Moderator
If the Occult Brotherhood founded most/all religions, are they actually good?
It has been a long time since I read about the Occult Brotherhood in probably Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, and I am not done with The Mahatma Letters.
I read an argument by some advanced philosophers recently that went along the following lines of 'P&Q imply R.'
Premise P. Theosophy says the Occult Brotherhood founded most/all religions (perhaps implying harmful cults are excluded.)
Premise Q. The Abrahamic religions are evil/Satanism (Gnostic argument, and based on horrors in Abrahamic texts.)
Conclusion R. If, or sInce, the Occult Brotherhood founded the Abrahamic religions, the Occult Brotherhood is evil.
One can read Skeptics Annotated Bible and Quran or do a search on 'anti tracts' to see why Abrahamism is evil.
Apparently Moses, besides carrying out the massacre and condoned enslavement/rape of many, sacrificed 32 girls to 'God.' Abraham was a lunatic who followed either an imaginary voice in his head or an insane, cruel 'God.' Jephtha sacrificed his daughter to 'God.' King David crucified seven people and thought 'God' was appeased.
The first link you would see if you do a search on 'anti tracts' would probably be one with several tracts showing the Jesus of the New Testament said and did 10 or more disturbing things, such as saying he is here 'to bring a sword, not peace,' letting demons kill a herd of pigs, cursing/killing a tree, teaching in parables in order that non-followers would not understand and would not be saved, stealing, saying people calling others fool are in danger of Hellfire, but using the insult several times himself and being rude to his parents, lying, etc. Paul's writings, which not all Christians accept, are pretty negative. A Nazarean Essene/Gnostic story of Jesus is more positive.
As for the Quran, it is a violent, misogynistic text like the Old Testament and is hateful.
The Abrahamic texts are on the level of harmful cult literature.
I do not recall if Madame Blavatsky strictly said the Occult Brotherhood started Abrahamism, but I was wondering if anyone else recalls. If not, I think this argument about Theosophy is an honest mistake on the part of the writers. They say Theosophy has several great ideas, but also a lot of nonsense.
Replies to This Discussion
-
ModeratorPermalink Reply by John on -
>> As for the Quran, it is a violent, misogynistic text like the Old Testament and is hateful.
??
compared to the Bible (Old Testament) the Koran is incredibly tame. In the Koran, you usually have to take things out of context to find a nasty verse.
I would argue that premise "P" is outright wrong. Theosophy does not say this. But, some theosophists have.
The logic argument is actually a pretty good one to prove NOT-P by contradiction. <G>(NOT-Q would require a rewrite of history... )
-
ModeratorPermalink Reply by John on -
Most of this is all context. If you go to a Christian site (western fundamentalist) you will easily find 100's (I would think).
Search on the word "sword" in the Qur'an and there is none found (to my knowledge; not even the "sword verse" has the word in it).
I just ran across a "Science Article" dealing with some of these issues... (Applied Math in Social Sciences). I'll have to post that. it was very interesting when it came to "words".
-
Permalink Reply by Wes Amerman on
-
David, I would suggest that your unnamed "advanced philosophers" are wrong. To my knowledge, nowhere does H.P. Blavatsky state that the "Occult Brotherhood" founded ANY religion; if anything, their representatives came to reform existing religions. Take an analogy: just because the source of a river is pure, doesn't mean that spring is responsible for pollution dumped into it downstream.
-
Permalink Reply by Patita Dikshita on
-
hi David.
see first what means abrahamic. A is from greece and means: not. so a-brahamic is a-braham is a-brahman, so you recognice the source. Not brahmanic. And i would not say they are evil-but they( the brahmanis) took some stuff on their own explanation.
And of course the White brotherhood startet all religions-they are coming from Parabrahman, falling as a first beam in the duality, from tis beam the seven rays emanate. And i am sure you know each ray means one ascendet master who ist ruling this and therefore we have seven religion.Main religions.All know under the guidance from Maitreya.
OM Patita
-
-
beware of hebrew. First make sure where hebrew is coming from-it is the youngest script at all.And the way of creation is one another.....
David-i could explain all what is in your post--but it would need time.This would not be done in a few posts.
Jesus is one story and for sure not the story what the church wants to make people believe.
The Aztecs was an already degenerated and not aware of that meaning from science what was there millions of years before them.they disorted a lot....
Moses even did not in this way exist like it is explained-it is a symbolic story.
And muhammed-a lot is written usually about the koran and a lot was completely wrong explained.The koran has to be read with the right key.
like a lot of all this scripts.....
maybe-if it would interest you and my view-i could make a post of all this toppics.But i need some days, because right now i am busy with a book translation.But than--i would like to do so....
Om Patita
-
-
You are with some here already right.
But-never think about a script it is nonsens.take the core-and it will be right. The bible is also disorted, abused, but the core is also still right.
And-the Koran is the youngest script.See where the human kind was at this time( and espacially where it was given).We cannot compare this all to our times-we should be smarter.Unveil it with Blavatsky and even Annie Besant said once the Koran is a very good book-but one has to read it with the right understoodness...
:-))
Om Patita
-
Permalink Reply by Dr N C Ramanujachary on
-
Whoever started it, no religion retained its original strength, or its pristine purity of ideas/actions.
When people can distinguish 'great ideas' and 'nonsense', they have the sense of discrimination. Very encouraging.
-
Permalink Reply by Mary Magdalene on
-
It would seem that each movement as it were, was a provision through the vessels of the times in which the bodies of work were produced. Not all messages mind you, could remain pure as they refracted through the distortions of devotees based upon their respective development. For those seeking Truth, the faculty of discernment must be ever refined. Those following any movement would thus have the potential to resonate with what "rings true" and what does not, provided that they have the proper vibration to intuit for themselves what is Truth, or non-truth.
With matters of a more esoteric nature, that which was given as allegory or in ciphers, has consequently become lost on those in future incarnations precisely depending upon their proclivity to refine their faculties of intuition and discernment. Exoteric trappings are merely tattered garments.
Whereas some might find a particular teaching attractive and another repulsive, such inclinations are up to each respective seeker. That is not to say that any one is better than another, as it is up to those within the respective groups as to which becomes more amplified- the distortions, or the truths.
Many distortions are present through mistranslation alone. Without understanding the proper context, the entire teaching is wholly misunderstood. Hence, the importance to ever increase the influx of inspiration upon those in each sangha to continue to produce works with the living tongue.
Closed systems give in to entropy, they decay and die. Thus, we remain open to learn and to teach, to not remain fixated or focused upon any one teaching, but to thrive in exploring the eternal nature of self and presenting knowledge in any given age based upon the progression of humanity's development. Humanity may denigrate, dismantle, distort, and destroy the underlying current which gave rise to each tradition, but the truths remain. The primarily threads of this time and space upon planet Earth, can bind many in this day and age into blindness.
If any would but do their necessary work to cleave unto righteousness, to hear the Master within. To approach the teachings as a free thinker and to discern where the Truth exists and to amplify that. Within all religions herein exist gems buried in dross. Each seeker then, must dig through much darkness to find the glistening jewels. To see how they reflect and refract the one light.
-
-
David,
Hi. I don't remember anything of Blavatsky saying something about the 'Occult Brotherhood' started Abrahamism. I question whether the three monotheisms so-called can be properly called Abrahamic. I mean, what is "Abrahamic?" Muslims think "Abrahamic" refers to a strict Monotheism, anything other is in error. Then, you have to ask, then what is Monotheism? It gets into unnecessary technical, ideological complexity, which does not help in discriminating the real from the shades of real and just off-right falsity or misunderstanding of others concepts, e.g., I don't think the Qur'an in any part of its text understands the concept of the Trinity, either in the exoteric or esoteric sense. Instead, it has its own conception of Deity. Which is fine, but some Muslims kind of think they know better than Christians.
As to the Qur'an, many issues have been addressed by Muslims, their Imams and learned scholars on issues of context in Qur'an. Sometimes, I think they're lying. I've been lied to tactically by some Muslims, whom I believe are conditioned, or driven towards certain patterns of thought and behavior and the source is mainly the Qur'an, but cultural as well (although culture goes back to what Qur'an or Islamic law permits and its various interpretations*). Mohammad, their Prophet killed and slaughtered, not just out of defense. I think people need to be honest. I think traditional theosophy is not a hodge-podge of many things alone.
Theosophy only incorporates this to show that there is an underlying Truth underneath the man-made and invented dogmas. Other than that, a theosopher need not ALWAYS try to be TOLERANT to other organized religions. The goal is not to be uncritically tolerant, but is something far greater. Well, the Qur'an is written in such a convincing tone, as if what everything is being said was the TRUTH, but to me it is not. It has some truths in it, like you would find the talk of seven heavens, ect. You will also find ethics, but later in it, things that contradicts them, so Qur'an defines its own morality, its own terms, its own twists on the stories in the "Christian Bible" with quite a few inputs from Gnostic sources. Other than that, the Qur'an I find to be worded very simple, but it become repetitive, and is not in any order, which is kind of frustrating. Being originally written in Arabic, many Muslims recite it beautifully like a song. There are some elements of the book I like, but it lends to certain unpleasing characteristics in some of its followers.
To be honest, for most practicing Muslims (or all it seems), the book is like pretty much INFALLIBLE David. I don't see many theosophers talking about Islam, only when in reference to some its relation to certain Sufis, khwajagans, Arabian mystics and alchemists, or the Arabian Nights and Geniis.
Take a look at this video below David:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtWENrsxV9k
That is bad, but also look at this Interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1A8o2fbIg8 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1A8o2fbIg8 - Sufism: The Khwajagan, Naqshbandiyya, and the Malamatiyya - Part One
-
-
The Khwajagans are the Masters of Wisdom, the Adepts. The video below is very good, shows the difference between reality of the Adepts as opposed to the way most Westerners are presented with, as if they were secret hierarchical orders of angelic astral creatures-men, ect. It is very suitable for this site. :-)
-
-
The Problem is always-who is teaching.
1400 years ago when the Koran startet-who was able to read? not so many.And who came after Mohamed-the problem startet already with using Power over people. So also there it was misused.Because it was catched for getting maybe for some power....
Mohamed knew about that that this will happen.
And the Koran has to be read with the right key-than it is a very very beautiful book. I am working with this-and i was never one who is a beliver-not at all.But with the knowledge you will find all from the esoteric doctrine here inside the koran-in veiled form.The people at this time were not ready for the whole truth-and so many still today are nor ready for it.....
Om Patita
-
-
This is not fully the case. Some mention that Mohammad thought himself was the Kalki Avatar. Even if he didn't think that, some of his actions as a prophet is highly questionable. This idea that the Qur'an is often misinterpreted without the right key is partially bogus. I've talked to some Sufi teachers. They themselves deny this talk of esotericism, which they consider to be a Western adaptation of their traditions, sort of like puffing up the story and the mythology, some are even puzzled when I question them. This right key to Qur'an is highly disputable. When Muslims read, the Qur'an is right IN THE FACE, interpretations depend on many factors, but also upon your insight, intuitive-perception. BUT, there are elements in the Qur'an that are completely questionable, esp. some of its blatant "scientific theories" which DO NOT have an esoteric right key, but are reflections of the Aristotelian out-dated science of their day. As a non-Muslim I can question those things which some HAVE to take entirely literally. Whether context or not, first Mohammad started out with a small band, or gnostic like circle, and seemed genuine, but later, he becomes like a mob boss! even showing times when he was probably lying about some of his revelations to the people, or altering them. What is this right key to Qur'an?
This goes back to the reason of David's post. All these books are not perfect and infallible, and all are not carefully, tactically designed to be one side esoteric and the other exoteric, not all of them. They do come with errors you know, and right from their very beginnings. Just read all the passages Mohammad says in the Qur'an about the doctrines of the Christians. It is true, a religion can be built mostly upon misunderstandings of another tradition, thus there are many off-shoots, that may have been right for the time, but become ossified. Doesn't mean that religion is good, just that certain causes and circumstances led to its founding. The followers take the cue that their God must have permitted this to happen, or Providence. Now, how could Karma do such a thing? How could Naught permit anything, it is no Being or Entity. Somebody's lying to the people. Even if we had a "key" to the scriptures of the Abrahamic faiths, including Baha'i (which is neither perfect), will that help humanity fully? No, it wouldn't. Crazy how people imagine the "Occult Brotherhood" to be some nice hoppling tea-drinkers at a gathering of a nice dinner, with Jesus, Thor and everybody at the round table where every event in the world goes perfectly as planned!
© 2024 Created by Theosophy Network.
Powered by
