Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tl00145)

April 7th 1998

Dallas writes:

Concerning the Adyar property.

This what I recall history says about it:

The Adyar property was purchased (around 1880/81) by H.P.B. and
Col. Olcott using their own private funds, they used the property
and the houses on it, as it was their joint property, to house
the T S. headquarters.

It is situated about 11 miles south of Madras Fort, and is just
south of the Adyar river on the sea coast.

The S.P.R. Hodgson Report came out in December 1884 and created a
furor -- HPB returned to India early in 1885 to demonstrate that
she had nothing to fear and, to defend the honor of the T S and
of the Masters.

When in 1885 HPB was "banished" by the Council who refused to let
her take the risk of appearing in a court case involving the
Madras missionaries who slandered her,
( reviving the old "Russian Spy" theory, which the Indian
Government had verified was wrong ), Col. Olcott had her sign a
legal declaration whereby she "renounced" all ownership in Adyar
property or its effects.  She gave this so that if a judgment
against her were made, her ownership would not entail the said
property.  She left, very ill with Dr. Franz Hartman and another
friend who was her Doctor as companions for her to be with and
help her on the voyage.

Years later when requested by some of the Indian theosophists to
return she wrote a letter and asked Bertam Keightley to carry it
with him to Col. Olcott to be published in THEOSOPHIST.  Bertram
Keightley was visiting India in April 1890, and he carried this
letter in which she carefully explained the situation and why she
could not return to India although urged to do so by many after
the period of 1885, when there had been a change of heart and
fear had been banished.

It was entitled:

         WHY I DO NOT RETURN TO INDIA.

It was not immediately published in THEOSOPHIST (as it ought to
have been) but was privately circulated to a few.

Many years later, after her death, it was published in
THEOSOPHIST  for October 1898 pp 23-4, and again in July 1929.

It is currently in print on p. 106 of the 1st Vol. of HPB
ARTICLES, published by Theosophy Company, Los Angeles.

It reviews the exact sequence of affairs in India and the measure
of the Masters' influence is made plain there.

It is a letter that every student of Theosophy ought to be
acquainted with, and if desired I can publish it for all to read
here.

                        Best wishes,                    Dallas

>Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 8:52 AM
>From: M K Ramadoss <ramadoss@eden.com>
>Subject: Re: Theos-World Krishnamurti and theosophists, pro & con

>At 09:20 AM 4/7/98 EDT, you wrote:
>>In a message dated 98-04-06 23:59:47 EDT, Govert wrote:
>>
>><< Personally I think that K's  failure to qualify for vehicle
for Maitreya
>>and his denouncements of the  Masters and theosophy, created so
much confusion
>>within theosophical circles  that it started the decline of the
TS. That the
>>TS did not fold completely  is not due to K challenging beliefs
and concepts,
>>but to the fact that it
>> was already a viable organization with a body of very relevant
literature
>>and the backing of the Masters.  Rather than vitalizing the TS
I am afraid
>>that the teachings of K sap its strength. The TS is not aware
of this,
>>because it is still in a state of shock and denial regarding
what really
>>happened.  >>
>>
>>I agree with the above. I noticed when I visited Australia two
years ago, the
>>TS there was split into a pro-Krishnamurti school and a
pro-Geoffrey Hodson,
>>CWL, AB school, the Krishnamurti-ites being ensconced at Nat'l
HQ in downtown
>>Sydney and the neo-theosophists centered around The Manor.
>
>It is not surprising at all. On the one hand, we those of the
"Catholic"
>approach and "Non-Catholic" approach, former belonging to the
traditional TS
>approach especially after AB&CWL. [I will post a lecture on this
topic by
>Besant after a week.]
>
>One can sense this same kind of attitudes in the TSA also. At
least in the
>TSA we have not gotten to the level of two schools ensconced at
two
>buildings. [Don't be surprised if this happens!]
>
>The fact that Radha Burnier had known him all her life and of
course she
>must have been affected by his teachings may have something to
do about the
>shift in emphasis within TS. It was at K's urging, Radha Burnier
ran for the
>office of International President and won.
>
>Several years ago my brother visited Krotona and when he
inquired about
>directions to KFA he could did not get any help. Ojai is not a
big place and
>KFA is perhaps most well known organization there.
>
>
>>
>>I have problems with Krishnamurti myself. He was an alleged
"non-guru" with
>>tens of thousands of devotees. He rejected the TS yet he always
maintained
>>centers conveniently located near major TS compounds, Ojai and
Adyar being
>>examples.
>
>The location of these institutions are historical. K never had a
hand in
>location of Ojai or Adyar. Ojai property was originally donated
by  TS
>member and the Adyar property was built, I think by the Star
Trust. I would
>not read too much into it. For example there is the Rishi Valley
school
>which is quite far from Adyar and has been in existence for a
long time.
>
>>
>>His approach is basically that of a southern Buddhist, the
neti-neti path (God
>>is not this, God is not that). This is the most difficult of
all paths to
>>follow in my opinion. The iti-iti path of "God is this, God is
that" is
>>easier. It leads to bhakti yoga, devotion to God in one's
favourite form,
>>whether it be an avatar or guru. I realize that the two paths
are a matter of
>>choice.
>>
>> Krishnamurti complained in his last days that no one
understood his
>>philosophy (from Radha Schloss' book). People used to come to
me with the same
>>complaint and I told them I couldn't help them because I didn't
understand it
>>either. I finally got a better grasp of his teachings after
reading Rohit
>>Meta's book THE NAMELESS EXPERIENCE.
>>
>
>It took me almost two decades to get an inkling of what he is
talking.
>
>
>>Krishnamurti had a perfect right to expound and dispense his
philosophy, and
>>they're many people, including some on this List, who think
highly of him. But
>>or me, well, his teachings aren't my cup of tea frankly. I
think there were
>>many theosophists who felt the same way. Many acknowledge that
he created a
>>great division in the TS which is still healing.
>>
>>Lmhem111
>
>As I had mentioned earlier, if his message means something to
anyone, then
>that is of value to that person. After all we are all searching
and
>hopefully we will understand better.
>
>mkr
>
>
>-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk --
theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
>Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
>teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message
consisting of
>"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to
theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>