Official Social Network of The Theosophical Society in America
Wither Theosophy. Whither the Theosophical Society?
There is no spelling mistake in the title of this article. This article is an attempt to look at two branches of the TS and how they function and what characterizes them. These two branches are: the International Headquarters governed by the international President, Mrs Radha Burnier, at Adyar and the National Section of the TS in America governed by Mrs Betty Bland, National President, TSA.
One has to acknowledge that despite all her faults/weaknesses, Mrs Bland maintains several Burnierians in her administration of the TSA. These include Mrs Ananya S. Rajan who is a relative of Mrs Burnier and works on the Editorial Board of the Quest Magazine brought out by the TSA. On the other hand, in the administration of Mrs Burnier there is no place for a non- or anti-Burnierian. On 25 May 2009, just one day after I sent out my strong protest against the corruption practised and endorsed by Mrs Burnier, I was told by Mr Pedro Oliveira, Officer-in-Charge of the Editorial Office where I was then working, that I was no longer welcome to work in a department where Mrs Burnier’s articles and talks are published. Soon after that, the General Manager of the Estate informed me that my services were no longer required at Adyar and that I must therefore vacate the premises at the earliest.
The other staunch Burnierian is Pablo Sender, who to my understanding and knowledge, is treated at par with other workers and staff at the TSA. He continues his work for the TS, both in his administrative capacity and as a lecturer on topics theosophical, despite his pro-Burnierian stance and despite Mrs Bland’s opposition of the Burnier governance.
On the other hand, Mrs Burnier and her chelas, especially Pedro Oliveira, marginalize anyone with even a slight non- or anti-Burnierian disposition. Thus the very “impersonal” Mrs Burnier refused to even talk with Ms Mary Anderson once Mary had chosen Dr John Algeo for the next President before the recently held elections of 2008. As the time for declaring the results drew to a close, Mary was increasingly treated as though she were an outsider at Adyar. The President would not travel with her in the same car; every email Mary sent out was checked for content by Shailendra Agrawal; Mary was no longer given the privilege of speaking at the ES; and those who continued to maintain a friendly relationship with her were questioned, doubted, suspected. All this Mary braved for close to an year before deciding to leave Adyar for good, and it is only when Mary put up her papers that Mrs Burnier realized she could not replace her. And so Keith Fisher was called all the way from Australia to become the international Secretary. Mary to the last day of her stay at Adyar worked for the Cause, whether helping Keith take over as IS or editing articles for The Theosophist or Adyar Newsletter, braving every alienation Mrs Burnier could throw her way with a smile on her face and umpteen jokes to share.
Similar was the treatment given to Ms Idarmis Rodriguez, another committed worker at Adyar who managed the publication of the entire magazine section of the Theosophical Publishing House, the Masonic Office and the Esoteric Section. After her open support of the nomination of Dr Algeo and after Mrs Burnier won the elections, much of these duties were gradually eased out of Idarmis, such that she was left feeling unneeded and thus chose to leave Adyar and is currently working at the TSA.
Dolores, another anti-Burnierian-administration, committed worker of the TS leads a marginalized lonely life at Adyar today. If Pedro sees you talking to Dolores, he will surely find the time the next day to ask you what the conversation was about. I have often been a victim of Pedro’s “paranoia” in this regard as I continued to maintain my friendship with these three ladies despite their stand during the elections.
Dolores is no longer called upon to lecture on topics Theosophical, even though she is well-versed, well-read and has a deep and broad understanding of many subjects. She no longer has any post at Adyar. Mrs Burnier gives the excuse that she is ill and 80 years of age so she need not work so hard. But by that same count, Mrs Burnier is herself ill and 85 years of age; pro-Burnierian, Helen Jamieson has a sick husband to look after and is frail and forgetful and nearing 80 years of age; pro-Burnierian N. Muthuswamy in 90+, sick, unable to even stand for 5-10 minutes, and yet continues to hold office at the Masonic Office. It thus stands to reason that the reason Dolores has no office at Adyar is solely because she is anti-Burnierian-administration.
I stress the word administration in that last phrase because, to my knowledge and understanding, all the people thus far mentioned, have no problems with Mrs Burnier as a person, but only with the way she runs the TS and where she intends to take it with all her partiality towards her kith and kin and the corruption practised by them. But “impersonal” Mrs Burnier, so blinded by her personality and ego, cannot see the fact of this matter….or perhaps chooses not to.
During the international Convention of 2008, tempers ran high especially on the pro-Burnierian side. Govert van der Wal of the Dutch Section totally forgot the Theosophical ideal of tolerance and brotherhood and openly condemned Ms Kim-Dieu and co. for “daring to enter Adyar where they are no longer welcome”. His fanaticism was so high that he claimed he would not sit on the same table to share a meal with the anti-Burnierians.
Or take the case of Mrs Breda Zagar who walked up to me one afternoon to clarify if Mr Colin Price was on Kim Dieu’s side, solely because Colin and Kim were sharing a joke and reading something on Kim’s laptop. This Breda could not appreciate Preethi’s response that perhaps Colin, like myself, was neutral, had no sides and was supporting on the truth and the TS.
In most things I would agree with most people worldwide today in saying that the Americans, by and large, have got it all wrong. But where the administration of the TS is concerned, I have to acknowledge truthfully that the Americans have got it right for a change. Pro-Burnierians and Anti-Burnierians cohabit, cowork, coeducate at the TSA, while only Pro-Burnierians are welcomed into Adyar today. This Adyar is no longer the hallowed precincts the Mahatmas visited. Mrs Burnier and her chelas have and are redefining Theosophy, the TS, its characteristics and nature to mean everything HPB, HSO and the Masters of the Wisdom stood against.
Preethi
One has to acknowledge that despite all her faults/weaknesses, Mrs Bland maintains several Burnierians in her administration of the TSA. These include Mrs Ananya S. Rajan who is a relative of Mrs Burnier and works on the Editorial Board of the Quest Magazine brought out by the TSA. On the other hand, in the administration of Mrs Burnier there is no place for a non- or anti-Burnierian. On 25 May 2009, just one day after I sent out my strong protest against the corruption practised and endorsed by Mrs Burnier, I was told by Mr Pedro Oliveira, Officer-in-Charge of the Editorial Office where I was then working, that I was no longer welcome to work in a department where Mrs Burnier’s articles and talks are published. Soon after that, the General Manager of the Estate informed me that my services were no longer required at Adyar and that I must therefore vacate the premises at the earliest.
The other staunch Burnierian is Pablo Sender, who to my understanding and knowledge, is treated at par with other workers and staff at the TSA. He continues his work for the TS, both in his administrative capacity and as a lecturer on topics theosophical, despite his pro-Burnierian stance and despite Mrs Bland’s opposition of the Burnier governance.
On the other hand, Mrs Burnier and her chelas, especially Pedro Oliveira, marginalize anyone with even a slight non- or anti-Burnierian disposition. Thus the very “impersonal” Mrs Burnier refused to even talk with Ms Mary Anderson once Mary had chosen Dr John Algeo for the next President before the recently held elections of 2008. As the time for declaring the results drew to a close, Mary was increasingly treated as though she were an outsider at Adyar. The President would not travel with her in the same car; every email Mary sent out was checked for content by Shailendra Agrawal; Mary was no longer given the privilege of speaking at the ES; and those who continued to maintain a friendly relationship with her were questioned, doubted, suspected. All this Mary braved for close to an year before deciding to leave Adyar for good, and it is only when Mary put up her papers that Mrs Burnier realized she could not replace her. And so Keith Fisher was called all the way from Australia to become the international Secretary. Mary to the last day of her stay at Adyar worked for the Cause, whether helping Keith take over as IS or editing articles for The Theosophist or Adyar Newsletter, braving every alienation Mrs Burnier could throw her way with a smile on her face and umpteen jokes to share.
Similar was the treatment given to Ms Idarmis Rodriguez, another committed worker at Adyar who managed the publication of the entire magazine section of the Theosophical Publishing House, the Masonic Office and the Esoteric Section. After her open support of the nomination of Dr Algeo and after Mrs Burnier won the elections, much of these duties were gradually eased out of Idarmis, such that she was left feeling unneeded and thus chose to leave Adyar and is currently working at the TSA.
Dolores, another anti-Burnierian-administration, committed worker of the TS leads a marginalized lonely life at Adyar today. If Pedro sees you talking to Dolores, he will surely find the time the next day to ask you what the conversation was about. I have often been a victim of Pedro’s “paranoia” in this regard as I continued to maintain my friendship with these three ladies despite their stand during the elections.
Dolores is no longer called upon to lecture on topics Theosophical, even though she is well-versed, well-read and has a deep and broad understanding of many subjects. She no longer has any post at Adyar. Mrs Burnier gives the excuse that she is ill and 80 years of age so she need not work so hard. But by that same count, Mrs Burnier is herself ill and 85 years of age; pro-Burnierian, Helen Jamieson has a sick husband to look after and is frail and forgetful and nearing 80 years of age; pro-Burnierian N. Muthuswamy in 90+, sick, unable to even stand for 5-10 minutes, and yet continues to hold office at the Masonic Office. It thus stands to reason that the reason Dolores has no office at Adyar is solely because she is anti-Burnierian-administration.
I stress the word administration in that last phrase because, to my knowledge and understanding, all the people thus far mentioned, have no problems with Mrs Burnier as a person, but only with the way she runs the TS and where she intends to take it with all her partiality towards her kith and kin and the corruption practised by them. But “impersonal” Mrs Burnier, so blinded by her personality and ego, cannot see the fact of this matter….or perhaps chooses not to.
During the international Convention of 2008, tempers ran high especially on the pro-Burnierian side. Govert van der Wal of the Dutch Section totally forgot the Theosophical ideal of tolerance and brotherhood and openly condemned Ms Kim-Dieu and co. for “daring to enter Adyar where they are no longer welcome”. His fanaticism was so high that he claimed he would not sit on the same table to share a meal with the anti-Burnierians.
Or take the case of Mrs Breda Zagar who walked up to me one afternoon to clarify if Mr Colin Price was on Kim Dieu’s side, solely because Colin and Kim were sharing a joke and reading something on Kim’s laptop. This Breda could not appreciate Preethi’s response that perhaps Colin, like myself, was neutral, had no sides and was supporting on the truth and the TS.
In most things I would agree with most people worldwide today in saying that the Americans, by and large, have got it all wrong. But where the administration of the TS is concerned, I have to acknowledge truthfully that the Americans have got it right for a change. Pro-Burnierians and Anti-Burnierians cohabit, cowork, coeducate at the TSA, while only Pro-Burnierians are welcomed into Adyar today. This Adyar is no longer the hallowed precincts the Mahatmas visited. Mrs Burnier and her chelas have and are redefining Theosophy, the TS, its characteristics and nature to mean everything HPB, HSO and the Masters of the Wisdom stood against.
Preethi
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Konstantin Zaitzev on -
Though I share your concern in general (because HQ seems to me inactive and out of time) Pedro seemed to me a sincere man and open for contacts and collaboration (though I know him by email only). I would propose to try to conduct friendly talks with him in order to save the Theosophical Society as one organization; otherwise it can soon split as already occured in 1896. I think that we need two good negotiators from the both parties.
-
Permalink Reply by Preethi Muthiah on -
Janeth, thank you for the time you spent taking my article to bits...also for your comments. I will only clarify here the point about "attitudes to Americans in general worldwide", as not referring to the TS but to world affairs in general. Theosophists are not meant to indulge in political discussions, but I am not a Theosophist. All I am is a human being, and believe me, sometimes even being that is tough. Yes I am a member of the TS, but a Theosophist, not yet...
Getting back to the point mentioned, the political scenario is such that American politicians like George Bush think they can run the world and tell other countries how to function. So there was the Vietnamese War, and then the Gulf War and now the Afghan War. I was only talking about that, because I do know for a fact that most countries and most people the world over do not appreciate the American interference in the national affairs of several countries, to put it mildly. I am also one of those people.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Donaldson on -
Preethi Muthiah wrote; <<Janeth, thank you for the time you spent taking my article to bits...also for your comments. I will only clarify here the point about "attitudes to Americans in general worldwide", as not referring to the TS but to world affairs in general. Theosophists are not meant to indulge in political discussions, but I am not a Theosophist. All I am is a human being, and believe me, sometimes even being that is tough. Yes I am a member of the TS, but a Theosophist, not yet...>>
Huh? What? Darn, I need to visit Mississippi to remember how that side-step dance goes.
-
Permalink Reply by Nabil Naser on -
Jack
You are a bit harsh there!!!
Preethi is obviously sincere.
"All I am is a human being, and believe me, sometimes even being that is tough."
Are you saying, Jack, that it is never tough for you to be a human being?
If you have something that proves that a side-step dance is being played, then share it with us.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Donaldson on
-
I intuitively felt a suggestion was asserted by an individual, and the charge of US interference has now entered into the topic concerning what I see as problem arising from not possessing an electorate body, which mitigates the very real problem of rule strictly decided by ability to utilize pathos to sway the masses.
My favor is strongly directed toward India in comparison to many other nations. Now I'm hearing "the same old evil USA" rhetoric. I'm surprised to hear it from that quarter. But I thought I was being mild mannered, I didn't suspect anyone would really understand the reference I made within the Mississppi statement. I suppose the phrase "side-step" is clearly understood. I sincerely regret any harm caused.
-
Permalink Reply by Jon Knebel on -
"Yes I am a member of the TS, but a Theosophist, not yet..." Indeed being a Theosophist is a tall order. "Theosophist is who Theosophy does." Am I? No, not yet.
However. "Theosophists are not meant to indulge in (insert activity here), but I am not a Theosophist." Claiming not to be a Theosophist is a lousy excuse for anything.
Namaste, Jon
-
Permalink Reply by Nabil Naser on
-
"However. "Theosophists are not meant to indulge in (insert activity here), but I am not a Theosophist." Claiming not to be a Theosophist is a lousy excuse for anything."
What is wrong with the excuse, Jon?
There are no theosophists here. There are only people who claim to be theosophists.
Modesty in accepting that theosophy is not easy, is not terrible thing.
I have read many books, but I can't say that I am a theosophist. I am not even sure that anyone can.
Are you a theosophist Jon? Do you know what theosophy is?
-
Permalink Reply by Jon Knebel on
-
"Are you a theosophist Jon?" Please read my post. I answered your question. I am a student of Theosophy.
"Do you know what theosophy is?" Perhaps, Nabil, you can tell me.
My point was, there is no good excuse for intolerance, for judgement, for insensitivity, et. al.
Yet we are those things occasionaly. But not being a Theosophist does not make it OK to be intolerant, judgemental, insensitive.
Namaste, Jon
-
Permalink Reply by Pablo Sender on -
Criticism is something very difficult to get rid of, especially in our present culture. We all fall victims of this bad habit.
Below, a very interesting excerpt from Some Words on Daily Life, written by a Master of Wisdom
"Theosophy can only find objective expression in an all-embracing code of life thoroughly impregnated with the spirit of mutual tolerance, charity and brotherly love . . . As an Association [the TS] has not only the right, but the duty to uncloak vice and do its best to redress wrongs, whether through the voice of its chosen lecturers or the printed word of its journals and publications -- making its accusations, however, as impersonal as possible. But its Fellows, or Members, have individually no such right. Its followers have, first of all, to set the example of a firmly outlined and as firmly applied morality, before they get the right to point out, even in a spirit of kindness, the absence of a like ethic unity and singleness of purpose in other associations or individuals. No Theosophist should blame a brother, whether within or outside of the association; neither may he throw a slur upon another's actions or denounce him, lest he himself lose the right to be considered as a Theosophist. For, as such, he has to turn away his gaze from the imperfections of his neighbour, and center rather his attention upon his own shortcomings in order to correct them and become wiser. Let him not show the disparity between claim and action in another, but, whether in the case of a brother, a neighbour or simply a fellow man, let him rather ever help one weaker than himself on the arduous walk of life."
-
Permalink Reply by Preethi Muthiah on
-
By your definition, Mrs Radha Burnier cannot be called a Theosophist because she spends quite a lot of her energy condemning others, gossiping about them, focusing on their imperfections, denouncing them for speaking the truth about the way she runs the organization we call the Theosophical Society. So if Mrs Burnier is not a Theosophist, what is she doing in the role of the President of the Theosophical Society? Would that be a good question to ask, do you think?
-
Permalink Reply by Preethi Muthiah on
-
Jon,
That is precisely why this letter was written. Because the President of the TS gives us no tolerance, is ever ready to judge us, to punish us, to condemn us, and suffers from a lack of sensitivity to the fact that a soul -- perhaps of a 38 year old lady -- has found the courage to speak up the truth about how Adyar is being corrupted by the President's relatives and that corruption is endorsed by the President all because it is practised by her relatives. So at Adyar we are expected to remain deaf, blind and mute so that the President can continue to practise and endorse corruption.
The TS is not her property Jon. It is our shared trust, and when we see it being corrupted -- whether locally at Adyar or globally worldwide in the TS -- it is our duty and right to stand up against it. All I am trying to do is my duty as I best see it.
-
Permalink Reply by Jon Knebel on
-
"..the President of the TS gives us no tolerance, is ever ready to judge us, to punish us, to condemn us, and suffers from a lack of sensitivity.."
Whether Radha, or you, for that matter, are intolerant, judgemental, condeming, et. al. is not mine to judge.
I am not concerened about whether or not Radha is a 'proper' Theosophist. No, I do not think it a good question to ask.
I have plenty of imperfections in my own character to be concerned about.
Namaste, Jon
Read our Guide to Community Features to learn your way around!
Also, check out our Guidelines for Community Conduct to review our rules.
Have a question or issue to report? Send a message to the moderators and let them know.
Do you enjoy using this site and other online resources provided by the Theosophical Society in America? Would you like to contribute to these efforts? Click below to make a monetary donation. Your support is appreciated and will help us to add to the resources we offer online.
Events
© 2009 Created by The Theosophical Society
