Important books - www.AnandGholap.net - Online Theosophy

[Anand Gholap]

This is one of the most important books every student of Theosophy and most importantly officers in Theosophical Society should study. It is important because it gives most valuable inputs for deciding direction of the Theosophical Society.
http://www.anandgholap.net/Krishnamurti_And_The_Search_For_Light-Ge...
Best
Anand Gholap

[Nick the Pilot]

Jon,

You are right in saying that we must always be careful of crossing the line into evangelism, even if such evangelism speaks ideas that refute Christianity. You said, "...we will not gain by refuting this pervasive belief." Really? I disagree. I think HPB would also disagree. If the Ancient Wisdom refutes a pervasive belief of any kind, then it is our duty to stand up and speak out, no matter how unpopular our words may be. (HPB certainly did this many, many times.)

The beauty of all this is that we can all voice our disagreements without sinking into the depths of evangelism, whether it be pro- or anti-Christian evangelism. I feel everyone in this thread has done a good job of avoiding such sinking, while voicing honest and frank disagreements. The very purpose of Theosophy is to provide a venue for such discussions.

Anand is determined to point out contradictions in HPB's teachings. I welcome his efforts in this direction. The more 'contradictions' he points out, the more we can get them explained, and remove any misunderstandings. We must thank Anand for pointing out these 'contradictions,' and hope that he continues to point out more.

[Jerry Perry]

I think Jesus was just an archetype.

Nick the pilot, I am PandaMentionalBeing from interfaith. Add me.

[Anand Gholap]

My experience is Theosophy is very powerful in teaching laws of nature. Christianity is very effective in changing heart of a person. So both are very much compatible. Actually, great leaders like Annie Besant, Leadbeater, G.S. Arundale and Geoffrey Hodson were 'Christian Theosophists'
Best
Anand Gholap

[Anand Gholap]

If somebody says according to Blavatsky historical Jesus existed, there is other group of students of Blavatsky that says historical Jesus did not exist. And if somebody says according to Blavatsky historical Jesus did not exist, there is other group of students of Blavatsky that says according to HPB historical Jesus existed.
Similar contradiction is observed among the students of Blavatsky while discussing the existence of God.
I think somebody should make a table giving references on left side where HPB said historical Jesus existed and on right side references where HPB said historical Jesus did not exist. Similar table about existence of God can be made.
This will greatly help in deciding Blavatsky's position on these most important topics.
Best
Anand Gholap

[Andrew W. Smith]

Those "Christian Theosophists" you mentioned are none of them the equal, or even of the same calibre, as HPB. Surely you don't imagine them to be "Christian Evangelists" like yourself, Anand. Whatever he (Jesus) was, and whether or not he even existed, is for the acdemicians and archaeologists to debate. I, too, think he never existed. Paul was the very first one to declare the "Christian" message in his own peculiar way---the "gospels" came late and were, no doubt, based upon a lot of early speculation and mythology. Paul was, without a doubt, a genius, but was his "vision" worthy of being the basis for the "New Testament"? I don't think so, myself! By the way, Dan Brown's "Angels and Demons" title was taken verbatim from "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Gibbon, who used the phrase "angels and demons" to describe the wars between the earliest "Christians." (I read Gibbon, all 2,000+ pages, about a year ago. If you want a page reference, I can give it to you.)

[Anand Gholap]

From the preceding messages it has become clear that Nick and Andrew belong to the group which says according to Blavatasky historical Jesus did not exist.
Also we saw that Konstantin and Janeth belong to that group which says according to Blavatsky historical Jesus did exist. All these four students are studying Theosophy for many years, and yet we see such huge contradiction while interpreting Blavatsky's writing. If old students are not unanimous about Blavatsky's writing, what will happen to people new to Theosophy? Because of such contradictions on most important points I don't recommend Blavatsky's writing.
I would suggest that when somebody gives his interpretation of Blavatsky's writing on existence or non-existence of Jesus and God, he/she should give references from Blavatsky's writing to prove their opinion.
Best
Anand Gholap

[Anand Gholap]

Jehoshua ben Pandira (or Panthera) (120?-71? B.C.):

born in Lydda, IX 204 (226)
an initiate, VIII 182; IX 19 & fn.-20 fn.
Jesus was actually, IV 361-62; VIII 204, 362 (380); IX 19-20 fn., 204 (226)
Massey on, VIII 381-82 fn.
Masters affirm, was real Jesus, VIII 362 fn. (380 fn.)

These are references to the Blavatsky Collected Writings.

It will be more helpful if you give statements that these references are pointing to.
Best
Anand Gholap

[William Vollrath]

"The biblical Jesus did not exist." Some 95% of scholars who have studied Jesus would probably disagree with those who state this. There almost certainly was an historic Jesus who did live and teach much of what is attributed to his life in the Bible...

[Janeth]

>"The biblical Jesus did not exist." Some 95% of scholars who have studied Jesus would probably disagree with those who state this."---Right on, William!!☺ Such perception begs the question, if Avatar Jesus-who by the way compassionately (understanding compassion as 'divine love'), and altruistically volunteered to reincarnate for the purpose of bringing spiritual cleansing to human beings permeating us all with the Christ energy, this divine energy most powerfully present and felt during Christmas-then who brought it up to us?

[Konstantin Zaitzev]

> Jehoshua ben Pandira (or Panthera) (120?-71? B.C.):
...
> Masters affirm, was real Jesus, VIII 362 fn. (380 fn.)
> These are references to the Blavatsky Collected Writings.

Besant and Leadbeater and Hodson give the same datings, while Leadbeater questions the Gospel story, regarding it rather a symbolic story of the initiate, though containing several real sayings of Jesus. So I see a consensus in essentials between Blavatsky and other theosophical writers on this matter.

[Janeth]

From Nicholas: "Here is the name of the real "Jesus".--It would be wise to keep in mind that when someone says things such as "real", it should be understood that it is real to the one particular consciousness expressing such idea, as well as the consciousness of those whose perception/intuition are in sync with that specific consciousness. "..., you must still remember that of the real and the unreal there are many varieties; and discrimination must still be made between the right and the wrong, the important and the unimportant, the useful and the useless, the true and the false, the unselfish and the selfish." -Master K.H.'s words to Alcione, who in turn gave them to us in the form of the book ATFOTM.

[Janeth]

>"So in this case your point is not relevant."---I respectfuly disagree with you Nicholas, and I know for a fact others too. My point is very much reliable, indeed. As with everything, each individual's understanding is subject to his/her own level of evolution he/she finds himself/herself in at a particular moment in time.