Theos-Talk Archives (September 2004 Message tt00071)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Vera Santos <saffiebr@y...> wrote:

> Hi Pedro
> 
> This is Vera, from Brazil. I think I am missing your point in this 
> discussion. Have you found any diasgreement between HPB's writings 
and 
> the teachings contained in the old scriptures? I mean, are there 
any 
> disagreement between HPB's teachings and the Vedanta, the Vedas, 
> Upanishads, BG, and so on? If you have found disagreements, ok, 
tell us 
> which they are. If not, don't you agree that HPB's writings are a 
> reproduction of the old teachings, I mean, the *original* ones? 
And if 
> they are reproductions, are not them *original* also? What 
disqualifies 
> them as being *original*?

Hi Vera,

Can I reply in Portuguese? (lol)

The point I was trying to make, and judging by your post I probably 
failed to do so, was that a number of participants on this list use 
the expression "Original Teachings" as applicable to the writings of 
Madame Blavatsky, William Q. Judge and "The Mahatma Letters". 

Although I agree that Madame Blavatsky's writings, for example, are 
the source (or original teachings) of modern Theosophy, Theosophy as 
a timeless tradition, antedates in many centuries its modern 
formulation by HPB. The quote from the SD in my post referred to by 
you clearly says that: theosophical teachings are the result of the 
enquiry and experience of countless generations of initiated Seers, 
which, if true, makes impossible to invest one particular individual 
as the sole authority of Theosophy.

Sometimes, on studying "The Secret Doctrine", one can come across 
references by HPB to three, four or even five different ancient 
traditions in ONE PARAGRAPH! So, Vera, I was not referring to 
disagreements between HPB and the ancient traditions. I was just 
trying to point out that her teachings are not really "original", 
belonging as they do to the ancient Wisdom-Religion, "the spiritual 
heritage of humanity."


Pedro