Theos-Talk Archives (December 2005 Message tt00246)

Hello Morten,
Article is interesting. Indeed major problem for most is who is 
second and real teacher mentioned here.

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-
theosophy@s...> wrote:
>
> Hallo Anand and all,
> 
> My views are:
> 
> I think we have been talking about these issues before here at 
Theos-talk.
> 
> Maybe Anand, other participants to this thread as well as various 
> theosophists could be helped
> by reading a previous email of mine to this place:
> http://theos-talk.com/archives/200409/tt00536.html
> (And read also the links within the emails)
> Especially this one:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/17916
> 
> An major excerpt from the last link are given in the below
> It is in part about what happened when Blavatsky died physically:
> 
> "After the disappearance from the field of a teacher of Wisdom, 
the 
> followers
> will divide themselves into groups, in accordance with their 
strength and
> weaknesses. Some will assume control of others. They may be good 
or bad, and
> this will be shown by their reaction to - the second teacher - 
when he/she
> arrives.
> If they realise he/she is their teacher, then they have merely 
been 
> developing
> themselves and can mature. But if they have become atrophied, they 
will be 
> too
> blind to recognize the Spirituality of the very teacher, for which 
> appearance
> they have been prepared. They may attach themselves, in default, 
to a 
> different
> group. (And this groups existence is maybe no coincidence.) Again 
well and 
> good
> : providing they return to the mainstream of teaching when it is 
offered to 
> them
> again. This is the test of whether they have overcome the lower 
self. They 
> will
> realise, if they are sufficiently developed, that the person who 
appears to 
> be
> 'second' teacher is in reality - the first in importance.




> Life is reversed for the undeveloped man (the newcomer), and 
he/she will 
> behave
> in accordance with this. 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.
> 
> When a system of teaching of wisdom is in a period of fallowness, 
because 
> the
> one who propagated it is dead, then there comes a period of 
stagnation. This
> period can last between 10 years, 15 years or more. In the time, 
which 
> passes,
> the group of people who is affected by the system are sieved by 
natural 
> means.
> Some wander away. Others carry on automatically not really 
knowing, what 
> they
> are doing. They are now 'frozen', though they do not know they are.
> The blind may try to lead the blinder. This takes the form of 
assumption of
> authority by those who were given some sort of authority in the 
original
> mandate. These are the people in the most dangerous position, 
because the 
> longer
> they remain 'orphaned' the more strongly their lower self (or the 
three 
> lower
> bodies) asserts it self.
> Others may modify the teachings in a learned and personal way. 
Some 
> certainly
> fall a prey to cults, which have come into being in order to serve 
them. The
> people who joins these are at great pains to explain why they 
consider, that
> they represent the same kind of teaching - and this is important. 
It is
> important, because it shows the Theosophist or the real 
spiritually minded, 
> very
> clearly, that the people who try to explain - are in fact troubled 
by
> conscience. Somewhere inside them, they know, that they are 
identifying
> themselves with an imitation, or a second-best. But they are 
supported by 
> their
> lower bodies or lower personality, - and this is too strong for 
them.
> Those can be helped by being lead to think in new thinking-
patterns and 
> systems.
> It is via the conscience, that one finds the path forward, - 
thereby will be
> able to remove the limitations of the lower personality."
> 
> And again:
> So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, 
not to 
> support a
> system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in 
which the
> Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of 
ideas and
> movements. This seems important to understand and know about.
> 
> My views is:
> Dead-letter teachings has never been the hallmark of real 
theosophy.
> There is actually no need to use the very words "theosophy" or 
> "Theosophical"
> when TODAY forwarding true and honest teachings (related to time, 
place and 
> people mind you)
> about the Path or Atma-Vidya etc...
> Today a number of wellmeaning Theosophists forget too much to 
CLEARLY point
> this out to Seekers they themselves teach or guide.
> 
> What we don't need is the create yet a new set of branches each of 
them 
> being sort of
> "Bible-collection"-studying sects accepting only dead-letter 
teachings (as 
> main teachings)
> containing the words "Theosophical" or "theosophy" as a NECESSITY.
> And with each sect using their own Bible-collection.
> 
> Another excerpt trying to some how escape business as usual:
> "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 link to 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."
> 
> 
> And again:
> So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, 
not to 
> support a
> system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in 
which the
> Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of 
ideas and
> movements. This seems important to understand and know about.
> 
> 
> 
> from
> M. Sufilight with a smile...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Anand Gholap" <AnandGholap@A...>
> To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 12:28 PM
> Subject: Theos-World Re: Forget HPB & her writing, consider Besant 
as 
> founder & move on
> 
> 
> > Dear Jerry,
> > While
> >> it is not about Besant and Leadbeater, it is also not about
> > Blavatsky.
> >> While TSA does publish books by Blavatsky, Besant and 
Leadbeater,
> > most
> >> of their books are by more current authors on other subjects--
such
> > as
> >> Buddhism, mysticism, mythology, Feng Shui etc. What I am saying
> > is that
> >> TSA does not promote Blavatsky any more than Besant and
> > Leadbeater. And
> >> they promote books on many other subjects besides.
> >
> > To me this does not appear right way of doing Theosophical work.
> > There are many other organizations already doing work of 
spreading
> > Feng Shui etc. TS had many good occultists like AB, CWL and 
others
> > in that tradition. TSA and TS should focus on spreading writing 
done
> > by these authors because this knowledge is not available at other
> > places. Also TS has some special philosophy to offer and that
> > writing is available because of clairvoyant investigations done 
by
> > occultists in TS. Quality of that is much better than writing
> > outside, in my opinion.
> >
> >
> >> They achieved their objectives. That is, to centralize power 
and
> >> minimize autonomy. Traditionally, Theosophy was promulgated
> > through
> >> independent lodges where members gathered and studied, and
> > discussed the
> >> teachings in Theosophical books. Through restructuring, most of
> > the
> >> Lodges have disappeared and members have to rely upon their own
> >> resources, or join the "National Lodge" which becomes the sole
> > voice.
> >
> > This situation would make sick any honest member of TS.
> > Unfortunately decline of Theosophy has happened not only in 
America,
> > but also in Europe and many other countries. Indeed situation is
> > very bad. Membership is very low, those who are members have
> > negligible knowledge of Theosophy and have become fanatic. This
> > fundamentalism is driving away people from TS and Theosophy. This
> > failure of TS in last two decades is effect and every effect has
> > some cause behind it. So it is important to know causes of this
> > failure of TS.
> >
> > Anand Gholap
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>