[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: "Is there some decision maker who decides and gives permission . . . ?" is Rich's question

Jul 29, 2001 01:11 PM
by dalval14

Sunday, July 29, 2001

Dear Daniel:

If Rich has a question why does he not write it to the U.L.T. ?

Seems obvious to me: If you want to know something then write to the
U.L.T. in Los Angeles.

As a matter of fact you were here some years ago and I took you down to look
at them (archives) As I had been asked to look after their filing.

So there have been no complication and no roundaboutation either.

So what’s your point in this positing?

Again I say you give only half the story. Why not cut the talk short and
give it all from the outset ?



-----Original Message-----
From: D.Caldwell/M.Graye
Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2001 1:27 AM
Subject: "Is there some decision maker who decides and gives permission . .
. ?"
is Rich's question


In your email to Jerome, you write:

"There are no leaders, we Associates declare, but people constantly seem (to
me) to be asking and getting permission. From whom?"

Rich, is this just a rhetorical question or do you actually mean that you
don't know?! :)

Below is a partial narrative I received from a correspondent outlining his
trip to the Adyar T.S. and his research in the Adyar ARCHIVES in India:

"Everything is complicated. You must know in advance what you want. Then
they [the workers in the archives]
ask Radha's permission if they can give you that material. When we went to
Adyar, [Ben] wanted to research some of the papers of Annie
Besant, and Radha did not give permission. Then we went to New Delhi,
, and there we could research the same papers,
that were there available in films!"

So in this case, Radha Burnier, the International President of the TS.
Adyar, is the final "decision maker". No mystery here.

Another example. I think Caren Elin when she visited Adyar several years
ago talked to Radha about seeing the Judge letters to Olcott and Besant in
the Adyar archives but I think she was not allowed to see them or was told
maybe later. This was Radha's decision to make since she has the power to
make the decision.

One other example relevant to our ongoing discussion: I'm told that the ULT
Los Angeles also has an archives. Some years ago the late John Cooper told
me he was given permission to see some HPB letters that are in the ULT
archives and to obtain photocopies. Some person had to say: Yes. I
believe John said the person who allowed him to see the letters was Rob
McOwen. I think John said Dallas [??] actually showed him the letters but
it was with Rob's permission. I may be wrong about Dallas' part in this
transaction. Anyway, here is an example of a "decision maker" who either
gives permission or not.

So -- JEROME, if I wanted to obtain copies of these same HPB letters in the
the ULT LA archives, to whom would I write and ask his/her permission to
obtain the copies?


----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Taylor <>

To: <> ;
Cc: <> ;
<> ;
<> ; <> ; <> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ; <>
; <> ;
Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 11:25 PM
Subject: Re: Joining the ULT: Some Questions to Dallas


Please re-read your note, below.... If Daniel Caldwell "wrote and asked"
WHOM, would he not be turned away from conducting a ULT study group? Even
the idea of being "turned away" strikes me as quite odd.

This idea of "permission-giving" is one of the strangest outgrowths of ULT.
There are no leaders, we Associates declare, but people constantly seem (to
me) to be asking and getting permission. From whom?

Is there some decision maker who decides and gives permission as to what is
and what is not a ULT center?

Or would Daniel just wake up one morning, having read the ULT history and
principles beforehand, obviously, and say "Hey, I'm going to start a study
group along ULT lines and start telling people there is a ULT study group

----- Original Message -----
From: <>

To: <>
Cc: <> ; <> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ;
<> ; <> ; <> ;
<> ;
<> ;
Sent: 7/28/01 7:20:44 PM
Subject: Re: Joining the ULT: Some Questions to Dallas

The Declaration is not a "binding" document, but the Card IS ---it binds you
back to yourself. That is it./jw
Phoenix is a lodge.
It gets a little fuzzy sometimes though. Mexico City is a lodge at their
request. Usually there is an effort to have two generations of workers in a
group before it becomes a lodge so someone will be able to keep it going.
If you wrote and asked to conduct a ULT study group I doubt if you would be
turned away, or hemmed and hawwed at. Your honesty in dealing with the
evidence is held in high regard here.

If you are in doubt, or concerned that someone would be offended by getting
too closely associated with ULT, then call it a THEOSOPHY STUDY CENTRE.
The Long Beach Theosophy Centre does just that. So Does Odin in his
passouts for his Monday night meeting. Last night the speaker who gave the
lecture on Plato was President of the Long Beach T.S. They share the
building with us and we elbow the "Leadbeater" books with a "smile" on our
face. Humans are more important than all these idiotic rules people dream
up!!! A person can refuse to imitate his neighbour even though he might
ALSO hold his neighbour very dear and even rub elbows with him on
occasion! ---we all come from the same great Soul.

best regards,

On Sat, 28 Jul 2001 17:55:13 -0700 "D.Caldwell/M.Graye" < <> > writes:

Dear Dallas,

In one of your recent emails, you suggest that I become an associate of ULT
so I can know what goes on in the ULT by personal experience.

Before I would take such an action, I would certainly need to know more.

For example, you constantly refer to the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS'

I find a copy at:

Is this the ONLY written document that "governs" the ULT and its associates?

I also see at the bottom of this document a "form signed by Associates of
the United Lodge of Theosophists" Also the 3 objects. Are these also
written documents that govern the ULT?

You say there is no written bylaws or written constitution. So are you in
effect saying this DECLARATION is the only written document governing the

OBTW, is the Phoenix "association" a lodge or a discussion group?

What is the difference between a lodge and a discussion group?

Are there "unwritten" guidelines, rules, verbal "do's and dont's", call them
whatever you like, that "govern" the lodges and associates whether it is the
LA lodge or the Phoenix AZ lodge?

If I lived in Los Angeles and became an associate of the ULT and started
attending weekly meetings of the LA Lodge, I assume there must be a list of
"do's and dont's" that associates are expected to follow. If they exist,
are these written down or do you just learn them thru your interaction with

Since I live in Tucson, if I sign that form, what lodge do I become an
associate of? I don't think there is either a lodge or study group in
Tucson. If I lived in Phoenix, would I become an associate of that one? Or
could I choose even tho' I lived in Phoenix, to become an associate of, let
us, say the LA Lodge?

I also ask these questions because some of your own comments about the ULT
prompt me to think about these issues.


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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application