailed answers to all his
questions,
> > but as some my answers proved to be not like he expected, he
> declined to
> > publish the interview.
> > > I agree that for the last 30 years the Theosophical Society is
> > experiencing serious problems (probably more serious than the
author
> > points out but of quite different nature), but it's not the best
way
> to
> > solve them to resort to the help of the enemies of the Society.
For
> many
> > years he was a member and later left it, and, as HPB pointed out,
> such
> > people form the most bitter enemies. The other materials of the
site
> > illustarate that well.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [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]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
