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

Re: Theos-World Re:Those who study Blavatsky's writing become fundamentalists

May 26, 2005 01:02 PM
by M. Sufilight

Hallo Anand and all,

My views are:

I can agree with you on the Gardner issue. So let us put that at rest until
we withness some online copies of the letters.

2. On Phallicism I will have to refer to Blavatsky - one of the original founders
of the Theosophical Society.

The Secret Doctrine is a good place to start when one is ignorant about this issue.
Here are some of the places where Blavatsky talks about it in the book.

Here is a few of the important places. The book is filled with talk about it.
It must have been important to Blavatsky to write about this issue.
She had a reason no doubt.

SD Vol. 1, p. 114
SD Vol. 1, p. 264
SD Vol. 1, p. 317-318-319
SD Vol. 1, p. 452
One of the problems I have is the heavy use of male words - like calling God a "he" or "himself" in writings by especially Leadbeater, but also others; - writings which are offered beginner readers, which do not read between the lines. And that one at LCC at the same time - although maybe unintentional - promotes a personal MALE God - and not an immutable law - known as ParaBrahman. (Mahatma Letter 10, to A. P. Sinnett, 1881-2?)
This worng doing is not something which one aught to promote these days.
I know, that some will claim I am wrong. But please consider the beginner Seekers absorbtion of this teaching.

It is also Leadbeaters stance on the LCC teachings or liturgical issues, and the view that male physical bodies has more spiritual strength.
It is a false statement and not theosophical at all.

Theoosphy aught not to create a popery, someone said.
So, what did Leadbeater - he created a male bishop instead as if this was a solution !

And this is said as a true friend:
If you need more info on the phallic issues - Anand - then try to understand the expression "male chauvinism".
You could meditate a few years on that word - it might be quite helpful to you.
Well It might.


Anand wrote:
"Theosophy may be spread through internet in these areas and that is
happening. "

I think you misunderstand.

I was referring to the fact that there hardly is the same emphasis on
Middle Eastern culture and religion as there is on the western and Christian
one in the theosophical literature - and that Leadbeater and Besant especially
promoted an emphasis on the Christian religion while they ignored the Middle Eastern one
very heavily.

Today this and other similar facts are turning into becoming some vital problems to the theosophical groups.

Anand wrote:
"I think TS will slowly have Theosophical lodges in areas mentioned.
Much depends on social, economic, political conditions in any
country. "

Well, that is interesting.
But why is this important now, when it was not so back in the old days?
Christianity la LCC was more important, was it not?

Anand wrote:
"There is clear stance- Brotherhood without distinction on the basis
of race, culture etc."

I was referring to a MORE CLEAR stance - not business as usual
when we talk about the use of literary outlets and even present day lectures.

Anand wrote:
"Blavatsky's writing has lot of problems. It should not be considered
as standard."

I agree when we talk about beginner Seekers. But neither should Leadbeaters and Besants be used like that.
The beginner Seekers need something very new.
Today I have this view. In the year 1888-1930 I might have had a different view.


Anand wrote:
"Allegorical teaching creates lot of problems."

It depends on the audience Anand !

Theosophy is allegorical when one walks the path.
One will never reach initiation without an understanding of the theosophical methaphysics.
And such an understanding is easier aquire through allegorical teachings
which opens the intuitive inner organ. Whereas intellectual writings - ie. mere information -
like most of the Leadbeater literary outlets - MOST OFTEN ONLY - leads to intellectual development.

Bot teachings are in fact needed to many Seekers. But, they have to avoid the problems
I referred to in the last part of my previous email on this issue.

Wrong interpretations also happens when one for instance reads Leadbeaters outlets
on Devachan. Difficult words are difficult to understand.

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- From: "Anand Gholap" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 8:18 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re:Those who study Blavatsky's writing become fundamentalists

E.L. Gardner claims to have known private correspondence between
Besant and Leadbeater. And on that basis he is criticizing. We should
not praise of criticize on the basis of letters which we don't have,
what exact wording was there, context etc. I have seen many people
criticizing on the basis of comments made by some third fool who did
not know actual facts. That mistake should not be made by us. So I
won't comment unless I have actual draft of letters from authentic

I agree with Leadbeater's thoughts given in article by Radha Burnier.
Indeed he tells very important points.

To make a few words on Alego's interesting words.

My take is for instance, that the Theosophical Society and other
almost all of them lack a proper manifestation on the following
a) A clearer stance on phallicism and ones relation to the Liberal
What do you mean by phallicism ? I saw dictionary meaning of
phallicism and TS has nothing to do with that. For TS LCC is like any
other religious organization. And this stance is correct.

b) A clearer stance on the present VITAL lack of
literary outlets, or lack of emphasis if you like, - on cultural
religious areas as the Middle East and Islam.
Theosophy may be spread through internet in these areas and that is

But also areas as Africa and it spiritual historical heritage. And
also The
South America and other places where
we humans live and breathe.
I think TS will slowly have Theosophical lodges in areas mentioned.
Much depends on social, economic, political conditions in any

c) A clearer stance on multicultural issues and racism.
There is clear stance- Brotherhood without distinction on the basis
of race, culture etc.

c) A clearer stance on what Blavatsky called the basis of
teaching -
namely AtmaVidya - to which all other magical arts are inferior.
Blavatsky's writing has lot of problems. It should not be considered
as standard. And any stance on that basis will destroy Theosophy.
Look at what happened to Point Loma and ULT who follow Blavatsky.
Hardly anybody outside America appreciate them. And those in
America have became dogmatic and fundamentalists who fight all the
time and express hatred. This is the effect of Blavatsky's writing.

Most of the important policies for Adyar TS were made by Annie Besant
and they are right. Implementation may be done better.

d) A clearer stance on how one is promoting the theosophical
while taking the above four - issues into account.
That is, - for instance how to provide an online Internet Bookshop,
is showing the needed compassion in a now increasingly more and more
global world or planet - on the physical level.
I think more Theosophical literature is being added on internet every
year. And eventually most of it will be available.

e) And also a restoration within theosophical circles of the
emphasis given
on allegorical teachings compared with the many non-allegorical
outlets given by both Leadbeater and Besant.
Allegorical teaching creates lot of problems. Such presentation gives
rise to lot of speculation as everybody is free to attach different
meaning to allegories. That causes misunderstanding.
Writings of Besant and Leadbeater which is plain and clear like any
other science is best way of presenting Theosophy.

Anand Gholap

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Back to Top]

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