Re: Theos-World ON OTHER PEOPLE'S MOTIVES
Nov 13, 2006 00:04 AM
by Cass Silva
Yes, it is all very well and good. But if we admit it, it is not the way the world works. Perhaps I am still a sinner?
Cass
----- Original Message ----
From: Shel Steijl <shelley@sai.co.za>
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 5:05:51 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World ON OTHER PEOPLE'S MOTIVES
Dear Bruce... well done! You have hit the nail on the head, so to speak.
Shel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Bruce MacDonald" <robert.b.macdonald@ hotmail.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 7:26 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World ON OTHER PEOPLE'S MOTIVES
> Dear Bill, Adelaise, and other interested parties,
>
> Bill has presented an interesting question that I would like to address.
> Basically Bill asks
> whether it might be argued that there is no difference in the type of
> debate
> that goes on in the
> larger society between various religious groups and holders of scientific
> positions, and what goes
> on within the borders of the Theosophical Movement. Are devout
> Theosophists
> any different
> than devout Christians in their desire to make everyone else believe as
> they
> do, while at the same
> time unable to accept evidence contrary to their positions. On the
> surface
> there appears to be no
> difference.
>
> A contrary argument may go something like this. The Theosophical Movement
> was established
> to provide a forum where men and women could come together and argue on
> various subjects
> without appeal to outside authorities. As there is no appeal to outside
> authorities, theosophists
> are forced to develop their own minds and reasoning skills in order to put
> forward the best
> arguments on various subjects. This description of the Movement can be
> derived from its 3
> Objects. The First Object, Universal Brotherhood, means we have an equal
> playing field where
> no one theosophist' s argument is better than another's in virtue of any
> rank
> or authority. This
> means that the lowliest theosophist can argue against the arguments of HPB
> or one of the
> Masters. The Second and Third Objects point to the field of debate.
> Theosophy is a Movement
> whose prime purpose is to develop minds capable of thinking for
> themselves.
>
> As there can be no appeal to authority, theosophists have no reason to
> attack the good name of
> other theosophists. There is nothing to be gained. Whether another
> theosophist is a sinner or a
> saint, what matters are the ideas that he or she puts forth. As the
> history
> of human thought can be
> described as an appeal to authority, this is not an intuitive process.
> People do not normally think
> complex subjects through, they rather listen to what the authorities say
> on
> the subject and then
> decide which authority they "trust" more. Theosophists are in the process
> of learning how to do
> this, and as such they make many mistakes.
>
> For example, Olcott using his authority as president to claim that HPB
> enacted a fraud with
> respect to the writing of the "Prayag Letter", undermined the spirit of
> the
> Society. His belief that
> the content of the letter was not true and his existing doubts about HPB's
> integrity caused him to
> write something that was untheosophical. He put himself forward as HPB's
> judge and jury. This
> was a mistake. Besant's claim that Judge forged missives on the border of
> letters in order to
> accrue political power was a similar instance. She had no right to make
> that judgment, as she did
> not have the proof. It was simply a supposition based on her own doubts.
> She presented herself
> as an authority on human behaviour in general, and on Judge's behavior in
> particular. She did
> not possess that authority. She made a mistake. Today many write about
> Judge seeking
> guidance from mediums as if it were a fact. It is not a fact. The
> evidence
> they provide can be
> used to create uncountably many stories, all equally credible. Such a
> claim
> is a supposition, and
> as such, has no place within the Theosophical Movement. It seeks to
> remove
> any moral authority
> that Judge may have developed through his work and his writings by
> throwing
> dirt on his
> reputation. It is a lazy man's way of undermining his betters.
>
> It can be read in the posts of theosophy talk on numerous occasions, "You
> can never judge
> another persons motives", or "you are trying to put forward X, Y, or Z as
> an
> authority, what
> about the argument?" Theosophists are alive to what is at stake even if
> they continue to make
> mistakes and have not made the rules of theosophy a part of their own
> overall approach to life.
>
> Another example might be Charles Leadbeater, does he deserve to have every
> charge of
> pedophilia and sex magic trotted out before the public again and again by
> theosophists? Has it
> been proved beyond any doubt that he engaged in such practices? A good
> rule
> for all
> theosophists to keep in mind is that if you do not know an allegation
> concerning a man's
> reputation to be a fact, it is a probably a good idea to keep your mouth
> shut. Leadbeater is not a
> threat to the Movement. Most people acknowledge that Leadbeater promoted
> many false ideas.
> It follows from this quite reasonably that EVERY idea presented by
> Leadbeater should be studied
> carefully before being accepted. If a theosophist wants to study
> Leadbeater
> looking through his
> writing for a few gems among the dross, then so what? If another
> theosophists feels that he can
> spend his time more profitably elsewhere, then so much the better. If
> Leadbeater established
> groups within or without the Movement that practice sex magic or worse,
> this
> can be nullified by
> producing powerful arguments against such practices in general so that any
> practitioners will
> have to contend with these arguments within their own minds when they get
> ready for their
> rituals and/or debauchery. This way we can avoid tainting Leadbeater's
> reputation unfairly in
> case all of this unfounded rumour is untrue.
>
> In addition to unfairly blackening each other's names, we can also prevent
> ourselves from getting
> into the habit of repeating unfounded allegations. The mind does not make
> any distinction
> between the dead and the living. Therefore, when we repeat unfounded
> allegations about
> another, we are hurting ourselves most of all. We are giving credence and
> power to the
> allegations and credence and power to their importance. Almost every
> human
> being who has
> made any effort to become a spiritual human being has skeletons in their
> closet. If we are going
> to dismiss what people have to say based on past mistakes, then we will
> end
> up listening to no
> one. Logically, dealing in reputations is self defeating and it
> undermines
> the Principle of
> Universal Brotherhood. Leave such stuff to the academics.
>
> Academics and the priest-cast are in the business of appealing to
> authority.
> The priest-cast has
> its holy books which only they have the authority to interpret properly,
> and
> academics have the
> respected names of their own particular discipline. The High-Priest of a
> particular religion or
> academic discipline becomes the authority. Their word becomes more
> important than reason or
> any other criteria. This is how knowledge is controlled and the search
> for
> truth perverted. This is
> why theosophy was needed.
>
> If it is not theosophical to judge individuals, then what about groups?
> Is
> it okay to question the
> gay community, or the Jewish community, or Catholics, etc.? While the
> motives of individuals
> are unclear, it is not so with groups. They organize under charters or
> constitutions or dogmas
> that are explicit as to what they are about. As with any idea it can be
> interpreted according to its
> broader spirit or according to a more narrow dead-letter materialism.
> During this age, where
> materialism rules, power is held by the most material and their ideas gain
> ascendency. Politics is
> not the field of spiritual men and women. Consequently the spokesmen of
> identifiable groups
> often represent the worst tendencies of that group. If we cannot
> criticize
> the group and judge its
> behavior then its worst tendencies are bound to become the norm. What
> makes
> matters worse is
> that today's societies look upon it as hateful to criticize minorities.
> An
> unreasoning sympathy
> seeks to protect these groups by leaving them to their excesses. Even
> members of their own
> group are accused of self-hatred if they do not go along with the nonsense
> espoused by the
> political masters. It is not hatred from without that is the threat, but
> rather the immoral excesses
> from within.
>
> Consequently, we have to be able to be critical of the various
> Theosophical
> Societies of which
> many of us belong. This is the only way to prevent them from falling into
> dogma and political
> irrelevancy. There must be debate from within and without theosophical
> organizations if they are
> to remain relevant. It is not the constitution that makes a group good or
> bad, but rather how it
> gets interpreted. For various reasons things are made political.
>
> The shame that society made homosexuals feel for ages has been reacted
> against through a
> political movement called gay pride. Now we have hedonistic parades being
> conducted all
> around the world in the name of gay pride. Where is this going to lead?
> What is gay pride?
> Does it make any sense? Should heterosexuals feel proud about being a
> good
> heterosexual?
> Whether one is heterosexual or homosexual seems dependent on one's karma.
> Should we be
> proud about our karma? Is our sexuality essential to who we are or is it
> an
> accident of the phase
> that humanity is now going through? My sexuality has nothing to do with
> the
> core of who I am.
> Rather I would argue my capacity to love, platonic love, is essential, not
> love mixed up with
> personal emotions and sex. Regardless, if we are not able to debate about
> homosexuality, we are
> not going to understand and accept it in any meaningful way. If the very
> discussion becomes a
> threat, especially to theosophists - gay or otherwise - then we still
> haven't progressed very far
> down the theosophical path and it may be important to figure out why.
> Trust
> is essential in any
> brotherhood. Calling one another homophobes or anti-semites or nazis has
> no
> place in
> theosophical discourse. These are merely personal attacks where the
> attacker pretends to have
> the authority to judge others. We cannot make pariahs out of the
> ignorant.
> If they don't
> question, they will not learn nor come to finally understand. Perhaps
> their
> questions will force us
> to go deeper and force us to see things in a different way and bring about
> new understandings. In
> any event stifling discourse through such appeals is not theosophical.
>
> Practicing theosophy is not an easy road and we are all making mistakes.
> However, we can point
> out the mistakes and move on without having to impugn base motive. It can
> be argued that
> theosophists are trying and despite the mistakes they are learning, and
> learning at a faster rate
> than the society at large. They at least understand to some extent what
> the
> principles are, and are
> trying to reflect those principles as best they can. This leads to an
> accelerated learning full of
> many mistakes. The primary virtue that we have to cultivate right now is
> tolerance, until these
> theosophical rules become the natural expression of all theosophists.
>
> Bruce
>
>>--- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, Bill Meredith meredith_bill@
>>wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear Adelasie,
>> > If you have time, I would like to get your views on this article:
>> >
> http://www.apuritan smind.com/ ChristianWalk/ McMahonTreeAndIt sFruit.htm
>> > If you recall, you and I have had similar discussions in the distant
>> > past on BN-Study. My thoughts over the intervening years have come
> to
>> > be more in line with yours as I continue to seek for understanding.
>>It
>> > seems, however, that theosophy, when defined as a collection of
> people
>> > with various ideas, has accumulated its fair share of puritan minds.
>> >
>> > It has often been my observation that devout Theosophists are not
>>really
>> > that different from devout Christians in behavior. Both groups are
>> > intellectually inclined to harsh judgments and intolerance. It has
>> > become clear to me in discussions with such people, no matter their
>> > particular creed, that they relish perceiving themeselves as the
>>Knowers
>> > and Defenders of Truth. Hence all evidence that supports their
>>Beliefs
>> > is evidence of Truth and all evidence that represents the antithesis
>>of
>> > their Beliefs is slander and lies used as food to sustain their
>> > Beliefs. This usually takes the form of expressing pride and
>>happiness
>> > in being "attacked" and "challenged" because being opposed in one's
>> > beliefs is further evidence that one's Beliefs are the Truth.
>> >
>> > peace within,
>> >
>> > --bill
>> >
>> > adelasie wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Carlos,
>> > >
>> > > You are free to make however many judgements you wish to make. But
>> > > nowhere does thesosophy support making judgements about our
> brothers
>> > > and sisters based on our opinion of their motives. As students,
> far
>> > > better we err on the side of tolerance than that we made
> judgements
>> > > of our fellow human beings, no matter what evidence can be
> produced.
>> > > Exoteric history does not tell the whole story. Many are the
>>villains
>> > > of history who are someone else's hero.
>> > >
>
> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> Say hello to the next generation of Search. Live Search - try it now.
> http://www.live. com/?mkt= en-ca
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.430 / Virus Database: 268.14.3/531 - Release Date: 11/12/2006
> 7:34 PM
>
>
<!--
#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;
}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;
}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;
font-family:Verdana;
font-size:77%;
margin:0;
}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;
}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;
margin:25px 0;
white-space:nowrap;
color:#666;
text-align:right;
}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;
white-space:nowrap;
}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;
font-size:77%;
padding:15px 0;
}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;
font-size:77%;
border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;
}
#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;
margin-bottom:20px;
padding:2px 0 8px 8px;
}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;
font-family:Verdana;
font-weight:bold;
color:#333;
text-transform:uppercase;
}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;
margin:2px 0;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;
clear:both;
border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;
color:#ff7900;
float:right;
width:2em;
text-align:right;
padding-right:.5em;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;
}
#ygrp-vital a {
text-decoration:none;
}
#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;
font-size:77%;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;
background-color:#e0ecee;
margin-bottom:20px;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;
margin:0;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;
padding:6px 0;
font-size:77%;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;
font-size:130%;
}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc {
background-color:#eee;
margin-bottom:20px;
padding:0 8px;
}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;
}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;
font-weight:bold;
color:#628c2a;
font-size:100%;
line-height:122%;
}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;
}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;
}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;
}
o {font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal {
margin:0 0 0 0;
}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;
}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq {margin:4;}
-->
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
