Theos-Talk Archives (February 1997 Message tl00199)

Dr. A.M.Bain writes:
>In message <199702080436.XAA01402@envirolink.org>, John Straughn
>Depends what you understand by Theosophy, and what you understand by
>"guardian angels."  Kabbalah has them, and Kabbalah is *a* theosophy,
>but not big T theosophy.
>
>Alan
>---------
(nodding) By guardian angels I mean a protective deity which is not part of
the individual being protected, (by saying "not part of", I mean that the
"deity" has 1) a seperate heirarchy, or 2) is of the same heirarchy, but
likely "higher", and is constituted of a seperate buddhi vehicle.)  And yes, I
did mean to capitalize (T)heosophy.  I was just curious if (T)heosophists or
even theosophists generally accepted the idea behind the "guardian angel".
---
The Triaist



------------------------------