Hope this may help you.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/tbc/
Just as a matter of Buddhist history, it is worth spending a couple minutes reading this about him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Steel_OlcottColonel Henry Steel Olcott [1832-1907] was
Real salt-of-the earth type of guy then!"Olcott believed himself to be Asia's savior, the outsider hero who would sweep in at the end of the drama to save a disenchanted subcontinent from spiritual death.[16]"
Anyone who take the refuge of Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha and accept five precepts is a Buddhist.zamotcr wrote:He was a Theosophist. Even when he accepted Buddhism, he wasn't a Buddhist. He believed in a lot weird stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Stee ... _theosophycooran wrote:Hello zamotcr,
What is "the weird stuff" you claim H. Olcott believed in?
With, metta,
Chris
Yes, but they only accepted the five precepts one time. So if I took five precepts, and leave Buddhism and follow another religion, I'm still Buddhist?SarathW wrote:Anyone who take the refuge of Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha and accept five precepts is a Buddhist.zamotcr wrote:He was a Theosophist. Even when he accepted Buddhism, he wasn't a Buddhist. He believed in a lot weird stuff.
There are many types of Buddhist in different stages of development.
![]()
Please see "Are you a Buddhist?"
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=18611
For the darker side of Protestant Buddhism I'd recommend The Work of Kings by H.L. Senaviratne:zamotcr wrote: He took precepts with Helena Blavatsky, another "Buddhist", but again she was far far from believing in Buddhism. Do your homework, and search about the Secret Doctrine, a book Olcott, Blavatsky and others helped to write. A book full of racism and other ugly things.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Ypjyd2 ... sm&f=falseThe Work of Kings is a stunning new look at the turbulent modern history and sociology of the Sri Lankan Buddhist Monkhood and its effects upon contemporary society. Using never-before translated Sinhalese documents and extensive interviews with monks, Sri Lankan anthropologist H.L. Seneviratne unravels the inner workings of this New Buddhism and the ideology on which it is based.
Beginning with Anagarika Dharmapala's "rationalization" of Buddhism in the early twentieth century, which called for monks to take on a more activist role in the community, Seneviratne shows how the monks have gradually revised their role to include involvement in political and economic spheres. The altruistic, morally pure monks of Dharamapala's dreams have become, Seneviratne trenchantly argues, self-centered and arrogant, concealing self-aggrandizement behind a façade of "social service."
A compelling call for reform and a forceful analysis, The Work of Kings is essential to anthropologists, historians of religion, and those interested in colonialism, nationalism, and postcolonial politics.
Ok, I would say, that a person is a Buddhist for the period from the time he accept five precepts to the time he accept another religion.zamotcr wrote:Yes, but they only accepted the five precepts one time. So if I took five precepts, and leave Buddhism and follow another religion, I'm still Buddhist?SarathW wrote:Anyone who take the refuge of Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha and accept five precepts is a Buddhist.zamotcr wrote:He was a Theosophist. Even when he accepted Buddhism, he wasn't a Buddhist. He believed in a lot weird stuff.
There are many types of Buddhist in different stages of development.
![]()
Please see "Are you a Buddhist?"
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=18611
They took precepts, but they didn't keep with Buddhism, they founded their religion and society, far apart from Buddhist. So, they were Buddhist, but they leave Buddhism.