[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Political conspiracy against TS and Blavatsky?

Dec 27, 2009 08:27 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen

Dear friends

My views are:

This is lengthy article.

Please do not consider this as anything but a defence of H. P. Blavatsky's good name and reputation and the theosophical cause as I view it - and - which I consider to be aiming at non-political activities, and not aiming at espionage, political involvements and sinister conspiracies. At least not until after the year 1891, when things can be said to have begun to change into a more political direction for the TS movement. Something which until today has not clearly been revealed by the Theosophical Society and other more or less politically involved offshoots thereof.

I have just read the following quite official theosophical article...
"Mikhail Katkov and H.P.B.'s Political Loyalties" .

I therefore write this e-mail to protest in the name of compassion and truth to the webmaster of the below link against such a promotion and cleverly disguised (perhaps unconscious sought) attempt at turning H. P. Blavatsky into a SPY-seeking Occultist. And this with an article with quotes taken completely out of context. I have the humble hope, although I fear that Truth might be not fully appreciated, that they Author of the website will remove this article from the website - or at least seek to show a reeditted and more fair version thereof. I will say, that: Words contain energies and have impacts on peoples minds.

Let me seek to explain my views a bit further:

The article begins with a false statement seeking to turn H. P. Blavatsky in to a Russian Spy in her early days in 1872, before the time of The Theosophical Society in 1875.

Here is the relevant excerpt:

Mikhail Katkov and H.P.B.'s Political Loyalties
K. Paul Johnson
"In late 1872, Madame Blavatsky offered her services to the Director of the Third Section, the intelligence agency of the Russian government, saying that she would be useful as a secret agent because of her familiarity with European politics as well as her skills as a medium and actress:

"During these twenty years I have become well acquainted with all of Western Europe. I zealously followed current politics not with any goal in mind, but because of an innate passion; in order better to follow events and to divine them in advance, I always had the habit of entering into the smallest details of any affair, for which reason I strove to acquaint myself with all the leading personalities, politicians of various nations, both of the government factions and of the far Left...I, writing this letter with the aim of offering my services to Your Excellency and to my native land, am obligated to tell you the entire truth without concealment. And thus I must confess that three-quarters of the time the spirits spoke and answered in my words and out of my own considerations, for the success of my own plans. Rarely, very rarely, did I fail, by means of this little trap, to discover people's hopes, plans and secrets...I have played every role, I am able to represent myself as any person you may wish."(1) " 
(Maria Carlson's, "No Religion Higher Than Truth", p. 316)

I will state my own views:
The following are just my views. Of course som persons would like to disagree.
And how knows some might find me to be in error. But I will question them to document their views.

- First of all the above quote is not from any original letter of H. P. Blavatsky's. It is from a written copy. The original or just a scanned copy of the original has been sought by a number of researcher, but none have seen it. The article does not mention this.
- Second. Such a letter might have been fabricated at the same time or much later with a certain agenda in mind. And if so, obviously a non-theosophical one. 
- Third. The letter could be telling the truth, but this does not at all fit with the later words given by H. P. Blavatsky about herself and even various other of her enemies about her. It can indeed be said that the article is grasping after straws, where there are none or very few to reach. But this is not as far as I read it, what the article is pretending to reveal, and that is why I protest.

- Fourth. The question is why Solovyov's accounts according to the author of the article are more questionable than the non-original letter in the above? The article omits any answer to this question. No answer, is no answer.

The lattter part of the article is as such attempting to outweigh the above quote by Maria Carlson. That is fair enough as far as it goes. But why is the quote by Maria Carlson left unquestioned? I do not find this to be fair.

More over, I will have to reject the above article on the spot. This because the article is as I see it uncritically relying too much on second-hand authors testimony and articles - not seldom taken out of context - and baseless and even nasty insinuations in the face of the god Old Lady, also known as H. P. Blavatsky. - I dear say, that Journalists and Scholars will never be able to picture the truth in an honest and fair manner unless, they as a minimum listen much more carefully to the words of the main person they so more or less bluntly accuse of being politically involved and even have had the intent of being a first class SPY.

Have any of you ever seen a fair trial where the words of the accused was omitted or HALF of her testimony left out? The same for this article. Is this honest theosophical teaching?

An example. The article quote HPB's letter to Sinnett:
"I am ready to become an infamous informer of your English Govt. WHICH I HATE, for their sake, for the sake of my Society and of my beloved Hindus...For I feel, that however great the harm that will be done, it will end in the English having the best...your Govt. here and in India, is so stupidly short sighted " (ref. 10)

And we answer, that this quote is taken out of context and omits a very importance sentence just prior to the first sentence quoted. HPB here says:
" I want the Society to go on with its work, to progress and not to be disturbed with any political complications."

- First. The political implications only araises when such a very private letter is made public.
- Second. And even so, we will have to -fully - understand that the letter was written in a quite different timeperiod, and what this entails, before we can claim that we know its full implications. Blavatsky's manner of writing aught, as those who have read her extensively might know, not to be taken too litterally - and certainly not out of context. Such letters between theosophists can often be read omitting the use of the dead-letter.

And the article claims the Blavatsky shows contempt for the Russian government saying: "But while HPB felt contempt for the Russian government and diplomacy," - while omtting, that we in the previous quote just heard her say that she hates the English Government.

AND then the article quite out of the blue claims:
"And it seems that when speaking to an Irishman, Charles Johnston, she shared Katkov's attitudes about the desirability and feasibility of a Russian invasion of India."

And this view is based only on these words by Blavatsky given på the theosophical author Johnston:
""`I don't understand how these Englishmen can be so very sure of their superiority, and at the same time in such terror of our invading India.'

`We could easily hold our own if you did, H.P.B.,' ventured the patriotic secretary, pulling himself together, but evidently shaky yet, and avoiding her eye. She was down on him in an instant: `Why!' she cried, `what could you do with your poor little army? I tell you, my dear, when the Russians do meet the English on the Afghan frontier, we shall crush you like fleas!'

I never saw anything so overwhelming. She rose up in her wrath like the whole Russian army on a war footing and descended on the poor Briton's devoted head, with terrific weight. "(12) "

And M. Sufilight asks:
- First. How can one find any indication from these words by Blavatsky that she had any intentions sharing "Katkov's attitudes about the desirability and feasibility of a Russian invasion of India"? 
- Second. Is this fair theosophical teaching?

Such a conclusion is as I see it tending to mud-throwing or at least wishful thinking based on no solid ground.

4. The only thing I can find in the article said to be written by Blavatsky, which seems disturbing to theosophical ethics is the following letter to the Editor of the Moscow Herald, aug. 1887.

Here the article in mention is quote with the following words from Blavatsky:
"For four days I have been in a daze...He is no Russian and no patriot, who in these trying days does not recognize this death as an irreparable loss for our long-suffering fatherland; and that no other similar true sentinel of its national interests lives now...forever shut is the watchful eye which safeguarded both the honor and the interests of Russia." (13) 
Just tjek the reference 13:
"We know that personally he was not against England, but when England and Russia were in a fight for supremacy, he had no hesitancy to defeat and humiliate England, i.e. he did what should be done by a Russian. A few more Katkoffs would be very useful to us."*"

M. Sufilight says:
- First. I wonder if the quote actually was her words, while admitting, that the overall style of writing in the article resembles Blavatsky's.

- Second. And we are here relying on that the translation into english was faithfully performed with a proper eye for the fact that past words has not the same meaning as today.

- Third. Yet, as I see it, the letter to "Editor of the Moscow Herald" which is said to be written by Blavatsky is the only place, where one honestly (from this article) can document, that Blavatsky - to a certain extend - can be said to have been perhaps unwillingly involved in political intrige or sought to guide politically.  
This was Something she, as we later will see, clearly denied ever having attempted at, and which she rejects as "the greatest nuisance and a bore, the most false of all systems in the code of ethics." See the later quote in this e-mail.

- Fourth. And Blavatsky says at the beginning of this article: "I have no idea into whose hands this letter may fall or who will read it. But whoever he may be, he surely will be a Russian, and everyone who is truly Russian will understand that it has been written not merely for the sake of propriety, but under the weight of a sincere and heavy grief over the death that has shocked us all." --- Maybe it was a schock that provoked such an article by Blavatsky, because i cannot make this article with with Blavatsky's many many other activities, where she never involved herself with political tension in public writing.

- Fifth. The article or letter might have been change through censure.

Just so that no reader of this e-mail are going to misjudge the letter by Blavatsky and who Mr. katkov really was I will quote the following very accurate excerpt from the Wikipedia:

Mikhail Katkov - Wikipedia
"During the twenty-four years of editorship he exercised considerable influence on public opinion and even on the Government, by representing with great ability the moderately Conservative spirit of Moscow in opposition to the occasionally ultra-Liberal and always cosmopolitan spirit of St Petersburg. With the Slavophiles he agreed in advocating the extension of Russian influence in the Balkans, but he carefully kept aloof from them and condemned their archaeological and ecclesiastical sentimentality.

Though generally temperate in his views, he was extremely incisive and often violent in his modes of expressing them, so that he made many enemies and sometimes incurred the displeasure of the press censure and the ministers, against which he was more than once protected by Alexander III in consideration of his able advocacy of national interests. "

So we can not question whether the letter by Blavatsky had been covered with censure-ship? - This question aught to be asked.

- - - - - - -

The conclusion reached by the author of the article is:
"The conclusion I reached after years of research was that HPB was deeply ambivalent, part of a conspiracy without fully understanding its ramifications, having love/hate relationships with both Russia and Britain. "

And I will answer:
Yet, Unexamined assumptions and prejudices will never provide the truth of who H. P. Blavatsky was in the early 1870'ties and even later in her life.

Selective suspisions and a tenendcy to seek drama where there are none, will not create the truth, no matter how big insinuations or perhaps even distortions of the truth one seek to create. The Law of Karma and the individuals conscience will always be ready at hand. - I do hope that the publisher of the website with its article will seek a clean conscience.

Blavatsky was also under the Russian surveillance suspecting her for being an English spy!

Try - A BERLIN MARE'S NEST (by Blavatsky)
"To conclude, though feeling no passionate love for any monarchical Government, and a positive disgust and hatred for the politics of every one of them, I never felt half the hostility for the most despotical as I feel for those sensational mischief-breeding "correspondents" who having no news of importance to send, try to implicate individuals innocent of any guilt toward the country which affords them hospitality, if not any actual protection, by cooking up messes of gossip and conjecture in which the ingredient of common sense furnishes none of the seasoning.

- - -
H. P. Blavatsky said in defence of herself against the to the extreme numerous nasty attacks against her personality the following in an answer to a similar Russian Spy attack from a Lady A. de Grasse Stevens.

"I have never written in all my life on politics, of which I know nothing. I take no interest in political intrigues, regarding them as the greatest nuisance and a bore, the most false of all systems in the code of ethics. I feel the sincerest pity for those diplomats who, being honourable men, are nevertheless obliged to deceive all their lives, and to embody a living, walking LIE." (H. P. Blavatsky)

These words are omitted from the article in mention even when we witness the article uses the above link as an reference. I do hope that the author of the website will keep this view by H. P. Blavatsky in mind and heart.

The theosophist James Santucci also wrote about Blavatsky and espionage:

My conclusion is:
Either Blavatsky is lying or the Quote by Maria Carlson is lying.

The present day Intelligence Communities:
False fabrications are always possible to manufacture if one have a need to promote a certain agenda - whether it be a one of Freemasonry, Christian,  a Spiritualistic one or a political one; - especially if the present day Intelligence Community are eager to help it along.

So the honest reader will from the above link maybe understand that Maria Carlson's, "No Religion Higher Than Truth", p. 316 was not the first attempt throw mud at H. P. Blavatsky about her being a russian SPY.

- - -
HPB said in 1883:
"Neither the Tibetan nor the modern Hindu Mahatmas for the matter of that, ever meddle with politics, though they may bring their influence to bear upon more than one momentous question in the history of a nation-their mother country especially."
(Blavatsky Collected Writings, Volume 6 Page 15  )

HPB said in 1888:
"I am confident that, when the real nature of Theosophy is understood, the prejudice against it, now so unfortunately prevalent, will die out. Theosophists are of necessity the friends of all movements in the world, whether intellectual or simply practical, for the amelioration of the conditions of mankind. We are the friends of all those who fight against drunkenness, against cruelty to animals, against injustice to women, against corruption in society or in government, although we do not meddle in politics. We are the friends of those who exercise practical charity, who seek to lift a little of the tremendous weight of misery that is crushing down the poor. But, in our quality of Theosophists, we cannot engage in any one of these great works in particular. As individuals we may do so, but as Theosophists we have a larger, more important, and much more difficult work to do."
(Blavatsky Collected Writings Volume 9 Page 241 )

The Theosophists said in 1891:
The Theosophists - Constitution and Rules for the TS:


1. Any Fellow who shall in any way attempt to involve the Society In political disputes shall be immediately expelled. 

- - - - - - -

I find the issues in this e-mail important, especially because of the later events within the Theosophical Society during Annie Besant's involvement with the The Indian National Congress - and also A. O. Hume's involvement. One might almost say, that Annie Besant started when A. O. Hume left the scene in 1912. A. O. Hume were one of the main persons mentioned in the Mahatma Letters and Blavatsky's letters to A. P. Sinnett.

More on A. O. Hume (1829-1912) here:

- - - - - - - 
I will end the e-mail here, because I will not use more time on examining the issue.
I think I have stated at least some fresh views on Blavatsky's non-involvement with politics and non-espionage. Views which H. P. Blavatsky as a minimum deserves to be given in the light of all her activities against political involvement from the begining of the TS in 1875 to the end of her physical corpse open official activity in 1891.

M. Sufilight

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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application