theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

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

Re: Theos-World Re: TS Adyar's policy or non-policy?

Jan 03, 2009 08:46 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen


Dear friends and Chuck


My views are:

I asked the question so to be able to ask my next questions.

But selling the book (Alice A. Bailey's)  is promoting it is it not?
I tell you: Selling books by C. W. Leadbeater without telling the truth is abominable towards victims of phaedofiles!

So why not sell Alice A. Bailey's books if you sell C. W. Leadbeaters books?
The same could be asked about books related to Devas vs Aliens, Ufo's and Cropcircles.



M. Sufilight


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Drpsionic@aol.com 
  To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 5:10 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: TS Adyar's policy or non-policy?


  That makes about as much sense as saying that a library that has Mein Kampf 
  on the shelves is promoting Nazism!

  Chuck the Heretic


  In a message dated 1/3/2009 9:59:09 A.M. Central Standard Time, 
  global-theosophy@stofanet.dk writes:

  Dear friends and Chuck

  My views are:

  And all of them are - first editions - and also alvailable on the Internet 
  or elsewhere for free?

  So I take it, that Radha Burnier in secret are promoting the New World 
  Order, the Externalization of the Hierarchy within UN, the Great Invocation, and 
  the return of the Christ - and - similar in accordance with the Alice A. 
  Bailey groups main focus?

  - - - 
  H. P. Blavatsky about Prayer: "It kills in man self-reliance; "

  A few words by H. P. Blavatsky for considereation about the AAB's loud mouth 
  Great Invocation and LCC church songs, the the Messiah Schemes...

  H. P. Blavatsky in The Key to Theosophy, chapter 1 , p. 10- 
  (_http://www.phx-http://wwwhttp://wwhtt_ 
  (http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm) )
  "Meditation is silent and unuttered prayer, or, as Plato expressed it, "the 
  ardent turning of the soul toward the divine; not to ask any particular good 
  (as in the common meaning of prayer), but for good itself âfor the universal 
  Supreme Good" of which we are a part on earth, and out of the essence of 
  which we have all emerged. Therefore, adds Plato, "remain silent in the presence 
  of the divine ones, till they remove the clouds from thy eyes and enable thee 
  to see by the light which issues from themselves, not what appears as good 
  to thee, but what is intrinsically good."

  H. P. Blavatsky in The Key to Theosophy, chapter 14 - p. 66-71:
  (_http://www.phx-http://wwwhttp://wwhtt_ 
  (http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm) )

  "ENQUIRER. Do you believe in prayer, and do you ever pray? 

  THEOSOPHIST. We do not. We act, instead of talking. "

  ...............

  "ENQUIRER. To whom, then, do you pray when you do so? 

  THEOSOPHIST. To "our Father in heaven" â in its esoteric meaning. 

  ENQUIRER. Is that different from the one given to it in theology? 

  THEOSOPHIST. Entirely so. An Occultist or a Theosophist addresses his prayer 
  to his Father which is in secret (read, and try to understand, ch. vi. v. 6, 
  Matthew), not to an extra-cosmic and therefore finite God; and that "Father" 
  is in man himself. 

  ENQUIRER. Then you make of man a God? 

  THEOSOPHIST. Please say "God" and not a God. In our sense, the inner man is 
  the only God we can have cognizance of. And how can this be otherwise? Grant 
  us our postulate that God is a universally diffused, infinite principle, and 
  how can man alone escape from being soaked through by, and in, the Deity? We 
  call our "Father in heaven" that deific essence of which we are cognizant 
  within us, in our heart and spiritual consciousness, and which has nothing to do 
  with the anthropomorphic conception we may form of it in our physical brain 
  or its fancy: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the spirit 
  of (the absolute) God dwelleth in you? Yet, 

  let no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no Theosophist, if he 
  would hold to divine, not human truth, say that this "God in secret" listens 
  to, or is distinct from, either finite man or the infinite essence â for all 
  are one. Nor, as just remarked, that a prayer is a petition. It is a mystery 
  rather; an occult process by which finite and conditioned thoughts and desires, 
  unable to be assimilated by the absolute spirit which is unconditioned, are 
  translated into spiritual wills and the will; such process being called 
  "spiritual transmutation.let no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no 
  Theosophist, if he wouldlet no man anthropomorphise that essence in us. Let no 
  Theosophist, if he would hold to divine, not human truth, say that this "God 
  in secret" listens to, or is distinct from, either finite

  ENQUIRER. Do you mean to say that prayer is an occult process bringing about 
  physical results? 

  THEOSOPHIST. I do. Will-Power becomes a living power. But woe unto those 
  Occultists and Theosophists, who, instead of crushing out the desires of the 
  lower personal ego or physical man, and saying, addressing their Higher 
  Spiritual EGO immersed in Atma-Buddhic light, "Thy will be done, not mine," etc., 
  send up waves of will-power for selfish or unholy purposes! For this is black 
  magic, abomination, and spiritual sorcery. Unfortunately, all this is the 
  favourite occupation of our Christian statesmen and generals, especially when the 
  latter are sending two armies to murder each other. Both indulge before 
  action in a bit of such sorcery, by offering respectively prayers to the same God 
  of Hosts, each entreating his help to cut its enemies' throats. "

  ................

  "ENQUIRER. But how do you explain the universal fact that all nations and 
  peoples have prayed to, and worshipped a God or Gods? Some have adored and 
  propitiated devils and harmful spirits, but this only proves the universality of 
  the belief in the efficacy of prayer. 

  THEOSOPHIST. It is explained by that other fact that prayer has several 
  other meanings besides that given it by the Christians. It means not only a 
  pleading or petition, but meant, in days of old, far more an invocation and 
  incantation. The mantra, or the rhythmically chanted prayer of the Hindus, has 
  precisely such a meaning, as the Brahmins hold themselves higher than the common 
  devas or "Gods." A prayer may be an appeal or an incantation for malediction, 
  and a curse (as in the case of two armies praying simultaneously for mutual 
  destruction) as much as for blessing. And as the great majority of people are 
  intensely selfish, and pray only for themselves, asking to be given their 
  "daily bread" instead of working for it, and begging God not to lead them "into 
  temptation" but to deliver them (the memorialists only) from evil, the 
  result is, that prayer, as now understood, is doubly pernicious: (a) It kills in 
  man self-reliance; (b) It develops in him a still more ferocious selfishness 
  and egotism than he is already endowed with by nature. I repeat, that we 
  believe in "communion" and simultaneous action in unison with our "Father in 
  secret"; and in rare moments of ecstatic bliss, in the mingling of our higher soul 
  with the universal essence, attracted as it is towards its origin and 
  centre, a state, called during life Samadhi, and after death, Nirvana. We refuse to 
  pray to created finite beingsâi. e., gods, saints, angels, etc., because we 
  regard it as idolatry. We cannot pray to the ABSOLUTE for reasons explained 
  before; therefore, we try to replace fruitless and useless prayer by 
  meritorious and good-producing actions.

  - - - - - - -

  H. P. Blavatsky said:
  LET NO THEOSOPHIST, IF HE WOULD HOLD TO DIVINE, NOT HUMAN TRUTH, SAY THAT 
  THIS "GOD IN SECRET" LISTENS TO, OR IS distinct from, EITHER FINITE MAN OR THE 
  FINITE ESSENCES - FOR ALL ARE ONE.

  - - -

  M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: _Drpsionic@aol.Drp_ (mailto:Drpsionic@aol.com) 
  To: _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) 
  Sent: Friday, January 02, 2009 11:55 PM
  Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: TS Adyar's policy or non-policy?

  Unless there has been a radical change, the Olcott Library carries all the 
  Alice Bailey material and the Chicago branches have always had Baileyites as 
  members and had Bailey material present.

  Chuck the Heretic

  In a message dated 1/2/2009 12:16:12 P.M. Central Standard Time, 
  _global-theosophy@global-thgl_ (mailto:global-theosophy@stofanet.dk) writes:

  Dear Joseph and friends

  My views are:

  1) Thanks. Yes. But that does not at all explain why they do, what they do, 
  and who "they" actually are in person. And not why "their" policy is like it 

  is.

  2)
  I was rather reffering to the fact that the Alice A. Bailey books are not 
  allowed within any TS branch as far as I know. Whereas C. W. Leadbeaters are 
  more than welcomed. Weird is it not?

  And compartive study between them and H. P. Blavatsky's teachings? Have it 
  ever occured?
  When people start thinkin in terms like: You choose your path, we soon will 
  end up with another version of the Spiritists and a pseudo Esoteric version 
  og the Latter Days Saints or similar. Well, that is, if you get my view.

  2 + 3)

  4)
  Joseph wrote:
  Krishnamuti: "People choose their leaders out of confusion, therefore
  the leaders are also confused."

  My answer:
  Sure, that will imediately rule all others out except Kirshnamurti himself - 
  as a braging Messiah. 
  Sneaky fellow that Krishnamurti, .....sneaky, very very sneaky.

  So no one have ever compared J. Krishnamurti with any other TS teacher?
  I am amazed.

  Yes. The Theosophical Movement by Cooper is worth an effort.

  What is this: "Theosophical materials" (presumably
  from the Adyar organization) - you are reffering to?

  Joseph wrote:
  "Morten, I agree very strongly with your view of the TS as an
  "investigatory" organization. A major portion of the issues we deal
  with now date back to the post-Coulomb period when HPB was in Europe
  and the ES was formed. As soon as this direct line to a "higher
  authority" was established with the Europeans, free-thought, and the
  investigatory nature of the TS diminished greatly. It's a funny
  phenomenon, slightly alluded to in the Mahatma Letters (3rd Ed. Letter
  16 "Devachan" Pg. 24) regarding the existence of a pair of undisclosed
  Skandhas. These two are associated, according to the letter, with
  "the efficacy of vain rights and ceremonies, in prayers and
  intercession"intercession"<WBR>. Perhaps it is the action of this att
  which is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs."

  My answer:
  Thanks. I found your words very interesting.

  One aught to ask various TS leaders and leaders from other theosophical 
  branches about this issue. I wonder what they would say, if they at all 
  dared to 
  answer?
  ----

  Joseph wrote:
  "I have one other question. Who are the finest scholars in the
  movement today? David Riegle, Daniel Caldwell, Paul Johnson, Joy
  Mills? Where is the output from these individuals, presumably experts
  in Theosophical writing? Who are they challenging in the world of
  science, religion and philosophy?"

  My answer:
  Spot on. That was the major point with this e-mail.

  The question will be: When and who will do an effort - together - so that 
  the truth about the Wisdoms teachings will be forwarded, so that the untruth 

  might be shown clearly to the interested reader. - Who has or have the 
  capacity 
  to write a major comprehensive in deept volume - comparing H. P. Blavatsky 
  with Annie Besant, C. W. Leadbeater, J. Krishnamurti , W. Q. Judge - as well 
  as quite important the major player today: Alice A. Bailey, while forwarding 
  the - theosophical message to our present day audiences - with todays, 
  nuclears, DNA-engineeering, cloning, Disclosure Project, 
  Alien/UFO/Cropcirclnucl
  question will be: When and who will do an effort - together - so that the 
  truth 
  about the Wisdoms teachings will be forwarded, so that the untruth might be 
  shown clearly to the interested reader. - Who has or have the capacity to wr

  If this is what Master orders, we will have to write it. I could imagine, 
  that this is what Master would find one of important tasks to do today.
  ---

  We shall know the various authors on their fruits and not only their books.
  Are there at all any sages on this polluted and scarred Planet? Who?

  M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joseph P. Fulton 
  To: _theos-talk@To: _theos-talTo: _theos-_theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ 
  (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) ) 
  Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:56 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: TS Adyar's policy or non-policy?

  Very good question. I have to admit that sometimes I am quite amazed
  at the lack of comparative studies. There appear to be a number of
  things involved, some are philosophical, and some are quite, how
  should we say, prosaic? I'll answer the questions in order.

  1) Please see the site: 
  __http://www.questboohttp://www.http://wwwhttp://_ 
  (http://www.questboohttp://www.questhttp://www._) 
  (_http://www.questboohttp://www.questhttp://www._ 
  (http://www.questbooks.net/aboutquest.cfm#staff) ) for contact info and
  submission guidelines. 

  2) Have you ever done programming in a branch or study center? You
  find out one thing real quick. You're on your own. The most common
  reaction from a programming person doesn't have anything to do with
  what "Wheaton" or "Adyar" wants. Getting something, i.e. anything
  together is the best many can hope for. The prevailing attitude in
  most groups (having heard this enough times as a Federation Pres.) is
  if "Wheaton wants to tell us what to do, they can come do it themselves".

  3) See #2. Headquarters offers study courses to groups, but I've
  never, ever heard of word coming down from HQ saying that a group
  "must" study something. I've even visited groups where I was kindly
  told to leave for asking if they read or studied the SD or ML. 
  Running a local group is really a "by the seat of your pants" type of
  thing. I have some wonderful horror stories of times where speakers
  didn't show or someone in the audience tried to make a virtual
  whipping post out of the speaker or their topic.

  4) Applying a style of logic normally ascribed to Nagarjuna, this
  answer will apply to Questions #5, 6, 7, and 8. If a local group is
  fortunate enough to have someone with an Eastern philosophical
  background, chances are this type of debate goes on quite a bit. 
  However, in this organization, there seems to be much less emphasis on
  the tradition of inquiry and open examination. The prevailing
  attitude that I observe in most groups is that of your typical
  "believer", not much different than what you would find at a local
  Methodist or Congregationalist church. And, to paraphrase
  Krishnamuti: "People choose their leaders out of confusion, therefore
  the leaders are also confused."

  So the answer to Questions 4 - 8 is "yes, all the above are allowed".
  The reality is, and mostly for the reasons given above, is that it
  just doesn't happen.

  9) I guess it depends on who you call an "Adyar" writer or teacher. 
  Probably the most well-known piece from the "Adyar" camp is "There is
  No Religion Higher Than Truth" by E.L. Gardner
  (__http://hpb.narod.http://hpb.http://_ (http://hpb.narod.http://hpb.narhtt_) 
  (_http://hpb.narod.http://hpb.narhtt_ (http://hpb.narod.ru/NoReligion.htm) 
  ) ). 
  As a member of the British
  Section, Gardner lays out a comparison between various teachings of
  HPB and CW Leadbeater. In regard to the teaching of later
  "commentators" perhaps the issue is one of not having anything new to
  say vs. not saying anything. In the Adyar tradition, virtually
  everything is an expansion on the writings of CWL. Now that being
  said, there are some fine exceptions, such as "The Divine Plan" by
  Geoffrey Barborka, and "The Reader's Guide to the Mahatma Letters" by
  Virginia Hanson. One other little known source, and perhaps one of
  the most wonderfully objective pieces I've ever seen was a video of
  the history of the Theosophical Movement, by the late John Cooper. He
  did a brilliant exposition on the various traditions within the
  Theosophical movement without being rude or condescending to any
  particular viewpoint or organization. This is something (IMHO) that
  all of the various organizations within the Theosophical movement
  should have in their libraries.

  I would like to analyze the entire issue of what is taught in the
  Theosophical Society from a different viewpoint. The autonomy of
  local groups is pretty absolute. The only requirement that I am aware
  of for groups is that they use "Theosophical materials" (presumably
  from the Adyar organization) in "Theosophy" classes.

  Morten, I agree very strongly with your view of the TS as an
  "investigatory" organization. A major portion of the issues we deal
  with now date back to the post-Coulomb period when HPB was in Europe
  and the ES was formed. As soon as this direct line to a "higher
  authority" was established with the Europeans, free-thought, and the
  investigatory nature of the TS diminished greatly. It's a funny
  phenomenon, slightly alluded to in the Mahatma Letters (3rd Ed. Letter
  16 "Devachan" Pg. 24) regarding the existence of a pair of undisclosed
  Skandhas. These two are associated, according to the letter, with
  "the efficacy of vain rights and ceremonies, in prayers and
  intercession"intercession"<WBR>. Perhaps it is the action of this att
  which is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs.

  I have one other question. Who are the finest scholars in the
  movement today? David Riegle, Daniel Caldwell, Paul Johnson, Joy
  Mills? Where is the output from these individuals, presumably experts
  in Theosophical writing? Who are they challenging in the world of
  science, religion and philosophy?

  Answer that question, and you'll have the answer to everything you
  asked above. The sad truth is that the Theosophical movement as a
  whole is quite a marginal movement, of little importance to anyone
  today aside from its own participants. Nobody really cares about the
  arguments made on the forums or in the magazines because we just talk
  to ourselves. In a sense, I can get that by going downtown and
  listening to the winos and drug addicts talk to the voices in their
  head. I guess, based on that, there are a number of hobbies one could
  engage in that are more likely to be of benefit to society or cause
  more damage.

  Perhaps if we stopped pretending to have all of the answers and got
  back to asking questions, such mundane little issues as membership,
  who is President, and what do we teach may become meaningful again.

  Joe

  --- In _theos-talk@--- In _theos---- In _theos-t_theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ 
  (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) ) , 
  "Morten Nymann Olesen"
  <global-theosophy@glo> wrote:
  >
  > Dear friends
  > 
  > My views are:
  > 
  > A new year is beginning in peoples minds.
  > 
  > It is now more than 133 years since the founding of the moderne
  visdom teachings - The Theosophical Society year 1875.
  > 
  > Status at Conventions occurs.
  > It could be well for members at TS Adyar to consider the following
  questions and words and their value.
  > 
  > 
  > H.P. Blavatsky said:
  > "...Contrast alone can enable us to appreciate things at their right
  value; and unless a judge compares notes and hears 
  > both sides he can hardly come to a correct decision." H.P.
  Blavatsky. The Theosophist, July, 1881, p. 218.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > *** THE QUESTIONS to CONSIDER ***
  > 
  > I would appreciate if anyone would care to answer the following
  questions, so that we may be able to know about TS Adyar more fully...
  > 
  > 1.
  > Who decides what kind of books and what books at all are being sold
  at Quest Books?
  > Who decides, what Bookshop and what books by what authors - TS Adyar
  promotes?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 
  > 2.
  > Who decides what kind of lectures are emphasised within TS branches?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 3.
  > Who decides what books one are allowed to lecture on?
  > Are lectures on comparative study of various authors allowed freely?
  > What is the present day policy and why?
  > 
  > 
  > 4.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs. C.
  W. Leadbeater allowed?
  > 
  > 5.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Annie Besant allowed?
  > 
  > 6.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Alice A. Bialey / Lucis Trust allowed?
  > 
  > 7.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs.
  Radha Burnier allowed?
  > 
  > 8.
  > Are lectures on commparative studies beteween H. P. Blavatsky vs. J.
  Krishnamurti allowed?
  > 
  > 9.
  > Have any TS Adyar Teacher ever done an effort in the direction of
  comparative study - large or small - between H. P. Blavatsky and all
  of the aboves techings? If not, why not?
  > 
  > 
  > 10.
  > In the old H. P. Blavatsky days - no false claims were permitted to
  go unchallanged for a longer time by H. P. Blavatsky herself. A clear
  stance on various new religious groups was - ALWAYS - given in the
  Theosophist and Lucifer etc. when the situation demanded it. - Is this
  what is happening today?
  > 
  > Are false claims being allowed to flourish within TS today?
  > 
  > 
  > - - -
  > 
  > If time permit me, I will in a study, and if no others will, seek to
  compare 
  > H. P. Blavatsky with all the above - C. W. Leadbeater. Annie Besant,
  J. Krishnamurti, Radha Burnier, Alice A. Bailey. And I will eventually
  publish my study before this my phycial body reach its death.
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > M. Sufilight
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >

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

  ************************<WBR>**New year...new news. Be the first to kno
  headlines. (_http://www.aol.http://wwwhttp://www.aol.http_ 
  (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) )

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

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

  **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making 
  headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026)

  [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