[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

[no subject]

Oct 08, 1994 11:03 AM
by John Tullis

  The following is a long posting.

I posted a brief statement on Monday, 09/26/94 concerning the
"Dark Brotherhood" and asked 3 questions. The 3 questions were:

>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"
>b) Whether or not they could have contributed to the early problems
>of the organization
>c) Whether or not they in fact did so?

I include pieces of responses that were made to this posting,
related to these questions.  I posted the questions based on the
discussion revolving about whether one of the early letters
between the organization founders could have been a forgery, or
if it was genuine, then was it misinterpreted, etc.  I don't wish
to reopen that discussion because it appears to be well covered.

Most people who responded only focused on question "a".

Please, anyone who responded, don't get upset that I am only
including parts of your postings.  I am doing this because part
of your postings were not directly related to responding to the
above questions, and to keep this long posting from being REALLY
long.  The questions and responses follow:

a) Existance of the "Dark Brotherhood" (e.g., does it exist).

>From: (Paul Gillingwater)
>They exist and are active still.  I wouldn't recommend that you
>pay the much attention....

>From: "K. Paul Johnson" <>
>Therefore, by analogy one can identify the Dark Brotherhood as
>exemplars of past states of human evolution who exemplify
>primitive conditions of consciousness that we should be moving
>away from.  As such, BY THEIR INHERENT NATURE they drag down
>the progressive evolutionary flow of human history, thwart the
>enlightening, liberating movements of their time, etc.  Again,
>no need for organizations, titles, meetings, etc.  Of course,
>the idea of power is also part of the concept of the dark
>brotherhood, but selfish power that is anti-social in nature....

>From: (Jerry Hejka-Ekins)
>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.  We have stories of secret Government vaults...
>Even individuals in the Theosophical Organizations couldn't
>resist finding "black magicians" in every corner.  Anyone in the
>theosophical organizations who disagrees with the "party line"
>are considered by some to be "agents of the dark forces."...

>From: "Lewis Lucas"  <LLUCAS@Mercury.GC.PeachNet.EDU>
>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.
>I vaguely recall reading in the TS literature something to this
>effect, and the suggestion that even though there may be some
>temporary alliances formed for a specific purpose that none would
>last long given the characteristics of the participants.

>From: (Eldon B. Tucker)
>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. The apparently
>organized forces of evil are failures in life, those
>failing in the process of evolving into matter in order
>to acquire self-consciousness and to raise that treasure
>back into the spirit. That process is failing for them,
>and if totally failed, just means that it must be
>started anew.
>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 of evil.

>From: Jerry Schueler <>
>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)....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....
>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.
>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.

>From: (Eldon B. Tucker) [again]
>Lost Souls and Spiritual Evil [Consisting entirely
>of quotations  from G. de Purucker, "Fundamentals of the
>"... Even spiritual evil exists; and there are high
>agents of 'spiritual wickedness', of which the Christian
>Apostle Paul has spoken, forming the opposite agencies
>to the high agents of good. The latter ones, agents of
>spiritual wickedness, are called by us the 'Brothers of
>the Shadow', and the others are called by us the
>'Brothers of the Light'. The Brothers of the Shadow work
>in and with matter, for material and selfish purposes.
>The Brothers of the Light work in and with Nature for
>spirit, for impersonal purposes. They contrast one with
>Esoteric Philosophy," 1st ed.]

b) Whether or not they could have contributed to the early
problems of the organization

>From: (Paul Gillingwater)
>There are several references to this in Mahatma Letters, which is well
>worth careful study in my opinion.

>From: "K. Paul Johnson" <>
>Now, in this abstract definition, one can look at TS history in
>a broader way.  To say that the TS was aided by the GWB means
>that it was inspired and encouraged by beings who were far in
>the evolutionary vanguard.  To say that it was disrupted by the
>DB means that it was opposed and thwarted by the
>anti-progressive forces of the time.

>From: (Jerry Hejka-Ekins)
>I think it is about time that we stop this nonsense.  The
>alleged work of the "dark forces" may be quite real, but they
>leave no paper trail (or any other kind of trail for that matter)
>by which we can document them....

c) Whether or not they in fact did so?

>From: (Paul Gillingwater)
>This can only be conjecture.

>From: "K. Paul Johnson" <>
>For example, there was a
>Brahmin takeover of the TS of sorts, after which the anti-caste
>platform of the Society was quietly relegated to a back seat.  Or,
>in Steiner's case, a Christocentric, German-speaking cultural
>chauvinistic trend that spun off a large chunk of the Society's
>membership, energy, etc.  And so on through TS history-- a
>steady progressive movement, aided by "forces of light" but
>constantly disrupted by anti-progressive forces seeking to
>undermine that movement.

>From: (Jerry Hejka-Ekins)
>But on the other hands, as Paul
>Johnson pointed out, we can show incident after incident where
>the force of the T.S. was fragmented again and again.  The first
>incident was in 1885 with the Coulomb conspiracy.  It eventuated
>in HPB's forced leaving of Adyar, and her having to endure the
>SPR Report.  HPB called this incident a "test" which everyone
>seemed to have failed.  As she said of Olcott; He saved the body
>of the organization but lost its soul.  After that things went
>down hill.  I don't think you need "dark forces" to explain the
>fragmentation of the TS.  Plain stupidity, ignorance and greed
>for power seems to cover all bases very well.
>As for conspiracy theories, I don't buy them because it is
>easy to make them up, yet impossible to prove.  However, a woman
>I had studied theosophy with for eighteen years did offer an
>interesting (but unprovable) idea.  She suggested that since the
>Mahatmas say that the "dark forces" can only exert equal energy
>to counter the good they have done, these "Brothers of the left
>hand path" would have to thwart the TM in the most efficient way
>possible.  She suggested that all they had to do was spread
>confusion concerning the teachings.  Well, whether we can credit
>"dark forces" or not, it is clear that the teachings have
>progressively become more confused through the banterings of this
>or that "clairvouant,"  "channel" or "messenger"  over the last
>century.  The theory appeals to me.  It's the best one I've
>heard, but is no more provable than the others.

OK.  Regarding the 3 questions again, the consensus seems to be:
a) Does the "Dark Brotherhood" exist.


>b) Whether or not they could have contributed to the early problems
>of the organization


>c) Whether or not they in fact did so?


Now I would like to throw my ideas into the net.  1st - I agree
that some society members may run around seeing "black sorcerers"
under every bush.  I have noticed that not absolutely everyone
who is involved in the Theosophical societies/study groups is
what I might call wholey mentally and emotionally balanced.

Now, this is my opinion.  Feel free to disregard it...nay, to
jump up and down on it.  :-)

I observe the following facts:

1) The Nazis were quite effective at organization.  They
committed much that I consider evil, the leaders were deeply
involved in the occult, and they managed to hang together long
enough to do a lot of damage.

2) The old KGB was very effective at infiltrating organizations
and placing forged documents where they would be found and
believed to be genuine, inserting moles into government and
intelligence agency structures of their opponents, feeding
"disinformation" to the media, destabilizing government and other
organizational structures.  Many of their actions were "evil",
again in my opinion.  (I hope we don't get into a long discussion
on what is evil, since I suspect that most of us agree on it.  I
also am not claiming here that the KGB is or was the only
intelligence apparatus that pursued these methods.)

Therefore, I argue the following (my opinion):

1) That we should not be so quick to reject the concept of
organized evil.  I don't think that just because the dark path is
ultimately one of selfishness (and please lets not get into a
discussion on the meaning of selfishness, please please) that
that means that active members and agents of the "Dark
Brotherhood", consciously or unconsciously, cannot act in an
organized manner to achieve specific ends.

2) That it is clearly possible that some of the confusion,
backbiting, and quarreling between the various founders and their
followers could have been deliberately provoked.

3) The more successful an organization is for "Light", the more
pressure will be placed on that organization to discredit it,
break it up, damage it, and destroy it.  Some pressure is done
through apparently reputable people publishing "debunking"
reports.  Some will be done by publishing negative reports about
organizational leaders.  Some will be done by attacking the
organization financially.  Some will be done by infiltrating the
organization and quietly disrupting it from the inside.

4) Most attacks are not coordinated from any single agency.
However, just as today intelligence agencies infiltrate
organizations all the time (the FBI specializes in this), it is
just possible that SOME disruption of the early society may have
been due to various early intelligence agencies.  Of course, this
IS purely speculation.  All we do know is that British
intelligence suspected HPB of being a Russian spy.

Finally, I think that most damage done by the DB to the
Theosophical Society is done by influencing people through their
lower natures.  But I also think that it is organized.  I don't
subscribe to conspiracy theories.  But I do think that an
organization that works for Light attracts attention, and gets
"attacked" more than, say, a business organization.

       = John Tullis                                      =
       = Phone  312 507 3905                              =
       =                         =

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application