Original Theosophy & Alternative Spirituality 5/6

12-part, 6 short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. Informal essay, based on personal observations and experiences.

9- Freedom and Relativism

One of the nice things about the alternative spirituality scene is the great freedom and tolerance that exists. There’s a wide latitude of beliefs that can gain acceptance, very non-judgmental. 'Hey, cool mix of Celtic religion, Nietzsche, Egyptian Yoga, and Krishnamurti - if that's what works for you, then good on you'. You could call it very relativistic.

 

With original Theosophy, the importance of freedom and tolerance is also there, one is free to adhere to one's own beliefs. Added to that, there is a more critical, analytical aspect. I would say that there is a certain space for discussion and debate about certain theories and philosophies that one brings forth. For example, if there are inconsistencies in one's eclecticism, or contradictions between different ideas one has, or incorrect information is being put forward, then a certain space for respectful, productive, non-violent debate can be facilitated. 

 

Moreover, the comparative study of spiritual traditions did not start from scratch. Blavatsky compassionately and generously offered about 3,000 pages of research into traditional and modern wisdom as a solid base on which to build one's world view and pursue further research, although it is not made obligatory to study, but gently encouraged... If one's eclectic, comparative research is solid, methodical, and well-conceived, then it has a better chance of being considered...

 

10- Individual and collective

My understanding of the alternative spirituality movement as a collectivity is that it's informal, but a social network exists. People meet at various events, and a lot of people attend the same events, so they get to know each other. Maybe they connect on the internet. Maybe people work at some alternative health shop and socialize. There are local new age organizations where people meet, etc. I think that there is a surprisingly consistent culture that exists among them. People seem to share the same values can discuss common notions fairly easily. And it is quite substantial, maybe the third largest religious group in North America, with a financially important new age market of books, products, and services. It's fairly loose, casual, and fluid, although I think people discuss various issues and what not that arise in various circles and communities.... From the personal standpoint, it seems mainly individualistic. Each person mostly constructs their own philosophy and personal spiritual path based on their own discoveries and experiences. There are also professional independent alternative teachers, some with large organizations. People can follow a specific teacher or take just parts of their teaching for their own individual path.

 

With original theosophy, it is more focused, with international societies that have a certain amount of structure, organization, and policies. It probably appeals to those who want something more specific and directed. Any social movement needs to develop a certain amount of planning, regulation and structure for it to grow harmoniously and any socialization process thus entails following certain social norms and codes for a social experience to be fluid and consistent. So these elements are there for those interested in a more formal social experience. On the individual level, it is not quite as individualistic as in the new age, but there is a healthy amount of freedom and room for personal research, indeed, a proactive self-reliance is encouraged. All members are considered to be students in a learning process. A true teacher is considered to be an adept, therefore there are no teachers per se in the society, and so members who write and lecture are considered as teaching-students.

 

Part 6

 

Original Theosophy & Alternative Spirituality 4/6

12-part, 6 short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. Informal essay, based on personal observations and experiences.

7- Spiritual Practices

Indeed, it seems that the alternative spirituality scene places a strong emphasis on techniques and practices, and they have done a tremendous amount of research into esoteric, magical and ancient traditional practices, which they apply in their own lives. There are even institutes and universities where one can acquire various degrees with many levels of specialization. Moreover, there seems to be a bold, 'just do it', trial and error adventurous approach to discovering these practices.

 

Blavatskyan theosophy does not deny the validity of these practices and promoted an interest in studying and re-discovering these things. The main difference being a more methodical, cautious approach in undertaking such things. So there needs to be a more theoretical phase where information is gathered, compared, analyzed before determining if a practice is feasible. Also, as any sportive undertaking requires the necessary safety equipment and training, so there needs to be an awareness of potential short-term and long-term dangers. 

 

Although there were a small number of very knowledgeable theosophists in the early years who engaged in esoteric practices, nowadays, I think there are less. So I would say that the main difference is that original theosophy is still at a more philosophical, ethical, theoretical, explorational phase and so puts less emphasis on techniques and practices. The practices encouraged are more along the lines of doing one's duty in daily life and developing good ethical behaviour, which admittedly, does not have the exotic appeal of a lot of alternative spirituality practices.

 

8- Individual mystical experience.

Both are concerned with exploring the experiential spiritual possibilities in human potential - in the alternative spirituality scene, it seems that any type of supernatural perception is significant and has a certain determinative finality to it. Quite often, these experiences are then widely communicated and shared in order to make a significant statement or resolve a question, and can subsequently be used to determine plans of action. Much emphasis is given to discussing 'enlightenment' experiences, and many explanations given on how various people have attained enlightenment.

 

With original theosophy, even though there was considerable interest by adepts in certain people with developed psychic faculties in the early days, there is a certain wariness about psychic experience. There is a notion that discrimination is needed to determine the objectivity of psychic communications received. It is explained that a lot of the visions and messages one receives can be quite subjective, coloured by our own mental inclinations and distorted by our own subjective perspective. Still, I think that the importance of being intimately attuned to one's inner perceptions is a notion common to both.

 

Moreover, the exalted spiritual beings that can appear may not always be what they seem to be, as there exist a multitude of different types of elemental beings who enjoy taking on various forms and deceiving people. Additionally, since the model of spiritual progress is based on a multi-modal hierarchical structure as can be noticed with the idea of the 49 mystic fires, it can conceivably require a considerable amount of discrimination to determine the nature of one' s spiritual experience. Also, the rule of silence about one's psychic experiences that exists in the Buddhist monastic rules is applicable as well. Therefore there is considerable reticence enjoined in communicating events in one's inner life. Although in both schools, one can find the insistence of the need for a cautious, methodical, discriminating, analytical process in the context of psychic experimentation. 

 

Part 5 

Original Theosophy & Alternative Spirituality 3/6

12-part, 6 short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. Informal essay, based on personal observations and experiences.

One-week, 12-part short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. More of a subjective mode, based on personal observation.

 

5- Transcendence and progress.

 

Another point both schools have in common is that they are both concerned with spiritual evolution. In the New Age circles, there are often references to moving on to higher planes, higher levels of consciousness, higher levels of evolution, higher levels of vibration. There is constant progression, and you often hear about new phases of evolution. In year x, it will be time for people to rise to a higher phase. Soon people will enter into higher vibrational frequencies. In the next phase, there will be a new form of discipleship, etc...

 

With original theosophy, it is similar, only not quite so much, not quite so frequent, not quite so explicit. The evolutionary processes occur over long periods of time, so it is not necessarily easy to make a quantum leap in a single incarnation. The doctrine of cycles is considered very secret, therefore not much information is given, although Blavatsky gave out a workable amount. Hence the concepts are similar to the alternative spirituality schools, but not as fast and frequent, the evolutionary changes are considered to occur slowly and gradually over centuries and millennium. 

 

And even though Blavatskyan theosophy is concerned with higher planes of consciousness, they might have more of a focus on the lower planes, the problems of concrete material existence and the challenges of the material world, similar to the mystical traditions that are sometimes divided into three phases, where the first phase is strictly concerned with ethical problems and conquering vice and lasts a long time, perhaps a whole lifetime, before one is ready for the second phase, which is again, not that mystical, but is more concerned with developing and perfecting virtue, detachment and renunciation.

 

6- Modern and Traditional aspects

 

I think both movements do a good job at combining traditional notions with modern ideas. Sometimes maybe in alternative spirituality there might be a situation where they claim to be reviving ancient wisdom, like Celtic wisdom or Shamanism, and actually the research was fairly superficial and a lot of it is just made up or heavily adapted. I think it's ok to do some adaptations, but when it no longer resembles the original tradition, then maybe there it's possible that there might be a problem somewhere. But there has been a tremendous amount of work on both sides in researching ancient traditions. 

 

My opinion is that alternative spirituality has a more modern perspective whereas Blavatskian theosophy has a more traditional one. Which way is better, if my opinion is correct, is not for me to judge. The main problem I think, is that modernism tends to be very materialistic, and that to me, can be detrimental for a spiritual philosophy. Blavatsky however did formulate a philosophy that wished to both re-discover ancient values and traditions while integrating modern knowledge and discoveries. It's a difficult project in that sense, because it requires a lot of work of filtering and adjusting. 

 

Then there is the problem of even determining what is traditional and what is modern. That is not so obvious, either. But I personally feel that Blavatsky still maintained an essentially traditional world view and traditional values, while integrating certain modern aspects and also opposing the more materialistic aspects of modernism. At the same time, she was concerned with reforming old, outmoded practices and mentalities. It's like finding the right balance between conservative and progressive perspectives. Hence, one difference I see with the alternative spirituality movement, is that it appears to be based more in a modern mentality, with more traditional elements added in varying degrees... 

 

Part 4 

 

Original Theosophy & Alternative Spirituality 2/6

12-part, 6 short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. Informal essay, based on personal observations and experiences.

One-week, 12-part short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. More of a subjective mode, based on personal observation. 

 

3- Esoteric History

I think that it is useful to familiarize oneself with the history of the theosophical movement and the modern alternative spirituality movements that have developed since then, not necessarily in extensive detail, but just to be aware of the main trends. I understand the alternative spirituality scene so much better now that I have gained an understanding of the theosophical roots thereof. I actually have a bit of a strange trajectory in that I discovered Blavatsky relatively quickly, only about a year after exploring various hippie spiritual interests. Then I spent a fair bit of time blissfully unaware of the tremendous historical influence of the theosophical movement. Blavatsky was just someone among others I was into. Later, I began looking into the historical intricacies more objectively. It is still somewhat mind blasting to me to be continually discovering her influence, directly or indirectly, in so many areas worldwide.

 

If you look at the history of spiritual movements, fragmentation occurs pretty quickly, such are the ways of the world, it seems – especially after the fall of Egypt and Babylon in the Near East. Theosophy suffered the same fate most spiritual movements do, many currents have emerged since 1875, at least six major ones. (The three major organisations, Adyar (Leadbeater/Besant), the United Lodge of Theosophists (Crosbie/Wadia/Iyer), and the Point Loma/Pasadena groups (Tingley/Purucker/Barborka); then there’s Alice Bailey’s group, Rudolf Steiner’s Anthroposophy, and Max Heindel’s Rosicrucian group; and from there, many different offsprings, Krishnamurti deserves to be mentioned, as the first major independent spiritual teacher, with Crowley and Gurdjieff arriving on the scene at around the same time.

 

Esoteric historian Gary Lachman even sees it as a positive thing. The theosophical movement has been getting academic historical recognition in the last twenty years, so there has been more discussion about the importance of modern theosophy. The New Age movement of today was influenced by these theosophical currents, as well as spiritualism and new thought currents (such as positive thinking, itself derived from the transcendentalist movement) which began in the 1850s.

I stick to the original teachings (1875-1900) or Blavatskyan theosophy (because they have yet to disappoint me and the exploration thereof remains stimulating, educational, and coherent). It is possibly the least popular current, which is understandable, because it can be quite stern and the writings can be quite difficult), but I don’t have anything against other currents (which I would term Neo-Theosophy, not meant to be derogatory, just adopting a popular term, even though it is used in a negative sense). 

 

I’m open to discuss things with other schools. The only position that I maintain is that if someone takes the original teachings and changes them, then I feel justified in politely mentioning that such idea is consistent with the original teachings or such an idea is significantly different. This is because that I feel that if you take a teaching or term that the original writers first introduced, and change it significantly, then to me, it becomes a different thing and should be pointed out.

Some recommended books :

Bruce F. Campbell, Ancient Wisdom Revived: A History of the Theosophical Movement, 1980

https://archive.org/details/ancientwisdomrev0000camp

Antoine Faivre, Jacob Needleman, Karen Voss, Modern Esoteric Spirituality, 1992

http://www.jacobneedleman.com/modern-esoteric-spirituality

Joscelyn Godwin, The Theosophical Enlightenment, 1994

https://sunypress.edu/Books/T/Theosophical-Enlightenment2

Handbook of the Theosophical Current

Series: Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion, Volume: 7

Olav Hammer, Mikael Rothstein, 2013

https://brill.com/display/title/22123

Gary Lachman, The Secret Teachers of the Western World, 2015

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/.../the-secret.../

4- The Age of Aquarius

 

The term 'New Age' which refers to the Age of Aquarius, an astrological cycle that Blavatsky acknowledges. She also followed the Hindu theory of cycles known as the four yugas, where we are currently in the Kali Yuga. Blavatsky follows the standard Hindu yuga dates, so the Kali Yuga lasts 432,000 years and there are still about 427,000 years to go. In alternative spirituality movements, one can see a tremendous optimism in describing the Age of Aquarius, with great advances in spiritual development that affect all of society, with things occurring in a relatively short time. 

 

With original theosophy, there is more emphasis on the Kali Yuga, with lots of difficult times and spiritual struggles and so it is not quite so optimistic. It is more of a mixed development, there will be certain developments, but there will also be difficult aspects, and in general, the processes take a long time to develop and details about cycles are considered very secret. I don’t see any reason to think that the age of Aquarius, which last 2,160 years, should be any different from the previous ages, with different phases, up and downs, growing pains, progressive developments, peak and valleys. The original Theosophical Society was founded in part to form a nucleus of stability to face what she described as a coming 'tidal wave'. The Tidal Wave [Lucifer, Vol. V, No. 27, November, 1889, pp. 173-178]

 

Part 3 

 

Original Theosophy & Alternative Spirituality 1/6

12-part, 6 short article series on similarities and differences between Blavatskyan theosophy & the alternative spirituality/occulture/new age movement. Informal essay, based on personal observations and experiences.

 

1- Introduction.

2- Psychology and Spirituality

3- Esoteric History

4- The Age of Aquarius

5- Transcendence and progress

6- Modern and Traditional aspects

7- Spiritual Practices

8- Individual mystical experience

9- Freedom and Relativism

10-Individual and collective

11–Energetic healing

12- Commercialization

  

1- Introduction.

I guess the first observation is that it is safe to boldly suggest that original Blavatskian theosophy is hugely influential on the alternative spirituality movement, although not many people necessarily are aware of that. Without Blavatsky's influence, alternative spirituality would probably be very different. However, theosophy is not the only influence; there is also spiritualism (mediumnism, channelling, psychic practices) and the new thought movement (power of positive thinking, mind power, etc...) as well as various mystical and religious currents that were not influenced by theosophy. On the internet, there seems to be many more alternative spirituality seekers than original theosophists (and that has almost always been the case) and superficially they are very similar, maybe hard to see the differences. However, I do think that there are some significant differences of approach and perspective, some subtle, some not so subtle, so I thought it would be useful to write this piece, based on personal observations and experiences on the internet and in person, in order to try to clarify things a bit.

The main point of this article will be to discuss the balance of traditional knowledge and modernism in both Blavatskyan Theosophy and the new age movement, although even defining those two terms has its challenges. To begin, there's the problem common to both schools, which is spiritual materialism, which is prevalent when someone who was raised in a modern western culture decides to take up a spiritual path. More often than not, a person has deeply ingrained materialistic and ego-centred tendencies that take a long, laborious period to root out, and so in the beginning, tendencies of spiritual materialism are hard to avoid. The following article https://www.oprah.com/.../top-10-traps-of-spiritual.../all 

gives a good overview of the problems, of which there are many.

 

2- Psychology and Spirituality. 

 

For a lot of people, reflection on the question of suffering has been a key factor in getting them interested in the spiritual path. Now this is a fairly natural thing to occur, but one thing that I've noticed in today's often chaotic modern world, is that the breakup of traditional family structures has brought about a considerable amount of traumatic childhood experiences. The problem there is that this can lead to deep psychological wounds and even personality disorders of a more or less serious degree.

So it can happen that some people end up more or less unconsciously using spiritual practices in an attempt to heal psychological trauma. To a certain extent, this can be helpful, but I think that ultimately, it would be more effective to deal with psychological issues with psychological methods and tools. This can be helpful in healing certain blockages that are hindering one's progress and allow one to make more effective use of spiritual teachings per se, which often weren't designed to deal with the more extreme forms of mental affliction and attachment that have developed in modern societies, such as narcissistic personality disorder.

 

Note that I am not a professional therapist and I realize that I'm risking falling into the trap of playing the annoying role of a cheesy dime-store pop psychologist. Be that as it may, the following work is suggested for anyone interested in a path of self-reflection: John Bradshaw, Homecoming: Reclaiming and Healing Your Inner Child https://www.johnbradshaw.com/.../homecoming-reclaiming...

 

Although the work has been criticized quite a bit, and the notion of healing the inner child made fun of, and even if I do think that book is a little too complicated, self-indulgent, and sentimental, nonetheless, it's based on the more spiritual line of psychology and self-help literature associated with the Esalen institute (which has Theosophical influences) and the author seems aware of major trends in the popular psychology and self-help field and seems to borrow practical methods from others, and as such, I think that it covers basic, useful, effective notions of healing childhood trauma.

 

Moreover, there is a trend that has become more prevalent in the last five years, and has grown to a level that is quite remarkable: the question of conspiracy theories. Much has been written on this topic in the last two years. These are beliefs that can be found in the New Age movement and also among Theosophists, as well as among Religious groups and in the secular world, so it is quite widespread and can take quite a diversity of forms. I'd again like to take a more psychological approach on this question and suggest the following video, which I find gives a solid basic presentation of the question (8 min.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYQCIphJhAk Can You Win an Argument with a Conspiracy Theorist?)

Disclaimer:

It may seem disingenuous of me to present such a dichotomized comparison where I am able to present a well-defined notion of Blavatskyan Theosophy on one side, contrasted with an eclectic, vaguely defined, randomly organized grouping of almost anything in the alternative spirituality world that isn't Blavatskyan or original Theosophy, which could refer to New Age, Pagan, Wiccan, Neo-Theosophy, Occultism, Eastern Religions and much else besides. It may seem unfair of me to make descriptions that are unspecified and may or may not be accurate. All I can say is that my purpose is to break down barriers and encourage greater understanding and tolerance among the various groups, currents, and movements. This is simply an essay based on my subjective observations and experiences on social medium and personal experiences, in the hope of trying to clarify various misunderstandings and misconceptions that I may have noticed, in as a fair, respectful, and diplomatic manner as possible.

 

Part 2