Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00171)

Hi Daniel
Thanks for the the statements, they are helping me to clarify some mistakenideas that I got.
I am still waiting for the continuation of it.
Best wishes

Eddy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Daniel H. Caldwell 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 11:56 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Dr. Santucci and the neo/pseudo Theosophy


Hi Eddy,

I have a number of comments I would like to make but 
will start by quoting a statement by Dr. Alvin Boyd Kuhn.  

In his study of Theosophy titled "Theosophy:  
A Modern Revival of Ancient Wisdom" (published 1930), 
Kuhn wrote: 

"[Starting in the March 15, 1928 issue]. . . The Canadian 
Theosophist, a magazine published under the editorship 
of Mr. Albert Smythe at Toronto, published a series of 
articles in which parallel passages from the writings of 
Madame Blavatsky and the Mahatma Letters on one side, and 
from the books of Mrs. Besant, Mr. Leadbeater, Mr. C. 
Jinarajadasa, on the other, give specific evidence bearing 
on the claims of perversion of the original theories by 
those whom they call Neo-Theosophists. The articles indicate 
wide deviations, in some cases complete reversal, made by 
the later interpreters [Besant, Leadbeater, Jinarajadasa] 
from the fundamental statements of the Russian Messenger 
[Blavatsky] and her Overlords [the Mahatmas]." 

"The differences concern such matters as the 
personality of God, the historicity of Jesus, his 
identity as an individual or a principle, the 
desirability of churches, priestcraft and religious 
ceremonial, the genuineness of an apostolic succession, 
and a vicarious atonement, the authority of Sacraments, 
the nature and nomenclature of the seven planes of man's 
constitution, the planetary chains, the monad, the course 
of evolution, and many other important phases of Theosophic 
doctrine. This exhaustive research has made it apparent 
that the later exponents have allowed themselves to depart 
in many important points from the teachings of H.P.B." 
(pp. 330-331)

This summary gives you some idea of the subject matter where 
there are "differences" that were, to quote Dr. Santucci again,
"often in total opposition to the Theosophy of
Blavatsky and her Masters."

OBTW, the first two books I ever read on Theosophy back in the
late 1960s were:

A TEXTBOOK OF THEOSOPHY by C.W. Leadbeater
THE ANCIENT WISDOM by Annie Besant

More later.

Daniel

BLAVATSKY STUDY CENTER
http://hpb.cc
   


--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Eddy" <loboguara@e...> wrote:
> 
> Subject: Dr. Santucci and the neo/pseudo Theosophy
> 
> 
> Hi everybody.
> I have been reading many articles and opinions from many of you and 
still have not finished meditation on them.
> But, specially, I liked very much Danielīs article written by 
Santucci, about the concept of neo or pseudo Theosophy.
> Daniel, what is your opinion, about Santucciīs considering  
Leadbeater and Annieīs a kind of false or neo theosophy?
> For me is very dificcult to tell because I was presented to Theos. 
thru these authors.
> It means that I went the contrary way, I got to know Theososophy 
from the people who learned ( I donīt know at what certain point 
though) from HPB. Not from Secret Doctrine, unfortunately.
> And you who have been studying SD for quite more time than me, such 
as Dallas, Adelasie or Katinka, what is your opinion?
> Is it a false or a neo-theosophy?
> 
> Eddy



   

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]