RE: Theosophy Reborn
Thank you Kim for that, perhaps my intent was too occluded and needs to be painted in brighter colours… I’ll have a read through again later and see where the thread may have become crossed with the one that you both pick up..
I have owned both a copy of The Voice of Silence and Doctrine of the Heart…
I am content in my own development – I can assure you of that, I have enough work on my plate to keep me personally busy for some time yet – most certainly! However my discontent is regarding the current movement of the TS – which IMHO is very, very minimal in respect of the third objective – as I described above. When the TS was the springboard for all if not most of the current spiritual / esoteric movements and groups, it is seemingly reticent now – as though its lost the wind for its sails… Yet with so many people all around the world and with 37 lodges throughout the UK – why and how can this condition prevail? That is my point – the how and why of the current TS… Honestly – its nothing to do with me personally – its just a curiosity issue that I have. I listed my own experiences of what I had done and where etc – in the original post simply to show that I have some grounds of experience to question the current TS condition – and I have not just ‘found' it and have decided to question it… there is some foundation to my opinion.
Your reference to the analogy of the chakra system and our spiritual evolution – I will respond to later – with a twist!
Sol.
RE: Theosophy Reborn
The Theosophical Society has done much good work over the years, but for practical courses in personal development, I think there is more happening at the College of Psychic Studies - Website [link= http://www.collegeofpsychicstudies.co.uk ]http://www.collegeofpsychicstudies.co.uk[/link]
RE: Theosophy Reborn
I've an abiding interest in the history and origins of Theosophy, and also in the fact that indeed Theosophy has forgotten those origins to a very large degree. Thirdly I'm interested in the Mahatmas or Masters who were the actual founders of Theosophy, and in what they are doing, or where they may be now (as evidently they have not worked through Theosophy, as an organisation, for nigh a century). Ouch, I had begun my own thoughts on this but now am in a different city and left them on the other PC. Will get back to this thread with them another day;) .
I also did understand from the original post what Sol's topic was, as it was clear enough to me at any rate. His topic is the organisation, Theosophy. Not his own Path, etc. It's a good and interesting subject for those with some familiarity with Theosophy, and it's one I've often found people discussing.
At the very core, Sol, I'd say that the Masters, the Brotherhood of Adepts both male and female, are the real 'thing' and not any organisation they may sponsor or help to create. The Brotherhood is FAR bigger and inestimably more important than the outer organisation called Theosophy. In fact, the TS was really only backed by a tiny handful of Masters. M was the real founder, KH assisted him, DK chipped in, and as it met with some success a few others such as the Seventh Ray Chohan got a little involved. All of course had to get the say-so of the Maha Chohan and any other of their own Gurus before even taking the first step. But that's very few of the Brotherhood.
I'd say that the Masters are overtly or behind the scenes the real founders of many movements, and when one movement becomes stultified they have no need of endlessly trying to give it and the stultified people within it the kiss of life. It's much easier and more practical to move on and start again. That's the lesson of New Wine as well: if you've new and deeper teaching to give than earlier, the first organisation or religion often can't contain it. (Theosophy has a long history of rejecting those who came after HPB though most consider a number of 20th century figures equally authentic as outposts of the Brotherhood.) I'd say they've done this, the creation of new organisations for a new level of teaching, a number of times since the TS began in 1875. Agni Yoga, for example, was begun through the Roerichs in the 1920s.
Later movements with the backing (IMHO of these Masters) have in many ways been more successful, though undoubtedly Theosophy has been hugely influential, and probably the most important influence by far, in getting concepts into the Western consciousness that led to the New Age movement. The TS was also the main influence upon the West giving rise here to an interest in Buddhism and Hinduism decades ago.
But Theosophy got into a tangle early on. Blavatsky was ousted and disregarded within just a few years of setting up the Adyar HQ in India, so she left them to it and came to Europe, ending her life in London. Here she taught again the real Path and about the existence of the Masters, whereas back in Adyar they were already disregarding her and the Masters. So it might be said that the original or 'true' Theosophy was already somewhat defunct before the 20th century.
The words I left behind were of some of my own experiences with Theosophists who never even heard of the Masters! I'll maybe re-type them.
Venetian
RE: Theosophy Reborn
On the subject of what came after the original Theosophy, here's one line of opinion, and quite a sizeable body agree with this. It's an article written by Allen Buresz, an incredibly knowledgeable man on organisations and claimed organisations of the Masters, whom I've had the pleasure of meeting a number of times:
http://www.templeofthepresence.org/activities.htm
Here, for Theosophists, any stumbling blocks would be with some of the unfamilar terms, perhaps.
For example, Sol has written recently on another thread that the Masters never spoke of "Ascension" through Theosophy. Which is true. In the 20th century endeavors were made to bring forth their teachings using terms and concepts more easily understood in the West (Blavatsky's Theosophy is at first sight bewildering with its Buddhist and other terms for the various bodies of man and the planes of existence). In essence, what in Theosophy is called the "fifth initiation" i.e. when man/woman becomes an Adept, and free of the rounds of rebirth, is what later is called the Ascension. The Masters didn't in Theosophy go into this but the initiation is actually that of the Ascension such as the Bible describes Jesus undertaking. The mortal, flesh-and-blood body is transformed and transmuted. However, upon the term "Ascension" and also "Ascended Masters" coming forth in the 1930s, over time the New Age smorgasbord has gotten hold of the words and used them inappropriately, thus demeaning the original intent. But the original uses and meanings are wonderful and enlightening.
And so throughout, there's the different terms today. E.g. Theosophy's "Monad" has since the 1930s in other organisations been called the I AM Presence. There are also concepts and terms quite new and not found in Theosophy such as the Violet Flame (the fohat of the seventh ray), etc.
I think another potential stumbling block Theosophists might have at first sight with 20th century movements would be the great array of names (Masters) who later worked with and through embodied disciples. I would only state on this that the Adepts are inestimable in number - as I posted above, only a handful were involved in the TS, but many more became involved in later 20th century movements. I sometimes think of the TS as being the Brotherhood 'clearing their throat' before they actually begin to speak and teach in great depth and breadth as they since then have done (IMHO).
Of course, the subject of what came next, after the TS, does have a whole array of various views, but the link above is a view many today agree with by discernment.
Love, Light, and Life,
Venetian
RE: Theosophy Reborn
Hello Sol,
We can't but help to see that your heart is not engaged in your posts.
This, my dear friend, is a condition which many of the earth experience and it is why establishments, groups, meetings, gatherings, etcetera, etcetera, fail.
When man continues to see all from the mental realm of being much is missed. This we see thee doing, dear one. The heart does not see. Alas, this be true.
Those who have replied to you have tried, in their own way, to put across to you this view. However, dear one, your lack of open heartedness does not allow their understanding to penetrate your otherwise healthy being.
'We' would ask too, dear heart, that you allow their words to penetrate. They, those who offer their wisdom to you, do so for the ultimate reward of being heard, culminating in your heart hearing their kind words.
We know that this is not easy, dear friend, the vehicle who writes these words once too was closed to love. It was indeed a hard procedure to win her confidence.
And so we say to you, dear friend, hear the words of those whose love runs freely, they wish to be of help to thee.
Many blessings, dear one
Spirit Talk