Theos-Talk Archives (March 2009 Message tt00165)

Dear Anand, 

The most solid and internally consistent position that Krishnamurtian Theosophists might take regarding the WT project and AB's and CWL's involvement is as follows:

K was meant to be, and successfully became, the WT. The only acceptable and right thing AB and CWL did was finding the vehicle and give him a basic education. The rest (initiations, The  Lives of Alcyone, the LCC, the apostles, the World Mother, etc.) were neo-Theosophical inventions which had to be tossed by the WT and he could only do so by distancing himself from a hopelessly lost TS. Therefore the TS should and could find its bearing again in relation to the WT by tossing its neo-theosophical past and adopt an abstract, de-esoterized Blavatskyan perspective in harmonizing K and Theosophy. 

I'm not saying that anybody has developed that position in its entirety. It's just a composite of different elements that seem to fit in creating a somewhat logical picture that will explain many, if not most, of the allegedly more problematic aspects of K's story. 

The problem with this perspective is that as K threw out the baby with the bathwater, Krishnamurtian Theosophists might do so likewise in their quest to harmonize the impossible. My counter-proposal is to develop a more occult Theosophical explanation of the K story on the basis of elements provided by CWL, Jinarajadasa, Scott, Anrias, Bailey, Hodson, Prophet and Keidan. 

The key insight around which all the others might coalesce was provided by who I belief to be Maitreya himself, delivered through Anrias in "Through the Eyes of the Masters" in 1932: 

"Thus although Krishnamurti was right to emphasize the necessity for independent thought, he was wrong in assuming that everyone else, regardless of past Karma and present limitations, could instantly reach that point which he himself had only reached through lives of effort, and by the aid of those Cosmic Forces apportioned to him solely for his office as Herald of the New Age."

Govert

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Anand 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 12:30 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Evolution (AnandGholap.Net-Online Theosophy)


  There could be many reasons why she used word World Teacher there. Irony, humor could be the reasons. But I must tell that there are many in Theosophical Society who believe he was true World Teacher because they think that Leadbeater and Besant can't be wrong, if these occultists tell that K was World Teacher, then he must be World Teacher. This despite that fact that K's many statements are completely against reason and common sense. Followers of Leadbeater and Annie Besant don't know possibility that World Teacher project could fail. And Leadbeater and Besant also did not give too much publicity to failure of WT project. 
  Perhaps because AB, CWL thought even if K might have failed to work with Christ in the beginning, after some time he will start co-operating intelligently. But that has not happened. If AB and CWL had expressly declared that WT project had failed, then members would not have been in confused state, as they are now. After K started teaching, within few years AB, CWL died. So mystery whether Christ taught always through K or not through K remained. We also need to take into account time factor. 
  1) WT project might have failed in the beginning but succeeded later.
  2) WT project succeeded in the beginning but later failed.
  3) WT project never succeeded.
  4) WT project partly failed and partly succeeded.
  Whatever people might say, my reason and intuition tells me that Krishnamurti's teaching is disastrous to people.
  Best
  Anand Gholap

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@...> wrote:
  >
  > I think Jayakar meant it more ironic than metaphysical in order to thicken the contrast between WT and playing golf. Also, one can interject 'supposed' without really altering the meaning of the sentence or add quotation marks to more explicitly indicate the irony:
  > 
  > "To the astonishment of the correspondent, the [supposed] 'World Teacher' then went on to speak of golf and of his handicap, which was plus 2."
  > 
  > You could not do so if she had said something seriously and metaphysical like "I belief in the World Teacher," because the meaning would then have turned into its intended opposite. 
  > 
  > In the other instances in her book where she uses the term WT it seems to be to indicate the Theosophical perception of K, and not her own.
  > 
  > Still, you might be on the right track, as Jayakar keeps the door slightly ajar for the existence of the Masters and the occult hierarchy, but then rather connects those ideas with the sages of Varanasi with whom AB and later also K were in contact with and were, according to Jayakar, the source of AB's belief for the coming of the WT. 
  > 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: Anand 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 2:41 PM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: Evolution (AnandGholap.Net-Online Theosophy)
  > 
  > 
  > http://www.scribd.com/doc/11499301/Pupul-Jayakar-Krishnamurti-A-Biography
  > Page 66 in pdf.
  > "To the astonishment of the correspondent, the World Teacher then went on to speak of golf and of his handicap, which was plus 2. Krishnamurti had played golf on some of the most famous golf courses in the world."
  > Best
  > Anand Gholap
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@> wrote:
  > >
  > > Dear Anand,
  > > 
  > > Did Jayakar capitalize WT or did she mean wt? 
  > > 
  > > This is an important difference as part of the re-interpretation and re-calibration of the WT project by K and his folowers was to strip the WT concept of all esoteric/occult implications and to make it into a more secular concept denoting the idea that K was a teacher teaching the whole world irrespective of culture, class, etc. 
  > > 
  > > The irony though with Jayakar is that she appropriates K for India as she sees in him the product of something peculiar to the soil of Indian culture thereby severly diminishing the universal aspect of K's teachings. This 'Indianization' of K has also been pointed out, if I'm not mistaken, by Aryel Sanat.
  > > 
  > > Govert
  > > 
  > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > From: Anand 
  > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 1:25 PM
  > > Subject: Theos-World Re: Evolution (AnandGholap.Net-Online Theosophy)
  > > 
  > > 
  > > If you read this biography of J. Krishnamurti by Pupul Jaykar, you will find that she calls JK as World Teacher. It is misleading people.
  > > 
  > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@> wrote:
  > > >
  > > > Dear Govert,
  > > > I see that vast number of people are getting misled by J. Krishnamurti's teaching of freedom from all religions, theosophy, teachers and their teachings. One major reason why people give importance to J. Krishnamurti is they believe World Teacher taught through him. 
  > > > I am convinced that World Teacher DID NOT teach through him. I want to prove to people that WT did not teach through him. If people understand it, they will not believe blindly in J. Krishnamurti and won't get misled by J. Krishnamurti. Now the question is how to prove that WT did not teach through J. Krishnamurti. That is why I sent this message.
  > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
  > > > This message is among the most important messages I wrote, because it shows that
  > > > J. Krishnamurti's teaching has come from his own understanding of a human being,
  > > > and his teaching is not from Christ.
  > > > This passage is from the biography of J. Krishnamurti by Pupul Jaykar.
  > > > "At the opening of the Star camp at Ommen in 1927 Krishnamurti spoke a language
  > > > diametrically opposed to Theosophical teaching. On June 30 he said, "For many
  > > > lives and for all this life, and especially the last few months, I have
  > > > struggled to be free-free of my friends, my books, my associations. You must
  > > > struggle for the same freedom. There must be constant turmoil within you."
  > > > Krishnamurti was in revolt. No teacher or authority satisfied him."
  > > > 
  > > > Note the words "I have struggled to be free" It shows that struggle to become
  > > > free from authorities and teachings was Krishnamurti's OWN struggle. It was not
  > > > the teaching given by true World Teacher or Christ.
  > > > J. Krishnamurti thought his own condition is same as that of millions of others
  > > > and so he recommends his own struggle to all others, when they were completely
  > > > different from him.
  > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
  > > > Best
  > > > Anand Gholap
  > > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@> wrote:
  > > > >
  > > > > Dear Anand,
  > > > > 
  > > > > Krishnamurti's reports on his own struggles have to be viewed in the context of his overall spiritual development and level of initiation. The crux might be that he went arguably through the 4th initiation with some tests where he had to be free and independent. Some call it the dark night of the soul (or spirit), where the initiate has to deal with certain challenges free from the Masters and his higher self. K might have liked the independence coming with that initiation too much and decided to stay in that mode and toss everything overboard, Masters and Theosophy included. 
  > > > > 
  > > > > Of course the struggles he went through were his own and can be evaluated positively and are, within certain bounds, applicable to everybody. The important caveat is that this struggle is only a phase within a larger process and should not be absolutized as K did. 
  > > > > 
  > > > > I do think you're on the right track, but to really make the case, you have to get a close reading of all events between 1921 and 1933 and all set within a Theosophical paradigm of understanding and not K's own, fascinating, alluring and valuable as that also might be. 
  > > > > 
  > > > > And to make such an investigation really work we have to incorporate some considerations derived from "the philosophy of science of religion" as developed by some researchers with a keen sense of methodology. I'm still trying to wrap my my around the topic and it feels I'm almost there to share some insights. The important thing is that those methodological considerations are trying to straddle the area between religionism and reductionism in a very similar way as Therosophy tries a middle way between theological dogmatism (religionism) and materialism (reductionism). 
  > > > > 
  > > > > Govert
  > > > > 
  > > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > > > From: Anand 
  > > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 2:36 AM
  > > > > Subject: Theos-World Re: Evolution (AnandGholap.Net-Online Theosophy)
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > This message is among the most important messages I wrote, because it shows that J. Krishnamurti's teaching has come from his own understanding of a human being, and his teaching is not from Christ.
  > > > > This passage is from the biography of J. Krishnamurti by Pupul Jaykar.
  > > > > "At the opening of the Star camp at Ommen in 1927 Krishnamurti spoke a language diametrically opposed to Theosophical teaching. On June 30 he said, "For many lives and for all this life, and especially the last few months, I have struggled to be free-free of my friends, my books, my associations. You must struggle for the same freedom. There must be constant turmoil within you." Krishnamurti was in revolt. No teacher or authority satisfied him."
  > > > > 
  > > > > Note the words "I have struggled to be free" It shows that struggle to become free from authorities and teachings was Krishnamurti's OWN struggle. It was not the teaching given by true World Teacher or Christ. 
  > > > > J. Krishnamurti thought his own condition is same as that of millions of others and so he recommends his own struggle to all others, when they were completely different from him. 
  > > > > Best
  > > > > Anand Gholap
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > 
  > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > > > >
  > > >
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  > >
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >



  

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