When disaster strikes our fellow men and women, whether in the form of natural disasters, terrorist attacks, fatal accidents, war, or indeed any catastrophe of any kind, what can we – who view ourselves as spiritual people – do about it?
Does it help the sufferers and others affected by such tragedies if we pray for them or send positive thoughts or “visualisations” in their direction?
Depending on which Theosophists you ask, you may get different answers. Those who follow Robert Crosbie (the founder of the United Lodge of Theosophists) unquestioningly are likely to confidently answer that it does not help anyone except the one who is doing the thinking, i.e. ourselves, and is thus of extremely limited and non-altruistic value. This is the assertion Crosbie makes in “Answers To Questions on The Ocean of Theosophy” p. 234. He says there that even the Masters are unable “to affect humanity by their thoughts” and thus “have to write books” instead. Since many mistakenly believe that Crosbie’s explanation of Theosophical teachings is always perfectly in accord with those of HPB and WQJ, they assume that the rather severe and iconoclastic approach he often took to things – including our above question – must be accurately representative of the Theosophical stance on the matter.
But that is not always so. Here’s what William Judge (HPB’s most trusted colleague) actually had to say about it:
“Here is something, then, for you to do:— to think strong helpful thoughts for all the members of the T. S. [i.e. Theosophical Society] and for your friends, and then for the whole of humanity. It may be that when a bright helpful thought comes into your own life, it has been sent forth from some other, who is trying to lighten the load of the world’s suffering, and all the loving helpful thoughts that you can send out will help to lighten someone’s sadness, and bring a ray of hope into someone’s life. Each thought is a seed, and will bear fruit in due season.” (“Letters That Have Helped Me” p. 173-174)
That is a positive, constructive, and hopeful answer, and a reassurance that it “will help,” it “will bear fruit.” He naturally does not promise that it will solve all the problems or fix anything completely, but it is at least bound to help.
Some Theosophists might respond, “That may be so but Theosophy definitely draws a line at praying for people. Petitionary prayer is untheosophical.” It may be that some of us have demonised the terms “prayer” and “petitionary prayer” to such an extent that we have not even stopped to reflect and realise that any verbal prayer is merely the outermost clothing of a thought, an intention, a wish, a desire, etc.
If one imagines that one will achieve beneficial results for the welfare of others by formally and swiftly reciting a standard ecclesiastical prayer, or by sending a halfhearted wish up to one’s conception of a God in Heaven, or by essentially telling God what He should do in a particular situation, this is indeed as misguided as to believe that one can get whatever one wants for oneself by petitioning God for it. Petitions made for one’s own selfish benefit, or whose result would involve harm to another (such as praying for one side to slaughter the enemy in a battle) – these are what H. P. Blavatsky strongly condemns when she denounces petitionary prayer, such as in “The Key to Theosophy.” Most Theosophists would not make prayerful petitions anyway but she says nothing against those whose petitions are in reality a selfless, humble outpouring of love, compassion, and a will to help and heal those who are suffering or in danger. Such petitionary prayer is absolutely Theosophical and the words the individual formulates it in are largely irrelevant, for in such a case it is quite literally “the thought that counts.”
Damodar K. Mavalankar notes:
“We act upon the principle that what is meat for one is death for another. While, therefore, some people may not be able to develop their latent psychic capacities without prayer, there are others who can. We set no value upon the words uttered. For, if the words had any effect, how is it that different religionists, although using different forms of expression, obtain the same result? Again, those who pray silently and intensely gain their object, while those who merely mumble some formula without understanding the meaning, get no answers to their prayers. As has been said in Isis Unveiled, we believe prayer is the giving of expression to the desire, which generates Will. And this WILL is all-powerful; its effect depending, of course, upon all the surrounding conditions. . . . We cannot expect the ordinary mortals, whose sensuous perceptions and avocations do not permit them to penetrate behind the mask, to do without the help of some external process.” (“On Prayer”)
But it is true, according to the Esoteric Philosophy, that there will always be a limit – sometimes a very big and significant limit – to the degree and extent that our good thoughts and/or prayers can help another or ourselves. That limit is the limit placed by Karma.
It is maintained that everything proceeds unfailingly according to the Law of Karma, meaning that in the past we created our present and in the present we are creating our future. The Law of self-created destiny which is known as Karma (the law of cause and effect, action and reaction, sequence and consequence) is the means whereby the universe maintains its constant balance, harmony, and equilibrium.
Nothing can ever happen outside of Karma. Everything that happens to us in life is either karmically destined or karmically permitted. It cannot be otherwise. By “karmically destined” we mean those things that had to happen in this present life of ours due to the powerful force of old causes generated by us in a prior existence. By “karmically permitted” we mean those things which were not actually destined for us but whose manifestation is permissible or “allowable” within the confines or limits of our overall Karma for this life. For example, you may not be karmically destined to have lung problems in this incarnation but if you become a long-term smoker it is quite likely that you will, and you may even die from that. That is simple physical cause and effect. But there is an additional factor involved, for we have all known people who smoked extremely excessively for 60-70+ years and lived healthily into their eighties or nineties. Their lungs would still surely have been affected but not in a way that actually manifested itself in their life situation, health, or experience.
So by all means, we should “think [and] send out . . . strong helpful thoughts” to any and all, as Judge advises, and we should do so with confidence that it will help. But just as Christians should ideally always remember to include the proviso “Thy will be done; not my will but Thine be done” in their petitions, one ought always to remember that even the most perfect and potent thoughts – and this does indeed apply even to the Mahatmas or Masters of Wisdom – will reach an “invisible barrier,” for want of a better expression, beyond which they cannot take any further or greater effect. Rather than this being a cause for discouragement, it can serve to humble us and remind us of the grandeur, majesty, and power that is inherent within all planes of this Universe, and which is in reality perfect Justice. For perfect justice necessitates that we must reap what we sow, and that what we reap is what we have sown. There is no divine favouritism, no cosmic unfairness, involved. There is also always the potential to deeply learn and spiritually grow from even the worst and most challenging situations. “And we know that all things work together for good to those that love God, to those who are called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28)
Sadly, many who pride themselves on their alleged spirituality are also often some of the least generous of people in terms of giving practical, direct, material help and assistance to those in need.
When disaster of whatever kind strikes, it should go without saying that we need to contribute in whatever way we can – be it by donation of finances, direct practical assistance, offering a comforting and helpful support to the sufferers, etc. – to the relief of those affected by the tragedy. “Inaction in a deed of mercy becomes an action in a deadly sin,” says H. P. Blavatsky’s “The Voice of The Silence,” where it is also stated that Enlightenment “is of loving deeds the child.”
A minority of people are literally unable to help in any way at all beyond their thoughts and that is perfectly fine. They are themselves often in need of practical assistance. Most of us, however, can always spare at least a few £ and some minutes or hours of our time.
So even when we finally accept that there is in fact no real injustice in the world and that everything a soul reaps is as a direct result of what it has itself sown, let none of us neglect for even one moment the practical and sincere application of compassion – of LOVE – for all who suffer. We are always able to help others to the exact extent that their Karma will permit and thus we must always do our utmost.
It is not enough for us just to know and talk about the importance of compassion and selfless service . . . we must DO it, we must PROVE it, we must LIVE it . . . and until spiritual people become “doers of the Word, not just hearers only,” they can never expect to be taken seriously by the world at large.
“Thou canst not travel on the Path before thou hast become that Path itself.
“Let thy Soul lend its ear to every cry of pain like as the lotus bares its heart to drink the morning sun.
“Let not the fierce Sun dry one tear of pain before thyself hast wiped it from the sufferer’s eye.
“But let each burning human tear drop on thy heart and there remain, nor ever brush it off, until the pain that caused it is removed.”
– “The Voice of the Silence,” translated by H. P. Blavatsky from The Book of the Golden Precepts
~ BlavatskyTheosophy.com ~
For a more detailed and comprehensive study of prayer from the Theosophical perspective, you may wish to read
Regarding the Bible’s statements about prayer or anything else, Theosophy pays little attention and gives little – if any – credence to such things, since it considers the Bible to have been greatly distorted and altered from the originals of its texts, and would view much of those originals as being philosophically unsound in the first place anyway.
The focus and spiritual perspective of the Theosophical teachings is that of Eastern esotericism and it’s said in “The Secret Doctrine” that this can only be effectively rendered to the Western mind through the channels of Hindu and Buddhist philosophy, hence the very Hindu and Buddhist nature of much of the contents of Theosophy, although it must also be emphasised that Theosophy is not merely a form or expression of Hinduism, Buddhism, or any other religion.
How is it that there is a very small percentage of petitionary prayers – especially very intense and powerful ones – which do occasionally receive answers? HPB says: “Intense prayer for the accomplishment of some object is only intense will and desire, resulting in unconscious Magic. In our own day George Muller of Bristol has proved it.”
It is not the prayer itself which brings about the result in such cases, nor is it any type of God or external being, but simply the incredible force of will-power and focused intention. Such a faculty is well developed in a few individuals by reason of its development – either wittingly or unwittingly – over the course of several previous lifetimes, hence the occasional cases of some people (such as George Muller) “getting their prayers answered” in a seemingly miraculous and frequent way. Theosophy maintains that there is no miracle behind it but that the person is merely applying and using metaphysical laws and powers, usually unbeknownst to themselves.
I think the last part of your question was referring to Robert Crosbie’s words quoted in the article, that “Good and kind thoughts for others are good for those who think them, but they have no effect outside, unless the arouser of those thoughts has both the knowledge, will and power to direct them; and beings differ greatly in these. Most thoughts are like soap-bubbles and do not travel very far. Thoughts to be effective must not only be free from all selfish taint, but they must be sustained. The Masters, who of all beings are the most capable of sustained thought and have the power and knowledge, are not able to affect the minds of the people of the world, because those minds are constantly full of active, selfish thoughts. If Masters were able to affect humanity by their thoughts, they wouldn’t have to write books. If people, who can hear and read words intended to arouse the best in them, benefit so little by them, what hope is there in fugitive thinking?”
Doesn’t this in itself answer the question? I could add by means of elaboration that sending “a silent unheard prayer to someone in need, not invoking any kind of god,just a heart felt prayer of well being” is not in vain at all and Theosophy doesn’t say that it’s “all in vain.”
On the contrary, this is an act of compassion, kindness, and altruism, which will certainly help to develop and increase those noble and important qualities within us even further. What Theosophy DOES say is that “unless the arouser of those thoughts has both the knowledge, will and power to direct them; and beings differ greatly in these” the thoughts are unlikely to be of any actual or direct benefit or help to the person for whom they are thought or to whom they are “sent”.
Crosbie gives the example of the Masters (meaning the Masters behind H.P. Blavatsky and the Theosophical Movement), who DO have the power and ability to direct their thoughts and attention properly and effectively, but who in spite of this “are not able to affect the minds of the people of the world, because those minds are constantly full of active, selfish thoughts.” Hence their putting down of right ideas in book form instead, although even “people, who can hear and read words intended to arouse the best in them, benefit so little by them.” But the best that can be done is what must be done.
The Blavatsky Theosophy Group or BTG which you mention in your comments is really only a name applicable to this website and a few people who are connected with it in various ways. The views, concepts, and teachings presented in the articles on here are representative of those of the Theosophical Movement itself, particularly of the branch of the Movement known as the United Lodge of Theosophists or ULT for short. “Blavatsky Theosophy Group UK” only passes on what has already been presented to the world in the original teachings of Theosophy…it doesn’t promulgate any new or different ideas of its own.
Thank you again for your comments and queries!
Thank you- a very useful article and reminder of the core teachings.
This response has greatly increased my capacity to distinguish between healing on the one hand, and channeling by mediums on the other. The explicatory comparison to the Masters ability to exercise their thoughts – concurrent with will – is enlightening. Issues on healers are indirectly adduced.
Channeling remains abusive – excuse the epithet – by mediums. Crosbie’s contentions are quite valid on this subject. Meantime there are nuances – observations – to be considered.
I have a sustained experience of Mama Mona, a healer in Soweto. She would frustrate some of her probationers by refusing to get into the act of healing some patients. Her allusion would be based on something similar – Crosbie’s elaboration of “active and selfish thoughts” prevalent in some in need. May refer to the latter as state of mind or consciousness? There are no such things as miracles. “The act of compassion, like kindness and altruism …. will certainly develop and increase these noble and important qualities within us even further”. Furthermore “unless the arouser of these thoughts has both knowledge, will and beings differ greatly in these”. This has nothing to do with like distortions in the Bible of prayer. Quan Judge has reiterated consistent with “we are gods in embryo” from “Letters which helped me”. I find the response from the secretdoctrine March 25 ,2014 lucid. Thank you. Knowledge is not to be underestimated.
Thank you for your comment. You said “everything in our life does not happen due to karma, 60-70% life condition or event could be destined due to karma but not 100%.”
In response, we would say that Theosophy teaches that whatever is, is Karma. Everything without exception proceeds according to the Law of Karma, which is the law of self-created destiny…cause and effect, action and reaction, etc.
If Karma is truly a universal Law, then it must be the case that EVERYTHING is Karma. We cannot say that some things are and some things are not. If some things are not due to Karma then Karma cannot be a Law, since a Law – and especially one of cause and effect – does not fail and always operates.
You are invited to visit the “Articles” page at https://blavatskytheosophy.com/articles/ and to read some of the other articles listed there under the heading “THE LAW OF KARMA.” Please feel free to disagree with these teachings…we are merely attempting to clarify them so that you may understand more of our reasons and rationale for saying such things about Karma.
Thank you for the reply!
I am indian and as per my understading Everything does not happend by karma. If everything is Karmic then it would “fatalism”. Hinduism and buddhist does not teach fatalism.
Misconceptions regarding Kamma or karma
The misinterpretation or irrational views on kamma are stated in the Anguttara Nikaya which suggests that the wise will investigate and abandon the following views:
– the belief that everything is a result of acts in previous lives;
– the belief that all is the result of creation by a Supreme Ruler; and
– the belief that everything arises without reason or cause.
If a person becomes a murderer, a thief, or an adulterer, and, if his actions are due to past actions, or caused by creation of a Supreme Ruler, or if that happened by mere chance, then this person would not be held responsible for his evil action.Buddhists believe that man will reap what he has sown; we are the result of what we were, and we will be the result of what we are. In other words, man is not one who will absolutely remain to be what he was, and he will not continue to remain as what he is. This simply means that kamma is not complete determinism. The Buddha pointed out that if everything is determined, then there would be no free will and no moral or spiritual life. We would merely be the slaves of our past. On the other hand, if everything is undetermined, then there can be no cultivation of moral and spiritual growth. Therefore, the Buddha accepted neither strict determinism nor strict undeterminism.
Yes Law of karma is perfect,But everything is not due to our Karma..Fate is nothing but Past karma,But every moment we have free will to perform action(Kriyamana or Agami Karmas), and that free will is not operated by Past karma, if you say that everything is due to Karma than i wont have free will to do any action.Our current situation is result of Past karma or Fate But every moment we have free will to shape our future destiny or Fate.What we have created must be reap or faced. Karma create a boundaries and we play within that boundaries.So in other word i am agree if our karma allow then we will get something else we wont,But our every present action is not subject to Past karma.We are creating new fate while playing within Past kamra(Fate)..
Major events of our life are predestined due to Past karma because we are here to learn those lessons.Kriyamana or Agami Karmas are not subject to Past karmas..Every moment we have free will to do action which will create our Fate in future… We are master of our destiny!
I think you may have misunderstood our articles and comments.
Everything you say in your latest comment is what we say on this site. Theosophy talks about and explains Sanchita Karma, Prarabdha Karma, and Agami/Kriyamana/Vartamana Karma. The Theosophical view of Karma is not fatalism at all. It always emphasises that we have power to change, power to choose, and power to shape and fashion our own destiny. In fact, we are doing this every moment, whether we realise it or not, through our every thought, feeling, word, and action. We are setting causes in motion and for every cause there will always be a corresponding correlative effect coming back in due season to the causemaker, i.e. the point of origin, the soul or Ego who first initiated that cause.
Free will is a fact and there seems to be no actual disagreement or disharmony between your latest comment and the Theosophical teachings.
Perhaps the apparent confusion will be fully clarified if we explain that in saying that “everything proceeds according to the Law of Karma” we are not using the term “Karma” solely in the sense of PAST or PREVIOUS actions but rather are speaking of Karma as a whole, i.e. past, present, and future actions. Another way of expressing it would be to say that “everything in the Universe is the result of action and reaction.” I’m sure we can agree on this, since it is largely a self-evident fact.
There is never a moment, never a split second of time, when a human being is not both CREATING and EXPERIENCING Karma.
Thank you for explaining. Yeh i guess i misunderstood your article
Yes i am agree with you that “Everything has a reason”..Actually “Karma” is very complicated to understand for each person. so Yes if you say karma as whole, than present action,thoughts also have effect.