Theos-Talk Archives (March 1997 Message tl00210)

HI

        Krishnamurti's stated his position from which he never wavered -- In
spiritual matters there is no authority or no leader no path.

        What is generally happening is that when anyone assumes the position
of being a (spiritual) leader -- either de facto or by means of a formal
written or other requirements of the followers to commit to implicitly obey
and follow the leader -- even disregarding one's conscience -- it turns into
control of the followers (either overtly or covertly). Each one of us can
find of examples ourselves.

        Many followers would be willing to turn over themselves, their
souls, properties and everything to the cause represented by the leader. It
is not limited to less educated men and women of limited intelligence or
learning. High formal learning, scholarship etc has nothing to do with if
someone is willing to do it. You can find examples yourself.

        In addition, very frequently, the leader's assistants misinterpret
and misuse and exploit the followers - for their own ends -- either in this
world (fame, position, titles -- who does not like being made to feel
important by one means or the other) -- in the next world (may be the
promise of sitting at the right hand of God or one his assistants) --- next
life or even in the *belief* it is going to somehow move one along
spiritually faster track than the rest of the ordinary human beings (so that
one can somehow feel superior to the rest of the laggards.)

        Far too often we have seen disasters when you have spiritual leaders
leading a flock.

        The very ancient dictum -- Man (woman) know thyself, keeps one well
planted firmly in oneself, because you know you have depend solely one
yourself and are responsible to your actions. You are going to learn about
yourself first hand -- not second hand. Anyone will tell you that
independent thinkers are very difficult to deal with because they think for
themselves and are not led by other's ideas or thinking.

        I think this very ancient approach is productive of a lot of good
and prevent lot of problems. I think K saw this very clearly and tried to
impress on this simple approach. As time passes on we may see the wisdom of it.

        Here is my 2 cents worth.

MKR


PS: I think we have something to discuss and increase traffic here.

At 12:30 PM 3/28/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I was sad to hear about the tragic mass suicide in San Diego of members of
>the Heaven's Gate cult.  This reinforces my belief in Krisnamurti's
>statements regarding thinking for yourself instead of placing yourself in
>the hands of an organization or a guru.  Being a part of an organization
>should remain just that, and not a letting of an organization run your life
>for you.  It angers me that someone would take advantage of an individual's
>need to seek beyond their surroundings, the lies of a money-oriented
>culture, the lies of established churches, and the lies of societal values.
>It also angers me that someone used the person's loneliness and need to belong.
>
>My philosophy in my search for truth is that whenever someone makes you lose
>your center by giving you negative emotions, by disturbing you with
>artificiality, or by controlling you-go far, far away from that person.
>Other signs would be if there are attempts to change your life by trying to
>change your personal habits or by encouraging estrangement from family and
>friends.  With that in hand, I am not afraid to discover any new things
>knowing that I make my own choices.
>
>Cult incidents only hurt organizations who are really trying to allow room
>for discovery of truths without limiting an individual's free will.  I
>wonder, now, how a group encouraging a discussion on astrology, the
>metaphysical, and the other worldliness might immediately stir up a cry of
>"cult."  I read in the newspaper today a comment on how cults are springing
>up all over the internet, inviting people to join them, people who are
>already alienated from society, who built their life around the internet
>instead of being with real people.
>
>I was a bit offended by that since I only find the computer and the internet
>to be a positive development.  I have my life outside of the computer, but
>it is only within the computer that I am able to give extended, thoughtful
>conversations and receive the same (okay, maybe sometimes not so
>thoughtful).  Try talking about HPB's theories when you're in a social
>scene.  Even I can't stand hearing someone go on and on about something.  I
>would rather just read and comprehend it at my own pace. The internet
>provides me with information I may not find anywhere else.  Like the world,
>I see the internet as a non-judgmental containment of all that is in the
>world, good and bad.
>
>Thoa
>