Theos-Talk Archives (September 1994 Message tl00104)

     Some members of the net have been having a
jolly good time talking about the Dark Brothers
and the Dark Brotherhood.  I would like to jump
in, and say a few words of my own on the subject.


John Tullis <So - do any of you who have studied
this for a while have any comments or ideas
relating the a) Existance of the "Dark
Brotherhood">
     The "Dark Brotherhood", call it what you
will, does exist. It opposes the "White
Brotherhood," is just as powerful, and will
live just as long - relative only to Globe D of
our planetary chain (where matter and spirit are
so carefully balanced).

Jerry H-J <The idea of conspiring black magicians
is a perfect for fantasy novels, and even for
embellishments in not so fictional ones.  The
"Dark brotherhood conspiracy" archetype
appears in numerous forms.>
     Agreed, insofar as you use the words
"conspiring" and "conspiracy."  I do not believe
that there is any real conspiracy or collusion
between individual black magicians.  But then
again, I do not believe that "black magicians"
have anything to do with the Dark Brotherhood.

Lewis < One point on this subject which stuck with
me over the years has to do with the notion that
those on the "left hand path" are said to be
intensely selfish. Such selfishness and
egotism makes the possibility of cooperation
between them impossible, so to suggest there is a
"brotherhood" or organization is a contridiction.>
     First, permit me to clear up a typical
misperception.  Those on "the left hand path" have
nothing, specifically, to do with the Dark
Brotherhood.  The "left-hand path" refers to the
tantric path of sexual magic where a woman
(karmamudra) sits to the left of the male
tantrica.  In certain tantric rites, a male
tantrica would have a woman sit to his right -
without sexual union.  The "left-hand path" was
considered a perversion of the "pure"
tantricism by the purist (spelled puritan)
faithful.  The phrase refers, in general today, to
any and all practitioners of sexual magic which
envolves a physical partner.  Period.  If you want
to consider this "evil," then OK, but it has
nothing to do with egotism or selfishness or the
lose of one's "soul."
     I agree that the whole idea of a conspiracy
or organization of any kind between people who are
exceedingly egotistical and selfish is a
contradiction.  But those kind of people refer
more to black magicians than to the Dark brothers
of the Dark Brotherhood.

Eldon <A simple way to describe spiritual evil is
what happens if one awakens his higher faculties
and yet remains focused in a strong sense of
personality. The sense of personality and
separateness is raised into the higher principles,
along with a "not caring" that takes on monstrous
proportions. Instead of the sweet coolness of good
spirituality, there is the killing, icy coldness.>
     Eldon, I see some of G de P in your message,
but some of what you say seems off-the-wall to me.
To reach spirituality with a sense of personality
makes you at best a god or goddess and at worse a
Titan, not a member of the Dark Brotherhood.
Tibetan Buddhism views six segments of living
beings all tied together in this universe, and two
of these are the gods and the titans (jealous
gods).  HPB also describes these six realms,
almost as if she believed in it.  Why in the world
should having a "strong personality" automatically
make one to be "not caring?"  I also find your
term "good spirituality" rather naive and
confusing.  What, would you suppose, is "bad
spirituality?"  Are we to have good gods and bad
gods? Or good demons and bad demons?
I could be wrong, but I think you are confusing
the Pratyeka- Buddhists with the Dark Brotherhood.

Eldon <There is absolutely no thought of others,
the sense of personality and individual
separateness reigns supreme.>
     Here again, I think you are confusing the
Pratyeka- Buddhists with the Dark Brotherhood.

Eldon   <An totally evil person may have but a
wasted lifetime. An evil person with some occult
powers may be able to hold off the after-death
states for a period of time, but meets with
dissolution as the "second death" is faced and the
good part of Manas (for him--nothing) separates
from the Kamarupa.>
     While early theosophical literature talks
about the possible loss of one's "soul" and a
wasted life, I would submit that this is pure
theory, and that in practice the number of
"totally evil" persons is quite small and not
worth scaring young children about.
     I would also submit that a "good" person
"with some occult powers may be able to hold off
the after-death states for a period of time," as
well.  The magical techniques used for this have
nothing to do with one's goodness or one's
evilness, but rather with one's motive.   The idea
that an "evil" person "meets with dissolution as
the "second death" is faced and the good part of
Manas (for him--nothing) separates from the
Kamarupa" is interesting.  Could you provide a
source for this idea?  I thought that those who
faced "nothing" after death were those atheists
who simply didn't believe in any afterlife (Am I
wrong here?  Does the nothingness of the atheist
also imply a "wasted life?"  When is any life
"wasted?").  I can envision a situation where an
"evil" person dies, and then sees his entire life
flash by him, and perceives the wrong that he/she
has done to others, and feels intense regret,
sorrow, and remorse, and then eventually returns
to life to try and make amends.

Eldon <It is wrong to picture an hierarchy of
good, and another of evil, both of equal status
and power, both battling for control of the
direction of the world. There is but one order,
and that is good.>
     I have to disagree with you on this one.  I
believe that the polar opposites of good and evil
do, in fact, exist.  Both good and evil battle for
control of the direction of the world, and both
have equal status and power.  The notion that only
good exists is simplistic dualism (I must say
though, that it sure would be nice if this were
the case).  This idea is probably the singlemost
reason why I left the Christian Science church.
Christian Science too wants to believe that you
can hold on to the good and throw away the evil.
I wish everyone with this idea a lot of luck.

Eldon <The failures may band together, in some
loose-knit manner, but because of the nature of
their consciousness, they cannot trust each other
nor be depended upon to support any organized
structure, unless it is in their self interest.
Any cooperation not based upon self-benefit would
have to be out of fear. If stronger individuals
can control weaker ones, the weaker ones, although
untrustworthy and treacherous, will do what they
are told, until their boss turns his back... I
would not use the term "Dark Brotherhood," because
that implies some sense of brotherliness, at least
among fellow members, and any sense of that type
of consciousness is lost early on in their
development>
     Agreed, as I noted above for Jerry H-J.


The Dark Brotherhood, as I see it:
     I think a lot of folks misinterpret the idea
of the Pratyeka Buddha as well as the Dark
Brotherhood.  They are not the same thing.  In
Mahatma Letter IX, KH calls the "Brothers of the
Shadow" or Dark Brothers, "the Sorcerers," "the
Elementary Spooks," and "our most potential
Enemies."  In Letter XLIX, KH mentions "the Red
Capped Brothers of the Shadow" suggesting that the
Dark Brotherhood referred to the Red Caps of
Tibet.  If we read all of the Letters, as well as
what HPB has to say, it seems to me that they
meant the Dark Brotherhood to be the polar or
dualistic opposite to the White Brotherhood.  If
we consider the White Brotherhood to be good, then
the Dark Brotherhood must be evil.
     The Sanatana-Dharma (An Advanced Textbook of
Hindu Religion and Ethics) says that "the measure
used in Ethics at the present stage of evolution,
by which the rightness or wrongness of an action
is decided, is the tendency of the action to
promote or to hinder Union." (p 265)  By this we
can say that whatever tries to help us progrss
upward through the Arc of Ascent is "good" and
whatever tries to pull us downward along the Arc
of Descent (which G de P calls the Shadowy Arc) is
"evil."  By this measure, you can tell those who
are in the Brotherhood of Compassion and those who
are in the Dark Brotherhood.  Most members of both
groups who are incarnating, are totally
unconscious of their membership.
     The Pratyeka-Buddha is another story.  This
is the Arhat of Hinayana Buddhism.  However, we
have to remember that the term Hinayana (lower
vehicle) is a Mahayana term, meant to be somewhat
disrespectful.  The Pratyeka-Buddha is one who
fully sees the maya and illusiveness of the world.
He views the world as a mental projection, and
unreal.  Other people are also unreal mental
projections, phantasms, ghosts.  The Pratyeka-
Buddha is not really selfish in the sense that we
think of the word.  Once you recognize that all
aggragates are unreal (one of Gotama's last
teachings) then why have compassion over an
illusion?  Once you understand that life is a
dream, why deliberately fall back asleep in order
to have more dreams of helping people?  In other
words, they lack compassion simply because they
fail to see anyone to have compassion for.  And,
technically they are correct - all of us needy
people are ourselves illusions, asleep to the
truth of things.  I am not saying that this view
is "right" but simply trying to point out that
they are not selfish in the same way that we
normally think of the term.

             Jerry S.