LIST OF ARTICLES

BLAVATSKY WAS NOT INTERESTED ON POLITICS

 
 
She was affirming this on several occasions:
 
 
In The Theosophist magazine, October 1879, she wrote:
 
« Unconcerned about politics; hostile to the insane dreams of Socialism and of Communism, which it abhors—as both are but disguised conspiracies of brutal force and sluggishness against honest labour; the Society cares but little about the outward human management of the material world. The whole of its aspirations are directed toward the occult truths of the visible and invisible worlds.
 
Whether the physical man be under the rule of an empire or a republic, concerns only the man of matter. His body may be enslaved; as to his Soul, he has the right to give to his rulers the proud answer of Socrates to his Judges. They have no sway over the inner man»
(p.6-7)
 
 
 
 
In The Theosophist magazine, May 1883, she wrote:
 
« During the whole period of our four years’ living in India, neither our Society, nor its Founders, nor this Journal had anything to do whatever with politics. Nay, feeling an innate and holy horror for everything connected with it, we have avoided the subject most strenuously. Empires might have fallen down and arisen anew during that interval, but still our Journal as ourselves would not have heeded the catastrophe but given ever our undivided attention to “Occult Truths” and kindred metaphysical problems»
(p.206)
 
 
 
 
In the London newspaper Pall Mall Gazette, January 1889, faced with accusations of being a Russian spy, Blavatsky responded:
 
« I have never written, in all my life on politics, of which I know nothing. I take no interest in political intrigues, regarding them as the greatest nuisance and a bore, the falsest of all systems in the code of ethics. I feel the sincerest pity for those diplomats who, being honorable men, are nevertheless obliged to deceive all their lives, and to embody a living, walking LIE.
 
Ten years ago, the Anglo-Indian Government, acting upon a false and malicious insinuation, mistook me for a spy; but after the Police had shadowed me for over eight months—without unearthing a trace of the charge brought against me—it found to its great sorrow that it had made an April-fool of itself. Yet the Anglo-Indian Government acted, after that, in the most honorable way.
 
In November, 1876, Lord Lytton issued an order to the Political Department that Colonel Olcott and myself should be no longer subjected to the insulting surveillance of the Anglo-Indian Police. [Vide the Allahabad Pioneer, November 11, 1879.] From that day we were no longer annoyed.
. . .
Let the Press inquire, from themselves or their Secretaries, whether it has been ever proven by any of their respective Governments that I was a political agent, whatever may be the malicious society gossip of my enemies. Nor do I feel so certain yet, unless this disgraceful rumor is sufficiently refuted, that I will not appeal directly to the justice and honor of these three noblemen. Noblesse oblige.
 
The least of beggars has a right to seek redress from law, and to appeal to the evidence of the highest in the land, if that evidence can save his honor and reputation, especially in a case like this, when truth can be made known with one simple word from these high witnesses—a yea or a nay.
 
I say it again, Miss de Grasse Stevens and her publishers stand accused of an uncalled for libel. I may or may not be endowed by nature with the potentiality or even the commission of every mortal sin. But it so happens that I have never meddled in politics, am innocent of any knowledge of political intrigues, never bothered myself with this special science at any time of my long life, and that ‘where there is nothing, the King himself loses all rights.’ The ‘spy’ charge was thus at all times a mare’s nest.
 
In closing I would offer a bit of advice to my last slanderer. Since the authoress of Miss Hildreth [the authoress was Miss A. de Grasse Stevens] seems chronically afflicted with the political microbe, let her try her hand at something she knows more about than subterranean Russia and its agents. Her book is not only libelous, it is absurd and ridiculous. To make Count Melikoff talk in a drawing-room of our ‘little Father’ (read the Tzar!!!) is as correct as it would be to address Miss Stevens au sérieux as ‘the great Mother-Squaw’ in London»
(p.7)
 
 
 
~*~
 
And also the facts show that Blavatsky abhorred politics since throughout her life she never got involved in political affairs.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment