Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00462)

Hi Perry,

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> wrote:
> The same cannot be said of neo-theosophy which developed devotional
> belief based mindset's imo.
I really don't agree with that, at least as far as Besant's writings
go. Her book 'A Study in Consciousness' has some very decent material.
Much of it more psychology than theosophy, but certainly not merely
'devotional'. 

> So for me the issue of leaving the society was based not on having the
> society become a HPB only society but rather a society that allowed
> free and open debate and philosophical enquiry not only in the
> lectures or study groups but also in its PUBLICATIONS this being the
> main objection I have with the Adyar TS.
> 
> If the principal of freedom of opinion is one that is not only a
> platitude in the society then why are articles critical of CWL and
> neo-theosophy `not allowed' in its publications and yet it's perfectly
> fine to criticise HPB in them?
> Perhaps I got this wrong but theres been no reply from any Adyar
> people as to the veracity of this suggestion.
I don't think it is that simple. Criticism of HPB is done and
published, but then her work is studied a lot as well (and comments on
it published - see a very recent, very deep, article on the Blavatsky
meditation diagramme.
http://www.katinkahesselink.net/other/meditation_hpb.html note the
source and date. 

>From what I've heard Leadbeater isn't studied so much by the leaders
anymore (articles using his work are certainly not published in The
Theosophist often), so criticism of him may simply be perceived as
'not relevant'. But to be sure you will really have to ask Radha
Burnier herself. Perhaps we should make some sort of
Radha-questionaire, with people signing and saying: I want to know too?

Katinka