Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl00213)

> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1996 12:38:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Arnie Post <k3post@geordi.sbcc.cc.ca.us>
> Subject: Re: Misunderstandings re: K, ES (fwd)

On Tue, 9 Apr 1996, Sitanshu Kumar wrote:

> I dont know why such a big fuss is being raised over some masters
> living in the himalayas. It is true that K never denied the existence of
> the masters, he simple thought they are largely irrelevant as far as
> freedom for mankind is concerned. He has stated that very clearly.
> The theosophist seek the masters as spiritual authority, K said
> all authority stifles the mind. I think most childish people seek
> some kind of miracle, some unknown guiding hand, all that is result
> of fear, and fear can not be solved by any authority(look at the
> organized religions). It is quite malicious to say that K sought
> a special position for himself. His presence was selfless. As far as
> Radha Sloss is concerned, she is no more than a fiction writer like
> the ones you see on bookstands.( she may have some factual truth,
> but her mind seeks sensationalism, very much similar to what
> is shown on popular TV shows likes Cops etc.)
>
> sitanshu kumar
>

Arnie. I thought you put that very well Sitanshu. I just wanted to add
that we have no idea of what really went on in K's personal life and why
should we even care.

>
>
> > From listening-l-owner@zrz.tu-berlin.de  Tue Apr  9 09:31:41 1996
> > Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 11:27:31 -0500 (CDT)
> > From: M K Ramadoss <ramadoss@eden.com>
> > To: listening-l <listening-l@zrz.tu-berlin.de>
> > Subject: Re: Misunderstandings re: K, ES (fwd)
> > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII>
> > Content-Length: 2999
> >
> > Here is a response from Paul Johnson, for anyone interested.
> > .....doss
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1996 08:22:49 -0500
> > From: K. Paul Johnson <pjohnson@leo.vsla.edu>
> > To: Multiple recipients of list <theos-l@vnet.net>
> > Subject: Re: Misunderstandings re: K, ES
> >
> > According to M K Ramadoss:
> > >
> > > This reply is cross-posted to listening-l, where K related matters are
> > > discussed. Any respondent on listening-l may like to cross post the
> > > message here at  theos-l@vnet.net
> >
> > Dear Doss:
> >
> > I really wish you hadn't done that.  With enough adversaries in
> > Theosophical circles to last a manvantara, I don't need
> > Krishnamurti-ites demanding that I prove everything I say too.
> >
> > > > so I think it more plausible to conclude that he encouraged her
> > > > to maintain the ES and use it as a tool to turn the TS towards
> > > > his own teaching.  From what I hear this has been/is being done
> > > 	
> > > 	This is the first time I hear of this.
> >
> > If Radha is a disciple or admirer of K., who ran for the
> > presidency on his instructions, wouldn't it be surprising if
> > that *weren't* reflected in the direction she took the ES?  My
> > only source for this is a post someone made in which this was
> > asserted as fact here on theos-l.  Of course with people and
> > organizations wrapped in secrecy, the chance of an outsider
> > being able to prove anything is next to nil.
> > >
> > > 	After K's statement that Truth is a Pathless Land, I have not
> > > seen either his claiming any *authority* for himself least of all any
> > > *spiritual* authority,
> >
> > Sometimes actions speak louder than words.  The best source I
> > know of regarding this angle on K. is Sloss's Lives in the
> > Shadow.  He certainly allowed-- no, acted as if he expected as
> > his proper due-- his followers to treat him with great
> > deference due a World Teacher.  While explicitly questioning
> > such behavior.
> >
> >  and I have also not seen his mentioning *Masters*
> > > and least of all *his* intimacy with Masters. Since this is a fairly new
> > > revelation to me, can you enlighten me about your source for the above.
> >
> > Actually, on the subject of the Masters, I cannot enlighten
> > you on my source since it was made available to me on a
> > confidential basis.  However, perhaps I can find some things
> > *in that source* which will confirm what I am saying.  Again,
> > back to Radha-- if she is really a Krishnamurti intimate and
> > disciple, would she be pontificating about the Masters being
> > something *beyond perfected men* about whom it is blasphemy to
> > speak in human terms, unless she somehow thought such a view in
> > harmony with his (secret) teachings?  What I'm suggesting is
> > that K. never really denied his intimacy with Masters as
> > completely as it might seem from a superficial reading.
> > Moreover, he acted as if he were precisely what/whom Leadbeater
> > had proclaimed him to be-- the World Teacher.
> >
> > Will dig around for details.  Feel free to cross post my
> > response, since we've gotten started down this path, but I
> > don't wish to engage in debates with an expanded group.
> >
> > Cheers
> > P
> >
>
>