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

Re: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge

Jan 10, 2009 07:41 AM
by Morten Nymann Olesen

Dear friends and Paul

My views are:

You are reading an e-mail from on who have been visited by H. P. Blavatsky and Damodar K. Mavalankar. Either their visits was real or someone who was able to materialise them almost exactly as they look on the photos did the task.

Paul wrote:
"I think Emma was more reliable than HPB on 
the issue of the adepts who inspired the original 1875 TS. "

My answer:
And we say, that you are very much in error my dear friend. 
Will you telle me why you find Emma more reliable than HPB?
Will you honestly SEEK out the truth about this issue?

Let me aks you:

Why do you not find it a possibility, that the Masters mentioned by H. P. Blavatsky were REAL and are REAL?

Do you find it difficult to understand that a person kan dematerialise and rematerialise his or her physical body at will? And that such a person might do so - right now - just 1 meter behind you, when you read this?

The Master Morya mentioned by H. P. Blavatsky might have been a person, who was several persons at the same time, in the physical with different appearences.

The official Master Morya whom HPB meet in London at the first Nepaul Embassy was maybe an Rajput from birth. But none said how old he actually was! Did they? Quite importantly: A master might be a more than a hundred years old and still have the looks of a 30-40 year old.

"I saw Master in my visions ever since my childhood. In the year of the first Nepaul Embassy I saw and recognized him. Saw him twice. Once he came out of the crowd. He ordered me to meet him in Hyde Park. I cannot, I must not speak of this."

H. S. Olcott about H. P. Blavatsky's dematerialisations:
"Take for example the quotation made by Mrs Cooper-Oakley from the âSouvenirs de Marie-Antoinette.â by the Countess dâAdhÃmar, who had been an intimate friend of the Queen and who died in 1822. She is giving an interesting account of an interview between Her Majesty, the Count de Maurepas, herself and St-Germain. The last-named had paid Mme DâAdhÃmar a visit of momentous importance to the Royal family and to France, had departed and the minister, M. de. Maurepas, had come in and was slandering St-Germain outrageously, calling him a rogue and a charlatan. Just as he had said that he would send him to the Bastille, the door opened and St-Germain entered, to the consternation of M. de Maurepas and the great surprise of the Countess. Stepping majestically up to the Minister, St-Germain warned him that he was ruining both monarchy and kingdom by his incapacity and stubborn vanity, and ended with these words: âExpect no homage from posterity, frivolous and incapable Minister! You will be ranked among those who cause the ruin of empires.â . . . âM. De Saint-Germain, having spoken thus without taking breath, turned towards the door again, shut it and disappeared. . . All efforts to find the Count failed,â Compare this with the several disappearances of H.P.B. in and near Karli Caves and elsewhere, and see how the two agents of the Brotherhood employed identical means for making themselves invisible at the critical moment."

- - -

Your theories against H. P. Blavatsky and her Masters have a following among the enemies of the theosophical teachings - the strongest being the Christians. And now your theories are even written about on Wikipedia.

M. Sufilight

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: kpauljohnson 
  Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 3:41 PM
  Subject: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge

  Hi Morten,

  Of course there was a huge falling out between Emma and HPB, after 
  which they were enemies. I think Emma was more reliable than HPB on 
  the issue of the adepts who inspired the original 1875 TS. If people 
  would read her books they might come to agree. Mathiesen's monograph 
  would be the most important supporting reading to help people 
  evaluate Emma. If her books are totally ignored, no one has the 
  chance to decide. You wrote:
  quoting HPB: 
  > was founded, all the talk was of "Spirits." They were everywhere, 
  in everyone's mouth; and no one by any chance even dreamt of talking 
  about living "Adepts," "Mahatmas," or "Masters." One hardly heard 
  even the name of the Rosicrucians, while the existence of such a 
  thing as "Occultism" was suspected even but by very few. Now all that 
  is changed. We Theosophists were, unfortunately, the first to talk of 
  these things, to make the fact of the existence in the East 
  of "Adepts" and "Masters" and Occult knowledge known;

  PJ: That is only true if you consider Emma Hardinge Britten the 
  firsts Theosophist to do so, as Ghost Land precedes Isis Unveiled by 
  5 years, and Art Magic by one year. They is absolutely full of 
  adepts, Theosophy, Rosicrucianism, etc. That's why Theosophists 
  nowadays don't read Emma's books, IMO, to retain the illusion that 
  Isis Unveiled was the first rather than third book by a Founder of 
  the TS.


  and now the name has become common property. It is on us, now, that 
  the Karma, the consequences of the resulting desecration of holy 
  names and things, has fallen. All that you now find about such 
  matters in current literatureÃââand there is not a little of itÃââall 
  is to be traced back to the impulse given in this direction by the 
  Theosophical Society and its Founders. Our enemies profit to this day 
  by our mistake. The most recent book directed against our teachings 
  is alleged to have been written by an Adept of twenty years' 
  standing. Now, it is a palpable lie. We know the amanuensis and his 
  inspirers (as he is himself too ignorant to have written anything of 
  the sort). These "inspirers" are living persons, revengeful and 
  unscrupulous in proportion to their intellectual powers; and these 
  bogus Adepts are not one, but several. The cycle of "Adepts," used as 
  sledge-hammers to break the theosophical heads with, began twelve 
  years ago, with Mrs. Emma Hardinge Britten's "Louis" of Art Magic and 

  PJ: Whom HPB has no difficulting whatsoever in citing frequently as a 
  scholarly authority under his real name!

  and now ends with the "Adept" and "Author" of The Light of Egypt, a 
  work written by Spiritualists against Theosophy and its teachings.

  PJ: The Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor was an occultist rather than a 
  Spiritualist organization, and Emma was an occultist long before 
  Spiritualism existed, so this is misleading. But Emma was a 
  Spiritualist as well, so there is a grain of truth. But then she was 
  a Spiritualist when HPB was working with her daily as the TS was 
  being born!

  > THEOSOPHIST. We denounce no one, leaving this noble task to our 
  enemies. The spiritualistic author of Art Magic, etc., may or may not 
  have been acquainted with such an Adept Ãâ"

  PJ: HPB knew exactly how well Emma knew Bunsen!

  and saying this, I say far less than what that lady has said and 
  written about us and Theosophy for the last several years Ãâ" that is 
  her own business. Only when, in a solemn scene of mystic vision, an 
  alleged "Adept" sees "spirits" presumably at Greenwich, England, 
  through Lord Rosse's telescope, which was built in, and never moved 
  from, Parsonstown, Ireland,* may well be permitted to wonder at the 
  ignorance of that "Adept" in matters of science.

  PJ: And HPB knew well that Emma was no authority on matters of 
  history or science, that she was half- or more- author of Art Magic 
  and Ghost Land, as HPB herself was in daily communication with Emma 
  as they were being written. She knew that Emma's mistakes in the 
  book were no reflection on Ernest Bunsen's status as a scholar. 

  > So why should we sell just any book about the Masters and theosophy?

  PJ: Who is "we?" Theosophists don't sell Emma's books, and I have not 
  suggested they should. 

  > And why promote Hardinge Britten?
  PJ: Read the books and find out!
  > There are limites to me accepting such ideas!

  PJ: Accept ideas? I'm just suggesting that people should read Emma 
  to get some insight. Not that you individually ought to; read what 
  you like and don't be offended by others' reading proclivities.

  > And I find H. P. Blavatsky to be in agreement with me.
  PJ: The reasons HPB had in 1889 for dismissing Emma as someone to be 
  taken seriously on the subject of Theosophical Masters ought not be 
  reasons for Theosophists in 2009 to refuse to even read Emma. Most 
  its founding. Should their feud of 1884-1891 erase both their 
  collaboration from 1874-1883 and the interrelationships among their 


  > ----- Original Message ----- 
  > From: Frank Reitemeyer 
  > To: 
  > Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 7:11 AM
  > Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Taking offense, seeking revenge
  > >I'd rather put my energy into recommending other authors like
  > Hardinge-Britten, Bunsen, Burton, Aurobindo, who tie meaningfully
  > into the work of HPB, than worry about discouraging people from
  > reading authors whose books are connected with hers in a 
  > and delusional way.
  > You know who I mean :) but let's not denounce them,
  > Paul
  > ----
  > Paul, not so hard to identify the person.
  > Yes, he is not the overall supder duper perfect publisher.
  > But considering the weak level of the TM in general he does good 
  > I wished I would find the energy to do only 10% of his work.
  > The problem we all have is that so many are talking, but no 
  > underway.
  > Frank 
  > [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