Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00777)

Hallo all,


My views are:

There has as mentioned in the below link been a conflict
within and outside TS circles on what happened in 1925 when
Krishanmurti was in clear disagreement with Leadbeater and Besant
about the coming of the World Teacher and the use of Ceremonials.
And it is the last part, which I am interested in.

A. The major Theosophical conflict

The article or phamplet is named
"Revelation or Realization:The Conflict in Theosophy" by J.J. van der Leeuw, LL.D.
http://www.tphta.ws/JJL_RRCT.HTM

An excerpt or two:
"A system of revelation is only possible when there is one oracle, or channel of revelation, the authority of which is not to be questioned. A plurality of oracles is death to revelation. When in 1925 it was announced that the World Teacher would have twelve apostles as before in Palestine and when Krishnamurti himself denied having any apostles or disciples at all it was inevitable that members should begin to ask whether this revelation as well as previous ones was to be trusted or not. 
Previously the ceremonial movements had gained their adherents largely because they were announced as a preparation of the work of the coming teacher. In his name and on his authority were they launched forth and those who took part in them felt they were doing the teacher's work. When he began his teaching and denied the value of ceremonial, calling it an obstacle to liberation, there were again many who asked themselves how this contradiction could be explained. Many and ingenious were the explanations put forward, but the fact remained that the faith in revelation had been shaken forever. The consequence of this has been that the work and self-sacrifice of members in so far as these were based on such faith in revelations, has fallen off considerably. In the hearts of many doubt and despair have taken the place of unquestioning belief. The inevitable result is a process of disintegration, in which many of the most serious members leave a movement in which they no longer have confidence."

...and...from the same...

"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."





B. Criticism disturbing the harmony ?

Blavatsky had a different view upon criticism than Annie Besant appearntly had succes in promoting.
And even today the above view on criticism being cruel seems to have continued until today - even by some members here at theos-talk.
We find the following in the article:

--- "To the Readers of 'Lucifer'" ---
"Justice demands that when the reader comes across an article in this magazine which does not immediately approve itself to his mind by chiming in with his own peculiar ideas, he should regard it as a problem to solve rather than as a mere subject of criticism. Let him endeavour to learn the lesson which only opinions differing from his own can teach him. Let him be tolerant, if not actually charitable, and postpone his judgment till he extracts from the article the truth it must contain, adding this new acquisition to his store. One ever learns more from one's enemies than from one's friends; and it is only when the reader has credited this hidden truth to Lucifer, that he can fairly presume to put what he believes to be the efforts of the article he does not like to the debit account.
Lucifer, January, 1888 
H. P. Blavatsky "

...also...but at the beginning...

"Our magazine is only four numbers old, and already its young life is full of cares and trouble. This is all as it should be; i.e., like every other publication, it must fail to satisfy all its readers, and this is only in the nature of things and the destiny of every printed organ. But what seems a little strange in a country of culture and free thought is that Lucifer should receive such a number of anonymous, spiteful, and often abusive letters. This, of course, is but a casual remark, the waste-basket in the office being the only addressee and sufferer in this case; yet it suggests strange truths with regard to human nature.1

[Footnote added by M. Sufilight ] 
1 "VERBUM SAP." It is not Our intention to notice anonymous communications, even though they should emanate in a round-about way from Lambeth Palace. The matter "Verbum Sap" refers to is not one of taste; the facts must be held responsible for the offence; and, as the Scripture hath it, "Woe to them by whom the offence cometh!""
http://theosophy.org/tlodocs/hpb/ToTheReadersOfLucifer.htm





C. Ceremonials

a)
Blavatsky's views upon ceremonial magic might be helpful to learn and know about.
And Besant + Leadbeater seemed to have catched the wrong spirits.
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/thomas/thomasceremonial.htm

b)
Also in The Secret Doctrine we find
"In the Sepher Jezireh, the Kabalistic Book of Creation, the author has evidently repeated the words of Manu. In it, the Divine Substance is represented as having alone existed from the eternity, boundless and absolute; and as having emitted from itself the Spirit.* "One is the Spirit of the living God, blessed be ITS name, which liveth for ever! Voice, Spirit, and Word, this is the Holy Spirit;"** and this is the Kabalistic abstract Trinity, so unceremoniously anthropomorphised by the Christian Fathers. "
(The Secret Doctrine, vol. 1, p. 337

c)
Blavatsky also wrote the article: "CHELAS AND LAY CHELAS" (1883)

"From Book IV of Kiu-te, Chapter on "the Laws of Upasans," we learn that the qualifications expected in a Chela were:-- 

1. Perfect physical health; 

2. Absolute mental and physical purity; 

3. Unselfishness of purpose; universal charity; pity for all animate beings; 

4. Truthfulness and unswerving faith in the law of Karma, independent of any power in nature that could interfere: a law whose course is not to be obstructed by any agency, not to be caused to deviate by prayer or propitiatory exoteric ceremonies; 

5. A courage undaunted in every emergency, even by peril to life; 

6. An intuitional perception of one's being the vehicle of the manifested Avalokitesvara or Divine Atman (Spirit); 

7. Calm indifference for, but a just appreciation of everything that constitutes the objective and transitory world, in its relation with, and to, the invisible regions. 

Such, at the least, must have been the recommendations of one aspiring to perfect Chelaship. With the sole exception of the 1st, which in rare and exceptional cases might have been modified, each one of these points has been invariably insisted upon, and all must have been more or less developed in the inner nature by the Chela's UNHELPED EXERTIONS, before he could be actually put to the test. "

Leadbeater is in agreement with this quote by Blavatsky in his book named: 
- The Masters And The Path -

An interesting excerpt from Leadbeater's book might leave the LCC Seeker in doubt about,
whether Leadbeater was in two minds about his Ceremonial activities.

The Masters And The Path (Chapter IX - ACCOUNT OF A SECOND INITIATION ).
"
The Lord Maitreya continued: 

"You have transcended all superstition; you know that a man may find the light in any religion; you know that rites and ceremonies have no intrinsic value, and that all which is done by them can be done without them by knowledge and by will. Above all, you are free from the superstition of the wrath of the Power behind evolution, and you know that all that exists is within the Universal Love, and that it is the gospel of Universal Love which you must spread among men. Will you seek to lift the darkness by spreading this gospel?" 

"





So now I say:
- - - Ceremonials based on blind faith can never become a true theosophical activity. - - -
- - - No true chelaship will happen through the exoterical ceremonies at the Liberal Catholic Church - known as LCC. Even Leadbeater agrees upon that. Or am I wrong?- - -



from
M. Sufilight








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