Theos-Talk Archives (June 2010 Message tt00030)

Martha, M. Sufilight, friends

Thanks.

I think it's very important to reflect upon the role of original
Theosophy and its PRACTICAL application in the world.

And Theos-talk is a place were we can discuss "on topics regarding
Theosophy (or theosophy) and its realization in the modern world"
(as we can read in its description note).

Although not mine, I'm very glad that the article about
"Theosophy and the Second World War" had made a strong
impression.

For me, after reading this article, what was really impressive was the
misuse of sacred symbols by the Nazis, or the support of the Vatican to
Fascism, or even the great example of courage given by hundreds of
theosophist in several European countries, during those dark years.

Besides this, I also find very inspiring to find the theosophical ideal
of Universal Brotherhood mirrored in the United Nations. After all,
that's also PRACTICAL application of the main object of the
theosophical movement.

But there are those who don't think so.

In one of the most important letters received by the Sages of Himalayas
we can read:

  "Shall we devote our selves to teaching a few Europeans fed on the
fat of the land, many of them loaded with the gifts of blind fortune,
the rationale of bell ringing, cup growing, of the spiritual telephone
and astral body formation, and leave the teeming millions of the
ignorant, of the poor and despised, the lowly and the oppressed, to take
care of themselves and of their hereafter the best they know how. Never.
Rather perish the Theosophical Society with both its hapless founders
than that we should permit it to become no better than an academy of
magic and a hall of occultism. That we, the devoted followers of that
spirit incarnate of absolute self sacrifice, of philanthropy, divine
kindness, as of all the highest virtues attainable on this earth of
sorrow, the man of men, Gautama Buddha, should ever allow the
Theosophical Society to represent the embodiment of selfishness, the
refuge of the few with no thought in them for the many, is a strange
idea, my brothers."

  (View of the Chohan on the T. S., link:
http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-choh.htm
<http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/mahatma/ml-choh.htm> )



  Now, may I ask: it's not evident the seed of brotherhood present in
"one of the main long term objects" of the United Nations? What
is the need to defend the original ST, just because someone recognizes a
theosophical ideal present in an organisation that brings together
virtually all the nations of the world? Where is the so call
"political involvement"?

Let's not chase windmills. Nobody is talking about parties or
politics. We are talking about Ethics! What we are talking here it's
about one of the many ways that the ideals of Theosophy can be
"planted" in the world.

  After years of atrocity and oppression perpetrated by the Nazi and
Fascists regimes, the democratic countries of the world made a
compromise not to forget such painful experience that was the World War.
On December 10th of 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

  In that declaration we can find the ethical principles for the new
millennium, the same ethic present in the core of all religions and
philosophical traditions of the world ? the Ethics of Perennial
Wisdom, or Theosophy.

  The first and main object of the theosophical movement, founded in 1875
in New   York City, is:

  "To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity,
without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or color"

  The United Nations Charter commits all member states to promote:

  "[U]niversal repect for, and observance of, human rights and
fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex,
language or religion".

(http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml
<http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml> )

  The article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says:

  "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one
another in a spirit of brotherhood."

  I just wonder: how it would be this world if we do not have already the
theosophical ideal of brotherhood present, even if imperfect, in such a
practical way? How more suffering for millions of people, beyond that
they already live, if not for the established surveillance of those who
have the Human Rights Declaration of UN as an aim for all?

  As for we, theosophical students, the words of the Master remain always
present:

  "That we (?) should ever allow the Theosophical Society [or
Theosophical movement] to represent the embodiment of selfishness, the
refuge of the few with no thought in them for the many, is a strange
idea, my brothers."



Fraternal greetings,

  Joaquim



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Martha Vieira <marthavi@...> wrote:
>
> Joaquim,
>
> Thank you.
>
> Commentaries linking Theosophy and Nazism are misconceptions that
ought to
> be elucidated, always. The articles you mentioned do it successfuly.
> Theosophy do not mix with politics, but the situation in WWII was one
of
> crime against mankind, not actually politics. H.P.B. 's work stands
against
> opression, falsehood and violence, whatever form it assumes. It stands
for
> brotherhood, peace and freedom, no matter where or when these
initiatives
> appear.
>
>
> Fraternal greetings
>
> Martha
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:17 PM, M. Sufilight
> global-theosophy@...wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks Joaquim
> >
> > My views are:
> >
> > Your e-mail make me respond again in defence of the original
Theosophical
> > Society (1875-1891) before HPB died.
> > At least the below is my view on it. others might think that it is
wrong,
> > and that we all should be entangled with politics instead of wisdom.
> >
> > Carlos wrote the following in his article:
> > "* The first and main object of the theosophical movement, which
refers to
> > the ideal of Universal Brotherhood, was clearly adopted by the
United
> > Nations. The first Article of the U.N. Charter, which states the
four
> > Purposes and Principles of the U.N., is profoundly theosophical. The
United
> > Nations goals are:
> >
> > "1) To maintain peace and security (...); 2) To develop friendly
relations
> > among nations (...); 3) To achieve international cooperation in
solving
> > international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or
humanitarian
> > character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights
and for
> > fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex,
language,
> > or religion; and 4) To be a center for harmonizing the actions of
nations in
> > the attainment of these common ends." [19]"
> >
> > M. Sufilight says:
> > Well...when I read this, I did not at first believe my eyes, and
then I
> > remembered that something was quite wrong...
> >
> > The United Nations Charter in fact states something quite different,
if the
> > words are read in their entirety...
> >
> > The Purposes of the United Nations are:
> > 1.. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end:
to take
> > effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of
threats to
> > the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other
breaches
> > of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in
conformity with
> > the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or
settlement of
> > international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of
the
> > peace;
> > 2.. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for
the
> > principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to
take
> > other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
> > 3.. To achieve international co-operation in solving international
problems
> > of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in
> > promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for
fundamental
> > freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or
religion;
> > and
> > 4.. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the
attainment
> > of these common ends.
> > http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml
> >
> > - - -
> >
> > M. Sufilight says:
> > Now I do not mind, that people only like to read the good they see.
Yet H.
> > P. Blavatsky and other theosophists never hesitated calling politics
for
> > Low-Ethics in 1875-1891..
> > And the Constitution of the Theosophical Society was against
political
> > involvement as late as Januar 1891, before Annie Besant and others
changed
> > it. Saying that the United Nations is the same as theosophy or to
insinuate
> > such a thing is, aught to be shown in its true and honest light - as
a false
> > and deceiving activity, and aught to be rejected on the spot.
> >
> > I will dearly say, that Followers of The Theosophical Society in its
> > original spirit (1875-1891) should always be on guard - and - seek
to reject
> > any kind of politicizing or Christianizing of its Main Aims. The
creation of
> > a Nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of humanity can never ever be
> > achieved by writing man-made laws on a piece of paper, by the use of
human
> > Courts (swaering by the Bible or the Quran) and Judge, and more or
less
> > sickening prisons. Such a construction will never end the strifes
between
> > the worlds religions and never make politicians change and begin to
deal -
> > honestly - with the Meaning of Life, instead of continously get
entangled in
> > Spin, Party politics based on no-solid rock, and in compromizing
with
> > ethics.
> >
> > An example:
> > And should we state that Friendly relations and equal rights among
Afghan
> > people (in accordance with the UN Charter) without question has been
> > promoted by the United Nations since the western forces invaded that
> > country?
> > But why deceive people into thinking that the United Nations has the
first
> > object of the original Theosophical Society (1875-1891) as their aim
as
> > well, when it all in all is not the truth? This baffles me.
> > I wonder, what agenda there could be behind such a promotion.
> >
> > H. P. Blavatsky in fact also wrote in The Key to Theosophy:
> > "Abolish the oath in Courts, Parliament, Army and everywhere, and do
as the
> > Quakers do, if you will call yourselves Christians. Abolish the
Courts
> > themselves, for if you would follow the Commandments of Christ, you
have to
> > give away your coat to him who deprives you of your cloak, and turn
your
> > left cheek to the bully who smites you on the right. "Resist not
evil, love
> > your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate
you," for
> > "whosoever shall break one of the least of these Commandments and
shall
> > teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of
Heaven," and
> > "whosoever shall say 'Thou fool' shall be in danger of hell fire."
And why
> > should you judge, if you would not be judged in your turn? Insist
that
> > between Theosophy and the Theosophical Society there is no
difference, and
> > forthwith you lay the system of Christianity and its very essence
open to
> > the same charges, only in a more serious form. "
> > http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm
> >
> > And interestingly is it that the United Nations Headquarters in New
York
> > was build in accordance with what we know as Modernism.
> >
> > H. P. Blavatsky wrote on politics:
> >
> > "Unconcerned about politics; hostile to the insane dreams of
Socialism and
> > of Communism, which it abhors-as both are but disguised conspiracies
of
> > brutal force and sluggishness against honest labour; the Society
cares but
> > little about the outward human management of the material world. The
whole
> > of its aspirations are directed towards the occult truths of the
visible and
> > invisible worlds. Whether the physical man be under the rule of an
empire or
> > a republic, concerns only the man of matter. His body may be
enslaved; as to
> > his Soul, he has the right to give to his rulers the proud answer of
> > Socrates to his Judges. They have no sway ove the inner man. "
> > ( In the very first number of the first volume of the magazine, The
> > Theosophist, that for October 1879, in the article "What Are the
> > Theosophists?" (reprinted in U.L.T. Pamphlet No. 22) we find the
above from
> > H. P. blavatsky)
> > http://www.teosofia.com/Mumbai/7112politics.html
> >
> > - - -
> >
> > *** Let us not forget the next main articles of the United Nations
Charter
> > ***
> >
> > "Article 2
> > The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated
in
> > Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
> >
> > 1.. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign
equality of
> > all its Members.
> > 2.. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and
benefits
> > resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the
obligations
> > assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
> > 3.. All Members shall settle their international disputes by
peaceful means
> > in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice,
are not
> > endangered.
> > 4.. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from
the
> > threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political
> > independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with
the
> > Purposes of the United Nations.
> > 5.. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in
any
> > action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall
refrain
> > from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations
is
> > taking preventive or enforcement action.
> > 6.. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members
of the
> > United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may
be
> > necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
> > 7.. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the
United
> > Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the
domestic
> > jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit
such
> > matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle
shall
> > not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter
Vll.
> > Article 3
> > The original Members of the United Nations shall be the states
which,
> > having participated in the United Nations Conference on
International
> > Organization at San Francisco, or having previously signed the
Declaration
> > by United Nations of 1 January 1942, sign the present Charter and
ratify it
> > in accordance with Article 110.
> >
> > Article 4
> > 1.. Membership in the United Nations is open to all other
peace-loving
> > states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter
and, in
> > the judgment of the Organization, are able and willing to carry out
these
> > obligations.
> > 2.. The admission of any such state to membership in the United
Nations
> > will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the
> > recommendation of the Security Council.
> > Article 5
> > A Member of the United Nations against which preventive or
enforcement
> > action has been taken by the Security Council may be suspended from
the
> > exercise of the rights and privileges of membership by the General
Assembly
> > upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The exercise of
these
> > rights and privileges may be restored by the Security Council.
> >
> > Article 6
> > A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the
> > Principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the
> > Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the
Security
> > Council. "
> > http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml
> >
> > M. Sufilight
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: jdmsoares
> > To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:24 PM
> > Subject: Re: Theos-World Blavatsky and Nazism
> >
> > Dear Friends,
> > Thanks MKR to bring again to this group this topic about the
> > misconceptions aroud Theosophy and it supposed influence on Nazism.
> > There are still circulating on the web and in some books a lot of
false
> > ideais about HPB and Theosophy.
> > That article of Carlos is really opportune.
> > In this context, there is another article that i would like to draw
your
> > attention:
> > "THEOSOPHY AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR - Nazism, Fascism, and the
> > Theosophical Movement During The Twentieth Century
> >
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-w\
\
> > 
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-w\
>ar.html> "
> >
> > Direct link:
> >
http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-wa\
\
> > 
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-w\
a>r.html
> >
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-w\
\
> > 
<http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/2010/05/theosophy-and-second-world-w\
>ar.html>
> >
> > Joaquim
> >
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>,
"M.
> > Sufilight" global-theosophy@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks MKR
> > >
> > > My views are:
> > >
> > > This made me react and try to just one more time get an response
from
> > the honourable leaders of the TS about the follownig views...
> > >
> > >
> > > Carlos wrote:
> > > "7) You fail to see that Helena Blavatsky did not engage in any
> > anti-British Movement or pro-Indian Independence Movement, and that
> > even the Theosophical Society (Adyar) was pro-British during the
Second
> > World War, not to mention all the other branches of the Movement; "
> > >
> > > M. Sufilight says:
> > > This I write the following...
> > > What Carlos seem to fail seeing is, that Blavatsky and the
> > Theosophical Society was against any kind of political involvement.
> > > Try The theosophical Constitution and Statutes given in The
> > Theosophist - January 1891. And also the ORIGINAL PROGRAM
MANUSCRIPT,
> > written 1886 in BCW, Vol. VII, p. 145. Both of them are clearly
against
> > political involvement. H. S. Olcott wrote against political
involvement
> > of the T.S. members in 1882.
> > >
> > > . In the very first number of the first volume of the magazine,
The
> > Theosophist, that for October 1879, in the article "What Are the
> > Theosophists?" (reprinted in U.L.T. Pamphlet No. 22) we find the
> > following from H. P. blavatsky:
> > >
> > > "Unconcerned about politics; hostile to the insane dreams of
> > Socialism and of Communism, which it abhors-as both are but
disguised
> > conspiracies of brutal force and sluggishness against honest labour;
the
> > Society cares but little about the outward human management of the
> > material world. The whole of its aspirations are directed towards
the
> > occult truths of the visible and invisible worlds. Whether the
physical
> > man be under the rule of an empire or a republic, concerns only the
man
> > of matter. His body may be enslaved; as to his Soul, he has the
right to
> > give to his rulers the proud answer of Socrates to his Judges. They
have
> > no sway ove the inner man. "
> > >
> > >
> > > In the Supplement to The Theosophist for July 1883 can be found a
very
> > important pronouncement by Col. H. S. Olcott, the co-founder and
> > President of the Theosophical Society, against mixing Theosophy and
> > politics. This statement, which H.P.B. endorsed, reads:
> > > "That our members, and others whom it interests, may make no
mistake
> > as to the Society's attitude as regards Politics, I take this
occasion
> > to say that our Rules, and traditional policy alike, prohibit every
> > officer and fellow of the Society, AS SUCH, to meddle with political
> > questions in the slightest degree, and to compromise the Society by
> > saying that it has, AS SUCH, any opinion upon those or any other
> > questions. The Presidents of Branches, in all countries, will be
good
> > enough to read this protest to their members, and in every instance
when
> > initiating a candidate to give him to understand-as I invariably
do-the
> > fact of our corporate neutrality. So convinced am I that the
perpetuity
> > of our Society depends upon our keeping closely to our legitimate
> > province, and leaving Politics "severely alone," I shall use the
full
> > power permitted to me as President-Founder to suspend or expel every
> > member, or even discipline or discharter any Branch which shall, by
> > offending in this respect, imperil the work now so prosperously
going on
> > in various parts of the world."
> > > http://www.teosofia.com/Mumbai/7112politics.html
> > >
> > >
> > > This alone leads me to consider whether Olcot and Blavatsky would
not
> > have expelled Annie Besant and perhaps even the present day
Theosophical
> > Society's leaders, because the do not in any clear manner reject
> > political involvement - and the present day Constitution and
Statutes
> > have deleted the paragraph saying:
> > > "ARTICLE XIII
> > > Offences
> > > 1. Any Fellow who shall in any way attempt to involve the Society
In
> > political disputes shall be immediately expelled."
> > > (The Constitution and Statutes, written in The Theosophist, Januar
> > 1891)
> > >
> > >
> > > As long as no member in TS Adyar will go forward and clearly
exlpain
> > why it has been necessary to deviate from the original programe with
> > regard to politics during Annie Besants leadership, and during the
> > present day leadership, I se no reason to join the TS, because then
it
> > must really be a carcass reasting on no solid grounds.
> > >
> > > Silence is of course also an answer.
> > > And we ask in the name of compassion: Is this how you promulagte
> > theosophy? When will you teach theosophy proper?
> > >
> > > ----
> > > (B)
> > >
> > > Carlos wrote:
> > > "9) You fail to see that H.P.B.'s Theosophy is completely against
any
> > conception of a "unfailing leader", a concept which belongs to the
> > Vatican, to Nazis, and to Fascists."
> > >
> > > M. Sufilight says:
> > > This I write the following...
> > > I wonder if Carlos fails to see, that the present day TS does not
> > clearly and visibly seem offer such a view to outsiders and
potential
> > members about J. Krishnamurti's role in the TS of the past and the
> > present?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Well I found these question important to ask.
> > > And one can only wonder whether the TS only promotes theosophy
towards
> > the Jews, and leave all honest Blavatskyan Theosophists in the cold.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > M. Sufilight
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: MKR
> > > To: theos-talk
> > > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 4:01 AM
> > > Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky and Nazism
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The subject of the influence of HPB's writing on Nazism has been
> > discussed
> > > in the past in various forums.
> > >
> > > There is a very interesting discussion in a recent article at <
> > > http://www.esoteric-philosophy.com/> titled:
> > >
> > > 'Message to an Author Who Did not Study Theosophy'. It is very
well
> > written
> > > and theosophists would find it interesting.
> > >
> > > MKR
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Visite: www.filosofiaesoterica.com
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>



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