What should be made of B.P. Wadia’s statement about Theosophy and in light of other clear statements made in The Mahatma Letters on Theosophy as a definite system, and its modern expression deriving from a real lineage and school; or the fact that, an expositor of the ideas from this school, is responsible with not defiling the concepts? Was B.P. Wadia’s statements too strong, or rightly placed?

“Confusion, splits and failures in the Movement can all be traced to this very important teaching of what Theosophy is. (…) There is a tendency on the part of many who are sincere in their attachment to the Cause of Theosophy to overlook the implications of the correct view of Theosophy, namely, that it is a definite system of thought, a philosophy whose principles are clearly defined and a science whose findings are precise. Their desire to be broadminded and tolerant leads them to define Theosophy as something so all-inclusive as to become obscure, something so general as to become vague. (…) Those who have learnt their “theosophy” at any source other than that of H.P.B. need a serious warning: between her teachings and those that commonly pass as Theosophy there is an unbridgeable gulf; the difference between the two is as between day and night.” (B.P. Wadia, Studies in The Secret Doctrine)

Published by Dominique Johnson

View all posts by Dominique Johnson