Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00138)

Dear Bruce,

I hope you are not as angry as myself when reading 
such a poppycock as Mrs. Burnier's hypocritical, 
emotionalizing, truth searching and free thinking, 
free spreech and free research suppressing 
communistic ideal of "we-are-all-equal". Everyone 
can see from her writings that she (or Algeo and 
all the elite of that sect) has no basic knowledge 
of Theosophy or the aims of the aims or even about 
her own office.

Such suggestions from Adyar like that (and I have 
heard much of them here, I recall the 2002 
Convention with Burnier present with horrible 
feelings) of committing manasic suicide are a 
clever trick of her:
She or Adyar TS must not vindicate William Judge, 
whom they have persecuted so unjust for only lower 
motives.
They must not investigate the Besant-Leadbeater 
conspiracy. All is good, heaven is near, we are 
all equal.
Hooray, hooray, Peter Michel shouted in 2002 at 
the Convention, we have had so much success the 
last 100 years, our future is golden.
Hooray, hooray, the Lord is satisfied!! (He was of 
course present at the convention and nodded 
fatherly!)

O my dear, I am really so happy, happy, happy in 
my fools paradise since I have stop to think for 
myself!
Frank



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Bruce MacDonald" 
<robert.b.macdonald@hotmail.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 11:03 PM
Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky, Judge and the loss 
of autonomy


Many theosophists sympathize with the sentiments 
of Radha Burnier expressed
in 1987:

"A study of theosophical history does not have too 
much importance in
fulfilling the aims of the Society if it consists 
of digging out new
details, comparing characters or declaring who was 
a failure.  On the other
hand, it is history which can show what sacrifice, 
courageous thought and
energy led to the building of the world-wide 
organizations which has served
to inspire the hearts and minds of millions. 
Sacrifice and selfless energy
characterized the work, not only of our remarkable 
President-Founder Colonel
Olcott and that unique seer H.P. Blavatsky, but 
also their great successors
like Annie Besant.  To be fired by a passion for 
serving humanity such as
theirs is more important than learning details 
about various incidents and
passing judgement on them. . . . Such sacrifice 
was natural because it arose
out of a knowledge of the direction in which 
humanity has to progress and a
realization of the unitary nature of life. . . . 
The activities of the
Society from the earliest years were such as to 
encourage change in
contemporary thought and situations." - Krotona of 
old Hollywood p. xiv from
Radha Burnier's "Presidential Address to the 112th 
Annual Convention of the
T.S., Adyar, December 26, 1987". The Theosophist, 
Vol. 109, n.4, January
1988, p. 124.

It is very clear what Radha is attempting to do 
here.  It is the same thing
that many of those ignorant of the true import of 
the events of the
Society's early history try to do.  They try to 
frame  the dispute as a
fight between various factions where each faction 
champions its hero and is
busy uncovering all the evidence they can for 
their champion and all they
can find against their champion's opponent.  Such 
a description is an insult
to all theosophists as it suggests that 
theosophists have not even realized
a basic theoretical understanding of Universal 
Brotherhood and would waste
their time on such an exercise.  Also, I hope that 
Radha is not saying that
sacrifice for a foolish cause is a noble way to 
spend one's life.  Yet it
might be argued that those that came after 
Blavatsky and Judge sacrificed
foolishly.

Krsanna in a reply to 'HPB Sees "Poor Cowards" in 
Adyar', points to a very
telling point:

"Adyar was abolished as the parent society by HPB, 
and local lodges
were essentially set up as autonomous at the time 
the Esoteric
Section was created after the 1888 letter from the 
Adept that Olcott
received while on the Shannon."

The implication is that Adyar had somehow lost the 
moral authority to carry
on as the voice of theosophy.  How did they do 
this?

This is rather difficult when you remember that 
the only object that the
Masters cared about was that of setting up a 
nucleus of a Universal
Brotherhood of Humanity with no creeds, etc.  This 
was the Society's moral
raison d'etre.  Was this object somehow 
undermined?

Well this is exactly what those fighting to clear 
the names of Blavatsky and
Judge maintain.  Blavatsky  and Judge were 
attacked first by enemies outside
the Society and finally by friends from within. 
This attack on the
integrity of the two founders required a vigorous 
and wise defence.  Judge
demonstrated this in his defence of HPB, sadly the 
wisdom was lost after his
death.

We can see why Blavatsky wanted to neuter the 
power of Adyar.  Once it
turned away from the First Object, it was capable 
of moving in any
direction.  Any nonsense it would eventually spout 
would flow down to the
lodges beneath them within their organizational 
structure.  If Lodges were
autonomous, then they would be less likely to 
adopt the mistakes of a parent
organization.  The Masters understood that 
autonomy begins with the
individual and works its way up.  Lodges are 
autonomous only if their
members are autonomous.  A top down approach is 
very unstable and will
crumble as soon as you get a politically motivated 
individual in power.
Politics enter at the expense of the First Object.

When politics enter you get the following nonsense 
as described by Joseph
Ross in his non-judgmental way in "Krishnamurti: 
The Taormina Seclusion -
1912".  Ross helps the reader to understand the 
spirit of the book with the
following from the Foreward:

"In the many biographies of J. Krishnamurti little 
attention is given to the
time he spent during 1912 in seclusion in 
Taormina, a village in Sicily.  In
the four-month period, March through June, Annie 
Besant and C.W. Leadbeater,
then leaders of theosophical movement, supervised 
the preparation of four
young people for Initiation into the Brotherhood 
of the Inner Government of
the World.  Mrs. Besant was the President of the 
international Theosophical
Society, and Mr. Leadbeater was a lecturer and 
author of theosophical books
and a clairvoyant.  It was believed that 
Krishnamurti would be the vehicle
of the coming of the World-Teacher, the Lord 
Maitreya.  The other three
young people would be closely associated with 
Krishnamurti when his ministry
began.

"Krishnaji . . . had taken the First Initiation on 
January 11, 1910, at age
thirteen.  Initiation, comes from the Latin word, 
inire, in- and ire, into,
and to go, therefore, the making of a beginning of 
a life of
self-fulfillment, or the entrance into. 
Therefore, we say, they all were
about to enter or begin the new life, which shall 
ultimately lead them to
the heights of their being as man.  In 
theosophical parlance, initiation is
a ceremony conducted on a superphysical plane, 
usually at night while the
candidate is asleep and is conscious in his subtle 
body.  The candidate
undergoes tests to determine his dedication and 
worthiness, and his sponsors
testify as to his service to humanity.  During the 
ceremony, occult
teachings are given and his powers are expanded. 
As the candidate
progresses in wisdom, power and service, further 
initiations may be taken.
Mrs. Besant and Mr Leadbeater at this period had 
previously taken the Fourth
(Arhat) Initiation.  Of the five major ones, the 
Fifth Initiation qualifies
one as a Master.

"Some years earlier C. Jinarajadasa, a Cambridge 
graduate, was a lecturer
for the Theosophical Society.  At thirty-seven he 
had taken the First
Initiation.  Nityananda, a younger brother of 
Krishnaji, and George
Arundale, a college principal, were expected to 
take their First Initiation.
. . ."  (pp. 7-8)

Ross is brilliant at giving you a flavor for this 
period in the Theosophical
Movement.  He tends to let the participants speak 
for themselves through
letters and speeches, etc.  His description above 
gives the reader a very
good understanding of what was going on in the 
minds of theosophists at that
time.  Instead of working on understanding what 
they had, they were waiting
for some "World Teacher" and his "Inner 
Government" to come and tell them
what to think.  Meanwhile theosophical leaders 
were flying around in their
"subtle bodies" at night undergoing initiations 
and gaining powers.  Is it
any wonder HPB wanted to establish the autonomy of 
the Lodges?  This
nonsense wasn't isolated to Adyar only, it was 
world-wide.  If theosophists
looked at stories like this from any other 
organization, what would they
think?  Would they give that organization any 
credence?

If the modern Theosophical Movement is to ever get 
properly back on course,
this abandonment of principle (the first object) 
must be recognized and
dealt with.  Blavatsky and Judge must be accorded 
the respect they deserve
and theosophists must learn this lesson so that it 
is never repeated again.
In order to give more than lip service to 
Universal Brotherhood, we need
autonomous organizations, and we must protect the 
autonomy of each other in
order to realize those organizations.

Bruce

_________________________________________________________________
Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN 
Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/




Yahoo! Groups Links


    theos-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com