Theos-Talk Archives (December 1997 Message tl00098)

M K Ramadoss wrote:

> This question came up when I was reading a quote from Practical Occultism.
> One of the key statements was the key emphasis on the need to approach life
> with the best interests of Humanity.
>
> On the other hand, after Annie Besant took over the ES, there was a strict
> emphasis on vegetarianism etc. The simple question was why HPB did not seek
> a very strict regimen from her close followers. Was she wrong?

    Consider what the E.S. was when Blavatsky ran it, and what it was when Besant
ran it. The E.S. was originally a way for members to prepare for esoteric
(magical) practice. It was formed partially at the behest of the Mahatmas (I don't
recall the letter number, but it was in regard to the objections of Anna
Kinsgsford teaching Theosophy via Christian concepts and symbols), who said that
those who wished to follow the Mahatamas directly should form their own,
independent section. Besant, when she took over, turned it more into a religious
group, with the new embodiment of the "Christ" (aka the "World Teacher", aka J.
Krishnamurti) as the spiritual head. When Krishnamurti said that he was not the
World Teacher, nor was meant to be, Besant shut down the E.S. Later, at the behest
of members, she brought it back in its present state.

    Bart Lidofsky