Theos-Talk Archives (January 2004 Message tt00451)

January 30, 2004

Dear Friend:

Re: Early history and HQ of the T S 


As I see it there is a wide difference between a documentary record and
present opinions.  

In dealing with the past one is better served by going to the actual
records. Our opinions have to bow before facts. In such a case there
would be one source and no "twisting" of words.

I lived in India, and in and around Bombay (1927 to 1969) for about 40
years and have seen both 108 Girgaum Back Rd., and "Crow's Nest" which
is actually quite some distance from "Breach Candy," (it was on Nepean
Rd., (now renamed) on the shore of the Arabian Sea), as it (Crow's
Nest) is on Malabar Hill at the top of that hill. 

The Bombay Branch of the T S is now located at French Bridge, near
Dhobi Talao.

I see no contradiction in this. The H Q in India for India is (or rather
was) first at two addresses (you give them) in Bombay, and then at
Adyar, and as far as I know, it was later transferred (for India) to
Benares The International H Q of the T S remains at Adyar.  

As I said, it was Col. Olcott, PTS who established the H Q "wherever he
was encamped." 

The split between the American Section (sanctioned by Olcott) and the
rest of the T S was created solely by Olcott. It is on record that the
creation of the American Section T S was for administrative purposes, as
in America there were over 5,000 members and 300 Branches by 1895. ( See
Annual Report.) 

Col. Olcott declared it had succeeded; he was then in Spain in July
1895.

All this will be fund in detail in the history of the THEOSOPHICAL
MOVEMENT (1875-1950). I suggested it be procured and then my
statements can be verified with copies of the documents given there.

HPB's body died May 8th 1891. But I have no record of the H Q moving
with her to England. It is however agreed that without her and her
active "agency" there could have been no T S. , Vol. I of the:
Blavatsky: COLLECTED WORKS makes this plain. 

As to the changes made in the SEAL of the T S I do not at present have a
full record. I do know it is based on H P B's personal seal as a
countess. It has other symbols and meanings associated with it.

You are correct, the death of a teacher of theosophy (however named)
usually leads to divisions among their "followers." I would say, it is
because there is always a tendency to "follow" the literal,
word-recorded, "eye-doctrine" of the Teacher.  

To avoid divisions of this kind ne needs to apprehend and study the
"heart-doctrine." But this is also subject to interpretations and
opinions.  

So one might conclude that independent study is the ideal method, and a
loose affiliation of independent students striving to maintain a living
brotherhood is the best way of perpetuating the memory of the work the
"teacher" did -- and continues to do in the hearts of his disciples.

No organization and no "leader" is needed. Each one assumes that role
for themselves.

If one reads carefully all that HPB says about THEOSOPHY you can realize
that she is speaking of a very ancient system of philosophy, esotericism
and history. [Both the SECRET DOCTRINE and ISIS UNVEILED give ample
evidence of this.] 

Best wishes,


Dallas


========================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Morten 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 6:14 PM
To: 
Subject: RE: Manas and Blavatsky on the Christian Mass media...



Hallo Dallas and all,

My views are:

Very well. That is your view.
I think we are in to a twist on words more than anything.

Try this quote and se what you have to say about that:

"On March 7, 1879, just three weeks after their arrival in India, Mme.
Blavatsky and Colonel Olcott rented a small house in the center of
Bombay at
108, Girgaum Back Road. This served as headquarters for their
theosophical
and editorial activities until December 1880, when they moved to a more
spacious bungalow, "The Crow's Nest," at Breach Candy on the outskirts
of
Bombay. Here they remained until December 1882 when a formal
headquarters
for the Theosophical Society was established at Adyar, Madras.) They
were,
on the other hand, viewed with dismay by the Anglo-Indian community,
particularly by the missionary element. "
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/theos/th-kvmts.htm

Does this then not show, that the HQ in practice was - transferred - to
India about that time ?

Although the HQ issue was sort of dissolved when both W. Q. Judge and
Olcott
created the first split - deliberately !? - I would say indeed
deliberately
! - Since then (1891-93-96) there has not been any real official HQ -
especially because the Agent HPB went into a temporarily 'pralaya'.

And the letter by Blavatsky in Lucifer is much later - namely from 1890.
And true, because The HQ moved from Adyar with HPB to England - where
she
died. Because HPB was the - agent - of the Masters until her death !

More esoterically the HQ was in New York - and still is in New York -
where
so many energies are collected. But this is a westernized HQ. .....


I have four questions:
M
Was the Theosophical Seal changed in the - year1879 - in the manner I
mentioned ?


DTB	I do not know


M
And is there any records on why it was changed by Olcott and HPB ?
Did they just do it for fun ?
Do you have any clue to why it was changed and also why it was not
rechanged - the same also on when the break away from Arya Samaj
occurred ?



DTB	I have no information on this.


======================================


M

Now HPB died in 1891.

When a Teacher or 'Agent' dies in a spiritual organisation similar to
TS,
the following often happens ---

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.

And this has indeed happend to TS !


Now if the above views are correct - then we could discuss whether and
ponder the question - who is/was the SECOND TEACHER - whether
either of - W.Q. Judge, H. S. Olcott, Crosbie, A. Besant, C.W.
Leadbeater,
Krishanmurti, Alice A. Bailey, and others continued the work of HPB as
an
'Agent' for the Masters ?


----------------------------------------------------


DTB	I know of only one way of making this evaluation: READ THEIR
WRITINGS. Study the records made of them and their work. The
evaluation, like it or not, will have always to be a MORAL one.   

Do they measure up to what HPB and the Masters taught? And live.

Are they impersonal, universal, unselfish, and do they explain the
workings of the Universe and our word, as well as the inter-relations of
all beings?

Do they teach reincarnation, karma, the immortality of the MONAD,

Do they teach the BROTHERHOOD of all living things?

Are they educative and unifying -- or do they destroy?


-----------------------------------------------

M

It is clear to me, that they didn't do that to the same extent as
Blavatsky
did - although some might disagree upon that.

But the teacher was according to HPB awaited as late as 1975. She knew
that
from the Masters no doubt. And even Bailey's claims will not change this
fact - and I think earliere emails by me and others have clearly shown
that.

Even so Bailey has created something, namely - attetion at UN on what
Theosophy is, - and this I think we should not ignore.

In the Years around 1909-1925 a claimed overshadowing of an Avatar
happened.

The name was Krishnamurti. He died as late as 1986.

(His dear friend Rajagopal and later 'enemy' in court - was a follower
of
Sathya Sai Baba when he was in his last decade of his physical life.)
In 1964 - Idries Shah who then lived in England created the beginning to
an
enhancement of the theosophical teachings - covering the Middle East.
Idries
Shah died 1996.

In the years from 1960-1980 a by himself claimed Avatar became publicly
know
by many. His name was and is Sathya Sai Baba. Now they call him a
child-molester. The India court has ruled, that there is no evidence on
this.

A woman named Amma has emerged on the scene during tha later two
decades.

High level politicians and UN officials attend her speeches.Who is she
?

Others have emerged - but who could be said to be the so-called SECOND
TEACHER - ie. the one Blavatsky mentioned ?

The answer blows in the wind...

We are still waiting...

while we meditate on the fact, that - God - ParaBrahman is omnipresent.

*******

from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...

CUT

------------------------------------------------


DTB	As far as I can determine it is better not to look for any
individual.  

Therefore look to the TEACHINGS.

The onus is on each of us: DO WE KNOW WHAT THEOSOPHY TEACHES ?


Are we willing to devote our lives (without any desire for a "reward")
to promulgating THEOSOPHY ? [In the BHAGAVAD GITA, Krishna repeatedly
tells Arjuna that the secret to wisdom is impersonality, universality
and refusing to look for a "reward." ]

Each member is a potential "Center." Are we able to make this clear?



Best wishes,

Dallas

====================================


NOTES:


1


		
	

CHRONOLOGY 1875 -78



NOTES ON THE ORIGINAL MINUTES OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.

SOURCES:
PATH, Vol. 10, p. 55, May 1894.
THEOSOPHICAL FORUM, Vol. 1, p. 95-6--(Olcott on)
OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol.
1,p.114-18,121-2,126-133;137,
OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol. 7, p. 326.  



[ Start with Mr. Judge's THE T S AND ITS BASIS, J Art II
156 ] From AUSTRAL THEOSOPHIST, June 1894 ]

"As one of those who helped to form the T S, I may claim to
speak with personal knowledge of the facts, ...



SEPT 7th 1875

"1. At a meeting held in the rooms of H.P.Blavatsky, 46 Irving Place,
New York City, Sept. 7, 1875, it was agreed to form a Society for the
purpose of Occult Study. Upon motion of William Q. Judge, Henry S.
Olcott was elected Chairman of this meeting, and upon motion of
H.S.Olcott, William Q. Judge was elected Secretary of the same.
Adjourned to September 8, 1875...this is ascertained as the facts by
those who were present. (CWB, Vol. 1, 122)

NOTE:

Col. Olcott, in OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol. 1, p. 118, remarks
on this event from memory as follows: (he) "wrote on a scrap of paper:
"Would it not be a good thing to form a Society for this kind of study
?"--and gave it to Judge. H.P.B. read the note and nodded assent." 
     
[He also makes mention of this on p.114 of his book. OLD DIARY LEAVES
(Olcott) Vol. I
(CWB, Vol. 1, p. 473, 122-123)

Since Col. Olcott wrote OLD DIARY LEAVES, largely from
memory, some discrepancies have been observed by historians, these will
be found chronicled in CWB Vol. I, pp. 72-3, 94, 121, 123-4.  

H.P.B. later narrated this event to Mrs. A. Besant, who then
reported it in the opposite sequence: she [HPB] having originated the
idea, and then, having a note suggesting the formation of a society
passed through Judge to Olcott.
(see LUCIFER, Vol. 12, p. 105, April 1893).  

There is no question but Mr. Judge was one of the three founders of the
Theosophical Society who remained with it.

 

SEPT 8th 1875

2. Pursuant to adjournment, a meeting was held at the same place Sept.
8, 1875. It is with this meeting that the minute book begins. Upon
motion of William Q. Judge it was voted that H.S.Olcott take the Chair,
and upon motion it was voted that William Q. Judge act as Secretary.
Upon request of the Chair, sixteen persons handed their names to the
Secretary, as agreeing to found and belong to such a society. A
committee of four, including the Chairman, was appointed "to draft a
constitution and by-laws and to report the same at the next meeting."
Adjourned to Monday, Sept. 13, 1875, at the same place.   
(PATH Vol. 9, p. 1 - facsimile; CWB, Vol. 1, p. 123-5) 


SEPT 13TH 1875

3. Pursuant to adjournment, a meeting was held Sept. 13,
1875. H.S.Olcott acted as Chairman and C. Southern as Secretary. The
Committee on "Preamble and By-laws" reported progress. It was resolved
that the name of the society be "THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY". The Chair
appointed a committee to select meeting rooms. "Several new members
were nominated and upon motion those persons were added to the list of
Founders." The meeting adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.

OCTOBER 16 1875

4. Pursuant to a Notice dated at New York, Oct. 13, 1875,
signed Henry S. Olcott, President pro tem., a meeting was held at
206 W 38th St., Oct. 16, l875, "to organize and elect officers."
Eighteen persons were present. The report of the Committee on
"Preamble and By-laws" was laid on the table and ordered printed. The
meeting was adjourned to October 30th l875, at the same place.
H.S.Olcott was Chairman, and J. S. Cobb, Secretary,



OCTOBER 30 1875

5. October 30, 1875, the Society met pursuant to adjournment.
Mott Memorial Hall, 64 Madison Ave., New York City was selected as the
Society's meeting place. By-laws were adopted, but with the proviso
that the "Preamble" should be revised by a committee and then published
as the "Preamble of the Society." Officers were elected as follows:
President, Henry S. Olcott; Vice-Presidents, Dr. S. Pancoast and G .H
.Felt; Corresponding Secretary, Mme. H.P.Blavatsky; Recording
Secretary, John Storer Cobb; Treasurer, Henry J. Newton; Librarian,
Charles Southeran; Councilors, Rev. J .H. Wiggin, R. B. Westbrook,
LL.D., Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten; C E. Simmons, M.D. and Herbert D.
Montachesi; Counsel to the Society, William Q. Judge. Adjourned to
November 17, 1875. ....
PATH, VOL. 10, P. 55-60;
CWB, Vol. I, p. 122 - 125; 150; 193; 245-6; 375-8;
379-84;



NOTE

Mme. Blavatsky was by this time (1875) engaged in the
writing of ISIS UNVEILED. Mr. Judge's brother, John, was of help in
preparing the manuscript for the printers. Mr. Judge's participation is
not specified in existent records I have read. DTB.  

HPB invited Mr. Judge to help her in 1884 at Enghien, (WQJ
ART. ULT I 468) : "...while I at her request carefully read over,
sitting in the same room, Isis Unveiled, making indices at the foot of
the page, as she intended to use it in preparing the Secret Doctrine."


In THE COLLECTED WORKS OF H.P.BLAVATSKY, VOL. I p. 406
we are told by the editor that the diaries of HPB for the years 1875-77
"mysteriously disappeared" in Adyar.  

The diary for 1878 find Mr. Judge mentioned several times as a visitor
to HPB in the latter part of the year: [ August 5th and 6th (p. 409);
Oct 18 (p.413); Oct. 30 (p.416); Nov. 12 (p.420); Dec. 3-4(p.425);
Dec. 5 (p.426); Dec. 7 (p.427); Dec. 11 (p.429); Dec. 13-15.	COLL.
WKS. B, Vol I, p. 430.]

On December 17th. 1878 Mme. Blavatsky and Col. Olcott boarded a
steamer to sail via. England, for India; Mr. Judge remained in New
York. 

On Dec. 19th. 1879 (p.433, C W B) Mr. Judge visited them on
board the steamer prior to its actual departure, while it was still
anchored inside the bar of the harbor waiting for the tide.



DECEMBER 17 1878 to FEBRUARY 16 1879

9. In the year 1878 H.P.Blavatsky and H.S.Olcott were
appointed under a formal Resolution of the Theosophical Society
dated------- a "Committee of the Theosophical Society" to visit foreign
countries and report." The Theosophist for Oct. 1879, Vol. 1, #1, p. 1,
1st item, says: "For the convenience of future reference, it may as
well be stated here that the Committee, sent to India by the
Theosophical Society, sailed from New York Dec. 17th l878, and landed in
Bombay, Feb. 16, 1879, having passed two weeks in London on the way."
(The THEOSOPHIST, Jan. 1880, Vol. 1, p.95).


===========================================