Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00521)

>

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
>