Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00536)

Hallo all,

My views are:

Try this link on the conflict since Krishnamurtis dissolution of the Order of the Star and his resignation from the Theosophical Society:
"The J.J. van der Leeuw pamphlet" written around 1930. - A pamphlet which TS Adyar "loves" so much, that they have refused to reprint it even if it is central to TS History.
http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/krishnamurti/leeuw.html

A minor excerpt would be fitting:
" It is my intention in this lecture to seek out the causes of this disintegration and, if possible, to find a cure. I shall therefore criticize quite frankly. Now criticism has always been exceedingly unpopular in the Theosophical Society. In theory our platform is free, but in practice one who thinks differently from the rest, though perfectly free to do so, will find no platform to express his thoughts. There has always been fear of any idea that might disturb the harmony among the members. Criticism, however kindly expressed, was immediately branded as "cruel and unjust attacks," as "unbrotherly" and in the last resort as being under the influence of the Dark Powers. It is the mediaeval attitude of mind where the sulphur smell of satanic activity is detected whenever an opinion is expressed different from its own.

I speak for love of truth, not to attack theosophy. The one thing I should like to ask you is to credit me at least with the sincere desire of helping our members in the present state of confusion and not to suspect me of sinister intentions. " 
(J.J. van der Leeuw )

...and...

" In yet another respect does the Theosophical Society breathe the atmosphere of last century. It is in the desire to unite in one brotherhood all who think or feel alike. Thus the Theosophical Society aimed at forming a nucleus of brotherhood. Such a nucleus however always defeats its own ends. It cannot escape becoming a brotherhood with the exclusion of less desirable brethren. The moment we unite a number of people in such a nucleus we have created a sect, a separate group walled off from the rest of the world and thereby from life."
(J.J. van der Leeuw )

" The Society must cease to be a brotherhood with the exclusion of less desirable brethren; it must break down the barriers which make it possible to speak of an "outside world", and create a new form of membership which does not involve sectarian allegiance. "
(J.J. van der Leeuw )


Both these conflicts and the conflict of Krishnamurtis dissolution of the Order of the Star and his resignation from the Theosophical Society - still exists within various theosophical groups and even within TS Adyar. One reason being, that what happened or - more precisely - the manner in which it happended was not helpful in protomting theosophy - or what we also call the wisdom teachings.

The email I posted earliere here at Theos-talk might also be helpful in understanding,
how Theosophical Society will be evolving in the future and how this conflict(s) might be solved.
The first part of this email is a rewritten excerpt taken from the "The Sufi Mystery" by N. P. Archer, chapter 1.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/17916
(It is The first part of this mail which I am mainly concerned with in the below questions.)

An excerpt:
"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."


So how is the development of The Theosophical Soceity and various theosophical groups going to be in the future - IF - we as a minimum base our views on my above email - while keeping the J.J. van der Leeuw pamphlet in the first link in the above in mind?

We could with some adavantage ponder on the following questions:
1. Who is (or was) the "second teacher(s)" - if any - within Theosophy? - And will there be or has there been a third, fourth or fifth teacher?
2. Who are being or has been mistaken for being the "second teacher" within theosophical teachings, but are or was in fact only promoting a theosophical Cult, (emotional and what not) - with merely social and psychological teachings as the main objective?
3. And who has been or are promoting The Theosophical Society merely as an emotional cult and was this creation of a cult in accordance with the original ideas or with the wisdom teachings?
4. Who are merely frozen in the development of the furtherance of the theosophical teachings (the doctrine of "business-as-usual") - and not knowing to be so?
5. Who have merely been writing interpretations on the theosophical teachings in a learned manner since HPB died - and had success in building an marked increase in support to the theosophical cause? 
6. - And who have merely been writing interpretations on the theosophical teachings in a learned manner since HPB died - but failed to build an marked increase in support to the theosophical cause?
7. Is your conscience not telling you that a teaching which are labelled as "secondary" is not as good as a teaching named "primary" - 
with a "primary" and up-to-date Teacher guiding you? (A Teacher who is alive - and - not living in the past guiding you with "past" teachings.)
8. Have you actually matured visibly as a Seeker beyond the average fellow-human-beings level of consciuosness just by reading a few theosophical books or even one hundred of them? And do all Seekers who do that mature beyond that level?
9. Can real theosophical teaching happen in randomly collected groups - where the listeners are not in harmony with each other, the teacher, time, place and circumstances? (Are it just not merely information stimulating the intellect which are being exchanged?)
9. Can the blind lead the blinder? (Maybe it is good to be honest about how blind one is.)
10. Do you not need a - real - teacher first?
11. Can Universal Brotherhood be created or is it just merely a dream with all those theosophical sects (and Sisterhoods >:-)...) around in the world?
Sects because they do not openly tell the Seekers how they relate to other theosophical groups year 2004.
12. Will the Theosophical Societies and other theosophical groups create a good furtherance of its teachings through promotion of so-called "spritiaul Master Revelations" presented or treated by various Theosophical leaders as an authority? (What was good in the good old days - is maybe not good today.)
13. Is the furtherance of the theosophical teachings based on giving more emphasis to the opening of the spiritual Heart, love and unselfsh healing more than what can be termed "business-as-usual" or the spiritual support of emotional get-to-gethers?
14. How aught one to promote oneself as a Teacher of theosophy? And how not?
15. How do I promote Theosophy at work? Through social-get-togethers?


My views are:
Answering these questions will provide material enough to write several volumes of text.
At this place we call Theos-Talk, we dare challenge leadership and how it aught to be used theosophically speaking. 
At various theosophical groups leadership are not allowed to be challenged. Some of the reasons for this I think J.J. van der Leeuw has presented in his still important pamphlet. Blavatsky was challenged and allowed it to happen to a very great extend.
-------

Is it not so that Theosophical groups with advantage can be divided into three main groups?
a) Those teaching theosophy as a social-get-togethers, - with emphasis on emotional and intellectual stimulation (often mistakingly called Bhuddi energies). Ie. Teachings a la CWL and Besant as almost mentioned in the J.J. van der Leeuw pamphlet.
b) Those teaching rather self-contradictionary that there is no Path, no spiritual guides and no Masters. And that there is no need to collect the audience being taught in a different manner than the random one.
c) Those teaching Atma-Vidya and esoteric teachings with emphasis on stimulation of the Bhuddi eneriges. With the understandings of the fact that Masters exists and that a spiritual guide is necessary on the Path.

With the truth being, that People first joins a) and/or b) and later in their development they reach c). And from there they can be a member of both a), b) and c) without being recognized as belonging only to c) or even the un-named later stage the d) group.
Ignorance bars the Seekers understanding of this Truth.

-------
As Martin Luther King Jr. Said:
"But either we go up together, or we go down together."



M. Sufilight with peace and love...

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