On the Kabbalah. On Esoteric “Secrets.” A Luciferian Perspective. On the Prophet of the New Aeon

reply to post by Lucifer777


One hell of a post. Will take a very long time to read this.

Thanks for the information.

reply to post by Lucifer777


Unbridled perversion does not constitute great spiritual knowledge and enlightenment.

It usually ends with STD's, alimony, and child support.

Good luck with your "lifestyle" but if I were you I would open your King James Bible and get to asking God for wisdom and understanding in regards to your personal salvation paid for by Jesus Christ. His offer of eternal life still stands you know? Even for the worst of us. Remember, Paul killed Christians for a living before he became the greatest Christian ever to live.

There is always hope.

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Thus I ally myself ideological with the millions of Socialists and Communists in the world; the Marxists, Anarcho-Communists and all progressive movements "must" by necessity be similarly ideologically apocalyptic and genocidal; for our many enemies are also similarly genocidal. "Peace" is an impossibility if there are still genocidal Muslims, Christians and the assorted chaff of ideological Capitalists in the world.

You do realize the European communists, socialists, anarchists and other assorted rabble will side with the muslims if there is a final showdown between Christianity and Islam don't you?

You'll be standing there going '... wait, what happened!?'

Also, you'll lose.. or you'll find yourself in the trenches fighting against muslims with ideologically opposed skinheads.

Childish and shallow extremism in my opinion, count me out of your revolution.


You're very knowledgeable though, I'll give you that..
Good thread, very informational, thanks for the links and the resources, I especially appreciate the bits about the tarot and the link to the Thoth tarot book.

Originally posted by TheLaughingGod

You do realize the European communists, socialists, anarchists and other assorted rabble will side with the muslims if there is a final showdown between Christianity and Islam don't you?

You'll be standing there going '... wait, what happened!?'

Also, you'll lose.. or you'll find yourself in the trenches fighting against muslims with ideologically opposed skinheads.

Childish and shallow extremism in my opinion, count me out of your revolution.

I think that you will find hardly anyone in the West who is on the political left of the spectrum who ideologically "sides" with the Muslims; on the contrary; solidarity with resistance to US imperialism is quite another matter, however. Islamic Neofascism and imperialism are of course also disturbing matters, Of course there are Communist parties all over the Islamic world whose adherents live in an Islamic culture, but that is not to say that they are "Muslims;" on the contrary. Islam is not merely a religion, but a political philosophy and a primitive system of law which endorses both Capitalism and slavery, and is anti-thetical to Communism.

The Neomarxist Christopher Hitchens has come under a great deal of criticism for his support of US imperialism, however this is simply an "ad hoc (temporary and for a common purpose)" position, since he considers militant Islam to be an even great threat than Christianity (which he also despises), just as the support for militant resistance to US imperialism from the political left is an ad hoc position.

There are, for example, numerous regimes with tyrannical police states which oppress their citizens; the difference between many such regimes and the current Lybian and Iraqi campaigns is simply that Lybia and Iraq are major exporters of oil, who have had dictators who were hardly sumbissive to US imperialism; similarly Afghanistan is now the world's major heroin producer, which the Anglo-American narco-terrorists depend upon for their budgets.

Of course I would consider revolutions against all such oppressive Islamic regimes to have the potential to be progressive, but unfortunately also to have the potential to turn into militant Islamic republics. The current campaigns in the Islamic world by the Anglo-American state terrorists have nothing to do with liberating populations, but economic resources. Thus such campaigns are not revolutionary actions from a socialist perspective, but rather simply expansions of Capitalist Imperialism.



Unofortunately I tend to be drawn towards Hitchens' position, which is that although the modern humanist revolution against religious fanaticism is certainly winning the "intellectual" war in the West, such intellectual victories are not manifested in political victories, as we still live in a world where there are hundreds of millions of religious fanatics.

It is Hitchens' prediction that this will probably eventually lead to the destruction of civilisation and to nuclear war; unfortunately Hitchens' may well be proven right; however if such a scenario takes place it will certainly not be my doing, since I have entirely different ideological agenda which has nothing to do with either US Imperialism nor Islamic Imperialism, but rather with the establshment of secular progressive socialist republics and with agricultural and technological collectivism; none of which has anything to do with the Islamic or Capitalist objectives. .

Lux

reply to post by IAMIAM

Regardless, I see that your cup is full and you prefer to drink of your own wine. Though I know it be poison to your heart, I shall not take it from you nor shall I imbibe. If it is yours to drink and wallow in drunkenness then it is mine to leave you to it.

I love this response. Take away all the pretty wording and Lucifer is but an advocate of Marxist communist anti-capitalistism. That is the reduction I see.

reply to post by Lucifer777

I think that you will find hardly anyone in the West who is on the political left of the spectrum who ideologically "sides" with the Muslims; on the contrary; solidarity with resistance to US imperialism is quite another matter, however

It is interesting to note that on their websites, Socialists and Communists both often say that they will basically support any position to achieve their ends. Ends justify the means.

Originally posted by Lucifer777
So much for her "occult science." She was essentially a "medium" and claimed to have "received" much of her knowledge. She also claimed to have supernatural powers such as levitation and the materialisation of objects; this was typical of the fake psychics of her era. Having said all this, she is in many ways a "positive" mentor of the modern New Age movement.

Blavatsky's use of the swastika was long before the Nazis ever used it,

H.P. Blavatsky was not "essentially a medium".

This is addressed in a number of posts in this thread.

Originally posted by Tamahu

H.P. Blavatsky was not "essentially a medium".

This is addressed in a number of posts in this thread.

Well I notice the following response on that thread:

Originally posted by The GUT

Theosophy (literal meaning: Divine Wisdom) is a hybrid religion between Hinduism and Spiritualism It was founded by Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky in 1875 in New York City. Before that, she was a spiritualist medium in Europe, allegedly channeling a spirit named "John King"...

...In 1877, she published her first major work, Isis Revealed, which elaborated on her theories of ancient Gnostic and occultic religions. Her primary thesis of all of her writing was that all religions were drawn from the common thread of esoteric teaching that was handed down orally from the "Masters" or "Mahatmas" who she said were reincarnated beings currently living in a remote part of Tibet.

Blavatsky claimed that she could channel the thoughts of these Mahatmas, which included the personalities of Buddha, Christ, et al.. She thus believed that Theosophy was a "unifier" for all religions...
www.neirr.org...

I do rather consider Blavatsky a kindred spirit and a rather admirable and progressive creature in many ways, for a woman of the 19th century, however I don't consider it healthy to place anyone, including and especially myself, beyond criticism. Despite my admiration for Blavatsky, I tend to mistrust information which has been recevied through mediumship or channelling.

Throughout her career she claimed to have demonstrated physical and mental psychic feats which included levitation, clairvoyance, out-of-body projection, telepathy and clairaudience. Another claim of hers was materialization (producing physical objects out of nothing), though in general, her interests were more in the area of 'theory' and 'laws' rather than demonstration.
en.wikipedia.org...

The James Randi Institute has a one million dollar reward for anyone who can prove that they have supernatural powers, and as yet, nobody in the world has collected this reward.

Having said this, I personally have a lifelong habit of inducing "shamanic" experiences, however I have come to consider all such experiences to be unreliable and totally subjective. Crowley's "Book of the Law" was also similarly channelled, of course.

"Spiritual" experiences are "always" totally subjective and tend to reinforce the person's beliefs. For example a Christian who has such experiences will tend to find that they reinforce their faith, just as they do for a Hindu or a Muslim; a reincarnationist's belief can be reinforced by such experiences, just as a person who believes in the afterlife can have their beliefs reinforced. Such experiences are thus unreliable as a method of ascertaining truth. Revelations and spiritual experiences have a direct link to brain chemistry; even with persons who do not use psychoactives, the human body anyway naturally produces the world's most powerful psychoactive, '___'; thus such experiences are quite normal to the human condition; however they are also totally unreliable.

The Koran, for example, was allegedly given as a revelation to Mohammad from the angel Gabriel; however this is not to suggest that the Gabriel archetype is that of a proponent of slavery, sex slavery, misogyny and holy war; merely that Mohammad was a proponent of such evils and simply claimed that these were divine revelations. Similarly with the claim that the Vedas are "received (from the gods) teachings," and yet they promote institutional racism and human sacrifice cultism. Thus I consider it appropriate to subject all such ramblings to the highest authority of human reason and human intuition.

For example, Blavatsky claimed that we are the descendents of the people of Atlantis, which dissapeared around 800,000 years ago, and yet there is no scientific evidence of human beings on earth 850,000 years ago; our species has probably not been on earth for more than 300,000 years. Should we accept the word of a medium or of the evidence of science? The problem with accepting even one irrational statement from a medium, is that it leads to a slippery slope of accepting any and all irrational statements.

Religious Schizophrenia

It has been estimated that around a quarter of all inpatients in psychiatric institutions suffering from schizophrenia are suffering from a religious form of schizophrenia; common to religious schizophrenics is the hearing of voices, the claim that God or the gods or the Devil or devils are communicating with them, and that they are receiving divine revelations. Even a president of the world's leading terrorist state, George "God told me to invade Iraq" Bush, claimed to be in direct communication with God, and this was not taken as an indication of his insanity, but was taken as an indication of his righteousness by many Christians.

Part of the problem of the world's major religions is that they offer models of allegedly "perfect" or "holy" persons which are essentially models of religious schizophrenics. This is a very dangerous form of model to project. Unfortunately the three major texts of the three largest world religions, the Bible, the Koran and the Vedas, appear also to be the ramblings of religious schizophrenics. I must admit to having written more than a few metaphysical ramblings myself based upon "spiritual experiences," but I have deleted all such essays from my website as I no longer consider such ramblings to be reliable. I do have an essential belief, based upon such experiences, that the human soul is eternal, and that it continues it's existence in other realms after the death of the body, and that such intelligences are what human beings refer to as gods, goddesses, angels, demons, ghosts, Jinn or ancestral spirits; however the worship of such ancestral spirits is entirely a form of self induced religious schizophrenia which can have dangerous consequences. .

Lux

____________

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

I think that you will find hardly anyone in the West who is on the political left of the spectrum who ideologically "sides" with the Muslims; on the contrary; solidarity with resistance to US imperialism is quite another matter, however

It is interesting to note that on their websites, Socialists and Communists both often say that they will basically support any position to achieve their ends. Ends justify the means.

Since the end of WW2 we have also seen the expansion of imperialistic World Capitalist Revolution and the attempt to impose the International Dictatorship of Capitalism, by all means necessary, including overt and covert wars, assassinations, genocides, military coups and false flag operations, etc. Militant Capitalism is essentially a genocidal "Ends justifies the means" ideology, but ideological Capitalists don't seem to have a problem with that. Since Capitalism is a militant and genocidal ideology; an entirely militant and possibly genocidal response will be required to eradicate the International Dictatorship of Capitalism. One cannot expect Socialist revolutions to appear peacefully, since the Capitalists themselves are hardly peaceful.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by IAMIAM

 

Regardless, I see that your cup is full and you prefer to drink of your own wine. Though I know it be poison to your heart, I shall not take it from you nor shall I imbibe. If it is yours to drink and wallow in drunkenness then it is mine to leave you to it.

I love this response. Take away all the pretty wording and Lucifer is but an advocate of Marxist communist anti-capitalistism. That is the reduction I see.

Capitalism is a system of distributing and rationing commodities which utterly fails for hundreds of millions of people; around 200 million of whom are always on the verge of starvation. Most of the participants in Internet debates however are generally part of the economic elites, at least on a global level anyway, and are thus the recipients and beneficiaries of economic slavery. Just as a slavemaster will tend to defend the institution of slavery, because it benefits them, so too do the beneficiaries of the Capitalist system tend to defend Capitalism. I too am a person of the First World who lives in one of the wealthiest nations on earth, but it is not because of my own situation that I am ideologically anti-Capitalist, but because of the extreme suffering and enslavement of humankind. Obviously to an economic slavemaster, "Socialism" and "Communism" are direct threats to them and tantamount to "Satanism (adversarialism)," which of course it entirely correct.

See also my essay: "'___' & Religious experiences, gods, angels, etc. on: forum.davidicke.com...



Lux

Even if H.P. Blavatsky was into channeling before she met H.S. Olcott and before she wrote Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, she definitely abandoned the practice of mediumism.

Again, please see my posts in this thread.

H.P. Blavatsky herself was against channeling and mediumism when she helped to form the Theosophical Society.

Originally posted by Tamahu

Even if H.P. Blavatsky was into channeling before she met H.S. Olcott and before she wrote Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, she definitely abandoned the practice of mediumism.

Again, please see my posts in this thread.

H.P. Blavatsky herself was against channeling and mediumism when she helped to form the Theosophical Society.

edit on 31-3-2011 by Tamahu because: punctuation

Blavatsky claimed to be in psychic communication with centuries old Tibetan Masters who were allegedly living underground in Tibet and her fake mediumship and plagiarism is quite notorious. Frankly I think that she displayed symptoms of religious schizophrenia, which is a common side effect of spiritualism. There are so many critical writings on Blavatsky that I think it to be simply better to post some of them. Of course many of these critiques are written by Christian conspiracy theorists for whom all alternatives to Christianity are considered to be Satanic; never the less when analysing an historical figure, I think it to be appropriate to consider critical positions

The Frauds of Madame Blavatsky
by Wm. Emmette Coleman
[Reprinted from The Summerland (Summerland, California), April 18, 1891, p. 2.]

www.blavatskyarchives.com...

It is well known that the founder of theosophy, Mme. H. P. Blavatsky, has for a number of years denounced Spiritualism and mediumship in no uncertain terms. As per contra it may be well to present a few facts relative to the connection of this woman with spiritualistic and other alleged occultic phenomena. In 1874, she first came to the attention of the American public in connection with certain alleged marvelous manifestations of “spirits” to her through the Eddy’s at Chittenden, Vermont. It was claimed among other things, that a buckle, attached to a decoration, buried with her father, was brought, from his grave in Russia, to her at the Eddy’s, by spirit power. It was subsequently established that decorations of Russian officers were never buried with the bodies of those upon whom they were bestowed. It is clear, then, that the alleged spiritual phenomenon was a trick or device, doubtless arranged between herself and the mediums. These mediums have been detected in trickery a number of times, and I have a mass of positive evidence as to the fraudulent character of the Chittenden manifestations. There is little doubt that the whole of the “wonderful” phenomena described as occurring at that place in connection with Mme. Blavatsky, were fraudulent, --- got up by preconcerted arrangement between the Madame and the mediums.

In 1875, the Madame was closely involved in certain manifestations, claiming to come from “John King,” through the mediumship of Mr. and Mrs. Holmes in Philadelphia. Mme. Blavatsky then claimed to be herself a medium of the said John King; and through her various phenomena from him, are said to have occurred, including long messages by rapping, direct writing and painting by John King, transportation of objects, etc., all similar in character to many, afterwards claimed as being performed through her by the mahatmas or adepts. She sent General F. J. Lippitt a painting, which she said had been painted by John King for the General; but proofs that this painting had been done by the Madame herself, were afterwards published. She was also seen to get up in the night and paint pictures, which she claimed were produced by spirit power. The Holmeses were exposed as frauds both before and after Mme. Blavatsky’s partnership with them in the “John King” manifestations in 1875; and there is strong evidence that she and the Holmeses were in collusion in the production of bogus phenomena, principally for the purpose of hoodwinking Colonel Olcott into the belief in her remarkable occultic powers.

In 1874 and 1875, Mme. Blavatsky many times declared, in the most emphatic manner, that she was a life-long Spiritualist and the champion of mediums, and Spiritualism was the world’s savior, etc. In 1875, she instituted a new society, called the “Theosophical,” at first quasi spiritualistic in nature, but subsequently of a more pronounced anti-spiritualistic character. After transfer of the headquarters of this society to India in 1878-79, she became radically anti-spiritualistic, and has since been a bitter opponent of that which she professed so ardently in 1874-75. In India she became notorious through the performance of a number of purported feats of magic, alleged as being partly her own work and partly those of certain adepts, living in the Tibetian Himalayas. Overwhelming proofs of the frauds practiced in the performance of these feats, has been published by her confederates in guilt, Madame and M. Coulomb, and by Mr. Richard Hodgson, in his report of a scientific examination of said phenomena.

I have evidence that a number of the leading workers in the Theosophical Society acknowledge that fraud was practiced by Mme. Blavatsky and her assistants in the production of her feats said to have been done by the adepts and herself. I have read the original of a letter [by] probably the ablest and one of the most honest of the leading theosophists of the world, in which he avows his knowledge of the frauds practiced by Mme. Blavatsky, and her assistants in the production of spurious maketime phenomena. He speaks of a nasty trick “the old lady” has of writing bogus letters from the mahatmas, instancing a case when a friend of his had been caused to go to Germany, in obedience to a spurious letter from the mahatma; while he himself had received one of these bogus letters from the Madame. While he believes that a very few of the mahatmic phenomena are genuine, he is convinced that nearly all of them are fraudulent. He also says that he was warned by the Countess Wachtmeister, the Madame’s confidential friend and champion, “to beware of bogus manifestations” made by Mme. Blavatsky. He also says that Mr. A. P. Sinnett, the author of “Esoteric Buddhism,” detected her in a trick attempted to be played on him, with a spurious “precipitated” letter, and that it nearly caused Sinnett to throw up the whole business. He says, in addition, that Dr. Franz Hartmann, the most prolific of theosophic authors, had written a pamphlet, in which like Col. Olcott and Mr. Cooper Oakley, he declared a large number of the Madame’s phenomena to be fraudulent. It is published that Dr. Hartmann, Mr. W. Q. Judge (President of the American section of the Society), and a native Hindu, destroyed the trick shrine at Madras, in which the spurious mahatma phenomena were performed for so long by the Madame, with the assistance of the Coulombs. This shrine contained such palpable evidence of the trickery that had been performed by its aid, that these three destroyed it, to prevent its examination by Mr. Hodgson and others. This destruction Dr. Hartmann acknowledged to Mr. Hodgson. It is also published that the knowledge of her frauds in India is held over the Madame’s head by Mr. Judge, and that the society was compelled to pay Mr. Judge’s expenses back to America from India, he having threatened that if such was not done, he would publicly expose the fraud he had discovered.

Mrs. Anne Kingsford, author of “The Perfect Way,” and at one time a prominent theosophist, severed her connection with the Theosophical Society, alleging as a reason her discovery of the frauds practiced by Madame Blavatsky. Mr. A. O. Hume, was at one time one of the most prominent theosophists in India, and he was the person to whom was addressed, in conjunction with Mr. Sinnett, the Koot Hoomi correspondence, ultimating in the publication of “The Occult World” and “Esoteric Buddhism.” When he discovered the fraud that Madame Blavatsky, and her confederates had practiced on himself and others, he severed his connection with the Society, and since then has had nothing to do with it. We thus have the very “head and front” of the society cognizant of the Madame’s frauds, namely, Col. Olcott, W. Q. Judge, A. P. Sinnett, Dr. Hartmann, Dr. Cooper Oakley, Countess Wachtmeister, Anne Kingsford, A. O. Hume, and the writer of the letter referred to, who has not given permission for the publication of his name.

The doctrines of theosophy are contained in the two works of Madame Blavatsky, “Isis Unveiled” and “The Secret Doctrine.” The whole of these peculiar theories and statements are plagiarized from other works and authors. I have discovered the source whence they were “borrowed.” There is nothing original per se in theosophy. Her first book, “Isis Unveiled,” is a compilation from other books, mostly without proper credit. The bulk of the contents of this work was copied, with light alterations, from other books, without crediting the borrowed matter to the sources whence it was stolen. I have traced to the original source most of the contents of the work, and such a gigantic mass of unadulterated plagiarism the world probably never saw before. Moreover, the quotations from other authors in this book are in a great many cases grossly garbled, distorted, and perverted; and in a number of cases spurious citations manufactured by the unscrupulous Madame, are attributed to various books and authors. Besides this, the whole work is one mass of blunders and errors of every imaginable description. The extreme carelessness of the author and her great ignorance in every branch of knowledge, are conspicuous on every page of the work. The world’s literature has never before been cursed with such a monument of plagiarism, literary forgery, falsehood, ignorance, blunders, and general balderdash as that alleged production of the Tibetan mahatmas in “Isis Unveiled.” I am now publishing in “The Golden Way,” an expose, in detail, with proofs of every statement, of the true character of this unique production. It is probable that I may, at some future time, publish a book giving a complete expose of theosophy in all its features, with full evidence of the truth of every point presented.

One Extra Large Medium

usminc.org...

........ The two hundred fifty pound Russian Medium Helena Blavatsky started the Theosophical Society 1875 claiming she had made telepathic contact with mysterious �ascended masters� in Tibet. She dubbed herself a �Priestess of Isis�, and combined Spiritualism, Cabala, Western occultism, Hinduism and Buddhism along with a dash of Darwinian evolution, to make the whole thing sound �scientific�.........

The Theosophical Society had an alliance with an organization run by a certain Swami Sarasvati, until the Swami denounced Blavatsky and her sidekick Ollcott as charlatans, and they were exposed as such many times. Nevertheless, the society is still around today. She wrote two occult best sellers, Isis Unveiled (1887) and The Secret Doctrine (1888), which are still in print. Blavatsky claimed the ascended masters (humans who are centuries old living inside a mountain in Tibet) inspired her to write the books and communicated with her telepathically. She claimed the goddess Isis herself gave her the ideas for Isis Unveiled.........the bulk of the material for her books is simply plagiarized from other works.

A skeptic named William Coleman discovered 2000 passages Blavatsky lifted from other books and never gave credit for. He counted a total of 100 books in all used in the making of Isis Unveiled, and The Secret Doctrine was discovered to be in a similar vein, with even entire pages plagiarized from other books! The footnotes to Blavastky�s books were added years after her death by her followers to help cover up her plagiarism.. The Book of Dyzan, yet another book Blavatsky wrote, claiming it was the oldest book in the world, also turned out to be a hoax with many passages copied from books of the 19th century! ............. She also became the traveling companion of a wealthy heiress who had a library of hundreds of books that she always took with her. This is no doubt where Blavatsky got much of her material to plagiarize from.

She had been previously been employed as the assistant to medium Daniel Home, and this is where she learned the tricks of the trade of Spiritualism. She was not as cautious as Home, however, and got accused of fraud and exposed as a fake several times during her career. She set up shop as a medium in Cairo, Egypt, but was exposed as a fake when someone found a long white glove stuffed with cotton in the Seance room right before a Seance was about to begin (The Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural by James Randi, pg 34 ). She fled Egypt after that and went to America. Blavatsky's psychic �powers� were proven fake many times. Once she claimed to have materialized a teacup by meditating while sitting on the ground. When an observer accused of her of having buried it their earlier and merely digging up the teacup, she was treated to one of those blasts of foul language Blavatsky was notorious for. (3) Another time Blavatsky claimed to have found a lost broach of an heiress. The heiress accused Blavatsky of simply buying one that looked like it. Blavatsky denied this profusely, until a receipt for the broach from a local pawn broker was produced! .......

One follower (who had apparently been Blavatsky�s assistant in fakery) named Emma Coulomb became disillusioned with Blavatsky and set out to expose Blavatsky as the fraud she was. Coulomb passed along evidence which showed Blavatsky to be a fake to the editor of Christian College Magazine. One revelation was that Blavatsky made letters from �Coot Hoomi� (one of the Tibetan ascended masters Blavatsky supposedly had contact with) seem to magically appear from nowhere by simply shoving them through cracks in the ceiling from the room above! Coulomb also revealed Blavatsky had secret passages and hidden doors built into her house which aided her in deceiving people about her �psychic abilities�. ...

Not long after this, a medium in America claimed that Blavatsky plagiarized one of his lectures and published it as a "revelation" from Coot Hoomi. (The Occult: A History by Collin Wilson pgs ) . About this same time The Society for Psychical Research set out to India to investigate Blavatsky at the insistence of Coulomb. The investigator, Richard Hodgson, was admitted to the room containing the "shrine" where Coot Hoomi's letters magically appeared, but only after much stalling. He smelt a rat after finding just a newly made cedar wood box and freshly plastered walls. A bungling follower tried to defend HPB by saying "You see, it's perfectly solid" while slapping the back of the �shrine�, and thus accidentally causing the back to fall off, revealing a secret entrance to Blavatsky's bedroom! The investigator interviewed several people who had witnessed her �magic feats� and grouped them into four categories: 1. Skeptics 2. Partial skeptics 3. Sincere believers 4. Confederates who aided her in deception. (Madame Blavatsky High Priestess Of The Occult by Gertrude M. Williams pgs.270-271)

The Society for Psychical Research published a detailed 200 page report, detailing the methods of trickery Blavatsky used. The report concluded by calling her �...one of the most accomplished, ingenious, and interesting imposters in history�. ........ Biographer Gertrude Williams wrote that �she ruled her followers ambidextrously, through glamour and fear�. Toward the end of her life, she wrote a confession to one of her detractors, a Russian writer named Solyvov, and admitted she had lied about many things, including the existence of the Mahatmas, having hundreds of lovers (she was actually a virgin until they day she died), that she faked communications with spirits and that some of the phenomena her followers saw could be attributed to hallucination! Even then, she wrote the letter in the most dramatic manner possible, making herself sound like a persecuted martyr rather than a fraud. Later she retracted part of the confession, claiming the Ascended Masters were real after all, which would mean she lied about lying if that were the case. Considering the Chinese Army has control of every square inch of Tibet, it�s unlikely they would have failed to miss the discovery of an underground Bhuddist momentary. And if Tibetan Bhuddists had all these miraculous powers, with all due respect, the Dalai Lama would not have to live in exile as he has for decades!

Though Blavatsky was proven a fraud in her lifetime and even finally admitted it, her Theosophical Society continues on. There are chapters in several countries even today, including the U.S. Her followers will even say things like �Sure, HPB had a streak of charlatanism in her, but you have to look past that and read her teachings for what they really are.� What are these teachings? Blavatsky�s Theosophy deals with such hookum as the "seven root races". The god like giant Aryan race lived on Atlantis and lost their god-like status by intermarrying with the �semi-human� Jews. The intermarrying with Jews caused the Aryans to devolve, according to Blavatsky. Blavatsky called Judaism a �religion of hate and malice toward everyone and everything outside itself.� , while the Aryans were the most advanced people spiritually. Compare this type of mentality with that of Joseph Mengele. Theosophy is nothing but recycled occult gobbledy gook from previous books with a strong flavor of anti-Semitism and anti-Christianism thrown in for flavor!

Eventually, so the story goes, the Aryans blew up Atlantis through black magic. Kaboom! The next root race were invisible, made from �fire mist�, and lived at the North Pole. No doubt, neighbors of Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer. I wonder if they were invisible how anyone knew they existed since they can't be seen? There�s a head scratcher. The race after that was just barely visible, lived in Asia and �invented sex�. A race of giant telepathic apes inhabited the now vanished continent of Lemuria. (I know, it sounds like a D.C. comic.).

.......
HPB was probably the first to introduce reincarnation into Spiritualism. Up until then, most Spiritists believed in a heaven like existence throughout eternity, called �Summerland�. Blavatsky also introduced evolution into reincarnation by saying people were reincarnated as people, not randomly switching incarnations between animals and people as in the version of reincarnation taught by Eastern religions, like Hinduism and Bhuddism..

Her saddest and most horrifying accomplishment was being the spiritual impetus for the Nazi regime, decades after her death. As you can guess by her doctrines about Aryans and Jews previously mentioned, many German occultists and racists embraced Blavatsky�s idea of being descended from Aryan god-men and her anti-Semeticism. Blatvatsky�s favorite occult symbol was the swastika, which she claimed was the symbol of the Aryan race and the most powerful of all occult symbols. This symbol was adopted by the Nazis. Heinrich Himmler was a devout believer in Blavatsky�s teachings, and even went on an expedition to Asia as Germany was losing WWII to try and find the (non-existing) link to the Tibetans and the Aryans.

.......
Even though Blavatsky admitted she was a fake, there are still a handful of followers that refuse to believe it. There are two branches of the Theosophical society, the result of a schism after her death. One branch is based in Arya, India, the other in Wheaton, Illinois. In the 1990's during a Theosophist convention of the American branch, a pair of ice tongs Blavatsky had �materialized� during her career (no doubt by slight of hand) was proudly on display. Some people will always want to believe.

..........

JITTA KRISHNAMURTI (1895-1986) The fake messiah introduced by the Theosophical Society, who later denied being divine. His father was a Bhramin who worked for the Theosophical society as a clerk. In his 20's, Krishnamurti became disillusioned with the Theosophy after his brother died from Tuberculosis after Theosophists had failed to heal him as they claimed they could. An occult order was formed by Theosphists called The Order of The Star in The East to introduce the new �World Teacher�. But in 1929 Krishnamurti dissolved the order during an address he gave before the group in 1929, which shocked and angered them.

After the dissolution embarrassment, Leadbeater, Bailey, and practically all Theosophists turned against Krishnamurti. Theosophist leaders had unwittingly set themselves up for such a thing to happen, having told their gullible followers over the years that the �World Teacher� might someday say things that were completely unexpected and contrary to their preconceived notions, and it would be unwise and even �dangerous� not to do as he instructed!

Krishnamurti gained some fame in the 1960's during the Eastern Religion craze. Ironically, Krinamurti is now known as the �un-guru�, because he told seekers that they should forgo all religions and all gurus (including Theosophy) and try to find answers themselves. ...

....
ALICE BAILEY Succeeded Bessant as head of the Theosophical Society. Like her predecessors, Bailey was a pro-Aryan anti-Semite. Bailey dismissed the persecution the Jews had endured had simply been their �Karma�, eerily reminiscent of Neo-Nazis who say the Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves. Bailey also informed her readers that the Jews had lost their right to be the people whom a future Messiah would be born due because of their arrogance, and that they would have to go through �fires of purification�. Bailey wrote that statement in 1949, after the ovens of Nazi extermination camps had been made well known. It�s unlikely such a poor choice of words was an accident, considering her attitude toward Jews. In addition to that, Bailey Claimed the atomic bomb was actually a �gift� from the ascended masters to mankind.

...... According to Blavatsky, the Aryans had been a race of giants with three eyes who lived on Atlantis. But because they had intermarried with the Jews, they had lost their "god like" qualities. She too loved the swastika that became the symbol of the Nazis and often wore a swastika broche .

Theosophical writings of Annie Besant, Charles Leadbeater, and Helena Blavatsky, were translated and published in Germany. An 1892 periodical, Lotus Blossoms, featured Blavatsky's writings and "was the first German publication to sport the theosophical swastika upon its cover" (Goodrick-Clarke:25). As time went on numerous other Theosophy-based groups of occult socialism formed in Germany and Austria via Guido von List and Jorg Lanz von Liebenfels and Julius Streicher and others. Two of List's closest associates were Jorg Lanz von Liebenfels and Harald Gravelle. Gravelle was a leading Theosophist in Germany. Several of these groups would provide the philosophical framework for National Socialism in Germany.

The Thule Gesellschaft, then, along with its sister secret society, the Vril would provide the philosophical, intellectual and even spiritual underpinnings of the eventual National Socialist movement, along with a third stream, about to converge. That was the pan-Germanist and esotericist Guido Von List, whose occult, Templar-influenced secret society boasted a membership which included the wealthy and those from the conservative and nationalist circles, as well as the occult community. Ironically and sadly, while her hate succeeded in the murder of 10 million Christians and 6 million Jews (members of two religion she despised) during World War II, her bizzare mythology caused the death of millions of her fellow Russians as well.

The entire article on: usminc.org...

reply to post by Lucifer777


I try to understand people like you, why so much hate about Jesus, your signature says it all, and about god, I sense you hate that too, no matter how you picture god, an entity, the force Keter or just some guy sitting on a big chair. Maybe you should have your own out of the ordinary expiriance and come to the understanding that there are such things.

reply to post by "Lucifer777"


Even if she was into mediumism before she collaborated with H.S. Olcott and the Eastern Adepts, H.P. Blavatsky did not "channel" or use mediumism to write her Theosophical books; and she also did not "plagiarize".

It is true that some Theosophists did not completely abandon mediumism; however, this does NOT mean that the actual Theosophical teachings themselves are a product of channeling/mediumism.

Remember that Tantric or Yogic Siddhis or positive occult powers such as Telepa thy and Astral Projection, etc. are NOT mediumism or "channeling".

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

I try to understand people like you, why so much hate about Jesus, your signature says it all, and about god, I sense you hate that too, no matter how you picture god, an entity, the force Keter or just some guy sitting on a big chair. Maybe you should have your own out of the ordinary expiriance and come to the understanding that there are such things.

I fail to understand how anyone who has read the OP in this thread could consider me to be an atheist, though I am certainly not a traditional theist; however I am mostly certainly an evangelical anti-Christian, and I concur with Richard Dawkins that the Bronze Age tribal deity of the Bible is "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

Only an evil person would revere such an evil definition of a God, and consider the diabolical definition of the human hating Biblical deity to be a definition of absolute goodness; to me the Biblical deity is a definition of absolute evil. It is perfectly natural for a decent human being to hate and despise evil; whereas those who revere such a hateful definition of a primitive and savage deity are clearly morally subhuman in my judgement.

Of course, most of our Christian ancestors in human history have simply been uneducated and illiterate victims of religious hypnosis and indoctrination (see my essay: "The Dangers of Religious Hypnosis and Indoctrination: The genocidal faiths of Christianity & Islam," on: www.abovetopsecret.com... ), however we of the modern generation are certainly the most literate and educated generation in all of human history, and 21st century Christians do not have the same excuse as their ancestors for their devotion to a primitive and demonic deity.

Unfortunately a person who reveres an evil definition of a deity is likely to emulate such evil themselves, which explains the 1600 year history of Christian tyranny, misogyny, slavery, wars and Inquisitions, all of which can be justified by the Bible. The Bible is further not merely a "religious" text. but it promotes a tyrannical system of government and law, which if it were ever manifested in the real world would have genocidal consequences.

Although I consider the Biblical deity to be an anthropomorphic projection of the minds of the authors of the texts, it is also my view that such diabolical, demonic, human hating intelligences do indeed exist in other dimensions and that Christianity is merely a form of demonic worship.

With regards to hatred of "Jesus," I consider the Jesus of the Gospels to be a fictional character (see "The New Testament: A Fourth Century Fabrication & the 7 Signs of a Christian Charlatan" on: www.abovetopsecret.com... ). It is quite probable that the New Testament is based upon an actual historical person, but it is simply impossible to extract any facts about this person from the New Testament, which is simply a 4th century fabrication and a compilation of "in all, two thousand two hundred and thirty-one scrolls and legendary tales of gods and saviors, together with a record of the doctrines orated by them (Life of Constantine, cited www.bibliotecapleyades.net... )."

If we set aside the fabrication issue and just consider the Jesus as he appears in the Gospels, we find a description of an archetypal religious schizophrenic; a religious fanatic who promoted strict adherence to the primitive Judaic Law, and who was celarly a fake miracle worker and fake healer who promised such powers to his followers, but all I see the world of Christianity is charlatans and fake healers who prey on the old, the sick and the vulnerable and who have no such powers. I think that it is perfectly natural for a human being to have a hatred of such religious fanatics and charlatans.

Further it seems clear to me that Christians universally anyway reject the teachings and religion (i.e., Judaism) of Jesus and are openly hostile to them; "Jesus" is merely an arbitrary figure in the imagination of Christians; if the Christian is homophobic then Jesus becomes a homophobic icon, and if the Christian is anti-Communist and an ideological Capitalist, then Jesus becomes an icon of anti-Communism and militant Capitalism; a "Christian" is thus merely a person who superimposes their own personal beliefs and prejudices onto an imaginary being they refer to as Jesus, and whom they claim to represent, but Christianity in general is clearly a misrepresentation of the Judaic religion of of Jesus.

Lux

Originally posted by Tamahu

reply to post by "Lucifer777"

 

Even if she was into mediumism before she collaborated with H.S. Olcott and the Eastern Adepts, H.P. Blavatsky did not "channel" or use mediumism to write her Theosophical books; and she also did not "plagiarize".

Well contradiction is not really a valid form of argument; the allegations of Blavatsky's plagiarism and fake mediumship are quite widespread. To simply claim that she did not plagiarise her writings is a simple contradiction, which does not respond to the arguments and evidence that she did (see cited essay below). Further it is quite clear that even after the founding of the Theosophical Society in 1875 that Blavatsky was up to her usual tricks of fake mediumship. Both of her major works Isis Unveiled (1887) and The Secret Doctrine (1888), were written after the founding of the Theosophical Society with Olcott, and she claimed that "ascended masters," including the "Lord of the World" who lived in a secret heavenly oasis in the Gobi Desert were in telepathic communication with her. Blavatsky claimed that portions of Isis Unveiled would simply appear magically on her desk, and that spiritual masters would take over her body and write for her. Blavatsky herself responded to allegations of plagiarism as proof of her psychic powers.

The belief that there are secret spiritual "masters" on earth and also in the afterlife (the spiritual world) is common to almost all esoteric societies; frankly, despite my belief in other dimensions of reality and in malevolent and benevolent ancestral spirits (i.e., the gods and goddesses), I generally consider the progressive forces on earth to be the humanists, Anarchists, Socialists, Communists and anti-religionists, and "some" of the Neopagans; in other words those who can think for themselves, who submit to no "higher" metaphysical authority and who are humanitarians rather than spiritualists. It is quite clear that there are many persons on earth who claim to be "spiritual masters" or in communion with spritual masters on earth, however I count myself among their overtly stated enemies. Religion is a major part of the problem of the world, it is not the solution; on the contrary.

Lux

www.indiadivine.org...

The Sources of Madame Blavatsky's Writings

By William Emmette Coleman

(First published in A Modern Priestess of Isis by Vsevolod
Sergyeevich Solovyoff,
London, Longmans, Green, and Co., 1895, Appendix C, pp. 353-366.)

During the past three years I have made a more or less exhaustive
analysis of the contents of the writings of Madame H. P. Blavatsky;
and I have traced the sources whence she derived - and mostly
without credit being given - nearly the whole of their subject-
matter.

The presentation, in detail, of the evidences of this derivation
would constitute a volume; but the limitations of this paper will
admit only of a brief summary of the results attained by my analysis
of these writings. The detailed proofs and evidence of every
assertion herein are now partly in print and partly in manuscript;
and they will be embodied in full in a work I am preparing for
publication, - an expose of theosophy as a whole.

So far as pertains to Isis Unveiled, Madame Blavatsky's first work,
the proofs of its wholesale plagiarisms have been in print two
years, and no attempt has been made to deny or discredit any of the
data therein contained. In that portion of my work which is already
in print, as well as that as yet in manuscript, many parallel
passages are given from the two sets of writings, - the works of
Madame Blavatsky, and the books whence she copied the plagiarised
passages; they also contain complete lists of the passages
plagiarised, giving in each case the page of Madame Blavatsky's work
in which the passage is found, and the page and name of the book
whence she copied it. Any one can, therefore, easily test the
accuracy of my statements.

In Isis Unveiled, published in 1877, I discovered some 2000 passages
copied from other books without proper credit. By careful analysis I
found that in compiling Isis about 100 books were used. About 1400
books are quoted from and referred to in this work; but, from the
100 books which its author possessed, she copied everything in Isis
taken from and relating to the other 1300.

There are in Isis about 2100 quotations from and references to books
that were copied, at second-hand, from books other than the
originals; and of this number only about 140 are credited to the
books from which Madame Blavatsky copied them at second-hand.

The others are quoted in such a manner as to lead the reader to
think that Madame Blavatsky had read and utilised the original
works, and had quoted from them at first-hand, - the truth being
that these originals had evidently never been read by Madame
Blavatsky.

By this means many readers of Isis, and subsequently those of her
Secret Doctrine and Theosophical Glossary, have been misled into
thinking Madame Blavatsky an enormous reader, possessed of vast
erudition; while the fact is her reading was very limited, and her
ignorance was profound in all branches of knowledge.

The books utilised in compiling Isis were nearly all current
nineteenth-century literature. Only one of the old and rare books
named and quoted from was in Madame Blavatsky's possession, - Henry
More's Immortality of the Soul, published in the seventeenth
century.

One or two others dated from the early part of the present century;
and all the rest pertained to the middle and later part of this
century. Our author made great pretensions to Cabbalistic learning;
but every quotation from and every allusion to the Cabbala, in Isis
and all her later works, were copied at second-hand from certain
books containing scattered quotations from Cabbalistic writings;
among them being Mackenzie's Masonic Cyclopaedia, King's Gnostics,
and the works of S. F. Dunlap, L. Jacolliot, and Eliphas Levi.

Not a line of the quotations in Isis, from the old-time mystics,
Paracelsus, Van Helmont, Cardan, Robert Fludd, Philalethes,
Gaffarel, and others, was taken from the original works; the whole
of them were copied from other books containing scattered quotations
from those writers.

The same thing obtains with her quotations from Josephus, Philo, and
the Church Fathers, as Justin Martyr, Origen, Clement, Irenaeus,
Tertullian, Eusebius, and all the rest. The same holds good with the
classical authors, - Homer, Ovid, Horace, Virgil, Plato, Pliny, and
many others.

The quotations from all these were copied at second-hand from some
of the 100 books which were used by the compiler of Isis.

In a number of instances Madame Blavatsky, in Isis claimed to
possess or to have read certain books quoted from, which it is
evident she neither possessed nor had read. In Isis, i., 369-377,
are a number of quotations from a work of Figuier's, that she
claimed to have taken from the original work, which she says (i.,
369) now "lies before us".

As every word from Figuier in Isis was copied from Des Mousseaux's
Magie au Dix-neuvieme Siecle, pp. 451-457, the word "lies" in the
sentence used by her is quite a propos. In Isis, i., 353, 354, et
seq., she professed to quote from a work in her possession, whereas
all that she quoted was copied from Demonologia, pp. 224-259.

In ii., 8, she claimed that she had read a work by Bellarmin,
whereas all that she says about him, and all that she quotes from
him, are copied from Demonologia, pp. 294, 295. In ii., 71, she
stated that she had a treatise by De Nogen, but all that she knows
about him or his treatise was taken from Demonologia, p. 431. In
ii., 74, 75, the reader is led to believe that certain quotations
from The Golden Legend were copied by her from the original; the
truth being that they were taken from Demonologia, 420-427. In ii.,
59, she gave a description of a standard of the Inquisition,
derived, she said, from "a photograph in our possession, from an
original procured at the Escurial of Madrid"; but this description
was copied from Demonologia, p. 300.

In Isis, i., pp. xii, to xxii., is an account of the philosophy of
Plato and his successors. Nearly the whole of these ten pages was
copied from two books, - Cocker's Christianity and Greek Philosophy,
and Zeller's Plato and the Old Academy. There are some 25 passages
from Cocker and 35 from Zeller; and, of all these, credit is given
for but one citation from Cocker and about a dozen lines from
Zeller. In Isis, ii., 344, 345, 9 passages are copied from Zeller,
but one of which is credited.

Here follows a list of some other of the more extensive plagiarisms
in Isis. It includes the names of the books plagiarised from, and
the number of passages in them that were plagiarised: -

Ennemoser's History of Magic, English translation 107 passages.
Demonologia, 85 "
Dunlap's Sod: the Son of the Man, 134 "
Dunlap's Sod: the Mysteries of Adoni, 65 "
Dunlap's Spirit History of Man, 77 "
Salverte's Philosophy of Magic, English translation 68 "
Des Mousseaux's Magic au Dix-neuvieme Siecle, 63 "
Des Mousseaux's Hauts Phenomenes de la Magie, 45 "
Des Mousseaux's Moeurs et Pratiques des Demons,. 16 "
Supernatural Religion, 40 "
King's Gnostics, 1st edition, 42 "
Mackenzie's Masonic Cyclopaedia, 36 "
Jacolliot's Christna et le Christ, 23 "
Jacolliot's Bible in India, English translation. 17 "
Jacolliot's Le Spiritisme dans le Monde, 19 "
Hone's Apocryphal New Testament, 27 "
Cory's Ancient Fragments, 20 "
Howitt's History of the Supernatural, 20 "

Among the other books plagiarised from may be named Eliphas Levi's
Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, and his La Science des Esprits,
La Clef des Grands Mysteres, and Histoire de la Magie;

Amberley's Analysis of Religious Belief, Yule's Ser Marco Polo, Max
Muller's Chips, vols. i. and ii., Lundy's Monumental Christianity,
Taylor's Eleusinian and Bacchic Mysteries (1875 ed.), Reber's Christ
of Paul, Jenning's Rosicrucians,

Higgins's Anacalypsis, Inman's Ancient Faiths in Ancient Names,
Inman's Ancient Pagan and Modern Christian Symbolism, Inman's
Ancient Faiths and Modern, Wright's Sorcery and Witchcraft, Bunsen's
Egypt, Payne Knight's Symbolical Language of Ancient Art and
Mythology, Westropp and Wake's Ancient Symbol Worship, Pococke's
India in Greece, Findel's History of Freemasonry,

The Unseen Universe, Elam's A Physician's Problems, Emma Hardinge's
Modern American Spiritualism, More's Immortality of the Soul,
Draper's Conflict between Religion and Science, Randolph's Pre-
Adamite Man, Peebles's Jesus: Myth, Man, or God, Peebles's Around
the World, Principles of the Jesuits (1893),

Septenary Institutions (1850), Gasparin's Science and Spiritualism,
Report on Spiritualism of the London Dialectical Society (1873),
Wallace's Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, and Maudsley's Body and
Mind.

Two years ago I published the statement that the whole of Isis was
compiled from a little over 100 books and periodicals. In the
Theosophist, April, 1893, pp. 387, 388, Colonel Olcott states that
when Isis was written the library of the author comprised about 100
books, and that during its composition various friends lent her a
few books, - the latter with her own library thus making up a little
over 100, in precise accordance with the well-established results of
my critical analysis of every quotation and plagiarism in Isis.

The Secret Doctrine, published in 1888, is of a piece with Isis. It
is permeated with plagiarisms, and is in all its parts a rehash of
other books.

Two books very largely form the basis of this work, - Wilson's
translation of the Vishnu Purana, and Prof. Winchell's World Life.
The Secret Doctrine is saturated with Hinduism and Sanskrit
terminology, and the bulk of this was copied from Wilson's Vishnu
Purana.

A large part of the work is devoted to the discussion of various
points in modern science, and the work most largely used by Madame
Blavatsky in this department of her book was Winchell's World Life.

A specimen of the wholesale plagiarisms in this book appears in vol.
ii., pp. 599-603. Nearly the whole of four pages was copied from
Oliver's Pythagorean Triangle, while only a few lines were credited
to that work.

Considerable other matter in Secret Doctrine was copied, uncredited,
from Oliver's work. Donnelly's Atlantis was largely plagiarised
from.

Madame Blavatsky not only borrowed from this writer the general idea
of the derivation of Eastern civilisation, mythology, etc., from
Atlantis; but she coolly appropriated from him a number of the
alleged detailed evidences of this derivation, without crediting him
therewith.

Vol. ii., pp. 790-793, contains a number of facts, numbered
seriatim, said to prove this Atlantean derivation. These facts were
almost wholly copied from Donnelly's book, ch. iv., where they are
also numbered seriatim; but there is no intimation in Secret
Doctrine that its author was indebted to Donnelly's book for this
mass of matter.

In addition to those credited, there are 130 passages from Wilson's
Vishnu Purana copied uncredited; and there are some 70 passages from
Winchell's World Life not credited. From Dowson's Hindu Classical
Dictionary, 123 passages were plagiarised.

>From Decharme's Mythologie de la Grece Antique, about 60 passages
were plagiarised; and from Myer's Qabbala, 34. These are some of the
other books plagiarised from: Kenealy's Book of God, Faber's Cabiri,
Wake's Great Pyramid, Gould's Mythical Monsters, Joly's Man before
Metals, Stallo's, Modern Physics,

Massey's Natural Genesis, Mackey's Mythological Astronomy, Schmidt's
Descent and Darwinism, Quatrefages's Human Species, Laing's Modern
Science and Modern Thought, Mather's Cabbala Unveiled, Maspero's
Musee de Boulaq, Ragon's Maconnerie Occulte, Lefevre's Philosophy,
and Buchner's Force and Matter.

The Secret Doctrine is ostensibly based upon certain stanzas,
claimed to have been translated by Madame Blavatsky from the Book of
Dzyan, - the oldest book in the world, written in a language unknown
to philology. The Book of Dzyan was the work of Madame Blavatsky, -
a compilation, in her own language, from a variety of sources,
embracing the general principles of the doctrines and dogmas taught
in the Secret Doctrine.

I find in this "oldest book in the world" statements copied from
nineteenth-century books, and in the usual blundering manner of
Madame Blavatsky. Letters and other writings of the adepts are found
in the Secret Doctrine.

In these Mahatmic productions I have traced various plagiarised
passages from Wilson's Vishnu Purana and Winchell's World Life, - of
like character to those in Madame Blavatsky's acknowledged writings.
Detailed proofs of this will be given in my book. I have also traced
the source whence she derived the word Dzyan.

The Theosophical Glossary, published in 1892, contains an
alphabetical arrangement of words and terms pertaining to occultism
and theosophy, with explanations and definitions thereof. The whole
of this book, except the garblings, distortions and fabrications of
Madame Blavatsky scattered through it, was copied from other books.

The explanations and definitions of 425 names and terms were copied
from Dowson's Hindu Classical Dictionary. From Wilson's Vishnu
Purana were taken those of 242 terms; from Eitel's Handbook of
Chinese Buddhism, 179; and from Mackenzie's Masonic Cyclopaedia,
164.

A modicum of credit was given to these four books in the preface.
But, inasmuch as, scattered through the Glossary, credit was given
at intervals to these books for a certain few of the passages
extracted therefrom, its readers might easily be misled, by the
remark in the preface relative to these four books, into the belief
that said remark was intended to cover the various passages in the
Glossary where these books are named as the sources whence they were
derived and these alone, - that the passages duly credited to said
books comprised the whole of the matter in the volume taken from
them, instead of being but a small part of the immense collection of
matter transferred en masse to the Glossary.

But the four named in the preface are not the only books thus
utilised. A glossary of Sanskrit and occultic terms was appended to
a work called Five Years of Theosophy, published by Mohini M.
Chatterji in 1885. At least 229 of these terms and their definitions
were copied in Blavatsky's Glossary, nearly verbatim in every
instance; and no credit whatever was given for this wholesale
appropriation of another's work.

I cannot find a single reference to Chatterji's glossary in any part
of the later Glossary. Nearly all of the matter concerning Egyptian
mythology, etc., in the latter, was copied from Bonwick's Egyptian
Belief and Modern Thought. A small part of this was credited, but
over 100 passages from Bonwick were not credited.

Nearly every word in relation to Norse and Teutonic mythology was
copied from Wagner's Asgard and the Gods, - a little being credited,
and some 100 passages not. Most of the Thibetan matter was taken
from Schlagintweit's Buddhism in Thibet, - some credited, but nearly
50 passages were not. Much of the material anent Southern Buddhism
was copied from Spence Hardy's Eastern Monachism, - nearly 50
passages being uncredited.

Most of the Babylonian and Chaldean material was extracted from
Smith's Chaldean Account of Genesis, with nearly 50 passages not
credited. The Parsi and Zoroastrian matter was from Darmesteter's
translation of the Zend-Avesta, and West's translation of the
Bundahish in the Sacred Books of the East, - mostly uncredited.

Among other books levied upon in the compilation of the Glossary,
principally with no credit given, are these: Sayce's Hibbert
Lectures Myer's Qabbala, Hartmann's Paracelsus, Crawford's
translation of the Kalevala, King's Gnostics, Faber's Cabiri, Beal's
Catena of Buddhist Scriptures, Rhys Davids's Buddhism, Edkins's
Chinese Buddhism, Maspero's Guide au Musee de Boulaq, Subba Row's
Notes on the Bhagavad Gita, Kenealy's Book of God, Eliphas Levi's
Works, and various others.

The Voice of the Silence, published in 1889, purports to be a
translation by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky from a Thibetan work. It is
said to belong to the same series as the Book of Dzyan, which is
true; as, like that work, it is a compilation of ideas and
terminology from various nineteenth-century books, the diction and
phraseology being those of Madame Blavatsky. I have traced the
sources whence it was taken, and it is a hotch-potch from
Brahmanical books on Yoga and other Hindu writings;

Southern Buddhistic books, from the Pali and Sinhalese; and Northern
Buddhistic writings, from the Chinese and Thibetan, - the whole
having been taken by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky from translations by,
and the writings of, European and other Orientalists of to-day. In
this work are intermingled Sanskrit, Pali, Thibetan, Chinese, and
Sinhalese terms, - a manifest absurdity in a Thibetan work.

I have traced the books from which each of these terms was taken. I
find embedded in the text of this alleged ancient Thibetan work
quotations, phrases, and terms copied from current Oriental
literature.

The books most utilised in its compilation are these:
Schlagintweit's Buddhism in Thibet, Edkins's's Chinese Buddhism,
Hardy's Eastern Monachism, Rhys Davids's Buddhism, Dvivedi's Raja
Yoga, and Raja Yoga Philosophy (1888); also an article, "The Dream
of Ravan," published in the Dublin University Magazine, January,
1854, extracts from which appeared in the Theosophist of January,
1880.

Passages from this article, and from the books named above, are
scattered about in the text of The Voice of the Silence, as well as
in the annotations thereon, which latter are admitted to be the work
of Blavatsky. Full proofs of this, including the parallel passages,
will be given in my work on theosophy; including evidence that this
old Thibetan book contains not only passages from the Hindu books
quoted in the article in the Dublin Magazine, but also ideas and
phrases stolen from the nineteenth-century writer of said article.

One example of the incongruity of the elements composing the
conglomerate admixture of terms and ideas in the Voice of the
Silence will be given. On p. 87, it is said that the Narjols of the
Northern Buddhists are "learned in Gotrabhu-gnyana and gnyana-
dassana-suddhi".

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky copied these two terms from Hardy's
Eastern Monachism, p. 281. The terms used in Northern Buddhism are
usually Sanskrit, or from the Sanskrit; those in Southern Buddhism,
Pali, or from the Pali. Hardy's work, devoted to Sinhalese Buddhism,
is composed of translations from Sinhalese books, and its terms and
phrases are largely Sinhalese corruptions of the Pali. Sinhalese
terms are unknown in Northern Buddhism.

The two terms in the Voice of the Silence, descriptive of the wisdom
of the Narjols, are Sinhalese-Pali corruptions, and therefore
unknown in Thibet. Narjol is a word manufactured by Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky, from the Thibetan Nal-jor, which she found in
Schlagintweit's work, p. 138, - the r and l being transposed by her.

Esoteric Buddhism, by A. P. Sinnett, was based upon statements in
letters received by Mr. Sinnett and Mr. A. O. Hume, through Madame
Blavatsky, purporting to be written by the Mahatmas Koot Hoomi and
Morya, - principally the former.

Mr. Richard Hodgson has kindly lent me a considerable number of the
original letters of the Mahatmas leading to the production of
Esoteric Buddhism. I find in them overwhelming evidence that all of
them were written by Madame Blavatsky, which evidence will be
presented in full in my book.

In these letters are a number of extracts from Buddhist books,
alleged to be translations from the originals by the Mahatmic
writers themselves. These letters claim for the adepts a knowledge
of Sanskrit, Thibetan, Pali and Chinese.

I have traced to its source each quotation from the Buddhist
scriptures in the letters, and they were all copied from current
English translations, including even the notes and explanations of
the English translators.

They were principally copied from Beal's Catena of Buddhist
Scriptures from the Chinese. In other places where the adept (?) is
using his own language in explanation of Buddhistic terms and ideas,
I find that his presumed original language was copied nearly word
for word from Rhys Davids's Buddhism, and other books.

I have traced every Buddhistic idea in these letters and in Esoteric
Buddhism, and every Buddhistic term, such as Devachan, Avitchi,
etc., to the books whence Helena Petrovna Blavatsky derived them.
Although said to be proficient in the knowledge of Thibetan and
Sanskrit, the words and terms in these languages in the letters of
the adepts were nearly all used in a ludicrously erroneous and
absurd manner.

The writer of those letters was an ignoramus in Sanskrit and
Thibetan; and the mistakes and blunders in them, in these languages,
are in exact accordance with the known ignorance of Madame Blavatsky
there anent. Esoteric Buddhism, like all of Madame Blavatsky's
works, was based upon wholesale plagiarism and ignorance.

>From the Caves and Jungles of Hindostan, although published, in
letters to a Russian journal, as a veracious narrative of actual
experiences of Madame Blavatsky in India, was admitted by Colonel
Olcott in Theosophist, January, 1893, pp. 245, 246, to be largely a
work of fiction; and this has been even partially conceded in its
preface.

Like her other books it swarms with blunders, misstatements,
falsehoods and garblings. Full expose of it will be included in my
work. The Key to Theosophy, by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, being a
compendium of doctrines, its plagiarism consists in the ideas and
teachings which it contains, rather than in plagiarised passages
from other books.

In addition to wholesale plagiarism, other marked characteristics of
Madame Blavatsky's writings are these: (1) Wholesale garbling,
distortion and literary forgery, of which there are very many
instances in Isis particularly.

The Koot Hoomi letters to Hume and Sinnett contain garbled and
spurious quotations from Buddhist sacred books, manufactured by the
writer to embody her own peculiar ideas, under the fictitious guise
of genuine Buddhism. (2) Wealth of misstatement and error in all
branches of knowledge treated by her; e.g., in Isis there are over
600 false statements in Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity,
Assyriology, Egyptology, etc. (3) Mistakes and blunders of many
varied kinds

- in names of books and authors, in words and figures and what not;
nearly 700 being in Isis alone. (4) Great contradiction and
inconsistency, both in primary and essential points and in minor
matters and details. There are probably thousands of contradictions
in the whole circuit of her writings.

The doctrines, teachings, dogmas, etc., of theosophy, as published
by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, and affirmed to be derived from the
quasi-infallible Mahatmas of Thibet, were borrowed from the
philosophies and religions of the past and present, with some
admixture of modern science.

There is nothing original in this "Wisdom of the Gods," or "Wisdom
Religion," save the work of compilation into a composite whole of
the heterogeneous mass of materials gathered by Madame Blavatsky
from so many sources, and the garblings, perversions, and
fabrications indulged in by her in the preparation of the system of
thought called theosophy.

A careful analysis of her teachings shows that they were collected
from the sources named below.

(1) Madame Blavatsky was a spiritualistic medium many years before
she became a theosophist, and in its inception theosophy was an off-
shoot from spiritualism; and from this source was a large part of
her theosophy taken.

I find that its teachings upon some 267 points were copied from
those of spiritualism.

(2) In its later form, Hinduism constitutes one of the larger
portions of theosophy. I have not attempted an exhaustive
classification of the numerous minor points taken from this source,
but I have noted 281 of the more important.

(3) From Buddhism I have noted 63.

(4) In the beginnings of theosophy, the basis of most of its
teachings was derived from the works of Eliphas Levi, and I count
102 points therefrom borrowed.

(5) From Paracelsus's works were taken 49.

(6) From Jacob Bohme, 81.

(7) From the Cabbala, 86.

(8) From Plato, the Platonists, the Neo-Platonists, and Hermes, 80.

(9) From Gnosticism, 61.

(10) From modern science and philosophy, 75.

(11) From Zoroastrianism, 26.

(12) From Kingsford and Maitland's Perfect Way, 24.

(13) From general mythology, 20.

(14) From Egyptology, 17.

(15) From the Rosicrucians, 16.

(16) From other mediaeval and modern mystics, 20.

(17) From miscellaneous classical writers, 16.

(18) From Assyriology, 14.

(19) From Christianity and the Bible, 10.

In addition, doctrines and data, in lesser number, have been derived
from the following-named sources:

The writings of Gerald Massey, John Yarker, Subba Row, Ragon, J.
Ralston Skinner, Inman, Keeley, Godfrey Higgins, Jacolliot, Wilford,
Oliver, Donnelly, Mackenzie, Bulwer-Lytton, Kenealy, and various
others; also from Chinese, Japanese, Phoenician, and Quiche
mythologies.

There is not a single dogma or tenet in theosophy, nor any detail of
moment in the multiplex and complex concatenation of alleged
revelations of occult truth in the teachings of Madame Blavatsky and
the pretended adepts, the source of which cannot be pointed out in
the world's literature. From first to last, their writings are
dominated by a duplex plagiarism, - plagiarism in idea, and
plagiarism in language.

San Francisco, California, U. S. A.,
2nd August, 1893.


William Emmette Coleman
Member, American Oriental Society, Royal Asiatic Society of Great
Britain and Ireland, Pali Text Society, Egypt Exploration Fund,
Geographical Society of California; Corresponding Member, Brooklyn
Ethical Association; and Member, Advisory Council, Psychic Science
Congress, Chicago, Illinois.

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Well contradiction is not really a valid form of argument; the allegations of Blavatsky's plagiarism and fake mediumship are quite widespread. To simply claim that she did not plagiarise her writings is a simple contradiction, which does not respond to the arguments and evidence that she did (see cited essay below).

The Ancient Knowledge (whether we call it Theosophy, Gnosis, etc.) is not the property of any one author, including H.P. Blavatsky and the authors of the books that she cited. This is addressed in two Gnostic forum threads found here and here.

There are hundreds of footnotes in the writings of H.P. Blavatsky, which say things along the lines of: "see such-and-such book by such-and-such author". So I don't see how she "plagiarized" anyone, considering the extensive number of citations and references to other works found in the footnotes of H.P. Blavatsky's writings.

This being said, all I see in the quotes you've posted here, are a bunch of accusations of plagiarism aimed at H.P. Blavatsky, but without any solid specific examples of the alleged "plagiarism".

In Isis Unveiled, H.P. Blavatsky wrote:

"In an old book entitled Demonologia, the author cites many instances of important remedies which being neglected at first afterward rose into notice through mere accident."

Here we have H.P. Blavatsky specifically citing Demonologia, yet she supposedly "plagiarized" Demonologia.

So i met a really nice lady, shes a virgin well brought up and respectable. She comes from a good family and well she is what many would consider marridge material...

We have been seeing each other for 3 months..

Prior to meeting her there was another woman who i really wanted to get with..

Funny enough she is back on the scene...
So i am at a point where i have to make a choice..

I really want to experience being with both of them sexually.. but..

One way or the other there will be hurt and pain..

According to what you are saying i should have my cake and eat it.
I would very much like to but i also have a conscience...

Now i could take your road and sleep with both of them but i cant let the other know.. this would make me a dog in the eyes of the many but natural in your eyes..

If i am to be natural then i will hurt the girl i am with now.. this to me is not a nice thing to do... but to you it is normal.

How do i have my cake and eat it without feeling bad due to the pain i will be causing to this innocent lady?

Or should i not really care..?

Personally the way i see it is like this...

Everything you have put forward is mesmeric.. and so it should be.. lucifer has had a long time in which to infiltrate humanity and rid it of love and goodness...

This is an indoctrination that well really gives you a free pass to being sinful in the eyes of any wholesome religious person.

That isnt to say that im a bible basher or religious , just that i see people with faith as happy and healthy.

I too am into the occult and find the subject to be fascinating, however i have strong feelings that it is mystical and alluring precisely to make us venture into a realm of fantasy that leads us away from anything loving or godly.

If we look at the world today it is full of sin and dispear but i feel this is more a result of the influence that lucifer has on humanity and the world. He is the bringer of light.. light being wisdom.. secret knowledge that ultimatly tells the tale of enlightenment and becoming godlike. The reality is that the deeper you venture into the occult the more sin-ister you become. You actually allow the influence of demons to take hold of your being, not directly in any large doses for the most part but more subtely, over time you begin to change and grow a lust for dark things.

Human beings are beautiful creations that should be respected for the most part, we should all be conscious of the effect we have on others around us.. we simply can not go around doing as we please without thinking of the consequences of our actions. The proof is in the pudding.. and we only need to take a look at the world around us that has become diluted and posioned by the luciferic inlfuences in our modern day cult-ure.

It is a shame that humanity has lost its way and that people have become so parranoid and withdrawn that community spirit and genuine compassionate love are things we now view as weaknesses.

Lucifer has managed to stay under cover for many years.. slowly taking is souls unknowingly to many..
The fact is this.. and if you look at it through the eyes of common sense you will no doubt see the picture for what it is..

Lucifer is a by product of the holy books.. Call him satan, devil, dajall, lucifer or any other name associated with the entity/energy.. the world your OP creates is one with Lucifer at the helm..

To accept this world , this luciferic initiation is to breath life into the god that created him in the first instance.

You can not accept lucifer without accpeting the fact that god created him. And thus the parradox comes full circle..

My point is this:

If lucifer exists and i believe in one capacity or other that he does.. then so to must God. This then leads us to the things spelled out in the holy books which make much sense in context..

God made angels, god then made man, angels rebelled against god for the love he showed man over the angels...
The angels challenged god so god sent the angels to earth to test man..

Lucifer has since been weaving his wicked web of deceit and yes many have fallen, but many hold true to gods words and prophecies..

Especially the one that matters... the one where god says lucifer will , in the end days.. bring grand delusions to the world.. where he will cause many even those high up in the echlons of power to be fooled into believing his omnipotency.

I would say to tread extreamly careful with your beliefs as colorful and mesmeric as they are.. as alluring and awe inspiring as they appear... because such beauty can be deadly..

The only real condition humanity should be living under is one of love and community.. where sharing and family are at the core of the interconnectedness of the planet. Where we have a respect for nature and all that she provides and sustains us with. We have for too long abused our source of nurture and thus are experiencing the effects and rightly so. The only way to restore the balance is to bring love back to the forefront of our lives and let that be our guiding force.. all the illusions of grandure that come with the occult empower the individual to rule over others.. it is when we see ourselves in others and realise that we are all one family with no higharcy between us that equlity , peace and true justice will ensue.

Originally posted by Tamahu

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Well contradiction is not really a valid form of argument; the allegations of Blavatsky's plagiarism and fake mediumship are quite widespread. To simply claim that she did not plagiarise her writings is a simple contradiction, which does not respond to the arguments and evidence that she did (see cited essay below).

The Ancient Knowledge (whether we call it Theosophy, Gnosis, etc.) is not the property of any one author, including H.P. Blavatsky and the authors of the books that she cited. This is addressed in two Gnostic forum threads found gnostic-community.org... and gnostic-community.org...

The first page you have cited is not a refutation of Blavatsky's plagiarism; it does not in any way address this matter apart from merely claiming that she did not plagiarise here works. If there are any serious refutations of the claims that Blavatsky plagiarised her works and that she was a fake psychic who used conjuring trikcs, I would be interested to read them.

There are hundreds of footnotes in the writings of H.P. Blavatsky, which say things along the lines of: "see such-and-such book by such-and-such author". So I don't see how she "plagiarized" anyone, considering the extensive number of citations and references to other works found in the footnotes of H.P. Blavatsky's writings.

It has been alleged in the essays above that the footnotes were added later after the charges of plagiarism were added. Of course it is quite normal to have an eclectic (drawn from various sources) belief system; this probably defines most of the New Age / Neopagan movement, however it is quite another thing to be a fake psychic and to plagiarise other people's writings without giving accreditation for them.

This being said, all I see in the quotes you've posted here, are a bunch of accusations of plagiarism aimed at H.P. Blavatsky, but without any solid specific examples of the alleged "plagiarism".

[url=http://www.sacred-texts.com/the/iu/iu002.htm Isis Unveiled, H.P. Blavatsky wrote:

"In an old book entitled Demonologia, the author cites many instances of important remedies which being neglected at first afterward rose into notice through mere accident."

Here we have H.P. Blavatsky specifically citing Demonologia, yet she supposedly "plagiarized" Demonologia.

There are numerous examples which have been given in the William Emmette Coleman essay I cited above, citing page numbers from her works and which particular works were plagiarised. As to researching this matter in depth, and comparing the original works with Blavatsky's works, this would require a great deal of attention and this is something I would have to leave to Blavatsky's admirers, however in the well over a century since Coleman's essay was published, the Theosophists have had ample time to respond to it and I am unable to find any real point by point defense, apart from the usual blanker denials.

Personally I am satisfied that what I have read of Blavatsky's writings are mostly rather meaningless spiritual sophistry and ramblings, and having a print copy of the rather critical work, Peter Washington's "Madam Blavatsky's Baboon: Theosophy and the Emergence of the Western Guru" I am quite satisfied that the Theosophical movement was really a comedy of errors and quackery. The esoteric revivalism movement of the 19th and 20th centuries have ended up as the "New Age / Neopagan" movement, which despite being entwined with this myself, I am well aware that it is also full of quacks and charlatans.

Lux

____________________

Originally posted by nakiannunaki
So i met a really nice lady, shes a virgin well brought up and respectable. She comes from a good family and well she is what many would consider marridge material...

...
I really want to experience being with both of them sexually.. but..

One way or the other there will be hurt and pain..

According to what you are saying i should have my cake and eat it.
I would very much like to but i also have a conscience...

I think that you are misunderstanding what polyamory is about. See www.polyamory.org... and www.xeromag.com... the latter of which addresses your question directly.

The point I was making is that the human mind is not monogamous, but polyamorous; thus the monogamist lives in denial of their true nature and true desire. If you have a problem with that, you may wish to take it up with your Creator (if you can find Her), however I am merely commenting upon human nature; I did not create human nature.

Clearly the girl whom you have some affection for whom you describe as "marriage material" is not a polyamorist, but is probably looking monogamous relationship. Thus if you take a second lover, you might be following your natural will, but you will be deceiving her. Such deception has nothing do do with the modern philosophy and lifestyle of polyamory; on the contrary. In an honest polyamorous relationship, your girlfriends would know that you have other lovers and you would know that they have other lovers. Often in society the paternalistic male with a "slave master" mentality wants his various lovers to enslave themselves exclusively to him; this is polygamy (many wives) not polyamory.

Originally posted by nakiannunaki

This is an indoctrination that well really gives you a free pass to being sinful in the eyes of any wholesome religious person.

The texts of the three major world religions (The Bible, the Koran and the Vedas) were all derived from polygamous slave societies. You will not find a single line in the Bible, for example, which promotes the institution of monogamy; on the contrary; the Biblical culture was a polygamous culture; a male could have as many wives as he could afford to purchase and maintain, or could capture in war (assuming they were young virgin females; i.e., children).

"Polygamy (many wives)" is entirely the opposite of "sin (i.e., unlawful)" with regards to the Judaic Law; there is no problem with a male having many sex slaves; this is the Law of the primitive Biblical deity. The modern philosophy of "polyamory (many lovers)" however frees both the female "and" male of the species to allow them to follow their nature.

It seems to me that you associate what is "natural" with what is sinful. This seems to me to be an indication of the effects of religious hypnosis and indoctrination and a belief in a human-nature hating deity.

Lucifer has since been weaving his wicked web of deceit and yes many have fallen, but many hold true to gods words and prophecies..

It is quite common for people to believe that the savage, genocidal Bronze Age deity of the Bible, is a definition of goodness and of love, and that all opponents of this diabolical definition of a deity must therefore be evil. This is again a problem of religious hypnosis and indoctrination; a humanist person who is not affected by such techniques, upon reading the Bible probably could not fail to reach the judgement that Biblical definition of a deity is totally diabolical.
The problem here is that your definition of "goodness" is probably quite similar to my definition of evil.

Lucifer is a by product of the holy books.. Call him satan, devil, dajall, lucifer or any other name associated with the entity/energy.. the world your OP creates is one with Lucifer at the helm..

Lucifer was a relatively minor Roman deity who was the male counterpart of Venus. Lucifer and Venus the love gods were replaced by the rather sexually repressed ideal of Jesus and the Virgin Mary; thus it is understandable that the Christians would demonise the god and goddess of love. As far as I am concerned Luciferianism is an adversarial Christian philosophy. I do not worship the god of love (Lucifer) or any of the gods and goddesses (though I do not deny the existence of such archetypal intelligences in other dimensions) ; it is simply a magickal working; I merely seek to personify such qualities.

The only real condition humanity should be living under is one of love and community..

Yes of course, that is the Socialist agenda which the Christians and religious fanatics pay lipservice to. The Biblical deity and the behaviour and beliefs of the Christians however are very much the anti-thesis of love. If I was to personally promote even just the first 10 of the 613 Mosaic commandments, 9 of which are executable offences, and would have genocidal consequences if applied, and then say "love each other," persons who are easily deceived might think me to be a loving person, just because of my words, but in fact I would have to be genocidally insane and have a total hatred of human nature to make such claims.

Lux

Originally posted by "Lucifer777"
There are numerous examples which have been given in the William Emmette Coleman essay I cited above, citing page numbers from her works and which particular works were plagiarised. As to researching this matter in depth, and comparing the original works with Blavatsky's works, this would require a great deal of attention and this is something I would have to leave to Blavatsky's admirers,

But the said citing of page numbers by William Emmette Coleman proves absolutely nothing in and of itself, as you yourself said:

"...researching this matter in depth, and comparing the original works with Blavatsky's works, this would require a great deal of attention..."