Re: Theos-World Re: Leaving (Adyar)
Mar 12, 2006 06:16 AM
by Bill Meredith
Thanks for your comments. I am interested in your view of the TM as a
non-organization. Would not a Movement without organization be a bit
helter-skelter? In some sense, this seems similar to Dallas' and other
ULT member's contentions that they are not an organization either.
Perhaps I am stuck in my thinking here, but I see an organization as
being defined by what it and its membership do more than by what they
say. I think this is the case in most definitional instances. For
instance, one can hardly expect a person to say that he is a racist, but
his actions may very well say what he vehemently denies (perhaps even to
himself.) I believe that some members of the ULT see themselves, in
large part, as the one true center of the TM and they have organized and
are now acting in accordance with that vision. That the structure (see
5a below) of their organization is "behind the scenes" exchanges of
communications only serves to define them as a more private and less
public organization, but it does not relieve them of the dangers
inherent in any organization. The chief of these dangers is
group-think. This phenomenon should be studied by all who declare
themselves members (or associates) of a non-organization group. As your
experience shows, "all groups become congregations to some extent."
Here is the definition I am using:
*or·gan·i·za·tion* Audio pronunciation of "organization"
( P ) *Pronunciation Key*
1. The act or process of organizing.
2. The state or manner of being organized: a high degree of
2. Something that has been organized or made into an ordered whole.
3. Something made up of elements with varied functions that
contribute to the whole and to collective functions; an organism.
4. A group of persons organized for a particular purpose; an
association: a benevolent organization.
1. A structure through which individuals cooperate
systematically to conduct business.
2. The administrative personnel of such a structure.
or Buy the Book <http://dictionary.reference.com/bookstore/ahd4.html>]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Steven Levey wrote:
I agree with you regarding your statement about the Universal Wisdom being on a roll without the existing groups or societies, but, the Theosophical Movement, even though we and others have run the term "theosophical" into the ground, is by definition today's movement, and I feel that it includes all applications of the Universal Wisdom.
Sure this is just my perspective, and you may find cause to dispute because of that, but the meaning theosophical and Universal Wisdom are technically indentical. Also, there is no reason to tire of the term theosophical merely on the basis of how it has been abused and consistantly run over. This is like refusing to use words like soul or religion because they have been so disfigured. Hell, I can hardly look at the Bible, and my first reaction to one who brings it up, is one of distaste. I have to forcefully remind myself of what HPB and others have put forward (and my own study has revealed), that it is merely what it is on the one hand (neither Holy nor only worldly), and as deep as many texts, when non-dogmatically understood.
Finally, I don't see Carlos nessesarily fronting for an organization, since as I said, I don't see the "TM" as an organization but today's perspective on the Universal Wisdom. True Carlos and I disagree about the need of Groups to do this, and my own finding of the dangers inherent to group dynamics as regards the cause of dogmas, and the materialization of the Universal Wisdom. My experience shows that all groups become congregations to some extent. Just some views.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application