Theosophy and Reality

To Officials in the Theosophical Society and others possibly concerned:

THEOSOPHY AND REALITY.

After some decades in Organizations
for Essential Truths about Life
with Inherent Conflicts and Problems. (*)

All important words about Life have different meanings to different people. Religion, God, Life, Death, Evolution, Love. Theosophy. So what then specific terms may stand for have come to be most relative. With Krishnamurti even more so and especially by inner and direct perceptions of profound values, from leading theosophical persons, and this by their particular expressions of wisdom.

    The more of this, the more far back the real and true Theosophical source material may be found to be, eventually as minor parts of some superficial history, perhaps of some interest just to the intellect of some few.

    Within the Theosophical Society, and for it’s future, no concepts and no doctrine may come to be of any noticable importance any more.

    However, some members have evidently rather turned themselves towards some realizations of different levels of significance in basic Theosophical concepts and by this come to learn about certain Inner Realities, within and behind such concepts, and by this to another kind of freedom, from all images, expressions and words. A freedom from mere opinions, thoughts and feelings, but like full of living, real and dynamic contents, and this in firm but boundless relations to Universal Law.

    THE CONCEPT THEOSOPHY then stands for some degree of true and genuine knowledge of the Nature of Life, Man and Cosmos. And with and by that also to live in Wisdom.

    When a glimpse of this is a bit of Reality in oneself, it like liberates from all beliefs, doubts, fears and all other personal circumstances.

    Doors may open for new things, perhaps not even dreamt of before, such as a direct and natural oneness with others, regardless of all opinions and other differences, and this without any pretensions and pretendings.

    But what now about our actions together, for some cause of Theosophy, in this world?
That question is the one reason for what follows.

    In the latest Theosophist is The Future of the Theosophical Society (1), and for that future, let’s be honest and openminded, so that we from the past of TS can learn what was behind it’s conflicts and confusions, almost since it’s very beginnings, and then leave it all behind for ever and this with a different quality in our lives and actions, so that our works for Theosophy in the world would be like new, fresh, vital and full of love, energy and life.

    There will in this however be nothing of any value to speak about, or even think of, unless we are ready to lift every stone, to discover by ourselves what is under them, and then intimately learn and come to a piercing understanding like of it all. Then there can be a real future, in and by the TS itself, also for what is truly most unique about Theosophy: like a mildly penetrating Endlessness of Insights into the Very Nature of Everything, then necessarily including such as the various Vehicles for Consciousness and our certainly Outstanding Explanations of Psychic Phenomena.

    For such a future there must be a power of Freedom for Truth and hence to be ready to go right through any illusions, then primarily in regard to what is most close, which is our own matters, concerning Theosophy and the TS. — Greatest Learnings come from looking into what is most close and by that much else in the world may come into more light also.

    By fear, no future. So let’s for a while skip even the highest mottoes, ideals and spiritual experiences. Because what is highest in our minds may be good, in reducing coarse livings, or as most vital inspirations, and in this they are not replaceable; not on their own level of consciousness. But as emotional and dominating elements they may turn into something else and become like the worst obstacles, the most difficult to come over.

    The Best View of Life is the most Positive one to include an Ever Expanding Room, always for as many parts of the Whole as are fitting to oneself, and when then parts contradict each other, this view make us look closer into them and anything else which could be relevant for some Truth about it all.

    In our TS it has become like a primary dogma, that Theosophy just can not be defined.

    Verily Theosophy can be defined as synonymous with Truth, and the factual contents of Truth are of course endless, so Theosophy – as THE Truth – can not be defined. Not even by the Highest Initiates. So far so good.

    But as a CONCEPT it can most fruitfully be defined, and only then it can give some clear view or good impulse where to turn towards it, in one’s own consciousness.(3)

    Now the word Theosophy stands here for what is said above. For anything further, look in works by Those who undisputably in modern times first gave it out and therefore naturally and reasonably are to be regarded as it’s highest Authorities. Especially so by their inherent explanations of later and considerably less trustworthy versions of teachings. And this not possibly vice versa!

    In general every part of information is an indirect expression of it’s whole subject, including how seldom there are no flaws in that whole, and eventually revealing also them.

    In genuine expressions of Theosophy or Occultism all parts of it not only fit together, in several different ways – all of it invaluably vital, dynamic and significant for it’s whole – but such that it profoundly and radically may liberate from all dogmas, superstitions, thought-products and fears. (4)

    All of that must of coarse and fairly said be due to private and internal conditions, a most significant reservation, but which does not excuse public information, over and over again, incompatible with what undisputably was given by the Masters and therefore – and by certain unique qualities of that original information – can not deserve to be trustworthy, at least not in the long run and with any serious Studies for Truth.

*

To avoid various problems, to have a good atmosphere, and fairly said in some accord with some true principles, the TS stands for tolerance, freedom of thought and unity of members, regardless of traditions and teachings, even Theosophical. So by all in this, and by democracy, and time, there are organized groups, under the name of Theosophy, and in which nearly anything can be dealt with, except Proper or Genuine Theosophy, and this when any risk for association to fundamentalism or dogmatism must absolutely be avoided and it also so unpleasantly could disturb our preconditioned images of Theosophy, ourselves and each other. — By the way, this situation is nothing new, it takes place in all areas with democracy, time and something original which by good intellectual, philosophical or religious reasons is to be held as authoritative. In such as communism as well as Christianity.

    But now, if ”There is no religion higher than Truth” — then what?

    Without honesty in the TS in it’s basic information for unconditioned practices of free thought for Truth, in and about Reality – also concerning the TS – that motto of freedom of thought has over and over again been found to be hypocritical, and this regardless of being due to wonderful attachments to persons or organaizations, by warm affections for them, for what has been spiritually received by them, something personally higher than anything else. (5)

   To clear the ground and for an explaining perspective, how did it all come about?

    By judging from all what is known there can be no doubt that the Mahatma Letters came from Some who definitely KNEW what they then gave out. According to these letters, there were seven such Ones in their Lodge, but only two of them could at first stand behind, that it would serve the future of mankind, to give out so much of Esoteric Science, as then later was done, primarily by their chosen cooperator, Helena Blavatsky. And after some years one of the two – who had been allowed (!) to do this ”as an experiment” (!) – wrote, that it then seemed to him, that the other five could have been right. (6)

    When HPB had died and their amanuensis thus was gone – the evidently one and only chosen by themselves – destructive forces somehow more came in, the Theosophical Society was seriously damaged and it’s influence in the world became consequently reduced. (7)

*

For what follows something more of it’s basis and reason must be given.

    Before the TS there was for myself the Liberal Catholic Church, mostly thanks to a certain priest, the one who first inspired me seriously into Occultism and who in this primarily was strictly loyal to what his steady offerings of himself as an informal but ceremonial priest, and studies in books by Alice Bailey, consciously meant to him.

    When something most central from that (8) was in practice negated in the LCC (by a certain appointment of a new bishop), Krishnamurti came to take over, but then there were two different kinds of ”spiritual realizations”, and not possibly understood together, they were in conflict. Then an Englishman came up and by him indirectly, that basic explanations could come by what was historically like behind it all. (9) (After many years this is like fully confirmed.)

     Once he was later questioned of differences between first and later expositions of Theosophy and said that the later is so much related to persons and further giving all sorts of allowances to various behaviours. By the first version of Theosophy, such parts are not acceptable. (According to the first, ”if you follow the rules, you win” and this being ”fair, just and honest”.) (10)

    In translating one of his books (Theosophy — What’s it all about?), there suddenly came something one night. Texts about lower (!) aspects quickened a sense of realization of the whole, as like an occult but nevertheless material reality, giving a pressing fullness inwardly, like by a new and enormous power of Life. (11)

*

Some points regarding progresses vs difficulties, conflicts and problems in Theosophical Communities:

     1) One question has to do with occult realizations and insights, from their levels and special kinds of consciousness, beyond personalities, and how that relate to our own minds in common, all within rooms for opinions, comparisons, feelings, personal relations and longings, with their consequent sorrows, fears and disappointments or frustrations. — How could there be any best Future for the Theosophical Society, without Something Most Central in it, Positive, Whole and Firm, and this being Theosophy by itself and by which we then can feel really at home? — After many years no real unity of Theosophists can be fully separated from their unity also in Teachings, because in spite of all the otherwise endless but useless discussions with their enjoyments can be warmly overcome – and this to the benefit of all – by respecting all, also in their personalities – only by being really at home with a whole and firm association with Theosophy and its verily unique Teachings.

     2) As far as human beings can be personaly concerned, there are hardly any limits for how different aspects of psyche, intellect and spirit can relate to and influence each other. (Spirit as being truly spiritual, as well as by feelings for collective things, greater than ourselves. All from by Hitler to various unities in religions.)
    It must include effects of psychic faculties, such as clairvoyance. On the one hand there is then for us Occult Chemistry and the discovery of Krishnamurti (remarkably overlooked among the public, and typically by all Sceptics, as well as by all seen Swedish professionals in culture, psychology, philosophy and religion) and on the other hand what is commonly supposed to be Theosophy, but in a number of ways being seriously incompatible with the Original. — The warmer feelings in such mixtures, and the stronger one’s personal self is in them, the more hard Discriminations for Truth must be. (But everyone should in love or compassion be respected to experience anything, freely and fully, and for learning by that, which is like the only possible way.)

     3) For those with beginnings in previous life, just some title of a book may directly and firmly inspire for Theosophy. For others inspirations come by personal contacts and circumstances, so may we not turn away from whatever could bring a Spirit of Theosophy into ourselves.

     4) Primary concepts of universal brotherhood, freedom of thought and no dogmatism can be truly practiced only from a level of mind which is beyond those concepts. When that is lacking, they stand for personal friendships in relatively arbitrary opinions and good emotions, consequently also with steady risks for reactions, by our lower selfs, against exponents of more important realizations.

     5) In Occultism Truth may come, but only freely and from within, which excludes all coercions, and so there are No Objective Proofs in Occultism, at least not openly.

     6) Powers of Influence by Persons or Ideologies are No Signs of Truth.

     7) In all organizations or steady groups internal criticisms are commonly regarded as hostile and therefore internally reduced. So those who think most independently tend to move out.
     In general new existential views come from outsiders or they become outsiders. (Buddha, Jesus, Luther, Spinoza, Blavatsky, Krishnamurti.)
     All without any necessary or direct change in the formal groupings or traditions. (In worldly eyes, inertia governs.)

     8) Every existential view or position which is conditioned by conflicts with others, and then especially by religion, is with strong or warm powers of minds, giving strong inertias for changes. Wonderful experiences of universal love are most valuable, but most easily they become personal values, to be guarded for their own sake, in a free mixture of the personal ego and something from above the ego. For the Sake of Theosophy, let us clear and open the way for the Future, by sharply cutting the bands in the hidden realms within ourselves, between what is 1) personal and 2) impersonal or universal. Between what is more or less selfish and something Else which can be Amazing and in the Basics totally free from oneself.

     9) By some works of C. W. Leadbeater and A. Besant there are warm senses of spiritual love, and within a Presence of something Higher than the me, it is not easily to be compared with anything else.
     Whenever originators of something Higher are like inseparable from that, such that their Persons can not be fully put aside from it, in oneself, this calls for an Impersonal Perspective of it All.
     Especially P. G. Bowen has given, that also higher levels of mind and consciousness are conditioned and formed by previous lives and n a reply to what a group of persons published in defending CWL as an Occultist, it was refered to certain occult associations in CWL by his previous life.

     10) Most appreciated by myself in Centenary Celebrations in Adyar in 1975 was a talk by Radha Burnier, About Seriousness in the Search for Truth, starting an informal meeting one morning for young members, and in which she quoted Krishnamurti as when he was young, ”I watch my mind as a cat watches a mouse”. (12)
    Like everything else also a basic Theosophical view of divergence between lower and higher minds can be misused, then as a convenient excuse to neglect the character of one’s personality. The lower must come under full disciplin of the higher, only then it will eventually agree to be left behind, also in practice.
    Discriminations for Truth in Theosophy require doing that also in one’s own mixtures of memories, motives, loose imaginations, wishes, fears and disappointments.
    When ”Theosophy” or ”something spiritual” has become Pleasure or Enjoyment, let us also see and face what then follows, for only then any danger by that could die, and Joy is certainly quite different from having a Nice Time.

    11) Regardless of everything else, all persons who have given their most for what they could stand for, and this for others than themselves, are to be given our respects, in recognitions of various natural differences between all of us.

    12) All Considerations and Relations are to be together with where our Highest Loyalties most fully and seriously belong and this not to be lessened by anything else.

— o O o —

In grateful appreciations of and warm regards to differently wonderful persons
who I have been given the privilege to meet and see,

    Stockholm, 9th of June, 2009,
Gunnar Larson.

E-mail: gunnar.larson@telia.com, gunnarlarson@hotmail.com.
Phone +46 70 676 5678. Fax +46 8 80 5678.

PS. By just free choices in the contents of mind there will never be any true freedom of thought. Habitual contents can not be overcome by reflections over any ideas or partial experiences. Nor by some mild and kind expression of wisdom. Habits of thought cling in the mind and will not so easily give up. Just looking into some genuine Theosophical texts may hardly make any difference either. But some intense studies into them – presentations which typically are without any excuses or reservations, but with Firm Relations to the Whole of Life – FIRMLY ACROSS ALL POSITIVES AND NEGATIVES – eventually to the very NATURE OF NATURE – may radically change the conditions of mind, and this by how such Works touch and may quicken that Something Else in You, to be found only in and by yourself.
   Not without Risks and therefore also with unavoidable Responsibilities. DS.

————————————————————————————

Footnotes:

(*) Devoted spiritualist for two years (by some phenomena basic truth in materialism was found objectively impossible). 1964 – 1983 active in the Liberal Catholic Church as editor for a year of it’s national journal and from servant to priest. Member of TS since 1965, editor of magazine for members for 8 years, general secretary for five plus two. 1976 - 1982 attending talks by J. Krishnamurti in various parts of the world. Degree of Law in 1992 after a final essay in Jurisprudence on Civil Dissidence, refering to occult litterature in questioning Scandinavian (amoral) Realism of Law, by balancing that to relevant parts of esoteric matters. Since 2005 associated member of the United Lodge of Theosophists. Auditor in Krishnamurti Center, Stockholm. — Editor of www.livet.in, www.israel-palestina.se and www.integr.info. Soon also www.blavatsky.se.
    In the background is my father (born in 1882), to whom Emanuel Swedenborg was ”the Lord’s servant”, this early giving me a sense of a possible God, equally just and loving to all, and when 18 there suddenly one night came a dream of miraculously seeing Jesus appearing to me and my mother in the sky and woke up with a previously unknown kind of spiritual love, warm, universal and beyond all persons, conditions and times. This much surprised, was vital, it’s reality not to be questioned, and it lasted over breakfast, but as a solid experience it remained, later as one basis for main and lasting interests in spiritual questions, mostly for the truth of it all.

(1) On the Watch-Tower, The Theosophist, May 2009, and which directly called for this now here.

(3) According to Krishnamurti, or from a level of consciousness with nothing particular in it, but far beyond all forms and limitations of mind, there is for Truth nowhere to turn at all. So he jumped over an absolute and most natural necessity for all the rest of us: First some sense of clarity, in and by our lower minds (common thought, on personal levels) and only by that a First Ground for Trust in Life is possible, a sense of trust without any other beliefs, and which is an absolute condition, before one can really be ready for Something Theosophically higher or deeper, to firmly take root in oneself. — In this a notice by P G Bowen is remarkably striking, a certain difference between Indian and Western minds, regarding the Unity of Life. Westerners commonly need mental works for it, while Indians have it by ”instinct”.

(4) According to Krishnamurti (tape brought home from Brockwood in 1976) all particular ideas and views in religion and philosophy are ”based upon thought”. Even all deeper views which can come from deeper studies in such things. And no sign could ever be seen of any exception in this for anything regarding Theosophical or Occult Doctrines.
     In the European School of Theosophy (Germany 1983) an Englishman said that he had studied Theosophy laboriously for years and then not seeing how there could possibly be any real understanding if it’s concepts. Now, he said, they are full of profound significance, pregnant with wonderful meanings. (Exact quotation may come here later, or just ask for it on CD, Number 2 in http://www.livet.in/CDarchive.html.)
    In a circular sent out 1977 by that Englishman to all high officials in the TS it was suggested that Krishnamurti never got any proper Theosophical information, not even when he lived in the TS.
    Like by a routine Krishnamurti repeatedly ridiculed a most basic part of Theosophical Doctrine or perceptions, that of there being quite Another Kind of Ego in Man, than by the personal and temporary self. This ought to be recognized as most significant in relations between Theosophy and what he brought forth. In a published answer to a question he also firmly rejected any relations, what so ever, between what he stood for and Theosophy.
    However, trustworthy information given me mean, that K. knew of Occult Aspects of Man and of some Permissions, giving Limits for speaking out. An intimation is in this also given by himself in a book (about certain inner visitors when he was in the chair by a dentist). — To myself all by and about K. (for myself privileges) is better understood and explained by what has come from P. G. Bowen, plus by the United Lodge of Theosophists and all concerning this being considerably stronger by Krishnamurti and the Rajagopals by Mary Lutyens.

(5) In a last Mahatma letter (1900) it was said, that the recipients ”ambition” had led to her ”fall”. When it first came out that part of the letter was omitted.
     When a book from America was to be published in Swedish, there came a notice about it from Adyar. Not to the general secretary, officially the most relevant, but to some others, personally more close. It said that one sentence in that book could be removed: Paul Brunton as an Initiate, in the West like the only one in appearance. The general secretary (myself) was immediately seriously disturbed by such a cutting, to be secretly made in our TS, the most serious and unlimited organization for Truth, but was more afraid to disturb good friendships, so it was given to them to handle it as they liked. — Could there ever be any truly Theosophical cooperation, for Genuine Theosophy, unless we first become free from corruptions, even by personal friendships — the most difficult?
   A few years ago a big newspaper in Stockholm reported of a new and large Russian publication, with historical materials concerning publicly known Russians. It was then not put into any question, that Helena Blavatsky should have written to the secret Russian police, asking to be accepted as their secret agent in the West, and then refering to having contacts with many people in the West, and not long ago a book was published by our TS, saying to be with letters by HPB, some of them degrading public views of her, but without any objective support for having been written by her.
    Could there ever be any common and officially recognized Theosophical Committee for unbiased investigations into historical matters? Not long ago The Theosophist published positive evidence for Leadbeater having come to South America as a boy. But how do times and other statements given by himself fit together, and this with his age, later found to be 7 years younger? Could also such matters become open in the TS? If not, how could there ever be any other way to go for Truth, in and by Theosophy, than merely privately and independently of all organizations? But should not really The Original Theosophical Society somehow come to deserve to be taken most seriously?

(6) When the project had started, several more Masters (true Initiates in Esoteric Science) truly cooperated in it.

(7) The first and most crucial matters was in connections to the Judge-Case.
          Some years ago a book was randomly opened (at an English Summer School in Leicester), The Theosophical Movement 1875 – 1950. Quickly it was then surprisingly discovered and most seriously realized how Annie Besant some 20 years later had strongly refused to let it be publicly known, that her view of Judge had then positively changed! This immediately brought a decision to have that book translated into Swedish. It is a remarkable investigation by detective methods into most crucial matters in all kinds of mixtures between different aspects of what is relevant for Truth in Theosophy and Occultism.
     In this there is Mixtures and Diversities in Psyche, Intellect and Spirit.
     In fairness it must be added and regarded, that some years ago there were attempts for a new and impartial investigation of the Judge-Case and for this Adyar admitted to open it’s archives. But not so the Pasadena-TS.

(8) The constitution of man, basically differing between soul and spirit, learnings and evolutions by assimilations of experiences in reincarnations under Karma, Christianity deeper explained and understood, plus changes of minds by unselfish cerermonials. All of that then experienced as fundamentally thanks to Theosophy.

(9) In a council meeting in Denmark of the European Federation I first saw him. — ”Here we have The Mahatma Letters, written by themselves! Didn’t they know what they talked about? — If you [a long time member] read this twice [The Key to Theosophy] you will become quite another woman!”

(10) This was recorded in discussions for some 40 minutes and upon request it will be sent on a CD. For other recordings equally available, see www.livet.in/CDarchive.html

(11) Like a realization then came, that personally I can do like nothing, but this Power could lift the whole world. There just would have to be some real basis for it. Next day one cassette out of several with Otto Viking was randomly picked out and IMMEDIATELY it was heard: ”but we must have some basis for this, and that basis is brotherhood.”
    Otto Viking (ded in 1966) was earlier official representative in Denmark for Krishnamurti and lastly bishop in LCC. Geoffrey Farthing noticed his unusual degree of liberation and asked why he then continued with the church. He answered that ”it is because of my regular services as a priest that this has come to me”. This told by Geoffrey Farthing – and also for example his positive realizations of what went on at Brockwood (the Krishnamurti School) and told me, as soon as we left from there – confirms, that those who are most serious to Theosophy – most close to the Masters themselves – are likely to be the most open ones to Truth in and Significance of anything else.

(12) Available on CD, http://www.livet.in/CDachive.html