Theos-Talk Archives (January 2009 Message tt00017)

That makes about as much sense as saying that a library that has Mein Kampf  
on the shelves is promoting Nazism!
 
Chuck the Heretic
 
 
In a message dated 1/3/2009 9:59:09 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
global-theosophy@stofanet.dk writes:

 
 
 
Dear friends and Chuck

My views are:

And all of them are -  first editions - and also alvailable on the Internet 
or elsewhere for  free?

So I take it, that Radha Burnier in secret are promoting the New  World 
Order, the Externalization of the Hierarchy within UN, the Great  Invocation, and 
the return of the Christ - and - similar in accordance with  the Alice A. 
Bailey groups main focus?

- - - 
H. P. Blavatsky about  Prayer: "It kills in man self-reliance; "

A few words by H. P.  Blavatsky for considereation about the AAB's loud mouth 
Great Invocation and  LCC church songs, the the Messiah Schemes...

H. P. Blavatsky in The Key  to Theosophy, chapter 1 , p. 10- 
(_http://www.phx-http://wwwhttp://wwhtt_ 
(http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm)   )
"Meditation is silent and unuttered prayer, or, as Plato expressed it,  "the 
ardent turning of the soul toward the divine; not to ask any particular  good 
(as in the common meaning of prayer), but for good itself âfor the  universal 
Supreme Good" of which we are a part on earth, and out of the  essence of 
which we have all emerged. Therefore, adds Plato, "remain silent in  the presence 
of the divine ones, till they remove the clouds from thy eyes and  enable thee 
to see by the light which issues from themselves, not what appears  as good 
to thee, but what is intrinsically good."

H. P. Blavatsky in  The Key to Theosophy, chapter 14 - p. 66-71:
(_http://www.phx-http://wwwhttp://wwhtt_ 
(http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm)   )

"ENQUIRER. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray?  

THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We act, instead of talking.  "

...............

"ENQUIRER. To whom, then, do you pray  when you do so? 

THEOSOPHIST. To "our Father in heaven" â in its  esoteric meaning. 

ENQUIRER. Is that different from the one given to it  in theology? 

THEOSOPHIST. Entirely so. An Occultist or a Theosophist  addresses his prayer 
to his Father which is in secret (read, and try to  understand, ch. vi. v. 6, 
Matthew), not to an extra-cosmic and therefore  finite God; and that "Father" 
is in man himself. 

ENQUIRER. Then you  make of man a God? 

THEOSOPHIST. Please say "God" and not a God. In our  sense, the inner man is 
the only God we can have cognizance of. And how can  this be otherwise? Grant 
us our postulate that God is a universally diffused,  infinite principle, and 
how can man alone escape from being soaked through by,  and in, the Deity? We 
call our "Father in heaven" that deific essence of which  we are cognizant 
within us, in our heart and spiritual consciousness, and  which has nothing to do 
with the anthropomorphic conception we may form of it  in our physical brain 
or its fancy: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of  God, and that the spirit 
of (the absolute) God dwelleth in you? Yet,  

let no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no Theosophist, if  he 
would hold to divine, not human truth, say that this "God in secret"  listens 
to, or is distinct from, either finite man or the infinite essence â  for all 
are one. Nor, as just remarked, that a prayer is a petition. It is a  mystery 
rather; an occult process by which finite and conditioned thoughts and  desires, 
unable to be assimilated by the absolute spirit which is  unconditioned, are 
translated into spiritual wills and the will; such process  being called 
"spiritual transmutation.let no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no 
Theosophist, if  he wouldlet no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no 
Theosophist, if  he would hold to divine, not human truth, say that this "God 
in secret"  listens to, or is distinct from, either finite

ENQUIRER. Do you mean to say that prayer is  an occult process bringing about 
physical results? 

THEOSOPHIST. I do.  Will-Power becomes a living power. But woe unto those 
Occultists and  Theosophists, who, instead of crushing out the desires of the 
lower personal  ego or physical man, and saying, addressing their Higher 
Spiritual EGO  immersed in Atma-Buddhic light, "Thy will be done, not mine," etc., 
send up  waves of will-power for selfish or unholy purposes! For this is black 
magic,  abomination, and spiritual sorcery. Unfortunately, all this is the 
favourite  occupation of our Christian statesmen and generals, especially when the 
latter  are sending two armies to murder each other. Both indulge before 
action in a  bit of such sorcery, by offering respectively prayers to the same God 
of  Hosts, each entreating his help to cut its enemies' throats.  "

................

"ENQUIRER. But how do you explain the  universal fact that all nations and 
peoples have prayed to, and worshipped a  God or Gods? Some have adored and 
propitiated devils and harmful spirits, but  this only proves the universality of 
the belief in the efficacy of prayer.  

THEOSOPHIST. It is explained by that other fact that prayer has  several 
other meanings besides that given it by the Christians. It means not  only a 
pleading or petition, but meant, in days of old, far more an invocation  and 
incantation. The mantra, or the rhythmically chanted prayer of the Hindus,  has 
precisely such a meaning, as the Brahmins hold themselves higher than the  common 
devas or "Gods." A prayer may be an appeal or an incantation for  malediction, 
and a curse (as in the case of two armies praying simultaneously  for mutual 
destruction) as much as for blessing. And as the great majority of  people are 
intensely selfish, and pray only for themselves, asking to be given  their 
"daily bread" instead of working for it, and begging God not to lead  them "into 
temptation" but to deliver them (the memorialists only) from evil,  the 
result is, that prayer, as now understood, is doubly pernicious: (a) It  kills in 
man self-reliance; (b) It develops in him a still more ferocious  selfishness 
and egotism than he is already endowed with by nature. I repeat,  that we 
believe in "communion" and simultaneous action in unison with our  "Father in 
secret"; and in rare moments of ecstatic bliss, in the mingling of  our higher soul 
with the universal essence, attracted as it is towards its  origin and 
centre, a state, called during life Samadhi, and after death,  Nirvana. We refuse to 
pray to created finite beingsâi. e., gods, saints,  angels, etc., because we 
regard it as idolatry. We cannot pray to the ABSOLUTE  for reasons explained 
before; therefore, we try to replace fruitless and  useless prayer by 
meritorious and good-producing actions.

- - - - - -  -

H. P. Blavatsky said:
LET NO THEOSOPHIST, IF HE WOULD HOLD TO  DIVINE, NOT HUMAN TRUTH, SAY THAT 
THIS "GOD IN SECRET" LISTENS TO, OR IS  distinct from, EITHER FINITE MAN OR THE 
FINITE ESSENCES - FOR ALL ARE  ONE.

- - -

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message -----  
From: _Drpsionic@aol.Drp_ (mailto:Drpsionic@aol.com)  
To: _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com)   
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: TS  Adyar's policy or non-policy?

Unless there has been a radical change,  the Olcott Library carries all the 
Alice Bailey material and the Chicago  branches have always had Baileyites as 
members and had Bailey material  present.

Chuck the Heretic

In a message dated 1/2/2009 12:16:12  P.M. Central Standard Time, 
_global-theosophy@global-thgl_ (mailto:global-theosophy@stofanet.dk)   writes:

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"intercession"<WBR>. Perhaps it is the  action of this att
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/Cropcirclnucl
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 wr

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@To: _theos-talTo: _theos-_theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ 
(mailto: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.questboohttp://www.http://wwwhttp://_ 
(http://www.questboohttp://www.questhttp://www._)   
(_http://www.questboohttp://www.questhttp://www._ 
(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.http://hpb.http://_ (http://hpb.narod.http://hpb.narhtt_) 
  (_http://hpb.narod.http://hpb.narhtt_ (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"intercession"<WBR>. Perhaps it is the  action of this att
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@--- In _theos---- In _theos-t_theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ 
(mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) )  , 
"Morten Nymann Olesen"
<global-theosophy@glo>  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]

************************<WBR>**New  year...new news. Be the first to kno
headlines. (_http://www.aol.http://wwwhttp://www.aol.http_ 
(http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) )

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

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


 

**************New year...new news.  Be the first to know what is making 
headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)


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