Theos-Talk Archives (June 1996 Message tl00560)

At 11:20 PM 6/16/96 -0400, you wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jun 1996, Blavatsky Foundation wrote:
>> I, too, would like to see these alternatives with arguments, evidence in
support
>> of them.  We hear so much talk against core theosophy yet I seldom see anyone
>> point out alternatives with the supporting arguments, etc.
>
>Daniel ...
>	Tried to do exactly that on several occaisions - beginning 8
>years ago with a 10,000 word article called "TS 2000" in the AT, and most
>recently with a long (for the NET) post ... on this list ... on the First
>Object.
>	On every occaision these attempts, save for a few stray comments,
>have been virtually universally ignored. It takes a serious expenditure
>of energy to go beyond critique and actually attempt to formulate and
>articulate the "alternatives". It is not only myself, but a number of
>other Theosophists I've met over the years, and spoken with privately and
>at great length, that have had similar experiences.
>	In my own perception, Theosophy has settled into comfortable,
>carved channels, and on the whole has very little interest in the *genuine*
>exploration of any alternatives - even if those alternatives are grounded
>in the foundational Objects of the original society, and readings of the
>intentions of the Adepts that are at least as valid as those currently
>popular among the leaderships.
>	There *are* organizations ... and many of them ... hard at work
>in the world today - organizations that are actively working (whether
>they state it explicitly or not) towards the accomplishment of the
>intentions in those objects. And many of them welcome the creative energy
>of people who are trying to formulate new ways of looking at the human
>kingdom and the relations within it. It is to these that most who try to
>frame alternative views of Theosophy go - when it becomes clear that
>their efforts simply amount to wasted energy within the theosophical
>current.
>	I fear my own (completely personal) sense is that having
>*accepted as good and correct* the injunction at the core of Theosophy -
>that the *service to humanity* is both the source and end of "personal"
>spiritual activity and growth - that it constitutes both the philosophy
>and day to day existance of the Adepts - yes, having *accepted*
>Theosophy, that theosophical circles are unfortunately not the place to
>actually *live* the philosophy ...
>	The current people that have "status" in the movement, those
>considered "wise", are for the most part those that (IMO) are simply
>*selfishly* pursuing their own studies, their personal growth, seeking
>their own development, and then wanting to "teach" what they know to
>"neophytes" - as though that is *service*. Theosophy has become a place
>to serve oneself - not a place to serve humanity.
>	Perhaps there are very few "alternatives" really formulated and
>supported is because it takes a great deal of a very particular kind of
>energy to do such a thing - but if one intends to commit that sort of
>energy, it needs to be done with a serious cost/benefit analysis ...
>i.e., the question must be asked, *where* will the expenditure of that
>energy achieve the greatest effects? For myself, most of the time I
>choose to put what little abilities I have into organizations other than
>Theosophy - because I know of many that are actually *accomplishing* the
>Objects for which Theosophy was begun far more effectively than modern
>Theosophy is.
>	
>							Regards, -JRC


John:

Let me add my 1 cent worth (?).


1. There is a growing trend of un-attached membership in TS. There is a
positive chemistry that takes place when members interact. I am yet to see
any serious effort being made to look at the reasons for this phenomenon and
see if it can be turned around.

2. It is the norm rathern than exception that the lodge membership is
declining in most places. A serious effort has not been done by any of the
leaders to visit each one of them and find out what the problems are and
then come out with a strategy to strengthen the lodges. I make this under
the assumption that the TS is indeed interested in strengthening and
increasing the membership of the lodges in the long run. If this is not
their long term objective, then they should say so openly and very clearly.

3. I have not seen any long term strategy of the TS at International or
National Level. This does not mean that there is none. If there is one in
place, it has not been clearly communicated and feedback obtained from
members and lodges.

4. There is the question of secrecy. Unnecessary secrecy has killed many
organizations in the past. This is not my statement. This was a *warning*
given to AB in the 1900 letter by KH. I am sure that He knows what he was
talking about and may have forseen it coming down the pike. I have seen a
very classic example of the demonstration of this in such a trivial thing
like releasing the vote count of TSA elections. I will go into it later in a
separate posting.

5. Nothing that has been going on in TSA during the last eight months, has
IMHO, strengthend the trust in the administration. Short term gains have
been the focus. The level of confidence and trust need and can be enhanced
only with openness and candor at all levels of administration.

6. Without focus on the *fundamental* reason for the starting of the TS, TS
as we know it is doomed because if it is not helping the Humanity, then
Humanity has no use for TS. Look at the conditions of the world today. The
increasing crime rate in this country, the killings that go on in the
regional wars in the world etc.  I am not saying that we can stop all this.
But each Theosophist can do his or her little to improve the situation.

        MK Ramadoss
______________________________________________________________________
******** Peace to all living beings*****************

         M K Ramadoss