Theos-Talk Archives (February 2002 Message tt00466)

Hi Brigitte and all of you,

Brigitte wrote:
"But the original question I asked still remains, who from the 
participants of this mailinglists think are the real messangers, and 
who where the once to receive true messages of the Masters ?
Judge, Olcott in 1894, Besant, Leadbeater, Alice Bailey, I Am, Claire 
Prophet, and so on and so on ?"


1. 
I think the answer must be they all told some of the truth. They all had some faulths. 
But H. P. Blavatsky was the greatest among them (those you mention in the above) - in wisdom. Though I am not certain on W. Q. Judge - and his level.

I will seek to explain this further - and the view one can have of the history of the Theosophical Society.
One reason for answering so can be viewed in the following - excerpts - taken from an article of mine posted earliere on theos-talk (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4389) :


"Let us revert to the Spiritual journey. From time to time suitable teachers of the Wisdom Tradition has been sent by their Masters or guides to travel to a certain place and establish the teaching. Such teachers have an influence on
various levels. 
Those above mentioned Spiritual teachers work has not only been to give people Spiritual guidance and education. It has also been to prepare the ground for further development of the living progress of the Path of Wisdom.
There are also minor emissaries who are sent out to teach and prepare the ground for further development. These people has been known to set themselves up as ultimate authorities, because part of their training is to test their loyalty to the whole School of Wisdom, which is as generally known consisting
of one entity.

But, if, a teacher of the Wisdom tradition dies, or there is a gap in the teaching, what then? The interesting thing is, that the very gap is a part of the training. You may explain certain things to a child : shall we say teach her or him not to do certain things. Then you will pretend to go out of the house - and observe her or him. According to how well he/she has learned, so will he/she react. In this 'absence exercise', precisely the same thing happens to the teacher of Wisdom, though many are not conscious of it.

After the disappearance from the field of a teacher of Wisdom, the followers will divide themselves into groups, in accordance with their strength and weaknesses. Some will assume control of others. They may be good or bad, and this will be shown by their reaction to - the second teacher - when he/she arrives.

If they realise he/she is their teacher, then they have merely been developing themselves and can mature. But if they have become atrophied, they will be too blind to recognize the Spirituality of the very teacher, for which appearance they have been prepared. They may attach themselves, in default, to a different group. (And this groups existence is maybe no coincidence.) Again well and good : providing they return to the mainstream of teaching when it is offered to them again. 

This is the test of whether they have overcome the lower
self. They will realise, if they are sufficiently developed, that the person who appears to be 'second' teacher is in reality - the first in importance. 
Life is reversed for the undeveloped man (the newcomer), and he/she will behave in accordance with this. The first teacher does not make life easier, in most cases, for the generality of disciples. He/She will teach them things, which are only of use when the second teacher arrives and reality falls into place. The object of this is twofold. In the first place, certain valuable thoughts have been given to the disciples. In the second, they are tested by the means of these ideas. Just as our western psychologists give odd-shaped pieces of wood to people, to see how they put them together, teachers of Wisdom
will give odd-pieces of material of - mental kind - to his/her followers. - If they try to fit these together however, and to make a pattern in his/hers - absences, - they are becoming 'fossilised'. Because, the Wisdom tradition has to show that the object of mankind is not to construct idols, but to follow a supreme pattern, which is learnt piece by piece.

Quite obviously the semi-blind among the people, during their 'waiting-period', will try to work out their own interpretation. They may, as have been done in the past, write books to explain what they have learned. This is the danger-point, because when a man/woman is accepted as, say, a philosopher (of wisdom) because she/he has written a book explaining a philosophy, he/she will not readily accept, that she/he only have been 'fumbling'. He/She has quite possibly become a prisoner of his/hers lower self. The self-conceit of the man/woman is now bound up with his/hers 'creation', the book or the method, which he/she has used to organise the fragments, which he/she has. He/she is probably or possibly lost - for the cause.

In order to break through this shell of accretions and fossilisations, the - second teacher - will tend to act in a different, perhaps in a certain dramatically different manner, from the original one. This could happen, to break the 'idols', which have been formed out of the thoughts, which were
originally given. 

So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to support a system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of ideas and movements. This seems important to understand and know about.

When a system of teaching of wisdom is in a period of fallowness, because the one who propagated it is dead, then there comes a period of stagnation. This period can last between 10 years, 15 years or more. In the time, which passes,
the group of people who is affected by the system are sieved by natural means.

Some wander away. Others carry on automatically not really knowing, what they are doing. They are now 'frozen', though they do not know they are.
The blind may try to lead the blinder. This takes the form of assumption of authority by those who were given some sort of authority in the original mandate. These are the people in the most dangerous position, because the longer they remain 'orphaned' the more strongly their lower self (or the three
lower bodies) asserts it self.
Others may modify the teachings in a learned and personal way. Some certainly fall a prey to cults, which have come into being in order to serve them. The people who joins these are at great pains to explain why they consider, that they represent the same kind of teaching - and this is important. It is important, because it shows the Theosophist or the real spiritually minded, very clearly, that the people who try to explain - are in fact troubled by conscience. Somewhere inside them, they know, that they are identifying themselves with an imitation, or a second-best. But they are supported by their lower bodies or lower personality, - and this is too strong for them.
Those can be helped by being lead to think in new thinking-patterns and systems. It is via the conscience, that one finds the path forward, - thereby will be able to remove the limitations of the lower personality.

Imagine a group of people shipwrecked. They think there is no hope of rescue.
They find a raft, and are glad. After a time more people come along in a big boat. But the first people will not leave the raft, because they have become used to it. They may have convinced themselves, that it is actually a boat. (So it is to some philosophical or religious people today.)

The points at which the mystical traditions, which are still alive, are in contact with each other cannot really be explained by the means of books. And yet people continue to write books showing how they have found this and that
point of resemblance. 

The truth can only be found by actual experience, - and easier by awareness on such aspect as I have touch upon.

To sink ecstasy in Wisdom is better than to sink Wisdom in ecstasy. The Wisdom Tradition teaches by several different systems, and not only by one, - one book or teen books, BUT also by thousands and thousands of books - and the dogmatic ones doesn't want to listen."

2. 
And Annie Besant has been put forward by Sathya Sai Baba in one of his speeches as a teacher of wisdom etc.

3. 
In a book by Diana Baskin called "The Divine Memories of Sathya Sai Baba" she mentions, that Krishnamurti shortly before his dead - had a meeting with Sathya Sai Baba - in India at Madras.
Diana Baskin being the daughter of Raja (the Krishnamurti administrator) is not just anybody. Raja was taught by Annie Besant and Leadbeater - and became a follower of Sathya Sai Baba - before he died some years back.

4. 
I know, that the theosophical Howard Murphet have written a chapter in one of his books - about Theosophy - compared with Sathya Sai Baba. Has anyone read this book ? And will anyone one make a comment on this chapter ?

from
Sufilight with a flexible thought system...







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]