Re: Theos-World HPB's article entitled KARMIC VISIONS & Frank's relevant comments
Mar 23, 2005 12:05 PM
by M. Sufilight
Hallo Leon and all,
My views are:
I will seek to keep this answer as short as possible and only refer to the
main concern I have with your below posting.
You wrote:
"BTW, when Idries' teacher (I presume) Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan showed up in
New York for a lecture back in the early eighties, my collaborator (on the
theory of ABC) and I went over to talk with him. I can't say what we
discussed,
but we both received a warm hug and a good wish blessing for what we told
him we
were doing. He told us that Idries Shah and many others were doing the same
work for those who could follow the Sufi way... And, that what we were
accomplishing was good in that it joined their spiritual "messages" with the
materialized Western way. Interestingly, for whatever it implies, Idries,
my late
science collaborator (who passed on in '87) and myself are all of almost
exactly
the same age, being born in the same year. "
This is a false view as far as my knowledge goes. Either you are making a
spelling error or mister Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan's views about himself
being the teacher of Idries Shah is false.
The following should explain why I think so.
1. Primarily because of the following view about Hazrat Inyat Khan:
In addition to his Chisti background, Khan had also been trained in the
three other major Sufi orders of northern India, the Naqshbandi, Qadiri,
Suhrawardi. Perhaps because of his multiple lineages, Khan dispensed with
the usual Sufi practice of identifying with one primary order and gave his
expanding circle the generic designation "The Sufi Order in the West." After
his death in 1927, his followers continued to spread his message of Sufism
as the "religion of the heart."
This was the Sufism that most Westerners knew of - with the exception of
some Sufi poetry translated by R. A. Nicholson and A. J. Arberry - until the
arrival of Idries Shah in the sixties. Shah, whose father Ikbal Ali Shah,
had immigrated to England from northern India in the twenties, first
achieved some notoriety when he announced himself as a representative of
"the People of the Tradition," a remote top echelon of Sufism supposedly
located in the inaccessible Hindu Kush of Afghanistan.
Like Inayat Khan, Shah presented Sufism as a path transcending specific
religions and adapted it to Western ways. In distinct contrast with Khan,
however, he downplayed any religious or spiritual trappings and instead
emphasized Sufism as a psychological technology leading to self-realization.
This approach seemed especially pitched to followers of Gurdjieff,
human-potential movement students, and intellectuals well versed in modern
psychology. For instance, Shah wrote:
Sufism . . . states that man may become objective, and that objectivity
enables the individual to grasp "higher" facts. Man is therefore invited to
push his evolution ahead towards what is sometime called in Sufism "real
intellect."
Shah dismissed other forms of Sufism in both the East and West as
"watered-down, generalized or partial," including not only Khan's version
but the overtly Muslim Sufism found in most Islamic countries. A prolific
author, Shah popularized Sufi teachings stories and jokes as primary ways of
imparting wisdom, and oversaw the publication of numerous reprints of
translations of classic Sufi texts in English. His associates also produced
a number of books that included passages implying that Shah was the "Grand
Sheikh of the Sufis," an exalted position of authority that was undercut by
the failure of any other Sufis to acknowledge its existence.
--- Leon. I know, that you in the above referred to Pir Vilayat Inayat
Khan. ---
--- But this does not water down the problems your statement is facing if it
should keep itself on the path of truth. --
2. According to Idries Shah we have the following - when we remember to read
betweent he lines and that
Theosophy = Sufism:
"Sufism, considered as a nutrient for society, is not intended to subsist
within society in an unaltered form. That is to say, the Sufis do not erect
systems as one builds an edifice, for succeeding generations to examine and
learn from. Sufism is transmitted by means of the human exemplar, the
teacher...
We find traces of Sufism in derelict organizations from which this element
of human transmission of baraka has ceased; where the form alone remains.
Since it is this outer shell which is most easily perceptible to the
ordinary man, we have to use it to point to something deeper. Unlike him, we
cannot say that such and such a ritual, such and such a book, incarnates
Sufism...
A Sufi school comes into being, like any other natural factor, in order to
flourish and disappear, not to leave traces in mechanical ritual, or
anthropologically interesting survivals (The Sufis, quoted in R.Ornstein
(ed), The Nature of Human Consciousness, San Francisco, 1973, p.276; I do
not have the original reference)."
3. Shah says the Sufis utilized a secret language based on the numerical
values of letters. He cites the Abjad scheme, a fairly simple substitution
cipher, a basic system used in Arabic, which is often coupled with
allegorization of the recipherment, and says this was widely used in
literature, that many people read it, or at least look for it, almost as a
matter of course, especially poets and writers.
According to Idries Shah the title of the book which is commonly referred to
in the west as The Arabian Nights is just such an encoded title. Source of
Records in Arabic is UMM EL QISSA. The sum of the numerical equivalent,
utilizing the standard Abjad scheme, is 267. Next, a sufficiently
descriptive, or poetic, title for the book was found, made up of letters
which, when added, gave the same number 267. Rearrangement of these letters
gave the phrase: ALF LAYLA WA LAYLA which means Thousand and One Nights.
By this practice the title of a book, or the author's name, would often give
a most important indication of the emphasis which was to be placed upon the
book, and what could be discovered from it.
Shah says that in Arabian Nights, the person who named the work intended to
convey that it contained certain essential stories. According to Shah, a
study of the stories, and their decoding in accordance with the rules of the
secret language, demonstrates the intention, or concealed meaning of the
stories. He says many are encoded Sufi teaching stories, descriptions of
psychological processes, or enciphered lore of one kind or another.
According to Idries Shah - Shakespeare had a great influence in creating the
present day used english language. And Shah says, that because of
Shakespeare the relations between the English language and the Arab language
has been strenghened, so that English now are much more closely related to
the Arab language.
4. Just explore the teachings of Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan and compare them
with Idries Shah's.
a) Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan at the following website:
http://www.sufiorder.org/biographies.html
b) Idries Shah at the following websites:
Learning how to Learn
http://www.doyletics.com/art/learning.htm
Those interested in understand the problems surrounding "the true or false
Teachers of the Theosophical arts"
could with advantage read the following:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/sufi-shah.html
A short biography on Idries Shah:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/suf-shah2.html
A few words more:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/sufi/stretching.html
I think it speaks for it self when we know that Blavatsky herself neither
wrote much on her own, but often quoted
other writings while only adding little of her own wisdom. Idries Shah did
very much the same while being modest about it all.
5.
What Nasrudin Said
The Judge asked the defendant, "Mulla Nasrudin, do you understand that you
have sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?"
"I do," nodded the Mulla.
"Now what do you have to say to defend yourself?"
"Your Honour,' replied Nasrudin: 'under those limitations ... I have nothing
to say."
6. My own offer as a renewal of the Theosophical teachings is to incorporate
the
teachings of Idries Shah into the main theosophical teachings. Especially
the teachings by him on the issue - Spiritual Organizations and their
different levels of activity - are of importance. (If one of the readers of
this clearly disagrees, I will like to know, why.)
It is this enhancement of the theosophical teachings, that according to me
makes Idries Shah a likely candidate on being the Messenger, which Blavatsky
referred
to would come after the year 1975 and give final proof on Gupta Vidya.
But, there are of course other candidates to take into consideration.
An example: Sathya Sai Baba has taught a lot about Gupta Vidya or Jnana
Yoga.
We know that Senzar is a language related to Sanskrit. And Sathya Sai Baba
uses the language Telegu,
which are related to the Dravidian languages, which again The Voice of
Silence
written by Blavatsky also are related to. But Sai Baba is also romoured to
be a sex-trickster so...hmmm...
(I have copied some of the texts from the Internet - so my writing took less
time.
But the words could have been my own.)
Putting this answer together in fact helped me to understand something.
So thanks to Leon for helping me along.
from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...
----- Original Message -----
From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 7:31 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World HPB's article entitled KARMIC VISIONS & Frank's
relevant comments
In a message dated 02/22/05 3:57:17 PM, global-theosophy@stofanet.dk
writes:
I will have to ask you: Who is the messenger Blavatsky professed to come
past the year 1975?
Was it Idries Shah ?
If not, why not ?
How would anyone know -- (other than the ones who "directly" receive the
message :-)?
As I understand it, HPB referred to that "New Messenger" as one who would
appear in this century (to her direct disciples) and bring them the final
knowledge that would help them verify to the world -- in the "language of
this age"
-- that there was such a thing as Gupta Vidya... Also, she said, that its
final proof would answer all their questions about the true nature of
reality,
as well as fully justify the system of metaphysics related to both
Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis -- which starts from "Absolute abstract
motion," the
basis of karma and reincarnation that she gave out in the Secret Doctrine.
(I
assume in "outline form" only -- turning just four of the seven keys --
Because
she was limited by her vows at that time.) But, times have changed,
haven't
they?
So, it's a certainty, through necessity, that much occult truth was hidden
by
the obscure and complex method of her writing for those "intuitive" and
astute students (destined to become Adepts eventually) who could find the
higher
"keys" through their own individual study and efforts (both within and
without
the Secret Doctrine). I'm sure all the "keys" were given out and
scattered
throughout the world's mystical literature (she pointed to),
metaphorically and
otherwise, for many hundreds of years before she came along. What else
could
be the purpose of the last two objects of the Theosophical Movement that
she
"cut in stone" as the guiding purposes of the TS?
BTW, who knows whether or not her so called "outspokenness" wasn't
intentional -- so as, perhaps, to provoke some of the crises of this past
century that
led to WW2 and the eventual exposure of the inner workings of the Black
Lodge?
In my view, the realities of theosophical work and the promulgation of its
occult truths are not what they appear to be on the surface. HPB advised
that
to understand the true occult nature of reality, one must "read in an
around
the words and between the lines" -- and let our intuition expose the real
truths
of who and what we are, as well as the "powers" we have with relation to
the
universe as a whole. It's obvious (to me at least, and to some others who
have pointed it out to me:-) that all the secrets of magic and the
application of
the will was given out in the SD and other writings of HPB. And, for good
reason, I'm sure, so as to arm those who had to face the dark forces that
would
become powerful during this and the past century (and who are now,
apparently,
lurking behind some of the governments in both Europe and America).
In this light, I don't think such a "new messenger" would have anything
new
to say about the Heart Doctrine teachings (which could never be added
to) -- or
about the practical yoga's which are the basis and practice of the ethics
and morals that teachers such as Idries Shah focussed on.
So, it quite obvious that she was speaking directly (and referred that
Messenger) to the Jnana Yoga students and potential Adept occultists she
actually
wrote the Secret Doctrine's metaphysical teachings for ... Those, self
chosen
students of a highly motivated interest, and technical knowledge (Jnana)
who
could eventually offer the scientific proofs that would convince those of
any
religious or atheistic persuasions that karma and reincarnation were
fundamental
laws of nature... Based on the verification that the seven fold "coadunate
but
not consubstantial fields of consciousness," capable of carrying in their
vibratory patterns infinite constructive and karmic information, was the
true
reality of both Man's and the Cosmos' inherent nature as well as the
fundamental
cause of their being.
So, as far as I'm concerned -- since HPB spoke directly to her truly
"intuitive students" capable of understanding the deepest metaphysical
concepts
leading to a completely consistent picture of a scientifically valid
multidimensional universe based on fundamental laws of nature inherent in
the abstract
motion of Absolute Space that governed both Cosmogenesis and
Anthropogenesis -- I
don't believe Idries Shah is the particular "Messenger" that HPB spoke
about
as coming in this century to add to her teachings of metaphysics that she
merely "outlined" in the Secret Doctrine...
Although, he may be one of the wisest modern gurus around teaching the
Heart
Doctrine and its practical application with respect to the conditions of
the
present world. Therefore, we might consider him more of a "Guide" than a
"Messenger" -- since his Sufi teachings have been around long before he
came on
the scene and brought them into a modern form and application... And, we
can
also read everything he teaches in the writings of Pir Vilayat Inayat
Khan, Rumi,
Omar Khayyam, Kahlil Gibran, and even Lao Tse, Suzuki and many other
great
teachers of practical "living " yoga's, that are both timely and
timeless...
They each and all give us the means to find and connect with our true
self.
That is, if we have the means and knowledge of how to learn through the
awakening of our intuition through a direct inner visualization and
comprehension of
the ever static, yet uniquitous zero-point, as the unchanging root of
consciousness (awareness/will) -- and its abstract motion or "spinergy,"
as the root
of transformable matter (energy/mass and form in all its permutations,
from
spirit/mind/soul, to brain/body).... And, through that path, comprehend
the true
basis of karma and reincarnation.
As an aid to this understanding, we might imagine -- "as above, so
below" --
that the web-like threads of galaxies, stars and planets, along with the
tendrils of the multidimensional Force that connects them, as being the
Cosmic
equivalent of the neural networks and synapses of the human brain... And,
thus,
see that "universal mind" and "individual mind" are entirely analogous and
corresponding -- as theosophy teaches... One, an integral part of the
other, and
the other an essential part of the One. Thus, reinforcing the ideal of
universal brotherhood. Or, as Dumas put it, the practice of "One for all
and all for
one."
As I see it, the New Messenger HPB referred to, came just on time after
1975 (when the hi tech, electronic CGI and CAA tools were coming into
place to be
able to picture the truths of fractal multidimensional reality in the
graphical language of this age, that both the scientists and the ordinary
people
could understand). His mission was to begin teaching me (and other
theosophists
trained in the sciences and technologies of this age) who were capable of
comprehending the exact process by which the Universe is created and
how its
consciousness, reflected through the Dhyan Chohans who, governed by those
laws,
build the manifest universe and serve as guides (through their direct
connection with out higher natures) -- specifically for those who have
ears to hear,
minds to think, and eyes to see and visualize its infinitudes of
dimensionality's and potentialities, as well as its purely scientific
correlation's that
interface the higher metaphysics with modern science and mathematics.
Where
else could that final "objective" "proof" of theosopbhy come from to
convince the
material minded (or "spiritual materialist") people of today?
Thus, the real Messenger, who sparked that new knowledge in me and others
who are currently working on the "new scientific paradigm" that will
eventually
prove the truths of Karma and Reincarnation -- was here, went through
the
long and arduous study and initiations in the physical and metaphysical
sciences
to prepare himself to be able to reach those he needed to teach, and
finish
his work before he had to leave the scene and go back to his Devachan.
Incidentally, that messenger, in order not to become a Messiah to all the
foolish
"New Agers" and "New Word Order" creeps waiting for one -- would
necessarily
have to manifest to each of us "scientific interpreters" as a different
personality who could teach us directly, mouth to ear.
In what personal form he came to others I don't know... But in my
experience, he was a former nuclear physicist and biochemist who became an
initiated
Tibetan Lama with obvious (to me) demonstrable Adept powers. During a
period of
over five years, on almost a daily basis, he taught me everything I needed
to
know about physics, physiology and biology in order to correlate it with
the
metaphysics explained in painful detail by HPB in the SD. (He also
pointed
out to me how radically that teaching had became distorted by the later
pseudo
theosophists -- some of whom, possibly to sidetrack us into making an
organized
"religion" out of theosophy and set up a ruling hierarchy, could very well
be
dupes, or "plants" of the black Lodge.) Incidentally, I have spotted
several
such "plants" in various theosophical groups -- but that's another story.
This separation of the Messenger into different persons, of course, would
be
necessary so as to insure that -- when the "message" is finally "spread
broadcast" and accepted in unequivocal terms and beyond a shadow of a
doubt by the
world at large -- no cult will ever spring up around that "Messenger" who
brought us the metaphysical basis of those "proofs" that could correlate
with the
modern sciences and technologies that now have the world's understanding
and
respect (even if currently misconstrued).
However, I'm sure that such a comprehensive understanding will come about
through the unequivocal proofs which Science, as a whole, will eventually
bring
forth that could satisfy both the secular "evolutionists" and the
religious
"creationists" as well as those of all religious persuasions -- while
giving
them a God to respect but not worship, that can be both impersonal and
personal
(since it resides in each and all of us). It is these proofs of the
"fields"
of higher levels of consciousness, along with the reality of karma and
reincarnation, that may eventually give credence to the practical and
right living
yoga's (that embrace all religions and philosophies) as taught by such
wise
guides as Idries Shah. (I think Idries would be very happy to hear that.
:-)
BTW, when Idries' teacher (I presume) Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan showed up in
New York for a lecture back in the early eighties, my collaborator (on the
theory of ABC) and I went over to talk with him. I can't say what we
discussed,
but we both received a warm hug and a good wish blessing for what we told
him we
were doing. He told us that Idries Shah and many others were doing the
same
work for those who could follow the Sufi way... And, that what we were
accomplishing was good in that it joined their spiritual "messages" with
the
materialized Western way. Interestingly, for whatever it implies, Idries,
my late
science collaborator (who passed on in '87) and myself are all of almost
exactly
the same age, being born in the same year.
The only reason I can account for my still hanging around, is that my part
of
the work of helping "spread broadcast" these new teachings through the
mass
media -- without any connection to a particular living [or dead]
"messenger" --
isn't finished yet... Although, much of the groundwork has been laid down
(we're working on a few books and movies that may soon, hopefully, see the
light
of day)... One of them, BTW, has a funny kid philosopher-jokester
character
named "Nasty Rudin." :-) As they say. " When the materials are in place,
the
magician(s) will appear"-- and the work will be done. Then, all the
"messengers" will disappear [except, maybe, as characters in a film or
comic book]...
Which is as it should be. :-)
Best wishes,
Leon...
-------Original Message-------------------------
Hallo Leon and all,
My views are given with *** in the below.
M. Sufilight
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
