Re: What shall we do for our fellow...Mahatma?
Nov 11, 2002 03:31 PM
by netemara888
If you really go back to the original intent of TS it was
brotherhood. And that is also one of the main tenets of Islam--
brotherhood. Did this get lost in the minds of those who would be TS
detractors/derailers? Just because there were honest and painful
discussions about race? The concepts that SD presented are for
everyman. That was also her purpose to make the higher knowledge
plain or clear for all men. But she first had to pass muster with the
academics, political powers and those who would read her first: the
white middle classes.
She was a master politician herself: she said what the people wanted
to hear. But she also told the truth about the evolution and position
of the races. No matter how well it was said, it would NEVER go down
easily with those who would find a platform by which to proffer their
own careers. One said person, who died recently, Stephen J. Gould. He
had a big academic career and used it to try and destroy any
semblance of credibility for HPB. That is recent history. So it goes
on. But I mean to vindicate her writings.
Netemara
*****************
--- In theos-talk@y..., "Morten Nymann Olesen" <global-
theosophy@a...> wrote:
> Hi all of you,
>
> I can only suggest, that people add some more ('of the 7 keys')
value to the Upanishads. Since Theosophy doesn't differ so much from
the teachings of the Upanishads - i.e. when correctly understood... -
But as said it differs ! (But it is not for all to really learn true
Sanskrit.)
>
> 1. Some thoughts:
>
> I got this excerpt by Blavatsky:
> "And, because we refuse to accept the fallacies of some psycho-
physiologists as the last word of science, do we furnish thereby a
new proof that free will is an hallucination? We deride the
animalistic idea. How far more scientific and logical, besides being
as poetical as it is grand, is the teaching in the Kathopanishad,
which, in a beautiful and descriptive metaphor, says that: "The
senses are the horses, body is the chariot, mind (kama-manas) is the
reins, and intellect (or free will) the charioteer." Verily, there is
more exact science in the less important of the Upanishads, composed
thousands of years ago, than in all the materialistic ravings of
modern "physico-biology" and "psychophysiology" put together! "
> ("Studies in Occultism" By H. P. Blavatsky; - the chapter
on 'Psyhic and Noetic acton' http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/hpb-
sio/sio-pan.htm) ;
> And this excerpt by Blavatsky:
> "There is, and can be, no doubt that Vedanta and (exoteric)
Buddhism do not hold your view, but ours. Moreover, one could
scarcely dispute that Lord Buddha--whatever esoteric doctrine he may
have taught--founded monasteries, or that he favoured and assisted in
doing so. Whether he expected all his disciples to become
Bodhisattvas may be doubtful, but he certainly pointed out the "happy
life" of a Bhikshu as the road to salvation; he expressly abstained
from teaching cosmology or any worldly science; he never meddled with
the worldly affairs of men, but every assistance he rendered them was
entirely restricted to showing them the road to deliverance from
existence. And just the same with Vedanta. It prohibits any
attachment to worldly views and interests, or enquiries after
cosmology or evolution a fortiori socialism and any other world-
improvement. All this Vedanta calls Agnana (Buddhism: Avidya), while
Gnana or wisdom--the only aim of a sage (Gnani)--is but the striving
for the realization of the eternal (true reality, Atma).(a)
>
> Answer (a). It depends on what you call Vedanta--whether the
Dwaita, the Adwaita, or the Visishtadwaita. That we differ from all
these, is no news, and I have spoken of it repeatedly. Yet in the
esotericism of the Upanishads, when correctly understood, and our
esotericism, there will not be found much difference. Nor have I ever
disputed any of the facts about Buddha as now brought forward;
although these are facts from only his exoteric biography. Nor has he
invented or drawn from his inner consciousness the philosophy he
taught, but only the method of his rendering it. Buddhism being
simply esoteric Bodhism taught before him secretly in the arcana of
the Brahminical temples, contains, of course, more than one doctrine
of which the Lord Buddha never spoke of in public. But this shows in
no way that he did not teach them to his Arhats. Again,
between "attachment to worldly views or interests" and the study of
Cosmology, which is not "a worldly science" however, there is an
abyss. One pertains to religious and philosophical asceticism, the
other is necessary for the study of Occultism--which is not
Buddhistic, but universal. Without the study of cosmogony and
theogony which teach the hidden value of every force in Nature and
their direct correspondence to, and relation with, the forces in man
(or the principles) no occult psychophysics or knowledge of man as he
truly is, is possible. No one is forced to study esoteric philosophy
unless he likes it, nor has anyone ever confused Occultism with
Buddhism or Vedantism.--H.P.B."
> ("WHAT SHALL WE DO FOR OUR FELLOW-MEN?" Article by H. P. Blavatsky,
oktober 1889 ---
http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/WhatShallWeDoForOurFellowMen.h
tm)
>
>
>
> 2. The following are just views - Feel free to agree or....disagree:
>
> Sweet and good words are the best to use. The create peace and
ease. But, when people talk about tough issues they often get a
crowd. I mean no harm...
>
> A word on the - to some - possible racism in the theosophical
Mahatma Letters. I have to agree, that whenever the fearfull person
hear talks about 'races' or 'rootraces' or the like - the issue
racism comparatively easy comes to its mind. --- And especially when
ones eyes meet with that 'strange' theosophical LOGO containing
a .... a Swastika, whatever that is? Maybe a piece of Krupp Staal or
just a few lines of drawing?
> The frightened ones are not in doubt.
> And a magazine called 'Lucifer'. Oh dear - oh dear - were are we
now?
> You see Hitler Jugend was no joke - is was seroius stuff (or more
precis evil business, and that was NO good, and should be avoided):
> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Museum/6425/hitler.htm
>
> As long as Theosophy has teachings (on dead-letter print) on what
to other and more frigthened people are a "special" teaching on
races - there will be fear - and fear for, that theosophy will
mislead children.
>
> Today mind-manipulation is said to be out of the question in
Theosophical or ordinary schools or at scout-meetings.
> But is that really true ?
> And the Racist propaganda á la J. Goebbels has that vanished from
the childrens eyes on TV, PC-games etc...? Or is it just cleverly
hidden today?
>
> I do hope, that you all will understand, that only non-violence,
peace, love, good deeds and the like really can be the path forward
on this planet.
> We will for sure all of our small loyalities have to totally
transcend our race, tribe, culture and nation - if we are going to
have peace on this planet.
> As long as Theosophy or MAIN Theosophical groups in their PR and
tone of voice lacks being an example for others to follow - it will
fail in its tasks on the Wisdom teachings. The -dead-letter
theosophical teachings will have to be replaced by the 7 keys,
mentioned by Blavatsky. ("The Secret Doctrine" by Blavatsky, vol1.,
p. 318-19)
>
> Let Theosophy take care of their children with a high quality of
historical teachings in a most TRUE and proper sense of non-voilence.
> And let children be certain on, where they have you when the talk
about sexuality and A-RYAN races comes around - then certainly
no 'theosophical priest' named "W.C.Lumsy", his followers or the like
will be relevant as a TRUE theosophical teacher.
>
>
> Atma=Brahman
>
> Feel free to do your best...
>
> from
> M. Sufilight with ... shall we say...high hopes...and a smile >:-)
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application