Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00400)

If too many people study the Secret Doctine, it wouldn't be "secret" anymor=
e.

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "arielaretziel" <arielaretziel@y...> wro=
te:
> 
> My question is this, if the Wisdom is found everywhere, why propigate one=
 
> version of it? I personally like The Secret Doctrine and someone else may=
l=
> ike 
> the Necronomicon. We find people with the same interest and discuss our 
> own things. The world can be saved without everyone learning the Secret 
> Doctrine. 
> 
> PR is for salesmen. I have nothing to sell and neither does HPB. This 
Wisdo=
> m 
> comes for free. 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
> theosophy@a...> wrote:
> > Hallo all of you,
> > 
> > My views are:
> > 
> > When KH in a letter is quoted saying that Blavatsky was their chosen
> > vehicle.
> > http://blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm
> > http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-2.htm (Mahatma Letter 
2,
> > edition 2 - at the bottom).
> > 
> > He said this in the sense, that she was the vehicle for Theosophy in th=
e
> > period she was living.
> > When she 'died' - another policy was chosen on the 'outer head' idea. 
But=
> 
> > some who calls themselves theosophists
> > thinks that she and/or her writings still is the chosen vehicle - on th=
e
> > physical plane. And the only one.
> > I see no reason to think so.
> > - And I will welcome anyone to proove differently. I would rather that =
we=
> 
> > listen to what poeple are saying - than we closed
> > our eyes to future Teachers who without reasonable doubt could be said =

to=
> 
> > have importance. -
> > 
> > Because after her dead - things was by nature changed.
> > The result was in part that the western populations was more aware of 
the=
> 
> > Wisdom Tradition than
> > before. And that certian cultural barrieres had been broken down. India=

> > became more respected
> > for its historical background which was shown in a more true light - th=
an=
> 
> > the then stupid scholars
> > in the years 1875-1891 did. (This was very good indeed !)
> > The books written by people in the period 1891-1933 was many and and 
> some of
> > them helpful to
> > promote the importance of Blavatsky's work and make people aware of 
the
> > existence of the Wisdom Tradition.
> > 
> > Theosophy in its most widest sense of the term called the Ancient Wisdo=
m
> > Tradition
> > has never been promoting - dead letter thinking and Bible-study or simi=
la=
> r
> > activities - and clingings to
> > physical organisations and - the use of physical namings and letters of=
s=
> uch
> > organisations.
> > For instance the use of the word "Theosophy".
> > 
> > Back then in the years 1875-1891 people wanted - drama and emotional
> > arousels.
> > Even some who is called intellectuals fall for that. This happens also
> > today.
> > So Theosophy was flourishing because of this - attractive pull, which 
cam=
> e
> > at the right time
> > and which was needed.
> > 
> > The same is true today - on drama and the like - although the level is =
mo=
> re
> > intellectual and less emotional.
> > 
> > To do the exactly same kind of PR today would be no good or at least 
less=
> 
> > good.
> > True Theosophy always adapts its teachings and the presentation of its
> > realities
> > in different manners suited to time place and people.
> > (And true - there will nearly always be some who is not satisfied by th=
e
> > chosen presentation.)
> > In the future it will be given a different name than "Theosophy" or any=
d=
> ead
> > letter view,
> > we can for sure rely on that. (But not Lucis Trust or similar. Because =
of=
> 
> > the Middle Eastern flaws this group has.)
> > Let us still remember, this is just my views.
> > 
> > ***True Theosophy is NOT a physical organisation or branch !
> > Theosophy is in a certain sense non-physical more than it is physical. =
**=
> *
> > 
> > Right now we are in a period of transition when we talk about the PR
> > of Theosophy as TS with its various offshoot branches, some good some 
> bad,
> > some at least useful
> > as far as it goes.
> > - A new (synthesis) teacher is awaited -
> > This is also true when we talk about Rosicrucians and others...
> > 
> > Blavatsky and the Masters in fact didn't do anything wrong saying that
> > Blavatsky was an 'agent'.
> > They had to - in a certain sense lie - so to get the potential seekers
> > interested.
> > She was not what could be termed - a global 'outer head' or agent, but =

mu=
> ch
> > more a western-India related one.
> > 
> > What really happened then was, that other groups like some of the
> > Rosicrucians and Sufis and others
> > was also doing the job of the Masters, but on their own level and in th=
ei=
> r
> > own manner.
> > Blavatsky even says this in her book The Secret Doctrine. So she and KH=
 
> did
> > not really lie,
> > they just didn't clearly tell people that they played upon their emotio=
ns=
> ,
> > so
> > to if possible help them get developed.
> > (They made the name "Theosophy" important - and downplayed other 
> names of
> > other groups a little. The Masters in their Letters and Blavatsky
> > in her writings. other groups at that time did teach wisdom teachings -=
b=
> ut
> > not in such an open and public manner - in the western countries. 
Perhaps=
> 
> > apart from The Golden Dawn. And Theosophy came in to play partly 
> because of
> > the existence of The Golden Dawn with its misunderstandings of the 
> Kabbalah
> > and other teachings.)
> > 
> > The fact was and is, that the western part of the world at that time - =
ha=
> d a
> > more developed distribution of Newspapers and books,
> > was more rich, wealthy, and had the needed technology to travel between=

> > countries. For instance was Egypt owned by Britain
> > in most of the period from 1875-1891, something which sometimes is
> > overlooked by the students.
> > The higher level of distribution of Newpapers and distribution of books=
a=
> nd
> > the written word - and the larger public access to these things are
> > important,
> > when we talk about Theosophy and the period 1875-1891, the 
Blavatskian
> > period.
> > 
> > And the use of the word "Theosophy" has several meanings and layers,
> > when one quotes Blavatsky or the Mahtama Letters. And this we shouldn't=

> > forget.
> > 
> > The Masters has many compassionate "schemes" going today.
> > Do any of you think that they only are concerned with "Theosophy" in th=
e
> > dead letter sense of this word
> > and only this physical planet called Earth ?
> > 
> > Do you not think that they are involved in their own sweet manner in 
what=
> is
> > going on at the United Nations
> > and also in Iraq and elsewhere ?
> > 
> > Do you not think, that they consider the importance or lack of the same=
f=
> or
> > each and every branch of Theosophy
> > and ist many offshoot branches ? An view it all in a more true light ?
> > 
> > And what about the many "occult groups" and mystical groups in Africa, =

As=
> ia
> > and the Middle East, and the India groups
> > of various mystical relations ?
> > Do you think that the true value that each of these groups has escaped
> > their - sharp eyes of wisdom ?
> > 
> > 
> > Let us not underestimate this teaching called Theosophy - or much more
> > precisely THE WISDOM TRADITION of ALL AGES.
> > Labels are just labels. The compasionate Heart will reveal it all.
> > 
> > Theosophy as the organisation TS as we know it through Blavatsky was, 
> and is
> > just ONE single branch of a great weaving of the Masters activities.
> > If Theosophy is only TS, then KH's remarks in his letter on the 'agent'=

> > Blavatsky was not so good.
> > But if Theosophy is TS, Sufis, Rosicrucians, and a whole lot of other
> > acitvities through the ages especially including the last about 129 yea=
rs=
> of
> > human activities
> > on this physical plane - then KH is allright in what he is saying. Blav=
at=
> sky
> > was the primary head of the outer wisdom-movementS - so to speak - 
when 
> she
> > lived in the period 1875-1891. No real doubt in my mind about that. (Le=
t =
> us
> > not forget the work done by Damodar and others.)
> > A certain sense of humor - are hidden in the Mahatma Letters if one 
reads=
> 
> > them - with a deeper understanding than the intellectual one.
> > 
> > So when Caldwell says the following at
> > http://blavatskyarchives.com/latermessengers.htm , he is to my taste a
> > little bit too optimistic about the truth.
> > 
> > " H.P. Blavatsky (1831-1891) was the first person in modern times to cl=
ai=
> m
> > contact with the Theosophical Adepts, especially the Masters Morya and =

> Koot
> > Hoomi. She affirmed that in her writings she was giving out the teachin=
gs=
> of
> > the Adept Brotherhood. "
> > 
> > Blavatsky wasn't the first (or only) representative in modern times. Bu=
t =
> she
> > was the first - Publicly and with good use of PR - to succeed in doing =
so=
> 
> > or becoming such a representative. This is more true. (And what is the =

> words
> > "modern times" used at Caldwells webpage covering ?)
> > 
> > 
> > Try the Khwaja (Sufi Masters from India - Afghanistan; - Kashmir and
> > southwest of it) - known at least since year 980.
> > and others...So Blavtsky did at least not tell some people living in th=
at=
> 
> > local area anything new.
> > Blavtsky was on this issue talking mainly to a western audience. (Not t=
ru=
> e
> > ?)
> > Remember, that the Bhagavad Gita was for the first time mass-distrubute=
d 
=
> 
> as
> > late as 1950 - about three years after the independece of India.
> > The Theosophical success back then came also about due to the use of 
> written
> > materials and the clever distribution of them. Ie. Clever PR !
> > (This do not happen today. Well that is my view.)
> > 
> > Today - the new Teacher will talk not only - primarily to a western
> > audience.
> > The audience will be much larger - and much more multicultural.
> > My view is let us keep an eye on the United Nations and the religious
> > activities in and around this global body.
> > 
> > The time, place and poeple - and the PR - is different.
> > That is all.
> > 
> > The United Nations has 6 core languages they use in their publications.=

> > And This is just an english based - forum.
> > English not being the best language of communication. (quote - Blavatsk=
y 
=
> 
> on
> > that.)
> > Why the english alphabet ? To help us get rid of the poisonous Western
> > arrogance - the conquerors ? Or to help us get rid of ignorance ?
> > Arab, Chinese or even Sanskrit would be better to use - let us not forg=
et=
> 
> > that.
> > Follow the...aeehm...flow. (smile...)
> > 
> > Do good. Be good. See good.
> > And on Wisdom ?
> > 
> > 
> > You may correct me if I have made a mistake or two.
> > Did this help ?
> > 
> > from
> > M. Sufilight with peace and love...
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "adelasie" <adelasie@s...>
> > To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 3:22 PM
> > Subject: Re: Theos-World why blavatsky?
> > 
> > 
> > Hi Krishtar,
> > 
> > Interesting question, and one we might all pose. So many times it
> > seems that the person who is chosen for some role of leadership is
> > inadequate. Perhaps it's a test of the doubter's nature, a test of
> > loyalty and devotion, of obedience. If we accept the hierarchical
> > geometry of the universe, and the principle of centralization, if we
> > accept karma as a fact of nature, then we can see that when causes
> > indicate, a new impulse is due to the consciousness of humanity, and
> > some instrument, some individual human being (i.e Jesus, Krishna,
> > Buddha, etc.) must be found to bring the new vibration through to the
> > material plane. It makes sense that the one who gets that (thankless)
> > job would be the one next in line, the one who had earned the
> > opportunity. Speculating about the position in the hierarchy of such
> > a one is rather self-defeating, since we don't even know our own
> > position, and can hardly expect to be able to estimate another's. But
> > if we consider the fact of the unity of all life, and apply this
> > overarching principle to the question, it becomes evident that there
> > is nothing strange about it at all. Humanity is evolving from
> > unconsciousness to total consciousness. We (humanity) move along the
> > evolution trail together. We each have a position in the whole
> > constantly changing mosaic. All we are asked to do is fulfill that
> > role to the best of our ability. If one falls out of line, from
> > weakness or unwillingness, the next in line, the next one who has
> > earned the opportunity, steps into place. None of us is
> > irreplaceable. It is not a matter of individual success, but of
> > cooperation for the benefit of the whole.
> > 
> > Best wishes,
> > Adelasie
> > 
> > On 25 Jan 2004 at 17:13, krishtar wrote:
> > 
> > > Dears
> > >
> > > Be the peace be with you all.
> > >
> > > Why did all those masters choose HPB as their " representatives" and
> > > channel for registering the secret doctrines? Why couldnīt they
> > > themselves do the job? See: Thery were in major number; They were
> > > males - which could be much easier to be heard than a russian female,=

> > > in a machist world, with so much health problems and physical
> > > limitations? They had developed inner powers - they were oriental, s=
o
> > > why would they need to take a western woman to serve as an 
> amanuensis
> > > and still a woman who required to be taken to Tibbet to be iniciated,=

> > > trained, pretending to be a male in some occasions? It is not a doubt=

> > > of mine, but have you ever thought of it? What can you say?
> > >
> > >
> > > Krishtar
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > To visit your group on the web, go to:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/
> > 
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > theos-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > 
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/