Theos-Talk Archives (February 2010 Message tt00284)

Dear MKR

My views are:

Yes. But from the other half of my e-mail it is quite obvious that TS leadership do not follow the Original Lines laid down by H. P. Blavatsky and H. S. Olcott, which they agreed came from the Masters. TS Adyar is today clearly following another Line, which has been laid down by Annie Besant and her friends - as if this is in accordance with the Original Lines - while, as far as i know, not clearly explaining why this is a betterment.
And when we ask the leaders at TS Adyar, the answer is so far silence. I have asked about the political issue more than a month ago and have received no answer. Maybe members of the TS will have more easy access to an answer than I have.

So I find it more important and more central to ask, why it has been necessary to deviate from the Original Lines as they were given by  H. P. Blavatsky and H. S. Olcott?
Because then one might get to the bottom of why the General Counsil has been operating like it has.
Lack of transperency is wellknown among political groups.

Why deviate from the Original Lines laid down by H. P. Blavatsky and H. S. Olcott and involve the TS with politics, malchauvanism in the LCC Church, physical emotionalism in the Avatar of the believed Flesh of J. Krishnamurti? Why?

Why not reject this as well as any kind of dogmatic and political involvement as being in opposition to the Original Lines of the TS?

So that Is why I find the question about the TS leaders health quite unimportant compared with the many years she has served tirelessly - in the front line - for a cause we at least to a certain extend can call comparative studying of the possible Wisdom teachings and the Meaning of Life. The truth about this aught to be recognized as well. Then we might go every and ask all the leading members about their health and demand a doctor as a witness. This I find to be out of the question. I will have to receive some substantial evidence on the issue through documentation or at least teastimony from a certain number of witnesses. Mere romours and often silly ones about bad activity in TS Adyar has always been the pet of its opponents.


- - -
In the old days there was more transperency on this I agree.
Try [âORIGINAL PROGRAMMEâ MANUSCRIPT] 
Here we find H. P. Blavatsky defending H. S. Olcott standing accused for operating as a Pope and a "tyrant".
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm




M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: MKR 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 6:54 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World New Information re: Radha BurnierÃââs health in Dec 2007


    
  When I read the 2007 GC meeting Minutes, I was surprised to learn that Radha
  Burnier's health was indeed discussed in the GC meeting. In addition, Dr.
  Zagar was asked in the meeting by those present about her opinion on Radha's
  health, since she is a physician. She confirmed that Radha Burnier is in
  good health.

  Neither of the above info was disclosed to voting members at the time of
  electioneering.

  I think it is the duty of the leaders to disclose all available information
  to our brothers and sisters and members are intelligent to decide on the
  credibility of the info and then vote accordingly.

  Withholding the above, is indeed a disservice to the members and reduces the
  credibility of the leaders in the minds of members.

  MKR

  On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Morten Nymann Olesen <
  global-theosophy@stofanet.dk> wrote:

  >
  >
  > Dear MKR
  >
  > Maybe we have covered this issue about Radha Burnier before. It is a bit
  > hard to me to keep track with all the e-mails exchanged on the issue.
  >
  > Any answer to these questions without any documentation cannot be
  > considered to be very helpful.
  > Yet if more than say 20 Hindu members are able to give a testimony in
  > opposition to Dr. Susan Zagar's views it might be worth while to consider
  > the validity the realities.
  >
  > It is the duty of any member to defend the truth and not the duty to cloud
  > the truth.
  > There is no Religion Higher than Truth.
  >
  > -
  >

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]