The Theosophical Society is a world-wide organization which studies religious ideas, and tries to show ideas and beliefs that are common to all religions. Theosophy is also a collection of teachings that embodies a world-view, and a philosophy by which we can raise ourselves to a higher spiritual level.

The Theosophical Society was founded in New York City in 1875, and today there are Theosophical groups in some seventy countries. 30,000 people around the world call themselves Theosophists. Members (& non-members) have the opportunity to join in local discussions, study sessions, lectures, and self-study.

Here is my webpage explaining "What is Theosophy?" (A Besant/Leadbeater Perspective)

http://users.ez2.net/nick29/theosophy/lessons01.htm

There are other pages on the internet which take a slight different position as to what Theosohy is. They are all welcome here. As time permits, links to some of those pages will be listed here.

Beginners to Theosophy are welcome to post ideas and questions here. (That is what this thread is for!) Feel free to post your reactions.

I would like to hear other Theosophists post a short answer to the questions, "What is Theosophy?" I have heard things like it is a place to study comparative religions, but that does not seem to hit the nail on the head.

Try to answer the question, "What is Theosophy?" in four or five paragraphs (or less). I think we can get some good answers.

My version of an introduction into theosophy based on a selection of important theosophical articles.

I usually explain theosophy as 'divine wisdom'. This wisdom is something we seek by studying religious literature, theosophical literature, meditation, right action, etc. This divine wisdom is not something we have in the palm of our hand, but more like sand in a desert: one can only grasp a bit of it - most blows by.

Hi everybody!

Michael, a new member, is essentially asking what Theosophy is. I think it would be fun for everyone to contribute a definition of Theosophy. Theosophy is a large body of information, and each person can share a different perspective of it.

First, I would like to emphasize the Three Objects of Theosophy. The Three Objects of the Theosophical Society are:

1. To form a nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste or color.

2. To encourage the study of Comparative Religion, Philosophy and Science.

3. To investigate unexplained laws of Nature and the powers latent in man.

"For real Theosophy IS ALTRUISM, and we cannot repeat it too often. It is brotherly love, mutual help, unswerving devotion to Truth. If once men do but realize that in these alone can true happiness be found, and never in wealth, possessions, or any selfish gratification, then the dark clouds will roll away, and a new humanity will be born upon earth".
HPB - "Our Cycle and the Next" - BCW II pg 202

Jon has the keynote!

As HPB said in a letter to the Americans:

Note it is the keynote not just for the TS, the organization; but for Divine Wisdom, Theosophy.

Hi everybody!

Certainly, Brotherhood is a central teaching of Theosophy. I remember hearing someone say Theosophy has only one dogma, and that dogma is Brotherhood. I thought to myself, "I like that."

One of the most difficult things for us is to be nice to people who are a different color, different religion, and different ethnicity. This is the goal that Theosophy strives for.

---

Time for another definition of Theosophy. Theosophy is a body of information called the Ancient Wisdom. The Ancient Wisdom is a vast storehouse of religious ideas that are the source of all religions. In truth, the answer to the question, “What is Theosophy?” is, “Theosophy is a recent (periodic) re-release of parts the Ancient Wisdom to the world, this release containing more than the last release, this release being the first one available to everyone.”

The Ancient Wisdom is just that — ancient. All of the ideas of the major religions come from the Ancient Wisdom. In this respect, all religions come from the same source.

The reader may find the previous sentence to be preposterous. “How can religions as different as Christianity, Buddhism, and Japan’s Shinto come from the same source?” may be asked. The answer is three-fold.

1. Religions become “ossified” and corrupt over the years. The original teachings become changed. This creates the need for religious information to be periodically re-released.

2. The religious Mysteries (also called esoteric teachings) are slowly being released to humanity as the centuries go by. Humanity is finally ready to hear some of the esoteric teachings — released through Theosophy and other sources. (But other esoteric teachings must still be kept secret.)

3. There are different types of religions, for different types of people. (But the source of information is still the same.) Different types of religions appear in a cycle.

Prem and Ashish, in their book Man, the Measure of All Things (p. 105), discuss how the Bible, Hermetic Corpus, Rig Veda, Kabbalic Zohar, and Upanishads all come from a common source.

Theosophy's goal is to show this commonality of all the major religions.

“... the motto adopted by the Theosophical Society [is] "There is no religion higher than truth." The chief aim of [Theosophy is] ... to reconcile all religions, sects and nations under a common system of ethics, based on eternal verities.” (H.P. Blavatsky, The Key to Theosophy, pp. 3-4)

To all readers


My views are:

Here are a few views on the subject.

Try to consider this sentence for a few moments of your lifes:
The question is not "what is Theosophy?', but "what can be said and taught about Theosophy?'



Yet, I will give it a try:

The most obvious question of all is for us the most difficult question. But I'll try to answer. Theosophy is known as Divine Wisdom. There is no wisdom without altruism, and no altruism without wisdom. Divine Wisdom is experience of life through a method of dealing with life and human relations. This method is based on an understanding of man, which places at one's disposal the means to organize one's
relationships and one's learning systems. So instead of saying that Divine Wisdom is a body of thought in which you believe certain things and don't believe other things, we say that the Divine Wisdom experience has to be provoked in a person. Once provoked, it becomes his own property, rather as a person masters an art.
(Rewritten from the Idries Shah corpus of books.)


So my job is to provoke a theosophical experience in the readers.


Here is an option:

1.

Question:
One can't help getting the feeling that not all gurus or certain members of
various forums are trying to serve their fellowman?

Answer:
Some are frankly phonies, and they don't try to hide it from me. They
think that I am one, too, so when we meet they begin the most disturbing
conversations. They want to know how I get money, how I control people, and
so on.

Question:
They want to swap secrets?

Answer:
That's going a little too far. But they feel safety in numbers. They
actually feel there is something wrong with what they are doing, and they
feel better if they talk to somebody else who is doing it. I always tell
them that I think it would be much better if they gave up the "guru" role in
their own minds and realize that they are providing a perfectly good social
service.



2.

The following by Blavatsky might help some of you:

WHAT ARE THE THEOSOPHISTS?
Article by H. P. Blavatsky

"Our object now was but to prove to the reader that Theosophy is neither "a new fangled doctrine," a political cabal, nor one of those societies of enthusiasts which are born today but to die tomorrow. That not all of its members can think alike, is proved by the Society having organized into two great Divisions--the Eastern and the Western--and the latter being divided into numerous sections, according to races and religious views. One man's thought, infinitely various as are its manifestations, is not all-embracing. Denied ubiquity, it must necessarily speculate but in one direction; and once transcending the boundaries of exact human knowledge, it has to err and wander, for the ramifications of the one Central and absolute Truth are infinite. Hence, we occasionally find even the greater philosophers losing themselves in the labyrinths of speculations, thereby provoking the criticism of posterity. But as all work for one and the same object, namely, the disenthralment of human thought, the elimination of superstitions, and the discovery of truth, all are equally welcome. The attainment of these objects, all agree, can best be secured by convincing the reason and warming the enthusiasm of the generation of fresh young minds, that are just ripening into maturity, and making ready to take the place of their prejudiced and conservative fathers. And, as each--the great ones as well as small--have trodden the royal road to knowledge, we listen to all, and take both small and great into our fellowship. For no honest searcher comes back empty-handed, and even he who has enjoyed the least share of popular favor can lay at least his mite upon the one altar of Truth.

Theosophist, October, 1879 "


Did it help you?

Theosophy is Divine Knowledge or Science. The real meaning of the term is "Divine Wisdom," (Theosophia) or Wisdom of the gods, as (theogonia), genealogy of the gods. The word theos means a god in Greek, one of the divine beings, certainly not "God" in the sense attached in our day to the term. Therefore, it is not "Wisdom of God," as translated by some, but Divine Wisdom such as that possessed by the gods.

Based on The Key to Theosophy

Hi everybody!

Nicholas' post, directly above, reminds me of the difference between Pantheism and Monotheism. Theosophy is a form of Pantheism.

Here is a good definition of Theosophy from austheos.org.au

"What is Theosophy?"

http://www.austheos.org.au/theosophy.htm

To all readers


Thanks to Nick the Pilot. I enjoyed that version at
http://www.austheos.org.au/theosophy.htm
I find it to be among the best I have ever come across.


Here is another angle

We know, that there is a theosophical motto known as:

THERE IS NO RELIGION HIGHER THAN TRUTH

1. Truth has no form;

2. The means through which people may perceive Truth have forms;

3. All forms, writing included, are limited. Some of the limitations are time, place, culture, language;

4. Different forms are not necessarily antagonistic, for the above reasons;

5. Forms have changed through the centuries in obedience to the external
world to which all forms belong;

6. When people believe that form is more important than the Truth, they will
not find truth, but will stay with form;

7. Forms are vehicles and instruments, and vehicles and instruments cannot
be called good or bad without context;

8. Forms outlive their usefulness, increase or diminish in usefulness;

9. Theosophy is truth without form.

10. Truth is love.

11. Love is Parabrahman as not This, not That.

12. These statements are abundantly to be found in the writings of
theosophical teachers through the ages.



M. Sufilight

From Blavatsky's early article "What is Theosophy?":

.. which means that Theosophy excludes the belief in a creator?

I fail to grasp what methods Theosophists use to discover THE truth. How can one possibly discern superstitions from truth? I'd think the relative lack of dogma would leave Theosophists extra vulnerable to superstitious beliefs or manipulation by others?

Theosophy teaches that there are 'builders' and a Divine plan that can be seen in Nature, but that the architect is unknown and unknowable.

You are quite right Agur, about theosophical folk often being too credulous and open to manipulation, compared to those who have a solid grounding in some faith or theology or philosophy.

However, neither group can know the full truth without mastering their lower nature. That full understanding of truth or reality requires many lifetimes of discipline, meditation & altruism.

One of the intellectual keys is to realize or have full confidence in the composite nature of man & universe. Was it St Paul who wrote something about an "earthy" mind & a spiritual mind in our self? Theosophy as originally taught by Blavatsky & her gurus, teaches similarly. We have a higher nature that sees more clearly & thus knows truth better. Eventually we become god-like or buddha-like and know the full truth. But it cannot be taught in full.

There is no dogma or creed regarding a creator God. Blavatsky's gurus & their lineage of ancient Masters did find hierarchies of divine beings (gods, bodhisattvas, buddhas etc) but no supreme being. Yet one can believe & advocate any spiritual path one likes.

Ultimately, in the oneness of all that is, the higher Self IS the truth. Atman is Brahman. So the path is often pointed out as "Know Thyself."

Aqur, because theosophy has no dogma there are no barriers to seeking truth. A religion that insists on blind acceptance and faith seems to preclude any such search. Theosophy encourages us to look for information and knowledge from different sources, to assess claim and counter-claim, and to use discernment in building a belief system that gives meaning to our lives. What we acquire is not THE truth, but hopefully we have made progress in the search.

I’m not sure about Pantheism. We are probably all familiar with the Hindu Pantheon of gods, but the thousands of Hindu gods are all manifestations of the One God.

As for theosophy, I think Panentheism might be a better description: “God exists in and interpenetrates every part of nature, and timelessly extends beyond as well.” We could try to debate whether God is a creator (and thus self-creating?) or is perpetually evolving in infinity (from something eternal, which was never created?) but we would probably miss the point. We should simply hold these and other possibilities in our mind until we reach a better perspective.

Agur,

By the way, is your avatar a picture of Fred Flinstone? Nice!

You asked,

".. which means that Theosophy excludes the belief in a creator?"

--> No. Theosophy teaches of a "Creator," but Theosophy teaches that even the "Creator" emanates from a higher source, which Theosophy calls the Absolute.

Jon has referred to the idea that earth and humanity were created by a group of gods, not a single God. Even Genesis itself says that humanity was created by a group of gods, not a single God, and that idea fits into Theosophy quite nicely.

"I fail to grasp what methods Theosophists use to discover THE truth. How can one possibly discern superstitions from truth?"

--> First, Theosophists stress that an idea has to make sense. For example, many Theosophists believe in reincarnation because it makes sense to them. (It makes perfect sense to me, and I cannot see any flaw in the idea whatsoever.)

Many Theosophists also work from the assumption that a particular piece of writing called The Stanzas of Dzyan (a source of a number of Theosophical ideas) comes from the same source that Genesis comes from, and that both pieces of writing were originally the same piece of writing.

"I'd think the relative lack of dogma would leave Theosophists extra vulnerable to superstitious beliefs or manipulation by others?"

--> It would, except that Theosophy has a couple of safeguards built in. One is that no Theosophist has the right to tell another what to believe. Also, each Theosophist is required to see if Theosophical ideas make sense, and to discard ideas that do not make sense. These two things make the imposing of superstition on Theosophists very difficult. Theosophy runs the danger of falling into superstition just as much as any other philosophy does, but the safeguards that are built into Theosophy make it much more unlikely to happen than in most religions. (As a matter of fact, one of Theosophy's most popular books teaches that the first thing a Theosophist must do is throw out all superstitious beliefs!) There is no Theosophical Pope, we do not want one, every Theosophist must decide for him or herself what he or she believes, it is a very painful process, and we would not have it any other way.

St. Paul's letter to the Romans chapter 8:

"5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. "


I think we can agree that it is possible to become more spiritually minded/ come closer to our "higher" nature. But to what extent is this higher nature attainable? Can we ever know the "full truth"?

Agur,

We have an ongoing thread on 'the truth.' Please take a look.

http://theosophy-forum.com/index.php?showtopic=995&hl=

The idea I like best is that we will never know 'the truth' until we achieve consciousness in our Higher Selves. (I do not think Christianity has a concept comparable to the Higher Self.)

We could try to debate whether God is a creator or a perpetually evolving infinity, but I think it all eventually boils down to guesswork or faith. How can we ever reach a better perspective in order to know more about this supreme entity (if it indeed exists)? Science can never give us this answer, nor can we ever fully comprehend concepts like "infinity" or "eternity".

I have chosen to believe in Jesus; his teachings make sense as to human nature, and I believe that the only salvation for an imperfect world, is through him. I admit that this faith of mine creates barriers against accepting certain spiritual teachings, but not all.

I honestly believe there is much wisdom to be gathered from other religions/ spiritual teachings as well, though some of their fundamental conclusions, ultimately, happen to be incompatible with Christian faith.

Thank you for a most clarifying reply!

I must, however, disagree with one of the paragraphs: The way I see it, Genesis clearly states that humanity was created by one God; I can't think of any verse suggesting otherwise.

I understand, however, that it is possible to argue that there could be different deities acting in the two stories. One fact supporting this interpretation, is that God's name actually changes from Elohim(?) in chapter one to Jahve in chapter two.

The two creation stories in the first two chapters of Genesis, probably originate from different regions and cultures, hence the different naming of God and the differing description of the "event". In the first story, God creates by separating the waters which cover the earth (this story probably originated in a region where the watery season caused destruction). In the second, God creates by watering the dry land (this story probably originated in a dry region where rain was wanting). These creation stories are probably similar to stories from other cultures and religions.

My avatar is not mr. Flintstone, but the main character in a series of very funny comic strips made in Norway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondus

The short answer to both questions is - full extent & yes - but not with our present mind & self. It will take many lifetimes & Grace from above.

Study this sketch by a theosophist/Christian, perhaps it will help clarify.

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/gdpman...ity/th-xty1.htm

Agur,

You said,

"...Genesis clearly states that humanity was created by one God; I can't think of any verse suggesting otherwise."

Let's take a look at Genesis 1:26

“Then God said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...” (underlines added.)

Here, Genesis clearly categorizes the speaker(s) as plural, which agrees with Theosophical teachings.

There is another aspect of the Genesis "Double-Creation Story" worth mentioning. Theosophy agrees with Genesis on the idea that humanity was created on "Day Six," and that the story of Adam and Eve later "occured." According to Theosophy, the "Day Six" Story refers to humanity first being created as astral beings and then being attached to physical bodies. The later story of Adam and Eve (according to Theosophy) refers to the separation of humanity into male and female, and sexual activity that began occuring immediately afterwards. (The story of Adam and Eve is about snakes chasing fruit, an obvious sexual reference.) Theosophy contends that the story of the creation of humanity on "Day Six" and the story of Adam and Eve separating humanity into males and females both happend. Theosophy maintains that the second story is not a repeat of the first story, but that both events happened in succession (which is exactly what Genesis says). On this point, Theosophy and Genesis agree.

By the way, some Theosophists disagree with the interpretation I have presented here. No one Theosophist, especially me, speaks for all Theosophists. I am sure that you can find Theosophists who agree more closely with your interpretation of Genesis. Theosophy allows for a lot more disagreeing between members than many other philosophies and religions.

Agur,

You asked,

"But to what extent is this higher nature attainable?"

--> Theosophy teaches of different levels of consciousness. For example, there is our physical level of consciousness, the astral level of consciousness, etc. Theosophy teaches of a seemingly unending ladder of levels of consciousness. According to Theosophy, this Higher Nature is achieveable on many levels. And, the higher we go up that seemingly endless levels of consciousness, the closer we get to the 'truth.'

Aqur: Posted on Feb 16 2010, 11:14 PM

There are two aspects to this discussion. What is my relationship to God? And how should I live my life: for the next twenty years; next week; today. To the extent that knowledge of the relationship helps us determine how to live our lives, study is relevant, but the haziest approximation of that relationship is enough to know that our lives should be based on spiritual growth, compassion, etc. etc. Struggling towards further knowledge might be fascinating but probably not as important as building spiritual growth and practising compassion in our daily lives.

The answer to the "how can we know" query is found in the many paths & spiritual disciplines. Here is a good one that Blavatsky & Judge mentioned - the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.

This site has much good advice & commentary on the Raja Yoga of Patanjali:

http://swamij.com/index-yoga-meditation-yoga-sutras.htm

Yes, I forgot about that one. As far as I know, Christians traditionally dismiss this use of "us" as the "royal" plural, but of course this can be interpreted differently. Point taken.

This Theosophical approach to the two biblical creation stories is very interesting indeed.

Agur,

I can see that you have an open mind, and I am glad to see that. I have met many Christians who get angry when they hear these ideas, and I am glad to see that you are not getting angry.

I hope that I do not come across as being too critical of Christianity. If I do, I am sorry and I apologize. But Theosophy requires that all ideas and beliefs be open to the most intense scrutiny. Theosophy requires that we ask these kinds of questions, even of Genesis, etc. I am glad to see that you are willing to consider such probing questions.

The benefit of all this is that Theosophy gives us answers for these questions that I have not found anywhere else. One of Theosophy's first requirements is that we give up all forms of superstition and closed-mindedness. I think that interpreting Genesis in a particular way, just because it has been interpreted that way for over a thousand years, is an example of closed-mindedness that Theosophy is trying to get us away from. For many Christians, the idea that the story of Adam and Eve talks about a group of gods and not a single God is blasphemy to many Christians, and I am glad to see that you do not automatically dismiss such an idea as blasphemy.

I, too, have heard of the idea that the plural "us" in Genesis 1:26 is merely an example of the royal "we." I do not see it that way, I see it literally as an "us," a group of gods. I have more ideas on this, if you are interested in hearing them.

Nick,

Thanks for the compliment!

No, you are not being too critical of Christianity. Intense scrutiny is nothing but appropriate. It is only natural that we reach somewhat different conclusions, but that's OK.

Being Christian, I have to maintain the belief that one God is supreme, and I worship only that most powerful God. Creation could, however, have been aided by other (lesser) divine beings (like in the "Silmarillion" by J.R.R. Tolkien).

The Bible MUST be interpreted, and different Christians interpret in many different ways. I am opposed to a strictly tradition-bound interpretation (which lets other men decide what I should believe) as well as "no" interpretation (i.e. that every word in the Bible is equally "true" and equally important).

Besides, I find your ideas most interesting. Keep them coming!


PS
Thought I'd just mention that I have heard an alternative Christian interpretation of Genesis 1:26 as well: "Us" referring to the threefold nature of God (the Holy Trinity).

Agur,

You said,

“…I have heard an alternative Christian interpretation of Genesis 1:26 as well: "Us" referring to the threefold nature of God (the Holy Trinity).”

--> I, too, have heard this idea, but I think it is only speculation from people trying to get around the problem that Genesis 1:26 says humanity was created by a group of gods, and three is a group. I see no reason to think that the Genesis 1:26 is a group of three, and this agrees with theosophical teaching.

“Creation could…have been aided by other (lesser) divine beings…”

--> Theosophy takes a slightly different approach. Theosophy sees a lot of the “creation” of the universe as work being delegated to subordinate or lesser principles ("beings"). Theosophy teaches that there is a central principle which guides the universe, but there are lesser principles that take care of parts of the universe. Each lesser principle has even lesser principles that take care of smaller parts of the universe, and so on, in an unending hierarchy that stretches all the way down to earth. According to theosophy, these lesser principles always appear in groups of seven.

Theosophy also teaches the idea that each solar system, each galaxy, etc., has a central principle guiding it. Each of these principles are part of that hierarchy that I have just mentioned, which brings us back to the story of Genesis and the creation of the earth and humanity. According to theosophy, there were seven semi-divine beings which created humanity, and they are the group of “gods” mentioned in Genesis 1:26.

By the way, Revelations 4:5 mentions a group of seven flames.

“And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.” (Revelations 4:5)

It is possible that the seven flames mentioned in Revelations 4:5 are the same entities mentioned in Genesis 1:26. Such an idea makes sense to me.

“…I find your ideas most interesting. Keep them coming!”

--> Omigosh, theosophy is such a huge field of literature, I do not know where to begin. Which religious ideas (both Christian and non-Christian) are you most interested in? Two basic Theosophical concepts are reincarnation and karma -- what do you think of these two concepts?