Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tl00147)

If you can mail me a photo copy, I can get it scanned and posted here.

..mkr

At 02:14 PM 4/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>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
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: M K Ramadoss <ramadoss@eden.com>
>To: theos-talk@theosophy.com <theos-talk@theosophy.com>
>Date: Tuesday, April 07, 1998 8:52 AM
>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.