Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01569)

James A. Santucci, professor of religious 
studies at California State University 
(Fullerton) and editor of Theosophical 
History, has written the following:

". . . Annie Besant, the President of the 
[Adyar Theosophical] Society from 1907 to 
her death in 1933, and Charles Webster Leadbeater, 
arguably the most influential theosophical writer 
from the early years of the 20th century to his 
death in 1934, . . . were largely responsible 
for the introduction of new teachings that were 
often in total opposition to the Theosophy of 
[Madame H.P.] Blavatsky and her Masters. These 
teachings were designated by their opponents as 
Neo-Theosophy . . . or less often Pseudo-Theosophy. 
The differences between Theosophy and Neo-Theosophy 
are too numerous to mention in the context of this 
paper. . . . An extensive overview [of the differences] 
is given in . . . Theosophy or Neo-Theosophy by Margaret 
Thomas. . . . " Quoted from "The Aquarian Foundation." 

Jerry Hejka-Ekins, a long-time student of Madame Blavatsky's 
teachings, has also commented:

"The earliest use of the term 'neo-theosophy' was used by F.T. 
Brooks around 1912 in a book called Neo Theosophy Exposed. . . . 
Around 1924, Margaret Thomas published a book called Theosophy 
Versus Neo-Theosophy: Part one compares Blavatsky's teachings to 
those of Besant and Leadbeater's by juxtaposing quotes from each 
party on various subjects, so that the thoughtful reader could 
easily discern the differences and contradictions. Part two 
published documents concerning the Leadbeater scandal, and part 
three publishes documents concerning the Judge case. . . . " Quoted 
from "Discussions on the Theosophical Philosophy" 

In his book Theosophy: A Modern Revival of Ancient Wisdom 
(published 1930), Dr. Alvin Boyd Kuhn wrote in greater detail: 

"Certain schools of his critics assert flatly that he [C. W. 
Leadbeater] has only succeeded in vitiating her [H.P. Blavatsky's] 
original presentation [of Theosophy]. . . . . . . [Starting in the 
March 15, 1928 issue] The Canadian Theosophist, a magazine 
published . . . at Toronto, published a series of articles 
[excerpted from Margaret Thomas' Theosophy or NeoTheosophy?] 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) 

For more on this subject, see:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/leadbeaterbib.htm#Criticisms

Daniel
Blavatsky Study Center
http://hpb.cc