Overcoming the Practice of
Blind Obedience in Esoteric Schools
Carlos Cardoso Aveline
Robert
Crosbie (photo): the main loyalty of a true disciple is to his own higher self
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
A 2016 Editorial Note:
An initial version
of the following text was published
as a Letter to the
Editor in the ULT Birthday Issue of
“The Aquarian
Theosophist”, February 2006, pp. 12-13.
Jerome Wheeler was
then the editor of “The Aquarian”.
The article points
to a lesson valid for the
21st century.
Created in 2016, the Independent
Lodge of
Theosophists, ILT, takes into consideration
the historical example
given by Robert Crosbie as he
made the decision
to follow his own consciousness,
and not the
interests of an “esoteric corporation”, in
the first decade
of the 20th century.
(CCA)
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
A writer
who presents himself as a student of Helena Blavatsky wrote a couple of articles
in a website suggesting that Mr. Robert Crosbie broke the solemn vows he had
made as a student of the Esoteric School led by Katherine Tingley.
The author thought that by being a member of Katherine
Tingley’s inner school Crosbie had the
moral obligation to unconditionally obey Ms. Tingley regardless of
circumstances. He was supposed to renounce his own discernment and follow
orders. When Crosbie left Tingley’s esoteric school in 1904, he was therefore
seen as “breaking his vows”. As a result, it was believed, he should never have
founded the United Lodge of Theosophists in 1909.
This is,
of course, the bureaucratic view of esoteric schools. Blind obedience is a “law” with Jesuits and
pseudo-esotericists: not among Theosophists. A legitimate vow is a living process subject to the constant approval of one’s own
conscience, and not to the approval of one’s political “superiors”. [1]
Since
Crosbie saw that the Point Loma Society and its inner School had abandoned the
original teachings of theosophy, it was his duty to leave them aside, and he
would be breaking his vows if he remained
there against his conscience. Making
a vow in the true theosophical movement increases
one’s self-responsibility and the need for individual
discernment. There is no blind obedience in the pedagogy of discipleship
taught by Helena Blavatsky and the masters of the wisdom.
Writers
who attack HPB, Crosbie and other sincere theosophists tend to appear from time
to time in several countries.
Some of
them published long, high-sounding articles about things of which they know
nothing. Their careless writings add extra weight to the verses that open
Chapter 56 in the “Tao Te King”:
“Those who know, don’t talk.
Those who talk, don’ know.”
In order to attain esoteric knowledge, one must work
for a noble and altruistic goal. Selflessness is the key to higher realms of
consciousness.
By writing against those who search for lay discipleship according to the
unadulterated teachings of H.P. Blavatsky and the Masters, unethical observers
of the theosophical movement are but separating themselves from such an
opportunity.
We have had attacks against HPB’s work all the time
since the mid-1880s. We also have seen people successfully defending Theosophy
all along: every challenge is an opportunity in the inner side of the theosophical
effort.
The very existence of students who try to live
up to the inner side of H.P.B.’s Teachings seems to gravely offend some
individuals. This is of course unfortunate: no sincere
student would
wish to offend any individual. One can only hope that the aggressive
skeptics will in due time understand and accept the existence of such a thing
as an occult life and a spiritual path.
I wish they could see that there is an inner level of
study and action which must be kept to those who have freely decided to pledge
themselves to their own hearts to try
to improve themselves - and who have made a commitment to help each other along
that old, steep and narrow way to Eternal Wisdom. Each one’s responsibility
remains individual: bureaucracy has
nothing to do with aspiration to discipleship.
The lack of respect that the pseudo-theosophical skeptics
seem to show for the inner instances of the esoteric movement is connected to the
lack of respect they have for their own inner consciousness and conscience.
It follows that to wish them well, and to send them
good thoughts, is part of our task. On the other hand, our mission also
includes actively preserving the movement and the Teaching from any occult successors of the 19th century
slanderers Vsevolod Solovyov, Emma Coulomb and others.
It is
not a coincidence that both Solovyov and the Coulombs, as well as their 21st
century successors, first infiltrated the theosophical movement, and only then started to
attack H.P.B. and the Masters’ work from inside the theosophical circles.
As
paradoxes are part of the occult life, there is a bright side to this. Esoteric
philosophy states that great opportunities are generally in direct proportion
to the difficulty of challenges. Therefore,
putting a limit to the slanderous action of “modern” skeptics may be a golden
opportunity now available to earnest students worldwide.
NOTE:
[1] See on this topic
the article “Pledges in Theosophy, Real
and Phony”, which is available in the Associated Websites. Its subtitle
says: “Esoteric Frauds Use Vows to Obtain Political Control Over Sincere People”.
Read also in our websites “The Symbolism
of Judas Iscariot”.
000
In September
2016, after a careful analysis of the state of the esoteric movement worldwide,
a group of students decided to form the Independent
Lodge of Theosophists, whose priorities include the building of a better
future in the different dimensions of life.
000
Regarding pseudo-scholars who attack
Theosophy, see the article “On Looking
Like a Scholar”, which can be found in our Associated Websites.
000
On the role of the esoteric
movement in the ethical awakening of mankind during the 21st
century, see the book “The Fire
and Light of Theosophical Literature”, by Carlos Cardoso Aveline.
Published in 2013 by The Aquarian
Theosophist, the volume has 255 pages and can be obtained through Amazon
Books.
000
