In 1904, Peter Deunov moved permanently in Sofia – he lived at 66 Opalchenska Street. The change was of a particular importance both for him and for the movement that he established. That lodging on Opalchenska Street was the place where started the presentation of the so called talks. No official announcements were made about them, but the news was spread from person to person. In the beginning, the mechanism of talks was the same as at the gatherings – a personal invitation on the part of P. Deunov for a meeting or a dialogue, as through these acquaintances the number of the attendees grew up continually.

By the end of the World War I, P. Deunov gave talks only on Sunday mornings at 10 o’clock. During the wars (The Balkan War, the Second Balkan War and the World War I) the number of his disciples in the capital was about 250-300 people. His views that Bulgaria did not have to take part in the World War I, his statements against the nationalism and chauvinism, made him to look suspicious to the state power. In 1917, the mayor of Sofia prohibited him from giving public talks. Soon he was exiled in Varna. He stayed there till the end of 1918, at London Hotel. Meanwhile, in his absence, the meetings of the Brotherhood in the capital were degraded to spiritistic séances. At that time started the organization of study groups in the province: Varna, Ruse, Yambol, Gabrovo, V. Tarnovo and so on.

The influence of P. Deunov and his ideas grew immensely on a national scale after the war. The main reasons for that, which are emphasized by his opponents, are connected with the thesis that the catastrophic consequences from the war conflicts led to an orientation towards superstitions and mysticism. In addition to the external prerequisites in the common post-war conditions, the reasons for the increased public significance of the White Brotherhood have been also sought in the very essence of his teaching. The famous church figure and Orthodox theologian Prof. Evtimiy Sapundzhiev accentuates on two circumstances: 1) the Movement “does not impose those prohibitions and chains upon the human weaknesses and sins that the Church does”; and 2) Peter Deunov promised religious science and sensible faith, answering to the thirst of our society to solve the contradiction between science and faith. I. G. Hall pays attention both to Peter Deunov’s quality of knowing and appraising people’s character, and the circumstance that the social problems of the real life are not directly referred to in his teaching. N. Pravoslavov points out the absolute freedom in the basis of the ethics as the most important power of attraction in the ideas of Peter Deunov.

  In the publications that are well-disposed, the attempts to explain P. Deunov influence are fundamentally oriented towards a search for the reasons within the phenomenon. A. Tomov, in his extensive analysis, treats a variety of social and political reasons and the subsequent global problems that P. Deunov offers a solution for – the war and the post-war crises led to an aggravation of the social contradictions, misery and epidemics, as a result of which are noticed two tendencies: a) aspirations for justice and harmony are awakened within the human soul, it becomes more sensitive and receptive; b) the humanity itself, realizing the misery of the modern civilization, adopts the idea of overcoming the evil and laying the foundations of a new culture. Another important circumstance is that P. Deunov revealed certain parapsychological faculties, witnesses of which were both many of his disciples and outsiders. And yet, the most important is that P. Deunov’s teaching distinguishes from the rest of the ideological trends at that time (and not only then) by its practical orientation.

 The intellectuals, who attended the lectures, were attracted by the perspective offered by the lecturer – a new order would triumph on Earth by means of self-cognition and self-improvement of each human individual. This major aim seems convincing, clear and completely well sustained from an ethical point of view. Extremely attractive is the evolutionary element that corresponds deeply with avoiding the bloodshed and fratricide, the terror of which still lives in the consciousness of the contemporaries. The teaching of Love as a main principle of the Existence and the brotherhood among people (analogical to the Christian and Theosophical conception) – a leading point in the ethics and metaphysics of P. Deunov – answered to the social and moral quests, and the aspiration of the epoch, and at that moment it was in harmony with the ideas of the most advanced European and world minds.

There is another essential aspect of the phenomenon under investigation – the distinctive institutionalization of Peter Deunov’s personality within the frames of the entire sociocultural background, which emerged very distinctly and in its most pure form about the middle 1920s. As a prototype, the spiritual leader (or “guru”) is more typical for the religious and philosophical systems of the eastern cultures. According to them, the term “Teacher” has an ancient tradition and implies a certain spiritual content in which basis stands the idea of a being from a higher heaven hierarchy, a messenger of God on Earth, who is entrusted with the mission to precipitate the evolution, and to raise the prosperity of his humble fellows, the ordinary people. In the Western European civilization that notion was introduced by the modern Theosophy, as the original Indian mystic content was substantiated by the disciples of the WB teaching in Bulgaria. The relationships inside the movement, between Teacher and disciples, are based on relevant ethical ground and are a peculiar emblem of the essence of this informal community. All observers are unanimous in their assessment that the influence of P. Deunov on those who are around him is tremendous, comprehensive and unyielding.

The Universal White Brotherhood spiritual society itself has been given various names in the public context. The most widespread among them is “danovism” after the name of its founder, leader and ideological inspirer. This term has also spread out naturally over the teaching of P. Deunov claiming to be comprehensive. We should emphasize here, however, that the name “danovism” is used only by researchers and persons who are not in the movement. Within the WB itself, this conception does not exist. The members of the brotherhood call one another “white brothers” or just “brothers and sisters”, by which they express one of the fundamental purposes of the movement – to achieve a brotherhood among all people on the planet. Peter Deunov himself never declared a monopoly over the knowledge that he presented, and he excluded the mechanical transfer of his personal name to his overall theoretic-practical conception and system.

He called his teaching – “teaching of the White Brotherhood”, and his disciples – “disciples of the White Brotherhood”. By “White Brotherhood”, in this instance, he understands an invisible community of beings that have completed their spiritual evolution in the material world and have reached the perfection (according to the meaning in Mathew 5:48), who take a vigorous part in the whole life of the mankind in all of its dimensions. In the broad sense, the term “White Brotherhood” has been adopted by the disciples of P. Deunov for designation of their own movement. Тhe white colour is a symbol of their spiritual community, as an expression of the purity and high spirituality.

 At that time, the teaching of P. Deunov won followers also by its synthesis between eastern mysticism from the one hand, and the western scientific, rational thought from the other, i.e. by the yearning for unity of faith and reason. According to this teaching, the Christian dogmatism and church approaches are filled with conservatism and archaisms, the character of the church is assessed as incorrigibly formal and incompatible with the dynamics of the modern life.

After returning from the exile in Varna, P. Deunov stayed at 66 Opalchenska Street. His last tour around the country was in the very beginning of the 20s. At the same time he did not stop the talks in Sofia, which at a point were moved to 14 Oborishte Street (1922 - 1926). The hall on Oborishte Street was taken away from the WB after 1926, and was transformed into a local cinema. The Sunday talks were admission free for people since before 1918. This tradition was kept to the decease of the lecturer on 27/12/1944. This formulation does not mean that the access was unrestricted, because it was never forbidden to anyone at any of the lectures, but rather that the newcomers were not considered by all means as future members of the movement. P. Deunov revealed through the Sunday talks his ideas in the presence of the society. His aim was to work among as wide circle of people as possible in order to convince them to get into the path of the true Christian teaching, in the way he understood and interpreted it.

 The first walks in the open air dated from 1920-1922.
At first the object of the visits was the meadows below the Dragalevski Monastery, after that on foot to Chamkoria (today’s Borovets) and to Musala Peak. During the hiking, P. Deunov talked to his followers about the language of the “Animate and Rational Nature” and the grandeur of its judiciousness.

 On March 22, 1922, was opened the Youth Occult Class. P. Deunov himself made a list of 80 people that were supposed to participate, but the first lectures were visited by twice as many people because the news spread out in the circles of theosophists, spiritists, Tolstoyans and anarchists. Some of them hoped to see and hear sensations even miracles. P. Deunov himself defined the meaning of the School in the following way:”… So that the occult School is not for consolation of people, but it is a school for studying the great unalterable laws of the Existence and the manifestation of God, within Him our life is cultivating proportionally and harmoniously.” With these words he specified the creed of his future work – building of a strong spiritual environment where he could apply the new teaching, i.e. he undertook decisively an active and efficient direction for development of the movement.

 The audience in the School was differentiated in Youth or Special class, and the classes were hold from 22 September to 22 March. In addition to the listening of the lectures, the students were given tasks for reflection, a written assignment or specific deeds. – for the next lecture. The essays on the assigned theme were looked over by P. Deunov and were discussed at the next lecture. “Youth Gatherings” were also held (eight in number), which in their essence represented conferences of the schools – each of them was held from 25 to 28 August, as the first one was in the summer of 1923 in the hall at 14 Oborishte Street. Besides the traditional talks of P. Deunov, essays were read and problems were discussed at these gatherings, concerning the organizational activity and dissemination of the teaching.

After the opening of the Youth School, a class for other disciples was also created – General Occult Class, which was visited by the family followers. Probably about 1930, the two formations united. In the School, which was founded in such a way, P. Deunov taught generally known truths to his disciples, which so far remained inapplicable by people in their life – love, brotherhood, esteem for your neighbor; he initiated them in the secrets of the nature and human essence; he offered them methods for a right and healthy way of life – vegetarianism, moderation, fasting. Heading these communities of teaching, P, Deunov definitely won recognition as a “Teacher” that invariably followed him till his death, and it became the only appeal to him by all of his disciples. His work received the necessary formal institutionalization both in the face of the society, and for his followers.