 |
vol. title: Vol Four of The Theosophical Society of The Arya Samaj of Arya-wart vol. period: Sept 1878 – Sept 1879 pages in vol.: 350 |
< Theosophists in India (continued from page 8-117) >
and from this what more easy than to prove God? What are termed mysteries by an enslaved priest ridden multitude Theosophy recognises as no mysteries at all. Names and places are recognised by it that have no significance in Europe. Theosophy exults in its knowledge and proclaims to the unbelieving mass of humanity that India is not only a land of gold, but treasures richer far than all the accumulated riches of the world?
We cannot determine whether the Theosophists are spiritualists—we rather think their creed is fatal to the modern tone of spiritualism as it is opposed to materialism—but to us they appear to be rather partial to the doctrines of the Mediœval Rosicrucians. We think they admit the existence of sylphs and gnomes, undines and salamanders. The following, however, may be safely received as the beliefs of Theosophy. It believes in God and defines him as an uncreate, eternal Divine Essence, incomprehensible to man so far as it is not manifested in its effects. Man is composed of body, soul and spirit—and the spirit is eternal, while the soul is liable to decay if it is not pure. But chiefly it believes in evolution, which it contends is older than Moses would have us believe. This doctrine is carried into the spiritual world, while Theosophy designates the phrase ‘occult forces’ as vague and meaningless, while it contends that these ‘occult forces’ are but myriad forms of existences. These are profound doctrines, and however opposed they are to the spirit and teachings of Christianity, they are worthy of all deference. Christianity is, in truth, the religion which is most loathesome to the Theosophists—a religion of patchwork from Buddhism, Brahminism and Zoroastrianism. Theosophy asks—what has Christianity done for mankind? Why are Christians better than the Hindoos? Is it because there exists more vice among the former than the latter? Is the Hindoo a drunkard? Is the Christian sober? Do we not learn from statistics that intoxication is the parent of almost all recognised vices? Then again—Are the Christians tolerant even of themselves? If Jesus Christ was a true Shepherd, could contentions rise among his flock? Theosophy thus speaks through one of its chief votaries:—“To the protestant and catholic sectaries we have to show the pagan origin of many of their most sacred idols and most cherished dogmas; to the liberal minds in science, the profound scientific attainments of the ancient magi. Society has reached a point where something must be done; it is for us to indicate where that something may be found”.
How the people of India will receive the Theosophists is a problem which time alone may solve. If the Indians are bent on freeing themselves from the thraldom of ages, as they say they are, they cannot do better than join heart and soul with the principles of a system, whose very spirit breathes of freedom—freedom of enquiry in religion and science. It has been the fashion with the educated natives to sigh over the glory of the past. Now that the past beckons to them and would receive them in its bosom, they should hasten to throw themselves into its arms. We mean by the past, the glorious civilisation of those ancient times when a world looked to India for not only her gold but also for the light of truth. But we are afraid, this is not to be, for at least sometime to come. Moral courage is a very rare commodity. Theosophy offers no compromise. It hates Christianity, and Christianity returns the hatred with interest. The Indians have to choose between the Theosophists and the Christians. What choice are the Indians prepared to make? They will promise all sorts of things—they will rush into hysterics over the purity of Vedic theology—they will sing of the regeneration of India—but when the time comes for them to act, and we believe it has come, they will, we are, afraid, do nothing more. We are afraid, that the greatest ambition of natives is to bask in the sunshine of Christian politics rather than sit under the sun of truth. We do not exaggerate Look at that arch-humbug, Keshub Chunder Sen! What a fall was there! And if Keshub Chunder Sen succumbed to the vanity of a rich marriage and called on Jesus, St. Paul and John the Baptist to plead for him, what hope have we for inferior souls? What the Arya Samaj, whose aims are identical with those of Theosophy, means to do now, remains to be seen. The Samaj, if it is true to itself, will do all it can to encourage Theosophy Meanwhile, the Theosophists have much to undergo. The Government will look on them with suspicion—the Missionaries will cast anathemas—every pulpit in the country will sound with their abuse—they will be treated as rogues and spies—for all this the Theosophists must be prepared. They have already achieved a signal success in America. They have succeeded in exciting interest and establishing branches in England, France, Germany, Russia, India, the Phillipines, Australia and Greece. More than twenty-five thousand persons follow their creed—a large number to acquire within the limited space of four years. The Theosophists are acting wisely in refusing to have anything to do with politics. Politics have been the ruin of more causes than one.
The Indian "Public" and Theosophy
Same article on p. 45
Sir,—Before entering upon the main question that compels me to ask you kindly to accord me space in your esteemed paper, will you inform me as to the nature of that newly born infant-prodigy which calls itself the Bombay Review? Is it a bigoted, sectarian organ of the Christians, or an impartial journal, fair to all, and unprejudiced as every respectable paper styling itself “ Review” ought to be, especially in a place like Bombay, where such a diversity of religious opinions is to be found ? The two paragraphs in <... continues on page 8-119 >
Editor's notes
- ↑ The Indian "Public" and Theosophy by Blavatsky, H. P., Indian Spectator, The, March 2, 1879