HPB-SB-14-124

H. P. Blavatsky Scrapbooks

from Adyar archives of the International Theosophical Society

T i

vol. 14, p. 124	volume 14, page 124 vol. title: vol. period: 1882 pages in vol.: 174
Legend HPB note HPB highlighted HPB underlined HPB crossed out <Editors note> <Archivist note> Lost or unclear SBT, DT Restored

<<   ☰   >>

eng • рус

< Correspondence. (continued from page 14-123) >

secularist be a true theosiphist’ is not yet decided. So it is not right to say that the union has dismissed the late Secretary on ‘matters of opinion and belief.’ These few lines I am obliged to write to your journal to give you and others under mis-apprehension there true information regarding the dismissal of the late Secretary; and so I hope you will, in justice to our union, publish them in a corner of your journal.

Madras, 3rd Sep. 82. }

I beg to remain, Sir Yours Obedient Servant, P. Apputhorar Chetty, Secretary, Sub Protem, Hindu Freethought Union Madras.

<[A short blue pencil stroke appears below the date.]>

–––––––

<Untitled> (Christianity has brought to you all the necessaries of civilized life…)

Christianity has brought to you all the necessaries of civilized life, Christianity has taught you to interchange your thoughts freely with each other, Christianity has been to you the source of various advantages too numerous to be mentioned.

And in the face of all this is it not surprising to find that natives of the self same ever-obliged India, are joining and sympathising with Anti-Christian movements! You Anti-Christians who designate yourselves, Freethinkers, Theosophists and............, have you pondered over all this? I need not dwell at length upon the subject. Suffice it to repeat once more, that IT IS SHEER INGRATITUDE ON YOUR PART TO PROCEED AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.

I am, sir yours faithfully

T.

<[“Theosophists and” is underlined in blue pencil.]>

–––––––

NOTES, SCRAPS AND COMMENTS.

We should advice our brothers of the Thinker, and Philosophic Inquirer to avoid criticising each other. Let them not waste their energy in vain.

–––––––

<Untitled> (The Philosophic Inquirer of the 29th instant publishes an interesting letter…)

The Philosophic Inquirer of the 29th instant publishes an interesting letter from a “Heathen” on the “Failure and narrowmindedness of missions.”

–––––––

NOTES, SCRAPS AND COMMENTS.

Mr. Hastie has used strong language against the Indo-Anyans because they were idolatrous, but men had always an itching for idolatory. We quote the following from Macaulay, (Mr. Hastie’s favourite Author,) in support of this statement:—

“Logicians may reason about abstractions. But the great mass of men must have images. The strong tendency of the multitude in all ages and nations to idolatry can be explained on no other principle. The first inhabitants of Greece, there is reason to believe, worshipped one invisible Deity. But the necessity of having something more definite to adore produced, in a few centuries, the innumerable crowd of Gods and Goddesses. In like manner the ancient Persians thought it impious to exhibit the Creator under a human form. Yet even these transferred to the Sun the worship which, in speculation, they considered due only to the Supreme Mind. The history of the Jews is the record of a continued struggle between pure Theism, supported by the most terrible sanctions, and the strangely fascinating desire of having some visible and tangible object of adoration. Perhaps none of the secondary causes which Gibbon has assigned for the rapidity with which Christianity spread over the world, while Judaism scarcely ever acquired a proselyte, operated more powerfully than this feeling. God, the uncreated, the incomprehensible, the invisible, attracted few worshippers. A philosopher might admire so noble a conception: but the crowd turned away in disgust from words which presented no image to their minds. It was before Deity embodied in a human form, walking among men, partaking of their infirmities, leaning on their bosoms, weeping over their graves, slumbering in the manger, bleeding on the cross, that the prejudices of the Synagogue, and the doubts of the Academy, and the pride of the Portico, and the fisces of the Lictor, and the swords of thirty legions, were humbled in the dust. Soon after Christianity had achieved its triumph, the principle which had assisted it began to corrupt it. It became a new Paganism. Patron saints assumed the offices of household gods. St George took the place of Mars. St Elmo consoled the mariner for the loss of Castor and Pollux. The virgin Mother and Cecilia succeeded to Venus and the Muses. The fascination of sex and loveliness was again joined to that of celestial dignity; and the homage of chivalry was blended with that of religion. Reformers have often made a stand against these feelings; but never with more than apparent and partial success. The men who demolished the images in Cathedrals have not always been able to demolish those which were enshrined in their minds. It would not be difficult to show that in politics the same rule holds good. Doctrines, we are afraid, must generally be embodied before they can excite a strong public feeling. The multitude is more easily interested for the most unmeaning badge, or the most insignificant name, than for the most important principle.”

<[A blue pencil line runs beside the following paragraph.]>

Why do you laugh at the Hindus then? Some of their sages, were material atheists, others mono-theists, with a most sublime philosophical and abstract idea of the divinity, while the mass of people were idolaters. Those who believe in any religion should never laugh at that of the Hindus. For their defects are such as others have, but their excellencies are above the par. The religion of the Indo-Aryans embraces in itself all phases of religious belief. It is an embodiment of all that is sublime grand and noble.

Editor's notes