Comment

Comment by Richard Ihle on April 13, 2011 at 11:58pm

Greetings, Kirk, and good wishes.

Excellent observations; well expressed.

I might even be tempted to go further and say that a large segment in the Theosophical Society would even like the term Theosophy to ineluctably become "only the teachings of H.P. Blavatsky" (and this is often already definition #2 in dictionaries, anyway). 

General Theosophy #41, though, refers to a much broader definition:  

Theosophy—”Intuitive knowledge or wisdom resulting from direct experience of one’s Transcendent (‘Divine’) Nature.”

Thus, if one said Plotinus's was Theosophical, that might show a certain amount of respect (and the belief that there actually are Transcendent Realities possible); however, if theosophical, that one is not quite so sure that there was any valid utilization of "Divine help" (Buddhi-Manas consciousness) in the development of his philosophy.  (In the same way, I suppose, that some refer to Jesus as God but Zeus only as a god).

Thanks again for your interest, Kirk.  According to the definition above, you are a gentleman and a Theosopher. . . .

Comment by Kirk W Walker on April 13, 2011 at 10:24pm

I thought capitalized Theosophy refers specifically to the Theosophical Society and its works, but that the general term independent of the TS goes uncapitalized. This is how the usage is prescribed in many dictionaries. For example, Plotinus' philosophy is theosophical. If one were to say that Plotinus' work is Theosophical, wouldn't that be tantamount to branding it?--Maybe I'm misunderstanding you.