Theos-Talk Archives (April 2000 Message tt00001)

It is a breath of fresh air to learn that you have published the book. It
is all the more timely in the context of my experience with many "older"
generation "theosophists" especially in the United States, who dismiss
Krishnamurti as a "failure". 

Like all inspired works, the reality behind the written material is what is
important. I felt all along, that Krishnamurti tried to emphasize the need
for initiative and action, not following a particular cook book approach or
blindly following a guru or a selfappointed righthand of a guru.

Self-discovery in an unstructured non hierarchical environment may be the
real answer to transformation. My hope is your book may make many of us to
think for ourselves independently.

By the way, since you own the copyright to the work, could you make it
available on-line on Internet. It would permit immediate distribution
around the world. After all, the number of people interested in
Krishnamurti and theosophy are a miniscule in number.

I am copying this to theos-talk, theos-l and listening-l.

mkr


At 11:26 AM 04/02/2000 EDT, ASANAT@aol.com wrote:
Dear friends,

My book The Inner Life of Krishnamurti was published recently by Quest Books. 
 It contains information that I consider critical for understanding what 
theosophy is really likely to be (as opposed to what we have been told it is, 
in error, for much too long).

For instance, we have been told that theosophy is a metaphysics, a conceptual 
system.  Conceptual systems, however, all come from the analytical mind.  And 
that is what needs to be transcended in order for theosophy to even begin to 
manifest itself in our lives.  "The Mind is the Great Slayer of the Real.  
Let the Disciple Slay the Slayer."  Surely that was not meant in jest?

Theosophy is that which happens in theosophical (divine-like) states of 
awareness.  It demands, in other words, that there be transformation.  
"Transformation" is but a word, which refers precisely to the same activity 
that all the ancient schools (and early theosophists) called "initiation."

In the summer of 1884, the Master KH said to Sinnett, in ML # 63, concerning 
his book The Occult World, that "the results have proved quasi-disastrous!  
We had tried an experiment and sadly failed!  Now we see that none but those 
who have passed at least their third initiation are able to write upon those 
subjects comprehensively."

Let us recall that Sinnett was talking largely about bells ringing 
psychically, cups and saucers materializing, and brooches appearing under 
pillows.  In other words, he was talking about relatively "simple" matters.  
Yet, according to KH, three initiations were required in order to do even 
that.  And transformation is the one theme that runs through every single 
statement Krishnamurti ever made as part of his work.  That cannot be said of 
any other "theosophical" author.

If I am mistaken, and missed something here, please enlighten me.  I mean it. 
 But it does seem that K did precisely what the Master KH suggested for all 
theosophists:  To focus on transformation rather than on conceptual schemes, 
the acceptance of which does not require transformation, and is therefore not 
theosophical in itself.

I'll appreciate any comments.

Aryel Sanat


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.