Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00095)

I tend to find considerations, in general, 
about Annie Besant's role in organizational 
Theosophics interesting in that, as I tend to 
see it, she seems to have wanted to at least 
introduce (sort of regardless, in a sense?) 
some kind of (what might be called?) 
"Theosopical" (or "Liberal Cathollic"?) "new 
ideas," (apparently?) ... ie, as if such 
introductory exoterics could somehow help in 
broadening the wisdom of ... whatever she 
preferred to call the organization that she 
led with Leadbeater after HPB's passing.

So a question might be: was she tapping in 
to, and making good use of, what might be 
generally seen as "more-average" notions 
about such as the Esoteric Tradition (ie, as 
opposed to a leadership that might be seen to 
more clearly differentiate between 
"esoteric" and "exoteric"?) To my way of 
thinking, speculating, HPB in her 
organizational Theosophics was far more 
"esoteric" (in a sense!) than Becant.

BUT? When I compare the leaderships of 
Besant and HPB, an interesting contrast tends 
to come up (?): One can "now see" (as it 
were, in some cases?), (ie, "thanks to 
Besant's contrasting ways," in a sense, if 
in an interpretationsl sense?), something of 
the differences, contrasts, between HPB's 
leadership and Besant's leadership, (not that 
one couldn't necessarily see those contrasts 
before, exactly, but ... ?), and so one might 
consider (?) Besant's leadership 
influence/role from a broader perspective 
(?), and possibly even from a somewhat 
"Broader perspective," in some cases ... ? 
And of course we also have Alice Cleather to 
thank for offering more in the way of 
contrasting help, info? :-)

In other words, if one steps back far enough 
... ? Except that of course exoterics will 
forever remain exoterics (eh?); but/"but" ... ?

Speculatively,
Mauri