There a many contradictions in the original teachings (esp. in the SD). This is (prevailing) not a mistake, but intention.
Contradictions are signs of esoteric veiling. This is obviously. Moreover we have to remember, that only the outlines of the real esoteric teaching were given to us.
"She [HPB] says: "If one imagines that one is going to get a satisfactory picture of the constitution of the Universe from the S.D. one will get only confusion from its study. It is not meant to give any such verdict on existence, but to lead towards the truth". She repeated this latter expression many times." [Source: The "Secret Doctrine" and its Study, Robert Bowen]
So it's not all of the truth itselfs, which is (in esotericism) often veiled with contradictions. This kind of presentation are as well
""the traditional modes of teaching . . . by provoking the perplexity" . . . they [the teachers of HPB] do, or do not relieve — as the case may be." [SD:I:164]
Btw, for how we can nowadays "relieve perplexity" — as we don't have any direct connetcions to the teachers anymore — I refer to the following quote from a teacher:
"Lead the life necessary for the acquisition of such knowledge and powers, and Wisdom will come to you naturally..." [SD:I:167]
This means not practical esoteric, but practical Theosophy:
"The life of altruism is not so much a high ideal as a matter of practice. [...] Therefore it is that the Ethics of Theosophy are even more necessary to mankind than the scientific aspects of the psychic facts of nature and man." [Five Messages from HBP, Letter 2]
That this important point is neglected within the whole movement is disappointing. There is more related to such an ideal live, than assumed today, see f.e. here and here
Contradictions are an important part of the (original) teaching. This becomes also obvious in another letter of the "Five Messages" from HBP:
Orthodoxy in Theosophy is a thing neither possible nor desirable. It is diversity of opinion, within certain limits that keeps the Theosophical Society a living and a healthy body, its many other ugly features notwithstanding. Were it not also, for the existence of a large amount of uncertainty in the minds of students of Theosophy, such healthy divergencies would be impossible, and the Society would degenerate into a sect, in which a narrow and stereotyped creed would take the place of the living and breathing spirit of Truth and an ever growing Knowledge. [Letter 1]
Because of fast increasing knowledge and the fact, that such an appearance like HPB and her circumstances not often can take place, but the work of Theosophy has just began, there are this contradictions and there is no further developement on this path of truth without (solving) the contradictions.
So I wonder (beside the missing willingnes to become a true Theosophist) about the following:
- First: about the common (?) view, that the contradictions within the teaching are a problem, we have better to conceal.
- Second: about the lack of theosophical literature or at least a comprehensive analysis that deals with the contradictions within the teaching, as a starting point for further development, because this could lead us to more truth.
- Third: about an organisation, that promulgate the original teaching ("truth") and which every other interpretation qualify as not part of the (correct interpretation of the) original teaching ("untruth"). Don't missundertand me. Not every contradiction is part of the original teaching, but if the contradiction or the view that arising from that is part of the original teaching, then it is, in fact, a part of the original teaching, nothing more, nothing less. We own (potentially) truth only, if we have at least theorems, without any contradictions.
- Fourth: about a harominizing core teaching program from another organisation, that wants to define terms of Theosophy, that are "blurred" or not clearly defined, such as the term "monad". Again, don't missunderstand me. To promulgate an overview or simple interpretation of the teaching for beginners of Theosophy is a good intention, but to define once and for all such terms as monad — at least 5 different defintions used in the teachings spring to my mind — is problematic (in face of the pov above).
To come to the end: Everyone, who pretends a consistent picture of the theaching, without mentioning the "problem" (more a chance than a problem, an important task) of the contradictions, and its verry importance and purpose, don't please Theosophy, rather than hinders it, to stay what we all think, what Theosophy is — divine wisdom.