Theosophobia and christophobia

[Adyarman]

Janeth advised me to open a discussion of my own where Christianity can be discussed. I thought it more appropriate to discuss each other's negative image, as that might be most fruitful.
Only a few years ago I gave courses in theosophy, then I turned around and now I explain why theosophy is wrong. That is what I mean with 'theosophobia'. It happens often that converts like to criticize convictions of the past and while I think: "from how deep has God lifted me", theosophists probably think: "how deep can human fall" on contemplating my case. Of course my contributions to this forum are provocative, although I try to comment on ideas and concepts and not on people holding them. I admit that I'm not very polite or respectful about most ideas, but I always try to be respectful to the person whom I conceive to entertain incorrect views. Every human being has a right to be stupid, to fail, to sin and still be treated in a cordial way. And he has a right to be shown where and how his concepts go wrong, if he likes to learn.
I got a few remarks back, like Pablo Sender explaining how Christianity is 'especially' killing infidels. Such reactions are natural and don't bother me. I think Pablo is a gentle person. On the other hand, Christophobia is part of theosophy. It has deeper roots than Pablo's take, where he explains: "This is one of the reasons why Blavatsky was so against the church, although she was never against the figure of Jesus and his teachings." I believe she was against the figure of Jesus and also against his teachings. At the root of this conflict lie contradictory interpretations of the universe and the destiny of man. HPB depicts Gnostics as 'esoteric Christianity', while Christians call it 'heresy'. Some other day I intend to go deeper into this conflict.
The title of this discussion wall is negative. I intent to give negative comments on theosophy and counter negative comments on Christianity. Theosophists are invited to 'talk back'. Perhaps, out of all this negativity something good may arise, like a deeper understanding.

[Adyarman]

As a part of God Jesus was no doubt the first to have the wisdom of God.

[Brother Bruce]

Greetings Adyarman,
Read what T. Subba Row in his Gita: Philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita says.

He starts the lecture in a true theosophical spirit:
Quote:
All of you know that our Society is established upon a cosmopolitan basis. We are not wedded to any particular creed or to any particular system of religious philosophy. We consider ourselves as mere enquirers. Every great system of philosophy is brought before us for the purpose of investigation. At the present time we are not at all agreed upon any particular philosophy which could be preached as the philosophy of our Society. This is no doubt a very safe position to take at the commencement. But from all this it does not follow that we are to be enquirers and enquirers only. We shall, no doubt, be able to find out the fundamental principles of all philosophy and base upon them a system which is likely to satisfy our wants and aspirations. You will kindly bear this in mind, and not take my views as the views of the Society, or as the views of any other authority higher than myself. I shall simply put them forward for what they are worth. They are the results of my own investigations into various systems of philosophy and no higher authority is alleged for them. It is only with this view that I mean to put forward the few remarks I have to make.

Now we can look at the aims of one of the Theosophical Societies:


"To form a nucleus of the Universal Brotherhood of Humanity, without distinction of race, creed, sex, caste, or color.
To encourage the study of Comparative Religion, Philosophy, and Science.
To investigate unexplained laws of Nature and the powers latent in Man."


There is nothing there about it being a path or having dogmas (Eastern or otherwise) and forcing people to believe one thing or another. You often find anthroposophists speaking at theosophical societies around the world- and of course, Rudolf Steiner was leader of the German Section for a long stint.

"A theosophist has always before him the ideal of a universal single occultism, free of all religious prejudice."

Here Rudolf Steiner explains the ideals of theosophy, not as Eastern or Western but as a universal movement.

There is no Eastern, Western, Christian, Buddhist Theosophy:

"We must learn completely to overcome the inclination to a theosophy of a definite stamp and coloring. It has gradually come about in the history of evolution that theosophies have tended to receive a certain nuance and coloring in accordance — I will not say with religious prejudices, but with religious preconceived feelings and opinions. Theosophy needs to keep constantly in view its ideal, — to be a reflection of occultism. There can therefore be no such thing as a Buddhist theosophy or a Hindu theosophy, or a Zoroastrian or a Christian. Naturally, regard must be had to the characteristic ideas and thoughts with which particular people will approach theosophy.
Nevertheless it must never let go its ideal of being a pure expression for occult truth. It was, for example, a repudiation of the fundamental principle of occultists all the world over, when a
theosophy made its appearance among certain societies in Central Europe, calling itself a "Christian" theosophy. As a matter of fact, you can just as little have a Christian theosophy as a Buddhist theosophy or a Zoroastrian."

"The relation theosophy has to assume to religion is that of an expounder of its truths. For theosophy is in a position to understand the truths of religion....."

[Vincent]

Kabbalistic theosophy

[Vincent]

A friend of mine became a member of an anthroposophy cult in the 1970's. the cult is operated by the former prime minister of Hungary, who was being tortured by the Nazis at the close of WWII.

Her family has given up on her. The old Hungarian has done some prison time for fraud.

Its a sad story really....

[Arthur E Gregory]

Brother Bruce,

Thanks for posting that passsage from Subba Row! An excellent statement indeed. I have a fond memory of reading his book.

- Art

[Brother Bruce]

Let's put this link down Br. Arthur. A very good discussion on the nature of the Logos. Subba Row was a very learned man- probably the most learned theosophist of his time. Even H.P.B. turned to him for advice.

[Adyarman]

Brother Bruce
Dogma is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization: some dogma's are authoritative and not to be disputed, others are conceptual ways to understand the world and the universe
Devising dogma is the way forward in intellectual development. Teaching dogma is the only option for a teacher: either you teach dogma, or you don't teach at all.
Doubting dogma's is a way to find out if they hold, but doubting dogma's is not wisdom in itself, if you cannot find that some dogma fails, it is in fact a sign of stupidity to continue doubting it.
I did hold theosophical dogma's until I could show myself that they failed. Then I embraced Christian dogma's.
Christianity holds a few dogma's that are authoritative, like the existence of God, that Jesus is the Lord, that the bible is the written and correct summary of Gods teaching to humanity. If you don't believe these things, you're no Christian, it's simple as that.
In the texts you cite, I would like to point out two basic tenets, that one needs to hold if one wants to regard himself a theosophist, these are
1: "We shall, no doubt, be able to find out the fundamental principles of all philosophy and base upon them a system which is likely to satisfy our wants and aspirations."
And 2: "Nevertheless it must never let go its ideal of being a pure expression for occult truth."
My critique to 1: The fundamental principle of all philosophy is facts and experiences, not a shared abstract concept. There is no single abstraction of facts and experiences. We can think of the universe as an autonomous system without God, or we can think of a universe as a heteronymous system with God. We can think of man as destined to become a god, or as destined to become like Adam in Paradise, or as destined to die and cease to exist. By comparing these abstractions, you find no shared concept, hence no theosophy.
My critique to 2: Occult truth is a religion of its own, with concepts like the hermetic law, the ring pass not and the quest of the divine spark. These concepts do not hold if you compare them with facts and experiences, but by using the method of 'esoteric interpretation' theosophists manage to suggest them to be the basis of every consistent text. IMO 'esoteric interpretation' is a logical fallacy.

[Jack Donaldson]

You continue to claim dogma is a Theosophical path. When in fact, questioning is not forbidden. "If you don't believe this, or you don't believe that, you are not a Theosophist", is not an assertion made by a Theosophist. It is sort of intimidating when an individual listens to, or reads the words of a man stating, "if you don't believe this, or you don't believe that, you are not a Christian". This, you have done. You have made intimidating assertion. I also note you claimed to have studied Theosophy. I also note you are now utilizing Theosophical studies as part of Christian beliefs. I also remind that Origen was prohibited from the Bible, which means the General Doctrine of Reimbodiment, with collateral Teachings concerning Karma, are not of the Christian Bible. You are extremely disengenuous in your use of the Christian beliefs, and having beliefs which were banned from the Bible as part of your basis here upon this forum. Are Christians suddenly believing in Reimbodiment and Karma? Thus you would also believe life exists upon all planets and every Celestial Body. Are you therefore a reformer of the Christian religion? Shouldn't you have as a first priority, your reformation of the Christian religion accepted and thus authorized as Doctrine?

I simply believe all force/substance is Life. The fact that the physical body decays upon death proves subsumed life is now freed from my Higher Principles which have departed. Anarchy has begun as Life-atoms free themselves from the physical body. If my Higher Principles are subsumed into something Higher still, this is probably Natural and also might even be said to be more of an accord and concord. Near agreement. Christianity probably would do well in going back to Origen, Clement, Philo Judaeus, Moses and Plato, Pythagoras. The only reason they were dropped in the first place, was due to writings based upon superstitio (the result of additions onto a body of writings), and when they at times came upon writings from Origen, or Clement, they seemed foreign and distorted, seeing as how they lacked the necessary keys for interpretation.

Just because I want to study in order to understand, it doesn't mean I am indulging in superbio (pride). The latter can manifest within any man, including the least educated. Pride is not limited to only a narrow spectrum of humanity. Any and all can fall into its thrall.

[Adyarman]

So according to you, Janeth and Pablos Sender it is like this:
If you go to a theosophical bookshop, and you say: "I'd like to have a book that explains theosophical teachings", then to your utter amazement the attendent will answer: "I'm sorry Sir, but there no such thing as written theosophical teachings. What we have for sale in our shop are just books that happen to be populair among members of the Theosophical Society. These members believe anything and they don't share any common belief."
Right?
Come on folks, you know better and I know better.

[michaelcarlo]

Our Humanity has been in the possession of our "Secret Doctrine" since the arrival of the Manasaputras. Any Theosophist denying the existence of our "Doctrine" for whatever reasons, political correctness, agitation with the status quo or fear that our "Doctrine" might become dogmatic, might as well deny themselves because their sense of self or personality is more imaginary. In the recent past our "Doctrine" was revealed by invitation only (Mystery Initiations), to those deemed worthy. Just as our most recent Avatar, Jesus of the Piscean Age opened the door for our Humanity, qualifying in mass, our entrance into the Kingdom of the Gods. H.P.B was instructed to unveil our "Doctrine", "laying bare" the enigma of our past so all could understand the truth of who, what and why, proclaiming our place in the creation, qualifying us for another evolutional step in consciousness. It's come full circle. The tyranny of religious dogma was overthrown by materialistic empiricism, which is now being overthrown by the spiritual light of Occultism, which balances these two opposite poles and begins the great battle in Scorpio, between the Higher and lower self, which must be won individually before the student can progress. Open your spiritual eyes, the clock is ticking down, Aquarius is on the horizon, it's showtime.

[Jack Donaldson]

Adyarman wrote;So according to you, Janeth and Pablos Sender it is like this:
If you go to a theosophical bookshop, and you say: "I'd like to have a book that explains theosophical teachings", then to your utter amazement the attendent will answer: "I'm sorry Sir, but there no such thing as written theosophical teachings. What we have for sale in our shop are just books that happen to be populair among members of the Theosophical Society. These members believe anything and they don't share any common belief."
Right?
Come on folks, you know better and I know better.>>

That would seem to be the judgement of the person in the book store. And yours.

[Jack Donaldson]

I still await answer concerning the General Doctrine of Reimbodiment, and its collateral teachings such as Karma. Do Christian's accept this now? I'm fairly certain the two have been rejected long ago. Are you part of a Christian Reformist Group, Adyarman?

michaelcarlo wrote;
The tyranny of religious dogma was overthrown by materialistic empiricism, which is now being overthrown by the spiritual light of Occultism, which balances these two opposite poles...>>

That is well put.