Theos-Talk Archives (August 1995 Message tl00294)

>>Revelations? That's a religious terms if I ever heard one, implying
>>systematic, hierarchical, formal developments of Theosophy.
>
> It is as good a term as any for the discovery and or recognition truth.
> The assumption of such implications is false.
>
>>"These truths are in no sense put forward as a REVELATION; nor does
>>the author claim the position of a revealer of mystic lore
>

Blavatsky may not have presented her book, "The Secret Doctrine" as
a revelation, but according to Theosophy, it is derived from revelation.
In the middle of the Third Root Race, the Dhyani-Chohans gave the light
of mind to mankind, and imparted to us knowledge that is preserved to
this day among the elect of mankind, the Mahatmas. This is "revelation".
And any attempt to present to the western world some fragments of the
Wisdom Tradition is "revelation" even if there is not always a public
statement of the source of that knowledge.

The difference in the use of the term "revelation" is that we're
talking about knowledge passed on from one class of living beings,
either the Dhyani-Chohans to the Mahatmas, or the Mahatmas to the
general public. This is different than something being given from
some Supreme Being to his creatures of clay, from some ultimate Deity
to his creatures. It is closer in meaning to "instruction" or
"initiation", to the passing on of a new form or body of knowledge.

-- Eldon Tucker