Theos-Talk Archives (March 2007 Message tt00157)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "adelasie" <adelasie@...> wrote:
>
> Altruism means putting the welfare of others above your own 
personal 
> welfare and benefit. Karma is the law of balance, adjusting 
> constantly the imbalances caused by humanity choosing to ignore the 
> law of nature that determines everything. If you wish to point to 
one 
> or another individual and make them wrong or to blame for what you 
> perceive is wrong, I submit that you are moving in the direction 
that 
> eventually produced the Inquisition in the Christian church. This 
is 
> not what theosophy is about. Quite the opposite. 

Dear Adelasie
You write above in context, "We need not concern ourselves with the 
iniquities of others."

How then are we to approach those teachings that distort, subvert or 
betray original teachings?
How, for example, are we respond to the Koran's interpretations by 
the Taliban which deny women the right to walk freely on the street 
unaccompanied and/or with their faces showing?
How are we to respond when these same women are denied access to 
schooling and employment?
Furthermore, where a women claims to have been raped, under putative 
Islamic Sharia law in some jurisdictions, she needs four independent 
male witnesses to validate her claim otherwise she is guilty of 
adultery if already married and subject to be stoned to death.

What would be your course of action in these cases? Should we 
challenge these mostly inaccurate interpretations of the Koran or do 
we leave to karma to resolve. Or are we actually agents of karma?

Please excuse the strength of these examples but these are matters 
which I have thought through as deeply as I am able, particularly vis 
a vis what we might term the Theosophical approach.

What do you think?

Kind regards
Nigel 




We have quite enough 
> learning to control our own iniquitous behavior. HPB was a high 
> adept, under the direct guidance of the Masters. Comparing our 
> behavior to hers, or  justifying ours by saying that this is what 
she 
> did, shows a lack of understanding of the message she was trying to 
> get across. What would she say about one of her students saying 
that 
> it's ok to trash one of the early theosophists because that is what 
> HPB would have done? Ridiculous. Theosophical history is full of 
her 
> turning the other cheek in her personal life. She had work to do 
and 
> we may as well try to follow what she taught. It would save a lot 
of 
> time and energy.
> 
> Adelasie
> 
> On 6 Mar 2007 at 14:57, Cass Silva wrote:
> 
> > Good point Adelasie, and one which I believe should have been 
directed at Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater.
> > Altruism is selfless concern for the welfare of others.
> >   Isn't Karma itself living life in ignorance, repeating or 
repairing past judgements? 
> >   HPB had no concern for the welfare of the Roman Catholic Papacy 
and others she considered to be a blight on human development.
> >   I believe that before we can be altruistic to others we need to 
understand what true altruism is.  Besant created far more karma for 
the theosophical society by introducing an altruistic approach to 
christianity.  No?
> >   Cass
> >    
> >    
> >   adelasie <adelasie@...> wrote:
> >           Where I live we say "Creeds disappear, Hearts remain." 
This or that 
> > creed is only the limited attempt to materialize the eternally 
> > immaterial, which always results in some sort of distortion. But 
it 
> > would seem that karma decrees that humanity continue to make 
creeds 
> > out of eternal truth until we learn that spirituality cannot be 
> > reduced to cant. Or, until we realize that our work in the world 
is 
> > altruism, rather than self-aggrandizement.
> > 
> > Adelasie
> >
>