I absolutely struggled for days with writing the pages about Madame Blavatsky and her Theosophy. I am accustomed to compiling information from sources and writing intelligent text from my years as a science writer in college. But there is such a repelling dissonance with the material of Blavatsky and Theosophy and eventually I just gave up and stopped trying to polish the text in my usual fashion. I've even felt like deleting those pages, but then again I've spent days on them so I've left them.
I was not familiar with the work of Madame Blavatsky when I begun to investigate Kuthumi. My first impression of Blavatsky was strong and negative. No doubt it is the imprint of negative occultism about her. I am very sensitive to people and sensing their energy signature.
The occult, esoterical, and New Age contains also elements that are negative. Negative means unpleasant, based on beings and information that is unloving and often dangerous and harmful. The Fallen Angels are responsible for many dark arts, witchcraft, and occultism, and their work and presence will leave a dark and negative energy signature. Since I started reading about Blavatsky as there seemed to have been some possible connection to the beautiful Jesus Lord Sananda Kuthumi of mine, I wanted to keep a positive outlook on her material and to try my best to ignore the loud negativity about her. After all, Madame Blavatsky was said to have been the strongest influence on the New Age movement, which I associate with all the benevolent and positive things that helped me on my path. But I wasn't able to shake off the negativity and eventually I had to give up on writing about her. It is too negative.
From my reading on Blavatsky, it does not seem that she was an authentic source. The spirituality that she was giving and writing about was not her own. It was not that she herself was a teacher or ascended into consciousness. Her journey in her work in spirituality started with reading books of the occult, and she traveled the world studying occultism and religion and learning from other masters and teachers. She then compiled all of what she learned into a new system which she named Theosophy.
What concerns me the most is that I think I read that she also studied Ancient Egyptian religion. I have discovered from Satan himself that the Ancient Egyptian religion was Satanic, furthermore there is indication that the Ancient Egyptians were deeply nestled with the Fallen Angels to the extent of having genetic Nefilim amongst them.
In the symbol of Theosophy, note that the swastika was given by the Blue Kings to humanity and is originally a benevolent symbol. It was the Nazis who stole this symbol and reflected it into its mirror image to represents its opposite, similar to how some Satanists use the upside down Holy Cross as their symbol. So the symbol here is not depicting Nazism. But what concerns me is the snake. Without having studied mysticism, I can't say I know what the snake there represents, but what little I already do know from direct sources, the Serpent Gods and the snake people are a negative force on Earth. The Serpents do not stand for love and humanity.
If you decide to open up to the study of spirituality, magic, and religion, you open up doors both good and bad. There are not only benevolent loving teachings and beings available here, but there have also been negative entities and dark spirituality. I have the impression that Madame Blavatsky either lacked a personal distinction between the good and bad and may have been some kind of "omnivore" when it comes to spirituality, creating some sort of hodgepodge of "everything", perhaps blending her lessons of Buddhism together with the dark arts of Ancient Egyptian religion. But if you add as much as a drop of black ink into a clean vessel, the whole water goes dark and is no longer pure. I feel that Madame Blavatsky and Theosophy have been tainted. Or that perhaps she even felt drawn to the dark arts, as she did blatantly study occultism.
Some Christians or Muslims or others might say that all spirituality and New Age is dark, but it is not so. Much of the New Age movement has I would say more benevolent and loving spiritual science than the other old God-religions do. Crystals, healing, telepathy, astral travels, mandalas, the knowledge of chakras and energy bodies, are some of the gifts that are not negative or Satanic. Meanwhile other New Age elements, the pentagram, Tarot cards, Ancient Egyptian religion, and probably anything to do with the Serpents, is tainted with darkness.
I would say that it is inherently dangerous when somebody decides to build a new world religion when they lack the discernment between good and evil, light and dark. Madame Blavatsky was not a Light Being. She was not an Ascended Master. She was not sharing her own teachings, but rather a hodgepodge of material filtered through her own eyeglasses. If she did receive teachings from Buddhist Masters, then she was blessed to do so, but she herself was not a Buddhist Teacher. No she was not.
The true teacher does not need a teacher. If your teacher has a teacher then do not listen to them. Madame Blavatsky had teachers. So she was not a teacher. Only someone who reaches enlightenment and becomes the Buddha, can teach about the Buddha. Only Jesus can teach about Jesus. It is not for a human to try to understand something that they are not. To construct a world religion you would be a teacher, not a student. Madame Blavatsky was a student. And she is clearly tainted by the dark arts. She lacked the discernment to filter out the good from the bad. Elements of the dark was in her mind, and was no doubt in her writing.
Difference between good and bad? Consciousness. Dark spirituality lacks consciousness, and therefore lacks compassion, love and light.
But back to our original question. Was Madame Blavatsky's Master Koot Hoomi the same as Lord Sananda's previous incarnation as Kuthumi? The actual existence of Madame Blavatsky's Koot Hoomi was disputed by her critics, though he was described as an enlightened Master and teacher. Is this the Kuthumi mentioned by Lord Sananda? Of course I have the privilege of asking Lord Sananda himself to find out the answer, but I did want to check the literature first just to see what other people think.
I should never have touched the written material of Blavatsky or her Theosophy. It has left me with a very uncomfortable tainted impression. I am very sensitive to energies and I have to stick with my direct sources and not pry elsewhere on Earth. Why would I be so foolish to read about other channelers, who may or may not be tainted in the dark arts, when I have got direct linkages to Lord Sananda Jesoah Kuthumi and other Masters like him?
I try to humble myself but I am also - perhaps - an Enlightened Master. In today's day and age it is unseemly to acknowledge one's beautiful or unique traits, to stand out or shine. I have made a grave mistake by tapping into Blavatsky and Theosophy by reading about it. I will delete the pages I have written, it is vile.
Everything has an "energy" we could call it, a vibrational essence that is based on its consciousness, emotions, thoughts, and other sources of vibrational material. Lord Sananda and him as Kuthumi are beautiful pure white light.
Madame Blavatsky has an energy imprint that is similar to Satan. She was not a Light Being. To whatever extent she received a path of Buddhism up in the mountains of Tibet and spent time with her benevolent Teachers there, it did not make her into one of them to learn the words by which they are described. So I can safely say that Madame Blavatsky was not, at least, fully inspired by the same Kuthumi as was my Lord Sananda Jesoah Jesus Christ.
When Lord Sananda came into my life it has changed me in every way. He cleaned me and resolved my pains and sins and he makes my energy purest white and clean. If Madame Blavatsky's Koot Hoomi was the same as my Lord Sananda's Kuthumi, then Blavatsky did not take him in to her mind and body spiritually as I have with mine, because her energy would have shown the imprint very clearly.
It doesn't rule out that her Master Koot Hoomi was perhaps Sananda's Kuthumi. I will enjoy the privilege of asking Lord Sananda himself one day.
Thank you for reading my analysis on energies. Please show discernment when you study spirituality or religion. There are religions and spirituality both good and bad. It is a good idea not to be an omnivore, to not take in all ideas as if they were all equal. Do not be impressed by the tricks and talents of the Dark Ones, who have given us many dark arts. Spells and crafts designed by the Fallen may seem effective and impressive, but the corruption is far greater than any rewards. You cannot build something out of nothing, and the Fallen have nothing. Only love and compassion can build great things.
Many like New Age because it seems to teach its practitioners how to do things "on their own", instead of relying on God to have all the powers. Just remember that there are both benevolent and harmful tools in New Age. I have to write miles worth of text on the explanation of why dark arts are bad, I can also teach you the good arts. There is so much to say.
The symbol of the
Theosophical Society
Angel Oracle
Kuthumi Main
Kuthumi
Blavatsky
Theosophy
Comments