Theos-Talk Archives (February 2009 Message tt00195)

Dear Govert,

I think you perhaps don't take account that antroposophy, instead of 
theosophy of the Theosophical Society (Adyar), was very big in 
Germany since 1913, i.e. before the rise of Hitler. So the failed 
Krishnamurti case (or "project" or whatever) with its messiah 
expectations didn't matter very much in Germany. For me there was no 
spiritual vacuum where Nazism could enter.

I also think that you don't show enough criticism towards 
theosophical fancies on the Masters since about 1895 and especially 
since 1907 (Besant's time). I am assured that there is a brotherhood 
of Dark Brothers, who tries to mislead truth seekers. After HPB, I 
believe, Dark Brothers gave some deceiving, and the consequences were 
that the main direction of the TS went astray from the teaching of 
self-realization to worshipping outer authorities and imaging 
initiations. The same happened also in the US in the TS Pasadena 
(which organization, of course, had different names then) and in The 
Temple of the People (which also waited for an avatar). I don't 
either believe in later Master messages given by Guy Ballard, Mark L. 
Prophet and others, who you seem to believe in strongly. My argument 
is that those teachers, who continue the old CWL direction by talking 
about initiations and personal Masters who come to us as we call 
them, have not learned the essential lesson that Krishnamurti gave: 
know thyself.

HPB said that the world teacher will come after year 1975. So I don't 
believe that Krishnamurti was him. He gave important lessons, but 
much before 1975. There is a general belief in theosophical circles 
in Finland where I live that the world teacher is a collective, the 
new age, or the dalai-lama.

I know German and I think that nobody should read Heidegger in other 
languages but in German.

Just my ideas. I shall answer your Krishnamurti criticism when I have 
enough time.

Sampsa



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@...> 
wrote:
>
> Dear Nigel,
> 
> Thanks for your understanding and encouragement.
> 
> The report/article onphenomenology I referred to is titled:
> 
> "The Relevance of Phenomenology for Theosophy" and can be found at:
> 
> http://alpheus.org/html/articles/philosophy/phen&theos.htm
> 
> The section on Heidegger might be a little dense as is the subject 
matter itself. One day I hope to explain better the relevance of 
Heidegger. I did post an article 
> "Heideggerian Thinking and the Eastern Mind" by Rolf von 
Eckartsberg and Ronald S. Valle, from: Metaphors of Consciousness. 
> http://alpheus.org/tsclass/MHandEast.pdf
> 
> This article might get somewhere in wetting Theosophists' appetite 
for the 'sage of the black forest.' 
> 
> Maybe also more on Popper one day. A title for that might be: "The 
Refutation of the Refutation of the Conjecture Called Theosophy." 
> 
> Best
> 
> Govert