Re: Theos-World Blavatsky, Nazism and Brotherhood
Jun 16, 2010 05:25 PM
by jdmsoares
M. Sufilight, friends
Thanks M. Sufilight.
I think we all make our best to be independent thinkers and that's
an most important aspect, if we want to be faithful to the spirit of the
original program of the theosophical movement.
Now, nobody wants to "drag the theosophical teachings of all ages to
a low level". The point here is totally the opposite.
After the World War II, there was an effort to establish some principles
that could prevent such horror and suffering of happening again.
What was done, and everyone is free to disagree, was to form and elevate
an institution to a higher level, introducing on it important ethical
principles.
Off course that someone may say that it's "not high enough",
compared to the theosophical teachings. But that does not denigrate the
theosophical ideals, on the contrary.
If we can elevate our eyes above the present imperfections - not just
looking at the surface - we will see lights of hope in many areas of
human activity.
As HPB wrote in the "Key to Theosophy":
"Progress can be attained, and only attained, by the development of
the nobler qualities. Now, true evolution teaches us that by altering
the surroundings of the organism we can alter and improve the organism;
and in the strictest sense this is true with regard to man. Every
Theosophist, therefore, is bound to do his utmost to help on, by all the
means in his power, every wise and well-considered social effort which
has for its object the amelioration of the condition of the poor."
[http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm#p231
<http://www.phx-ult-lodge.org/aKEY.htm#p231> ]
Let's not forget our dharma.
Fraternal greetings,
Joaquim
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "M. Sufilight" <global-theosophy@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Joaquim
>
> My views are:
>
> Joaquim asked:
> "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"?"
>
>
> M. Sufilight says:
> Let me throw you an answer about what I think and know about it.
> In the earliere E-mail I iamed to show you this, and I also quoted
Blavatsky saying that law making and courts are not in accordance with
the theosophical teachings.
> The theosophical teachings promote the Law of Karma (as a hypothesis
until verified) and not human Laws signed by fat or rich people, who
promote themselves with ideologies which are based on lies and deceit,
political spin, and where their ethics vawers and belong to the voters
and opinion polls etc. etc. Politicians, which opereate through
ideologies not based on the Mening of Life, or theosophy, can never lead
people towards a Universal Brotherhood of Humanity. To drag the
theosophical teaching of all ages down to such a low level as the United
Nations Security Counsil today operates through - with its permanent
members etc. - will be rejected on the spot. The same with the
International Tribunal for War Crimes and similar man-made superficial
"Laws", which seek to bypass the Law of Karma. Only the Law of Karma is
able to Judge, whereas ignorant or "betterknowing" humans, laywers with
expensive clothes and judges with an image to nourish are certainly NOT!
> The Theosophical Society was formed to oppose any kind of materialism
and dogmatism. And since the UN Charter fails in this, we can hardly
find it to be in accordance with theosophical teachings.
>
> These are views in accordance with the theosophical teachings as they
were given in 1875-1891. Later branches and offshoots, and later leaders
of the Theosophical Society have deviated from these views. There can be
no doubt about this.
>
> The political involvement is promoted by each member state in the
United Nations. This fact can hardly be denied.
> Well these are my views. Am I really the only one who find these views
to be in accordancewith the theosophical teachings as they were given in
1875-1891?
>
>
> M. Sufilight
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jdmsoares
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 2:13 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Blavatsky, Nazism and Brotherhood
>
>
>
>
> 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@...:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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]
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
