I am trying to understand the differences in the experiences of human evolution between the schools of Steiner/Heindel/Blavatsky on the one hand and VM Samael on the other. The way I understand it is that Samael says that Self realization can never come about through the mechanical processes of nature, that only the human consciousness can evolve the human consciousness, as is the nature of the work, and realization of the Self in a way goes against nature because one must rise up against the flesh and the laws which govern it. This seems very true to me from my experiences and understanding of work with my consciousness.
However, the theosophists/anthroposiphists seem to understand it in a different sense. They say that with each incarnation of the earth a different faculty is devoloped with man, the physical body being the oldest, and therefore is the most perfect as can be seen when one looks at a bone ect, the etheric body coming next, the kama rupa/desire body next in the next earth incarnation, which is why it is so imperfect, and in the present incarnation, the I AM impulse is being developed brought to Earth by the Christ incarnation. In the future they talk about other faculties coming about as man moves into the astral light ect.
The theosophists seem to talk about the faculties of man which are developed by nature. What accounts for these differences, as Steiner and Blavatsky were masters in their own right, and accomplished seers. Were they mistaken, or was it too early in history to reveal true Gnosticism, or do the two accounts of anthropology speak about different things? I understand it may be silly and a distraction to ask questions of this sort as it truly has to be seen for oneself in the higher worlds, but I am trying to understand how much of the teachings of Blavatsky, Heindel and Steiner should be accepted into the consciousness and how much one should leave as historical mistakes. Thank you so very much for the glorious work of this website.