Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00100)

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