Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00255)

On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Shaman wrote:

> > 
> > Richard Ihle commented on feeling stranded in the Theosophical
> > movement, with people on his "right" lining up with John A. and
> > Radha B. redefining the TS in a more exclusive, dogmatic
> > direction, while some on his "left" seem to exemplify an
> > irresponsible and destructive cynicism.
> 
> 
> Perhaps I am missing something (again) but I am having an overwhelming
> thought here and feel compelled to put it out. Just ignore it, if
> that pleases you best...or perhaps give it some thought. Whatever. 
> 
> 
> First off, I don't understand all of this posturing and politicking
> that I've been reading about in several posts. I'm far from familiar
> with any kind of "movement" and have an ingrained suspicion of them
> to begin with. Doesn't it seem though that this is just a larger
> scale of office politics and really defeats the entire purpose
> of having an organization of people who are open to all sorts of
> religious philosophy? 
> 
> Again, maybe I am just missing something. But that's how it looks
> from the outside. All these personalities and quibbling over whose
> philosophy is the "right" philosophy smacks of creating dogma. Is
> that what you all want? 

<clip>

> What do they mean about "those who  
> > far, it seems that cyberspace communication has done little or
> > nothing to help improve the health of the Theosophical
> > movement.  Can or will it do so in the future?
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by the "health" of it. My understanding is
> that the whole purpose of the organization is to find other seekers,
> to explore different ideas and provide a resource for exposure to
> those ideas. From the sounds of it, you all are trying to herd cats.
> When you have some 1000s of people, all of whom are free thinkers,
> the typical methodology of organization ain't gonna work. 
> 
> I do know, though, that politicking and quibbling about personalities
> and the quest for "power" (as if any one of us had more "power"
> than another in *any* respect) is exactly what destroys organizations. 
> 
 >From what I've read, you all have a great library and each individual 
> is a wonderful resource for the exploration of ideas. Lots of sharp
> and aware minds. Why not tap that wisdom and ignore all the rest
> of this stuff. 
> 
> As me olde grandmither used to say, "will this all matter in ten
>years?"


100% agree!

The ongoing information revolution plus the rising grass-roots 
theosophical groups and individuals will make all this 
organizational stuff completely obsolete in several years and will help 
redefine the very concept of what shape a theosophical organization is 
going to take. There are at least two healthier models for a theosophical 
organization:

1. Although discussions in theos-*** email groups and on alt.theosophy may 
seem to be disappointing to many people (myself included), this is just a 
beginning, and it's going to evolve into a better kind of an 
electronic organization or rather an electronic community--not just a 
forum--a free coalition of independent thinkers helping each other (rather than 
teaching each other).

2. T.S. unfavorably compares with some other quasi-theosophical 
organizations that serve as strictly resource centers engaged in 
preservation and distribution of certain teachings attributed to 
various Adepts rather than 
broadcasting and enforcing their leaders' views or their beloved version 
of theosophy: Arcane School, the Temple of the People, and Nicholas 
Roerich Museum & Agni Yoga Society.    

Unfortunately, T.S. will not be easy to change, since it has 
accumulated a 
lot of lousy karma initiated by two of its co-founders, HPB and Olcott, 
who issued orders on behals of the Masters, encouraged unquestioning 
obedience, etc., etc., so the subsequent leaders just perpetuated that 
tradition--without being initiates like HPB. This karma got built in the 
very structure of the Society, so there is little hope for T.S. to 
survive.  

Max