Theos-Talk Archives (October 2008 Message tt00078)

Good question. I'm not sure I have words yet to describe my
disillusionment with Krishnamurti. I tried a bit a few years ago here:

http://www.katinkahesselink.net/kr/krishnamurti_theosophy.html
and (indirectly, but more recently)
http://www.allconsidering.com/2008/no-distinction/

Check out my blog All Considering on Monday for a more complete answer. 
http://www.allconsidering.com/

Katinka Hesselink

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Katinka
> 
> Firstly, may I thank you publicly for your committed 
> efforts to our Theosophical cause. Your website alone 
> is a highly valuable resource.
> 
> In your recent posting:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/45936 
> you quote Madame Blavatsky, "Theosophists have 
> no dogmas, exact no blind faith. Theosophists are
> ever ready to abandon every idea that is proved 
> erroneous upon strictly logical deductions. 
> http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v1/y1878_007.htm 
> 
> Then you write, "She repeated that point during her 
> whole life. Of course she also continued to teach her own 
> position during her whole life. However she never claimed 
> the TS was made merely to spread her own ideas. In fact
> she constantly warned against 'dogmatism'."
> 
> And further you reinforce this by adding, "If you 
> look at old issues of the Theosophist, made when 
> Blavatsky was editor, you will see much that isn't 
> 'theosophy' by any of our current definitions (except 
> the widest). In fact you will see that her contemporaries 
> told her: make the magazine more theosophical. Print only 
> that which you agree with. She never caved."
> 
> And, "And one of Blavatsky's fears for the TS
> was that it would become too dogmatic: too much 
> attached to the dead letter of her teachings."
> 
> These to me are such enormously significant points 
> to make. 
> 
> Moreover, they can be largely misunderstood by those 
> who perceive all students of Madame Blavatsky's 
> teachings to be dogmatic "Blavatskyites" and those 
> who challenge later commentators' writings as somehow 
> denying a person's freedom of speech or belief. 
> For some of us, nothing could be further from the 
> truth.
> 
> Quite apart from some of Madame Blavatsky's 
> extraordinary teachings, many validated by later 
> scientific discoveries, your abovementioned quote 
> demonstrates that her, to me, all important mindset 
> encouraged the fundamental right and necessity for 
> each to think for themselves and to discard any 
> teachings, including her own, where found to be 
> inaccurate or no longer relevant according to 
> contemporary knowledge. 
> 
> This is in stark contrast to the dogma and mindset 
> inflicted upon Theosophy by certain later commentators.
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/46129 
>  
> You then write, "This is hard. I've tried following 
> that procedure for my own website, but I'm not sure 
> I succeeded. It is however one of the reasons why I 
> have Buddhist material as well as Sufi material. It's 
> also the reason why I haven't deleted the material on 
> Jiddu Krishnamurti after I became somewhat 
> disillusioned with his teachings."
> 
> If I may ask, what is the nature/cause of your 
> disillusionment with Jiddu Krishnamurti's teachings?
> 
> Thank you again.
> 
> Regards
> Nigel
>