Theos-Talk Archives (June 2010 Message tt00088)

Dear Frank and friends

My views are:

1.
Frank wrote:
"Yes, Morten.
One border line would be false persecution of the co-workers of the Masters, 
as we have seen by Besant, Olcott, Leadbeater, Crosbie, Cleather, Hartmann, 
to name a few."

M. Sufilight says:
Yes. But, I do not think anyone want to persecute anyone. Do you?
(But I do not understand why A. L. Cleather is to be mentioned?)

What I am aiming at is, that the leaders in TS Adyar and other theoosophical groups - by all means possible and with an honest heart - seek to secure, that they REALLY in truth do follow the Original Programe as it was given by the Masters through HPB, their direct agent.
- Not doing this or to be careless and even non-compassionate about it, can hardly be the aim of the theosophical groups, as long as it demands to wear the name THEOSOPHICAL. - And each of the theosophical groups - aught to be ready and willing to properly inform its members on whether any changes have been made to the Original Programe, and WHICH changes if Any, and WHY they were necessary if any changes was made. - If they do not inform their members, It think we all will know why. And if they do not respond, when questioned, I think we also will know why. The have had days, weeks and even months to act and do their compasisonate duty. Have they performed it or failed?
Any comments?

Let me expand on my thoughts from the previous e-mail.
I will ask one question for anyone who are willing to listen to common sense and the truth.
We all agree, that H. P. Blavatsky was the direct agent of the Masters. And she called most of the Freemason groups in her time humbugs. And  H. P. Blavatsky often spoke out against the Christianizing of the visdom teachings through the centuries, and attempts on the TS as well. And the original programe as it was given by the co-founder H. P. Blavatsky aimed at the following which was said to be given by the masters: "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. " (BCW, Vol. VII, p. 145-146)

Now, what do you all think a masters would say, when he sees that the Theosophical Society (the cornerstone of the future World Religion of humanity) - today - have affiliated itself with what is known to be the Liberal Catholic Church? Is it an expression of acceptable and wiise leadership coming from TS Adyar? Is it at all within the frame of the original programe of the TS, which I quoted a part of in the above?

Please rethink your answer.
We all know, that affilition with Dyanand and his Arya Samaj immediately came to an end, when he took steps towards dogmatic bahaviour. Now, how can any affiliation between the Liberal Catholic Church and the TS Adyar be a healthy construction today compared with Arya Samaj's failure, when we know what the Liberal Catholic Church is an example on today, and was in the past? It seems strange, how much is accepted today in the realms of "bridge"-building, which in the past was rejected by H. P. Blavatsky and the Masters. - TS Adyar is failing, when it accepts this Church on its compunds - and - as we hear it all will very soon be removed. So is the Law of Karma.

(A)  - Now add H. P. Blavatsky's clear rejection of the Hiram Butler and Ohmart and CO. and their false esoteric school in Boston. H.P. Blavatsky wrote: "By pandering to the prejudices of people, and especially by adopting the false ideas of a personal God and a personal, carnalized Saviour, as the groundwork of their teaching, the leaders of this âswindleâ (for such it is) are endeavoring to draw men to them and in particular to turn Theosophists from the true path. "...."Stealing from us our esoteric Sanskrit terms, our facts --- which he disfigures --- and even our motto, âThere is No Religion Higher than Truth,â this self-styled illuminator is sure to prepare thousands of enemies to Theosophy, when those âawakenedâ by him will awaken to the sad truth of having been swindled by this âBrahminâ & Co.  Let all Theosophists be warned in time by the Esotericists." 
(B)  And also add H. P. Blavatsky's clear rejection and warning against the Esoteric Theosophical Society created by the charlatan Elliot Coues:"H.P. Blavatsky having learned that Professor Elliot Coues (1) of Washington D.C. calls himself âPerpetual President of the Esoteric Theosophical Society of Americaâ, feels it necessary to warn the members of the Esoteric Section of the T.S. of which she is the Head, that Professor Coues is not even a member of her Section. " 
(C) - Add Charles Sotheran a high-ranking Freemason of various humbugs: "In H.P.B.âs Scrapbook, Vol. VII, p. 258, there is pasted a brief cutting entitled âExtreme Measures Advocated.â Neither the source, the date, nor the author are stated. It speaks of Charles Sotheran who, declaring himself a labor Socialist, spoke at a mass meeting of strikers and urged them to take extreme measures against the Capitalist exploiters. To this H.P.B. remarked:] - A Theosophist becoming a rioter, encouraging revolution and MURDER, a friend of Communists is no fit member of our Society. HE HAS TO GO." (BCW, Vol. 1, p. 404)

Somewhere there has always been a clear demarcation line on which groups the TS allowed it self to affiliate with, and which members it kicked out, and which not. Yet this was, as far as I know, changed during Annie Besants leadership and until today.

Now when TS Adyar are willing to admit that the TS in the past under the leadership of Annie Besant deviated from the Original Programe, which I quoted in part in the above, I think we can start something real, which will lead towards progress. Until then, I will with good reason keep quesitoning any leading members at TS Adyar, how they find that the Masters can be supporting the TS Adyar as it operates today - in comparison with the above words and quotes, when we consider the Liberal Catholic Church (which its doctrine on blessing a Church Bell with 15 crosses by the use of chalk), its priests Absolutions, its "holy" baptisms, its funeral ceremonials and its Apostolic Succesions etc. etc. on the TS Adyar Compounds. Such promotions must be rejected.

Remember H. P. Blavatsky often spoke out against the Christianizing of the visdom teachings through the centuries, and attempts on it on the TS as well. The Original Programe stated: "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. " (BCW, Vol. VII, p. 145-146)


Now where is that contrast to be found on the TS Adyar compound? Inside the Liberal Catholic Church?
I ask some questions in the above, can we have some honest answers from the Theosophical Society Camps?

The words in the above were written by M. Sufilight who claim to have meet H. P. Blavatsky and also some of the Masters attached to this planet in our present cycle.

- - - - - - -

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
âAS THE LIMBS DEFEND THE HEAD AND HEART OF THE BODY THEY BELONG TO, SO HAVE THE DISCIPLES TO DEFEND THE HEAD AND THE HEART OF THE BODY THEY BELONG TO (in this case Theosophy) FROM INJURY.

(From the Letter of a Master.)

. . . . AND IF THE LIMBS HAVE TO DEFEND THE HEAD AND HEART OF 
THEIR BODY, THEN WHY NOT SO, ALSO, THE DISCIPLES THEIR TEACHERS AS REPRESENTING THE SCIENCE OF THEOSOPHY WHICH CONTAINS AND INCLUDES THE âHEADâ OF THEIR PRIVILEGE, THE âHEARTâ OF THEIR SPIRITUAL GROWTH? SAITH THE SCRIPTURE:-
âHE WHO WIPETH NOT AWAY THE FILTH WITH WHICH THE PARENTâS BODY MAY HAVE BEEN DEFILED BY AN ENEMY, NEITHER LOVES THE PARENT NOR HONOURS HIMSELF. HE WHO DEFENDETH NOT THE PERSECUTED AND THE HELPLESS, WHO GIVETH NOT OF HIS FOOD TO THE STARVING NOR DRAWETH WATER FROM HIS WELL FOR THE THIRSTY, HATH BEEN BORN TOO SOON IN HUMAN SHAPE."
(BCW, Vol. XII, p. 502-503)


- - - - - - - 

2.
Frank asked:
"I do not understand what do you mean by being concerned.
Could you please say it in other words?"

M. Sufilight says:
Just, that your sentence was and is important.
I.e.: "Most theosophists have not even an idea what a living teacher is and what their trained chelas are and who and where such higher persons worked within the Theosophical Movement"

- - -
The rest of your e-mail I will refuse to comment on at the moment.




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Frank Reitemeyer 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 9:28 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World Adyar School of Wisdom - 2010/11


    

  >The truth is Frank, and I think you agree: There are limitations to what 
  >aught to be and will be accepted by the Himalayan Masters, when one wants 
  >to promote the original TS Programe.

  Yes, Morten.
  One border line would be false persecution of the co-workers of the Masters, 
  as we have seen by Besant, Olcott, Leadbeater, Crosbie, Cleather, Hartmann, 
  to name a few.

  >Theosophists are known to act, but few are the workers it seems.

  Theosophists are rather known to chat and talk and talk and chat one to 
  death. KT was regarded by de Purucker as the highest theosophist and 
  occultist, because she was acting and did work most in the outer world.
  The more one works in the outer world, the more esoteric one is.
  You will know, that with the Besant-Leadbeater conspiration against the 
  Masters it is quite the contrary.

  If you study the psyche of the peoples of the world and their nation souls, 
  you will perhaps learn, that for centuries it was teh proud of the Germans 
  rather to die than to lie, in other words, that it was a quality of the 
  German soul that word and action were identical.
  That it may today be otherwise, is the result of political issues and 
  masonic conspiracy, which forces the Germans in their everyday life to lie 
  to survive.
  Here you have a key why HPB so often condemned cant and hpycrisy, which is 
  an accepted standard in England and USA, in other words of the Jewish elite 
  in the City of London and NY.

  >My view is - Quality members first - Quanitiy later.

  I agree. Instead allowing the psychics, the liars, the perverts to rule 
  wihtin the Theosophical Movement, the little one must be protected.
  For that a strong leader is needed. A strong leader is the result of good 
  karma.

  The followers of Besant, Crosbie and Conger/Long do not like strong leaders.

  I would like rather have a theosophical group, true to the aims, true to its 
  missions and ends, which consists only of 20 people, than to have a group of 
  20,000 people, of which no one is interested in truth.

  >>"Most theosophists have not even an idea what a living teacher is and what 
  >>their trained chelas are and who and where such higher persons worked 
  >>within the Theosophical Movement."
  >
  >M. Sufilight says:
  >This is an important sentence from you as far as I am concerned.
  >And yes, you are quite right on one level of thought.

  I do not understand what do you mean by being concerned.
  Could you please say it in other words?
  Are you refering to Tingley?

  Frank



  

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