Theos-Talk Archives (October 1999 Message tl00203)

>> What you fail to mention, Frank, is that they were working
>> for their own brand/version of Theosophy, as was CWL and
>> everyone else. We can't all agree on what "Theosophy" is,
>> even on this list.  How much more so in a TS?
>I do wonder why it is so difficult to unite different
>versions of theosophy into one organisation?
>Are you saying Jerry that to defend that ideal is wrong?
>Should it not be our aim to unite different ways of
>thinking about theosophy into one organisation? What else
>does the second object (Adyar or Theosophy International -
>versions ) mean, in combination to the first?

What are we defending? We can only "defend" our belief
system.  My belief system is not yours, even though we
are both Theosophists.  When we think that we are "right"
and others "wrong" then we wrongly conclude that we are
defending "truth" and can, if not careful, become a zealot.

As Theosophists, we should be striving to unite if nothing
else because of our purported belief in brotherhood.  But
different paths have been taken and it is doubtful that
they can ever come together at this point. For one thing,
Adyar went the route of having open elections while
Pasadena went the route of selecting a Leader who
then appoints committee people etc.  Which is right
or wrong????  How can they ever hope to unite? On
top of that, we have deep-seated hatreds such as that
espoused by Frank which woud have to be overcome.
I suspect that there will always be fragmentation in
the TSs. But as individuals, we still need to
develop compassion and forgiveness for whatever
wrongs we think may have been done in the past.
It helps neither ourselves or the Movement to throw
stones at other TSs.

Jerry S.