Liberation Theology

This is an interesting essay by K. Satchidanandan that is quite long but well worth the read. I have pulled out excerpts that I hope do justice to whole post, it is over four pages long.

I found it informative and in many ways it reflects my belief that certain religious or spiritual movements, such as paganism, Gnosticism, the spiritualist reformers and occult revival of the fin de sicle 19th Century as well as their heirs; the 20th century magickal movements, reflect a true liberation theology. In fact a theology of libertarianism.

As Satchidanandan says in the Indian context they are movements of the Sramana.

Satchidananda's critique of communalism is similar to that of Habermas though he is clearly critical of western positivism, Hegelianism and Marxism.

He deconstructs in a devastating way the fascist statist elements of Brahmanism and its modern revivalist incarnation in political Hinduism.

He ends with a reflection on the champion of libertarian spirituality, Ghandi, whom his Canadian biographer; George Woodcock called 'the gentle anarchist', and influenced a whole generation of intellectuals to become active anarchist pacifists.

For a critique of Woodcock's view of Ghandi's liberation theology see;Indian Spirituality and the Mythic Gandhi

Which should be contrasted with Woodcocks Who Killed the British Empire? that observes: "Undoubtedly if one had to choose any individual as more responsible than others for the death of the Empire, it will be Gandhi.''


All in all I found this an enlightening essay , if you pardon the pun, so I thought I would share with you.


Between saints and secularists

K. Satchidanandan is Secretary of the Sahitya Akademi.
A major Indian poet writing in Malayalam, he lives in New Delhi

We need a secularism that is not merely ‘tolerant’ of our pluralist traditions of religion but is inspired and motivated by them and fully takes into account the creative, positive, contributions of different religions to the moulding of our subjectivity as well as to the evolution of our civilisation. By dismissing religiosity and spiritualism as fundamentally flawed, superstitious and illusory, our communist friends have foreclosed any possibility of a dialogue with the majority of our people who have faith in one religion or another. They have also entirely failed to understand the radical significance of spiritual leaders from Buddha and Mahavira to Vivekananda and Gandhi, and of subaltern religious movements like the Bhakti and the Sufi traditions.

Communalism being the worst form of materialism, divorced from everything that is sacred and oriented towards worldly wealth and power, can truly be combated only by a higher form of the sacred that combines the secular ideal of human equality, democratic awareness, identification with the suffering, alleviation of poverty and resistance to oppression with a deep inner inquiry and belief in the holiness of all forms of life. Those who turn religion into a means to attain state power and worldly status are indeed the most irreligious of all, for they profane the most hallowed and usurp even the last refuge of the spirit from a world where ‘the best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity’ by joining the ‘ignorant armies’ that ‘clash by night’.

It is possible, at the risk of some simplification, to characterise the struggle within religions as one between Brahmanas and Sramanas. I am using these words more as oppositional metaphors than as historical categories. Of course, the terms do have historical sanction: there are references to them in Buddhist and Jain literature, Ashoka’s edicts and the travelogues of Megasthenes and Chinese pilgrims. Patanjali records that the two were born rivals "like the cat and the mouse, like the snake and the mongoose". The Arab documents of the second millennium AD also speak of two religious traditions they call Brahmanam (also Brahimam) and Samanyam. The Brahmana stream represents emphasis on ritual, belief in hierarchisation and priesthood and the resulting inequality, the unquestioning faith in the Vedas as repositories of eternal truth, the monopolisation of certain knowledges through a language seldom known to the majority and the linking of those knowledges to power, secrecy, deformation, mystifying representations and divisive practices imposed on people that are later legitimised and rationalised to seem almost natural or divinely created.

In short, it is the religion of hegemony that believes in subjection and domination that splits up community life, forces the individual into himself/herself and ties him/her to his/her own identity in a constraining manner. In this way, it always has had links with state power, even when it does not directly rule, by being more than the rulers, making rules for them, by being advisers in court in the past or as lawyers, managers and bureaucrats in the present, creating and sustaining mechanisms of subjection and determining the forms of subjectivity. Michel Foucault calls this ‘pastoral power’ in the context of the Western State, which has integrated the old power-techniques of the Church in a new political format. Originally, it was a form of power that guaranteed individual salvation in the next world, but it differed from royal power in that it not only commanded but was also prepared to sacrifice itself for the flock. It was a power that looked after not only the whole community but also each individual in particular during his entire life-span, a power that could not be exercised without exploring their ‘souls’, without making them reveal their innermost secrets. The concept of such a form of power applies equally well to the power the Brahmins enjoyed —and to some extent continue to enjoy in Indian society, the growing power of the Papacy and the Church in the Western states and the power of the mullahs in monoreligious Islamic states.

Sramanas by definition are beggars — those who have chosen poverty. They do not approve of the domination of the Brahmanas or accept the authenticity of their texts. Rituals are secondary in their practice: self-realisation and service are primary. They would prefer to speak in popular tongues rather than in Sanskrit or Latin, abhor the idea of hierarchisation through divisive practices like caste, look down upon earthly power and riches and demystify religion by taking it to the people. They interrogate traditional customs, rituals and taboos including, at times, the very idea of temples and idol-worship, not to speak of untouchability and other spatial strategies of distance and differentiation, and believe in basic human equality, or even go beyond it to believe in the equality of all created beings.

While for the Brahmana tradition religion is an instrument of hegemony, for the Sramana tradition, it is an instrument of spiritual enquiry, social justice and revolt against forms of oppressive subjectivisation.

The disappearance of women priests and the conversion of fertility cults dominated by women into celebrations dominated by men, like Ganesh Chaturthi, are all signs of similar patriarchalisation of society. Ancient Indian texts abound with legitimising narratives where the caste system is shown to have divine sanction. The Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda, probably a later interpolation into the Vedic canon, says that the mouth of the divine became the Brahmin, his arms the Kshatriya, his legs the Vaisya and his feet the Sudra. The Bhagavad Gita, again considered by historians like D.D. Kosambi to be a later Brahminical interpolation in the Mahabharata, brackets Vaisyas, Sudras and women together and calls them the ‘base-born’. The Vishnu Purana, the Padma Purana and Satapatha Brahmana are full of similar narratives and situations that glorify the Brahmin at the cost of other segments of society.

The Sramana tradition, on the other hand, is counter-hegemonic, often to the degree of being subversive. The Buddha and Mahavira, who interrogated the Varna system, questioned the priesthood, spurned rituals, upheld the equality of beings and hence condemned violence, whose victims in those days were mostly the Sudras and the animals useful for the peasants, may be said to belong to this tradition. The Bhakti-Sufi movement was another major pan-Indian articulation of this stream of subaltern dissent.

The spokesmen/women of the movement mostly came from the subaltern or marginalised sections of society and were workers, women or Mulsims. Namdeo the tailor, Kabir the weaver, Tukaram the peddler, Chokamela the bricklayer and Gora the potter were some of them. Bulhe Shah, Baba Farid, Mir Dard, Shah Abdul Latif, Sultan Bahu, Madho Lal Husain, Sheikh Ibrahim Farid Sani, Ali Haidar, Fard Faqir, Hashim Shah, Karam Ali and other Sufi poets were Muslims by birth. And there were women saints from Lal Ded and Meerabai to Andal, Ouvaiar and Akkamahadevi, who transcended their gender and whose stories are also often tales of emancipation from the oppression and subordination they experienced as women. The Sahaja cult of Chandidas and the cult of Chaitanya also did not recognise caste and creed and hence provided moments of liberation for the Sudras.

Tukaram, Kabir, Namdeo, Meera and the South Indian saints like Allamaprabhu and Basaveswara did not accept the authority of the Bhagavad Gita. Even the Sikh credo, that received its elements from various religious sources including bhaktas like Jayadev and Namdeo, has been little influenced by the Gita. Jnaneswar quarrelled with Brahmin beliefs in Alandi and hence had to seek refuge on the southern banks of the Godavari to write his popular version of the Gita. The Manbhavs (or Mahanubhavas), who belonged to the sect established by Chakradhara in Maharashtra in the twelfth century AD, also would have nothing to do with Brahminism; they practised a kind of primitive communism, sharing everything equally and denounced the idea of caste. Even Eknath, who was born a Brahmin, fell victim to the displeasure of his priestly class for opposing the caste system. The Varkari pilgrims of Maharashtra also renounced caste and refused to follow rituals.

The Hindu revivalist ideology practised in contemporary India deliberately ignores this second Sramana tradition of revolt and reform within Indian religion, or blurs the distinctions between the two traditions in order to absorb some of the populist aspects of Bhakti into its strategies of propagation. It is Bhakti vulgarised and emptied of its profound, egalitarian, radical content. The hidden agenda of this neo–Hinduism, what Romila Thapar calls ‘Syndicated Hinduism’, is a reassertion of the hegemony of the Dharmasastras and, through it, the retrieval of Brahmin ideology, now under threat from the awakening Dalit sections of society. The latter have very different traditions and practices of spirituality, a different iconography, and an alternative religion now half-submerged in the ruling rhetoric of the dominant religious discourse and marginalised by the conscious and unconscious processes of history. We know very well that a denomination called ‘Hindu’ did not exist until recently and the word merely denoted the people on the banks of the Indus. The Persians called the Sindhu river Hindu, the Greeks called it Indos and the Arabs, Al Hind. Muslim rulers and Christian missionaries used it as a blanket term to cover all those who did not belong to the Judaic religions, even while recognising the multi-religious nature of that population. The orientalist historians gave it a kind of theoretical legitimation by speaking about a Hindu civilisation and culture.

At the heart of this homogenising Hindutva lies the myth of a continuous and primordial struggle of ‘Hindus’ against Muslims as the structuring principle of Indian history. In this running construction of ‘otherness’, both the communities are to have been homogeneous blocs, though this myth has been entirely demolished by historians. Not the logic of religion but the logic of power had decided the nature of those struggles where Hindus have fought against Hindus (e.g., Saiva-Vaishnava) and Muslims against Muslims (e.g. Shia-Sunni). Both have also very often joined hands to crush someone perceived as a threat to sovereignty or royal power, whether Hindu or Muslim. And if Muslim kings had been invaders, let us remember, so were the Aryans. Only the communicational and economic integration of the last quarter of the nineteenth century provided sharply-defined identities and animosities with a larger expanse of space to spread across, and the forces of neo-Hinduism have managed to develop a wide-based institutional framework and strategic network to make full political use of this facility. Pride in the national past invoked during the anti-colonial struggle, the empowerment of the ‘other backward castes’ in search of new pastures of power and prestige, the growth of an aggressive middle class that seeks to manage society, the desire of the disempowered orthodoxy to retrieve their lost centrality in the power-grid: all these have in different ways strengthened the forces of revivalism and helped them expand their base. They are equipped now with a neo-Brahminical ideology well adapted to modern statecraft and in collusion with the forces of exploitation. This calls for new ways of perceiving ground realities, forging new alliances and reinforcing alternative forms of spirituality.

The Brahmana-Sramana paradigm is not confined to Indian religions alone. Christianity has its own brand of the Brahmana concept: the Vatican has been a major power centre whose growth has been over-determined by the power-systems of civil society from time to time. Hierarchy, priesthood, censorship against free enquiries and radical thought from those of Bruno and Galileo to Leonard Boff and Kazantzakis, alliances with the forces of oppression, with the Whites against the Coloured, with the Spaniards and Portuguese against the Indians in South America to hunt them down like beasts, inquisitions and crusades, the imposition of Western values and thought-systems on vast populations in the so-called ‘Third World’ who were forced to discard their own belief systems and traditions, support to colonialism of every kind and tacit support even to the Nazis, dictators like Somoza and to the CIA, as in destabilising the Arbens government in Guatemala: all these reveal the Brahmana streak of institutionalised Christianity.

I shall conclude this brief monologue with some comments on Gandhi’s attitude to the whole question, which I consider to be in the best of our Sramana traditions and to be valid even today as an alternative to Western touch–me–not secularism, which is completely divorced from the moral and spiritual insights of religion in fighting communalism.

He aspired towards God as an Absolute Truth while admitting that he was able to know only the relative truth. His shift from ‘God is Truth’ to ‘Truth is God’ in 1928-29 was strategic in that he wanted to appeal to the atheists as well. He claimed that sat (that which exists) the Sanskrit word for Truth, came closest to expressing the belief affirmed both in Hindu philosophy and the Kalma of Islam that ‘God alone is and nothing else exists’. He can be called Rama or Allah, Khuda or Ahura Mazda. Naming is a historical act, while God Himself is above Time. ‘There are many religions’, he said, ‘but Religion is only one’. ‘I do not differentiate between the sweeper and the Brahmin. My mind finds no difference between a Hindu, a Muslim and a Christian’. He denounced yajnas like most of the Sramana saints and said that the only true yajna is self-sacrifice for a higher cause. He refused to consider any prophet superior to any other. ‘To say Jesus was 99 per cent divine, and Muhammad 50 per cent and Krishna 10 per cent is to arrogate to oneself a function which does not really ‘belong to man’ — a simple argument, yet strong enough to refute all claims to superiority put forward by the fundamentalists. He considered the Koran, the Bible, the Zend Avesta, the Vedas and other religious texts as equally ‘divinely inspired’. He loathed monolithic categories and believed there were always many interpretations of Truth, many names for God, and many manifestations as scripture.

Truth, non-violence, abstinence, poverty and non-possession were the five vows he advocated; each was well thought-out and reasoned about. He never claimed, as fundamentalists do, that he spoke for truth or as truth, but only that he was ‘in search of truth’. He did not trust the shastras since they often offended his moral sense. ‘If Hinduism sanctioned untouchability,’ he once said, ‘I should denounce it’. Still, he was not prepared to give up his faith altogether; he held on to it even in the worst days of partition. He qualified Truth subjectively. ‘I represent no new truths, I endeavour to follow Truth as I know it.’ This is where he differs from the fundamentalists who always objectify Truth as something external to them and ask everyone to follow it. Gandhi also separated his notions of ‘faith’ and ‘religion’ from caste: "Caste has nothing to do with religion. It is a custom whose origin I do not know and do not need to know for the satisfaction of my spiritual hunger. But I do know that it is harmful both to the spiritual and national good."

Gandhi belongs to that great tradition of critical insiders within religion, and to invoke his image and to liberate it from the disuse into which it has fallen in the hands of the state and his self-proclaimed followers is, I believe, a moral-political act of great significance today, when the country is once again being asked to defend its sovereignty and its traditions of amity in plurality. I will consider my argument wasted if anyone feels that he/she is being persuaded to follow the footsteps of Kabir or Vivekananda, Sree Narayana or Gandhi. My essential plea is for a paradigm shift in our understanding of politics as well as philosophy. I have been looking at some of the positive aspects, the dimension of resistance within the idealist/spiritual traditions in India. In historical and practical terms, the materialist-idealist opposition does not work, at least in India. It has to be urgently replaced by the opposition between the hegemonic and the subaltern or the governing and the subversive. For this, one has to look at the internal critique that religions have developed, if we ever want to relate to the believing majority in the country. Arguments external to religion might appeal to an intellectual minority; but reformers like Sree Narayana, Vivekananda or Gandhi were forced to develop a spiritual idiom to persuade the people to fight the orthodoxy. It is wishful to think that religious revivalism and fundamentalism can be fought with philosophical materialism. One has to look at the history of struggle within and draw one’s energies for the contemporary combat against communalism from the strategies of the critical insiders within religions, especially the majority religion in India.



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, K.Satchidanandan, India, Sramana, Brahmana, Hindus, liberationtheology, paganism, gnosis, sufism, Ghandi, reilgion, spirituality, liberation, heresy, India, Woodcock, anarchism, libertarian, marxism, philosophy,

Black History Month; P.B. Randolph

Paschal Beverly Randolph (P.B. Randolph) was a 19th Century magickian, a spiritualist and founder of the Rosicrucian movement in the United Sates.

Like Paul Lafargue he was a mulatto but one who initially denied his Negro roots.

( 8 Oct. 1825 - 29 July 1875 ), physician, philosopher, and author, was born in New York City , the son of William Beverly Randolph, a plantation owner, and Flora Beverly, a barmaid. At the age of five or seven Randolph lost his mother to smallpox, and with her the only love he had known. Randolph later stated, "I was born in love, of a loving mother, and what she felt, that I lived." His father's devotion is questionable. In 1873 Randolph hinted at his own illegitimacy, stating that his parents "did not stop to pay fees to the justice or to the priest."

Randolph 's mother possessed a strong temperament, unusual physical beauty, and intense passions, characteristics that Randolph inherited. Later many, especially his enemies, perceived Randolph as being of "Negro descent," which he denied. Sent to live with his half-sister, Randolph was ignored, unloved, and abused and eventually turned to begging on the streets.

Being born in New York to a 'free black' woman, his reluctance to be considered a Negro at the time is understandable. And since his upbringing was in the time and area of the Gangs of New York, plagued by nativism as it was, it is also understandable.

But by the time of the Civil War he was an outspoken advocate of Negro Rights.

Born poor and of mixed race in 1825 and raised (more or less) by prostitutes in the Five Points slum of New York, Randolph was self-educated and prickly proud. Creating himself, he picked and chose just how "black " to be. He could de-emphasize his African heritage in the face of prejudice--after his suicide, a newspaper said he was "part Spaniard, and inherited all the suspicious distrusting qualities of the people of that nationality. " At other times, he emphasized it, as during his Civil War Black Nationalist phase, when he worked briefly as a teacher for the short-lived Freedman 's Bureau, an agency designed to educate freed slaves but only halfheartedly supported by the federal government.

Yet when some Northerners advocated a scheme to ship freed slaves to Africa, Randolph, speaking for the slaves, emphasized "American: " "We men of color were born here; so were our fathers and mothers down a long line of ancestry....Are all our sufferings to be rewarded by our removal to African deserts and barbaric climes and places?...No! Never! Here is our home, and here we mean to stay, and on this soil will die, and in it be buried. "

And like Lafargue he was an internationalist, traveling and training as well as lecturing in Europe. As with many in the occult movement of the 19th Century he was a social reformer. And like his contemporary Virginia Woodhull, Mrs. Satan, he was an advocate of womens rights and Free Love.

Randolph is to be remembered for his philosophical works on love, marriage, and womanhood. He provided new and unique insight into the then taboo world of sexual love. He aided the education, rights, and equality of both women and blacks. He foresaw the evils of tobacco and drug abuse. Finally, Randolph, through his position as the Americas' first Supreme Grand Master of the Fraternitas Rosæ Crucis, directly or indirectly touched the lives of more than 200,000 neophytes (students) comprising the Fraternitas and other Rosicrucian orders.

P.B. Randolph 's life story demonstrates also how reform-minded American Spiritualism turned into "occultism. " Spiritualism was well-intentioned, "scientific " but also passive, linked to social reform (early feminism, the abolition of slavery) but also to faddishness, most notably "free love, " which could, depending on who was talking, mean anything from a partnership of equals to mere spouse-swapping. ( "You and I were meant to be soul mates. ") Occultism, on the other hand, is individualistic, rooted in personal development and self-improvement, and generally not connected to any social or political philosophy.

With the democratic decline in Europe after the revolutions of 1848 and the Paris Commune secret societies were formed for the purposes of pursuing democratic as well as socialist revolution. In England and the Commonwealth they were formed for the purposes of pursuing trade unionism which had been banned as an illegal combination.

That secret societies should form for finding and revealing secret knowledge, was thus a natural outgrowth of this period and was coincidental with the growth and popularity of fraternal orders after the Civil War in America and across Europe.

His patron both in Spiritualism as well as getting him work with Lincoln was Colonel Ethan A. Hitchcock, a noted military officer as well as practicing alchemist. Like other occultists, John Dee comes to mind, he too was also a spy. The secrecy of the occult overlaps with the secret society of intelligence gathering. They share a similar cosmological outlook that is the search for hidden or secret knowledge.

As happens in the Occult community, as in the political one, sectarian differences are frequent and lead to rivalries and mutual denunciations. Such was the case with P. B. Randolph, who is credited with founding the Rosicrucian movement in the United States.

He faced attack by rivals for hegemony over the occult movement in America denouncing him for his Luciferian ideas from the likes of Madam Blavatsky and her Theosophists and from the white supremacist founder of the American Scottish Right of Freemasonry; Albert Pike. Ironic because both of them are also accused of being Luciferians.

Such is the case of 19th Century occult wars not only in America but in Europe where again competing orders of Rosicrucian's charged and counter charged each other as being in league with Lucifer.

The Luciferian charge comes about from Randolph's advocacy of free love, which was also embraced by American Anarchists at the time. His theories were outlined in his book Eulis and in his other famous treatise; Magia Sexualis

Today we would call his practices sex therapy, where he discussed sexual dysfunction with his patients, and as a Doctor he practiced mesermism, the passing of hands over the body to affect the magnetic energies. He also advocated the tantra practice of heightened sensuality by controlling the male orgasm and ejaculation.

 In 1870 he founded the Order of Eulis, which kept its teachings
secret because of the sex and drugs.  Some people must've talked,
though: H. P. Blavatsky denounced Randolph as immoral, a charge also
leveled at the Luciferian Freemason Sir Albert Pike.  An occult war
followed.  In 1872 his "Rosicrucian Rooms" were raided by police and
he was jailed for distributing "Free Love" literature.  Fires,
robberies, and disease followed, and on July 29, 1975, he shot
himself.  His friends and followers claimed that Blavatsky's curses
had nailed him.  Blavatsky founded the philosophical society the same
year.

By the 1870s many of Randolph's writings dealt with 
occult aspects of  love and sexuality.

Randolph, as a physician, also counseled many of his patients on matters of
family relations, marital bliss and the art of love. These acts of kindness and
concern were sometimes taken as conduct condoning "free love."

In February 1872, he was arrested and imprisoned for promoting
"free love" or immorality. Although acquitted of all charges, as it was discovered in
court that the indictment was merely a clever attempt by former
business partners (now enemies) to obtain his book copyrights, Randolph
never recovered from the humiliation of the proceeding.

Although dying at age 49, Randolph was a prolific writer, producing many books
and pamphlets on love, health, mysticism and the occult.

And further confusion was sown with his initiation into a mystical Gnostic cult from Syria/Iraq which mistakenly has been associated with the Yezedi.

The Yezedi created a sensation amongst some 19th Century scholars who had finally discovered a genuine devil worshiping cult. And the devil they worshiped was Lucifer.

Despite my best googling efforts the only references I could find to Ansaireh is that referred back to the region in Syria/Iraq which is named after a Mountain.

Gertrude Bell in her diary refers to visiting the region and the Yezedi who dwelled there. Which may have been the reason the author of the introduction to Magica Sexualis thought Randolph had been initiated into their religious teachings.

During his journeys to Paris, Pascal became aware of several works which were being published in France and Germany dealing with the Ansaireth or Nusairis of Syria. 25 There was much discussion, in the Rosicrucian circles that Randolph traveled in, of the purity and sublimity of the teachings of the Ansaireh. Books by Niebuhr, M. Catafago, Victor Langlois and others told of these mysterious hill dwellers in Northern Syria who were neither Jews, Christians or Muslims. They may well have been the people that modern anthropology has identified as the Yezidi, the devotees of the Peucock god, Melek Ta'aus.

PBR tells how the chief of the Ansaireth, Narek El Gebel, arrived at the Rosicrucian Third Dome in Paris with letters of introduction and then, recognizing Randolph's abilities and character, invited him to come to Syria and to study with the Ansaireth. Randolph went to Syria and was initiated into the Ansairetic Brotherhood. Upon his return to America, he established the Priesthood of Aeth based on the Ansairetic Mysteries

There were a variety of Christian and Islamic sects in the region. Including the Druze and Nusairis and one of the last surviving gnostic sects the Mandaens. As well as Kurds and Yezedi, Sabians all of whom faced persecution from the Turks for being dhimmis.

In another part of this Consular District there seems to have been little change from the old times of rapine and bloodshed in Turkey. I allude to the Ansaireh mountains, stretching from the valley of the Orontes to Mount Lebanon. On a late occasion a member of the Medjlis of Tripoli, passing through a Christian village in pursuit of the revolted Ansaireh, set fire to it, and, when the inhabitants conveyed their moveable property of value into their Church (…), it was broken open and plundered. This case, with many others equally abominable, of simultaneous occurrence, was laid before Her Majesty’s Consul General for Syria, the perpetrators of the outrages being under the jurisdiction of the Pasha of Beyrouth, and will thus have already come under Your Excellency’s notice. (Aleppo, 31st March, 1859; FO 78/1452 (No. 11), Skene to Bulwer, Constantinople)

The author of the introduction to Magica Sexualis is mistaken in associating the Ansairth with the Yezedi. As I said the Yezedi at the time had become somewhat of a sensation amongst certain Christian religious and historical scholars. And the Nusairis refer to an Islamic Shi'a Sunni sect.

Randolphs Rosicrucian Order and his fellow occultists of the time were fascinated with the recent discoveries of Gnosticism and the Gnostic's. Finding a living Gnostic religion which offered initiation would have been more in keeping with their occult traditions.

I suspect Randolph had been initiated into the the mystery religion of the Mandaens. Whose followers were in the same region of Syria at the time.

Within the Middle East, but outside of their community, the Mandaeans are more commonly known as the Ṣubba (singular Ṣubbī). Likewise, their Muslim neighbors will refer to them collectively as the Sabians (Arabic al-Ṣābiʾūn), in reference to the Ṣabians of the Qur'an. Occasionally, the Mandaeans are also called the "Christians of St. John" (a misnomer, since they are not Christians by any standard), based upon preliminary reports made by members of the Barefoot Carmelite mission in Basra during the 16th century.

Other groups which have been identified with the Mandaeans include the "Nasoraeans" described by Epiphanius and the Dositheans mentioned by Theodore Bar Kōnī in his Scholion. Ibn al-Nadim also mentions a group called the Mughtasila, "the self-ablutionists," who may be identified with one or the other of these groups. The members of this sect, like the Mandaeans, wore white and performed baptisms.

The similarity of beliefs about healthy living, not eating meat, avoiding tobacco, reincarnation and sexuality strike me as Mandaean rather than Yezedi.

According to E.S. Drower in the introduction to The Secret Adam, Mandaeans believe in marriage and procreation, and in the importance of leading an ethical and moral lifestyle in this world, placing a high priority upon family life. Consequently, Mandaeans do not practice celibacy or asceticism. Mandaeans will, however, abstain from strong drink and red meat. While they agree with other gnostic sects that the world is a prison governed by the planetary archons, they do not view it as a cruel and inhospitable one.

The Rosicrucian movement he founded still exists today publishing his works;

SEERSHIP; Guide to Soul Sight


The importance of Randolph cannot be underestimated. His works influenced later magickal and occult practitioners including Eliphas Levi as well as the Ordo Templi Orientis in particular Theodore Reuss and Aleister Crowley.




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
black history,, black history month,, occult,, magick,, spiritualism,, 19th Century America,, history,, P B Randolph,, secret societies,, fraternal orders,, Rosicrucianism,, Civil War,, five points,, african-americans,,Yezedi, Blavetsky, OTO, Crowley, Reuss, Lafargue, sabians, Mandaeans, gnostic, heresy, Islam, Turks, Iran, Iraq, Syria

Tie One On

So the Tie Domi affair has ended in mediation. No more Belinda rumours to feed the press.

Now why did Pronger really quit the Oilers?

TORONTO (CP) — The acrimonious divorce of Tie and Leanne Domi has quietly been settled through mediation.

The estranged wife of the former NHL enforcer says terms of the resolution are "confidential and private."

Tie Domi’s lawyer was not available for comment.

When the two split last September, Leanne Domi alleged the former Toronto Maple Leaf was having an affair with Liberal MP Belinda Stronach.

An agreement was announced Thursday after both sides resumed mediation.

There’s no word on how custody of their three children is being divided.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Tie Domi, NHL, hockey, Chris Pronger, BelindaStronach, Divorce
Liberals, politics, sports,

Edmonton Racist Cops

First Edmonton Cops pick up homeless indigenous people off Whyte Avenue and hold them in a van for hours and then drop them off miles away from where they picked them up.Edmonton police investigate forced ride claims

Now they are exposed for having used drugged and drunk indigenous people for observation purposes.Cops slammed for observing stoned addict

How do you spell racism? EPS

Edmonton Police Service.





Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Edmonton, Police, Cops, Alberta, racism, natives, drugs, homeless, drugs

CN Wildcat

Canadian workers did not wait for permission from their Yankee Union Bosses to go on strike. And of course it began in Montreal, since Quebec workers have a long history of labour militancy.

- Canadian National Railway Co. said on Saturday that 2,800 of its conductors and yard-service workers at its operations in Canada began a strike, a work stoppage that could affect the country's key shipments of grain, timber and other commodities.

CN, Canada's largest railway, said it was putting management personnel on trains and in switching yards to continue freight operations across Canada because of the strike by members of the United Transportation Union (UTU).

CN said the strike is restricted to Canada and its other unionized employees remain at work.

CN said it was ready to negotiate with the UTU at any time, but the company was seeking to have the strike declared illegal because CN said it had been informed that the certified bargaining agent of the UTU members employed at the rail company had not authorized the walkout.

CN says that the proper union representatives did not authorize the strike action and will file a complaint with the Canada Industrial Relations Board.

The union admits that while its international president has not provided authorization, it does not affect the legality of the strike.

Rex Beatty, a representative for the UTU said in a statement that the union was “disappointed that it could not reach a negotiated settlement.”

The union submitted an offer to CN that included 3 percent wage increases, paid every Jan. 1 between 2007 and 2009 and also sought a $1,000 bonus paid to employees March 1.

See

Unions

CN

Strike

Independent Unions

This is Class War

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
CN, railroad, UTU, unions, labour, strike, OBU, IWW, one big union, labor, workers, Canada

More Foreign Affairs Incompetency

We need a serious shake up in the Foreign Affairs department. This is not the first time this has happened.

"Canadian diplomats failed to contact the Chinese family of Huseyin Celil for more than 10 months after the Canadian citizen was arrested,"

So while the Harpocrites saber rattle and endanger our trading relationship with China they should get their ducks in a row before beaking off.

Foreign Affairs failed to protect Maher Arar, instead acting as a conduit for CSIS.

They failed Canadian businessman William Sampson when he was arrested and tried in secret in Saudi Arabia.

The BC Civil Liberties Association has proposed a bill that would force Foreign Affairs and other Canadian government agencies to protect Canadians abroad from torture.

It is not just a case of sloppiness or bureaucratic failure it is explicit policy, based on Canada's Security Laws. All of these cases, except Sampson (but he was judged guilty of a crime, by the Suadi's, thus reluctance on the part of FA to do anything) were because the Canadians were considered terrorists by Canada's allies.

Iacobucci's remit is to examine the cases of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nurredin. All are Canadian citizens born abroad. All have been under investigation by the RCMP, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service or both. All ended up being jailed and tortured in Syria and (in the case of El Maati) Egypt.

As such it fits in with a longstanding cold war security regime that exists in Ottawa amongst Foreign Affairs and Intelligence services.

Britain, the US and Canada had begun talking about psychological warfare together at least as early as June 1951, when Sir Henry Tizard, the Ministry of Defence's senior scientist, met Canadian scientists and Cyril Haskins, the senior CIA researcher, in Montreal. Among the Canadians was Donald Hebb of McGill University, who was looking for funds to research "sensory deprivation" - blocking out sight, sound and touch to affect people's personality and sense of identity. Early photographs show volunteers, goggled and muffled, looking eerily similar to prisoners arriving at Guantánamo.

And while there are commentators asking why Arar did not sue his captors it is important to remember that Sampson was unable to sue Saudi Arabia as Arar was denied the right to sue Syria.

In the area of justice and oversight Canada is also failing to meet recommendations set out by the UN human rights committees. Canada must change the State Immunity Act to allow individuals to seek redress in Canadian Courts for torture and other serious human rights violations suffered abroad, says Amnesty International Canada.

Canadians cannot seek redress for torture in other countries and rejected refugees who may face the danger of torture, as the Committee against Torture has noted, are being denied a judicial review on the merits of their cases. The Committee has called for this type of review. Canada must meet this recommendation, says Amnesty International Canada, and live up to the requirement of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and establish the refugee appeal process.

After all like it or not Huseyin Celil is considered a 'terrorist' by the Chinese. And the Harper government has been quick off the mark to use that label in questionable circumstances too, like they did when in opposition alluding to Maher Arar, being a terrorist.

The Harpocrites are very selective in whom they label terrorists, for instance Jason Kenney spoke on behalf of the PM at an event held by an Iranian terrorist organization.

And let's not forget that the Harpocrites major reason for challenging China over 'human rights' is their close relationship with and support for the fascist cult the Falun Gong.

And when they banned the Tamil Tigers as a terrorist organization it had less to do with Sri Lanka and more to do with cutting off Liberal Party support in the Tamil community in Canada.

And recent actions by the Sri Lanken government of breaking the peace agreement and using child soldiers means that instead of being an honest broker the Canadian government choose sides like they did with Israel. And the side they choose is guilty of state terrorism.

The fact that the Karuna faction has abducted so many children in Government-controlled areas in the eastern districts of Sri Lanka raises the question why the Government has not more effectively protected those children, investigated the complaints made by the children’s families, and secured the release and return of the children from the Karuna faction camps that are located in areas under Government control.

Based on the facts and circumstances set out in this report, I have concluded that certain elements of the Sri Lankan security forces are complicit in the abduction of children by the Karuna faction, and that at least some elements of the security forces have facilitated and sometimes participated in those abductions.

Ambassador Allan Rock, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict,

Terrorism is a broad brush pejorative for labeling the supposed 'enemies of the state', whereas others would call most of these organizations National Liberation Movements and the difference is crucial.

Whether the Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Kurds, or the Palestinians in the territories occupied by Israel, the Canadian government is targeting as terrorists people who are, in fact "victimized refugee groups involved in an armed conflict in terms of their self-determination rights", she asserts.

But it has been deliberately obscured by the American Empire and quickly adopted by other states to justify their repression of National Liberation Movements and oppositional groups, including those engaged in armed struggle.

Once you use the ideology of the War on Terror, you throw out your right to defend your citizens accused of being terrorists. This is the catch 22 Harper finds himself in over the Celil case.

Foreign Affairs deals with state to state relations, and the Chinese State has declared Celil a terrorist. Thus Foreign Affairs deems him a security threat, just as they did with Arar.

And they do so because of what Harper prides himself on most, being the Law and Order PM. Foreign Affairs is just carrying out their operations under the existing security laws. Laws which must be changed in the interests of all Canadians, here or abroad.



See

CIA

RCMP

Arar

Foreign Affairs

Terrorism

China


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Canada, Harper, China, terrorism, terrorist, national liberation movements, Sri Lanka, Tamil Tigers, Arar, RCMP, CIA, Falun Gong, William Sampson, Foreign Affairs, , Huseyin Celil,

Black Like Me

When Senator Biden made his gaff about Barack Obama he hit on the unsettling subtext in the American psyche; was Barack Obama really 'black'.

“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

Well of course he is. But what is really being said is that Obama is not the N word.

African Americans are openly asking whether the first-term Illinois senator is "black enough."

But in order to court the black vote he will need to win the Democratic nomination, he must be careful not to raise any flags among a white electorate, which so far feels unthreatened by him.

"When you hear about his background, you hear Hawaii, Kenya (where his father was born), or Kansas (his mother's home state). You don't hear Alabama," says Ronald Walters, president of the African American Leadership Institute at the University of Maryland. "It's not strange at all that blacks would view him with a little suspicion. When somebody presents themselves, you want to look them over and if they don't share your background you might withhold judgment."

Debra J. Dickerson, a black author and essayist, broke the "not black enough" debate into the open in salon.com, last month, arguing Obama would be the great black hope for president, except he isn't black.

She argues that "black" in U.S. culture means those descended from West African slaves.

Biden's choice of words clean, ( a slip of the tongue he probably meant to say clean cut) articulate, knowledgeable, mainstream etc. all could be referenced back to Americas popular culture of racism.

Obama is middle class he represents those class values regardless of race. Or because of it, since race politics in the United States has been dominated by the grievances of the ghetto.

The N word is the new iconography of pride of current hip-hop black gangsta rap culture which currently dominates the cultural self-image of blacks in the United States.

It is the same issue with Tiger Woods, who is Thai and Black. His blackness was questioned like Obama's is. But it wasn't really about his mixed race it was because he was light skinned he was not N enough. Until his father started making his presence seen.

You never saw his Thai mother of course, ostensibly because she was the little woman at home and not a golfer. You saw his father who was a golfer, but one who didn't make it in the white segregated golf world because he was 'black' an African-American, despite also being of mixed race.

Tigers dominance and race breakthrough in golf was his fathers goal and victory, and it was a victory for all black's whether grandchildren of slaves or newly arrived from the Caribbean. But his race was still used against him no matter how light his skin.

Like Tiger, Obama is also mixed race, so he is lighter skinned, and he was brought up in Hawaii and abroad. He is not N enough, for some American blacks. He has not suffered their ghetto life is the subtext of their comments.

Well neither has Rev. Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. But they speak for those folks, you see. That's their politics, the politics of the disposed, the politics of the ghetto. And the resentment of slavery deeply underlies that politics.

Like Quebec's Nationalism, the resentments run deep, and the old grievances of reparation underlie pre-Obama politics of blackness.

In reality Tiger and Obama are the beneficiaries of the Great Society, they are part of the rising black middle class that has benefited from affirmative action, equal rights, voting rights, civil rights.

They represent the new generation of middle class blacks seeking to assimilate into American culture. They are the post Colin Powell, Condi Rice generation, just as they are the post Jackson/Sharpton generation.

It was Oprah, the black multimillionaire media mogul and voice of the black middle class that pushed Obama to run. He speaks for her generation and class.For a different kind of blackness in America, one that leaves behind the grievances of the ghetto and looks towards integration into the American melting pot.

Tiger and Obama cannot say they fought to get where they are. But they can appreciate the fight that got them where they are. Hence Obama's announcement today from the hometown of Abraham Lincoln.

Republican Lincoln, emancipator of the slaves, in one fell swoop Obama takes out the Republicans, who no longer are the party of Lincoln, in Democrat country, felling the Dixiecrats and Tammany Hall Democrats, and uses the great iconography of the Great emancipator and the emancipation to launch his campaign.

Lincoln was not a conservative or a neo-con, he too was a an anti war activist and pro labour, a social democrat. This is often forgotten by the current crop of Republicans that refer to him as if their party is His party. It isn't.

And Obama can appeal to both Democrats and Republicans as he can independents with his message of a politics of hope. That is why the Democratic establishment is wary of him. As they are of his populist base and politics.

His campaign will coincide with the fortieth anniversary of Robert Kennedy's run for the presidency. His campaign is grassroots, being driven by a popular push to have him run just as Kennedy's was.

The younger Kennedy's presidential bid in 1968 was a wild, people-driven ride, and it is not surprising that reporters who cut their teeth on it now look back on that summer with awe.

On the surface, Obama's embryonic campaign has some qualities that Kennedy's had. He too has hesitated publicly before subjecting himself to the fray. He too attracts vast audiences, full of hope, because he promises the future not the past. He has an ease with the language that sets him apart. And, merely by joining the race, he is rewriting the odds.

The race echoes 1968 too. Then, as now, a failed war dominated an anguished national campaign. Then, as now, the war compelled candidates, not least Kennedy, to get off the fence and adapt to anti-war concerns. Back then, though, it was the Republicans who had the last laugh. The hopes of the Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy campaigns ended with the election of Richard Nixon.

As for his blackness, it has nothing to do with skin colour or race but more to do with how Democrat black politics has played out in the United States. No major black American candidate for the party's leadership has had such a broad base of public support.

To some it is disconcerting that he appeals to white voters, to women, to other ethnic minorities and yes to blacks.He appeals to the fictional self-identified American middle class and their myth of the American Dream. So did Robert Kennedy. The similarities are striking.

He truly is a black man running for President, as the cheering crowds in Kenya attested to. He is more African, than those who criticize him as an Uncle Tom.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
black, Oprah,Tiger Woods, Africa, African-American, US, presidential elections 2008, Barack Obama, Democrats, Robert Kennedy, Lincoln, Kenya,

NOW Public AP

I belong to Now Public which originates from Vancouver, B.C. and is a source for the news media of 'citizen journalism' or as they call it crowd powered media. They have announced that they will be officially part of the AP wire service.

Which shows that contrary to the contrarians blogging does have an impact on the main stream media. It is being integrated into the mainstream media as news and opinion just as the MSM have added blogs to their own online services.

Another example proving Time Magazine was right in selecting YOU as the person of the year.


See

Blogs




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
blogs, blogging, Now Public, AP, internet, media, new media

Union Drive USA

This law will be the New Deal of the 21st century if it is passed.

Employee Free Choice Act Hearings Begin in Congress

But the right wing is mobilizing to oppose it.

"Under current law, an employer can already agree to collective bargaining with the union on behalf of his workers when a majority of them have signed union authorization cards. But if the employer wants to make sure that his workers weren't pressured into signing the cards, or if he wants to try to convince them that they will have more flexibility without a union or even that the union may end up destroying jobs, he can insist on an open campaign period followed by a secret ballot election.

The new bill, on the other hand, would force the employer to recognize the union solely on the basis of cards collected by union organizers, collected before the employer even has a chance to make his case to the employees".

Linda Chavez is president of Stop Union Political Abuse.

Linda Chavez is a former Bush appointed Secretary of Labor. What a friend the bosses have in Linda. And like a reformed smoker there is nothing worse than a former union porkchopper and labor fakir, that is someone who has been appointed a union bureaucrat and not elected by the members. Such was Chavez's role in the American Federation of Teachers. Now she attacks unions from her position of privilege. Once a labor fakir always a fake unionist.

If employers want to make their case to their workers they would have insured they had good wages, benefits and working conditions, a grievance procedure, profit sharing, etc. etc. But they won't until forced to.

The right wing pro boss lobby in the U.S. is ramped up attacking this new bill as anti democratic. Really. What about the Right To Work laws that the U.S. government passed that even after workers vote to join a union, those opposed don't have to they get to be free riders.

It was the right wing who brought in the Taft-Hartley Act which limited workers democratic rights and favored the bosses. Since then so called democratic votes have been rigged in favour of the boss. This is the act that Chavez and her ilk defend and claim is the very essence of American free choice and democracy.

That's not choice that's union busting.

Currently, workers do not have “free choice” when going through the NLRB petition and election process, Sweeney said. Instead, he said, the petition “triggers a bitter, divisive and often lengthy anti-union campaign designed to chill or destroy union support.”

He continued, “The NLRB process may be called an ‘election,’ but it is nothing like any democratic election held in any other part of our society.”

And the argument Chavez and her ilk make that workers are not joining unions because they have no interest in doing so, of course denies the reality that the bosses are anti-union period. They will use any means possible to stop unionization of their companies. And the laws in the U.S. favour the boss not the workers. Thus the so called democratic vote of all workers is rigged in favour of the boss not the unions. It allows the bosses time to organize an anti-union drive.

The idea behind EFCA is simple. Most any American can join a group -- a church group, the PTA at their child's school, or the National Rifle Association -- by signing a card and paying dues. With EFCA, if a majority at a workplace wants to build a union, they sign cards and the employer recognizes their wishes. Negotiations for a labor contract begin soon after.

Hey don't forget the NRA.

And let's look at how the bosses convince workers NOT to vote union.

The University of Illinois at Chicago's Center for Urban Economic Development released a study in December 2005 that found outrageous instances of employer resistance when workers decide to form a union: 30 percent of employers fire pro-union workers; 49 percent of employers threaten to close a worksite when workers try to unionize; 82 percent of employers hire union- busting consultants to fight organizing drives; and 91 percent of employers force employees to attend anti-union meetings one-on-one with supervisors.

But right now tens of millions of workers can't join unions even when they want to. The Bush administration, which is anti-union to its dying breath, controls federal agencies like the National Labor Relations Board, which oversees labor disputes between workers and their bosses.

This means that Bush-appointees don't settle disputes fairly, but automatically favor companies and typically refuse to protect workers' rights.

But even when Bush appointees aren't tipping the scale to hurt workers, the system of arbitration and labor relations always favors the companies. Even when a majority of workers at a shop or business sign union membership saying they want their union to represent them in collective bargaining, companies have the power to refer the dispute to an NLRB election. This referral gives them something like 6 weeks to change the workers' minds.

And they really go to town on the workers. Threats and harassment are all too common. Bosses will even stage mandatory meetings of workers where they feed the workers a lot of anti-union propaganda like claims that unions will either strike or force the shop to close.

Surveys indicate that more than half of all bosses threaten – illegally – to shut down the workplace and move out of the area or country if the workers decide to join a union. As many as 25 percent of workers who are trying to start a union at their workplace are either fired or threatened with being fired – illegally.

In Canada several provinces have this labour legislation in place, including binding mediation on a first contract. The result has been less first contract strikes and union busting.

In Alberta, the only 'Republican' lite province in Canada, we do not have this legislation we are far closer to the American style labour laws. The result has been long drawn out strikes not only for union recognition but for a first contract. If this law passes in the U.S. it will leave Alberta one of last bastions of right wing anti-labour laws in North America.



See

Unions

Labour

OBU

IWW


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
USA, labor, labour, unions, trade unions, AFL, Democrats, Congress, Senate, Linda Chavez, Taft Hartley Act, Wagner act, New Deal, Employee Free Choice Act,
Alberta, labour laws, strike, first contract

Deforming The Senate

Reforming the Senate is a waste of time.

But Harper is pushing Senate reform , actually its more like deform, his proposal is that provinces hold Senate elections during Federal elections and then the PM would appoint the 'elected senators' thus avoiding a constitutional change, read constitutional amendment, is another Alberta innovation.

Quebec will never agree, Que. says no to Harper's senate plan even though Alberta has already done this, which leaves eight other provinces open to electoral reform through the back door. And it is being rejected not only by Quebec but Canada's biggest province, Ont. minister dismisses Harper's Senate-reform plan

And it is being rejected even by the other Western Canadians; If the Senate mattered

The Triple E Senate originated in Alberta, and was a key platform demand of the Reform Party it is Harpers sop to his Alberta base the only province that has held Senate elections. And even those elections have lacked popular support, garnering as many spoiled ballots and abstentions as votes.

And who wants Link Byfield in the Senate, he and his whole family are representatives not of Alberta but the loony right.

That Harper continues to attempt Senate Reform by edict, misses the whole point of the Reform Movement in the West. It was about reforming the parliamentary system, but under Preston Manning it only went part way with the concept of the Triple E Senate.

Like vestigial useless wisdom teeth the Senate is the home of non-representative democracy, the last vestige of aristocracy, modeled as it is on the House of Lords. It represents the early parliament of landowners. You need to own property and be over the age of thirty to sit in the Senate, or to even run for the Senate.

We don't need to reform the Senate we need to eliminate the Senate and replace it with Proportional Representation, and a greater say in Ottawa. Senate Reform itself was realpolitik of the Manning reformers, they didn't think they could radically change Canadian parliamentary politics perse so they used Senate Reform as their hobbyhorse.

The reality has changed since the eighties and nineties, and PR is now on the agenda for the NDP and Greens and even members of the Liberals, Conservatives and BQ.

So instead of Senate Reform let's abolish the Senate and talk about real parliamentary reform including PR, recognition of municipalities as political bodies that pre-date provinces thus entitled to federal recognition as provinces are, recognition of Aboriginal Self Government, and a new federalism based upon constituent assemblies.

Now that would be radical reform.

The true sociological doctrines of modern times can be summed up in a few words: Recognizing that, in the political and temporal order, the only legitimate authority is the one to which the majority of the nation has given its consent; that are wise and beneficial constitutions only those for which the governed have been consulted, and to which the majorities have given their free approbation; that all which is a human institution is destined to successive change; that the continuous perfectibility of man in society gives him the right and imposes him the duty to demand the improvements which are appropriate for new circumstances, for the new needs of the community in which he lives and evolves.

1867 Speech of Louis-Joseph Papineau at the Institut canadien

See

Senate Reform

Abolish the Senate 1

Democracy Is Messy

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Triple E Senate, Reform Party, Harper, Conservatives, Parliament, parliamentary reform, senate reform, senators, politics, Canada, abolish the senate, Louis-Joseph Papineau

Canada
Federal Election
Politics
Alberta
Abolish the Senate
Harper
Conservatives
electoral reform