Theos-Talk Archives (February 2005 Message tt00668)

Hello Erica,

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Erica Letzerich" <eletzerich@y...> 
wrote:
 
> Or do you think it was Besant's idea to create the Order?

I don't know whose idea it was, but it wasn't so bad as it seems.
It was necessary to segregate all the activity concerning World
Teacher project from Theosophical Society which has non-sectarian
basis and shouldn't preach such a doctrine. In case of failure
of the project the consequences for the TS should be minimized.
The trouble was that there were too many devotional people in TS
who were involved into the project, so it didn't help much.

I have read many issues of The Theosophist of 1913-18, and
Krishnamurti and World Teacher project are scarcely mentioned
there. The Herald of the Star, printed in the same time, was
entirely dedicated to them, and seemed to me not interesting at
all. In "Masters and the Path" which was written for several
years before dissolution of the Order, Leadbeater mentions
that he was against the public activity. "We had not meant to
introduce him to the world; we had not considered it desirable
that a mass of thought should be concentrated on a boy of
thirteen, who still had his education before him."

> I wonder how your judgement to Krishnamurti can be so hard
> to the point to call him a materialist and in the same time
> you seem to support CWL's teachings. That is difficult for me
> to understand.

There was a rule in ancient Russia — when someone applied
an information against some other person, the both should be
tortured. Because so many books are written against Leadbeater,
and almost none for, I decided to find out who are those
denunciators.

I judge about teachings in that respect how they widen my
understanding of the world and explain those phenomena which
need explanation. And also how they help me to get rid of
suffering. I am not concerned with moral side, as I already
wrote before, but am interesting in facts of nature only. I
don't like people who tell me what I have to do; I will decide
it myself, but I welcome any useful information. I have found
much of interesting information in CWL's works, while I'm
rather dislike his language and moral approach (which are
obviously due his background as a clergyman). I just filter
it off, for I haven't still found any author with whom I could
be in full agreement on all points.

I made sure of some of his points myself; sometimes from people
who are not theosophists but have astral faculties from birth
I got the corroborations about some other points. They say that
his description fits best to what they see and some points explain
well the things that they have seen but couldn't understand.

I understand that he was not a philosopher at all and that I
have to search some explanations myself. I cannot explain and
understand some of his actions, and I could never do so if I
were in his place. Only a kamikadze could dare to start a World
Teacher project. We decidedly belong to different rays, but
I appreciate the point of view which in some respects is quite
foreign to me. I was very intolerant to religions before,
especially to Christianity, but from his books I have seen
that it has some good sides. So regardless of real value of
Christianity his books made me (and probably other readers) more
tolerant, and so they promoted the objects of Theosophical
Society. From the other side, they could be a good introduction
to theosophy for christians, and it is important in countries
like Greece where you live. From practical point of view it is
not important at all, does man believe in God or not, if he came
to understanding of karma and does not believe in vicarious
atonement. And these points were defined by HPB as of prime
importance.

"Do you expect that your doctrines could ever take hold of the
uneducated masses ...?
It does not require metaphysics or education to make a man
understand the broad truths of Karma and Reincarnation. Look at
the millions of poor and uneducated Buddhists and Hindus, to
whom Karma and reincarnation are solid realities, simply because
their minds have never been cramped and distorted by being
forced into an unnatural groove. They have never had the innate
human sense of justice perverted in them by being told to
believe that their sins would be forgiven because another man
had been put to death for their sakes." (Key to Theosophy)

As a translator I sometimes get responses from the readers,
and as a rule these responses are good; some say that they were
misinformed about CWL's books and personality.

Noteworthy that there is no any cult around CWL. I haven't seen
people who keep his portrait on the wall. There are no strict
followers of CWL, and those who study his books read them along
with those of many other authors, and as a rule are sane and
well-balanced people. They will never say that, for instance,
W.Q. Judge was a black magician and his books shouldn't be
studied. Bit it is not always so with followers of Krishnamurti.
On the contrary, there is some cult around him, as around many
contemporary new-age gurus, even though he was against cults,
but those who create cults are still somehow attracted to him.
Most of the books published by his followers as a rule contain a
biography in which he is praised and theosophists sometimes are
blamed. I have never seen annotations on CWL books written in
that style. An author can't be responsible for all that the
followers do, but it shows that the followers obviously didn't
transform themselves and the teaching didn't fulfill its
mission. I don't insist that Krishnamurti is a materialist in full
sense of the word, but at least some of his ideas can be
understood (or misunderstood?) materialistically and it seriously
tinges the thought of his followers.