Theos-Talk Archives (March 2007 Message tt00096)

Dear friends,

Let me try to bring the issue of the publication of A.Besant's and 
C.W.Leadbeater's work and texts in somehow broader context.

There are several non-theosophical publishers who now publish the 
theosophical texts which are in public domain. Therefore it is 
practically irrelevant what the theosophists think which theosophical 
texts should be published and which not - they will be published 
anyway.

In making business non-theosophical publishers are seldom splitting 
and making other changes to the original theosophical texts to 
copyright their publications and are in that way distorting the 
original texts. Therefore it is, in my opinion, almost the duty of 
theosophists to make an effort to present to the public as much as 
possible undistorted original theosophical texts and as many as 
possible, without exemptions.

In my view the main purpose of the publication of the theosophical 
texts is in the first place to let know to the general public that 
such thing as Theosophy exists at all. Therefore it is important to 
publish those theosophical texts which address average uninformed 
persons to awake their interest for theosophy. Works of A.B. and 
C.W.L. obviously perform this role as they continue to attract 
numerous persons towards theosophy. And as in their texts both of 
these two authors stress the importance of individual examination of 
facts and truths they are good introduction to the individual study 
of complex theosophical texts from the part of more pretending 
readers and students. Great number of theosophical students, who went 
through this experience, developed their own discrimination and found 
the theosophy proofs that this line of approach was and is still 
bringing results.

In non-English speaking countries the situation in regard to the 
publication of the theosophical texts is, at least in Europe, still 
more determined as the theosophical publishers practically do not 
exist any more and therefore there are commercial publishers who 
dictate which theosophical texts will be published. And obviously 
they publish those texts which they assume will bring them some 
profit; and texts of A.B. and C.W.L., besides those of H.P.B., are 
high on their list. 

There is another important issue regarding the texts of A.B. and 
C.W.L. There were several persons who, at least in the area of former 
Yugoslavia, published their own so-called spiritual texts in which 
they made their own interpretations of the ideas from the A.B.'s and 
C.W.L's texts and in that way additionally distorted the message. 
Therefore it is important to bring to the public these original texts 
to unmask these self-proclaimed gurus.

Again, certain number of theosophical workers in Central and Eastern 
European countries are making an effort to publish and make 
available online the translations of the theosophical texts which 
were translated by their predecessors as this is the material they 
have at their disposal, besides their own recent translations. And as 
their legacy is strongly connected with the Adyar tradition and 
A.B.'s and C.W.L's texts it is natural that they publish these works.

I myself came to know Theosophy through their texts and 
translated them as this was the way of my study. And I find it quite 
natural to publish them now and to include them in the overall 
presentation of Theosophy on my website. But I am trying to include 
also all the available texts which treat the dilemmas within the 
theosophical movement and various interpretations of theosophy. 
Unfortunately, although there is present a lot of discussion 
regarding the Theosophy, Neo-Theosophy and Pseudo-Theosophy on the 
web, there are not available many moderate analytical abstracts on 
these issues which could be translated and presented to the readers 
and students of theosophy.

Finally, I have the impression that we are often somehow mixing up 
the theosophical movement and the theosophy. The theosophical 
movement went through turbulent history, through ups and downs, 
through different splits, and it seems that each of its fractions has 
developed its own dogmas, beliefs and Theosophies. But behind this 
scene there is theosophy waiting for every theosophical student and 
worker, regardless the tradition, which is thoughtful enough to 
approach the problems within the theosophical movement and life in an 
investigative, tolerant and compassionate manner, for it seems to me 
that this approach does not depend on the chosen literature but 
rather on previously accumulated experience and willigness to serve. 

Warmest regards,
Anton