Theos-Talk Archives (May 2008 Message tt00860)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@...> wrote:

> Some letters contradict with actions of the disciples accepted by 
the
> Masters. This letter is indeed very different from what would
> otherwise be understood from Theosophy.  

> > "And now, after making due allowance for evils that are natural 
and 
> > cannot be avoided, ? and so few are they that I challenge the 
whole 
> > host of Western metaphysicians to call them evils or to trace 
them 
> > directly to an independent cause ? I will point out the greatest, 
the 
> > chief cause of nearly two thirds of the evils that pursue 
humanity ever 
> > since that cause became a power. It is religion under whatever 
form and 
> > in whatsoever nation. 


You may have to consider that disciples are not, necessarily, 
Masters. For example, you may wish to consider the following passage 
from the Mahatma Letters:

"The fact is, that to the last and supreme initiation every chela ? 
(and even some adepts) ? is left to his own device and counsel. We 
have to fight our own battles, and the familiar adage ? "the adept 
becomes, he is not made" is true to the letter. Since every one of us 
is the creator and producer of the causes that lead to such or some 
other results, we have to reap but what we have sown. Our chelas are 
helped but when they are innocent of the causes that lead them into 
trouble; when such causes are generated by foreign, outside 
influences. Life and the struggle for adeptship would be too easy, 
had we all scavengers behind us to sweep away the effects we have 
generated through our own rashness and presumption." 
(ML # 92, chronological) 


> Do  Masters want to say Buddha who founded Buddism, Shankaracharya 
who
> contributed to Hinduism, Jesus who founded Christian religion made a
> mistake of founding these religions ? Some Mahatma Letters are such
> that Masters themselves can be challenged ! I can understand letters
> are not written always very carefully and so I won't take some
> statements from Mahatmas literally. According to Theosophical 
leaders
> like HPB, CWL, AB many of the Great Ones were themselves associated
> with the founding of religions, spread of the religions and 
spiritual
> schools. Do Masters want to say that these Great Ones from the same
> White Brotherhood did wrong things by founding and spreading 
religion ? 


As far as I can see, in the Mahatma letter which I quoted K.H. is not 
attacking the wise teachers who left a legacy of wisdom. He his 
denouncing what happens to religion when it becomes 
institutionalized. And I find his views resonant with what 
Krishnamurti and many others have said. For example, Rubem Alves, a 
Brazilian theologian, once said that "most of the religions which 
exist today are like fossils of a spiritual experience which has 
disappeared long ago." David Tacey, a scholar from La Trobe 
University, Melbourne, Australia, has written in a similar vein. He 
says that many of the students that come to his classes at the 
university say they are completely disillusioned with religion. And, 
last but not the least, Richard Dawkins' book "The God Delusion" has 
had very successful sales in Australia.

 
> >It is the sacerdotal caste, the priesthood and 
> > the churches; it is in those illusions that man looks upon as 
sacred, 
> > that he has to search out the source of that multitude of evils 
which 
> > is the great curse of humanity and that almost overwhelms 
mankind. 
> > Ignorance created Gods and cunning took advantage of the 
opportunity. 
> > Look at India and look at Christendom and Islam, at Judaism and 
> > Fetichism. It is priestly imposture that rendered these Gods so 
> > terrible to man; it is religion that makes of him the selfish 
bigot, 
> > the fanatic that hates all mankind out of his own sect without 
> > rendering him any better or more moral for it. It is belief in 
God and 
> > Gods that makes two-thirds of humanity the slaves of a handful of 
those 
> > who deceive them under the false pretence of saving them.

> If belief in God was cause of problem, why did Masters gave 
Theosophy
> through their accepted disciples HPB, AB, CWL ? Theosophy literally
> means Wisdom of God.  God is central in Co-masonry and LCC. Why did
> CWL created these two organizations ? And Besant was a co-mason.
> According to HPB God exists. According to Subba Rao God exists. Does
> that mean disciples like HPB contradicted Masters views on God ? 


It all depends on how you view the concept of God. To translate the 
word "Theosophy" as "Wisdom of God" does not seem correct to me. As a 
matter of fact, HPB spoke clearly against this kind of translation 
in "The Key to Theosophy". The word "theos", in Greek, means "a god", 
not God in the sense that theologians use the word. And the 
word "theos" comes from "thein", 'to grow, to expand'. Interestingly 
enough, the word "Brahman" comes from the Sanskrit verbal 
root "brih", 'to expand'. So, in view of the above, we could say that 
Theosophy or Divine Wisdom is a way of seeing things which is 
constantly growing, expanding, and is never static, dogmatic, fixed. 
Personally, I think that is the legacy of the Founders through the TS.


> > It is not man 
> > ever ready to commit any kind of evil if told that his God or 
Gods 
> > demand the crime ? voluntary victim of an illusionary God, the 
abject 
> > slave of his crafty ministers? The Irish, Italian and Slavonian 
peasant 
> > will starve himself and see his family starving and naked to feed 
and 
> > clothe his padre and pope. For two thousand years India groaned 
under 
> > the weight of caste, Brahmins alone feeding on the fat of the 
land, and 
> > to-day the followers of Christ and those of Mahomet are cutting 
each 
> > other's throats in the names of and for the greater glory of 
their 
> > respective myths. Remember the sum of human misery will never be 
> > diminished unto that day when the better portion of humanity 
destroys 
> > in the name of Truth, morality, and universal charity, the altars 
of 
> > their false gods."

> Yes, this letter sounds like Krishnamurtian philosophy. But the
> problem is this letter itself is weak and does not withstand logical
> scrutiny. 
> I don't blame Masters as they had asked not to publish letters.

Unlike you, I find this letter one of the most important documents in 
the whole of the theosophical literature. It challenged me when I 
first read it in 1978 and it continues to do so. I continue to be in 
awe of is vitality, wisdom and energy. And I find the following 
statement by HPB equally important:

"In its capacity of an abstract body, the Society does not believe in 
anything, does not accept anything, and does not teach anything."
(http://www.austheos.org.au/topics/thenewcycle.htm)

Pedro