Talk:Theosophy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Religion Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

This article has been rated as B on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Occult Portal

Theosophy is supported by WikiProject Occult in order to expand, improve, and standardize articles related to the occult. Feel free to edit the article attached to this talk page and/or become a participating member.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

	This article is being improved by WikiProject Rational Skepticism. Wikiproject Rational Skepticism seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with science, pseudosciences, pseudohistory and skepticism. Please feel free to help us improve this page. See Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

[edit] Old comments from 2002

This article appears to be a collection of quotes... where are these quotes all from? Did whoever put them here have permission to quote them? (The amount of text quoted, especially in comparison to the amount of unquoted text, probably exceeds the amount permitted under fair use.) SJK 15:29, January 10, 2002

Also, it would be useful to have some information on when, where and by who theosophy was founded, and where its beliefs derived from...i.e. its historical sources. -- SJK 15:29, January 10, 2002

Apparently from the web site cited in the article: see http://www.ts-adyar.org/theosophy.html - but where are they from? -- The Anome 16:02, January 10, 2002

I agree with SJK here re fair use. Quotations from a creed do not really make for a good encyclopedia article in any case. I'd like to hear from the person/people who added this article, before we just remove all the quotes. --LMS (Larry Sanger) 17:42, January 10, 2002

I'm still working on the article. I plan to paraphrase all the quotes and add comments of my own, as well as some history. Sorry to create such a stir! :) F. Lee Horn

Better now? NO, it is not DONE! ;))) F. Lee Horn 21:02, January 10, 2002

Sorry this is taking so long to write, but I can only take Theosophy in small doses! (unsigned, undated entry from February 2002)

[edit] Congratulations!

I have been a Member of the Teosophical Society for over 20 year. I not only congratulate your efforts but thank you for helping us spreading the existence of the Divine Wisdom. Theosophy is not an easy matter and I understand you cannot tackle it all at once. Thank you once again and keep the good work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.199.99.237 (talk • contribs) 11:31, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

I see that there is a Samael Aun Weor quote in the article. Is he considered a member of Theosophy? I would think otherwise. Luis Dantas 13:43, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The reason I have deleted the irrelevent comments from this talk page is that they do not discuss the article, which is what this talk page is for. Furthermore, they may be interpreted as offensive. --Blainster 00:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

One of the root races in Theososophy is the Aryan. The word "Aryan" translates as "noble". I'm not sure exactly what significance the concept of nobility has in Theosophy.Gringo300 12:37, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Research Topic

Can somebody please search for the perported racist and anti-semitic quotes made by Mm. Blavatsky and Alice Baily. I am thinking of making a balancing heading on this article which may reveal some unpleasant things about this religion (please try to study the context also, I do not want to go on a wild goos chase by adding presumptions). Also add it's possible foundation in racist enterpretations of the Varna system.

I feel there are some issues that we must tackle here, serious issues that may involve much of the New Age and "Postmodernism"... (See: [1] and [2]. Thank you, see my other contributions.

RoyBot 11:46pm, 17 Dec 2005

I mean Alice Bailey is easy: http://www.pinenet.com/rooster/bailey.html "The Jewish race, who loved the possessions of the world more than they loved the service of Light, joined ranks with the rebels against God [and against the Aryan race, whom Bailey admires] Thus the history of the wandering Jew began and the Jew since has known no lasting peace."

As for the Varna system, if you want to cite rascism, you need to look to what India did with it. Origonally, the Varna system origonally had nothing to do with race, and one's position was NOT inherited. Sethie 22:03, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, according to madame Blavatsky's "The secret Doctrine" , the Jews were part of the Aryan Race. --Vindheim 02:15, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Earth Changes delete

Hey, would you people care to give your opinion about Earth changes? The article is about to be deleted: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Earth_changes -- Subramanian ^talk 08:47, October 11, 2005

[edit] Reincarnation, Karma in Chistianism

Hello! We may need your opinions here, as the article on karma, as well as the article on bible and reincarnation, have been labeled tendentious (POV). Subramanian ^talk 00:06, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Of course there is Karma in Christianity, the the word for sin (Chet) and Dharma are antinyms (Chet, as you may have heard, is an archery term similar to "foul" in baseball). In Christian theology, man is inherently unable to fulfill his dharma (as is quite evident). The scape goats, sin offerings, peace offereings, and Christos himself can be coneptualized as a kind of shock obsorber, taking in an ever compounding negative force (which generally overwhelms our attempts to express it possitively). However, if you mean karma as reincarnation, the answer is negative, (we are ressurected, possibly implanted into superior, possibly mechanical beings given the scriptural description).

RoyBot 06:21pm, Dec 18 2005

[edit] Theosophy and theosophy

I came to this page from the Wiki article on Jakob Bohme. Bohme's theosophy is distinct from the Theosophical Society that this article treats. This distinction is recognized in most academic study of Western esoteric thought presently. See, for example, http://www.theohistory.org/prospectus.html - esp. note 1. Mixed into this article are references to both senses of the word, and this is very misleading and confusing.

I propose that a disambiguation page be created and an article be made that deals with 'lower-case "t"' theosophy, and that the few references here to that sense of the word be removed and placed in the new article. I may be able to do this myself at some point or someone else may offer to do it. I will wait to see what people think before I take any further action ofcourse. Aglie 23:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm...I think that makes sense. The problem is one of "undue weight" and perhaps conflation ("theosophy" and "Theosophy") as well. Due weight would give a great deal of space to Swedenborg and Boehme, but I think a short discussion with links is more to the point. Randwolf 18:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Swastika' or 'fylfot'?

I am not sure that the word 'swastika' conveys the innocent, apolitical intentions of Theosophists' use of this symbol. See [[3]]. Etaonsh 08:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

For Indian Hindus and Theosophists, the swastika continues to be a symbol of auspiciousness. It has existed for millenia as such, and became part of the Theosophical logo well before its appropriation by the Nazis. Recent European history should not be the sole determinant for what is appropriate for Wikipedia, if this encyclopedia is to have global relevance.--Chhaprahiya@yahoo.com 01:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

I would question the neutrality of this article. I refer you to the first paragraph, claiming the coherence of Theosophy. Perhaps this should be re-worded to avoid any neutrality issues. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.71.36.79 (talk • contribs) 12:37, May 22, 2006 (UTC)

The problems seem to me undue weight and conflation of two different philosophical systems. The OED gives two definitions for theosophy. Definition one: the philosophies of Pseudo-Dionysius, Cornelius Agrippa, Paracelsus, Robert Fludd and, especially, Jakob Boehme, which are based in Western occultism (pseudo-Denys was a 6cy neo-platonist; the rest were Renaissance mystics). The greatest influence here (not mentioned by the OED) was probably on Swedenborg. Definition two: the theories of the Theosophical Society, which are based in Indian mysticism. If due weight were given, we would have to give Pseudo-Denys and Boehme quite a few more bytes, and Swedenborg might get more space than Blavatsky; I know that when I looked up theosophy I wasn't looking for an extended discussion of the beliefs of the Theosophical Society. I would prefer to see this split this into two articles: Theosophy (history of philosophy), which I would prefer to see at most three or four paragraphs with links to specific philosophers, and Theosophy (Theosophical Society). Randwolf 08:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I have started a stub artice about pre-Blavtskyan theosophy. With the exception of the Boehme article, none of the other articles you mention mentions anything about theosophy in their articles. And the Boehme article merely states that he influenced theosophical thought. If you search Theosophy on Google you'll see that all of the first pages of results are about Blavatskyan thesophy. It's much more widely used in this sense. --Jrphaller 11:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] seal of theosophical society

The seal shown is not that of the main theosophical society (TS- Adyar). I have therefore removed it's description.--Vindheim 18:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC) The seal was deleted:

Image:Theosophical Society emblem .jpg

H.P. Blavatsky's personal seal

[edit] Delete external link to Terry Bergeson?

I'm Athansor 15:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)new to Wikipedia, so I thought I should ask before I acted.

In External links, there is a link to a Wikipedia page on Terry Bergeson, a state politician who happens to be a theosophist. The page itself looks a little suspect to me. A person seeking knowledge about theosophy isn't like to gain very much from following this link.

I would suggest that the link be deleted.

Athansor 15:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Including Dr. Bergeson in the list of theosophists is essential. Her work in introducing Theosophical teachings into public education should not be ignored nor minimized.

I highly recommend keeping the link.

B8 3 February 2007

I see nothing on the Terry Bergeson page that indicates she has done anything to introduce Theosophical teachings into public education.

[edit] Major blanking

Since "Theosophy" means much more than Blavatskean Theosophy, I've moved most of that material to Theosophical Society. Hope the edit sticks... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.167.160.171 (talk) 09:52, 4 January 2007 (UTC).

Probably not. The Theosophical Society page is about the organisation. This page is about the Philosophy and Religion. If you fancy to do something useful, you can well write something about the "other theosophy" here or on a dedicated separate article. --Mallarme 22:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you have it backwards. "Theosophy" is the broader term (as HPB herself says), and was around for literally thousands of years before her. If a new article is needed, it should be "Blavatskean Theosophy" or something, and leave this as the more general one.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.167.169.39 (talk)

Wikipedia uses the most common name of a person or thing. When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine? For example, the page about jazz should simply be called "Jazz", not "Jazz music", because "jazz" refers in almost any context to a genre of music, and the simpler title makes linking easier. Adding the word "music" is redundant. We use Julius Caesar (not Imperator Gaius Iulius Caesar Divus.) Even if there are many other Julius Caesar's Julius Caesar (disambiguation). You can well write something about the "other theosophy" here or on a dedicated separate article. --Mallarme 20:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

In that case, I suppose our disagreement is about how (un)important Blavatskean Theosophy is viz. other forms. I would compare the situation with "Madonna"--a search engine will yield links about the entertainer, but the encyclopedia should give priority to the Virgin Mary. In both cases the wider, older term should get priority.

So Lucius Julius Caesar should now also be the Julius Caesar article, because he lived before the more famous one? Wikipedia uses the most common name for the article name. When choosing a name for a page ask yourself: What word would the average user of the Wikipedia put into the search engine? Even if modern Theosophy is not the oldest Theosophy of the world, it is the most common use of the name. The articles discusses both concepts, and since the modern use of the term is much more common and has much more secondary sources, it has more place in the article. You are not willing or not able to write anything about your "Theosophy" in this or another article, but you only blank everything about the modern use of the term. This is just vandalism. --Mallarme 10:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Could we please hear from people other than Mallarme?

I think it depends on how frequently Boehme and Swedenborg &c. used the word theosophy: was it barely used it all until M. Blavatsky revived it, or is theosophy a major concept in their works? Algabal 06:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sorry for not using proper italicised english transliteration

Thanatos666 01:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusivenes

Whoever changed the direct quote from the Theosophist (and many other publications) of the stated objectives of Theosophy to make it more "inclusive" (i.e., by removing the word Brotherhood) needs to stop. You just don't change direct quotes so they match your feelings. I have fixed this. Algabal 03:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of links on theosophy pages

Ohnoitsjamie (talk · contribs) has deleted all links that he could find to the katinkahesselink website, with the pretext that they were spam and were spammed by Kh7.[4] The links were not added by Kh7 to many of these articles, A. G. E. Blake, Mahatma Letters, Ernest Wood, The Ancient Wisdom, Edicts of Ashoka, Ashoka the Great, and many other articles. After she was warned for adding the links, she has only added two links (which she shouldn't have done), but then Ohnoitsjamie goes on and deletes links that were added by other people or before she was warned. The links point to a website that is not a spamsite, a website which is often linked on other websites and is of high quality. Some of these links were added with an explanation that even that they are appropriate to the article. [5]--Voidocore 15:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Theosophy's Racial Belief System

This article is incomplete if it does not mention Theosophy's concepts regarding so-called "Root Races" and "savage" races. See Aryan Race.Typing monkey 17:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I strongly agree, this has been a source of great controversy. Algabal 06:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to Agrippa, Boehme, etc.

There was a group of Renaissance philosophers: Cornelius Agrippa, Paracelsus, Robert Fludd, and, especially, Jacob Boehme; the Enlightenment theologian Emanuel Swedenborg was influenced by these.

Judging from some of the discussion here, this sentence seems out of context, incomplete, and/or out of place. It doesn't offer enough details to integrate it with the rest of the article.

The construction is a bit indirect. A better way to phrase it would be:

A group of Renaissance philosophers -- the scientific-minded occultists Cornelius Agrippa, Paracelsus, Robert Fludd, and, especially, the Christian mystic Jacob Boehme -- influenced the Enlightenment theologian Emanuel Swedenborg.

Because I know little about this subject, I'll leave this for others to consider and take action on.

--Athansor 17:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure that this link belongs here, and it is already included in Theosophy (history of philosophy). It is not specific / original to Swedenborg, Blatavsky, et al.Typing monkey 02:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

This page seems vastly undersourced to me. Also there are glaring examples of promotional and just plain weird statements, eg written by highly evolved humans. Who says so? What are we to make of this? Rumiton 10:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Krotona

If any editors have information about Krotona, please take some time to help me fill out that stub, would you? I don't know much about it, myself. Eaglizard 22:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Courtesy notification of report: WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard

This is to inform editors on this page that this topic, along with a list of related topics, have been mentioned in a report at this link on the WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. It has been mentioned in the noticeboard report that some of the articles listed in the report may be nominated for deletion.

The report at the noticeboard was not posted by me. I'm placing this comment here as a courtesy for the editors working on this article. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minority religious beliefs should not be treated as "fringe theories"

All one can do with any religion, let alone those apart from the mainstream, is to faithfully report their beliefs taken from the literature of the believers of their religious belief system. In doing so, we are not assesing truth claims (such as the Mormons believing that God is a physical being on another planet), one simply reports on the beliefs held, with as much accuracy as possible - with reliable sources and references.

There is no need at all to assess the truth claims of the 20th century new religions. If people were to delve into assessing the truth claims of religion, then an entry on Christianity may as well begin with assessing whether God exists. The best approach would seem to be an accurate rendition of any movement's beliefs, nature, history and activities (regardless of what a Wikipedia editor's own views are). Questioning the validity of religious beliefs isn't the role of an encyclopedia entry. Arion (talk) 13:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for external link

Would anyone object to adding a link to www.esotericscience.org/articles.htm ? The website contains numerous articles of a theosophical nature. They are not "old-school" theosophy (which is why I ask before adding the link); they are very contemporary and bring the teachings right up to date with modern science. For example, article 5a "Esoteric Theory of Everything" is a 21st century presentation of Leadbeater and Besants "Occult Chemistry". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.119.126 (talk) 13:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the esoteric science website contains a series of contempory theosophic articles that should be of interest to many theosophists. I actually visted this page to ask about adding a link to www.laurency.com - Henry Laurency was a little-known Swedish theosophist who wrote 8 books between 1930 and 1971. Most of his books are freely available online as pdf documents. If you haven't read Laurency yet, I highly recommend you do so. Anyway, since no one else has commented on this last suggestion I will go ahead and add both these links - I hope that is ok. Juan234 (talk) 09:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I added the laurency link, but wiki wouldn't allow me to add the www.esotericscience.org/articles.htm link. It said it was blacklisted as a spam site but it definitely didn't look like spam to me. I will see if this can be sorted. Juan234 (talk) 09:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)