School #183

Theosophy

Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Henry Steel Olcott, Annie Besant, Charles Webster Leadbeater, Rudolf Steiner

Theosophy is the modern esoteric movement founded in New York in 1875 by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott as the Theosophical Society, and developed in Blavatsky's great syncretic works 'Isis Unveiled' (1877) and 'The Secret Doctrine' (1888). Blavatsky drew together Western occultism (Hermeticism, Kabbalah, Neoplatonism), Hindu Vedanta and Yoga, Mahayana Buddhism, and a speculative evolutionary cosmology of root-races and cosmic cycles, claiming that the whole was the esoteric 'wisdom-religion' (theosophia) lying behind all exoteric faiths. After Blavatsky's death (1891) Annie Besant became president of the international Society (1907), and with Charles Webster Leadbeater developed its devotional and clairvoyant wing ('Thought-Forms', 1901; 'Occult Chemistry', 1908) and the controversial promotion of Jiddu Krishnamurti as a coming world teacher. Rudolf Steiner led the German Section of the Society until his break with Besant in 1912-1913 and founded Anthroposophy, codified in 'Occult Science: An Outline' (1909), which retained the evolutionary cosmology in a more Christ-centred and explicitly Western form. Theosophy has been disproportionately influential as a transmission belt between Asian religions and Western popular spirituality, and as a parent of the New Age and Western esoteric movements of the twentieth century.

Worldview

The Theosophist inhabits a vast, animated cosmos of nested cycles in which every monad is on a long evolutionary journey through many lives, planes and worlds toward eventual reunion with the divine. The fundamental sensibility is one of cosmic optimism crossed with esoteric earnestness: the universe is intelligible, sacred, and progressing, and the careful student can read its laws of correspondence, vibration and karma. The world's religions are read as exoteric expressions of a single inner wisdom-tradition, and the great religious teachers (the Buddha, Christ, the Masters) are members of a continuing Hierarchy that quietly guides human evolution. The framework classifies this as Spirit-relational: the operative agencies are not the personal creator-God of biblical monotheism but a graded hierarchy of cosmic intelligences, Mahatmas, and devic beings with whom the adept stands in relation; the absolute underlying them all (the 'One Reality' of 'The Secret Doctrine') is too impersonal to be addressed as a Thou. The framework classifies this as Experience in moral authority: although Blavatsky's vast corpus and the writings of the Masters are treated with great respect, the operative test of any claim is inner experience — meditation, clairvoyance, initiation — and the Theosophical Society's founding principle commits members to investigate rather than merely to believe. Steiner's Anthroposophy formalises this as 'spiritual science', presenting esoteric knowledge as the result of methodical inner research.

Moral Implications

Theosophical ethics is grounded in the universal brotherhood of humanity (the first of the Society's three objects) and in the laws of karma and reincarnation: every act has consequences across many lives, and the spiritual evolution of the individual is inseparable from the evolution of the whole. The tradition has been a consistent advocate of vegetarianism, non-violence, tolerance between religions, women's education, and (especially under Annie Besant) Indian self-rule and labour reform. The characteristic risk, frankly noted by later critics, is the elitism implicit in a hierarchy of initiates and an evolutionary scheme that can shade into invidious racialised ordering.

Practical Implications

Theosophy has had outsized cultural influence: it shaped early Western reception of Hinduism and Buddhism, helped catalyse the Indian independence movement (Besant was president of the Indian National Congress in 1917), inspired the founding of the Krishnamurti foundations, contributed motifs to modern art (Mondrian, Kandinsky), and transmitted much of the vocabulary of the later New Age. Steiner's Anthroposophy produced enduring practical institutions — Waldorf education (from 1919), biodynamic agriculture (1924), anthroposophical medicine, and Camphill communities for the developmentally disabled — that operate worldwide a century later.

I. Time

Time in Theosophy is Emergent, One-dimensional in its surface flow but inserted into an Infinite series of cycles (manvantaras and pralayas) of immense duration: the cosmic Day and Night of Brahma. Traversability is Cyclical at the macro scale, though each moment of subjective experience is Uni-directional and Continuous. Freedom is Non-Deterministic: karma is a law of moral causation but not fatalism, and the soul shapes its future incarnations by present choices. The overall historical arc is Progressive within each cycle, as monads evolve through successive rounds of experience.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Grain: Continuous Freedom: Non-Deterministic Traversability: Cyclical Dimensionality: One Direction: Uni-directional

II. Space

Space is Emergent and Infinite, with multiple planes of being beyond the physical — etheric, astral, mental, causal — so its dimensionality is best classified as N rather than as the ordinary three. Curvature is Curved at the cosmic level (the rounds and globes of 'The Secret Doctrine' are organised in nested spherical schemes) and Non-local in the sense that subtle influences propagate independently of physical distance, through the principle of correspondence and through the universal medium (akasha).

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Curvature: Curved Dimensionality: N Locality: Non-local

III. Matter

Matter is Emergent and exists on multiple planes of progressively subtler vibration: physical matter is only the densest form, and astral and mental matter are also real, occupying their own dimensional ranges (hence dimensionality N rather than Three). Conservation holds across the cosmic cycle — matter is repeatedly reabsorbed into spirit at pralaya and re-emanated at the next manvantara. Locality is Non-local: subtle correspondences link distant material objects (Leadbeater's 'Occult Chemistry' purports to clairvoyantly observe atomic structure), and physical events have their astral counterparts.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: N Locality: Non-local

IV. Observer

The Theosophical observer is a complex being constituted on several planes — Blavatsky speaks of seven principles (physical, etheric, astral, manas, buddhi, atma, plus the monad) — and is therefore Both embodied and disembodied, depending on the plane one considers. Obs_time_instance and obs_space_instance are Multiple because the same monad passes through a long series of reincarnations on this and other planets within vast cosmic cycles. Knowledge extent and retainment are Total in principle: through clairvoyance, meditation and initiation the adept can read the Akashic Records and recover the experience of past lives. Agency is Active and Plural: each individual monad is genuinely responsible for its own evolution, even as it is guided by the Masters of the hidden Brotherhood.

Attributes
Time Instance: Multiple Space Instance: Multiple Extent of Knowledge: Total Retainment of Knowledge: Total Physicality: Both Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: Spirit-relational Moral Authority: Experience Theological Method: Mystical

V. Energy

Energy is Emergent, Infinite, and Variable: the cosmos is animated by subtle energies (prana, fohat, kundalini) of which physical energy is only the densest manifestation, and these subtle currents can be concentrated, raised and directed by trained will. Dispersibility is Reversible because the cosmic process is fundamentally cyclical and involutive-evolutive: spirit descends into matter and matter is resublimated into spirit. This is why Theosophy is naturally drawn to talk of healing, occult chemistry, and the perfectibility of the body through spiritual practice.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Emergent Conservation: Variable Dispersibility: Reversible

VI. Information

Information is Substantival and Discrete: the Akashic Records — the cosmic memory — preserve every event, thought and act in a permanent register from which advanced adepts can read. Cosmic information is therefore Conserved; personal-identity information is Conserved across reincarnations because the higher self (the reincarnating ego) carries the moral and karmic record of its previous lives. Granularity is Discrete because the cosmos is articulated into distinct planes, rounds, root-races and sub-races, each with its own characteristic vibration and informational signature.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Conserved Granularity: Discrete
← #182 Anti-Trinitarianism All Schools #184 Western Esotericism →

Works that name Theosophy in their embodiments

Foundational texts that draw on this school, with each work's declared weight.

8%
Isis Unveiled (Early)
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky · 1877
8%
The Secret Doctrine (Mature)
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky · 1888
8%
The Key to Theosophy (Late)
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky · 1889
8%
The Voice of the Silence (Late)
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky · 1889

How Theosophy resolves each dilemma

57 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 38 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

Persistence, the future, and the direction of becoming.

Distinctive · only 15% of schools agree (31/202)
Is the universe running out of usable energy?
The heat death of the universe — entropy maxed out, no further work possible — is among the more sobering implications of mainstream physics. Whether it is structurally inescapable depends on what kind of finitude the cosmos has.
Both time and matter are unbounded; 'running out' is misframed.
On this view, the cosmos has neither a temporal horizon nor a material exhaustion point. The framing of running out presupposes bounds that the cosmos doesn't have. Energy gradients perpetuate; new configurations emerge; the categories that make heat-death scary don't apply at the cosmic scale.
Roads not taken Time is unbounded but matter is finite; usable energy can fail without time failing. (47%) · Time both has and lacks bounds depending on the level you ask at; finitude is conventional. (26%) · The cosmos has bounds; heat death is a real horizon. (12%)
Distinctive · only 15% of schools agree (31/202)
Are natural resources fundamentally finite, or only practically so?
Whether we can grow our way out of resource constraints — or whether the cosmos sets limits the economy ultimately must obey — depends on what kind of finitude matter has.
Resources are practically inexhaustible on cosmic scales; terrestrial limits are engineering.
On this view, matter and time are both unbounded at the largest scales. Terrestrial resource limits are real engineering and political constraints but not metaphysical ones; the cosmos can in principle support whatever expansion intelligence is capable of.
Roads not taken Time goes on but matter is bounded; we are eventually constrained even with infinite time. (47%) · The finitude question is level-dependent; resource ethics happens at the level that constrains us. (26%) · Resources are finite in the strict sense; living well requires accepting the limit. (12%)
Distinctive · only 15% of schools agree (31/202)
Could we owe future generations more than is materially possible to provide?
If we owe future people a habitable planet and the material means to flourish, and the cosmos is bounded in ways that make those obligations impossible at some scale, the obligation and the possibility come apart. Where they come apart turns on what kind of finitude we live in.
Both time and matter are unbounded; we cannot in principle owe more than is possible.
On this view, the cosmos has the resources to support whatever flourishing future generations are capable of, given sufficient time and intelligence. The impossibility concern is misplaced; the real questions are about trajectories and choices, not about resource ceilings.
Roads not taken Time is unbounded but matter is not; we can owe more across long time than the matter can provide. (47%) · The owing-and-possibility question is level-dependent; we owe what is appropriate at the level we act on. (26%) · The cosmos is bounded; our obligations to future generations are bounded with it. (12%)
Distinctive · only 17% of schools agree (35/202)
How much weight do future people deserve?
If a billion people will exist in the 25th century, do their interests count for as much as the interests of a billion people alive now? The answer turns on what kind of reality the future has.
Past, present, and future are bound in cycles — duties span generations as a matter of course.
On these views, time is not a one-way arrow but a structure of return: cosmic cycles, karmic cycles, the seasons, the succession of generations. To act now is always also to act for the ancestors who shaped your inheritance and for the descendants who will …
Roads not taken Future people are as real as you are — and their interests count for as much. (47%) · Time arises from events or from a deeper substrate — the future is not yet. (32%) · The future branches — what we owe depends on which branch we create. (2%)
Distinctive · only 17% of schools agree (35/202)
Is regret rational?
If the past is fixed and unchangeable, what kind of mental act is regret? An error, a duty, a lesson, a perspective on a moment that is still in some sense present?
The past is part of a cycle one keeps returning to; regret is one of the gates of the cycle.
On cyclical views, the past is not a fixed thing behind you — it is part of the ongoing structure of return: karmic cycles, cosmic cycles, the cycle of seasons and generations. Regret, on these views, is less about an unchangeable past and more about …
Roads not taken The past is as real as the present; regret is a real attitude toward a real thing. (47%) · The past is not a thing now; regret is the present holding what is no longer. (32%) · Other branches exist; regret tracks roads not taken that are nonetheless real. (2%)
4 mainstream positions

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Is the world created from nothing?
Creatio ex nihilo is one of the most distinctive Western-theological claims. Whether matter was created from nothing, eternally exists, or is sustained moment-by-moment turns on what kind of thing matter is.
Matter is real but emerges from something deeper — neither bedrock nor created-from-nothing.
On this view, matter is genuinely there, but it isn't the floor of reality. It depends on something more fundamental — dependent origination, mind, divine sustaining act, computational substrate, or the structure of conditions — and is conserved only at its own level of description. …
Roads not taken Yes — matter was created and is conserved as a real substance. (55%) · Matter is constituted by relations; the question of 'from what?' presupposes substance. (16%) · Matter arises and dissolves through cosmic rounds; neither created from nothing nor eternal. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Is the physical world fully real?
Realists, idealists, and relationalists divide on whether matter exists mind-independently, derivatively, or as a pattern of relations. The split runs deeper than any single scientific question.
Real but sustained — not mind-independent in the strict realist sense.
On this view, the physical world is real enough — it has its own laws, its own conservation principles, its own resistance to wish — but it is not the floor of being. It is sustained by something else: mind, divine attention, computational substrate, or …
Roads not taken Yes — the physical world is fully real, mind-independent, persisting. (55%) · Real as relations — neither pure substance nor pure construction. (16%) · Real for this cycle — the deepest reality cycles through creation and dissolution. (4%)
Distinctive · only 23% of schools agree (47/202)
Does matter have intrinsic moral standing?
Do rocks, soil, rivers, and stuff in general deserve moral consideration — or only the living, the conscious, the human? The answer turns on what matter is.
Matter is morally considerable derivatively — through what it sustains.
On this view, matter doesn't have standing on its own; it has standing through what it makes possible. Soil matters because it grows food; water matters because it sustains life and mind and practice. Asking whether the rock as such has moral standing slightly misreads …
Roads not taken Matter is morally considerable insofar as it is created or conserved good. (55%) · Matter has intrinsic moral standing as part of the relational fabric. (16%) · Matter is in flux; standing is impermanent and ritual-mediated. (4%)
4 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 6% of schools agree (12/202)
Can prayer for someone far away affect them?
If you pray for a friend in another city, can the prayer reach them? The answer turns less on whether distance can be spanned than on whether anything beyond natural causation is doing the spanning.
Prayer reaches through ancestors, kami, or the spirits active in the world.
On this view, prayer is intelligible because the world includes spirits, ancestors, and energetic presences with whom petitioners stand in real relation. The prayer addresses these — particular kami, named ancestors, the orisha — rather than (or alongside) a single transcendent God. The practice is …
Roads not taken Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. (49%) · Prayer reaches because God or a cosmic ordering acts on the prayed-for. (37%) · There are no truly separate minds; prayer is one part of one talking to another. (8%)
Distinctive · only 6% of schools agree (12/202)
Are coincidences ever more than coincidence?
Thinking of someone and hearing from them moments later. Two friends humming the same obscure song at the same moment in different cities. Whether such patterns ever carry meaning depends on whether the world contains any ordering agency beyond chance.
Coincidence is the world speaking through spirits, ancestors, or signs.
On this view, what looks like coincidence is often the action of specific spirits or ancestors making themselves present — an omen, a sign, a felt arrival. The framework for reading such events is rich and particular: which spirit, what message, what response is fitting. …
Roads not taken Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. (49%) · What looks like coincidence is providence — there is no such thing as a real coincidence. (37%) · Coincidence is the One showing through the appearance of plurality. (8%)
Distinctive · only 6% of schools agree (12/202)
Is reality fundamentally digital?
Pancomputationalism, Planck-scale quanta, simulation theory and Kabbalistic letter-mysticism all say yes — but for very different reasons. The rest of the atlas says no.
Yes — but divinely-discrete: divine letters, momentary cognitions, atomistic theism.
On this view, the world is at bottom discrete, but the units are not bare bits. They are divine names, momentary cognitions, karmic atoms, sacred letters — the elementary acts of a creating or ordering agency. Discreteness is real and fundamental, and so is the …
Roads not taken No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. (44%) · No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. (37%) · Yes — bits, quanta, computational substrate. (13%)
Distinctive · only 6% of schools agree (12/202)
Are there indivisible units of experience?
Whiteheadian actual occasions, Buddhist moments of mind, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions, IIT phi-units — or the unbroken Jamesian stream? The atomism of experience cuts across naturalism and theism alike.
Yes, theistic atomism — actual occasions, divine letters, momentary cognitions.
On this view, the atoms of experience are not bare quanta but agent-laden moments: Whiteheadian actual occasions in which subjectivity and the divine lure meet, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions in which divine names act, Buddhist Abhidharma moments of mind, tantric ksana. The discreteness is real and so …
Roads not taken No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. (44%) · No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. (37%) · Yes — naturalist quanta of experience. (13%)
Distinctive · only 6% of schools agree (12/202)
Is memory stored or reconstructed?
Engrams and traces — or continuous re-narration each time you remember? The cognitive-science debate has a theological cousin: divine memory holding each hair, or the ancestors' continuous remembering.
Stored — in divine memory's discrete particulars, or in karmic-record units.
On this view, memory is held in discrete particulars by an agency: the Lord who knows each hair, the karmic ledger that records each act, the angelic scribe who writes each deed, the Kabbalistic letters that spell each soul. Storage is real; the storer is …
Roads not taken Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. (44%) · Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. (37%) · Stored — discrete engrams, traces, weights. (13%)
32 mainstream positions
What makes someone the same person over time? You span moments — identity is a pattern that need not be located at a single now. 9% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? The person is the pattern across moments — diminished pattern, diminished person. 9% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? You are the pattern; the pattern survives the substrate change. You arrive. 9% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Distance doesn't dilute obligation; what is real is the connection, not its length. 12% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers span moments; the dead are present in a real (not merely metaphorical) way. 13% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? An observer can occupy multiple times at once; foreknowledge is not foreordering. 13% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditation accesses a trans-temporal level the ordinary observer doesn't ordinarily reach. 13% Does prayer change God's mind? Prayer participates in a trans-temporal liturgy or communion; the question of 'changing the mind' misses the trans-temporal mode. 13% Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? The cosmic-religious order is the moral primary. 14% What is our place in nature? Nature is partly what we make of it — concepts, practices, and minds shape the world. 15% Should we colonize space? The 'space frontier' is partly what we make of it. 15% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? What counts as a 'natural' genome is itself a construction. 15% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? Direct experiential union is the authority. 16% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Loss is part of cycles; what disappears returns in another form. 17% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilization rises and falls in cycles; recovery is structural to history. 17% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Local entropy increase is part of a cycle; the moral category is participation in the cycle. 17% Could causation work backwards? Time is structured as return; 'forward' and 'backward' are local features of the cycle. 17% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? Memory and anticipation are phases of a cycle that visits both directions. 17% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? Within a cycle there is a direction; across the cycle there isn't. 17% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is the gradual unfolding of improvement or liberation. 23% Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. 65% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% What happens to "you" when you die? A soul continues into another mode of being. 37% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise only insofar as it coheres with first-person experience. 17% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? What gets called 'revelation' is real direct experience — not a text. 17% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM has no first-person experience, so no knowing in the relevant sense. 17% Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? Liberation is the realization of cosmic or species self. 15% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through direct contemplative union with reality. 13% Could an AI have a mind that matters? Yes — mind is a pattern, not a substrate. 9% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? If the pattern of mind is there, the standing is there — regardless of species. 9% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? If the pattern is present at sufficient complexity, the experience is present too. 9%

Information · 4 dilemmas · 4 distinctive

Pattern, memory, and what is preserved or lost.

Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Is anything truly lost when someone forgets?
The memory you don't retrieve, the conversation you can't remember, the face you no longer recognise — is the forgetting a loss of something real, or just the routine operation of a finite mind?
Information persists or doesn't depending on whether the holder is sustained.
On these views, conservation is not a flat cosmic law but a function of the conditions that hold. Memory persists where it is sustained — by divine attention, by community, by ritual, by practice — and is genuinely lost where it isn't. The asymmetry between …
Roads not taken Information is lost when a mind forgets; matter and energy continue, but the pattern is gone. (51%) · Information is conserved — the personal pattern is held even when an individual mind loses it. (39%) · Forgetting is the cosmic case, not the exception; nothing is conserved. (1%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Does deleting your data online destroy something real?
Account deletion, the right to be forgotten, the obsolescence of file formats, the slow decay of digital archives — whether any of this destroys something that was real depends on whether information is the kind of thing that can be destroyed.
Information persists where it is held; deletion releases what isn't held elsewhere.
On these views, information persists or doesn't depending on whether something is sustaining it. What is held in divine memory or in active communal practice continues; what is held only by the deleted artifact is genuinely released. The variable conservation maps onto a variable moral …
Roads not taken Information is genuinely lost when the substrate that hosted it goes; deletion really destroys. (51%) · Information at the cosmic level isn't destroyed; deletion only obscures access. (39%) · Nothing is fundamentally conserved; deletion is just routine impermanence. (1%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Could the dead, in principle, be brought back?
If we had perfect information about who someone was — their connectome, their behavioral patterns, their history — could we, in principle, restore them? The question is partly engineering, but the ceiling on the engineering is metaphysical.
What is held by God or sustaining practice can be restored; what isn't can't.
On these views, the conservation of personal information depends on what is sustaining it. The Eastern Orthodox doctrine of resurrection holds that the person is preserved in God's memory and restored in the resurrection by divine action operating on what God has held. What is …
Roads not taken The information dissipates with the substrate; restoration is in principle impossible. (51%) · The information that constitutes a person is conserved; restoration is in principle possible. (39%) · Nothing of what was can be restored; restoration is wishful framing. (1%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Is forgiveness ontologically possible?
When someone forgives, does the offense actually go away — erased, undone, no longer a fact — or does forgiveness reframe a wrong that persists exactly as it always was?
The offense persists where sustained and releases where conditionally absolved; forgiveness is real ontological work.
On these views, conservation is not a flat cosmic law but a function of what sustains. An offense persists where it is held — by holding-on, by ritual continuation, by divine attention to a particular debt — and is genuinely released where it is conditionally …
Roads not taken The offense is locally constituted by its substrate; when the substrate dissolves, the offense genuinely passes away. (51%) · The offense persists ontologically; forgiveness is real moral work, but it doesn't erase what was. (39%) · Nothing is preserved; the offense is impermanent, and holding it is the suffering. (1%)
Jump to school (202)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 #64 #65 #66 #67 #68 #69 #70 #71 #72 #73 #74 #75 #76 #77 #78 #79 #80 #81 #82 #83 #84 #85 #86 #87 #88 #89 #90 #91 #92 #93 #94 #95 #96 #97 #98 #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104 #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119 #120 #121 #122 #123 #124 #125 #126 #127 #128 #129 #130 #131 #132 #133 #134 #135 #136 #137 #138 #139 #140 #141 #142 #143 #144 #145 #146 #147 #148 #149 #150 #151 #152 #153 #154 #155 #156 #157 #158 #159 #160 #161 #162 #163 #164 #165 #166 #167 #168 #169 #170 #171 #172 #173 #174 #175 #176 #177 #178 #179 #180 #181 #182 #183 #184 #185 #186 #187 #188 #189 #190 #191 #192 #193 #194 #195 #196 #197 #198 #199 #200 #201 #202