Hinduism and Theosophy
"[2][3][4] Prof. Antoine Faivre wrote that "by its content and its inspiration" the Theosophical Society is greatly dependent on Eastern traditions, "especially Hindu; in this, it well reflects the cultural climate in which it was born.
"[7][note 1] In 1895, Prof. Merwin Snell (Catholic University of America) published an article, in which he, calling Theosophy a "peculiar form of Neo-Paganism",[10] attempted to determine its attitude to the "various schools of Bauddha and Vaidika" thought, i.e., to Buddhist and Hindu beliefs.
In Taimni's opinion, Theosophy has introduced in them "order, clarity, system and a rational outlook" which allowed us to get a "clear and systematic" understanding of the processes and laws underlying the revealed universe, "both visible and invisible.
[33] Prof. Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke wrote: "[Blavatsky's] preference for Advaita Vedanta related to its exposition of the ultimate reality as a monist, nontheistic, impersonal absolute.
"[34] In his book Man, God, and the Universe,[35] Taimni demonstrated several examples showing the coherence of cosmology in The Secret Doctrine with the positions of Hindu philosophy.
Robert Ellwood wrote that, according to the Theosophical point of view, spirit and matter are "to be regarded, not as independent realities, but as the two facets or aspects of the Absolute (Parabrahm), which constitute the basis of conditioned Being whether subjective or objective.
Holding this country, as we do, for the fruitful hot-bed whence proceeded all subsequent philosophical systems, to this source of all psychology and philosophy a portion of our Society has come to learn its ancient wisdom and ask for the impartation of its weird secrets.
His organization was in fact "merely a new sect of Hinduism", and several years after the arrival of Blavatsky and Olcott in India, the connection between the two societies finally ceased.
[50][note 14] Dayananda Saraswati's disappointment was expressed in a form of warning to the members of Arya Samaj on contacts with the Theosophists, whom he called atheists, liars, and egoists.
[53] Goodrick-Clarke wrote that "educated Indians" were particularly impressed by the Theosophists' defense of their ancient religion and philosophy in the context of the growing self-consciousness of the people, directed against the "values and beliefs of the European colonial powers."
He wrote, citing in Cranston's book, that, according to Prof. Radhakrishnan, the philosopher and President of India, the Theosophists "rendered great service" by defending the Hindu "values and ideas"; the "influence of the Theosophical Movement on general Indian society is incalculable.
"[56] Bevir wrote that in India Theosophy "became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism", which gave Indian nationalists a "legitimating ideology, a new-found confidence, and experience of organisation."
He stated Blavatsky, like Dayananda Sarasvati, Swami Vivekananda, and Sri Aurobindo, "eulogised the Hindu tradition", however simultaneously calling forth to deliverance from the vestiges of the past.
He wrote that a book by Charles W. Leadbeater [and Annie Besant], Man: Whence, How and Whither, in which the Indians play a "central role in the spiritual development of mankind", is one of the typical examples of "emic historiography".
"[64] In Ramanujachary's opinion, his "deep-rooted" nationalist prejudices clearly appear in such his words: "It will not be a very easy thing to make me believe that any Englishman can really be induced to labour for the good of my countrymen without having any other motive but sincere feeling and sympathy towards them.
[69] According to Stuckrad, when creating the official emblem of the Theosophical Society, some elements were copied, including the swastika, "from the personal seal of Madame Blavatsky.
[72][73] In Hinduism, "Om", representing the unity of atman and Brahman, is being identified with the "entire universe and with its modifications," including temporal, that is, past, present, and future.
"[74] A follower of Advaita Vedanta Alberto Martin said that a maxim "There is no religion higher than truth" can be compared, in relation to an "inspiration or motivation", with one phrase from the Bhagavad Gita which reads: "There is no lustral water like unto Knowledge" (IV, 38).
[80][note 18] Hammer wrote that the Theosophical doctrine of the chakras is a part of the "specific religious" system, which includes a Western scientific and technical rhetoric.
According to information obtained from the Tantric sources, it is impossible to ascertain whether the chakras are objectively "existing structures in the subtle body," or they are "created" by a yogi through visualization in the process of his "meditative" practice.
"[85] A Japanese Indologist Hiroshi Motoyama noted that the chakras, according to the Theosophists' statements, are the [psycho-spiritual] organs, which actually exist, while in a traditional Hindu literature they are described as the sets of symbols.
[88] In Prof. Max Müller's opinion, neither in the Vedas, nor in the Upanishads there are any esoteric overtones announced by the Theosophists, and they only sacrifice their reputation, pandering "to the superstitious belief of the Hindus in such follies.
"[89] A French philosopher René Guénon noted that the Theosophical conceptions of evolution are "basically only an absurd caricature of the Hindu theory of cosmic cycles.
[91] Prof. Lopez wrote that some Indians, for example, such a "legendary" figure as Vivekananda, after initially "cordial relations with the Theosophists," disavowed the connection between "their Hinduism" and Theosophy.
[92] In 1900, Vivekananda, calling Theosophy a "graft of American spiritualism," noted that it was identified by "educated people in the West" as charlatanism and fakirism mixed with "Indian thought," and this was, in his opinion, all the help provided by the Theosophists for Hinduism.
Because they cannot understand the individualities to be relatively constant centres (conglomerations, groups) of functions of the universal spirit, they must take them either for illusions or for separate senso-material existences.
