Theos-Talk Archives (March 2012 Message tt00059)

Dear Jacques and friends

My views are:

Thank you for your answer Jacques.
The following words are given as a reply to you Jaxques, but also equally to other readers of it, so that we might be able to be better at promoting altruism on this planet.


Jacques wrote:
"We can spend our whole life to review past history. But in fact, it does not help much. Of course, it is important not to repeat causes of suffering (like wars), and in that respect, history is useful."

M. Sufilight says:
Yes. Let us not repeat past mistakes, and let us not continue to blurr og muddle the fact that the Theosophical Society originally was having as its aim to be - ABOLUTELY NON-SECTARIAN (See The Constitution and Rules for the Theosophical Society 1891, or, 1886 by Blavatsky herself, or 1879  http://www.teozofija.info/tsmembers/Rules_1890.htm or http://www.theosopher.net/dzyan/theosophist/theosophist_v1_n7_april_1880.pdf (Scanned copy): See Page 179-180 --- read carefully - on the words... "spread of non-sectarian education"...and avoiding..."prejudice" and "bigotry" etc. etc.:.......  or even 1875 --- and more) 
A Society based on altruism and philosophical exchanges and research so to promote altruism and discover the meaning of life and its truth - aimed at all New Agers in those days as well as non-dogmatic religions. (See The Key to Theosophy, 1890, p. 19 - http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm and other reference can be forwarded saying the same.)

With other words, not a Society where a certain kind of teaching called "Theosophy" or "theosphy" was forwarded by a minor group of lecturers or teachers on behalf of the Society - but where any lecturer og teacher ONLY forwarded his or her teaching on behalf - of himself or herself, whether it was called theosophical, Zoroastrian, Buddhism, Bahai, Judaism etc. etc. or not; - It just had to be a non-dogmatic one and respecting other teachings - even if disagreeing in various respects. 
And this is very important!

Because the tendency is, quite clear, to me, that in many a theosophical organisation or off-shots thereof do the opposite today - and instead forward a teaching called Theosophy ON BEHALF of the Society - and are thereby effectively establishing a Sect - and - NOT a Non-sectarian Society. This is so obvious - and covers as I see it The Theosophical Society today and since year 1891 or at least 1910. And the Pasadena Theosophical Society as well as it is today and has been for decades. The ULT's has today certain problems in the same directions, although they seem to be less than the other two organisations. Not to mention the many Alice A. Bailey groups, and Ascended Master groups in various countries and other similar ones.

This tendency, OUTWARDLY, to teach (or clearly to give the impression thereof) a doctrine on behalf of the Society or organisation (and NOT each members on behalf of themselves individually) among these organisation and groups are so visible, that I find it important to ask for a clarification on: Why a deviation from the original concept or Constitution and Rules given in 1875-1891 have been deemed necessary???
(So far I have not gotten an answer to this.)


Jacques wrote:
"What matter is what we do and act right now. Organizations have allways being a must-go-through for most of human seekers to feel not lonely and have a community sharing the same concepts and activities. It is a securing situation. "

M. Sufilight says:
Yes, I agree very much with this view. But it does certainly not remove the fact that the Theosophical Society originally was Absolutely Non-Sectarian (se the above linkes and others examples) - And all this had been changed since year 1910 or so - for most theosophical organisations and off-shoot branches, the mother organization included. - and nobody ask why. Interesting indeed.
Give the public, the ordinary historians, the journalists, and the average New Agers the impression that  the Theosophical Society is a sect??? And the same could be asked for almost any other later off-shot theosophical organizations - similar organizations...???

Jacques wrote:
"Theosophy teachings have their merits, provide we drill down to the core of what is really important and useful for us, i.e. self-culture, altruism, ... All these stories about people and behaviors are gossips. They do not help creating the true momentum needed to make some real progress. We need a positive attitude vis-a-vis life which is wonderful. Be aware that the ego love to be in a fight situation. This is confirming him the fact that He exists and is the Leader. Life is so much more than that petty little governor. The core teachings of theosophy, like the Voice of Silence, is talking to the real person, the heart. Let's listen to it (and put in practice...)"

M. Sufilight says:
Yes. But no matter how well meaning and truthful the above by you is - you are here clearly advocating - your very own Sectarian doctrine. There are thousands of deinfitions of what the word "Theosophy" covers and what not. Please do not misunderstand me, I beg you. I am merely seeking to make you and others understand the difference between being Sectarian and Non-sectarian compared to the original Consitutions and Rules for the Theosophical Society as given in the above.
About all the stories and what you call gossip: Yes, yes. But, another matter are the scientific facts, which easily can be proven to the ordinary human being about what happended in the past and what has happended in the latest years - with regard to actual sectarian promotions on behalf of the Society (and not-non-sectarian ones) - and clear tendencies of giving the public, the ordinary historians, the journalists, and the average New Agers the impression that the Theosophical Society is a sect - INSTEAD OF CLEARLY DOING AN EFFORT OF AVOIDING IT - in the name of claimed Altruism, as it happens these days and has happened for years. And this is the central issue, exchanged upon by me.

As long as everyone claim they can walk on water - while they forward the impression that the Theosophical Society or almost any theosophical organization are the Sectarian thing  - and where "Theosophy" is the real thing - there will be no end to this deviation from the original objects, Constutution and Rules for the Theosophical Society as given in 1875-1891, with minor changes (or deviations occuring) even in that period.

___
To one who claim to know a bit about cycles - it indeed seems that we are in Kali Yug, and the sluggards will have to wait, even beyond year 2010 and not only year 1975.
We do not make any an unwilling slave. Sectarianism is NOT the path to follow if one seek to stick to the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society, this must be clear to anyone studying the original papers - and for instance just the above links (while keeping in mind that the Science on Psychology - and anti-Cult Psychology was in its very infancy in 1875-1899). If one want something else, one just need to continue with business as ususal - in the present day theosophical organizations - because they are doing a great effort in giving the public, the ordinary historians, the journalists, and the average New Agers - the unequivocal impression of being Sects. But calling a theospohical sect with its very own version of so-called "Theosophy" being taught on behalf of others - more truth-seeking and altruistic than a Absolutely Non-Sectarian one - I cannot and will not in the name of logic and in the name of altruism.

And as I see it:
The advances within the Science of Psychology and Anti-Cult Psychology in our present times - necessitates - a reformulated set of Consitutions and Rules for any Theosophical organization seeking to stick to the original Programe of  the Theosophical Society - as being Absolutely Non-Sectarian, while we keep in mind that the organizational structure always was consider organic, because of the main object: the promotion of Altruism.

All the above are of course just my views. If I am mistaken I will gladly welcome any elaboration on why, so to seek the truth of the matter. The truth is important to altruism.
I will wait for an answer from all readers of this. And no answer is also an answer on how important the reader find altruism to be with regard to the Theosophical Society and its later off-shot branches - of course also you included Jacques.




M. Sufilight



  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jacques M 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 8:48 PM
  Subject: theos-talk Re: TS - Sectarian (?) Freedom of Thought versus Altruistic Anti-sectarian Psychology


    
  We can spend our whole life to review past history. But in fact, it does not help much. Of course, it is important not to repeat causes of suffering (like wars), and in that respect, history is useful.
  What matter is what we do and act right now. Organizations have allways being a must-go-through for most of human seekers to feel not lonely and have a community sharing the same concepts and activities. It is a securing situation. But at the end of the day (at death time) you'll be alone and what will matter to you is what you will have learned and experimented. The teachings are going on every second of our life.It is mainly a matter of being conscious or not of what is going on. Theosophy teachings have their merits, provide we drill down to the core of what is really important and useful for us, i.e. self-culture, altruism, ... All these stories about people and behaviors are gossips. They do not help creating the true momentum needed to make some real progress. We need a positive attitude vis-a-vis life which is wonderful. Be aware that the ego love to be in a fight situation. This is confirming him the fact that He exists and is the Leader. Life is so much more than that petty little governor. The core teachings of theosophy, like the Voice of Silence, is talking to the real person, the heart. Let's listen to it (and put in practice...)

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > 
  > A few views and a question...
  > 
  > Is it so that all readers of the below previous post find it to be unimportant --- Or is it just - little me - who is missing something vital here?
  > 
  > The below could in certain respects also - easily - be related to other theosophical organisations or related off-shots of The Theosophical Society in Adyar.
  > 
  > Altruism must be important to promote for members such organisations.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: M. Sufilight 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 2:51 PM
  > Subject: theos-talk TS - Sectarian (?) Freedom of Thought versus Altruistic Anti-sectarian Psychology
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > Dear friends 
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > A few words on the Theosophical Society.
  > 
  > A few words about John Alego's wellmeant article: "THEOSOPHY AN INTRODUCTORY STUDY COURSE FOURTH EDITION"
  > given here http://www.theosophical.org/files/resources/selfstudy/theosophyintro.pdf
  > (Given a special place on Daniel Caldwell's website - http://blavatskyarchives.com/theosophypdfs/early_theosophical_publications.htm)
  > 
  > A quote or two follows...
  > 
  > John Alego wrote:
  > "SOME FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS OF THEOSOPHY"
  > "The universe and everything in it are orderly, following patterns of regular
  > cycles, including alternating phases of activity and rest, governed by a
  > universal principle of cause and effect or karma. In human life, this principle of
  > cycles is expressed, among other ways, by repeated rebirths or reincarnation."
  > .......
  > "The evolving entities of the universe include intelligences both less and more
  > advanced than human beings, of whom some of the more advanced (the
  > Masters or Adepts) may serve as helpers and guides to the less advanced."
  > .......
  > "THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, while reserving for each member full freedom to
  > interpret those teachings known as Theosophy, is dedicated to preserving and
  > realizing the ageless wisdom, which embodies both a worldview and a vision of
  > human self-transformation."
  > http://www.theosophical.org/files/resources/selfstudy/theosophyintro.pdf
  > 
  > M. Sufilight says:
  > 
  > With regard to the above quotes page 12 +14 in the above and later pages...
  > We know that the Theosophical Society, in its early days, never made the doctrines of Karma and the Masters an article of faith, and neither a sectarian promotion within the Society on behalf of it.
  > Why change this today year 2012 and call it Altruism in a claimed non-sectarian Society?
  > The book says that there is freedom of thought - but at the same time promotes a sectarian doctrine called - Theosophy - as if it was done ON BEHALF of the Theosophical Society, and then call the Society a Society that promotes freedom of thought.
  > 
  > Such a method of promoting a doctrine as claimed altruism - is these days by wellknown Anti-cult psychologist and the moderate Exit-Counseelors called - Subtle Mind Control or sectarian behavior.
  > I wonder what the purpose is with such promotions.
  > 
  > Why not avoid turning the public opinion about the Theosophical Society into a sect, or a cult or worse?
  > Is it not true that most journalists, historians and average new Agers consider the Theosophical Society to be a sect or worse and not as Absolutely Non-Sectarian?
  > And how do we become better in avoiding this, as I see it, sad situation to continue than the above book are able to by its self-condtradicting and in fact quite sectarian content?
  > Altruism cannot be sectarian in its promotions (of so-called claimed truths), because - it has to seek to be Absolutely Non-Sectarian. This is an obvious fact, and not a belief. Is it not?
  > 
  > Anyone?
  > 
  > It seems to me that a Sectarian Thesophical Organization claiming to promote Altruism - can relatively fast increase its memberships among the Average New Age seekers etc. who are used to Sectarian
  > Organizations. A Non-Sectarian Thesophical Organization can however not do that it seems - unless it is clear and non-blurred about its objects and aims in this regard. And promote genuine Altruism, which necessitates a Non-Sectarian promotion.
  > 
  > I find these thoughts and questions central to the reason why there is an at least apparent stand still with regard to the memberships of the Theosophical Society.
  > And add to that an apparent lack of self-searching open honesty and open-minededness with regard to the past failures in the Theosophical Society with regard to these issues and other failures.
  > I suggest that one become honest about past failures - when they can be proven. And then seek to avoid them. Also organizationally speaking.
  > 
  > __________________
  > A few words explained and defined by me:
  > a) 
  > Sectarian person:
  > A narrow or bigoted person or persons. And a person how teaches doctrines on BEHALF of an organisation - and - avoid clearly doing it NOT on behalf of herself or himself. Or one who let such an activitiy be promoted as if it was a non-sectarian one, what it is not. Or a person who operate as a priest in such an sectarian manner. 
  > 
  > Sect: The term is occasionally used in a negative way to suggest the broken-off group follows a more negative path than the original. Or an organisation promoting the above named sectarian teachings, or which has an outward bias towards on particular set of doctrines, gives a handful of so-called Eminent Personalities and Compound Shrines more emphasis than others.
  > 
  > Bigotry added to explain the word sectarian:
  > A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. The correct use of the term requires the elements of intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing 
  > 
  > beliefs or views. 
  > 
  > b)
  > Dogma and dogmatic:
  > Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: it is authoritative and not to be disputed, doubted, or diverged from. 
  > Condemnations or worse might reach those who oppose the leaders in a dogmatic church or sect.
  > 
  > __________________
  > 
  > A few more comments:
  > 
  > No doubt the public, with its journalists, historians, opinion-makers, and average New Agers, and people in general view the the Theosophical Society as a mere Sect, or even as a Cult or worse these days.
  > 
  > And a Non-Sectarian message is important today year 2012, when one seek to promote Altruism, ie. Wholeheartedly and Sincere, in these days where the Science of Psychology now is a known and recognized Science, not a belief. (In 1875-1910 it was in its infancy).
  > And since the Organisational structure of the the Theosophical Society - is claimed to be organic in nature - of necessity because of the realitites of the existence of time and space - It might be right to consider whether there is a need to change the Consitution and Rules of the Theosophical Society - as soon as possible in light of the above questions I have written.
  > 
  > Let us recognize the Truth when it is proven to us.
  > Lack of Self-Criticism has never been the Apex of Altruism and Compassion.
  > Let Altruism flourish - I beg of you do not keep it down under false pretences or by a continous blurred stance on whether Altruism is sought promoted by the Theosophical Society in a Sectarian manner or not.
  > Do not let the Sectarian and Cult opinion about the Theosophical Society continue in the eye of the public, the journalists and historians and average New Ager. Let the Truth be known.
  > There is no Religion Higher than the Truth.
  > 
  > All the above are of course merely my views.
  > And I will gladly take them all back If they are an obstacle to the promotion of Altruism.
  > 
  > Any comments?
  > Or is business as usual just the central thing here?
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > [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]