Hello, my fellow Thesophists,

After some lurking and with no hesitation I finally decided to join this wonderful forum. And what a pleasure it is! I am somewhat new Theosophy but no stranger to the work. I do hope some of you may excuse my lack of knowledge on some parts. I am deeply intruiged by it and like all Seekers of Truth wish to expand my wisdom, but most of all, also share what I learned.

I would like to tell you how I came to find theosophy.

My journey began after reading the wonderful book, "Thought-forms" by Mrs Annie Besant and Bishop Leadbeater. Their findings were astounding and confirmed what I suspected about Nature and her mysterious ways. After reading much Theosophy work, I found that it resonated deeply within me. I have to admit that I have not tackled The Secret Doctrine, but I plan to eventually. Before doing so, I would like to have some basic theosophy terminology understood. Reading Mr's Besant's and Leadbeater's work has helped me in that aspect, and I've learned much.

I understand, however, that there is some controversy regarding the traditional Theosophy of Madame Helene Blavatsky, and that of Mrs Besant and Leadbeater, which some have now termed Neo-Theosophy. With this in mind, I had to carefully consider some of the facts from both views and see what corresponded to what I had learned and experienced.

To give a simple example, MHB states that the dead have no to slight consciousness in the Astral Plane and cannot communicate with us. On the contrary, Charles Leadbeater states that the dead are fully conscious in the Astral and can very much see and communicate with us. And I have to agree with Mr Leadbeater on this. There is just too much evidence to support this. And we hear about it all the time!

Most importantly though, I've learned a lot about the Higher Life and how I could apply it in my daily living. This is, I think, what really drew me to learn more. And I have much reading and studying to do on subject if I hope to catch up to some of you Theo-Vets. :)

Erutan

>>> Hey, Erutan. Great to have a fresh face and new perspective at the forum. I think the test of Theosophy, is “can it attract new inquirers?” If a spiritual philosophy has merit, it must transcend any one period to have lasting and eternal value. It must also be comprehensive enough, AND flexible enough, to appeal to a populous; as the larger body of people are trying to fit the wisdom into [their] lives, and these represent a multiplicity of interests.
I think you have come for the right reasons, even though they can be hard to verbalize by most people. I think the willingness to not HAVE to be able to put the draw into words is essential at first, as it takes us out of our ego and allows us to approach [something new.] That ability to approach something new, WITHOUT FEAR, is why artists have a spiritual nature. It is why the Dali Lama told an inquirer of his Tibetanism asking “how to become more spiritual,” TO PAINT. Curiosity, inquiry and creativity (think “open mind”) will serve you and all lurkers well to discover the solutions to the innate callings within us.

>>> I have that book, Erutan, and read it every couple of years. To that and your apprehension of undertaking “the Secret Doctrine,” I would like to suggest that they be incorporated into your life such that you will encounter them several times. The mind understands [only] after encountering that which is new, three times. None-the-less, the Secret Doctrine is not an easy story or novel, it is imbued with a depth that takes considerable resting with before it takes on significance such that it can be translated into one’s own way of thinking. What I did, what I do, is simply read a FEW pages every night. There is greater reward when you can actually appreciate what is read, at some level. As the mind cannot resolve too many problems at once (and NEW information is a problem to solve) enjoy the quantity that you can more easily assimilate, but consider a commitment. I might be considered herein the most ignorant on “the Teachings,” if one follows AN interpretation of Blavatsky’s purposes, BUT, IT IS IN THERE. As life allows, it will resurface and help me make better sense of all I think, feel and do. Summation: Make Theosophy a success story ̶ however it may work for you.

>>> I wonder sometimes, Erutan, if it is ACTUALLY a controversy? To my observation people simply have proclivities and need to hold information and teachers a certain way to achieve the level of accomplishment and mastery they seek. It is natural to project that reverence as a kind of thought form of one’s OWN truth, all on its own … to keep to your introduction. When something becomes real, then “Truth” sets in, and truth seems to be something fleeting, varied and multidimensional ̶ like a rainbow of “knowingness.” It must be an extension, in some way, to “free will,” for it is not a consistent purview, from person to person. Which, is why I push for people to think, and allow others to think, over HOW to think, or what to conclude. The answers and wisdom we derive and contemplate and MUST be best suited for us. And THIS would be what I would consider a fundamental objective of Theosophy … not so much the literal steps and outlines that probably occurred in the moment of some conversation or another with Blavatsky and whoever. To me, or that is my way of thinking, if you get SOMETHING, then you get Theosophy.
In the age of Blavatsky, Judge, Besant, Bishop Leadbeater and others, the WAY they could exercise their mind is what made them “Greats” in Theosophy. I could never, would never, confine them or anyone to their thinking or words in the moment, our use them against themselves or others as a judgment. THAT THEY ARE THINKING and coming up with a growing experience is what is important. The luminaries you mention, and they ALL indeed were, SHOWED us we could do it, and NOT HOW TO DO IT, in my way of interpretation. I think this sort of says, EVERYONE can benefit from Theosophy, and it is not a club or rigid mind set. It is a DEMONSTRATION that we have the wherewithal within us to discover an Ancient Wisdom, and a [connection] to the Absoluteness.
Theosophy is not a new thing, only the westernized presentation of Blavatsky was new for the time and place. But it existed long before AS Theosophy, and as components of other expressions of Ancient Wisdom. So I fought TOO for the “former” Theosophists, in addition to the neo-Theosophists, and of course the Blavatsky tradion.

>>> To the extent that by the term “the dead,” one does not mean decaying carcasses, and rather the living Astral Bodies that retain consciousness and a connection to one’s Higher faculties, I would agree. The level of consciousness shifts to Higher levels as one progresses through the gradients of the Astral Plane. But, connection at Higher levels is just as possible, simply more difficult as it requires the mind to be even more quieted to sense. At one extreme Bishop Leadbeater is absolutely correct to my verification, and so is Blavatsky at the extreme she is mentally speaking to. Further, you are correct, the public awareness of this connectivity is actually objective, those in the field endeavor to prove the continuity of life. And, regardless the current mindset of some schools, it was a well indoctrinated process of Blavatsky at stages of her life. Further, what we connect with IS NOT just the astral embodiment of human life; it was actually Theosophy that opened the eyes of the Western world to the realms of Deva and Angels. ALL visually, experientially provable life.

>>> Have you considered the 2-volume set “the Inner Life,” by Bishop Leadbeater? If you are incorporating Theosophy in your daily life, than that “right living” should make Blavatsky, Bessant and Leadbeater too, very proud. They made a difference. And you are living proof that the wisdom works.