Open source Theosophy

[Martin Euser]

It is a little-known fact  that there are multiple theosophies in this world.

I suppose that theosophers are aware of the close affinity of Vedanta with Blavatskian theosophy, and, that some relation to Buddhism exists with her eclectic philosophy. But, there is so much more in the world than these systems of thought alone. Have you ever thought that there can be found many theosophies in the West? Yes, there are many such. 

A list of the most important ones:

-Greek theosophy (especially Proclus). Acknowledged by De Purucker.

-Jewish theosophy: Kabbalah. Recognized by Blavatsky.

-Teutonic theosophy (Jakob Boehme). Recognized by Blavatsky and Quan Judge.

-Celtic theosophy as found in the prose and poems of Druidic bards. Acknowledged by De Purucker.

-Gnostic philosophy as formulated by Vitvan. Certainly acknowledged by me as a valuable system, very cognate to Theosophy.

You see, there is a virtual goldmine here to be explored. 

I have personally made all the major works of Jacob Boehme available as texts on my scribd account and the same goes for the great theosopher Proclus. Together more than 5,000 pages of text. 

As to the other systems: Celtic theosophy can be found in the sacred-texts archive and Vitvan on www.sno.org

It will hardly come as a surprise that there are many recurrent themes to be found in these theosophies; themes on which there is much agreement as to how nature operates (which "laws" or principles are at work); agreement as to ethical standards, purification of soul, etc.

What  is slightly surprising, however, is that there has been done relatively little study on these systems, comparing ideas, extracting models of natural process, etc. 

One of the few theosophers who has done this a bit, is G.R.S. Mead.

Other names are James Morgan Pryse (Greek theosophy and Christianity), Alvin Boyd Kuhn (Greek theosophy, Egyptian religion and Christianity), Franz Hartmann (on Boehme and Paracelsus). But these were people born in the 19th century! What happened to the T.S. movement in the first half of the 20th century??? Well, we do know a bit of the desastrous developments that took place there, so, no need to repeat that. One century has been almost lost, hopefully the 21st century will see some new developments.

So, here is a goldmine of information to be explored. Hopefully some dynamic, young, or seasoned guys and girls, will see an opportunity to do some comparitive research as per the second object of the T.S.

It may lead to a revitalized theosophy. My own interest lies with extracting simple models for bio-psychological process. Maybe more about that later.

Anyone interested, and which true theosopher wouldn't be? - have a go at it!

[Martin Euser]

And of course there is the related material of the Hermetic tradition, alchemy, Jung, Tarot, Western Qabala, and its associated organizations, but this is a mixed bag of ripe and green material, which needs careful sifting.
Not to forget the plethora of all the would-be rosicrucian organizations and the like. There is simply too much of varying and questionable quality in that regard, so I simply skip that in this connection.

[M K Ramadoss]

There appears to be an overwhelming amount of literature available on the web and it is going to be difficult task to prioritize what each one of us want to study. Is not Internet opening up possibilities no one imagined a decade ago?

[Martin Euser]

Hence the necessity of developing discrimination as to quality of content.
With some this comes easy, others never seem to learn it. Time for a Wiki for the perplexed? :)
Making choices is necessary. Besides all this, I find it highly encouraging that there are multiple theosophies in the West. Gives us something to compare and can be a mighty help to prevent crystallization of thought ("H.P.B. said...", "The Master said..."). We *have* to learn to think for ourselves or we become marionettes.

[Martin Euser]

Elsewhere on this forum I have already mentioned the work of J.G. Bennett, incorporated in his systematics. He can be considered as one of the most creative philosophers of the post-world war two era. Drawing from Sufism (Islamic theosophy), and from Fourth Way philosophy, he formulated a method of enquiry which stimulates observation and reflection of natural order process. It is not a completely developed method, though. There remain tons of things to be researched. His work is quite reminiscent of theosophical notions of reality.

In the area of process philosophy I cannot omit Whitehead, the eminent philosopher and co-worker of Bertrand Russell. His theory of perception reminds me of Platonic concepts. It is quite useful to take notice of it. He also has intimations of involution and evolution, like our beloved Theosophy.

Finally, I mention Arthur Young, who was inspired by the Mahatma letters. His fourfold level model of developmental process is useful as a starter for enquiry into natural process. I have slightly reformulated his model in my own work on levels of process. See my ebook and blog.

[Daniel Noga]

I am glad to see these varied philosophies/systems being described by the term "theosophies." I have always been in favor of recognizing the broader sense of the term theosophy--less "branded," more inclusive. Thanks Martin!

[Joe Fulton]

There's no law out there saying that we can't come up with something ourselves.

Any ideas for a good name?

[Martin Euser]

Joe: I personally like to use the term "integral philosophy" for my writings, because this has no reference to the perhaps tainted term "theosophy". Plus it stresses the point that I like to deal with *philosophy*, contemplating and connecting notions of diverse kind, rather than embracing a *belief*. Not that there is something wrong with belief per se, but the connotation is often that of a blind believer, which I categorically reject to be.
Unfortunately, the term integral itself has become contaminated by the work of Ken Wilber, the associated biases in and with his work, so even this term is a bit suspect.
"Natural theology" sounds a bit too theological. What about natural philosophy?
This, after all, has been the name for the Greek philosophers of old.

[Daniel Noga]

I can empathize with what Paul has said. I have to admit that I get a headache every time I'm about to type the word "theosophy." "Do I capitalize it this time? Do I mean the word in the general or specific sense? Should I bother distinguishing the two? If I do, I might only confuse people as to my meaning..."

Still and all, I am very glad every time I see recognition of the fact that the word pre-dated the birth of HPB by a long, long time. The dispensation signified by brand-name Theosophy has a lot to offer, but I think we all agree that the experience of theos-sophia is what's really important. That meaning takes precedence for me.

The biggest problem with the "branding" of the term is that the "brand" labors under a great deal of dogmatic weight, which almost makes "Theosophy" an antonym of "theosophy"--I recognize that, too. For that reason, I think it is all the more important to continually assert that the word has a deeper meaning. I think the best way to broaden thought on the subject is to take advantage of (rather than lament) the word's more recent associations, Trojan-horse style, by refusing to let go of the word's broader meaning-- and by continually and deliberately using it in a non-branded context. For that reason, I feel no need to come up with a new word to replace it. It works for me.

[Richard Ihle]

Re [Paul]: "But the conflict between 'our beloved Theosophy' (HPB's) and everyone else who doesn't accept the Mahatma Letters as sacred scripture is so longstanding, it is not worth the hassle to even try to use the term theosophy."

Yes. Yes.

In my view the really only promising use of the word Theosophy may be to signify a particular type of EPISTEMOLOGY (what can be considered valid knowledge). In this connection I try to reproduce these related definitions every chance I get:

Theosophy: "Intuitive knowledge or wisdom resulting from direct experience of one's ('Divine') Transcendent Nature."

Microcosmic Theosophy: "Practical application of intuitive knowledge or wisdom at the human level, especially psychological insights and tools for the transformation of ordinary life into extraordinary life."

Perhaps many 19th and 20th Century individuals thought they were doing a good thing by trying to make the word Theosophy an exclusive synonym for HPB’s formulations of Cosmogenesis and Anthropogenesis. (Such usage is now at least a second definition in many or most standard dictionaries—and I even remember John Algeo citing this circumstance with great approbation on one occasion.)

Unfortunately, this great success in establishing Theosophy as a “specific, preternaturally dispensated whole-ball-of-wax to believe in” may actually be the thing which will eventually bring the term into most disrepute. (In these scientific times it does seem like the Australopithecines are kicking the Lemurians’ butts more and more every day, doesn’t it? . . .)

[And sports officials won’t even allow the headless Asiras “pudding-bags” and Hyperborean asexual shadow-people out on the playing field nowadays. . . .]

The paradox for me is that I consider much of HPB's work as real Theosophy BECAUSE IT WORKS AS AN ANALOGY" WITH ALL THE POSSIBLE PSYCHOLOGICAL STATES OF "MODIFIED CONSCIOUSNESS" (ego-formations, semi-Self delusions, or whatever one wants to call them).

Yes. Yes.

[Joe Fulton]

Howabout "transpsychospiritual" or the "TPS Group"

Creative is good...play off of this or come up with something of your own. We're all at least as bright as Charles Southeran (who came up with the name "Theosophical" for the TS).

[Martin Euser]

Richard: I like your definition of theosophy. To Paul: keep in mind that the word "theosophy", and "theosophical" are very old terms. Ammonius Saccas seems to have used it in the second century A.D. Later, it was used to indicate Divinely inspired knowledge, such as Boehme's work (the Teutonic theosopher). This happened long before Blavatsky started to use the term. But it has been monopolized by the Theosophical movement. We certainly need a new term for a reformed theosophy ("Reformed Theosophers", very funny indeed). I think we need terms such as "transformational", "spiritual", "growth", "change", "dynamic", "intuitive", "relational", "whole", "applied", "philosophy", "insight", to express something of the vibrant nature of what we stand for.
Applied philosophy? Spiritual philosophy? Something more playful? Transformer Network?

Richard: if you care to elaborate on the analogy you indicate, please do. Analogy is such a fascinating topic.

[Martin Euser]

Psycho-spiritual transformation network?
Inner Work Mediation network?