Theos-Talk Archives (February 2003 Message tt00137)

Hi Leon,

Dallas privately mailed me about this, so I reread Judge and I have 
to agree with you both: I was a bit harsh on Judge. 
The problem with having a teacher is that you come to see things 
almost through their eyes. This is a natural result of the communion 
that comes into being. When it comes naturally, I am enthousiastic 
about that. Also, I wish my students were a bit more like that. 
Respect for teachers isn't something taught to children by their 
parents as much anymore. Independence is the thing. The problem with 
too much independence is an inability to listen to what somebody has 
to say, and hear it from their point of view. 

But, all this has to come naturally. What I was trying to say, but 
obviously not effectively, was that a real guru-chela relationship 
emerges, more than it is cultivated. It was said somewhere that 
chelaship will come upon the person. Everything else we know about 
the relationship between mahatma and chela should, IMO be seen from 
that perspective: there being a natural communion between the two, 
and mutual devotion etc. Orders are in this, as I think it has also 
been said in the Mahatma Letters, rare. Blavatsky and Olcott were in 
the very strange position to do a lot of wordly work in the name of 
the Mahatmas. That is not the usual order of business, obviously, or 
we would be seeing inspiring examples of wordly work all over the 
place (then again, maybe we aren't looking well enough). Seriously: 
mostly the white brotherhood work is done in secrecy, in the 
background, far from sight. Details of people-managment, publicity, 
books that have to get somewhere - are simply a result of the public 
nature of their work. And the mahatmas were simply gracious enough to 
lend some of their inner knowledge to help keep things afloat. 

That was what I was trying to say. But such a sacred relationship 
should not be forced, and what you write below is a wise state of 
affairs: learn from everything and everybody, if you can.

And yes, Blavatsky is in some ways my guru. I very much hesitate to 
disagree with her, always thinking I must be misunderstanding her. 
But other "guru's" include: Krishnamurti, Buddhism as a whole, Mother 
Teresa, and at the moment - this list. 

Katinka
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, leonmaurer@a... wrote:
> Hi Katinka,
> 
> I think you are right about individual spiritual development to 
attain self 
> realization by one's own self devised and self determined efforts, 
and not 
> through devotion to a guru, in the sense of worshipping, loving, or 
becoming 
> dependent on him/her. But, I don't think that's what WQJ meant by 
devotion. 
> That word, at its root, has many meanings other than 
personal "Love" or in 
> the sense of Bhakti-type worship or adoration of a living or dead 
God, guru 
> or teacher. 
> 
> When I was a beginning student of Theosophy, WQJ was my guru -- who 
taught me 
> through his writings, and by pointing me to the writings of HPB. 
At that 
> time, I chose to devote myself to him as the teacher, and thus 
accept his 
> guidance with full confidence. That sort of devotion is what I 
always 
> thought Judge meant when he said to find oneself a guru. In fact, 
by 
> following that line we can have many gurus at different times on 
our path. 
> When I first read that advice by Judge, I then chose HPB as my guru 
and 
> become devoted to her teachings, and thereby became devoted to 
theosophy (as 
> I assume both you and Dallas have done). Also, when we seriously 
study the 
> Bhagavad Gita, we can become devoted to Krishna as our guru. Or, to 
the 
> Buddha, when we study the Dammapada. In addition, we can even 
choose a living 
> teacher for our guru whom we believe can lead us further on the 
path, even if 
> it's to point us to the proper passage in a book to study, or a 
meditation to 
> practice devotedly. In that sense, many theosophoists I have met 
over the 
> years, and even here, such as Dallas and yourself, have become my 
gurus. 
> 
> For the benefit of newcomers to theosophy, the following 
definitions might be 
> helpful to consider and understand so as to interpret Judge's 
advice 
> properly. 
> 
> de'vote v. tr. de'vot'ed de'vot'ing de'votes 1. To give or apply 
(one's time, 
> attention, or self) entirely to a particular activity, pursuit, 
cause, or 
> person. 2. To set apart for a specific purpose or use: land devoted 
to 
> mining. 3. To set apart by or as if by a vow or solemn act; 
consecrate: a 
> temple devoted to Apollo. 
> Synonyms
> 1. [v.] To give over by or as if by vow to a higher purpose 
> -dedicate-beatify-commit-consecrate-offer-pledge-sacrifice-sanctify-
surrender-
> 
> yield
> 2. [v.] To occupy oneself or one's efforts to something
> -apply-dedicate-direct-address
> 3. [v.] To intend or set aside for a specific purpose
> -earmark-consecrate-dedicate-destine-mark-allocate-allot-apportion-
appropriate
> 
> -designate-assign
> 4. [v.] To use time in a particular way
> -spend-employ-expend-fill-idle-invest-kill-pass-put in-take up-
while away
> 5. [v.] To provide gratuitously-give-bestow-donate-give away-dole-
give 
> out-hand out-present
> (American Heritage Dictionery and Thesaurus)
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> LHM
> 
> 
> In a message dated 02/08/03 3:55:52 PM, mail@k... writes:
> 
> << This is actually one of the very few places where I sort of 
disagree 
> with Judge, though you haven't quoted the most extreme that he has 
to 
> say on this subject.
> 
> He suggests, in the beginning of Letters that have Helped Me, that 
a 
> would-be chela should find him/herself a guru, whatever the 
qualities 
> of that guru. That devotion itself will help make the relationship 
> fruitfull. 
> Devotion which is Love is never a bad thing, and maybe that is what 
> he means, but all in all I don't think many people are capable of 
> that kind of devotion, unconditionally. And forcing yourself to 
that, 
> all the while struggling with yourself is simply not worth it. 
> 
> The truth has to be found on a solitary path - I am absolutely 
> convinced of that. That the Mahatmas may find the chela there, when 
> the chela has progressed to such a state of inner purity that 
> communion with the mahatmas becomes possible, is another matter. A 
> student of such purity cannot but be devoted to the even greater 
> purity of the Mahatma. It is a natural thing, not something forced 
> and adulatrous the way it was suggested by somebody else. Also, 
when 
> right, not something that will rob the student of independent 
> thinking, making their own choices etc. Some of my favourite quotes 
> show that this last was always meant:
> 
> >> Coll. Wr. Vol. X, p. 96
> >> It is this pernicious doctrine of ever relying upon extraneous 
> help that leads to the collapse - physical, mental, moral, andental 
healer, 
> the neophyte of 
> the sorcerer, and the dilettante of Reform. Neither success nor 
> safety is to be found outside self-development. >>
> 
> >> Letters from the Masters of Wisdom, second series, letter 51, p. 
97
> >> [chelaship] is an educational as well as probationary stage, and 
> the chela alone can determine whether it shall end in adeptship or 
> failure. Chelas, from a mistaken idea of our system, too often 
watch 
> and wait for orders, wasting precious time which should be taken up 
> with personal effort. 
> ... 
> 
> For, to work for mankind is grand, its recompense stretches beyond 
> this brief dream of life into other births. So now, you my chela, 
> choose and grasp your own destiny. You wish to heal the sick, - do 
> so; but remember your success will be measured by your faith - in 
> yourself, more than in us. Lose it for a second, and failure will 
> follow. 
> 
> ... 
> 
> Have faith in your soul power, and you will have success. >>
> 
> 
> >> Mahatma Letters, letter 54, p. 311; chr. letter 92. p. 299
> >> Every human being contains within himself vast potentialities, 
and 
> it is the duty of the adepts to surround the would-be chela with 
> circumstances which shall enable him to take the "right-hand-path" -

> if he has the ability in him. We are no more at liberty to withhold 
> the chance from a postulant than we are to guide and direct him in 
> the proper course. >>
> >>