Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00609)

Hi all of you,

The following is my view on the debate:
I think, that Blavatsky didn't intend her scriptures The Secret Doctrine and
articles to be taken litterally as it seems to be the case in the below
debate, when we talk about what Aryanism really is !

But some readers won't use and think in the terms of the 'seven keys' as
used and mentioned by Blavatsky in
her scriptures.

( Try the "The Secret Doctrine" written by H. P. Blavatsky ,
vol 1., p.165, 264-5, 310-??, 325, 464 --- and vol 2. p. 22, 334-35 and
more...)

To me the below examples are - very important for westerners - if they want
to understand what direction Blavatskys wisdom are moving...

Below are 5 examples on the issue:
>>>
Here an example from "The Secret Doctrine", vol1., p. 265:
"To make the whole clearer and to show at the same time the enormous
difference in the spirit of interpretation and the original meaning of the
same symbols between the ancient Eastern Occultists and the Jewish Kabalists
we refer the reader to Book II., "The Holy of Holies.*"
* Phallic worship has developed only with the loss of the keys to the true
meaning of the symbols. It was the last and most fatal turning point from
the highway of truth and divine knowledge into the side path of fiction,
raised into dogma through human falsification and hierarchic ambition.

>>>
Here an example from "The Secret Doctrine", vol1., p. 310-11:
"The many-sided facets of the mystery language have led to the adoption of
widely varied dogmas and rites in the exotericism of the Church rituals. It
is they, again, which are at the origin of most of the dogmas of the
Christian Church, e.g., the seven Sacraments, the Trinity, the Resurrection;
the seven capital Sins and the seven Virtues. The seven keys to the mystery
tongue, however, having always been in

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Vol. 1, Page]] 311 EGYPT'S MANY RELIGIONS.

the keeping of the highest among the initiated Hierophants of antiquity, it

is only the partial use of a few out of the seven which passed, through the
treason of some early Church Fathers -- ex-initiates of the Temples -- into
the hands of the new sect of the Nazarenes. Some of the early Popes were
Initiates, but the last fragments of their knowledge have now fallen into
the power of the Jesuits, who have turned them into a system of sorcery."

>>>
Here an example from "The Secret Doctrine", vol1., p. 318-19:

But while supposing that the whole cycle of the universal mystery language
will not be mastered for whole centuries to come, even that which has been
hitherto discovered in the Bible by some scholars is quite sufficient to
demonstrate the claim -- mathematically. Judaism having availed itself of
two keys out of the seven, and these two keys having been now rediscovered,
it becomes no longer a matter of individual speculation and hypothesis,
least of all of "coincidence," but one of a correct reading of the Bible
texts, as anyone acquainted with arithmetic reads and verifies an addition
or total.* A few years longer and this system will kill the dead letter of
the Bible, as it will that of all the other exoteric faiths, by showing the
dogmas in their real, naked meaning.

And then this undeniable meaning, however incomplete, will unveil the
mystery of Being, besides changing entirely the modern scientific systems of
Anthropology, Ethnology and especially that of Chronology. The element of
Phallicism, found in every God-name and narrative in the Old (and to some
degree in the New) Testament, may also in time considerably change modern
materialistic views in Biology and Physiology.

Divested of their modern repulsive crudeness, such views of nature and man,
on the authority of the celestial bodies and their mysteries,

[[Vol. 1, Page]] 319 MOSES COPIED FROM SARGON.

will unveil the evolutions of the human mind and show how natural was such a
course of thought. The so-called phallic symbols have become offensive only
because of the element of materiality and animality in them.

(Footnotes)
* All we have said in Isis is now found corroborated in the "Egyptian
Mystery; or The Source of Measures," by those readings of the Bible with the
numerical and geometrical keys thereto.


>>>
Here an another example from "The Secret Doctrine", vol1., p. 325:
The SEVEN KEYS open the mysteries, past and future, of the seven great Root
Races, as of the seven Kalpas. Though the genesis of man, and even the
esoteric geology, will surely be rejected by Science just as much as the
Satanic and pre-Adamic races, yet if having no other way out of their
difficulties the Scientists have to choose between the two, we feel certain
that, Scripture notwithstanding, once the mystery language is approximately
mastered, it is the archaic teaching that will be accepted.

>>>
"The Secret Doctrine", vol2., p.22:
All the words and sentences placed in brackets in the Stanzas and
Commentaries are the writer's. In some places they may be incomplete and
even inadequate from the Hindu standpoint; but in the meaning attached to
them in Trans-Himalayan Esotericism they are correct. In every case the
writer takes any blame upon herself. Having never claimed personal
infallibility, that which is given on her own authority may leave much to be
desired, in the very abstruse cases where too deep metaphysics is involved.
The teaching is offered as it is understood; and as there are seven keys of
interpretation to every symbol and allegory, that which may not fit a
meaning, say from the psychological or astronomical aspect, will be found
quite correct from the physical or metaphysical.


I hope you understand, that wisdom is important !



PART 2

The following could be given to students at Theosophical Schools - IF - they
will
benefit from it.

Here is something on

"*** Organisations, Books and superficial readings ***


People read books, which affect them in various ways. They will admit that
they
cannot get the best out of a book if, say they are too young or
inexperienced
to know the words, or to understand what the author is talking about. But
once
they are adult, and accustomed to reading books, they will assume that they
must be able to profit by the text in exactly the way in which the author
intended. This is not bourne out of experience, and it is even unsound
otherwise, being based upon an assuption for which there is NO proof.
The way in which some books are written, and the purpose for which they are
written, is only half understood by most people. The idea, for instance,
that a
book is designed to be read under certain circumstances, or different stages
of
development, is not well know to current cultures. If a book appears to be
understandable, the reader will take it that it means just what he or she
has
been able to deduce it means. This is not, of course a correct assumption.
Books of real developmental value can be read only under their own
conditions.
The teacher explains the way in which the book is to be read, and other
things
necessary for the current position of the student. Poeple very often
recommend
books to each other to read, without knowing about the inner content of the
book or the fact that the book may in fact be highly technical contrivance,
simply looking like an ordinary book. A book of abstruse philosophy, and in
the
East we have many, may merely cloak directions for carrying on various
essential exercises, which are infinitely more precious thanthe intellectual
content of the book. Again, people who are recommended books not
infrequently
are greatly moved by them emotionally.
Experiment will readily show that a book on religion, given to someone who
does not know how to read it for its specific directions, will merely move
that
person emotionally; either because the words or the phrases are such as to
evoke emotion, or because of the person who gave them the book or the
recommendation. These reactions are superficial, though they may appear to
the
ungenerate reader to be deep.
Since the Middel Ages, when books minus the knowledge of how to use them
became more plentiful, this problem has existed, and become more acute. The
amusing thing is that we now have millions of books, in some of whose texts
there is lurking the knowledge, the REAL knowledge, which the academician
does
not suspect.
It is as if we had a rhymed telephone directory, thinking that the rhyme was
the point, without knowing that at a certain time and place this book is of
inestimable other, practical, value."

(Almost taken verbatim from "The Commanding Self" by Idries Shah, d.1996.
The
same goes for the previous email on "Writing").


Now one could compare the above with Theosophical books, their content.
Other
books than what we more ordinarily call Theosophcial could or should of
course
also be considered.





from
M. Sufilight


----- Original Message -----
From: <stevestubbs@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:39 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Composites and counterparts


> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kpauljohnson <kpauljohnson@y...>"
> <kpauljohnson@y...> wrote:
> > Perhaps the attitude of superiority of Kashmiri and Punjabi light
> > skinned Indians towards darker South Indians might figure into
> HPB's
> > Aryanism. Maybe the readiness of 20th century Indians to accept
> the
> > Kashmiri Nehru-Gandhi dynasty had something to do with this same
> > Aryanism. Yet the dynasty that has been leading the Theosophical
> > movement through most of the 20th century has been South Indian, as
> > was Krishnamurti.
>
> Wasn't Subba Rao of south Indian origin?
>
> > That ignores the crucial, and hidden-in-plain-sight case of Swami
> > Dayananda Sarasvati. (And her mythologizing his disciple Shyamaji
> > Krishnavarma in letters to her aunt in Russia.) But after being
> > publicly *disowned* by the Master she came to India to publicly
> > serve, she was not likely to make the same mistake again.
> > Mythologizing her other and later mentors protected her from any
> such
> > embarrassments down the road.
>
> That is an ingenious theory. What do you make of the fact that she
> concealed her association with P.B. Randolph's organization, while at
> the same time copying from his stuff? I mention this because it was
> while she was still in New York, before the breakup with Dayananda.
> You may remember that the Randolph association is hotly and
> disingenuously denied by Fundamemtalists today, as evidenced by the
> enormous amount of outraged fustian that apeared on this site.
>
> One other point of interest is that Blavatsky identified herself as
> Buddhist while she was still in New York. That suggests she already
> had an Oriental preceptor in addition to Randolph but there is no
> evidence she knew anything of consequence about Buddhism at he time.
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>