What are the cornerstones and foundations of new age religion?

[winter light]

Hello ayar415:

Krishnamurti was almost a leader of Theosophy but had a falling out and refused the role. Then he also denies most of what they teach. I've met a lot of new age people or listened to their ideas and I would say none of the new agers I demonstrate much interest in teachings of Krishnamurti.

Related article about the differences: https://www.filosofiaesoterica.com/k...and-theosophy/

Theosophy made attempts to integrate and transform the traditional religions into something new with teachings from the ascended masters. Krishnamurti adamantly insisted that all older ideas should be done away with. So while he is a significant spiritual teacher in the last century his teachings do not reflect most core new age concepts.

On the other hand, the attempts by Theosophy to make him their leader was I think a misguided and willful attempt to form yet another unbalanced religion power structure. So effectively by rejecting it completely, his teachings became a balancing effect. With teachings that would reach similarly-minded people who also wish to make a clean break from the past. He became their inspiration instead. So in effect, by breaking off, it allowed more people to be included in the new sharing of knowledge. He seems to be a champion of freedom. Which is also key to the new age.

The new age is universal. Everyone has a part to play. Thanks for raising the question as it helped me to better understand the role that Krishnamurti plays in this.

[CosmicWonder]

Thanks all :) I have no idea who all these people are, so I’m impressed!

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by winter light

Krishnamurti adamantly insisted that all older ideas should be done away with. So while he is a significant spiritual teacher in the last century his teachings do not reflect most core new age concepts.

I like your analysis and would like you to explore it a little further. The Wiki definition of New-Age is quoted below:

"While Christianity upholds that humanity is God's creation, New Age considers human kind to be just another part of every thing that exists."

What are "new age concepts"? Are traditional (Christian) concepts any different - fundamentally - from new age concepts?

Krishnamurti rejected all concepts: i.e no ideas either old or new. This is where the difficulty is. Death is the key, he said. Die to the self before the body dies. No God, no devotee.

[winter light]

ok here is what I got for now...

It is hard to put all of the Christians in the same box. Some of the "U" churches like Unity, Unitarian are Christian-based are very open to exploration of new age ideas. However other churches consider anything new age to be feared.

What I see is that Christianity expects you to derive your spiritual experience primarily or exclusively from Bible study and contemplation. The degree of tolerance for outside ideas varies widely depending on the Christian group. The more conservative groups also treat "personal interpretation" of the scriptures as suspect unless they align closely to what is written. Then there are some Christian churches that explore mystic or ecstatic states. I know they are out there but I don't have any direct experience with them to consider.

Whereas the new age concepts are very open and inclusive. All of the sub-sections of this forum gives you a pretty good idea of what new age concepts. You can take inspiration and practice from suits your own personal truth. That includes choosing ideas and methods from other religions, channeling, psychic readings, astrology, energy healing, etc, etc.

With new age it is assumed that each individual has their own personal connection to the divine. And has the right to choose how to explore and express that. So you are not accountable to any external group or teaching. That kind of wild freedom of thought makes some people uneasy. So new agers take heat from all of the traditionalists and tend to be feared and scrutinized way out of proportion to any actual harm caused. In my opinion. For the most part are harmless and very accepting of the paths of others.

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by winter light

With new age it is assumed that each individual has their own personal connection to the divine. And has the right to choose how to explore and express that. So you are not accountable to any external group or teaching.

By your definition, Krishnamurti is new age. Reject authority. Truth is a pathless land, he said. "Be a light to yourself." No gods, no guru, nothing!

Are you a new ager?

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by winter light

EXCERPT New age and not really well organized like a religion on a large scale. Theosophy historically is what I would say is the root of new age teachings. Then more recently there is Church Universal Triumphant and also Church of the Seven Rays.

Theosophy began with Olcott's purse while at the same time, he published one of the best books on seances. Madame Blavatsky sought out Olcott who was publishing in the newspaper, excerpts of what was going on at this place where the seances where held. What kicked off the 'seances' was Modern Day Spiritualism' which began about 12 miles from where the Mormons began over 1 and 1/2 decades prior.

And we can keep going back in time and find out there have been a lot of contributors that got the New Age 'going'.

[winter light]

hi ayar415,

Yes I suppose. I am many things. I am just beginning to find common ground with some of Krishnamurti's ideas. But I find his teachings too limited because he rejects everything whereas my path is to accept everything. There is some overlap when you go to the end it circles back to the beginning. I suppose it depends how you see things.

I accept definitions for the sake of communications, but when they get in the way I discard or adjust them as needed. Relationships are more important to me than ideas. From my experience of relationships I do not agree with no guru no nothing. And I do not represent new agers or Christians. I am just another sentient being in the universe sharing the experience.

[winter light]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Theosophy began with Olcott's purse while at the same time, he published one of the best books on seances. Madame Blavatsky sought out Olcott who was publishing in the newspaper, excerpts of what was going on at this place where the seances where held. What kicked off the 'seances' was Modern Day Spiritualism' which began about 12 miles from where the Mormons began over 1 and 1/2 decades prior.

And we can keep going back in time and find out there have been a lot of contributors that got the New Age 'going'.

Yes I understand how the origin has threads going back and back. But what impresses me about Madame Blavatsky is how organized her teachings are and the content is very clear and deep into the nature of shifting of humanity globally into the new age guided by spiritual teachers. To me the first true modern channel of that sort. My opinion anyhow. The Mormon teachings do not attract my interest in the same way and seem more of a soul-group effort.

[BigJohn]

As for the Mormons: I put that in as a tidbit. As I mentioned, Modern Day Spiritualism began 12 miles away from Hill Cumorah which I found interesting. As for that greater area, quite a few religions merged from that area. One of the last groups was Jehovah Witnesses.

I found Madame Blavatsky interesting but in a different way. Her and Olcott were very much into Theravada Buddhism. She didn't stick with that version of Buddhism whereas Olcott became deeply emerge in putting together a Buddhist catechism. A study of how the Theosophical Society began parallels in many ways the 'beginning' of the Masters.

[winter light]

It does seem like that region was central to a lot of spiritual activity around that time.

From what you noted about Madame Blavatsky and my own impressions it seemed that she was more in line with Mahayana Buddhism than Theravada Buddhism. And everything I just read confirmed that. I also did not realize had such a strong relationship with Japanese Buddhists as well such as D. T. Suzuki and who was also a Theosophist.

And then I noticed his charter was very similar as well: "The Eastern Buddhist Society (EBS) was founded in 1921 by D. T. Suzuki, Sasaki Gesshō, Akanuma Chizen, and others for the purpose of relaying the true spirit of Buddhism to the modern world." https://www.jstor.org/stable/44362467