Let the true Theosophy stand up.
Dec 22, 2001 01:22 AM
Eldon B.:"The theosophical philosophy does not stand nor fall
based upon the details of the personal lives of the
people who first wrote about it in the 1800's."
Brigitte: I think there is a misunderstanding here that might at its
source have propaganda purposes. First of all it is the dragging
certain theosophical teachings like the use of drugs in the higher
secret initiations, to a mean level making something "personal" out
of it, wich it isn't, it was part of the teachings as Blavatsky
clearly stated. An second of all people like Blavatsky who wrote in
the 1800's did so based on various book sources of the 1800's plus
older theosophical printed sources , including from other
Theosophical groups, the so called theosophical current as A.Faivre
and Dr.James Santucci, edior ot Theosophical History Quarterly call
Or to say that the primary function is the study and the theosophic
ideas the way Blavatsky put them together (see the idea-historic work
of Brendan French earlier presented on this list ) one has to be
aware that that is indeed based on the above, pure "history" and
noting else. One will only be able to really understand Blavatsky if
one study's the truth about her in the context of the literature of
her time, and not the fiction, or only the re-invented early 1900's,
British version "they" called "theosophy".
Since Eldon quoted Paul, suitable in this context is what
Paul wrote :
"What you call doubt, I call intellectual freedom and inquiry, and
it is of the very essence of what the modern Theosophical movement
claims to embody and encourage. What you might call "freedom from
doubt" I would call intellectual death.
And is the keystone of universal theosophia the specific claims of
one particular 19th century author? Could the keystone of theosophia
*possibly* be the truth of one particular person's assertions? What
arch collapses if we start to doubt that everything HPB said about
Masters was true? Weren't HPB and Olcott pretty explicit that such
an approach was anathema in the TS?"
Since it can be shown that theosophy is an ongoing invention, has an
ongoing evolution (Paul wrote "Perhaps the spirit of Theosophy can
only be found outside the contemporary Theosophical movement?") it
would be good if this forum opens itself to all forms
of "theosophy", past, present, future.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application