Theos-Talk Archives (February 2011 Message tt00003)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...> wrote:
>
 
> I find it interesting because oriental languages (especially Sanskrit and Tibetan) are far better in revealing subjective expressions - especially philosophical ones according to many who have learned these languages. And the heavy use of western expressions which now fills volumes of volumes on the bookshelves in various so-called theosophical groups - must therefore certainly lack something vital.


For what it is worth, in the case of Master KH, instructions were given soon after discovery that the boy Krishnamurti must be well versed in English first and foremost, then other languages like French. Sanskrit was deliberately avoided, IMO, precisely because of the enromous amounts of gobbledygook built up over centuries which makes it easy for every street corner teacher to come up with his own translation/interpretation.


> "Then I take it, Sir Thomas," I ventured to ask, "you don't altogether approve of
> Krishnamurti's methods?"
> "Unfortunately he has no proper methods since he took the Arhat initiation, and ceased to be
> the medium for the Lord Maitreya. Better if he had retired from public life to meditate in
> seclusion, as Arhats did initiation," I whispered to the man beside me.
> "It's the one in which the Master withdraws all guidance from His pupil, who may have to
> negotiate the most difficult problems without being allowed to ask any question," he explained; "


Very happy to learn that the Lord Maitreya himself had given such a detailed explanation about why/how he stopped using Krishnamurti as a 'medium'. Do these folks have a memo to this effect from Maitreya as well?!


> "And so what did Krishnamurti do?" my host interpolated, obviously having heard. "Like the proverbial manservant who knows he's about to be given notice, he gave notice first. In other
> words, he cut himself adrift from the white lodge, and repudiated all of us."


Ah,knew this was coming. It always does. Repudiated all of US. The important US! If only he had not done that, WE would hail him as the pristine World Teacher!


>Also instead of giving forth the new Teaching so badly needed, he escaped from the
> responsibilities of his office as prophet and teacher by reverting


So the NEW teaching was already known to these people ( then how was it going to be NEW) and they figured out (by repudiating US) he was not giving the new teaching. Great stuff, this.

 
> 58
> flaw in this pseudo-Advaita which Krishnamurti is giving out,> 

Sheesh! The least these people could have done before sticking their collective feet in their mouth was to listen to a great Advaita master like Ramana Maharshi. He found the same Krishnamurti teachings to be beyond his expression. Seems for most of these characters in this article, it was way beyond their comprehension.