Theos-Talk Archives (January 2009 Message tt00008)

Dear Joseph and friends

My views are:

1) Thanks. Yes. But that does not at all explain why they do, what they do, and who "they" actually are in person. And not why "their" policy is like it is.

2)
I was rather reffering to the fact that the Alice A. Bailey books are not allowed within any TS branch as far as I know. Whereas C. W. Leadbeaters are more than welcomed. Weird is it not?

And compartive study between them and H. P. Blavatsky's teachings? Have it ever occured?
When people start thinkin in terms like: You choose your path, we soon will end up with another version of the Spiritists and a pseudo Esoteric version og the Latter Days Saints or similar. Well, that is, if you get my view.

2 + 3)


4)
Joseph wrote:
Krishnamuti: "People choose their leaders out of confusion, therefore
the leaders are also confused."

My answer:
Sure, that will imediately rule all others out except Kirshnamurti himself - as a braging Messiah. 
Sneaky fellow that Krishnamurti, .....sneaky, very  very sneaky.

So no one have ever compared J. Krishnamurti with any other TS teacher?
I am amazed.


Yes. The Theosophical Movement by Cooper is worth an effort.

What is this: "Theosophical materials" (presumably
from the Adyar organization) - you are reffering to?

Joseph wrote:
"Morten, I agree very strongly with your view of the TS as an
"investigatory" organization. A major portion of the issues we deal
with now date back to the post-Coulomb period when HPB was in Europe
and the ES was formed. As soon as this direct line to a "higher
authority" was established with the Europeans, free-thought, and the
investigatory nature of the TS diminished greatly. It's a funny
phenomenon, slightly alluded to in the Mahatma Letters (3rd Ed. Letter
16 "Devachan" Pg. 24) regarding the existence of a pair of undisclosed
Skandhas. These two are associated, according to the letter, with
"the efficacy of vain rights and ceremonies, in prayers and
intercession". Perhaps it is the action of this attribute of mind
which is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs."

My answer:
Thanks. I found your words very interesting.

One aught to ask various TS leaders and leaders from other theosophical branches about this issue. I wonder what they would say, if they at all dared to answer?
----

Joseph wrote:
"I have one other question. Who are the finest scholars in the
movement today? David Riegle, Daniel Caldwell, Paul Johnson, Joy
Mills? Where is the output from these individuals, presumably experts
in Theosophical writing? Who are they challenging in the world of
science, religion and philosophy?"


My answer:
Spot on. That was the major point with this e-mail.

The question will be: When and who will do an effort - together - so that the truth about the Wisdoms teachings will be forwarded, so that the untruth might be shown clearly to the interested reader. - Who has or have the capacity to write a major comprehensive in deept volume - comparing H. P. Blavatsky with Annie Besant, C. W. Leadbeater, J. Krishnamurti , W. Q. Judge - as well as quite important the major player today: Alice A. Bailey, while forwarding the - theosophical message to our present day audiences - with todays, nuclears, DNA-engineeering, cloning, Disclosure Project, Alien/UFO/Cropcircle situation, psychology today, brain washing in the new age movements and religion,  etc. etc. Such a book could easily be running past 500 pages. A book for instance also drawing from the ancient mythologies and words of wise vibration.

If this is what Master orders, we will have to write it. I could imagine, that this is what Master would find one of important tasks to do today.
---


We shall know the various authors on their fruits and not only their books.
Are there at all any sages on this polluted and scarred Planet? Who?


M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joseph P. Fulton 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:56 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: TS Adyar's policy or non-policy?


  Very good question. I have to admit that sometimes I am quite amazed
  at the lack of comparative studies. There appear to be a number of
  things involved, some are philosophical, and some are quite, how
  should we say, prosaic? I'll answer the questions in order.

  1) Please see the site: 
  http://www.questbooks.net/aboutquest.cfm#staff for contact info and
  submission guidelines. 

  2) Have you ever done programming in a branch or study center? You
  find out one thing real quick. You're on your own. The most common
  reaction from a programming person doesn't have anything to do with
  what "Wheaton" or "Adyar" wants. Getting something, i.e. anything
  together is the best many can hope for. The prevailing attitude in
  most groups (having heard this enough times as a Federation Pres.) is
  if "Wheaton wants to tell us what to do, they can come do it themselves".

  3) See #2. Headquarters offers study courses to groups, but I've
  never, ever heard of word coming down from HQ saying that a group
  "must" study something. I've even visited groups where I was kindly
  told to leave for asking if they read or studied the SD or ML. 
  Running a local group is really a "by the seat of your pants" type of
  thing. I have some wonderful horror stories of times where speakers
  didn't show or someone in the audience tried to make a virtual
  whipping post out of the speaker or their topic.

  4) Applying a style of logic normally ascribed to Nagarjuna, this
  answer will apply to Questions #5, 6, 7, and 8. If a local group is
  fortunate enough to have someone with an Eastern philosophical
  background, chances are this type of debate goes on quite a bit. 
  However, in this organization, there seems to be much less emphasis on
  the tradition of inquiry and open examination. The prevailing
  attitude that I observe in most groups is that of your typical
  "believer", not much different than what you would find at a local
  Methodist or Congregationalist church. And, to paraphrase
  Krishnamuti: "People choose their leaders out of confusion, therefore
  the leaders are also confused."

  So the answer to Questions 4 - 8 is "yes, all the above are allowed".
  The reality is, and mostly for the reasons given above, is that it
  just doesn't happen.

  9) I guess it depends on who you call an "Adyar" writer or teacher. 
  Probably the most well-known piece from the "Adyar" camp is "There is
  No Religion Higher Than Truth" by E.L. Gardner
  (http://hpb.narod.ru/NoReligion.htm). As a member of the British
  Section, Gardner lays out a comparison between various teachings of
  HPB and CW Leadbeater. In regard to the teaching of later
  "commentators" perhaps the issue is one of not having anything new to
  say vs. not saying anything. In the Adyar tradition, virtually
  everything is an expansion on the writings of CWL. Now that being
  said, there are some fine exceptions, such as "The Divine Plan" by
  Geoffrey Barborka, and "The Reader's Guide to the Mahatma Letters" by
  Virginia Hanson. One other little known source, and perhaps one of
  the most wonderfully objective pieces I've ever seen was a video of
  the history of the Theosophical Movement, by the late John Cooper. He
  did a brilliant exposition on the various traditions within the
  Theosophical movement without being rude or condescending to any
  particular viewpoint or organization. This is something (IMHO) that
  all of the various organizations within the Theosophical movement
  should have in their libraries.

  I would like to analyze the entire issue of what is taught in the
  Theosophical Society from a different viewpoint. The autonomy of
  local groups is pretty absolute. The only requirement that I am aware
  of for groups is that they use "Theosophical materials" (presumably
  from the Adyar organization) in "Theosophy" classes.

  Morten, I agree very strongly with your view of the TS as an
  "investigatory" organization. A major portion of the issues we deal
  with now date back to the post-Coulomb period when HPB was in Europe
  and the ES was formed. As soon as this direct line to a "higher
  authority" was established with the Europeans, free-thought, and the
  investigatory nature of the TS diminished greatly. It's a funny
  phenomenon, slightly alluded to in the Mahatma Letters (3rd Ed. Letter
  16 "Devachan" Pg. 24) regarding the existence of a pair of undisclosed
  Skandhas. These two are associated, according to the letter, with
  "the efficacy of vain rights and ceremonies, in prayers and
  intercession". Perhaps it is the action of this attribute of mind
  which is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs.

  I have one other question. Who are the finest scholars in the
  movement today? David Riegle, Daniel Caldwell, Paul Johnson, Joy
  Mills? Where is the output from these individuals, presumably experts
  in Theosophical writing? Who are they challenging in the world of
  science, religion and philosophy?

  Answer that question, and you'll have the answer to everything you
  asked above. The sad truth is that the Theosophical movement as a
  whole is quite a marginal movement, of little importance to anyone
  today aside from its own participants. Nobody really cares about the
  arguments made on the forums or in the magazines because we just talk
  to ourselves. In a sense, I can get that by going downtown and
  listening to the winos and drug addicts talk to the voices in their
  head. I guess, based on that, there are a number of hobbies one could
  engage in that are more likely to be of benefit to society or cause
  more damage.

  Perhaps if we stopped pretending to have all of the answers and got
  back to asking questions, such mundane little issues as membership,
  who is President, and what do we teach may become meaningful again.

  Joe

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen"
  <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear friends
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > A new year is beginning in peoples minds.
  > 
  > It is now more than 133 years since the founding of the moderne
  visdom teachings - The Theosophical Society year 1875.
  > 
  > Status at Conventions occurs.
  > It could be well for members at TS Adyar to consider the following
  questions and words and their value.
  > 
  > 
  > H.P. Blavatsky said:
  > "...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at their right
  value; and unless a judge compares notes and hears 
  > both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision." H.P.
  Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > *** THE QUESTIONS to CONSIDER ***
  > 
  > I would appreciate if anyone would care to answer the following
  questions, so that we may be able to know about TS Adyar more fully...
  > 
  > 1.
  > Who decides what kind of books and what books at all are being sold
  at Quest Books?
  > Who decides, what Bookshop and what books by what authors - TS Adyar
  promotes?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 
  > 2.
  > Who decides what kind of lectures are emphasised within TS branches?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 3.
  > Who decides what books one are allowed to lecture on?
  > Are lectures on comparative study of various authors allowed freely?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 
  > 4.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs. C.
  W. Leadbeater allowed?
  > 
  > 5.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Annie Besant allowed?
  > 
  > 6.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Alice A. Bialey / Lucis Trust allowed?
  > 
  > 7.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Radha Burnier allowed?
  > 
  > 8.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs. J.
  Krishnamurti allowed?
  > 
  > 9.
  > Have any TS Adyar Teacher ever done an effort in the direction of
  comparative study - large or small - between H. P. Blavatsky and all
  of the aboves techings? If not, why not?
  > 
  > 
  > 10.
  > In the old H. P. Blavatsky days - no false claims were permitted to
  go unchallanged for a longer time by H. P. Blavatsky herself. A clear
  stance on various new religious groups was - ALWAYS - given in the
  Theosophist and Lucifer etc. when the situation demanded it. - Is this
  what is happening today?
  > 
  > Are false claims being allowed to flourish within TS today?
  > 
  > 
  > - - -
  > 
  > If time permit me, I will in a study, and if no others will, seek to
  compare 
  > H. P. Blavatsky with all the above - C. W. Leadbeater. Annie Besant,
  J. Krishnamurti, Radha Burnier, Alice A. Bailey. And I will eventually
  publish my study before this my phycial body reach its death.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



   

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