Theos-Talk Archives (May 2011 Message tt00146)

Dear Diwata and friends

My views are:

Diwata wrote:
"I think the presentation must reduce mysticism"

M. Sufilight says:
Maybe you misunderstood my question.
I was thinking about what kind of Constitution and Rules one aught to forward these days compared to the one given in 1886 by H. P. Blavatsky: ["ORIGINAL PROGRAMME" MANUSCRIPT] ( http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm ) and in the Constitution and Rules for the Theosophical Society, jan 1891

In the Constitution and Rules for the Theosophical Society, jan 1891  (See especially article XIII):
"ARTICLE XIII 
Offences
1. Any Fellow who shall in any way attempt to involve the Society In political disputes shall be immediately expelled.

2. 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. "
http://www.global-theosophy.net/ts_constitution_rules.php

Therefore I cannot agree upon a presentation of a doctrine as such within a Society and behalf of it - when I am mererly seeking to reformulate the frame of the Constitution to something in accordance with the changes of time. Because, such a reformulation would turn the Theosophical Society as it was given in 1875-1891 in to a sect, and this was not the original aim with the Society. (See the Constitution and Rules for the Theosophical Society, jan 1891  - Article I: "The Theosophical Society is absolutely unsectarian" and also the above in Article XIII, where not doctrinas are forumulated ON BEHALF of the Society(!) ). - But if your are syaing that we aught to turn the The Theosophical Society into a sect with a doctrine and all, I think I would like to know why this should be an improvement compared to the original aim? What are your views on this, Diwata?

Diwata wrote:
"The idea of Vitvan is that we always be aware that language itself distorts perception of reality, and that we are capable to percieving a deeper degree of truth by clear thinking. "

M. Sufilight:
Yes, maybe on aught to add this obvious truth to the new reformulated Constitution, which one seek to create.

I have the thought that maybe the Theosophical Society aught to replace its title with something like: "THE MEANING OF LIFE SOCIETY --- perhaps with the sub-title: The Theosophical Society or perhaps instead the sub-title "Stop evil - Seek to Promulgate non-Secterian Altruism".....?
And add a sentence about, that the Society invite all persons, who are in sympathy with the promulgation of altruism to join the Society, whether they are New Agers, Spiritualist, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians etc.....? 
(Hypothesises are welcomed within the Society, dogmatism and politics are not. This in a non-secterian Society. And no Esoteric Section (secterian or not) should "boss" the members of the Society by the use of cold non-communication. The members deserve an answer to questions raised to the General Counsil, if they are important to a great number of them.)

Now, we all know that the present day Theosophical Society year 2011 has deviated from the Original Constitutions and Rules given in 1875-1891, and that the above mentioned Article XIII from the Constitution and Rules for the Theosophical Society, jan 1891 was deleted, and has been so since the year 1908 if not before that time, and this without any answer given to the necessity of this. So unless, I am given a clairifcation by any member of the present day Theosophical Society about this, I will have to consider the present day Theosophical Society to be a political body and perhaps also a sect - (because although the Society claim that it is non-secterian, it present day constitution contains secterin articles - See the TS Declaration under "The Basic Truths of Religion" - and - "Fundamentals of Theosophy" etc. etc. --- http://www.teozofija.info/Teozofsko_gibanje/Declarations.htm ).

All the above are however just my views.



M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: DiwataD 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 7:41 AM
  Subject: Re: theos-talk Anyone here studying the work of Vitvan?


    
  > This provokes the question, what kind of presentation 
  > aught to be created today so to reach a wider audience?
  > It must be a quite important question, if one really consider 
  > altruism and wisdom to be very important, and not just 
  > something trivial or similar.

  M. Sufilight,

  I think the presentation must reduce mysticism -- I mean, for example, ideas with referrent to common experience must be so termed, and those with remote referrents must be made clear that they are (i.e., put in quotes, etc.). The idea of Vitvan is that we always be aware that language itself distorts perception of reality, and that we are capable to percieving a deeper degree of truth by clear thinking. I also think that we must find illustration of the Ancient Teachings in our experiences today (both personal and scientific) and less rely on myths handed down from remote ages. The reason for this is that the ancient people were endowed with atavistic clairvoyance with which they percieved supersensible realities, but this is almost completely extinguished today in exchange for our increasing capability for individual thinking. I'm not capable of personally verifying this change in the capability of our race, but in view of Evolution which Theosophy consistently teaches, it appears that this is our path and we must make use of it. One wonderful example use of this faculty can be seen in Rudolf Steiner's "Theosophy". He makes the reader deduce, from experience and thinking faculty, the existence of the subtle bodies and necessity of reincarnation -- the most basic teachings of Theosophy. I think, such is the path that we must take. I don't think that this is abandoning Theosophy -- instead, we are taking it to the New Age. We have lost the "automatic" clairvoyance to see the reality behind the myths -- and we have lost it for our faculty to think as individuals -- but thinking will in the future replace this clairvoyance . This is according to Rudolf Steiner, but even now if we contemplate on it, we can see that present thinking is a basic degree of clairvoyance but with the additional element of Self-consciousness -- if by clairvoyance we mean the ability to derive knowledge from a single "idea" or "concept" etc.



  

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