RE: [bn-study] TS, ULT, Krishnamurti & Besant WHERE IS THE TRUTH ?
Oct 23, 2001 05:19 PM
Tuesday, October 23, 2001
Thank you for reviewing your progressive encounter with various Theosophical
groups, bodies, societies, etc.. and the benefit you have received from
reading ABOUT Theosophy in the opinions offered by some of the better known
What strikes me as interesting is that you value your direct contact with
The SECRET DOCTRINE --
Looking over what you write about the reading you have done, it strikes me
that you must have been gradually building up an opinion concerning the
value and use of THEOSOPHY. I would guess that various writers who
contributed their opinions concerning Theosophy have played an important
part in helping you frame you own concepts.
But what I am curious about is what in Theosophy has appealed to you as
valuable? The reason I asked is that one “feels” attracted by many things
and by certain writers.
All writers, (like myself) are transmitters -- and the easiest thing to
transmit is one’s opinion. A more difficult thing is to ask and request
assistance in getting at certain fundamental concepts of mutual agreement --
not in ”feeling” (which is often difficult to explain), but, rather, in
KNOWING. (Which can be set down before others as a set of interlocking
One has to take time out to think. Push back the importunities of the world
’s rush and crush, and give one’s self time to think out these things. So
many of us are rushing here and there and we rarely give ourselves the
entertaining luxury of a few moments to think about THINKING. Who does it ?
and, How is it done? Who in us is the directory of the Mind? what can we
do with our Mind. Is it different from and separate from the DESIRES ?
What is the real power? is it The Director of the Mind (and of thinking) or
is it the sometimes overwhelming impulses that arises from desire, passion,
attraction, aversion, and so forth -- which are all passing impulses and
moods. But, they are NOT US.
Like you in the course of life I have read most of what those writers have
produced, and followed the history of the development of their views. In
some cases they maintain a coincidence with H P B’s teachings (as Agent for
the Mahatmas) and in other cases they seem to diverge. I try to always
check such cases to see who is retaining the thread of logic and coherency.
So far, I have found that the ORIGINAL PRESENTATION remains accurate.
I have learned to trust it and to always, review any answer derived from it
by going to the FUNDAMENTALS. So I do not take anything on faith, or on
Speaking in general, I do agree that in some cases those who write about
theosophy historically have in some cases made the approach easier for some
students. But when push comes to shove, I have always found that
H.P.Blavatsky’s THEOSOPHY IS RELIABLE. It does not bend nor does it obscure
things, nor does it pretend to be in any way “authoritarian: or “exclusive.”
What is always seems to do, is to take us back to prime bases, and then show
the derivation of an answer from there.
It is not always easy to find the answers she has placed there, but they
can be found.
One of the most helpful articles in this regard is H P B’s WHAT IS TRUTH.
It was published in LUCIFER for February 1888. It is reprinted in U L T H P
B Article Series in Vol. 1, p. 1, 281; . another good reference is in the
Same series of articles in vol. II, p. 171-2.
I found out many years ago that the best reference books for me, was the
KEY TO THEOSOPHY (HPB), the OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY, and the VOICE OF THE
ILENCE -- Then I made an intensive study word by word of the GLOSSARY and
ISIS UNVEILED and then have worked in and on The SECRET DOCTRINE -- there
are many treasures there you will not get from any Academy or University, or
from hours of long talks and discussions. In those books lie the keys to a
wisdom we all need.
Best wishes, and happy hunting,
From: Monica Pege
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:37 AM
Subject: [bn-study] TS, ULT, Krishnamurti & Besant
My first contact with Theosophy was (in this incarnation) in California in
1977 when I met Boris De Zircoff, Robert Bannell ( I don't think the
spelling is right) and many other valued friends there. I was very young
and never really got clear about the "riff", I think, regarding TS and ULT.
I read some of the works by G dePurucker as well as HPB and was made only
superficially aware of the issue around K, Besant and his supposed failed
mission with TS.
Then in 1989 after I moved back to NY I "happened" to be walking down E.
72nd St and "happened" upon ULT - no accidents in life! I started going
regularly and this input gave me a little more clarity about the situation.
I have never nor will I ever believe that K turned away his destiny to be
the agent/mouthpiece for the Masters M and KH and Theosophy, though I
certainly could be wrong. And I have certainly benefited from ULT's
determination to adhere to the teachings as originally written down by HPB;
there are so many movements, so many pathways and "techniques". It was a
relief and a blessing to engage in the discipline of only studying SD, etc.
Afterall, how would we be able to recognize Theosophical ideas elsewhere if
we don't study them apart from all the various fragments found in the form
of the religions and philosophies of the day?
ULT says, I think, that the original writings of Theosophy as written down
by HPB need no further elucidation from anyone else. Point extremely well
taken. But in studying some of the works written by G de Purucker and others
I was genuinely helped in my understanding of some of the basic tenets of
Theosophy and I truly believe the inspiration of those teachers is and was
from a source that is authentic, whose mission, however smaller or greater
than HPB's, was to help us along on this glorious path. Am I getting my
issues confused here? I guess what I'm saying is that within the powerful
movement that Theosophy is, there can be and are many wonderful teachers,
but I don't think that qualifies any of them as World Teacher - I have heard
that Maitreya is the World Teacher...Krishnamurti? With all due respect to
him I don't think so and I don't think he thought so. I have always had the
feeling that this was really a matter of! personal karma.
I believe, that although she was a great teacher, the whole idea of K's
functioning as leader of TS was a test for Annie Besant because there seemed
to me to be the strain of something personal in the relationship, something
the Masters clearly teach us to go beyond. Ultimately, who can know other
than those directly involved?
It would truly be wonderful if the split could be healed; if there were one
Theosophical Group, whatever the name, a deeper and wider unity.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Current topic is at
You are currently subscribed to bn-study as: [email@example.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application