Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00319)

Hallo all,

My views are:

The following is problably worthwhile considering, when we deal with internal theosophical controversies of different kind.


"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."

So very important it is to understand theosophy as not only a Movement because:
"The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to support a system like for instance Theosophical Society or similar - 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 like Theosophical Society. This seems important to understand and know about."

*******
To an ernest student of Thesophy, the question: "Who was or is the second teacher?" keeps starring in the face begging for an answer.
Even Blavatsky mentioned in The Secret Doctrine, that there - problably - would come one along. And it seems likely that she meant, that it would at the earliest happen a hundred years later. Som maybe all later claimants up-til-know have only been small wawes on the water. The BIG one is to arrive.

Some has tried to answer this, and claimed that the teacher has already arrived.
A. A. Bailey has been one of the answers, and I think the most controversial one.
Idries Shah has been mentioned.
Others have been mentioned.
Who has the answer ?

*******


Characteristics of Theosophical Litterature


Here are a few characteristics of Theosophical litterature:

1. Some books, some passages, are intended to be read in a certain order.

2. Some books and passages have to be read under specific environmental conditions.

3. Some have to be read aloud, some silently, some alone, some in company.

4. Some are only vehicles for illustrations or other content generally regarded as extraneous or secondary to the text.

5. Some are of limited use or ephemeral function, being addressed to communities in certain places, at certain stages of development, or for a limited time.

6. Some forms have concealed meanings which yield coherent but misleading meanings, safety-devices to ward of tamperers.

7. Some are interlarded with material deliberately designed to confuse or sidetrack those who are not properly instructed, for their own protection.

8. Some books contain a completely different potential, and they are communicators through another means than the writing contained in them. They are not designed primarily to be read at all.

9. Theosophical litterature is a part of carefully worked out plan. Its abuse lead to nothing of permanent value.

Theosophical teachings, and sometimes keys to it, are sometimes embedded in quite other material, not recognisable as theosophical at all to the uninitiated. Many of these teachings are really meditation-themes. They have deep function almost unknown to the pedestrian conventionalists, enthusiasts, imitators or occultist." ...

And the text continues on. - It is especially the last four sentences, which we aught to familiarze ourselves with. And anyways - all of the text seem to work wonders in my mind. For instance is it so, that Blavatskys talks about that allegories, dead-letter reading and the Seven Keys exists. These has to do with the above text on Theosophical litterature. This is my knowledge. There are also non-physical libraries. 

*******
I mention this because. There are many modes of reading, writing and teaching within the what we call the wisdom tradition. A tradiotion which the various different Theosophical branches are only a minor part of.

*******


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...

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