From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 01 Dec 1996 06:59:04 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Santa Cost Cutting Hi all Thought this might amuse you and show how bad the economy must be to affect poor Santa to such an extent. I have forwarded this from MMList. > >Date: 191711 1995 >To: All good girls and boys >From: Santa Clause CEO >Subject: Downsizing at the North Pole > >The recent announcement that Donner and Blitzen have elected to take the >early reindeer retirement package has triggered a good deal of concern >about whether they will be replaced and about other restructuring >decisions at the North Pole. > >Streamlining was appropriate in view of the reality that the North Pole no >longer dominates the season's gift distribution business. Home shopping >channels and mail order catalogues have diminished Santa's market share and >he could not sit idly by and permit further erosion of the profit picture. > >The reindeer downsizing was made possible through the purchase of a late >model Japanese sled for the CEO's annual trip. Improved productivity from >Dasher and Dancer who summered at the Harvard Business School is >anticipated and should take up the slack with no discernible loss of >service. Reduction in reindeer will also lessen airborne environmental >emissions for which the North Pole has been cited and received unfavorable >press. > >I am pleased to inform you and yours that Rudolph's role will not be >disturbed. Tradition still counts for something at the North Pole. >Management denies in the strongest possible language the earlier leak >that Rudolph's nose got that way not from the cold but from substance >abuse. Calling Rudolph "a lush who was into the sauce and never did pull >his share of the load" was an unfortunate comment made by one of Santa's >helpers and taken out-of-context at a time of >year when he is known to be under executive stress. > >As a further restructuring today's global challenges require the North >Pole to continue to look for better more competitive steps. Effective >immediately the following economy measures are to take place in the >"Twelve Days of Christmas" subsidiary: > >The partridge will be retained but the pear tree never turned out to be >the cash crop forecasted. It will be replaced by a plastic hanging plant >providing considerable savings in maintenance. > >The two turtle doves represent a redundancy that is simply not >cost-effective. In addition their romance during working hours could not >be condoned. The positions are therefore eliminated. > >The three French hens will remain intact. After all everyone loves the French. > >The four calling birds were replaced by an automated voice mail system >with a call waiting option. An analysis is underway to determine who the >birds have been calling how often and how long they talked. > >The five golden rings have been put on hold by the Board of Directors. >Maintaining a portfolio based on one commodity could have negative >implications for institutional investors. Diversification into other >precious metals as well as a mix of T-Bills and high technology stocks >appear to be in order. > >The six geese-a-laying constitutes a luxury which can no longer be >afforded. It has long been felt that the production rate of one egg per >goose per day is an example of the decline in productivity. Three geese >will be let go and an upgrading in the selection procedure by personnel >will assure management that from now on every goose it gets will be a good >one. > >The seven swans-a-swimming is obviously a number chosen in better times. >The function is primarily decorative. Mechanical swans are on order. The >current swans will be retrained to learn some new strokes and therefore >enhance their outplacement. > >As you know the eight maids-a-milking concept has been under heavy >scrutiny by the EEOC. A male/female balance in the workforce is being >sought. The more militant maids consider this a dead-end job with no upward >mobility. Automation of the process may permit the maids to try a-mending >a-mentoring or a-mulching. > >Nine ladies dancing has always been an odd number. This function will be >phased out as these individuals grow older and can no longer do the steps. > >Ten Lords-a-leaping is overkill. The high cost of Lords plus the expense of >international air travel prompted the Compensation Committee to suggest >replacing this group with ten out-of-work congressmen. While leaping >ability may be somewhat sacrificed the savings are significant because we >expect an oversupply of unemployed congressmen this year. > >Eleven pipers piping and twelve drummers drumming is a simple case of the >band getting too big. A substitution with a string quartet a cutback on >new music and no uniforms will produce savings which will drop right down >to the bottom line. > >We can expect a substantial reduction in assorted people fowl animals and >other expenses. Though incomplete studies indicate that stretching >deliveries over twelve days is inefficient. If we can drop ship in one >day service levels will be improved. > >Regarding the lawsuit filed by the attorney's association seeking >expansion to include the legal profession "thirteen lawyers-a-suing" >action is pending. > >Lastly it is not beyond consideration that deeper cuts may be necessary in >the future to stay competitive. Should that happen the Board will request >management to scrutinize the Snow White Division to see if seven dwarfs is >the right number. Happy Holidays! S. Claus > > -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 01 Dec 1996 15:28:35 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Krotona Schedule Winter/Spring 96 At 034400 PM 11/30/95 -0500 Martin Leiderman wrote: >Krotona School of Theosophy >Ojai California >Program of Activities: Winter/Spring 96 >......... etc > Thanks for taking the time to keyin the schedule. It is possible some one may be able to use the information. Have you attended any of the programs? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 02 Dec 1996 02:15:35 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Krotona Schedule Winter/Spring 96 Thanks for this Martin! I am too far away to get to any of it even if I could afford to but I am *really* pleased to see news of things that people can DO! Alan -- Member Theosophy International Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 02 Dec 1996 08:17:24 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Theos-news as a non-discussion-list hi -- just a reminder that Theos-News is meant for *Announcements* of news rather than discussions. I think it works better that way; many people want information only and not discussions/dialogue. The idea was that people could stay in contact with things without the deluge of e-mail discussion-lists generate. peace - john mead discussion of news items are very welcome on the other lists. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 02 Dec 1996 08:17:24 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Theos-news as a non-discussion-list hi -- just a reminder that Theos-News is meant for *Announcements* of news rather than discussions. I think it works better that way; many people want information only and not discussions/dialogue. The idea was that people could stay in contact with things without the deluge of e-mail discussion-lists generate. peace - john mead discussion of news items are very welcome on the other lists. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 02 Dec 1996 08:17:24 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Theos-news as a non-discussion-list hi -- just a reminder that Theos-News is meant for *Announcements* of news rather than discussions. I think it works better that way; many people want information only and not discussions/dialogue. The idea was that people could stay in contact with things without the deluge of e-mail discussion-lists generate. peace - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 04 Dec 1996 00:31:57 GMT From: MGRAYE@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: A test I am having problems with my e-mail so I am trying to send a message to theos-roots. Also Rich: did you get my message I sent you on Sunday? Dan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 04 Dec 1996 04:01:48 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re A00 test On 04 199512 MGRAYE@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU wrote: > > I am having problems with my e-mail so I am trying to send a message to > theos-roots. > > Also Rich: did you get my message I sent you on Sunday? > > Dan > Your message came loud and clear. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 04 Dec 1996 20:58:45 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re A00 test Dan Yes got it and responded with thanks. You never got my e-mail? Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 05 Dec 1996 03:21:06 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Adyar Rules ROOTS! It seemed a good idea to make available material rarely seen by theosophists of any denomination when the matter of the international Adyar rules came up on theos-l. So here goes with the first part ..... Beginning of Memorandum of Association and Rules and Regulations of the Theosophical Society as incorporated at Madras India 1905. Transcript follows from photocopy in the editor's possession: MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION ETC. CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION No. 02 of 1905 I hereby certify pursuant to Act XXI of 1860 of the Governor- General of India in Council entitled 'An Act for the Registrat- ion of Literary Scientific and Charitable Societies 1860' that The Theosophical Society is duly incorporated as a Society under the aforesaid Act. SEAL Sd A. PERYIASWAMI MOODALIAR Station Madras Registrar of Joint Stock Companies Dated 3rd 190504 THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY FOUNDED 17 NOVEMBER 1875 INCORPORATED 03 APRIL 1905 In the matter of Act XXI 1860 of the Acts of Viceroy and Governor-General of India in Council being an Act for the registration of literary scientific and charitable Societies and IN THE MATTER OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY ------------- MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION 1. The name of the Association is The Theosophical Society. 2. The objects for which the Society is established are: I. To form a nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity without distinction of race creed sex caste or colour. II. To encourage the study of Comparative ReligIon Philosophy and Science. III. To investigate unexplained laws of Nature and the powers latent in man. a The holding and management of all funds raised for the above objects. b The purchase or acquIsition on lease or in exchange or on Hire or by gift or otherwise of any real or personal property and any rights or privileges necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Society. c The sale improvement management and development of all or any part or the property or the Society. d The doing of all such things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects or any of them including the founding and maintenance of a library or libraries. 3. The names addresses and occupations of the persons who are members or and form the first General Council which is the governing body of the Society are as follows: GENERAL COUNCIL Ex-Officio President-Founder: H. S. Olcott Adyar Madras Author. Vice-President: A. P. Sinnett London England Author. Recording Secretary: Hon. Sir S. Subramania Aiyar Madras Justice of the High Court. Treasurer: W. A. English M.D. Adyar Madras Retired Physician. Alexander Fullerton General Secretary American Section 07 West 8th St. New York. Upendra Nath Basu. B.A. LL.B. General Secretary Indian Section Benares U.P. Bertram Keightley M.A. General Secretary British Section 28 Albemarle St. London W. W. G. John General Secretary Australasian Section 42 Margaret Street Sydney N.S.W. Arvid Knos General Secretary Scandinavian Section Engelbrechtsgatan 07 Stockholm Sweden. C. W. Sanders General Secretary New Zealand Section Queen Street Auckland New Zealand. W. B. Fricke General Secretary Netherlands Section 76 Amsteldijk Amsterdam. Th. Pascal M.D. General Secretary French Section 59 Avenue de la Bourdonnais Paris. Decio Calvari General Secretary Italian Section 380 Corso Umberto I. Rome. Dr Rudolf Steiner General Secretary German Section 95 Kaiserallee Friedenau Berlin. Jose M. Masso Acting General Secretary Cuban Section Havana Cuba. Additional Annie Besant Benares Author [for 03 years]. G. R. S. Mead London Author [for 03 years]. Khan Bahadur Naoroji Dorabji Khandalvala Poona Special Judge [for 03 years]. Dinshaw Jivaji Edal Behram Surat Physician [for 02 years]. Francesca E. Arundale Benares Author [for 02 years] Tammacharla Ramachandra Row Gooty Retired Sub-Judge [for 01 year]. Charles Blech Paris France Retired Manufacturer [for 01 year]. 4. The Founders Henry Steel Olcott who with the late Helena Petrovna Blavatsky and others founded The Theosophical Society at New York United States of America in the year 1875 shall hold during his lifetime the position of President with the title of 'President-Founder' and he shall have alone the authority and responsibility and shall exercise the functions provided in the Rules and Regulations for the Executive Committee meetings of which he may call for consultation and advice as he may desire. 5. Income and property applied to promotion of objects The income and property of the Society whencesoever derived shall be applied solely towards the promotion of the objects of the Society as set forth in this Memorandum of Association and no portion thereof shall be paid or transferred directly or indirectly by way of dividends bonus or otherwise by way of profits to the persons who at any time are or have been members of the Society or to any of them or to any person claiming through any of them: Provided that nothing herein contained shall prevent the payment in good faith of remuneration to any officers or servants of the Society or to any members thereof or other person in return for any services rendered to the Society. 6. Members of General Council not answerable No member or members of the General Council shall be answerable for any loss arising in the administration or application of the said trust funds or sums of money or for any damage to or deterioration in the said trust premises unless such loss damage or deterioration shall happen by or through his or their wilful default or neglect. 7. Vesting of Property on dissolution If upon the dissolution of the Society there shall remain after the satisfaction of all its debts and liabilities any property whatsoever the same shall not be paid to or distributed among the members of the Society or ally of them but shall be given or transferred to some other Society or Association Institution or Institutions having objects similar to the objects of this Society to be determined by the votes of not less than three-fifths of the members of the Society present personally or by proxy at a meeting called for the purpose or in default thereof by such Judge or Court of Law as may have jurisdiction in the matter. 8. Filing of rules and Regulations Memorandum A copy of the Rules and Regulations of the said Theosophical Society is filed with this Memorandum of Association and the undersigned being seven of the members of the Governing Body of the said Society do hereby certify that such copy of such Rules and Regulations of the said Theosophical Society is correct. As witness our several and respective hands this...day of Mar 1905. Witnesses to the signatures: Sd. WM GLENNY KEAGEY " ARTHUR RICHARDSON " PYARE LAL " PEROZE P. MEHERJEE [The above witnessed the seven signatures below - Ed]. Sd H.S. OLCOTT " W.A. ENGLISH " SUBRAMANIAM " FRANCESCA E. ARUNDALE " UPENDRA NATH BASU " ANNIE BESANT " N.D. KHANDALVALA Rules and Regulations to follow in due course. Ed. Posted by Alan Bain -- Member Theosophy International Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 05 Dec 1996 18:56:47 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: Universal Youth The next posting contains a copy of the text for 'Universal Youth' a international 'youth' magazine published in New Zeland under the the World Thesophical Youth Federation umbrella. If you or anyone you know might like to join and/or contribute to this organisation please see the address details at the start of the the magazine text. Please note that although the fedeartion/magazine is designed by/for younger people 'youth' is not a term of exclusion someone said a young thesophist is one under 90 all are welcome to join / contribute. Regards Malcolm Idoine From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 05 Dec 1996 19:05:05 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: Universal Youth Universal Youth Newsletter of the WTYF=20 Nov 1995 Published by the World Theosophical Youth Federation New Zealand Address:=20 Simon Webber 26 Hillcrest Rd Hamilton New Zealand E-mail: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz =20 Marina Cesar Caixa Postal 124-Viam=E3o RS 94400-970 Brazil E-mailasisson@vortex.ufrgs.br Editors:Simon Webber and Charles Sitwell Greetings! Welcome to the Nov edition the fourth for the year of the World Theosophical Youth Federation. We the New Zealand Young Theosophists feel a certain "wonder" with our involvement in the WTYF. That is communicating with our brothers around the world; questioning investigating and enquiring into life and trying to make the world a better place through our involvement with the WTYF. It gives us great pleasure and inspiration when we receive the Brazilian issue and read the events happening from all around the world. It reinforces our message of oneness with others. Congratulations to our new WTYF President Ulisses Borges de Resende. We wish you all the best and will help you in every way possible. Thanks to Arnaldo Sisson. F for holding the fort for 17 years and keeping the youth from around the world together. We wouldn't be here today if he had not. Arnaldo has asked us to mention in this issue that Ulisses will be in Adyar at this year's international convention and is planning to organise some WTYF meetings like we had last year those of you who attended last years meetings will remember that we achieved a lot. If you will be in Adyar this year could you keep this in mind and mention it to any other young ones who will be attending. There will also be a WTYF youth camp 3-9 Feb 1996 at Colonia Teosfica San Rafael Argentina. Please contact our Secretary Marina Cesar for further details. Our experiments with the internet are proving a success. It is a fast and efficient way of keeping in touch with each other. If any of you have access to e-mail then send us a line sometime. It would be great to hear from you. However we have been recieving letters via standard post and it is wonderful to read them. We have published some of them to share with you. It seems very appropriate that our Brazilian edition has a column titled "Sharing the Way" because they publish our letters and thoughts. Consequently we will now rename our correspondence column "Satellite Shift" and call it "Sharing the Way" too.=20 This issue has as its theme "Brotherhood". There are a couple of articles on brotherhood conveying some personal thoughts and feelings about brotherhood. There is also a reply titled "Flora and Fauna" to the article "Thorny Issues" printed in the Apr edition of the WTYF newsletter. We also have correspondence from around the world including poems and sketches. Please write with suggestions for the next theme. Contact us by Feb at the latest as the next edition will most likely come out in Apr. =20 We are interested at the moment in what activities members of the Round Table and Theosophical Order of Service TOS participate in. We hope that we could all share ideas thoughts and meditations of interest especially with countries like New Zealand that don't have a TOS. We would also like to develop an awareness and interest in members who can't get access to these groups. In NZ we are looking forward to our centennial from Jan 06 - 10 1996. We know of some fellow young theosophists coming from Austrailia and will enjoy meeting them and any others that may arrive from New Zealand or overseas. This is always an exellent time for discussing a wide range of topics . Psychological Aspects of Brotherhood This article consists of some personal thoughts on brotherhood. However they are not of an abstract or intellectual bent but are based on actual psychological changes that I am experiecing. I feel it is appropriate to share them with everyone since it was agreed in Adyar 1994/95 convention that the WTYF newsletter published from New Zealand be a medium among other things for expressing common psychological problems experiences and discoveries that the young people of today are going through. And I am going through changes of this nature at the moment. =20 The Theosophical Society proposes to create a nucleus of universal brotherhood. And I have been questioning myself for the past five years since I joined the society what that means for me. I have read some of the standard TS literature and have a fairly reasonable "intellectual" understanding of what the creation of a universal brotherhood means. However for me now it seems a step up in intensity is required if I am to paticipate in and help create that brotherhood. =20 The literature speaks of =93buddhi=94 intelligence or in the west =93intuition=94. To me this means a blending of mind and heart. Not= emotional sentimentalism devoid of cognition or mental coldness devoid of feeling but an integration of the two. It requires that my heart be fused with my mind. The Bagavadgita refers to a dissolution of the mind=92s continuity and one of the preliminary statements in =93Light on the Path=94 refers to the= soul having its feet washed in the blood of the heart; ie sacrifice. I may be wrong about this blending process but that is all I have to go on because in the final analysis I have only got myself to rely on. And this goes for everyone because ahead of us is that solitary trek from the =93alone to= the Alone=94 that we all must undertake at some time or another. So my investigation into what the TS means to me and why I am in it if it is to be answered requires that this process eventuate. I cannot just sit back and be a mental participant in the TS as I have been in the past. I also think it has to do with my "Svabhava" or what is expected of me in this lifetime my life calling. I am now 29 and I believe that astrologically at the age of 28 Saturn returns to where it was when we were born. Thus for 28 years I have "grown into" where I left off in my last incarnation and am now beginning a period of new growth and lessons. And I think it is a birth in consciousness. A blending of heart and mind and therefore operating in the world with love and compassion for all sentient beings. But for this to occur requires that a price be paid. And that price is "me". My little selfish separate self. And this is the psychological change or dilemma that is occuring in my life now.=20 Inherent in this psychological process is fear which is a concomitant of this change. And I live with fear every day of my life. In a book titled "Zanoni" which HPB recommended that every occultist read fear or the Dweller on the Threshold is in direct antagonism with faith natures messenger of reasurancce. My dissolving of the mind's continuity brings about fear since I am afraid of losing my separate self the known and experienceing something better; faith - a union in consciousness with the Divine this has been expressed in poetry as =91the dewdrop slipping into= the shining sea=92. However in not giving up the known or my little ego= then I will not experience "something better" and thereby be able to help create by the Divine acting through me the nucleus of universal brotherhood which we aspire to in joining the Theosophical Society. Do any of you feel that this is happening to you? Do you think that if our nucleus of universal brotherhood is to be created that it requires such a process?=20 I guess all this means is that we must keep going through our own difficulties because fundamentally "ALL IS ONE". When I receive letters from my brothers around the world and read what's happening in the "Universal Human Family" it puts things back in perspective. I feel joy happiness and also feel that we are doing something worthwhile in carrying out the society=92s objectives through the WTYF. And this keeps me going because if I don't try and do my "little bit" then our endeavours will be worse off rather than better. =20 So I would like to leave you with some inspiration; something to help you through the dark stages in your life. Something which continues to help me through this current psychological dilemma. It is a poem I wrote. But when I say this I didn't really write it although it was my hand that jotted it down on a piece of paper. It was given to me from "on high" if you like. Three years ago I had a perception. I had been asking myself questions such as; "What am I to do with my life?" and "What are the answers?" when this perception occurred. I was lying in bed on a sunny morning looking out the door watching the sea trees and birds when an intuitive vision filled my mind accompanied with feelings of wonder. I had to bring this perception "down to earth" and the result is the poem you see on the opposite page.. It was the answer I had been looking for. I share it with you all because it may help you with the hand that life has dealt you to play. Take care. May we be True to Ourselves and make the world a better= place. Simon Webber New Zealand Looking within Fear greets my gaze. Retreat! Worldly morality meaningless to me The relentless hunter allowing no escape. At the crossroads and choice confronts me A sand storm rages directly where I stand To remain here is to die. Directions of course! and eagerly I look:- Behind the grasses almost hidden Reclines the solitary signpost - Reeling in horror My dreams and hopes shattered There are only two words which read =93Look within=94 Simon Webber The Universal Brotherhood of Humanity We congratulate you for choosing this theme. It is a very important one with a really crucial importance to the mission of the TS. Universal Brotherhood is said by the Mahatmas in Their letters to A.P.Sinnett to be the leading idea of the TS. It is the heart of the first Object. All important things seem not to be easy ones. And this subject although it looks to be very simple surely is a difficult one. Otherwise why would in one of the Letters it be written: "...the general misconception of the aims and objects of the Society that paralyses its progress - nothing else. There's no want of definitiveness in these objects were they but properly explained." M. L.38 p. 251 So if a general misconception was there and according to our point of view - is still there - then this is NOT an easy matter. And so this aspect also reinforces the importance of this subject. Due to the limited space of a newsletter we will comment on just 03 points. First; usually Univ. Brotherhood is seen as a virtue something that we must develop ie. an aspiration instead of something already and actually existing in Nature ie. a law or fact in Nature. Second that the two main aspects of this law are from a common parenthood or source which implies equal values of the brothers and sisters and the existence of different ages of younger and elder brothers which implies different levels of capacities or maturity. And third that the first Object of the TS points to the formation of an organisation where its rules its model its structure are derived or in harmony with the two main aspects of this law of Nature. As far as we can see the two main aspects of this kind of relation similar to that of brothers brotherhood is that there is the same parenthood and second that there are different ages younger and elder brothers.=20 These two aspects MAY look to be very simple and not very relevant. Indeed that is what the world tend to think about them - that this is very nice to say but that it is not real that it is something naive etc. And in reality the leading thought currents of the world those that organise or give birth to the main social institutions of the world like liberalism and Marxism for example do not understand and more than that they negate in their central premises the law/fact of the Univ. Brotherhood of Humanity since they affirm different things a different picture with different main aspects or axioms in relation to humanity. If we go into their main or central premises it is very easy to see that they =93see=94 humanity not as= a universal brotherhood but as something else. And out of that central blunder are generated terrible results lots of suffering and conflict. This is so because they generate social systems institutions based on wrong premises and that are therefore unable to organise the human family harmoniously.=20 They negate these two main aspects: same parenthood same source which implies same value; but also at the same time different ages different levels of evolution which implies different levels of capacities or= maturity.=20 These two aspects are negated. Just to give one example we have in the world today mass suffrage all are considered to a great extent as having similar capacities to judge national and international issues - which is a blunder and out of that kind of social institution so many people unworthy of being governors etc are elected. As to the first aspect just a quotation from Dr. Besant: "... has not Emerson taught the same lesson? ... he taught the great truth that Nature only looks cruel while we oppose her; she is our strongest helper when we join ourselves to her. For every law that crushes you when you oppose it lifts you when you are united to it. ...' "Brotherhood then in its full meaning is a law in Nature. Stress has more than once been laid on this in our meetings but not too much stress has thereon been laid. For it is the very object the desire of our work that brotherhood shall become practical in society and it will never become practical until men understand that it is a law and not only an aspiration. ... in that very way we have preached brotherhood. And yet brotherhood is but so little known ..." "The Spiritual Life" vol II p. 160. The next aspect is that to understand this law we must see that its two main aspects are the unity of a common parenthood and the differentiation of "ages" of evolutionary levels. Here again just a quotation from the pen of Dr. Besant: "But to understand Brotherhood we must remember that evolution proceeds by reincarnation under the law of karma. ... Now most of you believe these two great teachings and in your individual lives they play a might part. Why do you not apply them to nations as well as to individuals to social problems as well as to the helping of your own personal development ? As the ideas of reincarnation and karma make their way in the western world which has the habit of applying principles to practice I think we shall find this Ideal of Brotherhood under the law of reincarnation and karma will solve many of the problems under which the world is groaning in our time." "The Ideals of Theosophy" p. 21 =20 Here it is important to note that the leading thought currents of our times are not in harmony with this law of the universal brotherhood of humanity. We just have to examine the fundamental principles of Marxism and of Liberalism to see the truth of the previous statement. We have just to compare the false egalitarian patterns of their principles and the consequence of their social systems with statements like the following one to see how distant they are" "That great principle of Reincarnation must ever go hand in hand with the principle of Brotherhood; if Brotherhood is to be applied if it is to be made a working principle of ordinary life. For it is out of these differences of age that grows up all the possibilities of an ordered and happy society amongst ourselves." Dr. Annie Besant "The Changing World" p. 79. As to the third aspect again a quotation now from the Letters: "The truths and mysteries of occultism constitute indeed a body of the highest spiritual importance at once profound and practical for the world at large. ... they were given to you but for their practical bearing on the interests of mankind. ... They have to prove both destructive and constructive - destructive in the pernicious errors of the past in the old creeds and superstitions which suffocate in their poisonous embrace like the Mexican weed nigh all mankind; but constructive of new institutions of a genuine practical Brotherhood of Humanity where all will become co-workers of nature ... The Chiefs want a "Brotherhood of Humanity" a real Universal Fraternity started; an institution which would make itself known throughout the world and arrest the attention of the highest minds." K.H. L. 06 p. 23/24 So it seems to us that the TS should be a miniature of these "new institutions" a model or example to be copied and applied by the highest minds to the solutions "consistent solutions" of the worlds urgent problems. Unfortunately in most places and certainly at the international level the most important one the TS is but a poor copy of the institutions today dominating in the world. Too bad but who cares?=20 Marina & Arnaldo Sisson. F. Brazil Sharing the Way Correspondence from around the globe Dear Simon & Charles May you be well and in peace! Congratulations for the newsletter Universal Youth - Ed. I'll comment more to the e-mail address but it is very good. Now is just to send you the official convocation to the WTYF elections. =20 I'll write soon to the e-mail! Lots of love from Arnaldo & Marina. Past WTYF Chairman & Secretary Brazil To the Universal Youth I would like to ask a question which you may like to include in a future edition of Universal Youth or the Young Theosophist and invite the responses of others. Do you think that karma works on the objective principles of "good" and "bad"? I enjoy and appreciate Universal Youth and the Young Theosophist so thank you all for your efforts. David Hutchinson Queensland Australia. Dear friend Simon I got both your letters and I am taking the chance to share my opinion with you. Regarding your newsletter [Universal Youth] it is difficult for me to say something about it because until now I haven't done much to participate. It is always easy to criticise when you haven't done anything and don't know how difficult it is to face all the problems that arise in creating and publishing such a newsletter. But I want to be honest. I guess that is what this newsletter needs to become to a good one and I also guess that is what you want and its not meant personally what I am saying but only regarding the form of the newsletter. I don't like it as it is up to now. I feel myself one voice in the youth crowd. I see no other reason for a youth newsletter than pointing to an ideal. Making it clear by discussing and understanding it with oneself and helping to create it an ideal which is moving within the hearts of those who are young. In achieving that we have to understand what we are writing and why we are writing it. I am sure many of those writing in the last issue were not sure about these points. If we don't learn see and understand how much our ideas are a mixture of personal interests and those of an impersonal idealistic nature how then will we be able in the future to turn the world the right way when this task having the status and position to change outward conditions for the better will be put on the shoulders of those who see themselves as one of the youth today? Look at the issue - things are put to heights which the person likes or dislikes which are told with an unattractive image. So much is said in relation to the personal judgement of the writer. And that for sure puts the ideal beyond the possibility of reach because the essential problems are discussed on a personal level - discussions that will be endless and not lead to the manifestation of the ideal until one understands the condition under which he/she suffers. Well that is the reason why this youth magazine should point to this condition first of all be aware of it because when that takes place there will automatically be the words which will move the idealistic nature of the reader. The ideal has to be freed out of the boundaries which rape and reduce it to a rain shelter of the egoistic nature. Only then can the two factors mentioned above status and position to change outward conditions be used by hands which are capable of creating a whole work of art which will be the change that so many try to bring about but who have failed until now. Forgive me my words if they should sound hard but I feel it is so important to cut this line of unconsciously continuing mistakes which is the result of the misunderstanding of a person/group believing that they are changing things when what they do is mainly a shifting on the same horizontal level and not a vertical journey up to the top. That is why I had to write this consciously. Also my own failures and mistakes in this world are big. Honestly taking your hand with mine and hugging you Yours Andr=E9 Schumacher BerlinGermany Dear Simon Thank you for your letter the newsletters and the t-shirt it is very nice. All greetings for the Young Theosophists over there I have the photo you gave me.... I am happy to be at home sometimes I remember Adyar it is very special place for me and a very good experience to have lived there for some time. I am sure I will come back again.=20 Here I attend meetings in my lodge and my old friends are really nice to meet. Of all the members I am still the youngest can you believe it? but now there are two more young women they just joined a few days ago. Here I send you the photocopies of some sketches that I have done for the newsletter and also a poem which is below the statue of the unwanted dog in Barcelona's zoo [see page 15]. Surely it happens everywhere here in my town it is very common to see at the end of the big holidays of the year many dogs and cats that have been derelict. This is a tourist area and the poor animals are sometimes beautiful ones that do not know how to survive in the streets. In my village which is more or less 15 km from Alicante a not very big town there are no organisations that can do something about it. Meanwhile the cats are more and in worse conditions. The saddest thing is that in the University they require cats for vivisection and they pay some money to the people who bring them in with no questions. I will inquire to the Animal Protection Society of Alicante to see if something can be done but somebody told me already that they just put down the cats. I shall check it up. Well that is all for now. You also take care. With affection Silvia. AlicanteSpain Dear Lara May I received your letter dated 9th Feb regarding your initiative in setting up a network and commend your people for this very useful enterprise. As far as we are concerned Mt Helena is a retreat centre that does not have a membership; it is a facility used by Perth Lodge members. I shall ensure that they have copies of the questionnaire and that they carry out your request I have very fond memories of NZ where I did a lecture tour some years ago. At this time I presented a number of workshops on spiritual awareness techniques and many participants asked me if I was interested in writing a book about the subject - well I did and it was published about a year ago. The book is entitled 'The Spiritual Path to Complete Fulfilment'. As far as I have been able to ascertain there have been no sales in NZ and that is a pity since the idea was initiated in your country and the book's content should appeal to all theosophists particularly young ones who wish to practice self-culture rather than just talk about it! Perhaps you may be able to assist by ensuring the TS bookshops are stocking it the TS libraries are putting it on the shelf - and members are aware of its existence. I enclose a copy of the publishers leaflet for your information [Phillip Harris's book is distributed by Allen & Unwin Ltd]. The continuous accusation levelled at our TS is that the members are 'head-oriented' and do little except talk. I don't think that that is entirely true but I do know that many members have complained about the absence of many modern works based on theosophy and with practical approach. This book of mine is an attempt to remedy the situation Thank your for your letter - I hope that the venture prospers and if I can help in any way let me know. Your fraternally Phillip Harris Mt Helena Western Australia Dear Simon Thanks for your letter addresses and newsletter "Universal Youth". I have made copies and distributed these to the YT's here. I have also encouraged them to write to other YT's and may contribute to your= Newsletter. It was great to meet you in Adyar and hear ideas on how to stimulate the world TS Youth Federation. I very much like the format and content of your newsletter. Well done! I am so pleased you are doing this work. Caring people are a rare breed. They oil the gears of Social life and without them the world would be in a very sorry state. Thankyou for caring. Warmest Fraternal Greetings Tom Davis Pretoria South Africa Dear Lara-May I am glad that there are groups of YT's obviously functioning under less stress than what we did. But Melbourne is known as somewhat of a Black Hole as far as esoteric groups are concerned. Normal groups anywhere around the world but Melbourne! We had a YT group in Melbourne for about 3-4 years 3rd incarnation. Starting off small but a good group at the= end. We continued informally but encouraged each other to give a short talk 10-20 minutes followed by a discussion. We also held many workshops - we were all a wealth of information on pet interests - topics included crystals music and metamorphic technique. Participation was our goal - Positive and Inter-active theosophy. I hope that this may be of some interest to you. And I would be interested to know how you are set up there. Good luck with your endeavours. Yours sincerely Caroline van Dissel Endeavour HillsAustralia formerly of the Melbourne YT's. Dear Simon Thanks for the paper. I attended both the European School and the International Congress in Stockholm. We are planning to build up a European youth section but I see no reason to limit it to Europe. Still those ideas are hollow but someday!!! I'll soon send an e-mail! Take care Andreas Borg Gothenburg Sweden. Dear Simon Hello!. I received your newsletter Apr issue along with your letter. Thank you for the same. Then how are you Simon? Please give my regards to Mr Charles; how is he? I intend to attend the Dec convention 95. Please do write according to the availability of time - and send your newsletters as usual. I am glad to receive the materials from you. Praying for your happiness and peace of mind. With lots of love and affection Anand. R. Kerela India. Flora & Fauna To lose our native flora and fauna or kill their enemies? that is the question. While this question is being asked and answered with some intensity from Alaska to Africa and Auckland it isn't despite appearing to be the question. It is only an attempt an early-days first attempt at trying to frame the question and of course it is a good place to start. But now that we suspect it isn't quite right as a question it only contains two possibilities: kill or have something of ours killed we can poke around a little to see what can be done to increase its range and depth and sophistication. One could begin by asking some question which seem likely to provide useful partial starting points: 1. In what sense are native flora and fauna ours? We certainly are not their creators. Perhaps their creators however envisaged have another view of the entire conflict? Should we take their viewpoint into consideration? 2. If we take the nature spirit view of creation it raises the question of whether we might consider consulting the senior Rabbit Nature Spirit and the Elder Possum Nature Spirit prior to putting their offspring to death. They might like equal time. Could we expect to get an unbiased reply? If rabbits are seen to be damaging pasture we might also consider consulting with the nature spirits behind the various grass species for a balanced= view. 3. Any such consultation might be more profitable if approached from the realisation that we have precious little knowledge of the purposes behind any particular groupings of life whether bacterial fungal animal or vegetable. From a theosophical perspective we might as well add mineral. 4. Suppose we proceed a little further by imagining some possible answers. It is likely that the Rabbit Nature Spirit would say =93We have placed these creatures in your country so that you may slaughter them. Go for it=94? 5. Well perhaps the reply might be this one: In spite of my best efforts I have lost control of Rabbit kind though they live and breath in my being though every drop of life that courses through their veins and little carrot-loving souls first courses through mine. Accordingly I am unable to right the balance of the portion of nature that has been assigned to me and it is a good thing that mankind is ready with guns traps and poison to assist me in my efforts to evolve a Rabbit group soul. 6. Is there any possibility of adding some concrete experience to the above perhaps fanciful perhaps real but distant imaginings? I have intervened at least two times this lifetime in a seeming dispute between several natural forces in nature. The outcomes which were decidedly unexpected have served to severely caution me about the wisdom of thinking I knew on which side to throw my weight. One was a fight between an adult goose and a wild fox the second was between a native grass clearing and a bushfire both stories too long to relate here. The point I wish to convey is that in both instances my non-theosophical choice was very quickly shown to be wrong. Finally I recall a passage I read in a mystical work so long ago that I cannot remember its author or title but the scene and the incident is vivid in my memory: A pupil has just been accepted as a new disciple of a master and has a week to tidy up his affairs before he must move on to an unknown but welcome stage on the Path. He is contemplating doing some long overdue weeding of a useless patch of blackberries and bracken when a disembodied voice gravely reminds him that he hasn't a clue as to the destiny of that plot of land nor the needs of its vegetable or animal residents and he would therefore further his own and its development by just leaving it severely lone which the reader presumes is what he does. One seems to hear again faintly in the air in the more than 2000 year old Greek phrase from Hippocratic Oath First Do No Harm. None of the above is meant to suggest that there is an easy answer. If there were such this wouldn't really be the Plant called Earth but there are certainly better questions and towards them we slowly work our way. MrGladney Oakley=20 NSW Australia Your breed=92s unimportant unimportant your name your life so short that you give to man. It=92s the faithful offer of your love with no bounds that is in your eyes=20 of shining flame until the last day=20 final and ignored of your sad life >From a statue in Barcelona zoo From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 05 Dec 1996 22:39:59 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Adyar Rules > > THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY > FOUNDED 17 NOVEMBER 1875 INCORPORATED 03 APRIL 1905 > > MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION Correction to previous posting: > > 7. Vesting of Property on dissolution > > If upon the dissolution of the Society there shall remain after > the satisfaction of all its debts and liabilities any property > whatsoever the same shall not be paid to or distributed among > the members of the Society or ally of them but shall be given or ^^^^ any Alan From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 06 Dec 1996 06:39:14 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Krotona Schedule Winter/Spring 96 Doss: Re the Krotona programs. I've never attended them in person but I've learned from many of them on tape. There was a time before I had my lens implants when I couldn't read & studied exclusively from Krotona tapes. I'd say most of them are worthwhile. Every now 'n so often you hit a klinker. If you can go therego if not if you have time to listen to tapes get their list & buy some or borrow some from the Libary in Wheaton. They have a lot of them. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 07:18:33 GMT From: jem@vnet.net Subject: server-up test testing if server is up. jem@vnet.net From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 08:23:38 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: To: Simon Webber Dear Simon Thanks for putting that really inspiring newsletter of the WTYF on theos-news. To comment on just one thing it contains you talk about the fusion of heart & mind. I think you're fortunate to have intuited this before you were 30. I came upon it in late middle age. Most important we e-mail participants who belong to the United States Theosophical movement have just been talking about what we could do to attract more young people to Theosophy. I think I've heard of the WTYF vaguely... and years ago but is it in existence in our country now? And what can we especially the younger members do to have an active Youth organization in our country? There are several young people on this mailing list interested in this question & I think a few of us oldsters are too. We need to attract more young people to our organization. Anything you can tell us about how to do this would be most welcome. Liesel --OAA19963.818364855/future.dreamscape.com-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:10:28 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: testing new configuration hi - this is a message to test the e-mail configuration on Vnet peace - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:23:51 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: lists are up hi - It appears that the lists are back up. testing. john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:23:51 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: lists are up hi - It appears that the lists are back up. testing. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:32:48 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: back up for sure hi - Vnet went through some growing pains over the last couple days. Hopefully the problems are solved now. sorry for the delays. peace - john mead jem@vnet.net p.s. I'll spare you the details :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:32:48 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: back up for sure hi - Vnet went through some growing pains over the last couple days. Hopefully the problems are solved now. sorry for the delays. peace - john mead jem@vnet.net p.s. I'll spare you the details :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 08 Dec 1996 18:32:48 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: back up for sure hi - Vnet went through some growing pains over the last couple days. Hopefully the problems are solved now. sorry for the delays. peace - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 02:04:36 GMT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@compuserve.com> Subject: Copy of: Copy of: Bylaw revisions pose threat to T.S.I.A. Ann: >I've also wondered if long-time members view newcomers with a certain amount of >suspicion wondering if they'll try to change the established order. I get the >impression they are questioning whether the newbie can make the grade stick it >out and keep up with the group. Perhaps suspicion and skepticism regarding >newcomers should be changed to helpfulness and optimism. I have never been suspicious of newbies. Frustrated maybe but not suspicious. I don't expect newbies to "keep up" with some of my discussions. After studying for almost 30 years I would hope that I am able to talk over their heads at some point. While this is probably frustrating to them I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am a member at large and except for computer networking have not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with others. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 11:24:56 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon >If I may add a bit from de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy. >"Do you know there is a way of living in thought rather than in thoughts. > This illustrates the dual action of the manasic >faculty the lower and the higher manas." >This strikes me as coming about through meditation for one and when this >state is operating even on and off then knowledge takes on a new meaning. >It rises above personal likes and dislikes and then theosophy in its purer >form becomes a part of us and is able to influence our inner self. >Bee Brown Member Theosophy International The classic meditation given in Tibetan Buddhism for this is to watch each of your thoughts drift through your mind. Then try to concentrate on the tiny space in between where one thought ends and another begins. This space is empty like the sky and is exactly what Purucker is talking about. Thanks for the quote Bee. Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 11:26:06 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Eldon to Alan: >You make a good point here that we should be responsive to someone's >*intent* and not what they literally say. If someone is wanting >sympathy and a shoulder to cry on the appropriate reply would be >different than if they were seeking to understand *why* something >happened. This is exactly the point that I tried to make awhile back about the necessity for at least some psychism. The only way to know how to really help a person is to be able to look into his/her heart and sense what is wrong and what the real need is. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 11:26:34 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Ethical Apotheosis of Jerry Eldon: >Is the term "abyss" meant to imply a "dark night of the soul" >experience for those that cross it? Then it would be akin to >the western experience of transcending the personality of >rising to the pure experience of unqualified consciousness. They are different but similar thing. The Abyss is an objective "place" in the invisible worlds around us. It is the demarcation line between the upper three cosmic planes arupa and the lower four rupa. The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at some point in which the human mind eventually comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. Technically the Abyss marks the end or beginning of the Ego not the ego/personality which is limited to the 3rd plane. Thus the Abyss stands just above the Reincarnating Ego and just below the atma. >It would be more like a "sweet melting" leading >to a sense of "eternal delight" rather than a "dive into >the dark unknown" or a "shattering". It is "eternal delight" to atmic consciousness but the Abyss is a "dark unknown" of incoherence and insanity e.g. the unconscious to the ego/personality. It is exactly what the ego sees when it faces the unconscious in Jungian terms. Not a pretty sight because the ego sees its own death within. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 12:21:04 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: ERGATES ERGATES is a quarterly publication produced by the U.L.T. San Francisco which attempts to connect all interested Theosophists regardless of affiliation around the world. The 199512 issue is out and available FREE to any interested subscribers. ERGATES survives solely on donations which are welcome but not required. Current feature articles include "Observations from the Internet" about diversity on Theos-L "Worship" reports from Theosophical centers as far-flung as Bombay Mexico City and Belgium interesting book reviews and a calendar of events including plans for the upcoming centenary of William Q. Judge's passing. If interested in a free subscription or to submit articles news or events for the calendar please send your mailing address to ULTnews@aol.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 12:24:47 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: To:Donna Donna-- I would also recommend the short introductory book on Theosophy by William Q. Judge THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY. It was written last century 1894 I think so the English is a little Victorian but the teaching is clear and accurate. Mr. Judge worked with HPB for nearly 20 years and was a Founder of the Theosophical Movement in the West with HPB and Mr. Olcott. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 12:29:09 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Eldon -- You wrote "Members of a theosophical group may not have a guru but KH and M do. They've said that their obedience to their teacher the Mahachohan comes first and they'd rather let the T.S. sink than obey a single request of their teacher." I'm almost positive you meant DISOBEY. Probably obvious but I thought it worth pointing out. We find the same problem in ancient texts the scribe forgets to put in the negative. Can make for very difficult teaching without an interpreter who knows what is meant eh? Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 13:10:50 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy ET To gain knowledge the first step is intellectual study. Then comes a form of putting it all together using the intuition and prajna. And one further deepens the knowledge *as one shares it*. An idea is not truly one's own until it has been shared repeatedly with others. RI But to gain *spiritual* knowledge the first step is meditation the middle step is meditation and the the last step is meditation. Intellectual study is perhaps never more valuable than when its meager payoffs for happiness and the adept conduct of private life prompts one to do even more meditation. Intellectual study of theosophical ideas remains interesting nonetheless because of all the different ways others have tried to articulate what one is learning for oneself. It is doubtful however that one can actually "deepen" spiritual knowledge by "repeatedly sharing" ideas which are primarily the result of intellectual study--regardless of how much "intuition" and "prajna" one feels has been used in putting the package together. Ten minutes of reading ten hours of thought and ten days of meditating is the recipe for producing the Wisdom you can't share but the smile you can. . . . Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 14:28:16 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy I want to add on to those comments. With all the glitches I think my 01 suggestion didn;'t go through. By now I have several others. I think a good start for anyone would be Shirley Nicholson's pamphlet "A Program for Living The Spiritual Life". In brief the 04 suggested phases of the program with lots of leeway as to how to do it are 1. Study 2.Meditation 3. Changing Yourself 4. Service. There are brief lists of books to read at the end of each section giving a beginner a perfect start. Also Ed Abdill has made basic theosophy videos. I've been waiting forever to get them to show them to my group of newcomers but Ed is still working on the manual which'll go with the videos. Also a few days ago there was news from the World Theosophical Youth Federation which is either non-existent or very dormant in the US. I wish the young people on the mailing list would get in touch with these guys & get something going in this country. They were talking about putting a facsimile of their membership applicatiion on theos-l. As for a certificate in Theosophical studies I don't see anything wrong with it provided the person going for the certificate is given enough latitude to be able to study theosophy to his/her own liking. If it's a bunch of prescribed subject material after the basics I'm against it too. It depends upon how it's done. As for viewing newcomers with suspicion I'm not sure that it's newcomers & not people who don't belong to the ES. I've gotten it too & i've been in for a long time. I always have to prove again & again that I know soemthing about Theosophy. I think it would be great if olsder more seasoned theosophists would be helpful to the new ones. I've been trying to do that but what I get from the Library is "Don't send me anybody new. We have enough to do." That's not very helpful. Maybe they don't have enough money for more staff. Wel then maybe they could get more volunteers. In the same vein I don't approve of the By-laws revision that says newcomers have to wait for 02 years to be able to vote. What for? I hope ther aren't tooo many typing errors on the message. I can only see the right half of what I'm writing & don't know how to correct it Liesel. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 14:32:20 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: God loves you Serge King in 01 of his books has a really nice exercise in conjuction with this. He tells you to imagine that you're being cradled in the arms of some immense loving being. It's the most wonderful sensation. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 15:13:58 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: TI Dear Rich What's ERGATES? Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 15:46:08 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Copy of: Copy of: TSA by-law revisions Sy Just as a side light when our Onondaga Provisional Study Center was approved last year I was told that we had to do a course on basic Theosophy before we could be approved as a permanent study center. We were given a choice of 02 ... Emogene Simons' Intro to Theosophy which is very antiquated or Doss McDavid's "Intro to Esoteric Principles" which it says in the blurp is "a more advanced course". I haven't looked at that but I'm not going to bore my people to death. I objected but I do see that giving such a course to a new group is a good idea provided there's a live one available. I"m waiting for Ed Abdill's video tapes but they've been stalled for I think almost a year. Jerry & Apr Hejka-Ekins did a video tape on Basic T. a number of year ago but I found that unimaginative & not at all inspiring. Thought you'd like to know that they ask something else besides the 3 objects. When I joined all you had to agree to was the Brotherhood of Man. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 21:59:25 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you > To : Paul Johnson: > I like what you had to say. I must ask however if you truly and deeply > believe that God is a He or whether it is just through habit that you use > that pronoun. It seems to me the "father" idea was the only exceptable one > at such an intensely patriarchal historical time as when Jesus walked the > earth and the notion of parental love was best expressed by the "father" > image. If God truly is a He it means not only that he has a sexual identity > but that sexual identity makes "Him" closer to half of the world's > population and makes the other half seem less than human. It is sort of > like imagining that God is white or something. > Anne .. I heard she was green :- Seriously Anne I am really pleased to see you raising this question. One of the reasons for my promoting the idea of Theosophy International with its own version of the original Adyar three objects was to help move spiritual and mutual-aid concerns into the new age or the 21st century whichever. Of course God does not and cannot have a sexual identity yet the language which supposes this persists and those like myself who protest are either ignored or insulted though not insulted on theos-l. A while back before you signed up to the list I posted an article of mine on this which also appeared in the UK ~Theosophical Journal~ from which it attracted - unbelievably - only hostile responses called "I'm Alright Jill." If you would like I can e-mail a copy of this privately to you. Alan Bain D.D. -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:12:09 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: TI Dear Rich Thanks for the reprint of the TI article in ERGATES. Smail copies of anything can be sent to me thus: Dr. A.M.Bain 14 Tyndall's Park Road Clifton BRISTOL BS8 1PY England. Unlisted phone If you seen anything of mine on the list or in the archives which might be of use in the ULT newsletter feel free to use it free of charge though a copyright mention would be appreciated. The "Dr." bit comes from a D.D. awarded by St. Ephrem's Institute for Eastern Christianity Studies Solna Sweden in 1985. Not a lot of people know that. Even fewer care. :- Keep the faith Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:21:14 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: bounced mail resent > Re: > > "We are the chosen few; > there ain't no room in heaven for you." > > This is to let the TI membership know that in my younger years I got > out of being one of the Chosen People as well as I could and that I'm > not about to get tangled up in that kind of provincialism again. > > Liesel I hope NONE of us will! Alan -- Member Theosophy International Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:21:42 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: bounced mail resent > It's true also as your story implies that if we get too deep > in the metaphysics it can end up sounding like gibberish! > But we're fortunate to live in an age when we can openly explore > metaphysics without fear of persecution. A few centuries back > we'd be burned at the stake for such radical ideas as reincarnation > and karma. > > -- Eldon True. However in my time I have been threatened with the modern equivalent of persecution as a "blasphemer" of theosophical dogmas. Sounds like the TSA is having similar problems with some of its members right now .... Alan -- Member Theosophy International Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:21:58 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: bounced mail resent > Alan: > > >As I see it the question in Kabalist > >terms is how safely to direct people to the Abyss in the first > >place - you can't cross it until you get there. For > >non-Kabalists I am talking about the gap between lower and > >higher manas here or similar. > > Is the term "abyss" meant to imply a "dark night of the soul" > experience for those that cross it? Then it would be akin to > the western experience of transcending the personality of > rising to the pure experience of unqualified consciousness. > An eastern depiction of the same experience would need a > different term. It would be more like a "sweet melting" leading > to a sense of "eternal delight" rather than a "dive into > the dark unknown" or a "shattering". > > -- Eldon Not quite in my version. It is a reaching "upward" or "inward" to a different dimension or plane. A useful comparison is the apostle Paul's write-up on the "third heaven" experience in 01 Corinthians. Imagery ceases and there is the possibility of an experience which some have called "darkness visible." Alan -- Member Theosophy International Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:42:48 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Thoughts > > The classic meditation given in Tibetan Buddhism for this > is to watch each of your thoughts drift through your mind. Then try to > concentrate on the tiny space in between where one thought ends > and another begins. This space is empty like the sky and is exactly > what Purucker is talking about. Thanks for the quote Bee. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy International Another one to try it can be done is to *observe* just ONE thought arrive and watch it go. Where does it come from and to where does it go? Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 22:46:33 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Abyss > Re: "The Abyss" > > It is "eternal delight" to atmic consciousness > but the Abyss is a "dark unknown" of incoherence and > insanity e.g. the unconscious to the ego/personality. > It is exactly what the ego sees when it faces the > unconscious in Jungian terms. Not a pretty sight > because the ego sees its own death within. > > Jerry S. .. and then you have to jump into the hole if you actually want to get anywhere. Gulp! Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 09 Dec 1996 23:24:32 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon >From: Jerry Schueler 764001474 > >RE: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon > >>If I may add a bit from de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy. >>"Do you know there is a way of living in thought rather than in thoughts. > >> This illustrates the dual action of the manasic >>faculty the lower and the higher manas." >>This strikes me as coming about through meditation for one and when this >>state is operating even on and off then knowledge takes on a new meaning. >>It rises above personal likes and dislikes and then theosophy in its purer >>form becomes a part of us and is able to influence our inner self. >>Bee Brown >Member Theosophy International > > The classic meditation given in Tibetan Buddhism for this >is to watch each of your thoughts drift through your mind. Then try to >concentrate on the tiny space in between where one thought ends >and another begins. This space is empty like the sky and is exactly >what Purucker is talking about. Thanks for the quote Bee. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy International Is it possible to say that an empty space thinks also? That is the only way I can think off to describe it. The brain seems to have deferred to the mind and thoughts come from somewhere else via the now quieter brain which no longer thinks madly about everything and everything. Everything just sort of 'is' and life takes on a smoother troublefree path. > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 00:35:52 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon >Is it possible to say that an empty space thinks also? That is the only way >I can think off to describe it. The brain seems to have deferred to the mind >and thoughts come from somewhere else via the now quieter brain which no >longer thinks madly about everything and everything. Everything just sort of >'is' and life takes on a smoother troublefree path. > >> >Bee Brown >Member Theosophy International > An observation of mine is about the relatioship bewteen thought and its translation into words. The observation is that the 'thoughts' are independent of thier translation into words; that thoughts exists before thier translation. Thoughts seam to appear in a whole lump it seems to take time and concentration to make the transistion into words. I am not not multilingual so would like input from anyone that is - "Do toughts exist independantly of the language you are thinking in?". Also there is the experience of 'not being able to find the word' ie the thought exists before its linguistic expression. I don't know how to analyse this in terms of higher mind / lower mind / brain etc. Does anywone haeve any input? Anyway I have used this as a technique of meditation:- to try and stay in that space where thoughts are thoughts but before they become words. I found it a very effective way to 'quiet the mind' and gain insites into the mind's working. You can gain also gain an appreciation of the 'problems' of the translation service. There is certainly and reduction and compression happening. I would love some people to try this and give me some feedback. This also opens up ideas about communictaion and its limitations - great communicators seem to transmitt the thought as a whole to their audience and communicate more than the sum of their words. I love listening to great speakers and good theatre or a good book and never loose fasination of this process! malcolm idoine malcolmi@iconz.co.nz From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 03:58:19 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: J H-E Bylaws and Bailey TO: Jerry Hejka-Ekins: Thanks for your comments/interpretation of Brant Jackson's letter -- I wish more people were concerned with logical fallacies. >JHE: > I have stated many times before on theos-l that the main > points of Bailey's teachings come from ES material extant between > 1912 and 1918. Almost none of this has ever been published > except some that is in CWL's books which some readers assume was > stolen from Bailey. This may seem like trivia but I think it > is very relevant to your question because ES members are in fact > warned about Bailey. But for the general membership who are not > in the ES the TS cannot dictate what they can or cannot study. > On the other hand ES members are responsible to keep Lodges on > the "right track." See how this makes for problems? "... the main parts of Bailey's teachings come from ES material extant between 1912 and 1918. Almost none of this has ever been published except some that is in CWL's books ..." That rather takes the thread into a conversational cul-de-sac does it not? Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? About 18 months ago you had an interesting series of conversations with Arvind Kumar regarding the Bailey teachings but I don't recall reading anything "from the ES perspective." Most of the posts seemed to be focussed on the potential for cross-referencing the Bailey material with "standard" Theosophical texts rather than discussing the ideas themselves. note: my only access to theos-l at that time was by Compu$erve and the list server charges quickly grew out of hand. I signed off shortly thereafter and subscribed again through a different channel only a short time ago. If you or someone could direct me to the archives section where you earlier posted re: Bailey and the ES I would appreciate it. Jim PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the Tibetan Djwhal Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from cyberspace. : From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 04:08:04 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Beginner's list My vote for "the book that should be placed in the hands of everyone especially beginners in Theosophy" is BE HERE NOW by Ram Dass. It's not even a "theosophical" work as such. But it is a wonderful overview of the steps on the Path and the last section is a "recommended readings" list that is comprehensive and geared towards those folks who are looking for something without knowing what "it" is. btw kudos to the Wheaton library >From a review in one of the old Whole Earth catalogs 1980 "... you'll be face to face with the intensely illustrated Ram Dass amalgamation of Hinduism Buddhism Christianity and more. That's followed by *Cookbook for a Sacred Life* an excellent synopsis of methods and practices available to those who wish to work on themselves to begin their own personal yoga." From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 04:41:28 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon > >snip. > >This also opens up ideas about communictaion and its limitations - great >communicators seem to transmitt the thought as a whole to their audience and >communicate more than the sum of their words. I love listening to great >speakers and good theatre or a good book and never loose fasination of >this process! > >malcolm idoine malcolmi@iconz.co.nz > I had a very interesting experience with language when I went back to Denmark after 40 years away. My Danish was childlike and much has been forgotten. My uncle does not speak English so here we were with so much I wanted to know about my early years because now that I am all English much of the Danish part is missing. Over a large family dinner my uncle and I exchanged all the information we each wanted to know about each other mostly without any real language being used. If we were not looking at each other I could not understand what he was saying so I figured we must have been passing thought at each other through the eyes. It was an amazing experience that I have never had before or since. There is communication other than words and I wonder if one mental body can communicate directly to another on a vibration level. Thoughts are things so we may encounter the thing itself in the thought world and then language translates it into the brain so it can be used. It is an interesting subject.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 09:02:06 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: J H-E Bylaws and Bailey Jim Meier writes: Thanks for your comments/interpretation of Brant Jackson's letter --I wish more people were concerned with logical fallacies. JHE Thanks for reading them. Whenever there are bylaw changes the basic structure of the Organization will always be affected. It is vitally important for members to carefully scrutinize these changes and not assume that the administration is necessarily acting in the best interests of the membership. I believe that the current bylaw changes are the most critical concerning the abridgment of the rights of members and Branches that I have ever seen--and I've been in this Organization since 1963. JM Quotes JHE and comments: >"... the main parts of Bailey's teachings come from ES material >extant between 1912 and 1918. Almost none of this has ever been >published except some that is in CWL's books ..." > >That rather takes the thread into a conversational cul-de-sac >does it not? JHE Indeed it does take "the thread into a conversational cul-de-sac" when I make a statement that cannot be backed with evidence. But what evidence can I reasonably be expected to offer to back up this statement? It would be useless to cite ES material published between 1912 and 1918 because it is unlikely that you or anyone on this net has access to any of this material to check my statements against. Even most living ES members don't have this material because all they get is what is current at the time they join. But on the off chance that you do have this material then I will give you the citations. If you are an ES member then you can take a trip to Adyar where there is a special archive of all ES material. All you have to do is apply for permission from Radha to see it. But getting permission from her is by no means guaranteed. If you get permission then I understand that you have access for a maximum of two hours per day. The only public *clue* that I can think of at the moment is published in a very scarce work by F.T. Brooks entitled foreword: Moreover I must confess that some of the later findings of those psychic diggings in the Earth's past history have been to my mind far more interesting and on the while more consistent than any fiction that I have yet set eyes on. And I refer mainly to matters yet unpublished but which will I believe soon be published under the title: "~Man How Whence and Whither~" p viii. ~Man Whence How and Whither~ was published in 1913. Read through as early an edition as you can find and I think you will discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy already outlined. JM >Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? JHE I wish I could. Reasons are not given that I know of. My guess is that the Arcane school is regarded as a rival organization. JM About 18 months ago you had an interesting series of conversations with Arvind Kumar regarding the Bailey teachings but I don't recall reading anything "from the ES perspective." JHE That is because Arvind knew nothing of the ES teachings for that period so there was no basis for a discussion here. I do remember mentioning the ES connection during those conversations and receiving a long response from Eldon Tucker questioning whether or not I should discuss "classified" ES material on a public forum. JM Most of the posts seemed to be focussed on the potential for cross-referencing the Bailey material with "standard" Theosophical texts rather than discussing the ideas themselves. JHE Yes. That is as far as we were able to get. We agreed that HPB's writings predated AAB's and that AAB considered her writings to be extensions of HPB's. Therefore we agreed that it would be reasonable to compare AAB's ideas to HPB's and check for consistency. But before we got into the examination of the ideas Arvind admitted that his real agenda was to win disciples for AAB not to examine the writings. Shortly after that he announced that he found another spiritual leader that required no reading or study and was no longer interested in Theosophy or the Bailey teachings and would only discuss the teachings of his new spiritual teacher. That was the last I heard of him. JM If you or someone could direct me to the archives section where you earlier posted re: Bailey and the ES I would appreciate it. JHE John Mead: jem@vnet.net has all of those details. You will need to know the dates. My recollection was that the discussion ran from the summer of 93 through the first months or so of 94. I have them archived on a separate disk--more or less complete and could upload them to you but the file is over 1.33 million bytes. JM PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of those unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the Tibetan Djwhal Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from cyberspace. : JHE I would be very interested in those ideas and would defend VERY LOUDLY your right to post them. Bee Brown: If Theosophy was not so protective of their right to be the only organization who can decide who speaks on behalf of our Elder Brothers we all might live in peace together and let all of us pursue our individual studies under their umbrella. If we can develop our inner knowing I am sure guidance from within will sooner or later put us back on the right road. JHE Remember Krishnamurti's "Truth is a pathless land" speech that he gave in 1930? That was protest against the "spiritual authority" held by the TS at the time. Van der Leeuw was alluding to this in that pamphlet I posted a few months ago when he said that when K made a statement that the Theosophical leaders did not agree with then it came from K. But when he said something they agreed with it came from the World Teacher. Van der Leeuw observed that it seems that everyone except K knew when the World Teacher was speaking through him and when He was not. Well the paradigm shift that K tried to put in place in 1930 has finally happened though sixty years late. Radha likes K's and takes his "non authoritative" approach seriously. Now if she would only stop requiring new ES members to pledge obedience to her.... BB >From what I can see the majority of branch members do not study the SD anyway because it is too hard for them. JHE Too bad because HPB says that the SD is an outline of the esoteric philosophy. On the other hand she said in the ~Key~ "To the mentally lazy or obtuse Theosophy must remain a riddle..." xi. BB Why not allow them to get their sustenance from sources they can understand and if that turns out to be A B so what? JHE I have no problem with that. But those who claim to understand the SD because they have read what AAB CWL AB ect. said about the SD but find the SD itself too difficult to read--then I think they have a problem. Jerry HE International Theosophist ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 13:35:54 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey Hi Bee I absolutely agree with you. We should be able to read & study whatever interests us as of the moment if for no other reason than that we learn best from interesting materials. If it's Alice Bailey well then it's Alice Bailey. I don't think that should make a person an outcast if we're really practicing the tolerance that goes with us all being one brother/sister-hood. I say that in spite of the fact or maybe because of the fact that I find Besant & Leadbeater more to my liking. To me they have more substance. But since I'm asking others who don't like these 02 to stop making snide remarks about them & to accept me as a believer in Besant/Leadbeater then by the same token I should be willing to extend the same courtesy to someone who finds Alice Bailey more to their liking. I thoroughly dislike this sophistry which comes out of the ES that their nucleus of the brother/sisterhood is wiser & holier than the wisdom & holiness which comes out of other tradtions & beliefs. It's divisive when we should be synthesising. I was brought up as a real provincial snob. We thought of ourselves as the creme de la creme. The Jews of Frankfurt were only second in stature to the Jews of Berlin. Just don't ask me who of the 02 got put into the ovens first. I don't think the Nazis were refined enough to differentiate between the Frankfurt & the Berlin Jews. The experience taught me many lessons one of which was to get me over feeling holier than thou because I belonged to the very high class Frankfurter Jews. Putting this lesson to use with the issue at hand I will respect someone who believes in Alice Bailey! I may argue with them about an idea if I think mine makes more sense. In the final analysis I was taught by Theosophists that it's very difficult to judge a person by their outside appearances & if their actions seem odd there might be a perfectly valid inner reason. A few theosophical friends treated me in this manner when I seemed wild & wolly & I was very grateful for their understanding while I was struggling. I try to apply the same courtesy to someone else don't always do it it's hard but try. So much for Alice Bailey. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 14:37:06 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: very important "big"brother action fwd > From: Michael Powell <73140.1517@compuserve.com> > Subject: very important "big"brother action > > RE: very important "big"brother action CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE NET CENSORSHIP LEGISLATION IN CONGRESS On 191212 1995 Join With Hundreds of Thousands Of Your Fellow Internet Users In A NATIONAL INTERNET DAY OF PROTEST PLEASE WIDELY REDISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT WITH THIS BANNER INTACT REDISTRIBUTE ONLY UNTIL 192012 1995 ________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS Internet Day of Protest: 191212 1995 What You Must Do On 191212 1995 List of Participating Organizations Where Can I Learn More? ________________________________________________________________________ INTERNET DAY OF PROTEST: TUESDAY DECEMBER 12 1995 Outrageous proposals to censor the Internet demand that the Internet Community take swift and immediate action. We must stand up and let Congress know that we will not tolerate their attempts to destroy this medium! Please join hundreds of thousands of your fellow citizens in a National Day of Protest on 191212 1995. As you know on Dec 06 1995 the House Conference Committee on Telecommunications Reform voted to impose far reaching and unconstitutional "indecency" restrictions on the Internet and other interactive media including large commercial online services such as America Online Compuserve and Prodigy and smaller Internet Service Providers such as Panix the Well Echo and Mindvox. These restrictions threaten the very existence of the Internet and interactive media as a viable medium for free expression education commerce. If enacted the Internet as we know it will never be the same. Libraries will not be able to put any books online that might offend a child somewhere. No "Catcher in the Rye" or "Ulysses" on the net. Internet Service Providers could face criminal penalties for allowing children to subscribe to their Internet Services forcing many small companies to simply refuse to sell their services to anyone under 18. Worst of all everything you say and publish on the net will have to be "dumbed down" to that which is acceptable to a child. As Internet users we simply must not allow this assault against the Internet and our most basic freedoms to go unchallenged. On 191212 the organizations below are urging you to join us in a NATIONAL DAY OF PROTEST. The goal is to flood key members of the House and Senate with phone calls faxes and email with the message that the Internet community WILL NOT TOLERATE Congressional attempts to destroy the Internet limit our freedoms and trample on our rights. Below are the phone fax and email address of several key members of Congress on this issue and instructions on what you can do to join the National Day of Protest to save the Net. ______________________________________________________________________ WHAT YOU MUST DO ON TUESDAY DECEMBER 12 1995 1. Throughout the day 191212 please contact as many members of Congress on the list below as you can. If you are only able to make one call contact House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Finally if the Senator or Representative from your state is on the list below be sure to contact him or her also. 2. Urge each Member of Congress to "stop the madness". Tell them that they are about to pass legislation that will destroy the Internet as an educational and commercial medium. If you are at a loss for words try the following sample communique: Sample phone call: Both the House and Senate bills designed to protect children from objectionable material on the Internet will actually destroy the Internet as an medium for education commerce and political discourse. There are other less restrictive ways to address this issue. I urge you to oppose both measures being proposed in the conference committee. This is an important election issue to me. Sample letter fax or email: The Senate conferees are considering ways to protect children from inappropriate material on the Internet. A vote for either the House or Senate proposals will result in the destruction of the Internet as a viable medium for free expression education commerce. Libraries will not be able to put their entire book collections online. Everyday people like me will risk massive fines and prison sentences for public discussions someone s somewhere might consider "indecent". There are other less restrictive ways to protect children from objectionable material online. This is an important election issue to me. 3. If you're in San Francisco or near enough to get there go to the Rally Against Censorship from Ground Zero of the Digital Revolution: WHEN: 191112 1995 120000 - 01:00 PM WHERE: South Park between 2nd and 3rd Bryant and Brannon San Francisco. SPEAKERS: To be announced BRING: Attention-grabbing posters signs and banners that demonstrate your committment to free speech and expression and your feelings about Congress. FOR UPDATED INFORMATION including rain info: http://www.hotwired.com/staff/digaman/ ### THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT ### 4. Mail a note to protest@vtw.org to let us know you did your part. Although you will not receive a reply due to the number of anticipated responses we'll be counting up the number of people that participated in the day of protest. P ST Name and Address Phone Fax = == ======================== ============== ============== R AK Stevens Ted 1-202-224-3004 1-202-224-1044 R AZ McCain John 1-202-224-2235 1-602-952-8702 senator_mccain@mccain.senate.gov D HI Inouye Daniel K. 1-202-224-3934 1-202-224-6747 R KS Dole Robert 1-202-224-6521 1-202-228-1245 D KY Ford Wendell H. 1-202-224-4343 1-202-224-0046 wendell_ford@ford.senate.gov R MS Lott Trent 1-202-224-6253 1-202-224-2262 R MT Burns Conrad R. 1-202-224-2644 1-202-224-8594 conrad_burns@burns.senate.gov D NE Exon J. J. 1-202-224-4224 1-202-224-5213 D SC Hollings Ernest F. 1-202-224-6121 1-202-224-4293 senator@hollings.senate.gov R SD Pressler Larry 1-202-224-5842 1-202-224-1259 larry_pressler@pressler.senate.gov R WA Gorton Slade 1-202-224-3441 1-202-224-9393 senator_gorton@gorton.senate.gov D WV Rockefeller John D. 1-202-224-6472 n.a. senator@rockefeller.senate.gov Dist ST Name Address and Party Phone Fax ==== == ======================== ============== ============== 6 GA Gingrich Newt R 1-202-225-4501 1-202-225-4656 2428 RHOB georgia6@hr.house.gov 14 MI Conyers Jr. John D 1-202-225-5126 1-202-225-0072 2426 RHOB jconyers@hr.house.gov 1 CO Schroeder Patricia D 1-202-225-4431 1-202-225-5842 2307 RHOB 18 TX Jackson-Lee Sheila D 1-202-225-3816 1-202-225-3317 1520 LHOB 6 TN Gordon Bart D 1-202-225-4231 1-202-225-6887 2201 RHOB 4. Forward this alert to all of your wired friends. ________________________________________________________________________ WHERE CAN I LEARN MORE? At this moment there are several organizations with WWW sites that now have or will have information about the net censorship legislation and the National Day Of Protest: American Civil Liberties Union ftp://ftp.aclu.org/aclu/ Center for Democracy and Technology http://www.cdt.org/ Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/ Electronic Privacy Information Center http://www.epic.org/ Wired Magazine http://www.hotwired.com/special/indecent/ Voters Telecommunications Watch http://www.vtw.org/ ________________________________________________________________________ LIST OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS In order to use the net more effectively several organizations have joined forces on a single Congressional net campaign to stop the Communications Decency Act. American Civil Liberties Union * American Communication Association * American Council for the Arts * Arts & Technology Society * Association of Alternative Newsweeklies * biancaTroll productions * Boston Coalition for Freedom of Expression * Californians Against Censorship Together * Center For Democracy And Technology * Centre for Democratic Communications * Center for Public Representation * Citizen's Voice - New Zealand * Cloud 09 Internet *Computer Communicators Association * Computel Network Services * Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility * Cross Connection * Cyber-Rights Campaign * CyberQueer Lounge * Dorsai Embassy * Dutch Digital Citizens' Movement * ECHO Communications Group Inc. * Electronic Frontier Canada * Electronic Frontier Foundation * Electronic Frontier Foundation - Austin * Electronic Frontiers Australia * Electronic Frontiers Houston * Electronic Frontiers New Hampshire * Electronic Privacy Information Center * Feminists For Free Expression * First Amendment Teach-In * Florida Coalition Against Censorship * FranceCom Inc. Web Advertising Services * Friendly Anti-Censorship Taskforce for Students * Hands Off! The Net * Inland Book Company * Inner Circle Technologies Inc. * Inst. for Global Communications * Internet On-Ramp Inc. * Internet Users Consortium * Joint Artists' and Music Promotions Political Action Committee * The Libertarian Party * Marijuana Policy Project * Metropolitan Data Networks Ltd. * MindVox * MN Grassroots Party * National Bicycle Greenway * National Campaign for Freedom of Expression * National Coalition Against Censorship * National Gay and Lesbian Task Force * National Public Telecomputing Network * National Writers Union * Oregon Coast RISC * Panix Public Access Internet * People for the American Way * Republican Liberty Caucus * Rock Out Censorship * Society for Electronic Access * The Thing International BBS Network * The WELL * Voters Telecommunications Watch Note: All 'Electronic Frontier' organizations are independent entities not EFF chapters or divisions. ________________________________________________________________________ End Alert ======================================================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 18:08:58 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey On 10 199512 Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote: > > Moreover I must confess that some of the later findings of > those psychic diggings in the Earth's past history have been > to my mind far more interesting and on the while more > consistent than any fiction that I have yet set eyes on. > And I refer mainly to matters yet unpublished but which > will I believe soon be published under the title: "~Man > How Whence and Whither~" p viii. > > ~Man Whence How and Whither~ was published in 1913. Read > through as early an edition as you can find and I think you will > discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy already > outlined. It is my recollection that some of the material was serialized in Adyar Theosophist before they were put in a book form and published. May be this source should also be checked. > > JHE > Remember Krishnamurti's "Truth is a pathless land" speech that he > gave in 1930? That was protest against the "spiritual authority" > held by the TS at the time. Van der Leeuw was alluding to this Before he died Krishnaji held a private discussion session in which he was questioned and discussed the issue of Spritual Hierachy and the TS and at some time in the future I hope to see it published. I do not know if Krishnaji had indicated his personal preference on publishing the discussion. I believe that he would never have discussed this issue unless he felt that it is something on which he has something to say. Let us wait for its publication. I hope it is not something shocking for some Theosophists. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 18:18:32 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: TSA Bylaws Referendum - Retransmit I am retransmitting the msg I posted yesterday as it is likely that ome of the participants in the the theos-l may not have received it. If you have received it please ignore this msg and bear with me. thanks ...doss > From: MK Ramadoss INTERNET:ramadoss@eden.com > TO: Multiple recipients of list INTERNET:THEOS-L@VNET.NET RE: TSA Bylaws Referendum Hi.. I have sent the following message by US Mail to the members of Theosophical Society in America. Some of you may have already seen it. Some may not have. For the benefit of everybody I am posting it in the cyberspace where distribution is instantaneous. Seasons greetings to all. MK Ramadoss =========================================================== Dec 02 1995 To: Members of Theosophical Society in America VOTE NO TO TSA BYLAWS CHANGES Dear Fellow Members: I am a member of the San Antonio Lodge a third generation Theosophist and have been a formal member of the TS for nearly four decades and informally for several years prior to that. I am a self employed CPA in private practice primarily in business and tax consulting areas to both business and non profit organizations. I have taken the trouble in writing this to you at my own cost as I foresee that a very serious and dangerous situation may develop for TSA if the proposed changes to bylaws pass. Hence I am suggesting that the proposed bylaws changes be REJECTED IN TOTAL for the reasons discussed below. The areas of concern to me in the proposed changes to bylaws are: 1. Membership rights of Lodge/Branch Members. 2. Lodge/Branch Property and money rights. 3. Disposition of assets in future if TSA ceases to exist. When I saw the proposed bylaw changes in the American Theosophist I had several serious concerns especially on 3 above and I had sent several letters to our National President communicating my concerns and requesting response and information. For most of the issues either there was no response or the few responses I received were very unsatisfactory. I am discussing below some of the major items of concern. The proposed bylaw changes if passed in my humble opinion have a great potential for creating disharmony among the membership and may even cause dissension leading to significant loss due to several lodges and members leaving the TSA. The price paid in terms of unity and cooperation from members may also be very high. As for the membership in TSA presently every Lodge/Branch/Study Center has the authority to rescind the lodge/branch membership of its members. With the change proposed the National Board can rescind the membership of the local members which is simply taking away the authority of the lodges. I do not see that there is any need for the lodge/branch to cede this authority to the National Board. The changes proposed relative to the assets of the lodges/branches is even more serious and far reaching. At the outset it may not appear so. As for real estate even though the title to the lodge property may be in the name of the lodge/branch if there is a difference of opinion between the local lodge and the National Board relative to any transaction relating to the property and the National Board declines to consent no prospective buyer/lender etc. will go ahead with the transaction due to the threat of National Board suing to nullify the transaction especially when the buyer/lender finds out about the deep pockets of TSA to finance litigation. This applies to mortgage or any other encumbrance. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. PLEASE SHOW THE NEW BYLAWS AND CONSULT WITH YOUR FRIENDS IN THE LEGAL AND REAL ESTATE AND BANKING COMMUNITY AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY. With the above almost veto control over the cash and real estate matters subtle but sure and strong extreme pressures could be brought on lodges branches and study centers on the type of activities and programs carried on by them. While I have high confidence it will not happen with the present leadership it is very likely to happen with a determined charismatic and strong national leader and a board who will go along with him/her with a fundamentalist view of Theosophy. This is a potential risk I do not think we should take. THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE IRREVERSIBLE AND HENCE I URGE YOUR UTMOST ATTENTION AND THOUGHT SINCE YOUR DECISION IS GOING TO AFFECT THE FUTURE OF THEOSOPHY AND TSA FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. As for the disposition of assets in the future if TSA ceases to exist it is to be transferred to the Theosophical Investments Trust. While I do not see this happening in the near future it is a possibility in 20-30 years from now. If this were to happen then you will be faced with a Trust with multi-million dollar assets all over the country whose trustees are answerable to no one and can do anything they want so long as it is legal. Also in this eventuality no one may be able to know what is going on inside the trust as the trustees have no obligation to disclose any information to any one including members of TSA. As far as I know changes to the bylaws were developed with very little input from membership and officers of Lodges and study centers which indeed are the entities affected by these. Nor was there any public discussion or deliberation of the problems and solutions thereof. While all of us agree about the objectives far reaching changes such as those proposed should be made after careful deliberation with extensive field input as it affects the members and the lodges in the field. So I urge you to say NO to all changes. Then a national commission can be appointed to come up with changes which will meet the objectives to which we all agree. This commission should get all the input and ideas it can from members and officers of lodges branches and study centers and discuss all of them in an open forum. The commission can also have open hearings to get inputs. Then the commission can come up with a workable set of changes to the bylaws which we all can approve. If you want to contact me on any of the items discussed above I can be reached at 1-800-615-1710 during days and 1-800-693-3365 any other time including evenings and weekends. With regards Yours fraternally M. K. Ramadoss CPA ==========================end of message================= From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 19:26:34 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey >TO: Jerry Hejka-Ekins: > Thanks for your comments/interpretation of Brant Jackson's letter -- > I wish more people were concerned with logical fallacies. > >>JHE: >> I have stated many times before on theos-l that the main >> points of Bailey's teachings come from ES material extant between >> 1912 and 1918. Almost none of this has ever been published >> except some that is in CWL's books which some readers assume was >> stolen from Bailey. This may seem like trivia but I think it >> is very relevant to your question because ES members are in fact >> warned about Bailey. But for the general membership who are not >> in the ES the TS cannot dictate what they can or cannot study. >> On the other hand ES members are responsible to keep Lodges on >> the "right track." See how this makes for problems? > >"... the main parts of Bailey's teachings come from ES material extant >between 1912 and 1918. Almost none of this has ever been published >except some that is in CWL's books ..." > >That rather takes the thread into a conversational cul-de-sac does it not? >Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? > >About 18 months ago you had an interesting series of conversations with >Arvind Kumar regarding the Bailey teachings but I don't recall reading >anything "from the ES perspective." Most of the posts seemed to be focussed >on the potential for cross-referencing the Bailey material with "standard" >Theosophical texts rather than discussing the ideas themselves. note: my >only access to theos-l at that time was by Compu$erve and the list server >charges quickly grew out of hand. I signed off shortly thereafter and >subscribed again through a different channel only a short time ago. If you >or someone could direct me to the archives section where you earlier >posted re: Bailey and the ES I would appreciate it. > >Jim > >PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of those >unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the Tibetan Djwhal >Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from cyberspace. : > I am surprised by all this furore over Alice Bailey and always have been. Why do Theosophists need protecting from her? Are we not urged to develop our discrimination so that we can tell what is real and what isn't? I have read some of her stuff and really enjoyed it and taken out of it what I felt was relevant to myself. I also study SD and do the same there. As you all know I am a de Purucker fan just now and when I have read him who will be next? If I wander up a mental side road by reading queer things I have every confidence I will return to the main path again wiser than before I did a little detour. Detours can add to our knowledge of the landscape even if we spend a whole lifetime in the bypass. When we have digested our detour in devachan then we come back and continue on our path once more. If Theosophy was not so protective of their right to be the only organization who can decide who speaks on behalf of our Elder Brothers we all might live in peace together and let all of us pursue our individual studies under their umbrella. If we can develop our inner knowing I am sure guidance from within will sooner or later put us back on the right road. Who is to say that people who study A B will be less spiritual at the end of it than someone who studies Besant and Leadbeater? From what I can see the majority of branch members do not study the SD anyway because it is too hard for them. Why not allow them to get their sustenance from sources they can understand and if that turns out to be A B so what? Next incarnation they may be ready to investigate the SD. Since trying to come to grips with our cosmogony I have readjusted my time scales to a much wider framework and see much of the disagreements and disputes being caused by a small timeframe of this 'life time' only. From a wider perspective it doesn't matter because we all get where we are going when we are ready to get there. We are still coping with the 5th race ideas in the 4th round of globe D. There are eons ahead to travel our paths on so why get hung up on such silly issues in this little lifetime? I like to read what is around that pertains to my path and if I don't agree with some of it I just leave it and get on with what I can understand and that appeals to my present level of understanding. Maybe next time around I might understand Quantum Physics properly because I am intrigued by it but not having that sort of mind this time it is hard to do more than skim the surface. I believe that what we set in motion this lifetime will come to fruition in a later one so I am content to develop the intense interest required and to build on that next time. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 19:30:24 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: by-law vote --PART.BOUNDARY.0.427.mail06.mail.aol.com.818659822 Content-ID: <0_427_818659823@mail06.mail.aol.com.13403> Content-type: text/plain The following is the complete text of the letter to the American Theosophist from Gerda Thompson on the matter of the by-law changes being voted on. I hope this time it gets on because if it does not she may assualt me with a broccoli stalk Chuck Cosimano --PART.BOUNDARY.0.427.mail06.mail.aol.com.818659822 Content-ID: <0_427_818659823@mail06.mail.aol.com.13404> Content-type: text/plain; name="GERDAT.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0D Sep 1995 AT Letter to the Editor =0D Dear Fellow TSA Members: =0D I would like to start this by reminding you that the TSA is a democratic = non-profit membership organization. The power and responsibility in the c= onducting of our affairs rests in each and everyone of us to know what is= going on at our Administrative Headquarters - Olcott. And to hold our e= lected Board of Directors accountable for their omissions as well as acti= ons. =0D Did you know that this latest round of By Law revisions began two years a= go? That just a year ago a very small number of members were informed th= at major changes to the By Laws were being contemplated? Some at the inst= igation of the International Society? Why wasn't the general membership i= nformed of these vital matters and denied the opportunity to contribute= their ideas and suggestions? We have an "official members' magazine" - T= he American Theosophist. Why wasn't this vehicle used to informed the mem= bership? If not a special letter sent to every member? =0D I know the general reasoning the Board will state why these comprehensive= by-law revisions were kept virtually secret. That too many people contri= buting their suggestions would make things unwieldy for the three-person = By Law Committee. That the goal of these revisions changed over time from= being a simple clean-up-job to the major undertaking it evolved into. Th= at the changes instigated at the International level weren't complete unt= il last Dec's General Council meeting in Adyar. These reasons are NEITHER VALID NOR JUSTIFIED in my opinion from keeping the general memb= ership informed of the status of the By Law Committee's work! =0D Now that the general membership is being informed another question raises= its head. Why the rush in voting? There will only be two AT issues out b= efore the voting is completed. Now that we have or will have a copy of= the proposed by-laws don't they warrant a serious consideration? Remembe= r this is the product of two years work by people who have put in much ti= me and effort with personal sacrifices. =0D Again I know the basic line of reasoning the Board will take. They will = say that as some of the changes have to do with electing the Board and as= next year is our triennial elections that these changes must be put in = place for that. This is nonsense! We can have our election operating unde= r the present system. This present system works very well and I don't see= how the welfare of the TSA would be unduly compromised by using the "ol= d rules" another time. =0D In fairness to the By Law Committee and to the TSA membership I would pro= pose that the vote on the revised By Laws be postponed until next Fall. B= esides the changes effecting the election of the Board there are two subs= tantive issues [items 09 and 17] that will have an enormous impact on the = individual member and the organizational structure. These are two very se= rious issues and can't be handled casually. A postponement would give all= the members ample time to talk among themselves at Study Center Branch = and Federation meetings. Also that the Annual Meeting for 1996 be devoted= to discussing the By Laws and TSA policies in general as we prepare to e= nter the 21st Century. =0D If a postponement of the referendum is not forthcoming then especially b= ecause of the critical nature of [9] and [17] which I will outline below= I urge you to VOTE NO ON ALL THE ITEMS. The rational and justification= for [9] and [17] is vague and tenuous in some parts and completely lack= ing in others. =0D [9] By Law 04 Section 09 Termination of Membership Adyar has asked for this inclusion in our By Laws referring to Internatio= nal Rule 9. To my knowledge this is the first time that an expulsion clau= se would be included in our By Laws. Approximately ten years ago a Board = member prior to the Annual Meeting proposed something similar which was s= o strenuously rejected by the members and at the Annual Meeting that it n= ever came up for a vote. I have asked for background and reasoning for th= is item but have received none. I also asked what criterion would be use= d and who is to formulate it? Again all I got was silence! I proposed th= at a parameter of conduct be included in the By Law which was also reject= ed. If no clear guidelines are established the reasons for "termination" = could readily change over time because of the rotation on and off the Boa= rd. This means that the reasons for excommunication could easily degenera= te into personality and/or political differences. The need for a two-thir= ds Board vote doesn't necessarily protect a member from this contingency.= I strongly urge you to VOTE NO ON ITEM [9]! =0D [17] By Law 09 Section 03 Lodge Organization The second paragraph of this section begins "Each lodge shall be a fully= autonomous body...". If this is truly the case then why is [17] being p= roposed? Financial autonomy is just as important as philosophical autonom= y. I know that there have been a few difficulties in the past but when I= asked for explanations all I got were these general statements: 01 prot= ection for legal official? members when factions occur; and 02 to stop= a local group from unilaterally wanting to withdraw from the TSA and do = something else or affiliate with another organization and use the lodge f= unds. These two types of problems can be handled without the TSA taking o= ver financial control of all the Branches. Even without this clause there= is nothing stopping a Branch from asking for nor the TSA from offering t= o help with any financial transactions. It all hinges on the phrase "suc= h consent not to be unreasonably withheld". Point d states that the TSA= has legal recourse for enforcing this. But what remedy does a Branch hav= e if they feel that TSA consent has been unreasonably withheld? Can a Bra= nch especially those which are incorporated have legal recourse also? T= he way this whole item has been written the TSA if they so choose can h= ave a strangle-hold over a Branches' finances. And through the finances c= an influence both collectively and individually the Branches philosophica= l autonomy. I strongly urge you to also VOTE NO ON ITEM [17]! =0D The general direction of the Theosophical Society in American our offici= al policies are the responsibility of the members to formulate and the B= oard of Directors to execute. Think about the impact this version of the = By Laws will have on the future growth and prosperity of the TSA. Will it= be beneficial or detrimental? If a postponement of the By Law referendum= is not forthcoming I again urge you to VOTE NO on all nineteen items bu= t most especially [9] and [17]! =0D Fraternally yours Gerda J. Thompson --PART.BOUNDARY.0.427.mail06.mail.aol.com.818659822-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 22:43:30 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: To Eldon Ann: >The arrogance >I refer to is the inability of any organization to admit that their >lack of membership may lie with the organization's attitudes and >techniques. I am suggesting that there may be highly advanced people >out there who perhaps through no fault of their own haven't got a >clue as to how to proceed after they get their membership card. >Failing to find a niche in the organization they drop out and join >something else. What do do after joining? This is the important question that comes up again and again. We can provide people with books and hold study classes but what do we really give them *to do*? They could become lodge presidents and hold classes for others but what if they are ready for more than reading books? When someone wants something more that person can come up with a self-devised approach to the Path. This is difficult though and not a likely thing. It's more likely that anyone doing so is simply "remembering" an approach taught them in a previous lifetime. More likely people will leave theosophical groups to find a teacher and practice. The techniques of theosophical groups are based upon teaching the basic philosophical ideas. The teachings stop short of actual spiritual practice and training and are theoretical. The highest person in a theosophical group may be a pundit but not a guru. If this is the goal of theosophical groups then they are successful. If we were to expect more of them then we could say that they fall short. The arrogance would come in I think when people active in theosophical groups would claim that *this is the highest there is*. That is when they claim that there are no higher practices training or approaches to the Path other than the study of books in theosophical lodges. >If we state that they all must be a bunch of no-good no-account >lower consciousness slobs because they don't join up or stay is >throwing all the responsibility on them. Perhaps some people feel insecure in their theosophical studies and need the external validation of seeing others universally acquire membership cards and profess their belief? If one is uncertain about the philosophy the sight of others rejecting it would be a blow. One would be inclined to put those people down rather than question one's own beliefs. People don't of course reject Theosophy simply by quitting a theosophical group. Not anymore than someone rejects the idea of gravity when quitting a local community college and no longer taking introductory courses in physics there. The important question which you and many of us raise is: what do we give people to do when they've joined our theosophical groups? And how can we improve over what we currently offer? Let's move beyond potatoe-chip spirituality and see if we can cook up a full meal for people... -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 23:00:18 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Alan: > [writing to Ann]: >Of course God does not and cannot have a sexual identity yet >the language which supposes this persists and those like >myself who protest are either ignored or insulted though not >insulted on theos-l. According to our theosophical textbooks the separation into sexes happened in an earlier race and will one day in the distant future end. It is a temporary experience. We as human Monads are not male or female but simply human. The being whose existence brings about our world a being which might be called "God" is sexless. Sexual differences are like other patterns of personality; they are psycho-physical. They are among those specific attributes taken on in a particular lifetime. We will never directly know the "God" whose life energies create our world. That being bears a relationship to us akin to the relationship that we bear to our lifeatoms or Skandhas. What we relate to and know are gods and goddesses. These are the Dhyani-Chohans the highest beings in our system. They establish the laws of nature and spiritual superstructure of the world. While male and female are polarizations of our physical body and temporary constructs masculine and feminine are universal qualities that things can take on. We can have a male or female deity. They are male or female not because of physical form but because of representing a masculine or feminine quality. Shiva for instance would be male and Shakti female. What we will find in the future I think is that as physical gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities without regard to the size of their nose the color of their eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 10 Dec 1996 23:40:28 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey Jerry H-E: >I do remember mentioning the ES connection during those conversations >and receiving a long response from Eldon Tucker questioning >whether or not I should discuss "classified" ES material on a >public forum. I don't usually repost things but it's been about two years and the subject is important. Since you brought up the subject and my original posting isn't too long I'm reposting it for the new people on the list: -- Eldon >From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM >Subject: ethics and confidential materials A comment of Jerry H-E's got me thinking about the ethics of having other people's confidential materials. Here are my thoughts. ---- An interesting ethical question for us to consider confidential materials. Is it ever right to possess and study materials belonging to other people materials that were considered confidential and not entrusted to oneself? Does the right to possess and to utilize the materials depend solely upon how they were acquired or are their certain ethical principles involved that are independent of anything one may have agreed to? Are there certain principles that are right to follow regardless of whether we can be sanctioned or found at fault by others? Say that we've found a photocopy of someone's diary in a trash bin or perhaps in a folder at a used bookstore. Is it okay to freely use it without the writer's permission? What is a fair use of the materials in these circumstances? One of us may have materials of the Esoteric School of Theosophy an organization associated with the Adyar Theosophical Society. We all may come across materials in bookstores or from friends. How do we handle them? When we have materials where their owner intends to keep them secret and it is clearly known that those entrusted with the materials are sworn to secrecy does it matter if we came into possession of them through an round-about way? For us to obtain something like the Adyar E.S. materials someone had to intentionally or inadvertently break their trust with the organization to allow the materials to come into our hands. Are we ethically bound to keep them secret or can we say that because we've made no specific pledge to do so that we are free to reveal them at our own discretion? I would say that there is a karmic responsibility to the person whom betrayed the secrecy and that we may add to their bad karma and make some for ourselves depending upon how we handle the situation. It is not a cut-and-dry situation where a blanket rule can be made. But when we read materials meant to be secret and talk about them we are in a delicate situation one where we could possible do harm. I'm not trying to make a case that the Adyar E.S. secrets are especially esoteric--except to those who believe in the Besant/Leadbeater variant of Theosophy--but there is a direct analogy to the real Mysteries. Would we reveal their secrets if we were to come across them? There are different degrees of betrayal of a secret. We could join an organization but be unfaithful to our pledges and reveal information entrusted to us. We could secretly copy materials that were not meant for us to see or have. Or we could obtain materials that were lost by their owner or inadvertenly released materials never intended to be let go of and only coming to us due to someone's mistake. It is not always though in the best interest of others that secrets be kept beyond a certain point. Consider the Mahatma Letters. They certainly needed to be secret at the time that they were being written. But by the 1920's things had changed and they were needed to help bring to public attention again the original Theosophy that HPB taught. In our time we have seen similar decisions being made regarding the Point Loma esoteric materials. The higher E.S. materials were published as "The Dialogues of G. de Purucker." Then the first degree E.S. materials were published first by Theosophical University Press revised and edited into a book called "The Fountain-Source of Occultism." They were later printed in nearly the original form of the twelve books by Point Loma Publications. A case could be made that times change and that materials that were meant to be esoteric in one time could be published at a later date. But we are always faced with the question: When does our need to present some materials exceed the right of others to keep it hidden? And is the exposing of the materials a form of our intervention in or interference with the karma of another the karma of the person whose decision or mistake allowed the materials to get into our hands? Maybe the distinction could be made between the theosophical doctrines as presented within the esoteric theosophical groups and the actual Mystery doctrines which come to us through special training or through some form of inner contact or guidance. Perhaps the materials taught in the outer organizations were meant to eventually become public and that is why they were allowed to be written down and given wide distribution. The other secrets of the Mysteries perhaps only come to those whose lips are already sealed against their betrayal. We hear that we are to Know to Dare to Will and to Keep Silent! I think that we are capable of such. I think that we know when we have something that should go unmentioned. And that we will simply forget or lose touch with or never really know those great Truths that we would betray. It is not that we are talking about things that are beyond words just beyond *our* words beyond our right to speak of them. And we will know too when our lips are unsealed and we should share what we have learned. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 01:02:38 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Priests Osmar: Glad to see you here from Brazil. Please contribute your responses when you can on matters discussed here. Also keep us informed of the going ons in Brazil. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 02:26:56 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey > > >BB >>From what I can see the majority of branch members do not study >the SD anyway because it is too hard for them. > >JHE >Too bad because HPB says that the SD is an outline of the >esoteric philosophy. On the other hand she said in the ~Key~ >"To the mentally lazy or obtuse Theosophy must remain a >riddle..." xi. > >BB >Why not allow them to get their sustenance from sources they can >understand and if that turns out to be A B so what? > >JHE >I have no problem with that. But those who claim to understand >the SD because they have read what AAB CWL AB ect. said about >the SD but find the SD itself too difficult to read--then I >think they have a problem. > >I agree with that but the average person that I was talking about isn't likely to get into involved discussions on the SD anyway. They are mostly concerned with their own spiritual growth and trying to get enough information to understand what is being talked about in general in their lodge. If they are 'mentally lazy' then they won't be interested in debating the finer points of theosophy. As Liesel said people learn quickest if they are enthusiastic about what they are reading and if that is A B then I would rather they did that than say 'no no' and give them SD. Sadly many want titilation with their knowledge so while they are going through that stage they will not take on something that takes serious thought. I raved on about de Purucker and how much easier he was to understand to one of our members who I knew was upset at not understanding SD and she took his book out. Two weeks later it was returned and nothing has been said since. As it was one of his larger books it could not have been read in two weeks. If people want to discuss and they say their source is other than SD then of course it is debatable how much store to put on their ideas but even reading SD does not preclude misunderstanding what HPB meant by what she wrote. So it seems to boil down to each persons interpretation of what they have read what ever that may be. On this list debate goes on between persons who are familiar with the same books yet see things differently. That is good for the rest of us as we then have to think about it and decide how we each understand it. This is discrimination at work. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 03:36:46 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Practical Lessons/guidance & Theosophy In theos-l in several msgs in the past a mention was made about the lessons and guidance etc. There is a great interest in the eastern philosophy and practices at the current time. One of the issues that has been of concern to me is about the practical "lessons" that one could try. I have seen some writers in Theosophical Literature mentioning about the dangers of some of the practices in the hands of a rookie who is self guided or guided by person who may not be fully competent. I have indirectly known of two instances where in two individuals came close to losing their mind for rest of this life. So I am very hesitant. In this context I recently saw TSA at Olcott sponsoring a program on Hatha Yoga which specifically mentions guided "pranyama". May be it is a good beginning that TSA embarks upon such programs. May be it is potentially dangerous to the financial health of TSA. Say a participant attends this program for which there is a fee and for some reason or other gets into some psychiatric difficulties what is there to prevent TSA getting sued as the course being the cause of the problem when the lawyers find out about the deep pockets of TSA? I thought I share the above with you all. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 03:54:35 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey > Hi Bee > > I absolutely agree with you. We should be able to read & study > whatever interests us as of the moment if for no other reason than > that we learn best from interesting materials. If it's Alice > Bailey well then it's Alice Bailey. I don't think that should make > a person an outcast if we're really practicing the tolerance that > goes with us all being one brother/sister-hood. I say that in spite of the > fact or maybe because of the fact that I find Besant & Leadbeater > more to my liking. To me they have more substance. But since I'm > asking others who don't like these 02 to stop making snide remarks > about them & to accept me as a believer in Besant/Leadbeater then > by the same token I should be willing to extend the same courtesy to > someone who finds Alice Bailey more to their liking. > Liesel > Member Theosophy International > Member Human Race If we believe what we say we believe in then our approach must be INCLUSIVE not EXCLUSIVE. Personally I do not care for Alice Bailey's writings not because I object to what she says but because I found her too verbose and over the top with blue type ..... just couldn't read it! However if someone else gets on fine with her what is that to me? I have my way; let them have theirs. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 05:04:30 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking RI: >>Arrogance or humility represent an attitude we bring to things. >>[. . .] The idea that the Mahatmas have a body of knowledge >>and that it is more than we know is not arrogant. >But would it be arrogant to talk with apodictic certainty about >living Mahatmas and the authenticity of what one has learned by >means of Them if Their continuing existence were merely someone's >pleasant private belief to begin with? Dictionary time for apodictic: AHD> necessary or demonstratably true incontrovertible The theosophical doctrines include certain key ideas like reincarnation and karma other planes of existance the unity of life and the path of spiritual evolution. This includes the idea of the Masters. There are various ideas about them that are taught us. We can infer more from the literature and from our own thinking. While it's fine to open up to consideration any particular idea found in Theosophy and consider its pros and cons I don't think that the basic ideas are anyone's pleasant private beliefs. The ideas are part of a system of thought and they are interdependent. You could also say the same thing about any of the basic ideas. Perhaps Parabrahm is someone's private belief? Or other planes of existence? Or the unity of life? We come back to the basic question of how we know things. Is it possible for someone to accept Masters as taught by Theosophy as true without personally knowing them? I'd say yes. And the same for the other basic doctines. >I suppose however that capitalizing *Belief* in this case >would justify the forging of such an unbreakable chain of >Authority for oneself. . . . The chain or lineage passes from Dhyani-Chohans through the Buddhas Bodhisattvas Mahatmas to lesser gurus coming down ourselves at some point. We can of course believe that there are such higher beings or not. That belief can be qualified with uncertainity where we say "I think this may be true but I'm not sure." Or the belief may be based upon something we read and dependent upon citations for its support: "I read on page XYZ of 'The Top Secret Doctrine'." But we're entitled to study and believe in as much of Theosophy as we find appealing and to speak our beliefs with conviction. >>I don't think that the Mahatmas are holding back any of their >>knowledge ... >Because you said "*are* holding back" there seems to be a >suggestion of intimacy and insight into Their current >motivations etc. Could it be that this was simply a hasty >verb-tense oversight? I.e. did you really mean the passage to >read something more along these lines: "I don't believe that >the Mahatmas held back any of their knowledge from the public ?due to pride or contempt. Sources suggest that they gave out >as much as they safely could and that many of those fragments >are what we have available in theosophical groups"? I don't think that it's unreasonable to speak in the present tense of what the Masters may be doing. To do so does not mean that I have to be intimate with them to know them personally. This would be especially true in the case of things which they have always done things not likely to change in a few generations. In "The Mahatma Letters" they talk about not giving out the secrets of occult science to the public and about how would-be students need to come to them or settle for crumbs. Do you know of anything that would have caused this ages-old approach to change in the past century? -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 05:12:15 GMT From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: Updated Holistic www pages Hi Updated www pages Holistic - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/maininfo.html Esoteric - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/esopsych.html Auras - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/auras.html Meditation - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/service.html Peace & Light Patrick From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 05:14:29 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Beginner's list JM: >My vote for "the book that should be placed in the hands of everyone >especially beginners in Theosophy" is BE HERE NOW by Ram Dass. I applaud your choice Jim. It was placed in my hands when I was in college by a very dear friend of mine who also introduced me to Bucky Fuller and Kahlil Gibran. - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 05:17:47 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Jerry S: >>You make a good point here that we should be responsive to someone's >>*intent* and not what they literally say. If someone is wanting >>sympathy and a shoulder to cry on the appropriate reply would be >>different than if they were seeking to understand *why* something >>happened. >This is exactly the point that I tried to make awhile back >about the necessity for at least some psychism. The only way to >know how to really help a person is to be able to look into his/her >heart and sense what is wrong and what the real need is. To truly know a person and look into their heart requires empathy a direct-connectedness that resides in Buddhi. We need to put ourselves in that person's place by realizing how we are connected with that person. Using psychism looking at their physical appearance listening to what they say we can gather *external clues* to what is going on. But it's in our direct experience of oneness with the other person in which we really know what is needed. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 06:30:56 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Titillation BB: >As Liesel said people learn quickest if they >are enthusiastic about what they are reading and if that is A B then I would >rather they did that than say 'no no' and give them SD. Sadly many want >titilation with their knowledge so while they are going through that stage >they will not take on something that takes serious thought. I was intrigued by the meaning of the word titillation in regard to esoteric material and spiritual growth so I consulted my robot dictionary and found this interesting quote. It also suggests that one would have to keep "titillating" the readers or they will go elsewhere. Although I read and like CWL that reminds me of him and his more fantastic writings. Titillation To excite another especially in a superficial pleasurable manner: "Once you decide to titillate instead of illuminate . . . you create a climate of expectation that requires a higher and higher level of intensity" Bill Moyers. The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 06:43:47 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy In a recent post one writes: < One gets the impression that perfection lies on the side of any theosophic organization and there are so many swine out there that it is useless to throw them a handful of pearls . . . . . . Could it be that there could be some faults within the organizations that convey theosophy?> ABSOLUTELY. This is the point and the problem we desparately need to address. From observing the posts here it is becoming painfully clear that Theosophical Organizations are problematic and really need to be re-thought. Let me also state that I am not never have been and probably never will be a member of the or any T.S. But let's approach the issue of the organization from a different angle. Like neighborhoods cities states and nations these organizations are composed of individuals. Any reform must begin with individuals. We cannot lament the failings of an organization if we do nothing ourselves to make the situation better. We must conduct ourselves according to the highest and best we know. Throw off the fetters of the organization and act individually to remedy the problems we see. Walk away and do your own good trying to figure out how to make Theosophy more nutritious. The only real purpose of the organization is to provide a forum for students to learn from each other by the exchange of ideas and experiences to help one another. To the extent that this is not occuring get rid of it. My hearty congratulations to those expelled members and sections for a job well done. Theosophy exists independent of the T.S. or any other body and most fail to realize this. It is the mutual sympathy of thought existing among Theosophists which binds them together. When studying in ernest help is never far away. And if we each acted according to the spirit and philosophy of the teachings more would be drawn to and stay with Theosophy being the most undiluted statement of the Ancient Wisdom >> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 06:45:11 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Several have requested recommendations for a simpler statement of the philosophy sources which are not so daunting. Here are my recommendations: UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A wonderful "primer" for the any student and the book that was handed to me first 15 years ago. LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME by Wm Q. Judge. A collection of letters by Judge to students comprising a warm wise and practical approach to Theosophy. THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Wm Q. Judge. A summary of the SD in very readable language and an amazingly small book. Gets to the heart of the matter. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A great companion to the Ocean All are available from the Theosophy Company 245 W. 33rd St. Los Angeles CA 90007 213 748-7244 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 06:49:25 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy BB: >There is no hurry and some people learn through devotion rather than through the >intellect. I don't really expect to see devotional people in Theosophy as it >appeals to the intellect and promotes the wisdom as knowledge to the >intellect and then for intellectual people the devotion comes later. We all >start a various levels and types of spiritual pursuits. This would go back to the fact that people have different rays in their natal charts. The personality with a majority of 6th ray planets would be more devotional. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the LCC and other devotional services were created and still attended. Those with a majority of 5th ray would tend to be intellectual and perhaps feeling superior suggest that other do not need rituals or devotion. Everyone has his own path and his own collection of rays to deal with. God bless us - every one. - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 07:02:41 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Father/Mother God In response to the question about my use of male language referring to the deity: I don't remember doing so other than in a quote. But of course I deplore the envisioning of divinity in male terms and don't even find monotheism appealing. What I was getting at in the post "God loves you" is that there is truth in this phrase that can be accepted even within the framework of Theosophical pantheism-- which is really where the Cayce readings come down on the issue. God is used as synonymous with "the Creative Forces." Of course Cayce's lifelong study of the Bible influenced the language of the readings and often God is called a Father therein. But here's an exception: Father-Mother-God! In Thy mercy in Thy love be Thou the guide just now as I seek in humility and in earnestness to present that which may give my fellow man [uh-oh] a better and more perfect insight into the love which was manifested by Jesus my Lord and my God. Help Thou O God my every effort. 849-76 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 09:17:14 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: AT Early Winter Issue Hi I just received it. Hope all of you have received it. FYI. .doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 10:34:27 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Members-at-large and interent > ... I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 > or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and > learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am > a member at large and except for computer networking have > not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with > others. > > Jerry S. > YES! Finally a way to link members who don't have access to a local group. I too live to far from the nearest group in Atlanta to attend programs as often as I would like. I love being able to "discuss" theosophy or even just vicariously participate in discussions while lurking as frequently as I choose -- which is nearly every day! Lewis llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 10:44:32 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Dark night of the soul Jerry S. wrote: >... The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul > is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at > some point in which the human mind eventually > comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never > allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. I thought of it more as the anguish one feels now I see I am speaking at the emotional level while you are addressing our mental state over the separation which occurs as we strike out away from the group we have been traveling with for many lifetimes. Lewis llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 11:31:13 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Rituals are a way of reaching the Unconscious. Actually Bee I'm writing because I'd like to know what town you're in. I was telling my friend who lives North of Brisbane Australia about you & she wanted to know & I couldn't tell her. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 11:39:42 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Abyss I've several times in my life jumped over abysses & landed safely on the other side. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 11:50:08 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: God loves you Re God being male At one point in my introspection not too many years ago I realized that because I wanted to be among the best & brightest I modeled myself to all male role models. I thought of female role models as being inferior. It's very easy to do the way this civilisation is set up. When I was little I whistled climbed trees & played punch ball with the boys in my apartment house. Liesel Member Theosophy international Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:07:03 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: by-law vote Dear Gerda Thompson I think you've got a real good idea. Instead of railroading these by-laws through now in such a short time there should be more time to discuss them & we could vote on them lateron. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:30:12 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: The Abyss Eldon: >Is the term "abyss" meant to imply a "dark night of the soul" >experience for those that cross it? Then it would be akin to >the western experience of transcending the personality of >rising to the pure experience of unqualified consciousness. They are different but similar thing. The Abyss is an objective "place" in the invisible worlds around us. It is the demarcation line between the upper three cosmic planes arupa and the lower four rupa. The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at some point in which the human mind eventually comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. Technically the Abyss marks the end or beginning of the Ego not the ego/personality which is limited to the 3rd plane. Thus the Abyss stands just above the Reincarnating Ego and just below the atma. >It would be more like a "sweet melting" leading >to a sense of "eternal delight" rather than a "dive into >the dark unknown" or a "shattering". It is "eternal delight" to atmic consciousness but the Abyss is a "dark unknown" of incoherence and insanity e.g. the unconscious to the ego/personality. It is exactly what the ego sees when it faces the unconscious in Jungian terms. Not a pretty sight because the ego sees its own death within. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:30:15 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Classic Meditation >If I may add a bit from de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy. >"Do you know there is a way of living in thought rather than in thoughts. > This illustrates the dual action of the manasic >faculty the lower and the higher manas." >This strikes me as coming about through meditation for one and when this >state is operating even on and off then knowledge takes on a new meaning. >It rises above personal likes and dislikes and then theosophy in its purer >form becomes a part of us and is able to influence our inner self. >Bee Brown Member Theosophy International The classic meditation given in Tibetan Buddhism for this is to watch each of your thoughts drift through your mind. Then try to concentrate on the tiny space in between where one thought ends and another begins. This space is empty like the sky and is exactly what Purucker is talking about. Thanks for the quote Bee. Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:30:18 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Newbies Ann: >I've also wondered if long-time members view newcomers with a certain amount of >suspicion wondering if they'll try to change the established order. I get the >impression they are questioning whether the newbie can make the grade stick it >out and keep up with the group. Perhaps suspicion and skepticism regarding >newcomers should be changed to helpfulness and optimism. I have never been suspicious of newbies. Frustrated maybe but not suspicious. I don't expect newbies to "keep up" with some of my discussions. After studying for almost 30 years I would hope that I am able to talk over their heads at some point. While this is probably frustrating to them I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am a member at large and except for computer networking have not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with others. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:30:22 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: One Reason for Psychism Eldon to Alan: >You make a good point here that we should be responsive to someone's >*intent* and not what they literally say. If someone is wanting >sympathy and a shoulder to cry on the appropriate reply would be >different than if they were seeking to understand *why* something >happened. This is exactly the point that I tried to make awhile back about the necessity for at least some psychism. The only way to know how to really help a person is to be able to look into his/her heart and sense what is wrong and what the real need is. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 12:31:34 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Error-Free Theosophy? The idea that HPB was always correct is wrong IMHO. She was usually right but sometimes what got published is wrong and I can't say if she was really aware of the errors or not. For example lets look at the new Inner Group Teachings. On page 180 we read "There are six or seven Nadis or plexuses along the Spinal Cord; but the term "Nadis" is not technical; it is used as descriptive of any knot centre ganlion or similar body" etc. Now as we all know today these lines describe the chakras not the nadis. The chakras are the centers or plexuses. The nadis are their interconnecting channels. The author HPB? never mentions "chakras" here and we must conclude that the terminology used is erroneous and that the author is discussing material that is not all that familiar to him/her. For example the sushumna ida and pingala are described with no mention of the fact that these are the three primary nadis. The paragraph on pages 181 and 182 is all about the horrors of sex on the Path and concludes "Therefore all sexual intercourse is forbidden to the students of Practical Occultism." This conclusion is either right or wrong depending on exactly how we define "Practical Occultism." If this is HPB's brand of theosophy then it is probably true. But if it refers to occultism in general as practiced for centuries in various countries then it is false I give the Tibetan use of a Karmamudra or female partner as only one example. Sexual practices were employed in both Hindu and Buddhist tantras and the tantras are a valid school of occultism. On page 131 we read about the Pratyeka- Buddha the "rhinoceros" who "can never pass beyond the third plane that of Jiva." This is an error and is practically a slander to Theravadin or Hinayanists. The average person is able to explore the "third plane" which is the mental plane the plane of the human mind or manas which contains thoughts and thought-forms. According to Ocean of Nectar by Geshe Gyatso a Mahayanaist these "rhinoceros-like Solitary Realizers" "dwell in spiritual solitude" and so on far above the third plane and the human mind. The very fact that they are Buddhas requires them to have crossed the Abyss into the fifth plane which is where magical schools like the OTO place them. These three examples to me demonstrate a danger in blindly accepting everything read in theosophical literature. The theosophical books were written by human beings and human beings all make mistakes or their publishers do. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:12:03 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: WTYF [Liesel:] >Also a few days ago there was news from the World Theosophical >Youth Federation which is either non-existent or very dormant in the >US. I wish the young people on the mailing list would get in touch >with these guys & get something going in this country. They were >talking about putting a facsimile of their membership applicatiion on >theos-l. I only saw that WTYF was being mentioned once here in theos-l. Having been 'recruited' down in Adyar sic I was a bit sceptical at first. But for a few times now I've received their newsletter called 'The Universal Human Family' and it's really a nice initiative. It may not be much more than a few pages with thoughts written down and greetings offered but it still represents a linking together of young ones around the world. Perhaps when more people are joining some real activities can be undertaken. I *do* find it somewhat formal though with elections taking place for people to take place in an executive committee. Well compared to a group such as here on theos-l ;- So let's see if more material turns up in the coming days. Otherwise if anyone's interested I'll be glad to give the address snail or e-mail of the people in Brazil who are organizing it. /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:13:41 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy [Liesel:] >In the same vein I don't approve of the By-laws revision that says >newcomers have to wait for 02 years to be able to vote. What for? Yeah what for? If I am correct this 2-year wait is necessary as well for joining the E.S. It's like you have to prove yourself a good theosophist or: member first. Isn't it possible that even young people already have their feet planted firmly on the Path perhaps more than age-long members? IMHO it's a person's own responsibility to make the best of it to follow one's Dharma! /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:13:43 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series When it comes to accomplishing one's daily work there is no technique of Magick a period b which has not somewhere along the line been tried by Jerry Schueler c which can turn it into a Picnick d which can produce more success than choosing exactly the right occupation for oneself to begin with. Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:35:25 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: J H-E Bylaws and Bailey Jim: > note: my >only access to theos-l at that time was by Compu$erve and the list server >charges quickly grew out of hand. I signed off shortly thereafter and >subscribed again through a different channel only a short time ago. I had much the same financial problem but decided to stick it out with Compuserve. Recently they dropped all of the charges for internet email and now its all free billing being charged per your time like AOL instead of pay-forums and pay-mail. Just in case you didn't know I suspect that you and others who dropped out are the reason why the charges were dropped here on Compuserve. Thanks. Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:35:33 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon Malcolm: >An observation of mine is about the relatioship bewteen thought and its >translation into words. The observation is that the 'thoughts' are >independent of thier translation into words; that thoughts exists before >thier translation. >Thoughts seam to appear in a whole lump it seems to take time and >concentration to make the transistion into words. I am not not multilingual >so would like input from anyone that is - "Do toughts exist independantly of >the language you are thinking in?". Also there is the experience of 'not >being able to find the word' ie the thought exists before its linguistic >expression. > >I don't know how to analyse this in terms of higher mind / lower mind / >brain etc. Does anywone haeve any input? I prefer to think of it in terms of ideas which are then clothed in thoughts which are then clothed in words. because of all of the clothing disguises we often hear the words but miss the ideas behind them. >Anyway I have used this as a technique of meditation:- to try and stay in >that space where thoughts are thoughts but before they become words. I >found it a very effective way to 'quiet the mind' and gain insites into the >mind's working. Here you will find images. Words are rolled up into thoughts which are rolled up into ideas which are expressed on this level as pure images. Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:35:38 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Bee to Eldon: > I don't really expect to see devotional people in Theosophy as it >appeals to the intellect and promotes the wisdom as knowledge to the >intellect and then for intellectual people the devotion comes later. We all >start a various levels and types of spiritual pursuits. True. I used to wonder why after describing so many gods and goddesses in the literature theosophists were simply ignoring them. Finally I realized the reason is that gods and goddesses are not appealing to the intellect. The polytheism of theosophy is simply another intellectual doctrinal note in a long list of others. In magical schools and in religions we converse with these deities via either prayer or ritual. In theosophy we pretty much ignore them. Bee to Eldon: >There are lots of people who do not see knowledge as an intellectual study >to be their way of spiritual growth. I am one of these. However I do love to read and study. I see this as building the scaffolding so to speak to keep the mind on some kind of sanity track. The human mind requires a structure or pattern of some kind in order to make sense of one's experiences. Without such a "mind map" or intellectual background it is easy to go off the deep end and loose one's perspective completely. The thought "Am I crazy?" must be answered in some way. However it is important to remember that this scaffolding i.e. world view is always subject to change. Bee to Eldon: >Rituals do a lot for devotional people as they relate to spirit in that way. >Rituals also get imbued with certain vibrations that these people can use in >their meditations and can be felt by sensitive people. Sometimes rituals are >what opens them to the spiritual life and then they have to discover which >way is the best for them to follow. There are formal conscious and informal unconscious rituals that we can conduct. If anyone thinks that they never do rituals then they are simply done unconscious as every psychologist knows. Most Buddhist meditations try to employ the body speech and mind together. Thus these yogic meditations are really rituals. Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 13:35:41 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy > Ten minutes of reading ten hours of thought and ten days of >meditating is the recipe for producing the Wisdom you can't share but the >smile you can. . . . > >Richard Ihle This is a great quote. Is it ok if i use this? Thanks Jerry S. Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 14:43:35 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Theosophy on Internet How to Subscribe to the Theosophy mail lists on Internet. The five Theosophy lists are: THEOS-L - General Theosophy discussions. This is the main list. THEOS-BUDS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-ROOTS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-NEWS - For posting news and announcements about Theosophical events and activities. THEOS-SPAN - For the benefit of Spanish Speaking members. How to log on get on the Theosophy lists. Send an e-mail message to the following address. LISTSERV@VNET.NET In the body of the message type just this line: subscribe If you have any questions please feel free to write to me by e-mail at: > From Internet 726621335@compuserve.com > From Compuserve 726621335 Don DeGracia Posted by ramadoss@eden.com. If you have any questions please send a msg by e-mail to ramadoss@eden.com The person who coordinates the above lists is John E Mead. If you have any questions please send e-mail to John at jem@vnet.net Please print this message and distribute copies to your lodge branch or study center or anyone else who may be interested. Participation and exchange of views ideas comments by more individuals who are interested in Theosophy whether they be members or not of any Theosophy group is what is going to make these mail list very useful and helpful to everybody. ---------------------end of message-------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:02:45 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy >From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy >Eldon to Alan: >>You make a good point here that we should be responsive to someone's >>*intent* and not what they literally say. If someone is wanting >>sympathy and a shoulder to cry on the appropriate reply would be >>different than if they were seeking to understand *why* something >>happened. > > This is exactly the point that I tried to make awhile back >about the necessity for at least some psychism. The only way to >know how to really help a person is to be able to look into his/her >heart and sense what is wrong and what the real need is. > > Jerry S. That's exactly what I tried to say in a different way yesterday I think it was. You can never tell why another person is acting the way they do. It might seem terrible but there might be a very good inner reason. So we should be tolerant. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:08:20 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey RE: Alice A. Bailey following discussion of chapter expulsion: >JHE >Indeed it does take "the thread into a conversational cul-de-sac" >when I make a statement that cannot be backed with evidence. But >what evidence can I reasonably be expected to offer to back up >this statement? I can't think of any. To continue with your post no I am not a member of the ES and so the citations are not necessary. That really wasn't my point however -- whether or not the AAB writings are "based" in ES material doesn't seem especially significant. Both Alice and Foster Bailey were TSA members after all. What does seem significant to me is the validity or lack thereof of the ideas presented. JHE >[re: Man Whence How and Whither] ... and I think you will >discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy already >outlined. Fair enough and thanks for the reference. But this doesn't address the question of rightness does it? I was never clear in your earlier discussions with Arvin on your position with respect to AAB "neo-theooosophy" Saraydarian etc. excepting CWL. >JM >>Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? > >JHE >I wish I could. Reasons are not given that I know of. My guess >is that the Arcane school is regarded as a rival organization. I wish someone could. : I supect you're right about the perceived "rivaly." Most likely there's also a bit of resentment on the part of the TS regarding the Tibetan's assertion that the TS had drifted from its original intention to something of a personality cult ~1930 and a training ground for probationary disciples. That seems like the sort of thing that could ruffle feathers. RE: Eldon's point on discussing ES material as recounted: that's a good point. The Bailey texts are published materials however so it may be possible to look for a "fit" within theosophy. On the other hand I can remember some particularly pointed discussions on here regarding CWLeadbeater and he was accepted within Theosophy sort of anyway by most at least for a time. Would this be an improper forum for the discussion? RE: JHE's discussion w/ Arvin: >JM >Most of the posts seemed to be focussed on the potential for >cross-referencing the Bailey material with "standard" >Theosophical texts rather than discussing the ideas themselves. > >JHE >Yes. That is as far as we were able to get. We agreed that >HPB's writings predated AAB's and that AAB considered her >writings to be extensions of HPB's. Therefore we agreed that it >would be reasonable to compare AAB's ideas to HPB's and check for >consistency. But before we got into the examination of the >ideas Arvind admitted that his real agenda was to win disciples >for AAB not to examine the writings.. Ah I remember that now. I'm not sure it is entirely accurate to say Arvin was looking "to win disciples for AAB" but I think I get your point. RE: your offer to upload the 1.3Meg file -- thanks but I could probably locate the original posts on a disk if necessary. You did jog my memory on the ending of your discussion and besides you answered my earlier question re: the ES position on AAB. >JM >PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of >those unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the >Tibetan Djwhal Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from >cyberspace. : > >JHE >I would be very interested in those ideas and would defend VERY >LOUDLY your right to post them. I did not expect anyone would question "the right" to post re: AAB but I'm still wondering if this would be an improper forum. There is not a lot of Saraydarian material posted on here for example though he is generally regarded as a theosophical writer. I was introduced to the AAB texts by friends in the Austin chapter of the TS in my college days '70s. The Austin group was highly polarized along generational lines and the younger set also accepted the Bailey texts. The Austin group doesn't appear on the chapter list anymore but I do not know when or why they faded. In one sense I suppose the Bailey influence has been devisive since the TSA split in the early '20s. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:10:21 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey Dear Jim I wish you would put on Alice Bailey's 07 new ideas. It might start a good discussion & I dare anyone to expel you from cyberspace. They won't. You might get an argument. That's all. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:25:18 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Newbies At 053700 PM 12/11/95 -0500 Jerry S wrote: >suspicious. I don't expect newbies to "keep up" with some of my >discussions. After studying for almost 30 years I would hope that I >am able to talk over their heads at some point. While this is >probably frustrating to them I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >a member at large and except for computer networking have >not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with >others. In the very early days of TS when there were very few written publications the members were having a difficult time getting information on various Theos* subjects. Reading your appreciation of theos-l and how it would have helped you if it were there I see an analogy. I truly believe Internet and the international access to theos-l is the next quantum leap and we Theosophists should make full use of it no matter what the organized entities/TS Organizations think about it or how they have reacted to it. I am very objective about this whole thing. How many times have you seen any of the elected/appointed officials at the national or regional level have ever posted any messages here. It is either due to illiteracy on their part or their indifference or what other reason they only know. As I pointed out in a msg some time back let us all put ourself in the seat of HPB and imagine how she would have used Internet as a means of attracting the attention of the world to the Theosophical ideas. It may give us some creative ideas. I have always felt that JEM and any one else who took the initiative to put the theos-xxxx together have done all of us a great favor and our gratitude is due to all of them. ...doss > > Jerry S. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:28:08 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws & Bailey At 101100 PM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: >Liesel: >>Dear Jim >>I wish you would put on Alice Bailey's 07 new ideas. >>It might start a good discussion & I dare anyone to expel you from >>cyberspace. They won't. You might get an argument. That's all. > >I second the request. > >- ann bermingham > add my name to it. it does not matter what I personally think about anybody's ideas. let each look at the ideas and decide for themselves. are we not grown up to intelligently look and learn and decide for ourselves? ...doss > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:33:12 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: by-law vote At 051000 PM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: >Dear Gerda Thompson > >I think you've got a real good idea. Instead of railroading these >by-laws through now in such a short time there should be more time to discuss them & we >could vote on them lateron. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > do your really think anyone out there is thinking about thinking thru this whole issue of railroading. their single thought at least to me is how quickly we can get this thru and implement all that the new bylaws empowers them to do. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:45:10 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale At 044800 PM 12/5/95 -0500 Ruben wrote: > >A memo from Brant Jackson on Proposed By-Law revisions: > >MEMO: To Members of the Atlanta Lodge >From: Brant Jackson >Subject By-Law revisions > > I have been asked by Louise Bromley to review the letter which >Sy Ginsburg President of the Miami Branch circulated to various Lodges >and individual members of the T.S. with regard to the proposed revisions >of the By-Laws. As a practicing attorney and member of the National >Judiciary Committee I am familiar with the By-Laws and the events out >of which these proposed revisions arose. I have also had an opportunity >to talk with John Algeo today with regards to my concerns. I would >therefore respond to Louise Bromley's request for my opinions and >responses to Mr. Ginsburg's stated concerns as follows: Imagine a case in which relatively new members constitute the >voting majority of a lodge's membership and also control the Board of >Directors. The lodge has real property and other assets worth many >hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Board of Directors and a majority > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ of the lodge members acting under the influence of several powerful ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >members vote to sell the real property for the financial benefit of the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >individual lodge members i.e. to give each member a pro-rata share of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >sale proceeds. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > The Lodge has not dissolved but remains a viable corporation to >the transfer upon dissolution provisions of the By-Laws are not >violated. While this is in violation of the tax laws the I.R.S would >not find out for a long time and at best might merely revoke the >corporation's tax exempt status and tax each member upon the distribution >of the sale proceeds each received. > I think all Theosophists would see such an act as violating the >trust under which the property was given to that lodge and all the >ideals of Theosophy as well. While offensive to us all many of us would >think that the chances of it actually happening would be highly unlikely >if not impossible. This scenario however actually happened recently ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >with the Boston Lodge which sold its building and has happened a ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >number of times in other lodges across the world. > <> Some very interesting statements coming from Brant Jackson. Would he or any one in the administration at Olcott share facts and details of the Boston Lodge sale? All of us who are members of the TSA would be interested to know. In addition in his letter of 192811 1995 to the Lodges and Study Groups TSA National President states: "...the facts about some past disagreements over property in this country and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ abroad are not correctly stated in Sy's letter. The accounts in that letter are ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ simplistic and skewed versions of matters that were very complex and do not correspond ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ with the facts as far as I know them." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There are various reasons why the facts should be laid out in full. Many of us do deal on a daily basis with very very complex matters. Let us not underestimate the abilities of the participants here. Hence many many here can fully comprehend and understand any complex matter if all the facts surrounding them are made available. Why not post them here for everybody to see? Secondly if the Boston Lodge does indeed sell the property and individual members were personally and financially benefitted then let us know the facts openly and fully. Individuals have gone to prison for conversion of tax exempt property and assets for personal use or benefit. As law abiding citizens it is our duty to report any law breakers. Has any report been filed with IRS? If no such report of violation of tax laws has been made by those who know the "facts" the question is why they have not done so? One wonders? There are e-mail addresses to IRS and messages can be sent 24 hours a day and these individuals are very high officials who can initiate quick action. Lack of easy and free availability of facts and information on situations quoted/described as above leaves very low level of credibility of the statements made. Statements and conclusions fully supported by facts have a high degree of credibility on their own. Credibility of entities - individuals organizations nations etc are not created overnight; it is gradually built over a time. And once credibility is lost it can never be regained. Let us lay on the table all the facts on the situations cited above in support of the revision of bylaws. If the facts are convincing then it will generate a lot of support for the changes. If on the other hand if there is non response silence will speak for itself. And each one of us can draw our own conclusion why no one who has the knowledge of the facts is not speaking. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:52:48 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: theos-l rev From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:56:24 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Internet According to a recent poll 85% of the Internet users are below the age of 45 years. This is where the younger people are. One more pointer where we can reach people and have theosophical information available to those willing to use it. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 15:59:43 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: theos-l Hi Looks everthing very normal. Very quick distribution of messages. Appreciate all the good work for the "cause". ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 16:12:38 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy At 073100 PM 12/9/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: > >I want to add on to those comments. ><< clip>> > >As for viewing newcomers with suspicion I'm not sure that it's ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >newcomers & not people who don't belong to the ES. I've gotten it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >too & i've been in for a long time. I always have to prove again & ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >again that I know soemthing about Theosophy. I think it would be ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >great if olsder more seasoned theosophists would be helpful to the >new ones. >I've been trying to do that but what I get from the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Library is "Don't send me anybody new. We have enough to do." That's ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >not very helpful. Maybe they don't have enough money for more staff. >Wel then maybe they could get more volunteers. Responding to inquirers and helping them is their job. If they cannot keep up with it they should bring to the attention to those higher ups who are responsible. If I were you I will keep on refering the inquirers and just ignore any responses like the above and if the inquirers do not get good help in a reasonable time then it is time to see what can be done. As they say the first impression is the most important impression and we cannot lose a single opportunity to introduce a single soul to Theosophy. > >In the same vein I don't approve of the By-laws revision that says >newcomers have to wait for 02 years to be able to vote. What for? > >I hope ther aren't tooo many typing errors on the message. I can >only see the right half of what I'm writing & don't know how to >correct it > >Liesel. Don't worry about any typo's. You are not submitting a English Paper Project in an English Language Class and is worried about the grade!!! ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 16:19:56 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Theosophy on Internet TO: TSA Information/Membership Department It may be a good idea to take a print out of the following Internet instructions and provide it along with other informational documents to inquirers and new members. Humbly submitted for your kind consideration and appropriate action. MK Ramadoss Member TSA San Antonio Lodge Texas How to Subscribe to the Theosophy mail lists on Internet. The five Theosophy lists are: THEOS-L - General Theosophy discussions. This is the main list. THEOS-BUDS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-ROOTS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-NEWS - For posting news and announcements about Theosophical events and activities. THEOS-SPAN - For the benefit of Spanish Speaking members. How to log on get on the Theosophy lists. Send an e-mail message to the following address. LISTSERV@VNET.NET In the body of the message type just this line: subscribe If you have any questions please feel free to write to me by e-mail at: > From Internet 726621335@compuserve.com > From Compuserve 726621335 Don DeGracia Posted by ramadoss@eden.com. If you have any questions please send a msg by e-mail to ramadoss@eden.com The person who coordinates the above lists is John E Mead. If you have any questions please send e-mail to John at jem@vnet.net Please print this message and distribute copies to your lodge branch or study center or anyone else who may be interested. Participation and exchange of views ideas comments by more individuals who are interested in Theosophy whether they be members or not of any Theosophy group is what is going to make these mail list very useful and helpful to everybody. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 16:23:15 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series > > When it comes to accomplishing one's daily work there is no technique of > > Magick a period b which has not somewhere along the line been tried by > > Jerry Schueler c which can turn it into a Picnick d which can produce > > more success than choosing exactly the right occupation for oneself to begin > > with. > > > > Richard Ihle e that will not if spoken about aloud result in your excommunication from Theosophy the immediate seizure and sale of all of your Lodge's property and possessions and the public assertion from Wheaton that this is really a good thing that is only designed to prevent great potential damage. Hi y'all ... am back at least to the degree very scarce time permits. Bumped into Morya during an inner adventure who told me I could burn off all remaining karma from those 17 embarrassing brutal-dictator past lives if I stayed connected to Theosophy for another 02 weeks tee hee - oh yeah ... Morya also told me to give all those who believe Wheaton has finally gone too far and are finally ready to do something about it and have been very busily researching the pragmatic means by which to accomplish the badly-needed transformation the following message: Its time. [I don't know what this means ... perhaps some do -:]. Just kidding. Sort of. Love and giggles -JRC [PS. Sorry for probably being almost instantly irritating again. I took a vow but I guess it didn't help -:]. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 16:32:35 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Members-at-large and interent At 033700 PM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: > >> ... I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 >> or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and >> learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am >> a member at large and except for computer networking have >> not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with >> others. >> >> Jerry S. >> >YES! Finally a way to link members who don't have access to a local >group. I too live to far from the nearest group in Atlanta to >attend programs as often as I would like. I love being able to >"discuss" theosophy or even just vicariously participate in >discussions while lurking as frequently as I choose -- which is >nearly every day! > >Lewis >llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu > Liked your feedback. As the theos-l acts like a buffer so that the poster and recipient does not have to synchronize to communicate with each other cyberspace "lodges" like this is going to be order of the day. However if one needs social interaction then a formal lodge can help. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 17:03:35 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws & Bailey Liesel: >Dear Jim >I wish you would put on Alice Bailey's 07 new ideas. >It might start a good discussion & I dare anyone to expel you from >cyberspace. They won't. You might get an argument. That's all. I second the request. - ann bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 17:11:38 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: JHE and Bailey Bee Brown writes: >JHE >I have no problem with that. But those who claim to understand >the SD because they have read what AAB CWL AB ect. said about >the SD but find the SD itself too difficult to read--then I >think they have a problem. > BB I agree with that but the average person that I was talking about isn't likely to get into involved discussions on the SD anyway. They are mostly concerned with their own spiritual growth and trying to get enough information to understand what is being talked about in general in their lodge. JHE And "what is being talked about in general in their lodge" depends upon what the material the members are attracted to in the first place. When I taught "theosophical doctrine" I always started with Blavatsky because her writings are primary to all of the others including Judge. If I were teaching Platonism I would start with Plato for the same reason. I realize the SD is difficult but with a little guidance I found that students had little or no trouble with the ~Key to Theosophy.~ BB If they are 'mentally lazy' then they won't be interested in debating the finer points of theosophy. As Liesel said people learn quickest if they are enthusiastic about what they are reading and if that is A B then I would rather they did that than say 'no no' and give them SD. JHE I hope Liesel doesn't faint if I say that I agree with her 100% :-. However much of the "enthusiasm" is generated by the person who is presenting the material i.e. the class leader. If the group wants to study AB then by all means study AB. However this is where our perceptions may differ. I don't view "Theosophy" as a seamless fabric of teachings running from one writer to another. I see Theosophical teachings changing from decade to decade sometimes because of fuller explanations becoming available; sometimes because of more confused explanations becoming more available; sometime for still other reasons. But I view theosophical teachings in their historical context. Therefore when I read HPB then I'm reading what HPB was writing during such and such a period in her life under such and such circumstances. When I read CWL then I'm reading what CWL was writing during such and such a period under such and such circumstances.... BB I raved on about de Purucker and how much easier he was to understand to one of our members who I knew was upset at not understanding SD and she took his book out. Two weeks later it was returned and nothing has been said since. As it was one of his larger books it could not have been read in two weeks. JHE Perhaps de Purucker was too difficult also. Or perhaps he didn't like Purucker's sermonesque style. That is one the of great things about the theosophical writings we have such a variety of approaches and styles. Personally I found that I have to read some chapters of ~Fundamentals of the Esoteric Philosophy~ three or four times before I felt that I had a mastery of the points he was making. In my thirty years experience of teaching theosophy I found that only a small minority of students are willing to go though that much trouble. BB If people want to discuss and they say their source is other than SD then of course it is debatable how much store to put on their ideas but even reading SD does not preclude misunderstanding what HPB meant by what she wrote. JHE Amen. I remember a member with whom I used to correspond proposing to the Lodge that they study the SD. The President at first resisted then finally consented to share his personal conversations with M and KH on the SD rather then going through the trouble of reading it. BB So it seems to boil down to each persons interpretation of what they have read what ever that may be. On this list debate goes on between persons who are familiar with the same books yet see things differently. That is good for the rest of us as we then have to think about it and decide how we each understand it. This is discrimination at work. JHE Right. JHE > ~Man Whence How and Whither~ was published in 1913. Read > through as early an edition as you can find and I think you >will discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy >already outlined. MK Ramadoss It is my recollection that some of the material was serialized in Adyar Theosophist before they were put in a book form and published. May be this source should also be checked. JHE Are you thinking of "Rents in the Veil of Time"? > JHE > Remember Krishnamurti's "Truth is a pathless land" speech that >he gave in 1930? That was protest against the "spiritual >authority" held by the TS at the time. Van der Leeuw was >alluding to this MKR Before he died Krishnaji held a private discussion session in which he was questioned and discussed the issue of Spritual Hierachy and the TS and at some time in the future I hope to see it published. I do not know if Krishnaji had indicated his personal preference on publishing the discussion. I believe that he would never have discussed this issue unless he felt that it is something on which he has something to say. Let us wait for its publication. I hope it is not something shocking for some Theosophists. JHE It seems that K had a lot of things to say that might shock Theosophists. But no one seems to publish them. KFA has stayed with K's public talks after 1930 but not his more private remarks. Too bad--the off cut are almost always more interesting. Jim Meier writes: That really wasn't my point however -- whether or not the AAB writings are "based" in ES material doesn't seem especially significant. Both Alice and Foster Bailey were TSA members after all. What does seem significant to me is the validity or lack thereof of the ideas presented. JHE Because I approach occult teachings from a historical context the succession of ideas from one source to another is very relevant to me and is very germane to the question of "validity." I understand AAB and DK's concept about intuitively grasping the genuiness of teachings. I do that too but my "intuitive perceptions" lead me down relatively untraveled paths sometimes because my background is quite different from most people. JHE >[re: Man Whence How and Whither] ... and I think you will >discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy >already outlined. JM Fair enough and thanks for the reference. But this doesn't address the question of rightness does it? I was never clear in your earlier discussions with Arvin on your position with respect to AAB "neo-theooosophy" Saraydarian etc. excepting CWL. JHE My position was one of an investigator. I was a person knowledgeable about HPB but less so about AAB. Arvind was knowledgeable about AAB but less so about HPB. So I proposed a dialogue and comparison of ideas for our mutual education. As for "neo-theosophy" I perceive it as a system distinct from pre 1895 theosophy. I don't think Saradarian really entered the discussions. He used to drop in and out of SD classes I used to hold and I used to invite him to do public talks at the LA Branch twice a year. Otherwise I didn't have much contact with him. He lives in Arizona now. >JM >>Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? > >JHE >I wish I could. Reasons are not given that I know of. My guess >is that the Arcane school is regarded as a rival organization. JM I wish someone could. : I suspect you're right about the perceived "rivaly." Most likely there's also a bit of resentment on the part of the TS regarding the Tibetan's assertion that the TS had drifted from its original intention to something of a personality cult ~1930 and a training ground for probationary disciples. That seems like the sort of thing that could ruffle feathers. JHE I'm sure that is a factor. JM RE: Eldon's point on discussing ES material as recounted: that's a good point. The Bailey texts are published materials however so it may be possible to look for a "fit" within theosophy. On the other hand I can remember some particularly pointed discussions on here regarding CWLeadbeater and he was accepted within Theosophy sort of anyway by most at least for a time. Would this be an improper forum for the discussion? JHE I think discussion on Bailey have raised objection in the past with participants arguing that the Arcane school has its own discussion group. I think the objections were fair enough. On the other hand comparative discussions of Theosophy and .... should be fair game. JHE >....But before we got into the examination of the ideas Arvind >admitted that his real agenda was to win disciples for AAB not >to examine the writings.. JM >Ah I remember that now. I'm not sure it is entirely accurate >to say Arvin was looking "to win disciples for AAB" but I think >I get your point. JHE I pretty sure that he used the word "disciples." >JM >PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of >those unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the >Tibetan Djwhal Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from >cyberspace. : > >JHE >I would be very interested in those ideas and would defend VERY >LOUDLY your right to post them. JM I did not expect anyone would question "the right" to post re: AAB but I'm still wondering if this would be an improper forum. There is not a lot of Saraydarian material posted on here for example though he is generally regarded as a theosophical writer. JHE Probably some will object if you used this net as a forum for Arcane School or Aquarian Foundation Material and I think rightly so. But in this case you would be posting something in context to a "theosophical discussion" so I don't see way anyone would object. In fact several of us have already asked you to post these ideas. JM I was introduced to the AAB texts by friends in the Austin chapter of the TS in my college days '70s. The Austin group was highly polarized along generational lines and the younger set also accepted the Bailey texts. The Austin group doesn't appear on the chapter list anymore but I do not know when or why they faded. In one sense I suppose the Bailey influence has been devisive since the TSA split in the early '20s. JHE Yes. There seems to be quite a story here that needs to be put together and told. Jerry HE International Theosophist ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 17:47:34 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws and Bailey At 104700 AM 12/11/95 -0500 Eldon wrote: > >Jerry H-E: > >>I do remember mentioning the ES connection during those conversations >>and receiving a long response from Eldon Tucker questioning >>whether or not I should discuss "classified" ES material on a >>public forum. > >I don't usually repost things but it's been about two years and >the subject is important. Since you brought up the subject and >my original posting isn't too long I'm reposting it for the new >people on the list: > >-- Eldon > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: 20 199401 085323 -0500 >From: eldon@raider.sandiegoca.NCR.COM >Subject: ethics and confidential materials > >A comment of Jerry H-E's got me thinking about the ethics of having >other people's confidential materials. Here are my thoughts. > >---- > >An interesting ethical question for us to consider confidential >materials. Is it ever right to possess and study materials >belonging to other people materials that were considered confidential >and not entrusted to oneself? > >Does the right to possess and to utilize the materials depend solely >upon how they were acquired or are their certain ethical principles >involved that are independent of anything one may have agreed to? Are >there certain principles that are right to follow regardless of whether >we can be sanctioned or found at fault by others? > >Say that we've found a photocopy of someone's diary in a trash bin or >perhaps in a folder at a used bookstore. Is it okay to freely use it >without the writer's permission? What is a fair use of the materials in >these circumstances? > >One of us may have materials of the Esoteric School of Theosophy an >organization associated with the Adyar Theosophical Society. We all may >come across materials in bookstores or from friends. How do we handle >them? > >When we have materials where their owner intends to keep them secret >and it is clearly known that those entrusted with the materials are >sworn to secrecy does it matter if we came into possession of them >through an round-about way? > >For us to obtain something like the Adyar E.S. materials someone had >to intentionally or inadvertently break their trust with the >organization to allow the materials to come into our hands. Are we >ethically bound to keep them secret or can we say that because we've >made no specific pledge to do so that we are free to reveal them at >our own discretion? > >I would say that there is a karmic responsibility to the person whom >betrayed the secrecy and that we may add to their bad karma and make >some for ourselves depending upon how we handle the situation. > >It is not a cut-and-dry situation where a blanket rule can be made. >But when we read materials meant to be secret and talk about them we >are in a delicate situation one where we could possible do harm. > >I'm not trying to make a case that the Adyar E.S. secrets are >especially esoteric--except to those who believe in the >Besant/Leadbeater variant of Theosophy--but there is a direct analogy >to the real Mysteries. Would we reveal their secrets if we were to come >across them? > >There are different degrees of betrayal of a secret. We could join an >organization but be unfaithful to our pledges and reveal information >entrusted to us. We could secretly copy materials that were not meant >for us to see or have. Or we could obtain materials that were lost by >their owner or inadvertenly released materials never intended to be >let go of and only coming to us due to someone's mistake. > >It is not always though in the best interest of others that secrets >be kept beyond a certain point. Consider the Mahatma Letters. They >certainly needed to be secret at the time that they were being written. >But by the 1920's things had changed and they were needed to help >bring to public attention again the original Theosophy that HPB taught. > >In our time we have seen similar decisions being made regarding the >Point Loma esoteric materials. The higher E.S. materials were published >as "The Dialogues of G. de Purucker." Then the first degree E.S. >materials were published first by Theosophical University Press >revised and edited into a book called "The Fountain-Source of >Occultism." They were later printed in nearly the original form of the >twelve books by Point Loma Publications. > >A case could be made that times change and that materials that were >meant to be esoteric in one time could be published at a later date. >But we are always faced with the question: When does our need to >present some materials exceed the right of others to keep it hidden? >And is the exposing of the materials a form of our intervention in or >interference with the karma of another the karma of the person whose >decision or mistake allowed the materials to get into our hands? > >Maybe the distinction could be made between the theosophical doctrines >as presented within the esoteric theosophical groups and the actual >Mystery doctrines which come to us through special training or through >some form of inner contact or guidance. Perhaps the materials taught in >the outer organizations were meant to eventually become public and >that is why they were allowed to be written down and given wide >distribution. The other secrets of the Mysteries perhaps only come >to those whose lips are already sealed against their betrayal. > >We hear that we are to Know to Dare to Will and to Keep Silent! I >think that we are capable of such. I think that we know when we have >something that should go unmentioned. And that we will simply forget >or lose touch with or never really know those great Truths that we >would betray. It is not that we are talking about things that are >beyond words just beyond *our* words beyond our right to speak of >them. And we will know too when our lips are unsealed and we should >share what we have learned. > A very well presented background. I think it is always very difficult to decide whether some material one knows is "private" to be published. I think that when time is ripe the past "private" "esoteric" "secret" material will become exoteric one way or the other. There are two classic instances/incidents that I would like to relate. One relates to the Seven Rays. Until a book was written by Ernest Wood there was not much information formally available. According to Wood much of the material he came into possession were learnt by himself/or provided to him by his Teacher. When wood mentioned about the material to CWL the later pulled out a table that he had drawn up forty years prior to it and told Wood that that was the ONLY information he had on seven rays and was astounded about the amount of information that Wood had come into his possession. It is reported that CWL asked Wood to stop everything that the latter was doing and write down everything he knew about seven rays. The whole book was written in a period of one week and when the manuscript was shown to CWL not a single word was altered. There is a mention by Wood that not much information was released prior to his publication since the information on seven rays can be misused and time was not ripe. The second instance was in the case of the famous Hindu reformer Shri. Ramanujacharya. His worldly teached told him of some secrets and was told that were he ever to reveal them his head will blow off. When he learnt of the message that was to be secret he realized that the masses could immensely benefit by them. So he immediately climbed to the top of the Hindu Temple Gopuram Minaret and yelled the message to the crowd below so that he could pass on the message before his head blows off. Of course his head did not blow off. I feel that time makes many esoteric information exoteric because the former esoteric information could benefit the masses. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 17:57:41 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re re beginner's list Alan writes: My *very first* book on Theosophy was Jinarajadasa's ~First Principles of Theosophy~ which was hard going and took me two weeks to read - but I got just about all the basics from a one-volume clearly printed volume. JHE Actually that was also the first book on theosophy that I seriously read--and it helped to peak my interest in astronomy. Ironically through my new interest in astronomy I came to realize that the science especially the astronomy is very out of date. What is worse CJ's teachings which are essentially restatements of CWL's hang on that scientific mis-information. I would think that most anyone with a basic scientific background would be put off of theosophy if they read it. A little over fifteen years ago a representative from TPH Wheaton made a business trip to our Lodge and book store. He mentioned that TPH London would not reprint ~First Principles~ because of the out-of-date science. On the other hand I'm surprised at how many people still value that book. Used copies are very much in demand. It seems that TPH has a good model for a basic textbook on theosophy here but it needs to be completely rewritten. Jerry HE Member Theosophy International International Theosophist ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 18:23:57 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Newbies At 122500 AM 12/12/95 -0500 you wrote: >> >> I truly believe >> Internet and the international access to theos-l is the next quantum leap >> and we Theosophists should make full use of it no matter what the organized >> entities/TS Organizations think about it or how they have reacted to it. I >> am very objective about this whole thing. How many times have you seen any >> of the elected/appointed officials at the national or regional level have >> ever posted any messages here. It is either due to illiteracy on their part >> or their indifference or what other reason they only know. As I pointed out >> in a msg some time back let us all put ourself in the seat of HPB and >> imagine how she would have used Internet as a means of attracting the >> attention of the world to the Theosophical ideas. It may give us some >> creative ideas. > >I expect she would have signed up for THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL >and used a similar sig to mine but probably on a higher plane :- > >How about you? :- > >> ...doss > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > Probably sign as a Human Being!!! .doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 18:24:00 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: by-law vote At 011600 AM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: > >The following is the complete text of the letter to the American Theosophist >from Gerda Thompson on the matter of the by-law changes being voted on. I >hope this time it gets on because if it does not she may assualt me with a >broccoli stalk >Chuck Cosimano > >> >=0D >Sep 1995 AT Letter to the Editor >=0D >Dear Fellow TSA Members: >=0D >I would like to start this by reminding you that the TSA is a democratic = >non-profit membership organization. The power and responsibility in the c= >onducting of our affairs rests in each and everyone of us to know what is= > going on at our Administrative Headquarters - Olcott. And to hold our e= >lected Board of Directors accountable for their omissions as well as acti= >ons. >=0D >Did you know that this latest round of By Law revisions began two years a= >go? That just a year ago a very small number of members were informed th= >at major changes to the By Laws were being contemplated? Some at the inst= >igation of the International Society? Why wasn't the general membership i= >nformed of these vital matters and denied the opportunity to contribute= > their ideas and suggestions? We have an "official members' magazine" - T= >he American Theosophist. Why wasn't this vehicle used to informed the mem= >bership? If not a special letter sent to every member? Sometime before the 1994 Annual Meeting of TS I heard thru a member that some changes to the bylaws are in the works. As soon as I learnt about it I wanted to know from the horse's mouth and sent a handwritten fax to the National President. I did get a reply but it got nowhere and nothing was ever mentioned about any thinking of the bylaws change. So when I recently got the AT publishing the numerous changes I was surprised and immediately shot off several letters to the National President touching upon several issues of importance based on my experience and professional training. All communication with the National President was in writing so that the communication is very precise and all elected Board Members and the International President were copied every correspondence. I wanted to keep everybody fully informed. There were also some very serious issues relating to the TIT and I sent Chairman of the Board of Trustees the correspondence for his information and action. Any request for facts and information from National President was mostly met with silence. >=0D >I know the general reasoning the Board will state why these comprehensive= > by-law revisions were kept virtually secret. That too many people contri= >buting their suggestions would make things unwieldy for the three-person = >By Law Committee. That the goal of these revisions changed over time from= > being a simple clean-up-job to the major undertaking it evolved into. Th= >at the changes instigated at the International level weren't complete unt= >il last Dec's General Council meeting in Adyar. These reasons are >NEITHER VALID NOR JUSTIFIED in my opinion from keeping the general memb= >ership informed of the status of the By Law Committee's work! >=0D >Now that the general membership is being informed another question raises= > its head. Why the rush in voting? There will only be two AT issues out b= >efore the voting is completed. Now that we have or will have a copy of= > the proposed by-laws don't they warrant a serious consideration? Remembe= >r this is the product of two years work by people who have put in much ti= >me and effort with personal sacrifices. >=0D >Again I know the basic line of reasoning the Board will take. They will = >say that as some of the changes have to do with electing the Board and as= > next year is our triennial elections that these changes must be put in = > >place for that. This is nonsense! We can have our election operating unde= >r the present system. This present system works very well and I don't see= > how the welfare of the TSA would be unduly compromised by using the "ol= >d rules" another time. >=0D >In fairness to the By Law Committee and to the TSA membership I would pro= >pose that the vote on the revised By Laws be postponed until next Fall. B= >esides the changes effecting the election of the Board there are two subs= >tantive issues [items 09 and 17] that will have an enormous impact on the = >individual member and the organizational structure. These are two very se= >rious issues and can't be handled casually. A postponement would give all= > the members ample time to talk among themselves at Study Center Branch = >and Federation meetings. Also that the Annual Meeting for 1996 be devoted= > to discussing the By Laws and TSA policies in general as we prepare to e= >nter the 21st Century. >=0D >If a postponement of the referendum is not forthcoming then especially b= >ecause of the critical nature of [9] and [17] which I will outline below= > I urge you to VOTE NO ON ALL THE ITEMS. The rational and justification= > for [9] and [17] is vague and tenuous in some parts and completely lack= >ing in others. >=0D >[9] By Law 04 Section 09 Termination of Membership >Adyar has asked for this inclusion in our By Laws referring to Internatio= >nal Rule 9. To my knowledge this is the first time that an expulsion clau= >se would be included in our By Laws. Approximately ten years ago a Board = >member prior to the Annual Meeting proposed something similar which was s= >o strenuously rejected by the members and at the Annual Meeting that it n= >ever came up for a vote. I have asked for background and reasoning for th= >is item but have received none. I also asked what criterion would be use= >d and who is to formulate it? Again all I got was silence! I proposed th= >at a parameter of conduct be included in the By Law which was also reject= >ed. If no clear guidelines are established the reasons for "termination" = >could readily change over time because of the rotation on and off the Boa= >rd. This means that the reasons for excommunication could easily degenera= >te into personality and/or political differences. The need for a two-thir= >ds Board vote doesn't necessarily protect a member from this contingency.= > I strongly urge you to VOTE NO ON ITEM [9]! >=0D >[17] By Law 09 Section 03 Lodge Organization >The second paragraph of this section begins "Each lodge shall be a fully= > autonomous body...". If this is truly the case then why is [17] being p= >roposed? Financial autonomy is just as important as philosophical autonom= >y. I know that there have been a few difficulties in the past but when I= > asked for explanations all I got were these general statements: 01 prot= >ection for legal official? members when factions occur; and 02 to stop= > a local group from unilaterally wanting to withdraw from the TSA and do = >something else or affiliate with another organization and use the lodge f= >unds. These two types of problems can be handled without the TSA taking o= >ver financial control of all the Branches. Even without this clause there= > is nothing stopping a Branch from asking for nor the TSA from offering t= >o help with any financial transactions. It all hinges on the phrase "suc= >h consent not to be unreasonably withheld". Point d states that the TSA= > has legal recourse for enforcing this. But what remedy does a Branch hav= >e if they feel that TSA consent has been unreasonably withheld? Can a Bra= >nch especially those which are incorporated have legal recourse also? T= >he way this whole item has been written the TSA if they so choose can h= >ave a strangle-hold over a Branches' finances. And through the finances c= >an influence both collectively and individually the Branches philosophica= >l autonomy. I strongly urge you to also VOTE NO ON ITEM [17]! >=0D >The general direction of the Theosophical Society in American our offici= >al policies are the responsibility of the members to formulate and the B= >oard of Directors to execute. Think about the impact this version of the = >By Laws will have on the future growth and prosperity of the TSA. Will it= > be beneficial or detrimental? If a postponement of the By Law referendum= > is not forthcoming I again urge you to VOTE NO on all nineteen items bu= >t most especially [9] and [17]! >=0D >Fraternally yours >Gerda J. Thompson > >--PART.BOUNDARY.0.427.mail06.mail.aol.com.818659822-- > Gerda: You have presented very logical and clear suggestions. I was hoping that your letter will be published in the AT. Today I received the AT and there were only three comments published. Two detailed ones arguing against and one one line is support of the changes. Reading AT and reading the above each one can come to ones own conclusions. It's providential that we have Internet today and what you post is uncensored and is for everyone to see all over the whole world. Again let us hope better judgement will prevail and the bylaws revision is postponed; it's never too late. ..doss PS: Chuck: You have done an excellent job of uploading the message. Looking forward to more messages. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 18:30:00 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: WTYF At 010000 AM 12/12/95 -0500 you wrote: > > To Malcolm: > >>>We in New Zealand are backing this organisation in order to foster youth >>membership of the theosophical society and its objectives around the world >>as it is obvious that the TS has and aging membership and it is often very >>difficult for younger new members to feel a sense of belonging. > > Well... well... This may sound tragic or comic but I study >Theosophy >since I was seventeen now I'm in the return of Saturn as a Lodge president >and I never ever received one sole communication from WYTF although >I had met many times the "retired" president from this "world" organization >Arnaldo Sison his wife Marina sending regular mails from my branch to theirs. >They do know my branch has a good number of young members because >they saw them at theosophical meetings. > > I'm glad the organization is working people of many countries do >contribute >to the newsletter but at the same time shoked by the "fact" that >the WYTF >don't communicate with the Lodges of the country where its headquarters >is located. It is a very strange situation to see news about this from >New Zealand >thousands of miles away when people envolved live at the same country do >speak the same language as in the case of Brazil. > Osmar: You are seeing the power of communication in Internet. So distance is no longer the problem. When I posted a msg requesting the receipt to be acknowledged the very first one was from NZ even though I am in the USA. Glad you have access to Internet. ....doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 18:42:20 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: by-law vote >At 011600 AM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: >> >>The following is the complete text of the letter to the American Theosophist >>from Gerda Thompson on the matter of the by-law changes being voted on. I >>hope this time it gets on because if it does not she may assualt me with a >>broccoli stalk >>Chuck Cosimano >> >>> >>=0D >>Sep 1995 AT Letter to the Editor >>=0D >>Dear Fellow TSA Members: >>=0D >>I would like to start this by reminding you that the TSA is a democratic = >>non-profit membership organization. The power and responsibility in the c= >>onducting of our affairs rests in each and everyone of us to know what is= >> going on at our Administrative Headquarters - Olcott. And to hold our e= >>lected Board of Directors accountable for their omissions as well as acti= >>ons. >>=0D >>Did you know that this latest round of By Law revisions began two years a= >>go? That just a year ago a very small number of members were informed th= >>at major changes to the By Laws were being contemplated? Some at the inst= >>igation of the International Society? Why wasn't the general membership i= >>nformed of these vital matters and denied the opportunity to contribute= >> their ideas and suggestions? We have an "official members' magazine" - T= >>he American Theosophist. Why wasn't this vehicle used to informed the mem= >>bership? If not a special letter sent to every member? > > ================================================================== Sometime before the 1994 Annual Meeting of TS I heard thru a member that some changes to the bylaws are in the works. As soon as I learnt about it I wanted to know from the horse's mouth and sent a handwritten fax to the National President. I did get a reply but it got nowhere and nothing was ever mentioned about any thinking of the bylaws change. So when I recently got the AT publishing the numerous changes I was surprised and immediately shot off several letters to the National President touching upon several issues of importance based on my experience and professional training. All communication with the National President was in writing so that the communication is very precise and all elected Board Members and the International President were copied every correspondence. I wanted to keep everybody fully informed. There were also some very serious issues relating to the TIT and I sent Chairman of the Board of Trustees the correspondence for his information and action. Any request for facts and information from National President was mostly met with silence. ...doss ============================================================================= > >>=0D >>I know the general reasoning the Board will state why these comprehensive= >> by-law revisions were kept virtually secret. That too many people contri= >>buting their suggestions would make things unwieldy for the three-person = >>By Law Committee. That the goal of these revisions changed over time from= >> being a simple clean-up-job to the major undertaking it evolved into. Th= >>at the changes instigated at the International level weren't complete unt= >>il last Dec's General Council meeting in Adyar. These reasons are >>NEITHER VALID NOR JUSTIFIED in my opinion from keeping the general memb= >>ership informed of the status of the By Law Committee's work! >>=0D >>Now that the general membership is being informed another question raises= >> its head. Why the rush in voting? There will only be two AT issues out b= >>efore the voting is completed. Now that we have or will have a copy of= >> the proposed by-laws don't they warrant a serious consideration? Remembe= >>r this is the product of two years work by people who have put in much ti= >>me and effort with personal sacrifices. >>=0D >>Again I know the basic line of reasoning the Board will take. They will = >>say that as some of the changes have to do with electing the Board and as= >> next year is our triennial elections that these changes must be put in = >> >>place for that. This is nonsense! We can have our election operating unde= >>r the present system. This present system works very well and I don't see= >> how the welfare of the TSA would be unduly compromised by using the "ol= >>d rules" another time. >>=0D >>In fairness to the By Law Committee and to the TSA membership I would pro= >>pose that the vote on the revised By Laws be postponed until next Fall. B= >>esides the changes effecting the election of the Board there are two subs= >>tantive issues [items 09 and 17] that will have an enormous impact on the = >>individual member and the organizational structure. These are two very se= >>rious issues and can't be handled casually. A postponement would give all= >> the members ample time to talk among themselves at Study Center Branch = >>and Federation meetings. Also that the Annual Meeting for 1996 be devoted= >> to discussing the By Laws and TSA policies in general as we prepare to e= >>nter the 21st Century. >>=0D >>If a postponement of the referendum is not forthcoming then especially b= >>ecause of the critical nature of [9] and [17] which I will outline below= >> I urge you to VOTE NO ON ALL THE ITEMS. The rational and justification= >> for [9] and [17] is vague and tenuous in some parts and completely lack= >>ing in others. >>=0D >>[9] By Law 04 Section 09 Termination of Membership >>Adyar has asked for this inclusion in our By Laws referring to Internatio= >>nal Rule 9. To my knowledge this is the first time that an expulsion clau= >>se would be included in our By Laws. Approximately ten years ago a Board = >>member prior to the Annual Meeting proposed something similar which was s= >>o strenuously rejected by the members and at the Annual Meeting that it n= >>ever came up for a vote. I have asked for background and reasoning for th= >>is item but have received none. I also asked what criterion would be use= >>d and who is to formulate it? Again all I got was silence! I proposed th= >>at a parameter of conduct be included in the By Law which was also reject= >>ed. If no clear guidelines are established the reasons for "termination" = >>could readily change over time because of the rotation on and off the Boa= >>rd. This means that the reasons for excommunication could easily degenera= >>te into personality and/or political differences. The need for a two-thir= >>ds Board vote doesn't necessarily protect a member from this contingency.= >> I strongly urge you to VOTE NO ON ITEM [9]! >>=0D >>[17] By Law 09 Section 03 Lodge Organization >>The second paragraph of this section begins "Each lodge shall be a fully= >> autonomous body...". If this is truly the case then why is [17] being p= >>roposed? Financial autonomy is just as important as philosophical autonom= >>y. I know that there have been a few difficulties in the past but when I= >> asked for explanations all I got were these general statements: 01 prot= >>ection for legal official? members when factions occur; and 02 to stop= >> a local group from unilaterally wanting to withdraw from the TSA and do = >>something else or affiliate with another organization and use the lodge f= >>unds. These two types of problems can be handled without the TSA taking o= >>ver financial control of all the Branches. Even without this clause there= >> is nothing stopping a Branch from asking for nor the TSA from offering t= >>o help with any financial transactions. It all hinges on the phrase "suc= >>h consent not to be unreasonably withheld". Point d states that the TSA= >> has legal recourse for enforcing this. But what remedy does a Branch hav= >>e if they feel that TSA consent has been unreasonably withheld? Can a Bra= >>nch especially those which are incorporated have legal recourse also? T= >>he way this whole item has been written the TSA if they so choose can h= >>ave a strangle-hold over a Branches' finances. And through the finances c= >>an influence both collectively and individually the Branches philosophica= >>l autonomy. I strongly urge you to also VOTE NO ON ITEM [17]! >>=0D >>The general direction of the Theosophical Society in American our offici= >>al policies are the responsibility of the members to formulate and the B= >>oard of Directors to execute. Think about the impact this version of the = >>By Laws will have on the future growth and prosperity of the TSA. Will it= >> be beneficial or detrimental? If a postponement of the By Law referendum= >> is not forthcoming I again urge you to VOTE NO on all nineteen items bu= >>t most especially [9] and [17]! >>=0D >>Fraternally yours >>Gerda J. Thompson >> >>--PART.BOUNDARY.0.427.mail06.mail.aol.com.818659822-- >> > > Gerda: You have presented very logical and clear suggestions. I was hoping that your letter will be published in the AT. Today I received the AT and there were only three comments published. Two detailed ones arguing against and one one line is support of the changes. Reading AT and reading the above each one can come to ones own conclusions. It's providential that we have Internet today and what you post is uncensored and is for everyone to see all over the whole world. Again let us hope better judgement will prevail and the bylaws revision is postponed; it's never too late. > >...doss > >PS: Chuck: > > You have done an excellent job of uploading the message. Looking forward to more messages. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 19:50:43 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: WTYF World Theosophical Youth Federation The World Theosophical Youth Federation was founded in 1923 by leading member of the Theosophical Society to further and support the Objects of the Society among young people. Radha Burnier is the Honorary Presidentie it is set up a bit like a section. For the past few years it has been administered from Brazil but has international representation on its committee. There is no age restriction on membership most members are either younger teenage & 20's 2nd generation theosophists or new members in their 20's & 30's. There are no restrictions or requirements regarding membership to other theosophical organisations. We in New Zealand are backing this organisation in order to foster youth membership of the theosophical society and its objectives around the world as it is obvious that the TS has and aging membership and it is often very difficult for younger new members to feel a sense of belonging. I said in a previous post that I would create and e-version of the WTYF membership form however it looks a little complicated. If you are interested in joining please e-mail to me malcolmi@iconz.co.nz or write to me Malcolm Idoine 26 Arthur St Ponsonby Auckland New Zealand and I will post you a membership form a copy of the constitution and a leaflet about the organisation. Membership is free but you may like to make a contribution towards postage as this is currently being funded by the Brazilian and New Zealand sections. Membership will entitle you to receive and contribute to our two international newsletters one from New Zealand and one from Brazil. This does not sound by much but you have to start somewhere! This allows us to share ideas and provided a medium for expressing thoughts feeling poetry drawings etc with other young theosophists around the world. Malcolm Idoine PS. Could you please display this at you lodge or include the address details in you local newsletter. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 22:25:05 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Beginner's list Alan: >Although I went on to study mainly Kabala I have encouraged all >students over the years to begin where I began - with basic >theosophy. If you have that you have the basis for all the >esoteric ideas and teachings all the new age material and all >the writings of Eldon :- Oops. I guess I need more practice writing about basic Theosophy if I'm seen on the other end of the scale! -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 22:50:03 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Coherence: >Several have requested recommendations for a simpler statement of the >philosophy sources which are not so daunting. Here are my recommendations: > >UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A wonderful "primer" for the any >student and the book that was handed to me first 15 years ago. > >LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME by Wm Q. Judge. A collection of letters by >Judge to students comprising a warm wise and practical approach to >Theosophy. > >THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Wm Q. Judge. A summary of the SD in very readable >language and an amazingly small book. Gets to the heart of the matter. > >ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A great >companion to the Ocean There is a copy of a computerized version of "The Ocean of Theosophy" and "Universal Theosophy" on theosophy.org. The first is in WordPerfect 5.1 format. I set it up and proof-read it. The second is in ascii format. These two were scanned by someone in Canada. It's been a few years since I got the original scanned text and can't seem to find the piece of paper where I wrote down the name of the guy that scanned them or I'd give his name and email address. They also have a version of "Esoteric Buddhism" and "The Key to Theosophy" also both in WordPerfect 5.1 format. I understand that they will be reformatting the materials into HTML format. These two I set up. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 23:13:16 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Coherence: >Theosophy exists independent of the T.S. or any other body and most >fail to realize this. This is an important point. It's easy to lose sight of this as one moves into a leadership role in theosophical groups. Our intent is to disseminate the Philosophy. Theosophical groups are better than nothing but could be improved. Perhaps with the diversity of theosophical views and international participation we could on theos-l come up with some useful original ideas about where to go in the future. >It is the mutual sympathy of thought existing among Theosophists which >binds them together. When studying in ernest help is never far away. I agree but would put it differently. Despite the sometimes differing ideas and thoughts it is the mutual dedication to the Bodhisattva ideal -- harmless and the life of compassion -- that binds Theosophists and those of all the approaches to the spiritual together. The study is one aspect of the Path. When expressing love wisdom and compassion in the world help is never far away in obtaining the ideas words strength and external circumstances to live the life. >And if we each acted according to the spirit and philosophy of the >teachings more would be drawn to and stay with Theosophy being the >most undiluted statement of the Ancient Wisdom And if we act with innocent pure unstained intent with pure motivation with selfless love and impersonality we will bring the fruits of the spiritual to the world. We can bring ourselves and others to the Path where we learn directly from the Gupta Vidya the Wisdom Tradition. This blazing fire of Wisdom uses the public exoteric materials found in the theosophical textbooks and other great writings of the world as its tinder. Our intent with this tinder is not so much to build a wooden box as it is to provide the material to consume that allows us to create a blazing light that brightens the world about us! -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 23:33:31 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy Jerry S: > [writing to Bee] >I used to wonder why after describing so many >gods and goddesses in the literature theosophists were simply >ignoring them. Finally I realized the reason is that gods and >goddesses are not appealing to the intellect. The polytheism >of theosophy is simply another intellectual doctrinal note in a >long list of others. In magical schools and in religions we >converse with these deities via either prayer or ritual. In >theosophy we pretty much ignore them. This is because Theosophy is presented in theosophical groups as an intellectual study. There is no spiritual practice as part of the package. We don't have meditation on deities taught because that is a specific practice. We just learn about the inner workings of the world but aren't given specific methods of training to undertake. >> [Bee] >>There are lots of people who do not see knowledge as an intellectual study >>to be their way of spiritual growth. >I see this [study] as building the scaffolding so to speak to keep >the mind on some kind of sanity track. The human mind requires a >structure or pattern of some kind in order to make sense of one's >experiences. ... This structure is an important part of the personality. It can be based upon a broad-based appreciation of the deep side of life or it can be consumed with shopping coupon-clipping and Monday-night sports on TV. The structure is not the direct experience of knowledge or understanding but rather the "memory" of such neatly organized and stored away for future reference. That "memory" is like a filter which both explains and limits incoming ideas. It's like an OCR program making sense of the dots on a scanned image attempting to pick out the text. It looks at the dots and pulls them together. But there's a higher faculty of mind which allows one to look at the page at a glance and read what is on it! >There are formal conscious and informal unconscious >rituals that we can conduct. If anyone thinks that they never do rituals >then they are simply done unconscious as every psychologist knows. >Most Buddhist meditations try to employ the body speech and mind >together. Thus these yogic meditations are really rituals. Yes. Rituals are an important part of live. Our five-year-old daughter has rituals that are an important part of her daily schedule. One involves giving everyone hugs and kisses before going to bed for the night. Another is a "run up" where when I come home from work for the night and I first enter the door she runs up to me and gives me a hug and I pick her up. This is an important ritual that's very important to her. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 11 Dec 1996 23:50:48 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Nutritious Theosophy > > Bee to Eldon: > >There are lots of people who do not see knowledge as an intellectual study > >to be their way of spiritual growth. > > I am one of these. However I do love to read and study. > I see this as building the scaffolding so to speak to keep the mind > on some kind of sanity track. The human mind requires a structure > or pattern of some kind in order to make sense of one's experiences. > Without such a "mind map" or intellectual background it is easy to > go off the deep end and loose one's perspective completely. The > thought "Am I crazy?" must be answered in some way. However > it is important to remember that this scaffolding i.e. world view is > always subject to change. > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy International I say to students of Kabala: "When you have built your temple you lay the tools aside. Don't throw them away though as better ones will come along and you will need to maintain the building on a regular basis." Or words to that effect. Some folk seem to want to keep playing with the tools so much they hardly build anything let alone a temple. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 01:27:04 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon > I prefer to think of it in terms of ideas which are then clothed >in thoughts which are then clothed in words. because of all of the >clothing disguises we often hear the words but miss the ideas >behind them. You have made a finer distinction here between ideas thoughts and words which I have not experience of or not noticed!. I like you image of clothing disgiuses I guess I had thought of it as a process of reduction as sort of orthogonal projection from a higher demension to a lower excluse my mathmatical model but its the only one I have where information is lost not gained and there are an infinite number of possible projections depending on you view point plane of reference. Ugh! Can any one with a mathmatical mind translate that into something more generally comprehesible? > >>Anyway I have used this as a technique of meditation:- to try and stay in >>that space where thoughts are thoughts but before they become words. I >>found it a very effective way to 'quiet the mind' and gain insites into the >>mind's working. > > Here you will find images. Words are rolled up into >thoughts which are rolled up into ideas which are expressed on >this level as pure images. > Lovely. Good to see in from the other way round. Again I had always seen in analytically ie: we have to tear ideas apart to put then into words. Malcolm From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 01:44:36 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: JHE and Bailey At 040300 AM 12/12/95 -0500 you wrote: > >Bee Brown writes: > >>JHE >>I have no problem with that. But those who claim to understand >>the SD because they have read what AAB CWL AB ect. said about >>the SD but find the SD itself too difficult to read--then I >>think they have a problem. >> > >BB >I agree with that but the average person that I was talking about >isn't likely to get into involved discussions on the SD anyway. >They are mostly concerned with their own spiritual growth and >trying to get enough information to understand what is being >talked about in general in their lodge. > >JHE > And "what is being talked about in general in their lodge" >depends upon what the material the members are attracted to in >the first place. When I taught "theosophical doctrine" I >always started with Blavatsky because her writings are primary >to all of the others including Judge. If I were teaching >Platonism I would start with Plato for the same reason. I >realize the SD is difficult but with a little guidance I found >that students had little or no trouble with the ~Key to >Theosophy.~ > >BB >If they are 'mentally lazy' then they won't be interested in >debating the finer points of theosophy. As Liesel said people >learn quickest if they are enthusiastic about what they are >reading and if that is A B then I would rather they did that than >say 'no no' and give them SD. > >JHE > I hope Liesel doesn't faint if I say that I agree with her >100% :-. However much of the "enthusiasm" is generated by the >person who is presenting the material i.e. the class leader. If >the group wants to study AB then by all means study AB. >However this is where our perceptions may differ. I don't view >"Theosophy" as a seamless fabric of teachings running from one >writer to another. I see Theosophical teachings changing from >decade to decade sometimes because of fuller explanations >becoming available; sometimes because of more confused >explanations becoming more available; sometime for still other >reasons. But I view theosophical teachings in their historical >context. Therefore when I read HPB then I'm reading what HPB >was writing during such and such a period in her life under such >and such circumstances. When I read CWL then I'm reading what >CWL was writing during such and such a period under such and >such circumstances.... > >BB >I raved on about de Purucker and how much easier he was to >understand to one of our members who I knew was upset at not >understanding SD and she took his book out. Two weeks later it >was returned and nothing has been said since. As it was one >of his larger books it could not have been read in two weeks. > >JHE > Perhaps de Purucker was too difficult also. Or perhaps he >didn't like Purucker's sermonesque style. That is one the of >great things about the theosophical writings we have such a >variety of approaches and styles. Personally I found that I >have to read some chapters of ~Fundamentals of the Esoteric >Philosophy~ three or four times before I felt that I had a >mastery of the points he was making. In my thirty years >experience of teaching theosophy I found that only a small >minority of students are willing to go though that much trouble. > >BB >If people want to discuss and they say their source is other than >SD then of course it is debatable how much store to put on their >ideas but even reading SD does not preclude misunderstanding what >HPB meant by what she wrote. > >JHE > Amen. I remember a member with whom I used to correspond >proposing to the Lodge that they study the SD. The President at >first resisted then finally consented to share his personal >conversations with M and KH on the SD rather then going through >the trouble of reading it. > >BB >So it seems to boil down to each persons interpretation of what >they have read what ever that may be. On this list debate goes >on between persons who are familiar with the same books yet see >things differently. That is good for the rest of us as we then >have to think about it and decide how we each understand it. This >is discrimination at work. > >JHE > Right. > >JHE >> ~Man Whence How and Whither~ was published in 1913. Read >> through as early an edition as you can find and I think you >>will discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy >>already outlined. > > >MK Ramadoss >It is my recollection that some of the material was serialized in >Adyar Theosophist before they were put in a book form and >published. May be this source should also be checked. > >JHE > Are you thinking of "Rents in the Veil of Time"? > MKRamadoss Yes. I also think some material could have been published under some other titles especially around 1909 ?. >> JHE >> Remember Krishnamurti's "Truth is a pathless land" speech that >>he gave in 1930? That was protest against the "spiritual >>authority" held by the TS at the time. Van der Leeuw was >>alluding to this > >MKR >Before he died Krishnaji held a private discussion session in >which he was questioned and discussed the issue of Spritual >Hierachy and the TS and at some time in the future I hope to >see it published. I do not know if Krishnaji had indicated his >personal preference on publishing the discussion. I believe that >he would never have discussed this issue unless he felt that it >is something on which he has something to say. Let us wait for >its publication. I hope it is not something shocking for some >Theosophists. > >JHE > It seems that K had a lot of things to say that might shock >Theosophists. But no one seems to publish them. KFA has stayed >with K's public talks after 1930 but not his more private >remarks. Too bad--the off cut are almost always more >interesting. > MKR The private discussion I refer to above it looks to me as somewhat formal and I believe it was fully recorded. Hence one of these days we may see it published; in what form I do not know. But I am very interested in his comments and it may provide another viewpoint altogether. >Jim Meier writes: >That really wasn't my point however -- whether or not the AAB >writings are "based" in ES material doesn't seem especially >significant. Both Alice and Foster Bailey were TSA members >after all. What does seem significant to me is the validity or >lack thereof of the ideas presented. > >JHE > Because I approach occult teachings from a historical >context the succession of ideas from one source to another is >very relevant to me and is very germane to the question of >"validity." I understand AAB and DK's concept about intuitively >grasping the genuiness of teachings. I do that too but my >"intuitive perceptions" lead me down relatively untraveled paths >sometimes because my background is quite different from most >people. > >JHE >>[re: Man Whence How and Whither] ... and I think you will >>discover all of the main characters in Bailey's hierarchy >>already outlined. > >JM >Fair enough and thanks for the reference. But this doesn't >address the question of rightness does it? I was never clear in >your earlier discussions with Arvin on your position with respect >to AAB "neo-theooosophy" Saraydarian etc. excepting CWL. > >JHE > My position was one of an investigator. I was a person >knowledgeable about HPB but less so about AAB. Arvind was >knowledgeable about AAB but less so about HPB. So I proposed a >dialogue and comparison of ideas for our mutual education. As >for "neo-theosophy" I perceive it as a system distinct from pre >1895 theosophy. I don't think Saradarian really entered the >discussions. He used to drop in and out of SD classes I used to >hold and I used to invite him to do public talks at the LA >Branch twice a year. Otherwise I didn't have much contact with >him. He lives in Arizona now. > >>JM >>>Can you explain *why* ES members are "warned" about Bailey? >> >>JHE >>I wish I could. Reasons are not given that I know of. My guess >>is that the Arcane school is regarded as a rival organization. > >JM >I wish someone could. : I suspect you're right about the >perceived "rivaly." Most likely there's also a bit of >resentment on the part of the TS regarding the Tibetan's >assertion that the TS had drifted from its original intention to >something of a personality cult ~1930 and a training ground for >probationary disciples. That seems like the sort of thing that >could ruffle feathers. > >JHE > I'm sure that is a factor. > >JM >RE: Eldon's point on discussing ES material as recounted: >that's a good point. The Bailey texts are published materials >however so it may be possible to look for a "fit" within >theosophy. On the other hand I can remember some particularly >pointed discussions on here regarding CWLeadbeater and he was >accepted within Theosophy sort of anyway by most at least for >a time. Would this be an improper forum for the discussion? > >JHE > I think discussion on Bailey have raised objection in the >past with participants arguing that the Arcane school has its >own discussion group. I think the objections were fair enough. >On the other hand comparative discussions of Theosophy and .... >should be fair game. > >JHE >>....But before we got into the examination of the ideas Arvind >>admitted that his real agenda was to win disciples for AAB not >>to examine the writings.. > >JM >>Ah I remember that now. I'm not sure it is entirely accurate >>to say Arvin was looking "to win disciples for AAB" but I think >>I get your point. > >JHE > I pretty sure that he used the word "disciples." > >>JM >>PS: I would post Bailey's seven "new ideas" for the benefit of >>those unfamiliar with the writings of Alice A. Bailey and the >>Tibetan Djwhal Khul but I'm afraid of being expelled from >>cyberspace. : >> >>JHE >>I would be very interested in those ideas and would defend VERY > >>LOUDLY your right to post them. > >JM >I did not expect anyone would question "the right" to post re: >AAB but I'm still wondering if this would be an improper forum. >There is not a lot of Saraydarian material posted on here for >example though he is generally regarded as a theosophical >writer. > >JHE > Probably some will object if you used this net as a forum ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >for Arcane School or Aquarian Foundation Material and I think ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >rightly so. But in this case you would be posting something in ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >context to a "theosophical discussion" so I don't see way >anyone would object. In fact several of us have already asked >you to post these ideas. > MKR JHE has hit the very important point. I have seen many instances in which people have tried to use the TS Lodges and Branches as recruiting ground for their particular group or organization. I have always been on the look out when such attempts are made and have alerted the audience to be aware of this. So surely if anyone is trying to use this net as a recruiting ground then there is going to be some very vehement objections. >JM >I was introduced to the AAB texts by friends in the Austin >chapter of the TS in my college days '70s. The Austin group >was highly polarized along generational lines and the younger >set also accepted the Bailey texts. The Austin group doesn't >appear on the chapter list anymore but I do not know when or why >they faded. In one sense I suppose the Bailey influence has >been devisive since the TSA split in the early '20s. MKR I was familiar with the Austin group. There was an enthusiastic group of young people and was hoping that the group will expand. I believe there was fire in which the building and all the library was burnt down and that ended the lodge. > >JHE > Yes. There seems to be quite a story here that needs to be >put together and told. > >Jerry HE >International Theosophist >------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins > ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and >CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org >|------------------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 01:48:21 GMT From: malcolmi@iconz.co.nz malcolm idoine Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >Eldon: >What we will find in the future I think is that as physical >gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an >individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities >without regard to the size of their nose the color of their >eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. > Obviously there are hugh changes taking place on the planet right now with the change in consciouness spearheaded by the feminist and gay liberation movements. This changes are not without probems as the great pains of the past power based patriarchies are being worked through and collective karma is released. Malcolm From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 01:57:19 GMT From: mstosmar@embratel.net.br Osmar de Carvalho Subject: Re: WTYF To Malcolm: >>We in New Zealand are backing this organisation in order to foster youth >membership of the theosophical society and its objectives around the world >as it is obvious that the TS has and aging membership and it is often very >difficult for younger new members to feel a sense of belonging. Well... well... This may sound tragic or comic but I study Theosophy since I was seventeen now I'm in the return of Saturn as a Lodge president and I never ever received one sole communication from WYTF although I had met many times the "retired" president from this "world" organization Arnaldo Sison his wife Marina sending regular mails from my branch to theirs. They do know my branch has a good number of young members because they saw them at theosophical meetings. I'm glad the organization is working people of many countries do contribute to the newsletter but at the same time shoked by the "fact" that the WYTF don't communicate with the Lodges of the country where its headquarters is located. It is a very strange situation to see news about this from New Zealand thousands of miles away when people envolved live at the same country do speak the same language as in the case of Brazil. >I said in a previous post that I would create and e-version of the WTYF >membership form however it looks a little complicated. If you are >interested in joining please e-mail to me malcolmi@iconz.co.nz or write to >me Malcolm Idoine 26 Arthur St Ponsonby Auckland New Zealand and I >will post you a membership form a copy of the constitution and a leaflet >about the organisation. Membership is free but you may like to make a >contribution towards postage as this is currently being funded by the >Brazilian and New Zealand sections. I would like so much to take part of WYTF and I request you to inform the new president that he could revise the politic of the past president communicating with the Brazilian members also. My Lodge is one example. There are many members in his twenties and they are the public whose stimulus of WYTF would bring many benefits. One "portuguese" issue of the newsletter would be great to start. He can send us the english version also because many of our members do read in english. OM SHANTI! Osmar From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 02:35:14 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Adyar Rules 02 Herewith rules 1-10 inclusive of the Adyar TS incorporated in 1905 being the second upload from the beginning rules 3345 already separately uploaded: -------------------------------- RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF THE ASSOCIATION NAMED 'THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY' ADYAR MADRAS 1. General Council The General Council shall be the Governing Body of The Theosophi- cal Society. All members of the General Council shall at all times be Fellows of the Society and not fewer than seven members of this Council shall be resident in India. 2. Members of the General Council a The President the Vice-President the Treasurer the Secretary and the General Secretaries of the component National Societies otherwise called Sections shall ex-officio be members of the General Council. The terms of those members of the General Council who hold office ex-officio shall expire with the vacation of their qualifying office. b The General Council shall include not fewer than 05 and not more than 12 Additional Members among whom all past Presidents while in good standing shall automatically have place. Other members shall on the nomination of the President be elected for a term of three years by vote or the General Council at its Annual Meeting their names having been sent to the Members of the General Council at least three months before the Annual Meeting. c Members retiring shall be eligible for re-election. d The Secretary shall be the Secretary of the General Council. 3. Removal of General Council members and officers It shall be competent for the General Council to remove any of its members or any officer of the Society excepting the President of the Theosophical Society and excepting the General Secretaries of National Societies by a three-fourths majority or its whole number of members at a special meeting called for the purpose of which at least three months' notice shall have been given the quorum consisting however of not fewer than five members. 4. Meetings of the General Council a The General Council shall ordinarily meet once a year at the time of the Annual Meeting or Convention of the Society; but a special meeting may be called at any time by the President and a meeting shall be called at any time by him or if not by him by the Secretary on the written requisition of not less than one-fourth of the total number of members; but of such special meetings not less than three months' notice shall be given and the notice shall contain a statement of the special business to be laid before the meeting. b Whenever at any time or place a Convention or other function of the Society shall bring together a number of members of the General Council the President at his discretion may call such members to a meeting for the purpose of study and discussion of any matters concerning the Society that he considers appropri- ate to lay before them. The meeting may then forward to the President its report on such matters and may make recommendations thereon. Such meetings shall be of a consultative nature without administrative or legislative authority or may be of a legisla- tive nature upon the decision of the General Council taken at least one year in advance. In the event the President does not himself attend such a meeting he may appoint the Vice-President or some other member of the General Council to preside in his stead. The President or his Deputy shall give not less than thirty days' notice of such meeting to all members of the General Council who may be expected to be present at the function that provides occasion for the meeting but all members of the Council shall have the right to attend. 5. Resolutions a On the request of any member of the General Council any resolution or other item of business proposed by such member shall be placed on the Agenda and circulated with brief supporting statements for consideration at the next meeting of the General Council provided that not less than three months' notice of such resolution or item of business shall be given to the Secretary. b At all meetings of the General Council members thereof may vote in person or in writing or by proxy duly given to another member of the General Council for the particular meeting concerned. Except as aforesaid no member shall exercise more than one vote. No member shall be allowed to exercise more than 05 proxy votes. Note: Meetings include adjourned meetings. 6. Quorum The quorum of an ordinary as well as of a special meeting of the General Council shall be five members. If there be no quorum the meeting may be adjourned sine die or the Chairman of the meeting may adjourn it to another date of which three months' further notice shall be given when the business of the meeting shall be disposed of irrespective of whether there is a quorum present or not. 7. Who Shall Preside The President or in his absence the Vice-President of the Society shall preside at all meetings of The Theosophical Society or of the General Council and shall have a casting vote in the case of an equal division or the members voting on any question before the meeting. 8. President In the absence of the President and the Vice-President the meeting shall elect a chairman from among the members present at the meeting and he shall have a casting vote in the case of a tie. 9. President's term of office The term of office for the President shall be seven years from the date of assuming office. 10. Election of President The procedure for election to the office of President shall be as follows: a Seven months before the expiration of a President's term of office or within three days or the office becoming vacant the Executive Committee shall appoint a special Committee consisting of three members of The Theosophical Society in good standing including the Secretary but excluding any candidate for the office of President to carry out the election procedure as hereinunder detailed. This Committee shall be known as the Election Committee and shall be answerable only to the Executive Committee. It shall be automatically dissolved on the declaration of the voting result. b Immediately on its appointment the Election Committee shall instruct the Secretary to send out to the members of the General Council a written call for nominations for the office of President. The call for nominations shall be sent by airmail or other expeditious means if airmail be unavailable followed one week later by a second duplicate call. c Any member of the Society in good standing having been a member for at least ten consecutive years immediately preceding his nomination may be nominated. Each member of the General Council who is a General Secretary shall be entitled to make three nominations and shall consult his Governing Body before making nominations. The President shall be entitled to make three nominations. The Vice-President Secretary Treasurer and each Additional Member of the General Council shall be entitled to make one nomination. The nominator shall be responsible for ensuring that his nominations reaches the Secretary within ten weeks of the date of the call for nomina- tion. The nominee shall be responsible for notifying the Secretary within the above- mentioned period of his acceptance of nomination. One written consent shall suffice for all nominations for that nominee. d At the expiration of ten weeks the Election Committee shall place all the nominations received together with the relevant papers before the Executive Committee at a meeting especially convened for the purpose. At such meeting the Executive Committee shall examine the nominations. The three nominees having the highest number of nominations shall alone be qualified to be on the voting list but if two or more nominees qualify for the last place on the voting list they shall both or all be included in the list. No nominee shall be included in the voting list unless supported by at least twelve nominations. The names of the nominees who thus qualify for inclusion shall be listed in alphabetical order. This list as finalized by the Executive Committee shall be the voting list and shall not be subject to challenge. However in the event of a nominee dying or being so seriously incapacitated as to be unable to carry out the Presidential duties if elected between the date of the call for nominations and the despatch of the voting list the nomination procedure shall be repeated commencing within seven days from the notification of the fact to the Secretary. e The Secretary shall then immediately communicate in writing by airmail or other expeditious means followed one week later by a second and duplicate communication the voting list together with biographical data of the candidates in accordance with Appendix A to these Rules to the General Secretaries Regional Secretaries Organizing Secretaries and Presidential Representa- tives and to the Lodges Branches and Fellows-at-large attached to Headquarters. Each General Secretary Regional Secretary Organizing Secretary and Presidential Representative shall make known the names of the candidates and their biographical data to the members in his area and take the votes in accordance with the instructions in Appendix B to these Rules of the individual members on the rolls of his National Society or area or adminis- tration who have been members in good standing for two full years as on the date of the call for nominations and shall communicate the results to the Secretary in accordance with the instructions given in Appendix B to these Rules. The Election Committee shall take the votes in accordance with the instructions given in Appendix B of these Rules of the members of the Lodges Branches and Fellows-at-large attached to Headquarters who have been members in good standing for two full years as on the date of the call for nominations. The voting results must reach the Secretary within fifteen weeks of the date of issue of the voting list by him. If only one name remains on the voting list the vote shall be taken on a 'For' or 'Against' ballot. f At the expiration of fifteen weeks from the date of issue of the voting list by the Secretary the voting results shall be totalled by the Election Committee and placed before the Executive Committee. Within three days of the closing date of voting the candidate who has received the largest number of votes shall be declared elected President and shall assume office not later than thirty days thereafter. In the event of a tie or of the rejection or a single candidate in a ' For' or 'Against ' ballot or of a candidate on the voting list dying or being so seriously in- capacitated as to be unable to carry out the Presidential duties if elected after the despatch of the voting list and before the final totalling of votes the nomination and election procedure shall be repeated commencing within seven days from the notification of the fact to the Secretary and the President in office or the Vice-President if he is temporarily filling such office shall continue therein until a new President assumes office. Note. A member is in good standing if his dues have been paid for the last official year to his Section Regional Association or Presidential Agency or in the case of Lodges Branches attached direct to Adyar and Fellows-at-large to the Secretary or Treasurer concerned. ----------------------------------------------------- AB -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 02:47:55 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series > When it comes to accomplishing one's daily work there is no technique of > Magick a period b which has not somewhere along the line been tried by > Jerry Schueler c which can turn it into a Picnick d which can produce > more success than choosing exactly the right occupation for oneself to begin > with. > > Richard Ihle ... b? Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 02:54:40 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy >Bee to Eldon: >> I don't really expect to see devotional people in Theosophy as it >>appeals to the intellect and promotes the wisdom as knowledge to the >>intellect and then for intellectual people the devotion comes later. We all >>start a various levels and types of spiritual pursuits. > > True. I used to wonder why after describing so many >gods and goddesses in the literature theosophists were simply >ignoring them. Finally I realized the reason is that gods and >goddesses are not appealing to the intellect. The polytheism >of theosophy is simply another intellectual doctrinal note in a >long list of others. In magical schools and in religions we >converse with these deities via either prayer or ritual. In >theosophy we pretty much ignore them. Do you think the Masters represent the intellectual version of god/desses? Perhaps it is the devotional persons who like Leadbeater and A B as there is more ritual in their writings and they talk more about how to approach the unseen worlds and use invocations etc. Conversing with deities in any shape or form seems scary to theosophists. Somehow that seems to have been lumped in under 'new age' and to be treated with caution. There is a real difference in thinking between the intellectual and the devotional and I sometimes wonder if the twain can meet sensibly. One day a jointing of the two will no doubt occur so in the mean time tolerance is sorely needed. > >Bee to Eldon: >>There are lots of people who do not see knowledge as an intellectual study >>to be their way of spiritual growth. > > I am one of these. However I do love to read and study. >I see this as building the scaffolding so to speak to keep the mind >on some kind of sanity track. The human mind requires a structure >or pattern of some kind in order to make sense of one's experiences. >Without such a "mind map" or intellectual background it is easy to >go off the deep end and loose one's perspective completely. The >thought "Am I crazy?" must be answered in some way. However >it is important to remember that this scaffolding i.e. world view is >always subject to change. > >From an intellectual's point of view much of the 'new age' is without perspective as the discussions come straight from the emotions and lack clarity of thought. I used to enjoy the new age stuff emotions and all until the novelty wore off and now I need more serious stuff to think about and I cannot get it together with it anymore. Rather a shame because they are all caring people and share all their experiences and dreams as if it was the most important thing there ever was. To them it is and I respect their right to do it their way but I find it is no longer satisfying to myself. >Bee to Eldon: >>Rituals do a lot for devotional people as they relate to spirit in that way. >>Rituals also get imbued with certain vibrations that these people can use in >>their meditations and can be felt by sensitive people. Sometimes rituals are >>what opens them to the spiritual life and then they have to discover which >>way is the best for them to follow. > > There are formal conscious and informal unconscious >rituals that we can conduct. If anyone thinks that they never do rituals >then they are simply done unconscious as every psychologist knows. >Most Buddhist meditations try to employ the body speech and mind >together. Thus these yogic meditations are really rituals. I love the concept of the Masters and so I guess in my own way I have organised a ritual of sorts out of the theosophical wisdom. I like to think of them as humanity's guardian angels and aspiring to one day being a chela seems a neat way to go. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy International > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 03:09:40 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > >>Eldon: >>What we will find in the future I think is that as physical >>gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an >>individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities >>without regard to the size of their nose the color of their >>eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. >> > >Obviously there are hugh changes taking place on the planet right now with >the change in consciouness spearheaded by the feminist and gay liberation >movements. This changes are not without probems as the great pains of the >past power based patriarchies are being worked through and collective karma >is released. > >Malcolm > Hi Malcolm Greeting from Wanganui. The changes in physical and non-physical reality is taken very seriously on the Lightwork-l discussion list. There are some interesting theories being talked about. Some of it I can't go with but still I read them to see what is happening in the big world out there. > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 04:24:41 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy On 12 199512 Eldon B. Tucker wrote: > Coherence: > > >Several have requested recommendations for a simpler statement of the > >philosophy sources which are not so daunting. Here are my recommendations: > > > >UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A wonderful "primer" for the any > >student and the book that was handed to me first 15 years ago. > > > >LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME by Wm Q. Judge. A collection of letters by > >Judge to students comprising a warm wise and practical approach to > >Theosophy. > > > >THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Wm Q. Judge. A summary of the SD in very readable > >language and an amazingly small book. Gets to the heart of the matter. > > > >ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A great > >companion to the Ocean > > There is a copy of a computerized version of "The Ocean of Theosophy" > and "Universal Theosophy" on theosophy.org. The first is in WordPerfect 5.1 > format. I set it up and proof-read it. The second is in ascii format. > These two were scanned by someone in Canada. It's been a few years since > I got the original scanned text and can't seem to find the piece of paper > where I wrote down the name of the guy that scanned them or I'd give > his name and email address. > > They also have a version of "Esoteric Buddhism" and "The Key to Theosophy" > also both in WordPerfect 5.1 format. I understand that they will be > reformatting the materials into HTML format. These two I set up. > > -- Eldon > Eldon: Glad to know the electronic version of classics in Theosophy. If anyone else knows about what else is available in electronic media it could be the start of a project to put all of them on a CD Rom. The prices of recordable CD Rom have come down and soon we all can have a couple of CD Roms with all the published Theosophy works. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 04:48:43 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Newbies > > I truly believe > Internet and the international access to theos-l is the next quantum leap > and we Theosophists should make full use of it no matter what the organized > entities/TS Organizations think about it or how they have reacted to it. I > am very objective about this whole thing. How many times have you seen any > of the elected/appointed officials at the national or regional level have > ever posted any messages here. It is either due to illiteracy on their part > or their indifference or what other reason they only know. As I pointed out > in a msg some time back let us all put ourself in the seat of HPB and > imagine how she would have used Internet as a means of attracting the > attention of the world to the Theosophical ideas. It may give us some > creative ideas. I expect she would have signed up for THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL and used a similar sig to mine but probably on a higher plane :- How about you? :- > ...doss Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 04:50:26 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: TSA Membership Trends At one point earlier in the year I asked John Algeo if it would be ok to give out selected TSA membership statistics. He said it would be ok if I were prudent and did not reveal any particular member's information. We've discussed trends in TS organizations to appealing to different age groups. Following is the trend in TSA membership over the last eight years. The statistics are based upon people joining the TSA for which valid birthdates exist in the database. -- Eldon ---- Trends in TSA Appeal to Different Age Groups 1987 - 1995 TOTAL <20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ OCT87 - SEP88 887 2% 9% 29% 30% 17% 13% OCT88 - SEP89 1034 1% 13% 31% 29% 13% 13% OCT89 - SEP90 804 2% 12% 26% 32% 16% 12% OCT90 - SEP91 695 1% 12% 27% 33% 13% 13% OCT91 - SEP92 721 1% 12% 27% 33% 17% 10% OCT92 - SEP93 654 1% 10% 24% 35% 19% 11% OCT93 - SEP94 641 2% 8% 22% 35% 20% 14% OCT94 - SEP95 597 1% 9% 20% 33% 19% 16% From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 04:57:04 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Beginner's list My *very first* book on Theosophy was Jinarajadasa's ~First Principles of Theosophy~ which was hard going and took me two weeks to read - but I got just about all the basics from a one-volume clearly printed volume. Although I went on to study mainly Kabala I have encouraged all students over the years to begin where I began - with basic theosophy. If you have that you have the basis for all the esoteric ideas and teachings all the new age material and all the writings of Eldon :- Mind you it is definitely not an easy book for someone who wants a "quick fix." I wish Adyar would reissue it. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 05:03:22 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy > [Liesel:] > > >In the same vein I don't approve of the By-laws revision that says > >newcomers have to wait for 02 years to be able to vote. What for? > > Yeah what for? If I am correct this 2-year wait is necessary as well for > joining the E.S. It's like you have to prove yourself a good theosophist > or: member first. Isn't it possible that even young people already > have their feet planted firmly on the Path perhaps more than age-long > members? IMHO it's a person's own responsibility to make the best of it > to follow one's Dharma! > > /* Peter */ > Member Theosophy International Absolutely - some 17-year old on the net might be an old soul returning to *tell* us something not to ask for it ..... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 05:06:49 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: TI Going up .... THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without discrimination with regard to sex including sexual orientation creed class or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* by any member. *** There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. The following internet folk have so far signed up: Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker ....... *** It has been suggested that we add: We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with others. I feel sure those above-named agree so please press your reply button/key and add "*** YES" to this message. Don't bother to snip just reply. Many thanks. Unanimity would be real nice ..... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk ----------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 05:25:06 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Father/Mother God > Father-Mother-God! In Thy mercy in Thy love be Thou the > guide just now as I seek in humility and in earnestness to > present that which may give my fellow man [uh-oh] a better and > more perfect insight into the love which was manifested by > Jesus my Lord and my God. Help Thou O God my every effort. > 849-76 Would you like to discuss this God person? I am up to my armpits in heretical and gender-inclusive theology ...... Alan :- -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 06:29:22 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Eldon I totally agree with what you wrote here and don't suppose it is unusual to think this way. It is just a shame to perpetuate an old concept by using a certain pronoun. Language is powerful. That was my main point. Ann >Alan: > >> [writing to Ann]: > >>Of course God does not and cannot have a sexual identity yet >>the language which supposes this persists and those like >>myself who protest are either ignored or insulted though not >>insulted on theos-l. > >According to our theosophical textbooks the separation into >sexes happened in an earlier race and will one day in the >distant future end. It is a temporary experience. We as >human Monads are not male or female but simply human. > >The being whose existence brings about our world a being which >might be called "God" is sexless. Sexual differences are like >other patterns of personality; they are psycho-physical. They >are among those specific attributes taken on in a particular >lifetime. > >We will never directly know the "God" whose life energies create >our world. That being bears a relationship to us akin to the >relationship that we bear to our lifeatoms or Skandhas. What >we relate to and know are gods and goddesses. These are the >Dhyani-Chohans the highest beings in our system. They establish >the laws of nature and spiritual superstructure of the world. > >While male and female are polarizations of our physical body >and temporary constructs masculine and feminine are universal >qualities that things can take on. We can have a male or >female deity. They are male or female not because of physical >form but because of representing a masculine or feminine quality. >Shiva for instance would be male and Shakti female. > >What we will find in the future I think is that as physical >gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an >individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities >without regard to the size of their nose the color of their >eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. > >-- Eldon > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 08:26:54 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re J00 H-E Bylaws & Bailey >Liesel: >>Dear Jim >>I wish you would put on Alice Bailey's 07 new ideas. >>It might start a good discussion & I dare anyone to expel you from >>cyberspace. They won't. You might get an argument. That's all. > >I second the request. > >- ann bermingham > I third that. By the way I have been to have a look at the Theosophy Page on the web and found the library postings. Printed off 34 pages of assorted goodies. Quite a bit there from Judge. Keep it coming it will all end up in our library as articles on display for members.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 08:31:45 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re re JHE and Bailey Peter Walstra writes: >A couple of months ago I ran into some books of Saraydarian for >the first time he seems to have written quite a few just like >every other well-known theosophist ;-. >Trying to expand my Theosophy-related horizon I would be most >pleased to learn something more about him and this Aquarian >Educational Group. Anyone can tell me some more or refer me >to some address in Cyberspace? >Thanx... JHE He lives in Sedona Arizona now and has about 35 books to his credit which he primarily distributes himself: Aquarian Educational Group P.O. Box 267 Sedona AZ 86336 602 282-2655 Depending upon how you use the word "theosophist" I'm not sure if it is an appropriate label for Torkom Saraydarian. He is the head of his own organization that is much more closely related to the Arcane School pedigree than to the Theosophical Society. On the other hand I consider AAB teachings to be represent another school of theosophy. But the Arcane School the Aquarian Educational Group and the Theosophical Society are very separate organizations. In one sense I would only use the term "theosophist" to apply to those very rare people who live a life of pure altruism--such as perhaps Mother Theresa. In the other hand for the word "theosophist" in context to an organization I would only apply it to members of the Theosophical Organizations. For instance CWL would be "a theosophist" but AAB would not be after 1918 when she left the TS to start her own organization. In this usage of the word I prefer the term "student of theosophy." I used to invite Saraydarian to speak on the Secret Doctrine at the Los Angeles Branch. I remember not agreeing with many of his interpretations But I never included or excluded speakers based upon my opinion of their point of view yet they were obviously well thought out and were based upon AAB's interpretations of the SD. Jerry HE ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 08:36:24 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Titillation >BB: >>As Liesel said people learn quickest if they >>are enthusiastic about what they are reading and if that is A B then I would >>rather they did that than say 'no no' and give them SD. Sadly many want >>titilation with their knowledge so while they are going through that stage >>they will not take on something that takes serious thought. > >I was intrigued by the meaning of the word titillation in regard to esoteric >material and spiritual growth so I consulted my robot dictionary and found this >interesting quote. It also suggests that one would have to keep "titillating" >the readers or they will go elsewhere. Although I read and like CWL that >reminds me of him and his more fantastic writings. > >Titillation >To excite another especially in a superficial pleasurable manner: "Once you >decide to titillate instead of illuminate . . . you create a climate of >expectation that requires a higher and higher level of intensity" Bill Moyers. > >The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition >copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from >InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. > What a handy dictionary. I like that definition and it fits nicely to the groups I used to go to because the novelty wore off so I guess we ran out of titillation. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 08:44:50 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Newbies >At 053700 PM 12/11/95 -0500 Jerry S wrote: > >>suspicious. I don't expect newbies to "keep up" with some of my >>discussions. After studying for almost 30 years I would hope that I >>am able to talk over their heads at some point. While this is >>probably frustrating to them I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>a member at large and except for computer networking have >>not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with >>others. > > In the very early days of TS when there were very few written >publications the members were having a difficult time getting information >on various Theos* subjects. Reading your appreciation of theos-l and how it >would have helped you if it were there I see an analogy. I truly believe >Internet and the international access to theos-l is the next quantum leap >and we Theosophists should make full use of it no matter what the organized >entities/TS Organizations think about it or how they have reacted to it. I >am very objective about this whole thing. How many times have you seen any >of the elected/appointed officials at the national or regional level have >ever posted any messages here. It is either due to illiteracy on their part >or their indifference or what other reason they only know. As I pointed out >in a msg some time back let us all put ourself in the seat of HPB and >imagine how she would have used Internet as a means of attracting the >attention of the world to the Theosophical ideas. It may give us some >creative ideas. > >I must pass on that I send articles of interest to our National President in Auckland and he tells me he enjoys reading them and if it isn't any trouble to keep sending them. I have heard mention that they are thinking about joining us one of these days. I have just sent a envelope full to do with the by-law postings etc up there for his Xmas reading. I think lack of time is one factor that has kept Internet at bay. > > I have always felt that JEM and any one else who took the initiative >to put the theos-xxxx together have done all of us a great favor and our >gratitude is due to all of them. > > ...doss > >> >> Jerry S. >When the list goes down from time to time I get withdrawal symptoms because I just love this Internet and all you lovely people. I have learned so much since joining and I appreciate your patience when I let rip.> >> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 09:04:04 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale On 12 199512 Richtay@aol.com wrote: > >MEMO: To Members of the Atlanta Lodge > >From: Brant Jackson > >Subject By-Law revisions > > >[Imagine if] The Board of Directors and a majority of the lodge members > acting under the influence of several powerful > >members vote to sell the real property for the financial benefit of the > >individual lodge members i.e. to give each member a pro-rata share of > >sale proceeds. > > While offensive to us all many of us would > >think that the chances of it actually happening would be highly unlikely > >if not impossible. This scenario however actually happened recently > >with the Boston Lodge > > Whooaaa !! Hold your horses here fella! I was SECRETARY of the Boston Lodge > during the fallout of the lawsuit and I am personal friends with almost all > of the current board members. To my knowledge no individual has received a > PENNY from the sale of the building rather a new building was bought in a > suburb of Boston called Arlington. > > I did NOT support the lawsuit nor do I support the Alice Bailey studies of > the current Arlington T.S. but it is grossly unfair even malicious to > insinuate that these Theosophists however misguided were actually motivated > by greed and personal gain. I can't believe this accusation is being posted > internationally and the author of it should certainly recant and apologize > publicly. > > We may not agree with many of our brother and sister Theosophists but > neither can we get away with slander and lies about them. How unbrotherly ! > > Disgusted > > Rich Taylor > Glad you posted the message. I do not know how many are aware of Brant Jackson's unsigned memo was circulated by the National President of TSA to all the Lodges and Study Centers with a cover letter in effect endorsing Brant Jackson's letter. In the circustances both the National President and Brant Jackson need to apologize in public and send copies to everyone to whom the cover letter and Jackson's letters were sent. If on the other hand they have facts support that the tax exempt assets were converted to private benefit they need to file a complaint with Internal Revenue Service in public who will take action on the individuals involved. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 09:18:54 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: TI *** YES From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 09:18:57 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Coherence wrote: >>Theosophy exists independent of the T.S. or any other body and most fail to realize this. It is the mutual sympathy of thought existing among Theosophists which binds them together. When studying in ernest help is never far away. And if we each acted according to the spirit and philosophy of the teachings more would be drawn to and stay with Theosophy being the most undiluted statement of the Ancient Wisdom<< Good post !! Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 09:19:02 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale >MEMO: To Members of the Atlanta Lodge >From: Brant Jackson >Subject By-Law revisions >[Imagine if] The Board of Directors and a majority of the lodge members acting under the influence of several powerful >members vote to sell the real property for the financial benefit of the >individual lodge members i.e. to give each member a pro-rata share of >sale proceeds. While offensive to us all many of us would >think that the chances of it actually happening would be highly unlikely >if not impossible. This scenario however actually happened recently >with the Boston Lodge Whooaaa !! Hold your horses here fella! I was SECRETARY of the Boston Lodge during the fallout of the lawsuit and I am personal friends with almost all of the current board members. To my knowledge no individual has received a PENNY from the sale of the building rather a new building was bought in a suburb of Boston called Arlington. I did NOT support the lawsuit nor do I support the Alice Bailey studies of the current Arlington T.S. but it is grossly unfair even malicious to insinuate that these Theosophists however misguided were actually motivated by greed and personal gain. I can't believe this accusation is being posted internationally and the author of it should certainly recant and apologize publicly. We may not agree with many of our brother and sister Theosophists but neither can we get away with slander and lies about them. How unbrotherly ! Disgusted Rich Taylor From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 10:07:11 GMT From: Ruben Cabigting Subject: Re: re re beginner's list Alan Come to think of it that was also the book that brought me to Theosophy. It was on Nov in 1951 when I just received my commission as Ensign in the Navy and I was visiting a friend in his office and saw the book on his table. My friend said that there is this Navy Captain who is lending TS books to Navy personnel. I borrowed the book and my photographic mind then enabled me to finish reading the book that night. The next day I saw the Captain and we immediately became good friends he gave me an application form and I paid my membership dues and became a T.S. member since then. Ignoring the science part of the book to a new member or to a person who has no idea about Theosophy most of its contents were very helpful as an introduction to Theosophy then. Ruben Cabigting On 12 199512 Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote: > > Alan writes: > > My *very first* book on Theosophy was Jinarajadasa's ~First > Principles of Theosophy~ which was hard going and took me two > weeks to read - but I got just about all the basics from a > one-volume clearly printed volume. > > JHE > Actually that was also the first book on theosophy that I > seriously read--and it helped to peak my interest in astronomy. > Ironically through my new interest in astronomy I came to > realize that the science especially the astronomy is very out > of date. What is worse CJ's teachings which are essentially > restatements of CWL's hang on that scientific mis-information. > I would think that most anyone with a basic scientific background > would be put off of theosophy if they read it. > A little over fifteen years ago a representative from TPH > Wheaton made a business trip to our Lodge and book store. He > mentioned that TPH London would not reprint ~First Principles~ > because of the out-of-date science. On the other hand I'm > surprised at how many people still value that book. Used copies > are very much in demand. It seems that TPH has a good model for > a basic textbook on theosophy here but it needs to be completely > rewritten. > > Jerry HE > Member Theosophy International > International Theosophist > > ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins > ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and > CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org > |------------------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 10:50:56 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: TI AYE Jerry HE Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 12:29:58 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Working on ballot Have been trying to follow all points of view expressed about by-laws here and in the AT and am coming up confused. Questions for anyone who cares to advise: I'm voting yes for the housekeeping changes 1-35710-14 because I haven't seen any reason to oppose them. No on 08 for reasons stated by others. Am not clear about 469 and 15-19. Would vote no on 09 but after reading John Algeo's explanation that the new by-law on rescinding membership is not as bad as the old guess it's OK. 4 makes me wonder what sort of compatibility statement is needed and why; 06 is confusing with two lawyers giving opposite advice 15-18 raise issues of local autonomy I'd like to see debated more and 19 makes me want to know the current rules about referendum petitions. Can anyone shed more light on any of the above? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 12:45:21 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: God loves you In a message dated 95-12-06 114134 EST you write: >The knee-jerk orthodox Theosophical response to the >phrase "God loves you" would be a00 Initiates do not use the >word God as the truth about the cosmos is far too complex to >be adequately rendered by a term fraught with anthropomorphic >connotations; b love is a univeral law of attraction and >repulsion and not some current directed at an individual from >some other level of being; c the "you" which wants to be loved >by God is the lower personality the desire nature which is >mortal and should be transcended not mollycoddled with >pietistic religion. To which after immersing myself in the >Cayce material I can only respond with "God loves you anyway. What a riot! Thank you for the comic relief sorely needed. There is no humor so great as that which points out the obvious the humor in the everyday events as in the style of the classic George Carlin and soon to be famous Richard Ihle. The problem I find with this type of approach a la Cayce Bailey is that the anthropomorphic terminology and references to an Absolute Principle with all too human characteristics kills self-reliance and removes responsibility from the individual. This would occur in those who have not or could not study a system such as Theosophy to be able to detect and interpret the symbolism of these writers. The thinking goes: If there is a God who loves me s/he therefore forgives me. This concept is ultimately belittling to the individual because they are not forced to recognize the true divinity within and its possible "development" and powers and then accept responsibility for their actions and their ability to create and bring about change. People tend to either rail against the injustice of life or passively chalk difficulties and "the unknown" up to the will of God. It's God's way. So you may find a little personal and emotional solace from these writings but remember that you have the benefit of an understanding of Theosophy to provide light on the import of the more emotional words of Cayce. For me I much prefer a little more of the intellectual approach but only to provide the why. Rather than say "intellectual" I think "rational" would be better because we truly have the reasons and the ability to reason through these ideas. "Intellectual" is cold "rational" is productive creative and leads to conclusion action and a reasoned faith as opposed to a blind faith.. Thank you for the wonderful observation on Theosophists and thank god its true. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 13:11:47 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: JHE and Bailey >My position was one of an investigator. I was a person >knowledgeable about HPB but less so about AAB. Arvind was >knowledgeable about AAB but less so about HPB. So I proposed a >dialogue and comparison of ideas for our mutual education. As >for "neo-theosophy" I perceive it as a system distinct from pre ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >1895 theosophy. I don't think Saradarian really entered the ^^^^^^^^^^^ >discussions. He used to drop in and out of SD classes I used to >hold and I used to invite him to do public talks at the LA >Branch twice a year. Otherwise I didn't have much contact with >him. He lives in Arizona now. >Jerry HE >International Theosophist A couple of months ago I ran into some books of Saraydarian for the first time he seems to have written quite a few just like every other well-known theosophist ;-. Trying to expand my Theosophy-related horizon I would be most pleased to learn something more about him and this Aquarian Educational Group. Anyone can tell me some more or refer me to some address in Cyberspace? Thanx... /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 13:54:34 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking RI >>But would it be arrogant to talk with apodictic certainty about >>living Mahatmas and the authenticity of what one has learned by >>means of Them if Their continuing existence were merely someone's >>pleasant private belief to begin with? ET While it's fine to open up to consideration any particular idea found in Theosophy and consider its pros and cons I don't think that the basic ideas are anyone's pleasant private beliefs. The ideas are part of a system of thought and they are interdependent. You could also say the same thing about any of the basic ideas. Perhaps Parabrahm is someone's private belief? Or other planes of existence? Or the unity of life? RI Unless an individual corroborates these ideas theosophically mystically transcendentally for himself or herself the ideas--for all of their beauty and glory--are merely potential "contaminants" for the formation of egoic delusions at either the desire-mental or mental levels of consciousness. "I *really am* the idea I believe or am attracted to." "I *really am* my dispassionate understanding of the idea and the logical operations and implications which arise from it." Few individuals who believe in the continuing existence of the Mahatmas seem to testify that such a belief is an unpleasant or merely neutral thing for them; therefore one might guess that it is "pleasant" or egoically "useful" to them in some way. Possibly *ditto* for *Parabrahm* *planes* *unity* etc.--however there is a much better chance that these are actually individual theosophical insights since they are some of the first things which authenticate themselves by means of meditative practice. *Private* is really the thing I was hoping you would address. In this instance I mean it in the sense of being "closed" or "restricted to the individual." Assuming for the discussion that the fact of living Mahatmas has *not* been validated theosophically by a person what could be another basis for "believing" in Them? Is there any or is it merely a closed pleasant private predilection of merely idiopathic importance. If it is just the latter certainly the "Chain of Authority" we were talking about seems a little slight . . . and to use it perhaps a little arrogant. Would you be willing step up to the plate theosophically? That is would you be willing to go on record and say that you have an inner certainty about the continuing existence of the Mahatmas and that it has come as the natural result of your meditative practice or that it has developed in you in some other theosophical/mystical/transcendental way? I would accept such a statement without challenge. On the other hand look what we have without it: "How do you know there are Mahatmas?" "Because H.P.B. tells us there are." "How do you know H.P.B. is reliable in this regard?" "Because H.P.B.'s knowledge was given to her by Mahatmas." "How do you know there are Mahatmas?" "Because H.P.B. tells us there are." "How do you know H.P.B. is reliable in this regard?" "Because H.P.B's knowledge was given to her by Mahatmas." "How do you know there are Mahatmas?" Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:15 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series >When it comes to accomplishing one's daily work there is no technique of >Magick a period b which has not somewhere along the line been tried by >Jerry Schueler c which can turn it into a Picnick d which can produce >more success than choosing exactly the right occupation for oneself to begin >with. > >Richard Ihle Definitely b. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:19 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: To Eldon Eldon: >What do do after joining? This is the important question that comes >up again and again. We can provide people with books and hold study >classes but what do we really give them *to do*? They could become >lodge presidents and hold classes for others but what if they are >ready for more than reading books? > >When someone wants something more that person can come up with a >self-devised approach to the Path. This is difficult though and >not a likely thing. It's more likely that anyone doing so is simply >"remembering" an approach taught them in a previous lifetime. More >likely people will leave theosophical groups to find a teacher and >practice. > >The techniques of theosophical groups are based upon teaching the >basic philosophical ideas. The teachings stop short of actual >spiritual practice and training and are theoretical. The highest >person in a theosophical group may be a pundit but not a guru. >If this is the goal of theosophical groups then they are successful. >If we were to expect more of them then we could say that they >fall short. > >The arrogance would come in I think when people active in >theosophical groups would claim that *this is the highest there is*. >That is when they claim that there are no higher practices training >or approaches to the Path other than the study of books in theosophical >lodges. Eldon I find myself in full agreement with you here. Eldon: >The important question which you and many of us raise is: >what do we give people to do when they've joined our theosophical >groups? And how can we improve over what we currently offer? >Let's move beyond potatoe-chip spirituality and see if we can >cook up a full meal for people... I would like to add "especially for those who are members at large who must sink or swim entirely on their own." Jerry S. Member Theosophy international From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:26 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Some responses to Eldon's posting: >According to our theosophical textbooks the separation into >sexes happened in an earlier race and will one day in the >distant future end. It is a temporary experience. We as >human Monads are not male or female but simply human. The sexes split at the inception of duality and will continue so long as we live in a dualistic world. >The being whose existence brings about our world a being which >might be called "God" is sexless. Sexual differences are like >other patterns of personality; they are psycho-physical. They >are among those specific attributes taken on in a particular >lifetime. I do not believe that such a "being" exists. Our world was brought about by a countless host of beings all acting through karmic laws of causation and just a little chaos to liven things up. Your words suggest a very narrow definition of "sex." In occultism female and male mean a lot more than physical bodies or personalities. Female is soft and accepting while male is firm and directing. Male is the conscious I while female is its world or Not-I and so on. Bodies and personalities are but expressions of these basic dualisms on the lower planes. They will continue must continue on the lower planes so long as their basic archetypes exist on the higher planes. I agree with Jung that we each have an inner opposite sexual identity so that every man has a feminine anima and every woman has a masculine animus. Thus I would say that we don't have to wait for countless eons in the future but we are in fact whole and complete human beings right now. >While male and female are polarizations of our physical body >and temporary constructs masculine and feminine are universal >qualities that things can take on As I noted above I see the lower as expressions of the higher. If "masculine and feminine are universal qualities" then we will take on male and female bodies forever because these are but expressions. >What we will find in the future I think is that as physical >gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an >individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities >without regard to the size of their nose the color of their >eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. This will not happen in any of our lifetimes and I rather think it a pipedream albeit a nice one. The current movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying to be more like men. This has already resulted in sever psychological damage to many women and some men. The answer is not for one sex to imitate the other but for the two to combine in a monadic-like unity. I do not believe that this will ever happen on Globe D. Jerry S. Member Theosophy international From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:29 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Coherence: > From observing the posts here it is becoming painfully clear that >Theosophical Organizations are problematic and really need to be re-thought. > Let me also state that I am not never have been and probably never will be >a member of the or any T.S. All human organizations are problematic. I learned this from 30 years of working within a Government bureaucracy and in earning my Masters of Science in Administration degree. This is also something to keep in mind when we all talk about growth and ways to increase our membership - the larger the organization the more bureaucratic and unwieldy it becomes. Jerry S. Member Theosophy international From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:33 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy >To truly know a person and look into their heart requires empathy >a direct-connectedness that resides in Buddhi. We need to put ourselves >in that person's place by realizing how we are connected with that >person. Using psychism looking at their physical appearance listening >to what they say we can gather *external clues* to what is going on. >But it's in our direct experience of oneness with the other person >in which we really know what is needed. > >-- Eldon Buddhi looks out at another person and sees - buddhi. Your last sentence is absolutely correct. But "oneness with the other person" requires more than buddhi because that person is more than buddhi and his/her problems are not in buddhi but in kama-manas. You cannot look directly at another person's kama-manas through your buddhi alone. Atma-buddhi-manas does not recognize any "problems" that exist in kama-manas nor will it even recognize kama-manas as existing at all but rather sees the person as whole and quasi-perfect. If you want to "see" the problems fears and so on in another person you have to use psychism in the sense of using your own kama-manas which hopefully has been enlightened and purified by atma-buddhi. In the terms of modern magic/occultism in order to see another person's astral or mental bodies you must be in your own astral or mental body and view from that perspective. Buddhi is the causal body and viewing through that vehicle will not help to see another person's astral or mental bodies at all but only the other person's causal body which will not be helpful. Jerry S. Member Theosophy international From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 15:39:37 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Dark night of the soul >>Jerry S. wrote: >> >> >> >>... The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul >> is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at >> some point in which the human mind eventually >> comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never >> allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. > >I thought of it more as the anguish one feels now I see I am >speaking at the emotional level while you are addressing our mental >state over the separation which occurs as we strike out away from >the group we have been traveling with for many lifetimes. > >Lewis I think that I have it right Lewis at least as it was used in olden times. If this Dark Night is successfully passed through one arrives at some level of gnosis or intuitive/spiritual insight that is beyond the human mind. If it is not passed through the usual result is death and one must try again in the next life. So the Dark Night is really a pretty serious stage along the Path. If one arrives at spiritual insight without going through this Dark Night then I would assume that it was handled successfully during a past life. Jerry S. Member Theosophy international From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 16:37:21 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Newbies >From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown >Subject: Re: Newbies >At 053700 PM 12/11/95 -0500 Jerry S wrote: > >>suspicious. I don't expect newbies to "keep up" with some of my >>discussions. After studying for almost 30 years I would hope that I >>am able to talk over their heads at some point. While this is >>probably frustrating to them I wish that I could have had theos-l 30 > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>or so years ago when I was grappling with these subjects and > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>learning all on my own. If I feel anything its probably envy. I am > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>a member at large and except for computer networking have >>not had a chance to share views or discuss these subjects with >>others. > > In the very early days of TS when there were very few written >publications the members were having a difficult time getting information >on various Theos* subjects. Reading your appreciation of theos-l and how it >would have helped you if it were there I see an analogy. I truly believe >Internet and the international access to theos-l is the next quantum leap >and we Theosophists should make full use of it no matter what the organized >entities/TS Organizations think about it or how they have reacted to it. I >am very objective about this whole thing. How many times have you seen any >of the elected/appointed officials at the national or regional level have >ever posted any messages here. It is either due to illiteracy on their part >or their indifference or what other reason they only know. As I pointed out >in a msg some time back let us all put ourself in the seat of HPB and >imagine how she would have used Internet as a means of attracting the >attention of the world to the Theosophical ideas. It may give us some >creative ideas. > >I must pass on that I send articles of interest to our National President in Auckland and he tells me he enjoys reading them and if it isn't any trouble to keep sending them. I have heard mention that they are thinking about joining us one of these days. I have just sent a envelope full to do with the by-law postings etc up there for his Xmas reading. I think lack of time is one factor that has kept Internet at bay. > > I have always felt that JEM and any one else who took the initiative >to put the theos-xxxx together have done all of us a great favor and our >gratitude is due to all of them. > > ...doss > >> >> Jerry S. >When the list goes down from time to time I get withdrawal symptoms because I just love this Internet and all you lovely people. I have learned so much since joining and I appreciate your patience when I let rip.> >> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International I know that John Algeo is too busy to read all of theos-l but some people in Wheaton do & show John that which they deem important & to the point. I too miss theos-l when it goes off. Dreamscape was upgrading on Nov. 30 & I wasn't able to get back into my e-mail until Dec. 6. Out of habit I came up to my apartment from the dining room & wanted to go over to my computer desk & I also had withdrawal symptoms. I would like to see some more systematic studying go on on theos-l. So far we debate whatever comes to someone's mind. Come to think of it why don't we have a separate theos- start for newcomers? Like where one of us puts on something very basic every week. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 16:43:47 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Titillation >From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown >Subject: Re: Titillation >BB: >>As Liesel said people learn quickest if they >>are enthusiastic about what they are reading and if that is A B then I would >>rather they did that than say 'no no' and give them SD. Sadly many want >>titilation with their knowledge so while they are going through that stage >>they will not take on something that takes serious thought. > >I was intrigued by the meaning of the word titillation in regard to esoteric >material and spiritual growth so I consulted my robot dictionary and found this >interesting quote. It also suggests that one would have to keep "titillating" >the readers or they will go elsewhere. Although I read and like CWL that >reminds me of him and his more fantastic writings. > >Titillation >To excite another especially in a superficial pleasurable manner: "Once you >decide to titillate instead of illuminate . . . you create a climate of >expectation that requires a higher and higher level of intensity" Bill Moyers. > >The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition >copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from >InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. > What a handy dictionary. I like that definition and it fits nicely to the groups I used to go to because the novelty wore off so I guess we ran out of titillation. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International Titillation reminds me of the crapola you can watch on American TV any time day or night. Lunchtime today I was cruising around looking for something interesting to look at while I ate my tofu chili. I found this talk show where they were interviewing this pretty young lady who was saying that she loved her disabled boy friend & that she was a prostitute to get money for them both to live on. Why would she do that for him? Because he was very kind to her. So help me that's what I saw on TV this noon before I turned to another channel Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 16:52:33 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Alice A. Bailey; tenets The writings of ALice A. Bailey AAB in shorthand make up an interesting part of the overall body of theosophical publications IMO. I don't believe there is any question about the books' basis in the theosophy of HPB but there is certainly debate on nearly everything after that point. As mentioned in an earlier post my introduction to AAB came from a local TS group in Austin TX -- the first TS group I had ever met. The following text is taken more or less verbatim from a pamphlet by the AAB publishing group. I will attest to the accuracy of what is written here in so far as matching the original published material -- I am interested to know how the ideas fit or clash with "orthodox" theosophy as promoted by the larger organizations. note: "new" is a relative term; some of the "newer" ideas of Alice Bailey are commonplace now and we may discover that the source as far as can be determined or inspriration may predate AAB. It is *not* my intention to promote a debate or discussion regarding materials which are not in public circulation from the ES archives or any other such source. Jim The Tibetan Djwhal Khul has said that his work continues on the foundations laid by Mdm. Blavatsky and the early teachers in the TS. He gives us in some detail what he considers to be the "newer truths" and he lists these seven ideas as 1 The teaching on Shamballa; the Spiritual Hierarchy of the earth and the "center where the Will of God is known" including the nature of the will aspect and the building of the conscious bridge between the personality and the higher Self 2 The teaching on the New Discipleship including the changes resulting from the new energies available as we transit into Aquarius and the meditative techniques for the Aryan people 3 The teaching on the Seven Rays the conditioning energies or "Seven Spirits before the Throne of God" emphasizing the psychology of the consciousness of man and God 4 The teaching on the new astrology with the conditioning forces which influence the soul and not the personality 5 Information about the New Group of World Servers as a group intermediate between Hierarchy and humanity and determining the quality of the period in which we live through the men and women of goodwill 6 The attempt to form an exoteric branch of the inner Ashram as detailed in the two volumes of Discipleship in the New Age and 7 The teaching on the coming new world religion emphasizing the three major festivals and nine lesser and of the meditations at the time of the full moon. This establishes a relation between the work of the Buddha and the Christ broadening human aspiration. These are the essential teachings of the Tibetan. The Lucis Trust is the organization responsible for the legal and financial affairs of the service activities set up in conjunction with the Bailey teachings. There are a number of parallels between the Lucis Trust and the TS; both organizations have a wonderful and free lending library by mail both maintain a correspondence course designed for training individuals in the methods of occultism and meditation and both will absolutely fill your mailbox with all kinds of interesting things just for asking. In my opinion the Tibetan's teachings can be summed up as information about *relationships* and the Laws and principles which govern them. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 16:52:37 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Father/Mother God >From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain >Subject: Re: Father/Mother God > Father-Mother-God! In Thy mercy in Thy love be Thou the > guide just now as I seek in humility and in earnestness to > present that which may give my fellow man [uh-oh] a better and > more perfect insight into the love which was manifested by > Jesus my Lord and my God. Help Thou O God my every effort. > 849-76 Would you like to discuss this God person? I am up to my armpits in heretical and gender-inclusive theology ...... Alan :- -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Father/Mother/God ... Who dat man? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 17:01:30 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy >From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain >Subject: Re: Nutritious Theosophy > [Liesel:] > > >In the same vein I don't approve of the By-laws revision that says > >newcomers have to wait for 02 years to be able to vote. What for? > > Yeah what for? If I am correct this 2-year wait is necessary as well for > joining the E.S. It's like you have to prove yourself a good theosophist > or: member first. Isn't it possible that even young people already > have their feet planted firmly on the Path perhaps more than age-long > members? IMHO it's a person's own responsibility to make the best of it > to follow one's Dharma! > > /* Peter */ > Member Theosophy International Absolutely - some 17-year old on the net might be an old soul returning to *tell* us something not to ask for it ..... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk And suppose you don't as yet have your feet firmly planted on the Path but are seeking as I did at first what's wrong with being able to vote then? It's been 30 years since I started out with AB's "The Ancient Wisdom". I think I've gotten a bit wiser but from what I read from some of our younger theos-l members I keep on thinking I got a very late start. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 17:22:08 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking Eldon Re the Masters not giving out many esoteric secrets. I think this is because many people are not as yet ethically advanced enough to be able to work with those esoteric secrets without hurting someone. Just think of the faculty of being able to read another person's thoughts which is said to not be terribly difficult to do. If you can read someone's thoughts you'll know all their weaknesses and if you're not completely ethical loving & harmless you might go right for the jugular if you get angry enough at them. It makes good sense to me that some esoteric things are only given out to those who are ready. The others don't need to settle for crumbs really but they need to learn what there is to learn which includes hoiw to practice Ahimsa. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 18:06:06 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: by-law vote >From: MK Ramadoss >Subject: Re: by-law vote At 051000 PM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: >Dear Gerda Thompson > >I think you've got a real good idea. Instead of railroading these >by-laws through now in such a short time there should be more time to discuss them & we >could vote on them lateron. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > do your really think anyone out there is thinking about thinking thru this whole issue of railroading. their single thought at least to me is how quickly we can get this thru and implement all that the new bylaws empowers them to do. ..doss I asked John Algeo whether he couldn't postpone the voting so we could talk this thing over a little better & he said that the Board would have to do it. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 18:14:57 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Rich If you were the Secretary of the Boston Lodge please tell us how it came about that the building near Boston U campus was sold. Also do you know what happened to Lou DeLuca? Thanks. Liesel Member Theosoophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 18:39:16 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking At 102500 PM 12/12/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >esoteric things are only given out to those who are ready. The others >don't need to settle for crumbs really but they need to learn what >there is to learn which includes hoiw to practice Ahimsa. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > I completely agree with you. We all have a lot to learn and we do learn every minute of our lives. The practice of Ahimsa just for the good it contributes to all living beings is a very contributory way to help all living beings which automatically includes humans and by practicing Ahimsa may be progressing spiritually too. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 18:39:20 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: by-law vote At 110600 PM 12/12/95 -0500 you wrote: >Date: 11 199512 223725 -0500 >Reply-to: theos-l@vnet.net >From: MK Ramadoss >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Re: by-law vote > >At 051000 PM 12/11/95 -0500 you wrote: >>Dear Gerda Thompson >> >>I think you've got a real good idea. Instead of railroading these >>by-laws through now in such a short time there should be more time to >discuss them & we >>could vote on them lateron. >> >>Liesel >>Member Theosophy International >>Member Human Race >> > > do your really think anyone out there is thinking about thinking >thru this whole issue of railroading. their single thought at least to me >is how quickly we can get this thru and implement all that the new bylaws >empowers them to do. > > ..doss > >I asked John Algeo whether he couldn't postpone the voting so we >could talk this thing over a little better & he said >that the Board would have to do it. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race Glad you talked to John Algeo. Hope he brings this issue to the Board of Directors and recommends that it is a good idea to postpone the whole thing. I am sure the Board will go along. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 21:48:19 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Doss wrote > In the circustances both the National President and Brant Jackson > need to apologize in public and send copies to everyone to whom the cover > letter and Jackson's letters were sent. > > If on the other hand they have facts support that the tax exempt assets > were converted to private benefit they need to file a complaint with > Internal Revenue Service in public who will take action on the > individuals involved. Yes and if there's PROOF I will be shocked. I don't like the work that these Boston Theosophists are doing but that is THEIR business and THEIR karma. I was very invovled in the process and did not see anyone benefitting PERSONALLY in any way especially financially. Rather it was a great headache and sacrifice to everyone involved -- BOTH sides. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 22:42:01 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM Bee: >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone working full time on the project. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 22:42:01 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM Bee: >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone working full time on the project. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 22:52:34 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Liesel wrote > Rich > > If you were the Secretary of the Boston Lodge please tell us how it > came about that the building near Boston U campus was sold. > > Also do you know what happened to Lou DeLuca? > > Thanks. The building near Boston Univesity was sold because a Boston University wanted it back and b it was necessary to liquidate funds to pay for the lawsuit and to have dividends to split up between the two parties. 2/3 of the assets remaining after the legal fees went to the newly incorporated and independent Besant Lodge autonomous from TSA and 1/3 went to the Blavatsky branch headed by regional director Fernando De Torrijos and his wife Ruth. The building near BU was sold to the campus for nearly 01 million dollars. There were nearly $400000 in legal fees and then $390000 went to the Besant Lodge and nearly $200000 went to the Blavatsky lodge. The Besant group used their money to buy the new building in Arlington a suburb of Boston on the other side of the Charles River the next city out beyond Cambridge. The Blavatsky group meets privately in homes of members and to my knowledge does not yet have meetings open to the public. It is not clear where the funds have gone but I suppose that is the business of the TSA in Wheaton. Both sides have very devoted serious Theosophists with totally opposing points of view. If I were to characterize it the Besant lodge is into "neo-Theosophy" and the Blavatsky lodge sticks to the lines first laid down HPB Judge and the Mahatmas. But that is only my personal impression. The Besant lodge likes to proudly show their "orthodoxy" by touting their S.D. study group but I founded that study group myself over the strong disinterest of the TS board there and for months we met in the BU building with two members me and one student from Boston College. I have since moved to UC Berkeley my student to pursue his Ph.D. at UC Santa Barbara. Besant lodge never had a real interest in HPB except as a name to conjure with and a figurehead under which to carry out their Bailey/Roerich/New Age program. I strongly disapprove of their studies but HEY --- that's my opinion and you will not catch me insulting them let alone spreading vicious lies about using their monies from the lawsuit fraudulently. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 23:23:50 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Jerry S: >The sexes split at the inception of duality and will >continue so long as we live in a dualistic world. I recall that it happened in the Third Root Race and think that it may end in the Sixth. The separation is not so much related to duality as it is to one form of physical reproduction. >>The being whose existence brings about our world a being which >>might be called "God" is sexless. >I do not believe that such a "being" exists. Our >world was brought about by a countless host of beings all >acting through karmic laws of causation and just a little >chaos to liven things up. >From the standpoint of this greater being it is coming into birth and all these hosts of beings are the life-atoms being drawn to form its principles and physical body. It is not in conscious relationship with any of these specific life-atoms. >From the standpoint of the countless hosts of beings they create the world and the highest of them govern over it. We have a dual view to the creation of a world-system. There's the point of view of the Heavenly Man and that of the countless "creations" or creatures of the world. First Brahman awakens within the bosom of Parabrahman. There is an awareness of identity yet non existence. Then Brahma awakens as the creative male God of the world to be. This is the First Being the first to exist the great being out of which pour forth all the various Monads into the world. Brahma would be called male. There is no physical gender to him but the masculine characteristics of activity potency creative origination of things and control are all qualities that could be given him. The use of "him" is anthropomorphic and is not intended to somehow say that men are godlike and women are not. All these creatures Monads that come into existence in this world system fall into three streams of evolution. The architects lay out the blueprints of the worlds and their functioning. The builders follow the blueprints and construct the actual things of the worlds. And the materials are the passive beings that take on the forms given them and follow instictively the patterns life they were impressed with. >Your words suggest a very narrow >definition of "sex." In occultism female and male mean a >lot more than physical bodies or personalities. Female is >soft and accepting while male is firm and directing. Male is >the conscious I while female is its world or Not-I and so on. I don't think we disagree on this. I'd say that the masculine and feminine are universal qualities and appear at all levels up to the first level of manifestation where "Father-Mother spin a Web". I'd not call these qualities "sex" but rather limit that term to our temporary method of physical reproduction. >I agree with Jung that we each have an inner >opposite sexual identity so that every man has a feminine >anima and every woman has a masculine animus. I'd rather consider the psychological complex that is the mirror opposite of our sex like the anima for a man as really part of the shadow. It represents the unlived-out compliment of our conscious personality. We currently have a polarization of personalities along sexual lines because of cultural roles and the differing responsibilities of child-bearing and child-rearing. As the cultural roles change and in the future with different methods of coming into birth this polarization will go away. There still will be psychological complexes that represent qualities that are not consciously lived out in our lives but these complexes will be different. >Thus I would say that we don't have to wait for countless eons >in the future but we are in fact whole and complete >human beings right now. We would be whole and complete when we can stop the activity of mind that objectivizes the world and creates the false notion of a personal self. >>What we will find in the future I think is that as physical >>gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an >>individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities >>without regard to the size of their nose the color of their >>eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. >This will not happen in any of our lifetimes and I >rather think it a pipedream albeit a nice one. The current >movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying >to be more like men. The Jungian model would have us consider men and women as intrinsically different with different psychological complexes and archetypes at work in their personalities. This is true from the level of the personality but the distinction is lost when we function in a mode of awareness that transcends the personality. >This has already resulted in severe >psychological damage to many women and some men. The personality functions in a cultural context and that context includes the different psychological and social training that boys and girls are brought up with. The personality should be regarded as living thing and allowed to grow and change as nature dictates. If we attempt radical changes there's the danger of psychological damage. For some it's possible to have both masculine and feminine characteristics for others it may not be. I wouldn't make a general rule one way or the other. >The answer is not for one sex to imitate the other but for >the two to combine in a monadic-like unity. I do not >believe that this will ever happen on Globe D. It's only at the highest level that the masculine and feminine qualities are unified where we have "Father-Mother". Below this level in the manifest world we have various mixes of these separate qualities. Long after the physical distinction between the sexes has gone away we'll still I think have masculine individuals like Aries types and feminine individuals like Pisces types. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 12 Dec 1996 23:59:18 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: TI >Going up .... > >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the >three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on >suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed >thus: > >1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without >discrimination with regard to sex including sexual >orientation creed class or color. > >2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion >theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to >individual ability and inclination. > >3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized >human potential and abilities. > >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network >whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or >allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having >done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* >by any member. *** > >There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary >donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific >projects or even individuals for particular and specified >purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not >need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such >activity is an entirely personal matter. > >The following internet folk have so far signed up: > >Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; >Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; >Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; >Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker ....... > >*** It has been suggested that we add: > >We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with >others. > >I feel sure those above-named agree so please press your reply >button/key and add "*** YES" to this message. Don't bother to >snip just reply. Many thanks. Unanimity would be real nice ..... > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk >----------------------------------------------- > >Yes. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:06:51 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series > >> > When it comes to accomplishing one's daily work there is no technique of >> > Magick a period b which has not somewhere along the line been tried by >> > Jerry Schueler c which can turn it into a Picnick d which can produce >> > more success than choosing exactly the right occupation for oneself to begin >> > with. >> > >> > Richard Ihle > > e that will not if spoken about aloud result in your excommunication >from Theosophy the immediate seizure and sale of all of your Lodge's >property and possessions and the public assertion from Wheaton that this >is really a good thing that is only designed to prevent great potential >damage. > >Hi y'all ... am back at least to the degree very scarce time permits. >Bumped into Morya during an inner adventure who told me I could burn off >all remaining karma from those 17 embarrassing brutal-dictator past lives >if I stayed connected to Theosophy for another 02 weeks tee hee - oh >yeah ... Morya also told me to give all those who believe Wheaton has >finally gone too far and are finally ready to do something about it and >have been very busily researching the pragmatic means by which to >accomplish the badly-needed transformation the following message: > > Its time. > >[I don't know what this means ... perhaps some do -:]. > >Just kidding. > >Sort of. > Love and giggles -JRC > >[PS. Sorry for probably being almost instantly irritating again. I took a >vow but I guess it didn't help -:]. > Just a bit of high-brow humour. What is life without a sense of fun? I need a giggle just now. We have moved all our theosophy stuff and library into the garage of our new premises and now the solicitor tells me we have to have the Common Seal by or else the signatures on the transfer papers are not valid. Panic panic!!!! At this stage I have ordered a new one and cross my fingers it arrives by Friday. Otherwise we may have to scratch through our boxes. A little lighthearted kidding is welcome. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:08:07 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Anne: > Could this "host" be another's understanding that you believe in such a > "being"? May-be God is and/or isn't a being. It's all OK isn't it? > Because one person's conception can be the same as another's yet the > language used to define it different. Myths teach us that. To me "God" > is everywhere and manifests itself in love and energyprana. That can make > "God" no thing. But then again God's beingness can be the grasping > projections that help some in advancement and bring personification for > another level of relationship. The Hindu gods are great examples of that. > It's at that level in representation that it is important to not forget > both masculine and feminine aspects or an imbalance can be created that has > great social implications. To ascribe gender in any way to deity *per se* is no go. To ascribe gender to aspects of deity or divinity in action or expression is in itself silly but we may feel a need as human beings who *do* have gender to express such activity in human terms - but this is for our convenience and has nothing to do with what God is. As a theologian as well as a theosophian may I state: God is not a being and never was. In the Western version of the Ancient Wisdom found in the Bible Tanach and other writings the "name" of God is given as YHWH or Yahweh or in HPB's time Jehovah. This name is a variant form of the Hebrew verb "to be" and intelligently understood hence such phrases as "whoever has ears to hear" represents insofar as human awareness is capable of knowing what it means the fact of eternal being or being-ness *as such*. In the Aramaic-speaking world in which Jesus taught the word for God as in Hebrew is ALWH or "Elohe" or similar but has the same connotation to a middle-easterner today as it did then. For example in the Arab-speaking world Arabic derives from Aramaic and Hebrew to argue over the existence of God is regarded as absurd and Islam has no time for atheists. This is not prejudice but common sense for to argue in any of those languages that God does not exist is to argue that *Being* does not exist - an obvious absurdity. One could represent a well-known saying therefore: In God [YHWH = Eternal Being] we live and move and have our [individual] being. To put it another way we as monads are part of the ALL. Bit of a relief really. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:08:26 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy > On 12 199512 Eldon B. Tucker wrote: > >> Coherence: >> >> >Several have requested recommendations for a simpler statement of the >> >philosophy sources which are not so daunting. Here are my recommendations: >> > >> >UNIVERSAL THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A wonderful "primer" for the any >> >student and the book that was handed to me first 15 years ago. >> > >> >LETTERS THAT HAVE HELPED ME by Wm Q. Judge. A collection of letters by >> >Judge to students comprising a warm wise and practical approach to >> >Theosophy. >> > >> >THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Wm Q. Judge. A summary of the SD in very readable >> >language and an amazingly small book. Gets to the heart of the matter. >> > >> >ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY by Robert Crosbie. A great >> >companion to the Ocean >> >> There is a copy of a computerized version of "The Ocean of Theosophy" >> and "Universal Theosophy" on theosophy.org. The first is in WordPerfect 5.1 >> format. I set it up and proof-read it. The second is in ascii format. >> These two were scanned by someone in Canada. It's been a few years since >> I got the original scanned text and can't seem to find the piece of paper >> where I wrote down the name of the guy that scanned them or I'd give >> his name and email address. >> >> They also have a version of "Esoteric Buddhism" and "The Key to Theosophy" >> also both in WordPerfect 5.1 format. I understand that they will be >> reformatting the materials into HTML format. These two I set up. >> >> -- Eldon >> > >Eldon: > >Glad to know the electronic version of classics in Theosophy. If anyone >else knows about what else is available in electronic media it could be >the start of a project to put all of them on a CD Rom. The prices of >recordable CD Rom have come down and soon we all can have a couple of CD >Roms with all the published Theosophy works. > >..doss > I thought I heard mention that the London Lodge is doing something like that. Is that so Alan?> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:26:22 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Masters? Here's one I prepared earlier: ----------------------------- ON THE HIDDEN MASTERS Again and again in occult writings reference is made to higher beings who when the time is right appear to instruct and enlighten the student pupil or aspirant. While this is undoubtedly true after a manner of speaking it is clear that some very strange ideas must exist in the minds of readers of occult literature. Maybe it is possible for an aspirant to higher knowledge to flit off in the astral body to mysterious Tibet or the fastness of the Himalayas there to sit at the feet of some ancient wizened guru who will either also be in the astral or will have full astral vision in the physical. This may be possible certainly but it is not very likely. We may with considerable justification wonder why such "masters" do on occasion appear to give countenance to contradictory statements as contradictory as the very ordinary differences of opinion which pass among we lesser beings. Let us endeavour to clarify the situation. Hidden teachers there most certainly are but to think of them as knowing all things is unwise. No doubt in their various ways they may individually be adept in some art or another but that strangely enough does not for any practical purpose concern an aspirant to higher knowledge. They are most certainly beings at a higher level of existence than those of us in the human state or better higher intelligences with higher but not necessarily absolute knowledge and understanding. Hidden they may be but not from choice on their part - they have no inclination to be either hidden or not hidden from ourselves. They are hidden simply due to the inability of the average person to become aware of them. When a student of life's mysteries raises consciousness to a sufficiently high level then individual awareness will abut upon the level at which these intelligences have their being and for the student the teacher may seem to appear. In truth it is rather different. In the event that wondering and wandering consciousness touches upon the experience of a higher intelligence so will questions be answered from the knowledge of that intelligence. Such intelligences or teachers are not however sitting up yonder somewhere in a higher state waiting for pupils to pop in with questions. Nor do they spend their time watching benevolently over any human flock like a shepherd with the sheep. As we at our level are gathering experience in life so at another level are higher intelligences. The One Life permeates through all levels without as Thomas A Kempis put it "respect of persons." From The point of view of higher intelligences it is the student who appears as impinging upon their consciousness where it was not impinged upon before: and they are perfectly aware of it. Such a higher consciousness is part of what in Christian terms may be called the communion of saints. In broader terms this is a communion of individual intelligences in permanent communication; but generally speaking at our level of being unconsciously - which is for most of us very fortunate. When the aspirant after higher things touches usually briefly the higher levels he or she becomes for a short time part of this communion shares in the higher life and knowledge comes according to need. Not it must be added according to fancy or ideas of self. In this higher communion there is no identification no idealisation; here is knowledge of reality; aspirants are aware in their own higher selves and are their own teachers by virtue of the higher communion. This is both more practical and reliable than any form of astral travelling. As for apparent differences of opinion emanating from various intelligences it may be that like us they differ among themselves. It may also be and is very likely so that we have made contact imperfectly and that the higher "voice" is that of our own dreams telling us what we would like to hear. On a contemporary note we may wonder why "masters" and not "mistresses" are usually mentioned in the older writings. The answer is most likely that as the study of the Mysteries has been for at least two thousand years the privilege of men then these discarnate intelligences are largely former male human beings. Since the latter part of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries this has begun to change and we may be sure there are on what Dion Fortune called the inner planes an increasing number of former female human beings to keep her company there along with such luminaries as H.P.Blavatsky. ["Channelled" and reworked over the years with magisterial approval as a result of direct personal experience by Alan Bain who hereby places this text in the public domain]. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:29:06 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Xmas A Happy Christmas to all my readers! And a sobering thought: ---------------------- "THEY WILL RECEIVE MY SON" FATHER YOU WERE NAIVE SO TO BELIEVE. WHAT IF TONIGHT HE SLEEPS AGAIN HEAVEN IN HAY MAN AMONG MEN TILL THE WORLD'S BELLS BEGIN AND PLAY "ADESTE" ON CHRISTMAS DAY? WILL SAGE AND SHEPHERD GIFT AND GLORY ROUND OUT THE STORY? FATHER YOUR FOLK PREPARE A HILL MORE TERRIBLE STILL. Ernest Britten Page Nov 1957. =================================== Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 00:32:29 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: TI OK folks .......... THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without discrimination with regard to sex including sexual orientation creed class or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities at the same time respecting _all_ life. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* by any member. *** There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with others.*** The following internet folk have so far signed up: *Jerry Hejka-Ekins; *Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; *Liesel F. Deutsch; *Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; *Murray Stentiford; *Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; *Eldon B. Tucker; *Anne Picker; *John E. Mead; *** It was suggested that we add the above line and as most of us have said "Yes" [or Aye or Oui!] I hope that Sy Peter and Jerry will send me a brief e-mail confirming their agreement if their vote has not already crossed in the post. Those above with * by their name have already done this. There have been a number of representations to me privately as well as on the list to include a reference to the theosophical respect for life. JEM has also had various representations following his own posting re the list in general. I have taken the liberty therefore of adding to "Object 3" above the words "At the same time respecting _all_ life" where _all_ would be in italics if in printed form. As I find it difficult to imagine a true theosophist objecting to this I hope to avoid a vote by assuming all agree with the basics as we now have them - but if need be I will un-take the liberty if the signers and members of TI tell me to. A few folk on the list have suggested variant forms of words for this or that expression of what we are trying to promote but may I ask that we leave it as it has developed so far at least for a while? To appear to be nit picking over the words does no one any good and we are all free to write our own essays on the topics and post them wheresoever we will - I mean the Internet really *is* the land of the free but watch out for the US Congress! I wonder if they have yet realized that the net is international and they cannot legislate internet law for the UK Sweden Malaysia the Pacific Ocean etc.... As an example of what TI means to me personally I have adopted Liesel's valuable point that we are also members of the human race see mine and her sigs. But that doesn't mean we all have to say so even if we believe it. Jerry and at least one other prefer the sig "International Theosophist" - and why not? The *spirit* of TI is conveyed just the same isn't it? And it's the spirit that matters more than the detail of the words. Falls off soapbox. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk ----------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 01:19:53 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale At 024900 AM 12/13/95 -0500 Rich wrote: >Doss wrote > >> In the circustances both the National President and Brant Jackson >> need to apologize in public and send copies to everyone to whom the cover >> letter and Jackson's letters were sent. >> >> If on the other hand they have facts support that the tax exempt assets >> were converted to private benefit they need to file a complaint with >> Internal Revenue Service in public who will take action on the >> individuals involved. >Yes and if there's PROOF I will be shocked. I don't like the work that >these Boston Theosophists are doing but that is THEIR business and THEIR >karma. I was very invovled in the process and did not see anyone benefitting >PERSONALLY in any way especially financially. Rather it was a great >headache and sacrifice to everyone involved -- BOTH sides. > >Rich > When one National President & Brant Jackson makes statements such as the above it is very important that one checks the accuracy of the information. The responsibility is much higher when a a member of the Judiciary Committee makes it and 02 when the National President forwards it to members with a cover letter in effect vouching for it. We all agree that the resources should be protected. But we have to do it in a very clear and convincing manner with full and free disclosure of facts. I hope we see a rebuttal from them with complete facts surrounding their statements if they can substantiate them. Having spent such large amount of legal fees I am sure lawyers would have collected a large amount of information which can be used. To ignore and not responding will affect their credibility and I do not want that to happen. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 01:19:55 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale At 035200 AM 12/13/95 -0500 Rich wrote: >Liesel wrote > >> Rich >> >> If you were the Secretary of the Boston Lodge please tell us how it >> came about that the building near Boston U campus was sold. >> >> Also do you know what happened to Lou DeLuca? >> >> Thanks. > >The building near Boston Univesity was sold because a Boston University >wanted it back and b it was necessary to liquidate funds to pay for the >lawsuit and to have dividends to split up between the two parties. 2/3 of >the assets remaining after the legal fees went to the newly incorporated >and independent Besant Lodge autonomous from TSA and 1/3 went to the >Blavatsky branch headed by regional director Fernando De Torrijos and his >wife Ruth. The building near BU was sold to the campus for nearly 01 million >dollars. There were nearly $400000 in legal fees and then $390000 went to >the Besant Lodge and nearly $200000 went to the Blavatsky lodge. > >The Besant group used their money to buy the new building in Arlington a >suburb of Boston on the other side of the Charles River the next city out >beyond Cambridge. > >The Blavatsky group meets privately in homes of members and to my knowledge >does not yet have meetings open to the public. It is not clear where the >funds have gone but I suppose that is the business of the TSA in Wheaton. > >Both sides have very devoted serious Theosophists with totally opposing >points of view. If I were to characterize it the Besant lodge is into >"neo-Theosophy" and the Blavatsky lodge sticks to the lines first laid down >HPB Judge and the Mahatmas. But that is only my personal impression. > >The Besant lodge likes to proudly show their "orthodoxy" by touting their >S.D. study group but I founded that study group myself over the strong >disinterest of the TS board there and for months we met in the BU building >with two members me and one student from Boston College. I have since moved >to UC Berkeley my student to pursue his Ph.D. at UC Santa Barbara. > >Besant lodge never had a real interest in HPB except as a name to conjure >with and a figurehead under which to carry out their Bailey/Roerich/New Age >program. I strongly disapprove of their studies but HEY --- that's my >opinion and you will not catch me insulting them let alone spreading >vicious lies about using their monies from the lawsuit fraudulently. > >Rich > Rich: 1 what a waste of money that could have been spent for much more productive purposes. 2 glad you posted the information. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 02:29:26 GMT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@compuserve.com> Subject: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale I personally visited the Boston Lodge on 191911 1995 and spoke to their officers at length because I wanted to get their side of the story. What I was told at Wheaton during the Jul convention by Fernando de Torrijos did not ring true to me and I could not understand how he as a member of the national board and the northeast director could have brought the lawsuit that he brought. Further I could not understand how our national board could have financially backed that lawsuit paying attorneys etc. the funds for which ultimately came out of the assets of the Boston Lodge. The Boston Lodge building was sold to Boston University for between $800000 and $850000 I have been given 02 different figures by the parties but believe that the sale price was somewhere right in there. Fernando did confirm that the attorneys for both sides split up about $200000 in legal fees and expenses. From what I found out subsequently it does appear that the figure is closer to $270000. I don't know about $400000 that Rich Taylor indicates but if Rich was treasurer and on the inside perhaps his figure is correct. Like Rich I do not believe that there was any misappropriation of funds. I know that the Boston Lodge used their share of the lawsuit settlement about $390000 to buy a new building in Arlington. I visited it. What did Fernando's small minority do with their share about $195000? He told me in Jul that it was still in the bank. I would hope that by now they have bought a property with which to present Theosophical studies. The point in all this and the real tragedy in my view is that in the so-called interests of preserving Theosophical assets which is the reason that has been given me for the proposed By-Law revisions #15 #16 and #17 our national directors engaged in activities which dissipated large amounts of Theosophical assets in addition to losing the 60+ members of the Boston Lodge. I consider what the national directors did was outrageous. If they had not butted in at great cost to our Society the Boston Lodge could have moved to Cambridge where they really wanted to locate and have gotten a top notch location. i.e. maybe off Harvard Square and put Theosophy right out there to expose more people to it. As it is they bought a quite nice building in Arlington with what they could afford. But they could have done something really great to make the Theosophical Society better known in a key metropolitan area had the lawsuit not been forced upon them which only created divisiveness and bitterness and dissipation of assets. Behind this all is I think was an effort on the part of Fernando and the other national directors to oppose the eclectic studies going on in the Boston Lodge and especially the Alice Bailey studies. Where in any of HPB's or the Masters writings does it say what people must or must not study? The Boston Lodge does have a Secret Doctrine study group and it is going on right now. It probably is not well attended but at least they are trying to keep it out there. Maybe some people who are drawn to the Lodge by their wide array of other studies will begin to look at the works of HPB. This is what we find at our Miami Lodge. We have a Secret Doctrine study group also and 03 other specifically Theosophical study groups. We give them prime time in our schedule but we have a lot of other studies too. Because of this our Lodge is active and growing over 100 members. Because we have all these members some come along and begin to study HPB. How else is the Society going to grow and stay alive? The decision to study the Secret Doctrine or anything else for that matter must be left to the local Lodges and Study Centers. This is what the second and third declared objects of the Society are all about. Rich Taylor says that he strongly disapproves of the Boston Lodge studies meanwhile saying that he founded their Secret Doctrine study group. The fact that it was poorly attended is in my view because of the difficult nature of the material. Boston Lodge is still trying with apparently only mediocre success to put the Secret Doctrine out there so the public can be exposed to it. How many of our Lodges have people clamoring to study the Secret Doctrine? If we start telling Lodges what they can and cannot study the membership will only continue to shrink. Look at our Society 4200 members and declining year by year. What is going on and why this attitude on the part of Wheaton that they know best that they can and should tell Lodges what to do? The sorry state of our membership size is ample evidence that national must put its own house in order and stop trying to tell good people in Lodge work who want to be of service what to do. Wheaton should be serving the Lodges with resources to provide lecturers to provide funding for bookstores and libraries to show Lodges how to attract more members so that Theosophy can become better known. Wheaton does some very good things along these lines and for that I applaud them. It is when they choose to be masters rather than servants as in the Boston case that they disparage the Theosophical Society. In my view Wheaton must be the servant of the Lodges and Study Centers if they are people who genuinely want to serve Theosophy and not try to be the masters of those Lodges and Study Centers and I believe this also should apply to Adyar on the international level. There appears to be something very wrong there also. Sy Ginsburg From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:08:59 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM On 13 199512 Eldon B. Tucker wrote: > Bee: > > >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> > > I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a > theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis > Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible > including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions > can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone > working full time on the project. > > -- Eldon > Keep us informed of any new information you come across. I am forwarding a copy of this to TSA requesting any information they have. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:13:23 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy [re CD-ROM texts] > > > I thought I heard mention that the London Lodge is doing something like > that. Is that so Alan?> > > > > > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International No news about this - sorry. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:13:39 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM fwd Theosophical Society in America: If you have any information on the following as well as the availability of any other CD Rom as well as any other project currently in process that you are aware of can you please post a msg here for my benefit as well as other Theosophists. Thanks M K Ramadoss - ramadoss@eden.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:20:59 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series > > Love and giggles -JRC > > [PS. Sorry for probably being almost instantly irritating again. I took a > vow but I guess it didn't help -:]. It never does. I signed the Peace Pledge and someone hit me. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:22:54 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series > A little lighthearted kidding is welcome. > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International To Bee: A little lighthearted kidding. :- Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:26:12 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Newbies > >I expect she would have signed up for THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL > >and used a similar sig to mine but probably on a higher plane :- > > > >How about you? :- > > > >Alan > >-- > >Member Theosophy International. > >Member Human Race. > >---------------------------------------- > >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > > Probably sign as a Human Being!!! > > .doss > Could you be a little more specific? :- Alan -- Still a Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:35:56 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Father/Mother God > > Would you like to discuss this God person? I am up to my > armpits in heretical and gender-inclusive theology ...... > > Alan :- > -- > > Liesel: Father/Mother/God ... Who dat man? Presumably not .... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:47:23 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > Some responses to Eldon's posting: > > >What we will find in the future I think is that as physical > >gender differences disappear that anyone can live out an > >individually-appropriate mix of masculine and feminine qualities > >without regard to the size of their nose the color of their > >eyes nor their reproductive plumbing. > > This will not happen in any of our lifetimes and I > rather think it a pipedream albeit a nice one. The current > movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying > to be more like men. This is a pretty sweeping generalization Jerry - I don't see how you could reasonably substantiate it. I know a number of feminists working for equality and *none* of them is like a man - they are women all the way through. One woman who entered the fray in a "male" manner had a hard ride ... hasn't been around much since either. > This has already resulted in sever > psychological damage to many women and some men. Supporting evidence? > The answer is not for one sex to imitate the other but for > the two to combine in a monadic-like unity. I do not > believe that this will ever happen on Globe D. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy international No. Alan :- -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 03:57:52 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: TI THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without discrimination with regard to sex including sexual orientation creed class or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* by any member. There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. The following internet folk have so far signed up: Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker John E. Mead. Only 04 "YES" replies to proposed addition *** so far ....... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk ----------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 04:42:40 GMT From: Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM Bee: >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone working full time on the project. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 05:09:22 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: TI OUI > >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the >three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on >suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed >thus: > >1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without >discrimination with regard to sex including sexual >orientation creed class or color. > >2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion >theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to >individual ability and inclination. > >3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized >human potential and abilities. > >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network >whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or >allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having >done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* >by any member. > >There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary >donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific >projects or even individuals for particular and specified >purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not >need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such >activity is an entirely personal matter. > >The following internet folk have so far signed up: > >Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; >Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; >Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; >Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker John E. Mead. > >Only 04 "YES" replies to proposed addition *** so far ....... > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk >----------------------------------------------- > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 05:45:53 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >Some responses to Eldon's posting: > >> > I do not believe that such a "being" exists. Our >world was brought about by a countless host of beings all >acting through karmic laws of causation and just a little >chaos to liven things up. Could this "host" be another's understanding that you believe in such a "being"? May-be God is and/or isn't a being. It's all OK isn't it? Because one person's conception can be the same as another's yet the language used to define it different. Myths teach us that. To me "God" is everywhere and manifests itself in love and energyprana. That can make "God" no thing. But then again God's beingness can be the grasping projections that help some in advancement and bring personification for another level of relationship. The Hindu gods are great examples of that. It's at that level in representation that it is important to not forget both masculine and feminine aspects or an imbalance can be created that has great social implications. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 05:59:15 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >> The current >movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying >to be more like men. This has already resulted in sever >psychological damage to many women and some men. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy international > >I am sorry I haven't finished. Another thing I wanted to mention was about this last statement. I have heard this from some men and non-feminist women before and I don't agree. I hate to be labeled a feminist just because I do what I want and I don't let my gender be an issue unless it is walking down the street at midnight. If being "like a man" means not putting up with being forced to mindlessly obey to cook and clean against your will to abstain from developing your intellectual and creative abilities stay home and not work and develop the abibilities associalted with that to be paid less for the same work to work twice as hard to get the same recognition than OK. If Being free to create and BE means that one is imitating men-then what's wrong with it? A man is not those things any more than a woman. If Nietshze and Plato great philosophers thought women not more intelligent or able than mere animalstheir words not mine then WOW!!!SOCIETY!!!not gender From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 07:03:34 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Titillation Liesel: >Titillation reminds me of the crapola you can watch on American TV >any time day or night. Lunchtime today I was cruising around looking for >something >interesting to look at while I ate my tofu chili. I found this talk >show where they were interviewing this pretty young lady who was >saying that she loved her disabled boy friend & that she was a >prostitute to get money for them both to live on. Why would she do >that for him? Because he was very kind to her. >So help me that's what I saw on TV this noon before I turned to >another channel That's pretty much the norm for most TV talk shows. Wish I had a dollar for every time one of those shows brought out the male strippers and female exotic dancers. Last week I taped a documentary on the life of Rod Serling on PBS. They showed many clips from the dramas he wrote for early television and the Twilight Zone. They were in black and white but they far outstripped most of today's television in their acting writing dramatic presentation and ability to get across a real moral point of the story. The show talked many times about how Serling had to fight with the TV executives because they were sure this heavy drama wouldn't "sell" and how they were afraid their advertisers would stop paying for air time. Televison is a wonderful technical and communicative tool that has been prostituted since the Golden Age of television ended. And the movie industry isn't far from that description. People with good ideas and solid stories are often shoved aside for gimmicks or remakes. The guys in power are so afraid they won't make another billion on a project they'd rather bet on a "sure" thing. Like the "Brady Bunch" movie or some other piece of nonsense. Heard they're going to make a movie out of Mr. Ed. For those not in the US he was a talking horse that starred in a sitcom in the late fifities. I remember my family eating waffles in front of the television on nite while we all watched this great looking horse spout horse sense to his owner. - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 07:28:22 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy writes: > >[re CD-ROM texts] >> > >> I thought I heard mention that the London Lodge is doing something like >> that. Is that so Alan?> >> > >> > >> Bee Brown >> Member Theosophy International > >No news about this - sorry. > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > Sorry I have just remembered that it was mentioned to me by the President of Palmerston North after he came back from a visit to England a year ago and he was very pleased with what was being done and it sounded very impressive. I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 07:38:45 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Multiple Choice V Authorized Series writes: > >> A little lighthearted kidding is welcome. >> Bee Brown >> Member Theosophy International > >To Bee: A little lighthearted kidding. :- > > > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > Gee thanks. You could have used .zip as they tramped all over my hard disc and set up error messages.:-D > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 08:07:29 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking >Eldon > >Re the Masters not giving out many esoteric secrets. >I think this is because many people are not as yet ethically advanced >enough to be able to work with those esoteric secrets without hurting >someone. Just think of the faculty of being able to read another >person's thoughts which is said to not be terribly difficult to do. >If you can read someone's thoughts you'll know all their weaknesses >and if you're not completely ethical loving & harmless >you might go right for the jugular >if you get angry enough at them. It makes good sense to me that some >esoteric things are only given out to those who are ready. The others >don't need to settle for crumbs really but they need to learn what >there is to learn which includes hoiw to practice Ahimsa. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > Yes the promotion of positive thinking and thought projection is taught to sales persons and they use it to increase their sales. They are using what amounts to unseen forces to the detriment of the potential customer. The sales persons are required to attend meetings where they are subjected to all sorts of psychological mind twisting to whip up their enthusiasm for the products they sell. I look upon that as misuse of esoteric teachings. The control of the thought processes are recommended in many of the teachings as a necessary step and have been picked up and used in different ways against people. The human race can't be kept in the dark for ever so hopefully ethic will prevail one day and these faculties will be used properly.> Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 08:11:49 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: He/She/It Jerry S.: >> The current >movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying >to be more like men. This has already resulted in sever >psychological damage to many women and some men. > So true. My husband was the oldest of six children and had to take on the housework and child care when his mother went to work as an accountant. His father an auto mechanic couldn't make enough to feed and clothe the crew. He grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when he is at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex object don't you think? - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 11:59:43 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Trust Problem The more I contemplate the by-laws imbroglio for that is what it appears to be becoming the more it seems to boil down to a basic lack of trust on the part of the members toward Wheaton and Adyar. On a personal basis I have enjoyed visiting Wheaton have met most board members and feel a general trust that they and the staff there have Theosophy's best interests at heart. Yet the Bing episode and some previous power-struggle things I've heard about make me feel that 01 some people are trying to control things in underhanded ways and 02 their motives are mysterious and perhaps not benevolent. This is admittedly a suspicious mood rather than a well-founded conclusion. When we look at Adyar and the various section expulsions the same sense of distrust is engendered. One doesn't know exactly who is trying to control what there's little information on what has occurred but in the absence of information one can only speculate. The best cure I can imagine for this kind of generalized distrust is a completely open discussion of the issues involved. Until the membership knows exactly what went on in Boston Canada Yugoslavia Denmark we are not likely to be receptive to the message from higher up that "we need more control over you for your own good." What's really at stake? Who's really concerned about it? I hope that if the controversial amendments are defeated that there will be more time for discussion and a more open forum for it than we have had in the past. When years ago I described the way the ULT operates to my brother anonymity secret officers no by-laws etc. he said "Oh that's a cryptocracy." Meaning an organization in which the government is secret. Even though the Adyar TS has all the paraphernalia of a democracy there are still ways that it's cryptocratic due to the ES and other factors. I sense in the unease expressed here about the by-laws a deeper unease about the very nature of Theosophical democracy and a sense that cryptocracy lurks beneath its surface. Restoration of trust requires first of all a sense that there is real meaning to our democratic institutions and that they aren't just window dressing for cryptocracy. The suggestion of postponing the vote may not be feasible but it would help make people feel better about the genuineness of the democratic process. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 12:05:51 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Trust Problem On 13 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > > MKR > The board can always find a way to postpone the implementation of > the bylaws even if they are passed. So it all depends how the board views > the situation and what it wants to do. In fact I believe someone is currently composing a letter citing the several different ways in which the TS Bylaws themselves have *not been followed* in both the preparation for the vote as well as the actual balloting. The current vote is likely to be *invalid* - and unlike the past few years of behaviour at best unethical and domineering and at worst possibly outright illegal ... there is now a growing number of people who will simply not keep quiet about this and will force the issue. Wheaton had best begin to understand that there is a quickly growing sentiment among quite strong and articulate Theosophists that it has *stepped over the line*. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 12:35:26 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Trust Problem On 13 199512 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > The more I contemplate the by-laws imbroglio for that is what > it appears to be becoming the more it seems to boil down to a > basic lack of trust on the part of the members toward Wheaton > and Adyar. MKR Glad you took time to analyze and post the msg. > > On a personal basis I have enjoyed visiting Wheaton have met > most board members and feel a general trust that they and the > staff there have Theosophy's best interests at heart. Yet the > Bing episode and some previous power-struggle things I've heard > about make me feel that 01 some people are trying to control > things in underhanded ways and 02 their motives are mysterious > and perhaps not benevolent. This is admittedly a suspicious > mood rather than a well-founded conclusion. > > When we look at Adyar and the various section expulsions the > same sense of distrust is engendered. One doesn't know exactly > who is trying to control what there's little information on > what has occurred but in the absence of information one can > only speculate. > > The best cure I can imagine for this kind of generalized > distrust is a completely open discussion of the issues > involved. Until the membership knows exactly what went on in > Boston Canada Yugoslavia Denmark we are not likely to be > receptive to the message from higher up that "we need more > control over you for your own good." What's really at stake? > Who's really concerned about it? > MKR As you have had opportunity to personally meet the most of the Board members of TSA have you had an opportunity to communicate with them either on telephone or in writing regarding the bylaws? If you did can you let us know what feedback you have received. If you have not have you considered contacting them and get feedback. This would interest all of us. > I hope that if the controversial amendments are defeated that > there will be more time for discussion and a more open forum > for it than we have had in the past. > > When years ago I described the way the ULT operates to my > brother anonymity secret officers no by-laws etc. he said > "Oh that's a cryptocracy." Meaning an organization in which > the government is secret. Even though the Adyar TS has all the > paraphernalia of a democracy there are still ways that it's > cryptocratic due to the ES and other factors. I sense in the > unease expressed here about the by-laws a deeper unease about > the very nature of Theosophical democracy and a sense that > cryptocracy lurks beneath its surface. Restoration of trust > requires first of all a sense that there is real meaning to our > democratic institutions and that they aren't just window > dressing for cryptocracy. The suggestion of postponing the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > vote may not be feasible but it would help make people feel ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > better about the genuineness of the democratic process. > MKR The board can always find a way to postpone the implementation of the bylaws even if they are passed. So it all depends how the board views the situation and what it wants to do. As I see it we need better and more effective communication between Wheaton and members. This would go a long way in helping a lot of things to go smoothly. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 14:37:49 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: Saraydarian >JHE > He lives in Sedona Arizona now and has about 35 books to his >credit which he primarily distributes himself: > Depending upon how you use the word "theosophist" I'm not >sure if it is an appropriate label for Torkom Saraydarian. >He is >the head of his own organization that is much more closely >related to the Arcane School pedigree than to the Theosophical >Society. On the other hand I consider AAB teachings to be >represent another school of theosophy. But the Arcane School >the Aquarian Educational Group and the Theosophical Society are >very separate organizations. In one sense I would only use the >term "theosophist" to apply to those very rare people who live a >life of pure altruism--such as perhaps Mother Theresa. In the >other hand for the word "theosophist" in context to an >organization I would only apply it to members of the >Theosophical Organizations. For instance CWL would be "a >theosophist" but AAB would not be after 1918 when she left the >TS to start her own organization. In this usage of the word I >prefer the term "student of theosophy." Thanks for the info you too Sy. Of course I'm not sure as well whether to call him a theosophist. For me what makes a true theosophist is indeed the amount of pure altruism combined with the studying and practicing of that tradition of Ageless Wisdom teachings. Where this tradition starts or ends is not for me to tell. Perhaps 'student of theosophy' is safer to use because it implies more of a humbleness of the person involved. Mmm it almost sounds hierarchical... theosopher > theosophist > student of theosophy ;- > I used to invite Saraydarian to speak on the Secret Doctrine >at the Los Angeles Branch. I remember not agreeing with many of >his interpretations But I never included or excluded speakers ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >based upon my opinion of their point of view yet they were ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >obviously well thought out and were based upon AAB's >interpretations of the SD. That's the spirit! BTW a nice WWW-site also covering more of this 'neo-theosophy' I found at: http://www.primenet.com/~wtmtn/index.html. /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 15:50:43 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Trust Problem On 13 199512 Richtay@aol.com wrote: > > If there is ANY need for "control" from the top of the T.S. then we have a > problem. The way to lead IMHO is not by force or legal proceedings but by > excellent and persuasive example and moral worth. Yes. > So if Wheaton or Adyar want others to conform to their wishes if they feel > a need to lead and direct the Theosophical Movement then let them lead by > example by argument by persuasion and by demonstration that such-and-such > works. Yes! > But let there be no high-handedness manipulation slander or force. This > is not only unbrotherly but hinders individuals from growing into their own > Buddhic consciousness which is the personal ability to discriminate wrong > and right and to approach one's own personal ULTIMATE AUTHORITY -- the Self. YES! > How can another dictate to us how that can be accomplished? Suggestion only > never force. *YES*! > Rich Upon much we have great differences Rich but you frame the heart of the orginizational matter here IMO. TSA HQ I think would have no need to resort to political and bureaucatic methods of control if the moral force it generated established an appropriate tone throughout the Society. It faces now a crisis of legitimacy brought about by its own behaviour ... behaviour often selfish rather than altruistic concerned with protecting turf rather than the growth of Theosophy overly secretive about not occult secrets but about its *finances* ... doing a *major* revision of its Bylaws and keeping it hidden until almost the last moment - but all this really is secondary to a more primary level: If HQ Board Members and Officers saw themselves as *facilitators of a large family of spiritual equals - whose respect had to be earned who it is an honor to serve and whose voices were to be *genuinely* listened to* much of the ridiculous politicing would be renedered unnecessary. Instead the attitude towards the membership seems to be that of people who believe they stand above the members they serve who actually operate as though the membership *cannot be trusted* with information with money or even to freely *vote* do not all the restrictions being placed on who can run for board & officer positions implicitly state that the membership can't be trusted not to elect completely unsuitable people?. William Blake I think somewhere described the spiritual world as "a democracy of kings" - and this I believe is the attitude with which to serve as a board member or officer of a spiritual organization: as though every member were *royalty* ... fully capable of governing their personal kingdoms but still willing to listen to those who would facilitate the communications between themselves and others - but *not* willing to listen to those who approach them with the attitude that they are *serfs* being "permitted" a certain degree of freedom so long as they operate within parameters imposed from above but who are also expected to simply accept that they need rules and regulations to keep them from making bad choices and hurting themselves and their organization. IMO the *last* Theosophist who possessed the spiritual and moral force to get away with behaving as HQ is now behaving was HPB - and she never behaved that way. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 16:48:30 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: He/She/It Ann you're kidding right? > [My husband] > grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even > today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when he is > at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex > object don't you think? > > - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 16:53:54 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Sy Ginsburg wrote > From what I found out subsequently > it does appear that the [legal fees] figure is closer to $270000. I don't know about > $400000 that Rich Taylor indicates but if Rich was treasurer and on the > inside perhaps his figure is correct. I was actually secretary not treasurer and to be honest my figures are from what I heard at board meetings not from the books. I'm sure Sy's numbers are more accurate. I never took the time to learn all the gruesome financial details. Sy also wrote > our national > directors engaged in activities which dissipated large amounts of Theosophical > assets in addition to losing the 60+ members of the Boston Lodge. . Well this is a bit of legerdemain on the part of the Besant Lodge. I DO happen to know for a fact that of the 85 members on the Boston Lodge's roster BEFORE the split only about 15 of them were active and after the split about 12. During the election the year I was there only one office out of 06 was contested. Every other office had one candidate and so of course they took office again. So really Wheaton has lost a handful of active members and a nice padded membership-list. I agree with Sy GInsburg however that the money combined BEFORE the lawsuit could have bought a prominent building in Harvard Square etc. which would have attracted a great deal of attention. Very sad. Also > How many of our Lodges have people clamoring to study the Secret Doctrine? I know of a lot of places actually not to be difficult about it Sy is right the book is hard. But very often new students are very very anxious to tackle "the big book" and we in San Franscisco U.L.T. have about 10 new students that came in this year who CANNOT wait for the group to begin this Feb. I think it comes from a their inner drive and b what they were "raised" on the past year namely HPB's easier stuff that drops tons of hints. Sy writes > If we start telling Lodges what they can and cannot study the membership will > only continue to shrink. Look at our Society 4200 members and declining year > by year. I quite agree that we should not FORCE lodges or people to study anything they don't want to. But we as "old-timers" set the tone and when people come into the lodge they quickly get the gist of what the focus is. In my opinion Wheaton's number drop is not mainly because of authoritarianism though it is cool to say so but because they are trying the make Theosophy jive with "New Age" when in fact New Age grew out of Neo-Theosophy. I personally if anyone cares would rather have a very small serious dedicated group of students who wish to learn original Theosophy and THEN possibly branch out rather than a large scattered unfocussed and confused body with a kind of half-hearted interest in what the Masters taught as "Theosophy." I do not think bringing the lawsuit was wise nor do I believe in slandering the motives of "Neo-Theosophists" but I do want to speak up for Theosophy as it was originally presented before we unenlightened humans took over with our political battles Judge and Besant and our vain hopes Krishnamurti and high-handedness expelling the German section etc. and fragmentation over 20 separate Theosophical groups in the 1920s. If Theosophy is declining in the world I fear it's because we as custodians have not really done our job not taught Theosophy not held true to our program which anyone can read in the letter of the Mahachohan to HPB. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 17:02:56 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: by-law vote >From: MK Ramadoss >Subject: Re: by-law vote >>Dear Gerda Thompson >> >>I think you've got a real good idea. Instead of railroading these >>by-laws through now in such a short time there should be more time to >discuss them & we >>could vote on them lateron. >> >>Liesel >>Member Theosophy International >>Member Human Race >> > > do your really think anyone out there is thinking about thinking >thru this whole issue of railroading. their single thought at least to me >is how quickly we can get this thru and implement all that the new bylaws >empowers them to do. > > ..doss > >I asked John Algeo whether he couldn't postpone the voting so we >could talk this thing over a little better & he said >that the Board would have to do it. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race Glad you talked to John Algeo. Hope he brings this issue to the Board of Directors and recommends that it is a good idea to postpone the whole thing. I am sure the Board will go along. ...doss Na nobody's going to go along. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 17:23:24 GMT From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: RE: Saraydarian >> I used to invite Saraydarian to speak on the Secret Doctrine >>at the Los Angeles Branch. I remember not agreeing with many of >>his interpretations But I never included or excluded speakers >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>based upon my opinion of their point of view yet they were > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>obviously well thought out and were based upon AAB's >>interpretations of the SD. > >That's the spirit! Hmm I've read the A. Bailey books thoroughly some several times and I found Sarsaydarian's books to be very different in terms of the relation of teacher to student and on the subject of sex. I spent about a year there in Sedona some years back going to the A.E.G. meetings and found the actual activities and practices many behind the scenes there to be very different from the principles taught by Bailey and Blavatsky. I informed the Guru T.Saraydarian and others there of my views on this but to no avail. Se la vi. Peace & Light Patrick Holistic - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/maininfo.html Esoteric - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/esopsych.html Auras - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/auras.html Meditation - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/service.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 17:42:58 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Alan: >the "name" of God is given as YHWH or Yahweh or in HPB's time >Jehovah. This name is a variant form of the Hebrew verb "to be" and >intelligently understood hence such phrases as "whoever has >ears to hear" represents insofar as human awareness is >capable of knowing what it means the fact of eternal being or >being-ness *as such*. That's great news to me. I wonder if this is being shared from the pulpit? >To put it another way we as monads are part of the All. I agree with this. Yoga is my tool. meditation gives you the insight to the above statement. Anne From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 17:59:32 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Trust Problem Regarding the whole TSA amendments discussion -- I am reminded of a comment from a Mahatma we are told regarding the T.S. last century and what would become of the T.S. if it were not "a school of occultism." This Mahatma said that what was needed was not occultism but brotherhood and to "let the Theosophical Society flourish on its moral worth alone." If there is ANY need for "control" from the top of the T.S. then we have a problem. The way to lead IMHO is not by force or legal proceedings but by excellent and persuasive example and moral worth. Madame Blavatsky NEVER forced her ideas upon any one but merely offered her books among the plethora of other books being written -- many of which other books she had good things to say despite their shortcomings. William Q. Judge also added "Theosophy is for those who want it none others." So if Wheaton or Adyar want others to conform to their wishes if they feel a need to lead and direct the Theosophical Movement then let them lead by example by argument by persuasion and by demonstration that such-and-such works. But let there be no high-handedness manipulation slander or force. This is not only unbrotherly but hinders individuals from growing into their own Buddhic consciousness which is the personal ability to discriminate wrong and right and to approach one's own personal ULTIMATE AUTHORITY -- the Self. How can another dictate to us how that can be accomplished? Suggestion only never force. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 18:43:50 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Trust Problem On 14 199512 John R Crocker wrote: > On 13 199512 Richtay@aol.com wrote: > > > > If there is ANY need for "control" from the top of the T.S. then we have a > > problem. The way to lead IMHO is not by force or legal proceedings but > > by excellent and persuasive example and moral worth. > > Yes. > > > So if Wheaton or Adyar want others to conform to their wishes if they > > feel a need to lead and direct the Theosophical Movement then let them > > lead by example by argument by persuasion and by demonstration that > > such-and-such works. > > Yes! > > > But let there be no high-handedness manipulation slander or force. This > > is not only unbrotherly but hinders individuals from growing into their > > own Buddhic consciousness which is the personal ability to discriminate > > wrong and right and to approach one's own personal ULTIMATE AUTHORITY -- > > the Self. > > YES! > > > How can another dictate to us how that can be accomplished? Suggestion > > only never force. > > *YES*! > > Rich > > Upon much we have great differences Rich but you frame the heart of the > orginizational matter here IMO. TSA HQ I think would have no need to > resort to political and bureaucatic methods of control if the moral force > it generated established an appropriate tone throughout the Society. It > faces now a crisis of legitimacy brought about by its own behaviour ... > behaviour often selfish rather than altruistic concerned with protecting > turf rather than the growth of Theosophy overly secretive about not > occult secrets but about its *finances* ... doing a *major* revision of > its Bylaws and keeping it hidden until almost the last moment - > but all this really is secondary to a more primary level: If HQ > Board Members and Officers saw themselves as *facilitators of a large > family of spiritual equals - whose respect had to be earned who it is an > honor to serve and whose voices were to be *genuinely* listened to* > much of the ridiculous politicing would be renedered unnecessary. Instead > the attitude towards the membership seems to be that of people who > believe they stand above the members they serve who actually operate as > though the membership *cannot be trusted* with information with money > or even to freely *vote* do not all the restrictions being placed on who > can run for board & officer positions implicitly state that the > membership can't be trusted not to elect completely unsuitable people?. > William Blake I think somewhere described the spiritual world as > "a democracy of kings" - and this I believe is the attitude with which > to serve as a board member or officer of a spiritual organization: as > though every member were *royalty* ... fully capable of governing their > personal kingdoms but still willing to listen to those who would > facilitate the communications between themselves and others - but *not* > willing to listen to those who approach them with the attitude that they > are *serfs* being "permitted" a certain degree of freedom so long as they > operate within parameters imposed from above but who are also expected > to simply accept that they need rules and regulations to keep them from > making bad choices and hurting themselves and their organization. > IMO the *last* Theosophist who possessed the spiritual and moral > force to get away with behaving as HQ is now behaving was HPB - and she > never behaved that way. > -JRC > MKR JRC has summed up the fundamental problems we have in TSA today. Before it is too late if the Board moves swiftly and openly and convincingly comes out and states where they are headed and also open up the financial and other books and records and promptly respond to inquiries about administrative and financial and policy matters the situation can be turned around. To allow matters to continue in the current mode and justifying them on legality or any other excuse is not going to help. I hope someone in TSA HQ makes copies of the various messages posted here and distributes them to the Board Members and also International President so that everyone get a good feedback from the field. ..doss "One can only take the horse to the water but not make it drink." Anon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 18:53:45 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Internet Theosophy Mail lists --=====================_818931393==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Theosophical Society in America Information Department and Membership Department I had sent you a msg which contained information on the Theosophy Mail Lists which you may consider printing copies of and making them available to inquirers along with other introductory Theosophy Material. There was a minor typo which has been corrected. Thanks to John E Mead for locating the typo and letting me know. Attached is the revised information which may be copied and distributed. How to Subscribe to the Theosophy mail lists on Internet. Rev 12/95 The five Theosophy lists are: THEOS-L - General Theosophy discussions. This is the main list. THEOS-BUDS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-ROOTS - Discussing the history and historical literature of the TS. THEOS-NEWS - For posting news and announcements about Theosophical events and activities. THEOS-SPAN - For the benefit of Spanish Speaking members. How to log on get on the Theosophy lists. Send an e-mail message to the following address. LISTSERV@VNET.NET In the body of the message type just this line: subscribe If you have any questions please feel free to write to me by e-mail at: > From Internet 726621335@compuserve.com > From Compuserve 726621335 Don DeGracia Posted by ramadoss@eden.com. If you have any questions please send a msg by e-mail to ramadoss@eden.com The person who coordinates the above lists is John E Mead. If you have any questions please send e-mail to John at jem@vnet.net Please print this message and distribute copies to your lodge branch or study center or anyone else who may be interested. Participation and exchange of views ideas comments by more individuals who are interested in Theosophy whether they be members or not of any Theosophy group is what is going to make these mail list very useful and helpful to everybody. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 19:42:59 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM >Bee: > >>I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> > >I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a >theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis >Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible >including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions >can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone >working full time on the project. > >-- Eldon > Many thanks. I will keep my ears open for any likely outcome. It sounds neat and would be nice to have.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 19:53:08 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >>Some responses to Eldon's posting: >> >>> >> I do not believe that such a "being" exists. Our >>world was brought about by a countless host of beings all >>acting through karmic laws of causation and just a little >>chaos to liven things up. > >Could this "host" be another's understanding that you believe in such a >"being"? May-be God is and/or isn't a being. It's all OK isn't it? >Because one person's conception can be the same as another's yet the >language used to define it different. Myths teach us that. To me "God" >is everywhere and manifests itself in love and energyprana. That can make >"God" no thing. But then again God's beingness can be the grasping >projections that help some in advancement and bring personification for >another level of relationship. The Hindu gods are great examples of that. >It's at that level in representation that it is important to not forget >both masculine and feminine aspects or an imbalance can be created that has >great social implications. > I have read that the Christian God equates to our Solar Logos who is sort of responsible for this solar system and who in turns sort of answers to a higher Logos still until it all reaches the orignal 07 creative principles breathes out by All That Is. The whole show is maintained by trillions of beings of all grades of spirituality. Much better than one very important personification of the Ultimate. > > > > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 21:02:03 GMT From: theos Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM fwd Doss As per Eldon's posting below we are in close contact with the Philippines etc. and the TSA is in the process of preparing materials for this purpose and we will announce it when it is ready. Ruben - theos@netcom.com On 13 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > > Date: 13 199512 091152 -0600 > From: M K Ramadoss > To: theos@netcom.com > Cc: "m.k. ramadoss" > Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM fwd > > Theosophical Society in America: > > If you have any information on the following as well as the availability > of any other CD Rom as well as any other project currently in process > that you are aware of can you please post a msg here for my benefit as > well as other Theosophists. > > Thanks > > M K Ramadoss - ramadoss@eden.com > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: 13 199512 094240 -0500 > From: Eldon B. Tucker > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM > > Bee: > > >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> > > I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a > theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis > Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible > including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions > can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone > working full time on the project. > > -- Eldon > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 21:37:09 GMT From: "Murray Stentiford Scientific Software and Systems Ltd" Subject: TI YES to the latest proposal. Murray Stentiford From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 21:45:32 GMT From: theos Subject: Re: Internet Theosophy Mail lists This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --=====================_818931393==_ Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Doss Thanks I will forward this to the Departments concerned. Ruben theos@netcom.com On 14 199512 MK Ramadoss wrote: > To: Theosophical Society in America > Information Department and > Membership Department > > I had sent you a msg which contained information on the Theosophy Mail Lists > which you may consider printing copies of and making them available to > inquirers along with other introductory Theosophy Material. There was a > minor typo which has been corrected. Thanks to John E Mead for locating the > typo and letting me know. How to Subscribe to the Theosophy mail lists on Internet. Rev 12/95 The five Theosophy lists are: THEOS-L - General Theosophy discussions. This is the main list. THEOS-BUDS - Discussing the future of the TS. THEOS-ROOTS - Discussing the history and historical literature of the TS. THEOS-NEWS - For posting news and announcements about Theosophical events and activities. THEOS-SPAN - For the benefit of Spanish Speaking members. How to log on get on the Theosophy lists. Send an e-mail message to the following address. LISTSERV@VNET.NET In the body of the message type just this line: subscribe If you have any questions please feel free to write to me by e-mail at: > From Internet 726621335@compuserve.com > From Compuserve 726621335 Don DeGracia Posted by ramadoss@eden.com. If you have any questions please send a msg by e-mail to ramadoss@eden.com The person who coordinates the above lists is John E Mead. If you have any questions please send e-mail to John at jem@vnet.net Please print this message and distribute copies to your lodge branch or study center or anyone else who may be interested. Participation and exchange of views ideas comments by more individuals who are interested in Theosophy whether they be members or not of any Theosophy group is what is going to make these mail list very useful and helpful to everybody. ---------------------end of message-------------------------- --=====================_818931393==_-- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 22:14:14 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Lighthearted fun > writes: > > > >> A little lighthearted kidding is welcome. > >> Bee Brown > > > >To Bee: A little lighthearted kidding. :- > > > > > > > >Alan > > > Gee thanks. You could have used .zip as they tramped all over my hard disc > and set up error messages.:-D > > Bee Brown Oh but we do enjoy ourselves here! Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 22:23:40 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Serving ... Sy: Adapting your posting: > In my view Wheaton [and all National Section Headquarters] must be the servant of the Lodges and Study Centers if they are people who genuinely want to serve Theosophy and not try to be the masters of those Lodges and Study Centers and I believe this also should apply to Adyar on the international level. There appears to be something very wrong there also. My ideal would be to see National Section HQs as co-ordinating a network of lodges or branches each of which would run its own affairs in its own preferred way and in the case of the Adyar TS to which I belong in line with the three objects preferably TI flavored :-}. Lodges or branches would also have to be self-sufficient owning or renting their own property on behalf of their own local members as non-profit making organizations in law which would require all assets to be passed to a similar organisation in the event of dissolution. This should make control from the top impossible. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 23:16:48 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > > >> The current > >movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying > >to be more like men. This has already resulted in sever > >psychological damage to many women and some men. > > > > > > Jerry S. > > Member Theosophy international > > > >I am sorry I haven't finished. Another thing I wanted to mention was > about this last statement. I have heard this from some men and non-feminist > women before and I don't agree. I hate to be labeled a feminist just > because I do what I want and I don't let my gender be an issue unless it is > walking down the street at midnight. If being "like a man" means not > putting up with being forced to mindlessly obey to cook and clean against > your will to abstain from developing your intellectual and creative > abilities stay home and not work and develop the abibilities associalted > with that to be paid less for the same work to work twice as hard to get > the same recognition than OK. If Being free to create and BE means that one > is imitating men-then what's wrong with it? A man is not those things any > more than a woman. If Nietshze and Plato great philosophers thought women > not more intelligent or able than mere animalstheir words not mine then > WOW!!!SOCIETY!!!not gender LOUD APPLAUSE! - Without distinction of sex creed etc. etc. Alan OUI indeed! -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 13 Dec 1996 23:46:02 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Trust Problem Rich: >Regarding the whole TSA amendments discussion -- >If there is ANY need for "control" from the top of the T.S. then >we have a problem. This discussion on the asssertion of greater control over lodges by Wheaton makes me think about something that happened in the recent past. I'm not sure exactly which year but it was not too many years ago. It used to be that a number of members could apply for a charter and form a Study Center or Lodge. Now the groups are probationary and must demonstrate some attempt to study Theosophy in order to become regular groups. If I and a few people in Los Angeles with perhaps a 10-to-20 years average in theosophical studies were to apply to form a group we'd be in the same probationary status as any other group. This represents another attempt to control the studies and direction of groups. The intent of this policy may be good to insure that entirely new people have some guidance when they first get together to study Theosophy. But it is still a form of centralized control. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 02:23:52 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: CD Roms Here is the reply from my friend. I didn't get it quite right. Well when I visited London the first time about a year ago they had a couple of 286 computers at the headquarters. Everyone there were very much from the old guard. Not exactly very welcoming. I think they get people all the time. I visited again a few months ago. This time they employed a young computer programmer a Serbian refugee to upgrade their system. He is very much a Theosophist has written a small book and was very interesting like talking to Krishnamurti. He has had an experience of expanded consciousness quite interesting but that is another story in fact it happened to him while reading a book in the T.S. library written from a different level of consciousness. ANyway it is his intention to write on basic theosophy to put onto the network. I think if I achieved anything thereit may have been to convince the General Secretary how important it is to have this information accessible on the net. No point having lots of money in the bank and ancient equipment. I must say that England is still very behind compared to the rest of Europe as far as scientific equipment etc. is concerned. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 03:39:01 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM fwd Thanks for the information. I am eagerly awaiting the news. Hope the CD Roms are priced within my reach. ..doss On 14 199512 theos wrote: > Doss > > As per Eldon's posting below we are in close contact with the Philippines > etc. and the TSA is in the process of preparing materials for this purpose > and we will announce it when it is ready. > > Ruben - theos@netcom.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > On 13 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > > > > > Date: 13 199512 091152 -0600 > > From: M K Ramadoss > > To: theos@netcom.com > > Cc: "m.k. ramadoss" > > Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM fwd > > > > > > Theosophical Society in America: > > > > > > If you have any information on the following as well as the availability > > of any other CD Rom as well as any other project currently in process > > that you are aware of can you please post a msg here for my benefit as > > well as other Theosophists. > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > M K Ramadoss - ramadoss@eden.com > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: 13 199512 094240 -0500 > > From: Eldon B. Tucker > > To: Multiple recipients of list > > Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy theosophical CD-ROM > > > > Bee: > > > > >I think it was a C D that was being prepared at the London Lodge.> > > > > I believe that Vic Hao Chin in the Phillippines is working on a > > theosophical CD ROM. He has "The Secret Doctrine" done work on "Isis > > Unveiled" is underway and there are many more books possible > > including the Collected Writings of HPB assuming proper permissions > > can be obtained. I think I heard that he has a scanner and someone > > working full time on the project. > > > > -- Eldon > > > > > > > > > M K Ramadoss - ramadoss@eden.com 4203 Gardendale Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 Phone & Fax 210 615-7373 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 04:47:45 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking RI: >Unless an individual corroborates these ideas theosophically mystically >transcendentally for himself or herself the ideas--for all of their beauty >and glory--are merely potential "contaminants" for the formation of egoic >delusions at either the desire-mental or mental levels of consciousness. We seem to be talking about what might be two classes of ideas. The first is about mystical things related to what is not visible and tangible in our material world. These things are invisible to our eyes basically independent of the ordinary and known laws of nature and not directly experiencable with our physical and psychical senses. The second class of ideas deals with things that are subject to ordinary physical processes and exist in our world or perhaps the astral light. They have ordinary traits. We can learn about them and their attributes. And they are real in the same sense as an orange on a tree in someone's backyard. The first kind of idea may need some theosophical validation. The second kind of idea deals with things that could be considered as scientific knowledge and not need some special insight before they can be believed. I would put the idea of the Masters in the second category as real living beings and not as an arbitrary mystical insight dealing with something that is basically unknowable. I don't need an ego identifiction with the idea that there's a country called "France" in order to believe that it exists. I can take the word of geographers and map makers. >Few individuals who believe in the continuing existence of the Mahatmas seem >to testify that such a belief is an unpleasant or merely neutral thing for >them; therefore one might guess that it is "pleasant" or egoically "useful" >to them in some way. But an idea does not have to be either pleasant or unpleasant. It can simply make sense be reasonable and be the best idea to explain a particular area of life. >Possibly *ditto* for *Parabrahm* *planes* *unity* >etc.--however there is a much better chance that these are actually >individual theosophical insights since they are some of the first things >which authenticate themselves by means of meditative practice. These are things that are less likely to find physical validation. The idea of planes is validated if one accepts that dreams happen in the astral. The idea of unity can be experienced. If "Parabrahm" is correctly understood it can be a useful description of the final stage of unification with the rest of life. The idea of planes can be experimentally verified. That of Parabrahm and unity are states of consciousness that can be experienced but not externally observed. >*Private* is really the thing I was hoping you would address. In this >instance I mean it in the sense of being "closed" or "restricted to the >individual." Then this is talking about the type of ideas based upon states of consciousness or inner experience rather than the external observation of nature and living things. >Assuming for the discussion that the fact of living Mahatmas >has *not* been validated theosophically by a person what could be another >basis for "believing" in Them? I'd put the idea of the Mahatmas as one subject to external verification as something that exists in the world. A Mahatma is as real as a taxi driver. A Mahatma is not only known through mystical insight like a Tibetan deity. >Is there any or is it merely a closed pleasant private predilection >of merely idiopathic importance. Time for the dictionary American Heritage idiopathic = AHD> designating a disease having no known cause I wonder if this is an editorial comment on the theosophical Teachings? At what level of validation does one of the Teachings need to be internally validated before it is an honest truth something worthy of sharing with others rather than being personal delusion that merely sickens the person? >If it is just the latter certainly the "Chain of Authority" we were >talking about seems a little slight . . . and to use it perhaps a >little arrogant. Perhaps your distinction is between ideas that we've heard and merely parrot without genuine understanding and ideas that we've really made our own which are significant to us which play an important role in explaining the way that life works? >Would you be willing step up to the plate theosophically? That is >would you be willing to go on record and say that you have an inner >certainty about the continuing existence of the Mahatmas and that it >has come as the natural result of your meditative practice or that >it has developed in you in some other theosophical/mystical/ >transcendental way? I would accept such a statement without challenge. I would say that I'm speaking from what seems genuine to me and not simply materials that I recall having read in theosophical books. I've had what I consider insights of my own which I have not specifically read anywhere. I've found though that my ideas subsequently seem consistent with what I read as I continue to study Theosophy. I find that the ideas are inseparable with a dynamic process of change and growth and creativity. I've also found that there are certain things that are improper to put into words when they are in the formative stages since the words may attempt to impose an inappropriate order and direction to their outcome. Regarding the Mahatmas though I don't think that their existence needs to be controversial. They can be defined as being advanced humans beyond the Arhat stage considering the Buddhist definition of Arhat and less than the stage of either the Pratyeka Buddha or Bodhisattva. We may disagree over their abilities and characteristics but their existence itself does not need to be controversial. If we agree that the Buddha existed then there is a scale of advancement between the common person and him. The Mahatmas are humans at one point along this scale. Is there anything wrong with that idea? >On the other hand look what we have without it: >"How do you know there are Mahatmas?" >"Because H.P.B. tells us there are." >"How do you know H.P.B. is reliable in this regard?" >"Because H.P.B.'s knowledge was given to her by Mahatmas." [at the point the circle repeats itself ...] It's not really circular here. What we really have is that there are dozens of key ideas in Theosophy and they're all interconnected. Reincarnation karma spiritual evolution the Mahatmas the Path the other planes of existence etc. -- there is a strong interdependence among the ideas. We accept the idea of the Masters regardless of HPB's having talked about them. And we accept from having studied her materials her as being a spokeswoman for them. She is not infallable and some of what she writes could be mistaken. But she is considered authoritative in the same sense as a instructor of chemistry is considered authoritative while giving a college lecture in his field. There is not a circle here because the Teachings stand with or without HPB. The Teachings are accepted based upon their own intrinsic value and not because HPB has been depicted as being infallible unquestionable as a Pope speaking ex cathedra to the ignorant masses. The Teachings are validated I think when they are *gone into* when they are taken at a deeper level than the simple intellectual understanding of the passage before us in reading a particular book. The Teachings are both I'd say an accurate depiction of the visible and invisible worlds and at the same time a door way through the thinking mind into *lucidity* or *luminous mind*. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:02:16 GMT From: theos Subject: Practical Lessons/guidance & Thesosophy Doss Thanks for your information on the above topic. We have the following waiver or rather consent form for that purpose: ========================================================================= INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM Name................................................ Phone............... Address.................................................................. City.................................. State...........Zip............... Do you have any physical ailment which would limit your practice of hatha Yoga?.................................................................... If yes explain:......................................................... ........................................................................ How long have you been practicing yoga?.................................. What is your reason for practicing yoga?................................. We urge you to participate in each yoga position at your own comfort level and to discontinue any position or session as you choose. I hereby agree not to hold either the instructor or The Theosophical Society in America responsible for any injury which is incurred during any class. .................. ............................................... Date Signature ========================================================================= Happy Holidays! Ruben From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:14:33 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It Rich: >Ann you're kidding right? >> [My husband] >> grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even > >today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when he is > >at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex > >object don't you think? > My not-so-subtle attempt to use humor to suggest that men and women are moving towards a point where jobs and tasks will not be assigned by gender with little damage to their mental/emotional state. But consider this: A few years back I was down in Florida visiting my husband's relatives for Thanksgiving. My sister-in-law divorced had the dinner at her boyfriend's house. Not only did this guy have an in-ground pool a hot tub and a screened porch with a bar but he did the dishes from Thanksgiving dinner. You should have heard the female relatives swooning and sighing over the fact that he was doing the dishes. Let me tell the way to a woman's heart is through the dishpan. - ann From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:22:08 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: England > > I must > say that England is still very behind compared to the rest of Europe > as far as scientific equipment etc. is concerned. > > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International Oh how true how true :- Mind you England is bot so well off financially as people imagine. Times they is hard here. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:24:44 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: He/She/It > Ann you're kidding right? > > > [My husband] > > grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even > > today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when > he is > > at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex > > object don't you think? > > > > - ann I think she may be being a *liitle* sarcastic - switching the stereotype around. Tee hee. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:26:47 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > Alan: > >the "name" of God is given as YHWH or Yahweh or in HPB's time > >Jehovah. This name is a variant form of the Hebrew verb "to be" and > >intelligently understood hence such phrases as "whoever has > >ears to hear" represents insofar as human awareness is > >capable of knowing what it means the fact of eternal being or > >being-ness *as such*. > > That's great news to me. I wonder if this is being shared from the pulpit? Not very likely - but the bishops and the college theologians all know it. Hypocrisy and expediency hold their heads high as always. > >To put it another way we as monads are part of the All. > > I agree with this. Yoga is my tool. meditation gives you the insight to > the above statement. > > Anne A while back my Lodge had a debate-cum-discussion on reincarnation. At the end we took a vote - around 66 percent agreed that reincarnation was a fact. So - it must be as it was decided by the democratic process ..... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 05:40:13 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: TI Add to list of members: *John R. Crocker. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 06:07:56 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >FACT??????What dat???? >A while back my Lodge had a debate-cum-discussion on >reincarnation. At the end we took a vote - around 66 percent >agreed that reincarnation was a fact. So - it must be as it >was decided by the democratic process ..... > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 06:52:48 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: He/She/It >Ann you're kidding right? > >> [My husband] >> grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even >> today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when >he is >> at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex >> object don't you think? >> >> - ann > >Hi Ann I could get used to a man like that too. I might even let him use my knitting machine. I reckon that a man who can iron his shirts without putting creases in them is definitely worth cultivating. Haven't met one yet but we live in hopes. Now if he was a theosophist handsome sensitive home-handyman mechanic plays golf oh well just as well I like my own companyeh!!!! > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 07:03:32 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Neo-theosophy To all member of Theos-l: Today I visited the web site of The White Mountain Education Association whose address was posted by someone on our mailing list. It was referred to as Neo-theosophy. An amalgation of HPB Bailey Sarayadarian and Roerich it seemed to lean more towards Bailey. I will leave each of you to review the page for yourself http://www.primenet.com/~wtmtn/index.html but I will say this. While I was scrolling through the material I got a clear view of it. It was "I've seen this all before." It was like knowledge was being repackaged and being distributed through another yet another organization. Good or bad idea? -Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 07:36:59 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal In a message dated 95-12-13 172708 EST you write: >When years ago I described the way the ULT operates to my >brother anonymity secret officers no by-laws etc. he said >"Oh that's a cryptocracy." Meaning an organization in which >the government is secret. There is a misconception about ULT stated here that needs to be cleared up. The ULT is an Association of students. There is no legal entity called ULT hence no officers bylaws government. Each Lodge and study group is independent and autonomous and generally run by older students who assume the responsibility for its functioning. The ULT is not a democracy but the views and council of as many students as possible are taken into consideration. This generally applies to convenient meeting times administrative matters building maintainance etc. for the efficient functioning of the group. I try to think of the ULT as a combination of the concept of a Family and a Bridge Club. Families are run by older figures who are given authority by virtue of their position but opinions are sought. In a bridge club there is no official organization but various members take responsibility for its functioning. As the bridge club agrees that when they assemble they will play bridge the ULT students agree that when they assemble they will study HPB Judge and Crosbie. The anonymity issue is merely an attempt to stick to ideas and teaching rather than personalities. Therefore there are no "leaders" officially recognized as such. When writing ULT students do not sign their name so that the ideas come through and the reader is not biased by the personality of the author. It is not a secret society where the governance is hidden secret or mysterious in any way and certainly is not a "cryptocracy". Actually the operation is very much like the new Theosophy International. I would even say that this new organization seems to be modeled on ULT except for the agreed upon course of study. The ULT Declaration states that "It ULT is loyal to the Founders of the Theosophical Movement . . . " Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it does--people are involved. But the method of operation minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert its attention from its mission. Witness the current "lengthy" discussion of political events on this List taking up time and space better utilized by the discussion of the ideas and teaching of Theosophy. I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles gossip etc. be moved to a separate board. Does anyone else agree? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 09:10:32 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal Coherence writes: >There is a misconception about ULT stated here that needs to be >cleared up. The ULT is an Association of students. There is no >legal entity called ULT hence no officers bylaws government. >Each Lodge and study group is independent and autonomous and >generally run by older students who assume the responsibility >for its functioning. The ULT is not a democracy but the views >and council of as many students as possible are taken into >consideration. This generally applies to convenient meeting >times administrative matters building maintenance etc. for >the efficient functioning of the group. > >I try to think of the ULT as a combination of the concept of a >Family and a Bridge Club. Families are run by older figures who >are given authority by virtue of their position but opinions >are sought. In a bridge club there is no official >organization but various members take responsibility for its >functioning. As the bridge club agrees that when they assemble >they will play bridge the ULT students agree that when they >assemble they will study HPB Judge and Crosbie. This is about as fair of a description of how ULT works that I have seen. I was active with the Los Angeles ULT for about fifteen years until we moved out of the area but still in contact with some of the associates. ULT is indeed more of a federation of students than a formal organization but an inner structure does indeed exist and downplaying the importance of that structure is in MHO unrealistic. Decisions have to be made concerning the upkeep of the building organizing of office help paying the day to day expenses of telephones office machinery postage etc. Though there are no officers for ULT there is a board of directors for Theosophy Company which is a bonified Organization responsible for the publications. They are also responsible for the assets used by ULT associates and for the production of ~Theosophy~ magazine. That board has a chairperson who also has more than a little influence concerning the organizations of classes and the scheduling of speakers. Though ULT is founded upon some very high ideals weakness in human nature requires that the implementation of these ideals require some compromises by giving the Board and individuals some responsibilities therefore powers that gives some justification to Paul's observation of a "cryptocracy." >The anonymity issue is merely an attempt to stick to ideas and >teaching rather than personalities. Therefore there are no >"leaders" officially recognized as such. Yet everyone involved in ULT knows who these "leaders" are. I remember when Joe Pope came to Los Angeles on a visit. He was scheduled to speak at one of the night gatherings. True to form an announcement of the topic was sent out but not the speaker. It made no difference. The word got around that Joe Pope would be speaking that night and he got a much larger audience than what was usual. >When writing ULT >students do not sign their name so that the ideas come through >and the reader is not biased by the personality of the author. >It is not a secret society where the governance is hidden >secret or mysterious in any way and certainly is not a >"cryptocracy". Yes and this is a real headache for us historians. >Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it >does--people are involved. But the method of operation >minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert >its attention from its mission. I would say that ULT has had its share of "politics" that have diverted attention from its mission from time to time but on the whole I must agree that ULT is structured in such a way that more energy can be directed to the real work. In many ways it is much more efficient and focused than Adyar. >Witness the current "lengthy" discussion of political events on >this List taking up time and space better utilized by the >discussion of the ideas and teaching of Theosophy. > >I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other >organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles >gossip etc. be moved to a separate board. > >Does anyone else agree? Because of the evident failure of the Adyar TS to keep its membership properly informed and involved in decisions affecting member's and Lodge's rights I think this electronic forum is a godsend and may have the eventual effect of making a more democratic organization out of it. Since this board is open to all theosophical students regardless of affiliation or none I can see the wisdom of putting the current discussion on a separate Board. On the other hand if we create a new board every time a subject of limited popularity arises we will soon have our one forum fragmenting into more and more little ones. Perhaps another and more productive way of looking at this would be to allow the diversity of subjects to continue on this forum. Though a ULT associate has no personal investment in Adyar politics I think there is still much to be learned concerning organizational dynamics that may help to create a better Organizational structure that will be to everyone's benefit. Jerry HE Member Theosophy International Associate ULT Member Theosophical Society Adyar Member Theosophical Society Pasadena From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 09:12:53 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: Re RE Saraydarian Patrick writes: >Hmm I've read the A. Bailey books thoroughly some several >times and I found Sarsaydarian's books to be very different in >terms of the relation of teacher to student and on the subject >of sex. I spent about a year there in Sedona some years back >going to the A.E.G. meetings and found the actual activities and >practices many behind the scenes there to be very different >from the principles taught by Bailey and Blavatsky. I informed >the Guru T.Saraydarian and others there of my views on this >but to no avail. Se la vi. No doubt you are right about this. I remember being told much the same thing about Saraydarian when he was living in Agora So. California. It appears that he has some real differences with the Arcane School. But my knowledge of the AEG and the AS is much more superficial than yours so my bases of judgement concerning his ~Secret Doctrine~ lectures was that he held very closely to major themes found in Bailey literature such as the seven rays and his discussion of "the Logos" was very Bailey like. I can hear a lecture on the ~Secret Doctrine~ or any discussion on theosophy for that matter and tell you with perfect accuracy whether the speaker comes from a training of AS Adyar TS ULT or Pasadana TS. Each group has their pet themes and phrases that are dead give-a-ways. Jerry HE International Theosophist ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 09:13:38 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re re Trust Problem Rich Taylor writes: >But let there be no high-handedness manipulation slander or >force. This is not only unbrotherly but hinders individuals >from growing into their own Buddhic consciousness which is the >personal ability to discriminate wrong and right and to >approach one's own personal ULTIMATE AUTHORITY -- the Self. It is too bad that Wheaton has had to resort to the mis- representation of facts and sometimes to even slander in order to maintain control of the Section. Only a few years ago it was the bylaw changes that effectively prevented Bing Escudero from running for President. Now Boston Lodge members are being misrepresented as having stolen Lodge assets for their personal use. We are faced with new bylaw changes that will destroy the traditionally held autonomy of Lodges and make it easier to expel members who disagree. More than ever I think that the salvation of the TS depends upon the members exerting their will. Jerry HE International Theosophist ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:03:01 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >> The current >> movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying >> to be more like men. >> >This is a pretty sweeping generalization Jerry - I don't see >how you could reasonably substantiate it. All statements made regarding people are gross generalizations and there are always a lot of exceptions. However I do a lot of reading including psychology and there is a real problem today because a lot of women see "equality" as being more masculine i.e. some requirements to break through the "glass ceiling" are to devote your life to the company store to show drive and ambition to be dominant and agressive--all normally considered as masculine traits but required in our corporate business world today. In the process many women repress their own femininity and suffer for it. Case in point would be the career woman who must renounce her inner desires for children--balancing a career and motherhood is a BIG problem in this country and there is no real answer to it in sight. Good day care for example is hard to find. Men on the other hand don't generally have this problem of course some do widowers and so on. Anyway psychologists are telling us that women should not have to renounce or repress their femininty in order to have a career or own a business. My wife used to own and run a computer store so I know that this can be done--but it is not easy and some women have a hard time with it. In fact my wife quit her store after 05 years largely out of frustration and went back to being a foster parent. Why is all of this true? Probably because we have a male-dominated business/corporate world today. Its us men who have laid down all the rules. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:42:25 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >As a theologian as well as a theosophian may I state: God is >not a being and never was. In the Western version of the >Ancient Wisdom found in the Bible Tanach and other writings >the "name" of God is given as YHWH or Yahweh or in HPB's time >Jehovah. Thanks Alan. As usual you said it better and more succinctly that I could. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:42:28 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Ann on He/She/It >My not-so-subtle attempt to use humor to suggest that men and women are moving >towards a point where jobs and tasks will not be assigned by gender with little >damage to their mental/emotional state. I was raised with the view that there was man's work and there was woman's work. Women cooked and cleaned while men mowed the lawn and made repairs etc. After I got married I learned of a whole new way of doing business because my wife had not been raised that way. She taught me to do dishes floors kids etc. When our first- born boy was brought home from the hospital my wife was laid up in bed and so I had to take care of him. We had never discussed who would do diappers for example. But the circumstances left me as the only one who could do it and so I did. By the time my wife was up and walking around I was already used to it and so continued to help her out with all of our children. I don't believe that this made me any less of a man. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:42:31 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Trust Problem >The intent of this policy may be good to insure that entirely >new people have some guidance when they first get together to study >Theosophy. But it is still a form of centralized control. Perhaps events over the past have suggested to headquaters that some form of centralized control is needed? Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:55:13 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Trust Problem >From: "K. Paul Johnson" >Subject: Trust Problem The more I contemplate the by-laws imbroglio for that is what it appears to be becoming the more it seems to boil down to a basic lack of trust on the part of the members toward Wheaton and Adyar. On a personal basis I have enjoyed visiting Wheaton have met most board members and feel a general trust that they and the staff there have Theosophy's best interests at heart. Yet the Bing episode and some previous power-struggle things I've heard about make me feel that 01 some people are trying to control things in underhanded ways and 02 their motives are mysterious and perhaps not benevolent. This is admittedly a suspicious mood rather than a well-founded conclusion. When we look at Adyar and the various section expulsions the same sense of distrust is engendered. One doesn't know exactly who is trying to control what there's little information on what has occurred but in the absence of information one can only speculate. The best cure I can imagine for this kind of generalized distrust is a completely open discussion of the issues involved. Until the membership knows exactly what went on in Boston Canada Yugoslavia Denmark we are not likely to be receptive to the message from higher up that "we need more control over you for your own good." What's really at stake? Who's really concerned about it? I hope that if the controversial amendments are defeated that there will be more time for discussion and a more open forum for it than we have had in the past. When years ago I described the way the ULT operates to my brother anonymity secret officers no by-laws etc. he said "Oh that's a cryptocracy." Meaning an organization in which the government is secret. Even though the Adyar TS has all the paraphernalia of a democracy there are still ways that it's cryptocratic due to the ES and other factors. I sense in the unease expressed here about the by-laws a deeper unease about the very nature of Theosophical democracy and a sense that cryptocracy lurks beneath its surface. Restoration of trust requires first of all a sense that there is real meaning to our democratic institutions and that they aren't just window dressing for cryptocracy. The suggestion of postponing the vote may not be feasible but it would help make people feel better about the genuineness of the democratic process. Dear Paul I think what you wrote is very well thought through & well put. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race x and Spirituality Star Trek Tarot Tarot & Numerology Transmission Meditation Urantia. There is a lot worthwhile in many of these studies and admittedly a lot that is not serious but as T.S. people I think we should encourage ourselves and others to examine them. This is a method of outreach that we find works and I believe that if more Lodges took this approach of openness membership would be growing nationwide just as it is at the Miami Lodge and not declining. Sy From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 10:57:08 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It Anne- Good I thought you were serious that men shouldn't do housework. I thought I "knew" you better than that. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 12:43:21 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Dangerous TSA Bylaw Changes Part 02 On 14 199512 Liesel F. Deutsch wrote: > Hey guys > > You seem to exclude that a democratic organization can have a strong > leader. I think an organization in which everyone knows the score & > has valid opinions needs a stronger leader to guide it than one > where the leader just has to get up & say "We're going to do such & > such." & then everybody bows down low & says "Yassu!" But what if that leader seeks to *control* instead of *guide* rather significant difference between those two things methinks ... what if that leader delibrately attempts to limit the ability of that strong membership to *know* the score by refusing to provide requested information about the organization ... what if that leader purposely misrepresents events so as to achieve ends not fully disclosed? I agree a democratic organization can have a strong leader but in leadership to be strong does not mean to dominate. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 13:04:06 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Trust Problem On 14 199512 Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote: > > It is too bad that Wheaton has had to resort to the mis- > representation of facts and sometimes to even slander in order > to maintain control of the Section. Only a few years ago it was > the bylaw changes that effectively prevented Bing Escudero from > running for President. Now Boston Lodge members are being > misrepresented as having stolen Lodge assets for their personal > use. We are faced with new bylaw changes that will destroy the > traditionally held autonomy of Lodges and make it easier to expel > members who disagree. More than ever I think that the salvation > of the TS depends upon the members exerting their will. Yes. As distasteful as even thinking about this stuff is that fact that the membership has been willing to accept increasingly unacceptable behaviour has I believe lead some of those in the leadership to believe they can now do virtually whatever they wish. We probably all want to pay very little attention to political goings on but perhaps now and then it is our responsibility - as a means of paying our debt to the founders an indebtedness I believe most of us feel in some way or another - to take care of the organization they began. -JRC PS. Jerry ... any suggestions as to what form the exertion of will ought to take? I have been recently wrestling with this question and as you have a greater grasp of the historical context I would very much appreciate the broader perspective you might bring to the question. Certainly crises of legitimacy - such as the one we are approaching - are nothing new ... how might the current membership in your opinion accomplish a Headquarters housecleaning without causing yet another schism? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 14:56:20 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Alice A. Bailey; tenets >From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier >Subject: Alice A. Bailey; tenets The writings of ALice A. Bailey AAB in shorthand make up an interesting part of the overall body of theosophical publications IMO. I don't believe there is any question about the books' basis in the theosophy of HPB but there is certainly debate on nearly everything after that point. As mentioned in an earlier post my introduction to AAB came from a local TS group in Austin TX -- the first TS group I had ever met. The following text is taken more or less verbatim from a pamphlet by the AAB publishing group. I will attest to the accuracy of what is written here in so far as matching the original published material -- I am interested to know how the ideas fit or clash with "orthodox" theosophy as promoted by the larger organizations. note: "new" is a relative term; some of the "newer" ideas of Alice Bailey are commonplace now and we may discover that the source as far as can be determined or inspriration may predate AAB. It is *not* my intention to promote a debate or discussion regarding materials which are not in public circulation from the ES archives or any other such source. Jim The Tibetan Djwhal Khul has said that his work continues on the foundations laid by Mdm. Blavatsky and the early teachers in the TS. He gives us in some detail what he considers to be the "newer truths" and he lists these seven ideas as 1 The teaching on Shamballa; the Spiritual Hierarchy of the earth and the "center where the Will of God is known" including the nature of the will aspect and the building of the conscious bridge between the personality and the higher Self 2 The teaching on the New Discipleship including the changes resulting from the new energies available as we transit into Aquarius and the meditative techniques for the Aryan people 3 The teaching on the Seven Rays the conditioning energies or "Seven Spirits before the Throne of God" emphasizing the psychology of the consciousness of man and God 4 The teaching on the new astrology with the conditioning forces which influence the soul and not the personality 5 Information about the New Group of World Servers as a group intermediate between Hierarchy and humanity and determining the quality of the period in which we live through the men and women of goodwill 6 The attempt to form an exoteric branch of the inner Ashram as detailed in the two volumes of Discipleship in the New Age and 7 The teaching on the coming new world religion emphasizing the three major festivals and nine lesser and of the meditations at the time of the full moon. This establishes a relation between the work of the Buddha and the Christ broadening human aspiration. These are the essential teachings of the Tibetan. The Lucis Trust is the organization responsible for the legal and financial affairs of the service activities set up in conjunction with the Bailey teachings. There are a number of parallels between the Lucis Trust and the TS; both organizations have a wonderful and free lending library by mail both maintain a correspondence course designed for training individuals in the methods of occultism and meditation and both will absolutely fill your mailbox with all kinds of interesting things just for asking. In my opinion the Tibetan's teachings can be summed up as information about *relationships* and the Laws and principles which govern them. Hi Jim I have a dozen questions on Alice Bailey's 07 "Newer truths" & I'm hoping you can go into more detail about what she stands for.. 1. Please explain to me what it's saying. It doesn't make sense to me. 2. What "Aryan people" are we talking about and what are the new meditative techniques? If there's a more efficient way of meditating that'd sure be welcome. 3. I don't know what the 07 Rays have to do with the psychology of the consciousness of man. That there's any psychology connected with God is new to me. How does that figure? I thought psychology was all on man's side. 4. I don't know astrology at all so I'll skip this one but if you'd like to explain what "the new astrology" is others on this list do use astrology. 5. What's "World Servers" & what's "Hierarchy"? It sounds to me like the Catholic priesthood with its Pope at the head which you have to ask to intervene for you. My meditation phone line goes straight to God mostly to the God within & I'm not in favor of having to ask any intermediaries although I may at times consult some. 6. I think I understand. It's making exoteric little by little that which is now esoteric so that people can learn it & use it. Of that's what it means I agree with the idea. 7. I can only guess at what is meant there. Establishing a relation between the Christ & the Buddha is ok with me. It's there anyway only most people don't realize it. About teaching a new world religion that depends upon how dogmatic the teachings are or are not. What are the festivals Bailey people celebrate? Are they at all like the seasonal ones we all celebrate no matter what religion like Christmas & Easter? That's a lot of questions to keep you busy. Hope you can answer them. Thanks Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 15:06:30 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Dangerous TSA Bylaw Changes Part 02 Hey guys You seem to exclude that a democratic organization can have a strong leader. I think an organization in which everyone knows the score & has valid opinions needs a stronger leader to guide it than one where the leader just has to get up & say "We're going to do such & such." & then everybody bows down low & says "Yassu!" Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 15:19:44 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: He/She/It >From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown >Subject: Re: He/She/It >Ann you're kidding right? > >> [My husband] >> grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even >> today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when >he is >> at the sink elbow deep in suds. It's an awful thing to make a man a sex >> object don't you think? >> >> - ann > >Hi Ann I could get used to a man like that too. I might even let him use my knitting machine. I reckon that a man who can iron his shirts without putting creases in them is definitely worth cultivating. Haven't met one yet but we live in hopes. Now if he was a theosophist handsome sensitive home-handyman mechanic plays golf oh well just as well I like my own companyeh!!!! > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International Yeah Just as well I like my own company too. I think you forgot to mrention money that's a good asset too. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 15:40:02 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re:Trust problem ET: >It used to be that a number of members could apply for a charter >and form a Study Center or Lodge. Now the groups are probationary >and must demonstrate some attempt to study Theosophy in order to >become regular groups. If I and a few people in Los Angeles with >perhaps a 10-to-20 years average in theosophical studies were to >apply to form a group we'd be in the same probationary status as >any other group. This represents another attempt to control the >studies and direction of groups. My recent membership in new study group gave me access to info concerning this question. Someone told me that some new groups were studying something other than theosophy - let's say channeling or some other new age stuff. This is what caused TS to tighten up on their rules. My group was on probationary status and went through the introductory material. Having started with 25 we went down to 12 and continually lost membership through the months. The secretary also had to take a signed count of people attending and give a written summary of what we discussed. I imagine this would have all counted towards our official recognition had the group stayed together. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 15:44:38 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: TI Alan I'm in agreement with everything you propose. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 15:54:47 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Re: Trust Problem >>The intent of this policy may be good to insure that entirely >>new people have some guidance when they first get together to study >>Theosophy. But it is still a form of centralized control. > > Perhaps events over the past have suggested to >headquarters that some form of centralized control is >needed? > > Jerry S. Perhaps events over the past have suggested to the membership that changes to the bylaws should not be undertaken lightly? Just a thought. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:02:13 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! >From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain >Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > > >> The current > >movement toward "equality" is one in which women are trying > >to be more like men. This has already resulted in sever > >psychological damage to many women and some men. > > > > > > Jerry S. > > Member Theosophy international > > > >I am sorry I haven't finished. Another thing I wanted to mention was > about this last statement. I have heard this from some men and non-feminist > women before and I don't agree. I hate to be labeled a feminist just > because I do what I want and I don't let my gender be an issue unless it is > walking down the street at midnight. If being "like a man" means not > putting up with being forced to mindlessly obey to cook and clean against > your will to abstain from developing your intellectual and creative > abilities stay home and not work and develop the abibilities associalted > with that to be paid less for the same work to work twice as hard to get > the same recognition than OK. If Being free to create and BE means that one > is imitating men-then what's wrong with it? A man is not those things any > more than a woman. If Nietshze and Plato great philosophers thought women > not more intelligent or able than mere animalstheir words not mine then > WOW!!!SOCIETY!!!not gender LOUD APPLAUSE! - Without distinction of sex creed etc. etc. Alan OUI indeed! -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Don't blame good old Nietzsche. He was a product of his times during which women were thought to have smaller brains. Ir was considered better for women not to study the sciences & Math because it would be too taxing on their child bearing capacities. etc. etc. everyone including the women of the day really believed this. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:08:13 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: TI Alan: > >We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with >others.*** > Positive. /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:08:38 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! The idea that women need to be like men was the style about 10 20 years ago. feminists aren't striving for that so much anymore because it is recognized now that women do have worthwhile qualities which are different from men. One I cherish a lot is that we're said to be less competitive. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:18:36 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy >From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> >Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Coherence: > From observing the posts here it is becoming painfully clear that >Theosophical Organizations are problematic and really need to be re-thought. > Let me also state that I am not never have been and probably never will be >a member of the or any T.S. All human organizations are problematic. I learned this from 30 years of working within a Government bureaucracy and in earning my Masters of Science in Administration degree. This is also something to keep in mind when we all talk about growth and ways to increase our membership - the larger the organization the more bureaucratic and unwieldy it becomes. Jerry S. Member Theosophy international Well then maybe the answer is that if we get large & unwieldly we break the whole thing down into small independent units loosely functioning together. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:36:38 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale >From: Richtay@aol.com >Subject: Re: By-Law Revision/Boston Lodge Sale Sy Ginsburg wrote > From what I found out subsequently > it does appear that the [legal fees] figure is closer to $270000. I don't know about > $400000 that Rich Taylor indicates but if Rich was treasurer and on the > inside perhaps his figure is correct. I was actually secretary not treasurer and to be honest my figures are from what I heard at board meetings not from the books. I'm sure Sy's numbers are more accurate. I never took the time to learn all the gruesome financial details. Sy also wrote > our national > directors engaged in activities which dissipated large amounts of Theosophical > assets in addition to losing the 60+ members of the Boston Lodge. . Well this is a bit of legerdemain on the part of the Besant Lodge. I DO happen to know for a fact that of the 85 members on the Boston Lodge's roster BEFORE the split only about 15 of them were active and after the split about 12. During the election the year I was there only one office out of 06 was contested. Every other office had one candidate and so of course they took office again. So really Wheaton has lost a handful of active members and a nice padded membership-list. I agree with Sy GInsburg however that the money combined BEFORE the lawsuit could have bought a prominent building in Harvard Square etc. which would have attracted a great deal of attention. Very sad. Also > How many of our Lodges have people clamoring to study the Secret Doctrine? I know of a lot of places actually not to be difficult about it Sy is right the book is hard. But very often new students are very very anxious to tackle "the big book" and we in San Franscisco U.L.T. have about 10 new students that came in this year who CANNOT wait for the group to begin this Feb. I think it comes from a their inner drive and b what they were "raised" on the past year namely HPB's easier stuff that drops tons of hints. Sy writes > If we start telling Lodges what they can and cannot study the membership will > only continue to shrink. Look at our Society 4200 members and declining year > by year. I quite agree that we should not FORCE lodges or people to study anything they don't want to. But we as "old-timers" set the tone and when people come into the lodge they quickly get the gist of what the focus is. In my opinion Wheaton's number drop is not mainly because of authoritarianism though it is cool to say so but because they are trying the make Theosophy jive with "New Age" when in fact New Age grew out of Neo-Theosophy. I personally if anyone cares would rather have a very small serious dedicated group of students who wish to learn original Theosophy and THEN possibly branch out rather than a large scattered unfocussed and confused body with a kind of half-hearted interest in what the Masters taught as "Theosophy." I do not think bringing the lawsuit was wise nor do I believe in slandering the motives of "Neo-Theosophists" but I do want to speak up for Theosophy as it was originally presented before we unenlightened humans took over with our political battles Judge and Besant and our vain hopes Krishnamurti and high-handedness expelling the German section etc. and fragmentation over 20 separate Theosophical groups in the 1920s. If Theosophy is declining in the world I fear it's because we as custodians have not really done our job not taught Theosophy not held true to our program which anyone can read in the letter of the Mahachohan to HPB. Rich This debate on how to preserve the TS reminds me of discussions among the remnant of German Jews after the Holocaust. Some said we should have practiced our ancient orthodox religion more. Others said we were too clannish & should have assimiated more. Who knows what was right? Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:48:48 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: He/She/It Jerry S.: >Case in point would be the career woman who must renounce >her inner desires for children--balancing a career and >motherhood is a BIG problem in this country and there is no >real answer to it in sight. Good day care for example is hard to >find. Men on the other hand don't generally have this problem >of course some do widowers and so on. Anyway psychologists >are telling us that women should not have to renounce or repress >their femininty in order to have a career or own a business. . . Unfortunately there are thousands of families that have no choice but to have two parents working and leave the kids in day care with relatives or to their own devises. That is the only way they can pay the bills. My married cousin leaves her three kids with my aunt and uncle. Another woman my husband works with leaves her baby with her mother. They're lucky to have family support. There was an article in the local newspaper that described a couple in which the woman just had a baby. In order for her to stay home with it her husband had to work 80 hours a week. The current order of things can effect many people in the family. I believe the business world is trying to ignore the whole thing wishing that things were back to the old days rather than face the problem and do something about it. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 16:57:26 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Practical Lessons/guidance & Theosophy Glad you have the waiver form and I hope it does give good enough protection to TSA from liability. I am not a lawyer and hence do not know how much protection it provides. In this connection I am still bothered about TSA sponsoring practical lessons. Following quotes are from Theosophical Classics which you may recognize and be interested: I. "There are those who turn to pseudo-occultism for the attainment of magical powers in order to gratify personal ambition. That path is full of the most serious dangers. Sometimes such people sit in a passive condition and invite unknown entities of the astral world to work upon their auras and organisms and to adapt them to their purposes; sometimes they practice various forms of hatha yoga consisting mainly of peculiar kinds of breathing which have unfortunately been widely taught in the Western world during the last thirty years or so. As a result of such proceedings mental and bodily disorders of a serious character often arise while at best the contact which is gained with the inner worlds seldom extends beyond lower astral levels from which nothing can come that is uplifting to mankind." This was written in 1926. II. "The attainment of astral powers as an end in itself inevitably leads to what is called in the East the "laukika" method of development: the powers obtained are only for the present personality and there being no safeguards the student is extremely likely to misuse them. To this class belong the practices of Hatha Yoga pranayama or breath-control invocation of elementals and all systems which involve in deadening the physical senses in some way "actively" by drugs eg. bhang haschish etc. by self-hypnotisation or among the dervishes by whirling in a mad dance of religious fervor until vertigo and insensibility supervene; or passively by being mesmerized -- so that the astral senses may come to the surface." .MK Ramadoss At 010200 PM 12/14/95 -0800 you wrote: > >Doss > >Thanks for your information on the above topic. We have the following >waiver or rather consent form for that purpose: > >========================================================================= > >INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM > >Name................................................ Phone............... >Address.................................................................. >City.................................. State...........Zip............... >Do you have any physical ailment which would limit your practice of hatha >Yoga?.................................................................... >If yes explain:......................................................... >......................................................................... >How long have you been practicing yoga?.................................. >What is your reason for practicing yoga?................................. >We urge you to participate in each yoga position at your own comfort level >and to discontinue any position or session as you choose. > >I hereby agree not to hold either the instructor or The Theosophical Society >in America responsible for any injury which is incurred during any class. > >................... ............................................... >Date Signature > >========================================================================= > >Happy Holidays! > >Ruben > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:13:44 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re re trust problem JR Crocker writes: >Yes. As distasteful as even thinking about this stuff is that >fact that the membership has been willing to accept increasingly >unacceptable behaviour has I believe lead some of those in the >leadership to believe they can now do virtually whatever they >wish. We probably all want to pay very little attention to >political goings on but perhaps now and then it is our >responsibility - as a means of paying our debt to the founders >an indebtedness I believe most of us feel in some way or >another - to take care of the organization they began. This is so well said and I hope that everyone reads it. I believe that members of the TS indeed have a responsibility to speak up when they see an injustice and to make an honest effort to discern the issues and to vote. It is the same responsibility we have towards the country inwhich we live. We have a responsibility to vote in National and state elections. I also believe in the practice civil disobedience when it is clear to us that our government is perpetuating a moral wrong. As members of the TS we have the same kind of obligations. >PS. Jerry ... any suggestions as to what form the exertion of >will ought to take? I have been recently wrestling with this >question and as you have a greater grasp of the historical >context I would very much appreciate the broader perspective >you might bring to the question. Certainly crises of legitimacy >- such as the one we are approaching - are nothing new ... how >might the current membership in your opinion accomplish a >Headquarters housecleaning without causing yet another schism? First we need to realize how the system works. The major power is in the Presidency and in the "inner circle" to whom the President gets its cues. The Board of Directors per se have little real power because they only attend two meetings a year and it takes them the first term in order to even figure out what is going on. Therefore the Board tends to rubber stamp whatever the President presents to them. Second we need to realize that over half of the membership is unattached to any Lodge therefore they only know what they are told through the AT and through letters sent out by National. The only way to bring about the defeat of an undesirable change is for the membership to network together and to keep each other informed as to what is going on. Then the informed membership has to take the responsibility to vote. Only a small minority of members vote now. So a block of informed voters could be very effective. I think that if enough of the membership began to take the responsibility of keeping themselves informed and by voting we will be able to win back the Theosophical Society and the leadership will begin to learn to become responsive to the needs of the members. I don't know if the present crises will end in a schism. It depends upon the strength of the opposition and the determination of the leaders at National to hold their ground. But if the present issues pass it will be all the more difficult to oppose National in the future. Radha has already taken the position that she can sacrifice sections when they don't play her game and she has dumped three of them since 1984. If we don't stand up for ourselves then it will be a matter of time before our Lodges will be as vulnerable. It seems to me that the possibility of a schism is worth the risk--considering the greater risks we will be facing down the road if we don't take a stand. Jerry HE International Theosophist Member of the human race but getting tired :- ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:28:45 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal Rich ... >Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it >does--people are involved. But the method of operation >minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert >its attention from its mission. Witness the current "lengthy" >discussion of political events on this List taking up time and >space better utilized by the discussion of the ideas and >teaching of Theosophy. But its not a zero sum game. The potential space on the list has no limits obviously no post was rejected by the listserver because there were already too many other posts ... and clearly the people who have chosen to spend the time in political discussions believe that at this point in time their time is better utilized by contributing to a discussion of institutional matters than talking about the seven rounds - or they would have written about the seven rounds. >I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other >organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles >gossip etc. be moved to a separate board. > >Does anyone else agree? I would disagree with moving the discussion ... the simplest reason being the one Jerry's already mentioned - that we can't really start creating new boards for every discussion that lasts more than a few days; besides at least up to now the subject lines on the posts dealing with TSA politics have been quite obvious enough to permit the use of the delete key by those uninterested in the thread. I think however that there is a more important reason grounded in theosophy itself for not considering organizational politics to be somehow less valuable a topic than purely philosophical discussions are. Throughout the centuries humanity has hatched a great number of fine elevated religious and philosophical schools and traditions. And if ideas were all that mattered we would have all long ago reached enlightenment. The devil has always been in the details. If there is any single and profound problem that we humans must whether now or millenia from now face it is the problem of making the *expression* of our religious and philosophical ideas in day to day life personal and institutional remain in harmony with their intellectual and spiritual beauty. It is also the problem that takes the greatest spiritual courage for members of traditions to face ... because it is so damned uncomfortable distasteful and especially in juxtaposition with elevated philosophical thought is capable of producing an almost instinctual revulsion. But every light shined on humanity must inevitably produce a shadow and the type and intensity of the light determines the size and type of the shadow .. and I cannot think of a single historical example of a religious or philosophical tradtion that has yet *fully taken responsibility for its shadow* ... and thus could Christian philosophers discuss the finer points of God's love at the same time as the inquisition was slaughtering people; thus can Catholics and Protestants shed one another's blood on the streets of Ireland; thus could the framers of the US Constitution be slave owners; the list could go on endlessly. Theosophy as inspired in its latest incarnation by the likes of Morya Koothoomi DK and formulated into an exoteric organization by HPB IMO had as one of its features a startling concept: That to those serious about occult science and spiritual growth the comfortable line between the light and the shadow between the pristine beauty of the thought and the sometimes distasteful messiness of personality life not only does not but *can not* be permitted to exist. In fact I believe the chief thing that differentiates between exoteric and esoteric organizations may possibly boil down to that single concept. To accept theosophy as one's principle philosophical tradtion means one cannot simply go to confession every to church every and on the days inbetween have an affair with one's secretary female *or* male -: screw one's business partner out of money engage in greed deceit ingenuine manipulations slap around one's children and ignore the problems in one's community. It is a committment to *erase* the inner line that in much of humanity still enables a *seperation* between the "spiritual" and the "normal day to day" aspects of one's life. The goal may be the highest it is possible to conceive of: An elevated philosophy reified *totally* into every moment of one's day and referenced as the guide for every intention every action in even the most seemingly mundane components of life. Understanding of the philosophy through intellectual discussions lectures reading and meditating certainly is a part of this but is only half and perhaps not even the most difficult half of the picture. While none of us would say that we had perfected the expression of the philosophy any more than we'd claim to have mastered its intellectual components I would claim that discussion and in depth analysis of that expression in both our personal lives as well as in the organizations purporting to represent Theosophy is not only not unimportant but is in fact fully *equally* as important as discussions and analysis of the ideas themselves. And this is not simply an arbitrarily devised belief but comes from my own reading of "source" literature. The glimpses we get of the Masters are of people that were not isolated philosophers who spent most of their time in philosophical discussions ... both they and HPB did study did meditate but also travelled widely and spent considerable attention on seemingly "trivial" matters. The Masters we get hints lead organizations were at least titular heads of monestaries & etc. Even further it is clear from the ML that their *time and attention* were considered by themselves and by their Chief as being a very rare and valuable commodity that was never lightly allocated or unthinkingly spent and it is IMO a significant statement from *them* about what they considered a relevent "utilization of time" that throughout the ML they spend a not inconsiderable amount of time talking to Sinnet and others about some of the most seemingly mundane charateristics of the personalities involved in the TS took a personal interest even in particular issues of the magazines in particular meetings who should hold what office even in the financial aspects of the organization. In short much as we'd like to ignore the organization and focus only on ideas the Masters themselves as well as HPB took the *organization itself* to be a *spiritual project* important enough to claim their immensely valuable time and energy. How can we then ignore it? How can we claim to follow the "teachings" but ignore a large part of the message? How can we permit whoever has control of the organization to simply do whatever they wish unquestioned even when their behaviour becomes increasingly disturbing? In the last few years the TSA has lost a *fifth* of its membership - a cursory glance at the report on the Theosophical Investment Trust Funds in the AT and there are several people now determined to look in far greater depth at the financial situation at HQ shows that between 3/31/94 and 3/31/95 *one year* they seems to have lost between $90000 and $1000000 - something approaching a fifth - of their value. And the same people responsible for this situation are those now attempting to re-write bylaws in such a dashion as to give them greater institutional and financial *control* over the members and Lodges across the country. The TSA is in *trouble* - and perhaps many of us that were and are members bear some responsibility - the responsibility that comes from not paying attention from keeping our uneasiness and complaints silent within ourselves ... from not *taking the organization as seriously as the Masters and HPB did* and instead contenting ourselves with the delights of the philosophy alone. It is just my opinion but I definately do *not* think discussions of Theosophical politics are inappropriate on this list - especially because the members forum which is what the AT was *promised* to be when it was split from the Quest has been almost completely stolen from the membership and turned into something often resembling an ideological platform; because HQ is increasingly refusing people access to the information needed to distribute any views opposing its own ... even if the opposition is willing to fully bear the expense; this wonderful list may very well turn into the forum from which the necessary reformation of the TSA is hashed out and launched. How wonderful it is that no one can control the discussion here well John Mead could but doesn't - *THANK YOU JOHN* - and how unfortunate that this may be the only national Theosophical space in which the independence of thought and freedom of expression .... qualities prized by everyone from the Buddha to HPB .... is actually able to be expressed in all its fullness. -JRC [PS. Its time.] [-:] From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:35:21 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! Jerry I don't see that the fact that today's women are torn between career & having kids makes them act like men. It's a very female problem which men don't have. If you've ever stayed at home for weeks on end with an infant you know how drudging confining & utterly boring that can get even if they're real cute during the short time that they're awake. If you compare that to having a stimulating job even below the glass ceiling that can look awfully attractive. That isn't wanting to be like a man. Liesel Member Theosophjy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:39:36 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Ann on He/She/It Who said it would make you less of a man? Fathers can take care of their children & I think that makes them a more complete human being. I think it would be more unmanly if you'd insisted that your wife do it when she couldn't. And don't laugh I;ve seen that. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:43:00 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Practical Lessons/guidance & Thesosophy /1 >From: M K Ramadoss >Subject: Re: Practical Lessons/guidance & Thesosophy Ruben: Thanks for the fast response. The basic concern of mine is still the exposure of TSA to potential heavy liability. >From a lay man's point of view even if the disclaimer was signed if a participant in one of the programs gets sick at a future date a smart tenacious and expensive Chicago lawyer knowing the deep pockets of TSA may chose to pin down liability on TSA citing past theosophical writings/publications such as the one's I cited. The lawyers defending TSA would do so with great glee as they know they can generate a lot bills and TSA has money in the bank to pay the bills. More litigation more bills. It looks like this is something that needs to be investigated and evaluated at the highest policy level and decisions made at the highest levels. Please keep all of us informed on theos-l. MK Ramadoss On 14 199512 Theosophical Society wrote: > Doss > > I personally am glad that you brought out this matter and I agree with you > a hundred percent. But do you think that everybody will agree? And if we > even give a suggestion or hint that it would be harmful if these practices > are undertaken don't you think we might be accused of interferring with the > members' freedom to study whatever they like? And later on be accused that > we will be dictating to their choice of topics to study? Do you have any > ideas how to solve this problem? > > Ruben > > =========================================================== > > > Glad you have the waiver form and I hope it does give good enough > >protection to TSA from liability. I am not a lawyer and hence do not know > >how much protection it provides. > > > > In this connection I am still bothered about TSA sponsoring > >practical lessons. Following quotes are from Theosophical Classics which you > >may recognize and be interested: > > > > I. "There are those who turn to pseudo-occultism for the attainment > >of magical powers in order to gratify personal ambition. That path is full > >of the most serious dangers. Sometimes such people sit in a passive > >condition and invite unknown entities of the astral world to work upon their > >auras and organisms and to adapt them to their purposes; sometimes they > >practice various forms of hatha yoga consisting mainly of peculiar kinds of > >breathing which have unfortunately been widely taught in the Western world > >during the last thirty years or so. As a result of such proceedings mental > >and bodily disorders of a serious character often arise while at best the > >contact which is gained with the inner worlds seldom extends beyond lower > >astral levels from which nothing can come that is uplifting to mankind." > >This was written in 1926. > > > > > > II. "The attainment of astral powers as an end in itself inevitably > >leads to what is called in the East the "laukika" method of development: the > >powers obtained are only for the present personality and there being no > >safeguards the student is extremely likely to misuse them. To this class > >belong the practices of Hatha Yoga pranayama or breath-control invocation > >of elementals and all systems which involve in deadening the physical > >senses in some way "actively" by drugs eg. bhang haschish etc. by > >self-hypnotisation or among the dervishes by whirling in a mad dance of > >religious fervor until vertigo and insensibility supervene; or passively by > >being mesmerized -- so that the astral senses may come to the surface." > > > > > >...MK Ramadoss > > > >At 010200 PM 12/14/95 -0800 you wrote: > >> > >>Doss > >> > >>Thanks for your information on the above topic. We have the following > >>waiver or rather consent form for that purpose: > >> > >>========================================================================= > >> > >>INFORMATION AND CONSENT FORM > >> > >>Name................................................ Phone............... > >>Address.................................................................. > >>City.................................. State...........Zip............... > >>Do you have any physical ailment which would limit your practice of hatha > >>Yoga?.................................................................... > >>If yes explain:......................................................... > >>......................................................................... > >>How long have you been practicing yoga?.................................. > >>What is your reason for practicing yoga?................................. > >>We urge you to participate in each yoga position at your own comfort level > >>and to discontinue any position or session as you choose. > >> > >>I hereby agree not to hold either the instructor or The Theosophical Society > >>in America responsible for any injury which is incurred during any class. > >> > >> > >>................... ............................................... > >>Date Signature > >> > >>========================================================================= > >> > >>Happy Holidays! > >> > >>Ruben > >> > >> > > > > > > > M K Ramadoss - ramadoss@eden.com 4203 Gardendale Suite 226 San Antonio TX 78229-3137 Phone & Fax 210 615-7373 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:46:10 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Trust Problem I don't think it's a bad idea to make new Theosophists study the basics so they know what they're talking about. The problem is there is no attractive brief basic Theosophy literature. Boring isn't going to hold newcomers. The one Wheaton recommends is for last century's tweet tweets. The 2d one they recommend says it's for more advanced students. "Ancient Wisdom Modern Insight" is a bit long & has no study guide. Ed Abdills video tapes are coming out any year now. He's still working on the manual to go with them. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 17:48:14 GMT From: "Liesel F. Deutsch" Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It Dear Rich Why shouldn't men do housework? Afraid to get your tie & shirt dusty? Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 18:06:32 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal On 14 199512 Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote: > > Coherence writes: > > >There is a misconception about ULT stated here that needs to be > >cleared up. The ULT is an Association of students. There is no > >legal entity called ULT hence no officers bylaws government. > >Each Lodge and study group is independent and autonomous and > >generally run by older students who assume the responsibility > >for its functioning. The ULT is not a democracy but the views > >and council of as many students as possible are taken into > >consideration. This generally applies to convenient meeting > >times administrative matters building maintenance etc. for > >the efficient functioning of the group. > > > >I try to think of the ULT as a combination of the concept of a > >Family and a Bridge Club. Families are run by older figures who > >are given authority by virtue of their position but opinions > >are sought. In a bridge club there is no official > >organization but various members take responsibility for its > >functioning. As the bridge club agrees that when they assemble > >they will play bridge the ULT students agree that when they > >assemble they will study HPB Judge and Crosbie. > > This is about as fair of a description of how ULT works that > I have seen. I was active with the Los Angeles ULT for about > fifteen years until we moved out of the area but still in > contact with some of the associates. ULT is indeed more of a > federation of students than a formal organization but an inner > structure does indeed exist and downplaying the importance of > that structure is in MHO unrealistic. Decisions have to be made > concerning the upkeep of the building organizing of office help > paying the day to day expenses of telephones office machinery > postage etc. Though there are no officers for ULT there is a > board of directors for Theosophy Company which is a bonified > Organization responsible for the publications. They are also > responsible for the assets used by ULT associates and for the > production of ~Theosophy~ magazine. That board has a > chairperson who also has more than a little influence concerning > the organizations of classes and the scheduling of speakers. > Though ULT is founded upon some very high ideals weakness in > human nature requires that the implementation of these ideals > require some compromises by giving the Board and individuals some > responsibilities therefore powers that gives some justification > to Paul's observation of a "cryptocracy." > > >The anonymity issue is merely an attempt to stick to ideas and > >teaching rather than personalities. Therefore there are no > >"leaders" officially recognized as such. > > Yet everyone involved in ULT knows who these "leaders" are. > I remember when Joe Pope came to Los Angeles on a visit. He was > scheduled to speak at one of the night gatherings. > True to form an announcement of the topic was sent out but not > the speaker. It made no difference. The word got around that > Joe Pope would be speaking that night and he got a much larger > audience than what was usual. > > >When writing ULT > >students do not sign their name so that the ideas come through > >and the reader is not biased by the personality of the author. > >It is not a secret society where the governance is hidden > >secret or mysterious in any way and certainly is not a > >"cryptocracy". > > Yes and this is a real headache for us historians. > > >Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it > >does--people are involved. But the method of operation > >minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert > >its attention from its mission. > > I would say that ULT has had its share of "politics" that > have diverted attention from its mission from time to time but > on the whole I must agree that ULT is structured in such a way > that more energy can be directed to the real work. In many ways > it is much more efficient and focused than Adyar. > > >Witness the current "lengthy" discussion of political events on > >this List taking up time and space better utilized by the > >discussion of the ideas and teaching of Theosophy. > > > >I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other > >organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles > >gossip etc. be moved to a separate board. > > > >Does anyone else agree? > > Because of the evident failure of the Adyar TS to keep its > membership properly informed and involved in decisions affecting > member's and Lodge's rights I think this electronic forum is a > godsend and may have the eventual effect of making a more > democratic organization out of it. Since this board is open to Jerry you are 100% correct. In the past dissemination of information was slow and indirect filtered and usually thru the official print media over which the bureaucrats have total control. Even today without the electronic forum we all would not know as much as we know today. I believe there is a purpose behind the timely availability of this forum. So all credit goes to John E Mead. Even with the electronic forum I have not seen any of the elected officers saying a word here. Hope this changes. And changes soon. ..doss > all theosophical students regardless of affiliation or none I > can see the wisdom of putting the current discussion on a > separate Board. On the other hand if we create a new board > every time a subject of limited popularity arises we will soon > have our one forum fragmenting into more and more little ones. > Perhaps another and more productive way of looking at this > would be to allow the diversity of subjects to continue on this > forum. Though a ULT associate has no personal investment in > Adyar politics I think there is still much to be learned > concerning organizational dynamics that may help to create a > better Organizational structure that will be to everyone's > benefit. > > Jerry HE > Member Theosophy International > Associate ULT > Member Theosophical Society Adyar > Member Theosophical Society Pasadena > > ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins > ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and > CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org > |------------------------------------------ > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 19:01:55 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: He/She/It In a message dated 95-12-14 015412 EST you write: >>grew up with the idea that a man could wash floors vacuum and such. Even >> today he washes dishes and I always remark on how desirable he looks when >>he is at the sink elbow deep in suds. >> - ann >>Hi Ann >I could get used to a man like that too. I might even let him use my >knitting machine. I reckon that a man who can iron his shirts without >putting creases in them is definitely worth cultivating. Haven't met one yet >but we live in hopes. Now if he was a theosophist handsome sensitive >home-handyman mechanic plays golf oh well just as well I like my own >companyeh!!!! > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International Heck Bee if there were a man like that out there I'd ditch my girlfriend and marry him myself. . . . Best regards Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 19:18:41 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Neo-theosophy >To all member of Theos-l: > >Today I visited the web site of The White Mountain Education Association whose >address was posted by someone on our mailing list. It was referred to as >Neo-theosophy. > >An amalgation of HPB Bailey Sarayadarian and Roerich it seemed to lean more >towards Bailey. I will leave each of you to review the page for yourself >http://www.primenet.com/~wtmtn/index.html but I will say this. While I was >scrolling through the material I got a clear view of it. It was "I've seen >this all before." It was like knowledge was being repackaged and being >distributed through another yet another organization. Good or bad idea? > >-Ann E. Bermingham > I have been there too and feel a bit the same. In fact over all now that the novelty has worn off there is a lot of no-thing on the www. Perhaps my expectations were too high but I have been into the www.spirit and occult sites and have picked out what little interests me and bookmarked them to keep an eye on any changes. I really hope the Theo.org make more articles available. I have some sites booked that are fairly heavy going so they await the right mood to look at them but the sort of middle range serious theosophy type stuff is lacking or else I haven't found it. My daughter is coming for Xmas so she will teach me how to ftp articles too so that may change my opinions. I believe it is possible to get articles from the Theo library but again I haven't discovered how to do that either yet. I wish I got into computers 20 years ago then I would be a real wizz and not feel so inadequate when I can't get it together. Never mind by the time I get to 80 I should have it under control.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 14 Dec 1996 22:51:34 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy Liesel: >> [Jerry S]: >>All human organizations are problematic ... >Well then maybe the answer is that if we get large & unwieldly we >break the whole thing down into small independent units loosely >functioning together. This sort of sounds like the Theosophical Network of the 1980's. There was no HQ or central organization just an attempt to provide information about all the different theosophical groups and lodges. Every group was listed on an equal basis and no one was in charge. The groups could be loosely functioning together because they could cooperate on projects of mutual interest. But there was no objects to accept no bylaws no overall organization to join nor membership cards issued. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 01:53:25 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal Coherence states quite correctly that Theosophy International resembles the open structure that ULT is stated to have and which it would seem is approved of. So Coherence are you going to sign up for TI? My understanding of the "theosophy" bit is that theosophy with or without a capital T represents spiritual wisdom such as is to be found in the writings and teachings of antiguity as well as nowiquity. It is both ancient and eternal but is also found from time to time as "new wine" in "new bottles." Sincerely Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 03:11:05 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TSA Bylaws/Trust Problem On 15 199512 John R Crocker wrote: > Rich ... > > >Does the ULT have its share of politics? Of course it > >does--people are involved. But the method of operation > >minimizes the unfortunate events which plague the TS and divert > >its attention from its mission. Witness the current "lengthy" > >discussion of political events on this List taking up time and > >space better utilized by the discussion of the ideas and > >teaching of Theosophy. > But its not a zero sum game. The potential space on the list has > no limits obviously no post was rejected by the listserver > because there were already too many other posts ... and clearly > the people who have chosen to spend the time in political > discussions believe that at this point in time their time is > better utilized by contributing to a discussion of institutional > matters than talking about the seven rounds - or they would have > written about the seven rounds. MKR It is not simply a question of idle political discussion we are engaged in. I truly believe that the TSA is at a critical juncture in its history and the changes proposed if implemented will change the character of the organization for ever not only here but in other countries as well. This is because generally US sets the model for other countries to follow I am afraid the other National Organizations will follow suit leaders over there will surely cite US as an example to support their position. So the more I think of the situation the more serious and dangerous it looks to me. If anyone here feels otherwise I challenge them to come out and convince me and others here that it is not so. > > >I propose all discussion of the TS's and any other > >organization's politics by-laws officers internal squabbles > >gossip etc. be moved to a separate board. > > > >Does anyone else agree? > > I would disagree with moving the discussion ... the simplest > reason being the one Jerry's already mentioned - that we can't > really start creating new boards for every discussion that lasts > more than a few days; besides at least up to now the subject > lines on the posts dealing with TSA politics have been quite > obvious enough to permit the use of the delete key by those > uninterested in the thread. > > I think however that there is a more important reason grounded > in theosophy itself for not considering organizational politics > to be somehow less valuable a topic than purely philosophical > discussions are. > > Throughout the centuries humanity has hatched a great number of > fine elevated religious and philosophical schools and > traditions. And if ideas were all that mattered we would have > all long ago reached enlightenment. The devil has always been in > the details. If there is any single and profound problem that we > humans must whether now or millenia from now face it is the > problem of making the *expression* of our religious and > philosophical ideas in day to day life personal and > institutional remain in harmony with their intellectual and > spiritual beauty. It is also the problem that takes the greatest > spiritual courage for members of traditions to face ... because > it is so damned uncomfortable distasteful and especially in > juxtaposition with elevated philosophical thought is capable of > producing an almost instinctual revulsion. But every light shined > on humanity must inevitably produce a shadow and the type and > intensity of the light determines the size and type of the shadow > .. and I cannot think of a single historical example of a > religious or philosophical tradtion that has yet *fully taken > responsibility for its shadow* ... and thus could Christian > philosophers discuss the finer points of God's love at the same > time as the inquisition was slaughtering people; thus can > Catholics and Protestants shed one another's blood on the streets > of Ireland; thus could the framers of the US Constitution be > slave owners; the list could go on endlessly. > Theosophy as inspired in its latest incarnation by the > likes of Morya Koothoomi DK and formulated into an exoteric > organization by HPB IMO had as one of its features a > startling concept: That to those serious about occult science and > spiritual growth the comfortable line between the light and the > shadow between the pristine beauty of the thought and the > sometimes distasteful messiness of personality life not only > does not but *can not* be permitted to exist. In fact I believe > the chief thing that differentiates between exoteric and esoteric > organizations may possibly boil down to that single concept. > To accept theosophy as one's principle philosophical > tradtion means one cannot simply go to confession every > to church every and on the days inbetween have an affair > with one's secretary female *or* male -: screw one's business > partner out of money engage in greed deceit ingenuine > manipulations slap around one's children and ignore the problems > in one's community. It is a committment to *erase* the inner line > that in much of humanity still enables a *seperation* between > the "spiritual" and the "normal day to day" aspects of one's > life. > The goal may be the highest it is possible to conceive of: > An elevated philosophy reified *totally* into every moment of > one's day and referenced as the guide for every intention every > action in even the most seemingly mundane components of life. > Understanding of the philosophy through intellectual discussions > lectures reading and meditating certainly is a part of this but > is only half and perhaps not even the most difficult half of > the picture. While none of us would say that we had perfected the > expression of the philosophy any more than we'd claim to have > mastered its intellectual components I would claim that > discussion and in depth analysis of that expression in both our > personal lives as well as in the organizations purporting to > represent Theosophy is not only not unimportant but is in fact > fully *equally* as important as discussions and analysis of the > ideas themselves. > And this is not simply an arbitrarily devised belief but > comes from my own reading of "source" literature. The glimpses > we get of the Masters are of people that were not isolated > philosophers who spent most of their time in philosophical > discussions ... both they and HPB did study did meditate but > also travelled widely and spent considerable attention on > seemingly "trivial" matters. The Masters we get hints lead > organizations were at least titular heads of monestaries & etc. > Even further it is clear from the ML that their *time and > attention* were considered by themselves and by their Chief as > being a very rare and valuable commodity that was never lightly > allocated or unthinkingly spent and it is IMO a significant > statement from *them* about what they considered a relevent > "utilization of time" that throughout the ML they spend a not > inconsiderable amount of time talking to Sinnet and others > about some of the most seemingly mundane charateristics of the > personalities involved in the TS took a personal interest even > in particular issues of the magazines in particular meetings > who should hold what office even in the financial aspects of the > organization. In short much as we'd like to ignore the > organization and focus only on ideas the Masters themselves as > well as HPB took the *organization itself* to be a *spiritual > project* important enough to claim their immensely valuable time > and energy. > How can we then ignore it? How can we claim to follow the > "teachings" but ignore a large part of the message? How can we > permit whoever has control of the organization to simply do > whatever they wish unquestioned even when their behaviour > becomes increasingly disturbing? In the last few years the TSA > has lost a *fifth* of its membership - a cursory glance at the > report on the Theosophical Investment Trust Funds in the AT and > there are several people now determined to look in far greater > depth at the financial situation at HQ shows that between > 3/31/94 and 3/31/95 *one year* they seems to have lost between > $90000 and $1000000 - something approaching a fifth - of their > value. And the same people responsible for this situation are > those now attempting to re-write bylaws in such a dashion as to > give them greater institutional and financial *control* over the > members and Lodges across the country. MKR There are other serious issues related to TIT which need to be looked into and fixed. If not done now down the road we may have some serious problems. In order not to divert attention from the basic and immediate issues of administrative and financial micro control over membership and lodges that the National Board seeks thru bylaw changes I have not brought them up here so far. I have communicated them in writing to the National President with copies to the elected board of directors and the International President as soon as the proposed bylaws were published. A very disturbing aspect is the difficulty of getting information from Wheaton. For example for the last two months I have been trying to get the Trust Document and the Bylaws of the TIT and have had no success so far. Since TIT is a 501c3 tax exempt charitable trust these documents are NOT confidential ones. They are open to public access I believe because of the Federal Tax Exempt status. If not I should have been informed why I cannot have access to. In the absence of any such positive response I am wondering why the silence and why anyone should be afraid of providing these documents to a dues paying member? I just want to share this information in the general context of what is going on. > The TSA is in *trouble* - and perhaps many of us that were > and are members bear some responsibility - the responsibility > that comes from not paying attention from keeping our uneasiness > and complaints silent within ourselves ... from not *taking the > organization as seriously as the Masters and HPB did* and > instead contenting ourselves with the delights of the philosophy > alone. > > It is just my opinion but I definately do *not* think > discussions of Theosophical politics are inappropriate on this > list - especially because the members forum which is what the AT > was *promised* to be when it was split from the Quest has been > almost completely stolen from the membership and turned into > something often resembling an ideological platform; because HQ is > increasingly refusing people access to the information needed to > distribute any views opposing its own ... even if the opposition > is willing to fully bear the expense; this wonderful list may > very well turn into the forum from which the necessary > reformation of the TSA is hashed out and launched. How wonderful > it is that no one can control the discussion here well John > Mead could but doesn't - *THANK YOU JOHN* - and how unfortunate > that this may be the only national Theosophical space in which > the independence of thought and freedom of expression .... > qualities prized by everyone from the Buddha to HPB .... is > actually able to be expressed in all its fullness. > -JRC > [PS. Its time.] > [-:] > John you have most elegantly presented the issues. We are all grateful. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 03:13:16 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: Ann on He/She/It Well said Liesel. Anne >Who said it would make you less of a man? Fathers can take care of >their children & I think that makes them a more complete human >being. I think it would be more unmanly if you'd insisted >that your wife do it when she couldn't. And don't laugh I;ve >seen that. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 04:45:44 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: God loves you He/She/It Does! > >As a theologian as well as a theosophian may I state: God is > >not a being and never was. In the Western version of the > >Ancient Wisdom found in the Bible Tanach and other writings > >the "name" of God is given as YHWH or Yahweh or in HPB's time > >Jehovah. > > Thanks Alan. As usual you said it better and more succinctly > that I could. > > Jerry S. Thanks! .... smiles modestly but knowingly :-| Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 04:52:16 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It > Dear Rich > > Why shouldn't men do housework? Afraid to get your tie & shirt dusty? > > Liesel > Member Theosophy International > Member Human Race Tie? Shirt? What DAT? Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 04:58:04 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy > ways to increase our membership - the larger the organization the > more bureaucratic and unwieldy it becomes. > > Jerry S. > Member Theosophy international > > Well then maybe the answer is that if we get large & unwieldly we > break the whole thing down into small independent units loosely functioning > together. > > Liesel > Member Theosophy International > Member Human Race I agree totally. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 06:28:43 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: patanjali spoken in sanskrit It is quite possible that there is a version available somewhere. It is an interesting request. The best possible solution will be to find someone from India who can speak/chant the verses and record it on video tape. This way we could get an authentic pronounciation of the verses. MK Ramadoss On 15 199512 Frits Evelein wrote: > Hello > > In Holland there is a "professor in theosophy" at the University of > Leiden. The Theosophicall organisation "Proclos" founded somewhere > about 1950 has this chair at the university. For the last ten years > our professor is Wim van Vledder. Every year he takes a new subject. > His classes are attented by 40 to 70 students. > > Subjects of his classes has been Secret Doctrine Plotinus Bhagavad > Gita Patanjali sutra's Gnosis Modern science and theosophy etc.. > > He asked me if I could help him on a spoken version of the sutras of > Patanjali. Mayby someone knows how to get this. Please let me know. > > Greatings > > Frits Evelein From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 08:17:33 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It >Dear Rich Why shouldn't men do housework? Afraid to get your tie & shirt dusty? Liesel< Liesel: You misunderstood -- I thought that's what ANNE was saying and I couldn't believe it. I certainly do my share of housework or else I would live in a dirty house! And yes I have to cook for myself also else I would starve! P.S. Please don't send me personal copies of e-mail posted to theos-l since I then must read it twice and I have no use for multiple copies. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 10:54:27 GMT From: Picker@UTKVX.UTCC.UTK.EDU Anne Picker Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It Dear Rich I think you may have both Annes mixed up. There is an Anne And an Ann. Anne >>Dear Rich > >Why shouldn't men do housework? Afraid to get your tie & shirt dusty? > >Liesel< > >Liesel: > >You misunderstood -- I thought that's what ANNE was saying and I couldn't >believe it. I certainly do my share of housework or else I would live in a >dirty house! And yes I have to cook for myself also else I would starve! > >P.S. Please don't send me personal copies of e-mail posted to theos-l since >I then must read it twice and I have no use for multiple copies. > >Rich > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 10:55:29 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Practical lessons & guidance Doss: >From a lay man's point of view even if the disclaimer was signed >if a participant in one of the programs gets sick at a future date >a smart tenacious and expensive Chicago lawyer knowing the >deep pockets of TSA may chose to pin down liability on TSA >citing past theosophical writings/publications such as >the one's I cited. The lawyers defending TSA would do so with >great glee as they know they can generate a lot bills and TSA >has money in the bank to pay the bills. More litigation more bills. If someone chokes on a piece of carrot in the Olcott dining room or claims he caught salmonella from a bad salad dressing then anyone could sue for almost anything. If the maintenance crew fails to clear the snow and ice off the walkway and entrance to the building and someone falls some one can yell "SUE!" Some parent can sue TS for poisoning the mind of their child with theosophy. You could sue Olcott for giving you sore feet climbing up those steps to the auditorium. The possibilites are endless and no amount of prevention is going to help. Cross your fingers do the best you can and hope your aspects are good. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 11:22:07 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Practical lessons & guidance At 044600 PM 12/15/95 -0500 you wrote: >Doss: >>From a lay man's point of view even if the disclaimer was signed >>if a participant in one of the programs gets sick at a future date >>a smart tenacious and expensive Chicago lawyer knowing the >>deep pockets of TSA may chose to pin down liability on TSA >>citing past theosophical writings/publications such as >>the one's I cited. The lawyers defending TSA would do so with >>great glee as they know they can generate a lot bills and TSA >>has money in the bank to pay the bills. More litigation more bills. > >If someone chokes on a piece of carrot in the Olcott dining room or claims he >caught salmonella from a bad salad dressing then anyone could sue for almost >anything. If the maintenance crew fails to clear the snow and ice off the >walkway and entrance to the building and someone falls some one can yell >"SUE!" Some parent can sue TS for poisoning the mind of their child with >theosophy. You could sue Olcott for giving you sore feet climbing up those >steps to the auditorium. The possibilites are endless and no amount of >prevention is going to help. Cross your fingers do the best you can and hope >your aspects are good. > >Ann E. Bermingham > Sure all of the above and more is possible. Prudence requires risk issues need to be deliberately looked at and with the best professional help decisions have to be taken. What all I am pointing out is that this is an issue that Wheaton "may" want to look at. If Wheaton had no money or assets at all then most of the risk problems just go away. They do not when you have deep pocket. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 12:02:34 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Cryptocracy Thanks to JHE for his clear explanation of ULT/Theosophy Co. interdependence. In my previous post I didn't say outright that ULT *was* a cryptocracy but rather that since its governance was secret my brother called it a cryptocracy apparently a term found in SF lit which he likes. Anyway let me be clear-- ULT is *governed* by a cryptocracy the board of the Theosophy Company in many important respects even if the ULT itself is free of officers or by-laws. Better? On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make condescending remarks about other people on the list and their ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could you consider revealing your identity? It might change the energy flow. As for moving the by-laws discussion I oppose it for the simple reason that the exchanges have been most educational even enlightening without degenerating into serious conflict. It ain't broke so why fix it? Probably 90% of us belong to the Adyar TS although many of those also belong to Pasadena or ULT. By virtue of its size what goes on in the Adyar TS is relevant to all Theosophists. For those who don't want to read it the headers should be clear indications of when to press the delete key. Namaste From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 13:14:35 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Nutritious theosophy In a message dated 95-12-14 230635 EST you write: >Well then maybe the answer is that if we get large & unwieldly we >break the whole thing down into small independent units loosely functioning >together. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race > To refresh your memory these "small independent units" are called "People" and your recommendation is a good one. One that needs to be continually repeated here until the TS Membership realizes as I stated previously that Theosophy exists without this organized body. From all these posts I as an outsider would say the TS has ceased to fulfill its function. Many of you have commented how terrible the TS made you feel at some point. What will it take for you to say "ENOUGH!" From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 13:15:11 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal Some thoughts and comments from several posts: In a message dated 95-12-14 224352 EST you write: >Because of the evident failure of the Adyar TS to keep its >membership properly informed and involved in decisions affecting >member's and Lodge's rights I think this electronic forum is a >godsend and may have the eventual effect of making a more >democratic organization out of it. No doubt. < if we create a new board Subject: Re: ERGATES Many thanks for your recent message. Could you please place my name on the mailing list for your publication and I will ensure that it is placed regularly on display at the TS Pasadena central library for Australia in Melbourne. Let me know if you would like us to send you a copy of our publication - Australasian TS Newsletter - in exchange. Greetings for the Sacred Season from Companions of the TS Pasadena Downunder Andrew Rooke 16 Wimmera St. Carnegie Melbourne Victoria 3163 AUSTRALIA From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 16:47:11 GMT From: "Frits Evelein" Subject: patanjali spoken in sanskrit Hello In Holland there is a "professor in theosophy" at the University of Leiden. The Theosophicall organisation "Proclos" founded somewhere about 1950 has this chair at the university. For the last ten years our professor is Wim van Vledder. Every year he takes a new subject. His classes are attented by 40 to 70 students. Subjects of his classes has been Secret Doctrine Plotinus Bhagavad Gita Patanjali sutra's Gnosis Modern science and theosophy etc.. He asked me if I could help him on a spoken version of the sutras of Patanjali. Mayby someone knows how to get this. Please let me know. Greatings Frits Evelein From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 16:51:57 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: TSA by-laws disc --- where?? hi - Since Theos-L has so much e-mail and such varied audience I am rather sensitive to any complaints about the volume of TSA-By-laws e-mail. I don't think a separate list is a very good idea as most seem to agree. However I should recall to all that the original purposes of theos-roots and theos-buds was to separate out certain lengthy discussions which were not relevant to many theos-L subscribers. with this in mind... perhaps Theos-Buds might be a good place for it. after all it has to do with the evolving ideas in Theosophy or rather Theosophical organizations and their future. I thought I'd just toss that out as an idea. anyway theos-roots and theos-buds have been slow lately. peace - john mead p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA members regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 16:51:57 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: TSA by-laws disc --- where?? hi - Since Theos-L has so much e-mail and such varied audience I am rather sensitive to any complaints about the volume of TSA-By-laws e-mail. I don't think a separate list is a very good idea as most seem to agree. However I should recall to all that the original purposes of theos-roots and theos-buds was to separate out certain lengthy discussions which were not relevant to many theos-L subscribers. with this in mind... perhaps Theos-Buds might be a good place for it. after all it has to do with the evolving ideas in Theosophy or rather Theosophical organizations and their future. I thought I'd just toss that out as an idea. anyway theos-roots and theos-buds have been slow lately. peace - john mead p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA members regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 19:12:01 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Bylaw Changes I just happened to find an interesting statement in AT Mar/Apr 1993 by Dorothy Abbenhouse the then National President in the Viewpoint section. I am quoting some of the relevant parts below: "The by-law committee has been working hard to bring TSA by-laws into harmony with today's practices and language. Willamay Pym David Bland and Tim Boyd are members who serve on that committee and they will present proposed changes for membership approval when these are ready. The following statement has been produced by the committee and is being printed here to invite discussion by members prior to its consideration at the annual meeting in Aug. It will then be put to the membership by referendum." BE IT RESOLVED- ....... That this resolution shall be published in the American Theosophist for purposes of discussion by the members and after that after due discussion and after consideration at an annual meeting the question shall be put to the membership of the Theosophical Society in America by a referendum for their decision." The procedure that was followed in 1993 was first to publish the resolution on bylaws in AT to provide a window of five months during which members could discuss and after due discussion and after consideration at an annual meeting the bylaws are put to the membership by referendum. The steps and the time line and the objectives are very clear. In 1995 under the new leadership the changes are being roadrollered with no time for any member discussions with a hurried referendum. The changes that were considered in 1993 were generally more cosmetic than substantial. Even so Dorothy Abbenhouse trusted members and found it wise and practical to provide ample opportunity for members to fully discuss them before they are implemented. This simply shows that she was approaching the changes in a very open and cooperative spirit and attitude as it should be since the cooperation of every member will go a long way to keep the unity and strength of TSA. Lo and behold the changes proposed in 1995 that is being voted. The changes are very very substantial in terms of their impact on the rights and previleges/autonomy of members and lodges and concentration of authority at National level for financial micromanagement of the affairs of the lodges and study centers thus providing an effective tool for Wheaton to exert pressure on the types of programs and activities of lodges and study centers will be able to carryout. The National President has a responsibility to consult with the members when such major fundamental changes are proposed. And also there is an urgent need to explain to the membership in a convincing manner why this 180 degree turn from the past the procedure effectively cutting of discussion by membership. The speed with which these changes are roadrollered appears to give the impression that there is a rush to seize control that a quick passage the new bylaws will provide. Wake up fellow members before it is too late. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 15 Dec 1996 21:41:19 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: TSA Membership Trends > Trends in TSA Appeal to Different Age Groups 1987 - 1995 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > TOTAL <20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ > OCT87 - SEP88 887 2% 9% 29% 30% 17% 13% > OCT88 - SEP89 1034 1% 13% 31% 29% 13% 13% > OCT89 - SEP90 804 2% 12% 26% 32% 16% 12% > OCT90 - SEP91 695 1% 12% 27% 33% 13% 13% > OCT91 - SEP92 721 1% 12% 27% 33% 17% 10% > OCT92 - SEP93 654 1% 10% 24% 35% 19% 11% > OCT93 - SEP94 641 2% 8% 22% 35% 20% 14% > OCT94 - SEP95 597 1% 9% 20% 33% 19% 16% > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Seems the midlife crisis householder baby-boomers makeup the majority and not the "older" members. Interesting. Thanks. Lewis llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 00:55:15 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Theo-politics > ... this wonderful list may > very well turn into the forum from which the necessary > reformation of the TSA is hashed out and launched. How wonderful > it is that no one can control the discussion here well John > Mead could but doesn't - *THANK YOU JOHN* - and how unfortunate > that this may be the only national Theosophical space in which > the independence of thought and freedom of expression .... > qualities prized by everyone from the Buddha to HPB .... is > actually able to be expressed in all its fullness. > -JRC > [PS. Its time.] > [-:] It's not just the TSA though is it John? The constitution of out English section bears some of the characteristics that have been mention in connection with the proposed TSA by-law changes and the same is probably true of other National Sections. What happens in the TSA is of interest *and concern* to all theosophists many of whom are not in the USA. The number of US members is low per head of population compared to the UK. Aside from my own rather obvious postings theosophy as such *is* an international concern. The TSA and the TS in England share a common connection with Adyar in India as well as with other National Sections: note the term "sections" - we are *part* of something. Maybe it would be a good thing for the leadership of the TSA to remember this? I do not have a vote on these proposed changes but I am as concerned as anyone else about them - the future of the theosophical movement itself could be at stake. The existence of ULT or Point Loma theosophy is virtually non-existent here though my own Lodge for example has writings from both sources in its library as well as AAB. If the heart of theosophical principle is at stake then this most certainly *should* and *must* be discussed internationally. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 02:09:56 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members At 102900 PM 12/15/95 -0500 JEM wrote: > >hi - > >Since Theos-L has so much e-mail and such varied audience I am >rather sensitive to any complaints about the volume of TSA-By-laws >e-mail. ><> > >I thought I'd just toss that out as an idea. > >anyway theos-roots and theos-buds have been slow lately. > >peace - > >john mead > >p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA members ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I have not received it yet. If you or any one else who has received it can post it here it would help if the letter is not too long. ...doss Scribed at 8.00 am cdt - 12/16/95 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 02:44:42 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Cryptocracy Scribed at 8.45 on 12/16/95... At 052800 AM 12/16/95 -0500 Bee wrote: JOHNSON Thanks to JHE for his clear explanation of ULT/Theosophy Co. >>interdependence. In my previous post I didn't say outright >>that ULT *was* a cryptocracy but rather that since its >>governance was secret my brother called it a cryptocracy >>apparently a term found in SF lit which he likes. Anyway >>let me be clear-- ULT is *governed* by a cryptocracy the >>board of the Theosophy Company in many important respects >>even if the ULT itself is free of officers or by-laws. Better? >> >>On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Glad you mentioned this. I wondered about it. >>person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make >>condescending remarks about other people on the list and their >>ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. >>Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression >>that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could >>you consider revealing your identity? It might change the >>energy flow. >> >>As for moving the by-laws discussion I oppose it for the >>simple reason that the exchanges have been most educational >>even enlightening without degenerating into serious conflict. >>It ain't broke so why fix it? Probably 90% of us belong to >>the Adyar TS although many of those also belong to Pasadena or >>ULT. By virtue of its size what goes on in the Adyar TS is >>relevant to all Theosophists. For those who don't want to read >>it the headers should be clear indications of when to press >>the delete key. >> >>Namaste >> >As a TS member far removed from TSA I agree with what you say. It may not >apply to our situation at the moment but having read the posts it will keep >the matter in memory if it should crop up in my patch. I have printed off >the most informative ones to keep on file. We have minor disputes here but >nothing that cannot be sorted out at one of our Exec meetings which are held >5 times a year and Lodge Presidents or their designated deputy are paid >travelling to attend so we are encouraged to participate by this fact alone. >Some people at meetings can take umbrage where none was meant and so >unsettle the meeting for a while but so far all has ended ok in the end. > >Bee Brown >Member Theosophy International > I too fully agree both with Johnson and Bee. Couple of years ago I had first hand experience in a smaller scale as to how useful e-mail communication could be. From the Theosophical literature I learnt that transportation and communication are key to efficiency. Are not the Adepts have at their disposal instant transportation and communication capabilities in addition to other capabilities and powers. We are in a world of instant communication and Internet is a god send to keep all the members around the world informed of happenings in any part of the world. Let us make full use of it. Let us hope our elected officials understand and intelligently use this forum and encourage members around the world to get on it. Again all this would not have happened but for JEM. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 03:09:12 GMT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@compuserve.com> Subject: Save Reading Time on Theos-L I agree that the one bulletin board "Theos-L" is a good place to put most postings since it is the board that most of us watch. But there is something we all can do to save us all a lot of time. Many of us have the habit of recopying all or part of someone else's message and then put our own comments after it. This is easy to do with the Internet tools that we use but it is very time consuming for the readers. In some recent instances I have had to re-read someone's relatively long reposting of an earlier message just to see their one or two sentence comments about it. If we all use a little common sense and just give a simple reference to a previous posting or a few words to summarize it our messages would be shorter and more succinct saving everyone time. For example my lead sentence of this posting simply refers in summary to previous postings from "Coherence" "John Mead" and others about the use of the Theos-L board. I could just as easily have copied their entire messages just to add this comment. But then you would all have had to read it over again just to get to what I have to say. I offer this simple suggestion for your consideration. Sy Ginsburg From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 03:50:51 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Re: Re: Alice A. Bailey; tenets In reply to Liesel of 12.14.95: Hi Liesel -- My aplogies for the delay in getting back to you -- I've been working around the effects of a catastrophic hard drive failure. Regarding your guestions on the AAB tenets and your request for greater detail: I'll give it a go but I think it is important to establish a few "ground rules" first --- I am *not* professing to be an expert on either the teachings of AAB or HPB and my first purpose in posting the AAB tenets was to solicit comments from others. "Multiple Choice" tests are always easier but "Compare and Contrast" questions generally give more information wouldn't you agree? : With that in mind 1 RE the teaching on Shamballa the Hierarchy and the "Center where the Will of God is known": this to me seems to be the single biggest point of difference between the AAB writings and "orthodox" theosophy. In the former M KH and the other Masters of Wisdom are not singular individuals but are parts of a "community of saints" or White Brotherhood or Hierarchy which is comprised in part of those human individuals who have met or surpassed that point in evolution called Transfiguration of the Personality. That point is achieved for an individual when the integrated threefold personality first makes contact with and is finally subject to the purpose of the Soul; the "how to" of this is outlined in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras or Raja Yoga. Hierarchy forms the Heart center of the "One in Whom we live and move and have our being" while Shamballa corresponds to the Head center. 2 "Aryan people" is used in AAB's writings in the same way that "race" is used in theosophical literature. In Jung's commentary on Richard Wilhelm's translation of the Taoist text The Secret of the Golden Flower he says "When faced with this problem of grasping the ideas of the East the usual mistake of Western man is like that of the student in Faust. Misled by the Devil he contemptuously turns his back and carried away by Eastern occultism takes over yoga practices quite literally and becomes a pitible imitator. Theosophy is our best example of this mistake." Hard words but his point is that there is a fundamental difference between the Oriental and Occidental mind and that what is "best" for one is not necessarily correct for the other. Jung got a little carried away there IMO but he does have a point. In the writings of AAB meditation begins "with seed" and is formalized as opposed to say zazen. 3 In the AAB teachings about the Seven Rays or energies qualified by the seven fundamental differentiations of the intitial manifestation of Spirit we have one of the first substantial "splits" from the original teachings of HPB again IMO. There are references in the SD that can be interpreted this way but there is not a detailed body of information in that work about it. I believe it is in one of CWL's books where the first outline is given Masters and the Path?. The concept is central to AAB's writings. RE your comment: For Psychology to be "all on man's side" you have to define Mind as "all on man's side" yes? 4 I doubt that I'm the person to try and explain AAB's take on astrology. : 5 In AAB's teachings your meditation phone line should go straight to your Soul or Higher Self or Ego -- this is one instance where a lack of accepted standard theosophical terminology hinders. I once saw a group of newcomers walk out of a TS study group that got sidetracked from the scheduled topic to arguing about which subplane the Higher Self resides upon and whether or not it encompasses the causal lotus -- sheesh.... The first goal of significance is to completely integrate the threefold personality with the Soul which has been incarnating for eons through various personalities. In the AAB writings there is a sharp distinction made between occultism and mysticism and meditation is a scientific means of creative endeavor. 6 Fair enough close enough whatever. : The idea goes a little farther in that what was once a *personal* relationship between Master and chela is now one of *group identification* as a result of the transition from Pisces to Aquarius. 7 In the AAB teaching on the coming world religion we have another of the main differences with pre-1895 theosophy I think. In the former the returning Piscean Avatar the Christ the Imam the Maitreya the Messiah etc. will as the Avatar for humanity in Aquarius institute an exoteric religious observance of presently esoteric events or Festivals. The three main "religious holy days" are Easter the great Western festival at the time of the full moon of spring Wesak the great Eastern festival of the Buddha at the time of the Taurus moon and the Festival of Goodwill at the moon of Gemini. These three anchor in human consciousness the "divine aspects" of Will-Love-Active Intelligence the Trinity of Christianity and the nine other festivals correspond to the "divine attributes" which are the remaining energy qualities seeking expression through humanity or Rays 04 - 7 in AAB's parlance. Does that address your questions somewhat? As MKRamadoss pointed out theos-l should not be a forum for promoting a separatist agenda but rather for exploring the ideas of theosophy. The key question as it seems to me is whether or not the pre-1895 teachings of the founders make a complete set of theosophical instruction or if there are other sources/ideas that are useful to us in what we are trying to accomplish as individuals and as a group. I look forward to reading the comments of others on this. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 03:54:38 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Rich on He/She/It Rich: >You misunderstood -- I thought that's what ANNE was saying and I couldn't >believe it. I certainly do my share of housework or else I would live in a >dirty house! And yes I have to cook for myself also else I would starve! You'd be quite a catch. All that esoteric knowledge cooking and housework too! Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 05:49:07 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking ET >The first kind of idea may need some theosophical validation. The second >kind of idea deals with things that could be considered as scientific >knowledge and not need some special insight before they can be believed. >I would put the idea of the Masters in the second category as real >living beings and not as an arbitrary mystical insight dealing with >something that is basically unknowable. > >I don't need an ego identifiction with the idea that there's a country >called "France" in order to believe that it exists. I can take the word >of geographers and map makers. RI It's pretty obvious that "France" is not nearly as closed or private of a belief since it can be validated by most people who are willing to follow the directions of the map makers and go there. This is the first time I have heard anybody say that the existence of Masters is the kind of idea which "could be considered as scientific knowledge"; I suppose however you simply mean it in the same sense as the "Abominable Snowman"--that is if they ever find it they will be able to see it etc. Also allow me get rid of *arbitrary* and change the wording a little so we can agree on our "first category of ideas." Thus: *Mystical insights dealing with things basically unknowable any other way*. --I am never one for biting the theosophical hand that feeds us all . . . . Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 09:28:22 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: ERGATES Dear Andrew We would love an exchange! The latest ERGATES Dec 1995 is coming at you. Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 09:48:24 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Cryptocracy >Thanks to JHE for his clear explanation of ULT/Theosophy Co. >interdependence. In my previous post I didn't say outright >that ULT *was* a cryptocracy but rather that since its >governance was secret my brother called it a cryptocracy >apparently a term found in SF lit which he likes. Anyway >let me be clear-- ULT is *governed* by a cryptocracy the >board of the Theosophy Company in many important respects >even if the ULT itself is free of officers or by-laws. Better? > >On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous >poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed >person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make >condescending remarks about other people on the list and their >ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. >Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression >that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could >you consider revealing your identity? It might change the >energy flow. > >As for moving the by-laws discussion I oppose it for the >simple reason that the exchanges have been most educational >even enlightening without degenerating into serious conflict. >It ain't broke so why fix it? Probably 90% of us belong to >the Adyar TS although many of those also belong to Pasadena or >ULT. By virtue of its size what goes on in the Adyar TS is >relevant to all Theosophists. For those who don't want to read >it the headers should be clear indications of when to press >the delete key. > >Namaste > As a TS member far removed from TSA I agree with what you say. It may not apply to our situation at the moment but having read the posts it will keep the matter in memory if it should crop up in my patch. I have printed off the most informative ones to keep on file. We have minor disputes here but nothing that cannot be sorted out at one of our Exec meetings which are held 5 times a year and Lodge Presidents or their designated deputy are paid travelling to attend so we are encouraged to participate by this fact alone. Some people at meetings can take umbrage where none was meant and so unsettle the meeting for a while but so far all has ended ok in the end. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 17:31:05 GMT From: lcm@vnet.net Subject: testing interfaces for jem this is a test message only. rs and go there. I agree that France is more accessible to more people than France this is indisputable. But the way you demonstrate knowledge of France is very interesting: "since it can be validated by most people who are willing to follow > the directions of the map makers and go there." It strikes me that the knowledge of the Masters is the same. We are given directions but we must pursue them. If we will not i.e. become chelas admittedly a difficult task we cannot thereby say that Masters are not scientifically knowable. IN PRINCIPLE THEY ARE because we have a means of testing that hypothesis and falsifying it. If we follow the "directions" and do NOT find Masters then we may say it is false. But so many people throughout history testify to the existence of enlightened beings that to me the evidence is unimpeachable !! At least so it seems to me. Cheerily Rich P.S. The Winter Solstice is coming. What is everyone planning to do for it if anything? I always at least burn a candle and think of my highest spiritual goals. Sometimes I make myself a full-blown ceremony as the mood strikes. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 16 Dec 1996 22:41:56 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Coherence > >On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous > >poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed > >person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make > >condescending remarks about other people on the list and their > >ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. > >Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression > >that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could > >you consider revealing your identity? It might change the > >energy flow. If you send an e-mail to listserv@vnet.net with the words review theos-l as the body of the text you will find coherence@aol.com listed as Gregory D. Hoskins though Mr. Hoskins is not necessarily by this definition the same person who posts to theos-l. However Bee I agree with what you say above. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 01:09:34 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: E-Mail Address for Adyar fwd Is there an e-mail address for Adyar? I have seen on the web that Internet Service is commercially available in India. MK Ramadoss At 050800 PM 12/15/95 -0500 Johnson wrote: >Thanks to JHE for his clear explanation of ULT/Theosophy Co. >interdependence. In my previous post I didn't say outright ><<>> >On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous >poster on the list. I think Coherence is Gregory D Hoskins. Some one in this list may recognize the name. Anybody any comments? ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 07:03:05 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking ET >I'd put the idea of the Mahatmas as one subject to external verification >as something that exists in the world. A Mahatma is as real as a taxi driver. >A Mahatma is not only known through mystical insight like a Tibetan deity. >If we agree that the Buddha >existed then there is a scale of advancement between the common person >and him. The Mahatmas are humans at one point along this scale. Is there >anything wrong with that idea? RI No I guess there is nothing wrong with thinking about it this way. You should remember however that John Algeo criticised Paul for using the term *Masters* in a not-quite-preternatural-enough fashion. I agree there is a "scale" of advancement going up from the common person; however I prefer the term *Adept* capitalized to characterize someone who is able to utilize his or her theosophical "category one" transcendental understandings for the more successful management of his or her private life. There are naturally many "degrees of Adeptship." Perhaps then we agree on this. Where we may disagree nevertheless is how freely and in what manner an individual is entitled to promulgate esoteric ideas without indicating their basis category one transcendental; "category two scientific"; or "category three" just passing them along because someone else passed them along. If HPB's testimony for the existence of her Mahatmas the type with wonder-working powers etc. is sufficient for someone else to believe in Them that is fine with me--provided of course that the person does not present the belief in a way which suggests that his or her own theosophical development also corroberates Their existence. One of academia's few saving graces perhaps is its obdurate insistence on a proper chain of footnotes. . . . ET >I would say that I'm speaking from what seems genuine to me and not >simply materials that I recall having read in theosophical books. >I've had what I consider insights of my own which I have not specifically >read anywhere. RI To the extent you speak about the Mahatmas in this way I honor your words. [ET incidental >>Is there any or is it merely a closed pleasant private predilection >>of merely idiopathic importance. >Time for the dictionary American Heritage idiopathic = >AHD> designating a disease having no known cause RI *idiopathic* 01: "peculiar to the individual" WEBSTER'S SEVENTH NEW COLLEGIATE] Best wishes Richard Ihle I From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 09:24:55 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: delivery workaround/problems hi - mail delivery seems to having some "lock" problems. we are still getting e-mail. The listserv seems to work ok. hence you can retrieve e-mail by sending to listserv@vnet.net the lines get theos-l theos-l.951216 for 12/16/95 e-mail of course -- this message may not get through :- peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 09:36:57 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: An Auspicious Solstice We did a solstice celebration at the Houston Lodge. I was asked to do a meditation and I realized that this may be a very auspicious solstice indeed. The solstice is a little late being on the 22. The solstice marks the longest day of the year the dark night of the soul. We move from the frivolity and generosity of Sagitarius ruled by Jupiter Santa to Capricorn the merciless executive ruled by Saturn the father of endings and restriction. Provocatively the new moon in Capricorn occurs almost exactly at the same time which I think is very unusual K. Paul help me out on this! This means the new year is heralded by new beginnings of the and Moon in Capricorn. To further this influence there is a continuing conjunction of Neptune and Uranus in Capricorn furthering the influences of this sign. Pluto moves into Sagitarius. Some possible interpretations. This year will be marked by a move toward austerity and responsbility or there will be very negative consequences. The US Budget will be modified and signed marking the end of a 30 year cyle of government give-aways. Medicare-Medicare will be changed to increase individual responsiblity and will be managed by executives more like HMO executives and less like irresponsible bureaucrats. Medical care for all will be a serious issue but the element of sprituality will be introduced so that death is seen once again as a nescessary growth stage and less a punishment to be avoided at all costs. Hospices and death with dignity movements will also be seen more. Pluto in Scorpio coincided with the AIDS crisis and Pluto's slow movement into Sagitarius will bring philosophical and spiritual insights into the slow management of the disease. Abortion racial and decadent spirituality in the entertainment industry will be further examined with a more philisophical eye. Neptune and Uranus in Capricorn fortell monstrous yet hazily and almost glamourous changes in economic and political instituions. Power grabs in organization large and small wil be seen with democratic fairness being replaced by executive commands know what I mean?!. The good side of Capricorn is that discipline and restriction bring need prudence and skill with what once was thought as endless bounty. Enjoy the influence of Sagitarius while you can. Kiss your favorite Mr. or Ms. Claus before we get even further into harrassment issues just a joke :! Is this a bunch of Capri-corn or what smiles and hugs for the holidays?! Merry Solstice and Happy New Cycle of Evolution! Namaste Keith Price Merry Solstice From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 10:44:00 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Internet Hi I just saw that in the Detroit Metro yellow pages businesses are putting their e-mail address in addition to their telephone numbers. Soon I think we will have our e-mail addresses in the residential white pages as well. Just an indication that no one can ignore Internet any more. We had telephones then faxes and now e-mail. What next? ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 12:20:08 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Re: Alice A. Bailey; tenets Jim:< In Jung's commentary on Richard Wilhelm's >translation of the Taoist text The Secret of the Golden Flower he says >"When faced with this problem of grasping the ideas of the East the usual >mistake of Western man is like that of the student in Faust. Misled by the >Devil he contemptuously turns his back and carried away by Eastern >occultism takes over yoga practices quite literally and becomes a pitible >imitator. Theosophy is our best example of this mistake." > >Hard words but his point is that there is a fundamental difference between >the Oriental and Occidental mind and that what is "best" for one is not >necessarily correct for the other. Jung got a little carried away there >IMO but he does have a point. Yes he does. And as I have pointed out before this idea was originally expressed to me by James Long back in 1969 before I knew of Jung. Jung's criticism is directed toward Adyar. Basically we in the West need a whole new type of meditation/yoga practice based on the Eastern model but differing to account for our basic differences in constitution. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 12:53:58 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking sorry for butting in but... RI: >Theosophy is doomed at least in terms of popular appeal if it continues to >present itself as merely the place where all the grand-but-removed esoteric >ideas can be studied; its hope is to show how these ideas may also be >regarded as "metaphors" for some psychological realities which when properly >understood can be USED by the individual to very great advantage indeed. Just a humble opinion here but I rather like grand-but-removed esoteric ideas. I agree with your line of thought here but doesn't "can be USED by the individual to very great advantage" smack of the dreaded m word? magic to the uninitiated. This is probably why I like theosophy so much--it provides a very nice mental framework upon which to build my magical universe. This makes theosophy useful as a great source of meaningful archetypal structures or as you say metaphors from which to construct a viable worldview. It gives firm intellectual foundation to modern magical experience. For this reason I would suspect that the TS leaderships would prefer to let theosophy die then wed it to magic and make it useful. In any case none that I know of are terribly concerned about the current low memberships opting for quality over quantity. > The important thing is to keep some "remainder" of >untransformed Self operative. This unfortunately is not so easy to do with >semi-Selves forming at the higher levels of consciousnessness; thus a >meditative practice which can perfect an individual's ability to make >ever-more subtle discriminations between Self and all the "advanced variants" >of semi-Self becomes crucial. Agreed. This reminds me of something James Long once told me--we should not try to re-unite consciousness with the Self in toto but rather maintain contact with it in the backs of our minds as an inner guiding voice that is always available should we need it. There is nothing wrong with the semi-Self that maintains contact with its inner Source and uses that Source for inspiration and guidance on an as-needed basis. It is the semi-Self that loses this contact and sets itself up as Self that will soon step in deep doodoo. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 14:19:10 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: delivery workaround/problems On 17 199512 John E. Mead wrote: > mail delivery seems to having some "lock" problems. > > we are still getting e-mail. The listserv seems to work ok. > hence you can retrieve e-mail by sending to > listserv@vnet.net the lines > > get theos-l theos-l.951216 > > for 12/16/95 e-mail John ... Does the command go to or ? ^^^^ ^^^^ -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 14:23:47 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Theosophy and Democracy To what extent are theosophical organizations and democracy compatible? To what extent is theosophy compatible with organization and institutionalization? I ask these questions as I am tangentially aware of the concerns over the proposed change in by-laws as well as other larger issues. Theosophy proposes an ultimate unity of material mentality and spirit. Yet it also proposes a hierarchical gradation of spirit higheset to mental in the middle and matter at the lowest. ALthough matter is ultimately spirit and spirit is ultimatley matter there is in the process of evolution a seeming arrow of time that points toward greater and greater organization and thus greater and greater value for entities that can value. Theosphy is based on semi-secret and secret teachings that have appeared everywhere and all times throughout man's history. Many see Blavatsky as the greatest recent teacher and have contineued the organization that she built. She did not conceive of it as a church or else she would have made herself head and set down a canon of ultimate authority. She seemed to choose the then current parlimentary style of organization that seemed democratic and advanced for that time. Times change people change philosphies change worldviews change but hopefully some nearly ulitmate truth remains unchanged which we could put under the general title of "ancient wisdom" or theosophy. Theosophy will always remain but the teachers and teaching institutions must change and evolve as does everything else. Of pressing concern is the current "triumph" of democratic and free marketplace ideas vs. top down structured organizations such as Communism the Catholic Church Islam Masonry? and such. America has never really been a true democracy but a Republic with checks and balances of the various competing factions. Can the mob really be trusted or do we need the guiding wisdom of an inner circle of trusted leaders in the know? Theosophy has no real membership requirements and the membership is transient uncontrolled and individual members may have no real contact with the teachings of Blavatsky at all. Shouldn't those older and wiser and with more time than most your trully for sure be entrusted with making certain the the current wealth of archived materials remain intact and available for years and centuries even. An individual's life is short and their membership shorter. Do the Master's oversee the well being of the societies and inspire the leadership to do the right thing with the burden of leadership? Isn't their a hierarchy at work in everything in the world? To this last question Ken Wilber would reply a definite YES!. Everything has its place as a monad or holon as he calls it. Yet these holons fit on a specific level within the hierarchy. The higher cannot exist without the lower levels but the lower levels do not contain the higher they only support it and become united with it as a latter new unity-monad-holon. Thus the holographic paragigm is true in a way but is wishful thinking if you think that a dewdrop really equals an ocean-in some ways yes but not in all ways. Many similar dewdrops can make very different oceans. But back to the original concern is democracy possible or and ideal? Can the tail wag the dog? The dog can do without the tail but not without his brain. All things are not always equal. Yet we instinctively feel that all should have a voice an opportunity to be heard. This one feels need not be changed. Why should the leadership have things too easy? Shouldn't they be held accountable? Shouldn't they trust the membership as much as the membership trusts them. Or do they care about the amorphous faceless members that appear to them as burdens. The Kern Foundation has continued to support the society to the extent that its members contribute also. They often provide matching funds. The KF seems to support a widening of membership and its contributions. To what extent are the proposed by-law changes consistent with our overall mission? Namste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 14:52:37 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: psuedonyms hidden users etc. hi - actually as it is currently set up a person can use an alias as well as request that their subscription be "hidden" when people use the "review" query. I have not changed these options since I can envision a "rare" case or two where this might be desirable. However I personally don't like the "hidden" aspects concerning user's identities. It is somewhat immaterial since anyone who posts has a specific e-mail address. Hence -- any person who is motivated can ultimately ask the sysadmin at that location who is using that address. i.e. any good private investigator can easily figure out who is there. The net is not a secure place to hide. I do encourage people to use their "real" names. This actually gives their comments more validity. People who speak from "behind the curtain" are easily ignored and assumed untrustworthy. peace - john mead jem@vnet.net p.s. the lists are slow these days. be patient. the through-put should be better this coming week. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 15:29:40 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Happy Solstice Keith: >Abortion racial and decadent spirituality in the >entertainment industry will be further examined with a more philisophical eye. Decadent spirituality? Self-indulgent clergy? Could someone please tell me what that is? Sounds like something I might want to explore with the right study group. >Neptune and Uranus in Capricorn fortell monstrous yet hazily and almost >glamourous changes in economic and political instituions. Uranus goes into Aquarius on Jan 09 1995 and Neptune goes into the same sign on 192811 1998. Care to give us some interpretations here? Happy Soltice to all! Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 15:35:11 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Call for help on beginner books To all members of Theos-l: I have a friend who is interested in TS. She likes Quest magazine and wants to know more about what TS is what it stands for and some history. She feels she is not an intellectual and is intimidated by some of the literature. She's looking for guidance in terms of some beginners' literature that is not going to overwhelm her. What would the august body that frequents this corner of cyberspace suggest? Thank you Ann E. Bermingham P.S. We have a tenative date to see J. Algeo speak on the Wizard of Oz at Olcott. She thinks John is cool. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 16:15:44 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: An Auspicious Solstice At 044100 PM 12/17/95 -0500 you wrote: >We did a solstice celebration at the Houston Lodge. I was asked to do a >meditation and I realized that this may be a very auspicious solstice indeed. >The solstice is a little late being on the 22. The solstice marks the longest >day of the year the dark night of the soul. We move from the frivolity and >generosity of Sagitarius ruled by Jupiter Santa to Capricorn the merciless >executive ruled by Saturn the father of endings and restriction. > Glad to see that someone in Houston is on this forum. I am planning to send out the information sheet on signing up to theos-l. Any effort on your part to encourage the members of your lodge and their friends to sign up here will greatly help. More participants more we can exchange ideas and discuss other matters. When you next meet with members at your lodge please convey my best greetings for a merry christmas and happy new year to all of you. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 23:16:18 GMT From: theos Subject: Re: E-Mail Address for Adyar Doss None yet as far as I know. I suggested to a member who was going there this Winter to help set up at least email services so that we can communicate with Adyar thru cyberspace. I was also thinking of going to Adyar maybe in 1997 to assist on this regard. Ruben ============================================================================== On 16 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > > Is there an e-mail address for Adyar? I have seen on the web that > Internet Service is commercially available in India. > > MK Ramadoss > > Scribed at 11:15pm - 12/16/95 > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 23:31:09 GMT From: theos Subject: Re: E-Mail Address for Adyar fwd Doss We have no official notification if Adayar has their email working at this time. I suggested to a member from California who was scheduled to go to Adyar this Winter to assist in setting up Adyar's cyberspace communications. Ruben - theos@netcom.com ========================================================================= On 17 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > From: M K Ramadoss > To: theos@netcom.com > Cc: theos-l@vnet.net "m.k. ramadoss" > Subject: E-Mail Address for Adyar > > Is there an e-mail address for Adyar? I have seen on the web that > Internet Service is commercially available in India. > > MK Ramadoss > > Scribed at 11:15pm - 12/16/95 > Resent at 7.10am 12/17/95 > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 23:36:08 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: ULT Misconceptions and a Proposal Coherence: > ... because of the importance of the topic and >the sweeping effects that this type of communication could have on the TS a >board list dedicated to announcements changes votes officers isssues >basically a forum for the TS membership still seems like a good idea. I think that things like this will naturally arise by fission as our level of participation grows. We've been flat for about two years in subscribers and whenever we've gotten too active some people will drop out being unable to handle the greater volume of messages. Perhaps at that point we could consider new lists. On the other hand a list created for discussion in Spanish theos-span has been totally ignored since its creation ages ago. >However HPB said sorry no reference available >to the effect that she would shake off the TS like dust from her feet if it >should stray from the original program. Yes if it failed in its purpose it would be abandoned. The important thing is the work not the particular method of carrying it out. The Masters are of course bound by loyalty gratitude and duty to those that carry on the work. Among the ideals that are followed is loyalty to one's teacher. In "The Mahatma Letters" it's mentioned that KH and M would abandon the T.S. in a moment rather than disobey or be disloyal to their teacher the Mahachohan. >To the extent that the TS is an >organization attempting to live up to the highest ideals of Theosophy it is >worthy of support. To the extent that the organization its "leaders" >really no longer exemplify the ideals of Brotherhood and Selflessness >displaying clear unbiased judgement dump it. I might compare it to a financial investment. Forget about sunk costs about how much has been put into a particular project. See how much it would cost to refurbish things make the T.S. better and use it as an instrument for promulgation of the philosophy. Compare that cost to what it would take with other approaches including starting other new theosophical groups. See where there is the most benefit to the world for our efforts. >Our allegiance to an organization need be no greater than our personal >convictions dictate regardless of sentimentality for the founders. Our allegiance I'd suggest is not specifically to the organization nor to its founders but to the universal cause of compassion which we take with the Bodhisattva Vow. We are loyal of course to our fellow workers and to our guru teacher pandit or spiritual teacher if we have one. We are in a way in love with the beauty of the spiritual and the wisdom of Mahat and express this love by passing on and sharing in the world whatever we are capable of passing on. >ULT associates are "loyal to the founders of the Theosophical Movement" >and in effect abandoned the TS because it had strayed from the original >lines laid down. But ULT associates are simply theosophical students in an organization with its own program and policies. They follow the particular pattern given them as formulated by Crosbie and those that followed him. Signing an associate card and leaving it on file at a ULT lodge does not make one any different than before. When you describe how ULT asssociates are you're talking about *the way they should be* according to the way that organization was made. Individuals in the ULT are as likely to fall short of the ULT ideal as those in the Adyar or Pasadena T.S. to fall short of their organizations' respective ideals. >So like the United States there is a rebeliousness against autocratic >or dictatorial leadership. The sense of rebellion may have come from Crosbie being unable to put up with the strong emphasis on the arts on gardening and on being in close touch with Mother Nature that Katherine Tingley made. People were not allowed to spend all their time with books living in their heads but were required to live a full-spectrum life at the Point Loma commune. As head of the Point Loma T.S. during the years when Crosbie was a devoted and loyal member she may have required a bit too much of him leading him to rebell and create the ULT. Since the Adyar T.S. the Point Loma T.S. and the ULT all appeal to different types of people it's fine that there are three groups. But they should remain on the most cordial relationship with one another and there would be nothing wrong with yet more theosophical groups assuming they had a different specialization and weren't simply in direct competition with one another. >I recommended a space of its own where these important idealogical >democratic issues could be addressed specifically and at length >without getting entangled in discussions of the eroticism of seeing >one's husband up to his elbows in soap suds at the kitchen sink. We all have different interests. As an international group of students from many different backgrounds we could have almost any topic come up. And there is likely disagreement on anything that anyone may care to say. But this is not bad. It encourages us to refine our thinking and sharpen our words sharper in clarity and lucidity not sharper in biting hurtful words. We become more expert at expressing the philosophy and better able to promulgate Theosophy in the future. >If anything I propose getting more organized. Distribute the TS information >updates editorials voter issues etc. in a more formal matter making sure >that as many members as possible are aware that a forum specifically created >for the dissemination of this information has been established. There are mailing lists that are thing way. Like the one for Project Gutenberg there may be thousands or tens of thousands of subscribers. The list is moderated and the moderator edits and passes on suitable messages. Otherwise there would be too much duplicated and unrelated materials for people to separate the useful from the useless. We don't have this volume problem. If only we had tens of thousands of participants! Then we could break apart into dozens of on-line lodges and individuals could participate according to interest. As long as we remain steady at about 100 subscribers though this won't happen. >My delete key works just fine but there may be those people who do not >want to wade through the other stuff but would rather go straight to a >place where this information existed with someone in charge of the >completeness timeliness and accuracy of the information. Again it depends upon what one is interested in. Someone else may use their for all the political stuff in much the same way you delete some of the other topics. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 17 Dec 1996 23:56:22 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Ethical Apotheosis of Jerry Jerry S: >>Is the term "abyss" meant to imply a "dark night of the soul" >>experience for those that cross it? Then it would be akin to >>the western experience of transcending the personality of >>rising to the pure experience of unqualified consciousness. >They are different but similar thing. The Abyss is >an objective "place" in the invisible worlds around us. It is >the demarcation line between the upper three cosmic planes >arupa and the lower four rupa. Yes it exists on different scales of being. In us there's an gap between Auric Egg / Buddhi / Manas and Kama-Manas / Kama / Prana / Linga-Sharira that corresponds to this gap in the planes. We have this gap both within our constitution and externally in the world in which we live. >The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul >is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at >some point in which the human mind eventually >comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never >allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. This happens when we recognize the emptiness of our external life and start looking within for something more. That search leads us to the Path and to an awakening spirituality. It happens again in Initiation when we are separated from our higher self our Manasaputra and become a Manasaputra in our own right. It happens at different situations in life when we step outside our old limits and become something more. >Technically the Abyss marks the end or beginning of >the Ego not the ego/personality which is limited to the >3rd plane. Thus the Abyss stands just above the >Reincarnating Ego and just below the atma. I wouldn't put it that high but rather place it somewhere between higher and lower Manas. It separates the ordinary sense of self and personality and the pure functioning of mind where mind does not objectify the external world. >>It would be more like a "sweet melting" leading >>to a sense of "eternal delight" rather than a "dive into >>the dark unknown" or a "shattering". >It is "eternal delight" to atmic consciousness >but the Abyss is a "dark unknown" of incoherence and >insanity e.g. the unconscious to the ego/personality. It depends upon how awake and pervasive the influence of the higher principles are. If the qualities of Atma and Buddhi are starting to prevade our constitution then it's more like a fade-out of the lower and a fade-in of the higher with no dark in-between space. We have the sweetness of the higher in our lives and we shift our emphasis to it. This is different than when the higher principles are mostly mute in our external personality. In that case it's like a jump into the unknown betcause there's no continunity. In one case Atma and Buddhi are present and still persent in increasing intensity as the lower principles fade out to the background. In the other case Atma and Buddhi are not realized and one is fading out from the lower principles and moving into a black unknown an abyss with no qualities of consciousness perserving a continunity over the transition. >It is exactly what the ego sees when it faces the >unconscious in Jungian terms. Not a pretty sight >because the ego sees its own death within. But the ego doesn't die. It's just I think it improves. It creates the everyday maya of an objective material world. This and other byproducts of its existence which cloud our minds and darken our hearts -- all disappear. The personality becomes a clear lens to view life through rather than a narrow box to be locked up within. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 00:57:13 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theosophy and Democracy At 055400 AM 12/18/95 -0500 Keith Price wrote: > To what extent are theosophical organizations and democracy compatible? >To what extent is theosophy compatible with organization and >institutionalization? I ask these questions as I am tangentially aware of the >concerns over the proposed change in by-laws as well as other larger issues. <<>> > To what extent >are the proposed by-law changes consistent with our overall mission? > >Namste >Keith Price > > Keith: You have raised some valid and fundamental issues. I have been around Theosophy for several years. From what I have seen the lodges and study centers have always functioned most autonomously and democratically. >From the early days of TS even this is the case. It is only recently I have seen that there is an attempt to introduce some structure and the bylaws currently proposed is a quantum leap in that direction. From the point of branch autonomy and day to day functioning the most serious change is in the financial area that the National Headquarters in the US seeks to impose. Even though the motivation may be good the changes if implemented have a great potential to cripple and/or paralyze the functioning of the lodges. These changes can be and in all probability will be used to control the type of programs carried out in the lodges and for all practical purposes most of the fianancial decisions have to have the "Amen" of the National Board. Added to the above is the fact is the sudden change in the strategy of how these changes are proposed and to be voted. As I pointed out in an earlier message in the past when changes are proposed they are first published in AT and several months time was available for members and lodges and study centers to discuss all the issues surrounding the proposed changes. After this it is presented to the Annual Meeting and then later a referendum voted upon. In the changes currently proposed the procedure now adopted by the National Board the members discussion of the issues and dissemination of any dissenting opinions were truncated to the point of elimination. Moreover not much explanation and information is forthcoming from the National Board as to specific background reasons why the changes are proposed so that we can explore why the problems cannot be handle by some other way. When specific issues like the sale of Boston Lodge were raised they were dismissed by simply saying the issues are too complex as if some of us cannot understand complex matters. Overall as I had indicated in my mailout as well as my posting here the only best way to make any necessary changes yet preserve the autonomy of lodges and unity of membership is to REJECT every change proposed. Let us go back to square one and start all over again. This may be the only and last chance we all may have for a long time to save TSA as we have known in the past. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 01:10:35 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members At 102900 PM 12/15/95 -0500 JEM wrote: > >hi - > >Since Theos-L has so much e-mail and such varied audience I am >rather sensitive to any complaints about the volume of TSA-By-laws >e-mail. ><> > >I thought I'd just toss that out as an idea. > >anyway theos-roots and theos-buds have been slow lately. > >peace - > >john mead > >p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA members ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I have not received it yet. If you or any one else who has received it can post it here it would help if the letter is not too long. ...doss Scribed at 8.00 am cdt - 12/16/95 s first to publish the resolution on bylaws in AT to provide a window of five months during which members could discuss and after due discussion and after consideration at an annual meeting the bylaws are put to the membership by referendum. The steps and the time line and the objectives are very clear. In 1995 under the new leadership the changes are being roadrollered with no time for any member discussions with a hurried referendum. The changes that were considered in 1993 were generally more cosmetic than substantial. Even so Dorothy Abbenhouse trusted members and found it wise and practical to provide ample opportunity for members to fully discuss them before they are implemented. This simply shows that she was approaching the changes in a very open and cooperative spirit and attitude as it should be since the cooperation of every member will go a long way to keep the unity and strength of TSA. Lo and behold the changes proposed in 1995 that is being voted. The changes are very very substantial in terms of their impact on the rights and previleges/autonomy of members and lodges and concentration of authority at National level for financial micromanagement of the affairs of the lodges and study centers thus providing an effective tool for Wheaton to exert pressure on the types of programs and activities of lodges and study centers will be able to carryout. The National President has a responsibility to consult with the members when such major fundamental changes are proposed. And also there is an urgent need to explain to the membership in a convincing manner why this 180 degree turn from the past the procedure effectively cutting of discussion by membership. The speed with which these changes are roadrollered appears to give the impression that there is a rush to seize control that a quick passage the new bylaws will provide. Wake up fellow members before it is too late. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 04:27:24 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Copy of: Sidetorture to Eldon Malcolm: >An observation of mine is about the relatioship bewteen thought and its >translation into words. The observation is that the 'thoughts' are >independent of thier translation into words; that thoughts exists before >their translation. This is true. Words express a thought but cannot fully contain it. We could all have the same idea about a chair for instance but come up with entirely different words to describe it. It's much harder when we are trying to come up with words about metaphysical realities. >Thoughts seam to appear in a whole lump it seems to take time and >concentration to make the transistion into words. The same is true with feelings. We could have a feeling and then try to put it into words. The words partially describe it but always fall short. A thought as you say comes in a flash. Then it takes time to describe it. But as we are attempting to put it into words we are also working out its relationship with other thoughts and working on fitting it into the big picture of how we understand life. The greater the concrete expression that we give to the thought the more real more self-conscious more lucid it becomes. >I am not not multilingual so would like input from anyone that is - "Do >thoughts exist independantly of the language you are thinking in?". It would seem so. How else would we understand Eastern ideas like reincarnation and karma? How else would there be universal principles of life found in the various great philosophies and world religions -- regardless of the language they are clothed in? >Also there is the experience of 'not being able to find the word' ie >the thought exists before its linguistic expression. This is a good example of the thought coming first before it is clothed in words. But the thought becomes much more real when we do find the proper words for it. >I don't know how to analyse this in terms of higher mind / lower >mind / brain etc. Does anywone haeve any input? I'd say that in both the higher and lower mind there is the ability to know things directly to have flashes of understanding that come before the words. And there is the ability to put into words these flashes. The distinction between the higher and lower minds has to do with abstract versus applied thought. The lower kama-manas deals with the mind engaged in specific acts and activities in the external world. The higher buddhi-manas deals with the mind engaged in pure thought in abstract mathematics and philosophy in words about the inner nature of life. I'd say that both higher and lower mind have the ability to put things into words as well as to know things directly or be lucid and transparent and understand things in a flash. One deals with the inner nature of life; the other deals with the life in the external world. >Anyway I have used this as a technique of meditation:- to try and stay in >that space where thoughts are thoughts but before they become words. I >found it a very effective way to 'quiet the mind' and gain insites into the >mind's working. Another technique might be to leave the mental voice alone. Ignore the mind's narration. Look to the *flashes*. Rather than thinking of it as a space before thoughts become clothed in words consider it as fireworks that are always going off regardless of the narration. Look at the brilliance of the ideas. There's no need to silence the narration since you'd be paying attention to something else it would appear quiet due to your lack of attention. >You can gain also gain an appreciation of the 'problems' of the translation >service. There is certainly and reduction and compression happening. The purpose of the translation is not to completely represent the thought in words because that would not be possible. Rather it is to associate enough of the thought with the words that the words by sympathetic magic evoke the same thought in the reader/listener. It is more like an act of magic than like literal communication. >This also opens up ideas about communictaion and its limitations - great >communicators seem to transmitt the thought as a whole to their audience and >communicate more than the sum of their words. These communicators are therefore powerful magicians! They evoke in the audience things that remain otherwise hidden. And it's the very same thing that we try to do with ourselves as we read the theosophical books! We attempt to evoke the grand thoughts that remain hidden behind the words on the printed page to perform the same magic upon ourselves! -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 04:33:08 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Coherence writes: > >> >On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous >> >poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed >> >person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make >> >condescending remarks about other people on the list and their >> >ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. >> >Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression >> >that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could >> >you consider revealing your identity? It might change the >> >energy flow. > >If you send an e-mail to listserv@vnet.net with the words > >review theos-l > >as the body of the text you will find coherence@aol.com listed >as Gregory D. Hoskins though Mr. Hoskins is not necessarily by >this definition the same person who posts to theos-l. > >However Bee I agree with what you say above. > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > >I am glad you agree but I am not responsible for the above. I can't remember who posted it but it wasn't little old me. Coherence is ok which ever name he wants to talk under. If I had known that I didn't have to put my proper name in that slot when I joined up to my server then I might have got cute and thought up something profound instead of Bee Brown. :-D Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 06:29:11 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: 90s pub stats by language Continuing my research into WorldCat titles for various religious movements of the 19th century. One can search by any of a number of languages. A search for book titles published in the 1990s about six religions in six languages revealed the following: English Spanish German French Russian Japanese Mormon 1421 12 00 4 01 1 Adventist 925 32 08 3 01 1 Spiritualist 428 42 06 29 12 17 C. Science 239 03 3 02 1 01 Baha'i 203 07 1 01 0 00 Theosophy 118 20 09 4 32 00 For Theosophists this is an encouraging picture. In German and Russian there are more new books on Theosophy than any other of the 06 traditions. In Spanish French and English Theosophy's publishing presence is comparable to those of groups dozens of times larger. For Baha'is it would appear that English-language works are a disproportionately *high* percentage compared to other groups or to Baha'i membership statistics. Raising questions about database coverage. Another search looked for new titles in the 1990s on the world religions in all languages. The totals: Christianity 45034 Judaism 15649 Islam 10745 Buddhism 7432 Hinduism 3050 Sikhism 359 Baha'i 255. Even allowing for some distortion caused by a North American databse this shows Judaism Christianity and Buddhism to be producing far more literary works in relation to their memberships than is found in the cases of Islam Hinduism Sikhism and Baha'i. BTW a listing of the titles under Islam shows them overwhelmingly in Arabic and other non-European languages indicating OCLC's coverage. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 06:51:27 GMT From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: Re: Re: Alice A. Bailey; tenets Hello Jim Your answers seem right on to me about A.B.'s writings. >4 I doubt that I'm the person to try and explain AAB's take on astrology. : Here's one definition paragraph: ''Esoteric astrology deals with the relationship of the soul to the personality of the evolving consciousness and the form through which it seeks expression as represented by and interpreted through the astrology chart. Esoteric astrology uses a variety of rulerships for the signs in conjunction with the seven rays to help in the understanding of this process. Many theosophical writers have written books on the subject and the book generally considered as the primary source for these ideas is "Esoteric Astrology" by A. Bailey. Also see the esoteric astrology web page and ftp site: http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/esopsych.html - Patrick Holistic - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/maininfo.html Esoteric - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/esopsych.html Auras - http://users.aol.com/psychosoph/auras.html Meditation - http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/service.html From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 07:26:59 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: 07 Returns of Christ Having wandered into the subject of comparative publishing output for different 19th century religious movements I found much more information than I went looking for. The immediate reason for searching WorldCat was to compare Baha'i publishing to that of comparable traditions. But in coming up with five other examples and contemplating a sixth there is one surprising implication: the theme of Christ's return runs through all of them. The Mormons most successful of 19th century religions claim to have the restored gospel and the restored early Church. Their prophecies include a fairly imminent return of Christ. The Adventists 2nd most numerous have based their entire movement on anticipation of the return. Baha'i teaching in Western countries tends to center on Baha'u'llah's claim to be the returned Christ. Christian Science sees its founder as complementing the original gospel with new information about Christ's message; her own spiritual status is ambiguous. Spiritualism defines Jesus as a great medium and has produced a large body of "channeled" material about him. Theosophy emphasizes the law of cycles and various factions anticipate or have anticipated cyclical teachers who in some sense are seen as returns of Christ-- most notably Krishnamurti who rejected the role. Theosophical offshoots like Anthroposophy the Temple of the People and the Lucis Trust are even more emphatic about the present being a time for Christ to return; yet the return is often defined as a spiritual rather than material event. Radhasoami another movement from the 19th century teaches that its spiritual practices are the same techniques implicit in the teachings of Jesus and can give direct access to him. The work of Edgar Cayce recapitulates themes from all seven of these traditions. What is most interesting from the above facts in light of publishing statistics is that contemporary vitality in spiritual movements seems so connected to visions of Christ's return conceived in a great variety of manners. Regardless of the dubious accuracy of most claims made on behalf of this event it is revealing about our time in history that this theme is so prevalent. If we define the Christ as an archetype of the collective unconscious it seems fair to say that He/It *has* returned *through* all the movements mentioned above. Returned in many new forms and with conflicting messages. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 11:06:35 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Christmas Card "That which is a mystery shall no longer be so and that which has been veiled will now be revealed; that which has been withdrawn will emerge into the light and all men shall see and together they shall rejoice." - Old Commentary A very Merry Christmas Solstice Hannukah & A Happy New Year! Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 13:05:57 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Practical lessons & guidance At 044600 PM 12/15/95 -0500 you wrote: >Doss: >>From a lay man's point of view even if the disclaimer was signed >>if a participant in one of the programs gets sick at a future date >>a smart tenacious and expensive Chicago lawyer knowing the >>deep pockets of TSA may chose to pin down liability on TSA >>citing past theosophical writings/publications such as >>the one's I cited. The lawyers defending TSA would do so with >>great glee as they know they can generate a lot bills and TSA >>has money in the bank to pay the bills. More litigation more bills. > >If someone chokes on a piece of carrot in the Olcott dining room or claims he >caught salmonella from a bad salad dressing then anyone could sue for almost >anything. If the maintenance crew fails to clear the snow and ice off the >walkway and entrance to the building and someone falls some one can yell >"SUE!" Some parent can sue TS for poisoning the mind of their child with >theosophy. You could sue Olcott for giving you sore feet climbing up those >steps to the auditorium. The possibilites are endless and no amount of >prevention is going to help. Cross your fingers do the best you can and hope >your aspects are good. > >Ann E. Bermingham > Sure all of the above and more is possible. Prudence requires risk issues need to be deliberately looked at and with the best professional help decisions have to be taken. What all I am pointing out is that this is an issue that Wheaton "may" want to look at. If Wheaton had no money or assets at all then most of the risk problems just go away. They do not when you have deep pocket. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 13:11:06 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: TS Elections Hi I understand that the nomination papers are under circulation in various parts of the country for the election of the Board of Directors of TSA. If any of you know who are all running please post a msg here. If you chose you can send me a e-mail directly to ramadoss@eden.com. ..doss Resent at 7.10pm on 12/18/95 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 13:12:41 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Cryptocracy In a message dated 95-12-16 030905 EST you write: > Anyway let me be clear-- ULT is *governed* by a cryptocracy the >board of the Theosophy Company in many important respects >even if the ULT itself is free of officers or by-laws. Better? Well no it's still not correct. The Theosophy Co. the publishing arm for the United Lodge of Theosophists and title holder to certain but not all ULT assets has a board yes. Those board members are the older students of the Los Angeles Lodge of ULT and probably do greatly influence the Los Angeles Lodge by virtue of the dual roles these people play. But they have no control whatsoever over any other Lodge. All ULT lodges and study groups are autonomous and independent each being run locally by the students with no accountability to The Theosophy Co. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 13:20:32 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Coherence In a message dated 95-12-18 180701 EST you write: In a message dated 95-12-17 183921 EST you write: >>On a related matter-- Coherence you're the only anonymous >>poster on the list. Sort of like a nude beach with one clothed >>person. You may have good reasons for this but when you make >>condescending remarks about other people on the list and their >>ideas it doesn't seem quite fair to do it from a pseudonym. >>Or rather perhaps the pseudonym strengthens the impression >>that you are looking down on us/me/some of us/whatever. Could >>you consider revealing your identity? It might change the >>energy flow. >>If you send an e-mail to listserv@vnet.net with the words >>review theos-l <>as Gregory D. Hoskins though Mr. Hoskins is not necessarily by >>this definition the same person who posts to theos-l. HORRORS!!! Unmasked!!! NAKED!!! Exposed!!! Now I ask you several things: 1 Do you think the energy flow will really change? 2 Why was it so important to know a NEW PSEUDONYM as opposed to the old one? 3 Was this a correct ethical move? i.e. to uncover and announce the identity of one who chose to remain anonymous not to hide but to keep the focus on ideas. 4 What if you would have discovered something you would have rather NOT known? Beware what you ask for. I bet you hunted and shook all your Christmas packages when you were small. Another comment you accuse me of hiding behind a screen name so that I can make condescending remarks about people and ideas which I don't think I have. But you do not consider that my screen name has not shielded my feelings when people have been condescending to me and my ideas. So which way does the issue cut? You also fail to note that I never use the participants name in my replies or comments but speak to the idea.. This makes theosophy useful as a great source of >meaningful archetypal structures or as you say metaphors from which to >construct a viable worldview. RI Yes Jerry but even I get nervous when I start using terms like *metaphors* or *analogs* with regard to certain esoteric ideas. Take reincarnation for example. While it is a useful and pleasant surprise to realize that one can regard waking up each morning--complete with all the uncorrected personal tendencies physical emotional and mental consequences of what one has done the day before ready to greet you etc.--as a type of "reincarnation" it is difficult if one is a serious meditator to continue to hold the view that the grander theosophical idea with *skandhas* *karma* etc. is merely the result of someone making a cosmic metaphor out of the more mundane insight. No theosophical "metaphors" seem to have a way of slowly and I think *validly* hypostatizing themselves despite how much one fights against them. But *slowly* seems to be the operative word here however. Accepting these colossal theosophical systems in one big fast gulp may be the formula for passionate desire-mental belief but it is not the recipe for Inner Certainty about them. Something like true conviction about reincarnation does not arrive fully clothed in glorious raiment and with the fanfare of a royal parade; rather it is at first dressed in rags and "lurks" quietly but persistently around the psyche. Since it will not go away no matter how much common experience and strict logic is used against it it slowly but inexorably establishes itself as a theosophical "fact" against which no argument can henceforth prevail. Yes Jerry there may be many who say they "believe" in more theosophical ideas than I do but perhaps not so many who are held so fast by a few. . . . Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 17:18:13 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Coherence On 18 199512 Coherence@aol.com wrote: > Now I ask you several things: > > 01 Do you think the energy flow will really change? Slightly but yes IMO. > 02 Why was it so important to know a NEW PSEUDONYM as opposed to the old > one? Perhaps because the "Nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity" can only be formed from relationships between *people* messy as they get who will always be far more than bundles of abstract ideas floating through space. > 03 Was this a correct ethical move? i.e. to uncover and announce the > identity of one who chose to remain anonymous not to hide but to keep the > focus on ideas. Somewhat of a disingenuous argument is it not? Though I wasn't the one seeking your name I find it rather odd that you would question the ethics of simply using the `review' function on listserver software. Your name wasn't "uncovered" ... its "announced" every time someone gets the list. If you *did* wish to remain anonymous it takes but one command to supress your name from the public list. You didn't. `Tis a tad odd to question the ethics of people for knowing what your living room looks like when you keep the curtains open and the lights on is it not? > 04 What if you would have discovered something you would have rather NOT > known? > Beware what you ask for. A *warning* about knowing something? What could anyone *possibly* discovered that might have been upsetting in simply finding out who you were? > I bet you hunted and shook all your Christmas packages when you were small. I sure did. As well as the vast majority of American children past and present. There is something wrong with this? > Another comment you accuse me of hiding behind a screen name so that I can > make condescending remarks about people and ideas which I don't think I > have. But you do not consider that my screen name has not shielded my > feelings when people have been condescending to me and my ideas. So which > way does the issue cut? You also fail to note that I never use the > participants name in my replies or comments but speak to the idea.. Not using the name doesn't mean the person is not being attacked. Surely you have some personal involvement in at least some of your ideas or you would not say "my" ideas or experience any sense of condescension and hence may feel attacked when people go after them ... just as others may feel attacked. Impersonal vocabulary is certainly capable of thinly veiling harsh personal intent. > easily > Is this true? I don't think so. The idea will speak to those receptive to > it regardless of the traditional or non-tradional pseudonym. Would you trust > me more or would my comments have more validity if you discovered my real > name was "Flock-of-Birds-by-the-Lake"? William Q. Judge did most of the > writing of his lifetime behind pen names. The Masters did not use their > "real" names. Your comment does not jive with the history of the movement. > Names are meaningless. They identify only which "Coherence" did nicely. But this is a discussion list the cyberspace equivilent of a Lodge meeting ... not a book. WQJ may well have written under pen names but did not attempt to use pseudonyms when he was actually engaged with discussions with people. And as so far as the "history" goes that vast majority of Theosophical writers including HPB herself certainly did use their real names. Names are only meaningless if you believe all Theosophy is is pure impersonal abstract ideation. And for instance I believe the post of yours that caused your name to be questioned had political overtones to it ... and I would say the source of such comments is *quite* relevant; if for instance that long legal post a couple of weeks ago had been posted anonymously I would have been *damn* curious to know who had written it ... as the fact that it was written by in essence a spokesperson for Algeo means it is evaluated quite differently than if it had been written by Eldon or KPJ or Jerry either one -:. > I am Gregory D. Hoskins says boldly beats chest Good to meet you. While I certainly grasp that various aspects of the path fill people with the urge to supress the personality which might as one of its expressions find the supression of the personality's name to make sense at least I know more than one friend for whom this is the case ... but there are also other possibilities. A person for instance might like the mysterious aura that surrounds anonymity ... might even if they were insecure about their thoughts believe that anonymity actually lends some weight to them. In fact the history of occult literature is full of people using pseudonyms and anonymity for a whole variety of reasons many of them not all that elevated. There is almost an entire genre of second rate "occult and mystical" whose authors fill the titles with words like "Secret" and who write anonymously because of the titillating air of the mystic that such devices lend ... and as publishers know it quite often *works*. Just a sec let me get an example .... Ah yes ha ha- a gift from a friend who gave it to me as a joke: _The Encyclopedia of Ancient and Forbidden Knowledge_ ... subtitled "The complete guide to the Occult" imagine! only $3.50 in paperback! what a *deal*! -:. It is by "Zolar" who honors us his students tee hee with the following final paragraph in the "about the author" page: "This book is the culmination of Zolar's years of study research and expertise. He is seldom seen because he feels that reality is a disillusionment. He prefers to be simply "Zolar" the name everyone knows - the person never seen". [And I might add that after reading but the first chapter I too felt that reality was a disillusionment -:]. While I don't believe that your motives are anything closely resembling his still you must admit that the world of esotericism is perhaps more than any other field of thought and letters filled with people using psuedonyms and perhaps the majority them fall far closer to "Zolar" than to WQJ ... its far more often a device to *get* attention than to deflect it. Besides if your motive was purely to keep attention on ideas and away from personalities on a list where everyone but yourself *uses* their name is not the use of the psuedonym *more* likely to attract attention to your person? Regardless of what your intention was you differentiated not your ideas but *yourself* by attempting to remain anonymous in a discussion ... creating a situation something like a person standing in a room of people and shouting "*Don't pay any attention to me*!". Your motive IMO is more likely to be accomplished by simply using your name than by not using it. Regards -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 20:39:56 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Uranus in Aquarius' Net TO ANN B.: I usually don't talk about astrology because a lot of people aren't interested. But many theosophists take it not literally but as another symbolic key like the tarot or the kabala et. Thanks for pointing out that Uranus will be moving into Uranus in Jan. 1996. This will modify the influence of Capricorn on large social issues as is the want of the outter planets I'm told. Uranus will be moving into his own sign wow! I think this will be the dawning of major cyle of Aquarius in our present cyle but not the age of Aquarius according to the precession of equinoxes of course. I think the interent will continue to be a world-wide social influence on the scale that rock music was in the sixites. It wil be a linking of the great and small minds of the world. It will create an electronic nervous system or noosphere for humanity and humanitie's mentality is part of the noosphere of Gaia. Will it be used for political scheming and crass comercialism? You bet!! But does it have the potential for increasing the sprititual and mental vibrations of the entire planet? Yeah I think so? What we are doing is being expanded and will continue to offer new ways for people to link spiritually. We percipitate letters seemingly easier than the Masters did. No need for cabinets in India at al with Windows 95. Have other people tried all the "spiritual"? software out there? There are all kind of programs that attempt to put the iching tarot kabala numerology meditation and many other things on the computer? I think they are mostly toys but many are quite informative and fun. What would a practical theosophy program look like? New Age music mandalas meditation history and quotes from Blavatsky and maybe a few vegetarian recipes? Don DeGracia has a good brief "Introduction to Theosophy" as a WIndows help file type program. There was talk some time back about having a Sega type theosophy game remember that? Kind of like Master of the 07 Globes in Spiritual Immortal Kombat or something. But would KH make a goood action figure? Groan But seriously something tells me that the computer mulit-media really could be used in some ways to have a positive spiritual impact the way TV rap rock and violent computer games have a negative spiritual impact increasing violence rape and a variety of negative thoughtforms. Generation X seems to be as interactive as the baby boomers are passive remember staring blankly at all those episodes of "I Love Lucy"? well the computer games demand attention and movement I'm kinding of brainstorming as you can tell. Has anyone gottten results with Blavatsky's Diagram of Meditation? If I remember it is in full color and attempts to focus the mind in buddhi-manas while rooting or suspending the other principles. Now that might be an interesting project! The computers could be perhaps used to draw one into deeper levels on one's spirituality as the current games have levels of physical conflict. I have used the video tapes of the Mandelbrot and Julia Fractal Sets as an open eyed meditation. Someone is going to come up with something with Uranus in Aquarius. Namaste Keith Price Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 23:01:14 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: On Using Names Coherence and/or Gregory: >> [not sure who wrote this] >>I do encourage people to use their "real" names. This actually gives their >>comments more validity. People who speak from "behind the curtain" are >>easily ignoredand assumed untrustworthy. >Is this true? I don't think so. The idea will speak to those receptive to >it regardless of the traditional or non-tradional pseudonym. By not wanting to use your personal name you are following the traditional ULT approach. If you were to carry it to an extreme you and perhaps other ULT members on 'theos-l' would all sign their email "A Student" and leave us guessing who said what. If you were strictly quoting HPB then it does not matter which person is reading the quote. But if you are writing *your* ideas and understanding it's important to know you and how you think. The reason that it's important to know the personality of the speaker is that despite all attempts to pass on the pure philosophy and not interject opinion a personal element creeps in. If we know the person we can take their particular bias into account. In addition we're not all attempting to speak straight textbook Theosophy. Most of us are expressing our personal views and understandings and there's quite a lot of ideas being tossed around that may conflict with the core teachings. We have an experimental laboratory where we can take the ideas apart and see how we can put them together again. This is different than a lecture platform where basic Theosophy is being taught and where one is expected to be faithful to the teachings when claiming to be teaching them. >Would you trust me more or would my comments have more validity if you >discovered my real name was "Flock-of-Birds-by-the-Lake"? The name that you're known by is not as important as the fact that you always use the name so that you can be known and understood. >William Q. Judge did most of the writing of his lifetime behind pen >names. He may have wanted to create the appearance of a more active American Section in order to inspire hope in members and encourage them to greater work. How would his magazine look if most of the articles were written by him? >The Masters did not use their "real" names. They certainly would not want the general public to know their true identities. But they also did not all hide behind a single pseudonym like "A Master". KH signed his letters as such and so did Morya. >Names are meaningless. They identify only which "Coherence" did nicely. Our birthname has a psychological significance. It affects how we are perceived by others as we grow up. And if we engage in a spiritual practice like taking various vows to become a practicing Buddhist we may get another name which has particular significance. In this case the name has a meaning and the meaning is meant to say something about our special role in life. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 23:19:04 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Dark Night of the Soul Lewis: >The idea that it the change in us is a gradual one seems to >contradict other ideas that indicate that enlightenment or awakening >to the next level is a sudden break through in consciousness. There are two ways to picture our growth. One is according to the gradual school. In this approach we slowly persistently with sustained effort grow towards an eventually awakening. In the sudden school we can achieve an immediate realization. It can come as quickly as the popping of a balloon. I'd say that both approaches describe different aspects of the process. We do ripen over time. A flowerbud slowly grows to maturity; it is not immediately ready to open. But we also have a dramatic awakening. The flowerbud one day is mature and opens to the sunlight. Both the *process* of growth over time is needed as well as the dramatic breakthrough. As an analogy I think of my 14-month-old boy. He is now a toddler having just started getting serious about walking in the last week. For many months he was standing up and holding onto things and getting ready to start walking. One day with sufficient readiness he took some steps and started to walk. One moment he was a crawler the next a walker. The dramatic nature of the change came in a moment but the growth and ripening happened over many months. My discussion with Jerry S. on the dark night of the soul though was not with regard to how sudden or dramatic the experience is. I mentioned that if there is sufficient experience of the higher principles there is no "dark night" when one shifts away from the lower. One has been embraced in Atma-Buddhi and continues to be embraced in it during the transition so it is not seen as a time of darkness and abandonment. There is not a feeling of collapse when the mind stops creating an objective world because the *something more* has already been filling one's nature. The transition is sudden dramatic but not like the scared jump that we might do when someone unexpectedly pops a balloon! It's more like an immediate gasp of amazement when gazing upon something incredibly beautiful. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 23:36:06 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking RI: >It's pretty obvious that "France" is not nearly as closed or private of a >belief since it can be validated by most people who are willing to follow >the directions of the map makers and go there. Some things are easier to validate than others but still possible. If something is hard to validate or would require personal training and preparation would it therefore become a "private and closed belief"? If you have never seen a particular country you have not validated the idea. Your belief that the country exists would be a matter of logic and would be based upon information provided you which you trust. The idea would be as unproven as that of the Masters. >This is the first time I have heard anybody say that the existence of >Masters is the kind of idea which "could be considered as scientific >knowledge"; I suppose however you simply mean it in the same sense >as the "Abominable Snowman"--that is if they ever find it they will >be able to see it etc. You might compare the idea to that of the Abominable Snowman if you thought it highly unlikely. I might compare the idea to the existence of France if I thought it likely. The reality of something in the world does not depend upon how easy it is for us to personally validate it. If something is not true unless a majority of people can readily validate it then much of what we'd call scientific knowledge would have to be rejected. Many would take more than a single lifetime to acquire the necessary knowledge to understand much less experimentally verify the more advanced areas of science. But science does not become untrue and the more advanced researchers are not followers of a closed private view about life. Theosophy deals with things that are more difficult to realize than research in advanced science. Many lifetimes of preparation may be required to make progress with it. There is a mystical side to it but it also deals with the invisible hidden side of nature parts of objective reality that are normally inaccessible to us. >Also allow me get rid of *arbitrary* and change the wording a little so we >can agree on our "first category of ideas." Thus: *Mystical insights >dealing with things basically unknowable any other way*. An understanding of Parabrahm falls in the first category that of personal mystical experience. The existence of the Masters as living flesh-and-blood people is not mystical but ordinary knowledge. I'd define them as people more advanced than the Buddhist Arhat and less than the Buddhist Bodhisattva. And all of these people are somewhat less advanced than the Buddha a real person. Where there might be some disagreement would be on the attributes and powers of such a person. We have two extreme views from all-powerful angels on the one hand to exceptional ordinary people as depicted in Paul Johnson's books. I'd tend to put them somewhere in the middle on the scale. >--I am never one for biting the theosophical hand that feeds us all ... Unless you think that the hand is empty and not likely to offer any more food! I'd still getting fed though so I'm well behaved. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 18 Dec 1996 23:37:14 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: trust problem what to do now JHE: >I believe that members of the TS indeed have a responsibility to >speak up when they see an injustice and to make an honest effort >to discern the issues and to vote. In reading over the discussion over Wheaton and theosophical politics I've been wondering what we should do about things. >From what I've read on theos-l I'm led to wonder if the TSA itself is in the same danger as any lodge. If it changes its bylaws could it be as subject to being shut down by Radha? If we want more independence the place to start would be in Wheaton itself. If it could protect itself legally from Adyar assert its autonomy and grant the same right to its branches then things would be safer for the future. If there is too much centralized control there's always the danger that someone will eventually come along get into power and mess things up. This is regardless of the trust we may have in the current leadership. But what happened the last time the American Section asserted autonomy in the TS? Olcott expelled it. Judge was the head at the time and ended up the international president of YATS Yet Another T.S. What is the purpose of centralized control? I'd assume to maintain some form of ideological purity. This is because of the open nature of the groups where no particular belief is required of members nor program of study imposed upon groups. Groups like Tibetan Buddhist sects preserve their philosophy from generation to generation by formalizing it into a dogma and by having a class of experts learn it and pass it on. There seems to be a mixed message in theosophical groups. On the one hand we're told we can beleve in anything that we want. But on the other hand if we say something too different we're likely to get shunned or in some cases shown the door. I'd tend to see any conflict as being over two possible roles for theosophical groups. In one role we have a well-defined body of theosophical doctrines. The purpose of the group is to promulgate these teachings although it is done in an open manner with no required beliefs. Members are considered students of the philosophy. In the other role we have no well-define body of doctrines but rather have a "seekers' club" where everyone gets together to assist each other with their personal quests. The organization does not exist to promote any specific doctrines. Everyone is free to read study and share whatever they find of interest. The theosophical literature has no special status either at the platform or at the printing presses. Both types of organizations serve useful purposes. They could readily exist side-by-side. I'm not sure though how well a single T.S. can accomplish both at the same time. Perhaps our various theosophical groups can specialize in different directions each filling some important need. For any problems that we may have with Wheaton I'd suggest an approach that focuses on providing positive feedback. We can provide useful ideas along with our reasons for them. This may be saying the same thing that we might otherwise have said in harsher words. A confrontational approach gets people to raise barriers become defensive and stop listening. A different manner of communication with tact can be more powerful in getting a message across. Apart from any discussion of specific things we've seen and not liked could we discuss and come up with a list of positive suggestions for changes in Wheaton's policies and how the T.S. might better be run in the future? -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 01:17:36 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Uranus in Aquarius' Net At 020200 AM 12/19/95 -0500 Keith wrote: >TO ANN B.: >I usually don't talk about astrology because a lot of people aren't interested. >But many theosophists take it not literally but as another symbolic key like >the tarot or the kabala et. Thanks for pointing out that Uranus will be moving >into Uranus in Jan. 1996. This will modify the influence of Capricorn on large >social issues as is the want of the outter planets I'm told. Uranus will be >moving into his own sign wow! I think this will be the dawning of major cyle >of Aquarius in our present cyle but not the age of Aquarius according to the >precession of equinoxes of course. > >I think the interent will continue to be a world-wide social influence on the >scale that rock music was in the sixites. It wil be a linking of the great and >small minds of the world. It will create an electronic nervous system or >noosphere for humanity and humanitie's mentality is part of the noosphere of I am glad to see the astrological prediction regarding Internet. Any of us who use Internet can see its future potential. Some of us even feel that it is the the thing that is provided to the humanity in this last quarter of the century. Just like telephone fax video confering equipment Internet is the next tool of communication and transfer of information. I have known people who have refused to use computers. You are going to have people who refuse to use Internet. These are well educated grown up men and women in all walks of life and professions. But the technology is going to pass them by. A somewhat limited analogy is the difference between walking and auto. While both are essential look how much auto has done to the humanity in the area of transportation. In the area of information movement and access Internet is going to do the same. Have you seen that ease of information access and printing of your own newspapers which is just news information predicted by CWL in his articles which appeared in the Theosophist around 1909? ....doss >Gaia. Will it be used for political scheming and crass comercialism? You bet!! >But does it have the potential for increasing the sprititual and mental >vibrations of the entire planet? Yeah I think so? What we are doing is being >expanded and will continue to offer new ways for people to link spiritually. We >percipitate letters seemingly easier than the Masters did. No need for >cabinets in India at al with Windows 95. Keith: From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 04:54:45 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Call for help on beginner books Ann I like the Key to Theosophy's question/answer format. It's a good way for new people to get some idea of how a theosophist looks at issues which often come up at meetings. Is your friend interested in any particular subject? What is her frame of reference? Science psychology anthropology or religion? I usually recommend something which approaches theosophy from the subject interests. Lewis llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 05:17:09 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Dark Night of the Soul Jerry S.: > >The Dark-Night-of-the-Soul > >is an anguishing experience that most of us go through at > >some point in which the human mind eventually > >comes to terms with the fact that its limited nature will never > >allow it to fully understand or comprehend the infinite spirit. > >>It would be more like a "sweet melting" leading > >>to a sense of "eternal delight" rather than a "dive into > >>the dark unknown" or a "shattering". > Eldon: > It depends upon how awake and pervasive the influence of the > higher principles are. If the qualities of Atma and Buddhi > are starting to prevade our constitution then it's more like > a fade-out of the lower and a fade-in of the higher with no > dark in-between space... Lewis: The idea that it the change in us is a gradual one seems to contradict other ideas that indicate that enlightenment or awakening to the next level is a sudden break through in consciousness. I once heard the analogy of a finger being pressed inside a ballon. The membrane stretches ever and ever thinner by the constant pressure but the breakthrough occurs suddendly. llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 06:19:39 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Uranus in Aquarius >TO ANN B.: >I usually don't talk about astrology because a lot of people aren't interested. >But many theosophists take it not literally but as another symbolic key like >the tarot or the kabala et. Thanks for pointing out that Uranus will be moving >into Uranus in Jan. 1996. This will modify the influence of Capricorn on large >social issues as is the want of the outer planets I'm told. Uranus will be >moving into his own sign wow! I think this will be the dawning of major cycle >of Aquarius in our present cycle but not the age of Aquarius according to the >precession of equinoxes of course. Alan Oken an esoteric astrologer had said that Uranus moving into Aquarius would be Love/Wisdom linking with technology and that there would new insights in research. Science and technology would cause humanity to know God. He also predicted astrology would move into the mainstream but then he might be a tad prejudiced about that. >I think the internet will continue to be a world-wide social influence on the >scale that rock music was in the sixties. . . The departed Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead said ten years ago that "Computers are the drugs of the eighties." There are now articles in the newspaper about people that are spending 07 hours chatting on the Internet and want to stop their addiction. >But seriously something tells me that the computer multi-media really could be >used in some ways to have a positive spiritual impact the way TV rap rock and >violent computer games have a negative spiritual impact increasing violence >rape and a variety of negative thoughtforms. I don't feel the media causes negative behavior but simply reflects. All those negatives energies that erupt into violent acts are within people. If everyone ran around in a meditative state the media would reflect that state. The negative reflection in the media then magnifies the negative potential already there. Media could be used for educating people on how to modify their negative impulses but alas the people that own the networks are blinded by ignorance or the buck. >Generation X seems to be as interactive as the baby boomers are passive >remember staring blankly at all those episodes of "I Love Lucy"? well the >computer games demand attention and movement I was blankly watching "Wagon Train" in those days. Computer games also can be addictive and pull a kid away from his homework and healthy outdoor play. Feel free to post whatever you like in terms of astrological issues. I love it! - Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 06:48:55 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Practical lessons & guidance The problem is nowhere near what has been stated. Writing as one who deals extenstively in practical work I can say that the legal advice both I and my publishers have been given is that there is a virtual blanket of first amendment protection for anything in this area. It is extremely doubtful that any court would even entertain the suit in the first place and the individual filing would be vulnerable to a counter-suit for conspiracy to use the courts to impede free speech. Chuck Cosimano From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 08:14:17 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Uranus in Aquarius >snip> >But the technology is going to pass them by. A somewhat limited analogy is the >difference between walking and auto. While both are essential look how much >auto has done to the humanity in the area of transportation. In the area of >information movement and access Internet is going to do the same. An even better analogy might be walking compared to public transportation buses and trains which are less damaging to the environment. Trains can go much faster than a car and carry groups of people. They also allow people who are visually handicapped or unable to drive due to some other physical problem the freedom to go where they want without depending on others to drive them. I would think air transport would also be popular in the Aquarian Age. - Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 12:09:43 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: TS Bylaws Dear Fellow Members of TSA: We have seen a lot of messages on TSA Bylaws Revision which is being voted on my the members. There was a lingering notion in my mind that there is still some aspects which are either not clear or does not fully make much sense. So I went back and reviewed the Early Autumn 1995 issue of The American Theosophist in which the Bylaws Revision was published. There is an elequent introduction to the changes which is commendable. In re-reading the bylaws revisions there are three underlying yet related factors cited when dealing with the substantial and fundamental changes proposed. The are 01 General Council of TS has asked that certain features be incorporated into all national rules 02 Requests by General Council 03 To comply with international rules/regulations 04 International President has recommended certain provision be placed in national bylaws. Due to the citation of the above underlying/related factors there appears to be a perception in the minds of some members that somehow the General Council and International President are calling the shots and the National Board is zealous in following them and trying to implement them and that too in a very great hurry and without giving any time for discussing them. The General Council consists of representatives from all over the world and many of them with long full time experience with Theosophical Society and many of them have made great personal sacrifices for the cause of Theosophy. Our International President also has made long-term full-time personal sacrifice for the cause of Theosophy. One can be sure that the General Council and International President would have carefully analysed and deliberated all the issues over a period of time before coming up with any recommendation to be suggested to National Sections. The easy availability of the background information written as well as informal on the recommendation would make all TSA members intelligently understand the recommendations. So far we have not seen full disclosure of any of this background information as well as any other related facts. The person who represents TSA in the General Council is the National President. So he is privy to the above information and at least I am yet to see him disclosing or communicating them to the general dues paying Membership of TSA. Lack of such information makes it difficult to understand what the recommendations of the General Council are and how they are sought to be implemented in TSA. Such lack of information may be used by the National Board to hide any well-intentioned zealous misguided impractical implementation. One also may wonder what information is being withheld from general membership and for what reason. It is a great puzzle. The way the whole issue being approached also appears to give cover to the National President and Board of Directors for unpopular and impractical unworkable extreme changes proposed however well motivated they may be. It is an injustice to the International President or General Council or National President or the National Board to be misperceived by the members of TSA due to lack of full disclosure of information. If such potential misperceptions are not promptly and fully corrected by full and immediate disclosure to members the effects are likely to linger for a long time to the detriment of TSA and TS as some of these questions are not going to go away easily. The price paid by TSA in terms of unity and cooperation between members and Wheaton between lodges and Wheaton may be very substantial and may hinder the the cause of Theosophy. It is my humble hope that the National Board of TSA does something and does it quickly before it is too late. With seasons greetings MK Ramadoss PS: As most of the members of the National Board and the International President are not on this newslist I am mailing a copy to them by Snailmail for information. Scribed at 6.00pm 191912 1995 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 13:07:16 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: re: Neo-theosophy/TS On 191412 Ann E. Bermingham wrote >To all members of Theos-l: > >Today I visited the web site of The White Mountain Education Association whose >address was posted by someone on our mailing list. It was referred to as >Neo-theosophy. > >An amalgation of HPB Bailey Sarayadarian and Roerich it seemed to lean more >towards Bailey. I will leave each of you to review the page for yourself >http://www.primenet.com/~wtmtn/index.html but I will say this. While I was >scrolling through the material I got a clear view of it. It was "I've seen >this all before." It was like knowledge was being repackaged and being >distributed through another yet another organization. Good or bad idea? The opening graphics of this website are copied from the Balyos book Three Remarkable Women. I thought that book was a nice easy introduction to the lives of ... well three remarkable women Blavatsky Roerich Bailey. The Bailey influence is prominent as you mentioned. Saraydarian is the most mentioned reference in the suggested reading list and the Agni Yoga teachings Roerich show up most often in the posted summaries of the monthly articles in the White Mountain publications. As to whether or not it is "a good idea" -- that depends. One of the most important IMO ideas being kicked around now on theos-l is What is the mission statement of the TSA? That is literal from one of the earlier posts unanswered I think but it is implied in all of the discussions of the proposed ByLaws changes and the effects they could have on TS future activities. But about good or bad -- while the Theosophical Society in America and elsewhere tries to come to grips with its current purpose and the means to best achieve it "neotheosophy" doesn't seem to have the same problem. All of the neotheosophy "schools" or at least the ones on that website have this in common: the two things which are *most useful* for a person to know are 1 the Constitution of Man and 2 the means for that person to take whatever is for them the next step forward. So if we believe the instructions of Bailey or Saraydarian or Agni Yoga can help an individual or group take a step in the right direction then they are definitely a good idea. If we believe that they are a "dilution" of theosophy or wrong in their emphasis then it's probably a bad thing. For myself I wish there was a stronger section on Blavatsky but then I felt the same way about the book. To be fair there is a homepage for "orthodox" Theosophy; I don't believe there are homepages for either Bailey Lucis Trust Saraydarian or the Agni Yoga Society are there? There is a homepage for World Goodwill [www.oneworld.org/worldgoodwill] which is one of the affiliated Lucis Trust activities but it is an NGO associated with the United Nations and is not itself an organ for the promotion of the Bailey teachings. The World Goodwill website is tied to oneworld.org which is btw one of my favorite sites on the Net. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 13:59:48 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: More Serious Nit Picking Some responses and thoughts to RI: : >Yes Jerry but even I get nervous when I start using terms like *metaphors* >or *analogs* with regard to certain esoteric ideas. Me too. For one thing esoteric ideas can't be put into words very well while metaphors and analogs can. > Take reincarnation for example. Yes. The metaphor is very simple and probably is expressed best in the Gita where the analogy is to putting on a new coat. However all serious practitioners who ask "Who is it that reincarnates?" knows that the metaphor is too simplistic and that a lot more is really going on here. Alan for example doesn't believe in reincarnation. In a way he is correct--i.e. in the Buddhist sense of reincarnation there is no-thing really to incarnate or re-incarnate. A. David-Neel for example says that the highest Lamas do not believe in reincarnation in the popular sense. >No theosophical "metaphors" seem to have a way of slowly and I think >*validly* hypostatizing themselves despite how much one fights against them. Which is exactly why I used the term "archetypal" which I use in the Jungian sense. > Accepting these >colossal theosophical systems in one big fast gulp may be the formula for >passionate desire-mental belief but it is not the recipe for Inner Certainty >about them Right. I discovered this personally when I learned first-hand that a mystical experience is but a first step on the path and not the end at all. The problem is that our experience always tends to validate our beliefs. So our experiences are always somewhat suspect. The Buddha cautioned us to *doubt* and it is by holding a healthy doubt about our experiences that we can slowly develop the inner Certainty that you mentioned. > Something like true conviction about reincarnation does not >arrive fully clothed in glorious raiment and with the fanfare of a royal >parade; rather it is at first dressed in rags and "lurks" quietly but >persistently around the psyche. True. In fact I don't think that we can ever reach inner Certainty about reincarnation until we actually enter the 4th cosmic plane shift identity to the Reincarnating Ego and see our past lives directly i.e. gain magical memory. But even this has problems as I pointed out above--our experiences are always suspect and demand a fair amount of doubt. Not only that but our magical memory is esoteric and the memory of the event after we return to our mundane world is exoteric and already distorted. > Since it will not go away no matter how much >common experience and strict logic is used against it it slowly but >inexorably establishes itself as a theosophical "fact" against which no >argument can henceforth prevail. Because there is a kernel of truth in it--an archetype Jung calls this the archetype of rebirth that breaks into consciousness in all ages and in all countries and peoples. >Yes Jerry there may be many who say they "believe" in more theosophical >ideas than I do but perhaps not so many who are held so fast by a few. . . . Belief is a reflection of worldview and changes accordingly. But when an archetypal idea such as rebirth or the Path becomes constellated breaks out into consciousness in some form it demands to be heard and assimilated. When such constellations occur that are in opposition to our worldview or that challenge our worldview then we are in serious psychological trouble. Jung took the view that this was a major cause of mental illness. The answer is to always remain mentally flexible like a child. Mental inflexibility is a pending death sentence. Actually until we experience these archetypes directly e.g. they are often expressed in our dreams but also in meditation they will remain mere beliefs where we may or may not have an intuitive "feel" for them. Their constellation is usually brought about because of specific imbalances within the psyche such as experience that conflicts with belief. The Self totally integrated psyche and ego form a symbiotic relationship in which the Self sacrifices itself to ego development during the first half of life and then the ego is supposed to sacrifice itself via assimilation with the Self during the second half of life. This is Jung's individuation process and the psyche is seriously handicapped until this assimilation process occurs. This is one of the many advantages of meditation. And we should all watch our dreams closely because dreams are the primary feedback mechanism of the psyche in which the Self feeds back information to the ego to let it know how well it is doing. Thanks for the stimulating conversation Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 13:59:52 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Dark Night of the Soul Lewis: > The idea that it the change in us is a gradual one seems to >contradict other ideas that indicate that enlightenment or awakening >to the next level is a sudden break through in consciousness. I once >heard the analogy of a finger being pressed inside a ballon. The >membrane stretches ever and ever thinner by the constant pressure >but the breakthrough occurs suddendly. Modern science now recognizes this phenomenon under the name of catastrophe theory. The idea has been known for ages as the old saw about "the straw that broke the camel's back" shows. I think that Eldon's response to the above is good and leaves little to be said. In terms of the human mind gaining knowledge through book learning is the slow additive process that will of itself never break through the veil of the abyss. However it is an important step that must be taken and I do not mean to denigrate it. I love reading and studying. But sooner or later as the human mind approaches the abyss it must leap over it and land on the other side--this is of course a beautiful and poetic metaphor of what really is going on. Eldon is right when he says that gradual development preceeds the sudden jump. This idea is also very popular in Zen. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 14:31:31 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Serious Nit Picking ET >We have two extreme views from all-powerful >angels on the one hand to exceptional ordinary people as depicted in >Paul Johnson's books. I'd tend to put them [existing Masters] somewhere in the >middle on the scale. RI Eldon It's dangerous to draw Paul in on my side against you . . . Perhaps if you could list three or four specific concrete things you think an existing Master of your conception would be able to DO as a result of advanced knowledge development etc. that let us say a Jerry Schueler is not able to do it would be helpful in determining whether or not we have something to disagree on. Naturally I am always ready to confer some degree of Adept status on anyone whose meditative or other transcendental practice has enabled him or her to be more successful in life than he or she would have been without it. ET >The reality of something in the world does not depend upon how easy >it is for us to personally validate it. If something is not true unless >a majority of people can readily validate it then much of what we'd >call scientific knowledge would have to be rejected. Many would take >more than a single lifetime to acquire the necessary knowledge to >understand much less experimentally verify the more advanced areas >of science. But science does not become untrue and the more advanced >researchers are not followers of a closed private view about life. > RI But the history of science shows us that most "scientific knowledge" *does* get rejected reformulated or replaced by something better doesn't it? Anyway even advanced researchers have something to SHOW or at least mathematically demonstrate to other advanced researchers. However even if I accepted all of your reasoning on this subject it would still not satisfy me: I would simply like the people within the Theosophical Society who talk so knowledgeably about and sometimes implying intimacy *with* a "Brotherhood" of existing Masters guiding events from behind the scenes etc. to either forthrightly say they have seen heard felt smelled etc. Them "category two" or that have a strong theosophical conviction "category one" about Them. I do not care if the Masters *could* be apprehended in this way or that--only if someone *is* currently apprehending Them in any way at all. If no one is then I vote for this as the subject which the Theosophical Society needs to put itself at the most "official distance" from. It is important to distinguish here however that we are talking about *existing* Masters and not those of H.P.B.'s association. Of the people I have tried to interest in the Society over the years by far the biggest stumbling block has been when they have encountered things like Radha's "calling for the blessings" of Those who continue to guide the Society etc. I have tried to explain that this was just certain people's private belief within the Society etc. but with little success. To the newcomers it seemed like *Existing Masters* was the "official" or at least the most popular view and I may as well have been trying to convince them to join a society based upon Dora's fairies or whatever. Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 16:14:10 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Coherence Coherence I thought you gave an eloquent defense making several good points. I had mistaken you for yet another pseudonym. I thought someone on the list had already id you as Adam. Now I'm not sure if that was to the biblical architype or Adam Warcup. We recently had a communications trainer come speak to our staff. One of the intersting points she brought out was how much body language contributes to communication. Facial expressions hand motions etc. makeup 60% of what we absorb. This medium one could argue is a very poor way to communicate. Putting our most commonly know pseudonym on our correspondence might help those who may know us in person or from other writings which one might expect would improve your chances of actually communicating your ideas. Few here claim to be a pure channel of truth I'm thinking of Daniel our fundamentalist antagonist--but hey if you want to zing a friend here's an opening:. The credit for your brilliant or not so will find you on the inner planes I suspect as I doubt they need any of your pseudonyms to find you! Lewis aka Luke aka Dad aka Buttknocker... llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 16:32:49 GMT From: "Lewis Lucas" Subject: Re: Dark Night of the Soul > > I mentioned that if there is sufficient experience of the higher > principles there is no "dark night" when one shifts away from the > lower. I am not familiar with other writers who expouse this idea. Could you share some reference? I thought it was a step in the rungs of the ladder so to speak which was universally experienced--similar to the Dweller on the threshold idea. Sounds more like wishful thinking to me. It would be nice if we could advance without the tests the fire which tempers the steel or would it? Lewis llucas@mercury.gc.peachnet.edu From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 20:42:06 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Re:Christmas Card-Lifting Veils Ann B. submitted this interesing commentary: "That which is a mystery shall no longer be so and that which has been veiled will now be revealed; that which has been withdrawn will emerge into the light and all men shall see and together they shall rejoice." - Old Commentary When people used to talk about veils I couldn't imagine what they meant except in a poetic figurative way. Now when I reflect on my consciousness as in the beginning of meditation I sense varioius inner rooms opening. When I am tired or have a headache I am literally up against a brick wall. My inner eye is frustrated with an ugly painful view. But when I center relax breathe etc it is as if people are moving scenery on a stage or elevator doors or opening and closing to reveal at certain times large expansive light-filled vistas. In this season we are told the light will come and merry gentlemen shall rejoice with the coming of the Light and the Word. I propose to those that may be interested a group meditation or reflection at the time of the ingress of the sun into Capricorn the night of the solstice. On the morning of Dec. 22 at 02:00AM Grenwich time 8:00 AM approximately in the USA the sun will ingress. Six hours later the Moon will ingress into Capricorn as the new moon. The Alice Bailey groups meditate at the time of the full moon. The moon is supposed to be out of the way of the sun. However the new moon is often seen as a begiinning of a cycle. Perhaps the veils will be lifted around this time and new energies will be provided to consciousnesses that are listening. Perhaps nothing at all will happen for some. Perhaps the Solstice day itself will provide a point of reflection and new beginnings. For those asleep dreams may bring messages for the coming new year! It is interesting that we mention "Isis Unveiled" hardly at all on this news group or rather rarely in other theosphical circles. From my sketchy knowledge in this earlier work she attempts to contrast relgious thinking concerning a personal God as opposed to the older Western traditions of the Goddess of the Moon as personification of the ancient wisdom man am I showing my ignorance here!. She mentions karma reincarnation Buddhism maya and all the Eastern Esoteric vocabulary very little if at all. The idea of the Masters had not been formulated either. The quantum leap to "The Secret Doctrine" shows that more than a few veils were left to be lifted. Those that are skeptical might see the hands of many of K. Paul's all-too-human Masters at work on the thought of HPB at this time. Isis-the moon in conjuction with Osiris-the sun will give birth to Horus the divine child as symbols of evolution of consciousness. Namste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 19 Dec 1996 23:17:43 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Internet/TAFs Here is a very interesting excerpt from Upside Magazine 1/96 Issue Right in the focal point of this new juggernaut is a group called Technologically Advanced Families TAFs which my firm the Yankee Group has been studying for 10 years. This group which consists of around 14.5 million U.S. families is already accessing AOL Prodigy and Compuserve. They were first in line for Windows 95 and they believe the Internet is the most potent force in the damn universe. This is a group that defines itself by its familiarity with technology and whose influence and clout is much greater than its percentage of the population would imply. Ask Intel about the role the TAFs played in the Pentium debacle. They stormed the chat lines and forced a major corporation to capitulate or face the wrath of an angry -- and interconnected -- cadre. MKR comment: If you look at the past it is some of the extra ordinary individuals and small groups of individuals who have have impacted progress. The TAFs quote above seem to show us a way. There is a great potential for us here to contribute to Theosophy via the Internet. Any comments? ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 00:33:06 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Uranus in Aquarius Actually public transporation is a rather bad analogy as it places the individual in an unacceptable position of dependence on the schedules of the services in question. The internet is more like a car than the postal service. It gives the individual the freedom to maneuver in ways that previous methods of communication did not. And once home virtual reality set-ups are practical with modems that can handle them it will be possible to have meetings inside cyberspace without having to physically travel to them at all. Chuck Cosimano From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 00:33:52 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic Here are a few questions that have puzzled me over the years and I put them out that they may puzzle you as well. While I have my own opinions on these I will withhold them for the moment and see what kind of answers if any are forthcoming. 1. Was the Buddha really enlightened or was he merely some nut with a good press agent? 2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social control? 3. Did the Masters tell the truth in their letters? 4. How much of Theosophy is a reflection of the culture of its founders? 5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should they? Have fun. Chuck Cosimano From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 01:00:41 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Returns of Christ > If we define the Christ as an archetype > of the collective unconscious it seems fair to say that He/It > *has* returned *through* all the movements mentioned above. > Returned in many new forms and with conflicting messages. Jesus in the gospel accounts also gives conflicting messages! At one point he is quoted as saying he has come only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel and elsewhere accepts gentiles into his following. I guess God's son is just confused in whatever guise we find him. Should have had a daughter if you ask me which you probably don't. :- Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 01:04:57 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Coherence > > I am Gregory D. Hoskins says boldly beats chest > > A Rose by any other name smells as sweet or something to that effect. . . . The point is brother Gregory if I may be so bold that your alleged pseudonym did not conceal the identity listed in the review of theos-l though from the listing one receives it would appear that anonymity is possible if anyone wants it. I always keep a copy of the entire subscribed list 100% unconcealed at last retrieval as I occasionally need the e-mail address of folks whose postings I have not retained. That you chose or choose to use "Coherence" on the list is fair enough but you might like to consider the idea that for example I would not want to send a message saying "Happy Christmas" or whatever to an adverb? Peace and goodwill etc. :- Alan ["Perspicacity"] Bain -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 03:39:25 GMT From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins Subject: re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic Chuck Here are my own answers to your questions: >1. Was the Buddha really enlightened or was he merely some nut >with a good press agent? Probably an unanswerable question but it doesn't matter to me anyway. The Buddha prescribed a way for us to live. For me the more relevant question would be whether or not those who live according to the Buddha's teachings find their lives to be better in some way and if the world is made better by living according to those precepts. 2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social control? I've only seen it used as a social control on two occasions. Once when I walked into a shop in Los Angeles that sold occult supplies. A sign above the counter said: "Shoplifting plays hell on your karma." The other is among some neo-theosophists I know who after stabbing people in the back remind them that it is their karma that put the knife there. The implication being: "Next time play our game and you won't get hurt." More often among the new age crowd I have seen it used as a cop out to avoid responsibility for one's self and others. "It was my karma to be born in these circumstances--so there is nothing to do but to suffer for it" or "Nothing I can do about it--it's your bad karma that you are in this situation." Personally I experience karma as an observable reality: that is--my environment responds to my presence--for better or worse. As for the pop version of karma i.e. "You are in this mess because you did the same thing to that person in your last life"--I don't believe in it. 3. Did the Masters tell the truth in their letters? Did you catch them in a lie? I always assume others are telling the truth according to the limits of their understanding of course unless I have evidence to the contrary. 4. How much of Theosophy is a reflection of the culture of its founders? Any idea must be expressed in terms of the culture to be meaningful. Theosophy is a very Indo-European expression in spite of its occasional references to non-Indo-European religion. Consequently Indo-European cultures seem to be the extent of its influence. For instance theosophy became popular in India Europe and the Latin countries but never really caught on in say Japan or China. Neo-theosophy is even more specifically cultural--with very Christo-European overtones. 5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should they? I care about rounds and chains and teach them. The doctrine when properly understood forces the student to abandon linear thinking. Whether or not the doctrine is "true" is less important to me than the perceptive skills one develops through their study. Jerry HE ------------------------------------------|Jerry Hejka-Ekins ||Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu ||and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org |------------------------------------------ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 05:39:57 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Re: 90s pub stats by language According to Christopher Buck: > > Dear Paul: > > Thanks for your interesting and instructive bibliographic posts. > They complement Seena Fazel's citation studies. > > For us neophytes could you tell us how one accesses the OCLC database? Not all libraries offer public access to it; it is very rare to find a terminal in a public library other than for staff use. But I have seen public access terminals at Duke and have had a friend at Colgate talk about having the same at that university. Note that OCLC is the company which provides its database through regional networks like SOLINET but also directly through its FirstSearch online service which includes a public access catalog called WorldCat. That may be the form in which you would be most likely to find it. Sorry I'm ignorant of Canadian circumstances but I bet somewhere in the Ottawa area is access to OCLC in some form. National Library perhaps? Perhaps Bill Collins can advise. Now what was that about Seena Fazel's citation study? What did he find? Cheers PJ From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 05:42:59 GMT From: MGRAYE@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: Johnson's thesis on Morya and Koot Hoomi ADDENDUM TO PART IV JOHNSON'S THESIS CONCERNING THE MASTERS MORYA AND KOOT HOOMI By Daniel H. Caldwell "In all about nine or ten persons testified to having seen the Mahatmas: Annie Besant Henry Olcott Damodar Mavalankar Isabel Cooper-Oakley William Brown Nadyezhda Fadeyev S.R. Ramaswamier Justine Glinka and Vsevolod Solovyov. Franz Hartmann said that while he never actually saw them he felt their presence." = Marion Meade in her biography MADAME BLAVATSKY THE WOMAN BEHIND THE MYTH 1980 p. 497. I remember reading this statement by Ms. Meade some fifteen years ago and exclaiming to myself "Oh Marion Meade you haven't done your homework!" Off the top of my head I could count *at least* twenty-five people who testified to having seen the Mahatmas during H.P.B.'s lifetime. = And despite Meade's statement to the contrary Hartmann had testified that he had also actually seen one of the Mahatmas. Apparently Ms. Meade had never carefully read even two of the titles listed in her own bibliography: Geoffrey Barborka's THE MAHATMAS AND THEIR LETTERS 1973 and Franz Hartmann's REPORT OF OBSERVATIONS etc. 1884; both titles prove Meade didn't know what she was writing about concerning Hartmann. It is a historical fact that more than twenty five people testified to having seen the Mahatmas during H.P.B.'s lifetime. Whether these testimonies are true or not of course is another question and issue. But how does Paul Johnson in his three major books handle these testimonies? We have already seen in Part IV of this series that Johnson uses a "double standard" in assessing the evidence of some of these testimonies. = In reply to my criticism that Johnson ignored certain testimonies of Olcott's encounters with the Master Morya Johnson asserted a "higher" standard of evidence that he felt should be met. Yet within his own published writings Johnson uses a *lower* standard and accepts "at face value" at least four accounts by Olcott. It was my contention in Part IV that by Johnson's own use of this lower standard the other accounts by Olcott of meeting the Master Morya in Bombay and elsewhere should also be accepted at face value. As I related in Part IV Johnson devotes pp. 59-62 of THE MASTERS REVEALED to Henry Olcott's 1875-76 meeting with Ooton Liatto and another unnamed Adept. To refresh the reader's memory I quote again some relevant extracts from Olcott's letter: "...I was reading in my room yesterday Sunday when there came a tap at the door---I said `come in' and there entered the [younger] Bro[ther] with another dark skinned gentleman of about fifty....[Then Olcott relates that a rain shower started in the room. Olcott continues the account:]...the younger of the two...gave me his name as Ooton Liatto....I asked Liatto if he knew Madam B[lavatsky]....I ran downstairs---rushed into Madams parlour---and---there sat these same two identical men smoking with her and chatting....I said nothing but rushed up stairs again tore open my door and---the men were not there---I ran down again they had disappeared---I...looked out the window---and saw them turning the corner...." In summarizing this account Johnson writes: "The names Ooton Liatto and Hilarion Smerdis have been equally impossible to find in biographical and historical reference books. While both may be pseudonyms *there is little doubt that two real adepts visited Olcott in New York.*" p. 62 Asterisks added. = From his own words we see that Johnson accepts the accuracy and truthfulness of Olcott's account and also believes that two *real* adepts visited Olcott in New York. Johnson makes these admissions although he concedes that the two names [Hilarion and Ooton Liatto] were *not* located in any biographical and historical reference books; hence both names "may be pseudonyms." = Johnson also accepts Olcott's account literally and at face value even though there is only Olcott's testimony to confirm the account. I should tell the reader that I also agree with Johnson's estimation of Olcott's account. In light of Johnson's *own criteria and standards* as evidenced in this Ooton Liatto incident and the other three accounts discussed in Part IV I submit to interested readers for their thoughtful consideration and analysis the following incidents involving the Master Morya: a In a letter dated Sept. 30 1881 Olcott relates what had happened just three days before: "...on the night of that day [Sept. 27th 1881] I was awakened from sleep by my *Chohan* or Guru the Brother [Morya] whose immediate pupil I am....He made me rise sit at my table and write from his dictation for an hour or more. There was an expression of anxiety mingled with sternness on his noble face as there always is when the matter concerns H.P.B. to whom for many years he has been at once a father and a devoted guardian." Colonel Olcott was at that time in Columbo Ceylon. Is this Brother dictating to Olcott to be equated with Johnson's "fictitious Tibetan persona"? Or is this Brother dictating to Olcott to be equated with a *real* Mahatma similar to the *real* adept Ootoo Liatoo whom Johnson is willing to believe visited Olcott in New York? In the Mahatma Letters near the end of Letter 29 in the 2nd and 3rd editions Morya himself refers to *this same visit* to Olcott in these words: = "O[lcott]'s memo...was written on the 27th [of Sept. 1881]....K.H. thought of asking me to go and tell O[lcott] to do so....At the same time as I delivered my message to O[lcott] I satisfied his curiosity as to your [Sinnett's Simla Theosophical] Society and told [Olcott] what I thought of it. O[lcott] asked my permission to send to you these notes which I accorded...." b In his handwritten diary for Jan. 29 1882 Bombay India Colonel Olcott writes this brief account: "M [orya] showed himself very clearly to me & HPB in her garden....she joining him they talked together...." Using Johnson's own "Ootoo Liatoo" criteria could we not accept this account at face value as evidence of the Master Morya visiting Olcott and HPB at Bombay T.S. headquarters? = c The following is a joint statement by seven people including Olcott: "We were sitting together in the moonlight about 09 o'clock upon the balcony which projects from the front of the bungalow. Mr. Scott was sitting facing the house so as to look through the intervening verandah and the library and into the room at the further side. This latter apartment was brilliantly lighted. The library was in partial darkness thus rendering objects in the farther room more distinct. Mr. Scott suddenly saw the figure of a man step into the space opposite the door of the library; he was clad in the white dress of a Rajput and wore a white turban. Mr. Scott at once recognized him from his resemblance to a portrait [of Morya] in Col. Olcott's possession. Our attention was then drawn to him and we all saw him most distinctly. He walked towards a table and afterwards turning his face towards us walked back out of our sight...when we reached the room he was gone....Upon the table at the spot where he had been standing lay a letter addressed to one of our number. The handwriting was identical with that of sundry notes and letters previously received from him....:" The statement is signed by =00 "Ross Scott Minnie J.B. Scott H.S. Olcott H.P. Blavatsky M. Moorad Ali Beg Damodar K. Mavalankar and Blavani Shankar Ganesh Mullapoorkar." *In this case we have not only Olcott's account but testimony by six other people.* Compare this with the Ooton Liatto account. From Olcott's own handwritten diary for Jan. 05 1882 I quote extracts never before published and now transmitted on the Internet around the world! concerning this event witnessed by the above-named seven individuals: "Evening. Moonlight. On balcony HPB Self Scott & wife Damodar....[etc]...M[orya] appeared in my office. First seen by Scott then me....Scott clearly saw M's face....M left note for me on table in office by which he stood...." To summarize the significance of these three accounts a b and c we can paraphrase Johnson's own summary of the Ooton Liatto account: "The names M and Morya have been equally impossible to find in biographical and historical reference books of 19th century people. While both may be pseudonyms there is little doubt that a real Mahatma visited Olcott and others in Colombo and Bombay." This is my estimation of these three accounts. Since I am using Johnson's own "Ootto Liatto" criteria to assess the evidence would Johnson also agree with my estimation of these three accounts? I ask interested readers who are willing to carefully analyze and think through these issues: What light do these three accounts shed on Johnson's hypothesis concerning the Morya persona? Can a merely "fictitious Tibetan persona" be walking around and interacting with Olcott as well as seen by six other witnesses? Furthermore can the Mahatma Morya in these three accounts be identified with Ranbir Singh? = Is it plausible that the Maharajah of Kashmir was in Bombay and Columbo on these dates? *I would suggest that these three accounts are simply more evidence showing the implausibility and improbability of Johnson's hypothesis on Ranbir Singh/Morya. It is my opinion that these accounts and other similar accounts indicate that Johnson's Ranbir hypothesis doesn't even begin to address and account for much of the Theosophical evidence/testimony concerning Morya etc.* = I believe that the evidence I have adduced in Part IV and in this Addendum help to support the validity of Dr. Algeo's following observation: "The parallels between Ranbir Singh and Morya are *exceedingly tenuous*....There is no evidence that Ranbir was in fact the model for Morya's virtues or *anything else* in connection with him." Asterisks added. Let us now turn to S. Ramawamier's account of meeting the Mahatma Morya in Sikkim. Johnson deals with Ramswamier's account on pp. 25-30 of *Initiates of Theosophical Masters* SUNY 1995. This account is a rehash of what Johnson had previously written on pp. 246-249 of his 1990 IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS. Johnson writes: "S. Ramabadra Ramaswamier was a clerk from Tinevely in South India on leave after a nervous breakdown. Following HPB on her travels on Oct 05 he allegedly went from Darjeeling into Sikkim and penetrated twenty miles beyond the border where he claimed to have met the Master M...." I give an excerpt from Ramaswamier's account Oct 1882: "...I suddenly saw a solitary horseman galloping towards me from the opposite direction. From his tall stature and the expert way he managed the animal I thought he was some military officer of the Sikkim Raja...But as he approached me he reined the steed. I looked at and recognized him instantly...I was in the awful presence of...my own revered *Guru* [Morya]...The very same instant saw me prostrated on the ground at his feet. I arose at his command....He wears a short black beard and long black hair hanging down to his breast...He wore a yellow mantle lined with fur and on his head...a yellow Tibetan felt cap...I had a long talk with him. He told me to go no further for I would come to grief. He said I should wait patiently if I wanted to become an accepted *Chela*...Before he left two more men came on horseback his attendants I suppose probably *Chelas for they were dressed...like himself with long hair streaming down their backs. They followed the Mahatma as he left at a gentle trot...." What are Johnson's comments on this account by Ramaswamier? In his 1990 book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS p. 247 Johnson writes: "The height and horsemanship are reminiscent of Ranbir Singh [maharajah of Kashmir] one prototype for Master M. *But what could he have been doing in Sikkim?* [Asterisks added.] Not only does this tale distract the reader from the geographical circumstances [Kashmir?] of the real M. [Ranbir Singh] it also makes him seem someone who can wander at will and has no obligations at home." This passage is deleted from the account in Johnson's newest book. But let us reflect on Johnson's remarks. "But what could he [the Maharajah of Kashmir] have been doing in Sikkim?" Looking at a map of India the reader will notice that Sikkim is located on the far northeastern side of India while Kashmir is located on the far northwestern side. Yes I agree IF the "real M" is Ranbir Singh Ramaswamier's account is hard to take at face value. Obviously Ranbir Singh has obligations at home as monarch of his kingdom and cannot wander at will! Therefore it is not surprising to me that Johnson tries to invalidate Ramaswamier's account. Why? One reason could be: If one accepts Ramaswamier's account *at face value* then this account can be considered another piece of evidence *against* Johnson's hypothesis concerning Ranbir Singh/Morya. I would suspect that if Ramaswamier's encounter had taken place in the vicinity of Ranbir's palace in Kashmir Johnson would have used the account to support his Ranbir hypothesis. Johnson's explanation in *Initiates of Theosophical Masters* is as follows: "Blavatsky's biographer Marion Meade interprets this as the hallucination of a madman rather than a role played under direction of real Masters. Ramaswamier's account is indeed inherently preposterous [why?] but a closer look [by Johnson] reveals it to have been inspired by HPB and her Masters....After Ramaswamier's death in 1893 one of his sons published the letters he received from the Masters intending them as proof that his father had been deceived by HPB. The eloquence of Ramaswamier's report [about meeting Master Morya] raises the question of how much of it HPB may have written for him. That an elaborate scheme of deception was indeed being engineered is apparent from these letters...which suggest a conspiracy to prove the Masters' existence." = In other words Johnson believes that Ramaswamier was neither a victim of hallucinations or a dupe of HPB's confederates as Richard Hodgson had suggested but that Ramaswamier was a co-conspirator with HPB. In other words he lied about meeting Morya in Sikkim; and HPB probably wrote his account! In passages not found in Johnson's newest book but to be found in his earlier 1990 work Johnson adds these details: "...it seems clear [to Johnson at least] that HPB had found in Ramaswamier a willing accomplice. The goal of the operation was to distract attention from the Punjab and Kashmir so as to confuse observers intent on finding the Mahatmas....It is impossible to tell from these passages [in M.'s letters to Ramaswamier] whether Ramaswamier was deceived in Sikkim by a bogus Mahatma or whether he was a willing partner in the deception. = The latter seems much more likely in light of the peculiar aspects of his story involving the Master's voice and coincidental meetings...." p. 246 & 249. = Concerning Johnson's reference to "peculiar aspects" like "the Master's voice" heard by Ramaswamier I could quote from similar accounts by Olcott in which Olcott said he also heard "the Master's voice" when the Master was not to be seen. Does this mean that Olcott can also be considered an accomplice? Is Johnson willing to label Olcott as a liar and accomplice of HPB's? In the above extract Johnson writes: "The goal of the operation was to distract attention from the Punjab and Kashmir so as to confuse observers intent on finding the Mahatmas...." This is of course *Johnson's own interpretation* of the events in order to safeguard his hypotheses on M. and K.H. As I said in Part IV Johnson will quote information from various sources in support of his hypotheses but if information even in the same document negates his hypotheses Johnson will discount the latter information and label it as "disinformation." By this method one could prove almost anything. The reader of Johnson's books may not be aware that S. Ramaswamier whom Johnson would like to believe is a confederate of H.P.B.'s also testified that he saw the Master Morya at Bombay T.S. headquarters on Dec. 28 1881. Henry Olcott was also a witness to this encounter and writes to A.O. Hume as follows: "I am glad to be able to send you the testimony of still another witness who has seen my *Chohan* [Morya] and under most favourable circumstances....I never saw the Brother looking more splendid than he did to-night in the bright moonlight. Mr. R[amaswamier] is a Brahman of the highest caste his brother or cousin is I believe chief priest to the Maharajah of Travancore and he is intensely interested in Occultism." Olcott's letter is dated the same day Dec. 28 1881. Attached to this letter is an account signed by H.S. Olcott Damodar K. Mavalankar and S. Ramaswamier testifying that they had seen "a man upon the balcony...leaning against the balustrade and with the moolight shining full upon him. He was dressed in white and wore a white Fehta [turban] on his head. His beard was black and his long black hair hung to his breast. Olcott and Damodar at once recognized him as the `Illustrious.' [Morya] He raised his hand and dropped a letter to us. = Olcott jumped from the carriage and recovered it....It was a message to Ramaswamier in reply to a letter in a closed envelope which he had written to the Brother a short time before we went out for the ride...." Was Ramaswamier an accomplice of HPB's in this account too? Maybe Olcott and Damodar were also confederates of HPB and the three of them lied about this event? If Johnson can attempt to convict Ramaswamier of giving false testimony lying then why not include Olcott and Damodar too? Turning to another matter remember some of Johnson's comments on Ramaswamier's meeting with = Morya in Sikkim? In his 1990 book IN SEARCH OF THE MASTERS p. 247 Johnson wrote: "The height and horsemanship are reminiscent of Ranbir Singh [maharajah of Kashmir] one prototype for Master M. But what could he have been doing in Sikkim? Not only does this tale distract the reader from the geographical circumstances [Kashmir] of the real M. [Ranbir Singh] it also makes him seem someone who can wander at will and has no obligations at home." Could not one paraphrase Johnson's comments and apply them to Ramaswamier's Olcott's and Damodar's account of Dec. 28 1881? as follows: "The height and turban are reminiscent of Ranbir Singh. But what could he have been doing in Bombay? Not only does this tale distract the reader from the geographical circumstances of the real M. it also makes him seem someone who can wander at will and has no obligations at home." And such remarks could be said of all of Morya's appearances to Olcott and others at Bombay. If Johnson is willing to accuse Ramaswamier who had known HPB for only a year or so of being an accomplice and liar is Johnson willing to accuse Olcott who had known HPB for some seven years and had a vested longtime interest in HPB's work etc. of being an accomplice and liar too? = *And if Olcott can be considered an accomplice and liar of HPB's what non-theosophical reader and scholar would be foolish enough to accept the four accounts of Olcott mentioned in my Part IV and accepted by Paul Johnson at face value as evidence of real adepts and masters?* If it is true that Dr. Gregory Tillett and Dr. David Christopher Lane has changed their opinions from one of believing HPB's Masters were entirely fictional to another opinion approximating Johnson's thesis concerning M. and K.H. then I would urge them to reconsider their new found perspectives. In light of what I have said in this series of articles it might be better for both of these scholars to return to their former positions. I again ask readers who are willing to carefully analyze and think through these issues: What light do these firsthand accounts shed on Johnson's hypothesis concerning the Morya persona? Can a merely "fictitious Tibetan persona" be walking around and interacting with Olcott Ramaswamirer Damodar? Furthermore can the Mahatma Morya in these accounts be identified with Ranbir Singh? Is it plausible that the Maharajah of Kashmir was in Bombay and Sikkim on these dates? I would suggest that these accounts are simply MORE EVIDENCE showing the implausibility and improbability of Johnson's hypothesis on Ranbir Singh/Morya. It is my opinion that these accounts and other similar accounts indicate that Johnson's Ranbir hypothesis doesn't even begin to address and account for much of the Theosophical evidence/testimony concerning Morya etc. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 05:44:40 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Uranus in Aquarius Chuck Cosimano: >Actually public transporation is a rather bad analogy as it places the >individual in an unacceptable position of dependence on the schedules of the >services in question. The internet is more like a car than the postal >service. It gives the individual the freedom to maneuver in ways that >previous methods of communication did not. And once home virtual reality >set-ups are practical with modems that can handle them it will be possible >to have meetings inside cyberspace without having to physically travel to >them at all. Hmm. I was using public trans because I was thinking of the "group" something that is connected with the sign of Aquarius. From your description perhaps it would be more like the transporter or holodeck on the Star Trek series. - Ann E. Bermingham PS BTW Chuck do live in the Chicago area? Your name seems very familiar to me. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 06:08:44 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Lifting veils Keith: >In this season we are told the light will come and merry gentlemen shall rejoice >with the coming of the Light and the Word. I propose to those that may be >interested a group meditation or reflection at the time of the ingress of the >sun into Capricorn the night of the solstice. On the morning of Dec. >22 at 02:00AM Grenwich time 8:00 AM approximately in the USA the sun will >ingress. Six hours later the Moon will ingress into Capricorn as the new moon. According to my astro-program the will move into Capricorn according to this US schedule: !:30 AM EST 023000 AM CST 3:30 AM MST 4:30 AM -0800 This schedule is based on the being 00 degree 01 min in Capricorn in Chicago. The Moon will be 03 degrees 40 min in Capricorn. Also in Capricorn will be Mercury Mars Neptune and Uranus. I wish I knew how to translate this into international hours. How would we handle a international theos-l meditation? - Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 06:47:53 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Anonymity In answer to Coherence's questions: 1 Do you think the energy flow will really change? I think it already has with your response and JRC's comments inspired by it. 2 Why was it so important to know... Didn't say it was *so* important; just asked if you'd mind revealing yourself. 3 Was this a correct ethical move? for Doss I think it was to get your name from the list Note that your post addresses "you" and it's unclear how much you mean that singularly to me; in this case it wasn't my ethical move. In the circumstances what Doss did was simply to post information that was easily accessible; if you had really wanted anonymity it need not have been so. Sorry if you feel violated but I think JRC has answered this one already. 4 What is you would have discovered something you would have rather NOT known? Well my only strategy was to ask if you would reveal your identity. Not sure what Doss or others might have discovered about anyone that we would rather not know-- any clues to offer? About your bet-- No I didn't hunt for Christmas presents or shake them because I enjoyed the anticipation. Sometimes mystery enhances things but not IMO in this forum. As for your being condescending I can only ask others for feedback in that regard. Your remarks about our political discussion about the Adyar TS in general about my post on Edgar Cayce best laugh in a long time about the sad state of most Theosophists on theos-l etc. etc. do come across as condescending. In 1958 Pierce Spinks in his Theosophists Reunite! accused ULT of acting like the Brahmins of Theosophy who look down on the rest of us. There is a collective personality in ULT that does indeed come across as condescending. I've participated in intergroup events at least twice at which the Pasadena and Adyar people were entirely loose and interchangeably friendly but the ULT people were distinctly closed off and superior-acting. This in the East; I think cooperation has worked better in California based on events I've attended there. In any event my point was to invite you to relax the "ULT spokesperson" persona and just be ordinary folks like the rest of us. I apologize for doing so in a way that offended you. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 07:10:32 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: your mail On 20 199512 liesel f. deutsch wrote: > To: Lewis Lucas > > beg to differ re the internet being a poor communications medium. I know I > cant' see you folks but talking to you on the internet beats not talking to > any Theosophists at all which is what I had before I begged borrowed & > didn't steal money to get me a computer. I'm accepting whatever "face" > anyone shows me on the internet without worrying too much about what other > faces they might present in person. > > Liesel Very few people know that you DO NOT need an expensive fast computer to user Internet unless you want to see all the nice graphics. It will run on an XT and all you need is a communication program. Of course a fast modem will help. I hope computer people get this across to potential Internet/e-mail users. I got on internet when a friend told me that she started with a 286 and graduated to a 386. But I started with a XT clone and I use both the XT clone and the 386 to access Internet. ...doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 08:36:40 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic >Here are a few questions that have puzzled me over the years and I put them >out that they may puzzle you as well. While I have my own opinions on these >I will withhold them for the moment and see what kind of answers if any are >forthcoming. >1. Was the Buddha really enlightened or was he merely some nut with a good >press agent? LFD Do you suppose his press agent was Miguel de Cervantes? >2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social control? LFD Karma might be a useful means but to me it gives a framework to live by. To me karma represents freedom rather than control because if I know the laws of the universe I don't unknowingly butt against them all the time but can maneuver with them and/or around them to acomplish my goal. It doesn't matter much to me whether it's real or not I find it a useful tool for the purposes stated above. >3. Did the Masters tell the truth in their letters? Here again I don't really care whether they told the truth or made it all up. I absorb whatever I find useful & leave the rest ie to me usefulness matters a lot more than truthfulness. >4. How much of Theosophy is a reflection of the culture of its founders? I'm beginning to wonder about that. I was reading around in HPB's writings the other day & came across this passage which began by HPB excusing herself for having to write about "indelicate" things but she found it necessary. In my imagination I thought I was getting into a juicy morsel about the theosophical sex life. Instead HPB gave a description of a foetus developing in utero. That was considered "indelicate" in her days. I know. I took "American Women's History" a few years ago. >5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should >they? I shouldn't. They bore me. >Have fun. >Chuck Cosimano > I did. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 08:45:24 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Internet/TAFs > >MKR comment: > > If you look at the past it is some of the extra ordinary individuals and >small groups of individuals who have have impacted progress. The TAFs quote >above seem to show us a way. There is a great potential for us here to >contribute to Theosophy via the Internet. > > Any comments? > > ...doss > Doss I think we've already begun to do this. We started out as individuals from the various factions & we've gotten to be a fairly cohesive group. I think some of our discussion have been really fruitful ... like for instance the one a while ago about karma. Also I've made several new friends whom I value. What I miss in all this is that we who know more or less what theosophy is all about are batting various subjects back & forth. There isn't anything much for a beginner & I think that's sorely needed. We need more members. We have I think a good doctrine to live by but we're not making a tremendous effort to let other people know about it. There should be a sub Theos list for basic Theosophy run by someone who knows how to do it or a group taking turns. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 08:51:10 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: (none) To: Lewis Lucas beg to differ re the internet being a poor communications medium. I know I cant' see you folks but talking to you on the internet beats not talking to any Theosophists at all which is what I had before I begged borrowed & didn't steal money to get me a computer. I'm accepting whatever "face" anyone shows me on the internet without worrying too much about what other faces they might present in person. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 10:20:48 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: New Web Pages For those of you who are Alice Bailey fans or merely curious here are two web addresses for offshoots of her group. The second is still being worked on but looks interesting. Here my enthusiasm for the internet rivals that of Ramadoss. http://www.oneworld.org/worldgoodwill http://emporium.turnpike.net/N/ngws Happy Surfing! Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 10:34:08 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: trust problem Yesterday both Eldon & Doss wrote something about the debate over the by laws revisions & I'd like to respond to some of it. ET "I've been wondering what we should do about things" LFD me too ET ...if the TSA....changes its by laws could it be...shut down by Rhada?" LFD I think it could & I don't see any rhyme nor reason to the shut downs in the past except maybe that following Alice Bailey offends. But that's conjecture. I'd like to get an answer to this from someone in Wheaton. ET you talk about "if we want more independence..." I'm not sure as to how much independence from Adyar we actually have. LFD ET Re believing anything you want vs. teaching The Doctrine. LFD I think both have their place. I think we should all study Basic Theosophy to begin with so that we know what our doctrines are. But then Theosophy is so wide & varied that we should become "a seeker's club" with everyone pursuing whatever wrinkle interests him/her at the time. I know that for me my interest wasn't always in 01 particular subject matter. Once it was Geoffrey Hodson once it was Zen Buddhism a la Xmas Humphreys then again I came across Lama Govinda and AB and CWL and Harry and Serge Sri Ram & Jinarajadasa and biofeedback & chaos theory & trying to help 3rd world families & taking care of my theosophical cats & learning vegetarian & chanting & Celts... the list is endless. That's what fascinates me about Theosophy... but the infighting doesn't. ET "...Positive suggestions for changes in Wheaton's policies..." etc. LFD I think John Algeo has introduced a number of changes in policy for the better. Ex.: When Dorothy presided we were just informed that there were by laws changes. Under John The by laws were published. We were asked to vote on the revisions even though discussion was painfully brief. From the letters John sent subsequent to some of the protests he's listening. I think he really truly believes that these revisions are for the good of the TS. The thing is he's inherited an aura of distrust which is hard to dispel. Like I think I should know & not have to ask whether Radha can shut us down & how independent we are of Adyar. After all I've been a member for not quite 20 years & I've had contact with the TS for 15 more years beyond that. How come these things aren't common knowledge? Seems to me I also remember that what happens at Board meetings is kept secret as well. If so I'd like to know what for. I think John Algeo has written articles several times which gave us insights into what goes on in Wheaton. One article in the AT gave a picture of what everyone on the Wheaton staff does & I thought that was informative. When I asked for an index of available video & audio tapes recording lectures & workshops at Wheaton & Ojai I got back a thick list. There's skads of useful material. Well I think there's got to be a lot more of this kind of interchange to dispel the aura of distrust that's been created. I also think that people in the office of the National Secretary could be a little less stand offish especially since they're an important point of contact for any new members. I've had some weird exchanges with them in connection with my new Study Center that I'm trying hard to make a go of. Doss you raise the question as to what the relationship is between the General Council the International President and our national officers. Who's calling the shots? I think that's a good question. You'd also like some more backgrounds info on the revisions in order to be able to vote on them intelligently. I think that's a good request. On some of those revisions I voted "No" because I wasn't very clear on what they actually meant. You talk about unity & cooperation. My greatest objection to all these goings on is that after John Algeoall along was mending fences & we were beginning to forget the big fight we had over Bing's elections here whamo bango comes something else to cause a rift. We need another rift like we need a hole in the head but maybe it's too late for that already. OK that's a couple of suggestions. I think there needs to be a build up of basic trust which used to be there under Dora but has eroded since then. As for our relationship with Adyar... I don't know. I've never been there. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 11:11:14 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: delivery workaround/problems >John ... > Does the command go to or ? > ^^^^ ^^^^ > -JRC either. There are aliases set up for both so it doesn't matter. peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 11:19:25 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members I also received the letter. It was postmarked 191212 and was mailed in a #10 envelope. The envelope was specially printed for this mailout as is obvious from the message that was printed on the lower left bottom of the envelope which reads: Message Impacting The Society's Future Please Open Immediately Hope every member has received it. ...doss On 20 199512 John E. Mead wrote: > > >> > >>p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA > members > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ^^^^^ > >>regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > > I have not received it yet. If you or any one else who has received it can > >post it here it would help if the letter is not too long. > > > > > > you should have received it by now. Mine was dated on Dec. 06 but mailed > on Dec. 12. > > I find it weird that TSA wasn't sure of what letter was being referred to. > > peace - > > john mead > > p.s. I've been off-line a coule days got busy with other things. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 11:53:28 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members >> >>p.s. I just received a letter from Dr. Algeo which was sent to all TSA members >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ >>regarding the By-laws change. This is itself rather interesting. :- >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > I have not received it yet. If you or any one else who has received it can >post it here it would help if the letter is not too long. > you should have received it by now. Mine was dated on Dec. 06 but mailed on Dec. 12. I find it weird that TSA wasn't sure of what letter was being referred to. peace - john mead p.s. I've been off-line a coule days got busy with other things. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 12:35:26 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: TS Bylaws > In re-reading the bylaws revisions there are three underlying yet >related factors cited when dealing with the substantial and fundamental >changes proposed. The are 01 General Council of TS has asked that certain >features be incorporated into all national rules 02 Requests by General >Council 03 To comply with international rules/regulations 04 >International President has recommended certain provision be placed in >national bylaws. > > Due to the citation of the above underlying/related factors there >appears to be a perception in the minds of some members that somehow the >General Council and International President are calling the shots and the >National Board is zealous in following them and trying to implement them >and that too in a very great hurry and without giving any time for >discussing them. so... did these changes really come from Adyar or not?? as a TSA member I assumed so. Could someone get a fax/comment/e-mail from Adyar stateing "their" position on the changes?? clearly it is presented as "Adyar-suggested". Does the TSA already have these communications? and if so they should be distributed for verification. this is very curious. >PS: As most of the members of the National Board and the International >President are not on this newslist I am mailing a copy to them by Snailmail >for information. > time is rather important. could you Fax the Adyar/International board?? I'd like to see a response. peace - john mead jem@vnet.net cc: J. Algeo From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 12:47:51 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TS Bylaws On 20 199512 John E. Mead wrote: > > In re-reading the bylaws revisions there are three underlying yet > >related factors cited when dealing with the substantial and fundamental > >changes proposed. The are 01 General Council of TS has asked that certain > >features be incorporated into all national rules 02 Requests by General > >Council 03 To comply with international rules/regulations 04 > >International President has recommended certain provision be placed in > >national bylaws. > > > > Due to the citation of the above underlying/related factors there > >appears to be a perception in the minds of some members that somehow the > >General Council and International President are calling the shots and the > >National Board is zealous in following them and trying to implement them > >and that too in a very great hurry and without giving any time for > >discussing them. > > so... > > did these changes really come from Adyar or not?? > > as a TSA member I assumed so. Could someone get a fax/comment/e-mail > from Adyar stateing "their" position on the changes?? ================================== Done. ================================== ....doss > > clearly it is presented as "Adyar-suggested". Does the TSA already have > these communications? and if so they should be distributed for > verification. > > this is very curious. > > >PS: As most of the members of the National Board and the International > >President are not on this newslist I am mailing a copy to them by Snailmail > >for information. > > > > time is rather important. could you Fax the Adyar/International board?? > I'd like to see a response. > > peace - > > john mead > jem@vnet.net > > cc: J. Algeo From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 12:57:31 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TS Bylaws CORRECTION********************************************************* The response I sent had my reply in the wrong place. The msg I posted has been faxed to Adyar as suggested by John E Mead. ....DOSS The correct version of my reply is: > > In re-reading the bylaws revisions there are three underlying yet > >related factors cited when dealing with the substantial and fundamental > >changes proposed. The are 01 General Council of TS has asked that certain > >features be incorporated into all national rules 02 Requests by General > >Council 03 To comply with international rules/regulations 04 > >International President has recommended certain provision be placed in > >national bylaws. > > > > Due to the citation of the above underlying/related factors there > >appears to be a perception in the minds of some members that somehow the > >General Council and International President are calling the shots and the > >National Board is zealous in following them and trying to implement them > >and that too in a very great hurry and without giving any time for > >discussing them. > > so... > > did these changes really come from Adyar or not?? > > as a TSA member I assumed so. Could someone get a fax/comment/e-mail > from Adyar stateing "their" position on the changes?? > > clearly it is presented as "Adyar-suggested". Does the TSA already have > these communications? and if so they should be distributed for > verification. > > this is very curious. > > >PS: As most of the members of the National Board and the International > >President are not on this newslist I am mailing a copy to them by Snailmail > >for information. > > > > time is rather important. could you Fax the Adyar/International board?? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ====================================== Done ....doss ====================================== > > > peace - > > john mead > jem@vnet.net > > cc: J. Algeo From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 13:00:51 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: TS Bylaws There is a correction to this msg which I just posted. Please see the corrected message. ...doss On 20 199512 M K Ramadoss wrote: > > On 20 199512 John E. Mead wrote: > > > > In re-reading the bylaws revisions there are three underlying yet > > >related factors cited when dealing with the substantial and fundamental > > >changes proposed. The are 01 General Council of TS has asked that certain > > >features be incorporated into all national rules 02 Requests by General > > >Council 03 To comply with international rules/regulations 04 > > >International President has recommended certain provision be placed in > > >national bylaws. > > > > > > Due to the citation of the above underlying/related factors there > > >appears to be a perception in the minds of some members that somehow the > > >General Council and International President are calling the shots and the > > >National Board is zealous in following them and trying to implement them > > >and that too in a very great hurry and without giving any time for > > >discussing them. > > > > so... > > > > did these changes really come from Adyar or not?? > > > > as a TSA member I assumed so. Could someone get a fax/comment/e-mail > > from Adyar stateing "their" position on the changes?? > > ================================== > Done. > ================================== > > ....doss > > > > > clearly it is presented as "Adyar-suggested". Does the TSA already have > > these communications? and if so they should be distributed for > > verification. > > > > this is very curious. > > > > > > >PS: As most of the members of the National Board and the International > > >President are not on this newslist I am mailing a copy to them by > > >Snailmail for information. > > > > > > > time is rather important. could you Fax the Adyar/International board?? > > I'd like to see a response. > > > > peace - > > > > john mead > > jem@vnet.net > > > > cc: J. Algeo From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 13:09:46 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Solstice Meditation More on the Solstice: ANN B: According to my astro-program the will move into Capricorn according to this US schedule: !:30 AM EST 023000 AM CST 3:30 AM MST 4:30 AM -0800 This schedule is based on the being 00 degree 01 min in Capricorn in Chicago. The Moon will be 03 degrees 40 min in Capricorn. Also in Capricorn will be Mercury Mars Neptune and Uranus. I wish I knew how to translate this into international hours. How would we handle a international theos-l meditation? - Ann E. Bermingham ----------------------------------- Keith again: Your are probably right. I was using the Neil F. Michelsen "THe American Ephemeris" which is not Grenwich. I was trying to convert to 6+ hours for Houston. You bring up a good point. The actually ingress will occur at diffiernent times around the world! Since we are not live on-line we cannot actually do a group meditation as if we were in the room together. But the internet poses challenges and offers opportunities. Since some consider theos-l an "electronic lodge" we can see that in some way it is not at all like a physical lodge but in what way is it a spiritual lodge? Perhaps something like this meditation could show us the opportuinites and limitations of our trying to be in spritual and not just intellectual contact. Many will not be interested at all. But for those that are I suggest that we meditate at anytime of the day that is conventient and report our experiences if any to the group. I think the Capricorn energies should give us ample opportuntiy to reflect on " inner government" whether in our individual psychology or on the global scale of politics. Visualize the solsitce as a time of disintergration recycling and rebirth. Someone e-mailed me regarding some ideas about the moon's cycles and meditation: On a post to theos-l earlier today you mentioned the AAB group full moon meditation; that is indeed the "spiritual high point" of the month but there is also a cyclic meditation that is done on the day of the new moon on "strengthening the hands of the New Group of World Servers" or to put it another way the new moon cycle corresponds with physical plane activity while the full moon corresponds to spiritual as in "non-physical plane" contact -- at the new moon the energies contacted earlier are made "real" on the lower levels. In the AAB writings the Tibetan says that the annual work of the Hierarchy in preparation for Wesak at the full moon of Taurus begins "from the moment the sun begins its nrthward course" -- at the solstice. This is the "lower interlude" on the annual cycle matching the lesser cycles of the moon. Keith: This gives me some new ideas regarding meditation and astrological cycles. If anyone knows what Blavatsky Leadbetter or others might have said about the solstice and meditation please tell us. I am looking forward to the inner experience of the outter astrological symbology regarding the upcoming solstice. It is exciting to know that other groups such as the AAB World Servers may be meditating regarding large issues such as World Peace and the possible influence of the Buddha and the spiritual hierarchies at the times of these cyles. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 13:28:01 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members special printing: > Message Impacting The Society's Future > Please Open Immediately > rather interesting that they did NOT know which one was referred to. :- peace - John E. Mead jem@vnet.net From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 13:40:12 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Bylaws Please see my message confirming that the msg I posted last evening was faxed to Adyar. Let us wait and see what response we get from Wheaton and/or Adyar. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 15:23:45 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Hunting humor Greetings of the season! I have a good friend who is a vegetarian and who at times perhaps gets a little radical about it. She collects anti-hunting jokes and I thought I'd pass this one on in honor of hunting season with apologies to any hunters on the list ... unlikely as that probably is -:. -JRC A man dies and finds himself facing St. Peter at the pearly gates. Peter asks him what gifts God had given him and he replies "well I was born with an IQ of 160". Peter asks him what use he made of the gifts and the man replies that he was a heart surgeon who saved many lives with his skill. Peter smiles and welcomes him to heaven. Second man dies and Peter asks him the same question. The man replies "well I was born with an IQ of 100". Peter says "well what use did you make of your gifts?" The man replies that he was a builder and built good strong houses for people to live in. Peter smiles and says "that's a good use of talent welcome to heaven". Third man dies and upon meeting Peter is asked what gifts he was born with. He replies "well I was born with an IQ of 40". Peter smiles and says "oh didja get your elk?". -: From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 15:46:33 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: New Web Pages >For those of you who are Alice Bailey fans or merely curious here are two web >addresses for offshoots of her group. The second is still being worked on but >looks interesting. Here my enthusiasm for the internet rivals that of >Ramadoss. > >http://www.oneworld.org/worldgoodwill > >http://emporium.turnpike.net/N/ngws > >Happy Surfing! > >Ann E. Bermingham > Thanks it's a good thing to exchange 'addresses' for the Net be that mailing lists newsgroups http or ftp.... For newbies with specific interests that can save a lot of surfing time. Not that this cannot be fun but it can save money too for those of us who have a private account. Yours most enthusiastically /* Peter */ Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 17:45:04 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic >5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should >they? >Have fun. >Chuck Cosimano Well I certainly do. Why? Magic. Unless you practice some form of astral traveling or "pathworking" in which you use the model of the planetary chain of globes as a map of the inner worlds then you probably won't care very much. But as a map of the inner or invisible worlds I think that HPB has done us a real service and I personally find her description of the planetary chain the cornerstone of theosophy and the cement so to speak that holds all of the theosophical "core teachings" together. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 19:50:43 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: One reason for Reincarnation A friend of mine gave perhaps one of the most logical reasons for reincarnation which a fundamentalist is likely to agree with. Some of you may have heard it. If it offends any one pardon me. He said as men and women die and all their sins are written off due to whatever belief system they belive in they all end up in Heaven. At some point there is over crowding in Heaven. God's easy way to reduce overcrowding is to send them back to earth!!!! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 19:58:40 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Dark Nights and Brighter Days AS ABOVE SO BELOW Some have been talking about the dark night of the soul as a spiritual process. The writings of St. John of the Cross and others testify to the fact that spiritual knowledge and even experience does not exempt one from the need to face the cycles of suffering built into the systems of change. All sentient life is suffering to paraphrase the Buddha.The solstice represents the dark night of the year. At this time the year has reached its darkest deadest point. It is the time of dark materiality. Yet it also marks the point at which the days begin to become longer. Its the point at which things can't get any worse. They must get better if the cyle of consciousnesss and life is to continue at all. My computer generated chart revealed that there is a stellium in Capricorn with sun moon Mercury Venus Mars Neptune and Uranus in Capricorn at this moment. Jupiter is conjuncting the sun and moonbut is dragging luckily behind in Sagitarius. The chart also points out that the solstice occurs this yeart after midnight 02 hours near the bottom of the chart-the IC. This may represent the influence as being more in the individual unconscious rather than a social and conscious influence if it had occurred say at midday in the 10th house of Capricorn. Of course the winter solstice ALWAYS has sun in Capricorn hence the name Tropic of Capicorn to mark the sun's journey south. This year maybe a little special in that the dark night of the year happens at the darkest most material time of the day. I perhaps unconciously forgot that Capricorn is represented by the card "The Devil" in the Tarot. The goat-footed god with curling horns is not a pleasent image. Yet surefooted the goat climbs to the top. He uses the material world to survive and allows for the easier playfullness of the other signs. Actually the goat represents an archetype that is part sea creature with depths with abilities to plunge into the depths of the unconsious as well as climb the heights of the material world. I tried to find the path Capricorn represents in the kabala but couldn't. Perhaps this too is as well. Saturn in some systems is Binah the dark archetypal watery mother-womb--cryptically referred to as UNDERSTANDING. But to avoid a hopeless confusion of symbols perhaps the simple idea of the solstice is an ending that is also a beginning. Some might find the idea of a mediation focused on the solstice as a little naive a little childish a little primitive and frankly a little low class --kind of like using an idol for prayer or something. Zen and other types of "pure" meditation would tend to merge the object of contemplation and the ego in a kind of grand unity. Yet depth ecology and other movements bewail our seperation from the natural cyles. Some people experience depression in the cold winter light. Our bodies still long for a sign a symbol a synchronicity to echo our inner processes of despair release and renewal.. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 20 Dec 1996 22:40:01 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic >1. Was the Buddha really enlightened or was he merely some nut with a good >press agent? The Master JS would say that the Buddha archetype is always enlightened. >2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social control? The Master ET would say that this could not be answered in under a trillion words and that he was only able to finish writing half of them this evening. >3. Did the Masters tell the truth in their letters? The Master KPJ would say that most of the thirty-two did. >4. How much of Theosophy is a reflection of the culture of its founders? The Master RI would say "How much do you want to start saying *the theosophical writings of . . .* in a context like this?" >5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should >they? The Master GH would say they are important because of their coherence. Chuck best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 00:50:53 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Christmas Card-Lifting Veils Keith: 2 am GMT 22nd - it's a date! Maybe you will get a revelation and join us in TI .... Alan :- -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 01:01:30 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic > Here are a few questions that have puzzled me over the years and I put them > out that they may puzzle you as well. While I have my own opinions on these > I will withhold them for the moment and see what kind of answers if any are > forthcoming. > 1. Was the Buddha really enlightened or was he merely some nut with a good > press agent? An enlightened nut with a good press agent? > 2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social control? There ain't no such thing as a free lunch; a free lunch *can* be a useful means of social control. Karma = "If I hit my thimb with the hammer it hurts." > 3. Did the Masters tell the truth in their letters? Yes in parts but - Who wrote the Mahatmas letters? What is truth? > 4. How much of Theosophy is a reflection of the culture of its founders? Curiously not as much as one might suppose IMHO. > 5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should > they? Difficult to know what one is supposed to care about. Maybe I'll be able to answer this after the next day and night of Brahma as by then I should be *at least* a major Avatar. > Have fun. I always try in my humble way. > Chuck Cosimano Alan -- Member Theosophy International - how about you? Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 01:10:47 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Dark Night of the Soul > > > > > I mentioned that if there is sufficient experience of the higher > > principles there is no "dark night" when one shifts away from the > > lower. > > I am not familiar with other writers who expouse this idea. Could you > share some reference? I thought it was a step in the rungs of the > ladder so to speak which was universally experienced--similar to > the Dweller on the threshold idea. > > Sounds more like wishful thinking to me. It would be nice if we could > advance without the tests the fire which tempers the steel or would > it? > > Lewis I can't recall the original post you are quoting here but consider if you will that it might not be connected to any writer at all but to someone's experience? I agree with the quote as it represents my own experience. At the same time I have had what was without doubt a "dark night of the soul" as well but at another time in another circumstance in this life not a former one or combination of lives. Having said that while fire and steel may not be necessary you don't get something for nothing - it has to be worked at and for realising in the process that "seeking powers" is counter-productive. Alan -- Member Theosophy International - how about you? Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 01:23:56 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Connecting! > Internet/e-mail users. I got on internet when a friend told me that she > started with a 286 and graduated to a 386. But I started with a XT clone > and I use both the XT clone and the 386 to access Internet. > > ...doss I started with a 64K "Dragon" UK machine and a 300 baud modem which connected me to BBS's. The same machine would *still* connect me to this list at the same speed if I cared to use it. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 01:27:45 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic > > 2. Is karma a reality or merely a useful means of social > control? P.S. from other post: I agree with Jerry H-E here. My answer to those who using karma as a weapon tell me that the horrid things which happen to me are my fault especially if they did them to me goes thus: "The karma I have inherited from previous lives means that in this one I believe in neither karma nor reincarnation." Misusing the teaching is all too easy. Thought for the day: Good fruit tastes good. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 01:41:06 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: John Algeo's Letter to Members Being in the UK I did not get a copy of John Algeo's letter which is no surprise :- However if the issues are important internationally I would like to see a copy. If it was to all TSA members will it be published in Quest? We have been getting this in England though I believe it is going to stop coming this year. On another note would any members of TI who are *not* in the USA please let me know - not all e-mail addresses show the country of the person concerned. The *.nz members are of course obvious as am I with a *.uk suffix but I know that some of the *.com and similar addresses are not necessarily in the US these days even though this used to be the case. I have also discovered that *.net suffixes can come from almost anywhere. Many thanks. There were at last count just over 100 subscribers to this list of which an active 13 have signed up in support of TI. If you haven't signed up this to anyone is it because of some objection of principle? Some other reason? I *really* would like to know and with the exception of nit-picking over the actual wording used think there could be a useful discussion on the list about this. Happy everything Alan. -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 04:36:50 GMT From: Sy Ginsburg <72724.413@compuserve.com> Subject: Invalidity of By-law referendum copy of letter mailed Dec. 18 1995 Theosophical Ad Hoc Committee The Theosophical Society in Akron 693 Kenmore Blvd. Akron OH 44314 The Theosophical Society in Miami 831 S.E. 9th Street Deerfield Beach FL 33441 The Theosophical Society in Minneapolis 900 Mount Curve Ave. Minneapolis MN 55403 The Theosophical Society in Ravalli County P.O. Box 4763 Missoula MT 59806 Theosophical Society of Saint Louis 8124 Big Bend Blvd. Webster Groves MO 63119 The Theosophical Society in St. Petersburg 723 17th Street North St. Petersburg FL 33713 Dec 18 1995 Board of Directors The Theosophical Society in America C/O John Algeo President 1926 N. Main Street Wheaton IL. 60189 and its National Secretary BY CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT Dear Members of the Board of Directors of The Theosophical Society in America and its National Secretary: Upon examination of the last three issues of The American Theosophist and the form of the Official Ballot we feel compelled to call to your attention our view that the procedures required under the existing By-Laws of The Theosophical Society in America as they pertain to the current referendum vote on the revision of the By- Laws have not been followed. Therefore the vote on this referendum whatever the outcome cannot be valid. Our basic reasons for so concluding are as follows: 1.The fact that the proposed "resolution" passed by the Board of Directors submitting the Amendments was not published by being quoted as is suggested if not required by Section XI A of the existing By-Laws; 2.The proposed Amendments were not published in the form of an official ballot in The American Theosophist within sixty 60 days of the determination of the Board of Directors to submit the Amendments to the members of the Society in a referendum as required under By-Law XI A Section 3; 3.The fact that a square was provided on the ballot in which a member might vote "YES" upon all of the proposed Amendments but no corresponding square was provided in which a member might vote "NO" upon all of the proposed Amendments constitutes "electioneering" on the ballot contrary to law on the matter of submissions of proposals to voters; 4. The first "question" submitted upon the ballot is so generally and vaguely worded as to make it impossible for the voter to make an intelligent choice as to what is being proposed; 5. After the determination that the schedule for permitting "about a month" for discussion and sending in comments could not be maintained President Algeo on Oct 05 at least this was the date of his letter stated that "we have extended everything by a month" Who were the "we" to whom he referred and how did they obtain authority to act as they did?; 6.The extension referred to above was not "published in the official members' magazine" as required by By-Law XI A Section 03 and as a result cannot be effective; and 7.To be valid ballots must reach the National Secretary on a date not later than "the date fixed and published by the National Secretary as the date of final return of such ballot" see By-Law XI A Section 03 and so far as the membership can determine no "date of final return" has been fixed and published as yet by the National Secretary in this instance. In view of the foregoing it appears to the undersigned that the proposed By-Law Amendments as presently being submitted to the members of The Theosophical Society in America cannot be adopted validly by that membership for want of a proper submission. In conclusion we observe that the publication of the "Comments on the By-Laws Revision" in The American Theosophist Early Winter edition 1995 contains two negative comments printed in small type followed by more extensive COMMENTS printed in larger type refuting the negative comments. One short positive comment was printed followed by no COMMENT. This is not even-handed nor is it even fair to those who took the time and made the effort to comment on very short notice. The lack of further comments evidences the confusion on the part of members caused by the failure to comply with the existing By-Laws. We further observe that the Early Winter edition of The American Theosophist began reaching members on 191212 1995 whereas the Official Ballots began reaching members on 192811 1995. Consequently many members voted before even seeing the comments in The American Theosophist. In Theosophy Lori Whitfield President The Theosophical Society in Akron Tel: 216-836-9959 Seymour Sy Ginsburg Attorney-at-law President The Theosophical Society in Miami Tel: 305-463-8900 Rolf J. Canton President The Theosophical Society in Minneapolis Tel: 612-822-3155 Terry A. Wallace Attorney-at-law President The Theosophical Society in Ravalli County Tel: 406-251-3771 Carl Trauernicht Jr. Attorney-at-law Chairman Theosophical Society of Saint Louis Tel: 314-421-0911 Mohamed Mokhtar President The Theosophical Society in St. Petersburg Tel: 813-593-8277 Copies to: Members of the Board of Directors individually Lodge Presidents and Study Center Secretaries Other interested members of TSIA for whom we have mailing addresses Radha Burnier International President INTERNET: THEOS-L From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 07:23:21 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Invalidity of By-law referendum Hi everybody. I am very glad to see the letter from Lodge Presidents on the bylaws. We should all consider it providential that they took the time to look into the procedural legal requirements of bylaw changes and were able to detect serious short comings. But for their timely input TSA may in ignorance of the legal requirement may have implemented those items which are approved in the referendum only to find at a future date some lodge challenging the validity of the bylaws and this leading to litigation which could be very very expensive and unjustifiable waste of money. However much we may want to move with haste in revising the bylaws we need to do it in a very very open and orderly manner so that whatever is done by TSA is bullet proof legally and morally. Otherwise a very heavy price is likely to be paid in the long run both financially in legal expenses - Chicago Lawyers do not come cheap and love to have clients like TSA with multimillion dollars in the Bank and in terms of harmony and unity of members. Let hope that whatever is done relative TSA turns out to be in its long term interests and has the full support of all members. .MK Ramadoss ======================================================================== On 21 199512 Sy Ginsburg wrote: > copy of letter mailed Dec. 18 1995 > > Theosophical Ad Hoc Committee > The Theosophical Society in Akron 693 Kenmore Blvd. Akron OH 44314 > The Theosophical Society in Miami 831 S.E. 9th Street Deerfield Beach FL > 33441 > The Theosophical Society in Minneapolis 900 Mount Curve Ave. Minneapolis MN > 55403 > The Theosophical Society in Ravalli County P.O. Box 4763 Missoula MT 59806 > Theosophical Society of Saint Louis 8124 Big Bend Blvd. Webster Groves MO > 63119 > The Theosophical Society in St. Petersburg 723 17th Street North St. > Petersburg FL 33713 > > 191812 1995 > Board of Directors The Theosophical Society in America > C/O John Algeo President 1926 N. Main Street Wheaton IL. 60189 > and its National Secretary > BY CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT > > Dear Members of the Board of Directors of The Theosophical Society in America > and its National Secretary: > > Upon examination of the last three issues of The American > Theosophist and the form of the Official Ballot we feel compelled to call to > your attention our view that the procedures required under the existing > By-Laws of The Theosophical Society in America as they pertain to the > current referendum vote on the revision of the By- Laws have not been > followed. Therefore the vote on this referendum whatever the outcome > cannot be valid. > > Our basic reasons for so concluding are as follows: > > 1.The fact that the proposed "resolution" passed by the Board of > Directors submitting the Amendments was not published by being quoted as is > suggested if not required by Section XI A of the existing By-Laws; > > 2.The proposed Amendments were not published in the form of an official > ballot in The American Theosophist within sixty 60 days of the > determination of the Board of Directors to submit the Amendments to the > members of the Society in a referendum as required under By-Law XI A > Section 3; > > 3.The fact that a square was provided on the ballot in which a member > might vote "YES" upon all of the proposed Amendments but no corresponding > square was provided in which a member might vote "NO" upon all of the > proposed Amendments constitutes "electioneering" on the ballot contrary to > law on the matter of submissions of proposals to voters; > > 4. The first "question" submitted upon the ballot is so generally and > vaguely worded as to make it impossible for the voter to make an intelligent > choice as to what is being proposed; > > 5. After the determination that the schedule for permitting "about a > month" for discussion and sending in comments could not be maintained > President Algeo on Oct 05 at least this was the date of his letter > stated that "we have extended everything by a month" Who were the "we" to > whom he referred and how did they obtain authority to act as they did?; > > 6.The extension referred to above was not "published in the official > members' magazine" as required by By-Law XI A Section 03 and as a result > cannot be effective; and > > 7.To be valid ballots must reach the National Secretary on a date not > later than "the date fixed and published by the National Secretary as the > date of final return of such ballot" see By-Law XI A Section 03 and so > far as the membership can determine no "date of final return" has been > fixed and published as yet by the National Secretary in this instance. > > In view of the foregoing it appears to the undersigned that the proposed > By-Law Amendments as presently being submitted to the members of The > Theosophical Society in America cannot be adopted validly by that membership > for want of a proper submission. > > In conclusion we observe that the publication of the "Comments on the > By-Laws Revision" in The American Theosophist Early Winter edition 1995 > contains two negative comments printed in small type followed by more > extensive COMMENTS printed in larger type refuting the negative comments. > One short positive comment was printed followed by no COMMENT. This is > not even-handed nor is it even fair to those who took the time and made > the effort to comment on very short notice. The lack of further comments > evidences the confusion on the part of members caused by the failure to > comply with the existing By-Laws. > > We further observe that the Early Winter edition of The American > Theosophist began reaching members on 191212 1995 whereas the Official > Ballots began reaching members on 192811 1995. Consequently many > members voted before even seeing the comments in The American Theosophist. > > In Theosophy > > Lori Whitfield President The Theosophical Society in Akron Tel: > 216-836-9959 > Seymour Sy Ginsburg Attorney-at-law President The Theosophical Society > in Miami Tel: 305-463-8900 > Rolf J. Canton President The Theosophical Society in Minneapolis > Tel: 612-822-3155 > Terry A. Wallace Attorney-at-law President The Theosophical Society in > Ravalli County Tel: 406-251-3771 > Carl Trauernicht Jr. Attorney-at-law Chairman Theosophical Society of > Saint Louis Tel: 314-421-0911 > Mohamed Mokhtar President The Theosophical Society in St. Petersburg > Tel: 813-593-8277 > > Copies to: > Members of the Board of Directors individually > Lodge Presidents and Study Center Secretaries > Other interested members of TSIA for whom we have mailing addresses > Radha Burnier International President > INTERNET: THEOS-L From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 10:01:38 GMT From: mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com Michael W. Grenier Subject: Re: John Algeo's Letter to Members theos-l@vnet.net writes: >There were at last count just over 100 subscribers to this >list of which an active 13 have signed up in support of TI. If >you haven't signed up this to anyone is it because of some >objection of principle? Some other reason? I *really* would >like to know and with the exception of nit-picking over the >actual wording used think there could be a useful discussion on >the list about this. Alan I think I was swamped at about the time discussions of TI went around. Could someone tell be the principles associated with this. -Mike Grenier mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 11:38:47 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Torn Inside Herewith a progress report on my research for a book about Edgar Cayce with comments relevant to Theosophical and Baha'i concerns. At present I'm in the middle of Vol. 07 of the Cayce Library Series each volume averaging 500 pages with 18 to go I skipped #5; there are 24 total. The first volume is excerpts from the readings on Life and Death. The next two volumes are Meditation I and II; then come Dreams and Dreaming I and II after 600 pages of dream interpretations I needed a break; thus skipping Vol. V. Sixth comes Early Christian Era just finished; #7 is Study Group Readings. While I feel more and more sure that this is something I must write about and must therefore spend the next year or two studying there is a very definite ambivalence developing; an inner split that causes something which feels like emotional fabric being ripped. The inner tearing comes between the intensely positive lyrical mysticism evoked by the Meditation readings the Life and Death volume and the Study Group readings and the loud screeching of my bullshit detector set off by the Early Christian readings-- with the dream material at an intermediate level of moderate interest and appreciation. The Early Christian volume reveals that dozens nay scores of people who got past life readings from Cayce *just happened* to have been eyewitnesses to the life of Christ. Without arguing for my perception I'll simply state that I *intuit* that this is simply regurgitation of the Bible turned into fictional past lives not done with deceptive intent but rather fulfilling some psychic need of Christians to imagine themselves living in immediate proximity to their Lord. It definitely comes across at a much lower level of plausibility than the medical readings or the psychological advice on attitudes and emotions or several other elements of Cayce's work. On the other hand the Atlantis descriptions and prophecies of drastic earth changes will also set the BS detector off no doubt. So there's the feeling of "Oh no all this wonderful uplifting helpful solid advice on meditation and dreams on basic patterns of living RUINED by nutty implausible occult pretensions about past lives future earthquakes lost civilizations." And an inner ...rrrrip... as the part of me that finds overwhelming value in *some* of Cayce's readings *resists* the awareness that there is some *junk mail* in the akashic records. Here now to Theosophical and Baha'i parallels. The very same stress between part of one that sees immense spiritual wisdom and clarity in a source and another part that sees misleading dangerous and even *silly* elements in the very same source's teachings-- has been felt in those other contexts. From that small sample I conclude that probably *any* spiritual affiliation sets up a force field in which one must contend with the cognitive dissonance between those parts that *ring true* and those parts that *thunk* and just don't seem plausible. Each of us who contends with that dissonance has an evolving capacity to work out the conflicts. But there are many strategies and we probably experience most of them along the way. True believers been there done that whether in Blavatsky Baha'u'llah Cayce etc. simply say "I *know* the inner voice telling me of the ultimate spiritual authenticity of this message is reliable; therefore the other inner voice saying `watch out this stuff is fill of holes' is to be *ignored* *silenced* and *destroyed.*" On the other hand the cynic says "I know that the flaws my critical reasoning finds in this system are really there I trust my thinking and the evidence *therefore* when I was imagining some ultimate spiritual value to the teachings it was all *imagination and self-deception.*" So people define themselves as believers or unbelievers thereby missing out on a great growth opportunity. To feel *simultaneously* the awe reverence joy of recognizing something as emanating from a divine source *and* the unease regret and perplexity caused by recognizing that it has been contaminated distorted and limited by *human contraints* is the beginning of wisdom. I'm sure that sorting out the wheat from the chaff in the Cayce readings will lead into controversies based on past experience with Theosophists and Baha'is. But the compulsion to separate fact from fiction is the fuel that keeps the search for truth going forward step by step day by day. Happy holidays to everyone still reading at this point! From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 13:11:55 GMT From: Coherence@aol.com Subject: Re: Anonymity and other issues I will now be the first to say that this issue has gotten a bit overblown at this point. I saw no need to provide my real name and as has been pointed out if I truly wanted anonymity I would have taken greater measures. I did not because I did not care. I have no hard feelings whatsoever and am not offended. Refer to me however you like. The "condescending" accusation is a difficult one to defend without resorting to "No I'm not!" So the approach I will take is to talk about perceptions and where I am coming from and what I have learned from all of you. First I have to attribute a certain amount of over-sensitivity to you KPJ due to the withering contumely heaped on your pour head the last year. Such assault wreaks havoc on the nervous system so that the slightest rub even if only perceived produces a pain not unlike the original. And may I be so bold as to presume that the assault and accusations directed at you did not all come from the collective condescension of the "ULT Brahmins" but rather from your TS Brothers? In this specific instance the sweeping characterisation of ULT students was inappropriate and also assumes that I am a member or associate of ULT which I have not claimed. On the other hand in your defense I have witnessed the attitude you refer to in some of the ULT associates. The "Brahmin" characterisation is interesting. Oversimplifying the "Brahmins" of India attempted to maintain blood lines as well as to pass on the esoteric teachings of their Hindu tradition. They had the "real" teaching and were the royalty so to speak. The main purpose of ULT is "loyalty to the Founders of the Theosophical Movement." And in this they maintain the "original" or "source" teachings unaltered in facsimile form so that when someone wants to know what Theosophy teaches ULT can point to the original stuff and say "Here it is." Many of the other TS branches cannot say that and I suppose that gives ULT students their aire odor? of distinction. Because of this attitude I too have perceived I recently wrote an article for a publication put out by ULT students addressing this very issue. Basically my point was that from my experience here on the Internet with you I have learned that there is a wide variety of expressions of Theosophy by as many students and one should not be too quick to label something as "Not Theosophy" or a student as "Not a Theosophist" It is the exposure to other ideas that liberalizes and ULT students need a bit of liberalizing. So on this point I have to agree with you and because of my agreement with you it is difficult to have the condescending accusation stick. On the other hand my opinion of the TS was formed about 8-10 years ago when I considered traveling to Wheaton to participate in whatever study groups/lectures they had on Theosophy. Upon requesting a schedule I discovered that a cornucopia of classes and lectures were offered at all times every day of the week. But there was not one class/lecture on Theosophy. So where does one go if learning about Theosophy is desired? My perception is an over-emphasis on the 2nd object to the point where the teachings of Theosophy itself are neglected. This attitude manifests here on the Internet in the TS membership where I am confronting attitudes that are foreign to me and many of which I firmly disagree with. Are all dissenter condescending? At times it is disturbing but as mentioned above enlightening at the same time. However the "sad state of most Theosophists on theos-l" words are yours and not mine. Please limit your personal projections onto me. Your comment on my "best laught" at your words about Cayce as being condescending. This is an unfortunate misunderstanding. In your post of the Theosophist's reply to the Caycian words "God loves you" I genuinely thought you were being funny. It is the humor which can result when we see ourselves in the mirror which is reflecting our countenance a little too clearly. I got a great chuckle out of it and I thought I was laughing with you. A final comment about the political discussions I have only been encouraging if blunt. I have stated and this can be verified "Get organized change the system correct the poor judgement of the board assert yourselves make the TS into the group the Masters intended or get rid of it and follow the philosophy on your own." I find it difficult to understand how suggesting that this take place on a separate list devoted to such matters is condescending. I have spoken my piece in my defense. It is the Holidays. All of you have taught me something and I thank you. Friends? Coherence. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 15:14:08 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: to Alan Keith and Coherence According to theos-l@vnet.net: > > Alan > -- > Member Theosophy International - how about you? Alan-- I asked to be signed up in a private email but have yet to appear on the list. So now I'll ask publicly-- please sign me up. I'm glad to be #14 instead of #13! Keith-- > Some might find the idea of a mediation focused on the solstice as a little > naive a little childish a little primitive and frankly a little low class > --kind of like using an idol for prayer or something. Zen and other types of > "pure" meditation would tend to merge the object of contemplation and the ego > in a kind of grand unity. Yet depth ecology and other movements bewail our > seperation from the natural cyles. Some people experience depression in the > cold winter light. Our bodies still long for a sign a symbol a synchronicity > to echo our inner processes of despair release and renewal.. You might find Purucker's The Four Sacred Seasons of interest. See you in Shambhala tonight : Gregory/Coherence-- > First I have to attribute a certain amount of over-sensitivity to you KPJ > due to the withering contumely heaped on your pour head the last year. Such > assault wreaks havoc on the nervous system so that the slightest rub even if > only perceived produces a pain not unlike the original. And may I be so > bold as to presume that the assault and accusations directed at you did not > all come from the collective condescension of the "ULT Brahmins" but rather > from your TS Brothers? True enough about my oversensitivity to personal criticism and condemnation in the wake of a rough year. Which I will be glad to see end. But I didn't feel *personally* condescended to but just one of many on the list. Am glad to learn that you don't intend to communicate this. As for where the assaults and accusations come from first consider that the *only* favorable reviews comments or letters my books have received from Theosophists have come from the Adyar TS members: Edward Hower in the New York Times Book Review Joy Mills in The Quest Claire Walker in Reflections of a Theosophist John Cooper in Theosophy in Australia Stephan Hoeller in Gnosis Bill Laudahn in a letter to The Quest Jerry H-E forgot the publication name and several kind people here. Whereas the two negative reviews I've seen came from a single person also in the Adyar TS. As for condemnations in other formats how many of these are ULT associates: D. Ten Broeck D. Eklund N. Weeks aren't they both Adyar and ULT? R. Townley M. Kirschenbaum D. Caldwell who years ago ignored my question about his Theosophical affiliation about which I therefore remain ignorant? Not that I'm keeping score; as you see I don't even know the affiliations of most of these people. But ULT does seem overrepresented as far as I can tell; and despite some real pain over the two bad Adyar reviews I feel that at least this society has room for vigorous differences of opinion which doesn't seem the case elsewhere in the movement as much. In this specific instance the sweeping > characterisation of ULT students was inappropriate and also assumes that I am > a member or associate of ULT which I have not claimed. It seemed you had implied it. Sorry. Are you not? > > Because of this attitude I too have perceived I recently wrote an article > for a publication put out by ULT students addressing this very issue. > Basically my point was that from my experience here on the Internet with > you I have learned that there is a wide variety of expressions of Theosophy > by as many students and one should not be too quick to label something as > "Not Theosophy" or a student as "Not a Theosophist" It is the exposure to > other ideas that liberalizes and ULT students need a bit of liberalizing. > So on this point I have to agree with you and because of my agreement with > you it is difficult to have the condescending accusation stick. So that was you in Ergates? I credited Rich with the piece-- shows what anonymity can do. > > foreign to me and many of which I firmly disagree with. Are all dissenter > condescending? No I have just found the "not adhering enough to the lines laid down" argument from ULT members as somewhat condescending in its expression. The tone of the book The Theosophical Movement 1875-1950 certainly is towards Adyar and Pasadena but that has nothing to do with you. At times it is disturbing but as mentioned above > enlightening at the same time. However the "sad state of most Theosophists > on theos-l" words are yours and not mine. Please limit your personal > projections onto me. Gotta plead innocent here. I wasn't projecting anything just describing the impression conveyed by some of your "I'm appalled by you people" messages early on-- which you may not have been aware of. > > Your comment on my "best laught" at your words about Cayce as being > condescending. This is an unfortunate misunderstanding. In your post of the > Theosophist's reply to the Caycian words "God loves you" I genuinely > thought you were being funny. It is the humor which can result when we see > ourselves in the mirror which is reflecting our countenance a little too > clearly. I got a great chuckle out of it and I thought I was laughing with > you. Sorry; at first I thought that's what you meant but then started to think it was my "God loves you anyway" that you found amusing-- which was OK too. Guilty to oversensitivity. > > A final comment about the political discussions I have only been > encouraging if blunt. I have stated and this can be verified "Get > organized change the system correct the poor judgement of the board assert > yourselves make the TS into the group the Masters intended or get rid of > it and follow the philosophy on your own." I find it difficult to > understand how suggesting that this take place on a separate list devoted to > such matters is condescending. OK. > > I have spoken my piece in my defense. It is the Holidays. All of you have > taught me something and I thank you. Friends? Friends. Paul trying to come up with something like "Coherence" or "Perspicacity" that fits-- how about "Persistence"? I've got more of that than coherence or perspicacity alas. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 15:14:51 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Torn Inside >The Early Christian volume >reveals that dozens nay scores of people who got past life >readings from Cayce *just happened* to have been eyewitnesses >to the life of Christ. That's nothing Paul. When I was speaking at the big "Aquarian Revelation Center" ARC extravaganza held in Detroit quite a few years ago I had to follow a nationally known "regression hypnotist." This man was was generally regarded by the audience as someone whose techniques "proved reincarnation." With considerable drama he proceeded to hypnotize a middle-aged lady and then systematically take her down memory lane to her birth and then into her "immediately previous incarnation." "What year are you in now" the hypnotist asked. "1821" she replied. "And what is your current location?" "Atlantis" she answered. Your whole post was great Paul. Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 15:29:38 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Torn Inside On 21 199512 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > So people define > themselves as believers or unbelievers thereby missing out on > a great growth opportunity. To feel *simultaneously* the awe > reverence joy of recognizing something as emanating from a > divine source *and* the unease regret and perplexity caused by > recognizing that it has been contaminated distorted and > limited by *human contraints* is the beginning of wisdom. This is an awesome paragraph. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 15:42:22 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Internet Bee B: >I have found internet a good communication medium for me as I have had to >organise my thoughts and knowledge system so that I could try to make >intellegent remarks that had coherence. I know a lot of stuff but I >discovered that it was rather all over the place in my mind so it has been >good for me. I also enjoy all the posts. I have just borrowed from my >daughter and am now the proud possessor of a Pentium 90 with Windows 95. >What fun. Sorry just had to show off. >This list is good to read as there aren't a whole lot of posts from people >who talk nonsense as there are on many of the newsgroups that I subscribe >to. The one on Meditation is generally hopeless. An e-mail list like this >one is very educative. I've found this to be my experience as well. Speaking of hardware: My husband and I started in 1982 with an Atari 800 48K and a NovaCat 300 baud modem. Last year he built me a 486-50 with 16 meg of memory and running Windows 3.1. It took him all the time between Christmas and New Years and he had parts all over the place on beach towels. I also agree with Mr. Coherence that this list exposes one to many different viewpoints and opinions which is very good. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 15:51:43 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Returns of Christ >Date: 20 199512 194722 -0500 >Errors-To: jem@vnet.net >Reply-To: theos-l@vnet.net >Originator: theos-l@vnet.net >Sender: theos-l@vnet.net >Precedence: none >From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain >To: Multiple recipients of list >Subject: Returns of Christ >X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas > > >> If we define the Christ as an archetype >> of the collective unconscious it seems fair to say that He/It >> *has* returned *through* all the movements mentioned above. >> Returned in many new forms and with conflicting messages. > >Jesus in the gospel accounts also gives conflicting messages! >At one point he is quoted as saying he has come only to the lost >sheep of the house of Israel and elsewhere accepts gentiles >into his following. > >I guess God's son is just confused in whatever guise we find >him. Should have had a daughter if you ask me which you >probably don't. > >:- Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > Alan thanks for the compliment but what makes you think a daughter would be any less confused than a son? Confused in a different way perhaps but confused nonetheless until Nirvana Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 16:47:40 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic Fascinating. How would you compare or contrast the system to let us say the pathworking on the Tree of Life? Chuck might have met at summer school. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 16:58:28 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Anonymity and other issues Dear Coherence I'm of the opinion that you can call yourself anything you enjoy calling yourself. I don't mind either that Alan Bain calls himself guru Nellie or Arthur Patterson Taliesin. I don't see that it's any different than my using the name Liesel. Everyone to their own dream! Liesel happens to be my given name but in Germany there are so many Liesels that it's almost an archetype. Liesel was the girl who in the middle ages minded the geese and her companion was Hans. Hans & Liesel is like Jack & Jill... I know a little boy of 03 Samora who calls himself Power Ranger. I don't know of anyone who takes offense at that or tells him "no you're not you're lying". We play along with his game. It's fun! Matter of fact I made him a cardboard sword for hallowe'en & he was so strong a Power Ranger that he bent it right away & I had to remember my Cub Scout crafts to make a 2d one twice as strong for a real Power Ranger. His parents had something else in mind for him. They're South African blacks. Samora was the name of a prominent Mozambican who was mysteriously killed in a plane accident. The little boy is the "reincarnation" in a way. I'm not for discussing Wheaton politics on a separate list either. It would be nice if we could help fashion a TS in the spirit the Masters intended. Unfortunately we seem to be such an independent lot that we need to quibbble all the time about who's righter. It would be great I think if to our independent thinking we could add a few smidgeons of tolerance. I can't erace the rest of this letter which is your original. I also can't independently send a message. My system is blinking. I put my message on top so you don't need to reread the whole thing. Thanks for contributing to this list. Happy Holidays Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race >I will now be the first to say that this issue has gotten a bit overblown at >this point. I saw no need to provide my real name and as has been pointed >out if I truly wanted anonymity I would have taken greater measures. I did >not because I did not care. I have no hard feelings whatsoever and am not >offended. Refer to me however you like. > >The "condescending" accusation is a difficult one to defend without resorting >to "No I'm not!" So the approach I will take is to talk about perceptions >and where I am coming from and what I have learned from all of you. > >First I have to attribute a certain amount of over-sensitivity to you KPJ >due to the withering contumely heaped on your pour head the last year. Such >assault wreaks havoc on the nervous system so that the slightest rub even if >only perceived produces a pain not unlike the original. And may I be so >bold as to presume that the assault and accusations directed at you did not >all come from the collective condescension of the "ULT Brahmins" but rather >from your TS Brothers? In this specific instance the sweeping >characterisation of ULT students was inappropriate and also assumes that I am >a member or associate of ULT which I have not claimed. > >On the other hand in your defense I have witnessed the attitude you refer >to in some of the ULT associates. The "Brahmin" characterisation is >interesting. Oversimplifying the "Brahmins" of India attempted to maintain >blood lines as well as to pass on the esoteric teachings of their Hindu >tradition. They had the "real" teaching and were the royalty so to speak. > The main purpose of ULT is "loyalty to the Founders of the Theosophical >Movement." And in this they maintain the "original" or "source" teachings >unaltered in facsimile form so that when someone wants to know what >Theosophy teaches ULT can point to the original stuff and say "Here it is." > Many of the other TS branches cannot say that and I suppose that gives ULT >students their aire odor? of distinction. > >Because of this attitude I too have perceived I recently wrote an article >for a publication put out by ULT students addressing this very issue. > Basically my point was that from my experience here on the Internet with >you I have learned that there is a wide variety of expressions of Theosophy >by as many students and one should not be too quick to label something as >"Not Theosophy" or a student as "Not a Theosophist" It is the exposure to >other ideas that liberalizes and ULT students need a bit of liberalizing. > So on this point I have to agree with you and because of my agreement with >you it is difficult to have the condescending accusation stick. > >On the other hand my opinion of the TS was formed about 8-10 years ago when >I considered traveling to Wheaton to participate in whatever study >groups/lectures they had on Theosophy. Upon requesting a schedule I >discovered that a cornucopia of classes and lectures were offered at all >times every day of the week. But there was not one class/lecture on >Theosophy. So where does one go if learning about Theosophy is desired? My >perception is an over-emphasis on the 2nd object to the point where the >teachings of Theosophy itself are neglected. This attitude manifests here on >the Internet in the TS membership where I am confronting attitudes that are >foreign to me and many of which I firmly disagree with. Are all dissenter >condescending? At times it is disturbing but as mentioned above >enlightening at the same time. However the "sad state of most Theosophists >on theos-l" words are yours and not mine. Please limit your personal >projections onto me. > >Your comment on my "best laught" at your words about Cayce as being >condescending. This is an unfortunate misunderstanding. In your post of the >Theosophist's reply to the Caycian words "God loves you" I genuinely >thought you were being funny. It is the humor which can result when we see >ourselves in the mirror which is reflecting our countenance a little too >clearly. I got a great chuckle out of it and I thought I was laughing with >you. > >A final comment about the political discussions I have only been >encouraging if blunt. I have stated and this can be verified "Get >organized change the system correct the poor judgement of the board assert >yourselves make the TS into the group the Masters intended or get rid of >it and follow the philosophy on your own." I find it difficult to >understand how suggesting that this take place on a separate list devoted to >such matters is condescending. > >I have spoken my piece in my defense. It is the Holidays. All of you have >taught me something and I thank you. Friends? > >Coherence. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 18:53:47 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: By-Law Irregularities Reflections on the TSA [A bit longer than I intended ... sorry gang -:] Reading the letter from the Lodge Presidents the first and perhaps most dramatic thing that struck me was the seemingly strange contradiction: Here is a National Board and President who are attempting a significant alteration of the By-Laws and in the attempt itself apparently don't consider the current By-Laws important enough to conform to. The paradox resolves itself by focussing on the precise *nature* of the By-Laws HQ is attempting to pass and that of those being ignored. And the resolution is deeply disturbing because it inadvertantly shines a terribly bright light on the intentions operating behind the revisions. Notice: the By-Laws HQ is trying to pass especially those that are clearly quite upsetting to even some long-time members all concern shifting financial and political power *from* members and Lodges and *to* centralized control from HQ. The By-Laws being *ignored* in the process of attempting to gain this control are precisely those whose purpose it is to provide a *check* on the power of HQ; those designed to provide the membership with full information in an adequate and timely enough way to either vote with reason in favor or organize the opposition needed to oppose; those meant to assure that balloting is done in such a way as to make certain that the process of balloting itself does not bias the results in one direction or another. HQ is asking the membership to grant it greater power and control at the same time as demonstrating it can't be trusted to correctly use even the power it currently has. And I'm not sure what is more upsetting ... the thought that these By-Laws were *purposely* avoided in an attempt to accomplish the revisions before opposition could build or the thought that those at HQ consider the opinion of the membership to be of so little relevance that they didn't even think it important to follow the By-Laws designed to protect the members' voices. Any institution that governs itself as a democracy or a representative republic exists by virtue of the maintenance of carefully balanced power. The brilliance of democracy is that it begins with the assumption that individuals are autonomous beings possessed of free will integrity and the right to participate in choices affecting them while at the same time recognizing that these individuals are imperfect beings. Democracy is now relatively taken for granted at least in some places but we must remember that it really is a relatively new idea or rather an old idea whose widespread practice is relatively new that it is a profoundly *spiritual* idea and to be an effective *leader* in a democracy requires an integrated mature human psyche ... capable of being *other-oriented*. This is the case even in national democracies where the state has the coercive power of legitimate force to impose its will. But it is doubly the case when the organization is a completely voluntary association of individuals who can easily just leave the organization if they begin to feel as though they are treated as *subjects of* rather than *participants in* the organization. I have worked with several public interest non-profits and work daily to build membership and involvement in one currently and as I was at a meeting today just after reading the post I'm responding to here containing several Board members the Executive Director and a project coordinator I was struck by the fact the while we were engaged in the planning of a somewhat large project that required us to make a series of decisions the entire discussion was completely pervaded by the thought that *we were acting on behalf of the membership* ... and in fact a couple decisions that would possibly slightly alter the ideological tenor of the organization were postponed with the agreement that each of us would personally speak to a number of members to get a sense of what would be acceptable to the membership as a whole. That is as is the case with many such organizations while we were at Headquarters and certainly had the *legal* power to do whatever we wished we did not for a moment forget that we existed *at the pleasure of the membership and as agents of its will*: That our role was not to attempt to go against its wishes but rather to focus and pragmatically express them. Perhaps some of the *problem* with the current TSA is that its various Trusts to some degree insulate its leadership from needing to pay attention to the membership. Membership could drop in half and the salaries of the staff and the heating bill at Wheaton would still get paid. This is positive in that it permits HQ to operate in something other than crisis mode which many non-profits do but can easily be very negative ... as it allows the President and Board to pursue their own personal visions oblivious to whether they are at all in tune with the membership and without even defining and analyzing whether they are successful. The TSA leadership seems to operate as though the moment it is elected it no longer even needs to reference the membership or even in fact reference the By-Laws that *require* it to reference the membership in some actions. This is now so internalized that members have become accustomed to judging by this standard which only looks strange when compared to other organizations ... for instance several people have lately mentioned that if serious opposition continued and positive suggestions were made John Algeo would be open to listening to them though none of even his supporters have implied he would actually feel compelled to *act* on what he heard - and this is said almost as though this listening is a gift he would give as though he it were a thing that distinguished him as a leader. It is not a *virtue* for the President of a voluntary democratic organization to *listen* to its membership its a damn *minimum requirement*. He is *not* our king our pope or our Master ... he is our *EMPLOYEE*. There has recently been discussions about the TSA's abysmal membership retention record ... in which it is the norm that a significant majority of new members leave after their first year; various different conflicting theories have been put forward as to exactly why this is but it occurs to me that this is the only organization I've ever been involved with in which such a discussion would take place at all. Any other organization would consider such a retention rate as a *serious* problem ... and would not *theorize* for years as to why it was the case but would *find out* why. Why hasn't a substantial study been done? Why hasn't a statistically significant sample of those who silently left been *polled* by phone or mail ... *asked* why they left? Obviously Theosophy still has a potent magnetic force somewhere within it or it wouldn't attract so many in the first place ... what then is the *equally powerful* force that then repels so many it attracted? And why isn't this even considered important enough to find out? Why in short do we not consider that there is any obligation to adjust the expression of Theosophy to the changing culture and era we live in live in with the Humanity we are allegedly supposed to be serving. Perhaps because it seems as though an unstated attitude throughout HQ and held by some members as well is that TS membership is a *gift* granted by HQ to petitioners ... almost as though its believed that those who leave weren't ready for or worthy of the gift. But to be very blunt just *what is this gift*? Why should someone join or remain a member? For the teachings? Well the books are available or can be ordered in almost any bookstore. I sure don't need HQ to study the Secret Doctrine. For the Quest magazine? Also can be purchased on the newsstand. Certainly not for the AT ... which is no longer the member's forum HQ *promised the membership it would be* when it split from Quest but is now an ideologically controlled platform. To be even blunter *why should I pay HQ $30.00 a year why should my Lodge make the effort to keep members current in their dues for the privilege of being told by HQ what we must study if we want to continue having the honor of giving HQ our money?*. "Well" some might say "that's a selfish attitude ... our ideal is an ideal of service". And this feeling keeps some from leaving because HQ has carefully over the years cultivated the feeling that supporting the TS is identical with supporting *Theosophy* that somehow membership in the TSA is a *link* to a current generated by the Masters and hence a link to the Masters. That in essence supporting the TSA is somehow *serving the Masters*. This *was* the case *when HPB was alive and the Masters actively involved*. But as harsh as it is to question this link is by no means any longer the case and IMO we must be pragmatic about the fact that belief in this link permits the possibility of great abuses. [The same formula that shows up far more clearly when glimpsed on a lower curve of the spiral is what permits people like Jim Jones and David Koresh to do what they did to their followers: link yourself to a "higher power" Jesus in their cases convince followers that to remain connected to you is to remain connected to that power that to *leave you is to break connection with the power* and you can literally lead people to their *deaths* without causing them to defect]. We are I believe *confusing* our spirituality with our politics instead of *integrating* our spirituality *into* our politics. The confusion ... allows small groups of people to periodically take control of HQ pursue their pet project send friends on speaking engagements all over the country hire friends and even relatives and engage in all sorts of behavior that in most other organizations would cause serious drops in membership - that is to *use the devotion to the Masters in members for their own ends*. If for a moment we look at the behavior of HQ separate it from Theosophy and judge it by the standards we would judge any other non-profit service organization it appears as though we are witnessing what is nothing other than an outright bald-faced power-grab deliberately planned and pursued with intensely manipulative means that HQ has not even bothered to hide. The confusion between politics and spirituality has permitted it to go this far as people *want* to believe in good motives at HQ *want* to give the actions a positive interpretation ... and some few perhaps even wish to believe that the Masters are still guiding the actions of HQ no doubt as the result of Radha's prayers tee hee. And HQ offers explanations designed to satisfy. But *come on* were spirituality and politics not confused could anyone *really* believe that *spending a quarter of a million of our dollars suing one of our own Lodges* was the exercise of pure intentions in the service of Theosophy? *Integrating* our spirituality into our politics would mean something entirely different ... would mean that we wanted to make our organization itself into a living practical expression of our philosophy. It would mean we wouldn't consider it wonderful when our leadership managed to *come up to* the standards of the average modern non-profit but would want as an organization to be setting an exemplary standard of organizational conduct. To be trying to demonstrate what the teachings of the Masters *look like in practice* ... trying to demonstrate what a service organization would look like run without games and manipulation by people striving to act with genuinely pure intent ... assuming its membership to be fully capable of self-determination at the Lodge level and composed of souls who it is a true honor to be given the privilege to serve seeing the membership not as a pile of unruly children that must be coerced and can't even be trusted with "complex" information but rather as composed of a hidden brilliance that simply needs to be *unleashed* ... a membership that then radiates this attitude outward into the world seeing humanity not as so many "masses" mostly too dim to be "ready" for Theosophy but as billions of heroic souls together beginning the long hard climb out of the densest spiral into matter who need - not condescension but rather living breathing *models* of *conscious travellers of the road* who will embrace them ... with the intention of reminding them of the star within their cores - reminding them of that home we all left so terribly long ago. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 22:30:42 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re:Internet >To: Lewis Lucas > >beg to differ re the internet being a poor communications medium. I know I >cant' see you folks but talking to you on the internet beats not talking to >any Theosophists at all which is what I had before I begged borrowed & >didn't steal money to get me a computer. I'm accepting whatever "face" >anyone shows me on the internet without worrying too much about what other >faces they might present in person. > >Liesel > Hi Liesel I have found internet a good communication medium for me as I have had to organise my thoughts and knowledge system so that I could try to make intellegent remarks that had coherence. I know a lot of stuff but I discovered that it was rather all over the place in my mind so it has been good for me. I also enjoy all the posts. I have just borrowed from my daughter and am now the proud possessor of a Pentium 90 with Windows 95. What fun. Sorry just had to show off. This list is good to read as there aren't a whole lot of posts from people who talk nonsense as there are on many of the newsgroups that I subscribe to. The one on Meditation is generally hopeless. An e-mail list like this one is very educative. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 21 Dec 1996 23:05:51 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Musings of a Theosophical Heretic >>5. Does anyone really care about the rounds and the chains and why should >>they? >>Have fun. >>Chuck Cosimano > > Well I certainly do. Why? Magic. Unless you practice some form >of astral traveling or "pathworking" in which you use the model of the planetary > >chain of globes as a map of the inner worlds then you probably won't care >very much. But as a map of the inner or invisible worlds I think that HPB has >done us a real service and I personally find her description of the planetary >chain the cornerstone of theosophy and the cement so to speak that holds >all of the theosophical "core teachings" together. > > Jerry S. > Having just made the effort to study this topic I agree. I see things quite differently since gaining a little understanding of how it all hangs together. Somehow I have accepted that I have been around for ever and will be around for ever and that has given life a new dimension. Globes and rounds also need to be understood in the evolutionary model to come to grips with life-atoms monads. I realise now that my previous attempts to understand Swedenborg's Grand Man has laid the framework to fit the life-atom concept in to. I has been much easier to think about it all. I had never really bothered with globes and rounds as I thought it too hard to get to grips with but now a glimmer is seen and it is fascinating.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 01:29:05 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Dark Nights and Brighter Days > > I tried to find the path Capricorn represents in the kabala but couldn't. > Perhaps this too is as well. Saturn in some systems is Binah the dark > archetypal watery mother-womb--cryptically referred to as UNDERSTANDING. "PATH TWENTY-SIX "The Renewing Intelligence. Thereby God reneweth all which is capable of renovation in the creation of the world." Sepher Yetzirah: The letter Ayin. Laughter. The zodiacal sign Capricorn. The Minor Sephiroth: 'Hesed in Assiah. The Christian Church: The Book of Epistles. The Greater Tarot: Card fifteen the "Devil." Commentary: "Thereby God reneweth all which is capable of renova- tion in the creation of the world." "One day the Children of God came to attend upon the Eternal and among them was Satan. So the Eternal said to Satan: Where have you been? "Round the earth" he answered "roaming about." So the Eternal asked: Did you notice my servant Job? There is no one like him on the earth; a sound and honest man who fears God and shuns evil. "Yes" said Satan "but Job is not God-fearing for nothing is he? Have you not put a wall round him and his house and all his domain? You have blessed all he undertakes and his flocks throng the countryside. But stretch out your hand and lay a finger on his possessions; I warrant you he will curse you to your face." The Eternal said to Satan: "Very well; all he has is in your power but keep your hands off his person." "Then Jesus was led by the Spirit out into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil . . . The Devil showed him all the dominions of the world and their splendour. "I will give you all of these" he said "if you worship me." Jesus replied: Be off Satan! These instances show a far different picture of the satanic role than that depicted in the popular imagination or for that matter in many theological or church circles. It is quite clear that in Old and New Testament times the role of "Satan" a word meaning "adversary" was regarded as a legitimate and divinely approved function. > But to avoid a hopeless confusion of symbols perhaps the simple idea of the > solstice is an ending that is also a beginning. > > Namaste > Keith Price Happy beginning! 25 minutes to Solstice ....... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 01:36:21 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI > > Alan > I think I was swamped at about the time discussions of TI went around. > Could someone tell be the principles associated with this. > > -Mike Grenier > mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com "THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without discrimination with regard to sex including sexual orientation creed class or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities at the same time respecting _all_ life. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* by any member. There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with others." The following internet folk have so far signed up: Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker; John E. Mead; John R. Crocker; Sincerely Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 01:38:12 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Torn Inside Sundry snips unmarked > The inner tearing comes between the intensely positive lyrical > mysticism evoked by the Meditation readings the Life and Death > volume and the Study Group readings and the loud screeching > of my bullshit detector set off by the Early Christian > readings-- with the dream material at an intermediate level of > moderate interest and appreciation. The Early Christian volume > reveals that dozens nay scores of people who got past life > readings from Cayce *just happened* to have been eyewitnesses > to the life of Christ. Without arguing for my perception I'll > simply state that I *intuit* that this is simply regurgitation > of the Bible turned into fictional past lives not done with > deceptive intent but rather fulfilling some psychic need of > Christians to imagine themselves living in immediate proximity > to their Lord. Ignatius of Loyala in his ~Spiritual Exercises~ instructs pupils to undertake this eyewitness activity from within *this present* life. Now there's a thought. But yes I think your bullshit detector is working fine. :- > *resists* the awareness that there is some *junk mail* in the > akashic records. Why resist? There's bound to be - *everything* is supposed to be recorded even I imagine TMR. :- > To feel *simultaneously* the awe > reverence joy of recognizing something as emanating from a > divine source *and* the unease regret and perplexity caused by > recognizing that it has been contaminated distorted and > limited by *human contraints* is the beginning of wisdom. Amen. > Happy holidays to everyone still reading at this point! Someone is still reading you Paul! Peace and joy and all that don't forget to sign up for TI Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 03:21:46 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Returns of Christ >To: theos-l@vnet.net >From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch >Subject: Re: Returns of Christ >I've been trying to put a message on theos-l sending SEASON'S GREETINGS TO EVERYONE. Somehow my system gets locked & I can only send a reply to another message. So here goes. ENJOY YOUR HOLIDAYS YOU-ALL. Liesel >>>Date: 20 199512 194722 -0500 >>>Errors-To: jem@vnet.net >>>Reply-To: theos-l@vnet.net >>>Originator: theos-l@vnet.net >>>Sender: theos-l@vnet.net >>>Precedence: none >>>From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain >>>To: Multiple recipients of list >>>Subject: Returns of Christ >>>X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas >>> >>> > >>>> If we define the Christ as an archetype >>>> of the collective unconscious it seems fair to say that He/It >>>> *has* returned *through* all the movements mentioned above. >>>> Returned in many new forms and with conflicting messages. >>> >>>Jesus in the gospel accounts also gives conflicting messages! >>>At one point he is quoted as saying he has come only to the lost >>>sheep of the house of Israel and elsewhere accepts gentiles >>>into his following. >>> >>>I guess God's son is just confused in whatever guise we find >>>him. Should have had a daughter if you ask me which you >>>probably don't. >>> >>>:- Alan >>>-- >>>Member Theosophy International. >>>Member Human Race. >>>---------------------------------------- >>>Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk >>> >>Alan thanks for the compliment but what makes you think a daughter would >>be any less confused than a son? Confused in a different way perhaps but >>confused nonetheless until Nirvana >> >>Liesel >> From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 03:40:55 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Searching e-mail address This morning while I was in cyberspace browsing around I typed in the key words e-mail and address. The search engine yahoo came with several locations which provide for searching of e-mail addresses. The search can be any combination of first name last name organization internet connection provider such as aol compuserve etc.. When I tried some names familiar to all of us in the Theosophy world in some cases I came up with one or two e-mail addresses. This search is like thumbing thru a phone book except that the computer program does it for you. It is a great resource for anyone trying to locate the e-mail of an individual or trying to find the name of the individual. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 07:00:33 GMT From: mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com Michael W. Grenier Subject: Re: TI Alan I shall decline joining for the present until I can consider the first object more. If we define discrimination as "choosing with care | good taste discernment" Webster's I'm not sure what forming a nucleus means. Certainly in my own life I discriminate on creed and sexual orientation. That is not to say that I can't respect those that have other views. -Mike Grenier writes: >> >> Alan >> I think I was swamped at about the time discussions of TI went around. >> Could someone tell be the principles associated with this. >> >> -Mike Grenier >> mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com > >"THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the >three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on >suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed >thus: > >1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without >discrimination with regard to sex including sexual >orientation creed class or color. > >2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion >theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to >individual ability and inclination. > >3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized >human potential and abilities at the same time respecting _all_ >life. > >THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network >whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or >allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having >done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* >by any member. > >There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary >donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific >projects or even individuals for particular and specified >purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not >need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such >activity is an entirely personal matter. > >We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with >others." > >The following internet folk have so far signed up: > >Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; >Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown; Peter Walstra; >Murray Stentiford; Alan Bain; Jerry Schueler; >Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker; John E. Mead; >John R. Crocker; > >Sincerely > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > ---- Michael W. Grenier mike@planet8.eag.unisysgsg.com 612-456-7869 Loral - Air Traffic Control From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 09:31:01 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: trust problem At 033700 PM 12/20/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >Yesterday both Eldon & Doss wrote something about the debate over the by >laws revisions & I'd like to respond to some of it. ascinates me about Theosophy... but the infighting doesn't. > >ET "...Positive suggestions for changes in Wheaton's policies..." etc. >LFD I think John Algeo has introduced a number of changes in policy for the >better. Ex.: When Dorothy presided we were just informed that there were by ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ >laws changes. Under John The by laws were published. We were asked to vote >on the revisions even though discussion was painfully brief. From the >letters John sent subsequent to some of the protests he's listening. I >think he really truly believes that these revisions are for the good of the >TS. The thing is he's inherited an aura of distrust which is hard to dispel. =============================================================================== MK Ramadoss I went back and in the Mar/Apr 1993 Vol 81/No 02 issue of American Theosophist the bylaw changes then under consideration are discussed in the viewpoint section of Dorothy Abbenhouse the then President. So from what I have been able to document the way she and the Board of Directors were handling bylaw changes was that the changes are first published in AT for purposes of discussion by members and after that after due consideration at an annual meeting the question shall be put to membership of TSA for a referendum for their decision. The annual meeting was scheduled for Aug 1993. That gives a period of five months for members to discuss and communicate their opinions and views. So it is not true that at the time of Dorothy Abbenhouse the bylaws were changed and then the members were just informed. So I would like to present what procedure was being followed by Dorothy Abbenhouse. In contrast to what is documented above this time when more fundamental and serious changes are proposed the procedure exactly opposite was followed. There was practically no time for discussion by members. The changes were not published before they were considered at the annual meeting. The members were asked to vote even before they could hear any views opposing any one or more of the changes being made. The ballot was designed in a very tricky manner so that any one who opposes all the changes has to vote for each item whereas if one wants to vote for all the changes need only to check one box. Thus making it very tedious to vote against the proposed changes. No one at the National Board has explained why each of these actions were taken. I am sure there are valid and good reasons. What that is needed is a simple convincing explanation. Hope someone will come out boldly and tell us. A positive and open and candid communication and quick response for information requests from interested members is all it takes to improve and build trust. Trust cannot be built overnight and it takes time like growing a tree. Early we start on this endeavor better we are. The start has to come from National Board down and not the other way. If anyone in the National Board is listening I hope they do something about the whole situation instead of keeping quite. These problems are not going to go away that easy. These kinds of problems when continued to linger only leads to a worser situation and greater problems which unfortunately becomes more costly and difficult to solve. ============================================================================ ======= >Like I think I should know & not have to ask whether Radha can shut us down >& how independent we are of Adyar. After all I've been a member for not >quite 20 years & I've had contact with the TS for 15 more years beyond >that. How come these things aren't common knowledge? Seems to me I also >remember that what happens at Board meetings is kept secret as well. If so >I'd like to know what for. I think John Algeo has written articles several >times which gave us insights into what goes on in Wheaton. One article in >the AT gave a picture of what everyone on the Wheaton staff does & I >thought that was informative. When I asked for an index of available video & >audio tapes recording lectures & workshops at Wheaton & Ojai I got back a >thick list. There's skads of useful material. Well I think there's got to >be a lot more of this kind of interchange to dispel the aura of distrust >that's been created. I also think that people in the office of the National >Secretary could be a little less stand offish especially since they're an >important point of contact for any new members. I've had some weird >exchanges with them in connection with my new Study Center that I'm trying >hard to make a go of. > >Doss you raise the question as to what the relationship is between the >General Council the International President and our national officers. >Who's calling the shots? I think that's a good question. >You'd also like some more backgrounds info on the revisions in order to be >able to vote on them intelligently. I think that's a good request. On some >of those revisions I voted "No" because I wasn't very clear on what they >actually meant. ============================================================================= MK Ramadoss Glad to know at least someone agrees with some of my questions. ============================================================================ > >You talk about unity & cooperation. My greatest objection to all these >goings on is that after John Algeoall along was mending fences & we were >beginning to forget the big fight we had over Bing's elections here whamo >bango comes something else to cause a rift. We need another rift like we >need a hole in the head but maybe it's too late for that already. > >OK that's a couple of suggestions. >I think there needs to be a build up of basic trust which used to be there >under Dora but has eroded since then. As for our relationship with Adyar... >I don't know. I've never been there. > >Liesel > ================================================================================ MK Ramadoss It is my hope that in the days and months to come we will get more candid information on the all the various things many of us have asked for and have been wondering. Let us wait and see. ..doss =============================================================================== From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 12:25:31 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: By-Law Irregularities [Sorry if you get this twice but there was a possible bug in the vnet server when I posted it so I don't think it ever got through -JRC] Reflections on the TSA [A bit longer than I intended ... sorry gang -:] Reading the letter from the Lodge Presidents the first and perhaps most dramatic thing that struck me was the seemingly strange contradiction: Here is a National Board and President who are attempting a significant alteration of the By-Laws and in the attempt itself apparently don't consider the current By-Laws important enough to conform to. The paradox resolves itself by focussing on the precise *nature* of the By-Laws HQ is attempting to pass and that of those being ignored. And the resolution is deeply disturbing because it inadvertantly shines a terribly bright light on the intentions operating behind the revisions. Notice: the By-Laws HQ is trying to pass especially those that are clearly quite upsetting to even some long-time members all concern shifting financial and political power *from* members and Lodges and *to* centralized control from HQ. The By-Laws being *ignored* in the process of attempting to gain this control are precisely those whose purpose it is to provide a *check* on the power of HQ; those designed to provide the membership with full information in an adequate and timely enough way to either vote with reason in favor or organize the opposition needed to oppose; those meant to assure that balloting is done in such a way as to make certain that the process of balloting itself does not bias the results in one direction or another. HQ is asking the membership to grant it greater power and control at the same time as demonstrating it can't be trusted to correctly use even the power it currently has. And I'm not sure what is more upsetting ... the thought that these By-Laws were *purposely* avoided in an attempt to accomplish the revisions before opposition could build or the thought that those at HQ consider the opinion of the membership to be of so little relevance that they didn't even think it important to follow the By-Laws designed to protect the members' voices. Any institution that governs itself as a democracy or a representative republic exists by virtue of the maintenance of carefully balanced power. The brilliance of democracy is that it begins with the assumption that individuals are autonomous beings possessed of free will integrity and the right to participate in choices affecting them while at the same time recognizing that these individuals are imperfect beings. Democracy is now relatively taken for granted at least in some places but we must remember that it really is a relatively new idea or rather an old idea whose widespread practice is relatively new that it is a profoundly *spiritual* idea and to be an effective *leader* in a democracy requires an integrated mature human psyche ... capable of being *other-oriented*. This is the case even in national democracies where the state has the coercive power of legitimate force to impose its will. But it is doubly the case when the organization is a completely voluntary association of individuals who can easily just leave the organization if they begin to feel as though they are treated as *subjects of* rather than *participants in* the organization. I have worked with several public interest non-profits and work daily to build membership and involvement in one currently and as I was at a meeting today just after reading the post I'm responding to here containing several Board members the Executive Director and a project coordinator I was struck by the fact the while we were engaged in the planning of a somewhat large project that required us to make a series of decisions the entire discussion was completely pervaded by the thought that *we were acting on behalf of the membership* ... and in fact a couple decisions that would possibly slightly alter the ideological tenor of the organization were postponed with the agreement that each of us would personally speak to a number of members to get a sense of what would be acceptable to the membership as a whole. That is as is the case with many such organizations while we were at Headquarters and certainly had the *legal* power to do whatever we wished we did not for a moment forget that we existed *at the pleasure of the membership and as agents of its will*: That our role was not to attempt to go against its wishes but rather to focus and pragmatically express them. Perhaps some of the *problem* with the current TSA is that its various Trusts to some degree insulate its leadership from needing to pay attention to the membership. Membership could drop in half and the salaries of the staff and the heating bill at Wheaton would still get paid. This is positive in that it permits HQ to operate in something other than crisis mode which many non-profits do but can easily be very negative ... as it allows the President and Board to pursue their own personal visions oblivious to whether they are at all in tune with the membership and without even defining and analyzing whether they are successful. The TSA leadership seems to operate as though the moment it is elected it no longer even needs to reference the membership or even in fact reference the By-Laws that *require* it to reference the membership in some actions. This is now so internalized that members have become accustomed to judging by this standard which only looks strange when compared to other organizations ... for instance several people have lately mentioned that if serious opposition continued and positive suggestions were made John Algeo would be open to listening to them though none of even his supporters have implied he would actually feel compelled to *act* on what he heard - and this is said almost as though this listening is a gift he would give as though he it were a thing that distinguished him as a leader. It is not a *virtue* for the President of a voluntary democratic organization to *listen* to its membership its a damn *minimum requirement*. He is *not* our king our pope or our Master ... he is our *EMPLOYEE*. There has recently been discussions about the TSA's abysmal membership retention record ... in which it is the norm that a significant majority of new members leave after their first year; various different conflicting theories have been put forward as to exactly why this is but it occurs to me that this is the only organization I've ever been involved with in which such a discussion would take place at all. Any other organization would consider such a retention rate as a *serious* problem ... and would not *theorize* for years as to why it was the case but would *find out* why. Why hasn't a substantial study been done? Why hasn't a statistically significant sample of those who silently left been *polled* by phone or mail ... *asked* why they left? Obviously Theosophy still has a potent magnetic force somewhere within it or it wouldn't attract so many in the first place ... what then is the *equally powerful* force that then repels so many it attracted? And why isn't this even considered important enough to find out? Why in short do we not consider that there is any obligation to adjust the expression of Theosophy to the changing culture and era we live in live in with the Humanity we are allegedly supposed to be serving. Perhaps because it seems as though an unstated attitude throughout HQ and held by some members as well is that TS membership is a *gift* granted by HQ to petitioners ... almost as though its believed that those who leave weren't ready for or worthy of the gift. But to be very blunt just *what is this gift*? Why should someone join or remain a member? For the teachings? Well the books are available or can be ordered in almost any bookstore. I sure don't need HQ to study the Secret Doctrine. For the Quest magazine? Also can be purchased on the newsstand. Certainly not for the AT ... which is no longer the member's forum HQ *promised the membership it would be* when it split from Quest but is now an ideologically controlled platform. To be even blunter *why should I pay HQ $30.00 a year why should my Lodge make the effort to keep members current in their dues for the privilege of being told by HQ what we must study if we want to continue having the honor of giving HQ our money?*. "Well" some might say "that's a selfish attitude ... our ideal is an ideal of service". And this feeling keeps some from leaving because HQ has carefully over the years cultivated the feeling that supporting the TS is identical with supporting *Theosophy* that somehow membership in the TSA is a *link* to a current generated by the Masters and hence a link to the Masters. That in essence supporting the TSA is somehow *serving the Masters*. This *was* the case *when HPB was alive and the Masters actively involved*. But as harsh as it is to question this link is by no means any longer the case and IMO we must be pragmatic about the fact that belief in this link permits the possibility of great abuses. [The same formula that shows up far more clearly when glimpsed on a lower curve of the spiral is what permits people like Jim Jones and David Koresh to do what they did to their followers: link yourself to a "higher power" Jesus in their cases convince followers that to remain connected to you is to remain connected to that power that to *leave you is to break connection with the power* and you can literally lead people to their *deaths* without causing them to defect]. We are I believe *confusing* our spirituality with our politics instead of *integrating* our spirituality *into* our politics. The confusion ... allows small groups of people to periodically take control of HQ pursue their pet project send friends on speaking engagements all over the country hire friends and even relatives and engage in all sorts of behavior that in most other organizations would cause serious drops in membership - that is to *use the devotion to the Masters in members for their own ends*. If for a moment we look at the behavior of HQ separate it from Theosophy and judge it by the standards we would judge any other non-profit service organization it appears as though we are witnessing what is nothing other than an outright bald-faced power-grab deliberately planned and pursued with intensely manipulative means that HQ has not even bothered to hide. The confusion between politics and spirituality has permitted it to go this far as people *want* to believe in good motives at HQ *want* to give the actions a positive interpretation ... and some few perhaps even wish to believe that the Masters are still guiding the actions of HQ no doubt as the result of Radha's prayers tee hee. And HQ offers explanations designed to satisfy. But *come on* were spirituality and politics not confused could anyone *really* believe that *spending a quarter of a million of our dollars suing one of our own Lodges* was the exercise of pure intentions in the service of Theosophy? *Integrating* our spirituality into our politics would mean something entirely different ... would mean that we wanted to make our organization itself into a living practical expression of our philosophy. It would mean we wouldn't consider it wonderful when our leadership managed to *come up to* the standards of the average modern non-profit but would want as an organization to be setting an exemplary standard of organizational conduct. To be trying to demonstrate what the teachings of the Masters *look like in practice* ... trying to demonstrate what a service organization would look like run without games and manipulation by people striving to act with genuinely pure intent ... assuming its membership to be fully capable of self-determination at the Lodge level and composed of souls who it is a true honor to be given the privilege to serve seeing the membership not as a pile of unruly children that must be coerced and can't even be trusted with "complex" information but rather as composed of a hidden brilliance that simply needs to be *unleashed* ... a membership that then radiates this attitude outward into the world seeing humanity not as so many "masses" mostly too dim to be "ready" for Theosophy but as billions of heroic souls together beginning the long hard climb out of the densest spiral into matter who need - not condescension but rather living breathing *models* of *conscious travellers of the road* who will embrace them ... with the intention of reminding them of the star within their cores - reminding them of that home we all left so terribly long ago. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 14:16:57 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Cycles-Continuous Multi-Dimensional Unbroken Well I did learn a few things from my meditaion on the solstice. I was awake from about 11:00-3:00 this morning. Yesterday was my last day of work for the holidays and I was very tired. I wasn't able to meditate really as I had expected. I went outside. It was raining and the sky was an empty grey. I did try to focus on the meaning of the solstice point as a beginning of a cycle. I did feel the energies of Saturn and Capricorn if that meens restriction old age death learning from lossesdepression and worry. I thought of those on theos-l and other spiritual groups and what the new year may hold for the world and peace. Today when I got up I continued to examine my perhaps over-enthusiam and high expectations regarding the solstice. I realized that the ancients had parties and festivals to more exactly mark the event. We choose Christmas and Jan. 01 New Year's Day in the West for our celebrations. Thus the solstice is not really a discrete event designed to give one a "spiritual experience" but an event in space from a geocentric point of view that marks an point in a CONTINUOUS cyle. Like a sine wave or other curve it is not a collection of points on a Cartesiam Coordinate graph but a smooth continuous FLOW of energy that our minds and geocentric position see as an "event". A solstice on earth would be a quite different astronomical allignment on Mars and along the equator hardly matters at all. Yet it does symbolizes an opportunity for reflection. We will see on TV and in print all the "stories of the year" and "people of the year.'" Appropriately Newt Gingrich is "TIME" magazine's man of the year for some representing the worst of Capricorn a ruthless stingey Grinchey Scrooge and for others an idealistic and wise executive doing the hard things that others are afraid to do for fear of being called "mean spirited". The Lunar New Year occurs for those using the Eastern Calender in late Jan of early Feb. So time is in some ways more maya. But still the season as a whole offers a chance for reflection on material and spritual directions for the next calender year. THe Capricorn energies are just beginning to be felt. But there are other cycles at work of course. Spiritual guidance is a precious thing at any time. Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 14:21:13 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: TI So initiate me into Theosophy International. Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 14:36:54 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Computers and Spirituality When I think about the hours I prostrate myself before the little one-eyed idol named 486 I wonder if I am getting the same benefit as the Dalai Lama before the Buddha. Computers can take a large chunk out of one's life and pocketbook. Some may rememember the work of Marshall McLuhan and his work "The Medium is the Massage." TV is a cold medium because you have to complete the image. When I think of people that post on theos-l and other places I think of their words and have to complete an image of the other 6+ vehicles. I can't see you hear you smell you or get a "look" at your auras or emotional projections. One has to use one's intuition to complete a picture based on verbal communication. Yet we also have to do this one a person is physically present but we have the advantage of all the non-verbal clues. Computers started in the cold analytical fields of math science then moved to business and are now rapidly trying to become warm and fuzzy. No doubt there will soon be on-line churches if there aren't already. Computers could possibly be used to cross-reference and analyze elements of various religious traditions and generate new one--create a new cyber-mythos? . 1. Do ANSI color characters help? They are use sometime on the local BBS's. 2. How will multi-media particullarly sound and motion aid in the education and transmission of religious theosophical and other ideas? 3. How are the on-line discussion going on the WWW? 4. For those that are Compuserve do you want to try to meet in an open live conference room on the "New Age Forum" over the holidays? The are usually empty except at the time of a scheduled conference? I know there are about five of us- Ann B Jerry S. Jim M. Don De G.-- and some others? Anyone have a topic and a time? Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 18:41:47 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: TI >Alan > I shall decline joining for the present until I can consider the >first object more. > >If we define discrimination as "choosing with care | good taste >discernment" Webster's I'm not sure what forming a nucleus >means. Certainly in my own life I discriminate on creed and >sexual orientation. That is not to say that I can't respect >those that have other views. Mike -- this is not very different from the TSA #1 object. what is the problem?? sexual orientation is included but creed seems as an objection to allowing other people to disagree with you have some alternative opinions?? allowing other creeds does not mean allowing "intolerance". you are seeing/reading things I seemed to have missed. peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 22 Dec 1996 19:13:51 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach hi -- I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests from the Adyar/Committee. We seem to be caught up in an arguement about the implementation vs. the *intent* of the changes. It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the following options: 1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. 2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too we need new options: 1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This means that they can extend it *without* blaim -- i.e. backing off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrasing. I think that they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain brothers/sisters within our organization. perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguements out in the open. we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this is neccessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore people's faith in the elected members. 2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. However the wording and implementation were to be determined by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. peace -- john mead jem@vnet.net p.s. send National TSA ideas on how to regain membership confidence especially regarding these new by-law changes. p.p.s. this letter is my own idea. I am also sending it to Theos@netcom and Dr. Algeo. quote: it is easier to mend fences *before* the cattle stampedes through them. I think we agree on this. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 00:34:07 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: trust problem It would seem from the international by-laws that Rahda technically has the power to excommunicate any national section but considering the size and economic clout of the Amercian Section such an action on her part would seem to be sheer insanity. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 00:34:19 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: John Algeo Gerda and I were at the Wheaton HQ tonight Friday for a solstice program. After the program was mercifully over it was awful! we ran into John coming out of his office. He looked terrible! I don't know if he is coming down with latest bug that is going around or the strain from all this by-law stuff is getting to him but if any of you out there have some healing energy to send to him please do so. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 02:23:20 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Returns of Christ > > > >Jesus in the gospel accounts also gives conflicting messages! > >At one point he is quoted as saying he has come only to the lost > >sheep of the house of Israel and elsewhere accepts gentiles > >into his following. > > > >I guess God's son is just confused in whatever guise we find > >him. Should have had a daughter if you ask me which you > >probably don't. > > > >:- Alan > > > Alan thanks for the compliment but what makes you think a daughter would > be any less confused than a son? Confused in a different way perhaps but > confused nonetheless until Nirvana > > Liesel It would at least have been worth a *try* surely? And who wants Nirvana? Sounds pretty d... selfish to me. Now a Boddhisatva sp? - that sound more fun - plenty of things to do you're considered right on loaded with good karma - a job with *respect* - KPJ please note! :- I'm at home all over the holiday and will be on line nightly as usual for anyone who is interested. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 08:46:51 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Returns of Christ writes: >> > >> >Jesus in the gospel accounts also gives conflicting messages! >> >At one point he is quoted as saying he has come only to the lost >> >sheep of the house of Israel and elsewhere accepts gentiles >> >into his following. >> > >> >I guess God's son is just confused in whatever guise we find >> >him. Should have had a daughter if you ask me which you >> >probably don't. >> > >> >:- Alan > >> > >> Alan thanks for the compliment but what makes you think a daughter would >> be any less confused than a son? Confused in a different way perhaps but >> confused nonetheless until Nirvana >> >> Liesel > >It would at least have been worth a *try* surely? And who wants >Nirvana? Sounds pretty d... selfish to me. Now a Boddhisatva >sp? - that sound more fun - plenty of things to do you're >considered right on loaded with good karma - a job with >*respect* - KPJ please note! :- > >I'm at home all over the holiday and will be on line nightly as >usual for anyone who is interested. > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > >Ok it'd be worth a try. I agree with you actually Bodhisattvahood is greatly preferable to Nirvana. 'I'm also at home over Christmas & will be checking my mail after my company goes home again which they do early. On Christmas Eve my son Dave is coming. On Christmas Day my computer whiz kid Michael is coming with his family. Maybe we'll have time to straighten out some kinks in my programs that I don't know how to do. Enjoy you holidays Alan Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 09:33:47 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Anonymity & other issues Liesel >It would be nice if we could help fashion a TS in the spirit the Masters >intended. Unfortunately we seem to be such an independent lot that we need >to quibble all the time about who's righter. It would be great I think if >to our independent thinking we could add a few smidgens of tolerance. This correlates to something I was just reading about - the need for diversity. "Have you ever realized that a group composed entirely of people upon the same ray and who were also at exactly the same point of evolution would be relatively futile and useless? Such a group would lack dynamic-the dynamic which comes into expression when many different ray qualities meet and combine" Discipleship in the New Age Vol. II p. 107 Maybe that's what makes this mailing list much more interesting. The contrasts the clashes the fights and the making up. Sounds like a pretty good storyline. Ann E. Bermingham PS When my spelling checker hits your name Liesel it wants to change it to Diesel. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 10:33:52 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Torn Inside Paul: > as the part of me that finds overwhelming value in *some* of Cayce's readings >*resists* the awareness that there is some *junk mail* in the >akashic records. Good posting Paul. One small point here: there is nothing per se wrong with the akashic records if one can see them directly. The "junk" comes when we view them through the astral-mental planes which distort what is there the akashic records as written by the Lipikas are on the casual plane which is above the personal ego and very hard for us to view directly. Because of the distortion when viewing them through the astral which is to say through our own personal emotions and desires this sort of thing is discouraged in theosophy. How is one to know if one's viewing is direct or is being distorted? Basically if you the personality are doing the viewing then you can rest assure that there is distortion. You have to shift consciousness to something higher than the ego in order to read these "records" correctly. Apparently Cayce sometimes did this and sometimes didn''t. This problem is inherent with the job of clairvoyance and all psychics are subject to it. It sounds like your job is going to be trying to sort out which is a direct view and which is a distortion. Like CWL Cayce was human after all. HAPPY HOLIDAYS Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 15:19:59 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Torn Inside KPJ: The Early Christian volume >reveals that dozens nay scores of people who got past life >readings from Cayce *just happened* to have been eyewitnesses >to the life of Christ. Without arguing for my perception I'll >simply state that I *intuit* that this is simply regurgitation >of the Bible turned into fictional past lives not done with >deceptive intent but rather fulfilling some psychic need of >Christians to imagine themselves living in immediate proximity >to their Lord. It definitely comes across at a much lower >level of plausibility than the medical readings or the >psychological advice on attitudes and emotions or several >other elements of Cayce's work. There is book by Raymond Moody Jr called "Coming Back" A Psychiatrist Explores Past-Life Journeys in which there are many documented regressions that Moody claims are really metaphors for problems in one's current life. At the end he stated that it may be difficult to say which regressions were past lives and which were simply someone working out there present problem in a story set in the past. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 17:09:36 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Bill Gates buys Vatican GOTO http://www.tach.net/public/personal/scpayne/ihatewin/vatican.html Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 23 Dec 1996 23:57:37 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: to Alan Keith and Coherence > According to theos-l@vnet.net: K. Paul Johnson > > > > Alan > > -- > > Member Theosophy International - how about you? > Alan-- > I asked to be signed up in a private email but have yet to > appear on the list. So now I'll ask publicly-- please sign me > up. I'm glad to be #14 instead of #13! Oops! - possible that Demon Internet Ltd. lost your mail in one of their periodic cracks in service. I am pretty sure that *some* e-mail just doesn't arrive at either end though of late the situation has imporved by leaps and bounds. WELCOME! Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 00:01:30 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: TI > Alan > I shall decline joining for the present until I can consider the > first object more. > > If we define discrimination as "choosing with care | good taste > discernment" Webster's I'm not sure what forming a nucleus > means. Certainly in my own life I discriminate on creed and > sexual orientation. That is not to say that I can't respect > those that have other views. > > -Mike Grenier IMO "forming a nucleus" is a beginning providing a focus around which like-minded [theosophical] folk can gather. In an ideal world the idea would be meaningless as we would all simply as human beings recognize our connectedness as members of the human family without the need to mention it. I too "in my own life" tend to discriminate on creed and sexual orientation insofar as I try to choose with whom I will or will not associate at a personal level. David Koresh never had a look in. I do not care for Christian and Muslim fundamenalists and seek to avoid rather than confront them. But that's just me; the project which if we aspire to theosophical ideals is TI seeks to go beyond personality inclinations prejudices and conditioned reflexes. In my twenties I lerned the basics of Astrology from a wizened grey-bearded homeless man whose devotion to his subject made him an expert in his field for those who could find him. A humanitarian amimal-loving person of the highest integrity he was an ex-Roman Catholic and a lover of truth and young men. I shared and continue to share his love of truth of which we are told there is no religion higher. I share his love of animals but not young men. He is long dead but I remember him with affection and gratitude - he taught me a lot not just astrology. In my relationship with him I employed discrimination at the personal level but never in respect of his membership of the human race of which he was one of the homosexual members. There are millions. I have little doubt that some of them are theosophists or theosophy students. I await the outcome of your considerations! Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 00:28:39 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: TI > So initiate me into Theosophy International. > > Keith Price Done. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 00:45:55 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: TI Update article to follow: THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL comprises those who subscribe to the the three objects of the TS but in a more up to date form based on suggestions by members of the internet community and expressed thus: 1. To form a nucleus within the universal human family without discrimination with regard to sex including sexual orientation creed class or color. 2. To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and unrealized human potential and abilities at the same time respecting _all_ life. THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL is simply a Theosophical Network whereby it is sufficient to declare one's sympathy and/or allegiance to the three objects and to be registered as having done so. No belief system is required *nor assumed to be held* by any member. There are no fees no subscriptions although voluntary donations and/or contributions *could* be made to specific projects or even individuals for particular and specified purposes. As THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL does not have and does not need rules whether anyone participates in or supports any such activity is an entirely personal matter. We do hope to be of service and to share what we have with others. The following internet folk have so far signed up: Jerry Hejka-Ekins; Richard P. Taylor; Sy Ginsburg; Liesel F. Deutsch; Bee Brown NZ; Peter Walstra; Murray Stentiford NZ; Alan Bain UK; Jerry Schueler; Eldon B. Tucker; Anne Picker; John E. Mead; John R. Crocker; K. Paul Johnson; Keith Price; Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. Please send E-mail to: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk ----------------------------------------------- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 01:04:10 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Object 02 >From Alan Bain. It cannot have escaped peoples' attention that I have been promoting THEOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL with some enthusiasm ..... and so I thought it time to say a few things that seem important about it. The 2nd object of the Adyar TS reads: To encourage the study of comparative religion philosophy and science. The TI version reads: To encourage and engage in the study of comparative religion theosophy philosophy and the scientific method according to individual ability and inclination. When the Adyar objects are considered there is no commitment to study anything at all and theosophy as a subject is not even mentioned an all too familiar peculiarity to the Adyar TS thinking members. TI has therefore added theosophy as a specific subject and *at the same time* expresses a commitment actually to study the subjects mentioned. On theos-l this is clearly already done as the quality of the discussions shows. One correspondent took to task the reference to "scientific method" as distinct from "science" as such. In attempting the initial formulation of the TI objects it seemed to me that "science" as a subject was in this day and age too broad a definition. The main characteristic of "science" has been so far as I can see to approach its increasingly large number of individual subjects or disciplines using the scientific method of experimentation verification and testing of data. Being in England I have had during my own studies the privilege of access to that wondrous institution the British Library. When I first used it it was more homely and although already vast called simply the Reading Room of the British Museum Library. There I read in the original editions such arcane works as Cornelius Agrippa's ~Three Books of Occult Philosophy~ and Dion Fortune's ~The Goat-foot God~. One interesting fact at that time and maybe still was that all such material was classified under one simple heading: OCCULT SCIENCE. Here too one found works on theosophy of all ages both pre- and post- HPB. Incidentally it was there that I first found a book mentioned recently on theos-l ~The Kabbalah~ by Isaac Meier. Sorry know nothing about him now. Anyhow you can see why on reflection I altered the rather vague reference to "science" to "scientific method." Why? Because as in its own wisdom fairly old if not actually ancient the British Museum Library implied so ingenuously that our own favorite topics were subject to its disciplines. On reading such books as that by Isaac Meier I can see they were right to do so though I am not so sure about ~The Goat-foot God~. Theosophy proper IMHO in all its manifestations *is* a science even though "science" - in the sense of the scientific "establishment" - might regard it otherwise. To follow on from there the third object really comes within the scope of the second it seems to me. It does help however to give it a separate mention as the third object links back to the first like the uroboros serpent in the Theosophical logo. The quest for truth in other words is an eternal quest. In subscribing to TI we are articulating our part in that quest but more importantly the fact that we have it in common; that it's findings are for sharing - like life itself. If I discover the truth which is the circle what do I draw? Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 03:44:38 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach At 123400 PM 12/23/95 -0500 John E Mead wrote: >hi -- > >I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that the intent >of the >changes were to directly conform with requests from the Adyar/Committee. > >We seem to be caught up in an arguement about the implementation vs. the >*intent* >of the changes. I am very glad to see your message and it is very timely. All of us are united in the best interests of Theosophy and Theosophical Society. We have a situation where all our hearts are in the right place and the motivation of everyone is correct and excellent. One thing my experience has taught me is that *every* problem can be solved if we only clearly see the *problem*. So I am very optimistic. I am also reminded of the famous quote "the wise compound their differences in a mutually forbearing spirit." Let us all try to make the New Year a starting point for a united and harmonious TSA. Seasons Greeting to all. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 04:47:44 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: John Algeo At 041800 PM 12/23/95 -0500 Chuck wrote: >Gerda and I were at the Wheaton HQ tonight Friday for a solstice program. > After the program was mercifully over it was awful! we ran into John >coming out of his office. He looked terrible! I don't know if he is coming >down with latest bug that is going around or the strain from all this by-law >stuff is getting to him but if any of you out there have some healing energy >to send to him please do so. >Chuck > Thanks for the info. I will send him whatever healing energy I have. Should help him. BTW on the question of the bug there are two things I have found very helpful when any bug hits you. One is a homeopathic tablet called Alpha CF which is manufactured in Netherlands for the famous US Company Boericke & Tafel. This helps to cut down the intensity of the bug if taken when the first symptom shows up. The second is the well known Apple Cider Vinegar. When there is any bug it help to take it twice a day when down with the bug as well as when there is no bug. The prefered vinegar is the ones made from whole apple and fermented in wooden vats. As all of us know it is acetic acid at 5% concentration and I usually take a teaspoon in one cup of water and some like it with a little honey. Some of you may recall there was a book on the apple cider vinegar by the well know theosophist Cyril Scott. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 04:48:09 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: origin Int'l Theosophists Alan: >On another note would any members of TI who are *not* in the >USA please let me know - not all e-mail addresses show the >country of the person concerned. The *.nz members are of course >obvious as am I with a *.uk suffix but I know that some of the >*.com and similar addresses are not necessarily in the US these >days even though this used to be the case. I have also >discovered that *.net suffixes can come from almost anywhere. My physical home is in the Netherlands in its cosmopolitan capital :- /* Peter I. Walstra */ Private: pwalstra@pi.net Member Theosophy International TS WTYF [...] Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 05:30:12 GMT From: Peter Walstra Subject: RE: Computers and Spirituality >No doubt there will soon be on-line churches if there aren't already. >Computers could possibly be used to cross-reference and analyze elements of >various religious traditions and generate new one--create a new cyber-mythos? Take a look at the 'McChurch' site at http://mcchurch.org/ ! >3. How are the on-line discussion going on the WWW? >4. For those that are Compuserve do you want to try to meet in an open live >conference room on the "New Age Forum" over the holidays? The are usually >empty except at the time of a scheduled conference? I know there are about >five of us- Ann B Jerry S. Jim M. Don De G.-- and some others? Anyone have a >topic and a time? > >Namaste >Keith Price > How about IRC channels? That's not restricted to Compuserve or some other service. I've only recently tried it out so don't know much about it but it seems you just need an IRC program like MIRC and connect to a server. Then you pick one or more of the channels that are available; haven't seen anything yet sounding like theosophy-related talk though. HAPPY HOLI-DAYS TO EVERYONE! /* Peter I. Walstra */ Member Theosophy International TS WTYF [...] Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 10:52:02 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: To Alan Regarding TI Alan With interest I have watched the development Theosophy International and commend your underlying motivation and skill in getting it rolling. Were there no Theosophical Society it is certainly the organization I would join. The problem for me however is that there *is* a Theosophical Society and it is the only group I have ever felt any--as Paul recently said--"karmic" connection to. Is there any incompatibility between TI and TS? I don't think so--perhaps the former is a good way to remind the latter what it really *was* *is* and *should be in the future* if it expects to have much further significance in this world. Nevertheless I suppose I have always felt myself to be a little too much of a "company man" to join anything besides the Theosophical Society. On the other hand were Theosophy International audacious enough to declare itself an unauthorized "Global Lodge *of* the Theosophical Society" . . . Right now though I agree that there does seem to be a great deal of desire-mental consciousness pervading the programs and procedures of the Theosophical Society. The possible "strategizing" of the by-law adoptions may be an example of this--using the mental nature in the service of a desired outcome etc. The possible requirement that study centers must first study certain things "Real Theosophy" in order to be certified may be another example. Nevertheless I continue to have hope for the TS--primarily I suppose because I am convinced that only individuals in the fourth-degree of Self-awareness and lower can be comfortable for very long when they utilize the semi-Selves which form in desire-mental consciousness. My prediction is that John Algeo for one despite his favoring of the changes in the by-laws is going to throw his support on the side of a much longer period for deliberation and discussion. I see him as someone in at least the fifth degree of Self-awareness; thus he should be able to maintain the "Once-Removed Vantage" vis-a-vis the desire-mental level of consciousness and consequently be able to forego indulging himself in what would in his better moments seem even to him like a declasse manner. If however he allows such a semi-Self to have free egoic rein "I *really am* my cherished idea for changing the by-laws and I *shall* prevail over individuals who *really are* less valid ideas" then I guess we're in more trouble than I thought. For now nonetheless I am keeping the faith that the Theosophical Society will soon return to being an organization simply founded upon THE THREE OBJECTS and that private beliefs and perspectives of members will stay private--in the sense of not superceding or "filtering" the expression of other members' beliefs and perspectives. This is not true at the moment I agree but both Adyar and Wheaton would have to be pretty obtuse to think that all the malcontents of the Society *just happened* to end up on theos-l. They must suspect that we may be at least a little bit like a representative sample of the entire membership and that many of us are getting a little worried that the official organization is starting to look like it is in the process of being redesigned by and for the benefit of those who resemble the Sadducees--i.e. the old Jewish "insider" aristocrisy often families which passed power from one generation to the next who rejected any new doctrines etc. coming into the Law. For the moment Alan I will just continue to watch both the developments within the Theosophical Society and your good efforts with Theosophy International as well. Best wishes Richard Ihle Capitalizing what they think can be articulated rather than reserving it for what cannot. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 14:00:09 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: trust problem >It would seem from the international by-laws that Rahda technically has the >power to excommunicate any national section but considering the size and >economic clout of the Amercian Section such an action on her part would seem >to be sheer insanity. >Chuck > >But it has been done to smaller sections. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 14:11:05 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach >Dear John Meade I agree with you 100% To reiterate I believe with you that "misunderstanding & comminucation problems *are* honest problems" & that they exist in this instance. I also think that "we need more time to come to a peaceful understanding" before there's a "stampede". "Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged." Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race hi -- > >I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that the intent >of the >changes were to directly conform with requests from the Adyar/Committee. > >We seem to be caught up in an arguement about the implementation vs. the >*intent* >of the changes. > >It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the following >options: > >1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. > >2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do not trust >the TSA administration -- which is not good for anyone/organization. law-suits >would probably follow too > >we need new options: > >1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This means that they >can extend it *without* blaim -- i.e. backing off can SEEM like a defeat and >be embarrasing. I think that they can decide to postpone elections in a manner >which signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we should >ACCEPT as >an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of discussion. We need to allow >for misunderstandings and communication problems as *honest* problems >due to the current communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against >certain brothers/sisters within our organization. > >perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguements out in the open. > >we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they TSA had >anticipated >the response to this ballot. We need to set up an environment where the >devisivness is eliminated. this is neccessary to preserve the TSA's >integrity and restore people's faith in the elected members. > >2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of the new By-Laws >were *requested* by International Adyar. However the wording and >implementation >were to be determined by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the >guidelines >were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open discussion esp. >between TSA Chapters/Lodges. > >Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. > >peace -- > >john mead >jem@vnet.net > >p.s. send National TSA ideas on how to regain membership confidence >especially regarding these new by-law changes. > >p.p.s. this letter is my own idea. I am also sending it to >Theos@netcom and Dr. Algeo. > >quote: it is easier to mend fences *before* the cattle stampedes through them. >I think we agree on this. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 14:55:41 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Anonymity & other issues This is from Liesel I still can't get into my "New Message" capacity. Guess not till Dreamscape opens up again on morning. From time to time I'm still reading "Talks on The Path of Occultism" & this AM I came across something which perhaps applies to us just now. It's several paragraphs but I thought it worth being put onto Theos-l. p.343 ff. "The great object of the TS is not so much to provide the mental development as to raise those who are ready into responsiveness to buddhic influences to rewaken the sensitiveness of its people on a higher turn of the spiral and prepare them for the new race. It does not deprecate mental development - far from it - but it prepares for the next stage when intuitional love will produce harmony and brotherhood & will employ the developed intellect to build a new civilization based on those ideals. Our Society being in close sympathy with the higher planes is very sensitive to the forces liberated when another "Son of Man" comes to birth. It receives the first touch of the great outrush and this gives it new impetus; its work increases and spreads and there is an advance in members and in brotherly feelings. "Sometimes however this stimulation of life produces friction due to a loss of the sense of proportion. Some great idea arises in the mind of some member; the inrush of force intensifies it & that is very good if he is a well-balanced man and can pursue his own ideas without deprecating those of other people. But where there is unbalance & narrowness differences of opinion may be made stronger. We have our special lines of work in Theosophy. Some take up 01 form of activity & some another but danger arises when a man begins to think that his line is the one which the whole Society ought to take up & emphasize. When other people try to follow out their ideas he tends to think that they are not doing the best for the Society because they do not come & help him. It is not unnatural that enthusiasm should sometimes cause friction in such cases when brotherly love & real tolerance fall a little behind..... "It is nearly always wise to let people try their ideas but always sad when they urge them too strongly upon others. Experience tells us ever more and more THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE SOCIETY IS HARMONY AMONG THE WORKERS. INDEED IT MAY BE SAID THAT HARMONY AMONG THE WORKERS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SUCCESS IN ANY ONE PIECE OF WORK. So let each man follow the best inspiration that comes to him but let him have the fullest sympathy for others also in their individual ideas. If without peril to the spirit of harmony which makes the Society a perfect channel for higher forces an open door to the Great ones we can engage in vigorous activity it is well indeed but not otherwise." CWL Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race >>It would be nice if we could help fashion a TS in the spirit the Masters >>intended. Unfortunately we seem to be such an independent lot that we need >>to quibble all the time about who's righter. It would be great I think if >>to our independent thinking we could add a few smidgens of tolerance. > >This correlates to something I was just reading about - the need for diversity. >"Have you ever realized that a group composed entirely of people upon the same >ray and who were also at exactly the same point of evolution would be >relatively futile and useless? Such a group would lack dynamic-the dynamic >which comes into expression when many different ray qualities meet and combine" >Discipleship in the New Age Vol. II p. 107 > >Maybe that's what makes this mailing list much more interesting. The contrasts >the clashes the fights and the making up. Sounds like a pretty good storyline. > >Ann E. Bermingham > >PS When my spelling checker hits your name Liesel it wants to change it to >Diesel. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 15:05:40 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: John Algeo >Gerda and I were at the Wheaton HQ tonight Friday for a solstice program. > After the program was mercifully over it was awful! we ran into John >coming out of his office. He looked terrible! I don't know if he is coming >down with latest bug that is going around or the strain from all this by-law >stuff is getting to him but if any of you out there have some healing energy >to send to him please do so. >Chuck > >Dear John Here is another thoughtformful of liberated Munchkins to help you on your way. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 24 Dec 1996 15:32:49 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: trust problem >>It would seem from the international by-laws that Rahda technically has the >>power to excommunicate any national section but considering the size and >>economic clout of the Amercian Section such an action on her part would seem >>to be sheer insanity. >>Chuck PS. It just occurred to me that I think we would do well to meditate for Radha as well. LFD > >>But it has been done to smaller sections. > >Liesel >Member Theosophy International >Member Human Race From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 06:44:09 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision Keith: The ball is in the court of National Board. I am waiting to see any further developments in the matter. Let us all keep tuned. MK Ramadoss At 011800 PM 12/25/95 -0500 Keith wrote: >It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the >voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get "lost" >at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the matter has >been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with >the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing >Escudero. > >Keith Price > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 08:02:27 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Solar Cult Suicides It seems it was an auspicious solstice with more negative elements than positive so far. I don't have the news article but a front page story mentioned that another branch know as the Solar Cult had a mass sucide in the early morning of the 22nd. The story said that it may have been linked to the time of the solstice. A note they left said they wanted to "see other worlds". Another branch of this group committed mass sucide last year. They were linked in the press to theosophy indirectly.Does anyone have more on this? Chuck mentioned that he went to a solsctice celebration at headquaters and "it was awful" and that John Algeo looked stressed and possibly a little ill. I don't want to over-dramatize but I wrote my post about my solstice meditation before I heard about the solar cult suicides. I may have unconsciously linked with the negative group meditations that go on at this time and I was also physically tired but this is the whole problem of the energies at this time of year anyway. I think we can learn yet another sad lesson from these suicides that a healthy skepticsm and humor can protect one from the despair that sets in win one doesn't see the world individuals or organizations like TSA transform to meet our spiritual expectations. We are obviously on a long path of evolution. It is sad to think that seemingly negative energies may be part of the spiritual plan: Alan writes concerning the path of Capricorn in the kabala: "PATH TWENTY-SIX "The Renewing Intelligence. Thereby God reneweth all which is capable of renovation in the creation of the world." Sepher Yetzirah: The letter Ayin. Laughter. The zodiacal sign Capricorn. The Minor Sephiroth: 'Hesed in Assiah. The Christian Church: The Book of Epistles. The Greater Tarot: Card fifteen the "Devil." Commentary: "Thereby God reneweth all which is capable of renova- tion in the creation of the world." Keith: For all that ignored the solstice it may have been just as well. One more question: Was it good for you Alan? Namaste Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 08:15:24 GMT From: Keith Price <74024.3352@compuserve.com> Subject: Postpone By-Laws Decision It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get "lost" at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the matter has been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing Escudero. Keith Price From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 11:18:26 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision At 050800 PM 12/25/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >>It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the >>voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get "lost" >>at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the >matter has >>been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with >>the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing >>Escudero. >> >>Keith Price >> >>Keith After Gerda Thompson suggested postponing the voting I asked John >Algeo whether this could be done. He said the Board would have to do it. >I had contacted John because I'm of the opinion that we can't take another >rift. We're still only partly recovered from the one which occurred around >Bing Escudero. >I myself would just as soon not take part in these revisions discussions at >all. I've had enough standing up for causes in the past & am entitled I >think to some peace in my retirment. I've tried to come in here & there >anyway because the whole thing worries me greatly. After having healed >partly from the former rift here we go again & I see the whole TS becoming >even more ineffective. Since my whole lifestyle is firmly rooted in >Theosophy and since I think we have something really worthwhile to offer to >others I hate to watch the Society the vehicle of Theosophy go down the >tubes. I think it's heading that way but I really don't know how one could >stop it since it involves more than our Board & our President it involves >Adyar. > >Liesel Liesel: 1. Please do not give up. We need take active interest in an organization from which and from whose philosophy we all have benefitted and thru us others may have benfitted. We are dealing with the long term future of TS and all of us are motivated by the same objectives and goals and we have to speak up when we see there is a need to speak up. Not speaking up means we are missing an opportunity. It is the collective inputs that help the TS continue to be strong and useful to the Humanity. 2. If you have carefully noticed I have copied my postings that I feel are very important to our International President National President and the National Board. I am confident that as International and National get the feedback as to some of our thinking and opinions they will be in a better position to address the important issues that need to be addressed. The views on issues from members in the field is very important as it gives a better picture of the issues as viewed from the field. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 11:44:47 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: trust problem - being of service To: Olcott Library Dear Elisabeth Iwasn't going to respond about this matter of library service but I've changed my mind. I really wonder whether my memory is playing computer tricks on me. I remember very clearly your telling me several times not to send you any more business but I don't recall anything about having new people contact you directly ... only about not contacting you at all in this country or out. For 23 years of my life I worked professionally with public including drug addicts & bank presidents... longer on a volunteer basis. In all that time I never pushed away anyone who sincerely sought my services. I tried to take care of them no matter how busy I was no matter how much I had to go out of my way. If they needed something I tried to get it for them or else tried to see that someone else did. To me that's what "being of service" means. Your conception seems to vary somewhat from mine & I guess I'm just too dense to understand your style of service. Liesel >>It would seem from the international by-laws that Rahda technically has the >>>power to excommunicate any national section but considering the size and >>>economic clout of the Amercian Section such an action on her part would seem >>>to be sheer insanity. >>>Chuck > >PS. It just occurred to me that I think we would do well to meditate for >Radha as well. LFD > >> >>>But it has been done to smaller sections. >> > >>Liesel >>Member Theosophy International >>Member Human Race >> > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 12:05:04 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision >It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the >voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get "lost" >at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the matter has >been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with >the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing >Escudero. > >Keith Price > >Keith After Gerda Thompson suggested postponing the voting I asked John Algeo whether this could be done. He said the Board would have to do it. I had contacted John because I'm of the opinion that we can't take another rift. We're still only partly recovered from the one which occurred around Bing Escudero. I myself would just as soon not take part in these revisions discussions at all. I've had enough standing up for causes in the past & am entitled I think to some peace in my retirment. I've tried to come in here & there anyway because the whole thing worries me greatly. After having healed partly from the former rift here we go again & I see the whole TS becoming even more ineffective. Since my whole lifestyle is firmly rooted in Theosophy and since I think we have something really worthwhile to offer to others I hate to watch the Society the vehicle of Theosophy go down the tubes. I think it's heading that way but I really don't know how one could stop it since it involves more than our Board & our President it involves Adyar. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 22:01:52 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Regarding TI At 115200 PM 12/25/95 -0500 Alan wrote: >>Thanks for the kind words. My motivation is based upon what I >see as the serious possiblity that given its current course and >policyies the Theosophical Society will simply wither away ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >partly from the very *untheosophical* power struggles that go on ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >England's history is not so very different from America's in >terms of the basics. I began promoting TI because of clues I >had picked up from theos-l - for which we should all be thankful >and greatly indebted. > I have been following *very closely* what is going on relative to TSA's Bylaws. As far as I know I *do not* see any power struggle. Most of the discussion you have seen are coming out of the implementation of policies originating from excellent motivation in the protecting the long term interests of TSA. Just the fact that there is much discussion here itself is very healthy gives strength to TSA and when ultimately the policies are properly implemented they will only strengthen TSA. No other organization would have tolerated the kind of discussions we have had here. No matter what is discussed here TS it is *not* going to wither away because at the lodge/branch/study center level the activities are going to go on. The strength and vitality and usefulness of each lodge/branch/study center and any organization depends on the dedication and sacrifices of a *few individuals*. We do have such individuals at each lodge/branch/study center. It is each individual member who spread Theosophy and help the other individuals members or not with whom they come into contact. Just thought I should share my views with everyone. MK Ramadoss Scribed at 4.00am cdt 12/26/95 From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 22:25:26 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Object 02 At 085700 PM 12/23/95 -0500 Alan wrote: > >When the Adyar objects are considered there is no commitment to >study anything at all and theosophy as a subject is not even ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >mentioned an all too familiar peculiarity to the Adyar TS ^^^^^^^^^ >thinking members. > It is one of the very important facts that I point out to new and prospective members that it is *the only* organization where its main subject is not *defined*. The motto of TS is "There is no Religion Higher Than Truth". As all of us are just students of Truth Divine Wisdom - Theo-Sophia cannot IMHO be static and be *defined*. The fact that TS has lived for 120 years is a standing evidence of the soundness of this decision of the Founders. IMHO that is why when there is some talk about the what lodges and study centers should *study* I felt that there could not and should not be any specific set of books as the specific line of work of each lodge/study center/ is different from any other. Long time ago I was a associated with an extremely active lodge which is as active today which had close to 300 members not counting their family members who participated in the programs. For example in spite of the varied kinds of programs there was *not* a single lecture or study class on "Secret Doctrine" during the thirteen years I attended the lodge programs. So each lodge has to tailor its activities to the line of work its members want to commit themselves. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 22:55:48 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Solstice > > Keith: > > For all that ignored the solstice it may have been just as well. > > One more question: Was it good for you Alan? > > Namaste > Keith Price It was very quiet very still. If anything I suspect a period of reflection and pause for thought in matters esoteric and/or theosophical. In my understanding of esoteric astrology Capricorn represents the gate of death of transition from this world to another be it astral mental causal or whatever; probably varies according to the individual. And of course the same journey can be taken while still in this temporal life. With the presence of both Uranus and Neptune in the latter end of Capricorn I wonder what will happen this coming year when the sun reaches their conjunction. Uranus will get to Aquarius first of the two - POW!! Thought: Namaste is an anagram of NAME TSA ..... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 25 Dec 1996 23:08:26 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Regarding TI > Alan > > With interest I have watched the development Theosophy International and > commend your underlying motivation and skill in getting it rolling. Were > there no Theosophical Society it is certainly the organization I would join. Richard Thanks for the kind words. My motivation is based upon what I see as the serious possiblity that given its current course and policyies the Theosophical Society will simply wither away partly from the very *untheosophical* power struggles that go on England's history is not so very different from America's in terms of the basics. I began promoting TI because of clues I had picked up from theos-l - for which we should all be thankful and greatly indebted. > The problem for me however is that there *is* a Theosophical Society and > it is the only group I have ever felt any--as Paul recently said--"karmic" > connection to. Is there any incompatibility between TI and TS? I don't > think so--perhaps the former is a good way to remind the latter what it > really *was* *is* and *should be in the future* if it expects to have much > further significance in this world. Nevertheless I suppose I have always > felt myself to be a little too much of a "company man" to join anything > besides the Theosophical Society. Yes there *is* a Theosophical Society. I am a member of it and a past president and past vice-president of my own Lodge upon whose committee I still serve. So in promoting TI I see myself as promoting something that exists *within* theosophy *within* the TS for those who are members and not something outside theosophy or instead of any theosophical setup currently in existence. > On the other hand were Theosophy International audacious enough to declare > itself an unauthorized "Global Lodge *of* the Theosophical Society" . . . I don't quite see how this could be - I do not know if all TI members are TS Adyar members though one or two belong to at least three TS organizations at the same time. > Right now though I agree that there does seem to be a great deal of > desire-mental consciousness pervading the programs and procedures of the > Theosophical Society. The possible "strategizing" of the by-law adoptions > may be an example of this--using the mental nature in the service of a > desired outcome etc. The possible requirement that study centers must first > study certain things "Real Theosophy" in order to be certified may be > another example. Well now to me TI is a way of "using" if you like "the mental nature in the service of a desired outcome." The difference is that the desired outcome is a coming together to *voluntarily* serve and promote the three objects in a more up to date manner which reflects the society we actually live in; which while respecting the values and ideals of the founders recognizes that humanity has moved on and is in fact not a little richer for the advent of the theosophical movement begun by HPB and company in 1975 and whose work may have influenced the world more than many of imagine. The development of knowledge and the understanding of truth - of which there is no higher religion - has progressed considerably since 1875 or even 1926 when my own Lodge was opened by Annie Besant around the time of the summer solstice. Theosophy - in the Adyar TS or anywhere else - needs I formly believe not only to regognize this but also to express it and adapt to it. I am regarded by some as something of a "feminist" in that I see the role of women in theosophical service as crucial to the future of the kind of theosophy we both value. But that's how the whole thing *started out* and was continued especially in the early decades. How many of the following were men: HPB Annie Besant Anna Kingsford Katherine Ting...y sp? Alice Bailey? My own Lodge was founded and held together in its formative years almost entirely by active women. So you can see why I favor the inclusive language approach of TI? How many *young* women of today want to members of a "brotherhood" - something associated with peculiar masonic all-male rituals which in this country are the regular stuff of TV humor. Sure one or two wonlt be too bothered but my guess is that *most* won't even look any further past this word when they are shown the objects as they now stand. In fact one woman joined our Lodge and resigned when she got the usual handout pack for new members *because she resented being described as a "fellow" and a "brother." "I am a woman!" she said and sent the lot back. A mere youngster of 52 ....... > Nevertheless I continue to have hope for the TS--primarily I suppose The declining membership figures here as in the US do not alas support this hope. > For now nonetheless I am keeping the faith that the Theosophical Society > will soon return to being an organization simply founded upon THE THREE > OBJECTS and that private beliefs and perspectives of members will stay > private--in the sense of not superceding or "filtering" the expression of > other members' beliefs and perspectives. Which is exactly what TI seeks to promote both within the Adyar TS and *anywhere else* where people truly care about theosophical principles and ideas. PLUS - it's free has no by-laws no laws! and to date although miniscule represented in three countries! > For the moment Alan I will just continue to watch both the developments > within the Theosophical Society and your good efforts with Theosophy > International as well. > > Best wishes > > Richard Ihle At my end Theosophy International *is* a development within the Theosophical Society! It can also be and is for some See the current issue of ~Ergates~ a development beyond it as well. Why not come on in? Help to change things simply by asserting your right to be Richard Ihle Theosophist. Happy New year New Age New Ideas Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 01:00:13 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Regarding TI On 26 199512 MK Ramadoss wrote: > > I have been following *very closely* what is going on relative to > TSA's Bylaws. As far as I know I *do not* see any power struggle. Save to the extent that HQ is struggling with its membership. I think there is a power struggle between two different *ideas* of what Theosophy is and between two different ideas of how hierarchically power ought to be distributed between the national and Lodge levels. > Most of the discussion you have seen are coming out of the > implementation of policies originating from excellent motivation in the > protecting the long term interests of TSA. Just the fact that there is much > discussion here itself is very healthy gives strength to TSA and when > ultimately the policies are properly implemented they will only strengthen > TSA. No other organization would have tolerated the kind of discussions we > have had here. Sadly the TSA really did *not* tolerate these discussions ... it could not stop them. It made no effort to permit or encourage similar discussions in for instance the AT. In fact seems to have gone out of its way to sharply limit the time and information available for discussion. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 06:13:20 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision Unfortunately the election material was mailed some time ago so now the board is stuck with a real mess and no good way out of it. Let us hope that they learn from this debacle. Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 07:35:59 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision At 111400 AM 12/26/95 -0500 you wrote: >Unfortunately the election material was mailed some time ago so now the >board is stuck with a real mess and no good way out of it. Let us hope that >they learn from this debacle. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Chuck > I hope so!!! ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 10:16:46 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Blame Ann for Asking Copy AEB In reading your excellent post I encountered your terms of level of consciousness. I come to theos-l with terminology from over 20 years of reading Bailey so that is what I am familiar with. Could you explain or direct me to the source of your terms such as fourth and fifth-level consciousness? RI Thank you for all *your* excellent posts. I have tried to simplify my terminology over the last couple decades and am now down to *degree* of Self-awareness and *level* of consciousness. While I can be tedious at the slightest provocation on the subject of *psychogenesis* the important part I suppose is the realization that individuals can be "ranked" according to the point at which their sense of Self "Undifferentiated Consciousness" is no longer able to its unable to "hold Its ground" along the "continuum" of psychological conditions which result from interactions with a person's energy-physical emotional mental and Spiritual nature thus giving rise to all the varieties of "differentiated consciousness". Perhaps the first hurdle to get over in all this is to realize that *everything* we experience has an "egoic" component as a result of the involvement with partial transformation of the Self the primordial sense of *I am*. Thus when we have a toothache there is little way to escape the psychogenetic state of *I AM the pain in my molar*. If our attention shifts to a different tooth the previous ego-formation dissolves and then we are "I AM the pain in my incisor." I call such egoic-formations "semi-Selves." Fortunately semi-Selves forming one at a time please at this "physical level of consciousness" are so gross that--unless the pain or sensation is *really* intense-- there is usually some "remainder" of untransformed Self present to keep a "Once-Removed Vantage" on the psychological condition. The person is seldom completely deluded that he or she *really is* a physical semi-Self o.k. o.k. maybe if the taste of the pecan pie is amazingly good . . .. Things get a little more problematic when semi-Selves form at higher levels of consciousness. Keeping the Once-Removed Vantage is dependent upon how much Self-awareness the person has developed often by means of meditative practice. Theosophical writers have tried to indicate the levels of consciousness in a variety of ways--number of divisions qualities etc.--so many in fact that an individual has little choice but to repeatedly watch the inner progression for himself or herself during meditation. I have settled on these seven for myself: *pranic physical desire-feeling desire-mental mental Spirit-mental and Spirit*. Theosophical scribes and pharisees will try to tell you that you are wrong because so-and-so says such-and-such; however this is a situation where you must stick to what you experience in meditation. Your purpose is not to come up with the last word on this subject only to get enough personal experience with the levels of differentiated consciousness so that you can USE them in Adept fashion. However you cannot use in a mistake-free manner the ones which entirely gobble you up egoically. When I say that someone is in the "fifth degree" all I mean is that he or she is able to experience "fourth-level" desire-mental consciousness without losing the Once-Removed Vantage. When I say "sixth degree" I mean someone who does not turn egoically kamikaze when utilizing a semi-Self forming at the "fifth level" of consciousness desire-free mentation. All in all I suppose this terminology is just an attempt to take the time-honored concept of *older and younger souls* not to mention *Rounds Root Races Sub-Races* etc. out of the context of anthropogenesis and see what it might mean in the context of psychogenesis. The power associated with this possibly newly unfolding component of theosophy is spectacular Ann. With a little practice one can not only begin to look at oneself in a far more expert way but often many of the more common mysteries regarding why other people behave as then do etc. simply seem to fall away as well. And the coolest thing about it Ann is that so many people are so well along the way with this personal theosophical development--without having needed any special terminology at all! Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 10:20:36 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision >At 050800 PM 12/25/95 -0500 Liesel Keith wrote: >>>It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the >>>voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get "lost" >>>at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the >>matter has >>>been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with >>>the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing >>>Escudero. >>> >>>Keith Price >>> >>>Keith After Gerda Thompson suggested postponing the voting I asked John >>Algeo whether this could be done. He said the Board would have to do it. >>I had contacted John because I'm of the opinion that we can't take another >>rift. We're still only partly recovered from the one which occurred around >>Bing Escudero. >>I myself would just as soon not take part in these revisions discussions at >>all. I've had enough standing up for causes in the past & am entitled I >>think to some peace in my retirment. I've tried to come in here & there >>anyway because the whole thing worries me greatly. After having healed >>partly from the former rift here we go again & I see the whole TS becoming >>even more ineffective. Since my whole lifestyle is firmly rooted in >>Theosophy and since I think we have something really worthwhile to offer to >>others I hate to watch the Society the vehicle of Theosophy go down the >>tubes. I think it's heading that way but I really don't know how one could >>stop it since it involves more than our Board & our President it involves >>Adyar. >> >>Liesel > >Liesel: > >1. Please do not give up. We need take active interest in an organization >from which and from whose philosophy we all have benefitted and thru us >others may have benfitted. We are dealing with the long term future of TS >and all of us are motivated by the same objectives and goals and we have to >speak up when we see there is a need to speak up. Not speaking up means we >are missing an opportunity. It is the collective inputs that help the TS >continue to be strong and useful to the Humanity. > >2. If you have carefully noticed I have copied my postings that I feel are >very important to our International President National President and the >National Board. I am confident that as International and National get the >feedback as to some of our thinking and opinions they will be in a better >position to address the important issues that need to be addressed. The >views on issues from members in the field is very important as it gives a >better picture of the issues as viewed from the field. > >MK Ramadoss > >Doss I guess I'm not really giving up but my input is rather tired & 1/2 hearted. I realize that this revisions question is very important but I'd rather be doing something else. Liesel > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 10:30:13 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Object 02 At 040800 PM 12/26/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >>At 085700 PM 12/23/95 -0500 Alan wrote: >>> >>>When the Adyar objects are considered there is no commitment to >>>study anything at all and theosophy as a subject is not even >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>mentioned an all too familiar peculiarity to the Adyar TS >> ^^^^^^^^^ >>>thinking members. >>> >> >> It is one of the very important facts that I point out to new and >>prospective members that it is *the only* organization where its main >>subject is not *defined*. The motto of TS is "There is no Religion Higher >>Than Truth". As all of us are just students of Truth Divine Wisdom - >>Theo-Sophia cannot IMHO be static and be *defined*. The fact that TS has >>lived for 120 years is a standing evidence of the soundness of this decision >>of the Founders. >> >> IMHO that is why when there is some talk about the what lodges and >>study centers should *study* I felt that there could not and should not be >>any specific set of books as the specific line of work of each lodge/study >>center/ is different from any other. >> >> Long time ago I was a associated with an extremely active lodge >>which is as active today which had close to 300 members not counting >>their family members who participated in the programs. For example in >>spite of the varied kinds of programs there was *not* a single lecture or >>study class on "Secret Doctrine" during the thirteen years I attended the >>lodge programs. So each lodge has to tailor its activities to the line of >>work its members want to commit themselves. >> >>MK Ramadoss >> >>Doss > >I don't quite agree with you on that one. The pattern you describe was ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ No problem. By the same token I think a Lodge should not be forced to adopt a particular program "approved" by the National Hq or anyone else. >followed by the small branch I was President of in NJ. We went along for >many years with a very varied Theosophical program until one fine day we >decided that we should really study Basic Theosophy because none of us were >sure of what it really was. I think it's a good idea to at least briefly >study the basics of Theosophy & then branch out from there. The trouble is >no one has as yet written a decent brief Basic Theosophy course. The only >one by Imogene Simons is hopelessly dated. I haven't looked at Doss >McDavid's but the blurp on that one says that it's for more advanced >students. Also I imagine it's too long. My idea is to have something that >touches briefly on the main Theosophical concepts & then let the group go >on from there to wherever they wish to go. I think to tie up a group for >several months by only giving them Basic Theosophy would be deadly. I know >that the group I'm trying to keep alive just now the Onondaga Provisional >Study Center isn't too interested in Basic Theosophy. They're interested in >New Age & esoteric things. They enjoy being members because they get "the >Quest". But other than that Theosophy doesn't mean too much to them yet & Each Lodge is unique due to the unique composition of its members. So it is the active members of the lodge who are in the best position to figure out with full communication with its members what is best suited to its needs. This approach will foster harmony and unity of its members and will in due course strengthen the lodge. This is what I feel. >I think meetings filled with nothing but Basic Theosophy would be the end. >We're struggling now without that because I'm insisting that I can't be the >whole program. They loved it when I ran the show & they came & >participated but I'm having problems with getting one of them to run the >show. If I now come preaching Theosophy I'd make it brief & in a style >that won't bore them to death. >> >>Liesel Do not worry about the length of the msg. When you have to discuss important issues sometimes it is difficult to be very brief. Sometimes the brevity itself will lead to not being fully or correctly understood by others. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 10:46:52 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Regarding TI >> Alan >> Re: brotherhood in our 1st object. Alan I sure appreciate your supportive stand on this matter. We never mentioned this in our discussions about the revisions but I voted "niet" on that first revision because they left in the word "brotherhood". I'm older than 52 by far & I resent being told I'm part of a brotherhood. Anyone who looks at me even physically can tell for sure from certain very evident signs that no way am I a "brother" no way can I be accepted into a brotherhood. Psychologically I'm not a brother either & that becomes evident too when you get to talking to me. I know that the younger generation is more adamant than I in resenting this. My niece who's in her 30ies rapped a guy over the knuckles for calling her "honey" all the time. Even that's demeaning let alone having to simulate that you're of the sex you're not of. I was wondering about the status of the TI. Are we a loose worldwide association of Theosophists. Alan are you planning to affiliate us with something some time in the future? That isn't very clear. It's ok with me if we just want to stay as is. Maybe we can steer clear of all this politicking nonesense. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race >> With interest I have watched the development Theosophy International and >> commend your underlying motivation and skill in getting it rolling. Were >> there no Theosophical Society it is certainly the organization I would join. > >Richard > >Thanks for the kind words. My motivation is based upon what I >see as the serious possiblity that given its current course and >policyies the Theosophical Society will simply wither away >partly from the very *untheosophical* power struggles that go on >England's history is not so very different from America's in >terms of the basics. I began promoting TI because of clues I >had picked up from theos-l - for which we should all be thankful >and greatly indebted. > >> The problem for me however is that there *is* a Theosophical Society and >> it is the only group I have ever felt any--as Paul recently said--"karmic" >> connection to. Is there any incompatibility between TI and TS? I don't >> think so--perhaps the former is a good way to remind the latter what it >> really *was* *is* and *should be in the future* if it expects to have much >> further significance in this world. Nevertheless I suppose I have always >> felt myself to be a little too much of a "company man" to join anything >> besides the Theosophical Society. > >Yes there *is* a Theosophical Society. I am a member of it >and a past president and past vice-president of my own Lodge upon >whose committee I still serve. So in promoting TI I see myself >as promoting something that exists *within* theosophy *within* >the TS for those who are members and not something outside >theosophy or instead of any theosophical setup currently in >existence. > >> On the other hand were Theosophy International audacious enough to declare >> itself an unauthorized "Global Lodge *of* the Theosophical Society" . . . > >I don't quite see how this could be - I do not know if all TI >members are TS Adyar members though one or two belong to at >least three TS organizations at the same time. > >> Right now though I agree that there does seem to be a great deal of >> desire-mental consciousness pervading the programs and procedures of the >> Theosophical Society. The possible "strategizing" of the by-law adoptions >> may be an example of this--using the mental nature in the service of a >> desired outcome etc. The possible requirement that study centers must first >> study certain things "Real Theosophy" in order to be certified may be >> another example. > >Well now to me TI is a way of "using" if you like "the >mental nature in the service of a desired outcome." The >difference is that the desired outcome is a coming together to >*voluntarily* serve and promote the three objects in a more up >to date manner which reflects the society we actually live in; >which while respecting the values and ideals of the founders >recognizes that humanity has moved on and is in fact not a >little richer for the advent of the theosophical movement begun >by HPB and company in 1975 and whose work may have influenced >the world more than many of imagine. > >The development of knowledge and the understanding of truth - of >which there is no higher religion - has progressed considerably >since 1875 or even 1926 when my own Lodge was opened by Annie >Besant around the time of the summer solstice. > >Theosophy - in the Adyar TS or anywhere else - needs I formly >believe not only to regognize this but also to express it and >adapt to it. I am regarded by some as something of a "feminist" >in that I see the role of women in theosophical service as >crucial to the future of the kind of theosophy we both value. >But that's how the whole thing *started out* and was continued >especially in the early decades. How many of the following were >men: > >HPB Annie Besant Anna Kingsford Katherine Ting...y sp? Alice >Bailey? My own Lodge was founded and held together in its >formative years almost entirely by active women. > >So you can see why I favor the inclusive language approach of >TI? How many *young* women of today want to members of a >"brotherhood" - something associated with peculiar masonic >all-male rituals which in this country are the regular stuff of >TV humor. Sure one or two wonlt be too bothered but my guess >is that *most* won't even look any further past this word when >they are shown the objects as they now stand. In fact one >woman joined our Lodge and resigned when she got the usual >handout pack for new members *because she resented being >described as a "fellow" and a "brother." "I am a woman!" she >said and sent the lot back. A mere youngster of 52 ....... > >> Nevertheless I continue to have hope for the TS--primarily I suppose > >The declining membership figures here as in the US do not >alas support this hope. > >> For now nonetheless I am keeping the faith that the Theosophical Society >> will soon return to being an organization simply founded upon THE THREE >> OBJECTS and that private beliefs and perspectives of members will stay >> private--in the sense of not superceding or "filtering" the expression of >> other members' beliefs and perspectives. > >Which is exactly what TI seeks to promote both within the Adyar >TS and *anywhere else* where people truly care about >theosophical principles and ideas. PLUS - it's free has no >by-laws no laws! and to date although miniscule represented >in three countries! > > > >> For the moment Alan I will just continue to watch both the developments >> within the Theosophical Society and your good efforts with Theosophy >> International as well. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Richard Ihle > >At my end Theosophy International *is* a development within the >Theosophical Society! It can also be and is for some See the >current issue of ~Ergates~ a development beyond it as well. > >Why not come on in? Help to change things simply by asserting >your right to be Richard Ihle Theosophist. > >Happy New year New Age New Ideas > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 10:48:52 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Postpone By-Laws Decision/Divine Intervention At 032300 PM 12/26/95 -0500 you wrote: >>At 050800 PM 12/25/95 -0500 Liesel Keith wrote: >>>>It seems like the only sensible thing to do at this point is to postpone the >>>>voting on the by-laws. If headquaters can let the by-laws material get >"lost" >>>>at the printers or whatever they can postpone the elections till the >>>matter has >>>>been discussed OPENLY. If not they will at this point lose crediblity with >>>>the members. They can't take another scandal as what has surrounded Bing >>>>Escudero. >>>> >>>>Keith Price <<>> ============================================================================ ========= The fact that the bylaws materials "lost" at printers brings back to my mind a very significant event that I was told happened several years ago in the election of the President. The election was a close one. There were two candidates who ran for the position. Each section is supposed to tally the votes and send a cable to the Headquarters notifying the voting results. There was a deadline by which these cables are to be received. It so happened that the results from one section was delayed by about two weeks after the deadline. This delay tilted the ballots in favor of the winner. Later investigation revealed that the cable was indeed handed over to the cable/telegraph office on time with enough time to reach the Headquarters. Some one in the cable/telegraph office mislaid the cable and it was two weeks later it was discovered that the cable was not sent. I believe that the cable delay was not accidental. It was more providential. In analogy to this situation I think it is equally providential that the printers "lost" the bylaws material and thus mailing was delayed and thus resulting violation of the deadlines required to be followed and thus leading to the referendum being legally void. If the bylaws were passed as proposed it would have been a disaster for TSA. Some of the Guardians of TS may have had hand in preventing this by the "accidental" "loss" of the by-laws material at the printers. It would be well to heed to such hints and make the best use of such omens. Let us all wait to see what decision comes out of the National Board. MK Ramadoss ============================================================================ ============ > >>>>Keith After Gerda Thompson suggested postponing the voting I asked John >>>Algeo whether this could be done. He said the Board would have to do it. >>>I had contacted John because I'm of the opinion that we can't take another >>>rift. We're still only partly recovered from the one which occurred around >>>Bing Escudero. >>>I myself would just as soon not take part in these revisions discussions at >>>all. I've had enough standing up for causes in the past & am entitled I >>>think to some peace in my retirment. I've tried to come in here & there >>>anyway because the whole thing worries me greatly. After having healed >>>partly from the former rift here we go again & I see the whole TS becoming >>>even more ineffective. Since my whole lifestyle is firmly rooted in >>>Theosophy and since I think we have something really worthwhile to offer to >>>others I hate to watch the Society the vehicle of Theosophy go down the >>>tubes. I think it's heading that way but I really don't know how one could >>>stop it since it involves more than our Board & our President it involves >>>Adyar. >>> >>>Liesel >> >>Liesel: >> >>1. Please do not give up. We need take active interest in an organization >>from which and from whose philosophy we all have benefitted and thru us >>others may have benfitted. We are dealing with the long term future of TS >>and all of us are motivated by the same objectives and goals and we have to >>speak up when we see there is a need to speak up. Not speaking up means we >>are missing an opportunity. It is the collective inputs that help the TS >>continue to be strong and useful to the Humanity. >> >>2. If you have carefully noticed I have copied my postings that I feel are >>very important to our International President National President and the >>National Board. I am confident that as International and National get the >>feedback as to some of our thinking and opinions they will be in a better >>position to address the important issues that need to be addressed. The >>views on issues from members in the field is very important as it gives a >>better picture of the issues as viewed from the field. >> >>MK Ramadoss >> >>Doss I guess I'm not really giving up but my input is rather tired & 1/2 >hearted. I realize that this revisions question is very important but I'd >rather be doing something else. > >Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 11:06:20 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Object 02 >At 085700 PM 12/23/95 -0500 Alan wrote: >> >>When the Adyar objects are considered there is no commitment to >>study anything at all and theosophy as a subject is not even > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>mentioned an all too familiar peculiarity to the Adyar TS > ^^^^^^^^^ >>thinking members. >> > > It is one of the very important facts that I point out to new and >prospective members that it is *the only* organization where its main >subject is not *defined*. The motto of TS is "There is no Religion Higher >Than Truth". As all of us are just students of Truth Divine Wisdom - >Theo-Sophia cannot IMHO be static and be *defined*. The fact that TS has >lived for 120 years is a standing evidence of the soundness of this decision >of the Founders. > > IMHO that is why when there is some talk about the what lodges and >study centers should *study* I felt that there could not and should not be >any specific set of books as the specific line of work of each lodge/study >center/ is different from any other. > > Long time ago I was a associated with an extremely active lodge >which is as active today which had close to 300 members not counting >their family members who participated in the programs. For example in >spite of the varied kinds of programs there was *not* a single lecture or >study class on "Secret Doctrine" during the thirteen years I attended the >lodge programs. So each lodge has to tailor its activities to the line of >work its members want to commit themselves. > >MK Ramadoss > >Doss I don't quite agree with you on that one. The pattern you describe was followed by the small branch I was President of in NJ. We went along for many years with a very varied Theosophical program until one fine day we decided that we should really study Basic Theosophy because none of us were sure of what it really was. I think it's a good idea to at least briefly study the basics of Theosophy & then branch out from there. The trouble is no one has as yet written a decent brief Basic Theosophy course. The only one by Imogene Simons is hopelessly dated. I haven't looked at Doss McDavid's but the blurp on that one says that it's for more advanced students. Also I imagine it's too long. My idea is to have something that touches briefly on the main Theosophical concepts & then let the group go on from there to wherever they wish to go. I think to tie up a group for several months by only giving them Basic Theosophy would be deadly. I know that the group I'm trying to keep alive just now the Onondaga Provisional Study Center isn't too interested in Basic Theosophy. They're interested in New Age & esoteric things. They enjoy being members because they get "the Quest". But other than that Theosophy doesn't mean too much to them yet & I think meetings filled with nothing but Basic Theosophy would be the end. We're struggling now without that because I'm insisting that I can't be the whole program. They loved it when I ran the show & they came & participated but I'm having problems with getting one of them to run the show. If I now come preaching Theosophy I'd make it brief & in a style that won't bore them to death. > >Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 11:58:03 GMT From: "Peter I. Walstra" Subject: RE: Solstice Just my part of the experience... Some friends of mine were talking about doing something special at the time of the solstice at midnight for celebrating this turning point. I didn't hear much of it anymore and at the appointed evening I was still working late having to follow a study course in evening hours. Tired as I was I did decide to drop by with my friends and found out that they were having a dip as well and there was only the three of us. After some tea we made a short walk outside; it was misty gloomy and cold. Feeling still somewhat unsatisfied we decided to head for a small kind of forest nearby. Nobody to be seen there; just some noise of cars in the distance. There was a small lake and some ice had already formed just about enough to shuffle around a bit on the water. We didn't have any specific ceremony in mind but saying the Great Invocation together hands joined standing in a triangle seemed very appropriate. Especially the part of invoking Light from the mind of God. It was a solemn silence afterwards despite the cold feet : and back home we all were glad we had given some attention to the solstice after all. It may not be much or look trivial and weird to passers-by! but actually doing something physically when it's much easier keeping seated in front of the television with a lot of x-mas cookies makes you just a little bit more conscious -again- about being an earth-citizen. /* Peter I. Walstra */ Private: pwalstra@pi.net Member Theosophy International WTYF TS [...] Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 13:23:08 GMT From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International at http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/gs.html Light & Love Patrick Adyar TS > ^^^^^^^^^ > >thinking members. > > > > It is one of the very important facts that I point out to new and > prospective members that it is *the only* organization where its main > subject is not *defined*. The motto of TS is "There is no Religion Higher > Than Truth". As all of us are just students of Truth Divine Wisdom - > Theo-Sophia cannot IMHO be static and be *defined*. The fact that TS has > lived for 120 years is a standing evidence of the soundness of this decision > of the Founders. Err... if its main subject is not defined then it does not have a main subject. Therefore any attempt to make the study of theosophy part of the curriculum is contrary to the the sound decision of the founders ..... ? > Long time ago I was a associated with an extremely active lodge > which is as active today which had close to 300 members not counting > their family members who participated in the programs. For example in > spite of the varied kinds of programs there was *not* a single lecture or > study class on "Secret Doctrine" during the thirteen years I attended the > lodge programs. So each lodge has to tailor its activities to the line of > work its members want to commit themselves. > > MK Ramadoss In my own lodge of late some of the members have begun to ask "What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name? Can someone tell us please?" Come the Spring we intend to do just that. With them I feel it is absurd to have a society with a description in its name theosophical with lodges branches which are not theosophical. Common sense? Alan Thought for the day: isn't it odd that our typos only appear when our postings come back to us .... -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 13:23:08 GMT From: Aprioripa@aol.com Subject: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International at http://users.aol.com/aprioripa/gs.html Light & Love Patrick Adyar TS > ^^^^^^^^^ > >thinking members. > > > > It is one of the very important facts that I point out to new and > prospective members that it is *the only* organization where its main > subject is not *defined*. The motto of TS is "There is no Religion Higher > Than Truth". As all of us are just students of Truth Divine Wisdom - > Theo-Sophia cannot IMHO be static and be *defined*. The fact that TS has > lived for 120 years is a standing evidence of the soundness of this decision > of the Founders. Err... if its main subject is not defined then it does not have a main subject. Therefore any attempt to make the study of theosophy part of the curriculum is contrary to the the sound decision of the founders ..... ? > Long time ago I was a associated with an extremely active lodge > which is as active today which had close to 300 members not counting > their family members who participated in the programs. For example in > spite of the varied kinds of programs there was *not* a single lecture or > study class on "Secret Doctrine" during the thirteen years I attended the > lodge programs. So each lodge has to tailor its activities to the line of > work its members want to commit themselves. > > MK Ramadoss In my own lodge of late some of the members have begun to ask "What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name? Can someone tell us please?" Come the Spring we intend to do just that. With them I feel it is absurd to have a society with a description in its name theosophical with lodges branches which are not theosophical. Common sense? Alan Thought for the day: isn't it odd that our typos only appear when our postings come back to us .... -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 20:45:38 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Hi Patrick >In my own lodge of late some of the members have begun to ask >"What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name? Can >someone tell us please?" Come the Spring we intend to do just >that. With them I feel it is absurd to have a society with a >description in its name theosophical with lodges branches >which are not theosophical. Common sense? You have perhaps touched upon *the* critical question which may have to get answered before the Theosophical Society can go forward. Will you forgive me for jumping in? THE NEW LEXICON WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ENCYCLOPEDIC EDITION gives two definitions--one for *theosophy* one for *Theosophy*: 1. *theosophy*: "any philosophical and religious system [add *and fact*] based on intuitive knowledge of [add *or transcendental approach toward*] the divine." 2. *Theosophy*: "a system of thought and practice derived from esp. Buddhist and Brahminical religious mysticism by Madame Blavatsky in 1875 in the U.S.A. and propagated by the Theosophical Society which she founded. It claims to be a synthesis of those elements in all religions which result from divine revalation and to enable its followers to establish personal communion with God." Now while perhaps both definitions leave something to be desired they do provide a clean way to ask the important question: Does the *Theosophical* in *The Theosophical Society* stand for something closer to definition #1 or #2? In my mind I find it hard to believe that the Founders meant it to stand for both--however I don't know. Because I came to the Society from a philosophical background and seeing THE THREE OBJECTS etc. I naturally assumed that the first definition was the operative one. Indeed for most of my years of membership the wide variety of subjects explored by individuals etc. gave me every reason to believe that it *was* the operative one. For me *theosophy* will principally continue to be the word for the epistemology which allows for the validity of knowledge which does not come from strict empirical observation or science--the knowledge which is associated with religions astrology mysticism esoteric writers not necessarily named Blavatsky etc. But also within the Theosophical Society we have the definition-#2 people. They are strong and getting stronger as the membership declines. They would like to firmly establish as a fact that the *Theosophical* in the Theosophical Society means definition #2. To counter that possibility my answer to members who might ask "What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name?" would be something like this: "It is the method by which you personally and transcendentally accumulate little nuggets of unsupported-but-absolute certainty about subjects impervious to other methods. Come Spring we're going to dig around one theosophist's mother lode--THE SECRET DOCTRINE." What do you think? Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 20:45:38 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Hi Patrick >In my own lodge of late some of the members have begun to ask >"What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name? Can >someone tell us please?" Come the Spring we intend to do just >that. With them I feel it is absurd to have a society with a >description in its name theosophical with lodges branches >which are not theosophical. Common sense? You have perhaps touched upon *the* critical question which may have to get answered before the Theosophical Society can go forward. Will you forgive me for jumping in? THE NEW LEXICON WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ENCYCLOPEDIC EDITION gives two definitions--one for *theosophy* one for *Theosophy*: 1. *theosophy*: "any philosophical and religious system [add *and fact*] based on intuitive knowledge of [add *or transcendental approach toward*] the divine." 2. *Theosophy*: "a system of thought and practice derived from esp. Buddhist and Brahminical religious mysticism by Madame Blavatsky in 1875 in the U.S.A. and propagated by the Theosophical Society which she founded. It claims to be a synthesis of those elements in all religions which result from divine revalation and to enable its followers to establish personal communion with God." Now while perhaps both definitions leave something to be desired they do provide a clean way to ask the important question: Does the *Theosophical* in *The Theosophical Society* stand for something closer to definition #1 or #2? In my mind I find it hard to believe that the Founders meant it to stand for both--however I don't know. Because I came to the Society from a philosophical background and seeing THE THREE OBJECTS etc. I naturally assumed that the first definition was the operative one. Indeed for most of my years of membership the wide variety of subjects explored by individuals etc. gave me every reason to believe that it *was* the operative one. For me *theosophy* will principally continue to be the word for the epistemology which allows for the validity of knowledge which does not come from strict empirical observation or science--the knowledge which is associated with religions astrology mysticism esoteric writers not necessarily named Blavatsky etc. But also within the Theosophical Society we have the definition-#2 people. They are strong and getting stronger as the membership declines. They would like to firmly establish as a fact that the *Theosophical* in the Theosophical Society means definition #2. To counter that possibility my answer to members who might ask "What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name?" would be something like this: "It is the method by which you personally and transcendentally accumulate little nuggets of unsupported-but-absolute certainty about subjects impervious to other methods. Come Spring we're going to dig around one theosophist's mother lode--THE SECRET DOCTRINE." What do you think? Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 22:51:48 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Regarding TI > > I have been following *very closely* what is going on relative to > TSA's Bylaws. As far as I know I *do not* see any power struggle. I have been following very closely the discusson of all this on theos-l! There clearly *is* a power struggle insofar as TSA HQ are so I keep hearing attempting to railroad through a set of by-law revisions because they want to reinforce their authority over the membership. In other words having the power they want to keep it. They may I suspect want to act quickly in order to get the changes in place before the next set of elections. > No matter what is discussed here TS it is *not* going to wither > away because at the lodge/branch/study center level the activities are > going to go on. The strength and vitality and usefulness of each > lodge/branch/study center and any organization depends on the dedication and > sacrifices of a *few individuals*. We do have such individuals at each > lodge/branch/study center. It is each individual member who spread Theosophy > and help the other individuals members or not with whom they come into > contact. In England over the last 20 years or so the same is true - but *the number of lodges and centres* has steadily decreased and shows few signs of reversing this trend. Two Lodges in this area have closed down completely in recent times Bath Somerset and Cheltenham Gloucestershire. Neither place is a small one both in fact being large enough to need multi-storey car parks :. My own Lodge has been helped to survive premises-wise by these sad events - we eventually had the proceeds from the sale of the Bath premises which enabled us to prevent our own from falling down. Oh - and it seems we Adyar have lost a few NATIONAL sections! Come on Richard look reality in the face! > Just thought I should share my views with everyone. > MK Ramadoss > Scribed at 4.00am cdt 12/26/95 Me too .... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 26 Dec 1996 22:51:48 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Regarding TI > > I have been following *very closely* what is going on relative to > TSA's Bylaws. As far as I know I *do not* see any power struggle. I have been following very closely the discusson of all this on theos-l! There clearly *is* a power struggle insofar as TSA HQ are so I keep hearing attempting to railroad through a set of by-law revisions because they want to reinforce their authority over the membership. In other words having the power they want to keep it. They may I suspect want to act quickly in order to get the changes in place before the next set of elections. > No matter what is discussed here TS it is *not* going to wither > away because at the lodge/branch/study center level the activities are > going to go on. The strength and vitality and usefulness of each > lodge/branch/study center and any organization depends on the dedication and > sacrifices of a *few individuals*. We do have such individuals at each > lodge/branch/study center. It is each individual member who spread Theosophy > and help the other individuals members or not with whom they come into > contact. In England over the last 20 years or so the same is true - but *the number of lodges and centres* has steadily decreased and shows few signs of reversing this trend. Two Lodges in this area have closed down completely in recent times Bath Somerset and Cheltenham Gloucestershire. Neither place is a small one both in fact being large enough to need multi-storey car parks :. My own Lodge has been helped to survive premises-wise by these sad events - we eventually had the proceeds from the sale of the Bath premises which enabled us to prevent our own from falling down. Oh - and it seems we Adyar have lost a few NATIONAL sections! Come on Richard look reality in the face! > Just thought I should share my views with everyone. > MK Ramadoss > Scribed at 4.00am cdt 12/26/95 Me too .... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 00:12:37 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Richard ... Excellent. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 00:12:37 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International Richard ... Excellent. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 00:14:06 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach >From John Mead: >I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >from the Adyar/Committee. Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been asking for precisely this kind of explanation? >We seem to be caught up in an argument about the implementation >vs. the *intent* of the changes. It seems more like the core issue is the *ramifications* of the changes and the shift of power towards centralized control from HQ that they entail. Both the original intent and the details of implementation are both *expressions* of this concern. The result of the new by-laws regardless of intent will be a further consolidation of power at the HQ level IMO continuing a trend that began when HQ began passing by-laws greatly limiting who could stand as a candidate for office. The way the proposals have been presented for a vote seems to me to contain the same attitude contained in the proposals themselves: That HQ knows what is best for the membership and the membership ought to just agree to be taken care of as HQ sees fit. >It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the >following options: >1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. >2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do >not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for >anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too Yes and the lack of trust in a membership almost *predisposed* to want to trust in the intentions of its officers is the direct result of the *behavior of TSA Administrations past and present*. **It is the responsibility of the TSA Administration to regain that trust** ... most especially if it wants the membership to actually give it more power. The Administration IMO has mistaken the silence of many members for contentment with policy. It had better understand that there is significant discontent among the ranks and the current by-law fiasco is not the only problem but is more like a final straw that caused normally quiet voices to speak up. The Bing situation for instance appeared to many to signify the willingness of HQ to use its power in an arbitrary and personal way to look like a particular faction that had been used to choosing leaders felt free to even possibly pass by-laws with the intention of keeping a "non-chosen" out of office ... and it is then surprised when the membership reacts to its desire for *more* power? >we need new options: >1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This >means that they can extend it *without* blame -- i.e. backing >off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrassing. I think that >they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which >signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we >should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of >discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and >communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current >communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain >brothers/sisters within our organization. Well here may be the most difficult part of the situation. I fear I cannot agree with the sentiment here ... and *my* intent also is the long term good of the TSA. The TSA Administration for whatever its reasons kept virtually secret until the very last moment when it was almost too late to do anything a major revision of the laws governing our organization. It then broke several of the current laws governing the means by which the revisions would be voted upon made absolutely no effort to encourage discourse and in fact seemed to attempt to thwart it. It also recently not only showed itself willing to use its substantial financial clout that it has because of *us* ... past and present members who have given money against one of our own Lodges but then gave this a spin that impugned the motives and accused the character of some Boston Theosophists to justify its own position that letter from the attorney posted on theos-l but also distributed by HQ with an introduction from JA ... was almost pure political smear tactics ... actually implying that the Boston members were intending to sell the Lodge and pocket the money personally ... and the apology Rich rightly demanded has *not* been forthcoming. While I believe the membership would *welcome* a *genuinely responsive* presidency/board I do not think it healthy to try to figure out how to allow the presidency/board to *appear* responsive when it has for some time seemed far more responsive to Adyar than to its own membership even acted *directly against* some of its own members and only now in an effort to mitigate the crisis of legitimacy it has itself caused finds itself *forced* to be responsive. In short uncomfortable as it is to accept HQ has had no qualms about playing political hard-ball to achieve its ends without regard to sentiment within the membership and now when suddenly it went the final step too far and finds itself besieged by a somewhat severe reaction from the membership its ignored it cannot suddenly sit back with no penalty to pay. It is reaping its own self-generated karma - its current dilemma was *entirely* created by its own behavior. Why should the membership attempt to help it find a "face- saving" way out of its mess? Compassion? A sense of "brotherhood"? These things are noble ideals but not when they applied in such a way as to inhibit *growth*. Many non-profits as they grow and evolve have periodic power grabs at their HQ's but in feeling the full force of the *effects* of them institutional *growth* happens as for instance in the United Way in 94 and the NAACP in 95 ... IMO it will be very *helpful* to the TSA Administration to have this current disaster *seared* into its institutional memory - for it to understand that if it behaves as it has been in the future it is taking a *risk*. We *want* future TSA officers and board members to *understand* that they serve the *membership* not Adyar or their own particular visions that *the Lodges and members do not need them ... they need the Lodges and members*; that if they want to operate according to the model of the Roman Catholic church with Adyar as "Rome" dispensing edicts to the "Archbishops" at Wheaton who then adapt them to an obedient membership they will discover that American Theosophists will react pretty much like American Roman Catholics have been ... with many members leaving and even among those who stay formally connected less and less of inclination to consider the pronouncements of the hierarchy in any way binding on them. I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: 1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter from Lodge Presidents or 2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. Either one of these *accompanied by an apology to the membership and a public declaration that a suitable length of time e.g. 01 year for Society-wide discussion would be permitted before another vote was called* would probably go a long way towards diffusing the temporary crisis ... but I also think there is a much longer-term distrust that it will take quite some time to make right. And finally to address the "personality" issue: I understand that we do wish to be nice that we want to keep things at the level of legitimate debate about the ideas themselves ... but we must remember that it has taken a good number of Theosophists expending considerable energy even to reach the point where the membership is on the verge of being given the time and information necessary to even *allow* reasonable debate: HQ had to be *forced* into it ... and it was not abstract entities that attempted to do this it was *people*. We are talking about the Administration of an organization and the behavior of its elected officials; decisions don't just get made *people* make them ... and just as organizations grow by being held accountable for their actions so too the *individuals* who are given the *power* to make decisions must be made to bear the *responsibility for its use.* I do not know John Algeo personally but *as President* I can't help but see the TSA being badly damaged: Tight control has been exerted over the AT; membership has declined significantly; the Theosophical Trusts have lost considerable equity; and the Lodges and membership are now embroiled in a by-laws fiasco that at best is taking considerable energy from members who might better spend time on Lodge activities and at worst threatens an outright schism. John Algeo was groomed for the job by our "Bishops" ran for the job and gets paid for doing the job and it is not a "personal" attack to say that by every almost standard measure that a non-profit might use to assess the job performance of its President or Executive Director - membership figures financial conditions membership morale accomplishment of mission - the TS is in worse shape since he took office. [While my own suggestions for by-law changes will be in the next post I should mention here that the absurdity of the by- laws restricting who can run as candidates show themselves here: Time as a member or on the Board simply assures one knows Theosophy but for instance deep knowledge of the SD and administrative skills *have nothing to do with one another*. In the TSA our President acts as Executive Director and I believe an examination of whether to split those duties ... i.e. *elect* a President with Theosophical "wisdom" and have the Board *hire* an Executive Director with demonstrated organizational and administrative skills ... is something that ought to be explored during "by-law discussions". Running a national non-profit organization with 5000 members and close to 05 million in assets takes specialized skills and the current by-laws allegedly designed as the filters to assure the integrity of the positions not only do not even discuss the qualifications *most* needed by those who would run the organization but in fact serve to significantly restrict a number of TSA members who may be far *more* qualified from running for the office.] >perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguments out >in. the open. Yes. >we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they >TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to >set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this >is necessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore >people's faith in the elected members. The elected members created the environment it is their responsibility to make things right. They have lost the faith of the membership because of an attitude that has manifested in far more than just this current situation; they must IMO *alter both the attitude and their actions* to regain that faith. So long as I and many I've spoken to feel as though this current "openness" on the part of HQ only came about because of the size and intensity of the reaction without which HQ would have actually ignored a few procedures and just imposed a new set of by-laws on the members with barely a fraction of the time needed for reasoned discussion ... there will be *suspicions*. >2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of >the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. >However the wording and implementation were to be determined >by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines >were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open >discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. Why has no one else received this letter? Why do we only find out now after the ballots have actually already been mailed that this is driven by Adyar? What *precisely* did Adyar "request"? In what *form* was the request delivered? To what degree can Adyar *force* the American Section to implement such things? And I don't agree that its just the implementation that we must discuss ... its the standing of Adyar to make such "requests" that is an issue as well. How much of this is *legal* and how much behind-the-scenes tacit agreements? In fact if Adyar got too insistent the American Section itself might start debating whether it even matters whether it remains formally connected to Adyar. This whole situation seems to be surrounded by too much secrecy. I'd like to see the US-Adyar relationship explicitly articulated ... and if Adyar wants to "request" guidelines I'd like to hear them *from Adyar* along with the reasons *why* Adyar wants them implemented ... to know for instance whether the whole American Section might be forced to alter its by-laws as the result of some factional dispute at *Adyar* - that seems to have recently gotten into the mood to exert control to the point of excommunicating national sections that do not behave. Regardless the fact that neither Adyar or Wheaton even considered that the American membership *ought to be given full information* which *to this day* it still does not have about the source and reasons for the by-law changes is quite disturbing. >Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently broken but rather that of understanding that a required if painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by something akin to Divine Right. We then had a number of leaders Dora the last in America who were elected but whose power and standing still came chiefly from having *known* or been connected to those who knew the Masters ... power and leadership legitimacy has been passed down with something like apostolic succession - and the leaderships both at Wheaton and at Adyar have long operated almost as though they were running an *occult hierarchy* . and Masters do not *consult* chelas when they make the rules of the order they simply make them and chelas have the right to either agree or leave the order. We are now perhaps for the first time having to face the fundamental contradiction between the Master-Chela and Democratic models of organization and IMO the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will need to do some very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... because they are no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships are increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". Its likely that the leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* anything from memberships that they'd better get rid of the attitude that voting is just a formality that they can decide what's "best" for the membership without even consulting the membership without bothering to even give them full information and just expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think that's best!". IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the courage to see it through. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 00:14:06 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach >From John Mead: >I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >from the Adyar/Committee. Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been asking for precisely this kind of explanation? >We seem to be caught up in an argument about the implementation >vs. the *intent* of the changes. It seems more like the core issue is the *ramifications* of the changes and the shift of power towards centralized control from HQ that they entail. Both the original intent and the details of implementation are both *expressions* of this concern. The result of the new by-laws regardless of intent will be a further consolidation of power at the HQ level IMO continuing a trend that began when HQ began passing by-laws greatly limiting who could stand as a candidate for office. The way the proposals have been presented for a vote seems to me to contain the same attitude contained in the proposals themselves: That HQ knows what is best for the membership and the membership ought to just agree to be taken care of as HQ sees fit. >It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the >following options: >1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. >2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do >not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for >anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too Yes and the lack of trust in a membership almost *predisposed* to want to trust in the intentions of its officers is the direct result of the *behavior of TSA Administrations past and present*. **It is the responsibility of the TSA Administration to regain that trust** ... most especially if it wants the membership to actually give it more power. The Administration IMO has mistaken the silence of many members for contentment with policy. It had better understand that there is significant discontent among the ranks and the current by-law fiasco is not the only problem but is more like a final straw that caused normally quiet voices to speak up. The Bing situation for instance appeared to many to signify the willingness of HQ to use its power in an arbitrary and personal way to look like a particular faction that had been used to choosing leaders felt free to even possibly pass by-laws with the intention of keeping a "non-chosen" out of office ... and it is then surprised when the membership reacts to its desire for *more* power? >we need new options: >1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This >means that they can extend it *without* blame -- i.e. backing >off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrassing. I think that >they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which >signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we >should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of >discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and >communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current >communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain >brothers/sisters within our organization. Well here may be the most difficult part of the situation. I fear I cannot agree with the sentiment here ... and *my* intent also is the long term good of the TSA. The TSA Administration for whatever its reasons kept virtually secret until the very last moment when it was almost too late to do anything a major revision of the laws governing our organization. It then broke several of the current laws governing the means by which the revisions would be voted upon made absolutely no effort to encourage discourse and in fact seemed to attempt to thwart it. It also recently not only showed itself willing to use its substantial financial clout that it has because of *us* ... past and present members who have given money against one of our own Lodges but then gave this a spin that impugned the motives and accused the character of some Boston Theosophists to justify its own position that letter from the attorney posted on theos-l but also distributed by HQ with an introduction from JA ... was almost pure political smear tactics ... actually implying that the Boston members were intending to sell the Lodge and pocket the money personally ... and the apology Rich rightly demanded has *not* been forthcoming. While I believe the membership would *welcome* a *genuinely responsive* presidency/board I do not think it healthy to try to figure out how to allow the presidency/board to *appear* responsive when it has for some time seemed far more responsive to Adyar than to its own membership even acted *directly against* some of its own members and only now in an effort to mitigate the crisis of legitimacy it has itself caused finds itself *forced* to be responsive. In short uncomfortable as it is to accept HQ has had no qualms about playing political hard-ball to achieve its ends without regard to sentiment within the membership and now when suddenly it went the final step too far and finds itself besieged by a somewhat severe reaction from the membership its ignored it cannot suddenly sit back with no penalty to pay. It is reaping its own self-generated karma - its current dilemma was *entirely* created by its own behavior. Why should the membership attempt to help it find a "face- saving" way out of its mess? Compassion? A sense of "brotherhood"? These things are noble ideals but not when they applied in such a way as to inhibit *growth*. Many non-profits as they grow and evolve have periodic power grabs at their HQ's but in feeling the full force of the *effects* of them institutional *growth* happens as for instance in the United Way in 94 and the NAACP in 95 ... IMO it will be very *helpful* to the TSA Administration to have this current disaster *seared* into its institutional memory - for it to understand that if it behaves as it has been in the future it is taking a *risk*. We *want* future TSA officers and board members to *understand* that they serve the *membership* not Adyar or their own particular visions that *the Lodges and members do not need them ... they need the Lodges and members*; that if they want to operate according to the model of the Roman Catholic church with Adyar as "Rome" dispensing edicts to the "Archbishops" at Wheaton who then adapt them to an obedient membership they will discover that American Theosophists will react pretty much like American Roman Catholics have been ... with many members leaving and even among those who stay formally connected less and less of inclination to consider the pronouncements of the hierarchy in any way binding on them. I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: 1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter from Lodge Presidents or 2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. Either one of these *accompanied by an apology to the membership and a public declaration that a suitable length of time e.g. 01 year for Society-wide discussion would be permitted before another vote was called* would probably go a long way towards diffusing the temporary crisis ... but I also think there is a much longer-term distrust that it will take quite some time to make right. And finally to address the "personality" issue: I understand that we do wish to be nice that we want to keep things at the level of legitimate debate about the ideas themselves ... but we must remember that it has taken a good number of Theosophists expending considerable energy even to reach the point where the membership is on the verge of being given the time and information necessary to even *allow* reasonable debate: HQ had to be *forced* into it ... and it was not abstract entities that attempted to do this it was *people*. We are talking about the Administration of an organization and the behavior of its elected officials; decisions don't just get made *people* make them ... and just as organizations grow by being held accountable for their actions so too the *individuals* who are given the *power* to make decisions must be made to bear the *responsibility for its use.* I do not know John Algeo personally but *as President* I can't help but see the TSA being badly damaged: Tight control has been exerted over the AT; membership has declined significantly; the Theosophical Trusts have lost considerable equity; and the Lodges and membership are now embroiled in a by-laws fiasco that at best is taking considerable energy from members who might better spend time on Lodge activities and at worst threatens an outright schism. John Algeo was groomed for the job by our "Bishops" ran for the job and gets paid for doing the job and it is not a "personal" attack to say that by every almost standard measure that a non-profit might use to assess the job performance of its President or Executive Director - membership figures financial conditions membership morale accomplishment of mission - the TS is in worse shape since he took office. [While my own suggestions for by-law changes will be in the next post I should mention here that the absurdity of the by- laws restricting who can run as candidates show themselves here: Time as a member or on the Board simply assures one knows Theosophy but for instance deep knowledge of the SD and administrative skills *have nothing to do with one another*. In the TSA our President acts as Executive Director and I believe an examination of whether to split those duties ... i.e. *elect* a President with Theosophical "wisdom" and have the Board *hire* an Executive Director with demonstrated organizational and administrative skills ... is something that ought to be explored during "by-law discussions". Running a national non-profit organization with 5000 members and close to 05 million in assets takes specialized skills and the current by-laws allegedly designed as the filters to assure the integrity of the positions not only do not even discuss the qualifications *most* needed by those who would run the organization but in fact serve to significantly restrict a number of TSA members who may be far *more* qualified from running for the office.] >perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguments out >in. the open. Yes. >we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they >TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to >set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this >is necessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore >people's faith in the elected members. The elected members created the environment it is their responsibility to make things right. They have lost the faith of the membership because of an attitude that has manifested in far more than just this current situation; they must IMO *alter both the attitude and their actions* to regain that faith. So long as I and many I've spoken to feel as though this current "openness" on the part of HQ only came about because of the size and intensity of the reaction without which HQ would have actually ignored a few procedures and just imposed a new set of by-laws on the members with barely a fraction of the time needed for reasoned discussion ... there will be *suspicions*. >2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of >the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. >However the wording and implementation were to be determined >by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines >were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open >discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. Why has no one else received this letter? Why do we only find out now after the ballots have actually already been mailed that this is driven by Adyar? What *precisely* did Adyar "request"? In what *form* was the request delivered? To what degree can Adyar *force* the American Section to implement such things? And I don't agree that its just the implementation that we must discuss ... its the standing of Adyar to make such "requests" that is an issue as well. How much of this is *legal* and how much behind-the-scenes tacit agreements? In fact if Adyar got too insistent the American Section itself might start debating whether it even matters whether it remains formally connected to Adyar. This whole situation seems to be surrounded by too much secrecy. I'd like to see the US-Adyar relationship explicitly articulated ... and if Adyar wants to "request" guidelines I'd like to hear them *from Adyar* along with the reasons *why* Adyar wants them implemented ... to know for instance whether the whole American Section might be forced to alter its by-laws as the result of some factional dispute at *Adyar* - that seems to have recently gotten into the mood to exert control to the point of excommunicating national sections that do not behave. Regardless the fact that neither Adyar or Wheaton even considered that the American membership *ought to be given full information* which *to this day* it still does not have about the source and reasons for the by-law changes is quite disturbing. >Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently broken but rather that of understanding that a required if painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by something akin to Divine Right. We then had a number of leaders Dora the last in America who were elected but whose power and standing still came chiefly from having *known* or been connected to those who knew the Masters ... power and leadership legitimacy has been passed down with something like apostolic succession - and the leaderships both at Wheaton and at Adyar have long operated almost as though they were running an *occult hierarchy* . and Masters do not *consult* chelas when they make the rules of the order they simply make them and chelas have the right to either agree or leave the order. We are now perhaps for the first time having to face the fundamental contradiction between the Master-Chela and Democratic models of organization and IMO the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will need to do some very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... because they are no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships are increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". Its likely that the leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* anything from memberships that they'd better get rid of the attitude that voting is just a formality that they can decide what's "best" for the membership without even consulting the membership without bothering to even give them full information and just expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think that's best!". IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the courage to see it through. -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 03:30:57 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Dear John Crocker: Your message is an excellent and comprehensive response. I hope it is read by John Algeo and the Board of Directors very very carefully and closely. I also hope Wheaton copies it to Radha Burnier and the General Council by FAX and not by snailmail. .doss ============================================================================ ===== At 091700 AM 12/27/95 -JRC wrote: >>From John Mead: > >>I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. > Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? > >>We seem to be caught up in an argument about the implementation >>vs. the *intent* of the changes. > It seems more like the core issue is the *ramifications* of >the changes and the shift of power towards centralized control >from HQ that they entail. Both the original intent and the >details of implementation are both *expressions* of this concern. >The result of the new by-laws regardless of intent will be a >further consolidation of power at the HQ level IMO continuing a >trend that began when HQ began passing by-laws greatly limiting >who could stand as a candidate for office. The way the proposals >have been presented for a vote seems to me to contain the same >attitude contained in the proposals themselves: That HQ knows >what is best for the membership and the membership ought to just >agree to be taken care of as HQ sees fit. > >>It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the >>following options: >>1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. >>2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do >>not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for >>anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too > Yes and the lack of trust in a membership almost >*predisposed* to want to trust in the intentions of its officers >is the direct result of the *behavior of TSA Administrations >past and present*. **It is the responsibility of the TSA >Administration to regain that trust** ... most especially if it >wants the membership to actually give it more power. The >Administration IMO has mistaken the silence of many members for >contentment with policy. It had better understand that there is >significant discontent among the ranks and the current by-law >fiasco is not the only problem but is more like a final straw >that caused normally quiet voices to speak up. The Bing >situation for instance appeared to many to signify the >willingness of HQ to use its power in an arbitrary and personal >way to look like a particular faction that had been used to >choosing leaders felt free to even possibly pass by-laws with the >intention of keeping a "non-chosen" out of office ... and it is >then surprised when the membership reacts to its desire for >*more* power? > >>we need new options: >>1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This >>means that they can extend it *without* blame -- i.e. backing >>off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrassing. I think that >>they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which >>signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we >>should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of >>discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and >>communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current >>communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain >>brothers/sisters within our organization. > Well here may be the most difficult part of the situation. >I fear I cannot agree with the sentiment here ... and *my* intent >also is the long term good of the TSA. The TSA Administration >for whatever its reasons kept virtually secret until the very >last moment when it was almost too late to do anything a major >revision of the laws governing our organization. It then broke >several of the current laws governing the means by which the >revisions would be voted upon made absolutely no effort to >encourage discourse and in fact seemed to attempt to thwart it. >It also recently not only showed itself willing to use its >substantial financial clout that it has because of *us* ... past >and present members who have given money against one of our own >Lodges but then gave this a spin that impugned the motives and >accused the character of some Boston Theosophists to justify its >own position that letter from the attorney posted on theos-l >but also distributed by HQ with an introduction from JA ... was >almost pure political smear tactics ... actually implying that >the Boston members were intending to sell the Lodge and pocket >the money personally ... and the apology Rich rightly demanded >has *not* been forthcoming. While I believe the membership would >*welcome* a *genuinely responsive* presidency/board I do not >think it healthy to try to figure out how to allow the >presidency/board to *appear* responsive when it has for some time >seemed far more responsive to Adyar than to its own membership >even acted *directly against* some of its own members and only >now in an effort to mitigate the crisis of legitimacy it has >itself caused finds itself *forced* to be responsive. > In short uncomfortable as it is to accept HQ has had no >qualms about playing political hard-ball to achieve its ends >without regard to sentiment within the membership and now when >suddenly it went the final step too far and finds itself besieged >by a somewhat severe reaction from the membership its ignored it >cannot suddenly sit back with no penalty to pay. It is reaping >its own self-generated karma - its current dilemma was *entirely* >created by its own behavior. > Why should the membership attempt to help it find a "face- >saving" way out of its mess? Compassion? A sense of >"brotherhood"? These things are noble ideals but not when they >applied in such a way as to inhibit *growth*. Many non-profits >as they grow and evolve have periodic power grabs at their HQ's >but in feeling the full force of the *effects* of them >institutional *growth* happens as for instance in the United >Way in 94 and the NAACP in 95 ... IMO it will be very *helpful* >to the TSA Administration to have this current disaster *seared* >into its institutional memory - for it to understand that if it >behaves as it has been in the future it is taking a *risk*. We >*want* future TSA officers and board members to *understand* that >they serve the *membership* not Adyar or their own particular >visions that *the Lodges and members do not need them ... they >need the Lodges and members*; that if they want to operate >according to the model of the Roman Catholic church with Adyar >as "Rome" dispensing edicts to the "Archbishops" at Wheaton who >then adapt them to an obedient membership they will discover >that American Theosophists will react pretty much like American >Roman Catholics have been ... with many members leaving and even >among those who stay formally connected less and less of >inclination to consider the pronouncements of the hierarchy in >any way binding on them. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. > Either one of these *accompanied by an apology to the >membership and a public declaration that a suitable length of >time e.g. 01 year for Society-wide discussion would be >permitted before another vote was called* would probably go a >long way towards diffusing the temporary crisis ... but I also >think there is a much longer-term distrust that it will take >quite some time to make right. > And finally to address the "personality" issue: I >understand that we do wish to be nice that we want to keep >things at the level of legitimate debate about the ideas >themselves ... but we must remember that it has taken a good >number of Theosophists expending considerable energy even to >reach the point where the membership is on the verge of being >given the time and information necessary to even *allow* >reasonable debate: HQ had to be *forced* into it ... and it was >not abstract entities that attempted to do this it was *people*. >We are talking about the Administration of an organization and >the behavior of its elected officials; decisions don't just get >made *people* make them ... and just as organizations grow by >being held accountable for their actions so too the >*individuals* who are given the *power* to make decisions must be >made to bear the *responsibility for its use.* > I do not know John Algeo personally but *as President* I >can't help but see the TSA being badly damaged: Tight control has >been exerted over the AT; membership has declined significantly; >the Theosophical Trusts have lost considerable equity; and the >Lodges and membership are now embroiled in a by-laws fiasco that >at best is taking considerable energy from members who might >better spend time on Lodge activities and at worst threatens an >outright schism. John Algeo was groomed for the job by our >"Bishops" ran for the job and gets paid for doing the job and >it is not a "personal" attack to say that by every almost >standard measure that a non-profit might use to assess the job >performance of its President or Executive Director - membership >figures financial conditions membership morale accomplishment >of mission - the TS is in worse shape since he took office. > [While my own suggestions for by-law changes will be in the >next post I should mention here that the absurdity of the by- >laws restricting who can run as candidates show themselves here: >Time as a member or on the Board simply assures one knows >Theosophy but for instance deep knowledge of the SD and >administrative skills *have nothing to do with one another*. In >the TSA our President acts as Executive Director and I believe >an examination of whether to split those duties ... i.e. *elect* >a President with Theosophical "wisdom" and have the Board *hire* >an Executive Director with demonstrated organizational and >administrative skills ... is something that ought to be explored >during "by-law discussions". Running a national non-profit >organization with 5000 members and close to 05 million in assets >takes specialized skills and the current by-laws allegedly >designed as the filters to assure the integrity of the positions >not only do not even discuss the qualifications *most* needed by >those who would run the organization but in fact serve to >significantly restrict a number of TSA members who may be far >*more* qualified from running for the office.] > >>perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguments out >>in. the open. > Yes. > >>we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they >>TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to >>set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this >>is necessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore >>people's faith in the elected members. > The elected members created the environment it is their >responsibility to make things right. They have lost the faith of >the membership because of an attitude that has manifested in far >more than just this current situation; they must IMO *alter >both the attitude and their actions* to regain that faith. So >long as I and many I've spoken to feel as though this current >"openness" on the part of HQ only came about because of the size >and intensity of the reaction without which HQ would have >actually ignored a few procedures and just imposed a new set of >by-laws on the members with barely a fraction of the time needed >for reasoned discussion ... there will be *suspicions*. > >>2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of >>the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. >>However the wording and implementation were to be determined >>by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines >>were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open >>discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. > Why has no one else received this letter? Why do we only >find out now after the ballots have actually already been >mailed that this is driven by Adyar? What *precisely* did Adyar >"request"? In what *form* was the request delivered? To what >degree can Adyar *force* the American Section to implement such >things? And I don't agree that its just the implementation that >we must discuss ... its the standing of Adyar to make such >"requests" that is an issue as well. How much of this is *legal* >and how much behind-the-scenes tacit agreements? In fact if >Adyar got too insistent the American Section itself might start >debating whether it even matters whether it remains formally >connected to Adyar. This whole situation seems to be surrounded >by too much secrecy. I'd like to see the US-Adyar relationship >explicitly articulated ... and if Adyar wants to "request" >guidelines I'd like to hear them *from Adyar* along with the >reasons *why* Adyar wants them implemented ... to know for >instance whether the whole American Section might be forced to >alter its by-laws as the result of some factional dispute at >*Adyar* - that seems to have recently gotten into the mood to >exert control to the point of excommunicating national sections >that do not behave. > Regardless the fact that neither Adyar or Wheaton even >considered that the American membership *ought to be given full >information* which *to this day* it still does not have about >the source and reasons for the by-law changes is quite >disturbing. > >>Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. > Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper >paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently >broken but rather that of understanding that a required if >painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this >dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its >foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its >greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: > We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by >something akin to Divine Right. We then had a number of leaders >Dora the last in America who were elected but whose power and >standing still came chiefly from having *known* or been connected >to those who knew the Masters ... power and leadership legitimacy >has been passed down with something like apostolic succession - >and the leaderships both at Wheaton and at Adyar have long >operated almost as though they were running an *occult hierarchy* >.. and Masters do not *consult* chelas when they make the rules >of the order they simply make them and chelas have the right to >either agree or leave the order. We are now perhaps for the >first time having to face the fundamental contradiction between >the Master-Chela and Democratic models of organization and IMO >the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will need to do some >very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... because they are >no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships are >increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". Its likely that the >leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* anything from >memberships that they'd better get rid of the attitude that >voting is just a formality that they can decide what's "best" >for the membership without even consulting the membership >without bothering to even give them full information and just >expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think that's >best!". > IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if >we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the >courage to see it through. > -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 03:30:57 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Dear John Crocker: Your message is an excellent and comprehensive response. I hope it is read by John Algeo and the Board of Directors very very carefully and closely. I also hope Wheaton copies it to Radha Burnier and the General Council by FAX and not by snailmail. .doss ============================================================================ ===== At 091700 AM 12/27/95 -JRC wrote: >>From John Mead: > >>I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. > Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? > >>We seem to be caught up in an argument about the implementation >>vs. the *intent* of the changes. > It seems more like the core issue is the *ramifications* of >the changes and the shift of power towards centralized control >from HQ that they entail. Both the original intent and the >details of implementation are both *expressions* of this concern. >The result of the new by-laws regardless of intent will be a >further consolidation of power at the HQ level IMO continuing a >trend that began when HQ began passing by-laws greatly limiting >who could stand as a candidate for office. The way the proposals >have been presented for a vote seems to me to contain the same >attitude contained in the proposals themselves: That HQ knows >what is best for the membership and the membership ought to just >agree to be taken care of as HQ sees fit. > >>It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the >>following options: >>1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. >>2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do >>not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for >>anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too > Yes and the lack of trust in a membership almost >*predisposed* to want to trust in the intentions of its officers >is the direct result of the *behavior of TSA Administrations >past and present*. **It is the responsibility of the TSA >Administration to regain that trust** ... most especially if it >wants the membership to actually give it more power. The >Administration IMO has mistaken the silence of many members for >contentment with policy. It had better understand that there is >significant discontent among the ranks and the current by-law >fiasco is not the only problem but is more like a final straw >that caused normally quiet voices to speak up. The Bing >situation for instance appeared to many to signify the >willingness of HQ to use its power in an arbitrary and personal >way to look like a particular faction that had been used to >choosing leaders felt free to even possibly pass by-laws with the >intention of keeping a "non-chosen" out of office ... and it is >then surprised when the membership reacts to its desire for >*more* power? > >>we need new options: >>1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This >>means that they can extend it *without* blame -- i.e. backing >>off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrassing. I think that >>they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which >>signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we >>should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of >>discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and >>communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current >>communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain >>brothers/sisters within our organization. > Well here may be the most difficult part of the situation. >I fear I cannot agree with the sentiment here ... and *my* intent >also is the long term good of the TSA. The TSA Administration >for whatever its reasons kept virtually secret until the very >last moment when it was almost too late to do anything a major >revision of the laws governing our organization. It then broke >several of the current laws governing the means by which the >revisions would be voted upon made absolutely no effort to >encourage discourse and in fact seemed to attempt to thwart it. >It also recently not only showed itself willing to use its >substantial financial clout that it has because of *us* ... past >and present members who have given money against one of our own >Lodges but then gave this a spin that impugned the motives and >accused the character of some Boston Theosophists to justify its >own position that letter from the attorney posted on theos-l >but also distributed by HQ with an introduction from JA ... was >almost pure political smear tactics ... actually implying that >the Boston members were intending to sell the Lodge and pocket >the money personally ... and the apology Rich rightly demanded >has *not* been forthcoming. While I believe the membership would >*welcome* a *genuinely responsive* presidency/board I do not >think it healthy to try to figure out how to allow the >presidency/board to *appear* responsive when it has for some time >seemed far more responsive to Adyar than to its own membership >even acted *directly against* some of its own members and only >now in an effort to mitigate the crisis of legitimacy it has >itself caused finds itself *forced* to be responsive. > In short uncomfortable as it is to accept HQ has had no >qualms about playing political hard-ball to achieve its ends >without regard to sentiment within the membership and now when >suddenly it went the final step too far and finds itself besieged >by a somewhat severe reaction from the membership its ignored it >cannot suddenly sit back with no penalty to pay. It is reaping >its own self-generated karma - its current dilemma was *entirely* >created by its own behavior. > Why should the membership attempt to help it find a "face- >saving" way out of its mess? Compassion? A sense of >"brotherhood"? These things are noble ideals but not when they >applied in such a way as to inhibit *growth*. Many non-profits >as they grow and evolve have periodic power grabs at their HQ's >but in feeling the full force of the *effects* of them >institutional *growth* happens as for instance in the United >Way in 94 and the NAACP in 95 ... IMO it will be very *helpful* >to the TSA Administration to have this current disaster *seared* >into its institutional memory - for it to understand that if it >behaves as it has been in the future it is taking a *risk*. We >*want* future TSA officers and board members to *understand* that >they serve the *membership* not Adyar or their own particular >visions that *the Lodges and members do not need them ... they >need the Lodges and members*; that if they want to operate >according to the model of the Roman Catholic church with Adyar >as "Rome" dispensing edicts to the "Archbishops" at Wheaton who >then adapt them to an obedient membership they will discover >that American Theosophists will react pretty much like American >Roman Catholics have been ... with many members leaving and even >among those who stay formally connected less and less of >inclination to consider the pronouncements of the hierarchy in >any way binding on them. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. > Either one of these *accompanied by an apology to the >membership and a public declaration that a suitable length of >time e.g. 01 year for Society-wide discussion would be >permitted before another vote was called* would probably go a >long way towards diffusing the temporary crisis ... but I also >think there is a much longer-term distrust that it will take >quite some time to make right. > And finally to address the "personality" issue: I >understand that we do wish to be nice that we want to keep >things at the level of legitimate debate about the ideas >themselves ... but we must remember that it has taken a good >number of Theosophists expending considerable energy even to >reach the point where the membership is on the verge of being >given the time and information necessary to even *allow* >reasonable debate: HQ had to be *forced* into it ... and it was >not abstract entities that attempted to do this it was *people*. >We are talking about the Administration of an organization and >the behavior of its elected officials; decisions don't just get >made *people* make them ... and just as organizations grow by >being held accountable for their actions so too the >*individuals* who are given the *power* to make decisions must be >made to bear the *responsibility for its use.* > I do not know John Algeo personally but *as President* I >can't help but see the TSA being badly damaged: Tight control has >been exerted over the AT; membership has declined significantly; >the Theosophical Trusts have lost considerable equity; and the >Lodges and membership are now embroiled in a by-laws fiasco that >at best is taking considerable energy from members who might >better spend time on Lodge activities and at worst threatens an >outright schism. John Algeo was groomed for the job by our >"Bishops" ran for the job and gets paid for doing the job and >it is not a "personal" attack to say that by every almost >standard measure that a non-profit might use to assess the job >performance of its President or Executive Director - membership >figures financial conditions membership morale accomplishment >of mission - the TS is in worse shape since he took office. > [While my own suggestions for by-law changes will be in the >next post I should mention here that the absurdity of the by- >laws restricting who can run as candidates show themselves here: >Time as a member or on the Board simply assures one knows >Theosophy but for instance deep knowledge of the SD and >administrative skills *have nothing to do with one another*. In >the TSA our President acts as Executive Director and I believe >an examination of whether to split those duties ... i.e. *elect* >a President with Theosophical "wisdom" and have the Board *hire* >an Executive Director with demonstrated organizational and >administrative skills ... is something that ought to be explored >during "by-law discussions". Running a national non-profit >organization with 5000 members and close to 05 million in assets >takes specialized skills and the current by-laws allegedly >designed as the filters to assure the integrity of the positions >not only do not even discuss the qualifications *most* needed by >those who would run the organization but in fact serve to >significantly restrict a number of TSA members who may be far >*more* qualified from running for the office.] > >>perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguments out >>in. the open. > Yes. > >>we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they >>TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to >>set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this >>is necessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore >>people's faith in the elected members. > The elected members created the environment it is their >responsibility to make things right. They have lost the faith of >the membership because of an attitude that has manifested in far >more than just this current situation; they must IMO *alter >both the attitude and their actions* to regain that faith. So >long as I and many I've spoken to feel as though this current >"openness" on the part of HQ only came about because of the size >and intensity of the reaction without which HQ would have >actually ignored a few procedures and just imposed a new set of >by-laws on the members with barely a fraction of the time needed >for reasoned discussion ... there will be *suspicions*. > >>2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of >>the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. >>However the wording and implementation were to be determined >>by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines >>were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open >>discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. > Why has no one else received this letter? Why do we only >find out now after the ballots have actually already been >mailed that this is driven by Adyar? What *precisely* did Adyar >"request"? In what *form* was the request delivered? To what >degree can Adyar *force* the American Section to implement such >things? And I don't agree that its just the implementation that >we must discuss ... its the standing of Adyar to make such >"requests" that is an issue as well. How much of this is *legal* >and how much behind-the-scenes tacit agreements? In fact if >Adyar got too insistent the American Section itself might start >debating whether it even matters whether it remains formally >connected to Adyar. This whole situation seems to be surrounded >by too much secrecy. I'd like to see the US-Adyar relationship >explicitly articulated ... and if Adyar wants to "request" >guidelines I'd like to hear them *from Adyar* along with the >reasons *why* Adyar wants them implemented ... to know for >instance whether the whole American Section might be forced to >alter its by-laws as the result of some factional dispute at >*Adyar* - that seems to have recently gotten into the mood to >exert control to the point of excommunicating national sections >that do not behave. > Regardless the fact that neither Adyar or Wheaton even >considered that the American membership *ought to be given full >information* which *to this day* it still does not have about >the source and reasons for the by-law changes is quite >disturbing. > >>Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. > Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper >paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently >broken but rather that of understanding that a required if >painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this >dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its >foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its >greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: > We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by >something akin to Divine Right. We then had a number of leaders >Dora the last in America who were elected but whose power and >standing still came chiefly from having *known* or been connected >to those who knew the Masters ... power and leadership legitimacy >has been passed down with something like apostolic succession - >and the leaderships both at Wheaton and at Adyar have long >operated almost as though they were running an *occult hierarchy* >.. and Masters do not *consult* chelas when they make the rules >of the order they simply make them and chelas have the right to >either agree or leave the order. We are now perhaps for the >first time having to face the fundamental contradiction between >the Master-Chela and Democratic models of organization and IMO >the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will need to do some >very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... because they are >no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships are >increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". Its likely that the >leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* anything from >memberships that they'd better get rid of the attitude that >voting is just a formality that they can decide what's "best" >for the membership without even consulting the membership >without bothering to even give them full information and just >expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think that's >best!". > IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if >we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the >courage to see it through. > -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 05:30:26 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Opposing forces? In a general letter to Pasadena TS membership Grace Knoche asks a question which I feel deserves an answer. While I have great respect for Grace and appreciate her recent letter regarding my resignation this question evokes a very emphatic response. After saying that in recent years American and European books and articles have "reviled" HPB and Theosophy making "farfetched" allegations that "besmirch her name and reputation" Grace asks "is it too farfetched to suggest that the publication three years ago of Sylvia Cranston's book HPB... has offended the opposing forces?" Which invites the response "YES IT IS TOO FARFETCHED!!!" I dread seeing the spectre of the "Dark Brotherhood" raised in any Theosophical publication particularly as a way of dismissing writings about HPB and Theosophy. "Opposing forces" sounds much like a code-word for the Dark Brotherhood Mamo-chohans etc. a concept that has been extremely destructive to Theosophical discourse. Even though from personal correspondence I gather that Grace wouldn't include my work among the alleged reactions of the "opposing forces" others have and do. To suggest that Sylvia Cranston's book is on the side of the Great White Brotherhood and anything that takes a less hagiographic look at HPB comes from the "other side"-- is indeed farfetched. Two questions that are not asked in the letter but which I will pursue in a later post are: 1 Who is attacking reviling etc. HPB? 2 Is opposing the portrayal of her found in Cranston's book tantamount to being an enemy of Theosophy? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 05:30:26 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Opposing forces? In a general letter to Pasadena TS membership Grace Knoche asks a question which I feel deserves an answer. While I have great respect for Grace and appreciate her recent letter regarding my resignation this question evokes a very emphatic response. After saying that in recent years American and European books and articles have "reviled" HPB and Theosophy making "farfetched" allegations that "besmirch her name and reputation" Grace asks "is it too farfetched to suggest that the publication three years ago of Sylvia Cranston's book HPB... has offended the opposing forces?" Which invites the response "YES IT IS TOO FARFETCHED!!!" I dread seeing the spectre of the "Dark Brotherhood" raised in any Theosophical publication particularly as a way of dismissing writings about HPB and Theosophy. "Opposing forces" sounds much like a code-word for the Dark Brotherhood Mamo-chohans etc. a concept that has been extremely destructive to Theosophical discourse. Even though from personal correspondence I gather that Grace wouldn't include my work among the alleged reactions of the "opposing forces" others have and do. To suggest that Sylvia Cranston's book is on the side of the Great White Brotherhood and anything that takes a less hagiographic look at HPB comes from the "other side"-- is indeed farfetched. Two questions that are not asked in the letter but which I will pursue in a later post are: 1 Who is attacking reviling etc. HPB? 2 Is opposing the portrayal of her found in Cranston's book tantamount to being an enemy of Theosophy? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 07:19:43 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Revilers of HPB? Following up my post about "opposing forces": what *are* the "numerous books and articles in respected journals as well as new `biographies' magazine articles and newspaper writeups have been published reviling HPB and her theosophy calling her a `mod con' a `Russian nobody who became an American somebody' a `spiritual spin doctor' and the like?" There are only three sources I know of that have outraged Theosophists: Peter Washington's Madame Blavatsky's Baboon reviewed favorably in Newsweek Wired and UK newspapers; my The Masters Revealed the introduction of which appeared in Gnosis and reviews of which have appeared in various places; and Edward Hower's article in Smithsonian about Olcott and HPB. Is there anything else? Joscelyn Godwin's The Theosophical Enlightenment seems to have been completely ignored by Theosophists which is a great pity. In what way do the above-named works qualify as "the dirt of the earth" and Cranston's as "the rays of the sun"-- to followup Grace's proverb about the "opposing forces?" Hower was a TS member at the time he wrote his article as was Washington while writing his book; I don't know the current membership status of either but can only conclude that they have absolutely no reason to continue as members. Including myself the three betes noires of "opposing forces" were Theosophists who just happened to see HPB in a different light than Cranston's hagiography-- and paid a heavy price. So there aren't numerous books but only three max-- and only one Washington's that has produced significant negative publicity for Theosophy. The handful of reviews of said books are to the best of my knowledge all there is of "numerous articles and newspaper writeups" save for Hower's generally admiring portrayal of the Founders in Smithsonian which generated 56 protest letters to the author. Grace encourages members to write protest letters to editors of journals that publish "derogatory" articles hoping that it will serve "a good purpose by alerting the editor to the need to research primary sources before publishing anything about HPB and theosophy." I can only say that in the case of Gnosis and Smithsonian the effect has been to convince said editors that Theosophists are a bunch of hypersensitive cultists who can't stand to see anything in print about HPB that doesn't agree in every detail with their religious beliefs even when written by fellow Theosophists and generally favorable. Hower did indeed read the primary source in question Hodgson's report which I bet VERY few of those protesting Theosophists ever had. He was excoriated for not mentioning V. Harrison's article about it which many Theosophists falsely imagine as an SPR "withdrawal" of the Hodgson report. Certainly neither Hower Washington nor I have attacked HPB or reviled her in the way many past works have e.g. Meade Williams etc. although our conclusions may seem like attacks on the version of HPB promoted by the Theosophical organizations. Now what about Cranston? Her book has been heavily promoted by all three major Theosophical groups. The ULT presumably subsidized it in light of its vast bulk and hagiographic tone. Pasadena and Wheaton have been involved in sales and translations. John Algeo was quoted in ads for it to the effect that it "avoids speculation and rests firmly on facts"!?!?. In short Wheaton Pasadena and ULT have agreed for once that the Cranston version of HPB is the one they want the world to accept. From the behavior of some members and leaders it would seem they want to denounce all other approaches as heretical-- or even emanating from the Black Lodge. Rather than "opposing forces" from without might it not be plain old karma/nemesis that brings forth plenty of alternative approaches just as the Theosophical organizations thought they had succeeded in Cranstonizing the world's understanding of HPB? The problem with Cranston's book which I think becomes problematic karma for the entire movement that promotes it is that it is blatantly distorted. To write a biography of HPB in which her adoptive? son Yuri IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED to evade all serious discussion of the men in her life to splice together pieces of conflicting stories about the Masters without acknowledging the conflicts all are indications that this is not a biography but a hagiography. Meaning that the intent is not to search through available sources trying to come up with an objective reliable account of HPB's life but rather to propagandize readers with a selective body of evidence for her sainthood. Since over half of the book is direct quotes it is more in the category of an anthology than a biography-- fine as is but deceptive when packaged as something else. It was even distributed misleadingly-- my library received a gift copy with a cover letter signed by A. Edgar Atkins presumably some man with no connection to the author. If free copies make it to obscure corners like Halifax County there's obviously subsidy somewhere. Cranston's book came out in 1993 three years after my In Search of the Masters and months after Washington's book came out in England and the intro to TMR came out in Gnosis. Hower had already arranged his research trip to India before he even laid eyes on Cranston's book. So the three authors who have upset Theosophists could not possibly have been motivated even unconsciously by wicked adepts by a wish to counteract the "light forces" of Theosophical orthodoxy as conveyed by Cranston's book. BUT there may very well be "opposing forces" at work in an entirely different sense. Truth will out. Any group that devotes great time effort and money into promoting a blatantly biased and distorted portrayal of its founder is sending out energy. Perhaps it is inevitable karmic synchronicity that produces other portrayals with more balance and depth that appear almost simultaneously. This should be welcomed by Theosophists as good news because the world now has several interpretations of HPB to choose from. However those who think there's only one allowable interpretation of HPB and Cranston is it are karmically destined to be outraged by the inevitable balancing energies that their own imbalance has evoked. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 07:19:43 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Revilers of HPB? Following up my post about "opposing forces": what *are* the "numerous books and articles in respected journals as well as new `biographies' magazine articles and newspaper writeups have been published reviling HPB and her theosophy calling her a `mod con' a `Russian nobody who became an American somebody' a `spiritual spin doctor' and the like?" There are only three sources I know of that have outraged Theosophists: Peter Washington's Madame Blavatsky's Baboon reviewed favorably in Newsweek Wired and UK newspapers; my The Masters Revealed the introduction of which appeared in Gnosis and reviews of which have appeared in various places; and Edward Hower's article in Smithsonian about Olcott and HPB. Is there anything else? Joscelyn Godwin's The Theosophical Enlightenment seems to have been completely ignored by Theosophists which is a great pity. In what way do the above-named works qualify as "the dirt of the earth" and Cranston's as "the rays of the sun"-- to followup Grace's proverb about the "opposing forces?" Hower was a TS member at the time he wrote his article as was Washington while writing his book; I don't know the current membership status of either but can only conclude that they have absolutely no reason to continue as members. Including myself the three betes noires of "opposing forces" were Theosophists who just happened to see HPB in a different light than Cranston's hagiography-- and paid a heavy price. So there aren't numerous books but only three max-- and only one Washington's that has produced significant negative publicity for Theosophy. The handful of reviews of said books are to the best of my knowledge all there is of "numerous articles and newspaper writeups" save for Hower's generally admiring portrayal of the Founders in Smithsonian which generated 56 protest letters to the author. Grace encourages members to write protest letters to editors of journals that publish "derogatory" articles hoping that it will serve "a good purpose by alerting the editor to the need to research primary sources before publishing anything about HPB and theosophy." I can only say that in the case of Gnosis and Smithsonian the effect has been to convince said editors that Theosophists are a bunch of hypersensitive cultists who can't stand to see anything in print about HPB that doesn't agree in every detail with their religious beliefs even when written by fellow Theosophists and generally favorable. Hower did indeed read the primary source in question Hodgson's report which I bet VERY few of those protesting Theosophists ever had. He was excoriated for not mentioning V. Harrison's article about it which many Theosophists falsely imagine as an SPR "withdrawal" of the Hodgson report. Certainly neither Hower Washington nor I have attacked HPB or reviled her in the way many past works have e.g. Meade Williams etc. although our conclusions may seem like attacks on the version of HPB promoted by the Theosophical organizations. Now what about Cranston? Her book has been heavily promoted by all three major Theosophical groups. The ULT presumably subsidized it in light of its vast bulk and hagiographic tone. Pasadena and Wheaton have been involved in sales and translations. John Algeo was quoted in ads for it to the effect that it "avoids speculation and rests firmly on facts"!?!?. In short Wheaton Pasadena and ULT have agreed for once that the Cranston version of HPB is the one they want the world to accept. From the behavior of some members and leaders it would seem they want to denounce all other approaches as heretical-- or even emanating from the Black Lodge. Rather than "opposing forces" from without might it not be plain old karma/nemesis that brings forth plenty of alternative approaches just as the Theosophical organizations thought they had succeeded in Cranstonizing the world's understanding of HPB? The problem with Cranston's book which I think becomes problematic karma for the entire movement that promotes it is that it is blatantly distorted. To write a biography of HPB in which her adoptive? son Yuri IS NOT EVEN MENTIONED to evade all serious discussion of the men in her life to splice together pieces of conflicting stories about the Masters without acknowledging the conflicts all are indications that this is not a biography but a hagiography. Meaning that the intent is not to search through available sources trying to come up with an objective reliable account of HPB's life but rather to propagandize readers with a selective body of evidence for her sainthood. Since over half of the book is direct quotes it is more in the category of an anthology than a biography-- fine as is but deceptive when packaged as something else. It was even distributed misleadingly-- my library received a gift copy with a cover letter signed by A. Edgar Atkins presumably some man with no connection to the author. If free copies make it to obscure corners like Halifax County there's obviously subsidy somewhere. Cranston's book came out in 1993 three years after my In Search of the Masters and months after Washington's book came out in England and the intro to TMR came out in Gnosis. Hower had already arranged his research trip to India before he even laid eyes on Cranston's book. So the three authors who have upset Theosophists could not possibly have been motivated even unconsciously by wicked adepts by a wish to counteract the "light forces" of Theosophical orthodoxy as conveyed by Cranston's book. BUT there may very well be "opposing forces" at work in an entirely different sense. Truth will out. Any group that devotes great time effort and money into promoting a blatantly biased and distorted portrayal of its founder is sending out energy. Perhaps it is inevitable karmic synchronicity that produces other portrayals with more balance and depth that appear almost simultaneously. This should be welcomed by Theosophists as good news because the world now has several interpretations of HPB to choose from. However those who think there's only one allowable interpretation of HPB and Cranston is it are karmically destined to be outraged by the inevitable balancing energies that their own imbalance has evoked. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 09:27:52 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: TI: Project 01 To Alan our Grand Poobah -: members of TI and the rest of the Cyber-Theosophists on the theos-l list: Greetings ... Having been of late making a considerable amount of noise about what TSA HQ has been doing and not doing it is certainly my responsibility to come up with suggestions for alternatives though I must admit I doubt they'll be listened to - which I'll do in a post soon ... BUT! as I was thinking this over I happened to also have a conversation with a neighbor who began asking me a bit about Theosophy and I found myself coming to the same conclusion I had several times before and that I've heard others on the list speak to: That there is very little introductory material that's any good. [And this is one of the things that disturbs me about HQ ... all the time and money spent fighting about by-laws suing Lodges ... yet somehow after more than a *century* our organization has *yet* to produce introductory literature written in an inviting tone...]. So! While I don't have all that much time I've decided to take a shot at writing a decent Introduction to Theosophy ... defining the parameters of conceptual complexity and vocabulary for the following audience: Teens to 20's in age a High School education or equivilent reading skills and no knowledge of spiritual or religious concepts beyond those of mainstream exoteric religion. [As simplistic as this sounds it has long been my belief that a significant reason for low mewmbership may come from the fact that Theosophy resembles an enormous and beautiful temple full of ornate art and brilliant stained-glass windows ... but somebody forgot to put any *doors* on the thing when it was being built. We have a body of very intense and highly intellectual literature but have failed to build the series of graduated conceptual steps needed to make it accessable to any but a very few - like a university that only teaches doctoral level courses expects students to enroll already having mastered the undergraduate level ... but not noticing that there *is* no undergraduate level teaching *anywhere* in the subjects they are teaching ...]. SO! I'm wondering whether Theosophy International might care to help out with this little endeavor as its first group project for global Theosophy I'd like it to be something that could used in many different countries ... would anyone mind if I periodically posted Chapters as they are written and they'll be short and simple on the list for comment suggestions etc.? Should I maybe use another of the theos- lists? How about other non-TI theos-l members ... care to participate? [And I'm certainly amenable to not involving the list at all if that is what people prefer ... but it has occured to me that we have a *tremendous* amount of knowledge scattered among the members of the list and as important and much rarer a diversity of views from almost every current perspective and a number of different nations ... and I thought maybe this might be one means of precipitating a bit of it into service - in an area where Theosophy clearly needs to be served ...] SO! Any comments from TI members? From non-TI list members? From people who think I'm a dufus and will get it all wrong -:? And as I now take to sketching the chapters & structure tell me especially those who have previously mentioned their desire to have a book they could refer people to .. ... what general topics would you consider to be absolute *essentials* for an introductory book? Toodles -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 09:49:32 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach reply to JRC from jem >>jem >> I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. >JRC >Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? Hi - he replied to me since I sent it directly to him. My original concern was if the published by-law changes were correct when they mentioned that the changes were in response to Adyar's requests. The letter he sent me just confirmed that TSA was responding to input from Adyar. No real new info. he gave no details or specific references/copies of any letters etc.. I hope he puts something together so we can see the wording of the Adyar- requests. peace - john mead p.s. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. I do not have any problems with these. I'm glad you're promoting the ideas. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 09:49:32 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach reply to JRC from jem >>jem >> I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. >JRC >Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? Hi - he replied to me since I sent it directly to him. My original concern was if the published by-law changes were correct when they mentioned that the changes were in response to Adyar's requests. The letter he sent me just confirmed that TSA was responding to input from Adyar. No real new info. he gave no details or specific references/copies of any letters etc.. I hope he puts something together so we can see the wording of the Adyar- requests. peace - john mead p.s. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. I do not have any problems with these. I'm glad you're promoting the ideas. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 10:49:33 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theosophy on MSN On 27 199512 Jerry Schueler wrote: > I am now on Microsoft Network as well as AOL and CompuServe. MSN has a very > large New Age Forum with a lot of sub-forums and folders libraries. One of > these is New Age Philosophy Forum and within it is the Theosophy folder. But > so far the folder is empty. > > Jerry S. > Jerry Thanks for pointing out the forum in MSN. I am just on the plain vanilla Internet and keep us informed of any traffic you see out there which may be of interest to all of us. You can also post them here and we can respond from here! The fact that Theosophy has been identified in a folder speak for itself. There are individuals who are aware of Theosophy. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 10:56:57 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Theos-l makes news On 27 199512 Ann E. Bermingham wrote: > Today I received the Jan/Feb issue of the Akbar Lodge newsletter. The > cover article was entitled "Observations from the Internet". In it the author > put forth in polite terms the wrangling fighting and intellectual warfare > that tend to break out on our little mailing list. > > The most interesting part to me was the realization that there are people *out > there* reading our group discusssions. Often I forget that and tend to think I > am only to talking to KPJ Dr. Bain Liesel Rich Sy Mr. Coherent the two > Jerrys Doss etc. It's almost like there is an invisible audience that > materializes once in great while to make us aware they are there. > > This is the last paragraph of the article: > "As we move toward more and more interaction among other Theosophists and > discover the extent of the disimilarities of expression and source are we > ready to find those common points and foster the true feeling of Unity > which should exist among Theosophists? The hot brand of authority bearing > the words "Not Theosohy" should not fall too quickly upon the ideas of > others. It is up to each of us to remain our own authority based on what > we ourselves have learned through study obsrvation and experience > continually exercising and strengthening our powers of discrimination." > signed: A Theosophy Student > Ann E. Bermingham > Ann I am glad to read you post on the material that appeared in the Akbar Lodge Newsletter. Am I also very glad that there are others lurking and reading the posts here. We need to get more e-mail users to sign up here. One of the problems is that many members who have access to e-mail either does not know about theos-l or do not have specific information on how to sign up. I have made copies of the writeup prepared by Don DeGracia and with slight changes have sent them to members of TS and also have requested them to make copies and distribute them to others who may have an interest. Also I have put copies in the local health food grocery chain store and have requested others also to do the same. I have also suggested them to reprint it in their Branch/Study Center Newsletter. It is my hope that we will see more interested people sign up. I am fully aware of the potential and power of e-mail as a medium of communication and discussion. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 11:30:56 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Theos-l makes news Today I received the Jan/Feb issue of the Akbar Lodge newsletter. The cover article was entitled "Observations from the Internet". In it the author put forth in polite terms the wrangling fighting and intellectual warfare that tend to break out on our little mailing list. The most interesting part to me was the realization that there are people *out there* reading our group discusssions. Often I forget that and tend to think I am only to talking to KPJ Dr. Bain Liesel Rich Sy Mr. Coherent the two Jerrys Doss etc. It's almost like there is an invisible audience that materializes once in great while to make us aware they are there. This is the last paragraph of the article: "As we move toward more and more interaction among other Theosophists and discover the extent of the disimilarities of expression and source are we ready to find those common points and foster the true feeling of Unity which should exist among Theosophists? The hot brand of authority bearing the words "Not Theosohy" should not fall too quickly upon the ideas of others. It is up to each of us to remain our own authority based on what we ourselves have learned through study obsrvation and experience continually exercising and strengthening our powers of discrimination." signed: A Theosophy Student Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 11:40:48 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Theosophy on MSN I am now on Microsoft Network as well as AOL and CompuServe. MSN has a very large New Age Forum with a lot of sub-forums and folders libraries. One of these is New Age Philosophy Forum and within it is the Theosophy folder. But so far the folder is empty. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 14:12:53 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Theos-l makes news >Hear hear! It's realy nice to know that we're making an impression on people who don't participate that actively. Liesel ________________________________________________________________________________ Today I received the Jan/Feb issue of the Akbar Lodge newsletter. The >cover article was entitled "Observations from the Internet". In it the author >put forth in polite terms the wrangling fighting and intellectual warfare that >tend to break out on our little mailing list. > >The most interesting part to me was the realization that there are people *out >there* reading our group discusssions. Often I forget that and tend to think I >am only to talking to KPJ Dr. Bain Liesel Rich Sy Mr. Coherent the two >Jerrys Doss etc. It's almost like there is an invisible audience that >materializes once in great while to make us aware they are there. > >This is the last paragraph of the article: >"As we move toward more and more interaction among other Theosophists and >discover the extent of the disimilarities of expression and source are we ready >to find those common points and foster the true feeling of Unity which should >exist among Theosophists? The hot brand of authority bearing the words "Not >Theosohy" should not fall too quickly upon the ideas of others. It is up to >each of us to remain our own authority based on what we ourselves have learned >through study obsrvation and experience continually exercising and >strengthening our powers of discrimination." signed: A Theosophy Student > >Ann E. Bermingham > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 14:16:13 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: TI: Project 01 To JRC & others: When I joined TS in 1991 I was sent a booklet entitled The Mysteries of Existence which really impressed me. It was nicely put together and has some really great illustrations. It was edited by Jack G. Patterson of the New Zealand Section of the Theosphical Society and was presented as an introduction to the Society. While I'm sure you have your own ideas this might be a good example to look at. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 14:22:36 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Movement towards central control --=====================_820124739==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" --=====================_820124739==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Movement towards Central Control There is a very interesting case litigated in the Denver Federal District Court. This case was filed by the US representatives of a world-wide fraternal organization whose headquarters is located in Paris and is dominated by the French. There were several branches in the US and the branches were working harmoniously with the Paris headquarters for the past several decades. The branches in the US were organized under a Colorado Non Profit Corporation. About two years ago in a very bold and swift move and *it appears* to be with the active help and suggestion and support of some of well known members of the US branches the headquarters wanted to change the long standing rules. Paris in a blatant move tried to seize *de facto* control of the *entire* organization and *its assets* in this country in a move reminiscent of the colonial days of "Residents" the colonialists had in their colonies. Under the change demanded by the Paris headquarters its representative *unilaterally* *appointed by* it shall have *absolute* and *unquestionable* *veto* powers on *all* and *any* decision made by the membership in the US and/or the legally and democratically elected Board of Directors of the US non-profit corporation. This representative is answerable to no one in the US but only to the higher ups in Paris. When Paris' demand was presented to the members in the US the majority of the members saw thru the power grab attempt and also the *irrevocable* and *non negotiable* nature of the demand and decided to reject the demand. It appears that the officers of the non profit US Corporation personally visited Paris to present their case and the mood of the US membership with a view to see how things could be worked out. Paris was it appears was adamant and in no mood to change its demands and they US officers returned empty handed with no choices left. As it is the most un-American way to accept such potentially dictatorial terms imposed by a small group of people from a foreign land the members of the branches overwhelmingly voted to reject the Paris demands thus severing its connection with Paris. The rejection of the demand resulted in the formation of a new US organization not answerable to Paris or any other foreign entity. Due to the legal status of the Colorado Nonprofit Corporation the new organization continues under the Colorado Nonprofit Corporation and retaining all the assets. A very small minority of members who wanted to continue to owe allegiance to Paris and submit themselves to Paris' requirements of being watched over by the *veto wielding* appointed representative sued in Denver Federal District Court the Colorado Nonprofit Corporation claiming rights to all the property owned by the corporation. All the court records are in public domain and anyone can have access to them. The litigation is proceeding and I do not know how many thousands of dollars have been wasted on legal fees by both sides. Anyone in the legal field knows that litigation in Federal Courts is very very expensive. There are several underlying factors in the above situation that many may not be aware. Many of the members of the above organization are also members of the Theosophical Society in America. While Theosophical Society has *no* legal or *formal* connection *whatsoever* with the above organization over the years all over the world many of the well known members of the Theosophical Society were active participants in the organization and their participation was in their *personal capacity* and *not* in any way as representing any *office* they may hold in the Theosophical Society. Secondly *it appears* that some of the well known names in the TSA who are members of the above organization were *it appears* actively supported the unilateral non negotiable demands of Paris and tried to induce others to follow them. In the Olcott Institute program following the TS Annual Meeting of 1994 a meeting of the members following Paris line was formally included. It was the very first time that I have been around TS for nearly four decades that the meeting of this organization was formally included in the program in the USA or at Adyar. Even at the International Headquarters during the annual meeting of the TS the meetings of this organization are never announced as part of the official program and also the meetings if any were always held very quietly *outside* the campus of the International Headquarters at Adyar. I felt that it was very inappropriate to include the above meeting as part of the TS program and also it does no good to TSA to be seen or perceived as being siding one side or the other. As soon as I saw the Annual Meeting program I presented my concerns and the facts as stated above to the National President and the Board of Directors. But my appeal and requests to the National President and the Board of Directors were of no avail and they went ahead with the program as part of the Olcott Institute. When the TSA bylaws changes were published in AT especially those relating to the financial *micro management* clauses I noticed that it appears to show unmistakable de facto similarities even though couched in clever legal lingo that an average member may not recognize the full significance. Some of those who are supportive of the Paris line of *power grab* thinking *appears to have had* something to do with the fast tactics adopted for a speedy formal referendum approval of bylaw changes by TSA members with no publicity and almost no discussion of opposing views. I am still wondering what's going on? Is it the cyclical changes occurring at the end this century? Any thoughts? MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 15:17:04 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: debate on by-laws -- new proposition the following are a few ideas which I think may help the future debates about by-laws etc. My suggestion comes from inspiration regarding the mechanism which California handles the citizen request/propositions: a/b. before and after text is given 1. each side submits a "pro"/"con" arguement for there position these are then given to the opposing sides for item 02 2. each side submits a rebuttal to the "pro"/"con" arguement given in item 1. 3. each side then gives a final arguement for their position. hence the final document sent to voters looks like this: a. original text of law of by-laws/legislation b. changed/proposed text of by-laws/legislation 1. arguement in favor 1. arguement opposed 2. rebuttal to arguement in favor 2. rebuttal to arguement opposed 3. final arguement in favor 3. final arguement opposed. I was usually impressed with how this system a document with the above text was sent to all voters helped to communiacate the key points of the issue. peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 15:34:59 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: resend - by jem re: by-laws resent -- possible delivery errors -- jem reply to JRC from jem >>jem >> I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. >JRC >Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? Hi - he replied to me since I sent it directly to him. My original concern was if the published by-law changes were correct when they mentioned that the changes were in response to Adyar's requests. The letter he sent me just confirmed that TSA was responding to input from Adyar. No real new info. he gave no details or specific references/copies of any letters etc.. I hope he puts something together so we can see the wording of the Adyar- requests. peace - john mead p.s. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. I do not have any problems with these. I'm glad you're promoting the ideas. :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 15:35:47 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Dear JRC >I have 02 things to say about what you wrote 1. IMO John Algeo *has* the administrative/executive ability & the Theosophical wisdom/knowhow required of a President of the TS. What's more he's a very exceptional person. He has an awful lot on the ball in many ways. I think he inherited a very difficult situation & is doing his best to deal with it. 2. I'm not sure of how that works with Adyar ie I don't know what the ties & obligations are on the part of the American Es'ers. Reading between the lines there seems to be some freedom but I don't know how much. What I know for sure is that the International President of the TS is also the Outer Head of the ES. Liesel >From John Mead: > >>I recently received an e-mail from Dr. Algeo which suggests that >>the intent of the changes were to directly conform with requests >>from the Adyar/Committee. > Is there some particular reason why this explanation was not >sent to the general list? Especially since so many have been >asking for precisely this kind of explanation? > >>We seem to be caught up in an argument about the implementation >>vs. the *intent* of the changes. > It seems more like the core issue is the *ramifications* of >the changes and the shift of power towards centralized control >from HQ that they entail. Both the original intent and the >details of implementation are both *expressions* of this concern. >The result of the new by-laws regardless of intent will be a >further consolidation of power at the HQ level IMO continuing a >trend that began when HQ began passing by-laws greatly limiting >who could stand as a candidate for office. The way the proposals >have been presented for a vote seems to me to contain the same >attitude contained in the proposals themselves: That HQ knows >what is best for the membership and the membership ought to just >agree to be taken care of as HQ sees fit. > >>It is clear from e-mail and also snail-mail that we have the >>following options: >>1 By-Laws get Ratified and several lodges file suit. >>2 By-Laws get rejected and we have many within the TSA who do >>not trust the TSA administration -- which is not good for >>anyone/organization. law-suits would probably follow too > Yes and the lack of trust in a membership almost >*predisposed* to want to trust in the intentions of its officers >is the direct result of the *behavior of TSA Administrations >past and present*. **It is the responsibility of the TSA >Administration to regain that trust** ... most especially if it >wants the membership to actually give it more power. The >Administration IMO has mistaken the silence of many members for >contentment with policy. It had better understand that there is >significant discontent among the ranks and the current by-law >fiasco is not the only problem but is more like a final straw >that caused normally quiet voices to speak up. The Bing >situation for instance appeared to many to signify the >willingness of HQ to use its power in an arbitrary and personal >way to look like a particular faction that had been used to >choosing leaders felt free to even possibly pass by-laws with the >intention of keeping a "non-chosen" out of office ... and it is >then surprised when the membership reacts to its desire for >*more* power? > >>we need new options: >>1 we need to allow TSA to gracefully extend the election. This >>means that they can extend it *without* blame -- i.e. backing >>off can SEEM like a defeat and be embarrassing. I think that >>they can decide to postpone elections in a manner which >>signifies a *responsive presidency/board* decision which we >>should ACCEPT as an HONEST effort to allow a larger window of >>discussion. We need to allow for misunderstandings and >>communication problems as *honest* problems due to the current >>communication networks. NOT as personal attacks against certain >>brothers/sisters within our organization. > Well here may be the most difficult part of the situation. >I fear I cannot agree with the sentiment here ... and *my* intent >also is the long term good of the TSA. The TSA Administration >for whatever its reasons kept virtually secret until the very >last moment when it was almost too late to do anything a major >revision of the laws governing our organization. It then broke >several of the current laws governing the means by which the >revisions would be voted upon made absolutely no effort to >encourage discourse and in fact seemed to attempt to thwart it. >It also recently not only showed itself willing to use its >substantial financial clout that it has because of *us* ... past >and present members who have given money against one of our own >Lodges but then gave this a spin that impugned the motives and >accused the character of some Boston Theosophists to justify its >own position that letter from the attorney posted on theos-l >but also distributed by HQ with an introduction from JA ... was >almost pure political smear tactics ... actually implying that >the Boston members were intending to sell the Lodge and pocket >the money personally ... and the apology Rich rightly demanded >has *not* been forthcoming. While I believe the membership would >*welcome* a *genuinely responsive* presidency/board I do not >think it healthy to try to figure out how to allow the >presidency/board to *appear* responsive when it has for some time >seemed far more responsive to Adyar than to its own membership >even acted *directly against* some of its own members and only >now in an effort to mitigate the crisis of legitimacy it has >itself caused finds itself *forced* to be responsive. > In short uncomfortable as it is to accept HQ has had no >qualms about playing political hard-ball to achieve its ends >without regard to sentiment within the membership and now when >suddenly it went the final step too far and finds itself besieged >by a somewhat severe reaction from the membership its ignored it >cannot suddenly sit back with no penalty to pay. It is reaping >its own self-generated karma - its current dilemma was *entirely* >created by its own behavior. > Why should the membership attempt to help it find a "face- >saving" way out of its mess? Compassion? A sense of >"brotherhood"? These things are noble ideals but not when they >applied in such a way as to inhibit *growth*. Many non-profits >as they grow and evolve have periodic power grabs at their HQ's >but in feeling the full force of the *effects* of them >institutional *growth* happens as for instance in the United >Way in 94 and the NAACP in 95 ... IMO it will be very *helpful* >to the TSA Administration to have this current disaster *seared* >into its institutional memory - for it to understand that if it >behaves as it has been in the future it is taking a *risk*. We >*want* future TSA officers and board members to *understand* that >they serve the *membership* not Adyar or their own particular >visions that *the Lodges and members do not need them ... they >need the Lodges and members*; that if they want to operate >according to the model of the Roman Catholic church with Adyar >as "Rome" dispensing edicts to the "Archbishops" at Wheaton who >then adapt them to an obedient membership they will discover >that American Theosophists will react pretty much like American >Roman Catholics have been ... with many members leaving and even >among those who stay formally connected less and less of >inclination to consider the pronouncements of the hierarchy in >any way binding on them. > I don't think Wheaton needs another option they have two: >1 Simply declare the current vote null and void due to the >irregularities present in the process as noted in the letter >from Lodge Presidents or >2 By a vote of the Board withdraw the current revisions. > Either one of these *accompanied by an apology to the >membership and a public declaration that a suitable length of >time e.g. 01 year for Society-wide discussion would be >permitted before another vote was called* would probably go a >long way towards diffusing the temporary crisis ... but I also >think there is a much longer-term distrust that it will take >quite some time to make right. > And finally to address the "personality" issue: I >understand that we do wish to be nice that we want to keep >things at the level of legitimate debate about the ideas >themselves ... but we must remember that it has taken a good >number of Theosophists expending considerable energy even to >reach the point where the membership is on the verge of being >given the time and information necessary to even *allow* >reasonable debate: HQ had to be *forced* into it ... and it was >not abstract entities that attempted to do this it was *people*. >We are talking about the Administration of an organization and >the behavior of its elected officials; decisions don't just get >made *people* make them ... and just as organizations grow by >being held accountable for their actions so too the >*individuals* who are given the *power* to make decisions must be >made to bear the *responsibility for its use.* > I do not know John Algeo personally but *as President* I >can't help but see the TSA being badly damaged: Tight control has >been exerted over the AT; membership has declined significantly; >the Theosophical Trusts have lost considerable equity; and the >Lodges and membership are now embroiled in a by-laws fiasco that >at best is taking considerable energy from members who might >better spend time on Lodge activities and at worst threatens an >outright schism. John Algeo was groomed for the job by our >"Bishops" ran for the job and gets paid for doing the job and >it is not a "personal" attack to say that by every almost >standard measure that a non-profit might use to assess the job >performance of its President or Executive Director - membership >figures financial conditions membership morale accomplishment >of mission - the TS is in worse shape since he took office. > [While my own suggestions for by-law changes will be in the >next post I should mention here that the absurdity of the by- >laws restricting who can run as candidates show themselves here: >Time as a member or on the Board simply assures one knows >Theosophy but for instance deep knowledge of the SD and >administrative skills *have nothing to do with one another*. In >the TSA our President acts as Executive Director and I believe >an examination of whether to split those duties ... i.e. *elect* >a President with Theosophical "wisdom" and have the Board *hire* >an Executive Director with demonstrated organizational and >administrative skills ... is something that ought to be explored >during "by-law discussions". Running a national non-profit >organization with 5000 members and close to 05 million in assets >takes specialized skills and the current by-laws allegedly >designed as the filters to assure the integrity of the positions >not only do not even discuss the qualifications *most* needed by >those who would run the organization but in fact serve to >significantly restrict a number of TSA members who may be far >*more* qualified from running for the office.] > >>perhaps we need 9-12 months to really get the arguments out >>in. the open. > Yes. > >>we may find it hard to understand but I do not think they >>TSA had anticipated the response to this ballot. We need to >>set up an environment where the devisivness is eliminated. this >>is necessary to preserve the TSA's integrity and restore >>people's faith in the elected members. > The elected members created the environment it is their >responsibility to make things right. They have lost the faith of >the membership because of an attitude that has manifested in far >more than just this current situation; they must IMO *alter >both the attitude and their actions* to regain that faith. So >long as I and many I've spoken to feel as though this current >"openness" on the part of HQ only came about because of the size >and intensity of the reaction without which HQ would have >actually ignored a few procedures and just imposed a new set of >by-laws on the members with barely a fraction of the time needed >for reasoned discussion ... there will be *suspicions*. > >>2 I have received a letter from Dr. Algeo where the intent of >>the new By-Laws were *requested* by International Adyar. >>However the wording and implementation were to be determined >>by the TSA. Hence --- we have an instance where the guidelines >>were set but the specific implementation needs to have an open >>discussion esp. between TSA Chapters/Lodges. > Why has no one else received this letter? Why do we only >find out now after the ballots have actually already been >mailed that this is driven by Adyar? What *precisely* did Adyar >"request"? In what *form* was the request delivered? To what >degree can Adyar *force* the American Section to implement such >things? And I don't agree that its just the implementation that >we must discuss ... its the standing of Adyar to make such >"requests" that is an issue as well. How much of this is *legal* >and how much behind-the-scenes tacit agreements? In fact if >Adyar got too insistent the American Section itself might start >debating whether it even matters whether it remains formally >connected to Adyar. This whole situation seems to be surrounded >by too much secrecy. I'd like to see the US-Adyar relationship >explicitly articulated ... and if Adyar wants to "request" >guidelines I'd like to hear them *from Adyar* along with the >reasons *why* Adyar wants them implemented ... to know for >instance whether the whole American Section might be forced to >alter its by-laws as the result of some factional dispute at >*Adyar* - that seems to have recently gotten into the mood to >exert control to the point of excommunicating national sections >that do not behave. > Regardless the fact that neither Adyar or Wheaton even >considered that the American membership *ought to be given full >information* which *to this day* it still does not have about >the source and reasons for the by-law changes is quite >disturbing. > >>Let us try to fix the system before it is permanently damaged. > Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper >paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently >broken but rather that of understanding that a required if >painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this >dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its >foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its >greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: > We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by >something akin to Divine Right. We then had a number of leaders >Dora the last in America who were elected but whose power and >standing still came chiefly from having *known* or been connected >to those who knew the Masters ... power and leadership legitimacy >has been passed down with something like apostolic succession - >and the leaderships both at Wheaton and at Adyar have long >operated almost as though they were running an *occult hierarchy* >.. and Masters do not *consult* chelas when they make the rules >of the order they simply make them and chelas have the right to >either agree or leave the order. We are now perhaps for the >first time having to face the fundamental contradiction between >the Master-Chela and Democratic models of organization and IMO >the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will need to do some >very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... because they are >no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships are >increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". Its likely that the >leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* anything from >memberships that they'd better get rid of the attitude that >voting is just a formality that they can decide what's "best" >for the membership without even consulting the membership >without bothering to even give them full information and just >expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think that's >best!". > IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if >we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the >courage to see it through. > -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 15:38:11 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: theos-l # 213 -- delivery resend hi - resending digest #213 --- possible delivery errors. peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 15:41:34 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: fwd by jem: jerry s. : theos on Microsoft forum I am now on Microsoft Network as well as AOL and CompuServe. MSN has a very large New Age Forum with a lot of sub-forums and folders libraries. One of these is New Age Philosophy Forum and within it is the Theosophy folder. But so far the folder is empty. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 16:02:16 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Opposing forces? >This is only in a roundabout way connected to Sylvia Cranston's book but rather it deals with the influence of dark brotherhood mentioned in the message. I learned something very useful in that regard from Serge King. The dark brotherhood rules by fear. If you're not afraid they can't touch you. Who are they? Well here we are talking about besmirching HPB which diminishes all of us some including the besmircher because we have a tie to her. We're talking disparagingly about other Theosophical leaders & writers. That diminishes us just as well. Besides our own little Theosophical circle just look around & see how many creators of negativity & of fear there are in this world... people who try to tear us down instead of building us up. It's not only the dope addict who robs & cheats & lies all arond his neighborhood it's also a boss who won't give his employe the satisfaction of a job well done but rather makes them seem little & unimportant. To me that's dark brotherhood. I had a mother with 02 kids over for Xmas dinner. One of the kids tried hard to be sociable but didn't make it quite. Her Dad was going to pick her up after dinner & take her to his house for a few days. & she'd have to listen to him tell her how awful her mother & her brother are when she loves both of them dearly. That to me is dark brotherhood. Serge taught us to bless as much as possible which is sometimes difficult. But you say something nice to a person & their whole being lights up. The aura expands & maybe their next action will be something real nice for sure nicer than if you've just insulted them & made their & your aura shrivel up. End of thought for the day. Liesel >In a general letter to Pasadena TS membership Grace Knoche >asks a question which I feel deserves an answer. While I have >great respect for Grace and appreciate her recent letter >regarding my resignation this question evokes a very emphatic >response. After saying that in recent years American and >European books and articles have "reviled" HPB and Theosophy >making "farfetched" allegations that "besmirch her name and >reputation" Grace asks "is it too farfetched to suggest that >the publication three years ago of Sylvia Cranston's book >HPB... has offended the opposing forces?" > >Which invites the response "YES IT IS TOO FARFETCHED!!!" > >I dread seeing the spectre of the "Dark Brotherhood" raised in >any Theosophical publication particularly as a way of >dismissing writings about HPB and Theosophy. "Opposing forces" >sounds much like a code-word for the Dark Brotherhood >Mamo-chohans etc. a concept that has been extremely >destructive to Theosophical discourse. Even though from >personal correspondence I gather that Grace wouldn't include my >work among the alleged reactions of the "opposing forces" >others have and do. To suggest that Sylvia Cranston's book is >on the side of the Great White Brotherhood and anything that >takes a less hagiographic look at HPB comes from the "other >side"-- is indeed farfetched. > >Two questions that are not asked in the letter but which I >will pursue in a later post are: >1 Who is attacking reviling etc. HPB? >2 Is opposing the portrayal of her found in Cranston's book >tantamount to being an enemy of Theosophy? > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 16:28:35 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: TI: Project 01 >JRC That's a real good idea. Do it with some imagination & verve! You talk about others participating. It's not the worst idea to have some input from others. like I chair a committee. We produce letters & flyers. I write them & then circulate them to the rest of the committee for input. The end results come out pretty good. I want to tell you that I had just last week suggested to John Mead to start up theos-basic & I was going to put on it Shirley Nicholson's "A Program for Leading The Spiritual Life" which I consider good beginners material. I haven't heard anything back from John Mead but frankly I like your idea better & also if you do it it'll go faster than if I start something. I have more irons in the fire than I can handle espcially since I'm not speedy Gonzales anymore. What do you say Grand Pooh Bah? Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race To Alan our Grand Poobah -: members of TI and the rest of the >Cyber-Theosophists on the theos-l list: > Greetings ... >Having been of late making a considerable amount of noise about what >TSA HQ has been doing and not doing it is certainly my responsibility >to come up with suggestions for alternatives though I must admit I doubt >they'll be listened to - which I'll do in a post soon ... BUT! as I was >thinking this over I happened to also have a conversation with a >neighbor who began asking me a bit about Theosophy and I found myself >coming to the same conclusion I had several times before and that I've >heard others on the list speak to: That there is very little >introductory material that's any good. [And this is one of the things >that disturbs me about HQ ... all the time and money spent fighting about >by-laws suing Lodges ... yet somehow after more than a *century* our >organization has *yet* to produce introductory literature written in an >inviting tone...]. > So! While I don't have all that much time I've decided to take a >shot at writing a decent Introduction to Theosophy ... defining the >parameters of conceptual complexity and vocabulary for the following >audience: Teens to 20's in age a High School education or equivilent >reading skills and no knowledge of spiritual or religious concepts >beyond those of mainstream exoteric religion. > [As simplistic as this sounds it has long been my belief that a >significant reason for low mewmbership may come from the fact that >Theosophy resembles an enormous and beautiful temple full of ornate art >and brilliant stained-glass windows ... but somebody forgot to put any >*doors* on the thing when it was being built. We have a body of very >intense and highly intellectual literature but have failed to build the >series of graduated conceptual steps needed to make it accessable to any >but a very few - like a university that only teaches doctoral level >courses expects students to enroll already having mastered the >undergraduate level ... but not noticing that there *is* no undergraduate >level teaching *anywhere* in the subjects they are teaching ...]. > SO! I'm wondering whether Theosophy International might care to >help out with this little endeavor as its first group project for global >Theosophy I'd like it to be something that could used in many different >countries ... would anyone mind if I periodically posted Chapters as >they are written and they'll be short and simple on the list for >comment suggestions etc.? Should I maybe use another of the theos- >lists? How about other non-TI theos-l members ... care to participate? > [And I'm certainly amenable to not involving the list at all if >that is what people prefer ... but it has occured to me that we have a >*tremendous* amount of knowledge scattered among the members of the list >and as important and much rarer a diversity of views from almost every >current perspective and a number of different nations ... and I thought >maybe this might be one means of precipitating a bit of it into service - >in an area where Theosophy clearly needs to be served ...] > > SO! Any comments from TI members? From non-TI list members? From >people who think I'm a dufus and will get it all wrong -:? > And as I now take to sketching the chapters & structure tell >me especially those who have previously mentioned their desire to have >a book they could refer people to .. ... what general topics would you >consider to be absolute *essentials* for an introductory book? > Toodles -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 16:34:52 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Theosophy on MSN >On 27 199512 Jerry Schueler wrote: > >> I am now on Microsoft Network as well as AOL and CompuServe. MSN has a very >> large New Age Forum with a lot of sub-forums and folders libraries. One of >> these is New Age Philosophy Forum and within it is the Theosophy folder. But >> so far the folder is empty. >> >> Jerry S. >> > >Jerry > >Thanks for pointing out the forum in MSN. I am just on the plain vanilla >Internet and keep us informed of any traffic you see out there which may >be of interest to all of us. You can also post them here and we can >respond from here! The fact that Theosophy has been identified in a >folder speak for itself. There are individuals who are aware of Theosophy. > >..doss > >Not very if the folder is empty. Jerry does it have a www address? Can it be reached by people like myself who are not an AOL compuserve etc.? Liesel > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 16:48:15 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: debate on by-laws -- new proposition John I think that's a good idea for starters in spite of the fact thsat we have 19 revisions & going through the process you suggest would take quite a while. But I think maybe at the end we could see where we were going. Would we convince anybody to change their minds I wonder or are we looking for a compromise getting together of all factions? Liesel >the following are a few ideas which I think may help >the future debates about by-laws etc. > >My suggestion comes from inspiration regarding the mechanism which California >handles the citizen request/propositions: > >a/b. before and after text is given > >1. each side submits a "pro"/"con" arguement for there position > >these are then given to the opposing sides for item 02 > >2. each side submits a rebuttal to the "pro"/"con" arguement given in item 1. > >3. each side then gives a final arguement for their position. > >hence the final document sent to voters looks like this: > >a. original text of law of by-laws/legislation >b. changed/proposed text of by-laws/legislation > >1. arguement in favor >1. arguement opposed > >2. rebuttal to arguement in favor >2. rebuttal to arguement opposed > >3. final arguement in favor >3. final arguement opposed. > >I was usually impressed with how this system a document with the >above text was sent to all voters helped to communiacate the key points >of the issue. > >peace - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 17:02:58 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: TI: Project 01 theos-l@vnet.net writes: >> To Alan our Grand Poobah -: members of TI and the rest of the >> Cyber-Theosophists on the theos-l list: >> Greetings ... > > > >> SO! Any comments from TI members? From non-TI list members? From >> people who think I'm a dufus and will get it all wrong -:? >> And as I now take to sketching the chapters & structure tell >> me especially those who have previously mentioned their desire to have >> a book they could refer people to .. ... what general topics would you >> consider to be absolute *essentials* for an introductory book? >> Toodles -JRC >Alan Are you saying you'd rather be our Pooh Bear than our Pooh Bah? Liesel >You mis-spelt Pooh Bear? Like Bee I can report that there is a >fairly straightforward intro sent out by English TS HQ to new >members which can also be purchased. Our Lodge is out of >copies right now so I can't refer to it but it sort of gives >the "party line" in terms that would be familiar to CWL et seq. > >Anyhow dear dufus this don't help anyone in the US of A so >why not go ahead with an outline and we can all mess with it >until it is servicable for - and this is the crunch I guess - >someone who has never heard of either theosophy or the society >bearing its name ....... > >For my part I would want to include a disclaimer to the effect >that whilst presenting the commonly held theosophical teachings >etc. the intro is not intended as a "statement of faith" but as >a guide for those who need somewhere to start and that >individuals may and likely do have variant opinions regarding >the basic teachings presented. Phew! That's already too wordy >innit? > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 19:05:26 GMT From: TheosLodge@aol.com Subject: Theosophy Lodge Online Program - 199601 Theosophy Lodge Online Program - 199601 Upcoming Live Discussions: Jan. 03 The Forward Impulse by Raghavan Iyer 10 Upanishads on Rebirth by William Q. Judge 17 Aquarian Axioms by H. P. Blavatsky 24 Spiritual Evolution by Raghavan Iyer 31 The Six Virtues by Robert Crosbie Articles are now available on the World Wide Web- http://theosophy.org Theosophy Lodge Online is open at all times and has a growing library of theosophical articles. Feel free to 'page the hosts' while logged on if you have any questions or comments - or send email to TheosLodge@aol.com. Theosophy Lodge Online is an independent non-profit association supported solely by individual contributions of time work and money; all are welcome to participate but nothing is compulsory. Where to reach Theosophy Lodge Online: mailto:TheosLodge@aol.com telnet://theosophy.org http://theosophy.org If you would like to be added to or removed from the TLO mailing list please email: TheosLodge@aol.com. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 19:35:22 GMT From: Richtay@aol.com Subject: Re: Theos-l makes news Just today Ann wrote "Today I received the Jan/Feb issue of the Akbar Lodge newsletter. The cover article was entitled "Observations from the Internet". In it the author put forth in polite terms the wrangling fighting and intellectual warfare that tend to break out on our little mailing list." Very interesting because this article was written by a prominent member of Theos-l and was first published by ME in the ERGATES newsmagazine Dec 1995 put out by U.L.T. San Francisco. How quickly our stuff is getting reprinted these days! Where the heck is the Akbar Lodge anyway? I wonder if they gave credit to the source? In these days of instantaneous communication plagiarism is sure to get caught! Rich From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 27 Dec 1996 23:27:55 GMT From: "Murray Stentiford Scientific Software and Systems Ltd" Subject: Polishing the mirror of the mind I came across the following little piece in the Theosophy-Science Group Newsletter #29 Dec 1995 published in Sydney Australia and thought it worth sharing. _Brain-Mind Bulletin_ for 199505 carries an item on an article by professor John Wren-Lewis in the _Journal of Transpersonal Psychology_ about the effect of his near death experience NDE and the general significance of such events. He is well known to members of Blavatsky Lodge where he has spoken on a number of occasions. John was poisoned in Thailand some years ago. When he awoke from a coma the world had suddenly changed for him. It was the most alive state he had ever known - intensely happy and absolutely peaceful. He found himself seeking mystical language to describe his new sense of perception. This state has never left him and has changed his whole outlook on life and sharply lessened any fear of death. He has researched and analysed other accounts of NDE's and has developed his own suggested explanation for such experiences. He says that a highly developed survival mechanism which focuses our consciousness so strongly on the business of survival forces us to shut out access to the underlying universal consciousness. This mechanism relaxes as the point of death approaches. He calls for transpersonal psychologists to research techniques for circumventing _this fundamental malfunction in humanity's "software"._ He says that the experience does not answer the question of survival so much as render it unimportant by intensifying the vividness of every living moment. Malfunction or not I find the naturalness of this approach refreshing and realistic. I have long thought that the question of survival after death debated so sharply and in materialistic terms on both sides in the past must soften and lose some of its significance as public conceptions evolve and the number of inwardly-sensitive people increases. Not to mention the number of NDE'ers in the population. This kind of "explanation" would also relate to visions that terminally-ill people sometimes have as they approach death the content of visionary and meaningfully-symbolic dreams and some of the experiences of meditation itself. Murray Stentiford From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 00:57:56 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Project 01 Reply to JRC. One thing we have here in NZ are short phamplets on Theosophy and aspects thereoff. They are written locally and some of them have just been updated. We have one called 'The Human Family' and ' Karma the Law of Action and Reaction' and 'Theosophy What is it?'. there are many others and some of them come from Australia. We leave them lying around in a prominent place with a notice saying free literature. But we have to get them in the door first to see the literature. They are quite short and can be read in a few minutes and we have given quite a few away. Hope it may be of interest. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 01:02:29 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Adyar Rules file 03 11. Nomination and election of Vice-President; his duties a Within three months of assuming office the President shall nominate the Vice-President subject to confirmation by the General Council. His term of office shall be at the discretion of the President but when the Vice-President has been three years in office that office shall become vacant by the passage of time and the President within three months shall again make a nomination and submit it to the General Council. Notwithstanding this provision the Vice-President shall remain in office and his term shall continue until a successor has been nominated and confirmed. The Vice-President in office may be renominated. It shall be his duty among other things to carry on the executive functions or the President in case the President is dead or where the Executive Committee finds that he is disabled by accident serious illness or otherwise from performing the duties of the President. b Notwithstanding anything herein contained the Vice-President doing the duties of the President shall continue to be the Vice-President of the Society until a new Vice-President has been nominated and his nomination confirmed by the General Council. In case of death resignation or disability of such Vice- President doing the duties of the President the Executive Committee shall appoint a Vice-President who shall hold office until the new President shall have nominated a new Vice-President and his nomination be confirmed by the General Council. Rules and Regulation. 12. Appointment of Secretary and other officials The Secretary and such subordinate officials as are necessary shall be appointed by the President and confirmed by a majority vote of the Executive Committee at its next meeting the newly appointed officials not being present or voting. The Executive Committee may remove any of these appointees by a vote of three- fourths of the whole number of its members. In this event the President shall make a new appointment. 13. Nomination and election of Treasurer The President shall nominate the Treasurer following consultation with and approval by the Executive Committee and subsequent confirmation by the General Council for a period of three years. In the event of an emergency the President may appoint an acting Treasurer with the approval of the Executive Committee until such time as the General Council can confirm a new Treasurer in accordance with the procedure laid down above. The Treasurer may be removed from office by the General Council or by a vote of three-fourths of the number of members of the Executive Committee. In such an event the President shall nominate a new Treasurer following consultation with and approval by the Executive Committee and subsequent confirmation by the General Council. 14. Appointment of Executive Committee a The General Council shall at each Annual Meeting appoint an Executive Committee for the ensuing year or until its next Annual Meeting of not less than seven and not more than ten members of whom at least six shall be members of the General Council. The President the Vice-President the Treasurer and the Secretary shall be ex-officio members. Vacancies caused by death or resignation or otherwise may be filled by co-option. b The General Council may delegate to the Executive Committee any of its powers and authority in the management of the business and affairs of the Society except : i The power to amend or repeal the Rules ; ii The power to borrow money and incur indebtedness; iii Such powers as are specifically reserved to the President. The Executive Committee shall have such powers as are delegated to it by the General Council and as are specified in the Rules. The Executive Committee may recommend to the General Council programmes policies or activities but it may not initiate projects requiring major funds not within the current approved budget. 15. Meetings of Executive Committee The Executive Committee shall meet at least once in every three months for the receipt and consideration of accounts and the despatch of any other business. A special meeting may be called by the President whenever he thinks fit and such meeting shall be called by him or if not by him by the Secretary when he is required to do so by not fewer than three members of the Committee who shall state to him in writing the business for which they wish the meeting to assemble. 16. Quorum of Executive Committee At a meeting of the Executive Committee three members shall constitute a quorum. 17. Chairman of Executive Committee The Committee shall in the absence of the President and Vice-President elect a Chairman to preside over the meeting and in case of equality of votes the Chairman for the time being shall have a casting vote. 18. President Custodian of archives; Executive Officer. power to make temporary and provisional appointments The President shall be the custodian of all the archives and records of the Society and shall be the Executive Officer and shall conduct and direct the business of the Society in compliance with its rules: he shall be empowered to make temporary appointments and to fill provisionally all vacancies that occur in the offices of the Society and shall have discretionary powers in all matters not specifically provided for in these Rules. 19. Receipt of moneys All subscriptions donations and other moneys payable to the Association shall be received by the President or the Treasurer or the Secretary the receipt of any of whom in writing shall be sufficient discharge for the same. 20. Deposits Signatories The securities and uninvested funds of the Society shall be deposited in the State Bank of India Madras or such other Bank or Banks as the Executive Committee T.S. shall select; and in countries outside of India in such Banks as the President shall select. Cheques drawn against the funds shall be signed by any two of the following: the President the Treasurer the Secretary and any other persons appointed by the President for the purpose under Rule 12. 21. Power of Attorney a Notwithstanding anything in these rules to the contrary the President may touching the assets and affairs of the Society beyond India at any time and from time to time by a Power of Attorney appoint any persons to be the Attorneys of the Society for such period and subject to such conditions and for such purposes and with such authorities and powers as he may think fit and he may if necessary affix the Seal of the Society thereto. Without prejudice to the general powers conferred as aforesaid the President may grant power and authority among others to sell grant mortgage lease or otherwise transfer the assets of the Society movable or immovable real or personal and to receive subscriptions donations legacies moneys and other property movable or immovable and to institute continue compromise compound or refer to arbitration any actions suits or other proceedings and to take and hold shares in any company and to vote at any meetings thereof and to sub-delegate all or any of his powers and to give receipts and release and to sign seal and deliver any instrument or document and have the same registered. Investments b The funds of the Society may be Invested by the President with the advice and consent of the Executive Committee in Government or other Public Securities Unit Trust of India Term Deposits in Scheduled Banks fixed deposits and bonds of Government of India undertakings or in the purchase of immovable property or First Mortgages in such property. Disposal of Adyar Estate c The Adyar Estate of the Society in Madras including the Society's original Headquarters and all other properties in Adyar since acquired by gift purchase or otherwise shall not at any time be disposed of by sale gift exchange mortgage or otherwise; save that the President if specially authorized by a resolution of the General Council passed by a three-fourths vote of their members voting in person in writing or by proxy may dispose of such outlying portions of the said Adyar Estate as may be specified in such Resolutions. Transfer of investments and other property d The President may with the advice and consent of the Executive Committee sell mortgage or otherwise transfer any investment in Government or other Public securities or any movable or immovable property of the Society other than those mentioned in Rule 21c. 22. Affixing of Seal Signatures a All deeds whereby immovable properties belonging to the Society are transferred or otherwise dealt with shall have affixed to them the Seal of the Society with the signature of the President and or the Secretary. In case or the absence of the President or Secretary of where the Executive Committee finds that either of them is by reason of disability caused by accident illness or otherwise unable to act it may appoint two of its members to sign in place of the President or Secretary as the case may be. Transfer of movable property b All transfers of movable property if in writing shall bear the signature of the President and of the Secretary but need not have affixed to them the Seal of the Society. In case of the absence of the President or where the Executive Committee finds that he is by reason or disability caused by accident illness or otherwise unable to act it may appoint two of its members to sign in place of the President. Note: The procedure detailed in this Rule is without prejudice to the powers conferred under Rule 21a. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 01:12:23 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: TI: Project 01 > To Alan our Grand Poobah -: members of TI and the rest of the > Cyber-Theosophists on the theos-l list: > Greetings ... > SO! Any comments from TI members? From non-TI list members? From > people who think I'm a dufus and will get it all wrong -:? > And as I now take to sketching the chapters & structure tell > me especially those who have previously mentioned their desire to have > a book they could refer people to .. ... what general topics would you > consider to be absolute *essentials* for an introductory book? > Toodles -JRC You mis-spelt Pooh Bear? Like Bee I can report that there is a fairly straightforward intro sent out by English TS HQ to new members which can also be purchased. Our Lodge is out of copies right now so I can't refer to it but it sort of gives the "party line" in terms that would be familiar to CWL et seq. Anyhow dear dufus this don't help anyone in the US of A so why not go ahead with an outline and we can all mess with it until it is servicable for - and this is the crunch I guess - someone who has never heard of either theosophy or the society bearing its name ....... For my part I would want to include a disclaimer to the effect that whilst presenting the commonly held theosophical teachings etc. the intro is not intended as a "statement of faith" but as a guide for those who need somewhere to start and that individuals may and likely do have variant opinions regarding the basic teachings presented. Phew! That's already too wordy innit? Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 04:10:44 GMT From: "Murray Stentiford Scientific Software and Systems Ltd" Subject: Re: TI Project 01 I'm very much in favour of an attempt to express the key ideas of theosophy in ways that relate to newcomers' needs and experience. It's an idea that has come to many over the years but not found the person/people with time as well as requisite insight to do it. JRC although you have said that you do not want to be considered a teacher I reckon you have a real neat way with words. I'd really like to see you give it a go if only in a few of the subject areas. Idea: I think it would help any who try writing for this project to get into or remember a discussion with young people and then write to the needs that come out of it. I hate to suggest another theos-x list but what about a theos-intro? It's similar to the lo-brow idea that was floated a couple of months ago but would be more specifically intended for newcomers where they could ask the simplest of questions without feeling they were breaking into some convocation of scholars and cognoscenti. Where they would receive warm enthusiastic responses and feel listened-to. This would be a great thing in itself but would also give those who want to write introductory stuff a heap of ideas and slants on just what problems to answer and how to address them. Theos-intro would be supported by possibly anyone in the theos-l group who felt motivated by a desire to respond. This would be a sort of living home page and hypertext network. Perhaps some more thought is needed here on *whose* version of theosophy is to be presented but I think the best thing is just to respect the freedom of enquiriers to enquire as much as that of others to give their opinions. The delete key is a great leveler! The answers themselves along with the queries could be great compiled into a collection. Perhaps not everything but there could be somoe selections and editing. For that matter we have the archives of theos-l itself which could be scanned for introductory material. There may not be that much but there certainly has been some for example just recently Richard Ihles' response to Anne Bermingham on his levels/degrees concept which by the way I find highly expressive and relevant. So there's more than one idea. Murray Stentiford Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 07:09:37 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Movement towards central control theos-l@vnet.net writes: MK Ramadoss I know that the International Order of Co-masonry has its HQ in Paris and that it found its support in England almost exclusively from members of the TS including Annie Besant who was a high degree member ....... Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 10:04:15 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Pharisaic Self-righteousness This morning I found something in the Edgar Cayce readings that describes IMO the fighting I've witnessed on theos-l Talisman alt.religion.eckankar soc.religion.bahai and quite a few other newsgroups: It was given "Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Pharisees ye shall all likewise perish."...What was the righteousness of the Pharisees and what was their sin? How were the disciples to discern between the righteousness of the Pharisees and the righteousness as presented by the Teacher?...The righteousness of the Pharisee was that as indicated by the prayer offered in the temple; that he thanked God he was not like other people. Here we find then self-righteousness...who is to judge as to what is sin and what is righteousness for the individual? As we remember as has oft been given "Study to show *thyself* approved unto God a workman not ashamed." Here we find much that may need analyzing looking into in our own individual experiences. Do we as children of God as seekers after God have firsthand knowledge? or do we accept only that others have told us? Do we condemn any? Do we know or is it only self-righteousness that speaks? Pharisaic self-righteousness henceforth to be referred to as PRS is a nearly universal element in disputes among Theosophists Baha'is Eckists and ex-Eckists and various other disputants I've observed on the Internet. The bottom line message is always "thank God I'm not like you/them" although it takes myriad forms: 1. Thank God I'm a believer in the Sylvia Cranston version of Blavatsky and thus on the side of the White Lodge and not like those who give credence to alternative views of Blavatsky inspired by the Brothers of the Shadow. 2. Thank God I'm a true believing Baha'i who never questions authority and not like those who teeter on the brink of becoming Covenant-breakers. 3. Thank God I'm an Eckist who has genuine spiritual experiences with the Masters not like those envious unbelievers who are incapable of any spiritual experience whatsoever. 4. Thank God I had enough sense to see that Eckankar is a fraud not like you dummies who just don't get it. 5. Thank God I'm a liberal Baha'i who understands something about human rights and scholarly discourse not like you fundamentalist anti-intellectuals. 6. Thank God I'm a progressive Theosophist who welcomes new ways of thinking about Blavatsky not like those fanatics who attribute any new idea to occult "opposing forces". And so it goes. Can we all say in unison "Thank God we're not all alike" and leave it at that? Guess not. When I look at the world of spiritual movements in light of the injunction to overcome Pharisaic self-righteousness things look pretty bleak. Not only can I think of dozens of instances it's been meted out to me by one Pharisee or another sometimes in the scholarly form of "Thank God if I wrote a book about HPB it wouldn't have any of the contemptible scholarly lapses yours do". I can also admit that I have doled it out in liberal measure. But what Edgar and Jesus seem to be saying is "you cannot advance a single step on the real spiritual path until you get past Pharisaic self-righteousness." Interestingly of all the spiritual teachings I've encountered Cayce's is the only one that seems totally devoid of PSR. A New Year's resolution then based on this passage from the readings: when confronted with PSR in a post or in person I will try to: arecognize that PSR is the commodity being delivered bignore it if possible and respond to any or all other elements of the communication cat times give a comment as to the intensity of PSR displayed but dnot reciprocate by giving an even larger dose of PSR in return. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 10:20:47 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Paradigm shifts JRC: In the discussion regarding the rights of lodges versus the power of Wheaton to conserve the T.S. assets I'm reminded of a personal experience. The situation was with the San Diego T.S. Regular Secret Doctrine classes were held at a member's home for a number of years. The lodge formed in the 1890's had accumulated quite a number of rare books. Its library was kept at that member's home. I moved to Maryland and left the lodge. Two years later I moved back and rejoined the lodge. I found out that the member had quit the lodge and meetings were no longer held at her house. A year before she had been contacted and asked by someone to turn over the library to them. The lodge president told her to hold on to the books and not release them. There were a number of confused phone calls and the former member somehow got pissed off. It is now a year later and I've moved back to San Diego. I'm now a lodge member again and write the ex-member thanking her for storing the books for us and asking if there was a convenient time when we could pick them up to store them elsewhere. She never responded although she told a friend that she might release the books if she were paid some money for having stored them. She basically would not release the books unless she was paid something insisting on retroactive storage fees. At different times that year I discussed the situation with various T.S. officials but no one wanted to do anything about it. The lodge eventually folded and I assume the library was converted to the personal use of the ex-member because it was never returned to the T.S. This is a situation where long-term T.S. assets were lost due to Wheaton not becoming involved enough in what was happening. >Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper >paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently >broken but rather that of understanding that a required if >painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this >dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its >foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its >greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: The current dispute may widen the outlook of people in the TSA but I'm not sure how Adyar's views will be changed. If Radha believes that she's the representative of the Masters and acts in an authoritative manner based upon that belief she won't particularly care if members of the American Section want a stronger voice in the T.S. The change that has been happening in the T.S. and outside it as well is the general attitude of networking. Members of different theosophical groups are becoming increasingly open to finding Theosophy in other groups and outside their T.S. and not looking to national or international HQ for guidance. >We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by >something akin to Divine Right. ... with something like apostolic >succession - and the leaderships ... have long operated almost as >though they were running an *occult hierarchy* There are different models for theosophical groups. Each model appeals to different people. On one end of the spectrum you have the Pasadena T.S. It has a succession from HPB to Judge Tingley Purucker Conger Long and Knoche each considered the current representative of the Masters and the current autocratic ruler of the T.S. This type of sucession could be compared to a Tibetan monastery where a succession of Lamas were considered the tulku of a certain deity. The person is both an appointed representative of higher powers and somehow overshadowed. Another type of model is found in ULT. There we have autonomous groups that exist for the study of Theosophy with a strong effort to deemphasize the personal element and avoid organizational politics. The ideal is fine but when the politics and rulership of the group goes underground it can be more difficult to deal with. A third type of mode is found in the T.S. Adyar. In this T.S. we have the appearance of a democratic organization with elected officials running the society. But again politics comes into play and we've seen from the previous discussions on 'theos-l' all the things that can happen. >We are now perhaps for the first time having to face the fundamental >contradiction between the Master-Chela and Democratic models of >organization and IMO the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will >need to do some very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... >because they are no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships >are increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". The different forms of organization exist to serve different purposes. The democratic form is not somehow higher or better than any other. In Tibetan Buddhism there is a strong emphasis on the importance of a Guru. With a bona fide spiritual teacher one can study and learn and grow. It is possible that some forms of theosophical groups in the west will evolve in the direction of spiritual organizations. When you mention that the membership of the T.S. Adyar is increasingly refusing to be chelas of the organizational leadership you're not making a case for gurus being unnecessary. What you're saying and most would agree with is that the T.S. Adyar leadership consists of fellow seekers on a par with us and not *bona fide* gurus. We would not accord guru status to someone unless they were in our eyes genuinely qualified. The useful purpose that the Adyar T.S. may be evolving towards serving is in being a western seekers' club. People will come to it to share their personal ideas and experiences. It may become a self-help society where everyone is on their own to tred the Path. And that is fine. There are other theosophical Buddhist and perhaps unnamed groups that exist to offer specific spiritual training when people are ready and give the right knock. In the Adyar T.S. there may be offered some comparative religion and comparative philosophy. This may include as one example religion or philosophy the theosophical tenants. Theosophy proper may not have a strong position but may end up only being offered as one item on the menu. The definition of Theosophy may remain fuzzy with multiple variates of it being taught and a mass of opinion added. The actual philosophy though will still be taught elsewhere in its original form. And the philosophy can't ever be lost since it is based upon but one of an on-going series of projects of the Masters to change the thought life of the world. >Its likely that the leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* >anything from memberships that they'd better get rid of the >attitude that voting is just a formality that they can decide >what's "best" for the membership without even consulting the >membership without bothering to even give them full information >and just expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think >that's best!". Each organization has its own agenda and is structured accordingly. With the Pasadena T.S. if I understand it correctly the head of the T.S. appoints the Cabinet and has near total control over the society in a much more complete fashion than Radha could ever have with the Adyar T.S. Someone will join an organization because they want to participate in what it is doing. If it is a democratic organization they have certain expectations including that elected officers do not issue orders and demand things of the members. If it is organized along autocratic or theocratic lines the expectations are different and one may follow the guidance of officials because of their spiritual status. Regardless of type of organization the officials need to keep in close touch with the membership to continue to get feedback in order to adjust what they do and do their work more effectively. >IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if >we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the >courage to see it through. The Adyar T.S. cannot both be a spiritual school with gurus in leadership and a democratic organization of fellow seekers. Its natural evolution is in the direction of the latter a democratic seekers' club and the move in that direction should be supported. If both approaches are insisted upon by different portions of the membership a split is inevitable. I would not though generalize this. The trend does not hold true for all theosophical and spiritual organizations just for the Adyar T.S. The trend does not show an evolutionary step forward; it shows a form of specialization by the Adyar T.S. so that it can become effective in doing *one type of spiritual work*. I'd agree with you that new introductory materials need to be written. But I'm not sure if what I might write would look anything like what you're planning to write! I think that the best people to write the generic introductory materials would be someone from a ULT background if they leave out the Crosbie teachings regarding such things as "impersonality". The introductions that you or I might right would be to our favorite *variates* of Theosophy with Besant/Leadbeater or Purucker/PointLoma slants. The purpose of any introductary materials is the same as the "Introduction" chapter holds to the book that it is in. It exists to provide background materials necessary in order that the reader can understand the chapters that follow. It paints the big picture and prepares the reader for the more difficult ideas that follow. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 10:20:54 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International RI: >> [Patrick]: >>In my own lodge of late some of the members have begun to ask >>"What is this theosophy thing that gives us our name? There are a lot of things that the word "Theosophy" could be applied to. Jerry H-E would probably ask us: "What did HPB intend when she helped co-found the T.S. and coined the term?" >> ... I feel it is absurd to have a society with a description in its >>name theosophical with lodges branches which are not theosophical. This is a big critism of the Adyar T.S. There are far too many branches where the basic philosophy is not taught and perhaps not understood. The ULT and Pasadena T.S. are better at keeping to the original philosophy but may also be too conservative at times making it hard to introduce new original ideas. If everyone teachings whatever they care to believe as original Theosophy sometimes without even having read the books and being exposed to the ideas then the philosophy will be lost to the western world. This is a danger that is continually before theosophical groups. >You have perhaps touched upon *the* critical question which may have to get >answered before the Theosophical Society can go forward.... >THE NEW LEXICON WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ENCYCLOPEDIC >EDITION gives two definitions--one for *theosophy* one for *Theosophy*: >1. *theosophy*: "any philosophical and religious system [add *and fact*] >based on intuitive knowledge of [add *or transcendental approach toward*] >the divine." This spiritual approach to *learning* emphasizes *process* and is fine. We are not considering though whether this intuitive knowledge is trained or untrained whether it is based upon exposure to gurus and spiritual training or if it is based upon the normal course of one's life without the benefit of hastened evolution. >2. *Theosophy*: "a system of thought and practice derived from esp. >Buddhist and Brahminical religious mysticism by Madame Blavatsky in 1875 in >the U.S.A. and propagated by the Theosophical Society which she founded. It >claims to be a synthesis of those elements in all religions which result from >divine revalation and to enable its followers to establish personal >communion with God." This definition deals more with the *content* or body of Teachings. But I don't think it gets it right. The philosophy is not a synthesis of elements from world religions. It is not a collage. It is a representation of primal knowledge of the Masters specifically tailored for western consumption. The philosophy is a fresh presentation of source materials not a rehash of materials from various world religions. The terms are borrowed from the religions and philosophies of the world but not always with identical meaning. And the extensive citations to world literature was to show the universal nature of the ideas presented not because the ideas were learned by HPB through reading that literature. >Now while perhaps both definitions leave something to be desired they do >provide a clean way to ask the important question: Does the *Theosophical* >in *The Theosophical Society* stand for something closer to definition #1 or >#2? In my mind I find it hard to believe that the Founders meant it to >stand for both--however I don't know. The definitions show what the popular understanding of the terms "theosophy" and "Theosophy" consist of. But Theosophy does not change every time a dictionary is revised. The theosophical doctrines are relatively timeless and will be around long after any trace of the English language has disappeared from the face of the earth. We can guess at what the various T.S. founders thought and intended. The real founders I think are KH and M and their intent was I think to stem the rising tide of materialism. What the intent was at the time of the T.S. founding though is a moot point. At each point in time the T.S. is a changing tool of possible use to furthering spiritual work in the world. Depending upon the members and the world situation that tool may be useful for one purpose at one time and for another purpose ten years later. The original intent in founding the society says nothing for what it can be used for at the present time. The present use would be based I think upon a pragmatic evaluation of what's happening in the world and how the T.S. could be used right now to make the world a better place. >Because I came to the Society from a philosophical background and seeing THE >THREE OBJECTS etc. I naturally assumed that the first definition was the >operative one. Indeed for most of my years of membership the wide variety >of subjects explored by individuals etc. gave me every reason to believe that >it *was* the operative one. The emphasis on *process* is important. Meditation is an important aspect of the process of spiritual unfolding. But meditation goes hand-in-hand with *content* and I'd say that much can be achieved using fragments of Mystery Teachings as the content of our studies and contemplation. >For me *theosophy* will principally continue to be the word for the >epistemology which allows for the validity of knowledge which does not >come from strict empirical observation or science--the knowledge which >is associated with religions astrology mysticism esoteric writers >not necessarily named Blavatsky etc. I don't necessarily disagree with you here. I'd say that the theosophical doctrines are true as far as they go but there's much that they don't cover. And Theosophy as we know it is but one presentation of the Wisdom Tradition. We can find this knowledge from other sources than HPB and those that follow her in the theosophical tradition. But there is much that is false amidst what is out there and discrimination is necessary. And our theosophical doctrines give keys that help unlock exoteric meanings in various religious materials. We need to make a distinction between the body of doctrines and how one learns or comes to a realization of deep truths. The body of doctrines are dead-letter empty lifeless by themselves. Even though they are true they often need a teacher or guru or fellow student to inspire one to realize what they mean. The realization is done by the student when the right stage of readiness has arrived and the idea is not merely communicated by the spoken or written words. You're talking about how the realization comes from within by the student which I agree with. But I'd still say "about what?" With training or assistance we can be exposed to much more content to much more to potentially realize. We can have realizations as things come to us in life or we can hasten the process by exposure to a systematic presentation of occult truths like in the theosophical philosophy. In either case it is *we* that achieve the insights through our own inner work. >But also within the Theosophical Society we have the definition-#2 people. >They are strong and getting stronger as the membership declines. They >would like to firmly establish as a fact that the *Theosophical* in the >Theosophical Society means definition #2. I'd say that you're making a false distinction here. The type one process deals with how we realize deep insights. The type two definition deals with the specific systematic content of occult doctrine that is of great benefit for our type one process. It is not an either/or situation. The content is true although incomplete and we need to bring this type one realization to understanding what it really means. It's not a situation of free thought versus Blavatskianity. >To counter that possibility my answer to members who might ask "What is >this theosophy thing that gives us our name?" The problem is not that type two is bad and type one needs to win out. The problem is rather I think that type one insight needs to be applied to the true deeply profound and esoteric type two content. Then we'll benefit from it. >"It is the method by which you personally and transcendentally accumulate >little nuggets of unsupported-but-absolute certainty about subjects >impervious to other methods. Come Spring we're going to dig around one >theosophist's mother lode--THE SECRET DOCTRINE." Again I'd agree that this process of mining for the gold of digging for the precious nuggets is what is missing. But we need both skillful mining and a vein of genuine gold to work with. And I'd say that there's plenty to be found *behind* the theosophical literature. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 11:11:42 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: peaceful children I found a quote in my early morning's reading today about a matter I've thought about for a while now but don't know a better answer than just to advance bit by bit. The quote comes from such an unlikely author as Gloria Steinem whose book "Revolution from Within A Book of Self-esteem" I discovered on the women's shelf at the Book Warehouse. This is one of my favorite places around Syracuse. It carries a plethora of overstocks & out of prints at a good discount. Never mind that it's located in one of the seedier neighborhoods in town. Never mind that I found a little dead mouse on its sidewalk the day I picked up Gloria Steinem & a few other assorted women's books plus a few boys' books for my grandsons. I spend a few hours in there every time I go. "... changing the way we raise children is the only long-term path to peace or arms control..." The way to peace I learned from Roger Gemme long ago is to be peaceful within oneself. If everyone could achieve peace within there would be peace without. It's much more difficult to come to such a state as a grown-up when one has to first undo the umpteen things one's parents taught which didn't lead to peace than it would be if one had learned to be peaceful within oneself as a child growing up. Easier said than done. When one remembers that the human struggle is based on trial & error when mankind was young even more so than today. The errors were built into our present unfavorable karma. So our not being able to be brought up peacefully goes way back to the dawn of time & I think can only be squared away gradually over the course of centuries. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 11:38:52 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Pharisaic Self-righteousness >Dear Paul Re:"thank God we're not all alike" There used to be a time when I'd wistfully wish that I were "normal". After about 10 years of wishing I finally realized that if I were "normal" I would be frightfully dull & that if everyone were "normal" we'd all bore each other to death. Sooo I changed to "Thank God I'm not normal!" Liesel >This morning I found something in the Edgar Cayce readings that >describes IMO the fighting I've witnessed on theos-l >Talisman alt.religion.eckankar soc.religion.bahai and quite >a few other newsgroups: > >It was given "Except your righteousness exceed the >righteousness of the Pharisees ye shall all likewise >perish."...What was the righteousness of the Pharisees and >what was their sin? How were the disciples to discern between >the righteousness of the Pharisees and the righteousness as >presented by the Teacher?...The righteousness of the Pharisee >was that as indicated by the prayer offered in the temple; that >he thanked God he was not like other people. Here we find >then self-righteousness...who is to judge as to what is sin >and what is righteousness for the individual? As we remember >as has oft been given "Study to show *thyself* approved unto >God a workman not ashamed." Here we find much that may need >analyzing looking into in our own individual experiences. Do >we as children of God as seekers after God have firsthand >knowledge? or do we accept only that others have told us? Do >we condemn any? Do we know or is it only self-righteousness >that speaks? > >Pharisaic self-righteousness henceforth to be referred to as >PRS is a nearly universal element in disputes among >Theosophists Baha'is Eckists and ex-Eckists and various >other disputants I've observed on the Internet. The bottom >line message is always "thank God I'm not like you/them" >although it takes myriad forms: >1. Thank God I'm a believer in the Sylvia Cranston version of >Blavatsky and thus on the side of the White Lodge and not like >those who give credence to alternative views of Blavatsky >inspired by the Brothers of the Shadow. >2. Thank God I'm a true believing Baha'i who never questions >authority and not like those who teeter on the brink of >becoming Covenant-breakers. >3. Thank God I'm an Eckist who has genuine spiritual >experiences with the Masters not like those envious >unbelievers who are incapable of any spiritual experience >whatsoever. >4. Thank God I had enough sense to see that Eckankar is a >fraud not like you dummies who just don't get it. >5. Thank God I'm a liberal Baha'i who understands something >about human rights and scholarly discourse not like you >fundamentalist anti-intellectuals. >6. Thank God I'm a progressive Theosophist who welcomes new >ways of thinking about Blavatsky not like those fanatics who >attribute any new idea to occult "opposing forces". > >And so it goes. Can we all say in unison "Thank God we're not >all alike" and leave it at that? Guess not. When I look at >the world of spiritual movements in light of the injunction to >overcome Pharisaic self-righteousness things look pretty >bleak. Not only can I think of dozens of instances it's been >meted out to me by one Pharisee or another sometimes in the >scholarly form of "Thank God if I wrote a book about HPB it wouldn't >have any of the contemptible scholarly lapses yours do". I >can also admit that I have doled it out in liberal measure. >But what Edgar and Jesus seem to be saying is "you cannot >advance a single step on the real spiritual path until you get >past Pharisaic self-righteousness." Interestingly of all the >spiritual teachings I've encountered Cayce's is the only one >that seems totally devoid of PSR. > >A New Year's resolution then based on this passage from the >readings: when confronted with PSR in a post or in person I >will try to: arecognize that PSR is the commodity being >delivered bignore it if possible and respond to any or all other elements >of the communication cat times give a comment as to the >intensity of PSR displayed but dnot reciprocate by giving an >even larger dose of PSR in return. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 11:43:53 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Opposing forces? Liesel your description of the Dark Brotherhood is perhaps one of the very best that I have ever seen. I think that you are exactly right. G de P says that we are all members of the Hierarchy of Compassion by virtue of having love in our hearts. So it stands to reason that we are also members of the Dark Brotherhood by virtue of having fear and egotism in our hearts. Thanks for the neat posting. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 11:43:54 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Theosophy on MSN >Not very if the folder is empty. >Jerry does it have a www address? Can it be reached by people like myself >who are not an AOL compuserve etc.? > >Liesel I am not terribly savy with WWW so I don't know. That is I do know that Microsoft has a WWW but I don't know if they have a theosophy folder there probably not. The MSN is new and just getting started in many ways. The fact that there is a whole folder for theosophy leads me to think that whoever is heading up the New Age Forum is aware of the interest in this subject and is preparing for it. I will probably put some stuff in it myself later on Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 11:51:09 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Movement towards central control At 054200 PM 12/28/95 -0500 Alan wrote: >theos-l@vnet.net writes: > >those relating to the financial *micro management* clauses I >noticed that it appears to show unmistakable de facto >similarities even though couched in clever legal lingo that an >average member may not recognize the full significance. Some of >those who are supportive of the Paris line of *power grab* >thinking *appears to have had* something to do with the fast >tactics adopted for a speedy formal referendum approval of bylaw >changes by TSA members with no publicity and almost no >discussion of opposing views. I am still wondering what's going >on? Is it the cyclical changes occurring at the end this >century? Any thoughts?> > >MK Ramadoss > >I know that the International Order of Co-masonry has its HQ in >Paris and that it found its support in England almost >exclusively from members of the TS including Annie Besant who >was a high degree member ....... > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk I have researched some of the background to the International Order of Co-Masonry. Annie Besant was the head of all the branches in the English speaking world. While she was extremely active in it in addition to various other lines of work in which she was involved she had the foresight and wisdom to keep TS getting even unwittingly mixed up with other organizations. At Adyar campus there are Hindu Buddhist Zoroastrian Temples LC Church and a Mosque. However when when a Masonic Temple was built she bought a lot outside the TS campus in spite of several hundred undeveloped land was available inside the TS Campus. I have been at several annual TS conventions at Adyar. In none of the official programs of TS I have seen the masonic meetings mentioned even though usually such occasions are used by masonic and other group to meet. It is in that context that I was amazed when 1994 TSA annual meeting schedule had the Masonic program formally mentioned. It was at a time when the dispute with Paris was dividing TS members against TS members on the Paris' stand. Such a meeting did no good to the TS. Some may argue that it may have done a lot of good spiritually. Some people may say TS has nothing to do with any other organization. However when leading members are active in the middle of such a serious dispute how can one ignore the commonality of the personalities? Just thought I should add the above. MK Ramdoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 13:36:45 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Pharisaic Self-righteousness Paul: >This morning I found something ... >What was the righteousness of the Pharisees and >what was their sin? ... he thanked God he was not like other people. >Here we find then self-righteousness ... who is to judge The problem here is that we're comparing ourselves to other people. When someone thinks "I'm glad that I have a roof over my head and not homeless on the street without food" that person is basing their happiness on being somehow better off than others. That is ego-centric and lacking in compassion. We find the same feeling in someone waiting a long time in a line in traffic and passing angry judgement upon the few selfish drivers that cut in at the head of the line. "I waited in line and am better" they think "than those #%*#! line cutters!" There *are* differences in intelligence ability spirituality and other qualities. Each person has something unique to offer the world but there are geniune differences. We can't simply follow liberal politics I think and ignore differences in the name of increased self esteem. The goal as I see it is to accentuate the positive not to deny such a thing as the authentic differences between people. It is not elitist to share what we have with others nor to seek out those more advanced than us for spiritual instruction. >Do we as children of God as seekers after God have firsthand >knowledge? or do we accept only that others have told us? Do >we condemn any? Do we know or is it only self-righteousness >that speaks? We share what we have and believe to be genuine keep silent about what we have that is not ready for sharing and enjoy and benefit from what others share with us. We can differ with what others say without condemning others. When you depict a duality between speaking from firsthand experience and speaking in self-righteousness you're not accounting for the many ways that we can know things the many ways of having experience and the sharing of the spiritual without any experience of self-righteousness. The presence or absence of self-righteousness comes from the individual's perception of the situation. If the individual is acting from an experience of me-and-thou and "I'm glad I'm better than you" then you're right there's self-righteousness. But an individual could say and do the exact same things and be operating from an entirely different perception one of "this situation" or of "the greater good for all" and you may not be able to externally tell the difference. It's important not to pass judgement on others. >Pharisaic self-righteousness henceforth to be referred to as >PRS is a nearly universal element in disputes among >Theosophists Baha'is Eckists and ex-Eckists and various >other disputants I've observed on the Internet. PRS ... Here in Los Angeles we refer to the Philosophical Research Society of the former Manly Hall by those letters. While it's quite possible that we all have an ugly side and we're not entirely free of judging others the important thing is to recognize it in ourselves when we're doing it and work on the subject most open to our influence: ourselves. We can leave others to set themselves right except when in extreme circumstances we have to intervene in their karma. I'd suggest that we do the very same thing that we condemn when we write off the typical T.S. member as self-righteous fools and feel glad that we so much better than they are! Rather than condemning this fault in people we can I'd suggest better spend our time in bringing people to accept the differences in others -- both differences that make them inferior and those that make them superior to them -- and simply *not care* how others stand relative to themselves. A far better motivation than competition than trying to compare to others and come out ahead is to what *to produce* to exceed our previous "personal best" in doing creative things to benefit the world. >The bottom line message is always "thank God I'm not like you/them" >although it takes myriad forms: Some people may think that way. Others may think "who cares that this teenager dies her hair green and that person works 60 hours a week trying to make lots of money!" Other people are simply different. We do our best to make a colorful contribution to the world and seek out others that enrich our lives and empower us to be bigger and better than we previously were! >1. Thank God I'm a believer in the Sylvia Cranston version of >Blavatsky and thus on the side of the White Lodge and not like >those who give credence to alternative views of Blavatsky >inspired by the Brothers of the Shadow. When we look for dark things we tend to see them. When we look for things of light and beauty we behold them and our world is brightened. We can gaze upon another person with both good and evil qualities and just see those qualities that match our expectations. Thus our perceptions color our world and bring good or evil to us. And this is quite apart from the actual nature of the people that we gaze upon. While we all have a mix of good and evil there are people in which one or the other predominates and we can call them basically good or basically evil. In various wars the people that ran the death camps and that committed war crimes may be basically evil though they are as capable of a change for the good as we are of a change for evil. At this moment of time though we can look at someone and say "this is a holy man" or "this person comes close to my idea of the personification of evil". >6. Thank God I'm a progressive Theosophist who welcomes new >ways of thinking about Blavatsky not like those fanatics who >attribute any new idea to occult "opposing forces". Yes it can happen in any of us regardless of viewpoint. We should look at what we say about other people and reflect upon our attitudes to seek out and deal with the harmful influence of self-righteousness. When we attribute negative motives to others condemn them and 'everyone like them' we're falling under the spell of this form of self-centeredness. > ... what Edgar and Jesus seem to be saying is "you cannot >advance a single step on the real spiritual path until you get >past Pharisaic self-righteousness." The sense of self-righteousness is but one aspect of the sense of personal self the negative influence of seeing ones self as different and more important than the rest of life. This is a form of perception that meditation and spiritual training seeks to eliminate to overcome as we go from "I and thou" consciousness to "us" or "this activity" awareness from the nirmanakaya to the sambhogakaya mode of perception. >I will try to a00 recognize that PSR is the commodity being delivered First we identify that it is happening. >b ignore it if possible and respond to any or all other elements >of the communication Then we fail to respond in kind letting it pass us like water off a duck's back. >cat times give a comment as to the intensity of PSR displayed but Then redirect its energy like in akido using it to accompish our purpose. >d not reciprocate by giving an even larger dose of PSR in return. Where we intend to turn it into constructive criticism by the self-righteous people. We lead them to careful reflection on the traits in others that they find unacceptable. This is so that they will look for ways to help others rather than for ways to reject them. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 13:39:40 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Rich: Theos-l in news Rich: >Very interesting because this article was written by a prominent member of >Theos-l and was first published by ME in the ERGATES newsmagazine >Dec1995 put out by U.L.T. San Francisco. How quickly our stuff is getting >reprinted these days! >Where the heck is the Akbar Lodge anyway? Chicago >I wonder if they gave credit to the source? In these days of instantaneous >communication plagiarism is sure to get caught! The article was preceded by a quote from Judge and there was no other source stated than the author signing as A Theosophy Student. Perhaps the editors got it from the author. If they took it from your publication I believe they should have at least made some reference to it. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 14:10:06 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: TI Project 01 Murray Well you call it theos-intro I called it theos-basic. I'm all for it. I thought JRC could spear head it & maybe some of us others could have some input. If we do it on Theosophy International I don't know how it'd get onto the computer though. I suppose John Mead would ok our putting it on theos-l since it's something that's desperately needed. Let me tell ya Since Nathan Greer told me a year ago that to become certified my Onondaga Study Center would have to do basic Theosophy I've been looking for something suitable to present to my small group of newcomers that would be interesting & not put them to sleep nor be way over their heads. There isn't anything. I once invited a ULT member from Rochester down to visit with us. She talked "Secret Doctrine" & talked down to them. They very adamantly told me afterwards that this was the first time they'd felt they were being proselytized & they didn't like it. I have a small group of professional people so what I give them had better be good. Liesel --Member Theosophy International Member Human Race >I'm very much in favour of an attempt to express the key ideas of theosophy >in ways that relate to newcomers' needs and experience. It's an idea that >has come to many over the years but not found the person/people with time >as well as requisite insight to do it. > >JRC although you have said that you do not want to be considered a >teacher I reckon you have a real neat way with words. I'd really like to >see you give it a go if only in a few of the subject areas. > >Idea: I think it would help any who try writing for this project to >get into or remember a discussion with young people and then write >to the needs that come out of it. > >I hate to suggest another theos-x list but what about a theos-intro? >It's similar to the lo-brow idea that was floated a couple of months ago >but would be more specifically intended for newcomers where they could >ask the simplest of questions without feeling they were breaking into some >convocation of scholars and cognoscenti. Where they would receive warm >enthusiastic responses and feel listened-to. This would be a great thing >in itself but would also give those who want to write introductory stuff >a heap of ideas and slants on just what problems to answer and how to >address them. > >Theos-intro would be supported by possibly anyone in the theos-l group >who felt motivated by a desire to respond. This would be a sort of living >home page and hypertext network. Perhaps some more thought is needed here >on *whose* version of theosophy is to be presented but I think the best >thing is just to respect the freedom of enquiriers to enquire as much >as that of others to give their opinions. The delete key is a great >leveler! > >The answers themselves along with the queries could be great compiled >into a collection. Perhaps not everything but there could be somoe >selections and editing. For that matter we have the archives of theos-l >itself which could be scanned for introductory material. There may not >be that much but there certainly has been some for example just recently >Richard Ihles' response to Anne Bermingham on his levels/degrees concept >which by the way I find highly expressive and relevant. > >So there's more than one idea. > >Murray Stentiford >Member Theosophy International > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 14:13:52 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Pharisaic Self-righteousness KPJ >A New Year's resolution then based on this passage from the >readings: when confronted with PSR in a post or in person I >will try to: arecognize that PSR is the commodity being >delivered bignore it if possible and respond to any or all other elements >of the communication cat times give a comment as to the >intensity of PSR displayed but dnot reciprocate by giving an >even larger dose of PSR in return. RI Hi Paul. I'm having a wonderful time on Christmas break away from all the "talented-and-gifted" for a while apart from the 40-50 so far letters of recommendation I am having to write to Yale Princeton MIT etc.--a little-appreciated drawback to teaching at this end of the high-school spectrum. Anyway what to do about pharisees. . . . I am wondering about your point *d*. Since pain resulting from the consequences of semi-Self egoic indulgence seems to be thing which discourages further indulgence at that particular level of consciousness could it not be possible that there will be instances where you may feel obliged to *help* another person's "psychogenetic" progress by giving him or her a dose of pain? Or would it always be best to abstain in order to avoid a new sin--"psychogenetic self-righteousness"? Just wondering. . . . Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 14:15:31 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Theosophy on MSN >>Not very if the folder is empty. >>Jerry does it have a www address? Can it be reached by people like myself >>who are not an AOL compuserve etc.? >> >>Liesel Well do they have an e-mail address? Actually if you're going to put something in the folder Jerry we're covered & that was my purpose in asking for the address. >Liesel > I am not terribly savy with WWW so I don't know. That is I do >know that Microsoft has a WWW but I don't know if they have a theosophy >folder there probably not. The MSN is new and just getting started in >many ways. The fact that there is a whole folder for theosophy leads me >to think that whoever is heading up the New Age Forum is aware of the >interest in this subject and is preparing for it. I will probably put some >stuff >in it myself later on > > Jerry S. > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 14:40:36 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: JRC do it! >From what I've seen here JRC would do a fine job of writing an introduction to Theosophy. Submitting chapters for group comment might seem like "too many cooks" but I don't think it would be a burden to us. If sending them to the list is a problem due to length perhaps a group of volunteers could get them via email without everyone on the list doing so. I hereby volunteer to read and comment as needed. Is this something you envision in print John or do you have it in mind as an electronic publication? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 14:59:00 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Russian Theosophists Perhaps because of my study of the Cayce readings I'm feeling some frustration about lack of communication between Russian Theosophists and the rest of us. Cayce says that Russia will lead the world spiritually once communism is dethroned and gives 1998 as the beginning of the New Age. In my search of publications in various languages it was really exciting to see that there are 32 Russian books on Theosophy published in the 1990s alone! I looked them up and most were by HPB; but couldn't read the titles. As I understand it there is a full-fledged revival of interest in Theosophy in Russia but we in the West and elsewhere in the world are being left in the dark about it because the Russian Theosophists are not affiliated formally with Adyar Pasadena or ULT. It would be a lot to ask an organization as small as Pasadena or ULT to do much in the way of networking with these folks in Russia but at one point it looked like Adyar was making a good start. What happened? All I get from third-hand reports is to put it in my own terms that they won't play Adyar's way so to hell with them. More specifically this from a board member but my memory is hazy that they were only interested in HPB and that this was unacceptable to Adyar. It is regrettable that Yugoslavia Denmark and Canada were lost to the TS. But it is catastrophic if the greatest opportunity for the movement in these times-- the rebirth of interest in HPB in her native land-- is being discarded simply because it cannot be totally controlled by an international headquarters that seems obsessed with control. Somebody please tell me I'm wrong and that things have changed or that the reports I've gotten were incorrect. Or if they are correct does anyone have any suggestions about how Western Theosophists can go over the heads of our organizations and link up with our Russian sisters and brothers despite their lack of "political correctness"? This of course takes literacy in Russian which I suppose is quite rare in our ranks. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 15:33:42 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: Re: TI and TLO; Project 01 >I can get to the web page and have downloaded the four basic >articles - not enough IMHO. However using the links offered >either refuses to work netscape 02 beta or in the latest >instance hangs my system. I got 3/4 of a picture of Ms. >Roehrer which I found in the CACHE directory after reboot. I >wonder if others have the same problem. hmmm... it worked ok from here there library is actually quite large. did you check out the contents? > >*Also* to use Telnet internationally requires some pretty weird >timekeeping to take full advantage of the online Lodge! How >about someone with the knowhow getting theos-l on a www page? > >Alan I just added a theos-l.html it is linked into the homepage too. try http://www.vnet.net/users/jem select the disc-list stuff further info or you can go directly to it with http://www.vnet.net/users/jem/theos-l.html regarding TLO telnet it does make a nice place to schedule meetings for any group in the world. they have 255 channels. also there is full access to their library. just interesting. peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 16:02:30 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Movement towards central control As a member of both the TSA and International Co-Freemasonry I can guarantee that crazy things are afoot! The strange machinations that you have outlined are causing me to be split in two! It all depends from which perspective you approach things ---- but linking the problems of the two organizations together and trying to find an overarching pattern is not healthy for either and causes undue confusion to people who don't understand the inner dynamics. This I fear is what you are doing! In spite of surface similarities the problems faced by the two organizations are very different and can't be compared. Gerda J. Thompson From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 16:40:04 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Pooh Alan Pooh Bah is a character in "The Mikado". If I remember correctly he's the one who held all the different offices. He was a caricature so why don't you stick to being Pooh Bear. he's at least loveable & cute. And what's so bad about getting your head stuck in a honey pot? Incidentally my one grandson is named Christopher Robert. His father is Robert; his mother is Christine & his grandma Chrstiane Liesel >I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if >its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors >due as I always do. Pooh Bear is perhaps better known to us >Brits from the Winnie the Pooh books by A.A.Milne so I was >really trying once more to be pathetically funny. > >Strikes breast three times rushes from room crying "Mea culpa >mea culpa." > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 16:45:15 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: JRC do it! >>From what I've seen here JRC would do a fine job of writing an >introduction to Theosophy. Submitting chapters for group >comment might seem like "too many cooks" but I don't think it >would be a burden to us. If sending them to the list is a >problem due to length perhaps a group of volunteers could get >them via email without everyone on the list doing so. I hereby >volunteer to read and comment as needed. Is this something you >envision in print John or do you have it in mind as an >electronic publication? > >Let's John make it an electronic publication first & then when it gels lateron we could print it up. I'd also like to have some input. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 17:29:04 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Pooh Dr. Bain: >I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if >its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors >due as I always do. Pooh-Bah or pooh-bah p!'ba' noun 1. A pompous ostentatious official especially one who holding many offices fulfills none of them. 2. A person who holds high office. [After Pooh-Bah Lord-High-Everything-Else a character in The Mikado by W.S. Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan.] The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 17:41:34 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Movement towards central control At 090300 PM 12/28/95 -0500 you wrote: >As a member of both the TSA and International Co-Freemasonry I can guarantee >that crazy things are afoot! The strange machinations that you have outlined >are causing me to be split in two! It all depends from which perspective you >approach things ---- but linking the problems of the two organizations >together and trying to find an overarching pattern is not healthy for either >and causes undue confusion to people who don't understand the inner dynamics. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This I fear is what you are doing! > >In spite of surface similarities the problems faced by the two organizations >are very different and can't be compared. >Gerda J. Thompson > Glad to see your comment. I just an very very ordinary member and I am not familiar with the inner dynamics. I am sure there are many others like me are here. If someone could explain inner dynamics it would be very educative and every one would welcome. Also any further factual light you can throw that will enable us to better understand the situations would be welcome and very constructive. The fact that there are individuals who are very active in both organizations cannot also be ignored. MK Ramadoss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 17:54:07 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: (none) >>John I think that's a good idea for starters in spite of the fact thsat we have 19 revisions & going through the process you suggest would take quite a while. But I think maybe at the end we could see where we were going. Would we convince anybody to change their minds I wonder or are we looking for a compromise getting together of all factions? Liesel<< I was just suggesting it as good system which allows both sides equal oppurtunity to present their side. It helps to "structure" a fair presentation. I doubt it would change minds but it would show an honest attempt to be totally fair and produce a document which answered many questions. peace - john mead p.s. I never said it would be a short document :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 21:55:27 GMT From: "Murray Stentiford Scientific Software and Systems Ltd" Subject: Re: TI Project 01 Somebody mentioned Jack Patterson's little "blue book" a couple of days ago as being a good introduction to theosophical ideas. As some will know it is available under a different cover in the USA. When the topic of this booklet came up about a year ago on theos-l it was suggested that it be made available as a theos-l archive file. I asked Jack about this and he was very happy to see it released on the Internet in a forum like theos-l. However despite persistent enquiries I was never able to locate the computer files of the text of the booklet. So it will have to be scanned in as suggested at the time. Add to the above that it wasn't Jack who in any way obstructed the enquiry for the files. Somehow the only diskettes of them got lost at the printer. I shall ask some people I know with a scanner if they can get the booklet into a text file and report back. Murray From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 22:47:13 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Theos-l makes news > Just today Ann wrote > > "Today I received the Jan/Feb issue of the Akbar Lodge newsletter. Rich: Very interesting because this article was written by a prominent > member of > Theos-l and was first published by ME in the ERGATES newsmagazine Dec > 1995 put out by U.L.T. San Francisco. How quickly our stuff is getting > reprinted these days! > > Where the heck is the Akbar Lodge anyway? > > I wonder if they gave credit to the source? "Copyright A. Student" ...? :- > Rich Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 22:54:39 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI and TLO; Project 01 fwd Forwarded message follows: > Date: 28 199512 145651 -0500 > To: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain > From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead > Subject: TI and TLO; Project 01 > > hi -- > > this is somewhat directed to TI people. > > The TLO Theosophy Lodge On-line seems to look alot like TI. > Are we all just duplicating things?? > > Also: TLO seems to have some Intro. material which may be useful for Project 01 > an aside to John R. Cocker. > > I suggest people telnet over to it and check it out theosophy.org. > > peace - From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 22:56:18 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: TI Project 01 > > I hate to suggest another theos-x list but what about a theos-intro? > It's similar to the lo-brow idea that was floated a couple of months ago > but would be more specifically intended for newcomers where they could > ask the simplest of questions without feeling they were breaking into some > convocation of scholars and cognoscenti. Where they would receive warm > enthusiastic responses and feel listened-to. This would be a great thing > in itself but would also give those who want to write introductory stuff > a heap of ideas and slants on just what problems to answer and how to > address them. > > Theos-intro would be supported by possibly anyone in the theos-l group > who felt motivated by a desire to respond. This would be a sort of living > home page and hypertext network. Perhaps some more thought is needed here > on *whose* version of theosophy is to be presented but I think the best > thing is just to respect the freedom of enquiriers to enquire as much > as that of others to give their opinions. The delete key is a great > leveler! > > Murray Stentiford > Member Theosophy International I think this a great idea and would certainly lurk thereon to offer support and the occasional "IMHO" to enquirers. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 22:59:50 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Lodge colors Do gay people belong to a Great Pink Lodge? It's so sad that what KPJ says is so true - go agin the party line or the current hero/heroine and its the Evil Brotherhood the Dark Forces or whaever who have got into your poor evil and forever damned soul. I think I mentioned once on the list that I was excommunicated by one of the independent American churches to which I did not belong and head never sought to join. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race Great Green Lodge ipsissimus mauve magician high priest and Poobah ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 28 Dec 1996 23:06:01 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Pooh I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors due as I always do. Pooh Bear is perhaps better known to us Brits from the Winnie the Pooh books by A.A.Milne so I was really trying once more to be pathetically funny. Strikes breast three times rushes from room crying "Mea culpa mea culpa." Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 03:54:29 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Pooh > >I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if >its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors >due as I always do. Pooh Bear is perhaps better known to us >Brits from the Winnie the Pooh books by A.A.Milne so I was >really trying once more to be pathetically funny. Have you read the Tao of Poo by Hoffman I think also the one about Piglet? Excellent reading for ordinary folks like me. > >Strikes breast three times rushes from room crying "Mea culpa >mea culpa." > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 05:14:15 GMT From: jem@vnet.net John E. Mead Subject: pooh-bah and masonry reply to Ann > >Pooh-Bah or pooh-bah p!'ba' noun >1. A pompous ostentatious official especially one who holding many >offices fulfills none of them. >2. A person who holds high office. >[After Pooh-Bah Lord-High-Everything-Else a character in The Mikado by W.S. >Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan.] > >The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition >copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from >InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. > thanks for the definition... I thought it was an old Masonic slang term! we use this term at our lodge whenever we get "official" visits from various Grand Lodge "Dignitaries". It is not really derogatory but used as a fill-in when people forget the "official" titles. It is always taken in good humour. taken in jest when formalities are getting absurd. ==================== sample conversation: lodge brother: I hear we are having an official visit from someone from grand lodge? Tyler: oh-oh which pooh-bah is it this time? lodge brother: not sure let's ask our "Worshipful Master". Worshipful! - who is coming to visit us tonight?? W.Master: it's brother Billy from Egypt Lodge #331; the peanut farmer from Rock Hill. lodge brother: great! I haven't seen him for three months! is his wife's arthritis still bothering her alot? W.Master: last I heard she is doing alot better. Brother Jimmy i.e. doc Smith has her on some new anti-inflammatory. Tyler: So what do I call him?? Lodge opens in 03 minutes... W.Master: well.. he is the current district lecturer. So it must be something like "Grand District Lecturer". We better ask someone who knows. Tyler: let's ask our certified lecturer John-boy. John-boy! what pooh-bah is this one? John-Boy: um... "Honorable Brother William A. Bean Grand Lodge Lecturer for District 12 from the Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons in the Noble State of North Carolina" jem-> or something like that Tyler: uhh ... say again?? ================================= peace - john mead From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 07:00:04 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Pooh >Dr. Bain: >>I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if >>its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors >>due as I always do. > >Pooh-Bah or pooh-bah p!'ba' noun >1. A pompous ostentatious official especially one who holding many >offices fulfills none of them. >2. A person who holds high office. >[After Pooh-Bah Lord-High-Everything-Else a character in The Mikado by W.S. >Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan.] > >The American HeritageR Dictionary of the English Language Third Edition >copyright C 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Electronic version licensed from >InfoSoft International Inc. All rights reserved. > >Ann E. Bermingham > >Now which one of those do you prefer Alan? You might be safer with Poo Bear. No responsibility in Poo Land. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 09:11:44 GMT From: "K. Paul Johnson" Subject: Akashic Records and EC Thanks to ann for the Raymond Moody reference and to Jerry S. for reflections on reading the Akashic records. Hope I'm not leaving anyone out who responded to my last Cayce post. It turns out the readings themselves point to a plausible explanation of what went on in the past life readings. Volume 8 Psychic Development contains much interesting material explaining Cayce himself and 08 pages on the Great White Brotherhood! Its center is alleged to be Virginia Beach : Anyhow here's what he says about reading the Akashic records for a particular person: What records? Whose record is being interpreted or being attempted to be interpreted that ye may comprehend that being sought? The records are upon time and space but these--ye say-- are concepts of man. There is no time there is no space; they are concepts. Then-- where? In individual consciousness. The individual consciousness arises from that faculty or that something called mind. Thus those of old have said it in these words: "My spirit beareth witness with thy spirit saith the Lord of hosts." Then the record is thine. How then-- ye ask-- may this individual ye call Edgar Cayce interpret same?...Whence cometh such a knowledge to one individual as to interpret the records of another through varied spheres of activity and experience? Only as a gift of Him who has given "If ye keep my ways I will love thee will abide with thee and bring to thy remembrance *all* things from the foundation of the world." Then while the source may be entirely capable of bringing a full or complete knowledge the answers must ever be according to the law just given-- within thine own self. ........................................................... OK then. If the "record" is within the individual person let's consider this in light of Theosophy. The personality is mortal the *result* but not the *continuation* of past personalities. Only the higher triad survives death. Therefore if what Edgar is reading is within the person and the ex-personalities are *not* within the person all he can read is the *results* of the ex-personalities; i.e. the skandhas. And of course the lasting individuality. What this suggests to me is that Edgar was quite capable of giving a correct reading of a person's spiritual identity his/her karmic inheritance from past personalities and his/her physical condition. But by virtue of *what* he is reading he *cannot* access detailed historical information about those past personalities because it isn't *there.* So when his reading goes into a blank spot the blank gets filled in by some regurgitated Bible or some fantasy Atlantis derived from Donnelly etc. The blank becomes a hole through which material of less reliability and value pours in. The unconscious for some reason seems incapable of just saying "I don't know" and will come up with *some* answer no matter what. How's that? From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 10:08:47 GMT From: RIhle@aol.com Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International ET There are a lot of things that the word "Theosophy" could be applied to. Jerry H-E would probably ask us: "What did HPB intend when she helped co-found the T.S. and coined the term?" RI I agree we need Jerry H-E here because I am pretty sure that HPB did not *coin* the term *theosophy*. ET If everyone teachings whatever they care to believe as original Theosophy sometimes without even having read the books and being exposed to the ideas then the philosophy will be lost to the western world. RI Perhaps it is merely my your and some of HPB's particular version of the "philosophy" which has any danger of getting lost. *Philosophia Perennis* Leibniz the "Perennial Philosophy" doesn't get lost--that is why it is thus named. Right now the ideas you may be referring to--cosmogenesis and anthropogenesis--are probably far more in jeopardy because of a general rejection of theosophical epistemology rather than a lack of promulgation. In other words intelligent people of the modern world are unfortunately now not so willing to consider the possible validity of ideas which do not have a firm basis in empirical science. This may be what needs to be changed first in order to give all theosophical ideas a chance to flourish. ET This spiritual approach to *learning* emphasizes *process* and is fine. We are not considering though whether this intuitive knowledge is trained or untrained whether it is based upon exposure to gurus and spiritual training or if it is based upon the normal course of one's life without the benefit of hastened evolution. RI *Fine*? People know how to hurt me with anemic adjectives. *Trained intuitive knowledge*? Some believe that authentic intuition is the *trainer* not the *trainee*. ET But meditation goes hand-in-hand with *content* and I'd say that much can be achieved using fragments of Mystery Teachings as the content of our studies and contemplation. RI I'd say so too. ET >RI >But also within the Theosophical Society we have the definition-#2 people. >They are strong and getting stronger as the membership declines. They >would like to firmly establish as a fact that the *Theosophical* in the >Theosophical Society means definition #2. I'd say that you're making a false distinction here. The type one process deals with how we realize deep insights. The type two definition deals with the specific systematic content of occult doctrine that is of great benefit for our type one process. It is not an either/or situation. RI The discussion is about what the *Theosophical* in the Theosophical Society really stands for. While I would agree that the process/content combination you mention is a good one it perhaps does not offer a legitimate "middle ground" between the either/or if the content-part is strictly limited to "Real Theosophy" as defined by the definition #2 people. Notwithstanding it is impossible for me to imagine a Theosophical Society which is not strongly associated with THE SECRET DOCTRINE. That just seems like a fact. That just seems like a given. Whatever shape the Society takes in the future HPB's contribution to the "Mystery Tradition" as you say will be there! there! there! there! Definition #2 people must relax about this. However what we may need most right now is a stong organization whose general focus is the reassertion of theosophy as a legitimate category of valid knowledge--and not just a brand name for a certain implied consensual belief. If the Society cannot do this not only THE SECRET DOCTRINE but many other things--like the aforementioned "religions astrology mysticism esoteric writers not necessarily named Blavatsky etc."--may indeed more and more start to get written off as merely "unsupported speculation." I don't know . . . as a definition #1 inclusion-type person *theosophy*: "any philosophical and religious system [add *and fact*] based on intuitive knowledge of [add *or transcendental approach toward*] the divine." I am starting to think I love HPB more than most because I keep coming back to her again and again without believing that the *theosophical* in the Theosophical Society officially suggests that I should. . . . Best wishes Richard Ihle From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 10:36:33 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International On 29 199512 RIhle@aol.com wrote: > ET > There are a lot of things that the word "Theosophy" could be applied > to. Jerry H-E would probably ask us: "What did HPB intend when she > helped co-found the T.S. and coined the term?" > > RI > I agree we need Jerry H-E here because I am pretty sure that HPB did not > *coin* the term *theosophy*. >From "The Key To Theosophy": HPB says "the origin of the name ... ... comes to us from the Alexandrian philosophers called lovers of truth Philaletheians from `phil' loving and `aletheia' "truth". The name Theosophy dates from the third century of our era and began with Ammonius Saccas and his disciples." -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 14:19:39 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: >>>John >I think that's a good idea for starters in spite of the fact thsat we have >19 revisions & going through the process you suggest would take quite a >while. But I think maybe at the end we could see where we were going. Would >we convince anybody to change their minds I wonder or are we looking for a >compromise getting together of all factions? > >Liesel<< ----> John I'm with you. Let's see if they'd agree to it. Liesel ----> I was just suggesting it as good system which allows both sides equal >oppurtunity to present their side. It helps to "structure" a fair >presentation. > >I doubt it would change minds but it would show an honest attempt >to be totally fair and produce a document which answered many questions. > >peace - > >john mead > >p.s. I never said it would be a short document :- From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 14:39:58 GMT From: Drpsionic@aol.com Subject: Re: Russian Theosophists Well even though the only Russian most of us can say is "Da" "Nyet" and "Vodka" it is possible that some of our Russian brethren may be able to write in English. That leaves us with the question of how many Russian Theosophists know about the internet and can they get on it? Chuck From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 15:03:44 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Paradigm shifts > Eldon I think you've got a good point there. The Adyar TS *is* moving into being a group of fellow seekers some wiser than others and that *is* brand new I hadn't thought of it. That's why we're having changing over pains. But we'd better settle it because the succession of gurus has fizzled out. It looks like we're going to be a community of seekers from here on in. I haven't even heard that anyone among our children has the qualities which might lead to his/her being a guru when he/she matures. I think that this is something we should consider very carefully before we move off in any direction. Re the diverse TS organizations: I've already said that I think any new Theosophist should get some Basic Theosophy. I myself like the Adyar TS best because one can take the 03 objects into a million different directions. There are so many fascinating subjects to study. For a linguist like me there is Senzar Mind > thought forms > speech the study of Mantras & chanting various esoteric facets of music writing. Practicing Brother/Sisterhood is a lifelong endeavor & leads one into many highways & byways as for instance my most rewarding correspondence with 02 TS groups in the 3rd world. The outlooks & needs of each group are entirely different even though they're all Theosophists. Because we're supposed to study "Unknown phenomena..." I've read & gotten at least something out of Kapra Prygogene Particle Physics Teilhard bio-feedback Tibetan Buddhism Ayurevedic Medicine Shamanism Quantum Theory. & just now I'm wading through a book from which I can but garner a few ideas but worthwhile ones "Trialogues at The Edge of The West" Abraham McKenna & Sheldrake. Those are the ones I remember. There must be others. I don't know of any other belief system that leads its members into such a diversity of knowledge. To me that's the very best Adyar has to offer.... God's infinite diversity. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race JRC: > >In the discussion regarding the rights of lodges versus the >power of Wheaton to conserve the T.S. assets I'm reminded of >a personal experience. > >The situation was with the San Diego T.S. Regular Secret >Doctrine classes were held at a member's home for a number >of years. The lodge formed in the 1890's had accumulated >quite a number of rare books. Its library was kept at that >member's home. > >I moved to Maryland and left the lodge. Two years later I >moved back and rejoined the lodge. I found out that the >member had quit the lodge and meetings were no longer held >at her house. A year before she had been contacted and asked >by someone to turn over the library to them. The lodge president >told her to hold on to the books and not release them. There >were a number of confused phone calls and the former member >somehow got pissed off. > >It is now a year later and I've moved back to San Diego. >I'm now a lodge member again and write the ex-member thanking >her for storing the books for us and asking if there was a >convenient time when we could pick them up to store them >elsewhere. She never responded although she told a friend >that she might release the books if she were paid some money >for having stored them. She basically would not release the >books unless she was paid something insisting on retroactive >storage fees. > >At different times that year I discussed the situation >with various T.S. officials but no one wanted to do anything >about it. The lodge eventually folded and I assume the >library was converted to the personal use of the ex-member >because it was never returned to the T.S. > >This is a situation where long-term T.S. assets were lost >due to Wheaton not becoming involved enough in what was >happening. > >>Actually I believe that from a larger view the proper >>paradigm may not be fixing a system before it is permanently >>broken but rather that of understanding that a required if >>painful and upsetting phase shift has been triggered by this >>dispute ... a phase shift needed for the TSA to live beyond its >>foundational generations and stabilize in a form in which its >>greatest service will be in the future rather than in its past: > >The current dispute may widen the outlook of people in the TSA >but I'm not sure how Adyar's views will be changed. If Radha >believes that she's the representative of the Masters and acts >in an authoritative manner based upon that belief she won't >particularly care if members of the American Section want a >stronger voice in the T.S. > >The change that has been happening in the T.S. and outside it >as well is the general attitude of networking. Members of different >theosophical groups are becoming increasingly open to finding >Theosophy in other groups and outside their T.S. and not looking >to national or international HQ for guidance. > >>We began with *Masters* choosing the leaders who lead by >>something akin to Divine Right. ... with something like apostolic >>succession - and the leaderships ... have long operated almost as >>though they were running an *occult hierarchy* > >There are different models for theosophical groups. Each model >appeals to different people. On one end of the spectrum you have >the Pasadena T.S. It has a succession from HPB to Judge Tingley >Purucker Conger Long and Knoche each considered the current >representative of the Masters and the current autocratic ruler of >the T.S. This type of sucession could be compared to a Tibetan >monastery where a succession of Lamas were considered the tulku >of a certain deity. The person is both an appointed representative >of higher powers and somehow overshadowed. > >Another type of model is found in ULT. There we have autonomous >groups that exist for the study of Theosophy with a strong effort >to deemphasize the personal element and avoid organizational politics. >The ideal is fine but when the politics and rulership of the group >goes underground it can be more difficult to deal with. > >A third type of mode is found in the T.S. Adyar. In this T.S. we >have the appearance of a democratic organization with elected >officials running the society. But again politics comes into play >and we've seen from the previous discussions on 'theos-l' all the >things that can happen. > >>We are now perhaps for the first time having to face the fundamental >>contradiction between the Master-Chela and Democratic models of >>organization and IMO the leaderships both at Wheaton and Adyar will >>need to do some very deep-level re-examinations of attitudes ... >>because they are no longer considered "Masters" and the memberships >>are increasingly refusing to be their "Chelas". > >The different forms of organization exist to serve different >purposes. The democratic form is not somehow higher or better >than any other. In Tibetan Buddhism there is a strong emphasis >on the importance of a Guru. With a bona fide spiritual teacher >one can study and learn and grow. It is possible that some forms >of theosophical groups in the west will evolve in the direction >of spiritual organizations. > >When you mention that the membership of the T.S. Adyar is >increasingly refusing to be chelas of the organizational leadership >you're not making a case for gurus being unnecessary. What you're >saying and most would agree with is that the T.S. Adyar leadership >consists of fellow seekers on a par with us and not *bona fide* >gurus. We would not accord guru status to someone unless they were >in our eyes genuinely qualified. > >The useful purpose that the Adyar T.S. may be evolving towards >serving is in being a western seekers' club. People will come to >it to share their personal ideas and experiences. It may become >a self-help society where everyone is on their own to tred the >Path. And that is fine. There are other theosophical Buddhist >and perhaps unnamed groups that exist to offer specific spiritual >training when people are ready and give the right knock. > >In the Adyar T.S. there may be offered some comparative religion >and comparative philosophy. This may include as one example >religion or philosophy the theosophical tenants. Theosophy proper >may not have a strong position but may end up only being offered >as one item on the menu. The definition of Theosophy may remain >fuzzy with multiple variates of it being taught and a mass of >opinion added. The actual philosophy though will still be taught >elsewhere in its original form. And the philosophy can't ever be >lost since it is based upon but one of an on-going series of >projects of the Masters to change the thought life of the world. > >>Its likely that the leaderships will no longer be able to *demand* >>anything from memberships that they'd better get rid of the >>attitude that voting is just a formality that they can decide >>what's "best" for the membership without even consulting the >>membership without bothering to even give them full information >>and just expect the membership to say "ok! as long as you think >>that's best!". > >Each organization has its own agenda and is structured accordingly. >With the Pasadena T.S. if I understand it correctly the head of >the T.S. appoints the Cabinet and has near total control over the >society in a much more complete fashion than Radha could ever have >with the Adyar T.S. > >Someone will join an organization because they want to participate >in what it is doing. If it is a democratic organization they have >certain expectations including that elected officers do not issue >orders and demand things of the members. If it is organized along >autocratic or theocratic lines the expectations are different and >one may follow the guidance of officials because of their spiritual >status. > >Regardless of type of organization the officials need to keep >in close touch with the membership to continue to get feedback >in order to adjust what they do and do their work more effectively. > >>IMO Theosophy will be *much* better off in the long run if >>we can accomplish this difficult shift so long as we have the >>courage to see it through. > >The Adyar T.S. cannot both be a spiritual school with gurus in >leadership and a democratic organization of fellow seekers. Its >natural evolution is in the direction of the latter a democratic >seekers' club and the move in that direction should be supported. >If both approaches are insisted upon by different portions of >the membership a split is inevitable. > >I would not though generalize this. The trend does not hold >true for all theosophical and spiritual organizations just for >the Adyar T.S. The trend does not show an evolutionary step forward; >it shows a form of specialization by the Adyar T.S. so that it can >become effective in doing *one type of spiritual work*. > >I'd agree with you that new introductory materials need to be >written. But I'm not sure if what I might write would look anything >like what you're planning to write! I think that the best people >to write the generic introductory materials would be someone from >a ULT background if they leave out the Crosbie teachings regarding >such things as "impersonality". The introductions that you or I >might right would be to our favorite *variates* of Theosophy with >Besant/Leadbeater or Purucker/PointLoma slants. > >The purpose of any introductary materials is the same as the >"Introduction" chapter holds to the book that it is in. It exists >to provide background materials necessary in order that the reader >can understand the chapters that follow. It paints the big picture >and prepares the reader for the more difficult ideas that follow. > >-- Eldon > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 16:55:09 GMT From: M K Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hypnotism On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: > Hi all > I came across this idea in de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy and I > would appreciate some comments on it. > >>>CLIP<<< > I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many > people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the > above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. > > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International > I have also read in some literature that all forms of hypnotism in no good and can have very undesirable effects. So I have kept away from all of them from practical use. As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very interesting. Have you seen any of his books? ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 21:49:45 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Pooh > Dr. Bain: > >I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if > >its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors > >due as I always do. > > Pooh-Bah or pooh-bah p!'ba' noun > 1. A pompous ostentatious official especially one who holding many > offices fulfills none of them. > 2. A person who holds high office. > [After Pooh-Bah Lord-High-Everything-Else a character in The Mikado by W.S. > Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan.] > > Ann E. Bermingham > 1. Gulp. 2. I accept. Send $$$$ Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 29 Dec 1996 23:49:07 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Hypnotism Hi all I came across this idea in de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy and I would appreciate some comments on it. "Hypnotic practice is almost always bad because it weakens the will of the subject instead of evoking the will from within outwards into action thus building up a structure of inner life and power. Every repetition of hypnosis renders the subject still more flabby still more negative still weaker etc." "Auto-hypnosis or self-hypnosis where the subject hypnotizes himself or herself by various means known for ages past such as staring at a spot or a bright light or a piece of crystal or glass or even looking at the tip of the nose concentratedly or at the navel: all those things which are so well known are emphatically not good because they mean using the will by the subject himself to send his higher will upwards and out of the picture and induce in the lower part of the constitution a false tranquillity or quiet by what is almost mechanical means. In other words the nerves instead of being roused into clean wholesome healthy activity upon which the inner will can work are put to sleep hypnotized which means sending to sleep and the brain and nervous system sink below the threshold of ordinary consciousness into the vibrational rates of the glass or other object stared at. Quiet is induced but it is the quiet of death of the mineral kingdom." I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 00:23:58 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Akashic Records and EC >Thanks to ann for the Raymond Moody reference and to Jerry S. >for reflections on reading the Akashic records. Hope I'm not >leaving anyone out who responded to my last Cayce post. It >turns out the readings themselves point to a plausible >explanation of what went on in the past life readings. Volume >8 Psychic Development contains much interesting material >explaining Cayce himself and 08 pages on the Great White >Brotherhood! Its center is alleged to be Virginia Beach : >Anyhow here's what he says about reading the Akashic records >for a particular person: > > What records? Whose record is being interpreted or being >attempted to be interpreted that ye may comprehend that being >sought? > The records are upon time and space but these--ye say-- are >concepts of man. There is no time there is no space; they are >concepts. Then-- where? > In individual consciousness. The individual consciousness >arises from that faculty or that something called mind. Thus >those of old have said it in these words: "My spirit beareth >witness with thy spirit saith the Lord of hosts." > Then the record is thine. How then-- ye ask-- may this >individual ye call Edgar Cayce interpret same?...Whence cometh >such a knowledge to one individual as to interpret the records >of another through varied spheres of activity and experience? > Only as a gift of Him who has given "If ye keep my ways I >will love thee will abide with thee and bring to thy >remembrance *all* things from the foundation of the world." > Then while the source may be entirely capable of bringing a >full or complete knowledge the answers must ever be according >to the law just given-- within thine own self. >........................................................... >OK then. If the "record" is within the individual person >let's consider this in light of Theosophy. The personality is >mortal the *result* but not the *continuation* of past >personalities. Only the higher triad survives death. >Therefore if what Edgar is reading is within the person and >the ex-personalities are *not* within the person all he can >read is the *results* of the ex-personalities; i.e. the >skandhas. And of course the lasting individuality. What this >suggests to me is that Edgar was quite capable of giving a >correct reading of a person's spiritual identity his/her >karmic inheritance from past personalities and his/her >physical condition. But by virtue of *what* he is reading he >*cannot* access detailed historical information about those >past personalities because it isn't *there.* So when his >reading goes into a blank spot the blank gets filled in by >some regurgitated Bible or some fantasy Atlantis derived from >Donnelly etc. The blank becomes a hole through which material >of less reliability and value pours in. The unconscious for >some reason seems incapable of just saying "I don't know" and >will come up with *some* answer no matter what. > >How's that? > There wouldn't be a problem if we subscribe to the non-linear theory of being. It is only in this 3dimension that time exists in a linear fashion. So we could assume that seeing into the unseen realms we would not encounter time or space. There have been many ideas written about the concept of the soul living all its lives at the same time from its point of view. Like a central point that sends down all these rays with a body on the other end all existing at once. From a soul's vantage point all actions could be seen whether they are in the past or in the future. I believe that we get things spiritual a bit mixed up because of the time and space frame we live with. Our consciousness has trouble with the idea on non-linear events and so it thinks that past lives must have been lived some time in the past and have to leave a trace if someone is to read them in the future. If Edgar transcended into the higher realms of soul-life perhaps he could see the past and future as actually happening at that point in time???? or however we would refer to time in those other dimensions. Our consciousness as experienced here in physical life is still a bit primitive compared with our soul-life without the physical to weigh it down. Can we really understand how it is for the soul from our human consciousness? We can only really go on what adepts and mystics have tried to tell us until we can experience it for ourselves. Living in the moment is about as non-linear as we can get down here. Just another thought. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 00:41:53 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Russian Theosophists At 043000 AM 12/30/95 -0500 you wrote: >Well even though the only Russian most of us can say is "Da" "Nyet" and >"Vodka" it is possible that some of our Russian brethren may be able to >write in English. That leaves us with the question of how many Russian >Theosophists know about the internet and can they get on it? >Chuck I think that those in the academic community may have access to Internet. However as for the common man/woman I am not sure. Costs could be very prohibitive. But you have raised a very good question. .doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 00:48:33 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Paradigm shifts At 055700 AM 12/30/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >> > >Eldon > >I think you've got a good point there. The Adyar TS *is* moving into being a >group of fellow seekers some wiser than others and that *is* brand new I >hadn't thought of it. That's why we're having changing over pains. But we'd >better settle it because the succession of gurus has fizzled out. It looks >like we're going to be a community of seekers from here on in. I haven't In a very interesting response that Sri Ram the then President made a statement that he is a fellow student of wisdom. So this does not seem to be a new idea. > >study "Unknown phenomena..." I've read & gotten at least something out of >Kapra Prygogene Particle Physics Teilhard bio-feedback Tibetan >Buddhism Ayurevedic Medicine Shamanism Quantum Theory. & just now I'm >wading through a book from which I can but garner a few ideas but >worthwhile ones "Trialogues at The Edge of The West" Abraham McKenna & >Sheldrake. Those are the ones I remember. There must be others. I don't know >of any other belief system that leads its members into such a diversity of >knowledge. To me that's the very best Adyar has to offer.... God's infinite >diversity. It is the diversity and openness that has kept my continued interest. It is freedom in one sense. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 01:55:08 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Pooh > Alan > Pooh Bah is a character in "The Mikado". If I remember correctly he's > the one who held all the different offices. He was a caricature so why > don't you stick to being Pooh Bear. he's at least loveable & cute. And > what's so bad about getting your head stuck in a honey pot? Incidentally my > one grandson is named Christopher Robert. His father is Robert; his mother > is Christine & his grandma Chrstiane > > Liesel I like the idea of an esoteric honey pot full of mysteries teachings practices and wonders. I guess I've been a kind of Pooh Bear for around 40 years in that case! Plus of course I'm loveable and cute. Not sure about the caricature angle. Actually being a Pooh Bah does have some resonances. As an Independent Catholic Bishop in succession from CWL and others I used to get showered with all kinds of titles and paper "honors"* - especially from would-be American church empires. Eventually got so independent that I gave up the "catholic" and "church" and came home sob to my spiritual roots. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race Pooh Bear. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 02:26:57 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Pooh > >Dr. Bain: > >>I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if > >>its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors > >>due as I always do. > >Ann E. Bermingham > > > >Now which one of those do you prefer Alan? You might be safer with Poo > Bear. No responsibility in Poo Land. > > > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International Removes head from honey-pot smiling enigmatically. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 02:56:35 GMT From: "Dr. A.M.Bain" Subject: Re: Akashic Records and EC > > OK then. If the "record" is within the individual person > let's consider this in light of Theosophy. The personality is > mortal the *result* but not the *continuation* of past > personalities. Only the higher triad survives death. > Therefore if what Edgar is reading is within the person and > the ex-personalities are *not* within the person all he can > read is the *results* of the ex-personalities; i.e. the > skandhas. And of course the lasting individuality. What this > suggests to me is that Edgar was quite capable of giving a > correct reading of a person's spiritual identity his/her > karmic inheritance from past personalities and his/her > physical condition. But by virtue of *what* he is reading he > *cannot* access detailed historical information about those > past personalities because it isn't *there.* So when his > reading goes into a blank spot the blank gets filled in by > some regurgitated Bible or some fantasy Atlantis derived from > Donnelly etc. The blank becomes a hole through which material > of less reliability and value pours in. The unconscious for > some reason seems incapable of just saying "I don't know" and > will come up with *some* answer no matter what. > > How's that? Pretty good. Warning: I am about to go into "guru" mode. [Seems only fair - delete key is probably a grey one to your right] Without repeating your source time does not exist in the "higher worlds". "Past" personalities may be anything as *memory* belonging to this world. So yes the unconscious will fill in the blanks - but can only do so at what is often called the "astral" level ie. it "images" or "imagines" something to fill the gap from the individual's own recall mechanism - can be anything from a book a conversation a dream - anything at all. But - ponder on this - if time is an illusion then *so are the skhandhas.* What then would the doctrine of reincarnation be? Paul the apostle would call it I suspect milk for babes. Of the seven "heavens" we have in this life complete access to three and part access to the fourth counting up from the lowest. Cf. cap 01 of ~The Cloud of Unknowing~. the other three may relate to the "higher triad" mentioned above in your post. A quality psychic such as Cayce seems to have been will be able to tap the second and lower third levels with no difficulty and the upper third when things are working well. Occasionally [rare] the shift will take place from upper third to lower fourth and all images disappear making "readings" as usually understood impossible. Here be gaps. I suspect that Cayce slipped in and out of these gaps from time to time and got answers from "within" rather than "without." Yes [see line 01 at start of your post] the "record" is within the individual person *but* - a big one - it is linked in eternity or timelessness with *all other records* in *all other people* both "past" and "present" and even "future". Pauses to mend fuse in blown mind If we discover how we can remember anything that has ever happened in human "time" regardless of who it happened to - even down to detailed information like names and addresses. Sometimes we check it out and the history says we are wrong and later it is discovered that the history was wrong. When for example Jesus is reported as saying "Inasmuch as you do it to one of these little ones you do it to me" he was stating a psycho-spiritual *fact* - it is not a metaphor. Consider if you like the following two re-writes as relevant: "In the beginning Gods create the heavens and the earth" Gen.1.1 "In the beginning is the word and the word is god [theos]" John 1.1. The beginning is a place a state a condition not a time frame. AB -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 08:16:01 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Pooh writes: >> >Dr. Bain: >> >>I was never quite sure what a Poobah is supposed to be but if >> >>its important I will graciously and modestly accept the honors >> >>due as I always do. > >"Eventually I got so independent that I gave up the 'catholic' and 'church' & came home sob to my spiritual roots." ie you chased away the Horrible Heffalump! Liesel >> >Ann E. Bermingham >> > >> >Now which one of those do you prefer Alan? You might be safer with Poo >> Bear. No responsibility in Poo Land. >> > >> Bee Brown >> Member Theosophy International > >Removes head from honey-pot smiling enigmatically. > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. >---------------------------------------- >Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 08:52:37 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Hypnotism >Bee I was taught from theosophy -scratch that hypnotism wasn't good for you. The whole thrust of Theosophy is to develop your will intelligence bodies & etc. & if you give power over yourself to any outside entity live human dead human or other you're not building up yourself spiritually. As long as you came near the subject this goes for most channeling too. What I use as touchstone is that anything that tires you out is sapping your energies & not good for you. We once had a psychic woman as member of our Study Center. I noticed that I got tired whenever I talked to her for a while. To me that indicated that she was pulling on my energy to do her thing. So I tried to stay away from her. Liesel Hi all >I came across this idea in de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy and I >would appreciate some comments on it. > >"Hypnotic practice is almost always bad because it weakens the will of the >subject instead of evoking the will from within outwards into action thus >building up a structure of inner life and power. Every repetition of >hypnosis renders the subject still more flabby still more negative still >weaker etc." >"Auto-hypnosis or self-hypnosis where the subject hypnotizes himself or >herself by various means known for ages past such as staring at a spot or a >bright light or a piece of crystal or glass or even looking at the tip of >the nose concentratedly or at the navel: all those things which are so well >known are emphatically not good because they mean using the will by the >subject himself to send his higher will upwards and out of the picture and >induce in the lower part of the constitution a false tranquillity or quiet >by what is almost mechanical means. In other words the nerves instead of >being roused into clean wholesome healthy activity upon which the inner will >can work are put to sleep hypnotized which means sending to sleep and >the brain and nervous system sink below the threshold of ordinary >consciousness into the vibrational rates of the glass or other object stared >at. Quiet is induced but it is the quiet of death of the mineral kingdom." > >I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many >people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the >above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. > >Bee Brown >Member Theosophy International > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 09:11:18 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International >On 29 199512 RIhle@aol.com wrote: >> ET >> There are a lot of things that the word "Theosophy" could be applied >> to. Jerry H-E would probably ask us: "What did HPB intend when she >> helped co-found the T.S. and coined the term?" >> >> RI >> I agree we need Jerry H-E here because I am pretty sure that HPB did not >> *coin* the term *theosophy*. > >>From "The Key To Theosophy": > HPB says "the origin of the name ... ... comes to us from the >Alexandrian philosophers called lovers of truth Philaletheians from >`phil' loving and `aletheia' "truth". The name Theosophy dates from >the third century of our era and began with Ammonius Saccas and his >disciples." > -JRC >............................................................................... Hey John That's already a good starting point for your Cyberspace Basic Theosophy. Liesel .............................................................................. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 09:22:30 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Russian Theosophists >Well even though the only Russian most of us can say is "Da" "Nyet" and >"Vodka" it is possible that some of our Russian brethren may be able to >write in English. That leaves us with the question of how many Russian >Theosophists know about the internet and can they get on it? >Chuck ............................................................................... Chuck I've been corresponding with a Russian Theosophist in English for over 03 years now but by snail mail. We're communicating well. All of my letters & book packages have made it to him but his letters are coming through in dribs & drabs so that he's been waiting until some friend takes a trip outside of Russia & has given them letters to mail to me so I'll be sure to get them. His English is almost perfect. It's so good that I've mailed him audio tapes in English & he can understand those too. > >I had an e-mail address from someone in Moscow from a different mailing list & not too long ago asked this man in Moscow whether he'd expedite our messages but he didn't write back so I guess it's "niet". Dunno where you'd get a Russian Theosophist with e-mail capacity from. I got the address of mine from Dick Slusser who does the "High Country Theosophist". If you're interested in further details I'd be glad to tell them to you. I know 01 more Russian word than you do. Mir means peace. Liesel From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 09:43:36 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: By - Laws : a new perspective/approach Paradigm shifts >Doss: Glad to see you also enjoy the diversity of our TS. It keeps you fresh & alive & on your toes ... don't you think? Re Sri Ram saying he was a "student" ... they all said that I think even HPB said that... but if my memory serves me right Sri Ram was also a well-trained clairvoyant. Being that somehow gives a deeper dimension. They have insight into matters which an ordinary person doesn't have. I'm not really against following a guru. I've done so. But as Eldon said a guru needs to be chosen with great care & discrimination & testing. They've gotta be very accurate ethical compassionate; they have to realize that they're not god; and they have to give their pupils the wherewithall to grow. It's also good if they sometimes listen to other people. But to come back to the present I'd like it fine if the Adyar TS became a true democracy. Liesel ........................................................................... ... At 055700 AM 12/30/95 -0500 Liesel wrote: >>> >> >>Eldon >> >>I think you've got a good point there. The Adyar TS *is* moving into being a >>group of fellow seekers some wiser than others and that *is* brand new I >>hadn't thought of it. That's why we're having changing over pains. But we'd >>better settle it because the succession of gurus has fizzled out. It looks >>like we're going to be a community of seekers from here on in. I haven't > > In a very interesting response that Sri Ram the then President made a >statement that he is a fellow student of wisdom. So this does not seem to be >a new idea. >> >>study "Unknown phenomena..." I've read & gotten at least something out of >>Kapra Prygogene Particle Physics Teilhard bio-feedback Tibetan >>Buddhism Ayurevedic Medicine Shamanism Quantum Theory. & just now I'm >>wading through a book from which I can but garner a few ideas but >>worthwhile ones "Trialogues at The Edge of The West" Abraham McKenna & >>Sheldrake. Those are the ones I remember. There must be others. I don't know >>of any other belief system that leads its members into such a diversity of >>knowledge. To me that's the very best Adyar has to offer.... God's infinite >>diversity. > > It is the diversity and openness that has kept my continued >interest. It is freedom in one sense. > >..doss > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 14:37:53 GMT From: John R Crocker Subject: Project 01 Greetings ... Mucho thanks to all those who responded to the idea of introductory literature in general and my own little project in particular ... I've had little time on-line this week but I'm digesting all the ideas you've sent. Since no one seemed to have strong objections to talking about this on the list I'll continue to do the project publically ... but make sure to keep the subject header "Project 1" so as to make deletion easy for those who aren't interested. Liesel I thought about the idea of a seperate "beginners" list but I'm not sure that's a workable thing. John has created four or five seperate lists but all but one are virtually silent for long stretches of time and the overwhelming predilection of most seems to be to stay on theos-l. I'm not sure about creating yet another list when the ones we have are barely used - plus the "beginners" if there are more than just a few on the list don't seem to talk much; perhaps a few would but I wonder whether a "beginners" list would soon turn into little more than the same people as are on theos-l talking to one another about basic concepts ... discussions that might soon become as esoteric as any on theos-l -:. Still there is the thought that some beginners might be silent perhaps because slightly intimidated listeners on theos- l and I wonder whether some of the longer-term Theosophists on the list might want to set up an informal "Mentorship" program here in cyberspace as a means of being more open and inviting to newcomers by allowing them private conversations with members i.e. by not requiring them to post to the whole list questions that they may feel they would seem simplistic to ask... Perhaps something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a month: GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! We are pleased you've chosen to join the discussions debates and ruminations of the on-line Theosophical community. We invite your voice and cyberpersonality into our forum and hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that draws your interest. _____________________________________________________ For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are members here from almost every prominant Theosophical perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about Theosophy and Theosophical concepts will be questioned sometimes vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened precisely because of the wide diversity of perspectives here. [NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to the list ...] ______________________________________________________ For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have recently joined a formal Lodge or Study Center may be reading some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of Theosophy through the agency of this list. It has been pointed out to the community here by several different people that the list sometimes seems highly intellectualized and too esoteric for some newcomers to feel comfortable speaking. While no one on the list would believe any question or comment you have was not worth posting and often the simplest questions have lead to some of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the basics before you post to the whole list. To this end a number of list members who have studied various different aspects of Theosophy in some depth have volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To recommend books to read on specific Theosophical topics that interest you to answer basic questions about the different Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great differences of opinion among Theosophists about many aspects of Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about the topic. Below is the list of volunteers with their private email addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! ___________________________________________________ MENTORS 1 NAME: EMAIL ADDRESS: INTERESTS: 2 NAME: EMAIL ADDRESS: INTERESTS: etc. etc. *************************************************************** What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written until it was agreeable to all participants. In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers who might want to join could have their name on the list when they have time and could remove it during times when they were too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like that for instant deletion by regular members. Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone out there who would volunteer for such a thing? Theosophically -JRC From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 16:20:32 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Akashic Records and EC Paul: >OK then. If the "record" is within the individual person >let's consider this in light of Theosophy. The personality is >mortal the *result* but not the *continuation* of past >personalities. Only the higher triad survives death. >Therefore if what Edgar is reading is within the person and >the ex-personalities are *not* within the person all he can >read is the *results* of the ex-personalities; i.e. the >skandhas. And of course the lasting individuality. What this >suggests to me is that Edgar was quite capable of giving a >correct reading of a person's spiritual identity his/her >karmic inheritance from past personalities and his/her >physical condition. But by virtue of *what* he is reading he >*cannot* access detailed historical information about those >past personalities because it isn't *there.* So when his >reading goes into a blank spot the blank gets filled in by >some regurgitated Bible or some fantasy Atlantis derived from >Donnelly etc. The blank becomes a hole through which material >of less reliability and value pours in. The unconscious for >some reason seems incapable of just saying "I don't know" and >will come up with *some* answer no matter what. > >How's that? Sounds very theosophical to me Paul. HPB says that only the "aroma" of each life is stored in the Reincarnating Ego and the details of each life are lost. Both the Reincarnating Ego alias the causal body and the Akashic Records are said to be on the 4th or causal plane. I would suspect that the one is the subjective version and the other the objective version of the same thing. The idea of the kama-manas "filling in" the holes is probably an accurate assessment. This is very interesting material here. Thanks. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 17:05:39 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Hypnotism >Bee >I was taught from theosophy -scratch that hypnotism wasn't good for you. The >whole thrust of Theosophy is to develop your will intelligence bodies & >etc. & if you give power over yourself to any outside entity live human >dead human or other you're not building up yourself spiritually. Letting yourself be hypnotized or hypnotizing others is wrong because it always weakens the will. However self-hypnotism can be a valid technique and has been carefully integrated into most forms of yoga for centuries. It is probably the only safe and painless way to change or modify our own world view. Hypnotism is a form of suggestion and when we suggest positive things to ourself it is usually advantageous. When G de P says that self-hypnotism or self-suggestion is wrong I think he means in the sense of trying to convince ourselves of something on a lower kama-manas level such as trying to quit smoking by listening to a self-hypnosis or subliminal tape. I agree with him that such a thing even when it is effective is a short-term solution rather than being a long-term solution. However the technique of self-suggestion of trying to see ourselves as a manifestation of spiritual energy rather than just a material body for example is certainly effective because it helps shift our conscious to a higher plane or vibration. The power of suggestion is well-known in psychology but has been used in occultism and magic for many centuries but it should always be used with care and discretion. ... >>the brain and nervous system sink below the threshold of ordinary >>consciousness into the vibrational rates of the glass or other object stared >>at. Quiet is induced but it is the quiet of death of the mineral kingdom." > >I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many >people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the >above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. > >Bee Brown G de P is pointing out one of the possible pitfalls of meditation on an object -- he is not saying that the technique itself is wrong or invalid. It is not that meditation on an object is "not the thing to do" but rather that it be done correctly. If done incorrectly one tends to fall asleep being hypnotized by the operation. This is what will often happen to us if we try this without a guru or teacher. If done correctly the technique will result in one-pointed concentration for a few seconds. This one-pointed concentration when fully developed allows us to go beyond our thoughts and look directly at ideas and images. It is rather like an important foundation or a basic-first-step in real meditation. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 17:05:43 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Akashic Records and EC Alan: >But - ponder on this - if time is an illusion then *so are the >skhandhas.* What then would the doctrine of reincarnation be? >Paul the apostle would call it I suspect milk for babes. Your logic is impecible. Yes all is maya. Even reincarnation and karma I am tempted to say "especially" instead of "even" here. Jerry S. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 30 Dec 1996 23:16:19 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Hypnotism >On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: > >> Hi all >> I came across this idea in de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy and I >> would appreciate some comments on it. >> >>>CLIP<<< > >> I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many >> people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the >> above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. >> >> Bee Brown >> Member Theosophy International >> > >I have also read in some literature that all forms of hypnotism in no >good and can have very undesirable effects. So I have kept away from all >of them from practical use. > >As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very >interesting. Have you seen any of his books? > >..doss > I have only had a glance at some of his writings but they are on the list to be read but that list is fairly long still so one day?????????? I would be interested in what he recommends because I suspect that as I sit in our new lodge like a spider waiting for the unsuspecting would-be theosophist that would be one of the FAQ I will come up against. It would be nice to point them in the correct direction.> > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 00:25:34 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Hypnotism > Hi all > I came across this idea in de Purucker's Studies in Occult Philosophy and I > would appreciate some comments on it. > > "Auto-hypnosis or self-hypnosis where the subject hypnotizes himself or > herself by various means known for ages past such as staring at a spot or a > bright light or a piece of crystal or glass or even looking at the tip of > I have done this myself when first I began to meditate and I know of many > people who use something external to concentrate on in meditation. From the > above it would suggest that it is not the thing to do. Interesting thought. > > Bee Brown > Member Theosophy International Ditto. I have found this to be a *bad thing* for serious students. Those who want to play games can hvae some fun with it perhaps but I would question its long term effect upon mental health. ALan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 00:53:27 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Re: Pooh > > >"Eventually I got so independent that I gave up the 'catholic' and 'church' > & came home sob to my spiritual roots." > ie you chased away the Horrible > Heffalump! > > Liesel > > >> >Ann E. Bermingham: > >> > > >> >Now which one of those do you prefer Alan? You might be safer with Poo > >> Bear. No responsibility in Poo Land. > >> > > >> Bee Brown > >> Member Theosophy International > > > >Removes head from honey-pot smiling enigmatically. > > > >Alan You know folks this list is one of the nicest places I have been too and have met some of the nicest people - just what is needed for chasing away the horrible heffalump. Agape [Gk.] Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 02:10:34 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hypnotism At 061700 PM 12/30/95 -0500 you wrote: >>On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: >>As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very >>interesting. Have you seen any of his books? >> >>..doss >> >I have only had a glance at some of his writings but they are on the list to >be read but that list is fairly long still so one day?????????? >I would be interested in what he recommends because I suspect that as I sit >in our new lodge like a spider waiting for the unsuspecting would-be >theosophist that would be one of the FAQ I will come up against. It would >be nice to point them in the correct direction.> >> >Bee Brown >Member Theosophy International > > Much of the material by Krishnaji is scattered in a number of publications. Let me try to identify a couple of them and post the references in a few days. In each it may be a couple of pages. He is not for a formal system. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 05:09:44 GMT From: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk Dr. A.M.Bain Subject: Project 01 > Perhaps something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a > month: > ************************************************************ > GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! > We are pleased you've chosen to join the ruminations of > the on-line Theosophical community. We invite you into our > forum and hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that > draws your interest. > _____________________________________________________ > For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think > you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are > members here from almost every prominant Theosophical > perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find > as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about > Theosophy and its concepts will be questioned sometimes > vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found > your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened > precisely because of the wide diversity here. > [NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software > and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to > the list ...] > ______________________________________________________ > For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like > to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have > recently joined a Lodge or Study Center may be reading > some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a > cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of > Theosophy here. It has been pointed out to the community here > by several different people that the list sometimes seems > highly intellectualized and too obscure for some newcomers > to feel comfortable about speaking. While no one on > the list would believe any question or comment you have was not > worth posting and often the simplest questions have led to some > of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish > to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the > basics before you post to the whole list. > > To this end a number of list members who have studied > various aspects of Theosophy in some depth have > volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To > recommend books to read on specific topics that > interest you to answer basic questions about different > Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown > term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great > differences of opinion among some of us about many aspects of > Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have > strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name > on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present > not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to > present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about > the topic. > > Below is the list of volunteers with their private email > addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They > invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that > remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private > conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! > ___________________________________________________ > MENTORS > 01 NAME: Dr. A.M.BAIN Alan > EMAIL ADDRESS: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk > INTERESTS: Kabala but not magic; esoteric ideas generally. A > student of some 40 years ..... will inflict occasional merry > quips upon you. Member of TS in England Adyar. > > 02 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > > etc. etc. > *************************************************************** > > What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of > the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people > actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written > until it was agreeable to all participants. My rewrite above ... > In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to > become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take > responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it > once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers > who might want to join could have their name on the list when > they have time and could remove it during times when they were > too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the > identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like > that for instant deletion by regular members. > > Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone > out there who would volunteer for such a thing? > Theosophically -JRC Sadly I could be relied upon to forget to do it. Alan -- Member Theosophy International. Member Human Race. ---------------------------------------- Private e-mail: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 07:12:20 GMT From: eldon@theosophy.com Eldon B. Tucker Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International JRC: >From "The Key To Theosophy": >HPB says "the origin of the name ... ... comes to us from the >Alexandrian philosophers called lovers of truth Philaletheians from >`phil' loving and `aletheia' "truth". The name Theosophy dates from >the third century of our era and began with Ammonius Saccas and his >disciples." That's fine for a definition of the term "Theosophy". But HPB could have chosen many different terms to label her new society and the philosophy which she was about to teach in the west. What she was going to teach did not I think come from Saccas and his disciples. "Theosophy" happened to be a handy term to use for the future T.S. The various doctrines in our basic theosophical books contain many borrowed terms including "Theosophy" itself. We can I think read about the philosophies and religious that they come from. It's important though to keep in mind that the borrowed terms sometimes may have their meanings changed. So when RI gives us two good dictionary definitions of "Theosophy" it's fine for purposes of understanding how Theosophy is popularly thought of but does not help us when we want to understand it in the theosophical context in the context that it is thought of in our theosophical textbooks. -- Eldon From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 09:27:32 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: RE: Liesel hypnotism and Purucker Hi Liesel -- In response to your post of 12/29: since you asked for comments I have a few: When Purucker goes from generalized statements regarding hynotism to "auto- or self-hypnosis" he begins using the word to define something quite different from the findings of Franz Mesmer to put hypnosis in an occult context. He equates hynpotism to a state wherein "the nerves... are put to sleep hypnotized which means sending to sleep..." [your quote]. That in itself is an interesting point if outside the clinical definition of hypnosis as regards the meaning of *sleep*. In Patanjali's Yoga Sutras -- the original "how to" manual for meditation -- "sleep" is defined as the "non-perception of the senses" I.10. This is one of the five "states of mind" but it is *not* meditation. What Purucker describes as "sleep" -- the forcing of the mind into an altered state by one-pointed concentration upon a physical point -- is sometimes referenced in the literature as "sitting for development" and it is a serious and potentially dangerous mistake for the practitioner of meditation. The goal of meditation in the earlier stages is to integrate our physical consciousness with the higher Self not to isolate the brain in a mechanistic sensory deprivation. As modern psychology has demonstrated the brain has defense mechanisms against such abuse and deprivation is most definitely *not* a means of transcending the lesser ego. So how then to control the senses and eliminate the "filter" that they impose to true meditation? That is the subject of the second book in Patanjali's Sutras. It is still a focus of concentration and self-discipline but in a different direction if that makes sense. On your last point that you speaking of sensory deprivation "have done this yourself when [you] first began to meditate and know of many people who use something external to concentrate upon in meditation. From the above [Purucker's comments] it would suggest that it is not the thing to do.": concentration is the necessary first step to meditation and many people find it useful to begin with a ritual as I do for example. However it is important to keep perspective; concentration is a means not a goal. Everyone who begins meditation starts off more of less "clueless" and it is normal to begin by trying to suppress thoughts rather than transcending them. Experience counts for a lot but a good teacher/friend/book at the beginning can save a lot of time. And that is the main point I wanted to make and the one that prompted me to respond to your post. At some point a sincere beginning student of Theosophy will ask "All of this sounds *so right* but what's next? Having read the books what should I do now?" I wish the TS would make it easier to find the answer to that question. The introductory letter set is very nice but it doesn't address the practice of meditation very well. And IMO holding out the ES as a carrot if you pay your dues for two years doesn't seem adequate to keep a neophite's interest -- especially now when entire isles in shopping mall bookstores are given over to "New Age" books cults and ideas some of them fantastic and bizarre even to Theosophists! And let's be honest -- most of society thinks we're a pretty strange bunch ourselves. My suggestion to the TS would be to put a greater emphasis from the beginning on practical mind control and the *instant* benefits that gives to the student of Theosophy and his immediate environment. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 09:27:33 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: Liesel JH-E and Musings Chuck Cosimano wrote "Musings of a Theosophical Heretic" some weeks back and replies were posted by Liesel and Jerry H-E. Chuck has yet to post his promised opinions but this is my two cent's worth: I. Was the Buddha enlightened or the product of good press? JH-E: said the answer did not matter to him and the more relevant question was whether or not the ethics of Buddha made life better for His followers and the world in general. JLM: JH-E has a point but it is not the main one. Chuck's question of the Buddha is a paraphrase of the fundamentalist Christian's "Trilemma": was Jesus/ Christ a Liar Lunatic or Lord? Theosophy holds a special place for Those who transcend the limitations of being "merely human" and it does take something away if we dismiss that accomplishment. In the case of the Buddha the story is that after His enlightenment the five ascetics who had previously abandoned Him came and asked What are You? Not *Who* are You but *What* are You? And the Buddha answered "I am Awake." If the enlightenment of the Buddha is *real* then it has definite implications for us as seekers on the Path. II. Is karma real or a tool for social control? LFD: said that it did not really matter but knowledge of the laws of karma was useful as a framework in accomplishing goals paraphrasing a bit. JH-E: more or less agreed with LFD's statements and added two anecdotes about "neotheosophists" of his acquaintance who used karma as a rationale for hurting others with the implication of "do it our way and you won't get hurt next time" and also those who use karma as an excuse for inaction or irresponsibility. JLM: I think knowledge of the laws of karma falls into the general category of "the more we know about the way things work the less energy we waste in trying to fight Purpose." Or "butting heads" as Liesel puts it. JH-E's second point is well made and that is the classic criticism of the East: belief in karma stunts growth because of the attending attitude of "it's all going to happen anyway so why should I act now?" But his first point is a misstatement: "stabbing someone in the back" and then claiming "it was their karma that put the knife there" is a violation of free will. The work "karma" is nearly interchangeable with the phrase "cause and effect" and the latter may be easier for Western minds to accept in all its implications. Which is to say we can forge new chains everyday -- such as initiating a new causal relationship by say stabbing someone in the back without reason. note: it is my point that Jerry's acquaintance has misunderstood the idea of karma not Jerry -- though I wish he had used "nontheosophist" rather than neotheosophist in his example. III. Did the Masters tell the truth in Their letters? JLM: for me the writings of "the Masters" form part of a working hypothesis. Jerry said more or less the same question: did anyone else get the impression that JHE and Liesel had changed places in answering this point? : IV: RE: Theosophy as a reflection of the culture of its founders: JLM: JH-E made an interesting observation regarding the spread of theosophy as a function of Indo-European influence. Question for Jerry: Do you separate the influence then of Buddhism and its promotion from Theosophy? The nineteenth and twentieth century revival of Asian Buddhism does not fit your pattern for example which excludes Oriental countries. V. Does anyone really care about the rounds and chains and why should they? JLM: Jerry does Liesel doesn't. I vote with Liesel. I've seen whole groups of people put to sleep listening to explanations of globes and such. Jerry who probably does a better job of explaining these things than I have witnessed makes a point about why he teaches them but it seems to me that many subjects could accomplish his stated goal of honing "perceptive skills of non-linear thinking." Maybe this is just a personal preference or a reaction to some *really bad* lectures and charts that pushed by tolerance/patience/politeness to the limit. Having said that I think it is important to differentiate between CYCLES and all that other stuff. So Chuck -- you started this thread. Holidays busy schedules and all aside when are you going to post your opinions? Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 09:34:39 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: The movement towards central . . . MK Ramadoss: > The fact that there are individuals who are very active in both >organizations cannot also be ignored. There are individuals who are members of Adyar TS Co-Masonry ES and the LCC. All at the same time. Being in contact with them I can assure you that they never bring business from one group over to another in public nor do they discuss such business except in private. The CIA would envy such a tight-lipped bunch. As for the public meeting of the Co-Masons during the Summer Session of 1994 there was no public statement about the struggles behind the scenes. I was there along with many others who were observing the ritual. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 09:46:11 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Hynoptism Liesel: > What I use >as touchstone is that anything that tires you out is sapping your energies & >not good for you. We once had a psychic woman as member of our Study Center. >I noticed that I got tired whenever I talked to her for a while. To me that >indicated that she was pulling on my energy to do her thing. So I tried to >stay away from her. That sounds like my mother. After I grew up two different psychic individuals told me she was sapping my energy. I feel much better if I limit my visits with her to once a month. I've always wondered what kind of strange karma we had. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 11:21:00 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hypnotism >>>On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: >>>As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very >>>interesting. Have you seen any of his books? >>> >>>..doss >>> >>I have only had a glance at some of his writings but they are on the list to >>be read but that list is fairly long still so one day?????????? >>I would be interested in what he recommends because I suspect that as I sit >>in our new lodge like a spider waiting for the unsuspecting would-be >>theosophist that would be one of the FAQ I will come up against. It would >>be nice to point them in the correct direction.> >>> >>Bee Brown >>Member Theosophy International >> >> Much of the material by Krishnaji is scattered in a number of >publications. Let me try to identify a couple of them and post the >references in a few days. In each it may be a couple of pages. He is not >for a formal system. > >..doss Bee As a starter I think you will find it interesting to read Krishnamurti's biography books 02 by Mary Lutyens - 01 The Years of Awakening and 02 The Years of Fulfillment which are available in paperback and they have been around for several years and you may find them in your local library. This may give you some background information. There are also some video tapes of his and some of them are very good and more communicative than the book IMHO. In 1929 he made a speech where he stated that Truth is a pathless land etc. This speech set the direction of his work rest of his life till he died in 1986. It is a speech with great significance and meaning and you will like it. It is found in Lutyens' books. Couple of other references specific to Meditations are: 1. Krishnamurti - The Open Door - Mary Lutyens. Published by Farrar Straus Giroux. ISBN 0-374-18225-6. See Chapter 06: The Art of Meditation. 2. Meeting Life - J Krishnamurti. Pub: Harper. ISBN 0-06-250526-2. pp. 31 - Meditation and Love pp. 32 - Meditation and Experience pp. 51 - Meditation and The Timeless Moment pp. 163- On Meditation 3. The Flight of Eagle - J Krishnamurti. Pub: Harper & Row. Chapter 03 - Meditation. If you are unable to locate the above please post me a msg and I will try to get to you some of the short pieces from the above. Do not spend too much money to buy all the books unless you are very wealthy!!! as you should be able to borrow them from a library. Sorry for the long reply. Wish you a Happy New Year and an enjoyable Centenary Celebrations. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 11:32:03 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: RE: Liesel hypnotism and Purucker At 022900 PM 12/31/95 -0500 Jim wrote: >Hi Liesel -- > >>My suggestion to the TS would be to put a greater emphasis from the >beginning on practical mind control and the *instant* benefits that gives to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >the student of Theosophy and his immediate environment. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Jim I have been with TS for several decades. I did not come with the expectation of mind control or was not looking for any "practice". It is the first object of the TS that kept my interest in TS and Theosophy. I am not sure that TS would ever start putting greater emphasis on practical mind control and "sell" "instant" benefits that one can get from it. May be I am an ordinary person who can never be induced to join any organization which touts mind control and induce me to continue my association. May be I am in the small minority!!! ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 11:39:55 GMT From: jmeier@microfone.net Jim Meier Subject: BBrown's postRe: Hypnotism oops .. The post earlier today under "Liesel & Hypnotism" was a reply to Bee's earlier posting. Jim From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 12:04:56 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: The movement towards central . . . At 025300 PM 12/31/95 -0500 Ann wrote: >MK Ramadoss: >> The fact that there are individuals who are very active in both >>organizations cannot also be ignored. > > There are individuals who are members of Adyar TS Co-Masonry ES and the >LCC. All at the same time. Being in contact with them I can assure you that >they never bring business from one group over to another in public nor do they >discuss such business except in private. The CIA would envy such a >tight-lipped bunch. > >As for the public meeting of the Co-Masons during the Summer Session of 1994 >there was no public statement about the struggles behind the scenes. I was >there along with many others who were observing the ritual. > >Ann E. Bermingham Ann Glad to see your post. As for your statement that the individuals who are members of TS Co-M ES LCC etc. at the same time I am glad they do not bring business from one group to another in public. If some thing is going on in private that is can raise questions. It is good that there was no public statement about the strugges behind the scenes. The group Co-M which conducted the meeting at the Summer Session of 1994 was the minority group which wanted the Paris directed remote control in the US. No wonder no one brought this up since it would have raised more questions than that can be answered convincingly. We all saw the "litigation" "prone" situation where finally at Boston Lodge it has been reported that 1/4 million dollars were wasted to pay the lawyers with the result we now have two theosophical lodges in Boston instead of one. And the leadership of TSA did not want anyone to know what a waste of money in Boston and why and did not disclose to or discuss with the members. At least I would not have known about the details but for the messages here. Everyone understands that TSA has nothing to do legally or otherwise with Co-M or any other organization. Now I see the is Co-M initiated litigation in Denver Federal District Court which in the end cost double or triple that amount of lawyer's fees I am wondering why the common membership does not avoid such huge waste of funds. These are "trust" funds meant to be used philanthrophic and other ways to help Humanity and not help expensive three piece suit litigators. As a simple person the above are my simple concerns. Hope you understand. .Ann PS: In another unrelated matter did you also read the most recent issue of AT where financial figures were printed. Did you notice that for the year ending 3/95 close to one million dollars was lost due to "market" fluctuations. I have requested more info on this and waiting to get them. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 12:09:46 GMT From: MK Ramadoss Subject: Re: Hynoptism At 030400 PM 12/31/95 -0500 you wrote: >Liesel: >> What I use >>as touchstone is that anything that tires you out is sapping your energies & >>not good for you. We once had a psychic woman as member of our Study Center. >>I noticed that I got tired whenever I talked to her for a while. To me that >>indicated that she was pulling on my energy to do her thing. So I tried to >>stay away from her. > >That sounds like my mother. After I grew up two different psychic individuals >told me she was sapping my energy. I feel much better if I limit my visits with >her to once a month. I've always wondered what kind of strange karma we had. > >Ann E. Bermingham > Ann: There should be some way to protect yourself from your mother or anybody else who can sap your energy. I recall that an individual can build a shell which protects in such cases. Such draw of energy is one kind of vampirism. Once a shell is built you should be able to visit your mother as often as you would like and I am sure your mother should welcome seeing you. ..doss From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 13:55:10 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Project 01 >Dear JRC I like what you wrote & I think that you should keep on writing the messages. I think you got a point there about not having a separate list. Maybe Alan & John Mead could work that one out. If it's always entitled "MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS" I think that would serve the purpose I have in mind. I'm thinking that Arthur Patterson & a young woman whose name I don't recall dropped out because reading through all the stuff we wrote wasn't profitable. Art said he wasn't getting enough out of it to warrant his reading everything; he didn't have time. What he really needed was the basics. He has a good grasp of the esoteric & mystical anyway but he didn't know Theosophy. The woman who dropped out was a brand new member & I think for someone like that all the stuff we srite without any kind of plan but just whatever we happen to think of is ok for us but I think is confusing to a newcomer. I would like to be a mentor but I don't have any specialty. Maybe human relations about which I know something but am not a professional like a social worker or a psychologist. I was dealing with all kinds of people on my job. I also know German & French and have an interest in the arts & music but again I'm not a professional. I majored in French & minored in English & took Ed. courses. But I don't feel comfortable teaching except on a 01 to 01 basis or in small informal groups. I have lots of volunteer experience being a recreation leader. So that's my whole resume now. Happy New Year Liesel Greetings ... Mucho thanks to all those who responded to the idea of >introductory literature in general and my own little project in >particular ... I've had little time on-line this week but I'm >digesting all the ideas you've sent. Since no one seemed to have >strong objections to talking about this on the list I'll >continue to do the project publically ... but make sure to keep >the subject header "Project 1" so as to make deletion easy for >those who aren't interested. Liesel I thought about the idea of >a seperate "beginners" list but I'm not sure that's a workable >thing. John has created four or five seperate lists but all but >one are virtually silent for long stretches of time and the >overwhelming predilection of most seems to be to stay on theos-l. >I'm not sure about creating yet another list when the ones we >have are barely used - plus the "beginners" if there are more >than just a few on the list don't seem to talk much; perhaps a >few would but I wonder whether a "beginners" list would soon >turn into little more than the same people as are on theos-l >talking to one another about basic concepts ... discussions that >might soon become as esoteric as any on theos-l -:. > Still there is the thought that some beginners might be >silent perhaps because slightly intimidated listeners on theos- >l and I wonder whether some of the longer-term Theosophists on >the list might want to set up an informal "Mentorship" program >here in cyberspace as a means of being more open and inviting to >newcomers by allowing them private conversations with members >i.e. by not requiring them to post to the whole list questions >that they may feel they would seem simplistic to ask... Perhaps >something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a >month: >************************************************************ > GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! > We are pleased you've chosen to join the discussions >debates and ruminations of the on-line Theosophical community. >We invite your voice and cyberpersonality into our forum and >hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that draws your >interest. > _____________________________________________________ > For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think >you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are >members here from almost every prominant Theosophical >perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find >as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about >Theosophy and Theosophical concepts will be questioned sometimes >vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found >your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened >precisely because of the wide diversity of perspectives here. >[NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software >and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to >the list ...] > ______________________________________________________ > For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like >to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have >recently joined a formal Lodge or Study Center may be reading >some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a >cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of >Theosophy through the agency of this list. It has been pointed >out to the community here by several different people that the >list sometimes seems highly intellectualized and too esoteric >for some newcomers to feel comfortable speaking. While no one on >the list would believe any question or comment you have was not >worth posting and often the simplest questions have lead to some >of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish >to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the >basics before you post to the whole list. > To this end a number of list members who have studied >various different aspects of Theosophy in some depth have >volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To >recommend books to read on specific Theosophical topics that >interest you to answer basic questions about the different >Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown >term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great >differences of opinion among Theosophists about many aspects of >Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have >strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name >on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present >not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to >present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about >the topic. > Below is the list of volunteers with their private email >addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They >invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that >remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private >conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! > ___________________________________________________ > MENTORS >1 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >2 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >etc. etc. >*************************************************************** > > What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of >the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people >actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written >until it was agreeable to all participants. > In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to >become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take >responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it >once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers >who might want to join could have their name on the list when >they have time and could remove it during times when they were >too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the >identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like >that for instant deletion by regular members. > > Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone >out there who would volunteer for such a thing? > Theosophically -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:01:01 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Project 01 >JRC PS. You've got a spelling error. It's "promin e nt". Liesel Greetings ... > Mucho thanks to all those who responded to the idea of >introductory literature in general and my own little project in >particular ... I've had little time on-line this week but I'm >digesting all the ideas you've sent. Since no one seemed to have >strong objections to talking about this on the list I'll >continue to do the project publically ... but make sure to keep >the subject header "Project 1" so as to make deletion easy for >those who aren't interested. Liesel I thought about the idea of >a seperate "beginners" list but I'm not sure that's a workable >thing. John has created four or five seperate lists but all but >one are virtually silent for long stretches of time and the >overwhelming predilection of most seems to be to stay on theos-l. >I'm not sure about creating yet another list when the ones we >have are barely used - plus the "beginners" if there are more >than just a few on the list don't seem to talk much; perhaps a >few would but I wonder whether a "beginners" list would soon >turn into little more than the same people as are on theos-l >talking to one another about basic concepts ... discussions that >might soon become as esoteric as any on theos-l -:. > Still there is the thought that some beginners might be >silent perhaps because slightly intimidated listeners on theos- >l and I wonder whether some of the longer-term Theosophists on >the list might want to set up an informal "Mentorship" program >here in cyberspace as a means of being more open and inviting to >newcomers by allowing them private conversations with members >i.e. by not requiring them to post to the whole list questions >that they may feel they would seem simplistic to ask... Perhaps >something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a >month: >************************************************************ > GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! > We are pleased you've chosen to join the discussions >debates and ruminations of the on-line Theosophical community. >We invite your voice and cyberpersonality into our forum and >hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that draws your >interest. > _____________________________________________________ > For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think >you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are >members here from almost every prominant Theosophical >perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find >as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about >Theosophy and Theosophical concepts will be questioned sometimes >vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found >your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened >precisely because of the wide diversity of perspectives here. >[NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software >and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to >the list ...] > ______________________________________________________ > For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like >to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have >recently joined a formal Lodge or Study Center may be reading >some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a >cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of >Theosophy through the agency of this list. It has been pointed >out to the community here by several different people that the >list sometimes seems highly intellectualized and too esoteric >for some newcomers to feel comfortable speaking. While no one on >the list would believe any question or comment you have was not >worth posting and often the simplest questions have lead to some >of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish >to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the >basics before you post to the whole list. > To this end a number of list members who have studied >various different aspects of Theosophy in some depth have >volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To >recommend books to read on specific Theosophical topics that >interest you to answer basic questions about the different >Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown >term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great >differences of opinion among Theosophists about many aspects of >Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have >strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name >on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present >not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to >present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about >the topic. > Below is the list of volunteers with their private email >addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They >invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that >remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private >conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! > ___________________________________________________ > MENTORS >1 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >2 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >etc. etc. >*************************************************************** > > What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of >the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people >actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written >until it was agreeable to all participants. > In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to >become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take >responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it >once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers >who might want to join could have their name on the list when >they have time and could remove it during times when they were >too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the >identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like >that for instant deletion by regular members. > > Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone >out there who would volunteer for such a thing? > Theosophically -JRC > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:05:11 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Project 01 >Alan Please see my answer to JRC. Karuna Liesel Member Theosoophy International Member Human Race 5th Root theos-l@vnet.net writes: > >> Perhaps something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a >> month: >> ************************************************************ >> GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! >> We are pleased you've chosen to join the ruminations of >> the on-line Theosophical community. We invite you into our >> forum and hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that >> draws your interest. >> _____________________________________________________ >> For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think >> you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are >> members here from almost every prominant Theosophical >> perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find >> as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about >> Theosophy and its concepts will be questioned sometimes >> vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found >> your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened >> precisely because of the wide diversity here. > >> [NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software >> and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to >> the list ...] >> ______________________________________________________ >> For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like >> to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have >> recently joined a Lodge or Study Center may be reading >> some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a >> cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of >> Theosophy here. It has been pointed out to the community here >> by several different people that the list sometimes seems >> highly intellectualized and too obscure for some newcomers >> to feel comfortable about speaking. While no one on >> the list would believe any question or comment you have was not >> worth posting and often the simplest questions have led to some >> of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish >> to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the >> basics before you post to the whole list. >> >> To this end a number of list members who have studied >> various aspects of Theosophy in some depth have >> volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To >> recommend books to read on specific topics that >> interest you to answer basic questions about different >> Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown >> term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great >> differences of opinion among some of us about many aspects of >> Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have >> strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name >> on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present >> not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to >> present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about >> the topic. >> >> Below is the list of volunteers with their private email >> addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They >> invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that >> remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private >> conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! >> ___________________________________________________ >> MENTORS >> 01 NAME: Dr. A.M.BAIN Alan >> EMAIL ADDRESS: guru@nellie2.demon.co.uk >> INTERESTS: Kabala but not magic; esoteric ideas generally. A >> student of some 40 years ..... will inflict occasional merry >> quips upon you. Member of TS in England Adyar. >> >> 02 NAME: >> EMAIL ADDRESS: >> INTERESTS: >> >> etc. etc. >> *************************************************************** >> >> What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of >> the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people >> actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written >> until it was agreeable to all participants. > >My rewrite above ... > >> In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to >> become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take >> responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it >> once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers >> who might want to join could have their name on the list when >> they have time and could remove it during times when they were >> too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the >> identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like >> that for instant deletion by regular members. >> >> Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone >> out there who would volunteer for such a thing? >> Theosophically -JRC > >Sadly I could be relied upon to forget to do it. > >Alan >-- >Member Theosophy International. >Member Human Race. From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:21:28 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: RE: Liesel hypnotism and Purucker >Dear Jim Meier That isn't my message you're commenting about but rather Bee Brown's. I've not read much in my life written by GdeP but I did answer Bee's message in the same vein as you did only not quite that detailed. I guess with the way I interspersed my message it wasn't very clear as to who was writing what. If you're looking for a quick way to arrive at something spiritual I don't think you can find it in Theosophy. Dunno what is attractive enough to offer a beginner that would work at the same speed as an LSD trip or some such. The thing is our way is slower & more innocuous. I still think a good beginning is Shirley Nicholson's manual "A Program for Leading the Spiritual Life". It has a program outlined which a beginner can follow right away & it describes briefly & with a list of cogent books how a spiritual life can be initiated & achieved. Liesel Hi Liesel -- > >In response to your post of 12/29: since you asked for comments I have a few: > >When Purucker goes from generalized statements regarding hynotism to "auto- >or self-hypnosis" he begins using the word to define something quite >different from the findings of Franz Mesmer to put hypnosis in an occult >context. He equates hynpotism to a state wherein "the nerves... are put to >sleep hypnotized which means sending to sleep..." [your quote]. That in >itself is an interesting point if outside the clinical definition of >hypnosis as regards the meaning of *sleep*. In Patanjali's Yoga Sutras -- >the original "how to" manual for meditation -- "sleep" is defined as the >"non-perception of the senses" I.10. This is one of the five "states of >mind" but it is *not* meditation. What Purucker describes as "sleep" -- the >forcing of the mind into an altered state by one-pointed concentration upon >a physical point -- is sometimes referenced in the literature as "sitting >for development" and it is a serious and potentially dangerous mistake for >the practitioner of meditation. The goal of meditation in the earlier >stages is to integrate our physical consciousness with the higher Self not >to isolate the brain in a mechanistic sensory deprivation. As modern >psychology has demonstrated the brain has defense mechanisms against such >abuse and deprivation is most definitely *not* a means of transcending the >lesser ego. > >So how then to control the senses and eliminate the "filter" that they >impose to true meditation? That is the subject of the second book in >Patanjali's Sutras. It is still a focus of concentration and >self-discipline but in a different direction if that makes sense. > >On your last point that you speaking of sensory deprivation "have done >this yourself when [you] first began to meditate and know of many people >who use something external to concentrate upon in meditation. From the >above [Purucker's comments] it would suggest that it is not the thing to >do.": concentration is the necessary first step to meditation and many >people find it useful to begin with a ritual as I do for example. >However it is important to keep perspective; concentration is a means not >a goal. Everyone who begins meditation starts off more of less "clueless" >and it is normal to begin by trying to suppress thoughts rather than >transcending them. Experience counts for a lot but a good >teacher/friend/book at the beginning can save a lot of time. > >***** > >And that is the main point I wanted to make and the one that prompted me to >respond to your post. At some point a sincere beginning student of >Theosophy will ask "All of this sounds *so right* but what's next? Having >read the books what should I do now?" > >I wish the TS would make it easier to find the answer to that question. The >introductory letter set is very nice but it doesn't address the practice of >meditation very well. And IMO holding out the ES as a carrot if you pay >your dues for two years doesn't seem adequate to keep a neophite's interest >-- especially now when entire isles in shopping mall bookstores are given >over to "New Age" books cults and ideas some of them fantastic and bizarre >even to Theosophists! And let's be honest -- most of society thinks we're a >pretty strange bunch ourselves. > >My suggestion to the TS would be to put a greater emphasis from the >beginning on practical mind control and the *instant* benefits that gives to >the student of Theosophy and his immediate environment. > >Jim > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:21:31 GMT From: Jerry Schueler <76400.1474@compuserve.com> Subject: Hypnotism Purucker and Samadhi > What Purucker describes as "sleep" -- the >forcing of the mind into an altered state by one-pointed concentration upon >a physical point -- is sometimes referenced in the literature as "sitting >for development" and it is a serious and potentially dangerous mistake for >the practitioner of meditation. The goal of meditation in the earlier >stages is to integrate our physical consciousness with the higher Self not >to isolate the brain in a mechanistic sensory deprivation. As modern >psychology has demonstrated the brain has defense mechanisms against such >abuse and deprivation is most definitely *not* a means of transcending the >lesser ego. NOTE: As many on theos-l know by now I take issue with the theosophical view in several areas such as magic and occult techniques. Most tend toward fear and shun techniques altogether preferring the longer road of service. This is fine and everyone must walk their own Path. However every now and again I like to point out that another alternative view is available on these topics. The topics of meditation and and hypnotism are now being discussed and I feel compelled to present an opposing view here for what it is worth. I speak here from my own experiences and lessons learned from studying theosophy and not so much from the Core Teachings of Theosophy: Until one obtains a solid one-pointed concentration and begins to see the Higher Self directly it will remain but a mental concept. I am always amazed by the fears generated by theosophists over these things. "Sitting for development" is a time-honored tradition in the East and surely was practiced by KH M and many others to help them get where they were. It is only dangerous as far as I know if used improperly like everything else in this life. Yes the goal is indeed sensory deprivation at least in so far as the 05 physical senses are concerned. Raja Yoga is a technique to subdue the brain and its goal is to transcend the brain and the human mind manas. You can't keep the brain functioning away nicely and expect to transcend it at the same time. The whole point to Raja Yoga meditation is to reach the direct awareness that after all thinking processes have ceased consciousness yet remains but on a higher level. Without a direct awareness of this profound fact all remains a mental mind game of words and thoughts. What we are really talking about here folks is crossing the Abyss and going beyond the human mind into a state of samadhi. Our physical "defense mechanisms" notwithstanding the human mind of which the brain is but a physical manifestation must be forced to grind to a halt in order for the light of truth to be glimpsed directly over its ashes as it were. As HPB says the mortal and finite can never ever know the immortal and infinite. The human thinking mind must be left behind because it cannot ever cross the Abyss and to think otherwise is wishful illusion. With the above in mind your contention that "... deprivation is most definitely *not* a means of transcending the lesser ego." is simply not true. It is in fact a time-honored means of doing just exactly that. If you wanted to add the word "safely" to suggest that it is not a 100% safe means to transcend the ego then I could agree. But to say that deprivation of the physical senses is not a valid means to transcend the human ego or manas is like the ostrich who sticks his head into the sand to avoid seeing things it doesn't like. Virtually every Adept or Master in the East and West for that matter whom I can think of has used this technique to temporarily squelch their monkey-mind and gain some control over it. I believe that even HPB practiced Raja Yoga. Sitting in a lotus posture is a device that is used to gain control over the body by depriving it of any movement. One-pointed concentration is a device that is used to gain control over the thinking processes of the human mind by depriving it of any movement. They are devices. If you can still your body and mind any other way then that is fine because any device that works is acceptable. I personally have never been able to sit in a lotus or even a half-lotus. I have found that I can accomplish the deprivation sufficiently while seated or even lying down. In time the need for such deprivation may lessen but to some extent it will always be there HPB calls it being in "a brown study". Ramakrishna and other great Masters were known to be so deprived both physically and mentally that their disciples had to feed them while they remained in deep meditation. We are all different and we all meditate in slightly different ways with slightly different results. But the body and brain must be deprived of consciousness to some degree because consciousness can only be fully focused in one place at a time. So long as our consciousness is focused on the human condition we will never gain anthing above that condition. I am deeply sorry if my maverick views on this subject oppose anyone's theosophical sensibilities. I am speaking here of theosophy with a small t. Theosophy with a cap T seems to be scared to death of such views and rails against them. But I feel the need to make my say in any case. >. At some point a sincere beginning student of >Theosophy will ask "All of this sounds *so right* but what's next? Having >read the books what should I do now?" Having read the books the next step is to go beyond them. Books and the thoughts that they contain are all part of manas and must be transcended. The student's head-doctrine must now be converted into a heart-doctrine. Jerry S. Member TI All opinions are my own humble ones No flames please From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:45:55 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Hynoptism >Liesel: >> What I use >>as touchstone is that anything that tires you out is sapping your energies & >>not good for you. We once had a psychic woman as member of our Study Center. >>I noticed that I got tired whenever I talked to her for a while. To me that >>indicated that she was pulling on my energy to do her thing. So I tried to >>stay away from her. > >That sounds like my mother. After I grew up two different psychic individuals >told me she was sapping my energy. I feel much better if I limit my visits with >her to once a month. I've always wondered what kind of strange karma we had. > >Ann E. Bermingham > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----Ann My mom sapped my energy too but she did it by being very demanding. Dunno whether you'd be interested in this book. I found it very healing. "In Her Image The Unhealed Daughter's Search for Her Mother" Kathie Carlson 1989-90 Shambhala Publications 300 Mass. Ave. Boston 02115 >The first part describes all the negative things mothers & daughters do to each other. The second part describes ways of healing. Liesel member Theosophy International Member Human Race 5th Root From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:50:12 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Esoteric Astrology Signs of Nations Global International >JRC: > >>From "The Key To Theosophy": > >>HPB says "the origin of the name ... ... comes to us from the >>Alexandrian philosophers called lovers of truth Philaletheians from >>`phil' loving and `aletheia' "truth". The name Theosophy dates from >>the third century of our era and began with Ammonius Saccas and his >>disciples." > >That's fine for a definition of the term "Theosophy". But HPB could have >chosen many different terms to label her new society and the philosophy >which she was about to teach in the west. What she was going to teach >did not I think come from Saccas and his disciples. "Theosophy" happened >to be a handy term to use for the future T.S. > >The various doctrines in our basic theosophical books contain many >borrowed terms including "Theosophy" itself. We can I think read >about the philosophies and religious that they come from. It's important >though to keep in mind that the borrowed terms sometimes may have their >meanings changed. > >So when RI gives us two good dictionary definitions of "Theosophy" it's >fine for purposes of understanding how Theosophy is popularly thought of >but does not help us when we want to understand it in the theosophical >context in the context that it is thought of in our theosophical textbooks. > >-- Eldon > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eldon I once had a dialogue with Elisabeth Trumpler about the definitions of Theosophy in encyclopedias & etc. She told me that all these publications give some sort of a definition which most often doesn't meet our criteria. Liesel > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:55:08 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: Re: Hypnotism >>>>On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: >>>>As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very >>>>interesting. Have you seen any of his books? >>>> >>>>..doss >>>> >>>I have only had a glance at some of his writings but they are on the list to >>>be read but that list is fairly long still so one day?????????? >>>I would be interested in what he recommends because I suspect that as I sit >>>in our new lodge like a spider waiting for the unsuspecting would-be >>>theosophist that would be one of the FAQ I will come up against. It would >>>be nice to point them in the correct direction.> >>>> >>>Bee Brown >>>Member Theosophy International >>> >>> Much of the material by Krishnaji is scattered in a number of >>publications. Let me try to identify a couple of them and post the >>references in a few days. In each it may be a couple of pages. He is not >>for a formal system. >> >>..doss > > Bee > > As a starter I think you will find it interesting to read Krishnamurti's >biography books 02 by Mary Lutyens - 01 The Years of Awakening and 02 The >Years of Fulfillment which are available in paperback and they have been >around for several years and you may find them in your local library. This >may give you some background information. There are also some video tapes of >his and some of them are very good and more communicative than the book IMHO. > >In 1929 he made a speech where he stated that Truth is a pathless land etc. >This speech set the direction of his work rest of his life till he died in >1986. It is a speech with great significance and meaning and you will like >it. It is found in Lutyens' books. > >Couple of other references specific to Meditations are: > >1. Krishnamurti - The Open Door - Mary Lutyens. Published by Farrar Straus >Giroux. ISBN 0-374-18225-6. See Chapter 06: The Art of Meditation. > >2. Meeting Life - J Krishnamurti. Pub: Harper. ISBN 0-06-250526-2. > pp. 31 - Meditation and Love > pp. 32 - Meditation and Experience > pp. 51 - Meditation and The Timeless Moment > pp. 163- On Meditation > >3. The Flight of Eagle - J Krishnamurti. Pub: Harper & Row. > Chapter 03 - Meditation. > >If you are unable to locate the above please post me a msg and I will try >to get to you some of the short pieces from the above. Do not spend too much >money to buy all the books unless you are very wealthy!!! as you should be >able to borrow them from a library. > >Sorry for the long reply. > >Wish you a Happy New Year and an enjoyable Centenary Celebrations. > >..doss > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doss I have a copy of "Flight of the Eagle" & access to a copying machine. The Meditation chapter is 14 pp long so that would probably make 07 or 08 sheets. If you want it please send me your snail mail address. Liesel > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 15:00:24 GMT From: liesel@dreamscape.com liesel f. deutsch Subject: RE: Liesel hypnotism and Purucker >At 022900 PM 12/31/95 -0500 Doss I'm with you. Liesel Member Theosophy International Member Human Race 5th Root Jim wrote: >Hi Liesel -- >> >>>My suggestion to the TS would be to put a greater emphasis from the >>beginning on practical mind control and the *instant* benefits that gives to >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>the student of Theosophy and his immediate environment. >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >>Jim > > I have been with TS for several decades. I did not come with the >expectation of mind control or was not looking for any "practice". It is the >first object of the TS that kept my interest in TS and Theosophy. > > I am not sure that TS would ever start putting greater emphasis on >practical mind control and "sell" "instant" benefits that one can get from it. > > May be I am an ordinary person who can never be induced to join any >organization which touts mind control and induce me to continue my >association. May be I am in the small minority!!! > >..doss > From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 15:35:01 GMT From: "Ann E. Bermingham" <72723.2375@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Hynpotism Doss: > There should be some way to protect yourself from your mother or anybody >else who can sap your energy. I recall that an individual can build a shell >which protects in such cases. Such draw of energy is one kind of vampirism. Vampirism is exactly what one psychic called it. I'd like to hear more from anyone about building a shell. I sure could use one considering that I'm so sensitive to energies. Ann E. Bermingham From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 18:04:53 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Project 01 >This is a great idea. I know how I felt when I first tuned in here and I have been into theosophy for a while so making newbies feel welcome is neat especially philosophical explorers who have found their way to our list. I am happy to contribute what I can keeping in mind that I am still a newbie too. I have time to help with whatever you might suggest. I will still use the Highbrow Chat when that is what I am doing as when I come back from Convention and pass on the happenings there. I look forward to developments and thanks for the ideas and the kick start. Happy New Year. Greetings ... > Mucho thanks to all those who responded to the idea of >introductory literature in general and my own little project in >particular ... I've had little time on-line this week but I'm >digesting all the ideas you've sent. Since no one seemed to have >strong objections to talking about this on the list I'll >continue to do the project publically ... but make sure to keep >the subject header "Project 1" so as to make deletion easy for >those who aren't interested. Liesel I thought about the idea of >a seperate "beginners" list but I'm not sure that's a workable >thing. John has created four or five seperate lists but all but >one are virtually silent for long stretches of time and the >overwhelming predilection of most seems to be to stay on theos-l. >I'm not sure about creating yet another list when the ones we >have are barely used - plus the "beginners" if there are more >than just a few on the list don't seem to talk much; perhaps a >few would but I wonder whether a "beginners" list would soon >turn into little more than the same people as are on theos-l >talking to one another about basic concepts ... discussions that >might soon become as esoteric as any on theos-l -:. > Still there is the thought that some beginners might be >silent perhaps because slightly intimidated listeners on theos- >l and I wonder whether some of the longer-term Theosophists on >the list might want to set up an informal "Mentorship" program >here in cyberspace as a means of being more open and inviting to >newcomers by allowing them private conversations with members >i.e. by not requiring them to post to the whole list questions >that they may feel they would seem simplistic to ask... Perhaps >something like the following could be posted on theos-l once a >month: >************************************************************ > GREETINGS TO NEW MEMBERS! > We are pleased you've chosen to join the discussions >debates and ruminations of the on-line Theosophical community. >We invite your voice and cyberpersonality into our forum and >hope you feel free to begin or join any thread that draws your >interest. > _____________________________________________________ > For those new to the list but not to Theosophy we think >you'll find this a challenging and stimulating place; there are >members here from almost every prominant Theosophical >perspective and from a number of different nations. You may find >as many of us have that ideas and assumptions you've had about >Theosophy and Theosophical concepts will be questioned sometimes >vigorously -: but believe that as many of us have also found >your knowledge and appreciation of Theosophy will be deepened >precisely because of the wide diversity of perspectives here. >[NOTE: If this is the first time you've used Listserver software >and run into technical problems no one minds questions posted to >the list ...] > ______________________________________________________ > For those new to Theosophy as well as to the list we'd like >to welcome you into the Theosophical current! You may have >recently joined a formal Lodge or Study Center may be reading >some Theosophical books or may have come to the list through a >cyberspace trail and be just getting your first taste of >Theosophy through the agency of this list. It has been pointed >out to the community here by several different people that the >list sometimes seems highly intellectualized and too esoteric >for some newcomers to feel comfortable speaking. While no one on >the list would believe any question or comment you have was not >worth posting and often the simplest questions have lead to some >of the most interesting discussions we understand you may wish >to ask questions and become a bit more comfortable with the >basics before you post to the whole list. > To this end a number of list members who have studied >various different aspects of Theosophy in some depth have >volunteered to engage in private discussions with newcomers: To >recommend books to read on specific Theosophical topics that >interest you to answer basic questions about the different >Theosophical organizations or even to simply define an unknown >term you may have seen in a discussion. While there are great >differences of opinion among Theosophists about many aspects of >Theosophy and those on the Mentoring list will naturally have >strong personal beliefs about many topics in putting their name >on the list see below they have agreed to attempt to present >not simply their own view about a topic you may ask about but to >present the several main perspectives if there is dispute about >the topic. > Below is the list of volunteers with their private email >addresses and their particular areas of study or interest. They >invite you to write. The *only* stupid question is the one that >remains unasked - and the complete confidentiality of any private >conversation you have is assured. Again welcome to Theosophy! > ___________________________________________________ > MENTORS >1 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >2 NAME: > EMAIL ADDRESS: > INTERESTS: > >etc. etc. >*************************************************************** > > What do you think? Liesel? Anyone? By the way the text of >the message was just to sketch the idea ... if a few people >actually wanted to do this the message should be re-written >until it was agreeable to all participants. > In practical terms a person would have to volunteer to >become the "Keeper of the Message" - who would take >responsibility for updating the list and making sure to post it >once a month. Monthly updates would mean that those volunteers >who might want to join could have their name on the list when >they have time and could remove it during times when they were >too busy. Additionally it could always be posted with the >identical subject header MESSAGE TO NEWCOMERS or something like >that for instant deletion by regular members. > > Anyway ... this is just a thought. Any suggestions? Anyone >out there who would volunteer for such a thing? > Theosophically -JRC > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International From ???@??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000 Date: 31 Dec 1996 18:11:10 GMT From: bbrown@whanganui.ac.nz Bee Brown Subject: Re: Hypnotism >At 061700 PM 12/30/95 -0500 you wrote: >>>On 29 199512 Bee Brown wrote: >>>As for meditation some the things Krishnamurti had said are very >>>interesting. Have you seen any of his books? >>> >>>..doss >>> >>I have only had a glance at some of his writings but they are on the list to >>be read but that list is fairly long still so one day?????????? >>I would be interested in what he recommends because I suspect that as I sit >>in our new lodge like a spider waiting for the unsuspecting would-be >>theosophist that would be one of the FAQ I will come up against. It would >>be nice to point them in the correct direction.> >>> > >> >> Much of the material by Krishnaji is scattered in a number of >publications. Let me try to identify a couple of them and post the >references in a few days. In each it may be a couple of pages. He is not >for a formal system. > >..doss > >Many thanks I look forward to that. > Bee Brown Member Theosophy International