Re: Theos-World Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?
Apr 27, 2010 08:07 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen
Whom do your lips degrade themselves to dare call an "Old dinosaour"?
I would say that compassionate Immortality cannot be mocked or thrown away, not even by wishful thinking.
----- Original Message -----
From: Cass Silva
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 4:33 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?
Is that old dinosaur still in existence?
>Cass
>
>From: Morten Nymann Olesen <global-theosophy@stofanet.dk>
>To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tue, 27 April, 2010 3:07:58 AM
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?
>
>
>Dear friends
>
>My views are:
>
>The following could be important to add when considering the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society (BCW. VII, P. 145-146) was aiming at showing itself as a future contrast to "Church organizations, Christian and Spiritual sects" and similar.
>
>H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
>"Open the Secret Doctrine, and you will find page after page denouncing the Jews and other nations precisely on account of this devotion to Phallic rites, due to the dead letter interpretation of nature symbolism, and the grossly materialistic conceptions of her dualism in all the exoteric creeds. Such ceaseless and malicious misrepresentation of our teachings and beliefs is really disgraceful. "
>(The Key to Thesoophy, 2nd ed. 1890, p. 279)
>
>Wikipedia on The Liberal Catholic Church:
>"According to the Liberal Catholic Church's Statement of Principles, "The Liberal Catholic Church recognises seven fundamental sacraments, which it enumerates as follows: Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist, Absolution, Holy Unction, Holy Matrimony, Holy Orders. It claims an unbroken apostolic succession through the Old Catholic Union of Utrecht and claims that its orders are 'acknowledged as valid throughout the whole of those churches of Christendom which maintain the apostolic succession of orders as a tenet of their faith." The LCC International has modified their Statement of Principles to read "it (the LCC) has preserved an episcopal succession that is valid, as understood throughout the whole of those churches in Christendom that maintain the apostolic succession as a tenet of their faith.""
>http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Liberal_Catholic _Church
>
>Liturgy (THE CEREMONIES OF THE LIBERAL CATHOLIC RITE (Blue Book) )
>About how to bless a Church Bell and other obscure rites.
>(Fifteen small crosses should be made on beforehand with chalk on the Bell according to a certain prescribed manner - p. 359)
>http://kingsgarden. org/English/ Organizations/ LCC.gb/
>
>According to the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society,:
>"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."
>(BCW, Vol. VII, p. 145-146)
>http://www.katinkah esselink. net/blavatsky/ articles/ v7/yxxxx_ 019.htm
>
>M. Sufilight
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Morten Nymann Olesen
>To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
>Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 9:53 PM
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?
>
>Dear friends
>
>My views are:
>
>Maybe I did not forward my views min a precise enough manner.
>The Original Programe, is found in the below link and an excerpt telling why A. L. Cleathers views aught not to be dismissed without careful examiantion and evaluation of the facts surrounding the present day T.S. relation to the Liberal Catholic Church. It is this Programe A. L. Cleather (past member of the special Inner Group of the Esoteric Section) in the below e-mail by me rightly says, the T.S. - deviated - from through Annie Besant 's leadership, when she related the T.S. to the Liberal Catholic Church.
>
>But are any present day T. S. Adyar leaders - responsible enough to listen to the Masters direct Agent? And what will their answers be to my below e-mails, which clearly by documentation show the truth about this deviation? Will ordinary T.S. members ask these very silent leaders about these issue?
>(I have e-communicate by e-mail with T.S. Adyars leadership early december 2009, so to if possible to be of service to the organisation. So far no response!)
>
>H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
>["ORIGINAL PROGRAMME" MANUSCRIPT]
>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 member 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 its outward organization- 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 organizations, Christian and Spiritual sects were shown as the future contrasts to our Society.* "
>
>M. Sufilight comments:
>It is precisely the last few sentences in the above, about Church Organizations, Christian and Spiritual sects being "future contrasts to our Soiety", and the words to "oppose materialism and theological dogmatism in every possible way" which tell me, that C. W. Leadbeater and Annie Besant clearly deviated from the original programe - by their strange affiliation of the T.S. Adyar with Liberal Catholic Church- instead of doing like H. P. Blavatsky had wished for, namely that the T.S. was sought brought back to its Originale Programe - the original lines. - I would say: The present day T.S. Adyar are still having this strange relation even if this is in direct opposition to the Masters teachings.
>
>H. P. Blavatsky said: "For this reason it is now contemplated to gather the "elect" of the T.S. and to call them to action. It is only by a select group of brave souls, a handful of determined men and women hungry for genuine spiritual development and the acquirement of soul-wisdom, that the Theosophical Society at large can be brought back to its original lines." (BCW, XII, p. 490)
>
>I will conclude that present day T.S. Adyar's leadership fails to recognize this truth.
>And because of this failure, and in fact other failures as well, i.e. T.S. Adyars relations to politics and masonry included, the Masters are not able to help more than they are. And that is not much, because they will not have the Eastern Doctrine disfigured like this.
>
>I ask:
>When will the leadership at T.S. Adyar seek to bring the T.S. back to the original lines, while adapting them wisely to our present day and hour?
>
>And If my conclusions are wrong in your eyes:
>Please explain why, so that I and others might better be of service to us all?
>
>M. Sufilight
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Morten Nymann Olesen
>To: theos-talk@yahoogro ups.com
>Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 6:37 PM
>Subject: Theos-World Did the AAB and Besant - T.S. and E.S. deviate from the Original Lines?
>
>Dear Friends
>
>My views are:
>
>Did the T.S. deviate from the original lines?
>H. P. Blavatsky said so. (BCW, vol. XII, p. 490).
>Were they brought back?
>Some say yes, others say no.
>
>____________ _________
>Let me throw a some words to contemplate.
>And ask yourselves the question whether the Jesuits and others have tried
>to Christianize the T.S. and whether they have succeed?
>
>The folllowing are some words to consider before answering the question...
>
>>H. P. Blavatsky as I knew her (1923) A. L. Cleather; Basil W. Crump.<
>"CHAPTER V.
>
>Causes of Degeneration in the T. S.
>
>N the spring of 1891 our beloved Teacher contracted a
>very severe form of influenza, and on May 8
>her Soul was released from the suffering body. She
>was undoubtedly " recalled," as I see it now, because
>we had all failed her ; even we, her own personal pupils ;
>I do not hesitate to assert it we could not " watch,
>even for one hour." We failed, too, on the most obvious
>and elementary point the practice of brotherhood, for
>there were jealousies and dissensions even in the I. G.
>For H. P. B. it must have been heart-breaking. Time
>and again had she striven to form an inner body which
>would provide the one and only essential for the reception
>of the esoteric teachings she was commissioned to give
>out. As she wrote of just such a body as the I. G. :
>" Unless the greatest harmony reigns among the learners,
>no success is possible." And we proved quite unable to
>provide that one indispensable condition. The E. S. T.
>came first, then its higher degrees, and finally the I. G.
>But all was of no avail ; the material was bad, and so
>the Temple could not be reared ; neither could the
>Corner Stone be found.
>
>In the preface to her first great work, Isis Unveiled,
>H. P. B. expressly declares it to be a direct challenge
>to all forms of ecclesiastical dogmatism, and " especially
>to the Vatican ..." Yet, in the face of this, we
>find Mrs. Besant proclaiming a new dispensation on
>what is practically a Roman Catholic basis, and steering
>the whole movement under her control towards Rome,
>i.e., the very antithesis of all that H. P. B. taught and
>
>2 7
>
>worked for. The means used is an anomalous body
>called the Liberal Catholic Church, with Mr. C. W.
>Leadbeater and others as its " Bishops " ; and dogmas
>like the Apostolic Succession are upheld, which H. P. B.
>denounced. The moral character of these " Bishops "
>is so notorious that I need not sully these memories by
>any but the barest mention. I shall deal more fully,
>later, and in a separate publication with this matter, 1
>which constitutes an indelible stain on Mrs. Besant's
>Society in recent years.
>
>Some twenty years ago, or more, I came to the
>conclusion that H. P. B.'s passing sounded also the
>death-knell of the Theosophical Society, as such. But
>from a personal and interior point of view, it was even
>more tragic. For I am absolutely convinced that,
>WHEN H. P. B. LEFT US, THERE WAS NO LONGER
>ANY POSSIBILITY OF DIRECT COMMUNICATION
>WITH THE GREAT LODGE OF MASTERS, except
>of course, for individuals who were capable of rising
>to Their plane by interior effort and aspiration. If this
>be not so, why after her death do we find Mr. Judge
>and Mrs. Besant, apparently unable to rely on interior
>guidance, turning to supposed chelas, psychics, and
>clairvoyants in their efforts to re-establish communication
>with the Masters ? The answer is plain to anyone who
>has carefully studied what the Masters Themselves have
>written on the subject. In the long letter of rebuke to
>Colonel Olcott for his attitude towards H. P. B., received
>during his voyage to England in 1888, the Master K. H.
>writes: "Since 1885, I have not written, or caused to
>be written, save through her [H. P. B.'s] agency, direct
>or remote, a letter or line to anybody in Europe or
>America, nor communicated orally with, or through any
>third party . . . With occult matters she has everything
>
>1 See A Great Betrayal, already mentioned.
>
>28
>
>to do. We have not abandoned her. She is not given
>over to chelas. She is our direct agent."
>
>Again, in a letter evidently to Miss Arundale and
>written in 1884 the same Master writes : " I take the
>opportunity, one of the last there are, to write to you
>directly, to say a few words. For you know, of course,
>that once H. P. B.'s aura in the house is exhausted, you
>can have no more letters from me. " (Italics are mine.)
>H. P. B. stayed with the Arundales in June and July of
>that year, when she came over from Paris on a short
>visit to adjust certain troubles in the London Lodge.
>
>But there exists still stronger, direct, evidence as to
>this. In a letter to Mrs. Langford (then Mrs. Laura
>Holloway, one of the " Two Chelas " who wrote Man]
>the Master K. H. writes in 1884. " . . .to help the
>cause in its present very complicated situation, we who
>are forbidden to use our powers with Europeans can act
>but thro' our chelas or one like H. P. B. . . . Where
>are the chelas strong enough to help us without the aid
>of our own powers " ? Incidentally it should be clear
>enough to anyone with a grain of intuition that H. P. B.
>was something much more than " a chela." Finally,
>H. P. B.'s Master Himself writes in relation to instruc-
>tions (for the " Inner Circle " of the London Lodge)
>which, He says, " can pass only through the hands of
>Mr. Sinnett, as hitherto . . . remains the question,
>what means there are to correspond even with Mr. Sinnett ?
>H. P. B. will not undertake the sending on and trans-
>mission of the letters ; she has shown her willingness to
>self-sacrifice in this direction long enough . . . Damodar
>
>K. M. has the same and even more unwillingness.
>
>[name of another chela} has not reached that stage of
>physiological development that enables a chela to send and
>receive letters. His evolution has been more upon the
>intellectual plane ..." (Italics are mine throughout.) "
>http://www.archive. org/details/ MN40273ucmf_ 6
>
>I think the picture in the above is quite true.
>But maybe the members of TS Adyar are able to follow the Esoteric Prasanga School of thought and reveal another more true view?
>____________ ________
>
>ON ALICE A. BAILEY
>
>M. Sufilight asks and says:
>Now, compare the above with the following given by present day Lucis Trust, AAB and her Master D.K...
>
>I ask, can we in all fairness not question whether Alice A. Bailey's master was completely unware of that Alice A. Bailey would write 5 books consciously (or perhaps unconsciously, although not likely) as a CHELA(?) effectively seeking to Christianize the theosophical teachings and the Eastern Doctrine; while Deep-freezing the Middle Eastern one?
>
>And even so the Alice A. Bailey master wrote the books "The Externalization of the Hierarchy" and "The Reappearnce of the Christ". Both books are clearly lacking info on the Eastern Doctrine and are heavily filled with emphasis on a doctrine effectively Christianizing the Eastern Doctrine; while also Deep-freezing the Middle Eastern Doctrine.
>
>____________ _________ ____
>
>Further we have from Alice A. Bailey's "Autobiography of Alice A. Bailey":
>"Our secretaries are not permitted to enter into political or religious arguments with the students they supervise. We seek only to indicate the common goal, the universal field of service and the ancient methods whereby human beings can pass from the unreal to the Real." (p. 198)
>
>A comment:
>Yet in recent years we find the Lucis Trust to formulate itself in more or less political tone of voice.
>
>Try the following newsletter from Lucis Trust, nr. 2, 2003:
>*** The War in Iraq ***
>"We did not rush blindly into war; instead it was considered deliberately and passionately by all the many members of the world community demonstrating a noble attempt to solve this problem in a more enlightened way. And although we seemingly failed, nonetheless a process was initiated."
>.......
>"That is not to say that force is never justified for, as we well know, the transition period through which we are manoeuvring is fraught with tremendous difficulties of which we are all too vividly aware. The terrorist threat does not yield to facile or immediate solutions. And as much as we might long for the cessation of warfare, due to the dangerous world in which we live there are times when it is justified. "
>http://www.lucistru st.org/en/ media/files/ wg_newsletters_ pdf_files/ 2003_2
>
>Try also the 2008 Newsletter on "The Meaning of Democracy"
>http://www.lucistru st.org/en/ service_activiti es/world_ goodwill_ _1/newsletter/ recent_issues/ 2008_2_the_ meaning_of_ democracy
>
>World Goodwill
>http://www.lucistru st.org/en/ service_activiti es/world_ goodwill_ _1
>
>WORLD VIEW - Rehabilitation for the Nations
>"The current dislocation/ relocation of people through emigration is helping to hasten this bond-breaking process, with world communication networks also expanding the sense of world community. But the main organ of hope for humanity remains the United Nations and the cycle of world conferences it hosts. Despite constant criticism of its effectiveness, the UN has been integral to the survival of humanity, smoothing its rough passage into the new world era. "
>http://www.lucistru st.org/en/ service_activiti es/world_ goodwill_ _1/world_ view_rehabilitat ion_for_the_ nations
>
>I agree, that most Alice A. Bailey followers do mean well, and that is very good.
>If they just were more motivated to pull that stupid Christian-political branch out of their own eyes, so that they could see the Middle Eastern part of the planet - much more obejctively - with the eyes of the Sufis and - especially - the promoters of the Eastern Doctrine. Politics is clearly Low-Ethics - even when the United Nations and AAB seek to throw another pictrue of it. Without exchanging views about the core doctrines about the Meaning of Life, how will any political activity be able to help humanity? - The Law of Karma will not be mocked! - Oh what a waste of Newsmedia-heads!
>
>Alice A. Bailey's: Esoteric Psychology
>************ ********
>"Every great religion which arises is under the influence of one or other of the rays, but it does not necessarily follow that each successive ray should have a great far-reaching religion as its outcome. We have heard that Brahmanism is the last great religion which arose under first ray influence; we do not know what may have been the religion which was the outcome of the last second ray period; but the Chaldean, the Egyptian and the Zoroastrian religions may be taken as representing the third, the fourth, and the fifth rays respectively. Christianity and probably Buddhism were the result of sixth ray influence. Mohammedanism, which numbers so large a following, is also under sixth ray influence, but it is not a great root religion, being a hybrid offshoot of Christianity with the tinge of Judaism."
>(Esoteric Psychology vol. 1 - 1936 , page 167)
>http://laluni. helloyou. ws/netnews/ bk/psychology1/ psyc1050. html
>
>- - - - - - -
>
>M. Sufilight says:
>Important knowledge about the Alice A. Bailey books today year 2006.
>
>I - The Bailey books are not a balanced multicultural presentation on
>Theosophy.
>II - The Bailey books have a heavy use of Christian vocabulary.
>The bad consequences of this will show itself in the present information
>society.
>III - The Middle East is hardly mentioned in the books, but the Christian
>religion gets a whole lot of coverage.
>IV - The books were NOT intended for a Middle Eastern audience. Today
>communication is rapid - due to the Internet. The audience is different
>today. And the physical world has changed.
>V - Bailey groups are connected with work at The United Nations,
>Headquarters. Because of that they are politically involved, and that on an
>international level.
>VI - True theosophical or esoteric teachings are always taking time, place, people,
>circumstances, teacher and audience into account. The Alice A. Bailey books are
>dangerous and irrelevant to a global audience on the Internet.
>VII -This is today some of the problems the books of Bailey creates in TODAYS
>international information society, where there are clearly visible
>political tensions between the Western politicians and The Middle Eastern ones."
>
>But again, I might be wrong in my wellmeant views.
>Because I do not claim to know all and everything.
>
>M. Sufilight
>
>[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]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
