Re: Daniel, why don't you warn readers about Blavatsky's mistakes ?
Sep 22, 2008 02:05 AM
Subject of Theosophy, as understood by world and students of
Theosophy, is complex. When I read messages of students of Blavatsky
and messages of students of CWL, I find that what they understand
Theosophy and it's main concepts is very different. That means
Theosophical understanding of students of Blavatsky is different from
understanding of students of Leadbeater. Differences are big and on
important topics. It is possible that HPB and CWL had same meaning in
mind but expressed that in different words. But their impact is
certainly different on people. If somebody is referring Theosophy, I
might ask "are you talking about Theosophy of Blavatsky or are you
talking about Theosophy of Besant-Leadbeater ?"
Similarly reactions of westerners and Christians to Theosophy depend
on what they consider as Theosophy. When they consider Blavatsky's
writing as Theosophy, they ridicule, hate Theosophy. Such hatred is
not expressed by those Christians who consider CWL's writing as Theosophy.
I have come to a point where it is necessary to make clear distinction
between Theosophy of Leadbeater-Besant and Theosophy of Blavatsky. As
these two are different and have different effects on people, I feel
that such distinction is very necessary. It is because we often come
in contact with students of Blavatsky not agreeing with students of
Leadbeater and CWL-students ignoring Blavatsky's writing.
I am also feeling a need of writing article making it clear which
Theosophy I support and which Theosophy I reject. I agreed with CWL,
but I did not agree with Krishnamurti. I felt Krishnamurti's teaching
would do damage to humanity. So I rejected openly K's teaching, just
as Catholic church openly rejects abortion and gay marriage.
I feel that I should now write article on which Theosophical ideas I
support and which Theosophical ideas I reject.
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application