Theos-Talk Archives (June 2009 Message tt00089)

Dear friends and

My views are:

Butchie asked:
"Why not agree that we don't know; be agnostic?"

Because we will continue to say, that "a tree is known on its fruits".
And because we can prove that certain activities are false, wrong or incorrect. Proving it will however not seldom take time.

Your view is almost like Socrates: "I know that I know nothing".
Yet, we cannot quite agree on that. 

And simply because some of us claim that we actually know, and do not assume, that a World Teacher of the age, who claims that himself reading books are allright, and yet a few years later tells people to throw books away, was not all the time a World Teacher. A Torchbearer not giving irrefutable proof on Gupta-Vidya can hardly be the same Torchbearer to come mentioned by H. P. Blavatsky. And when Annie Besant claimed the arrival of twelve apostles and was contradicted by the by herself claimed World Teacher, we cannot agree on both of them was telling the truth. There are persons who karmically liberates people, and there are persons who karmically does the opposite. This we know.
What is good for some is not good for others. Still "a tree is known on its fruits." A World Teacher not creating more impact than an average philosopher from India, who travels to Western countries, can hardly be called a World Teacher, but aught rather to be called an Exclusive "Secterian", who rejected the thought of comparative studying to create peace and end the strifes between the worlds religions on Earth. Even Vivekananda did a better job on that in his day. Please do not misunderstand me, I and others do hold the view and knowledge that meditation, PROVIDED it is understood correctly will lead the Seekers after Truth in the proper direction, but we do not teach the WHOLE world meditation, when they need something else before they will appreciate real occult meditation and not the superficial one, which is almost the same a the Christian dogmatic lip-prayer services towards a physical World Teacher of own their choosning. Occult meditation are only to be recommended to those who are ready for it, and guidance is to be recommended and not avoided at all costs.
We know this, prove is something else. Yet we claim, that you can never walk alone!
:-)

These are just my views and knowledge on my level.
And I might also be in error.




M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: butchie122 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 12:03 AM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: The Clairvoyants on Krishnamurti?





  Thanks Morten,

  What I do know is that I often (usually) fall on the Path or Pathless. The one mislead is me. How can I KNOW what a World Teacher is or what is overshadowing in reality? Nisagardatta famously said that a fact is "an event in awareness unstained by desire or fear". My experience is that I rarely enjoy such unstained moments - hence my opinions, no matter how well researched usually turn out to be wrong or sometimes half right i.e. also half wrong. Why not agree that we don't know; be agnostic?

  Brian

  --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
  >
  > Dear friends and Butchie
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > Butchie wrote:
  > "The pro & con discussions on Krishnamurti, Besant, Leadbeater etc were full of lots of heat but little else. "
  > 
  > May I ask if the anything writing and discussions amounts to the same in your mind, or have we throw a few remarks against a stonewall without a heart?
  > 
  > I suggest that you rather face the facts, that some persons fall on the Path or Pathless Path.
  > And because they do so, they are prone to mislead the Seekers after Truth.
  > Denying this you can, but the truth in it will not go away. Do you understand me on this?
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > 
  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: butchie122 
  > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 12:50 AM
  > Subject: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > Thanks for your well put point. I don't know if we have a duty to develop a plausible hypothesis on questions on which we cannot really have all the information. The whole Theosophy World site demonstrates the problems associated with 'plausible hypothesis' based on personal opinion. The pro & con discussions on Krishnamurti, Besant, Leadbeater etc were full of lots of heat but little else. 
  > 
  > In Lucifer in 1887 HPB had an article entitled 'Self KNowledge'; it says ' The first necessity for obtaining self-knowlwedge is to become profoundly conscious of ignorance; to feel with every fibre of the heart that one is ceaselessly self deceived.'
  > 
  > This seems to match The Voice of the Silence 1st verse which directs its instructions to those 'who are ignorant'.
  > 
  > This is why I am so cautious of any opinion that I develop. 
  > 
  > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Govert Schuller" <schuller@> wrote:
  > >
  > > Dear Brian,
  > > 
  > > Thanks for the answer. I think it's perfectly fine to have a somewhat agnostic position on these issues. All your observations are quite true. Question remains for many: What's the overarching, most plausible hypothesis to explain most, if not all, facts? It's up to us to develop the most plausible ones and debate the pros and cons. In the process we can get somewhat hardened or passionate, some more than others, but that comes with debate on profound spiritual issues. And of course, if one has soaked up enough HPB and got a taste for her polemics, one might emulate her rhetorical style. 
  > > 
  > > Govert
  > > 
  > > 
  > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > From: butchie122 
  > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  > > Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 3:13 AM
  > > Subject: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > Thanks for the question Govert.
  > > 
  > > The only true answer is that I don't know. Here are a few pointers that I have found useful
  > > 
  > > All the evidence points to Leadbeater 'discovering' Krishnamurti. Whether he, K, was the world Teacther or not, he turned out to be an extraordinary person in the 20th century. If it was a guess it turned out better than any of my guesses on anything.
  > > 
  > > In her diagram of Meditation, which is my own favorite, HPB asks us to acquire the capacity to see existing things without love, hate or indifference. I find resonance of this in K's "Look, don't think.' Incidently this is easy to say but extraordinarily difficult to do.
  > > 
  > > She also urges us to constantly refuse to think of the reality of '...association with places, times & forms. Again there is resonence with K's, 'I have no nationality'& 'I have no religion'. The issue is who/what is the 'I' that has no nationality?
  > > 
  > > Ramana Maharshi when asked about K said, 'Krishnamurti only speaks in absolutes.
  > > 
  > > I have known a large number of members who knew Leadbeater very well. Two were boys who lived with him & denyed any impropriety; another was a very senior Australian Public servant who was fascinated by his theosophical teaching but who constantly had to remind himself that Leadbeater was essentially a 19th century Englishman whose conditioning was very different from his own; as both are from mine and mine from young people today. e.g. He used this insight to help him interpret Leadbeater's description of K's initiation in 'Masters & the Path'. Another woman of the same era could not stand the man. I try and suspend judgement. I don't know & I don't have to know. HPB praised awareness of one's own ignorance as necessary before one begins the quest for the Voice of the Silence. In spite of my conditioning I try to 'know that I don't know'.
  > > 
  > > I'm sorry that in this site where concrete, hardened judgements for and against abound on almost everyone & everything that I am just unable to take a firm stand other thatn to use what appeals to me & not worry about the rest
  > > 
  > > Brian
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > ________________________________
  > > > From: Govert Schuller <schuller@>
  > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
  > > > Sent: Tuesday, 12 May, 2009 11:46:12 AM
  > > > Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > 
  > > > Addressing Brian or me?
  > > > 
  > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > > From: Cass Silva 
  > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com 
  > > > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 10:23 PM
  > > > Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > > > 
  > > > What is so detrimental about sorting the chaff from the wheat?
  > > > 
  > > > Cass
  > > > 
  > > > ____________ _________ _________ __
  > > > From: Govert Schuller <schuller@alpheus. org>
  > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
  > > > Sent: Tuesday, 12 May, 2009 10:57:44 AM
  > > > Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > > > 
  > > > Dear Brian,
  > > > 
  > > > Thanks for formulating a fair enough criticism on an esoteric conspiricism. 
  > > > 
  > > > What's your take on the truth about CWL and K? Genuine project? Succesfull project? 
  > > > 
  > > > Govert
  > > > 
  > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > > > From: butchie122 
  > > > To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com 
  > > > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:38 PM
  > > > Subject: Theos-World Re: The "clairvoyant finding" of Krishnamurti?
  > > > 
  > > > This post takes the cake; one puts up a 'possibility' , builds a theory & off we go. Why not suggest that the K finding was the result of a papal plot to discredit Theosophy, or of a dugpa, or if the Raj to further undermine the home rule movement. This sort of speculation is nothing to do with Theosophy or The truth about Leadbeater or K. NO wonder this whole site deals with matters that are largely irrelevant to most members.
  > > > 
  > > > Brian Parry 
  > > > 
  > > > --- In theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com, "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@ ..> wrote:
  > > > >
  > > > > Dear All
  > > > > 
  > > > > Historically, there has been much debate concerning the 
  > > > > putative "claiorvoyant finding" of Jiddu Krishnamurti by 
  > > > > Bishop (then Mr) CW Leadbeater.
  > > > > 
  > > > > Has anybody considered the possibility that the Mahatmas 
  > > > > and/or Karma itself had a role in bringing together the bad 
  > > > > Bishop and Krishnamurti for the purpose of ultimately 
  > > > > confronting the blind, authoritarian, messianic, follower 
  > > > > mindset, promoted by Bishop Leadbeater and Dr Besant, 
  > > > > a mindset so utterly abhorrent to genuine Theosophy?
  > > > > 
  > > > > As we are witnessing in this forum, is it not extraordinary 
  > > > > just how tenaciously resistant the blind, authoritarian mindset 
  > > > > can be in the face of overwhelming evidence and facts?
  > > > > 
  > > > > Regards
  > > > > Nigel
  > > > >
  > > > 
  > > > [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]
  > > >
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > 
  > > [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]