Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt00132)

Friends,


MKR is right (see below).   

The internet has had some tremendously positive effects on the theosophical movement recently.  

A friend of mine, long-standing student of the SD and related issues, individually suggests that in the next few years or decades, as at every period of 6,000 -- 7,000 years, a civilization crisis might 'change everything' and provoke a 'new start' with a certain 'loss of memory' in sociological terms. 


I wonder if the computers and internet would really disappear in such a critical rebirth. 

A professional in computer and internet technology, on the other hand, tells me that "in principle" even a sudden change in the orientation of the Earth Axis would not disturb the  geo-stationary (geocentrically stable) satellites  now used for the global communications.

It will be interesting to see how things actually evolve. 



As the title of a book by Al Gore says, "The Earth is in Balance".


Its karma is. 


Regards,   Carlos. 



De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Wed, 1 Nov 2006 16:52:02 -0600

Assunto:[Spam] Re: Theos-World On Pedro´s Article

> Here again, we see the power of Internet in dissemination of information
> which in the past is exteremely difficult and expensive to broadcast. Hail
> to Internet!
> 
> mkr
> 
> On 11/1/06, carlosaveline wrote:
> >
> > Carl,
> >
> >
> > An interesting, well-documented text of yours, thanks.
> >
> > Perhaps in the future we can establish an open, respectful dialogue among
> > people from all sectors of the movement, so that facts can be once more
> > accepted regardless of their political/institutional use.
> >
> > Of course that might be difficult for LCC/Masonry/E.R. people.
> >
> > Among the first steps in that road, though, I must mention that having a
> > poor dialogue is better than having no dialogue at all!
> >
> > Even if ignored by Pedro/Linda, your text is useful.
> >
> > Regards, Carlos.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Cópia:
> >
> > Data:Wed, 01 Nov 2006 15:24:11 -0000
> >
> > Assunto:[Spam] Theos-World On Pedro Oliviera's article, and my criticism
> >
> > > This article was not published in "Theosophy in Australia", nor on
> > > its web-page, after a decision made by Mrs. Linda Oliveira, the
> > > editor and wife of Pedro Oliviera. Strange, isn't it!?
> > > /Carl
> > > ______________________________
> > >
> > > Some comments concerning the article "Which Theosophy?" by Pedro
> > > Oliveira
> > >
> > > by
> > >
> > > Carl Ek
> > >
> > > In Theosophy in Australia, No 1 - March 2006, I was caught by an
> > > article by Pedro Oliveira titled "Which Theosophy?" My first
> > > thought was, after I read the title: "What does he mean?"
> > > What "which theosophy"? From my point of view, as a student of
> > > Theosophy, who is trying to live Theosophy, in the meaning of being
> > > a true Theosophist. I couldn't at first really understand what the
> > > sentence of the article was about. But after I had observed the
> > > picture collage with H.P. Blavatsky, William Q. Judge, C.W.
> > > Leadbeater and Annie Besant, it stood perfectly clear for me. These
> > > four people are well known names in the history of the modern
> > > Theosophical Movement. To directly say that they are representing
> > > two or more "camps" would be from several points of view wrong. But
> > > one thing is clear, that Blavatsky and Judge stand for one. This is
> > > because there is not a single word from either of them that goes
> > > against what the other has said either concerning teachings, or
> > > their view on the Theosophical Society or the modern Theosophical
> > > Movement. Blavatsky made a clear statement when she was
> > > saying: "There Judge is, there also I am". Internal ranking between
> > > them doesn't exist, because they were/are both highly accepted
> > > chelas, and advanced occultists. They were/are both the principal
> > > Teachers of the modern Theosophical Movement, and in that - true
> > > Colleagues. Everyone with any knowledge of what those two stood for
> > > and taught, know and understand that this was the case. That
> > > Leadbeater then stood for something different is undoubtedly clear
> > > too. He was representing another "camp", consciously or not
> > > consciously, I do not dare to say. This I state with the basis that
> > > he was presenting teachings, that stood in clear contrast with what
> > > the Masters, and what their Messengers taught and represented. Annie
> > > Besant as a disciple and close co-worker with Blavatsky (and
> > > personal friend of Mr. Judge) didn't deviate from this so long as
> > > Blavatsky was incarnated. But after that something happened, and all
> > > of you that have read Colonel Olcott's Old Diary Leaves, know this
> > > very well. The old Colonel knew very well what was going on. Several
> > > times he asked William Q. Judge to take over as the President of the
> > > Society. Then Judge did not do this and you know very well what
> > > Olcott did. Indeed he was still holding the title of Founding-
> > > President, but the main part of his time and energy he laid on
> > > Buddhism and this was the case until he passed away in 1907.
> > >
> > > In Mr. Oliveira's article there are several mistakes and errors, and
> > > some of these are because important historical facts in these
> > > matters are jumped over, and these are important to show to get a
> > > correct picture of the development of the modern Theosophical
> > > Movement. My comments are based on the fact that there is only one
> > > Theosophy, and one Theosophical teaching (with roots among the
> > > Masters, and the Tradition and the School they are representing),
> > > and everything else then is not Theosophy (for why should the
> > > Masters of Wisdom contradict themselves!?). The parts and quotations
> > > I comment on follow the order as they appear in Oliveira's article.
> > > I wish to make it clear that this should not be seen as a
> > > personal "attack" on Mr. Oliveira, but only to bring attention to
> > > where he has become a victim of errors. I have chosen only to
> > > comment the first part of the article in detail because it is more
> > > important for the understanding of the source, the purpose and the
> > > teaching of the Theosophical Movement. The rest I will comment in
> > > short words. Some errors I have chosen not to discuss because the
> > > teachings behind them are far too complicated and advanced for this
> > > forum.
> > > First of all, it's important to make clear what is the fountain-
> > > source and origin of Theosophy (according to Theosophy). Is it
> > > private statements made by one or several individuals (Blavatsky,
> > > Judge, Mahatmas, Buddhas, Chelas etcetera)? Revelations from
> > > beings, that are more or less human and/or gods? Or is it the
> > > result of experiences made by humans that have searched and
> > > researched unbounded since the Manasputras in the middle of the
> > > present rounds third root race (c. 18 million years ago) incarnated
> > > in humanity to "wake" it to full self consciousness? Theosophy
> > > teaches that it is the last thing, and nothing else. The most
> > > talented of these "awakened" humans was/are the so
> > > called "researches", whom later organised themselves into a unity, a
> > > body, which we (in The West) are calling The Brotherhood (this is
> > > the name the Masters themselves prefer that we use) or The Master
> > > Lodge (the expression The White Lodge, has been so misused by pseudo-
> > > theosophical groups that I prefer no to use it).
> > > One purpose among others of the Brotherhood is to continuously
> > > search and research the secrets of the Universe, and to guide (but
> > > not lead) humanity in its spiritual development. They are who we,
> > > (as us a part of the Theosophical Movement) are calling the Masters.
> > >
> > > What and who are the Masters?
> > > Among some pseudo-theosophical groups they have been given a super
> > > human, or even divine, status. And even some non-theosophical
> > > elements operating inside the Theosophical Movement have gone so far
> > > away from the original Theosophical Teaching that they are devoting
> > > the Masters into nearly religious forms. Clear is that the Masters
> > > do not answer any kind of prayers, neither do they communicate in
> > > mediumistic or spiritistic ways. Several terrible examples are known
> > > when this has been tried. H.P. Blavatsky in her excellent
> > > article "How too take contact with the Masters" makes clear how
> > > contacts could be taken, and all who are a member of the E.S. and
> > > have paid attention in their studies know another way. It is clear
> > > the Masters are humans, but not necessarily (for the moment) of
> > > flesh and blood (with knowledge in the Theosophical teachings
> > > concerning the seven human principles, and about the nature of the
> > > Masters this is very clear).
> > >
> > > In a number of places in Oliveira's article, the Masters are
> > > mentioned and referred to. For those who don't know who and what the
> > > Masters are, or how they work, is it important to explain, otherwise
> > > neither Oliveira's article, nor my comments will be understood
> > > correctly. Misunderstandings concerning the nature of the Masters
> > > outside the Theosophical Movement have created several strange
> > > doctrines, and indeed strange organisations. Those with knowledge in
> > > modern history and sociology of religion know, that during the 20th
> > > century (mainly from the 1920's and forward) many sects and cults,
> > > totally or partly got their "teaching" from people that operated
> > > inside the Theosophical Movement who spread false and wrong
> > > doctrines, or used Theosophy as a mask for their non-theosophical
> > > activity.
> > >
> > > How many Masters there are is known only to the superior in the
> > > Brotherhood. From the Theosophical literature we know of 17 Masters,
> > > (plus many chelas, that are a direct disciple to a Master), who in
> > > different ways, were more or less involved in the founding of the
> > > modern Theosophical Movement and the Theosophical Society (the
> > > Parent Society). Among these, three were considerably more active,
> > > and took the growing modern Theosophy on their shoulders, and Karma.
> > > These three Masters where M., K.H. and H.P.B. (not to be mixed-up
> > > with the Chela Helena P. Blavatsky). What the initials stand for has
> > > no interest, for none of them are standing for their real names.
> > > They are using different names in different circumstances and in
> > > different places. H.P. Blavatsky described how the two Masters M.
> > > and K.H. are living in Ladakh precisely as all the other humans
> > > there, and are well known in that society. If we should go there and
> > > ask for M. or K.H., no one of the locals would understand of whom we
> > > are talking about (and even if there are some people any of these
> > > names, they would certainly not be any of the mentioned Masters),
> > > hence they are using other names there. Therefore to give any
> > > importance to their names, and definitely to mystify them, is with
> > > out value. Everyone that has had connection with them, know that
> > > they are humans, just like you and I, but with a much greater
> > > knowledge than the main part of humanity. They eat less and have a
> > > significantly less need of sleep. Their occult powers, like to
> > > create, send away and use a Mayavi-rupa (a vehicle of mental matter,
> > > also called a thought body, with origin, where it also will be
> > > absorbed after its "duty" is fulfilled, often in Manas, and even
> > > more rare in Buddhi), to read karma and to read in the Astral Light,
> > > to change their physical material atoms in their sthula-sárira in to
> > > astral-material and through this reach a higher age than is normal
> > > for the common man, to reincarnate without a kama-loka and a
> > > devachanic rest in total consciousness and a lot of other things
> > > which make these humans to Masters, but they are still totally
> > > human. The Evolution of Man has this in its plan, for all mankind,
> > > on our way to higher life forms.
> > > The Masters send their disciples (Chelas) "out in the world" on a
> > > regular basis, and also on more unique and specific missions. One
> > > of these is to found a Mystery School, and the Chela appears then as
> > > a hierophant. We know several like this from the history, like
> > > Plato, Pythagoras and Cagliostro. And a mission, just like that,
> > > was one of Helena P. Blavatsky's. In this matter, she is not
> > > unique, but never in a surveyable time has so large amount of
> > > esoteric knowledge gone to be exoteric. The famous Hindu Theosophist
> > > and writer T. Subba Row's (1856-1890) reaction on Helena P.
> > > Blavatsky's publishing of the opus by the three Masters M., K.H. and
> > > H.P.B., the Secret Doctrine was interesting. His opinion was that
> > > this was absolutely too much (and this even since Master M. was his
> > > one Master, but to Theosophy he was loyal in till death, and
> > > probably still is, even if he resigned from his membership in the
> > > T.S. the year before that he past away).
> > > As the Master Lodge, the Mystery Schools are educational intuitions,
> > > built up by Masters (which in their turn are Chelas to their own
> > > Masters), and Chelas, which are the teachers and Students. They are
> > > also researchers (hence no one is fully skilled in the Mysteries of
> > > the Universe), and keepers of artefacts and scriptures from ancient
> > > times. The above mentioned Mystery Schools, have in some cases
> > > organised a "Temple", a religion, above its "crypt", for the common
> > > man, which not are ready to take part in deeper studies. Here they
> > > could take part of ethical messages, masked in an emotional and easy
> > > obtainable form to be accessible for simple minds, with something
> > > for all of the five senses. The Christian Church (which doesn't have
> > > any "crypt" anymore) is a well known example of this, with its
> > > priests in beautiful colourful dresses for the eyes, incense for the
> > > nose, bread and wine for the mouth, holy water to put the fingers
> > > in, then make the sign of the cross for the skin and have lovely
> > > music for the ears. Rituals exists even in the Mystery Schools, in
> > > their first three degree's, but then on a much higher level.
> > > Reminiscences from these rituals could the observant Esotericist
> > > find in the blue degrees of Freemasonry, to give a Western example.
> > > The hope of the Master Lodge was that the Theosophical Society would
> > > be a Mystery School in the West, the first and only one since the
> > > ardent christen Emperor Justinian I of Byzans in the year 529,
> > > closed the last one, namely Academos of Plato in Athens, and with
> > > that opened a new era, the "Dark Middle-age". They hoped to found a
> > > new Mystery School within T.S. which ended up to be a failure, by
> > > reasons we soon will see.
> > > Then it is clear, that Theosophy is science, which lives philosophy,
> > > and (could) use religion, in that order.
> > >
> > > In the first part on page 7, we read the following about the
> > > founding of T.S.:"... through the inspiration and guidance of her
> > > Adept-Teachers ..." It is indeed right so say that H.P. Blavatsky
> > > was inspired and guided by her Teachers, but three things that are
> > > important in this matter are not mentioned. The first is that her
> > > Teachers were also her Superiors in this work, so the founding of
> > > T.S. was nothing but an order. She was their Messenger, primarily
> > > for the West (but she has also other missions, of greater value),
> > > for the 19th (and 20th) century. The second thing is that T.S., or
> > > more correctly in this context the Theosophical Movement (because
> > > far from all members of the different theosophical societies are
> > > students of Theosophy, and far lesser Theosophists), has to be seen
> > > as a part of the Great Lodge, as a branch, even if not to
> > > satisfaction (as it was originally thought). The third is that it
> > > was two that had this mission, namely Helena P. Blavatsky and
> > > William Q. Judge.
> > > This was not the first time these two occult giants were
> > > working together, and definitely not the last. The trust H.P.B. and
> > > Helena P. Blavatsky had and has for William Q. Judge (his/her "mate-
> > > in-arm"), is showing the close relationship they had. These
> > > quotations from different letters (gathered and published in The
> > > Irish Theosophist in June, 1895) written by H.P.B. and Helena P.
> > > Blavatsky are showing this very clearly:
> > >
> > > "Thanks for all, my dear old chum [W.Q.J.]; may the Masters protect
> > > him. His ever and till and AFTER death."
> > >
> > > "My dear W.Q.J. . . . my only friend . . . Judge has done for me so
> > > much lately, I owe him such gratitude, there is nothing I would do
> > > for him . . . `Pon my word, I never knew I cared so much for him
> > > personally. . . . I will never forget Judge's loyalty and devotion,
> > > his unswerving friendship. . . ."
> > >
> > > The following quotation form the pencil of H.P.B. makes this far
> > > clearer:
> > >
> > > London Oct. 23, 1889
> > >
> > > "The idea is absurd and preposterous . . . H.P.B. would give . . .
> > > the whole esoteric bood in the U.S.A. for one W.Q.J. who is part of
> > > herself since several aeons . . . .
> > >
> > > DIXI. H.P.B."
> > >
> > > In the next part we read:"HPB, as Madame Blavatsky was
> > > affectionately known by her students and co-workers, . . . " . A
> > > person who is claming this has only elementary knowledge in
> > > Theosophy, and the Messenger (this fact even C.W. Leadbeater admit
> > > even if he made some mistakes concerning it, see his Statement from
> > > the June 14th 1885 which is quoted in the article The `Complex
> > > Character' of Madame Blavatsky by M.T. (Light (London) March 2,
> > > 1901, p. 103) which will be found under the link;
> > > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/anoncomplex.htm). The proofs are
> > > many, that H.P.B. and Helena P. Blavatsky was/are not the same
> > > person. For those who are not so well orientated in the Theosophical
> > > literature these facts are not known. This is explained with the
> > > following words: H.P.B. was one of the three Masters/High Occultists
> > > which had taken Theosophy, and with that the whole Movement, on its
> > > shoulders and Karma, he was also one of three co-writers of the
> > > Secret Doctrine. Helena P. Blavatsky on the other hand, was a Chela
> > > of Master M., which had from her Master been given the Mission to be
> > > the new Mystery School, which the T.S. was considered to be,
> > > Hierophant and Leader.
> > >
> > > The following quotation is showing this clearly:
> > >
> > > London Oct. 23, 1889
> > >
> > > "He or she, who believes that under any circumstances whatever,
> > > provocations, gossips, slander or anything devised by the enemy
> > > H.P.B. will ever dream even of going against W. Q. J. -- does not
> > > know H P B -- even if he or she does know H. P. Blavatsky, or thinks
> > > he knows her.
> > >
> > > DIXI. H.P.B. ?"
> > >
> > > Above he makes a distinction between "H.P.B." the high occultist
> > > and "H. P. Blavatsky" the Russian woman, the outer personality with
> > > its marked idiosyncrasies, of which the Masters speak very plainly
> > > in their letters to A.P. Sinnett. She half-humorously indicated this
> > > distinction, of which no one was more aware than herself, in the
> > > words she wrote in her own copy of The Voice of the Silence: "H.P.B.
> > > to H. P. Blavatsky with no kind regards."
> > > (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-tm/hpbtm-17.htm)
> > > In the middle of the same part Blavatsky's move from Adyar
> > > back to Europe is mentioned. It would have been suitable to mention
> > > the reasons of this move here. In Blavatsky's article Why I do not
> > > return to India we find them:
> > >
> > > "There seems to have been something strange and uncanny going on at
> > > Adyar, during these last years. No sooner does a European, most
> > > Theosophically inclined, most devoted to the Cause, and the personal
> > > friend of myself or the President, set his foot in Headquarters,
> > > than he becomes forthwith a personal enemy to one or other of us,
> > > and what is worse, ends by injuring and deserting the Cause.
> > > But the loyalty and courage of the Adyar Authorities, and of the few
> > > Europeans who had trusted in the Masters, were not equal to the
> > > trial when it came. In spite of my protests, I was hurried away from
> > > Headquarters. Ill as I was, almost dying in truth, as the physicians
> > > said, yet I protested, and would have battled for Theosophy in India
> > > to my last breath, had I found loyal support. But some feared legal
> > > entanglements, some the Government, while my best friends believed
> > > in the doctors' threats that I must die if I remained in India. So I
> > > was sent to Europe to regain my strength, with a promise of speedy
> > > return to my beloved Aryavarta.
> > > Acting under the Master's orders I began a new movement in the West
> > > on the original lines; I founded Lucifer, and the Lodge which bears
> > > my name. Recognizing the splendid work done at Adyar by Colonel
> > > Olcott and others to carry out the second of the three objects of
> > > the T.S., viz., to promote the study of Oriental Literature, I was
> > > determined to carry out here the two others. All know with what
> > > success this had been attended. Twice Colonel Olcott was asked to
> > > come over, and then I learned that I was once more wanted in India --
> > > at any rate by some. But the invitation came too late; neither would
> > > my doctor permit it, nor can I, if I would be true to my life-pledge
> > > and vows, now live at the Headquarters from which the Masters and
> > > Their spirit are virtually banished. The presence of Their portraits
> > > will not help; They are a dead letter."
> > >
> > > (http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/WhyIDoNotReturnToIndia.htm)
> > >
> > > On page 8, in its first own part we read: "Soon after HPB
> > > died, in May 1891, differences of approach to the teachings of
> > > Theosophy became evident." Two errors appear in this sentence.
> > > First; H.P.B. did not die in May, 1891. That Helena P. Blavatsky
> > > died then has nothing directly to do with H.P.B. The second, and far
> > > more important, is that there never were any changes in the
> > > Theosophical Teachings, until today's day, and will never happen.
> > > Some pseudo-theosophical teachings have been spread, but these are
> > > not Theosophical, and will never be. If it is the spread of these
> > > pseudo-theosophical teachings Oliveira is talking about, which it
> > > probably is, this happened not before the true Manas of the Society
> > > and the Movement was "gone". To it was 1891 was that Blavatsky,
> > > after that until 1896, it was William Q. Judge.
> > >
> > > Later in the same part we find: "William Q. Judge, Vice-President of
> > > the TS at that time, left the TS with Headquarters at Adyar and
> > > formed The Theosophical Society in America in 1895". This is not
> > > correct. Judge was also then Secretary General for the American
> > > Section of T.S., and what happened during the Boston Convention 1895
> > > was that the Section in total agreement with the Regulations and
> > > Statutes of the Society declared it self as an independent part of
> > > the International T.S. Just as Blavatsky did when she returned to
> > > Europe and formed the European Federation as an independent part of
> > > T.S., and with her self as President for life, and the Boston
> > > Convention elected Judge as President for life. The sentence trying
> > > to clam that Judge left T.S., in an alternative break of and founded
> > > his own society is not correct. If Judge had the ambition to be the
> > > International President of T.S., he could have been that. We must
> > > keep in mind that during this period, the normal way of organisation
> > > in the Movement was that every National society was an independent
> > > Theosophical Society.
> > > In chapter 22 of H. P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Movement by
> > > Charles J. Ryan we are finding:
> > >
> > > "Unfortunately, this desirable condition did not last long. Grossly
> > > distorted reports and scurrilous articles about the recent
> > > difficulties appeared in sensational newspapers, written by enemies
> > > of theosophy, upon documentary information supplied by a suspended
> > > member of the E.S., who said he found it "Intolerable" to be left in
> > > the position of "having brought charges without proving them."
> > > Within the Society sides were again taken. Mrs. Besant pressed her
> > > charges still more strongly, and Mr. Judge's defenders supported him
> > > with vigor. It soon became apparent that no satisfactory agreement
> > > could be reached between the contending parties. A temporary
> > > separation, at least, was the only way out of the difficulty. The
> > > final outcome was the decision of the American Section, the largest
> > > of the sections, to work henceforth as "The Theosophical Society in
> > > America" with complete independence, under the presidency of W. Q.
> > > Judge. This was effected with great enthusiasm at the Boston
> > > Convention on April 28-9, 1895, by a majority of 191 votes against
> > > 10."
> > >
> > > (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-tm/hpbtm-22.htm)
> > >
> > > H.P.B. and Helena P. Blavatsky trusted totally in Judge is there no
> > > duet in.
> > >
> > > "Take my place in America now & after I am gone ? at Adyar."
> > > H.P.B. to W.Q.J.
> > > (http://blavatskyarchives.com/hpbwqj81287.htm)
> > >
> > > In a letter by H.P.B. from 1889 we read the following:
> > >
> > > "The Esoteric Section and its life in the U.S.A. depends on W.Q.J.
> > > remaining its agent & what he is now. The day W.Q.J. resigns, H.P.B.
> > > will be virtually dead for the Americans. W.Q.J. is the Antaskarana
> > > between the two Manas (es), the American thought & the Indian ? or
> > > rather the trans-Himalayan Esoteric Knowledge. DIXI.
> > >
> > > P.S. W.Q.J. had show, & impress this on the minds of all those whom
> > > it may concern"
> > >
> > > H.P.B.
> > >
> > > H.P.B.'s last words make it far clearer how enormously important
> > > William Q. Judge was for the Movement:
> > >
> > > "KEEP THE LINK (the Antaskarana) UNBROKEN! DO NOT LET MY LAST
> > > INCARNATION BE A FAILURE."
> > >
> > > The Master was very clear upon His opinion then He
> > > wrote: "Judge is right!" to Mrs. Besant. This was also hers, until
> > > she ended up under the influence of Mr. Chakravarti. We continue to
> > > read in chapter 22 in H. P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Movement
> > > by Charles J. Ryan:
> > >
> > > "Annie Besant was strongly impressed by the personality of the
> > > Brahmanical representative, G. N. Chakravarti, and for many years
> > > her opinions were colored by his point of view. W. Q. Judge watched
> > > his growing ascendancy over her mind with anxiety, feeling that it
> > > was not in harmony with H. P. Blavatsky's intense disapproval of the
> > > methods of what she called "religions of pomp and gold." He became
> > > more uneasy when, on Mrs. Besant's return to England with the party
> > > that included Mr. Chakravarti, she prepared to go to India on a long
> > > lecture-tour, and he warned her that it was not a propitious time to
> > > go. Before leaving, she spent a short time in London during which
> > > she saw a good deal of the Brahman, who left for India shortly
> > > before she and the Countess Wachtmeister started for the Orient. A
> > > vivid light is thrown upon this very critical time in the history of
> > > the T.S. by Dr. Archibald Keightley, a most reliable student under
> > > H.P.B. The following passage occurs in a long protest he made in
> > > defense of Mr. Judge during the crisis of 1895. After giving
> > > instances of Chakravarti's ability to throw glamour over individuals
> > > or groups, he wrote:
> > > I lived at Headquarters [London] during Mr. Chakravarti's visit
> > > there and knew from Mrs. Besant, from him and from personal
> > > observation, of his frequent magnetisation of Mrs. Besant. He said
> > > that he did it to, "coordinate her bodies for work to be done." To a
> > > physician and a student of occultism, the magnetisation of a woman
> > > advanced to the critical age of mid-life, a vegetarian, an ascetic,
> > > by a man, a meat-eater, one of full habit, large appetite and of
> > > another and dark race, is not wise. The latter magnetism will
> > > assuredly overcome the former, however excellent the intentions of
> > > both persons. And I soon saw the mental effect of this in Mrs.
> > > Besant's entire change of view, in other matters besides those of
> > > H.P.B. and Mr. Judge. -- The Path, X, 99-100, June 1895. "
> > > (http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-tm/hpbtm-22.htm)
> > >
> > >
> > > Further some quotation from letters (gathered and published in The
> > > Irish Theosophist in June, 1895) written by H.P.B. and Helena P.
> > > Blavatsky are making clear Judge's position in the Theosophical
> > > Movement, and the personal trust H.P.B. and the Masters hade to him:
> > >
> > > " Judge . . . whom I trusted more perhaps than I did Olcott or
> > > myself."
> > >
> > > "Master wants Judge to be elected for life, for reasons of His own ?
> > > that's God's truth, . . .Less than you would I want to see X ______
> > > or anyone (save Judge) elected for life . . . But if I do not like
> > > the idea it is because I trust no one any longer, save Judge, and
> > > Olcott perhaps. I have lost my last faith in mankind and see and
> > > smell (rightly, if you please) Judases everywhere. But with Judge it
> > > is different . . ."
> > >
> > > "I trust Judge more than anyone in the world."
> > >
> > > [To W.Q.Judge] "Well, sir and my only friend, the crisis is nearing.
> > > I am ending my S.D. and you are going to replace me, or take my
> > > place in America. . . . I rather lose the whole American lot to the
> > > last man, X _______ included, than YOU."
> > >
> > > Mr. Judge was from the very beginning clear over the negative
> > > influence Mr. Chakravarti hade over Mrs. Besant, and through her
> > > even on T.S. and E.S.T. In a letter from 1894, Mr. Judge is writing
> > > to Mr. Torsten Hedlund, then deputy leader under Dr. Gustaf Zander
> > > for the E.S.T. in Sweden, and warning him of the new E.S.-
> > > instructions, in which Besant had change after Chakravarti's
> > > opinions. Dr. Franz Hartmann, then leader for the German
> > > Theosophists, private disciple of Blavatsky and corresponder with
> > > the Masters K.H. and S.B., described in a letter to his German
> > > fellow-Theosophists after one of his visits in London HQ. How Besant
> > > was when Chakravarti was present in the room in a state of hypnosis,
> > > and that this ended when he (Chakravarti) left the room.
> > > See further: William Q. Judge's 12-page E.S.T. circular dated the 3
> > > of November 1894, The Theosophical Movement 1875-1950 Chapter XVI
> > > and especially pp. 241-246 and Henry S. Olcott's Old Diary Leafs
> > > Volume V, Chapter XIV, "Mr. Judge Denounces Mrs. Besant", especially
> > > pp. 252-260.
> > >
> > > Further are we reading in the same part:" With him (Judge, my note)
> > > begins a line of students that regard the writings of Madame
> > > Blavatsky and her Adept-Teachers as the only authentic source of
> > > modern Theosophy. They include Katherine Tingley, Gottfried de
> > > Purucker and Robert Crosbie, among many others". This is absolutely
> > > not true! To clear this out we most look on two tendencies in the
> > > Theosophical Movement. Two persons are representing one of this,
> > > namely Katherine Tingley (K.T.) and Gottfried de Purucker (G.deP.)
> > > on one hand, and Robert Crosbie (R.C.), on the other. All three are
> > > on the "Judge-side". If we first look at K.T. and G.deP., they are
> > > representing that tendency which to day is the Theosophical Society
> > > with Headquarters at Pasadena (formerly in Point Loma and Covina).
> > > Oliveira is claming that they are saying, that it is only the
> > > writings of Madame Blavatsky and The Masters that are the only
> > > authentic source of modern Theosophy. This is absolutely not
> > > correct. One could see the Pasadena-Theosophy as a logical
> > > presentation in that that Blavatsky propound the basic overview,
> > > Judge further developed the mystic, Tingley the ethics and Purucker
> > > the philosophy. So the clam is totally wrong.
> > > If we now look at Robert Crosbie, who also got the doubtful honour
> > > of representing this "line", the third person in this "triad", we
> > > must see who he was. Firstly he was for many years a corresponding
> > > disciple of Blavatsky, and a personal friend, close co-worker and
> > > indeed one of Judge's most trusted disciples. In the beginning he
> > > followed Katherine Tingley. After Judges death, she "took" over the
> > > Theosophical Society in America and united with that the societies
> > > in Europe and other places which were "Judge-faithful" (some decided
> > > however to stay independent, and probably the most known of these
> > > was the German society Theosophische Gesellschaft in Deutschland
> > > e.V., headed by Dr. Franz Hartmann (which still is working totally
> > > independent after the original program) and E.T. Hargrove who was
> > > then President of the Theosophical Society in Europe and America
> > > (Judges administrative successor) left and founded a new society
> > > (according to him, K.T. took over more or less "illegally") and
> > > Julia W.L. Keightley (more known as Jasper Niemand, author of
> > > Letters that have helped me, she was Judges closest disciple and
> > > instructed many advanced occultists over the world) who later
> > > followed him, and some other well known Theosophists), and founded
> > > the new International Headquarters in Point Loma (also known as
> > > Lomaland). R.C. was invited by K.T. to come and live in Lomaland,
> > > and to take part of the inner work and to bear high offices in the
> > > Society. But 1909 R.C. left the Theosophical Society Point Loma, and
> > > settled down in Los Angeles. Around him, he joined a group of
> > > Theosophists and Students of Theosophy and started a study group,
> > > with Judge's The Ocean of Theosophy as material. The reason why he
> > > left Point Loma and its society, and he wasn't alone (the Society
> > > lost many members during K.T.'s leader-period), was because of
> > > K.T.'s way of leading the Society and keeping up, for the majority
> > > of the members, a far too high ethical level (which was close to
> > > superhuman), and put the character fashioning and altruism, before
> > > the main purpose and original way of working (G.deP. later, during
> > > his leadership, went back to previous forms of organisation and way
> > > working in the Society, but he was totally clear that K.T. was
> > > right, had good purposes and was guided by the Masters, he
> > > understood that if the members were not ready, then the common man
> > > wasn't either). The study group R.C. had founded in L.A. soon
> > > selected the name of the United Lodge of Theosophists (U.L.T.), and
> > > this lodge is seen as the Mother-lodge for the U.L.T.-lodges all
> > > over the world. The U.L.T.-lodges see them self as a group of
> > > Theosophists and Students of Theosophy which decided to unite in a
> > > lodge in a particular location and all lodges are considered to be
> > > independent. What holds the U.L.T.-lodges together are two things.
> > > First the Declaration:
> > > "The policy of this Lodge is independent devotion to the cause of
> > > Theosophy, without professing attachment to any Theosophical
> > > organization. It is loyal to the great founders of the Theosophical
> > > Movement, but does not concern itself with dissensions or
> > > differences of individual opinion."
> > >
> > > "The work it has on hand and the end it keeps in view are too
> > > absorbing and too lofty to leave it the time or inclination to take
> > > part in side issues. That work and that end is the dissemination of
> > > the Fundamental Principles of the philosophy of Theosophy, and the
> > > exemplification in practice of those principles, through a truer
> > > realization of the SELF; a profounder conviction of Universal
> > > Brotherhood.
> > >
> > > "It holds that the unassailable Basis for Union among Theosophists,
> > > wherever and however situated, is "similarity of aim, purpose and
> > > teaching," and therefore has neither Constitution, By-Laws, nor
> > > Officers, the sole bond between its Associates being that basis. And
> > > it aims to disseminate this idea among Theosophists in the
> > > furtherance of Unity.
> > >
> > > "It regards as Theosophists all are engaged in the true service of
> > > Humanity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, condition or
> > > organization, and
> > >
> > > "It welcomes to its association all those who are in accord with its
> > > declared purposes and who desire to fit themselves, by study and
> > > otherwise, to be the better able to help and teach others.
> > > The true Theosophist belongs to no cult or sect, yet belongs to each
> > > and all."
> > > The Declaration above is gathered together by R.C. mainly by the
> > > most essential quotations from the writings of W.Q.J. The second
> > > thing that is holding the U.L.T.-lodges together is that every lodge-
> > > member is associated in the Parent Lodge in Los Angeles (which a
> > > person could be without being a member in a particular lodge).
> > > U.L.T. is very careful of the fact that Judge was
> > > Blavatsky's "Colleague", and like her the Teacher of the modern
> > > Theosophical Movement, but doesn't use the Mahatma Letters (to A.P.
> > > Sinett, or others) and writings of other Theosophists. The U.L.T.
> > > only use Blavatsky's, Judge's and Crosbie's (plus in certain ways,
> > > the writings of B.P. Wadia) works. R.C. is not seen as a Teacher,
> > > but as a person who explains the writings of Judge. This authority
> > > his owns as a personal friend, co-worker and disciple of Judge. We
> > > have to be clear over what is the purpose of U.L.T. U.L.T. sees it
> > > self as a School of Theosophy, with the purpose to spread the basics
> > > in the Teachings of Theosophy. All other Theosophical studies, on a
> > > more advanced level or esoteric Theosophy, are left outside the
> > > U.L.T. Sometimes, in some places, it is arranged by leading
> > > members "private study groups" for this types of studies. These
> > > groups are not a part of U.L.T., are not advertised and its new
> > > participants are recruited from and out side the lodges, when they
> > > are thought to be mature and ready. The main purpose for this is as
> > > the Declaration is saying: "It holds that the unassailable Basis for
> > > Union among Theosophists, wherever and however situated,
> > > is "similarity of aim, purpose and teaching," In other words, the
> > > basic Theosophy, could all Students of Theosophy gather around. We
> > > must to have it clear that the majority of the "U.L.T.-members",
> > > during its period of increase in the 1920th and -30th mainly came
> > > form the Adyar-society (which followed Bomanji Pestonji Wadia when
> > > he left the T.S. (Adyar), because of that this society had left the
> > > original Theosophical Doctrine and way of working. In his Statement
> > > of Resignation from the Theosophical Society (Adyar), and as a
> > > member of the General Council, from July 18, 1922 B.P. Wadia writ:
> > > "I have come to the conclusion that the Theosophical Society has
> > > strayed away from the "Original Programme" inspired by the "Original
> > > Impulses" whereby the Masters brought it into existence through the
> > > help of Their Messenger, H.P. Blavatsky. It is no more a Society of
> > > seekers of the Wisdom, but an organization where many believe in the
> > > few, and blind following has come to prevail; where shams pass for
> > > realities, and the credulity of superstition gains encouragement;
> > > and where the noble ideals of Theosophical Ethics are exploited and
> > > dragged in the mire of psychism and immorality. Theosophy as a
> > > system of thought put forward by the Masters through H.P. Blavatsky
> > > has ceased to be a serious subject of persistent study, and that
> > > which has taken its place has little resemblance to the original
> > > virile, healthy, and profound teachings. The Theosophical Society as
> > > it exists today is disloyal to Theosophy and its Holy Cause, and I
> > > regard that those who remain loyal to Theosophy can not be loyal to
> > > the Theosophical Society.
> > > I have earnestly and honestly endeavored to bring the above fact to
> > > the notice of the members by the only straight forward course of
> > > preaching the Truth as H.P. Blavatsky taught it. Time, energy and
> > > money spent in the Theosophical Society have brought the further
> > > knowledge that the existing conditions in the Theosophical Society
> > > are so deep rooted and so wide spread that the disease is incurable.
> > > The Theosophical Society, as feared by H.P. Blavatsky, has drifted
> > > on a sandbank and is, spiritually speaking, a dead body.
> > >
> > > Under these circumstances there is but one honest course to be
> > > pursued, by the sincere Theosophist, and I have chosen it: to leave
> > > the Society from which the Life of the Lodge has departed; and must
> > > continue to work for Theosophy, loyal to the true Founders and to
> > > their Message, co-operating with all those brother-Theosophists who
> > > hold to the unassailable basis for union ? "similarity of aim,
> > > purpose and teaching" in reference to that Message."
> > > I am recommending every one to read and study this impotent
> > > document, as a whole. It is to be found during this Internet link:
> > > http://www.teosofiskakompaniet.net/BPWadia_StatementOfResignationTS_2
> > > 003.htm
> > > B.P. Wadia was the one who laid the foundations to every
> > > U.L.T.-lodge (except the Mother-lodge), except those in Malmö
> > > (Sweden), Jacmel (Haiti) and Douala (Cameroon), in the world. The
> > > case that U.L.T. is doubted about "new teachings", but not denying,
> > > has many reasons, which I here choose to leave out-side.
> > > On page 8, in its third part it's said:" . . . a great Adept known
> > > as the Maha-Chohan . . .". This is a title, gathered together by the
> > > Sanskrit word maha for great or grand, and the Tibetan chohan for
> > > lord. Which are given "Grand Lord", and describe one which is a
> > > Master to a Master. This sentence could give the non experienced
> > > Student the false idea that is a name (which is the opinion of
> > > several pseudo-theosophical and non-theosophical groups).
> > >
> > >
> > > Page 9:
> > > ? The part that is quoted in the fourth part, and is said to
> > > be from Maha-Chohan is a pure falsification, and produced in the
> > > ring among Leadbeater. And with that have the whole thing no value.
> > > ? In the last part is it spoken about T.S. (Adyar) in
> > > statistic words. That fact, that the Indians never removed a closed
> > > lodge from de scrolls, is not taken on consideration. Which the
> > > following quotation is showing:
> > > "H.S.O. threatens to resign, may be will resign, and he seeks to
> > > throw the whole blame upon me! Last year when here, he boasted of
> > > theosophy & its Branches going up higher than sky, in India. All was
> > > flourishing then, all promising, the people's devotion as great as
> > > ever, 150 Branches strong & happy: And what's the truth & what does
> > > Bert find there? Out of the 150 Branches, only 40 alive. No one
> > > approaching Adyar at 5 miles distance."
> > > (http://blavatskyarchives.com/hpbwqj111990.htm)
> > > Further is it talking about the numbers of members at the times of
> > > Annie Besant's death. The fact that around 50% of the members of
> > > T.S. (Adyar) left in connection with the abdication of Jiddu
> > > Krishnamurti, and with that a drastic falling numbers of lodges is
> > > not either taken into consideration.
> > > In the third part is it spoken about "Buddhist". Has Oliveira not
> > > read The Secret Doctrine, or even The Key to Theosophy? He seems to
> > > have read from The Key to Theosophy at least, but not understood
> > > what he was reading when he is seemed to believe that "Budhist" is a
> > > person that belongs to the Buddhist religion/philosophy and with
> > > that the same as a Buddhist. So the whole "talk" is with out value.
> > > We most not forget that both M. and K.H. was/are Hindus, and not
> > > belonging to Buddhism, but Budhists. In Encyclopedic Theosophical
> > > Glossary we read:
> > > "Budhaism or Budhism [from Sanskrit budha wisdom] The anglicized
> > > form of the term for the teachings of divine philosophy, called in
> > > India budha (esoteric wisdom). It is equivalent to the Greek term
> > > theosophia. It must be distinguished from Buddhism, the philosophy
> > > of Gautama Buddha, although this is a direct and pure derivative
> > > from budhaism."
> > > See further the Introductory to the Secret Doctrine Vol. I, pp. xxi,
> > > xxvii-xviii.
> > > Page 10:
> > > ? In the first part Oliveira is writing that several books
> > > that was co-writed by Annie Besant (her own book The Seven
> > > Principles of Man is as an excellent new beginners book, in its
> > > original from 1892/1897) and C.W. Leadbeater, "are based on their
> > > clairvoyant investigations". To not take into consideration what
> > > Blavatsky said about this type of activity is frightening. My
> > > question to Mr. Oliveira is: What interests have a student of
> > > Theosophy in their truly private thought forms? There is nothing of
> > > public interest in any of these books (except, maybe, for some parts
> > > of their Occult Chemistry). It is referred to that H.P.B. her self
> > > was using clairvoyance when "she" wrote the S.D. Every reader with
> > > some knowledge in the clairvoyance knows that this was not this same
> > > type of clairvoyance, and have nothing to do with this. To read in
> > > the Akasha, and travel in a mayavi-rupa is not the same thing, so
> > > when Oliveira is writing"..., bearing in mind the latter's effort
> > > was to popularise Theosophy." could it not to be seen as any thing
> > > else then a bad excuse for a none-theosophical way of acting.
> > > ? In concerning on what is appearing on page 10 have I am
> > > wondering if Mr. Oliveira considered there to be more then one
> > > truth, and if is he gives some value to the Motto of the
> > > Theosophical Movement, which is saying that there is no religion
> > > higher then the Truth?
> > > Page 11:
> > > ? The fact that T.S. does not having an official creed is not
> > > the same thing as that Theosophy is not representing certain
> > > doctrines. To be a member of a Theosophical Society is further, not
> > > the same as to be a Theosophist or a Student of Theosophy. And a
> > > Theosophist or a Student of Theosophy does not have to be member of
> > > a Theosophical Society, to be that. Probably are the majority of
> > > them NOT members of any Society.
> > > ? The quoted "letter" is not written by a Master, which its
> > > contents are showing since it's not Theosophical, and therefore have
> > > nothing to do in this matter.
> > > ? Oliveira is claiming in the last part of the page that the
> > > linga-sarira should be "the Double, the phantom body". This is not a
> > > Theosophical Doctrine. Theosophy is teaching that it directly the
> > > opposite, that it is the physical body that is the "the Double, the
> > > phantom body", and the astral body that is the original. The reason
> > > for this appears in early Theosophical writings because a large
> > > number of the early members came from Spiritism, and to choose other
> > > words would or could have be misunderstood by some. Another well
> > > known example of this is when H.P. Blavatsky is "denying" the
> > > doctrine of reincarnation in Isis Unveiled. When she does that she
> > > is meaning the ideas as they where thought by Allan Cardec, and how
> > > his fellow-Spiritists then believed it to be. She was speaking
> > > instead about the "transmigration of the soul" and "metempsychosis"
> > > (see H.P. Blavatsky "Theories about Reincarnation and Spirits", The
> > > Path November 1886).
> > > Page 12:
> > > ? Concerning the so called translations from Sanskrit made by
> > > Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater. Every student of Theosophy (and
> > > Sanskritist) knows that these not are correct, since they are not
> > > with Theosophy agreeing. An example of this that Manas is called
> > > a "body", because it is easy to destroy. The Manas is not a body, in
> > > the same way as the three bodies are in the lower part of the Human
> > > Constitution, and it is not easy to destroy, in other words nearly
> > > impossible.
> > > ? In the second part is further a non-theosophical statement
> > > about the Astral Body and to make it alone as bearer of Prana is not
> > > correct. Theosophy is saying that hence everything is living;
> > > therefore everything must be bearer of Prana.
> > > ? In the fourth part is H. Tudor Edmond's foreword to Arthur
> > > Powell's book The Etheric Double mentioned. How is it possible to
> > > use non-theosophical material, in a stillborn attempt to make non-
> > > theosophical ideas Theosophical? Named what ever! For a description
> > > over the differences between the HPB/Masters Theosophical Teaching
> > > concerning this, and the leadbeaterian, see The Etheric Double: The
> > > Far-Reaching Effects of a false Assumptions by Geoffrey A. Farthing
> > > (see link http://www.katinkahesselink.net/metaphys/etheric.htm).
> > > ? In the fifth part are a number of ideas by Annie Besant and
> > > C.W. Leadbeater, and their followers, menaced and incorrectly called
> > > theosophical. Even with a minor knowledge in Theosophy is it clear
> > > that these ideas not are Theosophical.
> > > My opinion about what is honest saying that if someone create a new
> > > doctrine (and I am talking about a totally new doctrine, and not
> > > minor explanation and complements to a already existing one),
> > > should, if they so wish, also give it a name of its own. Otherwise
> > > it is to go with a false notation. Then Annie Besant (most probably,
> > > not consciously and by her on will) and C.W. Leadbeater, and there
> > > followers, created a new doctrine (for one speaking example. see A
> > > Comparison of C.W. Leadbeater's The Chakras with the Writings of
> > > H.P. Blavatsky, William Q. Judge and G. de Purucker by M. Jaqua
> > > (http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/thomas/jaqua.htm), which is not
> > > Theosophical, should they not call it Theosophy, and therefore give
> > > it a name of its own.
> > > It is seemed that some persons in the T.S. with Headquarters in
> > > Adyar have come to have a creed which is saying; Do NOT believe as
> > > H.P. Blavatsky and the Masters were teaching. Believe what you want
> > > (and call it gladly theosophy), but absolutely not what the Pioneers
> > > of the Movement believed in, for then you are a Fundamentalist, and
> > > not welcome in the society. This even if someone truly and deep
> > > believes and works for the Principe of Universal Brotherhood.
> > > "Well I have raised a "Frankenstein" & he seeks to devour me."
> > > Helena P. Blavatsky in a letter to William Q. Judge
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> > > Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> > >
> > http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1162395226.51704.19714.balcomo.hst.terra.com.br,50816,20031127114101,20031127114101
> > >
> > > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> > > Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 31/10/2006 / Versão:
> > 4.4.00/4885
> > > Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1162421662.809678.2805.vacoas.hst.terra.com.br,53645,20031127114101,20031127114101
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 01/11/2006 / Versão: 4.4.00/4886
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/
> 


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