Dzogchen, the ULT and such...
Sep 14, 2003 09:36 PM
by Griffin Eddie
No doubt you are correct that this is not what the Masters intended for the Theosophical Movement. Why? That is because the Theosophical Movement is still going on outside of the various groups! Never before has there been so much "esoteric" information out there available to the general public. You can get books and take classes on yoga, chi gung, etc etc. everywhere. There are teachers (of various levels) everywhere out there. Like Dzogchen? You can find a teacher. Like Advaita? You can find one. Want to learn the microcosmic orbit? Go ahead. Get on a plane and you can find just about anything you want (as opposed to traveling for months/years in the mountains of Tibet/India/China etc).
HPB was the crack in the door that let the flood of information in. She prepared the west to receive what it has now.
The people who need the TS as it is now will be attracted to it. Those who need the ULT will be attracted to it. Those who have connections to Buddhism/Hinduism/Taoism etc etc. now can find groups for those things (as opposed to 100 years ago).
The problem is people equate the various Theosophical ORGANIZATIONS with the MOVEMENT. They are a part of the movement - but certainly not the whole of it. They are still around for those people who can benefit from the knowledge that they provide (each with it's own spin).
All conditioned things are impermenant - including the Theosophical orginizations. They will last as long as they last - 10, 50, 100, 200 more years or whatever. In the end the "Truth" will always be around in some form or another.
In regard to the distrust of lineages and such - westerners have strange and misguided views on what the Guru-disciple relationship should be. So it is no wonder that there have been so many issues.
Of course there are problems that arise with an incorrect understanding of the Dzogchen viewpoint also. (As with the wrong view of "emptiness"). People who try to act from the "highest viewpoint" "in disregard to "normal morals and ethics" end up eating a bitter pill when their actions come home to roost.
As to Krishnamurti's writing being shunned - well too bad for those who shun them!
Just some comments on my end also..
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:29:59 -0000
From: "Katinka Hesselink" <email@example.com>
Subject: ULT and Dzog Chen
We seem to agree to a large extent. I see the place for the ULT in the
theosophical spectrum in the sense that it is clearly usefull to have
a group that studies only HPB and Judge. On the other hand, I don't
think that this is what the Masters intended for the Theosophical
On the Dzog Chen issue. In the West people have become so afraid of
lineages, authority and all that, that the idea that one has to
prepare for understanding is anathema to many. On the one hand this is
correct, various sorts of experiences of consciousness can be
experienced by just about anybody. Keeping it up and not falling into
one or several of the traps on the spiritual path is a totally
Dzog Chen isn't the only tradition that has risen in popularity
because of this. Advaita Vedanta in the form of Satsang is another.
The good thing about this development is that people get to recognize
their own divinity through practical experience. The downside is that
integrating that insight into their practical lives in a healthy,
humble manner doesn't really get the same press.
Krishnamurti's work (compared to Dzog Chen by a few theosophical
writers) is comparatively safe because it's difficulty is so obvious
from the writings. But writings get shunned by many, these days.
Just a few thoughts.
"What makes a good artist, a good sculptor, a good musician? Practice. What makes a man a good linguist, a good stenographer? Practice. What makes a man a good man? Practice. Nothing else...-Henry Drummond
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application