[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: theos-talk Re: JK -assumption - The Messiah and Pope crutch...and its Descendants- smile

Feb 03, 2011 00:41 AM
by M. Sufilight

Dear Joshua and friends

My views are:

Here are a few examples on it in the below quotes...Of course preliminary meditation is safe and without dangers. But very soon the problems arrive. It is however from time to time possible to go far on the Path without a guide - or at least without really knowing that one has a guide - and not seldom a non-physical one. - My own experiences tells me this.

Let us see what H. P. Blavatsky co-founder of the Theosophical Society  had to say - Remember H. P. Blavatsky was one who had learned at least the ABC of occultism, and who could and can materialise and dematerialise her own body, and who showed all the signs on being a real esoteric occultist. This can be compared with other theosophists, the proclaimed Messiah named J. Krishnamurti included.

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"ENQUIRER. But why could not a man of well-balanced mind and singleness of purpose, one, say, of indomitable energy and perseverance, become an Occultist and even an Adept if he works alone?

THEOSOPHIST. He may; but there are ten thousand chances against one that he will fail. For one reason out of many others, no books on Occultism or Theurgy exist in our day which give out the secrets of alchemy or mediaeval Theosophy in plain language. All are symbolical or in parables; and as the key to these has been lost for ages in the West, how can a man learn the correct meaning of what he is reading and studying? Therein lies the greatest danger, one that leads to unconscious black magic or the most helpless mediumship. He who has not an Initiate for a master had better leave the dangerous study alone. Look around you and observe. While two-thirds of civilized society ridicule the mere notion that there is anything in Theosophy, Occultism, Spiritualism, or in the Kabala, the other third is composed of the most heterogeneous and opposite elements. Some believe in the mystical, and even in the supernatural (!), but each believes in his own way. Others will rush single-handed into the study of the Kabala, Psychism, Mesmerism, Spiritualism, or some form or another of Mysticism. Result: no two men think alike, no two are agreed upon any fundamental occult principles, though many are those who claim for themselves the ultima thule of knowledge, and would make outsiders believe that they are full-blown adepts. Not only is there no scientific and accurate knowledge of Occultism accessible in the West ânot even of true astrology, the only branch of Occultism which, in its exoteric teachings, has definite laws and a definite systemâbut no one has any idea of what real Occultism means."......."One and all of those who put their theory into practice are rapidly drifting, through ignorance, into black magic. Happy are those who escape from it, as they have neither test nor criterion by which they can distinguish between the true and the false. "
(The Key to Theosophy, 2ed., 1890, p. 21-22)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"A Christian--breaking "of the laws of nature," notwithstanding--while believing firmly in the miracles, because said to have been produced by God through Moses, will either scout the enchantments performed by Pharaoh's magicians, or attribute them to the devil. It is the latter whom our pious enemies connect with Occultism, while their impious foes, the infidels, laugh at Moses, Magicians, and Occultists, and would blush to give one serious thought to such "superstitions." This, because there is no term in existence to show the difference; no words to express the lights and shadows and draw the line of demarcation between the sublime and the true, the absurd and the ridiculous. The latter are the theological interpretations which teach the "breaking of the laws of Nature" by man, God, or devil; the former--the scientific "miracles" and enchantments of Moses and the Magicians in accordance with natural laws, both having been learned in all the Wisdom of the Sanctuaries, which were the "Royal Societies" of those days--and in true OCCULTISM. This last word is certainly misleading, translated as it stands from the compound word Gupta-Vidya, "Secret Knowledge." But the knowledge of what? Some of the Sanskrit terms may help us. 

There are four (out of the many other) names of the various kinds of Esoteric Knowledge or Sciences given, even in the esoteric PurÃnas. There is (1) Yajna-Vidya,1 knowledge of the occult powers awakened in Nature by the performance of certain religious ceremonies and rites. (2) Maha-vidya, the "great knowledge," the magic of the Kabalists and of the Tantrika worship, often Sorcery of the worst description. (3) Guhya-Vidya, knowledge of the mystic powers residing in Sound (Ether), hence in the Mantras (chanted prayers or incantations) and depending on the rhythm and melody used; in other words a magical performance based on Knowledge of the Forces of Nature and their correlation; and (4) ATMA-VIDYA, a term which is translated simply "knowledge of the Soul," true Wisdom by the Orientalists, but which means far more. 

This last is the only kind of Occultism that any theosophist who admires Light on the Path, and who would be wise and unselfish, ought to strive after. All the rest is some branch of the "Occult Sciences," i.e., arts based on the knowledge of the ultimate essence of all things in the Kingdoms of Nature--such as minerals, plants and animals--hence of things pertaining to the realm of material nature, however invisible that essence may be, and howsoever much it has hitherto eluded the grasp of Science. Alchemy, Astrology, Occult Physiology, Chiromancy, exist in Nature and the exact Sciences--perhaps so called, because they are found in this age of paradoxical philosophies the reverse--have already discovered not a few of the secrets of the above arts. But clairvoyance, symbolised in India as the "Eye of Siva," called in Japan, "Infinite Vision," is not Hypnotism, the illegitimate son of Mesmerism, and is not to be acquired by such arts. All the others may be mastered and results obtained, whether good, bad or indifferent; but Atma-Vidya sets small value on them. It includes them all and may even use them occasionally, but it does so after purifying them of their dross, for beneficent purposes, and taking care to deprive them of every element of selfish motive. Let us explain: Any man or woman can set himself or herself to study one or all of the above specified "Occult Arts" without any great previous preparation, and even without adopting any too restraining mode of life. One could even dispense with any lofty standard of morality. In the last case, of course, ten to one the student would blossom into a very decent kind of sorcerer, and tumble down headlong into black magic. But what can this matter? The Voodoos and the Dugpas eat, drink and are merry over heca-tombs of victims of their infernal arts. And so do the amiable gentlemen vivisectionists and the diploma-ed "Hypnotizers" of the Faculties of Medicine; tube only difference between the two classes being that the Voodoos and Dugpas are conscious, and the Charcot-Richet crew unconscious, Sorcerers. Thus, since both have to reap the fruits of their labours and achievements in the black art, the Western practitioners should not have the punishment and reputation without the profits and enjoyments they may get therefrom. For we say it again, hypnotism and vivisection as practiced in such schools, are schools, are Sorcery pure and simple, minus a knowledge that the Voodoos and Dugpas enjoy, and which no Charcot-Richet can procure for himself in fifty years of hard study and experimental observation. Let then those who will dabble in magic, whether they understand its nature or not, but who find the rules imposed upon students too hard, and who, therefore lay Atma-Vidya or Occultism aside--go without it. Let them become magicians by all means, even though they do become Voodoos and Dugpas for the next ten incarnations. 

But the interest of our readers will probably centre on those who are invincibly attracted towards the "Occult," yet who neither realise the true nature of what they aspire towards, nor have they become passion-proof, far less truly unselfish. 

How about these unfortunates, we shall be asked, who are thus rent in twain by conflicting forces? For it has been said too often to need repetition, and the fact itself is patent to any observer, that when once the desire for Occultism has really awakened in a man's heart, there remains for him no hope of peace, no place of rest and comfort in all the world. He is driven out into the wild and desolate spaces of life by an ever-gnawing unrest he cannot quell. His heart is too full of passion and selfish desire to permit him to pass the Golden Gate; he cannot find rest or peace in ordinary life. Must he then inevitably fall into sorcery and black magic, and through many incarnations heap up for himself a terrible Karma? Is there no other road for him? 

Indeed there is, we answer. Let him aspire to no higher than he feels able to accomplish. Let him not take a burden upon himself too heavy for him to carry. Without ever becoming a "Mahatma," a Buddha or a Great Saint, let him study the philosophy and the "Science of Soul," and he can become one of the modest benefactors of humanity, without any superhuman powers.".......and more.......

M. Sufilight says:
Other theosophists might have written similar words.
Various Eastern authors have also in their books warned against these things in the essentials.

And J. Krishnamurti adviced meditation, but forgot in the beginning years after 1929 to tell about the dangers of it. Later he became more careful, yet is seem to avoid telling about the so-called dangers.

Herer are some interesting words on meditation from J. Krishnamurti, which leads to the conclusion, that a guide must be necessary:

The Observer is the Observed
Ojai, California. 7th Public Talk 1945

Such teachings can be found in southern Buddhism, certain Adwaita teachings, and I believe the present day Eckhart Tolle teaches something similar. Krishnamurti did not tell people about this, and because of that people find his teachings to be very unique. Blavatsky is a bit more cautious, because she remembers to tell people to - never walk alone. Krishnamurti disallowed Masters and called them crutches more than one time, despite they are important, like chelas are important form time to time in helping people on the path. (This is in opposition to many age old teachings - in the sense, that anything and anyone can be a crutch, and anything and anyone can be a help. But those who are more wiise will in general always help more than the opposite). And Krishnamurti's teachings was and is a kind of pseudo-Adwaita Vedanta - which not all Westerners spiritually need to learn about, even when they desire it. Most Westerners learn more from Patanjali's Yoga Sutras or similar. - Others learn from "emptiness" and non-duality teachings given in Adwaita Vedanta or Gelug-pa Buddhism. - And all the Krishnamurti-Messiah promotions and proclamations given by Annie Besant and Leadbeater, and the inducing of young kids to wear silver-bagdes with a Kirshnamurti photo and silk-scarfs in special colors - was not in accordance with the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society. And - all these things are some of the main differences about this issue as I see it.

The question about whether Krishnamurti was overshadowed by Maitreya or not, and for how long, is pure guess-work for most people. And if preessed about it, they will admit it. 

And I am not the one, who favour emotional Messiah doctrines. To me and a number of old teachings from the East - we all of us are embodiments of the Divine. Some have realised who they are, - and - some know who they are, but have not realised it, - and some think that by pretending they have realised it - they will be admired, - and some do not know who they are and have not realised it yet. And some say like Fox Mulder from the X-Files movies: I Want to Believe. (smile.)

One of the objects of the Original Programe of the Theosophical Society was:
"The chief aim of the Founder of the Eclectic Theosophical School was one of the three objects of its modern successor, the Theosophical Society, namely, to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities."
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 3)

And therefore comparative studying is always important - and not a doctrine rejecting comparative studying.

All the above are however just my views.

M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joshua 
  Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:53 AM
  Subject: Re: theos-talk Re: JK -assumption - The Messiah and Pope crutch...and its Descendants- smile

  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.


  On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM, M. Sufilight

  > 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: <>
  > 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: <>
  > 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: <>
  > 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.
  > 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: <>
  > Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 9:10 PM
  > Subject: theos-talk Re: The Messiah and Pope crutch...and its Descendants-
  > smile
  > --- In <>, "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]


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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application