Re: Theos-World Candles and the Sun
Oct 27, 2009 10:23 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen
Dear Rosie
My views are:
Thank you for raising that question.
First I will have to agree with Nigels reply.
This is a long reply and I can only suggest that the interested reader read the words carefully. It is a long reply, because the subject is somewhat complex.
No matter what. The main point with this thread has been a debate about J. Krishnamurti's activities, (also the deal struck at court about who had the right to sort of "own" him - Besant using several rupees - and throwing Leadbeaters fumbled deeds into it all), and of course the events leading up to his - very own - claims about being a World Teacher, (not only Overshadowed - but later as Krishnamurti claimed "filled completely") are important, and aught to be considered as long as TS Adyar has the stance it in truth has - even today - on Besant and J. Krishnamurti.
- - -
On Leadbeater's sexual doctrines, which he claimed he learned from the Christians:
Try to read the following carefully. And after that - you can tell me how the TS today in year 2009 are able to promote pure theosophical heartflow - when not promoting a clear stance on the below - deeply rooted problems; problems facing the TS today.
We have A World Teacher groomed through a court decision; - discovered by an alledged phaedophile (the evidence are telling); - promoted by a political theosophist and who at the same time was the leader of the Esoteric Section. - And on top of that promoted with silver badges and yellow shawls like a Spielberg cult movie, just to tell the promoters, that they had deviated from the original program of the wisdoms teachings; - all this when he in fact formulated a another "wisdom teaching"? not in accordance with the wisdoms teachings of the original programe at all. A programe given by HPB and the Masters M and KH. - A teaching - not really - in accordance with the wisdom teachings given by sages through centuries and tousands of years!
If you read the report of the may 1906 meeting in London, where C.W. Leadbeater got expelled you will understand, that he did something, him himself openly admitted was wrong. - Saying that the report signed by all attending the meeting was very distorted can hardly be in accordance with the truth, when we consider who signed the report. (Still some persons would like to hope, that the report was distorted.).
The report against C.W. Leadbeater is online here. Is is one version among others near similar in content.:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/reportmeetingchargesleadbeaterfull.pdf
- - -
- The funny part was that J. Krishnamurti later claimed that it was not important whether he was the World Teacher or not! - And now we wonder why it was important for him to state the opposite in a phamplet in 1926 (see - Geoffrey Hodson: http://www.theosophical.org/resources/articles/AppreciationofCWL.pdf . J. Krishnanurmti wrote about himself: "To serve the World Teacher now that He is in our midst." )
http://www.robotwisdom.com/jorn/krishnamurti.html
Try to compare ...
a)
J. Krishnamurti's dissolving of the OSE in 1929:
"I maintain that truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect. That is my point of view, and I adhere to that absolutely and unconditionally. Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or coerce people along a particular path."
...
"Consider, reason with yourselves, and discover in what way that belief has made you different-not with the superficial difference of the wearing of a badge, which is trivial, absurd."
...
"As I said, you have been preparing for eighteen years for me. I do not care if you believe that I am the World-Teacher or not. That is of very little importance."
...
"Organizations cannot make you free. "
http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/about-krishnamurti/dissolution-speech.php
- WITH -
b)
H. P. Blavatsky's words on the TS and it importance of being present and organised:
"Has the Society or has it not over 140 Societies scattered through four parts of the World to take care of? As in the case of "Mahatmas" and the "Mahatmaship"-active work of the Theosophical Society is confused-willingly or otherwise it is not for the writer to decide-with Theosophy. No need of entering here upon the difference between the jar that contains a liquid and the nature of, or that liquid itself. "Theosophy teaches self-culture and not control," we are told. Theosophy teaches mutual-culture before self-culture to begin with. Union is strength. It is by gathering many theosophists of the same way of thinking into one or more groups, and making them closely united by the same magnetic bond of fraternal unity and sympathy that the objects of mutual development and progress in Theosophical thought may be best achieved. "Self-culture" is for isolated Hatha Yogis, independent of any Society and having to avoid association with human beings; and this is a triply distilled SELFISHNESS. For real moral advancement-there "where two or three are
----------
* "XIV. The Society having to deal only with scientific and philosophical subjects, and having Branches in different parts of the world under various forms of Government, does not permit its members, as such, to interfere with politics, and repudiates any attempt on the part of anyone to commit it in favor or against any political party or measure. Violation of this rule will meet with expulsion."
This rather alters the complexion put on the charge, which seems conveniently to forget that "scientific and philosophical subjects" are not the only declared objects of the Society. Let us not leave room for a doubt that there is more animus underlying the charges than would be strictly theosophical.
----------
gathered" in the name of the SPIRIT OF TRUTH-there that Spirit of Theosophy will be in the midst of them. To say that theosophy has no need of a Society-a vehicle and centre thereof,-is like affirming that the Wisdom of the Ages collected in thousands of volumes at the British Museum has no need of either the edifice that contains it, nor the works in which it is found. Why not advise the British Govt. on its lack of discrimination and its worldliness in not destroying Museum and all its vehicles of Wisdom?"
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm
- - -
A few questions and comments from M. Sufilight:
I am not saying that J. Krishnamurti is wrong in telling people to serch the divine within themselves. But why is it important for him to tell them that he is the World Teacher? - And I ask, why are organisations not or why can they not be steppingstons towards that goal? Why is such a search necessary to perform totally in solitude, when one perhaps is not ready for it, or why in solitude at all? Are Teachers who actually teach all unimportant, even if we agree that some of them are?
It is here, that I find J. Krishnamurti to deviate from the ageless wisdom teachings of all ages. Of course organisations in the physical are a limitation, just like all levels of manifestation are limitations, but I will not throw all of these levels away seeking to transform myself or help others doing it without using them as steppingstones. Why should a World Teacher and alledged Messiah formulate himself (or herself) in such an unclear or even non-theosophical manner, as if the english language was too difficult to use? - That is silly.
And when we in the above compare Annie Besants activities in political arena, we are easily led to wonder, what kind of theosophy is actually theosophy, when seeking to follow the Original Programe of the TS, even in the Esoteric Section?
Any comments?
(Silence is also an answer.)
- - -
I am only suggesting that TS and Adyar clear up all this unclear mess on J. Krishnamurti and Annie Besant. And that one honestly begins to promote sctual theosophical teachings.
To be J. Krishnamurti and Annie Besant failed to promote theosophy when they agreed to promote the J.Krishnamurti cult with insignia and badges. And later J. Krishnamurti failed when he dissolved too much - and in fact cut the flowers seeking wisdom and truth and asked them to learn to jump past all levels of manifestation without using them as steppingstones; steppingstones needed to come to the conclusion of "inquire" is important and steppingstones where Teacher (does how really can teach) are allowed at all in his teachings. - And because steppingstones are merely crutches and should be thrown to the ground even if you are without both your legs, in his teachings - at all in his teachings.
Just a few views to consider.
I might be wrong, but you are perhaps able to tell me where I am of the track.
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: Rose
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2009 3:59 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Candles and the Sun
I can understand the puritian sentiments of the times a century ago...
But do today's Theosophist hold anti-masterbation sentiments in general?
If so why?
-Rosie
On Oct 26, 2009, at 4:01 PM, "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-theosophy@stofanet.dk> wrote:
Dear Martin
Thanks.
One might add the extremely stunning words from B. Keightley:
"Mrs. Besant and the Alcyone Case"
http://www.archive.org/details/mrsbesantalcyone00veririch
And let us not forget who B. Keightley really was (Mr. Bertram Keightly is a Barrister-
at-Law, and was the General Secretary of the Indian Section and also of the British Section of the Theosophical Society. He was also a member of the Esoteric School), - when Besant received her first clairvoyance, august 1895, according to CWL himself:
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/other/leadb2.html
Remember, these words was uttered at Court under Oath.
Here are all five pages:
""CHAPTER XI.
Evidence for the Plaintiff.
On the 27th of March, Counsel read some of the
evidence taken before the Commissioner, (see Chapter
9) ; and it has been found necessary to condense this
here owing to want of space.
Mr. Bertram Keightly, residing at Allahabad,
United Province, being examined said :-
"
I am a Master of Arts and Barrister-at-Law. I
was the General Secretary of the Indian Section of the
Theosophical Society for several years and subsequently
General Secretary of the British Section. I was the
sole agent of the Esoteric Section in India under Madame
Blavatsky. I was also a member of the General
Council of the Theosophical Society, both ex-officio
as General Secretary and subsequently. I know Mr,
Leadbeter. I first met him in 1884, when he was a
Curate of the Church of England. He left Ceylon in
1890, to the best of my belief. During the last fifteen
years he has been one of the prominent leaders as also
the writers and lecturers in the Theosophical movement.
So he stands to the world as a teacher of Theosophy.
He is a colleague of Mrs. Besant in Theosophical
work ; and both of them are considered as "initiates
"
by
some people.
I remember the charges brought against Mr. Leadbeter
by the American Section in 1906, and I believe
the charges were brought on behalf of the American
Section. Mr. Leadbeter was at that time a member of
118
the British Section. He was also Presidential delegate.
I believe a memorial was addressed to Mrs. Besant from
America, giving evidence and charges against Mr. Leadbeter,
and a copy of this memorial was sent to Mr.
Leadbeter in 1906, but I could not be sure whether
this was sent prior to the proceedings of the Advisory
Committee or simultaneously. Mrs. Besant was certainly
in India at the date of the Advisory Committee,
and Mr. Leadbeter was present at the Committee in
London. I believe the Executive of the American
Section pressed for a searching investigation, and Mrs.
Besant wrote a reply to the Memorial that had been
sent to her from America, rather putting aside the idea
of investigation. The American Section could not expel
Mr. Leadbeter from the Society and that was why the
President was moved in the matter. Colonel Olcott
called together an Advisory Committee, consisting of the
Executive Committee of the British Section, v/ith the
addition of the representative of the French Section
and a special representative on behalf of the American
Section. I was one of the members of the Committee,
the object of which was to advise Colonel Olcott in
regard to what action he should take in respect of the
charges brought against Mr. Leadbeter. The Committee
was not in the position of a jury, but in that of an
advisory body. The object of the enquiry v/as to uphold
the honour of the Theosophical Society and keep its
honour clean."
Q.-' The Theosophical Society wanted to disown
any association with a man who advocated the teaching
of ... .- to young boys ?"
119
(( A.- Yes.
"
Q.-" The charges were in the hands of each of
the members of the Committee ?"
A.-" Yes.
"
Q.-" Was Mr. Leadbeter given every opportunity
to explain his position and justify his conduct? '*
A.-"Yes."
Q.-"
Will you tell us what evidence you had at
that time. ?
"
A.-"
Speaking generally, and from memory only,
I believe we had before us the confessions or rather
admissions of one or more boys in America certified
by the American Executive and also a letter of Mr.
Leadbeter to Mr. FuUerton in which the former admitted
having advised . . . .-. .... as a
prophylactic measure."
Being shewn a copy of Mr. Leadbeter's letter to
Mr. FuUerton and asked to summarise the contents,
witness said :-
"
Mr. Leadber states that the work of discovering
and training liopeful young members of the Theosophical
Society has been put into his charge. He finds that the
.question of sex is of vital importance in their training,
and that in the majority of cases great mischief results
from suppressed thoughts and desires on such matters.
He therefore in certain cases advised "".".'''"--=""."'.
^'»
Q.- This is exactly what he stated before the
Committee ?"
120
A.- Yes, both in the letter and before the Committee
he emphasised the absence of any evil intention
in connection with that advice."
Q.-" The Committee was also of opinion that he
had no evil intent ?
"
A.-"
Yes, at first, but later his replies to questions
put by members of the Committee caused some of themto
come to a different conclusion." (Here witness
entered into details that are not suitable for public
reading).
Q.-** Mr. Leadbeter referred to an organisation for
young men which dealt with the matter in the same
manner ?
"
A.-"
Yes. He stated that such an organisation
existed in the English Church."
Q.-^" And he said that he expected it to be found
in the Roman Catholic Church ?
"
A.--"Yes."
Q.- Did Mr. Leadbeter express any regret for
having taught these practices ?
"
A.-" No."
Q.-Questioned as to the acceptance of the resignation
of Mr. Leadbeter, witness said that some of the
members of the Advisory Committee only agreed to its
acceptance in order to secure unanimity in the decision
of the Committee.
Q.- State briefly what you know about the
re-instatement of Mr. Leadbeter in the Society and the*
consequences that ensued thereupon."
121
A.-" When Mrs. Besant became a candidate for
the Presidency of the Theosophical Society, she gave a
pledge to the British Section not to move for the reinstatement
of Mr. Leadbeter to the Society for two
years from the summer of 1907. But before theexpiration
of that time a strong agitation had sprung upin
various parts of the Society in favour of Mr.
Leadbeter's re-instatement. This culminated in the
question being referred to the general vote of the Society
at the close of 1908, or the beginning of 1909. A
considerable majority having declared in favour of hisre-
instatement, the result was the resignation from the
Theosophical Society of a large number of the oldest
and most respected members and a withdrawal fronn
active work of many others."
Q.-" You withdrew from the Society ?
"
A.-**
I withdrew from active work in the Society."
Cross-examined by Mrs. Besant, witness said that
he left the Eastern School about 1908, after the
decision of the Council with regard to Mr. Leadbeter.
He did not hold the opinion that no boy should be put
under Mr. Leadbeter's care until after the enquiry in
1906, although he had objected to Mr. Leadbeter's having
his pupils sleeping in the same room as himself,,
and had pointed out to Mrs. Besant how undesirable it
was while Mr. Leadbeter was living at Avenue Road.
Mrs. Besant ** You think that because people agree
with me, they must be non-independent?"
Witness.-"
By no means, but when people tell me
in all seriousness that a thing must be true because Mrsr
122
Besant says it, whatever the evidence and facts may
he, I cannot attach any high value to their opinion.'*
Counsel in the course of reading Mr. Keightly's
.evidence, remarked that the final decision of the Advisory
Committee that met in 1906 was decided by Mr.
Leadbeter's own statements, and an attempt was made
by Mrs. Besant to justify the teaching.
To this Mrs. Besant replied that she found the
charges to be false, so she changed."
http://www.archive.org/details/mrsbesantalcyone00veririch
I find B. Keightley to be a very credible witness.
So I wonder what on earth those self-proclaimed Arhats were doing but to throw the TS down the gutter?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Candles and the Sun
I join your View Morten, so you'r not alone anymore :)
________________________________
From: Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@stofanet.dk>
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 9:10:14 AM
Subject: Fw: Theos-World Candles and the Sun
Dear Do Thi Thuan and friends
My views are:
I am resending this e-mail to Theos-talk because some e-mails appears to get stuck before they arrive at Theos-talk, while others do not.
And let me say, that the below e-mail is merely being sent because I find that the questions asked need to be clairified to the Seekers after truth as long as Annie Besant is being praised at TS Adyar as a great leader, as long as J. Krishnamurti is being forwarded as someone to - merely be believed - to be a World Teacher and a Messiah.
Here we go again:
So "Pathless" is not Pathless, but Path after all; and we are expected to find a clear spiritual logic in such a point of view?
And a Guru is just a crutch, which is a nuisance?
And comparative studying is unimportant; what is important is only to listen to J. Krishnamurti, who never praised any teaching but his own?
And a Messiah-craze is the best theoosphy can arrive at?
H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"CHELAS AND LAY CHELAS"
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v4/y1883_095.htm
I somehow find it difficult to relate the above by H. P. Blavatsky with what J. Krishnamurti taught and was representing as a Messiah-craze with ribbons, badges, and J.K. insignia.
M. Sufilight
Recent Activity
a.. 3New Members
Visit Your Group
New business?
Get new customers.
List your web site
in Yahoo! Search.
Yahoo! Groups
Mental Health Zone
Learn about issues
Find support
Find helpful tips
for Moderators
on the Yahoo!
Groups team blog.
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Messages in this topic (7) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest |
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
