THEOSOPHY AND THE RELIGIONS
Before returning to the history of Theosophy, there are two further questions which we wish to examine briefly. The first is the attitude of Theosophy toward religions; the second relates to the existence of the oath in the Theosophical Society. As regards the first, we have seen that Mme Blavatsky offered her doctrine as 'the essence and common origin of all the religions,' no doubt because she had borrowed something from each of them. We have also noted that in the 'exoteric section' everyone was admitted without distinction as to their opinions, this being boasted of as proof of unlimited tolerance. In order to demonstrate that 'no member of the Society has the right to force another member to adopt his personal opinions.' Mme Blavatsky cited this passage from the regulations:
It is not lawful for any officer of the Parent Society to express by word or act any hostility to, or preference for, any one section, religious or philosophical, more than another. All have equal right to have the essential features of their religious belief laid before the tribunal of an impartial world. And no officer of the Society in his capacity as officer, has the right to preach his own sectarian views or beliefs to members assembled, except when the meeting consists of his co-religionists. After due warning, violation of the rule shall be punished by suspension or expulsion. [1]
It was this article that some Theosophists later reproached Mrs Besant for having violated by propagating a particular religion of
her own invention, to which charge Mr Leadbeater rather peevishly responded that
this policy is the affair of the president and not theirs, that as the president she knew more of the affair from every angle than her critiques, and that she doubtless had excellent reasons of which these members were completely ignorant. [2]
It seems then that the directors of the Society are above the laws, which are doubtless made only for simple members and subordinate agents; in these conditions it is very doubtful that the loudly proclaimed tolerance is always strictly respected.
Besides, even if one limits oneself to works considered authoritative in the Theosophical Society, one cannot help noticing that impartiality is often lacking. We have already mentioned Mme Blavatsky's avowed enmity toward Christianity, which no doubt was surpassed only by her enmity toward Judaism; moreover, all that displeased her in Christianity she attributed to Jewish origins. It was thus that she wrote:
All the unselfishness of the altruistic teachings of Jesus has become a merely theoretical subject for pulpit oratory; while the precepts of practical selfishness taught in the Mosaic Bible, against which Christ so vainly preached, have become ingrained into the innermost life of Western nations.... Christian but Biblical people prefer the law of Moses to Christ's law of love. They base upon the Old Testament, which panders to all their passions, their laws of conquest, annexation, and tyranny. [3]