Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00177)

This is a very good piece of work, Carlos.  Not only was 1900 the 
first year of the century for which "The Secret Doctrine" had been 
written yo assist in meeting, it was also the year in which the 
driving forces culminating in global warming were quantitatively 
measurable.  (Radiations associated with global warming in the 
presence of a thinning ozone layer are possibly more important than 
the mind boggling implications of higher temperatures.)  The 
importance of accelerating solar activity, which scientists do not 
even claim to understand, affects all life on earth in ways we still 
do not understand in the 21st century.

A real physical alignment in May with the Taurus constellation, and 
Alcyone, is a factor of the May 8 date that deserves attention.  
After doing forecasts for every month of 7 years using the proto-
Mayan calendar, I assure you that May is a very important month in 
physical conditions on the planet.  

The letter demonstrated that Blavatsky was not the source of the 
Mahatmas' letters, because she had been dead of 9 years.  That one 
revelation may have been a way of reiterating the factuality that 
Blavatsky had worked as their agent for more than 30 years but was 
not the source of the theosophical teachings.

I'm not sure that any of us are qualified to judge whether or not 
Annie Besant deserved that letter.  I've seen comments from others 
about Besant's worthiness believed to be implied by the letter.  I 
like Judge's defense against Besant's claims of forgery.  Judge said 
that the authenticity of his letters could only be determined on the 
plane of causation.  That shut up Besant and Olcott for a while, 
until they could reorganize to find another way to attack Judge.  

I'm not certain that the Mahatmas judge our worthiness in the same 
terms theosophists judge each other.  Our merits may look very 
different on the plane of causation than they do on the astral 
plane.  

Annie Besant's drivel as the World Mother was insidious.  I am not 
privy to the Mahatmas' reasoning for WARNING her of the pitfalls.  
The view of the inner working of the Mahatmas' plans and evaluations 
through their letters is a very narrow window, and I'm not convinced 
that any Theosophist has ever seen the full truth of the Mahatmas' 
workings.  

I have a feeling that the work that Mahatmas have set out to do far 
exceeds theosophical organizations.  It is possible that their early 
work in Theosophy as a modern movement was intended to attract a 
specific set of individuals who had worked together in the past, 
possibly with varying degrees of success, and were destined to work 
together again in the future.  The overriding virtue of the 19th 
century theosophical movement was to lay the foundation for working  
out the karma of a specific set of individuals among themselves.  
The Mahatmas work in a much larger arena than theosophical 
organizations, and worked with individuals who had no idea who the 
Mahatmas were.  They were the Theosophical Mahatmas by virtue of 
working with theosophy, but their work was not necessarily limited 
to theosophy.  The idea that the Theosophical Mahatmas are the 
exclusive property of theosophy is more of the same pride, vanity, 
and greed.  Theosophy is not the only child. 

The priestcraft exercised by Adyar -- skandas that Besant and 
Leadbeater brought with them? --- is inarguable.  Adyar's 
priestcraft is predicated on an elite that presumes to deliver 
authoritative dogma to a majority of members that are denied access 
to the inner workings of the priesthood.  It simultaneously denies 
the larger number who fall into line as true believers the 
opportunity to do the work necessary for higher development.  (The 
priesthood has already done the work, so the true believer needs 
only to follow the elite.) This, of course, is the biggest problem 
with Christianity, in that Jesus has already done the work and 
followers must only accept him as the savior, thus the real personal 
work necessary to evolution is lost.   

One thing that is clear about the 1900 letter to Besant is that I 
would NOT ever want to receive a letter like that one.

Krsanna Duran


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "carlosaveline cardoso aveline" 
<carlosaveline@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> 
> The Message in the 1900 Letter:
> 
> MISLEADING SECRECY AND THE NEED TO GO AHEAD
> 
> by Carlos Cardoso Aveline
> 
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> 
> The 1900 Letter of a Mahatma to Annie Besant might  be authentic, 
for it has 
> a most important message to the theosophical movement.(1)
> 
> Its timing is significant. It is an official, solemn  FAREWELL  
LETTER  
> written exactly  in 1900, the  year HPB said  Aquarius Age would 
precisely 
> start (2).
> 
> Of course, Annie Besant as an individual did not deserve that 
letter, for 
> various reasons. Yet the movement did deserve it.  At the occult 
plane and 
> akasha level, the movement still  had a great amount of vibration 
rates 
> coming from the Masters themselves and from HPB (a True 
Initiate).  The 
> Masters could not be indifferent to it.
> 
> The letter  is a last, vigorous warning  against credulity, pride, 
search 
> for personal power, emotional worship and blind belief.
> 
> It gives some  key hints and instructions not only for the  
movement in the 
> 20th century, but for the movement in the 21st century.   It is 
not a 
> coincidence, perhaps, that its full text was only published in 
1987, during 
> the recent "end of century" effort.
> 
> There was also  one or two short term goals to be achieved by that 
letter.
> 
> One of them was to reduce for some time at least the "cant 
about `Masters' 
> ".  The letter said: "Nameless and silently we work and the 
continual 
> references to ourselves and the repetition of our names raises up 
a confused 
> aura that hinders our  work."
> 
> Another short term goal of the letter was to stop the speculations 
that the 
> Old Lady was coming back in that very moment, as the little 
daughter of Mr. 
> Chackravartti. The letter says:
> 
> "The intense desire to see Upasika  reincarnate at once has raised 
a 
> misleading  Mayavic ideation. Upasika (...) cannot come again so 
soon."
> 
> The reason for such an authoritative clarification was probably to 
prevent 
> too great disturbances in the "skandhas" or karmic impressions 
left by the 
> Messenger.  Such skandhas have a special importance in the case of 
disciples 
> who renounce Devachan and come back to work relatively soon. A 
long Devachan 
> gives the skandhas time to dissolve, while the disciples who 
renounce it 
> will have to face their skandhas (including their public image 
skandhas) 
> rather soon and in a  direct way.
> 
> Therefore, having some quietness about  "HPB" was probably a 
technical 
> necessity in those first years after the death of her physical 
body.
> 
> The complete text of the 1900 Letter anticipates nearly all of  
the absurd 
> mistakes Annie Besant would do in the following decades.
> 
> Besant and Leadbeater did everything  the Master warned her 
against,  from 
> emotional worship to repeating their  names in an irresponsible 
way;  and  
> from creating an "esoteric popery" (Master's words) down to being 
misled by 
> "pride, vanity and love of power".
> 
> And yet, besides all of this – important though these points are – 
there is 
> one particular sentence in the complete text of the 1900 Letter  
to which we 
> must pay thorough  attention,  now and in the future. This 
sentence says:
> 
> "Misleading secrecy has given the death blow to numerous 
organizations."
> 
> The main treason committed by CWL and his protégé Annie Besant 
consists, 
> perhaps, in creating a complex  power structure which can be 
rightfully 
> described, in the Master's  words,  as "an Esoteric Popery",  
based on  
> "misleading secrecy".
> 
> In that, as in other things, Annie Besant  was a victim  of her 
own 
> credulity, pride and love for power, as the Letter explains.
> 
> Three non-theosophical, secretive structures  were implanted in 
the inner 
> instances of the  theosophical movement, Adyar,  and they are even 
today 
> practical tools for its political and institutional control.
> 
> One of them is the  co-masonic movement.  Whatever its merits are, 
it does 
> not belong to the theosophical movement and its feeding upon the 
> theosophical movement is a clear form of magnetic vampirism and 
power 
> manipulation.
> 
> Another one is the Liberal Catholic Church, a neojesuitical body 
which now 
> provides the last examples of active defenders of C. W. 
Leadbeater.   The 
> rest of Adyar people typically accepts  the evidences that CWL was 
not 
> legitimate and only  have courage to defend him in indirect ways --
 like 
> attacking HPB through the adoption of Solovyof's or the Coulombs' 
libels.
> 
> But L.C.C. priests and associates still come out to openly defend 
CWL's 
> accuracy.  The L.C.C. also uses a misleading secrecy about its 
obscure 
> origins. It directly appeals to people's credulity and "emotional 
worship".
> 
> As to the third structure, it  has been publically referred to by 
José Ramón 
> Sordo (in  "Fohat", Fall 2005), by Geoffrey Farthing (in his 1996-
1997  
> "Manifestos") and by Gregory Tillett in several places.   It is  
the 
> "Egyptian Rite", or E.R.
> 
> This "E.R."  is different from the Esoteric School or masonic 
groups  in one 
> important thing.
> 
> While the existence of the Esoteric School is public, and only its 
internal 
> proceedings are to be secret, we have that the very existence of 
the 
> Egyptian Rite is not supposed to be known, except by those who are 
invited 
> to belong to it. Therefore its existence will not be confirmed by 
its 
> members or leaders.  It works as a "post-E.S."  possibility for 
some 
> long-standing E.S. members, and it leads them into a ritualistic 
trap which 
> will reduce their search for Truth to mere emotional worship and 
blind 
> belief.
> 
> Thus,  the E.R. is an important mechanism for the practical 
management of 
> the  Adyar movement as an "esoteric popery", with the help 
of "misleading 
> secrecy", to keep to the Master's words.
> 
> One hundred and six years after the 1900  Letter was first 
received, it may 
> be the time, now,  to start unveiling and discussing the political 
use of 
> secrecy as a way to sustain  blind belief and ritualistic 
structures.
> 
> I guess in the next few years the Pedagogy of the Mahatmas might 
be 
> "rediscovered"  as a valid tool for the movement as a whole --  
and for each 
> of us in particular.  I sincerely hope so.
> 
> The pedagogy of the Mahatmas is the pedagogy of truthfulness.
> 
> ooooooooooooooooooooooooo
> 
> Om, shanti.
> 
> Best regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline
> 
> 
> O o o O o o O o o O o o O o o O o  oO o o O
> 
> NOTES:
> 
> (1) Its full text was first published in "The Eclectic 
Theosophist" in 1987 
> and later in "Theosophical History", October 1987, pp. 115-117.  
Up to now 
> people have been so busy discussing its legitimacy  that they 
didn't had the 
> time to discuss its content. Yet  its content is a major evidence 
of its 
> INTERNAL legitimacy,  regardless of its OUTER source.  On the 
other hand,  
> Adyar officers  have done their best to keep this letter's full 
text in 
> oblivion.  Its uncomplete version is the Letter 46, first 
series, "Letters 
> From the Masters of the Wisdom" (TPH, Adyar).   Even the 
incomplete version 
> is strong and significant, though.
> 
> (2) As to 1900 being the mathematical starting point for the 
Aquarius Age, 
> see the text "The Esoteric Character of the Gosples" in 
H.P.B.'s "Collected 
> Writings", TPH, India/USA, Volume VIII, p. 174, footnote.
> 
> O o o O o o O o o O o o O o o O o  oO o o O
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Copa 2006: Juiz @#$%*&!? e mais frases para seu MSN Messenger 
> http://copa.br.msn.com/extra/frases/
>