theos-talk.com
[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Re: Don't Forget HPB & her writing, or consider Besant as founder & move on

Dec 23, 2005 03:43 PM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins


Dear Sufilight, Leon, Anand et al,

Sufilight, I am glad that you brought forward van der Leeuw's assessment of the situation in 1930. It is historically important because the presentation was given right on the heals of Krishnamurti's resignation speech and the membership was still in quite a stir about it. Van der Leeuw was simply trying to identify the errors the leadership made which brought it to that crises, and I believe that he hit the nail on the head. Arundale, however, ignored van der Leeuw and took another track. He continued to praise K. for awhile in The Theosophist, then shifted gears again and suddenly stopped mentioning him at all. Obviously, as Anand comments, when Arundale became president in 1934, he had to take a different track. He did, but it was not the track van der Leeuw advocated. That van der Leeuw's talk was never reprinted by the TS is (to me) suggestive of the three real problems: 1) the leadership's continuing unspoken commitment to the tradition of revelation that began with the Besant era; 2) their unwillingness to return to the focus of realization which Blavatsky and her teachers originally tried to establish; 3) The organization's reluctance to acknowledge mistakes.
Whether TSA and the TS continue to follow Arundale's lead, I am not in the position to argue. I have had several people who were in leadership positions in the TSA affirm this to be the case. But policies do slowly shift over time, and who is to say exactly at what point they are still following a certain line and when they are no longer doing so.
Van der Leeuw's point about brotherhood, as I understand it, is a subtle one. There is a difference between an organization forming a nucleus of brotherhood and one trying to be that nucleus. An organization which tries to create a brotherhood of *Theosophists* around a set of doctrines is shooting itself in the foot. In this case, there will always be those on the inside and those on the outside. On the other hand, an organization which promotes a brotherhood of *humanity*, if it succeeds, will find the nucleus within the brotherhood itself--not the organization. Blavatsky, her teachers, and Olcott all remarked upon the TS's failure to bring about this first object. That did not change in van der Leeuw's time, and I don't believe it has changed as yet.
Best wishes,
Jerry




M. Sufilight wrote:

Hallo Leon and all,

Perhaps...perhaps.

But where is the Dutch theosophist, J.J. van der Leeuw wrong when
in 1930 he was saying:

"If there is to be any future for the Theosophical Society, it will have to renounce utterly its claim of having solved the riddles of life and being a repository of truth; instead it will have to unite those who search for truth and for reality whatever these may bring by way of suffering and discomfort. The seeker after truth welcomes disturbance and doubt, the very things which were and are feared most by theosophists.
In yet another respect does the Theosophical Society breathe the atmosphere of last century. It is in the desire to unite in one brotherhood all who think or feel alike. Thus the Theosophical Society aimed at forming a nucleus of brotherhood. Such a nucleus however always defeats its own ends. It cannot escape becoming a brotherhood with the exclusion of less desirable brethren. The moment we unite a number of people in such a nucleus we have created a sect, a separate group walled off from the rest of the world and thereby from life."



Especially the last sentemces are very important, and shows me, that one should not read the Mahatma Letters that litterally
(following the dead-letter key).

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.


So when we remember this just like the Masters remember it,
we will know, what a sect is when we see one.
:-)



from
M. Sufilight



----- Original Message ----- From: <leonmaurer@aol.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 6:38 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Don't Forget HPB & her writing, or consider Besant as founder & move on




In a message dated 12/22/05 6:49:24 AM, AnandGholap@AnandGholap.org writes:




Your opinion that G.S. Arundale made everything Theosophy, is
interesting. Maybe other members would like to comment on whether
this is correct or not. Few books which are written by Arundale and
printed by TPH are on Theosophy. However I think President is
allowed to adopt certain strategies temporarily depending upon
situation. As you know any, organization and government has
continuously changing plans to be successful in continously changing
environment. If he found that plan as suitable tempararily, it is
OK. But in the long run TS should focus on publishing writing done
by occultists like AB, CWL, Hodson, Clara Codd, Arundale himself and
Taimni. Also TS should direct it's members to study these books. TS
should not say everything is Theosophy and so members should study
everything. This is practically wrong. After suggesting these books,
they should give freedom to members to accpet or reject. Also
members should be told that TS has unique literature written by
occultists. All sciences, philosophies and religions and also
knowledge given by these occultists constitute Theosophy. But as
other organizations are already providing other literature, TS is
providing and promoting study of writing done by it's occultists. So
TS literature is part of total knowledge available to mankind. And
as other organizations are providing knowledge on other subjects, TS
should concentrate on providing and promoting study of writing done
by occultists in TS. So all knowledge available to mankind is
Theosophy. But work of TS is to make available and promote study of
writing done by it's occultists. So definition of Theosophy is one
thing and what TS should practically is different issue. Definition
of Theosophy and what TS should do practically are two different
things.
Actions of TS are to be guided not by just definition of Theosophy
but also by taking into account other factors mentioned above.
How about considering that the actions of the TS should be guided solely by
its own original guiding objectives... Namely, the "Three Objects of the
Theosophical Movement" set down by HPB when she, William Q. Judge and Henry Olcott
originally founded the Theosophical Society in America in 1875. Those
objects are:

1. "To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of humanity, without
distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or color."

2. "The study of ancient and modern religions, philosophies and sciences, and
the demonstration of the importance of such study."

3. "The Investigation of the Unexplained Laws of Nature and the Psychical
Powers Latent in Man."

Accordingly, for individual students, I think that, even though there was no
limit placed on the literature to be studied, it makes the most sense to first
study the books, articles and letters written in support of these objects by
the three founders and the Masters who informed and guided them (as well as
dictated the bulk of the Secret Doctrine), along with the writings of those
relevant ancient and modern books and scriptures pointed out and quoted by them.

After that, each student -- guided by the three objects, and based on the
three fundamental principles outlined in the Proem of the Secret Doctrine -- must
choose his/her own path of study empowered by their own individual, self
induced and self determined efforts. Only thus, can one gain a true picture of
theosophy from the ground up, and through an awakened discernment, make educated
comparisons and judgments so as to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Accordingly, the TS itself, should, as an organization, have no control over
how student members go about their studies, other than supplying them access
to any and all available literature, facilities, school rooms, meeting halls,
teachers, etc. -- that will enable them to acquire an enlightened understanding
of theosophical metaphysics at its deepest and most occult levels, as well as
demonstrate, as a group, a true brotherhood in action.

Let's hope that the modern remnants of the original TS can live up to those
primary aims, purposes and ends in view as set down by the initial founders.

Best wishes,

Leon Maurer



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




Yahoo! Groups Links












Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application