Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00367)

Paul:

For a group to grow and evolve, it must allow new ideas to be heard. This 
is not just regarding the history of its earlier leadership, but especially 
about its fundamental assumptions and key ideas. People in a current 
leadership role with a vested interest in the status quo would resist 
change, unless they make an effort to keep flexible and open minded.

How an organization responds to new ideas depends upon its purpose, as 
perceived by its leadership. A theosophical group dedicated to promoting 
those ideas found in the writings of HPB and Judge would be less likely to 
consider historic or philosophical issues that question their special 
occult status or authoritative nature of their writings. A group dedicated 
to promoting one's personal spiritual quest, regardless of where it may be 
found, would be more likely to question everything and less challenged by 
any particular viewpoint.

It is perfectly fine, I think, that different theosophical and spiritual 
groups exist, each with its own approach and perspective. Each group offers 
something different to its members and society. If there are enough various 
groups, everyone should be able to find one to fit in with and feel at home.

Some groups may focus on promoting a certain body of theosophical 
doctrines, those with a particular focus, like Besant/Leadbeater, 
Krishnamurti, Judge, MAHATMA LETTERS, or Purucker variants of the 
doctrines. Each focus may have distinctive ideas, some traceable to 
Blavatsky's writings and others that are first given voice in the later 
writers.

Despite questions of theosophical history, the Besant/Leadbeater ideas are 
popular. Consider the rapid growth of Anand Gholap's Yahoo Groups list, 
"theosophical," which in two months of existence has matched theos-talk's 
number of subscribers. (It just reached 263.)

What makes a group, magazine, or list popular is the consistence in view, 
content, and expected behavior of members. If someone wants to hang out 
with people of like mind, they'll seek out places where that belief is 
espoused, not where it is under attack and thought ill of.

A theosophical group that takes the approach that not only are a certain 
body of doctrines true, but the outlook of its current leadership defines 
the group's purpose, will take challenging views as a political threat. If 
you question Leadbeater's spiritual status, for instance, in a group 
dedicated to promoting his ideas, you may find yourself pushed to the 
sidelines. Regardless of issues of what may be true historically, you'd be 
seen as a threat to the group and treated accordingly.

In a different group, not dependent upon a particular belief in 
theosophical history and having a leadership not making any claims to 
special status for themselves, your historic investigations would fit in 
without making waves.

A basic question with a group is, "What is the purpose for which this group 
exists?" If it is to promote a certain belief system, any inquiry that 
undermines that belief, or is disruptive to people expressing ideas in 
terms of that belief, would be opposed. The questioning of the belief would 
be considered as not in accord with the group's stated purpose, being "off 
topic" and inappropriate.

If a group is to promote a certain open inquiry into the spiritual, 
regardless of one's belief, there would be no belief system to be 
undermined and the only disruptive behavior would be when someone stifles 
another's feeling of belonging and willingness to express and share his or 
her ideas. (That is, in terms of a mailing list, to treat other and their 
beliefs with respect, even as we may disagree and offer dissenting views.)

Theosophists are free to form their own groups, magazines, web sites, 
mailing lists, study classes, etc. with or without official sanction of 
some major theosophical groups. We're free to explore life without being 
subject to organizational politics as perhaps we were in the past. With the 
advent of the Internet, we have the means to continue our studies of deeper 
materials and further our spiritual quest without having to do so according 
to someone else's rules, regulations, or decision to grant us a membership 
card or lodge charter.

With theos-talk, there's a experiment in progress. How well can we coexist 
with people with widely-different views without giving up or blowing up in 
anger? Can we all learn from each other, rather than simply harden our 
positions and become more dogmatic about what we previously believed in? 
And can we become more skillful in exploring issues of deep philosophy, 
uncovering new insights for both ourselves and others to learn by? It's a 
challenge.

-- Eldon