II would like to make it very clear, these comments do not apply to any specific individuals. In fact, it is very safe to say that among the contributors on this site are some of the warmest, most thoughtful folk I have ever encountered in this movement. It's an honor to be able to discuss, chat with and even work together with all of you who take the time to come to this site. You could spend your time and effort elsewhere and hopefully we are meeting your needs.

What I am discussing here, in general are several troubling memes that seem to have been with, and continue to infect the Theosophical movement. We are not relevant for many reasons and I have tried very hard over the last several years to understand the causes. Here is a summary of those memes, and a thought at the end on a concept common with many leading companies, called a Value Proposition.

So far there seem to be several memes common to the Theosophical movement.

a) Everyone was (and still is) out to get HPB.

See Paul Johnson's fine graphic on Blavatsky Searches on Google. Long term, it tells a very disturbing story. Before long few will be talking about HPB, much less mounting attacks.

b) The Theosophical Movement is openly hostile to questioning. If you do, prepare to become a pariah and labeled a non-believer or at least treated like one. Authority trumps reason or logic.

c) Theosophy has secret knowledge which must be hidden from the profane.

d) Theosophy is not about making people happy. Is there any self-help literature in the Theosophical tradition? Especially anything that is very practical and not loaded with unpronounceable words?

e) Helping people understand everyday life is of no concern to Theosophy/Theosophists.

f) The emotional or material needs of people are automatically considered greed by Theosophists.

To someone just becoming acquainted with our movement, what reactions and feelings do you think these type of memes engender? The reaction of most people who are NOT "true believers" upon finding out that the ES exists is one of shock, horror and indignation. This is a natural reaction.

Are these feelings those you would want your parents, siblings, children and co-workers and friends to have towards you, knowing that you are involved with a movement which demonstrates the above stated values? This is, of course, keeping in mind that most Theosophists are deathly afraid of telling non-Theosophists about Theosophy because of fear of retribution or simply ridicule.

In the world of business, there is this concept of a "Value Proposition". A Value Proposition states what a company seeks to provide their customers in return for payment of goods and services. A Value Proposition goes beyond saying that "I will sell you something for a certain price". More than that, a Value Proposition promises a number of behaviors and benefits that a company agrees to provide to customers in addition to the product. Typically this covers such things as environmental activism, commitments to various causes, and details of how customers should expect to be treated.

What is our Value Proposition? What should we be providing to our users, and that includes you, if you're reading this.

Views: 545

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The New Theosophical Society idea is of interest, especially when the ablest contemporary minds are attracted to this, perhaps a little more clarity on the "psychological key" part(?)
Dear friends, have a nice day!!!
M. Sufilight, thanks for sharing your experience. I've also had experiences of this kind and writing about them is not easy. I've been called "Messiah craze" many times, he, he, he... and I still can appreciate a good joke.
I know very little about "Alice A. Bailey's groups" but I've studied her books carefully. I think that these are really important books and that they deal more with the science of Psychology than with "Messiahs".
The main reason why I don't trust modern science is because there is not a psychology in it, so psychological diseases are increasing every year in the so-called "developed world". "Psyche" means soul... My opinion is that this "Psychological Key" can be found in AAB's books, which are the continuation of HPB's books. This idea seems to be taboo here... :-)
Well, just to allow anyone to call me "Messiah craze", I am writing now that from personal experience I know that Benjamin Creme's story about the emergence of Maitreya, the world teacher, aka "the Christ" is true. It is much easier to call me "Messiah craze" than to have a look at what Ben Creme says with an open mind and make your own thoughtful opinion about it... ;-)
If I think that something is true, I present it as true. This doesn't mean that I want to be dogmatic or that I put myself above anyone.
Blessings from the Heart to everyone!!!
[M. Sufilight: (One who experienced H. P. Blavatsky's body materialize in his appartment year 2008 here in Denmark.)]

[Martin Euser: "Nevertheless, I 'm curious as to what she told you. Anything we should know? This is too good an opportunity to miss."]

R.I.: "Yes, and in particular, did she say anything about me again?"
Richard, this joke is too easy to make me smile.
Ferran, this smile is too easy to make me joke.
Dear friends and steel styl

My views are:

steel styl wrote:
"The New Theosophical Society idea is of interest, especially when the ablest contemporary minds are attracted to this, perhaps a little more clarity on the "psychological key" part(?)"

M. Sufilight says:
Let us for now call it the "new" Theosophical Society.
The psychological key was given officially by H. P. Blavatsky, but had in fact existed ages before the 19th century. From reading the Secret Doctrine - Blavatsky also use the word "moral" in connection withn that particular key (See The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 374). This key refers to Esoteric Psychology (or spiritual Psychology) as to be compared with Exoteric Psychology - as given today by our materialistic psychologists. At least this is what one are lead to think by reading Blavatsky's The Secret Doctrine. - So when I talk about using Psychology - I am talking about studying it in an esoterical light - like The Theosophical Society of old studied with EMPHASIS on the Eastern Philosophies in an esoterical light and chiefly those from India.

I will in the below throw a few quotes and after that I throw a commetn or two. It is a bit lengthy, but bear with me, because the subject is a huge one.

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
Because, we say, science has only one key—the key of matter—to open the mysteries of nature withal, while occult philosophy has seven keys and explains that which science fails to see.
(Secret Doctrine Vol.I. p. 155)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"(a) The idea that things can cease to exist and still BE, is a fundamental one in Eastern psychology."
(Secret Doctrine Vol.I. p. 54)


H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"These states—once the spirit of Esoteric philosophy is grasped—become absolutely necessary from simple logical and analogical considerations. Physical Science having now ascertained, through its department of Chemistry, the invariable law of this evolution of atoms—from their "protylean" state down to that of a physical and then a chemical particle (or molecule)—cannot well reject the same as a general law. And once it is forced by its enemies—Metaphysics and Psychology *—out of its alleged impregnable strongholds, it will find it more difficult than it now appears to refuse room in the Spaces of SPACE to Planetary Spirits (gods), Elementals, and even the Elementary Spooks or Ghosts, and others."
.....
"* Let not the word "psychology" cause the reader to carry his thought by an association of ideas to modern "Psychologists," so-called, whose idealism is another name for uncompromising materialism, and whose pretended Monism is no better than a mask to conceal the void of final annihilation—even of consciousness. Here Spiritual psychology is meant."
(Secret Doctrine Vol.I. p. 620)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
" But it is time to leave modern physical science and turn to the psychological and metaphysical side of the question. We would only remark that to the "two very reasonable postulates" required by the eminent lecturer, "to get a glimpse of some few of the secrets so darkly hidden" behind "the door of the Unknown"—a third should be added ‡—lest no battering at it should avail; the postulate that Leibnitz, in his speculations, stood on a firm groundwork of fact and truth. The admirable and thoughtful synopsis of these speculations—as given by John Theodore Merz in his "Leibnitz"—shows how nearly he has brushed the hidden secrets of esoteric Theogony in his Monadologie. And yet that philosopher has hardly risen in his speculations above the first planes, the lower principles of the Cosmic Great Body. His theory soars to no loftier heights than those of the manifested life, self-consciousness and intelligence, leaving the regions of the earlier post-genetic mysteries untouched, as his ethereal fluid is post-planetary.

But this third postulate will hardly be accepted by the modern men
——————————————————————————————
* "The Lord is a consuming fire." . . . "In him was life, and the life was the light of men."

† Which if separated ALCHEMICALLY would yield the Spirit of Life, and its Elixir.

‡ Foremost of all, the postulate that there is no such thing in Nature as inorganic substances or bodies. Stones, minerals, rocks, and even chemical "atoms" are simply organic units in profound lethargy. Their coma has an end and their inertia becomes activity.

627
LEIBNITZ AND OCCULTISM.

of Science; and, like Descartes, they will prefer keeping to the properties of external things, which, like extension, are incapable of explaining the phenomenon of motion, rather than accept the latter as an independent Force. They will never become anti-Cartesian in this generation; nor will they admit that "this property of inertia is not a purely geometrical property, that it points to the existence of something in external bodies which is not extension merely." This is Leibnitz's idea as analyzed by Mertz, who adds that he called this something Force, and maintained that external things were endowed with Force, and that in order to be the bearers of this force they must have a substance, for they are not lifeless and inert masses, but the centres and bearers of form, a purely esoteric claim, since force was with Leibnitz an active principle, the division between mind and matter disappearing by this conclusion. But—

"The mathematical and dynamical inquiries of Leibnitz would not have led to the same result in the mind of a purely scientific inquirer. But Leibnitz was not a scientific man in the modern sense of the word. Had he been so, he might have worked out the conception of energy, defined mathematically the ideas of force and mechanical work, and arrived at the conclusion that even for purely scientific purposes it is desirable to look upon force, not as a primary quantity, but as a quantity derived from some other value."

But, luckily for truth—

"Leibnitz was a philosopher; and as such he had certain primary principles, which biassed him in favour of certain conclusions, and his discovery that external things were substances endowed with force was at once used for the purpose of applying these principles.

One of these principles was the law of continuity, the conviction that all the world was connected, that there were no gaps and chasms which could not be bridged over. The contrast of extended thinking substances was unbearable to him. The definition of the extended substances had already become untenable: it was natural that a similar inquiry was made into the definition of mind, the thinking substance. . ."

The divisions made by Leibnitz, however incomplete and faulty from the standpoint of Occultism, show a spirit of metaphysical intuition to which no man of science, not Descartes—not even Kant—has ever reached. With him there existed ever an infinite gradation of thought. Only a small portion of the contents of our thoughts, he said, rises into the clearness of apperception, "into the light of perfect consciousness." Many remain in a confused or obscure state, in the state of "perceptions;" but they are there; . . .

Descartes denied soul to the animal, Leibnitz endowed, as the Occultists do, "the whole creation with mental life, this being, according to him, capable of infinite gradations.""
(Secret Doctrine Vol.I. p. 626-627)

*******
M. Sufilight with some comments:
First of all, I will say the same as Master Morya wrote in Mahatma Letter no. 47:
"Europe is a large place but the world is bigger yet. The sun of Theosophy must shine for all, not for a part. There is more of this movement than you have yet had an inkling of, and the work of the T.S. is linked in with similar work that is secretly going on in all parts of the world. "

In the above quote by Blavatsky we find that the esoteric psychology clearly is related to the fact of viewing psychology as a kind of substance, like the physical is viewed by science today. And esoterical psychology is therefore non-materialistic psychology - and the psychological key is hidden in this movement or development from the materialistic views to the non-materialistic views on psychological issues - and this is nevessarily found analogically on various levels of consciousness.

To know about your own prejudices about a book like for instance The Secret Doctrine, and your assumptions about it, and your more or less emotional attractions to it (saying I want to deal with it, not saying or at all knowing: I spiritually need to deal with it) or - very important your lack of these psychological blockages - are clearly a part of the Psychological Key to the Secret Doctrine - especially when they are viewed from an esoterical or theosophical non-materialistic angle. - These psychological blockages or the knowledge about them are viewed on various levels of consciousness according to the wisdom teachings.- And not only from an intellectual level. - And there are clearly a number of other blockages to consider in the same manner - and some of them are known on their materialistic levels by modern psychology today. (In Blavatsky's days - modern psychology was only known by the few - despite it is known that the Sufis Ibn El Arabi (known in the West as Doctor Maximus; d. 1240) and Al-Gazali (d. 1111) both wrote about psychological states, dream theory and archetypes many years before Freud and Jung born. Other Sufis can be mentioned. In in India we find many writings on the same centuries before Freud and Jung and various Sufis. In Buddhism we find information of the same kind (some of you reading this know the names of the papers better than I, and you could help other readers about this issue) - and the same with Hindu certain scriptures.

We also will have to say by the use of logical thinking, that the Psychological Key to The Secret Doctrine, that Key which unlocks the Psychological aspects of the Wisdom Teachings are hidden in what we can call Esoteric Psychology. Yet, such a Psychological teaching cannot be merely intellectual in nature, it must necessarily reach higher than stimulating the intellect alone and not confuse the intellect (and emotions) with something higher - something beginners often do - unknowingly. - We can also say that the Allegorical Key and the Analogical Key is very connected to the Psychological Key and that they also at least sometimes operate as a part of it.

Such a teaching can be found in Zen-Buddhism and in Sufi teachings like the Mulla Nasrudin Tales, or those about Hodja, and Birbal etc. etc. Authors like Idries Shah and D. T. Suzuki, and others not named, are modern examples on teachers using the Psychological Keys to unlock the the Secret Doctrine - and especially also the version given by H. P. Blavatsky and her Masters.
And studying books about Mind Control and cults in an esoteric light like the Eastern Philosophies was studied in the past in The Theosophical Society (1875-1891) might be helpful - so to steer clear from the constant tendencies to secterian behaviour and - even dogmatic and bible-collection-theosophical and politically inclined teachings.

Carl G. Jung said of Suzuki:
"Suzuki's works on Zen Buddhism are among the best contributions to the knowledge of living Buddhism… We cannot be sufficiently grateful to the author, first for the fact of his having brought Zen closer to Western understanding, and secondly for the manner in which he has achieved this task."
(D.T. Suzuki An Introduction to Zen Buddhism , Foreword by C. Jung. New York: Grove Press, p.9. 1964)

Doris Lessing (Nobel Prize Winner in Literature) wrote about Idries Shah:
"Shah has said often that a main difficulty in teaching is to prevent the material from being made into a system, yet another rigid framework of ideas, or a cult. This will happen in due course: it always does. Meanwhile here is the real thing, alive and full of juice and energy."
.......
"He was a good friend to me, and my teacher. It is not easy to sum up 30 odd years of learning under a Sufi teacher, for it has been a journey with surprises all the way, a process of shedding illusions and preconceptions. One way of putting it could be that it brings to life the familiar words, the set phrases, the "labels" used by all the mystics.

Shah remarked that "God is Love" can be words scrawled on a placard carried by an old tramp in the street, or the revelation of the greatest truth, with a thousand changes of meaning in between, and it is the thousand changes that are the experience of the learner. "
.......
"It takes a long time, perhaps years, to understand the Sufi claim that emotionalism may be a barrier. This is put in the Mulla Nasrudin joke, thus: Nasrudin summons the doctor. "My temperature is over 110." "You don't need me," says the doctor. "Call the fire engine."

Nasrudin is a joke figure created by the Sufis to carry their message across frontiers, and many of our jokes originated in the Nasrudin corpus. We value emotions and emotionalism, an attitude caricatured in the television serial Star Trek. Mr. Spock is deficient because he has no emotions, but real people have emotions and are on a higher level. But emotion with us is a word that lumps together everything from puppy warmth to the highest reaches of intuition."
.......
"Idries Shah writes in English. He has caused to be published or published himself Sufi classics considered still relevant, or mixed his own work with material from the past. All Sufi teachers have done this. It is hard to categorize Shah's books, or any Sufi book. They are not academic, nor like any genre we are familiar with. His books are very varied in style and method. Some Sufi books are written by the "scatter" method, where the material is arranged in such a way that "impacts" reach the reader by-passing the conditioned self, which is such a very efficient censor. A good example of "scatter" is in The Sufis, the book in which Shah introduced the new appearance of the Sufi Way in the West. People ask, "Does Sufism have a bible?" No, it cannot, because of their continual updating of the material, but this book is for our time a classic, a compendium of information, historical material, stories and poems and jokes."
(Collected from the Internet. One of them is here: http://www.sufis.org/lessing_commandingself.html - Try also: "Doris Lessing on the Sufi Way, 1 of 3" - Time: 8:39; search it on Youtube.)
- - - - - - -

A few more quotes from Blavatsky somewhat old but very wise hand...

And Blavatsky said about the secrets of the Wisdom Teachings:
"There were portions of the Secret science that for incalculable ages had to remain concealed from the profane gaze. But this was because to impart to the unprepared multitude secrets of such tremendous importance, was equivalent to giving a child a lighted candle in a powder magazine." (Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. xxxv)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"Our best modern novelists, who are neither Theosophists nor Spiritualists, begin to have, nevertheless, very psychological and suggestively Occult dreams: witness Mr. Louis Stephenson and his Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, than which no grander psychological essay on Occult lines exists."
(Secret Doctrine, Vol. II, p. 317)

And Blavatsky wrote:
"It is not against zoological and anthropological discoveries, based on the fossils of man and animal, that every mystic and believer in a divine soul inwardly revolts, but only against the uncalled-for conclusions built on preconceived theories and made to fit in with certain prejudices. Their premises may or may not be always true; and as some of these theories live but a short life, the deductions therefrom must ever be one-sided with materialistic evolutionists. Yet it is on the strength of such very ephemeral authority, that most of the men of science frequently receive undue honours where they deserve them the least.*"
(Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 636-637)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"Therefore, we can give it only from its philosophical and intellectual planes, unlocked with three keys respectively — for the last four keys of the seven that throw wide open the portals to the mysteries of Nature are in the hands of the highest Initiates, and cannot be divulged to the masses at large — not in this, our century, at any rate."
.....
"This proves once more that the so-called "myths," in order to be at least approximately dealt with in any degree of justice, have to be closely examined from all their aspects. In truth, every one of the seven Keys has to be used in its right place, and never mixed with the others, if we would unveil the entire cycle of mysteries. In our day of dreary soul-killing materialism, the ancient priest Initiates have become, in the opinion of our learned generations, the synonyms of clever impostors, kindling the fires of superstition in order to obtain an easier sway over the minds of men. This is an unfounded calumny,generated by scepticism and uncharitable thoughts."
(Secret Doctrine, Vol. II, p. 517)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
Some fifteen years ago, the writer was the first to repeat, after the Kabalists, the wise Commandments in the Esoteric Catechism. "Close thy mouth, lest thou shouldst speak of this (the mystery), and thy heart, lest thou shouldst think aloud; and if thy heart has escaped thee, bring it back to its place, for such is the object of our alliance." (Sepher Jezireh, Book of Creation.) And again:—"This is a secret which gives death: close thy mouth lest thou shouldst reveal it to the vulgar; compress thy brain lest something should escape from it and fall outside." (Rules of Initiation.)

A few years later, a corner of the Veil of Isis had to be lifted; and now another and a larger rent is made. . . .

But old and time-honoured errors—such as become with every day more glaring and self-evident—stand arrayed in battle-order now, as they did then. Marshalled by blind conservatism, conceit and prejudice, they are constantly on the watch, ready to strangle every truth, which, awakening from its age-long sleep, happens to knock for admission. Such has been the case ever since man became an animal. That this proves in every case moral death to the revealers, who bring to light any of these old, old truths, is as certain as that it gives LIFE and REGENERATION to those who are fit to profit even by the little that is now revealed to them."'
(Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, p. 299)

I am saying:
Therefore depending on the level of consciousness, - we always find that the Secrets protects themselves.

All the above are of course just my views.
I do hope, that it was a helpful answer.

M. Sufilight
Dear friends and Ferran Sanz Orriols

My views are:

Ferran Sanz Orriols wrote:
"I think that these are really important books and that they deal more with the science of Psychology than with "Messiahs"."

M. Sufilight says:
Are you able to provide some evidence showing the validity of this view?
And what values are they forwarding so to make you say that they are important?

Ferran Sanz Orriols wrote:
"Well, just to allow anyone to call me "Messiah craze", I am writing now that from personal experience I know that Benjamin Creme's story about the emergence of Maitreya, the world teacher, aka "the Christ" is true. It is much easier to call me "Messiah craze" than to have a look at what Ben Creme says with an open mind and make your own thoughtful opinion about it... ;-)"

M. Sufilight says:
First. Well, I am not calling anyone a Messiah Craze.
But, I would like to know which values you are following when promoting the Benjamin Creme teachings?

The following are a few views of mine:
I am writing these words to be of service to altruism and nothing else.
I will have to say: That those who panders on beginner-Seekers prejudices and which seek to make these beginner-Seekers use up precious energy and time - and make these same beginner-Seekers seek to persuade the Avatar of the Age to walking among men in the physical - and seek to drag the many Masters down to the physical, (as if THEY the ordinary- as beginner Seekers - cunningly know what is the proper thing to do for a Master and an Avatar of the Age), --- while at the same time saying that this Avatar already is here in the physical, however just in Asia --- those I will indeed call either wellmeaning ignorants, if not non-altruistic and promoters of a Messiah-craze - ( See for instance: "A Treatise on Cosmic Fire", p. 214 and 754, - and "The Externalization of the Hierarchy", p. 489 (May Christ return to Earth) + 590 (They will prepare and work for conditions in the world in which Christ can move freely among men, in bodily Presence; He need not then remain in His present retreat in Central Asia.))

The reason for this follows....

A few words by M. Sufilight about Messiah walking among men in the physical:
People are always looking for leaders; that does not mean that
this is the time for a leader. The problems that a leader would be
able to resolve have not been identified. Nor does the clamor mean
that those who cry out are suitable followers. Most of the people who
demand a leader seem to have some baby's idea of what a leader
should do. The idea that a leader will walk in and we will all
recognize him and follow him and everybody will be happy strikes me
as a strangely immature atavism.
Most of these people, I believe,
want not a leader but excitement. I doubt that those who cry the
loudest would obey a leader if there was one. Talk is cheap, and a
lot of the talk comes from millions of old washerwomen.
(Maybe some the leaders at various theosophical groups would consider the above words.)

M. Sufilight asks:
Dear Ferran Sanz Orriols I would like to know in what manner your claimed knowledge arrived and reached the conclusion that Benjamin Creme is telling the truth about his Maitreya and his more elevated Cosmic Christ named Sathya Sai Baba? (Benjamin Creme on Sathya Sai Baba: http://www.share-international.org/maitreya/Ma_others.htm)

I will throw a few words from H. P. Blavatsky about her views on prayer...

H. P. Blavatsky wrote some very interesting words:
"ON GOD AND PRAYER

ENQUIRER. Do you believe in God?
THEOSOPHIST. That depends what you mean by the term.

ENQUIRER. I mean the God of the Christians, the Father of Jesus, and the Creator: the Biblical God of Moses, in short.
THEOSOPHIST. In such a God we do not believe. We reject the idea of a personal, or an extra-cosmic and anthropomorphic God, who is but the gigantic shadow of man, and not of man at his best, either. The God of theology, we say — and prove it — is a bundle of contradictions and a logical impossibility. Therefore, we will have nothing to do with him. "
.......
"IS IT NECESSARY TO PRAY?

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" — 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. 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."
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 61-68)

And I am in agreement with H. P. Blavatsky's views in the above quotes.
(It was more easy to copy her words than to write the same words or almost the same.)

All the above are just my views.
I do not claim I know all and everything, I might be in error.

M. Sufilight
Dear M. Sufilight:
I'll try to answer the best I can. I, too, do not claim I know all and everything, I, too, might be in error. (My friend, please call me just Ferran ;-)
Of course, I cannot prove anything, just like you cannot prove that HPB's visit to you was real. I shall not go into details of my "strange" experiences. Any experience may prove anything only to the one who passes through it.
The value of any book can be discovered only by reading it. The first two volumes of "A Treatise on the Seven Rays" by AAB in my opinion deal with esoteric psychology and they have greatly helped me to understand what's all about (or to go totally insane, as some people think, opinions differ, of course:)
The most important point I have found in what Ben Creme says is the NEED to learn to share. Milions of people are suffering every day because we humans have not yet learnt to share.
Maitreya is not a leader but a teacher. He does not accept followers but students. Of course, as following is much easier than studying - I mean studying and practicing, a practical study- many people in Ben Creme's movement and organization are "following" instead of thinking for themselves. It happens everywhere. Maitreya is not the Messiah. This word belongs to the Jewish tradition and Maitreya belongs to the whole humanity. He is one of us, one who loves his brothers and sisters, one who suffers with our suffering, that is just plain human compassion, he is not someone coming from far away.
Why is he here? Because of those milions of people that are suffering needlessly. This is in my opinion the most important reason. We, for the first time in history, thanks to scientific and technical progress, have reached a point in human evolution in which it is POSSIBLE to feed all human population, to give everyone what he or she needs to live as a human being. Human rights have been proclaimed, so it seems the time to make them real. Psychological diseases in the so called "developed" part of the world will keep on increasing unless resources are shared for the benefit of the whole mankind.
Since I was 12, when I realized the inhumanity of the present economic and political system, I think that it is a shame for all us who live in the "rich" countries to let people who live in poor countries suffer and die of starvation just because of our complacency. I do not care much about "avatars" or "elevated beings", it is the aspiration for justice that is really important for me.
As you wrote, it is funny to see that the most noticed point is about "avatars" and not the need of sharing and justice.
(Yes, I think that Sai Baba is really a "big one" but this not the point I want to write about, and yes, I noticed that in this web there are videos that show him as a hoaxer, this is freedom, everyone may have his or her opinion.)
It is true that Jesus' words about "the Father which is in secret" have not yet been understood by most people.
I'm sorry I have not the time to write more right now, I don't have a PC of my own...
blessings from the Heart to everyone!!!
Dear Ferran and friends

My views are:

I write the following seeking to promote altruism...
The following can be taken as a hypothesis or a set of views, which perhaps later can be verified by the individual.

Farran wrote:
"I'll try to answer the best I can. I, too, do not claim I know all and everything, I, too, might be in error. (My friend, please call me just Ferran ;-)
Of course, I cannot prove anything, just like you cannot prove that HPB's visit to you was real. I shall not go into details of my "strange" experiences. Any experience may prove anything only to the one who passes through it."

M. Sufilight says:
Yes. I can only agree with such a view.

Farran wrote:
"The first two volumes of "A Treatise on the Seven Rays" by AAB in my opinion deal with esoteric psychology and they have greatly helped me to understand what's all about (or to go totally insane, as some people think, opinions differ, of course:)"

M. Sufilight says:
I am happy to learn that you have found something, which have helped you. And this is important.
But, the question being raised is whether the Alice A. Bailey books - oppose (theosophical) values on altruism - i.e. especially the two thick volumes "The reappearence of the Christ" and "The Externalization of the Hierarchy". - These two volumes namely have heavy emphasis on the use of the Great Invocation (www.lucistrust.org/invocation - there we find Maitreya is called the Messiah) given by Alice A. Bailey (AAB), and, there she (or her Master D. K.) says the following while interpreting a vital part of the Great Invocation:

"1. May Christ return to earth. This return must not be understood in its usual connotation and its well-known mystical, Christian sense. Christ has never left the earth. What is referred to is the externalization of the Hierarchy and its exoteric appearance on earth. The Hierarchy will eventually, under its Head, the Christ, function openly and visibly on earth. This will happen when the purpose of the divine will and the plan which will implement it is better understood and the period of adjustment, of world enlightenment and of reconstruction has made real headway. This period begins at the San Francisco Conference (hence its major importance) and will move very slowly at first. It will take time but the Hierarchy thinks not in terms of years and of brief cycles (though long to humanity), but in terms of events and the expansion of consciousness."
(The The Externalization of the Hierarchy, p. 488-491)

M. Sufilight says:
To this I will throw the below words by H. P. Blavatsky and when compared with the above by Alice A. Bailey (and her named master D.K.) one will see a clear opposition in views. I will morally have to follow my conscience and aim at not killing self-reliance in people through the teachings given by Alice A. Bailey in the above. Others might promote a killing of self-reliance like the Alice A. bailey book seem to advocate; I will however find myself opposing such a teaching - just like H. P. Blavatsky mentioned in the below quotes.

Seek to compare the above AAB quote and the Great Invocation given by Alice A. Bailey - with the below quotes by H. P. Blavatsky, and let your conscience decide.

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"It is, however, right that each member, once he believes in the existence of such Masters, should try to understand what their nature and powers are, to reverence Them in his heart, to draw near to Them, as much as in him lies, and to open up for himself conscious communication with the guru to whose bidding he has devoted his life. THIS CAN ONLY BE DONE BY RISING TO THE SPIRITUAL PLANE WHERE THE MASTERS ARE, AND NOT BY ATTEMPTING TO DRAW THEM DOWN TO OURS."
(Blavatsky's Collected Writings, Vol. XII, p. 492)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"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 beings―i. 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."
.......
"ENQUIRER. One argument more; an argument, moreover, much used by some Christians. They say, "I feel that I am not able to conquer any passions and weaknesses in my own strength. But when I pray to Jesus Christ I feel that he gives me strength and that in His power I am able to conquer."

THEOSOPHIST. No wonder. If "Christ Jesus" is God, and one independent and separate from him who prays, of course everything is, and must be possible to "a mighty God." But, then, where's the merit, or justice either, of such a conquest? Why should the pseudo-conqueror be rewarded for something done which has cost him only prayers? Would you, even a simple mortal man, pay your labourer a full day's wage if you did most of his work for him, he sitting under an apple tree, and praying to you to do so, all the while? This idea of passing one's whole life in moral idleness, and having one's hardest work and duty done by another―whether God or man―is most revolting to us, as it is most degrading to human dignity. "
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 70-74)

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"THEOSOPHIST. If we had money, we would found schools which would turn out something else than reading and writing candidates for starvation. Children should above all be taught self-reliance, love for all men, altruism, mutual charity, and more than anything else, to think and reason for themselves. We would reduce the purely mechanical work of the memory to an absolute minimum, and devote the time to the development and training of the inner senses, faculties and latent capacities. We would endeavour to deal with each child as a unit, and to educate it so as to produce the most harmonious and equal unfoldment of its powers, in order that its special aptitudes should find their full natural development. We should aim at creating free men and women, free intellectually, free morally, unprejudiced in all respects, and above all things, unselfish. And we believe that much if not all of this could be obtained by proper and truly theosophical education. "
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 270-271)

M. Sufilight ask:
My question is, whether one will be able to do what you and Benjamin Creme call "share", when one at the same time promote such a strange doctrine as the Great Invocation, seemingly killing self-reliance in the individual, and given by Alice A. Bailey and covered in two of her volumes?

I find it much more important to point out the fact that self-reliance is important, and that each individual are embodiments of love - i.e. - the divine recides within each human - and is not to be sought outside it or through seeking to drag the Avatar of the Age (and several Masters) down to each individuals more or less emotional level of thought. Such AAB invocative attempts are, as I see it, constituting a fruitless teaching and even a pernicious one killing self-reliance in the individual.
But others might know something I do not - and then I will ask them to enlighten me to what good the Great Invocation is to Esoteric Psychology when it seemingly kills self-reliance in the individual?

Even so we can agree, that to promote the hypothesis of the eastern doctrines about karma and reincarnation is more in accordance with altruism than to promote the various dogmas of atonement which even today is to be found in dogmatic religions.

All the above are just my views.
I might be in error. If so, - then please let me know.

M. Sufilight
Dear M.Sufilight and friends:
I am writing in this site trying to contribute to common good, no more, no less.
Maitreya may be called the Messiah by those who are waiting for the Messiah, most probably people belonging to the Jewish tradition. As I don't belong to that tradition, out of respect I don't think that I should write about the Messiah.
Also, I am not a member of Lucis Trust or Arcane School, and I am not a member of Share International, either. I do respect Ben Creme for his work, which I think is authentic, but he is not my leader or teacher.
I started a thread in this site on "The Great Invocation as a tool for service" that has received no answer yet. Any comment will be welcome.
I don't think that real prayer kills self-reliance, and I understand by real prayer that which is meant by HPB in her Matthew gospel quote that you provided above.
Of course, it is up to the individual disciple to work on him/herself to rise to where the Wise Ones dwell, and this is clearly stated in a note in the beginning of most AAB's books ("a declaration of the Tibetan" in which he presents himself as a disciple, not as a master, and disclaims himself of any authority, just like HPB did.)
Any word, sentence or book may be misinterpreted, it seems something in human nature as it is today, but anyone can notice that in the GI there is no "my" or "mine" so I don't know how it can increase selfishness and egotism. It seems an invocation for common good, doesn't it?
The GI is not about dragging down Master's energy to my individual level but to bringing down it to those who are at need (which are many) and works as long as I am able to keep focused on mental level, if I let my attention drop to emotions, the energetic connection is lost. Proper use of the GI is not an individual affair but a grupal effort. There are many groups nowadays in the world that use the GI as a grupal effort in service and I belong to one of them. Each group is completely autonomous. The only requisite is to will to spend some time regularly in a grupal effort for common good. This practice is called "Transmission Meditation" in Ben Creme's web.
I don't call Maitreya an "avatar" (in this point I differ from Ben Creme and AAB) : he is no more and no less than a perfected human being, and a perfected human being is still a human being like any of us. He really helps, but he will not "perfect" me. It is my own choice and effort to do so.
Did HPB loose her self-reliance because of the help she received from the Masters to write her books and in her other work? Did she loose her self- reliance when she was healed to be able to "finish" the SD?
When I write share, I mean share, not "share". I understand sharing as the plain practical side of brotherhood. I am not interested in "brotherhood" but in real brotherhood among humanity, which will only be real when human rights are real, not merely written in a solemn paper.
Sharing is the main principle of my daily life, it was so before knowing about Ben Creme or Maitreya and it would be so if I had never heard about that. I see it as the most natural way of life. Has anyone his own air to breathe? Has anyone his own Sun to give him his particular life-force? Has anyone his own planet, only for him?
We all need right human relationships and we all suffer because of the lack of them.
I do think that the "divine wisdom" (theosophy) is one, beyond any particular mindset or personal perspective, and that we all share it. It is inside all of us humans and it is difficult to let it shine.
As yesterday, I don't have the time to write anymore, I share the PC I'm writing with and my time is over...
Blessings from the Heart to everyone!!!
Dear Ferran

My views are:

I do mean well and I ask when I do not understand what is being forwarded.

Ferran wrote:
"I am writing in this site trying to contribute to common good, no more, no less."

M. Sufilight says:
I like that view.

Ferran wrote:
"The GI is not about dragging down Master's energy to my individual level but to bringing down it to those who are at need (which are many) and works as long as I am able to keep focused on mental level, if I let my attention drop to emotions, the energetic connection is lost. Proper use of the GI is not an individual affair but a grupal effort. There are many groups nowadays in the world that use the GI as a grupal effort in service and I belong to one of them. "

M. Sufilight says:
I do find your view to be wellmeaning. But this view of yours are, as far as I understand the below words written by Alice A. Bailey, not be in accordance with these same words.

How will you explain this?

Alice A. Bailey's so-called Master D.K. wrote:
""1. May Christ return to earth. This return must not be understood in its usual connotation and its well-known mystical, Christian sense. Christ has never left the earth. What is referred to is the externalization of the Hierarchy and its exoteric appearance on earth. The Hierarchy will eventually, under its Head, the Christ, function openly and visibly on earth. "
(The The Externalization of the Hierarchy, p. 488-491)

As I see it:
The above is clearly all about an attempt to drag the Avatar of the Age and the Masters down to each humans more or less emotional level - in the physical. - Is this not true?

- And, I find that, many AAB groups totally ignore the similarities between this Invoaction doctrine and the Christian's prayers. Both of them are attempts, which are pernicious according to Blavatsky. - Is this not true?

H. P. Blavatsky wrote:
"It is, however, right that each member, once he believes in the existence of such Masters, should try to understand what their nature and powers are, to reverence Them in his heart, to draw near to Them, as much as in him lies, and to open up for himself conscious communication with the guru to whose bidding he has devoted his life. THIS CAN ONLY BE DONE BY RISING TO THE SPIRITUAL PLANE WHERE THE MASTERS ARE, AND NOT BY ATTEMPTING TO DRAW THEM DOWN TO OURS."
(Blavatsky's Collected Writings, Vol. XII, p. 492)

Why should we waste time and energy telling the Avatar of the Age what to do and to walk about visibly in the physical, as if all humans would learn from this and let alone recognize such an Avatar? And why do this, when such a wise being already know what to do, and already know it before we ask?

Blavatsky wrote:
"Why should the pseudo-conqueror be rewarded for something done which has cost him only prayers? "
...
"This idea of passing one's whole life in moral idleness, and having one's hardest work and duty done by another―whether God or man―is most revolting to us, as it is most degrading to human dignity. "
(The Key to Theosophy, p. 70-74)

We should rather act wisely and with compassion, when we meditate, instead of - mechanically by the use of rituals - seeking to make ourselves more wise than the Masters and the Avatar of the Age - by telling them to show themselves visibly on the earth in the physical (as stated by AAB in the above) - when it is a fact that they know much better WHEN and HOW (physically or non-physically) we and all humans either individually or more or less collectively need attention or not.

- - -
Why should the pseudo-conqueror be rewarded for something done which has cost him only prayers? This is as I understand it, not in accordance with the Law of Karma.

Why should emphasis on the Divine within each human be down-watered and exchanged for such a dualistic and anthropomorphic doctrine as the Great Invocation clearly is?

- - -
And now, nother Himalayan issue...

Why should one as a theosophical seeker following the original values given in 1875-1891 trust an author of books, which falsly claims that it was Alice A. Bailey's so-called Master D.K. who wrote large parts of the Secret Doctrine, when this statement is contradicted several times by both Master Morya, Master KH, Blavatsky, Constance Wachtmeister and others?

Try to compare the following... A, B, C and D with E.

* * * A * * *
The Writing of The Secret Doctrine
By Kirby Van Mater
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/invit-sd/invsd-4.htm

* * * B * * *
Reminiscences of H. P. Blavatsky (Chapter 5)
http://blavatskyarchives.com/wachtmeister/wachtmeisterrem32.htm

* * * C * * *
Modern Theosophy Origins and Intentions
"Another witness to such a phenomenon (during H.P.B's stay in Würzburg) was Dr Hübbe-Schleiden who writes, I saw a good deal of the well-known blue K.H. handwriting as corrections and annotations on her manuscript as well as in books that lay occasionally on her desk. And I noticed this principally in the morning before she had commenced to work. I slept on the couch in her study after she had withdrawn for the night and the couch stood only a few feet from her desk. I remember well my astonishment one morning when I got up to find a great many pages of foolscap covered with that blue pencil handwriting lying on her own manuscript, at her place on her desk. How these pages got there I do not know, but I did not see them before I went to sleep, and no person had been bodily in the room during the night, for I am a light sleeper. [Reminiscences, 112/3]"
(http://www.blavatskytrust.org.uk/html/trilogy_sd.htm)


* * * D * * *
Here we have Blavatsky 's words about D.K.'s lack of grammar:
"Letter LIV
[Sent from Wurzburg. 1885 (?1886)
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/damodar/dam6.htm


- - - Now compare with the below assertions by AAB - - -
* * * E * * *
See the following places, where AAB quite falsely claims that D. K. was behind the Secret Doctrine written by Blavatsky guided by the Masters M and KH:
- Alice A. Bailey - "Initiation - Human and Solar", p. 58
- Alice A. Bailey - "The Rays and Initiations", page 255
- Alice A. Bailey - "The Externalisation of the Hierarchy", page 685
- Alice A. Bailey - "Esoteric Healing", p. 521, 536(?), og 565

I have sought to explain at least some of the reasons on why I disagree with certain of the values given by Alice A. Bailey, and why I find that Blavatsky and others also do that. And I find that if the Alice A. Bailey groups would do more officially on comparative studying on equal terms with non-dogmatic authors of various kinds - they would do much better in promoting the wisdom teachings as they were given in the past, as well as the present. It is not the number of followers which are important, but the quality in the teaching and the ability to listen to other theosophical groups in a non-secterian manner, which can be said to be of importance.

Let me add, that, I do understand parents who hesitate recommending Benjamin Creme's doctrines, when he speak so warmly about Sathya Sai Baba, who now stand accused for being a phaedophile - and who as a self-proclaimed Avatar (while claiming knowledge about the future) has allowed himself to be accused of it - one reason being that he at least one time (or more) allowed himself to be alone with a young boy for several minutes.

I will let each reader decide for themselves what they think about the values given by various AAB groups.
- - -

The Influence of Teaching
The influence of teaching is very little greater than the capacity of its pupils. When the pupils are mainly of a low quality, teaching momentum is lost, and the pupils dominate what is taught. The teacher has to select, therefore, who can best benefit, for the sake of all.
(Knowing How to Know, by Idries Shah)

Fools' Wisdom
"The wisdom of the fool is to imagine that he understands something just because he thinks it has been understood.
Fools' wisdom is something from which not only fools suffer.
The delinquency of the authority figure is when he tells people that they are understanding something when they are not.
The confusion of the result of this is that people imagine that they can understand anything because they can understand some things, and that if they are not idiots, they are in every way better than idiots."
(Knowing How to Know, by Idries Shah)

And I agree...

A few words:
Nearly all spiritual groups are quite often time-based and largely functions only in certain cultures, but not in others. Cults are most often based on a teaching given by one single author or a few. Comprehensive groups on wisdom teachings operate in a manner which emphasises comparative studying. Cults often avoid comparative studying. Comprehensive groups promotes each member or individual to form his or her own view and knowledge about the meaning of life and truth. The individual human cannot always be taught anything at any given moment in time and by the use of just one collection of books or set of teaching. There is simply a time and a place for these things. People in general cannot learn something they crave and want just because they want to learn about a particular subject. Sometimes preparatory study is necessary before real teaching can take place. The true theosophical groups are aware of this - and wait until the Seekers are ready for an open-minded approach to the wisdom teachings of all ages. Just a few views.

All the above are just my views.


from the heart
M. Sufilight
Excellent
thanks...

and the application of this key within the context of a "new" society...?....

RSS

Search Theosophy.Net!

Loading

What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


About
FAQ

Theosophy References


Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2022   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service