Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00014)

Hi Daniel and all of you,


Yes let us see if Brian would dare answer on that !
>:-)


from
M. Sufilight with great hopes and expectations...well maybe...

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <comments@blavatskyarchives.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 7:35 PM
Subject: Theos-World 'WHITE' ARYANIST RACISTS... NETWORKED UNDER THE
'UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD' . . . .


> SUBJECT: 'WHITE' ARYANIST RACISTS... NETWORKED UNDER THE 'UNIVERSAL
> BROTHERHOOD' EUPHEMISM OF THEOSOPHY . . . .
>
> Brian/Brigitte quotes an anonymous correspondent who writes about
> those "Theosophists" who are "racists." I quote only a portion of
> the text:
>
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> "HER [Blavatsky's] RACE THEORY IS THE THREAD TYING ALL OF THESE
> ELITISTS TOGETHER. RACISTS IN INDIA, PERSIA, SRI LANKA, THE
> MIDDLE EAST (THROUGH MAYAVADI SUFISM), EGYPT (MORE
> MAYAVADA SUFISM), JAPAN, EUROPE, RUSSIA AND THE
> AMERICAS...ALL AROUND THE WORLD, 'WHITE' ARYANIST RACISTS (
> AND THEIR 'HIGHER'-RACES CO-CONSPIRATORS) NETWORKED UNDER
> THE 'UNIVERSAL BROTHERHOOD' EUPHEMISM OF THEOSOPHY.
> EVERYWHERE THEY DENIED RACISM, BUT WHAT IS THE RESULT OF
> THEIR INFLUENCE ? "BY THEIR FRUITS YOU SHALL KNOW THEM". I
> PERSONALLY MET THEOSOPHISTS IN JAPAN, SRI LANKA, INDIA AND
> NEPAL, IMPERSONALISM, ANTI SEMITISM , AND
> CONSIDERING 'BLACKS' TO BE ANIMALS WAS COMMON TO ALL OF
> THEM.
> ***
> SECRET DOCTRINE INDEX
> SD INDEX Sinhalese
> heirs to giants of Lanka II 407-8
> regard Veddhas as animals II 286-7
>
> VEDDAS ARE THE INDIGENOUS NEGROS OF SOUTH INDIA."
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> End of the quote.
>
>
> My observations are as follows:
>
> (1) In the above quote, a good number of assertions are piled one
> upon each other but without any valid evidence given to prove these
> assertions other than: "I PERSONALLY MET THEOSOPHISTS. . . . "
>
> (2) FORTUNATELY, I have never met a "Theosophist" with such beliefs
> as those described above!!!
>
> (3) The anonymous writer asserts: "EVERYWHERE THEY DENIED
> RACISM. . . . "
>
> If that is so, then how did the anonynmous writer gain the knowledge
> that they were racists? Did they only confide in him? Did they come
> right out and tell him that they believed "'BLACKS' TO BE ANIMALS"
> and that they were also ANTI SEMITIC?
>
> (4) Furthermore, why is the reader referred to the SD index for the
> info that "Sinhalese . . . regard Veddhas as animals"?
>
> Notice that this is followed by the commentary:
>
> "VEDDAS ARE THE INDIGENOUS NEGROS OF SOUTH INDIA."
>
> Were these Sinhalese actually "Theosophists"? Or were the Sinhalese
> influenced by all those racist Theosophists?
>
> In other words, what are we suppose to conclude from this tidbit of
> info given by the anonymous writer?
>
> Is the anonymous writer wanting us to conclude that Madame Blavatsky
> also believed that the Veddhas were "animals"?
>
> Actually, I'm very glad that the anonymous writer brought up the text
> of SD II, pp. 286-7.
>
> I quote a part of the text. H.P. Blavatsky writes:
>
> ". . . even in our own day, while the Singhalese regard the Veddhas
> of their jungles as speaking animals and no more, some British people
> believe firmly, in their arrogance, that every other human family --
> especially the dark Indians -- is an inferior race. Moreover there
> are naturalists who have sincerely considered the problem whether
> some savage tribes -- like the Bushmen for instance -- can be
> regarded as men at all. . . . "
>
> Let me pull out one statement and focus on that:
>
> ". . . some British people believe firmly, IN THEIR ARROGANCE, that
> every other human family -- especially the DARK Indians -- is an
> INFERIOR race." caps added.
>
> Isn't this "attitude" or "belief" by some British people what the
> Mahatma K.H. is referring to (indirectly) when he writes to A.P.
> Sinnett about "yourselves the white conquerors" [of India and other
> British colonies]?
>
> In a Dec. 1880 letter to Sinnett, K.H. brings up this same subject in
> some detail:
>
> "My dear, good friend, you must not bear me a grudge for what I say
> to him of the English in general. They are haughty. To us especially,
> so that we regard it as a national feature. And, you must not
> confound your own private views -- especially those you have now --
> with those of your countrymen in general. Few, if any -- (of course
> with such exceptions as yourself, where intensity of aspirations
> makes one disregard all other considerations) -- would ever consent
> to have 'a nigger' for a guide or leader, no more than a modern
> Desdemona would choose an Indian Othello nowadays. The prejudice of
> race is intense, and even in free England we are regarded as
> an 'inferior race.' And this same tone vibrates in your own remark
> about 'a man of the people unused to refined ways' and 'a foreigner
> but a gentleman,' the latter being the man to be preferred. Nor would
> a Hindu be likely to have such a lack of 'refined ways' disregarded
> in him were he 'an adept' twenty times over again; and this very same
> trait appears prominent in Viscount Amberley's criticism on
> the 'underbred Jesus.' Had you paraphrased your sentence and said: --
> 'a foreigner but no gentleman' (according to English notions) you
> could not have added as you did, that he would be thought the
> fittest. Hence, I say it again, that the majority of our Anglo-
> Indians, among whom the terms 'Hindu' or 'Asiatic' is generally
> coupled with a vague yet actual idea of one who uses his fingers
> instead of a bit of cambric, and who abjures soap -- would most
> certainly prefer an American to 'a greasy Tibetan.' But you need not
> tremble for me. Whenever I make my appearance -- whether astrally or
> physically -- before my friend A. P. Sinnett, I will not forget to
> invest a certain sum in a square of the finest Chinese silk to carry
> in my chogga pocket, nor to create an atmosphere of sandal-wood and
> cashmere roses." Quoted from:
> http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-5.htm
>
> Also notice what the Chohan communicated to Sinnett and Hume:
>
> ". . . the Theosophical Society was chosen as the corner stone, the
> foundation of the future religion of humanity. To achieve the
> proposed object a greater, wiser, and especially a more benevolent
> intermingling of the high and the low, of the alpha and the omega of
> society, was determined upon. The white race must be the first to
> stretch out the hand of fellowship to the dark nations, to call the
> poor despised 'nigger' brothers. This prospect may not smile to all.
> He is no Theosophist who objects to this principle. . . ." Quoted
> from: http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-choh.htm
>
> Does Brian/Brigitte and the anonymous writer want us to believe that
> Blavatsky, KH and the Chohan were also "'WHITE' ARYANIST RACISTS"
> with as much ARROGANCE as the British?
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>