Re: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Nov 26, 2009 12:49 PM
by Morten Nymann Olesen
Dear Martin
My views are:
Interesting thoughts you have.
And I am merely in the below writing a few words about what I think about it all. A lenghy e-mail because of the subjects wast implications. And I am hesitating a bit with my answer. Because I might be wrong in my views in certain respects, because I am myself not knowing all about everthing. I will say that there to my knowledge is no teaching in this world of duality, which cannot be opposed or found to contain faults. What is important to me is the esoterical impact it creates in the Seekers or just humans in general.
Gently to hear, kindly to judge.
- - -
1.
Martin wrote:
"your statements are all righton, however some minor hickups can be solved."
M. Sufilight says:
Allright.
- - -
2.
Martin wrote:
"The Buddha was a "He" too, wasn't He, and so were all known messengers? The gender issue was tried to be solved by having women take over the Olympic stick of Wisdom. Hpb, Annie Besant, Anna Kingsford, Alice Bailey, Liz Prophet and so on."
M. Sufilight says:
Perhaps. You ask And I will answer. Here is my take on it.
The known messengers were many of them male in some period in the old days due to Karmic patterns (i.e. the male human was given easier access taken from an esoterical point of view; Buddha being one of these) - but in in the later more or less distorted historical narrations the female aspects importance in the promoted teachings also lost the level of importance it was originally given. This due to past karmic patterns of the animal man and other issues. The karmic patterns are different these days, with gender equity emphasised, - and we have male-chauvanistic dogmatic Churches like Christianity and Islam, who is in need of help to recognize their wicked natures, if not also evil natures.
I have thought the same as you. Then I reconsidered and came to the conclusion, that H. P. Blavatsky was true when uttering the following words:"With the advent of Theosophy, the Messiah-craze surely has had its day, and sees its doom."
- And when we relate this issue to the gender issue you mention, I find this Male Messiah craze problem to be more obvious....
The words by H. P. Blavatsky are true in this period of the human evolution and especially since the advent of The Theosophical Society. In Buddhas day before the dogmatic versions of Christianity and Islam the world were different, and Phallic emphasised phallic dogmatism was not reigning sumpreme on half of the globe as it does now. (Superstition did however.) In those days the Mystery Temples was allowed to co-exist side by side; the Mystery Schools was not banned. Then evil crept in - or some might call it Karma (due to the humans need for reincarnation cycles), and in various decades and centuries; but then it was all changed by Islams and Christianity's crusades or unslaughts, and the Mystery Temples was forbidden and called the devils work. Democracy and other changes came. The Mysteries, magical doctrines, extra sensory perception, and wisdom teachings etc. are now allowed again, or shall we say barely(?), in the Christian part of the planet and parts of Islam. - But they have become a taboo and something one mocks or laughs at either openly or secretly. So we live in a different world now. THAT, I think is why Blavatsky said that the Messiah Craze "has had its day, and sees its doom". - My point is that such a Messiah Craze like the AAB version, will have difficulties in dispelling itself as being non-dogmatic and even non-male-chauvanistic in nature as long as a certain claimed Guru (Maitreya, Christ or World Teacher) is continously being EMPHASISED as expected (or asserted) in the near future to come by the use of lip-prayer Invocations (or has HE arrived?), or by merchandized silver badges, yellow shawls, or in AAB groups by so-called esoteric posters and jewelry etc., - and by being nominated a MALE, and called an external World Teacher and Christ in the name of Dualism - and thereby killing or at least down-watering the theosophical doctrine of the Divine within each human and on top of that the selfconfidence in each human. And this especially because of this doctrines close relation to the Christian religions gender bias, if not also in parallel to a certain extend also Islam. - So I am saying, that the gender issue you mentioned is only a part of the whole problem or obstacle to the flowering of the wisdom teachings within each human no matter what gender each human have; an obstacle they or we are hampered by as long as it is promoted claiming to be based on theosophical teachings; something which is not true. And this simply because even today Christianity and Islam disallows women in their high-priest offices. - What do you think?
- - -
3.
Martin wrote:
"Alice Bailey's teaching were a test to unite Christianity, as did the Theosophy of Annie Besant/Leadbeater and even the school of Rudolf Steiner. They were far from the truth in many ways and like the teachings of Blavatsky at most half truths, which her mentors even claimed in the ML by saying: the other half should be discovered by one's own IntuÃtion..."
M. Sufilight says:
Now I am not prepared to just agree with you on this. And how much we agree depends on what is behind the words you use.
First the thought that Alice A. Bailey was a Christian-like test so to unite Christianity. My view on this issue is, that the Alice A. Bailey's teachings are efficient in the manner they are able to persuade various persons of a Christian cultural background in (mostly) Western countries to become Seekers after spiritual development of a dualistic kind. And not of a non-dualistic kind. Almost similar to various Vishishtadvaita or Bhakti teachings in the East, or a pseudo version thereof. The difference being that the doctrine claims to be based on the theosophical teachings as they were given by H. P. Blavatsky, even if they are distorted verions thereof. - But calling such a teaching helpful and targetting the whole world today, I will reject. And especially also because it, in view of todays circumstances, also promotes a very direct political involvement with the United Nations with its paper-laws and this through its own doctrines. And Also because it has a deep-freeze attitude towards the Middle Eastern culture and religion by nearly at all cost avoiding any talk about it. - On top of that we have the fact that the Roman Catholic Church are out on its limbs with a new initiative or two: One of them being that they seek to get the Christian religion written into the European Union as THE accepted religious doctrine for the European Union countries! - Other issues are their ongoing discussion about whether Aliens/UFo's are real, and the science of astronomy (and astrology?) and its place in the Christian Church teachings.
They tried with spiritualism in the past - now they might try to promote something else - or - perhaps they are already doing it by feeding various New Age groups of a Christian nature with a false Jesuitic-like doctrine, by promoting their doctrine of the external Christ in the flesh and the dawn of their new Jerusalem; a dualistic and Male biased one.
Just one example or two:
Alice A. Bailey writes in her book "Light of the Soul" (The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali - 1927, with commentary by Alice A. Bailey) page 13:
"In the New Testament there is depicted for us the life of a Son of God in full manifestation, wherein, freed from every veil, the soul in its true nature walks the earth. It becomes apparent to us, as we study the life of Christ, what it means to develop the powers of the soul, to attain liberation, and become, in full glory, a God walking on earth."
Or
Alice A. Bailey wrote on behalf of what she calls a Master:
"It is essential that we return to Christ and to His message and to the way of life exemplified by Him." ("Problems of Humanity", p. 124-5)
Or
Alice A. Bailey wrote on behalf of what she calls a Master about the return of her version of a Christ:
"But before all this can happen, He must again enter the public arena, play His part in world affairs, and prove the scope of His mission. He will gather round Him, in the FLESH, His chosen associates and advisors;" ("The Reappearance of the Christ", p. 55-56)
"The New Testament story is true and correct; it is only the man-made interpretations which have misled humanity."
("The Reappearance of the Christ", p. 100)
(Try for instance also "From Bethlehem to Calvary", p. 4 and 9-10, "The Reappearance of the Christ", p. 28-9, 31, 55-56, "Glamor a World Problem", p. 179-180, "Problems of Humanity", p. 212 )
- Included is the Great Invocation (RC, p. 31), which today is song with lip-prayers at hundres of Alice A. Bailey gatherings so to "break-in" the Jesus-principle of the Christians by letting the Christ return to Earth, to the physical - in the FLESH, although the AAB leaders will keep saying that this is not how it aught to be read, we know that the beginner Seeker of a Christian background read it like this.
>>>
In oppostion and after reading the above references by AAB I will still say the same as H. P. Blavatsky...:
<<<
H. P. Blavatsky:
"With the advent of Theosophy, the Messiah-craze surely has had its day, and sees its doom."
(BCW, Volume XII, p.262)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"true Theosophists will never accept ...a Christ made Flesh...or an anthropomorphic God"
( BCW, Volume VIII, p. 390)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, when the latest international revision of the Bible-that infallible and revealed Word of God!-reveals 64,000 mistranslations and other mistakes, it is not the Theosophists-a large number of whose members are English patriots and men of learning-but rather the Christians who ought to beware of "wanton aggressiveness" against people of other creeds. Their boomerangs may fly back from some unexpected parabola and hit the throwers. " (H. P. Blavatsky's article "NOT A CHRISTIAN"! , written 25. Feb. 1879.) (Meaning nearly each verse in the New Testament has mistranslations or mistakes.)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"When the Theosophists and Occultists say that God is no BEING, for IT is nothing, No-Thing, they are more reverential and religiously respectful to the Deity than those who call God a HE, and thus make of Him a gigantic MALE."
(HPB's Secret Doctrine, Volume I, p. 352)
M. Sufilight comments:
Thereby we witness that Alice A. Bailey (or her claimed Master) by the use of heavy Christianized vocabulary promotes a doctrine in oppostion to H. P. Blavatsky about an anthropomorphic God in the Flesh. At least that is how a great number of persons read her words. Yet, at the same time we agree that Alice A. Bailey's books also contains an emhpasis on the "Christ within", although it is much less emphasised and is a term most often very loosely explained by Bailey. And Bailey omits using the more wise and esoterical term: the "Divine within". The problem is that this Bailey doctrine often is related with placing her Christ named a "He" in what she calls the Human Heart, and creates by the use of her words the impression of a gigantic male in the physical heart of man. This instead of using Blavatsky words or similar as given in the above quote and elsewhere (The Key to Theosophy, 2nd ed. 1890, p. 67 etc.). - And we all know that the beginner Seeker most often confuse the human heart with the emotions and feelings.
Ignatious Loyola said quite un-theosophically:
"To be right in everything, we ought always to hold that the white which I see, is black, if the Hierarchical Church so decides it"
(Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius Loyola, SPEX365)
This is where I find the gender issue to be a central theme and not to be taken lightly even today.
- - -
Idries Shah said something related to the later TS and the later branches of the TS, which I will repeat here rewritten a bit:
"So very important: The use of ideas is to shape a man or woman, not to support a system - which is viewed in a limited manner. This is one way in which the Wisdom Tradition is 'living', and not just the perpetuations of ideas and movements. This seems important to understand and know about. When a system of teaching of wisdom is in a period of fallowness, because the one who propagated it is dead, then there comes a period of stagnation. This period can last between 10 years, 15 years or more. In the time, which passes. the group of people who is affected by the system are sieved by natural means."
"Some wander away. Others carry on automatically not really knowing, what they are doing. They are now 'frozen', though they do not know they are. The blind may try to lead the blinder. This takes the form of assumption of authority by those who were given some sort of authority in the original mandate. These are the people in the most dangerous position, because the longer they remain 'orphaned' the more strongly their lower self (or the three lower bodies) asserts it self."
"Others may modify the teachings in a learned and personal way. Some certainly fall a prey to cults, which have come into being in order to serve them. The people who joins these are at great pains to explain why they consider, that they represent the same kind of teaching - and this is important. It is important, because it shows the Theosophist or the real spiritually minded, very clearly, that the people who try to explain - are in fact troubled by conscience. Somewhere inside them, they know, that they are identifying themselves with an imitation, or a second-best. But they are supported by their lower bodies or lower personality, - and this is too strong for them.
Those can be helped by being lead to think in new thinking-patterns and systems. It is via the conscience, that one finds the path forward, - thereby will be able to remove the limitations of the lower personality."
"Imagine a group of people shipwrecked. They think there is no hope of rescue. They find a raft, and are glad. After a time more people come along in a big boat. But the first people will not leave the raft, because they have become used to it. They may have convinced themselves, that it is actually a boat. (So it is to some philosophical or religious people today.)
The points at which the mystical traditions, which are still alive, are in contact with each other cannot really be explained by the means of books. And yet people continue to write books showing how they have found this and that
point of resemblance.
The truth can only be found by actual experience, - and easier by awareness on such aspect as I have touch upon. To sink ecstasy in Wisdom is better than to sink Wisdom in ecstasy. The Wisdom Tradition teaches by several different systems, and not only by one, - one book or teen books, BUT also by thousands and thousands of books - and the dogmatic ones doesn't want to listen."
And I agree with Idries Shah about this view.
The theosophist and the Sufi operates thorugh the use of DESIGNs and MEASURINGs. Each teaching, book, lecture, e-mail etc. etc. is a DESIGN. After such a DESIGN has been presented, the receiver(s) of it, the message, reacts on it in various ways. Depending on the reaction and the impact the message has or have - the Initiate or Initiates MEASURES the receiver(s). After a while a new DESIGN will be presented, maybe by another person or by other means. This teaching about DESIGN and MEASURING is ages old. HPB talked a bit about it.
- - -
Annie Besant/CWL:
And Annie Besant/CWL teachings was a different issue. I will not agree uopn that they sought to unite Christianity. They sought to do what they thought was the best. But somewhere along the line they lost track theosophically speaking, (and karmic patterns might of course be the reason). Especially when they - officially - began their emotionally perceived Krishnamurti cult just about 1911-1929. And also when Besant became politician (near 1916) and when CWL the same year became Bishop with hat and all in the Christian sect called Liberal Catholic Church. (Here is a CWL gallery with hat and all:
http://www.cwlworld.info/html/liberal_catholic_church.html ) - Some might tell me whether CWL's friends and his Church, which Besant supported, have had any success. I do not think so. - I have been trying to picture Blavatsky arm in arm with CWL wearing Hat, Mitre, Cross and all, but the pictured always fades, because I hear Blavatsky groan or snort in despair. (smile.) And the same with H. P. Blavatsky throwing a fiery political speech at the Indian National Congress applauded by the political President Annie Besant. - Such deeds by Besant and CWL I cannot call proper theosophical teaching. - Some might of course disagre heavily with me on this view. What do you think?
- - -
Rudolf Steiner:
Rudolf Steiner's teachings has a similar pattern as Alice A. Bailey's in the sense that his teachings have been very efficient in the manner they have been able to persuade various persons of a Christian cultural background in (mostly) Western countries to become Seekers after spiritual development of a dualistic kind, or of such a tendency.
The difference though is that Steiner's teachings also involved cultural, humanitarian and other efforts - almost creating a role-model for a western Buddhistic community, with the flaw that the teaching was not esoterical in certain respects. The endresult today is that Steiners teachings are being used heavily as a Bible by his followers without any real emphasis on present day related comparative studying; although break away groups has been formed so to seek a more esoterical outlook on his teachings. - Some might of course disagre heavily with me on this view.
- - -
4.
Martin wrote:
"The reason knowledge is always veiled to the unworth is similar to the story of Jesus. The wonders and the tales of Jesus were all symbolical to ponder upon. Among his disciples Jesus was much more to the point as was Buddha veiling the Truth in His days. The flower ceremony is example of that..."
M. Sufilight says:
I wonder how Jesus can be said to be much more to the point? Especially when the teachings ascribed to him today are not.
The truth was veiled in the old days. Blavatsky unveiled a whole lot, and said that she did so. The reason being, that humanity was ready. So why Alice A. Bailey, Besant/CWL, and others have a need to veil, what they call theosophical teachings (Blavatsky, Ammonious Saccas, Plotin, Pot-Amun, Buddha) BY DEGRADING the same theosophical teachings given by The Theosophical Society in 1875-1891, we all only can wonder about?
There was plenty of New Age groups to choose from, and this has not changed today. -
Well that is at least my modest view on it.
- - -
5.
Martin wrote:
It is not important if there would ever be another "Messias", since we need to understand we can free eachother, by being eachothers teachers. With this Idea in mind, I will play back this discussion to you or anyone else, since I am ignorant in many ways as well, maybe my contribution did lightup things a bit, just like Duana and Morten have made this discussion worthy to read :-)
M. Sufilight says:
And I agree. I know that AAB, Besant, CWL and Steiner was often talking against dogmatism, yet their teachings are hampered by it today. I think simply because they did not fight as hard and clearly against it as H. P. Blavatsky did. And also because some of them in fact either consciously or unconsciously taught or promoted dogmatism or dogmatic reactions to their teachings, or a dualistic doctrine, or allowed this too much without rejecting it clearly and firmly enough. And this is a central issue to all these groups. about the 1950'ties but also before that, we experienced that the science of psychology began to map, what eomotionalism was, what dogmatism was, and Guruism, and Messiah worship - and spelt out clearly its psychological shortcomings. This last sort of - new development - has not been pictured very well by neither Alice A. Bailey, Besant, CWL, or Steiner - and not even by H. P. Blavatsky. (Perhaps the Karma of humanity did not allow it). Yet, that is why I emphasise Idries Shah's teachings and similar ones so much today. Because we will - in the name of compassion - have to deal we each of these theosophical teachings or so-called theosophical teachings - taking the "new" psychological teachings into account in our present day human evolution.
And, yes we should learn from each other and not seek to form a sect with some at the top and others at the bottom, and of course avoid a popery, - and seek to avoid go and create a Messiah or even a Guru Craze.
I thank you Martin for provoking me to write this e-mail.
What are the readers views?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: Martin
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Morten,
your statements are all righton, however some minor hickups can be solved.
The Buddha was a "He" too, wasn't He, and so were all known messengers? The gender issue was tried to be solved by having women take over the Olympic stick of Wisdom. Hpb, Annie Besant, Anna Kingsford, Alice Bailey, Liz Prophet and so on.
It is good, I never feel an issue of who is right in this theos-talk group, else I would call it theo-stalk.
Thius discussion is about the truth behind the scene.
There are several Bodhisatva's ( male and female ) and Avatars alive in the flesh ( read Mahatma Letters ), even today, but the One Great Bodhisatva Who is Leader of the the "White Brotherhood" is only visible in the Etheric Realms, has no gender, just a human form without features.
Alice Bailey's teaching were a test to unite Christianity, as did the Theosophy of Annie Besant/Leadbeater and even the school of Rudolf Steiner.
They were far from the truth in many ways and like the teachings of Blavatsky at most half truths, which her mentors even claimed in the ML by saying: the other half should be discovered by one's own IntuÃtion...
The reason knowledge is always veiled to the unworth is similar to the story of Jesus. The wonders and the tales of Jesus were all symbolical to ponder upon. Among his disciples Jesus was much more to the point as was Buddha veiling the Truth in His days. The flower ceremony is example of that...
It is not important if there would ever be another "Messias", since we need to understand we can free eachother, by being eachothers teachers. With this Idea in mind, I will play back this discussion to you or anyone else, since I am ignorant in many ways as well, maybe my contribution did lightup things a bit, just like Duana and Morten have made this discussion worthy to read :-)
________________________________
From: Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@stofanet.dk>
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 22, 2009 7:09:39 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Dear Duane and friends
My views are:
I have been seeking to keep this answer short.
Let me first tell the readers, that my views do not have the aim to be hostile towards the Alice A. Bailey teachings. I am merely seeking to show others what I have learnt to be the problems with Alice A. Bailey teachings compared with the ones given in TS in 1875-1891, and especially by the co-founder H. P. Blavatsky. - This e-mail was written to all readers on this forum named Theos-talk.
The aim with this e-mail is how ask whether it is possible or even healthy to create a Universal Brotherhood, through the use of Alice A. Bailey's teachings when they have more emphasis on the Doctrine of a male Christ in the physical outside each human - instead - of the Doctrine of the Divine within each human.
No doubt that in the hands of a true and wiise theosophical teacher the Alice A. Bailey followers will be taught in a manner which by emphasis will learn them about the doctrine of the Divine within each human; - and not with emphasis on the doctrine without them or outside them about a physical male Christ who will arrive in the near future. But Alice A. Bailey's doctrine does not teach people with emphais on the former, but clearly with emphasis on the latter. And that is an important difference compared with the theosophical teaching given in TS in the 1875-1890 period.
- - -
I will in the below comment on Duanes response to my questions in the previous e-mail.
I am noting: In the below e-mail by (you) Duane carefully avoids mentioning anything about the AAB's groups political involvments, - perhaps because those teachings are in clear opposition to the teachings and Constitution of the Theosophical Society in the period 1875-1891.
1.
Duane wrote:
"Because people do not respond in mass to your questions should not be misconstrued by you as a lack of interest nor of ability."
M. Sufilight says:
My e-mail was written to all members of Theos-talk forum and even their friends. When I call you a friend i do it because I find that you are ernestly interested in theosophical teachings.
2.
Duane wrote:
"When you are off the âPhallic, messianic AAB crazeâ your post are full of wisdom and important information. Do some of the posters here see the futility in trying to show you other points of view since like a spring you keep flipping back to the same narrow and dogmatic rhetoric?."
M. Sufilight says:
I am happy that you recognize the problems which the Alice A. Bailey teachings have when compared to TS in the period 1875-1891.
- What about TS Adyar and its present stance on the questions asked and Annie Besant's deeds whom they consider a great leader in the face of the whole world - including Master KH and M as well as the founders of TS?
- And what about the difference between Alice A. Bailey's acceptance of political involvement and TS rejection of it in the period 1875-1891?
3.
Duane wrote:
"These are repeat questions that have been posted here and on other theosopical forums many times in various ways and they always seem to allude or refer amongst other things to AAB's teachings on the Reappearance of the Christ."
M. Sufilight says:
No they do certainly not always allude to this question.
Allright. Then why do you and other persons keep promoting such no good and bad teachings, a Messiah craze included without answering the question with the use of references? Has the theosophical aim of comparative studying turned into a Bible study of AAB books?
The reason I repeat various quotes is because other persons not knowing about previous e-mails will be reading the words.
Alice A. Bailey said:
"The trained intuitive or disciple lives ever the dual life of mundane activity and of intense and simultaneous spiritual reflection. This will be the outstanding characteristic of the Western disciple in contradistinction to the Eastern disciple who escapes from life into the silent places and away from the pressures of daily living and constant contact with others. The task of the Western disciple is much harder, but that which he will prove to himself and to the world as a whole will be still higher.
This is to be expected if the evolutionary process means anything. The Western races must move forward into spiritual supremacy, without obliterating the Eastern contribution, and the functioning of the Law of Rebirth holds the clue to this and demonstrates this necessity. The [180] tide of life moves from East to West as moves the sun, and those who in past centuries struck the note of Eastern mysticism must strike and are now striking the note of Western occultism."
(Glamor a World Problem, p. 179-180)
http://www.light-weaver.com/links/kingsgarden.books.htm
The theosophical chelas did certainly not all of them escape into retreat in the East when Blavatsky was in India.
Many of them were in fact living openly. (Here some of them: Blavatsky, Olcott, Damodar, W. Q. Judge, Subba T. Row, Mohini, Gargya Deva, S. Ramaswamier, Darbhagiri Nath and others.)
H. P. Blavatsky wrote in The Secret Doctrine:
"It is difficult to find a single speculation in Western metaphysics which has not been anticipated by Archaic Eastern philosophy. From Kant to Herbert Spencer, it is all a more or less distorted echo of the Dwaita, Adwaita, and Vedantic doctrines generally."
. . .
"Its greatest scholars, instead of pooh-poohing that supposed "farrago of absurd fiction and superstitions," as the Brahminical literature is generally termed, will endeavour to learn the symbolical universal language with its numerical and geometrical keys. But here again they will hardly be successful if they share the belief that the Jewish Kabalistic system contains the key to the whole mystery: for, it does not. Nor does any other Scripture at present possess it in its entirety, for even the Vedas are not complete. Every old religion is but a chapter or two of the entire volume of archaic primeval mysteries â Eastern Occultism alone being able to boast that it is in possession of the full secret, with its seven keys."(p. 79, 318)
H. P. Blavatsky said in The Theosophist - Vol. IV, No. 9, June, 1883, p. 224-226:
"The Hebrew Kabala is but the loud echo of the Chaldean; an echo which passing through the corridors of Time picked up in its transit all kinds of alien sounds that got mixed up with the original keynotes struck beyond the epochs known to the present profane generations; and thus it reached the later student of Hebrew lore as a confused and somewhat distorted voice."
...
"Of course, as found out by the Orientalists, the word âZendâ does not apply to any language, whether dead or living, and never belonged to any of the languages or dialects of ancient Persia (See Farhang-i-JahÃngÃrà the Persian dictionary.) It means, as in one sense correctly stated, âa commentary or explanation,â but it also means that which the Orientalists do not seem to have any idea about, viz., the ârendering of the esoteric into exoteric sentences,â the veil used to conceal the correct meaning of the Zen-(d)-zar texts, the sacerdotal language in use among the initiates of archiac India. Found now in several undecipherable inscriptions, it is still used and studied unto this day in the secret communities of the Eastern adepts, and called by themâaccording to the localityâZend-zar and Brahma or Dew-Bhashya."
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v4/y1883_075.htm
4.
Duane wrote:
"Many times I have given to you quotes to the effect that AAB spoke of the Christ as a universal principal of Love first and foremost and not simply a person "in the flesh" as you would say."
M. Sufilight says:
I can only recall very few quotes and not an objective stance. But the words in this your latest e-mail makes me think, that you at least understand my views better now than you did earliere on.
Yes agreed. Alice A. Bailey spoke of Christ as a universal principal of Love, but did not emphasise it as much as the other doctrine of hers. Namely the doctrine about an externalized Saviour arriving as a male in the physical, and not much, in fact near nothing, about the Divine within each human.
She was namley calling Christ a male and a "He", writing at least three books related to a physical saviour in the flesh, and as one who will come AGAIN and walk among men. And promoted a so-called "Great Invocation" - which people would shout-out loud with lip-prayers so to make the awaited Messiah arrive - at their doorstep.
I will ask you:
- How can a universal principle of Love be a male and exaggeratingly called a "He" by Alice A. Bailey?
- Why did Alice A. Bailey emphasise the Doctrine of an Avatar arriving in the physical apart from each human instead of emphasising the Doctrine of the Divine within each human?
- Why aught a universal principle of Love to be emphasised with the activity of being helped along by the use of repeated Invocation rituals constituting to lip-prayers by ignorants, who never have learnt about Atma-Vidya - the Doctrine of the Divine within each human?
- Why down-watering the wisdom teachings by writing the books named "From Bethlehem to Calvary", "The Reappearance of the Christ","The Externalization of the Hierarchy" which emphasise external Saviour teachings and then only one paragraph or two in "The Soul and its Mechanism" (p. 82) and a few other places so to be able tell that the Atma-Vidya teaching was not left out entirely?
5.
Duane wrote:
"I understand in the Doctrine of Avatars there are many advanced beings that never because of their high development come lower than the mental plane. Alice Bailey included the idea that an Avatar called the Christ (Universal principal of Love), could be focuses not only within a group, many groups but also as an individual person at the same time. Buddha, Mohamed and Confucius to name a few advanced initiates all inhabited bodies at one time or another to do their great work and make their important contributions. . We donât designate them as âmessiahs in the fleshâ as if their sole contribution and the only level they worked on was some perverse physical one. Where do you get these biased ideas about the Bailey material?"
M. Sufilight says:
To show me and others what you claim is valid, you aught to use references. But, will you do that or only cling to Bible studying Alice A. Bailey and leave out comparative studies?
You asked a question. And I will therefore answer it to the best of my knowledge.
My answer might be myopic or ignorant in some persons eyes, yet I might not in others eyes.
A short answer giving my view is:
Alice A. Bailey omitted the doctrine of the Divine within each human to the extreme. That is as I see it the main difference in our views.
Alice A. Bailey's teaching can hardly be called Gupta-Vidya teaching.
- So when she claims that she was the one who wrote the Psychological Key to the Secret Doctrine given by Blavatsky - then we shake our heads and disagree.
- And when she on top of that omit delivering a clear warning against Messiah Craze and instead as a endresult promotes it - something we even withness today - then we shake our heads and disagree.
- When Alice A. Bailey fills her books with a Christian vocabulary to the brim - then we shake our heads and disagree. Because such a vocobulary is misleading the Seekers and keeps them in a Christian mindset or thoughtpattern, which they in fact need the get rid of or transform multiculturally, with emphasis on the eastern doctrine and vocabulary.
- When Alice A. Bailey promoted that a future Western Supremacy will necessarily arrive in the near future in her "Glamour a World Problem" - then we shake our heads and disagree.
- When Alice A. Bailey emphasises a MALE world Saviour to arrive and walk among men, while she omits emphasising the Doctrine of the Divine within each human - then we shake our heads and disagree.
- When Alice A. Bailey emphsises the use of Christian vocabulary leaving the Middle East in the cold by almost never mentioning Islam - how can her teaching in our information society then be said to be clearing the path for her claimed arrival of a World Teacher, a male Christ leaving his retreat in Asia? - Then we shake our heads and disagree.
6.
____________________________
- - - A more expanded answer - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now read the following carefully.
First some quotes then a few comments in-between to answer your question.
And I do hope, that if you disagree with the quotes, you will explain why.
Alice A. Bailey wrote in the book A Treatise on Cosmic Fire:
"In the case of H. P. B. this is apparent. On the tide of the present endeavor, the Secret Doctrine will be vindicated and her work justified."
("A Treatise on Cosmic Fire", page 707-8, written 1925, by Alice A. Bailey, english edition.)
Alice Bailey claimed that her teachings came from the same Occult Brotherhood that taught HP Blavatsky. Bailey's guide professed to be the same Djual Khool that was one of HPB's teachers. Bailey also declared that her guru was the same Master Koot Hoomi that Blavatsky knew.
H. P. Blavatsky:
"With the advent of Theosophy, the Messiah-craze surely has had its day, and sees its doom."
( H.P. Blavatsky's COLLECTED WRITINGS, Volume XII, p.262)
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v12/y1890_027.htm
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"true Theosophists will never accept ...a Christ made
Flesh...or an anthropomorphic God"
( H.P. Blavatsky's COLLECTED WRITINGS, Volume VIII, p. 390)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"The Society founded to remedy the glaring evils of Christianity, to shun bigotry and intolerance, cant and superstition and to cultivate real universal love extending even to the dumb brute".
(The Collected Writings of H. P. Blavatsky, vol. 7, p.246)
Master KH wrote in a Mahatma Letter:
For the opposition represents enormous vested interests, and they have enthusiastic help from the Dugpas -- in Bhootan and the Vatican!
(Here is all of Mahtama Letter, No. 55. Dugpas are the same as selfish Magicians.)
H. P. Blavatsky wrote (Posthumously published):
"Therefore one may repeat in full confidence the remark made by Cardinal Ventura on the devilâonly applying it to black magic.âThe greatest victory of Satan was gained on that day when he succeeded in making himself denied.â
It may be said further, that âBlack magic reigns over Europe as an all-powerful, though unrecognized, autocrat,â its chief conscious adherents and practical servants being found in the Roman Church, and its unconscious practitioners in the Protestant. The whole body of the so-called âprivilegedâ classes of society in Europe and America is honeycombed with unconscious black magic, or sorcery of the vilest character."
(H. P. Blavatsky's Collected Writings, vol. 13, p.256-257 )
Blavatsky wrote about the false Christians:
"It is these âenemies of the Human Race,â as they are called, that have once more obtained their old privileges of working in the dark, and inveigling and destroying every obstacle they find in their wayâwith absolute impunity. Butââforewarned, forearmed.â Students of Occultism should know that, while the Jesuits have, by their devices, contrived to make the world in general, and Englishmen in particular, think there is no such thing as MAGIC, these astute and wily schemers themselves hold magnetic circles, and form magnetic chains by the concentration of their collective will, when they have any special object to effect, or any particular and important person to influence. Again, they use their riches lavishly to help them in any project. Their wealth is enormous." (THEOSOPHY OR JESUITISM? Blavatsky Collected Writings Volume 9 Page 305)
- - -
7. The Alice A. Bailey Saviour has already arrived?
Alice A. Bailey wrote in The Externalization of the Hierarchy (1947) about the Coming Christ:
"Who has no use for fanaticism or hysterical devotion but Who loves all men persistently, intelligently and optimistically, Who sees divinity in them all and Who comprehends the techniques of the evolutionary development of the human consciousness (mental, emotional and physical, producing civilizations and cultures appropriate to a particular point in evolution) - these ideas the intelligent public can and will accept."
. . .
"They will prepare and work for conditions in the world in which Christ can move freely among men, in bodily Presence; He need not then remain in His present retreat in Central Asia. " (p. 590)
Alice A. Bailey wrote in A Treatise on Cosmic Fire, (1925):
"When He comes at the close of this century and makes His power felt, He will come as the Teacher of Love and Unity, and the keynote He will strike will be regeneration through love poured forth on all. As He will work primarily on the astral plane, this will demonstrate on the physical plane in the formation of active groups in every city of any size, and in every country, which will work aggressively for unity, cooperation and brotherhood in every department of life - economic, religious, social and scientific." (p. 754)
M. Sufilight asks:
So who arrived like that at the end of the 20th century?
And why so much emphasis on this issue by Alice A. Bailey?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: Duane Carpenter
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Hi Morten
Because people do not respond in mass to your questions should not be misconstrued by you as a lack of interest nor of ability. Some of us here have more important things to do then rehash the same basics dogmnas that seem to keep surfacing in your commentaries. When you are off the âPhallic, messianic AAB crazeâ your post are full of wisdom and important information. Do some of the posters here see the futility in trying to show you other points of view since like a spring you keep flipping back to the same narrow and dogmatic rhetoric?.
These are repeat questions that have been posted here and on other thheosopical forums many times in various ways and they always seem to allude or refer amongst other things to AAB's teachings on the Reappearance of the Christ.
Many times I have given to you quotes to the effect that AAB spoke of the Christ as a universal principal of Love first and foremost and not simply a person "in the flesh" as you would say.
I understand in the Doctrine of Avatars there are many advanced beings that never because of their high development come lower than the mental plane. Alice Bailey included the idea that an Avatar called the Christ (Universal principal of Love), could be focuses not only within a group, many groups but also as an individual person at the same time. Buddha, Mohamed and Confucius to name a few advanced initiates all inhabited bodies at one time or another to do their great work and make their important contributions. . We donât designate them as âmessiahs in the fleshâ as if their sole contribution and the only level they worked on was some perverse physical one. Where do you get these biased ideas about the Bailey material?
Even the great HPB had a physical body and was considered by some to be a type of Avatar. You have somehow confused the teachings of AAB on Christ Consciousness with conventional and orthodox Christianity. All religions as you know have an orthodox and esoteric side. Esoteric Christianity is just as valid as Esoteric Buddhism, Hinduism or Sufism. The initiate always clothes the teachings in the language and culture in which they live. To those who are more advanced the teachings are given out in symbolic form and through direct intuition.
40 years of work with Bailey and Blavatsky students I cannot recall one that was as misguided about the works of AAB and what she was trying to do on her theme of the Christ as you.
Regretfully Duane Carpenter
________________________________
From: Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@stofanet.dk>
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 22, 2009 4:59:40 AM
Subject: Fw: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Dear friends
My views are:
Look at my response on the below.
A week has passed and nobody from the TS Adyar or Alice A. Bailey camps have responded to my questions.
I can therefore only conclude that those TS Adyar members and Alice A. Bailey followers - as well as their so-called leaders are NOT`able to respond, because they know within themselves, that their doctrines are false compared with the original TS programe, and that
1) promoting a Messiah craze or a Messiah in the Flesh is and was not part of the original theosophical teaching as it was given in the original theosophical programe from 1875-1891 within the TS.
2) being involved with political disputes is not in accordance with the original TS programe, although some fleksibility with regard to communication was (and is?) allowed according to the original theosophical programe from 1875-1891 within the TS. But when a theosophical leader has involved herself or himself and the TS in political disputes - by founding a political party - then she/he aught to be expelled immediately - and certainly not in opposition be called a great leader. This is theosophical teaching.
3) because one is allowed to affiliate another group with the TS or the Alice A. Bailey organisation promoting a Messiah in the flesh ( without equalling it with the doctrine of "Within") - one is not in accordance with the original theosophical programe from 1875-1891 within the TS.
These must be the conclusions based on the Constitutions and Rules from the period 1875-1891.
And from quotes given by H. P. Blavatsky, with a logic that spells the doom to any Messiah Craze being promoted.
Let me know if I am wrong. Then I might be of service to the Cause you follow.
- - -
Should it not be clearly stated, that the President of The Theosophical Society or any other body of The Theosophical Society cannot affiliate any group or organisation with The Theosophical Society if it promotes dogmas as such - or - dogmas in the sense of a past Messiah in the flesh, promoted Messiah in the flesh, or future Messiah in the flesh?
What are your views?
M. Sufilight
- - -
People are always looking for leaders; that does not mean that
this is the time for a leader. The problems that a leader would be
able to resolve have not been identified. Nor does the clamor mean
that those who cry out are suitable followers. Most of the people who
demand a leader seem to have some baby's idea of what a leader
should do. The idea that a leader will walk in and we will all
recognize him and follow him and everybody will be happy strikes me
as a strangely immature atavism. Most of these people, I believe,
want not a leader but excitement. I doubt that those who cry the
loudest would obey a leader if there was one. Talk is cheap, and a
lot of the talk comes from millions of old washerwomen.
(Maybe the leaders at various theosophical groups would consider the above section.)
----- Original Message -----
From: Morten Nymann Olesen
To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 11:29 PM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Dear MKR and friends
My views are:
I will ask some question seeking to forward my modest views from what I have learnt through the years.
You might agree or disagree. The questions are asked to promote the cause - the wisdoms teachings of all ages.
There is no Religion Higher than Truth.
- - - A. - - -
* M. Sufilight asks:
Let the reader in support of the previous e-mails quotes by Foster Bailey
read the following words, and consider why, they were active in 1891, and at the same time consider if they can be said to be active today in the TS and the AAB groups.
And if they are not, consider if that is a healthy idea.
What are your views?
- - - - - - -
a)
"CONSTITUTION AND RULES
OF
THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY
As Revised in Session of the General Council,
all the Section being represented,
at Adyar, December 27, 1890.
The Theosophist - January 1891
ARTICLE XIII
Offences
1. Any Fellow who shall in any way attempt to involve the Society In political disputes shall be immediately expelled."
- - -
b)
"THE ORGANlSATION OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY
Article by H. P. Blavatsky
[In order to leave no room for equivocation, the members of the T.S. have to be reminded of the origin of the Society in 1875. Sent to the U.S. of America in 1873 for the purpose of organizing a group of workers on a psychic plane, two years later the writer received orders from her Master and Teacher to form the nucleus of a regular Society whose objects were broadly stated as follows:
(1) Universal Brotherhood;
(2) No distinction to be made by the members between]* races, creeds, or social positions, but every member had to be judged and dealt by on his personal merits;
(3) To study the philosophies of the East--those of India chiefly, presenting them gradually to the public in various works that would interpret exoteric religions in the light of esoteric teachings;
(4) To oppose materialism and theological dogmatism in every possible way, by demonstrating the existence of occult forces unknown to Science, in Nature, and the presence of psychic and spiritual powers in Man; trying, at the same time, to enlarge the views of the Spiritualists by showing them that there are other, many other agencies at work in the production of phenomena besides the "Spirits" of the dead. Superstition had to be exposed and avoided; and occult forces, beneficent and maleficent- ever surrounding us and manifesting their presence in various ways--demonstrated to the best of our ability.
Such was the programme in its broad features. The two chief Founders were not told what they had to do, how they had to bring about and quicken the growth of the Society and results desired; nor had they any definite ideas given them concerning the outward organisation- -all this being left entirely with themselves. Thus, as the undersigned had no capacity for such work as the mechanical formation and administration of a Society, the management of the latter was left in the hands of Col. H. S. Olcott, then and there elected by the primitive founders and members--President for life. But if the two Founders were not told what they had to do, they were distinctly instructed about what they should never do, what they had to avoid, and what the Society should never become. Church organisations, Christian and Spiritual sects were shown as the future contrasts to our Society.1 "
http://www.blavatsk y.net/blavatsky/ arts/Organisatio nOfTheTheosophic alSociety. htm
http://www.katinkah esselink. net/blavatsky/ articles/ v7/yxxxx_ 019.htm (BCW, vol. VII; 145-146)
- - - B. - - -
First I will forward the below quotes. And then I will ask a question or two.
a)
From "The Key to Theosophy" 2nd ed., 1890:
"ENQUIRER. What is the origin of the name?
THEOSOPHIST. It comes to us from the Alexandrian philosophers, called lovers of truth, Philaletheians, from fil (phil) "loving," and ajlhvqeia (aletheia ) "truth." The name Theosophy dates from the third century of our era, and began with Ammonius Saccas and his disciples*, who started the Eclectic Theosophical system.
ENQUIRER. What was the object of this system?
THEOSOPHIST. First of all to inculcate certain great moral truths upon its disciples, and all those who were "lovers of the truth." Hence the motto adopted by the Theosophical Society: "There is no religion higher than truth." â The chief aim of the Founder of the Eclectic Theosophical School was one of the three objects of its modern successor, the Theosophical Society, namely, to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities."
- - -
b)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
" "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 gathered" in the name of the SPIRIT OF TRUTH--there that Spirit or Theosophy will be in the midst of them. "
http://www.blavatsk y.net/blavatsky/ arts/Organisatio nOfTheTheosophic alSociety. htm
http://www.katinkah esselink. net/blavatsky/ articles/ v7/yxxxx_ 019.htm (BCW, vol. VII; p. 160)
- - -
c)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"With the advent of Theosophy, the Messiah-craze surely has had its day, and sees its doom." (Lucifer, july 1890)
http://www.blavatsk y.net/blavatsky/ arts/ModernApost lesAndPseudoMess iahs.htm
- - -
d)
H. P. Blavatsky said:
"true Theosophists will never accept ...a Christ made
Flesh."
( H.P. Blavatsky's COLLECTED WRITINGS, Volume VIII)
- - -
* M. Sufilight now asks:
How will the present day TS and AAB groups avoid failing to follow either one or more of the above quotes by H. P. Blavatsky?
How will they now and in the future avoid promoting a Messiah dogma as such and a Messiah dogma in the flesh?
What are your views?
What is theosophy proper to you?
- - - C. - - -
* M. Sufilight now asks:
Should it also not be clearly stated, that the President of The Theosophical Society or any other body of The Theosophical Society cannot affiliate any group or organisation with The Theosophical Society if it promotes dogmas as such or dogmas in the sense of a past Messiah in the flesh, promoted Messiah in the flesh, or future Messiah in the flesh?
What are your views?
M. Sufilight
----- Original Message -----
From: MKR
To: theos-talk ; theos-l
Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 8:23 PM
Subject: Theos-World Some thoughts on current shakeup
Witnessing the remarkable events starting with the nomination for the
International President, a cleverly organized attempt to defeat the sitting
President distributing unsubstantiated health issue, after the President was
re-elected with world-wide membership support, the allegations of election
procedural errors in the Indian Section and finally the most daring ultra
secret attempt to disenfranchise all members world-wide and seize control of
the President and finally the display of wide cleavage in the General
Council meeting are crisis developments TS never seen since Coloumb affair
which shook TS to its roots. Current disaster was averted due to Internet
being available to keep members around the world fully informed without
interference from the leaders.
HPB had her share of problems from TS and she had mentioned that the
troubles have always been from within. Even during Besantâs time, she had
her share of troubles and again she had stated that they are from within and
arising from the esoteric section members.
In the light of the above, I was fortunate to find a very interesting piece
of information in Joseph Rossâ recent book - The New Krotona from Hollywood
to Ojai - Vol III. (The book can be ordered from ebay.com).
Foster Bailey (husband of Alice Bailey) writing in The Beacon (1922) made
some very interesting comments. I am quoting it below, since it might be of
great interest to some here.
+++
Foster Bailey begins with a quotation from The Key to Theosophy:
"Enq. But if you have such wise and good men to guide the Society, how is it
that so many mistakes have been made?"
"Theo. The Masters do NOT guide the Society, nor even the Founders; and no
one has ever asserted that they did: they only watch over and protect it.
This is amply proved by the fact that no mistakes have been able to cripple
it, and no scandals from within, nor the most damaging attacks from without,
have been able to overthrow it. The Masters look at the future, not at the
present, and every mistake is so much more accumulated wisdom for the days
to come. That other "Master" who sent the man with the five talents did not
tell him how to double them, nor
did he prevent the foolish servant from burying his one talent in the
earth." H.PB.
We all recognize the unity of life which lies behind that expression of
Brotherhood to which every theosophist has subscribed. We cannot begin to
live Brotherhood until we have recognized and felt "Group consciousness. "
Co-operation is the beginning of Brotherhood, it is learning to work in
group formation, it is the Keynote of the NewRace.
It is possible to be a theosophist without being a member of a Theosophical
Society, but under the Law of Brotherhood which works toward unity and group
consciousness, once having joined this Brotherhood organization we have the
opportunity to work with our brother members for the common cause; a cause,
by the way, which is not the building of a great Society, or the
establishing of a theosophical system of thought, as such, but the
presenting of the Ageless Wisdom to our fellow men in whatever aspect and
degree is most needed for the helping of the Race. To aid the group to help
the world, that Is the true objective of the individual member.
To refuse longer to work in group formation because we dislike certain
prominent ones, or our immediate co-workers, or because we are disgusted
with things as we find them with in the group, is failure. It means
inability to discriminate between the essential and the less essential and
must bring the hard karma of delay in the plan and of failure to use
opportunity earned.
The great mass of humanity works out its karma under the Law generally quite
unaided by individual help. The Masters work primarily with groups and a
discipleâs usefulness and progress is measured not alone by his prominence,
brilliance or virtue but by his increasing ability to raise the rate of
vibration of ever larger groups.
The Disciple, however, because he has recognized the Law of Sacrifice and is
pledged to Service, is given special aid and protection. This aid very
largely takes the form of opportunity to balance his karma as he goes along,
and to work off old karma as fast as is consistent with the work in hand.
One of the main lessons of the Initiate is to learn to balance his own
karma, for it is because the Master automatically and immediately balances
his karma that he can work in the three worlds and yet remain free. Because
the Disciple and the Initiate have elected consciously to submit to a
forcing process in their own evolution in order that they may the better
serve, they necessarily make more mistakes than those not subjected to so
great a strain and the resulting karma would render them quite useless for
long periods of time if the Master did not help them to adjust it at
frequent intervals.
As there is individual karma so also there is group karma and a wise
comprehension of the present situation in the T.S. requires some
understanding of this factor.
The Theosophical Society is a group which has consciously chosen to accept
this forcing process in order to be an instrument for the Masters in world
service. It is therefore in somewhat the same relation to the group of
Masters as the Disciple is to his own Guru and it may therefore expect the
same increased number of mistakes, the same resulting karmic crises and the
same kind of adjusting help. This help it receives for, "no mistakes have
been able to cripple it and no scandals have been able to overthrow it."
One thing which the Society does in a most peculiar and interesting and
often in a most uncomfortable way, is to take an apparently indiscriminate
lot of ordinary humanity and begin at once to make occultists of them. Very
naturally this motley crowd, of which you and I are parts, makes quite a
mess of it and gets all stirred up every once and a while and this very
business of being-all stirred up saves its life. The usefulness of the
theosophical group would, as in the case of the Disciple, be very quickly
destroyed, if its karma were not apportioned in time, adjusted in intensity
and arranged for the further teaching of those who participate therein. This
is the protection given our Society. This the Masters do for us, using the
mistakes of the leaders and members to create situations whereby the
individuals may be stirred to that independent thought and action which
produces the needed balancing and adjustment and liberates force and energy
for larger constructive usefulness.
This is what is going on at the present time within the Theosophical
Society. The period of adjustment is the period during which the unit is
forced to consider the condition and the welfare of his group. The period
which follows of peace and growth and work is the period wherein the unit
having made the necessary adjustment can work with renewed vigor and
effectiveness through his group for the helping of his fellow men.
If this is so we are getting ready for bigger and grander and more important
times and effectiveness. It is often said that after each shaking the
Society goes on with renewed life to better things. It has been so in the
past; it will be so this time. This we can say for our comfort. The power of
the period of peace and growth must be proportional to the intensity of the
adjustment struggle; the effectiveness of the work of the days to come will
match the effectiveness of the adjustment achieved. We could almost be eager
to be shaken yet a little more if we could only get our eyes off of the
ugliness of the immediate foreground on to the beauty of the possibilities
on the horizon.
Surely then, we will not get disgusted or tired or self-righteous, or allow
ourselves to be shaken out of the Society either singly or in little group
fragments, thus weakening the body of the whole and creating individual bad
karma for ourselves. Better to remain where we are striving sincerely,
dispassionately and disinterestedly to understand the lessons which the
turmoil of the hour must inevitably hold for us and for our group.
The fundamental purpose back of all the varying situations and incidents in
the different Sections is the forcing of the members to think for themselves
and to realize and take up the responsibilities which are their own. Let us
therefore study the principles and the laws of right theosophical group
activity and organization, realizing ourselves as conscious participants in
the business of the whole, in order that we may wisely take advantage of the
present period and pass on to that happier endeavor which is waiting for us
on the threshold of tomorrow.
+++
[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]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[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
