Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01007)

Rich:

I am very happy to see your message.

When we try to bring down some of these grand "concepts" to our level of
"ignorance", we get all kinds of weird results.

To me, at my low level of understanding, it is very mind boggling and
stupendous is the  task of the Adepts who deal with groups of millions of
souls with wide  range of experiences the souls have gone thru. They must
be operating at  a level where it is easy for Them to deal with these
very large groups,   yet provide inspiration to the eager soul which
tries to help Them in their work.

BTW, the Tiruvellum Mahatma is the Adept who is even today revered in S.
India for the work he did in development of the Tamil Language and is the
one who helped HPB write some of her works.

	.....doss


 On Fri, 17 May 1996 Richtay@aol.com wrote:

> Jerry S. writes,
>
> > Its a benevolent
> > racism that the SD teaches.  As Doss said, its like a big brother
> > with a smaller brother or sister.  The big brother protects and loves
> > the little baby sibling, even while knowing his superiority.  Why
> > do you suppose, so few theosophists are black, Rich?  If you
> > were black, would you still feel the same way?
>
>
> Why do you think I'm NOT black?  I can't speak for your experience, Jerry,
> but it's not mine.  Here in San Francisco ULT we have a relatively small
> lodge, but 45% of the "core" associates are black.  That's WAY more than the
> national percentage of blacks in the population.  Los Angeles is even more
> diverse, and there are PLENTY of blacks there too, in leadership roles no
> less.  In fact more than half the Los Angeles lodge is Hispanic, with tons of
> Asians and blacks too.  While we're on the subject, I know over a dozen gay
> people in ULT circles, and at least half ULT-ers are women.
>
> So at least in ULT, I don't see a problem with diversity.  It's been this way
> since it was founded.
>
> And while I am not trying to pretend that racism has not been supported with
> misshapen ideas twisted perversely from Theosophical texts, I think it is a
> mistake to get on our "high horses" and presume to re-model the doctrines of
> the Masters on the shifting sands of public opinion and political
> correctness.  If that makes me a racist, then so be it.  One gets called
> plenty of names in the process of growing up, why should we expect it to stop
> now?
>
> I think it is manifestly illogical, however, to say we can speak of the
> differing development among individuals, but not groups.  For the individual,
> as the Buddhists point out, is nothing more than a collection of "heaps"
> him/herself.  There are no individuals apart from groups, and if individuals
> have characteristics, then so must groups because every individual is made up
> of "sub-groups" of elements, and belongs to "supra-groups" of communities.
>
> The problem is trying to TWIST the Secret Doctrine's teaching on "races" into
> the modern notion of "races" (which is indeed "racist").
>
> Everyone knows that nations have characteristics, which is borne out in their
> language, dress, speech, values, government, spirituality, etc. etc. etc.
>  It's hard to argue with this.  HPB and the Mahatmas are using "race" as a
> super-ordinate group which incorporates many nations, either vertically (as
> lineages of peoples through time) or horizontally (across the geographic
> globe at any given period) and probably both.  But this is not what is today
> called race, which is judged by OUTER characteristics.
>
> To think that when HPB says "race" she means something even vaguely like
> "blacks" or "Hispanics" is to BUTCHER the teaching, and then with such inept
> understanding, to inevitably fall into error, thence racism.  This is called
> "materializing the teachings."
>
> To clarify the meaning of "race" in HPB's Theosophy, I offer a quote which
> one Theos-L subscriber forwarded to me privately (imagine that!):
>
> >From BCW  5. (Boris de Zirkoff puts together
> some quotes from HPB & TSR [see 134-35] which
> make a convincing case that it was written by
> the Tiravellum Mahatma. In which case this
> makes the following quote VERY authoritative.)
>
> "The Occultist can by following the (to him)
> well distinguishable and defined *auric
> shades and gradations of color in the inner-man*
> unerringly pronounce to which of the several
> distinct human families, as also, to what
> particular respective group, and even small
> sub-group of the latter belongs such or another
> people, tribe, or man." [BCW 5, 213]
>
> Thus, not skin color or physiognomy are final
> evidences, but the aura. As read by an Adept
> of course.
>