Illuminati
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael A. Williams on
-
Christian,
I'm here in L. A. and your bio states you're in Malibu. I've check my Time-Warner schedule for the History channel and the episode on the Vatican isn't on until 9:00pm(PDT). Are you getting it on another cable system? - Just a curious thing you'd be seeing it earlier! ;-) - -- I sent you a friend request, so perhaps we could exchange some info and views privately without taking up space here.
I liked your topic of invisibility and the Rosicrucians and Blavatsky. I'm familiar with The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and it's history. In a forum I started last year on Hermeticism and Theosophy and it came out that The Theosophical Society was actually started on Hermetic Roots in the West. Many early member of the TS were also members of The Golden Dawn and it continued on. W. B. Yeats being the most well known, but also people like Dion Fortune. Some people have claimed that The Golden Dawn was the "inner circle" at the beginning of the TS in London.
Christian von Lahr said:
The red color that the Pope's hand-picked Cardinals wear is to symbolize the blood they are willing to shed on behalf of the Pope. Wow, there must be a great story to explore in that statement. They sure have a lot of Cardinals, and the world is witness to incredible devastation of life. Is all of that so public, though? This Vicker of Christ has even visited the CIA, and became the target of an assassination call by Bin Ladin. He has people in every country in the world, so the Vatican is a place to keep tabs on world events. In America we have had diplomatic relations within the Vatican for 25+ years, to be close to the Vatican's awareness. The papacy is alleged to succumb to corruption by power families in the 1400s. Popes were actually bribed. Murder occurred. There was a long reign of debauched Popes.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Christian von Lahr on
-
That would be an interesting topic to resurrect here. I presume there is an inference that H.P.B. was associated, given here demonstrable adeptness in magic? It's always curious to me with Blavatsky's association with the Mahatmas, and presuming them to be of the character and order she describes, that she would dabble so broadly and deeply into such lessor modalities and mystery schools --- not to lessen the quality of such for those others who would be drawn to these crafts.
I liked your topic of invisibility and the Rosicrucians and Blavatsky. I'm familiar with The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and it's history. In a forum I started last year on Hermeticism and Theosophy and it came out that The Theosophical Society was actually started on Hermetic Roots in the West. Many early member of the TS were also members of The Golden Dawn and it continued on. W. B. Yeats being the most well known, but also people like Dion Fortune. Some people have claimed that The Golden Dawn was the "inner circle" at the beginning of the TS in London.
-
-
-
Christian, The Golden Dawn was not the main Hermetic influence on HPB, for she, and others in her inner circle, were involved in "The Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor" for awhile. That group faded out by 1885 or so, but remnats remained underground and was re-vitalized in the late 1940's under the name "Church of Light." It was founded by a C. C. Zain, and many Theosophical Members joined, dissatisfied with the lack of practical work in the TS. Several people on this site are active members. There are some people in Theosophical circles that feel that HPB should have stuck to her Western Hermetic roots, or at least come back to them after her "journey to the east."
In regards to "Magick"(I spell it with a "k" to distinguish it from stage "magic"), it's a valid major aspect of Hermeticism, though not all Hermeticists choose to pursue it. It's really the practical application of theory, as you're actually dealing directly with the very "nature of reality."
It's in the Eastern tradition also, but just even more underground and less emphasized by the major religions there. I think it would tie in with the "Illuminati" also. It's a vast subject, and requires a whole other forum. but in the past members here have shown little to no interest in it, so I doubt there would be any now.
Christian von Lahr said:
That would be an interesting topic to resurrect here. I presume there is an inference that H.P.B. was associated, given here demonstrable adeptness in magic? It's always curious to me with Blavatsky's association with the Mahatmas, and presuming them to be of the character and order she describes, that she would dabble so broadly and deeply into such lessor modalities and mystery schools --- not to lessen the quality of such for those others who would be drawn to these crafts.
I liked your topic of invisibility and the Rosicrucians and Blavatsky. I'm familiar with The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and it's history. In a forum I started last year on Hermeticism and Theosophy and it came out that The Theosophical Society was actually started on Hermetic Roots in the West. Many early member of the TS were also members of The Golden Dawn and it continued on. W. B. Yeats being the most well known, but also people like Dion Fortune. Some people have claimed that The Golden Dawn was the "inner circle" at the beginning of the TS in London.
-
-
-
Thank you for that remarkable historical accounting. It will prove useful to many on the trail of discovery of these illusive Brotherhoods, and for quite some time.
On the side, I believe "Lux" has a connection to Lucifer, and the Light Bringer, which Blavatsky has associated with Venus ... Perhaps not unrelated the Maya (Mayan) tie Venus to their 2012 Calendar "ending" (which I consider a Theosophical Midpoint). Perhaps your. Brotherhoods did have some purpose of greater importance than has yet been revealed? -
-
-
Paris ... I'm reminded of all the ancient records and writings that went missing there after Napoleon confiscated the Vatican library; many were sold off to merchants rather than returning them. Some would claim a Library of Alexandria connection. I can certainly see Blavatsky being there since she has spoken to at least some of these speculations.
Your knowledge on these matters is a catalyst, to say the least. The chambers under the sphinx and the nearby alleged Hall of Records could probably be connected in some way, given its missing records and ties to Alexandria, and thereby Egypt and ancient Brotherhoods. -
-
-
Thanks, Paul, for clarifying the matter and filling in some of the details. I was hoping you would chime in here, as this is one of many areas you are a specialist in. I was only trying to briefly point out that Hermeticism did play a central role in Blavatsky's life at one point and in the early days of the TS.
The full story of the relationship between The Golden Dawn and The Theosophical Society is difficult to track down, but I've managed to find a website or two. I haven't had time delve into either of these, but they may be of interest to you, William, in your search for the "Illuminati."
http://www.illuminati-news.com/secret-societies.htm
Here's some information on Dr. William Westcott, MacGregor Mathers and Dr. Robert Woodman, all driving members of The Golden Dawn and tied in with the Theosophical Society.
http://home.earthlink.net/~xristos/GoldenDawn/biowescott.htm
Perhaps, Paul, you have run across more detailed info on the relationship between The SD and The TS.
-
-
-
Reply by Michael A. Williams 1 day ago
[1] There are some people in Theosophical circles that feel that HPB should have stuck to her Western Hermetic roots, or at least come back to them after her "journey to the east."
>>> Why would that be, Michael? Not to question the conclusion, but to ask does this direction on her part indicate (a) a [greater] body of wisdom was found that supplants her experience with Western Hermeticism, or that (b) it had a greater practical degree (I doubt), or (c) that it would speak to a spiritual experience more in line with what Blavatsky was ultimately striving for? (Not to limit you to my list, which may seem insipid to your learned research.)
[2] In regards to "Magick"(I spell it with a "k" to distinguish it from stage "magic"), it's a valid major aspect of Hermeticism, though not all Hermeticists choose to pursue it. It's really the practical application of theory, as you're actually dealing directly with the very "nature of reality."
>>> I also am in favor of the use of “K” in this manner. I should think that “nature of reality” can be underscored to bring greater importance to your statement, … as “Nature” would represent the sum-total of Consciousness attained in the Universe. Somehow, mankind has managed to both survive, and to progress at least up to modern times without science as we now know of it, but rather, with the knowledge of Magick, and energetic influences or resonances and their practical application. Blavatsky speaks highly and often of Hermeticism, perhaps more indirectly than directly … however, she is doing so even after her “journey to the East.” So, the charm of it was never lost for her, to my simple way of thinking.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 9 hours ago
[3] Pardon the intrusion but since the CofL was mentioned I'll take this occasion to clarify some of its prehistory.
>>> I think we can do so, Ha … who am I to challenge one of such High calling? Whatever clarification you can offer to this naïve departure from conventional wisdom will be considered an elevation of the notion ̶ intuitionally inspired as it may be for me ̶ and not research per sé of some more worthy academic pursuit.
[4] Mackenzie says he has met three people who alleged that this group exists and insinuated that they themselves are members. Other than this dubious testimony there is no evidence whatsoever that any such group existed. He also includes an entry for “Brotherhood of Luxor” which is described as an American group with a Rosicrucian basis and many members.
Forgive, but I’ll take the arrogant liberty of playing Devil’s scientist for a brief moment, and see if the hypotheses can be challenged:
>>> So, when you say “he insinuated,” that we are to also take as indicating he did not clearly state it so as if a fact?
>>> Well, hmmm - confused here. Is that dubious testimony, or merely scant?
>>> “No evidence whatsoever,” is an assessment that would preclude that [every] area of research has been exhausted, and not merely a particular course of inquiry. To clarify further where I might be going in this rejoinder, I still have in me the inspired belief that important ancient records were sought out, acquired and secreted away ̶ hence my inclusion of both the Vatican’s efforts to repossess all the ancient world’s mystery writings, and as well ,the likelihood that [some] have found their ways into mystery schools and private collections through the negligence of said church in restoring them into organized depositories after they resurfaced as a power following Napoleon’s conquest and subsequent fall – in France.
>>> I may have stated within this thread, if not then in another, that Blavatsky seems to always speak with reverence to the Rosicrucians in her writings. If so, and especially given her highly critical nature and proclivity for exactitude, fact and truth, I SURMISE that she has a basis for validating or authenticating those areas of Rosicruician mystery, practice and record she speaks to. To my way of thinking, she does this intently when she mentions the Rosicruician Illuminati in the Secret Doctrine. It didn’t escape my notice that she does so in her treatments on “Brotherhoods.” The American connection you bring to the surface [might] have been a purposeful draw or thread she pursued through her decision to come to America.
>>> Correct me if I error, but the interest Blavatsky held in Secret Societies was/is general knowledge, … as is at least some evidence of her involvement in them. Given her presumably far greater enlightenment through her Mahatma tutelage, (a Theosophical presumption) I find need to reconcile her continued need to remain involved with said societies. My current deduction is that [they] still held some [practical] application of, and real-world evidence of heretofore hidden wisdom. Michael A. Williams may have been referring to this perception as well in the excerpt of his that I posted first.
>>> To answer more colorfully, I withdraw to a statement that the figure Captain Kirk makes in one of the later Star Trek movies wherein his crew is drawn into a drama involving Spock’s brilliant brother who is on a pursuit of God, and Shakari (Garden of Eden.) They succeed in finding [someone] and this deity wants to make use of the U.S.S. Enterprise. Captain Kirks, query is thus:
“ Excuse me ... but what does GOD need of a Starship? ”
And so I therefore ask, more metaphorically than to you, “What did H. P. Blavatsky need from or of these secret societies?” The unknown answer speaks to the nature of my inquiry though this Thread.
[5] Later the same year in Isis Unveiled, Blavatsky confirmed the existence of the Brotherhood of Luxor, claiming it had been “long and hard at work” but was not Rosicrucian nor based in Egypt but rather in Looksur, Beluchistan, after which Luxor, Egypt was named.
>>> I am prone to wonder how she could make such a confirmation at this time, when she was not physically in route to or from those destinations, and would have no first-hand account. There [must] have been some secondary, physical evidence – likely by way of documents. If she was citing some other authority, then there too would be some modicum of physical record.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 4 hours ago
[6] To say that the hierarchical organizations conjured up by Mackenzie were imaginary and hoaxes is not to say that there were not real informal social networks during the time period that inspired the myth.
>>> or before? Myth, of course is inherently an unknown, and not an un-truth, so I agree with you, as would we all. Your inclusion of the decisive/divisive word “informal” seems a subjective introduction of a preferred fact. Why would such social network have to be “informal,” I am inclined to ask myself? And to continue the first point, why solely “…during the time period that inspired the myth,” as you say?
Whether Mackenzie “conjured up” is presentation, or revealed something then extant does not seem to be fully explored ̶ but then, on such matters (nor any, ha) I am no authority. So, speaking from a purely logical perspective, it would seem, one simply [does not know] whence Mackenzie’s information came from.
[7] Egypt and Hermeticism were central to the occult movement of the 19th century, but not via any organization that survived millennia and sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry.
>>> Certainly not to doubt your conclusions, but rather to be on the same page with you: Is there some fact that has been established in the greater body of philosophical, mystical, spiritual or other wisdom that is academically relied upon to indicate that any such organization that survived the 19th century (or before) [MUST] be of record? Does the test or method used to make this determination have no exceptions, nor is there no speculation that such could be done?
>>> I think everything along these lines sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry, and that simply leads me to believe there was some common elements of secret societies, just as there are common elements in religions. The strength of the suspicion, however, may be your indication that it is your best guess as to where to pick up the trail.
-----
Thank you. I am not presuming that either of you will pursue these lengthy qualifying inquiries further, but I do want them on record, as others may have some insight that will change this black and white outlined coloring book, into some resplendent work of vivid knowledge, replete with shading and signature brush strokes.
-
-
-
William,
Thanks for your compliment, but I make no claim to any "learned research" and hope I haven't given that impression. I consider any comments I make on this site as being informal, casual communication, and certainly anything I would put into an official article would be written over time and gone over numerous times.
That being said, I have not conducted any research into how many Theosophists in the past or present have wished that Blavatsky had been more Western and Hermetically oriented, or their motives behind it. I know I've run across references to it and the record obviously indicates the offshoots of Anthroposophy by Rudolf Steiner and the Alice Baily material, to name just two. I'm sure their are people here who could give a much better account of this than I could sum it up.
As to why Blavatsky leaned more to the East I don't know why. But, I'd hazard a speculation that it was number 3 on your list: "that it would speak to a spiritual experience more in line with what Blavatsky was ultimately striving for." I think David Reigle here could speak to this quite well.
In a recent Forum, "What did Blatvatsky miss?", I said that she never really developed any organized gradated system of exercises, practices, procedures, disciplines, etc. of spiritual and psychic development. So, I'd say that many Theosophists have felt the need to look elsewhere for such.
"Magick" is a large subject and largely misunderstood. We're dealing here with the prime tenet of all spiritual schools, both West and East, "Mind before Matter," or "Consciousness begets Matter." Magick goes further with "Mind over Matter" and "Mind influences circumstances." A whole other Forum.
I'm not sure what your question is here, but like I said, many Hermeticists, if not most, do not go into a formal, traditional practice of Ceremonial Magick. Some form of "Mind Magick," which is the essence of it anyway, is usually practiced.
As for Blavatsky, I'm not familiar enough with her writings to say if she did or didn't "indirectly" referred to Hermeticism after her "journey to the East," but as far as I know she certainly warned against some of the "magikal" practices in Hermeticism. Whatever her personal relationship to Hermeticism I personally don't think her works are referred to or read much in Hermetic circles now-a-days.
I will quickly add some thoughts on why Blavatsky joined so many Secret Societies. It was a whole different era back then, and the only way to gain any knowledge of them was to join up and go through some of the training and/or get access to their literature.
In modern times, there really are no metaphysicl/spriitual/occult "secrets" as such, as so much information is available to a diligent individual. But, what is "secret", so to speak, is the how do we deeply understand the "secrets" in our inner most beings, and as is emphasized in the Western Hermetic Tradition, how do we APPLY
these "secrets" to our lives.
As for a "common element" in all the Secret Societies and how to "pick up the trail," I can only say to keep searching on the Internet and elsewhere, and if any other info turns up, I'll pass it along to you.
Christian von Lahr said:
Reply by Michael A. Williams 1 day ago
[1] There are some people in Theosophical circles that feel that HPB should have stuck to her Western Hermetic roots, or at least come back to them after her "journey to the east."
>>> Why would that be, Michael? Not to question the conclusion, but to ask does this direction on her part indicate (a) a [greater] body of wisdom was found that supplants her experience with Western Hermeticism, or that (b) it had a greater practical degree (I doubt), or (c) that it would speak to a spiritual experience more in line with what Blavatsky was ultimately striving for? (Not to limit you to my list, which may seem insipid to your learned research.)
[2] In regards to "Magick"(I spell it with a "k" to distinguish it from stage "magic"), it's a valid major aspect of Hermeticism, though not all Hermeticists choose to pursue it. It's really the practical application of theory, as you're actually dealing directly with the very "nature of reality."
>>> I also am in favor of the use of “K” in this manner. I should think that “nature of reality” can be underscored to bring greater importance to your statement, … as “Nature” would represent the sum-total of Consciousness attained in the Universe. Somehow, mankind has managed to both survive, and to progress at least up to modern times without science as we now know of it, but rather, with the knowledge of Magick, and energetic influences or resonances and their practical application. Blavatsky speaks highly and often of Hermeticism, perhaps more indirectly than directly … however, she is doing so even after her “journey to the East.” So, the charm of it was never lost for her, to my simple way of thinking.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 9 hours ago
[3] Pardon the intrusion but since the CofL was mentioned I'll take this occasion to clarify some of its prehistory.
>>> I think we can do so, Ha … who am I to challenge one of such High calling? Whatever clarification you can offer to this naïve departure from conventional wisdom will be considered an elevation of the notion ̶ intuitionally inspired as it may be for me ̶ and not research per sé of some more worthy academic pursuit.
[4] Mackenzie says he has met three people who alleged that this group exists and insinuated that they themselves are members. Other than this dubious testimony there is no evidence whatsoever that any such group existed. He also includes an entry for “Brotherhood of Luxor” which is described as an American group with a Rosicrucian basis and many members.
Forgive, but I’ll take the arrogant liberty of playing Devil’s scientist for a brief moment, and see if the hypotheses can be challenged:
>>> So, when you say “he insinuated,” that we are to also take as indicating he did not clearly state it so as if a fact?
>>> Well, hmmm - confused here. Is that dubious testimony, or merely scant?
>>> “No evidence whatsoever,” is an assessment that would preclude that [every] area of research has been exhausted, and not merely a particular course of inquiry. To clarify further where I might be going in this rejoinder, I still have in me the inspired belief that important ancient records were sought out, acquired and secreted away ̶ hence my inclusion of both the Vatican’s efforts to repossess all the ancient world’s mystery writings, and as well ,the likelihood that [some] have found their ways into mystery schools and private collections through the negligence of said church in restoring them into organized depositories after they resurfaced as a power following Napoleon’s conquest and subsequent fall – in France.
>>> I may have stated within this thread, if not then in another, that Blavatsky seems to always speak with reverence to the Rosicrucians in her writings. If so, and especially given her highly critical nature and proclivity for exactitude, fact and truth, I SURMISE that she has a basis for validating or authenticating those areas of Rosicruician mystery, practice and record she speaks to. To my way of thinking, she does this intently when she mentions the Rosicruician Illuminati in the Secret Doctrine. It didn’t escape my notice that she does so in her treatments on “Brotherhoods.” The American connection you bring to the surface [might] have been a purposeful draw or thread she pursued through her decision to come to America.
>>> Correct me if I error, but the interest Blavatsky held in Secret Societies was/is general knowledge, … as is at least some evidence of her involvement in them. Given her presumably far greater enlightenment through her Mahatma tutelage, (a Theosophical presumption) I find need to reconcile her continued need to remain involved with said societies. My current deduction is that [they] still held some [practical] application of, and real-world evidence of heretofore hidden wisdom. Michael A. Williams may have been referring to this perception as well in the excerpt of his that I posted first.
>>> To answer more colorfully, I withdraw to a statement that the figure Captain Kirk makes in one of the later Star Trek movies wherein his crew is drawn into a drama involving Spock’s brilliant brother who is on a pursuit of God, and Shakari (Garden of Eden.) They succeed in finding [someone] and this deity wants to make use of the U.S.S. Enterprise. Captain Kirks, query is thus:
“ Excuse me ... but what does GOD need of a Starship? ”
And so I therefore ask, more metaphorically than to you, “What did H. P. Blavatsky need from or of these secret societies?” The unknown answer speaks to the nature of my inquiry though this Thread.
[5] Later the same year in Isis Unveiled, Blavatsky confirmed the existence of the Brotherhood of Luxor, claiming it had been “long and hard at work” but was not Rosicrucian nor based in Egypt but rather in Looksur, Beluchistan, after which Luxor, Egypt was named.
>>> I am prone to wonder how she could make such a confirmation at this time, when she was not physically in route to or from those destinations, and would have no first-hand account. There [must] have been some secondary, physical evidence – likely by way of documents. If she was citing some other authority, then there too would be some modicum of physical record.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 4 hours ago
[6] To say that the hierarchical organizations conjured up by Mackenzie were imaginary and hoaxes is not to say that there were not real informal social networks during the time period that inspired the myth.
>>> or before? Myth, of course is inherently an unknown, and not an un-truth, so I agree with you, as would we all. Your inclusion of the decisive/divisive word “informal” seems a subjective introduction of a preferred fact. Why would such social network have to be “informal,” I am inclined to ask myself? And to continue the first point, why solely “…during the time period that inspired the myth,” as you say?
Whether Mackenzie “conjured up” is presentation, or revealed something then extant does not seem to be fully explored ̶ but then, on such matters (nor any, ha) I am no authority. So, speaking from a purely logical perspective, it would seem, one simply [does not know] whence Mackenzie’s information came from.
[7] Egypt and Hermeticism were central to the occult movement of the 19th century, but not via any organization that survived millennia and sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry.
>>> Certainly not to doubt your conclusions, but rather to be on the same page with you: Is there some fact that has been established in the greater body of philosophical, mystical, spiritual or other wisdom that is academically relied upon to indicate that any such organization that survived the 19th century (or before) [MUST] be of record? Does the test or method used to make this determination have no exceptions, nor is there no speculation that such could be done?
>>> I think everything along these lines sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry, and that simply leads me to believe there was some common elements of secret societies, just as there are common elements in religions. The strength of the suspicion, however, may be your indication that it is your best guess as to where to pick up the trail.
-----
Thank you. I am not presuming that either of you will pursue these lengthy qualifying inquiries further, but I do want them on record, as others may have some insight that will change this black and white outlined coloring book, into some resplendent work of vivid knowledge, replete with shading and signature brush strokes.
-
-
-
Christian,
In rushing my reply to you last night, I called you "William" by mistake. Kindly accept my humble apology.
Michael A. Williams said:
William,
Thanks for your compliment, but I make no claim to any "learned research" and hope I haven't given that impression. I consider any comments I make on this site as being informal, casual communication, and certainly anything I would put into an official article would be written over time and gone over numerous times.
That being said, I have not conducted any research into how many Theosophists in the past or present have wished that Blavatsky had been more Western and Hermetically oriented, or their motives behind it. I know I've run across references to it and the record obviously indicates the offshoots of Anthroposophy by Rudolf Steiner and the Alice Baily material, to name just two. I'm sure their are people here who could give a much better account of this than I could sum it up.
As to why Blavatsky leaned more to the East I don't know why. But, I'd hazard a speculation that it was number 3 on your list: "that it would speak to a spiritual experience more in line with what Blavatsky was ultimately striving for." I think David Reigle here could speak to this quite well.
In a recent Forum, "What did Blatvatsky miss?", I said that she never really developed any organized gradated system of exercises, practices, procedures, disciplines, etc. of spiritual and psychic development. So, I'd say that many Theosophists have felt the need to look elsewhere for such.
"Magick" is a large subject and largely misunderstood. We're dealing here with the prime tenet of all spiritual schools, both West and East, "Mind before Matter," or "Consciousness begets Matter." Magick goes further with "Mind over Matter" and "Mind influences circumstances." A whole other Forum.
I'm not sure what your question is here, but like I said, many Hermeticists, if not most, do not go into a formal, traditional practice of Ceremonial Magick. Some form of "Mind Magick," which is the essence of it anyway, is usually practiced.
As for Blavatsky, I'm not familiar enough with her writings to say if she did or didn't "indirectly" referred to Hermeticism after her "journey to the East," but as far as I know she certainly warned against some of the "magikal" practices in Hermeticism. Whatever her personal relationship to Hermeticism I personally don't think her works are referred to or read much in Hermetic circles now-a-days.
I will quickly add some thoughts on why Blavatsky joined so many Secret Societies. It was a whole different era back then, and the only way to gain any knowledge of them was to join up and go through some of the training and/or get access to their literature.
In modern times, there really are no metaphysicl/spriitual/occult "secrets" as such, as so much information is available to a diligent individual. But, what is "secret", so to speak, is the how do we deeply understand the "secrets" in our inner most beings, and as is emphasized in the Western Hermetic Tradition, how do we APPLY
these "secrets" to our lives.
As for a "common element" in all the Secret Societies and how to "pick up the trail," I can only say to keep searching on the Internet and elsewhere, and if any other info turns up, I'll pass it along to you.
Christian von Lahr said:
Reply by Michael A. Williams 1 day ago
[1] There are some people in Theosophical circles that feel that HPB should have stuck to her Western Hermetic roots, or at least come back to them after her "journey to the east."
>>> Why would that be, Michael? Not to question the conclusion, but to ask does this direction on her part indicate (a) a [greater] body of wisdom was found that supplants her experience with Western Hermeticism, or that (b) it had a greater practical degree (I doubt), or (c) that it would speak to a spiritual experience more in line with what Blavatsky was ultimately striving for? (Not to limit you to my list, which may seem insipid to your learned research.)
[2] In regards to "Magick"(I spell it with a "k" to distinguish it from stage "magic"), it's a valid major aspect of Hermeticism, though not all Hermeticists choose to pursue it. It's really the practical application of theory, as you're actually dealing directly with the very "nature of reality."
>>> I also am in favor of the use of “K” in this manner. I should think that “nature of reality” can be underscored to bring greater importance to your statement, … as “Nature” would represent the sum-total of Consciousness attained in the Universe. Somehow, mankind has managed to both survive, and to progress at least up to modern times without science as we now know of it, but rather, with the knowledge of Magick, and energetic influences or resonances and their practical application. Blavatsky speaks highly and often of Hermeticism, perhaps more indirectly than directly … however, she is doing so even after her “journey to the East.” So, the charm of it was never lost for her, to my simple way of thinking.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 9 hours ago
[3] Pardon the intrusion but since the CofL was mentioned I'll take this occasion to clarify some of its prehistory.
>>> I think we can do so, Ha … who am I to challenge one of such High calling? Whatever clarification you can offer to this naïve departure from conventional wisdom will be considered an elevation of the notion ̶ intuitionally inspired as it may be for me ̶ and not research per sé of some more worthy academic pursuit.
[4] Mackenzie says he has met three people who alleged that this group exists and insinuated that they themselves are members. Other than this dubious testimony there is no evidence whatsoever that any such group existed. He also includes an entry for “Brotherhood of Luxor” which is described as an American group with a Rosicrucian basis and many members.
Forgive, but I’ll take the arrogant liberty of playing Devil’s scientist for a brief moment, and see if the hypotheses can be challenged:
>>> So, when you say “he insinuated,” that we are to also take as indicating he did not clearly state it so as if a fact?
>>> Well, hmmm - confused here. Is that dubious testimony, or merely scant?
>>> “No evidence whatsoever,” is an assessment that would preclude that [every] area of research has been exhausted, and not merely a particular course of inquiry. To clarify further where I might be going in this rejoinder, I still have in me the inspired belief that important ancient records were sought out, acquired and secreted away ̶ hence my inclusion of both the Vatican’s efforts to repossess all the ancient world’s mystery writings, and as well ,the likelihood that [some] have found their ways into mystery schools and private collections through the negligence of said church in restoring them into organized depositories after they resurfaced as a power following Napoleon’s conquest and subsequent fall – in France.
>>> I may have stated within this thread, if not then in another, that Blavatsky seems to always speak with reverence to the Rosicrucians in her writings. If so, and especially given her highly critical nature and proclivity for exactitude, fact and truth, I SURMISE that she has a basis for validating or authenticating those areas of Rosicruician mystery, practice and record she speaks to. To my way of thinking, she does this intently when she mentions the Rosicruician Illuminati in the Secret Doctrine. It didn’t escape my notice that she does so in her treatments on “Brotherhoods.” The American connection you bring to the surface [might] have been a purposeful draw or thread she pursued through her decision to come to America.
>>> Correct me if I error, but the interest Blavatsky held in Secret Societies was/is general knowledge, … as is at least some evidence of her involvement in them. Given her presumably far greater enlightenment through her Mahatma tutelage, (a Theosophical presumption) I find need to reconcile her continued need to remain involved with said societies. My current deduction is that [they] still held some [practical] application of, and real-world evidence of heretofore hidden wisdom. Michael A. Williams may have been referring to this perception as well in the excerpt of his that I posted first.
>>> To answer more colorfully, I withdraw to a statement that the figure Captain Kirk makes in one of the later Star Trek movies wherein his crew is drawn into a drama involving Spock’s brilliant brother who is on a pursuit of God, and Shakari (Garden of Eden.) They succeed in finding [someone] and this deity wants to make use of the U.S.S. Enterprise. Captain Kirks, query is thus:
“ Excuse me ... but what does GOD need of a Starship? ”
And so I therefore ask, more metaphorically than to you, “What did H. P. Blavatsky need from or of these secret societies?” The unknown answer speaks to the nature of my inquiry though this Thread.
[5] Later the same year in Isis Unveiled, Blavatsky confirmed the existence of the Brotherhood of Luxor, claiming it had been “long and hard at work” but was not Rosicrucian nor based in Egypt but rather in Looksur, Beluchistan, after which Luxor, Egypt was named.
>>> I am prone to wonder how she could make such a confirmation at this time, when she was not physically in route to or from those destinations, and would have no first-hand account. There [must] have been some secondary, physical evidence – likely by way of documents. If she was citing some other authority, then there too would be some modicum of physical record.
Reply by K. Paul Johnson 4 hours ago
[6] To say that the hierarchical organizations conjured up by Mackenzie were imaginary and hoaxes is not to say that there were not real informal social networks during the time period that inspired the myth.
>>> or before? Myth, of course is inherently an unknown, and not an un-truth, so I agree with you, as would we all. Your inclusion of the decisive/divisive word “informal” seems a subjective introduction of a preferred fact. Why would such social network have to be “informal,” I am inclined to ask myself? And to continue the first point, why solely “…during the time period that inspired the myth,” as you say?
Whether Mackenzie “conjured up” is presentation, or revealed something then extant does not seem to be fully explored ̶ but then, on such matters (nor any, ha) I am no authority. So, speaking from a purely logical perspective, it would seem, one simply [does not know] whence Mackenzie’s information came from.
[7] Egypt and Hermeticism were central to the occult movement of the 19th century, but not via any organization that survived millennia and sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry.
>>> Certainly not to doubt your conclusions, but rather to be on the same page with you: Is there some fact that has been established in the greater body of philosophical, mystical, spiritual or other wisdom that is academically relied upon to indicate that any such organization that survived the 19th century (or before) [MUST] be of record? Does the test or method used to make this determination have no exceptions, nor is there no speculation that such could be done?
>>> I think everything along these lines sounds suspiciously like fringe Masonry, and that simply leads me to believe there was some common elements of secret societies, just as there are common elements in religions. The strength of the suspicion, however, may be your indication that it is your best guess as to where to pick up the trail.
-----
Thank you. I am not presuming that either of you will pursue these lengthy qualifying inquiries further, but I do want them on record, as others may have some insight that will change this black and white outlined coloring book, into some resplendent work of vivid knowledge, replete with shading and signature brush strokes.
-
-
-
Well. I don't know. You didn't accept my humble compliment. Ha, of course. Everybody always gives me the Bill, anyway.
-
-
Permalink Reply by James Sunderland on
-
HPB refers most definitely to hermeticism throughout her writings. Pull up .pdf's and search key terms in her works. In regards to magick in the ceremonial and sensational FORM, it was largely frowned upon for it is too easily abused and in essence is psychic anyway, meaning it is not spiritual but only phenomenon. I suggest researching theosophical writings on ELEMENTALS as well as some of the hermetic writings of Paracelsus (A.E. Waite has 2 great volumes).
As for the Illuminati, the term itself has been bastardized by the media. You will be hard pressed to find any evidence to a present society. If such a group were to exist I can assure you through reasoning alone they would not be still referred to by this term. It's almost never taken anymore to mean the Bavarian Illuminati and instead a catchall word for Big Brother and ultimate of conspiracies.
I suggest in researching such topics you visit local lodges in your town and talk to the members there to form your own conclusions. Websites such as the one listed in the reply above me are written from skewed viewpoints, mostly pro-Christian or anti-something. There is nothing wrong with being Christian or against something, but working inside such a cubicle will limit your writings and end in useless arguments with opposing sides. The philosophy of theosophy teaches universality. Name-calling, attacks, and accusations providing Bible quotes or other "authorities" out of context continually serves the conspiracy website population. Be careful man!
I hope you are objective and reach honest conclusions for yourself letting your readers decide for themselves. The True and Invisible Rosicrucian Order by Paul Case will be the closest one may come to a good chase and capture of a Rosicrucian Illuminati. A lot more fun than the Bilderbergs and more real than the heaps of new age conspiracy theories you're used to hearing.
-
-
-
I will definitely have to get those books, to scour over.
-
© 2024 Created by Theosophy Network.
Powered by
