Re: [?? Probable Spam] RE: [?? Probable Spam] theos-talk More on the New World Order
Oct 31, 2011 03:08 AM
by M. Sufilight
Dear Jeremy and friends
My views are:
Jeremy wrote:
"Just as the Lucis Trust stands for the same principles, also of brotherhood
and compassion and supports the United Nations work towards this end. "
M. Sufilight says:
And there we have the very crucial difference. No, not the same principles
(!)
I have several times sought to tell you about it in my latest post in
various threads to you and others.
The Theosophical Society as given in 1875-1891 would never as a Society have
supported such a political institution. Individual members would have been
allowed to do so provided they did not injure the Society or involve
themselves in political disputes. You see a non-sectarian Society like the
TS in 1875-1891 did not condition people to support a political
Inter-Governmental body which create legislations on behalf of people on the
planet. Such a Society's primary concern is promulgation of altruism through
psychological change on the planet and the recognition of the need for
psychological change in the individual - even among political fools, who
think that they can legislate altruism and psychological change in the
individual (by a written formula on paper) - while they instead effectively
condition the individual. - You do not seem to understand the words given by
J. Krishnamurti in the speech I provided the link to a few days ago. I will
provide the link again and link to the video-clips.
Here it is again - please do read the whole text carefully or watch the
video-clip:
### J. Krishnamurti's talk to The United Nations ###
"QUESTION: At the end you said that we need to break the pattern of conflict
between man. My question to you is, do you see that as something of an
evolutionary process that inevitably will happen? Or do you see it as
something that we all have to work very hard to achieve? And there is an
expression that goes something like this: in times of darkness the eye
begins to see. And why I am throwing this at you because in a sense it is
either going to happen, or it is not going to happen, but how do you see it
happening?
Krishnamurti: I don't quite understand your question, sir.
Q: All right. You talk about breaking the pattern, man has a pattern, the
brain has a pattern, and that pattern has to be broken in order for there to
be peace in the world.
Krishnamurti: Of course.
Q: Now do you see the breaking of that pattern being an active movement, or
a natural progression in the evolution of man?
Krishnamurti: Sir, have we evolved at all?
Q: I think we are continuously evolving.
Krishnamurti: So you accept evolution - psychological evolution, we are not
talking about biological or technical evolution - psychological evolution.
After a million years, of fifty thousand years, have we changed deeply?
Aren't we very primitive, barbarous? So I am asking if you will consider
whether there is psychological evolution at all? I question it. Personally,
to the speaker, there is no psychological evolution: there is only the
ending of sorrow, of pain, anxiety, loneliness, despair and all that. Man
has lived with it for a million years. And if we rely on time, which is
thought - time and thought go together - if we rely on evolution then
another thousand years or more, and we will still be barbarous."
........
"So the question really is: whether human beings, you and us, sitting on the
platform - I am sorry to be sitting up here - are human beings? And as long
as we with each other, or with man and woman, are in perpetual conflict
there will be no peace on this earth. One may talk about it endlessly. The
Roman Catholic hierarchy talks about 'pacem in terris', and they have been
also responsible for appalling wars in the past. A hundred years of war,
torture, all kinds of horrible things they have done to man. These are all
facts, actualities, not the speaker's wish. And religions, are all facts,
actualities, not the speaker's wish. And religions, including Islam, Hindus,
Buddhists, and so on, they have had their own kind of war. And the future
beyond the 40th anniversary is what is going on now.
One wonders if one realizes that. The present is not only the past, but also
contains the future; the past modifying itself constantly through the
present and projecting the future. If we don't stop quarrels, struggles,
antagonism, hate, now, it will be like that tomorrow. And you can stretch
out that tomorrow for a thousand years, it will be still tomorrow.
So it behoves us to ask ourselves whether we, as human beings, single or a
community, or in a family, whether we can live peacefully with each other?
Organizations have not solved this problem. You can reorganize but war still
goes on. So organizations, whether it is a WORLD ORGANIZATION or a
particular kind of organization to bring about peace, such organizations
will never succeed because human beings individually, collectively,
nationally, are in conflict. Strong nations, like America or Russia, are at
war with each other - economically, ideologically, and actually - not
bloodshed yet. So peace cannot possibly exist on this earth if there are
nationalities, which, as we said, is glorified tribalism. Nationalities give
certain security, man needs security and he invests in nationalism, or in a
particular ideology or belief. Beliefs, ideologies and so on, have separated
man. And organizations cannot possibly bring about peace between man and man
because he believes in something, he believes in certain ideologies, he
believes in god and others don't.
I wonder if one has ever considered, religions based on a book - like the
Koran or the Bible - become very bigoted, narrow and fundamentalist. And
religions like the Hindu and the Buddhist, they have many, many books, all
considered sacred, real, straight from god's mouth! They are not so bigoted,
they are tolerant, they absorb. So there is this conflict going on: those
who rely, put their faith in books, and those who do not put their faith in
any book. So conflict between the book and those who accept multiple books.
I wonder if one is aware of all this."
.......
"It is a vast cynical world and cynicism can never tolerate affection, care,
love. I think we have lost that quality - quality of compassion. Not analyse
what is compassion - it can be analysed very easily. You cannot analyse
love, love is not within the limits of the brain, because the brain is the
instrument of sensation, it is the centre of all reaction and action, and we
try to find peace, love, within this limited area. Which means, thought is
not love because thought is based on experience, which is limited, and on
knowledge, which is always limited, whether now or in the future. So
knowledge is always limited. And having knowledge, which is contained in the
brain as memory, from that memory springs thought. This can be observed very
simply and easily if one examines oneself, if one looks at one's own
activity of thought, experience, knowledge. You don't have to read any book,
or become a specialist to understand."
http://www.krishnamurtiaustralia.org/articles/world_peace.htm (Caps added !)
KRISHNAMURTI at United Nations. part 1 + 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fzV8QH1JeE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUhqPSi2n_k&feature=related
H. P. Blavatsky wrote as I said in the previous post:
THEOSOPHIST. No one person and no society can lay down a hard-and-fast rule
in this respect. Much must necessarily be left to the individual judgment."
M. Sufilight says:
Conditioning the individual into acceptance of the United Nations as a body
which MUST be supported - as if it was based on altruism and its
promulgation is clearly out of the question on behalf of a Society working
for alleviation of suffering. You simply do not seek to psychologically
condition people into such a support of a political organisation of that
kind (!)
I will reject such an organisation on the spot as a primary tool for
alleviating suffering. - You cannot organize altruism by promoting that it
is in accordance with altruism to have countries and nationalities on the
planet - and - promote altruism by supporting all kinds of UN legislation
created by party-line politicians and dictators etc. (ie. walking lies)
while you thereby psychologically condition the human mind. The UN has
existed for more than 60 years - it has not succeeded in establishing peace,
let alone promote altruism and real psychological change. Legislation by the
UN condition the minds of people - it does not in reality create
psychological change within people. It is the huge failure of understanding
this, which is the primary problem, as I see it. Do you not agree that
Psychological change in each human being is of primary importance - and -
not the support of an organisation which day after day fail to recognize the
very same thing?
When the UN changes and recognizes the need for Psychological change and
begin to emphasise this much more than legislation which merely condition
people, then I might support it, and, not a second before.
If you are saying that people MUST support the UN as written in the Alice A.
Bailey book "Problems of Humanity", p. 177 --- are you then really aware of
what you are saying - and - how this is perceived?
Do you disagree with J. Krishnamurti in his words, and why if I in all
friendliness may ask?
Did you hear the AAB fellow Robert Mullers words in the last videoclip no.
8? He agreed with Krishnamurti. That was his words.
Now the United Nations gave J. Krishnamurti the UN Peace Medal - as if it
agreed with him.
That was more than 25 years ago. Did the UN listen to his words? I would
say, no.
All the above are of course just my views. I do not claim myself infallible
as a "pope" or similar
I do hope that at least some of it will be useful for something altruistic
and good.
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeremy Condick" <jpcondick2011@I3i2UImMu9M6PCT1hxh_3kZ0CfrIVt-kxfDn8vtOwXyzGUO-elSzrCg2AEWwjOCL3Gj0ItXrdIa61wJpESlE.yahoo.invalid>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 1:32 AM
Subject: [?? Probable Spam] RE: [?? Probable Spam] theos-talk More on the
New World Order
JPC: Morton, I agree there is no disagreement from my view either. Members
of the TS or AS or MF are free individually to work in politics or social
reform as they see necessary. The Theosophical society should stand for
equal human rights, world peace, sharing and the rejection of all political
and economic greed today on a world level. Just as the Lucis Trust stands
for the same principles, also of brotherhood and compassion and supports the
United Nations work towards this end.
JC Wrote: HPB makes clear that only "as a society it takes absolutely no
part in any national or party politics"
I think that the society could add great benefit to humanity when it
stands for equal human rights, world peace, sharing and the rejection of
all political and economic greed today on a world level... I think this is
a critical point to bear in mind regarding the many social questions of
today. Each member is free to work as individuals in political fields as
they see necessary. There is a great difference between the Theosophical
society entering party politics national or local on one side or the other
side, or of standing for the principles which it holds dear in altruism,
social reform or against world economic corruption. The latter stands for
the good of the whole. One sees a clear distinction here and it are worthy
of being thought out. In so doing, we do not stand aloof. JPC.
"ENQUIRER. But surely the T. S. does not stand altogether aloof from the
social questions which are now so fast coming to the front?
THEOSOPHIST. The very principles of the T. S. are a proof that it does
not -- or, rather, that most of its members do not -- so stand aloof."
THEOSOPHIST. No one person and no society can lay down a hard-and-fast rule
in this respect.
THEOSOPHIST. Every Theosophist, therefore, is bound to do his utmost to help
on, by all the means in his power, every wise and well-considered social
effort which has for its object the amelioration of the condition of the
poor. Such efforts should be made with a view to their ultimate social
emancipation, or the development of the sense of duty in those who now so
often neglect it in nearly every relation of life.
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
From: global-theosophy@XMGsB5kvoapc9OcEYnZCoe61WXHWkMsJ7jEj0zfa6H4AEsDB2Ws60zrSWOkGhj_uYct_jaCPVfMF8SVPAde8i1FP1f73Mxk.yahoo.invalid
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:41:13 +0100
Subject: Re: [?? Probable Spam] theos-talk More on the New World Order
Dear Jeremy and friends
MY views are:
I see no diasgreement. H. P. Blavatsky's words in the quote by Micahel was
on behalf of the Society, not on behalf of the members.
If you read more in the Key to Theosophy you will reach a better
understanding of it all:
"ENQUIRER. But what do you mean by "true efforts"? Each social reformer
has his own panacea, and each believes his to be the one and only thing
which can improve and save humanity?
THEOSOPHIST. Perfectly true, and this is the real reason why so little
satisfactory social work is accomplished. In most of these panaceas there
is no really guiding principle, and there is certainly no one principle
which connects them all. Valuable time and energy are thus wasted; for
men, instead of co-operating, strive one against the other, often, it is
to be feared, for the sake of fame and reward rather than for the great
cause which they profess to have at heart, and which should be supreme in
their lives.
ENQUIRER. How, then, should Theosophical principles be applied so that
social co-operation may be promoted and true efforts for social
amelioration be carried on?
THEOSOPHIST. Let me briefly remind you what these principles are -
universal Unity and Causation; Human Solidarity; the Law of Karma;
Re-incarnation. These are the four links of the golden chain which should
bind humanity into one family, one universal Brotherhood.
ENQUIRER. How?
THEOSOPHIST. In the present state of society, especially in so-called
civilized countries, we are continually brought face to face with the fact
that large numbers of people are suffering from misery, poverty and
disease. Their physical condition is wretched, and their mental and
spiritual faculties are often almost dormant. On the other hand, many
persons at the opposite end of the social scale are leading lives of
careless indifference, material luxury, and selfish indulgence. Neither of
these forms of existence is mere chance. Both are the effects of the
conditions which surround those who are subject to them, and the neglect
of social duty on the one side is most closely connected with the stunted
and arrested development on the other. In sociology, as in all branches of
true science, the law of universal causation holds good. But this
causation necessarily implies, as its logical outcome, that human
solidarity on which Theosophy so strongly insists. If the action of one
reacts on the lives of all, and this is the true scientific idea, then it
is only by all men becoming brothers and all women sisters, and by all
practising in their daily lives true brotherhood and true sisterhood, that
the real human solidarity, which lies at the root of the elevation of the
race, can ever be attained. It is this action and interaction, this true
brotherhood and sisterhood, in which each shall live for all and all for
each, which is one of the fundamental Theosophical principles that every
Theosophist should be bound, not only to teach, but to carry out in his or
her individual life.
ENQUIRER. All this is very well as a general principle, but how would you
apply it in a concrete way?
THEOSOPHIST. Look for a moment at what you would call the concrete facts
of human society. Contrast the lives not only of the masses of the people,
but of many of those who are called the middle and upper classes, with
what they might be under healthier and nobler conditions, where justice,
kindness, and love were paramount, instead of the selfishness,
indifference, and brutality which now too often seem to reign supreme. All
good and evil things in humanity have their roots in human character, and
this character is, and has been, conditioned by the endless chain of cause
and effect. But this conditioning applies to the future as well as to the
present and the past. Selfishness, indifference, and brutality can never
be the normal state of the race¯to believe so would be to despair of
humanity¯and that no Theosophist can do. Progress can be attained, and
only attained, by the development of the nobler qualities. Now, true
evolution teaches us that by altering the surroundings of the organism we
can alter and improve the organism; and in the strictest sense this is
true with regard to man. Every Theosophist, therefore, is bound to do his
utmost to help on, by all the means in his power, every wise and
well-considered social effort which has for its object the amelioration of
the condition of the poor. Such efforts should be made with a view to
their ultimate social emancipation, or the development of the sense of
duty in those who now so often neglect it in nearly every relation of
life.
ENQUIRER. Agreed. But who is to decide whether social efforts are wise or
unwise?
THEOSOPHIST. No one person and no society can lay down a hard-and-fast
rule in this respect. Much must necessarily be left to the individual
judgment."
http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm
And that is where the real problem is resting.
That is as the last sentence says: "No one person and no society can lay
down a hard-and-fast rule in this respect. Much must necessarily be left
to the individual judgment:"
Is it not?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeremy Condick
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 9:37 PM
Subject: RE: [?? Probable Spam] theos-talk More on the New World Order
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> From: libertyson11@94VaIV2E7HTBa9vPe77X6zcflK5C9MupbJLENTwhQC_4pLb5L9JBrZ4yi-0-zJnSziD4Rl92iDkHt-hbkeI.yahoo.invalid
> Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:55:54 -0700
> Subject: Re: [?? Probable Spam] theos-talk More on the New World Order
>
> H. P. Blavatsky wrote about the Theosophical Society:
> "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", 2ed., 1890 - p. 231)
> http://www.phx- ult-lodge. org/aKEY. htm
>
> So let us not be foolish. Do you not agree?
> *** I do not agree in the slightest. This is absurd. To wait until all
> men are perfect before we stand for our rights and a just society is a
> pathetic philosophy and utterly impractical on the face of it.
>
>
> The utterly corrupt people at head of banking and many mega-corporations
> will most likely never change.
>
>
> To sit still while they rape the earth and the minds of the young and
> enslave the world in perpetual fraudulent debt is amoral in the extreme.
I completely agree with your thoughts here stated. Let us remind ourselves
of this... "as individuals, each is left perfectly free to follow out his
or her particular line of political thought and action, so long as this
does not conflict with Theosophical principles or hurt the Theosophical
Society." The Key to Theosophy. HPB.
Individuals, as individuals are free, always, to work or lobby for
political and social reform. Your thoughts are valid and potent today and
certainly resonate with the times. HPB makes clear that only "as a society
it takes absolutely no part in any national or party politics" and we must
emphasis the meaning here that the society took no part in national or
party politics, as a society. I think that the society could add great
benefit to humanity when it stands for equal human rights, world peace,
sharing and the rejection of all political and economic greed today on a
world level.
I think this is a critical point to bear in mind regarding the many social
questions of today. Each member is free to work as individuals in
political fields as they see necessary. There is a great difference
between the Theosophical society entering party politics national or local
on one side or the other side, or of standing for the principles which it
holds dear in altruism, social reform or against world economic
corruption. The latter stands for the good of the whole. One sees a clear
distinction here and it are worthy of being thought out. In so doing, we
do not stand aloof. JPC.
"ENQUIRER. But surely the T. S. does not stand altogether aloof from the
social questions which are now so fast coming to the front?
THEOSOPHIST. The very principles of the T. S. are a proof that it does
not -- or, rather, that most of its members do not -- so stand aloof."
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
