Hi everybody!

I have begun reading Five Years of Theosophy, a collection of articles selected from "The Theosophist" Magazine, 1885-1980.

http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/five-years.htm

https://shoppingcartsecure.com/cart32.exe/2137487244-AddItem

I had barely begun reading the book, when I came across something surprising. The author of the first article (identified only as Chela) says a beginning student must not get involved in causes, but must spend that energy upon themself.

"...in the first stage [of being a beginning Chela], a determined, dogged resolution, and an enlightened concentration of self on self, are all that is absolutely necessary. It must not, however, be considered that the candidate is required to be unhuman or brutal in his negligence of others. Such a recklessly selfish course would be as injurious to him as the contrary one of expending his vital energy on the gratification of his physical desires. All that is required from him is a purely negative attitude. Until the turning-point is reached, he must not “ lay out” his energy in lavish or fiery devotion to any cause however noble, however “good,” however elevated. Such, we can solemnly assure the reader, would bring its reward in many ways—perhaps in another life, perhaps in this world, but it would tend to shorten the existence it is desired to preserve, as surely as self-indulgence and profligacy. That is why very few of the truly great men of the world (of course, the unprincipled adventurers who have applied great powers to bad uses are out of the question)—the martyrs, the heroes, the founders of religions, the liberators of nations, the leaders of reforms—ever became members of the long-lived “Brotherhood of Adepts” who were by some and for long years accused of selfishness." (pp. 10-11)

--> This seems to fly in the face of a need for doing social work, which is the very topic of the HPB quote in my signature. I must take time and reflect on this. I am interested in hearing other people's reaction to this.

Here is a little about the author, from CW 6 241 ff.

[This remarkable article was written by Mirza Murad Ali Beg. This was an alias for Godolphin Mitford, a scion of the old Hampshire family of the Mitfords. His father had served with the East India Company. He was born at Madras and was a very eccentric and peculiar character. He had dabbled in black magic with a selfish motive in view, and had thereby provoked the action of certain elemental entities which played havoc with his consciousness. He was a Mohammedan at the time he came to H. P. Blavatsky and Col. Olcott at their residence in Bombay, on Jan. 20, 1881. His life had been full of wild adventures. Col. Henry S. Olcott writes of him as follows (Old Diary Leaves, Vol. II, pp. 289-91):

“. . . when we met him, [he] was in the military employ of the Maharajah of Bhaunagar as ‘Chief Cavalry Officer’—practically a sinecure. His had been a wild, adventurous life, more full of misery than the opposite. He had dabbled in Black Magic, among other things, and told me that all the sufferings he had passed through within the preceding few years were directly traceable to the malign persecutions of certain evil powers which he had summoned to help him get into his power a virtuous lady whom he coveted . . . he himself fell under the power of the bad spirits whom he had not the moral strength to dominate after having accepted their compulsory service. Certainly he was a distressful person to be with. Nervous, excitable, fixed on nothing, the slave of his caprices, seeing the higher possibilities of man’s nature, yet unable to reach them, he came to us as to a refuge, and shortly after took up his residence in our house for a few weeks. A strange-looking creature for an Englishman he was. His dress was that of a Muslim throughout, save that he had his long light-brown hair tied up in a Grecian knot behind his head, like a woman. His complexion was fair and his eyes light blue. In my Diary I say that he looked more like an actor made up for a part than anything else. The writing of the Elixir of Life occurred some time later, but I may as well tell the story while he is under my mind’s eye.

“From the time that he came to us he seemed to be engaged in a strong mental and moral conflict within himself. He complained of being dragged hither and thither, first by good, then by bad influences. He had a fine mind, and had done a good deal of reading; he wanted to join our Society, but, as I had no confidence in his moral stamina, I refused him. H. P. B., however, offering to become responsible for him, I relented and let her take him in. He repaid her nicely, some months later, by snatching a sword from a sepoy at Wadhwan station, and trying to kill her, crying out that she and her Mahatmas were all devils! In short, he went mad. But to return. While with us he wrote some articles which were printed in The Theosophist, and one evening after a talk with us, sat himself down to write on the power of the will to affect longevity. H. P. B. and I remained in the room, and when he began his writing she went and stood behind him, just as she had in New York when Harisse was making his sketch of one of the Masters, under her thought-transference. The article of Mirza Saheb attracted deserved attention on its appearance (see The Theosophist, Vol. III, March and April, 1882, pp. 140-42, 168-71), and has ever since ranked as one of the most suggestive and valuable pamphlets in our Theosophical literature. He was doing well, and there was a good chance for him to retrieve much of his lost spirituality if he would only stop with us; but after giving his promise to do so, he obeyed an irresistible impulse and rushed back to Wadhwan and to destruction. His mind did not recover its equilibrium; he turned Roman Catholic, then recanted back into Islam, and finally died, and was buried at Junagadh, where I have seen his humble tomb. His case has always seemed to me a dreadful instance of the danger one runs in dabbling with occult science while the animal passions are rampant.”

Regarding this extraordinary personage, two passages occur in H. P. B’s The Secret Doctrine. They are as follows:

“. . . an Englishman whose erratic genius killed him. The son of a Protestant clergyman, he became a Mahomedan, then a rabid atheist, and after meeting with a master, a Guru, he became a mystic; then a theosophist who doubted, despaired; threw up white for black magic, went insane and joined the Roman Church. Then again turning round, anathematized her, re-became an atheist, and died cursing humanity, knowledge, and God, in whom he had ceased to believe. Furnished with all the esoteric data to write his ‘War in Heaven,’ he made a semi-political article out of it, mixing Malthus with Satan, and Darwin with the astral light. Peace be to his—Shell. He is a warning to the chelas who fail. His forgotten tomb may now be seen in the Mussulman burial ground of the Joonagadh, Kathiawar, in India.” (Vol. II, pp. 244-45, fnote).

“. . . he was a most extraordinary Mystic, of a great learning and remarkable intelligence. But he left the Right Path and forthwith fell under Karmic retribution . . .” (Vol. II, p. 541, fnote).

Nevertheless, H. P. B. recommends in several places his remarkable essay on the “War in Heaven” (The Theosophist, Vol. III, Nos. 1-3, Oct., Nov., and Dec., 1881, pp. 24-25, 36-38, 67-70, respectively) and quotes several passages from it in The Secret Doctrine.––Compiler.]

Social work, whether in the ordinary sense of feeding & clothing the poor, or as a disciple or member of the bodhisattva Brotherhood, is the heart of Theosophy. But the latter person must, at some point, go into retreat, physically as well as psychologically. This is necessary to fix ones equanimity, compassion, wisdom & power firmly into oneself, so one will be a better helper of beings.

Nicholas,

So the guy was nutty as a fuitcake? I wonder why they chose his article as the first chapter in the book...?

You said,

"But the latter person must, at some point, go into retreat, physically as well as psychologically. This is necessary to fix ones equanimity, compassion, wisdom & power firmly into oneself, so one will be a better helper of beings. "

--> This does bring up a good point. Some people expend all of their energy working for a particular cause. You are correct in that we have to take time to improve ourselves too. The purpose of Theosophy is for us to accelerate our progress along the Path — such acceleration cannot occur if we are out pursing too many causes.

Of course, there are people out there who are making incredible progress with particular causes. I like to think these people are Nirmanakayas — people who have already reached Adeptship, and are here to work for a particular cause. (It makes sense to me.)

From the same CW 6 247:

So, generally speaking, Adepts do not work directly on this plane, but only their disciples.

Nicholas,

I guess I wish I was reading The Collected Writings instead of Five Years of Theosophy....

Here they are - but you probably mean you wish you had more of the books - not just online versions.

http://www.tonh.net/theosofie/hpb_cw_online/

The new volumes may run $30? - not sure; but here are some used prices for individual volumes. Read a few articles online and if you like that volume a lot, buy it used.

Hi everybody!

I am over the initial shock of the mistaken idea, "We should not do social work". I am deeper into the book now, and it is starting to get much better.

The first part of the book deals with what it really means to become a Chela (student, disciple). Some of the quotes are worth sharing.

We must develop discipline along moral, mental, and physical lines.

"...the prescribed course of self-discipline commences here. It may be stated briefly that [beginning Chelaship] is a course of moral, mental, and physical development, carried on in parallel lines — one being useless without the other. The physical man must be rendered more etheral and sensitive; the mental man more penetrating and profound; the moral man more self-denying and philosophical."

Here is the author's list of things to give up before becoming a Chela:

alcohol
meat
sex
austerities
avarice, fear, and envy
worldly pride, uncharitableness, hatred, and finally, ambition and curiosity.

(page 19)

I am curious as to people's reaction to curiosity being on the list.

Here is a list provided by HPB:

http://www.tonh.net/theosofie/hpb_cw_onlin...4/y1883_095.htm

See also a similar list in CW 8, 294.

Nicholas,

That list of requirements in that link you gave

"1. Perfect physical health;
2. Absolute mental and physical purity;
3. Unselfishness of purpose; universal charity; pity for all animate beings;
4. Truthfulness and unswerving faith in the law of Karma, independent of any power in nature that could interfere: a law whose course is not to be obstructed by any agency, not to be caused to deviate by prayer or propitiatory exoteric ceremonies;
5. A courage undaunted in every emergency, even by peril to life;
6. An intuitional perception of one’s being the vehicle of the manifested Avalokiteœvara or Divine Atman (Spirit);
7. Calm indifference for, but a just appreciation of everything that constitutes the objective and transitory world, in its relation with, and to, the invisible regions.

Such, at the least, must have been the recommendations of one aspiring to perfect Chelaship. With the sole exception of the first, which in rare and exceptional cases might have been modified, each one of these points has been invariably insisted upon, and all must have been more or less developed in the inner nature by the Chela’s UNHELPED EXERTIONS, before he could be actually put to the test.

When the self-evolving ascetic—whether in, or outside the active world—had placed himself, according to his natural capacity, above, hence made himself master of, his (1) Sarira—body; (2) Indriya—senses; (3) Dosha—faults; (4) Duhkha—pain; and is ready to become one with his Manas—mind; Buddhi—intellection, or spiritual intelligence; and Atma—highest soul, i.e., spirit. When he is ready for this, and, further, to recognize in Atma the highest ruler in the world of perceptions, and in the will, the highest executive energy (power), then may he, under the time-honoured rules, be taken in hand by one of the Initiates. He may then be shown the mysterious path at whose thither end the Chela is taught the unerring discernment of Phala, or the fruits of causes produced, and given the means of reaching Apavarga—emancipation, from the misery of repeated births (in whose determination the ignorant has no hand)...." (pp. 608-609)

is the exact same list in Five Years of Theosophy on pages 51-52. (I wonder who copied who.)

Five Years copied some articles from five years of same published in The Theosophist, as the subtitle says. The CW link was to one of the articles compiled by the editor Mead of Five Years book.

So where does "curiosity" come in?

For comparison's sake, here's another list from "At the Feet of the Master":

Discrimination

Desirelessness

Good Conduct
1. Self - control as to the mind.
2. Self - control in action.
3. Tolerance.
4. Cheerfulness.
5. One - pointedness.
6. Confidence.

Love

Jon,

Thanks for sharing that. That is another great list of steps to pre-Chelaship.

Nicholas,

You said before that At the Feet of the Master was actually copied from a Hindu source. Where was that source?

Regarding curiosity, let me give an example. As you know, I have recently bought a house. I am now becoming a good concrete and chain-link-fence technician. Learning these technologies actually is fascinating, and they do cause me to become more curious about such things.

I think this is what the non-curiosity statement refers to: There are tons of technology out there we know nothing about, and it would be fun to learn them. However, they are just more forms of Maya that distract us from accelerating our progress along the path. (I completely agree with this idea.)

Regarding curiosity and the list from At the Feet..:

Isn't curiosity a desire? A desire for knowledge/understanding? For self?

I was just posting a comment on another list regarding desire and desirelessness, from a somewhat different perspective.

On Sunday nights at Wheaton, we have been havig a study group reading Nisargadatta Maharaj's book "I Am That". Nisargadatta was a contemporary Advaita Vedantist. Many of his dialogs with seekers were recorded in the book.

Here is the quote I was thinking about re desirelessness:

Desiring anything else is just another desire.

Shankara's Vivekacudamani or Crest Jewel of Wisdom, as it can be translated.

Here is another version of the disciple's qualifications from HPB:

From volume eight of the Collected Writings online

Nicholas,

Thanks for sharing that. I am still reading the book Five Years. It is really becoming a book of Do's and Dont's for would-be Chelas. I am starting to really appreciate that people should not attempt Chelaship if they are not ready. The more I read all this stuff, the more I am convinced of the need to master all of the pre-Chela requirements before even thinking of applying for Chelaship.

One point made in the book was, if any character flaws still remain in the new Chela, the flaws will surface. The book describes the stress all Chelas go through, and how these old flaws can really get in the way. The book highlights the case histories of some failed Chelas. It sounds really yuckky to be in such a situation. (I wonder if failing a Chelaship causes people to actually lose progress along the Path.)