New Secret Doctrine Abridgement published

[Mark R. Jaqua]

There is a new abridgement of the Secret Doctrine out by Michael Gomes, and published by Penguin Paperbacks in paperback and ebook, both at $17.95 US. (288pp.) It is good to see a major publisher have a Blavatsky book out. Gomes has a good intuition in his historical papers, so I imagine it is a good selection. There are probably many abridgements of the SD, the only I know of are, One edited by Elizabeth Preston and Christmas Humphreys for Quest Books and Theosophical Publishing house (260pp, $12.00), and another by Katherine Hillard, way back about 1900.
(link:)

>http://us.penguingroup.com/nf/Book/BookDisplay/0,,9781101106983,00.html?The_Secret_Doctrine_H.P._Blavatsky/body>

[Mark R. Jaqua]

I guess one either has an intuition for the material or one doesn't, which sounds hokey, but I think is true. Like the Buddha says, one shouldn't believe anything until he is satisfied about it himself. On the "Secret Books", David Reigle did just what you talk about, and tried to find some of this material. Wizards Bookshelf has two of his books: "The Books of Kiu-Te" and "Blavatsky's Secret Books." The link is:

[Tero T. Kuoppala]

I'm still having trouble believing in the Dzyan books and Kiu-Te. I don't exactly know why. Guess it seems so absurd that nobody else has "seen" the books and where exactly did HPB get the ideas of such a book ever existing and why isn't it at my local library? :) I'm new to theosophy. My background is from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Firstborn_Laestadianism

There are probably all kinds of explanations such as ooh the world isn't ready to see something so "controversial etc" or it wouldn't be accepted anyways... and so on.

I want concrete evidence of such a book ever existing. It's just the way I feel. I do feel a lot of what is said by HPB in her writings are truth but where did it all come from? Is clairvoyance so powerful for chosen people that we just have to have faith in all of this in that way?

[Erica Georgiades]

The S.D. is a book which I would say that 80 percent (or more) of Theosophists haven't studied it. The Abridgment offers a general view of the main teachings in the S.D., and in fact is a handbook for those interested in the Stanzas. However this is not all. The abridgment also raises the interest - of someone - to study the S.D. It is a great attempt to simplify and popularize the S.D..

[Mark R. Jaqua]

On thinking more about the lack of "19th century science" in the abridgment that Katinka mentions in her review - another advantage of HPB giving her own and the Lodge's perspective on science, is that one can get a handle on just what esoteric Theosophy's paradigm is, and how it differs from science - some of this difference in paradigm is drastic and fundamental. For instance, we take it for granted that our physical bodies generate energy from eating food - but the Theosophical paradigm is that we receive our body's energy from absorbing or withstanding the stream of prana in the environment - a basic difference (example from "Transactions," however.) The Theosophical paradigm is more all-encompassing. One can piece-together bits of the paradigm from HPB's seemingly "out-dated" comments.

[Erica Georgiades]

The abridgment by Michael Gomes is probably one of the most inspiring works ever done on the Secret Doctrine. Its a very successful attempt to extract its essence. I recommend it to anyone who wants to know better the Secret Doctrine.

[Mark R. Jaqua]

Yeah, the original is best of course, but 99.99999999% of the people out there don't care about our fastidiousness. It might attract or interest some. One could also regard it as a "Selection" from the SD, which isn't as offensive.

[christinaleestemaker]

i prefere in all the original, So I have the three originals from HPB 's SD.

[Mark R. Jaqua]

Yes, nice little review, Katinka. Its good some people make an effort. One thing one can learn from the "19th century science" in the SD, perhaps, is that science is just a mental paradigm, or mental construct. If you push the basic concepts to the limits, you find that they are based on nothing absolute, but work within practical parameters.

[Katinka Hesselink]

yes, it's great isn't it? A very meditative version of The Secret Doctrine based mostly on the Stanzas of Dzyan. I did a bit of a review here: Introduction to the Secret Doctrine.