[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

theosophy historical and doctrinal

Aug 28, 1995 00:32 AM
by Jerry Hejka-Ekins

Richard Taylor,

>Man, I am so confused! I signed on to Theos-L just last week
>and I feel like I am on another planet. I don't get all the
>"Christ" talk and "Son of God" stuff and Hierarchy and Plan and
>all that. Is any of this even distantly related to Theosophical

 It depends upon which theosophy you are interested in.
Different people have different perceptions of what it is. I
came up with five categories that seem to more or less include

 1. Theosophy is an approach to the development of a
philosophy. This approach has its origins in the Ptolemaic
period in Alexandria. (I've seen no interest expressed in this
one on theos-l, but it enjoys some academic interest.)

 2. The philosophical systems developed from the above
approaches such as those of: Boehman, Baader and Swedenbourg.
(I've seen one or two token mentions of this over the past two
years, but no takers.)

 3. An abstruse philosophical system attributed to H.P.
Blavatsky and/or her teachers. (There seems to be about a half
dozen people with any genuine interest in this.)

 4. A revelation expressed through H.P. Blavatsky in the late
nineteenth century and expanded upon by later writers. (The bulk
of theos-l subscribers seem to be here).

 5. Theosophy is everything--or at least, anything you fancy
it to be. (This definition seems to be well represented too).

 If your interests fall under classes 1,2,3 (and I know they
do) welcome to the (numerically) under represented class, and
please keep writing. There are a few of us out here who are
interested in your ideas.

>> ..And why is it that we are thinking Leadbetter is a good
>>guide to the
>> astral plane? ...And what are his qualifications?
>> Richard P. Taylor
>I can't wait for the answer to this one! He was very good at
>embroidering the teaching with his own speculations when he was
>here - maybe he has a better perspective now he's there ...

 Ooooh! I can't wait for the answer to this one either. :-)


> Oh, yes, and speaking of prayer, while CWL as well as other
>early Theosophists either did not pray or engage in too much
>ceremony (or at least arrived at broader than normal notions of
>those things) ...

 It seems to me that C.W.L. was very involved in ceremony.
He was Bishop of the LCC (which was brought into the T.S. to be a
vehicle for Krishnamurti's new religion), and performed mass
regularly. He was also a 33rd degree mason and brought co-
masonry into the T.S. C.W.L. also gives a description of Oscar
Kollestrom's initiation ceremony in ~Masters and the Path~ which
(by the way) has a very British format.


>It's amazing: dare to post a quote from one of H.P. Blavastky's
>books on a Theosophy board, of all places, and the board erupts
>in a furor.
>What could possibly be so uproarious about words from the
>Founder of Theosophy in the modern West, HPB?

 Now let that be a lesson to you! :-))

Ann Bermingham

>At the Akbar Lodge in Chicago, both the Secret Doctrine, Mahatma
>Letters and Alice Bailey have been used as discussion material
>in one meeting. I have had a problem with this. The material
>seems to naturally flow together, probably because those in
>charge, who are wiser and abler than I, have the ability to see
>the common thread between them and can sort out that which is

 Or perhaps by assuming that these three works are consistent
with each other, they "see" threads that don't exist. It is
interesting that you "have had a problem with this." Please

>PS to Rich
>From here on in I will no longer answer any of your
>communications. Your trends of thought are absolutely useless,
>& I have something more productive to do with my time, than
>argue with the likes of you.>

 Here we go again!

Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Please reply to:

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application