Theos-Talk Archives (May 2006 Message tt00586)

Sufilight, you raise some interesting questions.

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...>
wrote:
>
> Hallo Daniel and all,
>
> My views are:
>
> The following was written out of compassion to everyone of you.
>
> So Blavatsky was very much wrong when she got the following published
in
> Lucifer?
>
>
> "THEOSOPHY OR JESUITISM?"
> http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/TheosophyOrJesuitism.htm (HPB,
> Lucifer - June 1888)
> . . .
> For, in the field of religious and intellectual pursuits, these two
are the
> only luminaries--a good and an evil star, truly--glimmering once more
from
> behind the mists of the Past, and ascending on the horizon of mental
> activities. They are the only two powers capable in the present day of
> extricating one thirsty for intellectual life from the clammy slush of
the
> stagnant pool known as Modern Society, so crystallized in its cant, so
> dreary and monotonous in its squirrel-like motion around the wheel of
> fashion. Theosophy and Jesuitism are the two opposite poles, one far
above,
> the other far below even that stagnant marsh. Both offer power--one to
the
> spiritual, the other to the psychic and intellectual Ego in man. The
former
> is "the wisdom that is from above . . . pure, peaceable, gentle . . .
full
> of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy,"
while
> the latter is "the wisdom that descendeth not from above, but is
earthly,
> sensual, DEVILISH."3 One is the power of Light, the other that of
Darkness.
> . . ."
In light of the words of KH:
> "... even the faintest shadow of difference ARMS seekers
> after the same truth, otherwise earnest and sincere, with the
> scorpion-whip of hatred against their brothers, equally sincere and
> earnest." caps added.
>
> In this example both "sides" are characterized as "earnest"
> and "sincere".
>
> But what happens if one side starts to believe
> or to "accuse" the other side of being NOT earnest, NOT sincere?

It seems to be difficult to be a seeker of Truth if you are wedded
to a particular creed, such as Roman Catholicism.  The RC or Jesuit
must always understand his World with respect to the principles of
his order. He tries to develop followers while the Theosophist tries
to develop free and indepedent thinkers.  The cold and calculating
mind of the Jesuit compared with the cool, undisturbed mind of the
adept must appear very similar to the uninitiated.  The question
consequently becomes: How do you recognize he who is insincere?
How do you react to such people?  These are the practical questions
of Universal Brotherhood.  Certainly, all is never as it appears.

Bruce




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]