Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00721)

Hi

        In looking at the historical fact that the membership of TS, which
fell dramatically after Krishnamurti disbanded all organizations set up for
his work and severed all relationships with TS, has never recovered to this day.

        The following excerpt from Ernest Wood's (very rare book) "Is This
Theosophy?", may be of interest to some of the students of this subject.
BTW, Wood gave much of his prime of life to Theosophical work and was at one
time one of the instructors of Krishnamurti.

MK Ramadoss

=============================

        THE NEW KRISHNAMURTI

        Early in 1928, when I was in New York, writing my book on India,
Krishnamurti came there and gave a lecture in the Chemical Society's Hall.
I was asked to preside.  I found that, as he expressed it himself, the
picture had come out of its frame.

        Krishnamurti was administering truth from his own point of view to
the people who had built up various organizations for his use.  He declined
the disciples announced for him, rejected all the modes of organized access
to the forces of inner planes, said that the system of master and pupil was
injurious, declared that ceremonies were hindrances, not helps, and reverted
uncompromisingly to the position that in order to have spirituality a man
must lean upon no thing or person outside himself.  He cast off his
connection with the Theosophical Society because, he said, it was addicted
to these things.  A year later he closed down his own Order of the Star,
because its members were inclined to lean upon him, and he was determined
that no cult, dogma or system should be built round his personality.

        Some persons, including Dr. Besant, not realizing at first the
completeness with which Krishnamurti was rejecting all material and mental
props to spirituality, said that of course it was quite understandable that
he should not want the ceremonials himself, but they would be useful and
indeed necessary to carry on the life-giving power which he brought to us
after he had gone, just as Christ was present in the transubstantiation of
bread and wine into His Body and Blood on the altars of the Catholic Church.

        This idea also Krishnamurti severely rejected, but some of the
arhats continued in the belief none the less, now saying:	" Krishnamurti
does not know everything about the Lord.  We too have our direct connections
with him.  Krishnamurti is only authoritative in connection with a special
and limited mission."

        Dr. Besant speculated that Krishnamurti might really be speaking for
the future, and said that his utterances were probably intended for the
people of the coming sixth race, hundreds of years hence, more than for the
world to-day.  She said that her policy was to take as much as she could
understand from Krishnamurti and leave the rest for the future to deal with.
On the other hand Bishop Leadbeater at the same time wrote that the
realization claimed by Krishnamurti had already been attained by " ourselves
" and he was now really preaching to the horse-racing and foxhunting outer
world, rather than to the theosophically inclined!  These views well
illustrate the difference in character between Bishop Leadbeater and Dr.
Besant, the former always sure of himself, the latter modest and seeking,
and therefore yielding.

        It became very clear to me that the movement was going to be
shivered from top to bottom if something was not done to relieve the Society
from all connection with other movements which were advocating material
means to spiritual goals.

        In the middle of 1928 Dr. Besant was re-elected President of the
Society for a fourth seven-year term.  She appointed Mr. A. P. Warrington,
of America, Vice-President, and continued Mr. Albert Schwarz in, the post of
Hon. Treasurer, which he had occupied for over twenty years.  On my return
from Australia at the end of the year she completed her trio of officers by
appointing me Hon. Secretary of the Society, fully knowing my views with
reference to the undesirable influence of other organizations upon the
practical affairs of the Society.

        At the same time she spoke very seriously to me on that subject. She
told me that she was anxious to encourage everybody in their laudable
undertakings, but she was afraid of crystallization in the Society. She
praised highly the enthusiasm of those who had launched various movements,
but was at the same time anxious to prevent any bias from establishing
itself in the Society, or even from appearing to do so.  She spoke of the
difficulty which she felt on account of the pressure upon her of the
religious enthusiasts on one side, and finally said on that point: "I wish
some of you would push equally hard on the other side.  It would make it
much easier for me." She told me of her policy of co-operation with others,
and that she had scarcely used her own psychic powers for years, but had
been relying on her co-workers in that respect.

        This last was, I confess, a blow to me.  I had all along been trying
to sift the gold from the sand in connection with the many occult
pronouncements made in the Society, and had relied primarily on her
testimony to the existence of that gold.  But now I was informed by Dr.
Besant herself that she had been and was accepting without critical
examination or first-hand confirmation many of the statements of those whom
I positively knew to be incorrect, at least on some points.  The amount of
gold in recent statements diminished in my eyes almost to vanishing point.
Although positive, recorded evidence of the earlier days as to the abnormal
powers of Mme Blavatsky and the inherent reasonableness of the system which
she had expounded under the name of theosophy remained untouched by this,
the living testimony had now vanished as far as I was concerned.

        And here also was Krishnamurti, declared to be the World Teacher in
person, stating that ceremonies were hindrances to a spiritual life, and
even that explanations of life, such as those of reincarnation and karma
were soporific, for only the aid of pure action in the present, making the
most of the present was consistent with spirituality, liberation, or the
clean and self-fructifying operation of life itself. To hold a theory that
we must work for the development or accumulation or acquisition of
opportunities or powers to be attained at some future time was simply to
spoil the living present.

-------------------End of Part I ----------