Theos-Talk Archives (March 2009 Message tt00478)

http://theosophy.org/Blavatsky/Articles/AnimatedStatues.htm
Â
The administration of the Sacrament, the mystery of Transubstantiation "in the supposed conversion of the bread and wine of the Eucharist into the body and blood of Christ," would render the bread and wine and the communion cup along with them fetiches â no less than the tree or rag or stone of the savage African. Every miracle-working image, tomb and statue of a Saint, Virgin or Christ, in the Roman Catholic and Greek Churches, have thus to be regarded as fetiches; because, whether the miracle is supposed to be wrought by God or an angel, by Christ or a saint, those images or statues do become â if the miracle be claimed as genuine â "the receptacle or dwelling" for a longer or shorter time of God or an "angel of God." 
ÂÂÂÂ It is only in the "Dictionnaire des Religions" (Article on Fetichsme) that a pretty correct definition may be found: "The word fetich was derived from the Portuguese word fetisso, "enchanted," "bewitched" or "charmed"; whence fatum, "destiny," fatua, "fairy," etc. 
ÂÂÂÂ Fetich, moreover, was and still ought to be identical with "idol"; and as the author of "The Teraphim of Idolatry" says, "Fetichism is the adoration of any object, whether inorganic or living, large or of minute proportions, in which, or, in connection with which, â any 'spirit' â good or bad in short â an invisible intelligent power â has manifested its presence." 
The images of all the gods of antiquity, from the earliest Aryans down to the latest Semites â the Jews, â were all idols and fetiches, whether called Teraphim, Urim and Thummim, Kabeiri, or cherubs, or the gods Lares. If, speaking of the teraphim â a word that Grotius translates as "angels," an etymology authorized by Cornelius, who says that they "were the symbols of angelic presence" â the Christians are allowed to call them "the mediums through which divine presence was manifested," why not apply the same to the idols of the "heathen"? 
ÂÂÂÂ I am perfectly alive to the fact that the modern man of science, like the average sceptic, believes no more in an "animated" image of the Roman Church than he does in the "animated" fetich of a savage. But there is no question, at present, of belief or disbelief. It is simply the evidence of antiquity embracing a period of several thousands of years, as against the denial of the XIXth century â the century of Spiritualism and Spiritism, of Theosophy and Occultism, of Charcot and his hypnotism, of psychic "suggestion," and of unrecognized BLACK MAGIC all round. 




________________________________
From: Anand <AnandGholap@gmail.com>
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 18 March, 2009 12:57:37 AM
Subject: Theos-World Was Blavatsky a wrong choice for the foundation of TS?


I wrote this message at other group. Some people here might like to think on this topic, so I am pasting it here.
------------ --------- ---------
Blavatsky had strong Buddhist inclination. She was critical about Christianity and she attacked Christian ideas, some of her statements were highly insulting to Christians, e.g. when she said their God did not exist. First command for Christians is to love God with all of heart, mind and strength. And when Blavatsky said their God did not exist, it brought much opposition to Blavatsky, her Theosophy and the TS.
After the death of Blavatsky, philosophical leadership of TS went to Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater. Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater gave Theosophy with God as central idea. After Annie Besant all Presidents of Adyar TS followed Theosophy of Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater, which considered God as central idea.
That raises the question why Blavatsky, with her Buddhist inclination, was sent to Christian world. (Buddhism does not recognize existence of God). By sending Buddhist Blavatsky to Christian world Blavatsky only attracted harsh criticism. The headquarters of TS had to be shifted to India. Indians believe in God. In India also Blavatsky was not loved, and she had to go to London, where she died, without spreading Theosophy in England. England too had majority Christian population. It appears that if in the first place founder of TS was chosen as somebody who could explain Theosophy in THEIST terminology of Christians or Hindus, TS would have gained much more support and lot of unnecessary criticism would have been avoided.
Best
Anand Gholap





      Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/smarterinbox

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