‘neo theosophy’ vs ‘original theosophy’
Oct 22, 2005 06:15 PM
With all the discussion recently on `neo theosophy' vs `original theosophy'one important
point I think we need to remember is that while there are teachings that are contrary to a
greater or lesser degrees in the writings of Annie Besant and C.W Leadbeater with those of
HPB and the Mahatmas that does not therefore mean that they did not write some very
good theosophical material.
For example recently I was re-reading through Annie Besant's `Hints on the study of the
Bhagavad Gita' this is an excellent little theosophical book in my opinion.
Other books that spring to mind are `The seven principles of man' & `The laws of the
I think we can easily fall into a `I for Paul and I for Apollos' type of mindset.
While I don't support everything Annie Besant did or said, I do think she wrote some very
excellent theosophical material especially in relation to the spiritual path.
A comparison of teachings and historical facts does not mean we need to throw the baby
out with the bathwater or ignore uncomfortable facts if they don't fit our perhaps idealised
perceptions of a person.
This principle applies across the board and I think power & politics generally brings out
the best and the worst in people.
People make mistakes and perhaps even sometimes deliberately deceive for what they may
see as being for the greater good or in the worst case scenario simply for the acquirement
of more power.
The spiritual path can no doubt be a mine field.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application