Theos-Talk Archives (November 1997 Message tt00390)

Nov 23rd 1997

Dallas writes:

Several themes fly back and forth over my screen as our ideas cross and
strike fire from each other, but the general effect is either an increment
in information or a continuance of the same old ideas in areas we are
specially interested in and where we have found a basis to live in.

I think Theosophy has a value in bringing various views together and
serving to resolve differences by appealing to some truths, which being
universal and impersonal, are those to which all can agree.

As to the nature of the Being that used the body known as "Elena
Blavatsky." It would appear that the nature of the consciousness altered
as time progressed. As a child and young adult there is evidence of strong
will, and of great sensitivity to the psychic and astral planes and beings
thereon. But control had to be self-developed. Apparently this was
gradually, as a kind of training, made available. She speaks of it to her
family and in some of her letters. [ see as an instance the letters that
were reprinted serially in THE PATH magazine, vol. 9, pp 265, 297, 379,
411; vol. 10, pp 6, onwards ]

So there was an increment in the nature of the "personality." apparently
the training she asked for and received in the occult School enabled her to
gain full control over her "lower self." It also made her available as a
channel (not an unconscious medium, please) to the Spiritual plane where
dwell such beings as we call the "Masters," the Mahatmas, and the
Nirmanakayas. From that spiritual plane came the information, that enabled
her to write ISIS UNVEILED, to converse with learned men of all religions
and sciences, and to write the articles and letters in THEOSOPHIST and
LUCIFER, which led up to the writing of the SECRET DOCTRINE.

seem to also realize the nature of the depths which her writings reveal of
knowledge and wisdom which is extraordinary. To me, that is what is
valuable, and not all the many details concerning her activities, learning
and the incidents or evidence of psychic and astral control which in some
case showed themselves as inexplicable phenomena. No amount of outward
records are going to truly explain the psychological and spiritual nature
of that Being which used the body we called Mme. Blavatsky or named HPB.
Let us say, perhaps, that what is available as outer evidence conceals a
cause, a force, a power which only the inner individual, the Adept, which
HPB transformed herself into could use. As far as we are concerned, we are
all her pupils, near or remote. As an Adept, she did not "die," although
her body did. The Entity we call HPB--the Adept--remains as a power which
oversees and works with those who try to make Theosophy continuously
available to all who seek it. How can it be otherwise ?

Does this mean we are to seriously believe all the claims laid out from
time to time as from her, or from her Teachers ? The only way in which
such statements may have value lies in whether they are in line with the
PHILOSOPHY OF THEOSOPHY. Claims are easy to make and difficult to prove.

Unless we study and learn the nature of the 7 principles of man and nature,
the concepts of reincarnation and karma are adopted, and the view is held
that we are immortals attending in an ever-present school of experience,
which is inescapable, we will not be able to see the wider, the deeper and
the more far-reaching aspects of our lives here, as individuals and as
co-students. I try to keep these ideas in mind, and suggest that they have
a validity for all, which is demonstrated in the fundamental ideas of
Theosophy and made available to us primarily through the writings of HPB.

It does not matter much that "Brotherhood" may be mentioned in writing
earlier than is stated on p. 377 bottom of Vol. 1 of HPB Collected Works,
May 3rd 1878. Brotherhood is the basis for all theosophical work and
teaching.

A FEW QUESTIONS TO HIRAF... published in July 1875 [ BCW 1 - 101-118,
Modern Panarion, p. 38...] shows that brotherhood has been implicit since
the very commencement of the effort to put Theosophy before the world.

Brotherhood cannot be enforced. It may be evoked, presented, but its
adoption is always a spontaneous and generous response by asn individual to
others. Any attempt to enforce that results in tyranny.

As to Anna Kingsford and her employment of will and psychic power through
the astral plane to kill or harm others -- did not HPB write
CAN THE DOUBLE MURDER ? -- (Modern Panarion, p. 95 ) in which the rationale
of such an event is exposed [ see also HPB LETTERS TO A.P. SINNETT, p.
151... ] It is an act of "black magic," an abuse of occult knowledge and
force.

The ability to say "No" is one which is well within everyone's power if one
has adopted certain rules of conduct which reflect universal truths. This
need not be done violently, but only with definiteness. The history of
every reform down the ages has been an instance of an individual, or a
group which has resisted a trend to drag down a whole area into the horros
of the abuse of personal power, and exercise of undue physical and psychic
force over a number of people. The abuse of power needs always be resisted
by those who have moral strength.

The whole history of the T S would have been different had there never been
that fundamental error of trying to secure conformity. The Anglo-Indian
Eclectic T S of Simla was the first which demanded and secured complete
autonomy from Olcott's supervision as "President founder." Later the
"London Lodge TS" under Sinnett had the same autonomy. Olcott offered the
Armerican Section autonomy years before the "Theosophical Society in
America" was formed in April 1895. Subsequent to that the process of
excommunication has been appplied by the organized T S in direct violation
of brotherhood a number of times. It simply illustrates the extreme
weakenss of any organizaton when confronted by the rules of occultism and
universality which demand the practice of tolerance.

A study of the recent history of the Theosophical Movement shows that
politics and Theosophy do not mix well. If actual quotaions are needed I
will be glad to provide what I have found.

 Dallas
----------
> From: "Jerry Hejka-Ekins" <jjhe@netfeed.com>
> Subject: Re:Guidelines
> Date: Saturday, November 22, 1997 9:22 AM
>
>
>
> Brenda S. Tucker wrote:
>
> > What I would like to know is this: Was Steiner saying "no" to his
members
> > or was he saying "no" to Besant, because if he was saying "no" to
Besant,
> > then I feel that innocent people had to suffer.
> >
>
> Steiner was saying "yes" to his conscience by saying "no" to the job.
When he
> accepted the position of General Secretary of the German Section, the OSE
was
> not part of the original bargain. It's kind of like hiring a Jain to be
a
> bank accountant, then tell them six months later that their duties have
been
> expanded to include working part time in a slaughter house killing
animals,
> then firing him for refusing to do the work. The OSE was a separate
> organization from the TS and I contend that it was not appropriate to
expect
> Steiner to take on extra and unrelated duties that were against his
beliefs.
> If Besant wanted someone to charter OSE Lodges in Germany, then she could
have
> very easily appointed a believing member in THAT organization to do the
job.
> In that way Besant would get her charters, the OSE member would have an
> authorized place to meet, and Steiner would not have to do something that
was
> against his beliefs and outside of his original job description. In
other
> words, there was a obvious solution where no one would have to suffer.
>
> JJHE
>
>
>
>