(October 2022, February 2024).
01. "Not to Judge", or Sanctimonious Coercion and Boldness?
02. Politicisation in Theosophy: an Exemplary Case of "Love for Truth"
03. Conclusion
This article is a summary of other critical publications on this blog.
a) Leaving aside the well-known differences amidst contemporary theosophical sects, the Movement is shamefully divided into two general trends:
-"devotional" people who all the time repeat the same contents from books, avoiding regulated and thoughtful instances of debate, and
-excessively speculative/manipulative individuals who flirt with ideas or authors that hardly can be considered as "reliable".
Both groups incur in the same mistake of dogmatising their policies of theosophical broadcast by giving importance to sentimentalism or knowledge gluttony. Some theosophical magazines/websites publish inspiring and pertinent articles concerning the core of Theosophy, but the dubious concept of "not to judge" (or "not to debate") seems to be their most preferred mantra. However, this observer notes that more often than not those publications overlook the distinction between bias and objective criticism.
b) A number of theosophical articles are correct by reminding the importance of pain in our lives. There is no spiritual evolution without discomfort- on the contrary, this would lead to stagnation in all senses. We must not forget, however, that this physical world with all its shortcomings makes the transcendence of duality good-evil totally unattainable, as evil can never be eliminated but only controlled; thus, the incitation of "not criticising" as a fast and hard rule is a direct insult to common sense. It seems that many times several "theosophists" write or speak in a reductionist fashion, as if they were over a "pedestal", living in a bubble or simply believing to be "accepted chelas" without having/showing any merits for it.
c) The aforementioned sources are used to including strange contradictions in mystical and practical terms. A striking example is the insistence of "not renouncing to the world/society" to achieve true spirituality, and on the other hand there are plenty of articles praising the thoughts and deeds of Buddhist monks, yoguis and sannyasis. One would expect that certain theosophists empathise with readers in underdeveloped countries, whose societies or political activity indulge in serious vices and flaws.
c.1) There are theosophical magazines which constantly fall into the mistake of "evangelise" readership (proselytism, in one word/this link goes for the illiterates who love semantic escapism), and refer all the time to deontological concepts/attitudes that can be applied only for those who are treading the path of Occultism, or have enough time and financial resources/protection. People like HPB, William Judge, Jasper Niemand or Bahman Wadia did not suffer permanent scourges like unemployment, backscratching or nepotism, and they stood out from classist indifference by demonstrating deep social consciousness towards disadvantaged groups.
For this reason, many sensible people detect that a balance between mind and heart is utopistic, and see this as a mockery to their suffering. One would like to defy those "theosophists" to take a poll among people in Second/Third World nations who have to work six days a week (with or without family duties) or get anxious about money each end of month, delinquency or humiliation from client$/bosse$/colleague$. Instead of developing a minimum interest in spirituality, they prefer to have fun with the system's sensorial circus, pay the tithe to "leaders" who profit from hopelessness, or cling themselves to bastard manipulation/materialism in "politics" to search for more "practical solutions". Then, either we suggest to follow the monastic path, or else we keep integrated in "civilisation" to promote a deep ethical reform with productive, honest and impartial critiques against corruption, but we cannot have both at once.
d) The absence of stability between mind/heart in "civilisation" is encouraged mainly by three ill-intentioned and subconscious messages from "zoociety":
-the bombardment from publicity of "tempt yourself with food, sex, money, alcohol, nightlife, compare yourself with others, etc.";
-"you were born to live for working like a dog, otherwise you are out of the world", and
-"we wish you to get ill as much as possible to feed the medical industry",
all of which takes part in the vicious circle of "excessive working-getting unwell-recovering energy-excessive working-getting well", once and again. In this specific context, the bothersome proselytism of "love and compassion" or "not to judge" is particularly offensive and unacceptable for common and sincere seekers.
e) Another matter of concern observed by this author is the frightening "culture" of "treating evil with silk gloves", being the constant threat "to run the risk of upsetting anyone". For example, the sheer idiocy in today's parental materialism exposes youngsters to a lack of ethical education, which leads them to a complete weakness to face life's difficulties. There we have the worldwide rise of suicide rates among teenagers, their involvement with drugs or devilish ideologies that produce more chaos than order and unison.
Again, it comes as no surprise that most theosophists still confuse the categories of "news", "chronicle" and "criticism", implying that "information of worldwide problems is enough to stimulate reflection", but happily ignore that a critique MUST produce some discomfort, taking into account the neurotypical attitude in millions of people. One wonders if those followers of Theosophy are more concerned with the "immaculate and respectable public opinion", or to practise the Doctrine in its entirety and not just picking out what they like to hear. What a consistent objectivity, thank you!
-the moral cowards or prudish individuals who live in permanent fear of evil, and
-the hedonistic ones who have fun at the expense of everything and everyone, saying that "evil is a subjective fancy" and do not protect any moral value.
All these persons are commonly considered as "easy going", "relaxed", "attractive" or even "respectable" in "zoociety". Then, the question is: How many of those "anti-judgment theosophists" really practise good for its own sake? This also may be applied to metaphysical overspeculators, as if they were more concerned with death than practical living. Or is it that their consciousness do not live up to their expectations?
g) The recklessness by some "theosophists" is also evident with regard to their "work of translation" from English to other languages. Some "blogs" -irresponsibly promoted by online lodges/groups- contain shameful automatic translations (plenty of serious mistakes/misinterpretations), and published by coarse, envious and daredevil "comrades". This represents a direct offense and provocation to the responsible, thoughtful and altruistic translation labour/propaganda for the Cause, to the Messengers and Theosophy itself. It is curious to note that those "spiritual people" recur to an artificial intelligence devoid of ethics, empathy, acceptable knowledge and respect. Maybe they are expecting to suffer the same moral damage when A.I. leaves them homeless in the middle term.
02. Politicisation in Theosophy: an Exemplary Case of "Love for Truth"
HPB wrote: "Because by serving two masters, either the professional or the philanthropic work would have had to suffer. Every true theosophist is morally bound to sacrifice the personal to the impersonal, his own present good to the future benefit of other people. If the Founders do not set the example, who will?" (The Key to Theosophy, p. 282, PDF edition).
b) It would be better for arrogants or bigots of "positive thinking" not to take their ignorance by the limits of the world, in Schopenhauer's words. It is not surprising that many of them enjoy a "balanced life" through favouritism, second-rate politics or suspicious heirdom, paying a so sincere homage to merit and the "spiritual ethics" they boast on all the time and whenever they want to. Buddha said that the wicked rich are condamned to sleep wielding a sword, and the wicked poor permanently contrive how to steal them (of course, there are also decent and conscious individuals in both classes). In her book "Smile or Die", Barbara Ehrenreich denounces that the vogue of positive thinking is very common in capitalist/rightist societies and profusely used in communist/leftist regimes. Therefore, the culture of wishful thinking is conceived to congratulate and encourage the faecal cycle of materialism and fanaticism in the misnamed "political work".
c) Today there is a very extended prejudice: "any opinion given by anyone classifies him/her automatically in one spectrum of the political arena". This observer notices that politics, spirituality and marketing have become one and the same monster in Kali Yuga. This being the case, it is totally unacceptable to compare ethics with "political" activity, since the latter in many countries is very far from having any moral merit and bearing in mind the atrocities (bloodish/ethical) or heavy karmic bonds created or supported by capitali$m, communi$m, sociali$m, anarchi$m, traditio-vinegarism, progre-libertinism and other materialistic and manipulative dens of iniquity throughout history.
d) Politics in any form has not the monopoly of truth and never will, considering its execrable division process in behalf of selfishness; it has to undergo a complete, radical and PAINFUL reform to openly acknowledge and fight the deadly weeds of drug traffic, vested interests, bribe and other vices. Political parties must fearlessly combat those evils if they want to recover credibility from citizenship, especially in underdeveloped nations of "succe$sful savages". Needless to say, genuine theosophical activity should NEVER be acquainted with deliberate imbeciles who have physicalism as their daily creed. This is a complete lack of respect to H.P. Blavatsky's and William Judge's admonition of not doing so, for theosophists' primary role in this world is to create an ethical revolution, not merely external or ideological. If there are "theosophists" in any branch who promote active political involvement by a shameless manipulation of the Doctrine, they should openly recognise it to know exactly what are we talking about, because the fact of coercing members of "not to criticise" seems to be destined to protect vested interests (individual or collective) than teaching Theosophy and stimulating a healthy debate for the solely benefit of mankind.
e) WQJ wrote:
In relation to this, a number of "theosophical" websites elide topics explicitly mentioned in the works by HPB and WQJ, or exaggerate their implicit statements, falling into inadmissible and cynical support to leftism/rightism. It would be better for them to stop being so insolent and careless by exposing their weakness to follow the herd.
[Recently it has been noticed that certain "theosophists" -who "intelligently object" this article- draw upon the stupid argument of "esoteric victimisation", saying that "to blame Kali-Yuga for human corruption is useless" and "we shouldn't complain" about it (a very ambiguous statement which may mean "you can only criticise what is useful for MY/OUR canned ideology", or "you don't have the right to complain if you are somewhat responsible for specific problems", happily forgetting that all of us are karmic instruments). At any rate, it is funny to see that polarised "theosophists" and "spiritual influencers" are extremely worried about the strategies of their victimisers at the other side... No comments.]
This article is a summary of other critical publications on this blog.
01. "Not to Judge", or Sanctimonious Coercion and Boldness?
"A coward is a fellow with cold feet
who has sense enough to stay out of hot water".
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it
as he who helps to perpetrate it"
(Martin Luther King).
"Evil is the exaggeration of good"
(Mahatma K.H., Letter No. 10 to A.P. Sinnett).
a) Leaving aside the well-known differences amidst contemporary theosophical sects, the Movement is shamefully divided into two general trends:
-"devotional" people who all the time repeat the same contents from books, avoiding regulated and thoughtful instances of debate, and
-excessively speculative/manipulative individuals who flirt with ideas or authors that hardly can be considered as "reliable".
Both groups incur in the same mistake of dogmatising their policies of theosophical broadcast by giving importance to sentimentalism or knowledge gluttony. Some theosophical magazines/websites publish inspiring and pertinent articles concerning the core of Theosophy, but the dubious concept of "not to judge" (or "not to debate") seems to be their most preferred mantra. However, this observer notes that more often than not those publications overlook the distinction between bias and objective criticism.
b) A number of theosophical articles are correct by reminding the importance of pain in our lives. There is no spiritual evolution without discomfort- on the contrary, this would lead to stagnation in all senses. We must not forget, however, that this physical world with all its shortcomings makes the transcendence of duality good-evil totally unattainable, as evil can never be eliminated but only controlled; thus, the incitation of "not criticising" as a fast and hard rule is a direct insult to common sense. It seems that many times several "theosophists" write or speak in a reductionist fashion, as if they were over a "pedestal", living in a bubble or simply believing to be "accepted chelas" without having/showing any merits for it.
c) The aforementioned sources are used to including strange contradictions in mystical and practical terms. A striking example is the insistence of "not renouncing to the world/society" to achieve true spirituality, and on the other hand there are plenty of articles praising the thoughts and deeds of Buddhist monks, yoguis and sannyasis. One would expect that certain theosophists empathise with readers in underdeveloped countries, whose societies or political activity indulge in serious vices and flaws.
c.1) There are theosophical magazines which constantly fall into the mistake of "evangelise" readership (proselytism, in one word/this link goes for the illiterates who love semantic escapism), and refer all the time to deontological concepts/attitudes that can be applied only for those who are treading the path of Occultism, or have enough time and financial resources/protection. People like HPB, William Judge, Jasper Niemand or Bahman Wadia did not suffer permanent scourges like unemployment, backscratching or nepotism, and they stood out from classist indifference by demonstrating deep social consciousness towards disadvantaged groups.
For this reason, many sensible people detect that a balance between mind and heart is utopistic, and see this as a mockery to their suffering. One would like to defy those "theosophists" to take a poll among people in Second/Third World nations who have to work six days a week (with or without family duties) or get anxious about money each end of month, delinquency or humiliation from client$/bosse$/colleague$. Instead of developing a minimum interest in spirituality, they prefer to have fun with the system's sensorial circus, pay the tithe to "leaders" who profit from hopelessness, or cling themselves to bastard manipulation/materialism in "politics" to search for more "practical solutions". Then, either we suggest to follow the monastic path, or else we keep integrated in "civilisation" to promote a deep ethical reform with productive, honest and impartial critiques against corruption, but we cannot have both at once.
d) The absence of stability between mind/heart in "civilisation" is encouraged mainly by three ill-intentioned and subconscious messages from "zoociety":
-the bombardment from publicity of "tempt yourself with food, sex, money, alcohol, nightlife, compare yourself with others, etc.";
-"you were born to live for working like a dog, otherwise you are out of the world", and
-"we wish you to get ill as much as possible to feed the medical industry",
all of which takes part in the vicious circle of "excessive working-getting unwell-recovering energy-excessive working-getting well", once and again. In this specific context, the bothersome proselytism of "love and compassion" or "not to judge" is particularly offensive and unacceptable for common and sincere seekers.
e) Another matter of concern observed by this author is the frightening "culture" of "treating evil with silk gloves", being the constant threat "to run the risk of upsetting anyone". For example, the sheer idiocy in today's parental materialism exposes youngsters to a lack of ethical education, which leads them to a complete weakness to face life's difficulties. There we have the worldwide rise of suicide rates among teenagers, their involvement with drugs or devilish ideologies that produce more chaos than order and unison.
Again, it comes as no surprise that most theosophists still confuse the categories of "news", "chronicle" and "criticism", implying that "information of worldwide problems is enough to stimulate reflection", but happily ignore that a critique MUST produce some discomfort, taking into account the neurotypical attitude in millions of people. One wonders if those followers of Theosophy are more concerned with the "immaculate and respectable public opinion", or to practise the Doctrine in its entirety and not just picking out what they like to hear. What a consistent objectivity, thank you!
f) Speaking about "hypocrisy", let us analyse another excuse given by many theosophists: "judging others is unnecessary because essentially all people are good and sincerely strive to overcome their flaws". After a thoughtful analysis of real life, one can see that this hypothesis is completely false when we detect three kinds of "good people":
-the manipulative ones, who enjoy to use their "virtues" or attributes for utilising others;
-the moral cowards or prudish individuals who live in permanent fear of evil, and
-the hedonistic ones who have fun at the expense of everything and everyone, saying that "evil is a subjective fancy" and do not protect any moral value.
All these persons are commonly considered as "easy going", "relaxed", "attractive" or even "respectable" in "zoociety". Then, the question is: How many of those "anti-judgment theosophists" really practise good for its own sake? This also may be applied to metaphysical overspeculators, as if they were more concerned with death than practical living. Or is it that their consciousness do not live up to their expectations?
g) The recklessness by some "theosophists" is also evident with regard to their "work of translation" from English to other languages. Some "blogs" -irresponsibly promoted by online lodges/groups- contain shameful automatic translations (plenty of serious mistakes/misinterpretations), and published by coarse, envious and daredevil "comrades". This represents a direct offense and provocation to the responsible, thoughtful and altruistic translation labour/propaganda for the Cause, to the Messengers and Theosophy itself. It is curious to note that those "spiritual people" recur to an artificial intelligence devoid of ethics, empathy, acceptable knowledge and respect. Maybe they are expecting to suffer the same moral damage when A.I. leaves them homeless in the middle term.
[This writer knows at least one blogger -from Spain- who is an independent theosophist, and is taking online English courses to produce decent and acceptable translations. This should set an example to OBSCENE and PATHOLOGICAL FAKERS who indubitably demonstrate a "high devotion" to the Cause they "profess":
"What is there for me to do? Everything that you can do. A word, a hint, a tract, a volume, a subscription. If it costs you nothing, your interest is nothing. If it costs you little, your interest is little. If it costs till you feel it, then it is that you feel your interest" (WQJ, "The Test of Theosophic Interest").
Likewise, those blogs which include automatically generated text and without human edition can be removed by Google, no matter if indexed or not, as detailed on this link about spam content].
02. Politicisation in Theosophy: an Exemplary Case of "Love for Truth"
"Free men have ideas; the submissive ideologies" (attributed to Theocritus).
a) As if we did not have enough, many times this observer has heard or read that "to criticise social evils will put people away from Theosophy", but in private life thousands or millions in that audience/readership are the first ones to promote or defend conflictive ideologies, chauvinism or vested interests. Maybe for this reason most individuals style themelves as "spiritual pilgrims" by playing the fool.
HPB wrote: "Because by serving two masters, either the professional or the philanthropic work would have had to suffer. Every true theosophist is morally bound to sacrifice the personal to the impersonal, his own present good to the future benefit of other people. If the Founders do not set the example, who will?" (The Key to Theosophy, p. 282, PDF edition).
b) It would be better for arrogants or bigots of "positive thinking" not to take their ignorance by the limits of the world, in Schopenhauer's words. It is not surprising that many of them enjoy a "balanced life" through favouritism, second-rate politics or suspicious heirdom, paying a so sincere homage to merit and the "spiritual ethics" they boast on all the time and whenever they want to. Buddha said that the wicked rich are condamned to sleep wielding a sword, and the wicked poor permanently contrive how to steal them (of course, there are also decent and conscious individuals in both classes). In her book "Smile or Die", Barbara Ehrenreich denounces that the vogue of positive thinking is very common in capitalist/rightist societies and profusely used in communist/leftist regimes. Therefore, the culture of wishful thinking is conceived to congratulate and encourage the faecal cycle of materialism and fanaticism in the misnamed "political work".
c) Today there is a very extended prejudice: "any opinion given by anyone classifies him/her automatically in one spectrum of the political arena". This observer notices that politics, spirituality and marketing have become one and the same monster in Kali Yuga. This being the case, it is totally unacceptable to compare ethics with "political" activity, since the latter in many countries is very far from having any moral merit and bearing in mind the atrocities (bloodish/ethical) or heavy karmic bonds created or supported by capitali$m, communi$m, sociali$m, anarchi$m, traditio-vinegarism, progre-libertinism and other materialistic and manipulative dens of iniquity throughout history.
d) Politics in any form has not the monopoly of truth and never will, considering its execrable division process in behalf of selfishness; it has to undergo a complete, radical and PAINFUL reform to openly acknowledge and fight the deadly weeds of drug traffic, vested interests, bribe and other vices. Political parties must fearlessly combat those evils if they want to recover credibility from citizenship, especially in underdeveloped nations of "succe$sful savages". Needless to say, genuine theosophical activity should NEVER be acquainted with deliberate imbeciles who have physicalism as their daily creed. This is a complete lack of respect to H.P. Blavatsky's and William Judge's admonition of not doing so, for theosophists' primary role in this world is to create an ethical revolution, not merely external or ideological. If there are "theosophists" in any branch who promote active political involvement by a shameless manipulation of the Doctrine, they should openly recognise it to know exactly what are we talking about, because the fact of coercing members of "not to criticise" seems to be destined to protect vested interests (individual or collective) than teaching Theosophy and stimulating a healthy debate for the solely benefit of mankind.
e) WQJ wrote:
-"[The correspondent's question] contains a proposition for the T.S., or theosophists as a body, to advocate someone or other of the many proposed reforms. This should never be done. The T.S. is free and independent of all such reforms, while it applauds all good results. But it does not follow that the reformatory measures are the best. Nor has the last word been spoken on those subjects. It is very wise and right to alter if we can the oppressive conditions about the poor or others. But so long as the philosophy, the religion, and the view of life held by the people are wrong, just so long all reforms will be temporary. The people must be altered [i.e. criticised, exposed, denounced, etc.] in thought and heart, and then conditions will right themselves. I therefore strongly oppose any propositions looking toward binding the T.S. down to any system of reform or of legislation. Individual members can do as they please about it so long as they do not involve the Society" (Forum Answers, p. 131, PDF edition).
-"The theosophist can see no possibility of reform in existing abuses, in politics or social relations, unless the plan of reform is one which grows out of a true religion, and he does not think that any of the prevailing religions of the Occident are true or adequate. They do not go to the root of the evil which causes the pain and sorrow that call for reform or alleviation (...) None of the present attempts at reform will meet success so long as they are devoid of the true doctrine as to man, his nature and destiny, and respecting the universe, its origin and future course. Every one of these essays leaves man where it finds him, neglecting the lessons to be drawn from the cycles in their never-ceasing revolution. While efforts are made to meliorate his mere physical condition, the real mover, the man within, is left without a guide, and is therefore certain to produce from no matter how good a system the same evils which are designed to be destroyed. At every change he once more proceeds to vitiate the effect of any new regimen by the very defects in human nature that cannot be reached by legislation or by dogmatic creeds and impossible hells, because they are beyond the reach of everything except the power of his own thought. Nationalism, Socialism, Liberalism, Conservatism, Communism, and Anarchism are each and all ineffective in the end" ("Religion and Reform from a Theosophical Viewpoint").
In relation to this, a number of "theosophical" websites elide topics explicitly mentioned in the works by HPB and WQJ, or exaggerate their implicit statements, falling into inadmissible and cynical support to leftism/rightism. It would be better for them to stop being so insolent and careless by exposing their weakness to follow the herd.
Since they enjoy wearing blinkers, it becomes apparent that those little donkeys have to buy neurons in black market to learn to separate Theosophy from politics on their webpages. In place of proposing NEUTRAL, ORIGINAL and PRUDENT concepts, they seem to be very comfortable with ideological necrophilia under cover of "renovating" loathsome bipartisanship, not to mention the ever-present scandals by infranormal and violent "people" in the so-called "anarchism" or "neofascism". Thanks again for that "spirit of compassion" and "wisdom"!
f) Undoubtedly, it is inspiring to verify that, in your role of demagogic "esotericist$" ("tradi$"/"progre$" and other consciousness killer$), you are still stuck on the French Revolution aftermath, whatever the appearances it may take today. Even more inspiring is your self-assumed role of "unquestionable karmic ambassador$" in that context and restricting JUSTIFIED anger against manipulation from ALL sector$. Instead, you should remember that the Masters, WQJ, HPB and other few consistent theosophists are much above your level, since they never recurred to CHILDI$H DIVI$IONI$M and therefore have much more authority than you to teach compassion and fraternity.
From the Lucifer magazine, October 1887: "No 'cultured' man or woman will ever show anger in society. To check and restrain every sign of annoyance shows good manners, certainly, but also considerable achievement in hypocrisy and dissimulation. There is an occult side to this rule of good breeding expressed in an Eastern proverb: 'Trust not the face which never shows signs of anger, nor the dog that never barks'. Cold-blooded animals are the most venomous".
"[The chela] will not be held to account for using the most abusive words and expressions regarding his guru’s actions and orders, provided he comes out victorious from the fiery ordeal; provided he resists all and every temptation; rejects every allurement, and proves that nothing, not even the promise of that which he holds dearer than life, of that most precious boon, his future adeptship — is unable to make him deviate from the path of truth and honesty, or force him to become a deceiver" (Master K.H., Letter n° XXX).
At least this observer does not need to PRETEND via internet to be a "chelaship aspirer" (and he is not interested in it at all) by whitewashing violence or fondling hearts in the name of ever-wrecking "politic$". Is this not to tempt and deviate ma$$e$ from the path of Truth and honesty, or force them to become deceivers?
g) Repulsive politicisation in science is another heavy concern. Some theosophical authors do good research questioning physicalism, but spoil it by blaming certain ideologies, although never criticising their own openly. AIDS, global warming and Covid pandemics have been literally kidnapped by paid zombies who work under the euphemism of "think-tanks", underestimating the historical lessons of delivering science into wrong hands. See for example these articles by Jeanne Goldberg and Michael Crichton on the subject.
03. Conclusion
The Theosophical Movement at large has lost the capacity of being totally impartial. As WQJ clearly stated, mind and heart cannot be developed at mutual expense, and polarised "theosophists" are a reflection of this. It is incomprehensible how these "exemplary workers" can have a normal life even without thinking twice in their omission/comission karmic sins. As far as this observer is concerned, he won't collaborate with any theosophical group unless an internal purging is executed, by reason or by force, in all branches. The TM has lost of sight its battle against the virus of materialism, and on the contrary it prefers to deal only with its symptoms, presenting Theosophy as a sort of "spiritual placebo" or "vote collector".
In Western/Eastern societies, ALL ethical principles are employed and distorted with economic/selfish ends, adding the constant bombardment to sensorial consumerism from media. The delay to implement reforms in that line cannot be due only to the "wise and unerring work of Karma" (a synonym of extreme and passive naivety for many), but also to the unforgivable indifference of misnamed "spiritual people" who are accomplished hypocrites for loving those who think politically like them, and behaving as irrational pawns in the same chessboard like their "enemies".
These observer and website stand for temporally promoting critical thinking to put down materialism, as it deserves, and also a responsible eclecticism of information as much as possible. It is unconceivable that flaccid theosophists -and organised religions- still aspire to face physicalism saying "do you have a minute to hear the Divine Word?"
If our world is not retrieved from itself in due time -as HPB conditionally foretold-, those "theosophists" will pay a very high price for their deliberate manipulation. Now it is expected that intelligent readers can continue the job that "others" are incapable to perform, by boldly questioning malignant attitudes and prejudices, no matter how embarrassing the task may be. All the theosophical work should constantly put the masses between two fires: do you think you are more intelligent or respectable than others through your "spirituality" or "materialism"?
Krishnamurti was right when he said: "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society". And the moral cowards or psychologically conditioned people in Theosophy -or other forms of "spirituality"- are the perfect example of that conformism.
Aquila in Terris
"The multiplication of local centres should be a foremost consideration in your minds, and each man should strive to be a centre of work in himself. When his inner development has reached a certain point, he will naturally draw those with whom he is in contact under the same influence; a nucleus will be formed, round which other people will gather, forming a centre from which information and spiritual influence radiate, and towards which higher influences are directed. But let no man set up a popery instead of Theosophy, as this would be suicidal and has ever ended most fatally. We are all fellow-students, more or less advanced; but no one belonging to the Theosophical Society ought to count himself as more than, at best, a pupil-teacher, one who has no right to dogmatize.
Orthodoxy in Theosophy is a thing neither possible nor desirable. It is diversity of opinion, within certain limits, that keeps the Theosophical Society a living and a healthy body, its many other ugly features notwithstanding. Were it not, also, for the existence of a large amount of uncertainty in the minds of students of Theosophy, such healthy divergencies would be impossible, and the Society would degenerate into a sect, in which a narrow and stereotyped creed would take the place of the living and breathing spirit of Truth and an ever growing Knowledge" (HPB, "Letter to the Second American Convention").
"Both we believe that it is moral to tell the truth and immoral to lie; but here every analogy stops and our notions diverge in a very remarkable degree. For instance it would be a most difficult thing for you to tell me, how it is that your civilized Western Society, Church and State, politics and commerce have ever come to assume a virtue that it is quite impossible for either a man of education, a statesman, a trader, or any one else living in the world — to practice in an unrestricted sense? Can any one of the above mentioned classes — the flower of England’s chivalry, her proudest peers and most distinguished commoners, her most virtuous and truth speaking ladies — can any of them speak the truth, I ask, whether at home, or in Society, during their public functions or in the family circle? What would you think of a gentleman, or a lady, whose affable politeness of manner and suavity of language would cover no falsehood; who, in meeting you would tell you plainly and abruptly what he thinks of you, or of anyone else? And where can you find that pearl of honest tradesmen or that god-fearing patriot, or politician, or a simple casual visitor of yours, but conceals his thoughts the whole while, and is obliged under the penalty of being regarded as a brute, a madman — to lie deliberately, and with a bold face, no sooner he is forced to tell you what he thinks of you; unless for a wonder his real feelings demand no concealment? All is lie, all falsehood, around and in us, my brother; and that is why you seem so surprised, if not affected, whenever you find a person, who will tell you bluntly truth to your face; and also why it seems impossible for you to realize that a man may have no ill feelings against you, nay even like and respect you for some things, and yet tell you to your face what he honestly and sincerely thinks of you" (Master K.H., Letter No. 30 to A.P. Sinnett).
"It takes a great deal of courage to reject outward ideological constraints [i.e., SCOUNDREL DOGMATISM], keeping loyal to yourself (...) the truly brave person does not fit completely into social models. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who brag about being 'fearless' or 'special' just by fighting against what they know and hate from their psychological comfort zone [$$$], or when it is externally imposed (...) they are like immature children who do not face themselves through a real feeling of uncertainty" (formidable answer by ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE in the course of a chat test, June 2023 👏👏👏).
"BEWARE THE MAN THAT HAS NOTHING TO LOSE,
FOR HE HAS NOTHING TO PROTECT"
(Isaac Kappy, written via Instagram
before committing suicide on May 2019).
Notes:
-The author will reserve his right to reply or parody online answers in the same tone as they are published, regardless of the source.
-If EACH AND EVERY "theosophical" sector does not correct its "mistake$" in political propaganda, or does not offer public and detailed explanations, the admin won't modify/delete the critical articles on this site.
-Feedback: pericote.84@gmail.com. Only thoughtful answers will be considered and eventually included here as comments (please follow the scheme below). Otherwise, the author reserves his right to report conflictive messages as cybercrime.
