It is a little-known fact  that there are multiple theosophies in this world.
I suppose that theosophers are aware of the close affinity of Vedanta with Blavatskian theosophy, and, that some relation to Buddhism exists with her eclectic philosophy. But, there is so much more in the world than these systems of thought alone. Have you ever thought that there can be found many theosophies in the West? Yes, there are many such. 
A list of the most important ones:

-Greek theosophy (especially Proclus). Acknowledged by De Purucker.
-Jewish theosophy: Kabbalah. Recognized by Blavatsky.
-Teutonic theosophy (Jakob Boehme). Recognized by Blavatsky and Quan Judge.
-Celtic theosophy as found in the prose and poems of Druidic bards. Acknowledged by De Purucker.
-Gnostic philosophy as formulated by Vitvan. Certainly acknowledged by me as a valuable system, very cognate to Theosophy.

You see, there is a virtual goldmine here to be explored. 
I have personally made all the major works of Jacob Boehme available as texts on my scribd account and the same goes for the great theosopher Proclus. Together more than 5,000 pages of text. 
As to the other systems: Celtic theosophy can be found in the sacred-texts archive and Vitvan on www.sno.org

It will hardly come as a surprise that there are many recurrent themes to be found in these theosophies; themes on which there is much agreement as to how nature operates (which "laws" or principles are at work); agreement as to ethical standards, purification of soul, etc.

What  is slightly surprising, however, is that there has been done relatively little study on these systems, comparing ideas, extracting models of natural process, etc. 
One of the few theosophers who has done this a bit, is G.R.S. Mead.
Other names are James Morgan Pryse (Greek theosophy and Christianity), Alvin Boyd Kuhn (Greek theosophy, Egyptian religion and Christianity), Franz Hartmann (on Boehme and Paracelsus). But these were people born in the 19th century! What happened to the T.S. movement in the first half of the 20th century??? Well, we do know a bit of the desastrous developments that took place there, so, no need to repeat that. One century has been almost lost, hopefully the 21st century will see some new developments.

So, here is a goldmine of information to be explored. Hopefully some dynamic, young, or seasoned guys and girls, will see an opportunity to do some comparitive research as per the second object of the T.S.
It may lead to a revitalized theosophy. My own interest lies with extracting simple models for bio-psychological process. Maybe more about that later.
Anyone interested, and which true theosopher wouldn't be? - have a go at it!

Views: 607

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Leila: a brief reaction

"I am not opposing to explore others forms of mysticism, but is important be aware of some points:
* the name seems perfect, more perfect than the use we do of it, in fact, the special tool for knowing for a Theosopher is direct knowledge, modern students use comparative study of books."


The name itself is beautiful, agreed. It has become a bit tainted as discussed elsewhere in this thread.


" if somebody studies, practices and writes in Blavatsky-Mahatma’s framework is right to call what he do as Theosophy (of course, it is needed to acknowledge the pre-HPB meaning, but, it is precisely what HPB and Mahatmas mean in naming his school Theosophy, I think)."


I have to disagree a bit. For example, Leadbeater published material via Jinarajadasa that is considered as no Theosophy at all by other branches of TS. It all has to do with a true and deep insight, and even then one can make mistakes. People outside of Blavatskian Theosophy could have visions/insights that one can regard as pure theosophy (intuitive insight).


"* if somebody besides HPB uses another source, well, he can call what he do as he likes, this would not affect the neighbor work."

Agreed. I myself prefer to use the designation "integrative philosophy" for my work, not because it is not theosophical, but rather to free myself from narrow interpretation and dogma and prevent problems with orthodox Theosophers (the types that always want to know in which book one can find the authority for what one writes- not very stimulating to creative thought).

"* HPB's writing and work are under estimated, perhaps because of her style and because are hard to reading, but there are yet many treasures in it, The Secret Doctrine is full of esoteric exercises, scientific tenets and psychologic insights, and, no doubt, was written according to the Ibn Arabi’s statement: “my chief doctrine (wahdat al wuyud, oneness of being) is written throughout in my work, and not in a particular place, it is diffused here and there” or something like that. Then, before put her writings aside it is needed to be aware of the reason for doing that."


Yes, of course there are many treasures in it. But time does not stand still. New discoveries are made and insights develop. We live in the 21th century now.


" why was the svastika deleted from the emblem? Legal reasons?"

Ask Joe Fulton or Eldon Tucker about that. For me, I don't like the use of the swastika because of the connection people make with the nazi era.
Hi, I think it is a matter of personal experience or perspective.

*The name itself is beautiful, agreed. It has become a bit tainted as discussed elsewhere in this thread.*
Speaking for myself, in ten times I read Theosophy, only three are relatives a Theosophical Societyor Movement. For instance, some weeks ago I found Theosophia Practica by J. Gichtell, that book was not re-edited in spanish, then it was difficult to find it.


*People outside of Blavatskian Theosophy could have visions/insights that one can regard as pure theosophy (intuitive insight).*
Of course, I was refering to that, I like to read Ibn Araby, Sant Mat, Böhme, Gichtell, etc.


*...with orthodox Theosophers (the types that always want to know in which book one can find the authority for what one writes- not very stimulating to creative thought).*
It is a sign of the times, dead letter prevails. In due time erudition and orthodoxy are the criteria instead of inner experience or thinking.

I wanted clarify only this.
*...with orthodox Theosophers (the types that always want to know in which book one can find the authority for what one writes- not very stimulating to creative thought).*

(Leila) 'It is a sign of the times, dead letter prevails. In due time erudition and orthodoxy are the criteria instead of inner experience or thinking.'

It never ceases to amaze me to see that so few people seem to value contemplation, or true philosophy. Few have learnt to philosophize or really think. Not that it is an easy task - far from it. Paul Brunton describes the prerequisites for it, and it includes a.o. control of (excessive) ego and of course study of quality material. In these hurried and stressed times, few make room for such studies. Fear and greed reign supreme.
And Brunton says that a spiritual teacher is needed to guide the process of learning to philosophize (in the original sense of the word with the ancient Greeks and Hindus).
But such teachers are very rare and difficult to find in our time. A chicken and egg question. No teachers, ergo students have difficulty to develop as teachers themselves..
Al: Any suggestions for resources in the Western tradition.

Is this a question? I have made the major works of Jacob Boehme freely available to the world.
He is a Christian Gnostic. Immersing oneself in his work will quickly lead you into the flow he was in ( I mean the spiritual current). One can use it as a guided meditation! And of course contemplate the ideas he tries to put into words.

More Western esoterism: try Proclus, the successor of Plato. His works will help you to learn to philosophize. All this is freely available at my website: meuser.awardspace.com as well as on my scribd site, and the archive.org
(Joe): "This is why you see Theosophy mostly associated with Eastern ideas today".

Yes, and I would suggest that the time is highly overdue that theosophers start looking at a more modern, Western approach, to wit: process theosophy. This lends itself to an analytic treatment as I have tried to show in my ebook and blogs.
Especially the so-called value-systems and organizational elements will play a prominant role in that analysis. Still in its infant phase, but very promising as an integrative factor in the science of the future.
Hi, I have added Euser's site to my favorites.
Relating to Western tradition, I think that it is needed a research into the mediterranean spiritual stream of thought. The Roman Empire, in the first centuries of christian era, was a place sui generis, very amazing.
I have the best memories of my reading of Proclo's Life, by Marinos, a good example of practical as well as theoretic theosophy.
Research into the main traditions (neoplatonism, neopythagorism, gnosticism, oracula chaldaica, etc.) would be the best ground for the study of mediaeval developments such as christian neoplatonism, alchemy and mystics like Böhme and his followers like Gichtel and others.
It must not be left aside neither the arabic heritage nor kabalah, both with its roots in neoplatonic ground.
Tomorrow, if God wills, I'll add some comments to older posts about the chicken-egg question.
(Leila):"It must not be left aside neither the arabic heritage nor kabalah, both with its roots in neoplatonic ground."

Yes. I often get the distinct impression that Muslims have lost sight of the Neo-Platonic elements in their religion. That is a pity, because it entails a shared history between the West and Middle-East.
Instead of that, fanatics get the most attention. Not surprisingly, since their proneness to violent action and/or proselytism matches that of our so-called Christian society which has colonized the world for so long, and still thinks it is the summit of all development and wisdom.
I'm new here, this is my first reply: I don't think that we can find a better word than "theosophy". I prefer to use it in the broader sense just because HPB did so ;-). Have a nice day, everyone!!!
Hi. Good to see someone new expressing his thoughts on this forum.
That may encourage others to come out of the closet. Don't be shy!
Have fun.
Thanks!
Yesterday, I kept on thinkin' about this question for a while... and an analogy came (I don't know if I'll be able to find the proper English words :/ First thing that anyone sees when entering this site are its 3 objectives. First, second and third. If brotherhood is to be the first and foremost objective, then I think that the broadest sense of "theosophy" is the best and that an "open source theosophy" is needed. It is this "divine wisdom spirit within human being"(or any other name you may prefer) that makes brotherhood possible.
Second and third objectives, necessary as they are, are narrower (that's why are 2nd and 3rd) and somehow easier, at least "thinking about doing something" seems easier... I can think " I shall meditate 2 hours every morning defore dawn so in a year I surely shall become clairvoyant ;-)" or "I shall study Buddhism, Hinduism, Hegelianism, Existentialism" and any other "ism" and synthetise my own "-ism" ...and get some results, headache being most probable.
... but human brotherhood.... so easy to say... so many necessary changes if it's to be real... inner changes, social changes... love each other as you love yourself... that's dangerous stuff!!!
Yes, it's not a free ride..It's all about taking responsibility and working on oneself, gradually transforming oneself, opening up to the Spirit within.

RSS

Search Theosophy.Net!

Loading

What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


About
FAQ

Theosophy References


Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2021   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service