Theos-Talk Archives (October 2011 Message tt00060)

Dear Micahel and friends

My views are:

I guess, it is to me you send an email. Is this true, because your post in the below is not clearly telling the readers who you are addressing?
And you do not sign yourself with the same e-mail address as you did in the previous post. - I will call you Michael, because it seems to be you.

I have sought to take your private email about the Ascended Masters into account in the below answer.


Michael wrote:
"Each one has a message that is usually stated with great certainty, and force, as being the truth, the way, the life."

M. Sufilight says:
Yes and no. Not necessarily. Most theosophical seekers forward their views as hypoteses, and not as a sectarian dogma.
And then they let each individual decide and if possible verify, if they are able to do so, whether there is any actual truth in what have been forwarded.

I AM ACTIVITY exposed!
(I wonder whether the claims in the link is true?)
http://users.on.net/~thefirstbruce/Ballards/index.html


Michael wrote:
"Blavatsky's statement that prayer reduces self-reliance is one such example. 
No doubt it often does have that effect, as commonly taught in religions. But that doesn't mean that there are not ways of praying that do not so result."

M. Sufilight says:
It certain depends on why it in the name of altruism is necessary to use the word "prayer" some to make people think that they should use a Christian-like prayer.

Stated shortly. What I was referring to was something which is well-known today among psychologists. And it is also called - conditioning or "Classical conditioning".
Anti-cult Psychologist know about its use and especially the abuse which occur by its misuse. The knowledge about subtle Mind Control are related to this rather important psychological aspect.

 Wikipedia on "Classical conditioning".
( Pavlov's "Classical conditioning" was described by the psychologist William Sargant in his pioneering book on subtle Mind Control called "Battle for the Mind", printed as early as 1957.
The words are almost like the following: Sargant begins his thesis with the near drowning of Pavlov's dog - used in the psychological experiments in the 1924 Leningrad flood. The dogs witnessed that the water came in to the room where they were caged and slowly rose until only their heads were free. An assistant rescued the dogs just in time, and, freed them from their cages, and led them to safety. Though looking no worse for wear, a strange change came over them. They had forgotten or reversed the training they had received before the traumatic experience. Keepers they had shown affection towards now received their aggression. Keepers whom they disliked were now the recipients of affection. The dogs had forgotten their recent learning and had to be retrained.

This phenomenon interested Pavlov and lead him to his "three-stage process" of brain conversion, which Sargant believes we all are capeable of falling victim to under the proper circumstances.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning#Pavlov.27s_experiment

This method is in fact used in many New Age sects in various analogical manner. Either consciously or unconsciously. It is a psychological key to religious conversions and why they - sometimes - happen. Religious conversions might be sought by inducing fear of losing "something" if you leave the sect, or social attachment, or habit-attachments etc. etc. You see, if a child has his or her self-reliance killed; --- the "slate" wiped clean so to speak, like Pavlov's dogs. Then the child can easily be converted into various sectarian beliefs of any kinds - which are picturing themselves as sweet as honey on the outside. And this is what the theosophical teachings given by Blavatsky clearly argued against. See the quote I gave about children in the previous post. Therefore it was and is so important that children are taught self-reliance and not sectarian reliance; of course the same with grown-ups. You see, I like knowledge more than various beliefs being induced about various Masters and what they perhaps did or perhaps not did.

H. P. Blavatsky wrote in the same chapter of the book, The Key to Theosophy, that what is called - esoteric prayer  or rather meditation - is allright. But this is not a "prayer" people ordinarily understand - when we use the very misleading and Christian-like word "prayer". The only focus for "prayer" or rather esoteric meditation is the inner divine self which resides within each human as the core of that which we human beings ordinarily call the "I" or "Me". Any other kind of prayer is futile according to H. P. Blavatsky's teachings - they in fact instead leads to lack of self-reliance. - But in the Theosophical Society in the days of H. P. Blavatsky, there were a great variety of members having other teachings than hers. - Because the Theosophical Society was non-sectarian in nature from its beginning in 1875 until 1891, and perhaps a few years more, and then it was changed and became more sectarian in nature. Today there are great many sectarian theosophical groups or theosophically-related groups. Most of them are operating as sectarian organisations, where a few leaders are teaching doctrinas on behalf of their organisation. The Christian "Bible" has merely been exchanged with a new one - most often with new dogmas. And dogmatism and narrowminded thought-patterns aught to be opposed. The Theosophical Society in the period 1875-1891 was non-sectarian in the senses, that it never operated in a manner where a certain teaching was forwarded by "better-knowing" persons on behalf of ordinary members. This is what the I AM Activity is doing is it not?

Not all of the various spiritual organisations or New Age groups can be telling the truth. Especially not when they are sectarian in their Constitution and Rules. - Do you not agree?

That was why the Theosophical Society created in 1875 originally was a NON-sectarian body - and invited all kinds of religious persons as members. Invited were Christians, Muslims, Hindu's, Buddhists, Hermetics, Rosicrucians, Spiritists, Spiritualists, and all kinds of New Agers in those days. No - absolutely no doctrinas were forwarded by any leaders on behalf of the Theosophical Society in those days. The Theosophical Society was against any kind of "popery". (Not even a doctrine about the existence of the Masters was forwarded on behalf of the Society). But some persons (often power-hungry or ignorantly non-compassionate) do not understand this and want desperately to change it. Therefore they create sectarian groups - while they claim to have their origin in the original Theosophical Society and its activities. - Those groups with such claims  I will call nothing but FALSE and dishonest, or perhaps rather ignorant. They might be wellmeaning though.

Each individual in the Theosophical Society was given a free opportunity to form his or her own opinion about the meaning of life. - Today - we find quite a number of theosophical groups or theosophically related groups, who are doing the opposite. They have a few Leaders or so-called leaders who claim to have the - True - knowledge, and who lectures and tell people what  they should think - without encouraging free exchanges on the meaning of life - and - they most often even disallow criticism or critical views to be raised against their teachings by the members. And they carefully avoid the important aspect which the Theosophical Society in 1875-1891 did not avoid namely: Comparative studying between various thought systems, with emphasis on Eastern systems - and - not the Western ones since most of them are dogmatic in nature or christian-like sectarian in nature. 

The result in such groups which avoid comparative studying and self-criticism (sometimes of narrowminded thought-patterns) is often the killing of self-reliance. (Some of the named Leaders are not seldom merely authors who seek to get a profit from the sales of their books - and - live out their dream of being a Personality or an self-proclaimed advanced initiate of a special kind, or similar ideas - which are called deeply spiritual.) 
- Is this the proper aim, when one seek to promote altruism on the planet? 
I think not. 
Non-sectarian activities are far better than sectarian ones. This is the view. Do you not agree?

Why have the aim that it is better to promote as many sects as possible on the planet - all of them with their own Leaders, who most often are authors selling books for profit, - and who stand shouting in their calcified hen-house grounds - while thousands of others shout in their calcified hen-house grounds respectively - and all of them claim to be overly sweet and nice, and very altruistic? And proclaim that they know the real truth about the meaning of life? And who all of them ask anyone to join and support the free New Age super market. And thoughts like may the best marketeer win!
 --- The very very vital and important truth is - Not all of them can be telling the truth! 
Do you not agree?

Therefore the non-sectarian Theosophical Society was created - so to invite all those so very altruistic and sweet "truth"-tellers from all the religious and spiritual Super Markets to become members on EQUAL footing so they could meet and face each other. And then all beginner seekers would have a golden opportunity to meet all of them in a more honest free atmosphere of exchange - where the beginner seekers avoid being pushed into a thinking-pattern of a Sectarian Leaders choice - and not one of their own choice. 
Do you understand me and what I am trying to tell you, Michael - and the other readers as well?

Michael wrote:
"Blavatsky was pretty anti-Christianity, in many writings, or seemed so. "

M. Sufilight says:
Oh, yes. Very much so. And with good reason.
The Theosophical Society was created with having opposition to all kinds of dogmatism in mind. And Christian dogmatism was especially very much included. And to oppose subtle Mind Control, often prevalent in sectarian groups, (as far as I can tell Clare Prophets Church being one of them), which more or less knowingly seek to keep self-reliance down in the individual. And of course also to curb a growing tendency to better-knowing arrogance in the individual.

It is the attempt to Christianize all and everything, which aught to be opposed. And It is the attempt to promote "popery" in various theosophical offshoot groups with the original Theosophical Society included, which aught to be opposed.

______________________
Here is H. P. Blavatsky's view about the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society and why it was created and the intentions was to oppose Christianity based on dogmas:

["ORIGINAL PROGRAMME" MANUSCRIPT] 
"[Words within square brackets, as well as the italicizing of certain words and sentences, in passages quoted from the Chatterji-Gebhard Statement, are H.P.B.'s own, as careful comparison with the text of the Statement will show. Throughout H.P.B.'s Pronouncement, both in the main text of it, and in some of the footnotes, the occurrence of several dots indicates no elision of words, and is apparently meant to point to the beginning of a new thought which is particularly emphasized.
-Compiler.]
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.* To make it clearer:-

-----------
* A liberal Christian member of the T.S. having objected to the study of Oriental religions and doubted whether there was room left for any new Society-a letter answering his objections and preference to Christianity was received and the contents copied for him; after which he denied no longer the advisability of such a Society as the proposed Theosophical Association. A few extracts from this early letter will show plainly the nature of the Society as then contemplated, and that we have tried only to follow, and carry out in the best way we could the intentions of the true originators of the Society in those days. The pious gentleman having claimed that he was a theosophist and had a right of judgment over other people was told . . . "You have no right to such a title. You are only a philo-theosophist; as one who has reached to the full comprehension of the "
.....and the article continues....I suggest that you perhaps read more of it, if you have not already....
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/blavatsky/articles/v7/yxxxx_019.htm


Michael wrote:
"But I believe "The Brothers" were acting and are acting through any and all avenues available. They were working through Catholicism as much as possible at the same time as they were railing against the darkness that was in it. 

It takes a very flexible mind to keep up with the Brothers!

So, one can become an expert at any of the movements and thrusts of the The Brothers. However at the same time or next week they will be found sponsoring and trying get bits of The Truth through another avenue that looks at the elephant from another side and sees the matter differently. 

Thanks for the interesting dialogue, by which we grow in altruism and understanding."

M. Sufilight says:
To some readers the idea about Masters must be a hypotesis. But I confirm and claim that they do exist.
Yes. The initiates and the Masters employ agents - the best available in various organisations. And this happen not only in conncetion with the Theosophical Society, but also at other places. For instance in conncetion with various New Age groups - also sectarian ones like Summit Lighthouse or I AM Activity. Or Clare Prophets Church.
But, then we and the Masters NEVER operate in a manner, which ---- promotes --- what is called SUBTLE MIND CONTROL in psychological terms. Well unless something as sinister as that can be said to serve an altruistic purpose. Most often it cannot.

I will repeat my views. Here are some words on Subtle Mind Control. Try this page by a well-known Exit-Counsellor: The B.I.T.E. model - http://freedomofmind.com/bite/ or as shown here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3FO0pAj528  - Try to have a look at both links. Else you will hardly understand what I am talking about unless you already a thoroughly familiar with the term "subtle Mind Control".

I am not aware of any Master working as a Pope in the Catholic Church in the two last centuries. Are you?

A flexible mind? 
Any attempt to Christianize the original non-sectarian Theosophical Society by subtle and euphemistic vocabulary and sectarian activities aught to be opposed as far as I am concerned. Do you not agree on this?

Yes. I also say thank you for the interesting dialogue.
All the above are just my views. And, I do not claim to be infallible.

I do hope that the above will enable some of the readers to do more work in the name of compassion and altruism.


M. Sufilight


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: libertyson11 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 7:18 AM
  Subject: theos-talk Re: Are the TS organisations and offshoots merely members of the New Age


    


  Besides the private email I sent you, I would like to respond in public to a few points.

  I see from your writings you are very knowledgable in Blavatskyism, or Mahatmaism, or whatever you might call it, and I don't mean that disparingly. 

  I have studied Mr. Judges writings in some detail. 
  I have studied the various movements that in my judgment the Mahatmas sponsored after Theosophy. 

  Each one has a message that is usually stated with great certainty, and force, as being the truth, the way, the life. 

  Blavatsky's statement that prayer reduces self-reliance is one such example. 
  No doubt it often does have that effect, as commonly taught in religions. But that doesn't mean that there are not ways of praying that do not so result.

  Even the common phrase "Pray as if it all depends on God, and act as if it all depends on you" tends to break the mold of passive prayer. 

  The Puritans prayed and acted, hardly becoming passive. 

  That is just one example. 

  The appearances of Mary always find her imploring people to pray for others. 

  Every religious tradition, including Buddhism has prayer. To give a blanket denial of its worth is rather daring, and not so in a wise way, methinks. 

  Blavatsky was pretty anti-Christianity, in many writings, or seemed so. 

  But I believe "The Brothers" were acting and are acting through any and all avenues available. They were working through Catholicism as much as possible at the same time as they were railing against the darkness that was in it. 

  It takes a very flexible mind to keep up with the Brothers!

  So, one can become an expert at any of the movements and thrusts of the The Brothers. However at the same time or next week they will be found sponsoring and trying get bits of The Truth through another avenue that looks at the elephant from another side and sees the matter differently. 

  Thanks for the interesting dialogue, by which we grow in altruism and understanding.



  

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