Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00141)

Hallo Konstantin Zaitzev and all,

My views are:

1.
Konstantin Zaitzev wrote:
"Maybe she was essentially right, but the form in which she presented
her critics isn't satisfactory.
Our christian opponents say: you have declared the brotherhood
without
distinction of creed and comparative study of religions, but it's all
hypocrisy, for you are preaching your own fixed doctrine and are
definitely
hostile to our religion."

My answer:
I wonder, what form could today be helpful?
A totally non-critical or non-criticizing form? (I disagree on that. The 
results speaks for themselves.)

What the Christian opponents and other opponents do is their choice.
My goal is to reach the conscience of the all - so all these blind 
hypocracies or immoral activities are being compassionately taken care of.
It is when their conscience tells them, that something is not quite right 
here -
when one denies Wisdom, Reason, promotes blind faith, dead-letter thinking, 
phallisism, cereminoal magic of sacraments and the like while watering down 
the wise teachings of Atma-Vidya - the things starts to happen.
And Atma-Vidya can be presented in words understandable to the listeners.


2.
Konstantin Zaitzev wrote:
"I don't know whether she was RIGHT or WRONG, but I agree with her in
many points. Noteworthy that Leadbeater whose views are the topic of
the current discussion was completely agree with her and even quoted
that very article and her other articles about occult path.

As for my personal views, I cannot say that I agree with both of them
completely because I don't believe much in ethics, morals and other
things
like that."

My answer:
It is quite understandable that one is not in complete agreement with other
fellow human beings.
What I am interested in is Knowledge about these matters.
When one has some Knowledge instead of mere belief one might have something 
to say on the matter.
Else it is better to listen.

What can I say:
Later you will respect ethics and moral much more.
You could consider that I am right in saying this to you (and other 
readers).


3.
Konstantin Zaitzev wrote:
"It is a false logic, because it is based on many suppositions which
should be proved first. Who of later theosophical authors taught
the phallic thought-patterns and christian dogmatism?"

My answer:
Could you show me, why my answer is based on false logic?

- Is it allright to use phallic teaching within Theosophy - by calling God a 
HE and similar activities?
- Is dogmatic ceremonial magic - what theosophy promotes before Atma-Vidya?
- Is it the development of any kind of ESP - what theosophy promotes before 
Atma-Vidya?
- Is it the watering down of the use of allegories - what theosophy promotes 
before Atma-Vidya or allegorical teachings of Atma-Vidya?

As simple yes ot no to these questions could be helpful in understanding 
your position more clearly.

I think CWL failed doing his job properly on all of the above four questions 
of mine.
(Remember I am talking about promoting theosophy and the TS, much more than 
I am talking about what kind of
teaching there was taking place. There is difference.)


4.
Konstantin Zaitzev wrote:
"Writings of Leadbeater and Bailey surely had more spiritual impact
upon other people than those by Cleather and Mead. I know a man
who interested only in magic & ESP and bought "Treatise on white
magic"
by Bailey only because it had "magic" on the cover. There he found
references to Secret Doctrine and now he is a very serious student
of HPB works. He has also created a theosophical group in their
small mineworkers' town.

As for the followers of Alice Bailey, I don't agree with them in some
philosophical points, because many of them believe in God and neglect
the earlier teachings given in Lamrim Chenmo and Secret Doctrine, but
off all schools which I know they are most seriously working on their
own character and try really to live according the teaching, unlike
some "pure" theosophists which are just studying theory all their
life."

My answer:
Yes both groups followers (CWL and Alice A. Bailey) - are large in number.

The question is:
What kind of spiritual impact are you talking about?
Is it a healthy one?

To call an organisation Theosophical Society or LCC or Arcane School 
everyone can do.
But if there underneath the name of such a groups creeps the ugly head of 
Psychism,
dogmatism, narrowminded cultural thinking-patterns, promotion of emotioanl 
beliefs,
ceremonial magic and Phallisism at the expense of Atma-Vidya teachings
we really have a problem on our hands.
Or do you disagree?

Of course there is the positive side to it all.
The Spiritualists in the days of HPB - did often not respect the
possibility of Law of Karma or the possibility of the existence of the 
Masters.
But, that is just about all.

The trilogy of books written by Cyril Scott named "The Initiated" pictures 
the situation
of TS back in the 1920-30' ties in an almost similar manner.
And not much has changed since then as far as I am aware of.

Try this email of mine written August 15th 2005 here at Theos-Talk
http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/200408/tt00254.html

A quote more from the second volume by Cyril Scoot on Theosophists: "The 
Initiated in the New World" page 49
"Well- for instance, I think it's sad to see members of a Society which 
professes
Brotherhood engaged in civil warfare with words- which is only one degree 
better than
waging it with blows. From the very beginning the Society has at fairly 
close intervals
been preoccupied with quarrelling in one form of another, and what should 
best be
ignored or tolerantly forgiven, becomes augmented into a scandal, so that 
members
leave their Lodges in a body by way of protest, their chests expanded in an 
exhibition
of what they take to be righteous indignation."
(Reading further on the pages 54-60 could reaveal something to the Seeker.)

I think we at leatst can agree upon the following from page 55 in the same 
book:
"The Singhalese smiled in a manner that endeared him to me at once- it was 
so utterly
devoid of superiority. "Our Theosophical friends are deaf," he explained, 
"because
although they can hear the sot whispers from the astral planes, they cannot 
hear the
loud voice of Reason telling them that intolerance can never be compatible 
with the
spirit of Brotherhood."

------- Heart and Wisdom and Hands has to be in harmony -------


I think we can make a distinction:
a) There are Raja Yoga theosophists - a la "Spiritual Development" with an 
emotional tinge in the aura. (CWL and Alice A. Beiley)
b) There are Atma-Vidya theosophists ( Core HPB enthusiasts. )
c) There are what I tend to call Methaphysical tourists. Those who passes by 
at the various spiritual groups
just to meet som friendly people or to satisfy their ego. Or sometimes they 
look for a good TS babe or a male TS stud. >:-)
( All groups )
d) The Initiates ( They meet when in Need. The carry no name and puts small 
value on physical organisations)
They are more seldom. Sometimes they visit the various groups. And a few of 
them are leading figures in various TS groups and other groups of similar 
kinds carrying other names.
(All groups when Needed.)

5.
What CWL says about his views on Black Magic is one thing.
And the intention was and is allright with that. I think we agree on this.
The problem is what impact his teaching actually have today on new
Seekers and people in general. Various organisations included.

That is why the lack of a critical stance towards all kinds of:

- Promotion of Ceremonial Magic of Sacraments
- Promotion of Phallisism
- Promotion of non-Atma-Vidya teachings
- Promotion of ESP cravings
- Promotion of quarrels within TS groups or similar
- Promotion of all kinds of Scandals

is not a good idea to the Theosophical cause.

CWL and also Alice A. Bailey are forgiven.
But we should NOT promote a teaching which is unhealthy.
That is all.


HWH = Heart Wisdom Hands
Just doing his best at being helpful.


from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...

------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 
My neighbor has a circular driveway. He can't get out.
(by Stehpen Wright)

------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Konstantin Zaitzev" <kay_ziatz@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:04 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Answer to Leadbeater and bailey are a problem part 
I




--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight"
<global-theosophy@s...> wrote:


> Was HPB wrong in her clearly very critical remarks about dead-letter
> teachings, the dogamtic christian churches and other religious kinds
of
> dogmatism, various spiritualistic sorceries and phallisism etc. etc.
???
> Was it wrong to tell the wrong-doers about what they did ???
> If so, I would like a clear answer on this.
Maybe she was essentially right, but the form in which she presented
her critics isn't satisfactory.
Our christian opponents say: you have declared the brotherhood
without
distinction of creed and comparative study of religions, but it's all
hypocrisy, for you are preaching your own fixed doctrine and are
definitely
hostile to our religion.


> Was HPB wrong when she said the following ??? (If so, I would like a
clear
answer on this.) :

[quotation from Occultism Versus The Occult Arts skipped]

I don't know whether she was RIGHT or WRONG, but I agree with her in
many points. Noteworthy that Leadbeater whose views are the topic of
the current discussion was completely agree with her and even quoted
that very article and her other articles about occult path.

As for my personal views, I cannot say that I agree with both of them
completely because I don't believe much in ethics, morals and other
things
like that.

> So all of the later theosophical leaders and authors followed
> HPB's advice and did not put aside the esoteric doctrine of
> Atma-Vidya? Or was phallic thought-patterns, - dead-letter
> teachings and christian dogmatism just so very very important,
> that HPB's teachings should be PUT ASIDE?
It is a false logic, because it is based on many suppositions which
should be proved first. Who of later theosophical authors taught
the phallic thought-patterns and christian dogmatism?

> Would it be fair to judge the various wellknown theosophists
> teachings and activities on the spiritual impact they have
> created upon other people? I think so. We shall know them on
> their fruits.
Writings of Leadbeater and Bailey surely had more spiritual impact
upon other people than those by Cleather and Mead. I know a man
who interested only in magic & ESP and bought "Treatise on white
magic"
by Bailey only because it had "magic" on the cover. There he found
references to Secret Doctrine and now he is a very serious student
of HPB works. He has also created a theosophical group in their
small mineworkers' town.

As for the followers of Alice Bailey, I don't agree with them in some
philosophical points, because many of them believe in God and neglect
the earlier teachings given in Lamrim Chenmo and Secret Doctrine, but
off all schools which I know they are most seriously working on their
own character and try really to live according the teaching, unlike
some "pure" theosophists which are just studying theory all their
life.

> Black Magic in Science
> "Result on Karmic lines: every Hypnotist, every man of Science,
...
> Such is the consequence of public "Hypnotic" experiments which
> thus lead to, and virtually are, BLACK MAGIC."
I don't know why are you quote this, for Leadbeater was of
exactly same opinion.

"The dangers of mediumship and hypnotism could hardly be better
expressed than in this solemn warning:
Let no one ever resign the sovereignty of himself, his mind or
body, into the hands of another, be he priest or layman. For a
man' s freedom is his divine prerogative, and he who yields it to
another is more abject than the lowest slave.
...
There are many ways by which the inner sight may be opened, and
most of them are full of danger, and decidedly to be avoided. It
may be done by the use of certain drugs, by self-hypnotisation,
or by mesmerism; but all these methods may bring with them evil
results which far outweigh the gain." (Hidden side of things)

> As HPB said in the above: " ten to one the student would blossom
> into a very decent kind of sorcerer, and tumble down headlong
> into black magic". And that has never happened in all of the
> various theosophical groups history since 1875 ???
Leadbeater says that it DID happened.

"In the early days of this Society, while Madame Blavatsky was
still alive, we had a member who was in many ways a man of
tremendous power. If he had chosen to become a black magician
he would have been a very effective specimen. Sometimes he was
slightly unscrupulous; he had a passion for knowledge; he would
have done almost anything- even something a little shady- to
gain further information. He was a doctor of medicine, and in
attending upon one of our members he discovered her to be a
clairvoyant of rather rare powers in certain ways. Finding this,
when she was convalescent he asked her to join him in certain
experiments. He said to her quite openly on the physical plane:
`You have a very wonderful power; if you will allow me to
mesmerize you, to put you into a trance, I am sure that you can
attain heights which I myself can never touch, and in that way we
should gain much knowledge which at present is out of our reach.'
The lady refused- I think quite rightly; for such domination is
a most dangerous thing, and should certainly not be undertaken
except under exceptional conditions and with elaborate safeguards.

At any rate, she refused absolutely. The doctor was very much
dissatisfied and declined to take `No' for an answer; but for the
time he went his way. That same night he materialized in her
bedroom and began to attempt mesmeric passes. Not unnaturally she
was intensely angry; she felt a great sense of flaming outrage
that he should dare to intrude upon her, that he should try to
force upon her what she had definitely and after due consideration
declined; and she set herself to fight against his influence with
all her strength. But she quickly realized that her mental power
was nothing as compared to his; that her will was being slowly
but surely overborne: so, knowing that she was fighting a losing
battle, she called upon her Master (the Master Kuthumi) for help.

The result was not only instantaneous, but it astonished her
beyond words. Remember that she was filled with the most violent
and passionate sense of outrage. In a flash, in a moment, as she
made the call, she saw the doctor disappearing in the far
distance. That was perhaps not quite so wonderful; but what
struck her, what she never forgot, was that in one moment her
whole feeling was absolutely changed. The anger was gone, the
sense of outrage was gone, and all that she felt towards the
disappearing doctor was profound regret that a man who had such
wonderful powers should misuse them in that way."
(The Masters And The Path)

> Now if the huge majority neo-theosophical defenders still wants
> to raise their weapons against the Truth
Who knows the truth?







Yahoo! Groups Links