The Esoteric School Lobby

[Anand Gholap]

(Annie Besant was the head of the Esoteric School and Colonel Olcott was the President of TS.)
Mrs. Annie Besant wrote:
“In the T.S. we have a curious mixture. The Exoteric Society is purely democratic - it is only fair to admit this fully. On the other side we have an Esoteric body which is practically autocratic in its constitution ... The existence of a secret body to rule the outer Society made the constitution of the T.S. a mere farce, for it was at the mercy of the inner … All the differences that arose between the Colonel and myself were on this point; he could not believe that I was serious in saying that I would not use the E.S. against him, but slowly he came to understand it ... The greatest power will always be in the hands of the E.S., and not in the head of the Society ... I know that I exercise a quite unwarrantable power. This is what makes some people say there should not be an E.S.T. … We must recognize the danger and try to neutralize it. At any time during the last fifteen years I could have checkmated the Colonel on any point if I had chosen ...”

I could see frustration of some officers in TS regarding the results in Presidential elections. They were wondering how one person can get elected unopposed for around 30 years. It happened again and again in TS history. Different theories were offered to explain this phenomenon. I think all that mystery is solved by above passages of Annie Besant.
Best
Anand Gholap

[Anand Gholap]

I think, success of the Esoteric School depends, to much extent, on the outer head of ES. ES was more successful when disciples like Besant and Blavatsky were the heads of ES. As can be seen from Annie Besant's words, ES can be used for political purpose instead of spiritual purpose. It is important for members of ES to carefully observe for what purpose they are working.
Best
Anand Gholap

[Anand Gholap]

C.W. Leadbeater was a great example of self sacrifice. He served people through Theosophy by working from morning till night, but never held high posts in TS. It shows that old Theosophists were not interested in power, politics, posts etc.

[Pablo Sender]

Leadbeater did hold a high position in the ES, though.
What I don't understand is what the basis for your judgement about the "success" of the Esoteric School is, since you are not an ES member. I'm sorry, but I have to say that so far, most things you said about the ES are false, therefore, they are either based on prejudice or misinformation.
The majority of the most devoted TS members have been members of the ES. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t mean anybody who is devoted to the TS should join the ES. What I mean is that if the ES were a damaging force, they would not join it, would they? And I venture to say that many of them were remarkable, in part at least, thanks to the influence of the ES.
I love the TS and spend my entire day working for it. And, personally speaking, I find in the ES the closest expression to the TS ideals. I'm very grateful about it.
If you are really concerned about this, let me ease your worries by telling you that nobody in the ES is concerned about any kind of manipulation of the TS (besides, there are not means for that). Trust me. Anybody who is an ES member can testify that. We spend our meetings studying and discussing about how to deal a spiritual life. Success in that endeavor, however, depends solely on the individual, as your friend Krishnamurti always emphasized :)
If you would want to get power over the TS, you would have to do it through the TS itself. That’s the easiest way.

[Konstantin Zaitzev]

> We spend our meetings studying and discussing about how to deal a spiritual life.

Why isn't it possible in the regular lodges? I think that it would be a better solution to have several lodges in a city, as it used to be in older times, and these lodges dedicated to the spiritual life shall have more strict admittance, while in all other respects not differ from other lodges. For example, Blavatsky had her own lodge in London, while there was other lodge president of which was Sinnett.

> Leadbeater did hold a high position in the ES, though.

Outside ES no one could know this for sure, and in this respect we have to believe the members of ES without any possibility to test is ourselves.

[Pablo Sender]

"Why isn't it possible in the regular lodges?"

Of course that'd be possible. Now, since not every member of a Lodge is interested in actually leading a practical spiritual life you should create an “inner group” within a regular Lodge, for those who are willing to learn and follow a more dedicated spiritual discipline.
Now, there are many spiritual disciplines, and some of them have opposite effects on the aspirant's nature. They may develop the tattwas in different order, for example, which is very important in its practical effects.
When it comes to the actual spiritual training (and not only the study of it), we have to follow a line of development that is self-consistent. Therefore, you have to choose a line of development for your inner group. On what basis would you do it? But let’s say you are wise enough to know what kind of path would be spiritually health. Then, some members may say they don’t like that path, that in the TS there is freedom of thought, and that you cannot impose any path on them. Then, after complaining and struggle, you would have to say that the inner group of the Lodge is for those who agree with that path. Other members would still complain, until you will have to sever any official association of the inner group to the TS.
Then, if the work of that inner group is serious, some of its eager members may begin to actually undergo certain development. And you will find that there are certain socially accepted things (like drinking, for example) that become a hindrance for that development. Sensitive members will notice that their efforts are somewhat impaired by the consumption of meat, which makes harder for them to control their animalistic tendencies, or that smoking undoes their effort for becoming more sensitive. This may not affect some other members. If you were a wise guru, you could determine what is best for each one, but as the interest grows and the group slowly spreads around the world, there will not be enough people actually able to see the effect of any of these things on every person. So, you will have to draw some general rules which will ensure a healthy development in everybody.
Some people then, saying they want to tread the spiritual path laid down in that inner group, but unwilling to adjust their habits, will complain. If they cannot join because of those pre-requisites, they will feel excluded, and then they will want the inner group to be dissolved.
This is the story, in short, of how the Esoteric School of Theosophy developed, and that of most esoteric bodies also. The same would happen with your inner group, if its aim is something more than mere studying.
The ES is not the only path of development in the world. It is only one particular path, which is effective for those who follow it eagerly. Any TS member willing to follow that path and accept the pre-requisites which are integral part of the path is welcome to join the ES.
You will agree that it’d be silly to think that the apprentice should lay down the rules for his development, won’t you? The ES was started by HPB and the Mahatmas, and the rules and working were designed by them. We don’t know enough to change them. We are apprentices, and trust the wisdom of those who started it. Does it imply to put down our judgment? Not at all. If our judgment says the rules are not reasonable, we don’t need to join that path. Mine says the rules are good. And my personal experience says it is a valuable path, and its results are beneficial for eager individuals who also happen to be devoted to the TS work.
In this description I have excluded the esoteric reasons given by HPB for the formation of the ES and its effects (for example, that the ES is under the care of a Master of Wisdom, that every member generates a karmic link to him, and that for these reasons the ES is a centre for the flowing of spiritual energies to the world, through the TS, etc). Although I believe in these reasons, I cannot vouch for them with my direct experience, so I let them aside from my argument.

[Konstantin Zaitzev]

> since not every member of a Lodge is interested in actually leading a practical spiritual life you should create an “inner group” within a regular Lodge

I meant the special lodges for such persons.
Though I accept all your arguments in favour of ES, my purport was the following: Most of us, the simple members, are far from being fit to the life which ES disciples should live. Yet an existence of a secret society within the Theosophical Society which is declared a democratic body can provoke in us the thoughts that we are being manipulated. It can be our fault, not of the ES, as the people are liable to think the worst; nevetheless it is obvious that such our thoughts (even though ungrounded) poison the atmosphere in the Society.
As for the link, the very joining the Theosophical Society shall create a link with the Masters, if they really exist.

[Pablo Sender]

Yes Konstantin, I see your point. But what would you do? Would you dissolve something that is valuable (from my point of view) just because of some members' feelings? I'm not saying these feelings don't deserve respect. All I'm asking is if that should be a reason to stop a valuable activity.
This already happened in Blavatsky's time. I wrote about it earlier. After the attack of the Coulombs, Olcott thought the TS should drop any talking about the Masters, since this had produced so much conflict, damage, and disrepute. The Masters said with that action Olcott had killed the TS. It is only then that they ordered HPB to form the ES, in order to save the TS. Anyone can read about this.
The TS is not a club or a normal society. It has an esoteric aim, besides the declared objects. And esoteric movements in Kali Yuga will always face opposition, conflict, and disrepute. If the Masters would withdraw their activity just because of that, we wouldn’t have had mystics, martyrs, religious “saviors”, and the esoteric teachings would be lost for everybody.
I see all this as an unavoidable result of our current state of evolution ("our" involving non-TS members, TS members, and ES members).

PS: And yes, the ES is not the only way to create a link to the Master. The link is really created by our actions, emotions and thoughts. The Masters said the ES could help earnest members in this endeavor.

[Konstantin Zaitzev]

Can there be a solution in making the ES more open? I mean that all ES members should be known as such (without disclosing their inner proceedings).
Then other members shall have more trust to them, consult with them on sophisticated questions, etc. And they will serve as example to others and also a moving force of the Society, helping it to became more active.

[Pablo Sender]

"Can there be a solution in making the ES more open? I mean that all ES members should be known as such"

Yes, from my perspective that's a good idea. I've seen that this question varies in different countries. In some places most TS members know who are also ES members. In my country, it's the opposite. People try to keep their membership secret. I've never seen any official instruction regarding keeping the membership secret. But I know of reasons why they do it.
One reason is that they don't want to be regarded in a biased way (either in favor or against) because of their ES membership. It is sad when there are attacks because of one's ES membership. But it is also very uncomfortable to have people investing special value to your words, because then you stop being free. If you are regarded as anybody else, you express your thoughts and people may take them or leave them. But when your words are considered authoritative, what you say will condition or hurt people. Then, you have to be very careful about your words and give them as much importance as others give to them. I’ve seen this happening with some members.
Another problem is that some people believe just because you join the ES you have to become a saint. They don’t realize that the struggling may take many lives, and that no matter how sincere a person is, he or she will make many mistakes. So, your ES membership becomes a weapon in the hands of other members who care more about other’s faults than theirs. I’ve seen this also.
Finally (and this is the reason some ES members gave me when I asked about this) they don’t want people feeling discouraged about joining the ES because they may see some ES members who are not living up to the ES ideals. Mere joining the ES (as any other institution) will not produce any change in any person. It all depends on the person’s earnestness. So, even if in a group there are several ES members who are not up to the ideals, somebody earnest could profit from it because the effects of the discipline are personal.
Anyway, I agree with what you say, and that’s the reason why I am participating in this discussion. But for most people it is not easy to do it when the general environment is one of attacks (the very title of this discussion is aggressive). They think: "If they don't like the ES, that's okay. It is not my business."
I think for this to change ES members have to leave aside protective attitudes, and regular members their aggressiveness.

[Konstantin Zaitzev]

OK.
In 1900 Master K.H. wrote a letter to Annie Besant in which he advised to reform ES. Was it made that way as he proposed?

[Pablo Sender]

"In 1900 Master K.H. wrote a letter to Annie Besant in which he advised to reform ES. Was it made that way as he proposed?"

Yes, it was, as far as I can tell, because the directions in the Master's letter were very general. And Besant usually gets a lot of criticism by the orthodox Blavatskyans for that.
That is why I said the ES is not secret, and has no secret teachings. It is just a private activity.

[Anand Gholap]

J. Krishnamurti's opposition to the Esoteric School can be seen in his quotation below. Current Outer Head's promotion of J. Krishnamuriti seems strange when Krishnamuriti opposed Theosophy and the ES. Here is J. Krishnamuriti's quotation:

J. Krishnamurti: [Perhaps] you too hope that I may some day come back to Theosophy. Many friends of mine have told me that "eventually you will come back to us" + As I have repeated over and over again, I can say nothing with regard to ... Theosophy + The beliefs you hold are diametrically opposed to what I maintain. (Ommen 4Aug31 Q5 ISB Sep31);

Q: Will you ever come back to the Masters?

J. Krishnamurti: The questioner wishes to bring me back to his fold + Why do you need Masters, those supposed living beings with whom you are not directly in contact? + If you are seeking truth, why all this bother about them, why the exclusive organisations and secret conclaves?"
(Ojai 4Jun44 Q17)