Theos-Talk Archives (June 2011 Message tt00079)

Dear Joaquim and all readers


My views are:

The Theosophical Society was originally founded so to promote altruism and to seek to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities. 
There can be no doubt about this. But the Theosophical Society was founded in 1875, and there were no Internet and no websites, and no forums in those days.
Despite this, there must be certain basic facts with regard to communication and moderation on a theosophical forum, which aught to be in operation, if, and I clearly say IF, one attempt to promote altruism and seek to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities. 

Joaquim Soares a former member of the Theosophical Network informed me, that he had been banned from the same forum.
I know other members have been so through the past year. And I also know that several members have been given warnings about what is allowed to be written and what not on that forum.
I am one of those who also got warned. One of the times I might have stepped past the thin red line, but the other time I did not. And since the moderators of that forum - appearntly not - are interested open to an honest exchange about how they run their forum, I will seek to hightlight the problem on this forum, from which it in various repsects originally came.
My views are of course just my views. And of course no two persons agree entirely, or at least it cannot be expected.

But please tell me what you think we aught to do so to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities, if that is where your aims are?



To Joaquim:
Thank you for letting me and other know about it.
To all readers of the below I will have to say, that I am merely seeking to be of service to all of us. 
Be certain about that my motives are from a heart that is beating for service of all theosophical seekers. Please do not misunderstand my words in the below.

I wonder how many they are banning each week at the Theosophical Network based on a very unclear policy about what is acceptable to write and what not?
If they only are banning a few or warning a few each week - is this due to the fact that some members are not welcomed at the forum in advance?

No wonder people are seem to be afraid to write anything despite there are more than 780 members on the forum today. Look at how few posts the forum have on a daily basis (apart from greetings, and short sentences like "I agree.", "Me too!", "I admire your scholary inputs!" and similar, and postings of photos --- allright maybe that is to go a bit far, but I try to make you readers understand what I am getting at), and that it most often are the same persons who dare write anything. It seems that the forum is only open to some writers - ie. those who excel in the allowed kind of doctrine or "doctrine", or scope, what ever that scope might be. But maybe I am viewing it all with coloured glasses. The forum has in fact also done something good in creating an archive on rare manuscripts and it had many a fruitful exchange in its early days.
Some of the members on the forum are no doubt well-read and welleducated, and this is certainly a good thing. (But that does not imply that they all of them are very wise or without vital deficits in their auras. Just remember the scientist named A. O. Hume in the old days of the Theosophical Society. He was a clairvoyant and very intelligent, but not fit for spiritual matters ethically speaking. At least this was what a number of theosophists said about him).

A MODERATOR SPEAKS OUT:
This sentence given by you Joaquim from a (here unnamed) moderator of the Theosophical Network is very strange indeed. The sentence states the reason why Joaquim was banned:
"The theosophy vs. pseudo-theosophy discussion has no place on theosophy.net.  It denigrates anyone who holds a contrary view as being something less, or other than a theosophist."

M. Sufilight says:
I disagree with that sentence. How can one then fullfil the second aim given by the forum - namely "To encourage the comparative study of religion, philosophy, and science"; (ie. without any emphasis on eastern literature as given in the original versions in 1875-1891)?

I disagree, because, A discussion on theosophy vs. pseudo-theosophy does not denigrate anyone who holds a contrary view --- instead it opens up for an exchange on what is the meaning of life and how one can promote altruism. It is to me the same as saying that one cannot exchange views upon whether one agree with A when compared with B or C. Such a stance effectively rules out comparative studying of a certain kind (comparative studying being one of the aims on the forum),  while appearntly plastering the member with the view that the motive with the use of the words - theosophy vs. pseudo-theosophy -  was non-compassionate, whereas the motives might in fact indeed have been the quite opposite!

It is exactly the view expressed by the moderator, which aught to be deleted from a honest theosophical forum, which seek to promote altruism.
My experience is however, that this is not the first time we have witnessed this view by the same moderator or moderators on that forum. I do hope you understand better, why I write these words.

I would say, that those who cannot stand criticism or the truth when it is given to them, aught to learn to do so before they themselves can claim to be forwarding the truth - where they criticise others, even if those whom they - directly - criticise are dead, because they clearly indirectly cricise others by doing what they do.
But these are as always just my views.


- - -

To me it is sad to see something like that going on at a forum using the name Theosophical. And it is not the first time. I have experienced something similar and others as well. I do hope that someone will help the Theosophical Network to realise, that it is in fact to a certain degree operating in opposition to the principles of the Original Theosophical Society as it was given in 1875-1891. And they are not telling clearly that they have deviated from these original principles, and to what extend, - and especially they do not CLEARLY tell the members of that forum WHY, they have deviated from those principles, and why it was necessary to do so ethically speaking. (Strangely enough. Pople keep quitet, when I write about this, even if it is very important, ethically speaking! --- The frame and Constitution, and Rules from which a forum or a Theosophical Society operates has everything to do with ethics. And it is important, and should be taken seriously - if one really are honest about promoting altruism. But these are just my views.)

The present day behaviour of moderation is to me more and more like that of a secterian one - with no room for disagreements and with a certain - in fact quite unclear - stance by a (self-elected) group of moderators or a moderator - about what needs to be censored and what not. (There are as I see it some parallels to this compared with certain authoritarian methods of the past. - And to call something like that a promotion of altruism, I will not.)

But of course there are more than one opinion to all this. And I am open-minded and would like to hear other views, because they might be important. But the problem is there can neither be an open exchange about these issues on the Theosophical Network. So I write about it here. And I will be the first to admit that I am not always understanding how to present my views politely enough using the english language, because I was not born in an english speaking country. So please bear with me in the name of altruism.

- - -
My views are:
About forums. One cannot promote one self as a Seeker of altruism and comparative studying on a forum - and then disallow wellmeant criticism of ones own writings. (Think carefully about this.)
And one cannot promote one self as a Seeker of altruism and comparative studying on a forum - and then disallow wellmeant criticism of ones own writings, writings which almost inevitably criticize others. (Think carefully about this.)

And there should in the name of altruism be allowed a certain room for wellmeant criticism on a theosophical forum seeking to promote altruism - and - those who criticize should not be plastered with motives they do not have - by betterknowing moderators; (there is a proverb: Don't let the fox guard the hen-house). There fore a moderator should always in the name of altruism be willing to step down if needed - and his or her seat to another better fitted for such a task. 

The level of room for criticism should be quite open - especially because the aim of the forum is a search for the meaning of life based on wellmeant altruistic exchanges and the possible promotion of altruism. The criticism given should however not become dishonest or an attempt to chase individuals, - neither should those who promote various views be dishonest or lack objectivity in their views, or be unwilling to have their views examined by others - in the name of altruism. These words are as I see it very important to understand.

Those who participate at an honest theosophical forum where comparative studying are encouraged --- whether they be ordinary beginner seekers, long-time theosophical students, or long-time Ph.D.'s and self-esteemed Authors,  --- can NOT expect --- to have their special (self-esteemed: "I am a personality") wants charmed by moderators on an honest theosophical forum, where altruism and the truth about life is sought --- just because these (not seldom self-proclaimed) so-called personalities are overly sensitive and disallow criticism of their very own self-esteemed betterknowing brains --- while they themselves are allowed to trample on others more or less - or - as in some case on high initiates of the past who are not able to speak back from the grave (....unless that is what in fact is attempted from time to time ...although it is not always accepted or understood to be so). Such overly-sensitives (perhaps even "neurotics") aught not to claim that they are honest about seeking altruism and the truth about the meaning of life - and letting comparative studying have its say in an open-minded manner.
Those who are not allowing others to criticize their own views - in a wellmeant and friendly manner - because they somehow (or suddenly) are overly sensitive or perhaps feel elevated on higher level than the ordinary humans or non-authors or non-Ph.D.'s - aught perhaps to seek a psychologist or a doctor, because they might be in need to have their brains and Kama-Manas examined. Either they accept - wellmeant - criticism or they are out of the game. One cannot promote one self as a Seeker of altruism and Seeker after the truth about the Meaning of Life - and then disallow wellmeant criticism about ones own views. 

I now others would think, that we all have to be so sensitive and polite, that we only allow the sensitives (perhaps even "neurotics," - as I see it, sometimes they are in fact "spiritual leaders", various lecturers or PH.D. authors with self-esteem) to write something - while the ignorant so-called "ordinary" ones keep silent. Sensitives or neurotics cannot be reasoned with they might get a break-down when one write one single word, which they happen to disllike or feel uncomfortable about. Such persons will always hamper any exchange of views.

The promotion of altruism on a theosophical forum following the original principles given in the Original Theosophical Society's constitutions (1875-1891) is something the members aught to do together as fellow human beings, as friends - as humans - not as something else --- ie. DESPITE opposing views, disagreements, etc. etc. The tone of voice on such a forum, aught to of course to be civil. And those with surplus, aught to be so civil, that they allow others with less surplus to have their say.

Now the readers could tell me if they disagree on the above views


- - - 
A few more explaining word might be in order....


The Original Theosophical Society was created to be NON-SECTERIAN.
And people do not seem to understand what this implies.

Taken from the Preamble given in october 1875:
"The title of the Theosophical Society explains the objects and desires of its founders"
.......
"Whatever may be the private opinions of its members, the society has no dogmas to enforce, no creed to disseminate. It is formed neither as a Spiritualistic schism, nor to serve as the foe or friend of any sectarian or philosophic body. Its only axiom is the omnipotence of truth, its only creed a profession of unqualified devotion to its discovery and propagation. In considering the qualifications of applicants for membership, it knows neither race, sex, color, country nor creed. 
That all the members of a society should acquire an equal degree of knowledge within the same period of time is not to be expected. Knowledge is always progressive, and proportional to natural capability and susceptibility to intellectual impression. Even the most intelligent and the most perseveringly studious must labor in order to obtain or attain. To all, however, are alike indispensable, rectitude of principle and conduct, and love of truth and wisdom. No student can win his diploma without undertaking a long course of study and proving a good character; and every handicraftsman has to serve his apprenticeship before he can be journeyman or master. So theosophy, which claims to teach the vital points of science and art, exacts from its adepts an assiduity of purpose, a catholicity of mind, an unselfish devotion, an unflinching courage and perseverance, and a purity of life and thought commensurate with the nature of their self-imposed task, before admitting them into the arcana of nature, and intrusting them with powers not shared by meaner souls."*
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/gfkforum/ourdir.htm#Preamble

A few words of my own on the word Secterian...

To be secterian is when one person or a group of persons, or moderators on a forum:
a) Promote a certain doctrine on behalf of an organisation or a forum - and - do it in an authoritarian manner
b) Promote themselves as self-elected leaders or moderators
c) Promote the rules and constitution of their organisation or forum in an authoritarian manner - or - avoid forwarding any real constitution clearly based on altruism and non-secterian views.
d) Promote aims of the organisation or forum in a manner where Mind Control elements are not clearly explained, so that they in the name of altruism can be avoided in the organisational work or the work at the forum by the moderators and of course also the members of it. (See Wikipedia on the psychological term Mind Control; - defined by me as: Subtle persuasion of others through the use of various Mind Control techniques, spin, onesided-indoctrination etc.).

All the above are just my views.
I might be in error - since I do not like others claim myself infallible like a "Pope" or similar.

- - -
To Joaquim and others:
I will gladly invite anyone one interested to participate in the following forum seeking to be based on the Original Theosophical Society and its Constitution and Rules given in 1875-1891.
When membership grow high enough I will seek to see if all the members will agree upon transferring the forum to a separate non-Yahoo website-domain with an independant forum.
This forum is something we members seek to create together in an open manner seeking consensus.

Theos-talk-Heart 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk-heart/





M. Sufilight

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