Re: theos-talk THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
Mar 26, 2011 05:13 PM
by M. Sufilight
My views are:
The article are in certain respects wellwritten. In others I will have to reconsider whether it has a healthy odour so to speak.
Carlos wrote for instance:
"Krishnamurti is no theosophical solution to the problem."
M. Sufilight asks:
I find it important to ask in what manner is Krishnamurti not a solution?
And could he not in fact be a solution to at least some of the problems - especially when we deal with the idea of coercing people along a particular path?
J. Krishnamurti said, although I do not entirely agree with him:
"Truth, being limitless, unconditioned, unapproachable by any path whatsoever, cannot be organized; nor should any organization be formed to lead or coerce people along a particular path."
Truth is of course approachable by a path, but not a path in the ordinary sense of the word.
"Of course, the inner dimension of the movement cannot be ignored. Its real vitality depends on the Few whose sole aim in life is to work for the good of mankind and who thus forget their own lower selves. H.P.B. and the Masters never made a secret of that condition."
M. Sufilight says:
I perceive here in the above a tendency in the article to state the existence of the Masters as a fact, something which was not in accordance with the Original Theosophical Society, which held no doctrinas. Doctrinas were only held by each member individually, and none were held on behalf of the Society.
Another point worth mentioning is that the Theosophical Society was Originally created as a non-secterian body.
Carlos more than one time in his article mention the teachings of Theosophy in a manner, that make me think, that he find that the Original Theosophical Society as such had doctrinas to follow and to offer its members. It had not. Doctrinas was offered by each member to other members on behalf of themselves, and not on behalf of the Society. This must be true when one follow the Constitution and Rules for the Society as they were given in 1891, and also by Blavatsky as a co-founder in 1886 with her paper called the âORIGINAL PROGRAMMEâ MANUSCRIPT (See BCW, vol. VII, p. 145 - this whether the Masters exist or not).
To call for at going back to Blavatsky movement or as Carlos says "Back to H.P.B.", is as I see not the proper wording to give the whole thing. I would rather say - more precisely I hope - that one aught to understand the original intent with the Theosophical Society - and its Constitution and Rules in the early years - and the actions taken in these years. (Actions on scientific research in Mesmerism, today called Healing, Heartflow, and Terapheutic Touch etc., and other kinds of research parapsychology is onen of them, --- and the role the growing science of psychology, especially Cult-psychology and Mind Control has of importance to the aims of the a present day Theosophical Society. It is of great importance that the Theosophical Society finds its own role - with regard to its main aim of altruism --- because the Theosophical Society has by several outside opinion-makers been called a cult and a sect hundreds of times. And its was founded to be non-secterian. The co-founder defined Theosophy as the "exact science on psychology' - given in the Theosophist in 1879) When this is understood, one aught to compare them with the present day Constitution and Rules for the Society and decide what action is needed so that the noble attempt of altruism can be promoted - and the original aims followed. - If however, the original aims are deemed unimportant by the present day majority of members and also the administrative leadership of the Soicety, then I would say that the Theosophical Society effectively will have ceased to exist. Well unless a report are being made available so to give evidence upon why the Original lines of the Soicety are still intact - or - why it has been necessary to deviate from them in certain respects.
These are however just my views.
"The movement has several levels of consciousness: in order for it to have an inner life, it needs a certain number of people who are sincere aspirants to discipleship, and who, if still members of the Adyar Society, must be free from the delusional garbage accumulated under the leadership of Annie Besant. "
M. Sufilight might ask:
Well, yes maybe. But, in what manner "aspirants to discipleship" - and - related to what doctrine if any?
I have in the above just asked some question from the heart, and forwarded some views, which might be helpful to us all. Now it is for the readers to decide if there are some importance to the words given.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: theos-talk THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
There is another aspect which I would like to bring up.
None of the facts in the article has been refuted as to their correctness.
In this age of Internet, much light shines on the actions of leaders and all
good and bad actions are brought to world's attention. This affects the
credibility of the leaders and once it is marred, it is very difficult to
rebuild. Is it possible that the continued downward slide in membership is
one of the effects of this?
On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 8:42 AM, M. Sufilight
> Dear friends
> My views are:
> To MKR: Thanks for reminding me and others about it.
> I had quite interestingly just translated an article by Blavatsky, which
> are very much in parallel with this article by Carlos you just posted.
> Here is an excerpt of it....
> SPIRITUAL PROGRESS
> "The goal of the aspirant for spiritual wisdom is entrance upon a higher
> plane of existence; he is to become a new man, more perfect in every way
> than he is at present, and if he succeeds, his capabilities and faculties
> will receive a corresponding increase of range and power, just as in the
> visible world we find that each stage in the evolutionary scale is marked by
> increase of capacity. This is how it is that the Adept becomes endowed with
> marvellous powers that have been so often described, but the main point to
> be remembered is, that these powers are the natural accompaniments of
> existence on a higher plane of evolution, just as the ordinary human
> faculties are the natural accompaniments of existence on the ordinary human
> Many persons seem to think that adeptship is not so much the result of
> radical development as of additional construction; they seem to imagine that
> an Adept is a man who, by going through a certain plainly defined course of
> training, consisting of minute attention to a set of arbitrary rules,
> acquires first one power and then another; and when he has attained a
> certain number of these powers is forthwith dubbed an adept. Acting on this
> mistaken idea they fancy that the first thing to be done towards attaining
> adeptship is to acquire "powers"--clairvoyance and the power of leaving the
> physical body and travelling to a distance, are among those which fascinate
> the most.
> To those who wish to acquire such powers for their own private advantage,
> we have nothing to say; they fall under the condemnation of all who act for
> purely selfish ends. But there are others, who, mistaking effect for cause,
> honestly think that the acquirement of abnormal powers is the only road to
> spiritual advancement. These look upon our Society as merely the readiest
> means to enable them to gain knowledge in this direction, considering it as
> a sort of occult academy, an institution established to afford facilities
> for the instruction of would-be miracle-workers. In spite of repeated
> protests and warnings, there are some minds in whom this notion seems
> ineradicably fixed, and they are loud in their expressions of disappointment
> when they find that what had been previously told them is perfectly true;
> that the Society was founded to teach no new and easy paths to the
> acquisition of "powers"; and that its only mission is to re-kindle the torch
> of truth so long extinguished for all but the very few, and to keep that
> truth alive by the formation of a fraternal union of mankind, the only soil
> in which the good seed can grow.
> The Theosophical Society does indeed desire to promote the spiritual growth
> of every individual who comes within its influence, but its methods are
> those of the ancient Rishis, its tenets those of the oldest Esotericism; it
> is no dispenser of patent nostrums composed of violent remedies which no
> honest healer would dare to use.
> In this connection we would warn all our members, and others who are
> seeking spiritual knowledge, to beware of persons offering to teach them
> easy methods of acquiring psychic gifts; such gifts (laukika) are indeed
> comparatively easy of acquirement by artificial means, but fade out as soon
> as the nerve-stimulus exhausts itself. The real seership and adeptship which
> is accompanied by true psychic development (lokothra), once reached, is
> never lost.
> It appears that various societies have sprung into existence since the
> foundation of the Theosophical Society, profiting by the interest the latter
> has awakened in matters of psychic research, and endeavouring to gain
> members by promising them easy acquirement of psychic powers. In India we
> have long been familiar with the existence of hosts of sham ascetics of all
> descriptions, and we fear that there is fresh danger in this direction,
> here, as well as in Europe and America. We only hope that none of our
> members, dazzled by brilliant promises, will allow themselves to be taken in
> by self-deluded dreamers, or, it may be, wilful deceivers. "
> [The Theosophist, Vol. VI, No. 8(68), May, 1885, pp. 187-88]
> M. Sufilight says:
> It seems, to me, that ever since the Krishnamurti - Messiah emotionalism in
> the 1911-1929, many a theosophical group have found it difficult to
> understand what the Theosophical Society was all about - namely altruism
> (and not secterian Messiah-emotionalism) and that it was a non-secterian
> body etc. etc. - and that it was not an Occult Academi so to train seekers
> in the develoment of clairvoyance. And that the leader of an Esoteric
> Section was not allowed to make it a secterian body. If so - a new one under
> a different name, would out of compassion be created by the help of the
> Masters, who ever watch this planet and the spheres of the earth chain.
> So to "reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of
> ethics, based on eternal verities. " (The Key to Theosophy). Because that is
> what the core object of the Society was and is about - when we speak about -
> altrusism. And that it therefore was - and aught to be - non-political
> legislatively speaking in all its aims.
> But, these are just my views.
> M. Sufilight
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: MKR
> To: theos-talk
> Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2011 2:50 PM
> Subject: theos-talk THE FUTURE OF ADYAR SOCIETY - An Article
> Some months ago, an article on the topic of the Future of Adyar Society was
> published in a theosophical forum. It contains some interesting information
> and you can read it at the following link and come to your own
> conclusions/opinions. Here is the link:
> [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]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application