Theos-Talk Archives (July 2007 Message tt00092)

Pablo answers:
-----------------------------------------------------
When you, Frank, say:

"The term 'reformulated' in connection with the pseudo-Theosophy of
Besant and Leadbeater compared with the iti maya srutam pukka Theosophy
of Purucker is misleading, as if the adulteration of the teachings by
the self styled saviors of Mankind with their vivid phantasy is the
same as the deeper explanation of the occult philosophy by GdeP as
predicted by HPB in 'The Secret Doctrine'."

Do you mean that the "12-Globes Chain system" of GdeP has more validity
than the "Mercury and Mars being part of our Chain" of Sinnett and Co.?
Since that teaching was not HPB's, is it not the Puruker's a pseudo-
Theosophy, according to your view? Or is it that you have a corporative
attitude, like "all those who were in this side were right, those who
were in that side, wrong". If that, it doesn't seem to theosophical...

Pablo
-----------------------------------------------------

Frank:
Yes, I mean that the 12-globes model as taught by GdeP has more validity 
with the original ancient wisdom of the Dzyan school, of which HPB was also 
a member, as the speculations and misinterpreations of "Mars and Mercury 
being part of the Earth chain" as supported by Sinnett, Leadbeater, Besant 
(half recanted later on by her in The Theosophist), Steiner, Algeo.
You specualte that the 12-globes model was not taught by HPB. Why do YOU 
KNOW that?
Did you sit at her feet in London?
The most you can say is that you did not find a positive dead letter proof 
in her PUBLISHED teachings.
But bear in mind that HPB knew and taught much more than we find in her 
books or in the two lay degrees of O.S./E.S. and I.G.

Although you find the term 12-globes perhaps not EXPRESSED in her published 
and handed down documents, it fits well into what she taught.
She also declared that a new messenger will come (GdeP was initiated in 1888 
or 1889 by Judge) and give deeper explanations.
But you can of course believe that HPB rather thought of Leadbeater than of 
GdeP.

GdeP's deeper esoteric teachings are of course no pseudo-Theosophy in the 
sense HPB and GdeP understood the term "pseudo-Theosophy".
As GdeP was taught in the same school as HPB was, both messengers taught the 
teachings of the Chaldeo-Aryo-Tibetan Arhat Brotherhood of the Dzyan system.
Both taught first hand-knowledge of the highest wisdom on Earth.
HPB and GdeP understood by the term pseduo-Theosophy 
http://tonh.net/theosofie/hpb_cw_online/articles/v11/y1889_013.htm the 
corruption of the original teachings by the human mind.
So that's my view, too.
Iti maya srutam: I pass the teachings as I received them, not else.

You ask me, whether it is theosophical to hold to the true and unaltered 
transmission of the Dzyan doctrines.
Yes, in my humble view it is theosophical to hold fast to the original 
teachings and to refuse public the false and corrupted teachings.
Otherwise, HPB also was not theosophically, as she (and here teachers, too) 
refused public misinterpretations.

That misinterpretations and twisted and corrupted teachings have the same 
worth as the true teachings is a Marxist-all-is-equal-invention of the 
fanatics Besant and Leadbeater.
Bear in mind that HPB, Judge, Tingley and GdeP followed the Middle Way, 
which includes correction and criticism of wrong teachings.

Judge said on the American convention 1893 about alleged dogmatism in 
connection with the fight for truth:
"But those who have spoken of dogmatism have mistaken energy force, personal 
conviction and loyalty to personal teachers and ideals for dogmatism. Such 
are not dogmatism. One has a perfect right to have a settled conviction, to 
present it forcibly, to sustain it with every argument, without being any 
the less a good member of the Society."
http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/TheTheosophicalMovement-Series/Chapter-25.html

I hope I have answered your questions well.
Frank