Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00102)

mkr wrote:

>It is also a fact that when K started to speaking, there was none of his
>stature nor charisma in the Theosophical Society -- even today we do not
>have any nor do I see any in the horizon -- we had and have many scholars
>but none anywhere close to his stature, at least it in my humble opinion.
>Others may not agree. The leadership does have an effect on the growth of
>membership. The steady downward slide in membership worldwide since K's
>"Truth is a Pathless Land" statement is still continuing with no end in
>sight, It could be that the work of TS is over and that may be its destiny,
>who knows.

K has unparallelled stature because he was trained for many lives to be the
vehicle for a far superior consciousness. He was not just luckily born with
it, nor did CWL just luckily pick him. It was all part of a plan, and both K
and HPB were aware of that.

Again from my "Krishnamurti and the World Teacher Project: Some Theosophical
Perceptions."

"Reinforcing this view is an interesting, and at first sight puzzling,
remark Krishnamurti made about Annie Besant and the Theosophical Society
during an equally interesting conversation in 1979 with his friends, Radha
Burnier and Pupul Jayakar, while discussing Burnier's possible candidacy for
the presidency of the Theosophical Society. “Mrs.Besant intended the land
at Adyar [the T.S. international headquarters] to be meant for the
teaching. The Theosophical Society has failed, the original purpose is
destroyed.” This remark contains many assumptions and finds its proper
context in Besant's understanding of the mission of the Theosophical Society
and the role of Krishnamurti therein. Annie Besant thought she was
fulfilling a mission of the Theosophical Society, which was not stated as
one of its official objectives, but was given to it by Helena P.
Blavatsky--one of the founders of the Theosophical Society and the society's
main source of ideas--when she, at the close of her life, announced the
coming of a “torch-bearer of Truth” for the later part of the twentieth
century. The mission of the Theosophical Society, according to Blavatsky,
was to prepare the way for this “new leader” and prepare “the minds of
men....for his message.” At his arrival the Theosophical Society would be
available to him to remove the “merely mechanical, material obstacles and
difficulties from his path.” Indicating the possibility of a glorious
long-term goal of this plan, she states that if “the Theosophical Society
survives and lives true to its mission...earth will be a heaven in the
twenty-first century.” When Besant was challenged about her involvement in
the Order of the Star and her speaking of “the T.S. as being the Herald of
the coming Teacher,” she defended herself by referring explicitly to
Blavatsky's view about the future mission of the Theosophical Society: “My
crime is that I share it, and do what my poor powers permit in preparing the
minds of men for that coming.” Besant wrote that the only difference between
herself and Blavatsky regarding the coming of “the next great Teacher” was
that “she put that event perhaps half a century later than I do. Which of
us is right only time can show.”
 I think it is reasonable to state that the particulars of Blavatsky's and
Besant's views were picked up by Krishnamurti during his formative years.
He might even have read Blavatsky's statement referred to above. If so,
this might provide the ground to put Krishnamurti's remark in historical
perspective, and to explain the underlying structural similarity between his
remark and Blavatsky's vision. With this in mind a reconstructed reading of
Krishnamurti's statement would result in the following: “Mrs.Besant [and
Blavatsky] intended [subscribed to the view that] the land at Adyar [the
Theosophical Society] to be meant [to be available] for the teaching [for
the teacher]. The Theosophical Society has failed [did not to cooperate],
the original purpose [the mission of the Theosophical Society to herald and
aid the teacher] is destroyed [has not been fulfilled].” The point of this
digression is to show that implicit in this remark is the self-perception of
Krishnamurti as the teacher, who was expected and did come, but found the
Theosophical Society not cooperative."