I would appreciate someone reading the following URL and give me an opinion on it's validity. Most of it is new to me:

http://www.themystica.com/mystica/articles...a_petrovna.html

The prime sources are two typically anti-HPB biographies by Meade & Williams. They repeat old canards. Not a reliable sketch of her life.

I have not read any of the anti Blavastky biographies. I feel they are a waste of time. I have read Sylvia Cranstons book. I asked my teacher Eloise who was raised at point Loma and she reccommended the Cranston biography. I love interacting with my teachers there is not one question they will not answer. I have taken every course they have and there is one thing I noticed which to me is amazing. I wrote to my teacher and said I would like to start my courses all over again. What did she think. Her answer was no matter how many times you read our books and take our course it will always be different. That is true I have read the books gone back and lo and behold the words in the books will have changed. When I asked if it was my imagination I got a clear straight NO IT ISN'T. I will always be a student no matter how long I have studied or how many books I have read it is a never ending change of ideas.

Sara,

Theosophical teachings are fascinating because they are so complex. I like to go back and re-read The Secret Doctrine from time to time, because I always get something new out of it.

"I have not read any of the anti Blavastky biographies. I feel they are a waste of time."

--> I agree. In my opinion, HPB is the most calumnized woman in American history. The church attacked her with a vengence. A lot of the negative stories out there are merely church-instigated attacks.

Hi all,

Just a brief reflection. From certain point of view, I think one really begins to learn when one ceases to have a teacher...

HPB is reported to have said:

To my mind, the real value of Theosophy is not to offer a philosophy. It is a path of training to perceive truth by our own means. At the beginning it is useful to have people around with knowledge to help us make an intellectual picture. But that is only the first step. If after a while we still need people answering our questions, we are not exercising our intuitive powers. Other people’s answer could be our worse enemy, because it stops inquiry.

Pablo,

How does your "brief reflection" relate (if it does) to HPB or a biography about her?

The Brothers mention that They compare notes on Their spiritual explorations to make sure Truth is served, and thus do not rely only on Their intuition. They also mention that the Dhyanis are still Gurus to virtually all members of the Lodge on this globe. So, I doubt we will ever be without Gurus.

Hi Nicholas,

No, it doesn’t relate to HPB’s biography but to the comments in this entry. I’m sorry if I was off the topic... Now, I guess I can answer to your question here?
You are applying my words to the Adepts, and even to the Dhyanis! I didn’t mean to go so far. Besides the fact that, I think, we cannot really understand how they learn, I was referring to the aspirant for entering in the Path. Once he enters in the Path, some rules change because the Master takes the neophyte to a world completely unknown to him, and the latter naturally needs a guide until he becomes responsible.
Before entering the Path, however, we have to walk by ourselves as much as possible, in order to develop our inner potentialities. I don’t mean by this that we should isolate ourselves or have a self-centered attitude. But, rather than having one particular teacher and depend on him/her to get (conceptual) answers, we have to be able to learn from everything, and not only at a conceptual level.
I see that idea all over the theosophical teachings, but I may be wrong in my interpretation. I find it rightly expressed in Col. Olcott's words:

Perhaps we are not that far apart Pablo. I see the need for both a Guru & self-reliance for aspirants, disciples, Initiates & beyond. The Guru guides & corrects one's self devised spiritual evolution. We do the walking, but the Guru reminds us of what is needed for the Path and what is an obstacle etcetera. The external Guru is also very useful in helping us discern the truth or falsity of our "intuitions" - which are more often from the astral than our Higher Self.

yes it is true my teachers got me started and I have been a theosophist for fifteen years. All through her life Madame Blavatsky never lost sight of her teachers. They were with her and guided her through her hard journey to educate and yes teach her whole life. She never turned away anyone who wanted to learn. As my teachers do. I am a practicing theosophist on my own but I am always learning. There is no way you can take a few classes and go out an say I am a theosophist. A true theosophist is always learning we are always striving to ascend. When I need a shot in the arm when I sometimes feel it is hard to go on, I pick up a pen and write my teacher. We still keep in touch even at this time I am not studying. These teachings will be with me my whole life but so will the ones that taught me. We are always little children and no matter how old we get or how much we think we know we still are children, children of Gods.

Nicholas and Sara,

Yes, I agree with you both.
When one writes only tries to point out certain aspect of a topic that may be useful. It is not meant to be an absolute statement.
All best
p

That was a beautiful statement Pablo. Keep striving to reach higher and higher to soar with the Gods. When life seems to knock you down over and over again it is so wonderful to know there is always someone out there be thee masters, be thee neophytes who will always understand the heart. Pardon me for sounding sappy but the teachings always lift my soul .

Hi everybody!

I agree that the Mahatmas foster upon us a sense of self-reliance, even when we see it as a lack of leadership. I suppose we expect that, as soon as we declare ourselves to be Theosophists, that a lot of guidance will automatically start coming our way. It seems that the exact opposite is true.

We never guide our chelas (the most advanced even); nor do we forewarn them leaving the effects produced by causes of the own creation to teach them better experience. (Mahatma Letters p. 374)

...we offer our knowledge -- some portions of it at least -- to be either accepted or rejected on its own merits independently -- entirely so -- from the source from which it emanates. In return, we ask neither allegiance, loyalty, nor even simple courtesy -- nay, we rather have nothing of the sort offered since we would have to decline the offer. (Mahatma Letters p. 417)

An observation was made that even the Theosophical Society is not under the direct control of the Mahatmas, as some people might think.

...we [members of the TS] led the public to believe that our Society is under the sole management of the Adepts, while the fact is that the entire executive management is in the hands of the Founders, and our Teachers give us advice only in rare exceptional cases of the greatest emergency. (Mahatma Letters p. 487)

Well said Nick the Pilot. I believe that can be true for all teachings. I certainly do not believe that the masters control us or guide us. They stand back and let us make our own mistakes and guide us when we need it. We however choose our path and the road and must travel it at our own pace.

Good quotes Nick; except the last one is from Damodar K Mavalankar, a chela of KH. So when he writes "we led the public..." "we" means the membership of the TS, not the Brothers.

Nicholas,

Wow, thanks for spotting that. I have edited my post to reflect your correction. Your correction changes the meaning of the quote, and makes it have more sense.

(I thought it sounded a little funny when I posted it....)