Theos-Talk Archives (February 2011 Message tt00012)

Dear Morten,
Please accept my apologies for ignorance, but i dont recall ever reading
anything on "dangers" of meditation without a guide. Just curious if you
have anything worth reading regarding that as I would be interested.

Joshua

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM, M. Sufilight
<global-theosophy@R8UUZirakTCcLCzXhHVKO5h2Ju822gHUNgY6puKd2jhPZSvyuvvRtfnhzX2cIpS-xPvlo-HO-1ZsDfvSLZeBwBTF3HY.yahoo.invalid>wrote:

>
>
> Dear Govert
>
> My views are:
>
> I agree on the below views by you except the following words:
>
>
> "The fourth possibility left over is that both Theosophy and Krishnamurti,
> as inspiring as they might be, are seriously flawed. "
>
> Theosophy is as we know defined as the exact science on Psychology by the
> founders of The Theosophical Society.
>
> Krishnamurti's teachings are flawed no doubt there, since it can be proven,
> when compared to other theosophical versions - and age old teachings from
> various traditions. Yet, one cannot reject the fact that some of his
> teachings are very helpful to some Seekers after truth, despite some the
> dangers it contains with regard to meditation without a guide and a blurred
> stance on Messiah-emotionalism etc..
>
>
> M. Sufilight
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Govert Schuller
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 8:45 PM
> Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: JK -assumption - The Messiah and Pope
> crutch...and its Descendants- smile
>
> Dear Morten,
>
> In this instance the words conviction, assumption and conclusion would all
> be interchangeable. It doesn't matter too much whether he had the idea of
> methodless enlightenment as an assumption, opperative in the background, or
> as a conclusion, openly propagated. The crux is that Krishnamurti didn't
> have any proof for his position and from a Theosophical pov was dangerously
> wrong. He might have thought he himself got there in the (non-)way he
> advocated others to get there, but, if you read his biography and take
> Theosophical ideas into consideration, it looks like he went through many
> steps before he 'liberated' himself.
>
> On the other hand, if you really belief he liberated himself, you'll have
> to take his pronouncements about Theosophy serious, and come to terms with
> his wholesale denouncements.
>
> A reconciliation between the two creates too many contradictions and
> so-called 'cognative dissonances' that I don't see that as a serious
> alternative anymore.
>
> The fourth possibility left over is that both Theosophy and Krishnamurti,
> as inspiring as they might be, are seriously flawed.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: M. Sufilight
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 1:47 PM
> Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: JK -assumption - The Messiah and Pope
> crutch...and its Descendants- smile
>
> Dear Govert
>
> My views are:
>
> You quoted:
> "he was wrong in assuming that everyone else, regardless of past Karma and
> present limitations, could instantly reach that point which he himself had
> only reached through lives of effort, and by the aid of those Cosmic Forces
> apportioned to him solely for his office as Herald of the New Age. "
>
> The question that come to my mind is whether Krishnamurti really assumed
> this or just communicated as if people could understand it - and thereby -
> perhaps deliberately tagetting only a certain audience?
> I find that he at least, later in his life it seems to me, that he did not
> assume it.
> However, many beginner seekers lost a lot in the years just after 1929
> because of the angle of communication of more or less pseudo-Adwaita
> teachings he choose. That is what I get out of it all.
>
> When considering Krishnamurti's teachings, I did not find a multi-cultural
> angle on comparative studying, and not a teachings on the problems with Mind
> Control (coercive techniques) despite this science was in its infancy
> already in the 1920-ties, and no importance given on what other teachers of
> the past have said, no importance given to myths and legends and allegorical
> thinking - and their capabilities to convey higher levels of knowledge (not
> after 1929 or so), and no importance given to extra sensory perception and
> the dangers of meditation, and primary emphasis on the use of a terminology
> which is dry and which lack words talking to the heart compared talking to
> the mind. Yet he could be affectionate form time time, as we can see on
> record film-clips. - But maybe I have not been digging hard enough into his
> strange formulations?
>
> M. Sufilight
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Govert Schuller
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 5:34 PM
> Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: The Messiah and Pope crutch...and its
> Descendants- smile
>
> Sadhak asked:
>
> "Do these folks have a memo to this effect from Maitreya as well?!"
>
> To which I can answer: Yes, they do!
>
> See:
>
> Chapter IX in Through the Eyes of the Masters: Meditations and Portraits
> (London: Routledge, 1932, 2nd Ed. 1936, 3rd Ed. 1947) by David Anrias [Brian
> Ross], pp. 65-69.
>
> http://www.alpheus.org/html/source_materials/scott_anrias/maitreya_da.html
>
> You who have studied the horoscope of Krishnamurti know that he is
> incapable of compromising with the past; also that he was reinforced in his
> seemingly destructive work by those great Devas of the Air, who, under
> direction of the Lords of Karma, are helping Man to polarize himself towards
> spiritual rather than material conquests.
> In order to co-operate more completely with the Devas, Krishnamurti took
> initiations along their line of evolution. The essential nature of these
> Devas, used as agents of the Great Law, being perforce impersonal and
> detached, it came by degrees to influence his whole point of view, making
> him appear unsympathetic and even inhuman. Furthermore, since he had
> attained these initiations in the causal body by a positive effort of
> consciousness, it became all but impossible for him to be used any longer as
> my medium.
>
> Every astrological sign has its limitations, and that of the Aquarian is
> the tendency to become too introspective and self-sufficient, thereby losing
> contact with other types of men and their lines of development. Thus
> although Krishnamurti was right to emphasize the necessity for independent
> thought, he was wrong in assuming that everyone else, regardless of past
> Karma and present limitations, could instantly reach that point which he
> himself had only reached through lives of effort, and by the aid of those
> Cosmic Forces apportioned to him solely for his office as Herald of the New
> Age.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: sadhak1008
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 9:10 PM
> Subject: theos-talk Re: The Messiah and Pope crutch...and its Descendants-
> smile
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.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.
>
> [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]