Theos-Talk Archives (September 2007 Message tt00126)

Daniel,

Right. Perhaps the thing to do is identify clearly the teachings and 
terms of those authors you have listed by prefacing their initials 
before [their] theosophy, such as HPB-Theosophy, AB-Theosophy,or CWL-
Theosophy. Well, I don't know if that's workable. I'm inclined to 
think (or hope) there's only one Theosophy. 

I think I like the idea of a "preferred" (or "official") reading 
list. Would we even consider some sort of a certificate to enforce 
attention and study? We could come up with some reasonable questions 
based on IU, SD, VOS, etc., as Theos I, Theos II, Theos III, or 
something like that so we'd know they had the "basics." Then the 
other authors would be "extra credit," how's that?

But I don't know how good I'd be at tests nowadays. :)

No, I'm coming back to the idea of a Theosophical reading list that 
is agreed upon by those who know. Then, when someone mentions a 
doctrine that is not "official" or "approved" there is the written 
standard by which to compare and judge. We can start with, or leave 
it at, HPB's and the Mahatma's works.

Best,
Scribe

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@...> wrote:
>
> Not just the writings & teachings 
> of Besant, Leadbeater & Bailey...
> --------------------------------------------
> 
> Don,
> 
> In commenting on the issues we have 
> addressed in our recents posts, we
> should not forget that there are
> more than just the writings
> and teachings of Besant, Leadbeater
> & Bailey to consider!
> 
> Confining ourselves to what I call
> the broad "Theosophical Movement", 
> there are scores of individuals who
> have made claims to be in contact with
> HPB's teachers and have written books
> giving out Theosophical (?) teachings, etc.
> 
> See the list at:
> 
> http://blavatskyarchives.com/referencessourcestheosophy.htm
> 
> Scroll down this above page I compiled and see all 
> the names of people listed!
> 
> Most of these persons have made claims about
> being in contact with HPB's adepts or with other
> adepts or some variation of the claim.
> 
> All have written books.  I have read a good sample
> of books written by most of these writers.  I guess I could say 
that
> in each and every book I read I have found something
> (well, at least a few nuggets!) of value.  But finding
> such "nuggets" doesn't mean that therefore one should assume
> that the claims and teachings of said individual are therefore 
valid
> and true.
> 
> Who has the inclination (not to mention the time and effort) to
> sort thru all of this morass of books, teachings, writings, claims
> and try to figure out what might be actually "wild and fanciful 
> speculation", "disfigurements" of Theosophy,  "mis-statements and 
> absurdities", "mistakes" as contrasted with "the truths of
> Theosophy" and the "the original teachings"????  [I have put in 
> quotes the different phrases and words that were used by HPB in 
> her writing on these issues.]
> 
> That is why I suggest to new students and inquirers that if they 
are 
> interested in learning more of Theosophy, it might be a smart move 
as 
> well as a simple one to simply go and read some of HPB's works, 
for 
> example, her KEY TO THEOSOPHY and A.P. Sinnett's ESOTERIC BUDDHISM.
> 
> I am revising right now a list of recommended introductory reading 
> which I hope to post in the next week or so.
> 
> One can also profit from reading some of the articles and essays 
> posted on the web which can be found thru our Theosophy.INFO 
website:
> 
> http://theosophy.info.
> 
> Daniel
> http://hpb.cc
>