Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tl00069)

Dear Thoa:

All we can do is to say what each one of us sees in a situation. It is not
in my nature to keep quiet when I see something that need to be addressed.

Sometimes such efforts may yield results and some times they don't. However
if one is convinced enough of a point of view, one has to pursue it even
though most people don't agree. I have posted another msg where I have
elaborated the concern I have and hopefully it makes my point clear.

When such important issues are discussed, full participation from the
organizations can go a long way to help correct any erroneous impressions
or facts. But this has not happened so far. Hopefully one of these days the
situation may change before it is too late.

mkr

At 03:20 PM 2/13/1998 -0500, you wrote:
>To: theos-talk@theosophy.com
>From: thoa@withoutwalls.com (Thoa Tran)
>Subject: Universal Brotherhood
>Cc: theos
>Bcc:
>X-Attachments:
>
>>Dear Thoa:
>>
>>All you have mentioned is true. But here we are having a situation which
>>goes to the root of the future of TSA.
>>
>>My concern about putting Brotherhood/Sisterhood/Siblinghood first and
>>foremost is not out of my imagination. It came about as a result of some of
>>the messages that AP Sinnett got from Mahatma KH and which were reiterated
>>and reemphasized by HPB when Sinnett harped on putting emphasis on
>>mysteries and phenomenon as the best way to further Theosophy to the world.
>>In this context he was repeatedly told that Brotherhood is the key and even
>>if it is just a dream, at least a noble one. I will try to get some of the
>>material on this issue from the ML to APS later today when I have some time.
>>
>>Also if there has been a policy change in de-emphasizing Brotherhood as a
>>matter of official policy, then membership and public should be told so
>>(instead of taking an elitist hierarchical view.)
>>
>>When we see membership dwindling and lodges and centers on the decline, the
>>issue of the primary policies/objects of TS becomes very important and can
>>be decisive how far the decline can take place before the TSA itself is
>>shutdown (as a matter of fact in the by-laws, a provision has been made to
>>fold all the assets into the TIT Trust which does not have to answer anyone
>>-- Don't we all remember what happened in the Krishnamurti Trusts until the
>>California Attorney General had to sue the Trustees).
>>
>>mkr
>***************
>
>*The term brotherhood to include man, woman, children, creatures and
aliens.:o)
>
>Dear Doss,
>
>I now understand better what your concerns are.  Your heart is in a good
>place.  However, I do not think you expressed it very well in your
>statement to John Algeo.  The problem is not who the TS will attract, but
>the focus of the TS.  Your mentioning about "selfish" people only dilutes
>and confuses the issue.  Worse still, it judges and accuses innocent
>people.  Anyone who is interested in theosophical concepts, the mystery,
>and scholarship would be guilty under your description.
>
>I agree that an elitist point of view goes against everything that
>Brotherhood* stands for.  Your accusing people of being selfish based on
>their interests also goes against what Brotherhood stands for.  From
>several definitions posted, we see that Brotherhood also means tolerance
>for varying beliefs, tolerance for Theosophy and theosophy, assisting other
>Brothers on their paths, and includes the brothelhood of mankind.  This
>also includes scholars, people in search of the mystical, etc.  Intolerance
>for any would go against the idea of Brotherhood.  Two wrongs don't make a
>right.
>
>Have your attempts to change things bring much fruit?  If not, then maybe
>different avenues should be considered.  It could start as small as
>changing the wording of your letters to people who could make a difference.
>
>Thoa :o)
>
>