Theos-Talk Archives (January 2003 Message tt00089)

Having less time now than when I wrote Theosophy's Shadow some years ago, I still will try, from time to time, to respond to some criticisms of the article.

I am not sure what Lindsay means by "It" being the "other way around". He is apparently just quoting the Fibetan via Bailey about CWL's use of the first Fibetan book Initiation. It is irrelevant whether Leadbeater borrowed from that book in 1925 or not. My point was that the return of Maitreya and other elements of pseudo-theosophy were brought forth from the fount of CWL during the Esoteric Section teachings around 1910(?). (Hopefully Tillett or Hejka-Ekins or some other historian will nail down this timeframe more accurately) This was long before Bailey started channelling in 1918. The Adyar TS, during AAB's early membership, was steeped in CWL's teachings, so it is obvious that the words AAB's "books are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy pioneered by CW Leadbeater" are accurate.

Below is a snippet from http://www.esotericastrologer.org/AABHPBHR.htm#TSNW which has Lindsay's comments on Theosophy's Shadow.

I will eventually wade through his remarks and respond to some of them. Perhaps I will plump up the article with another rewrite someday.
Fare Thee Well,

Nicholas 

************
NW:
Her books are rooted in the pseudo-theosophy pioneered by CW Leadbeater. For example, one of CWL's favorite revelations was the return to earth of "Maitreya" the Christ. Bailey accepted this fantasy. 
Phillip Lindsay (PL): It is actually the other way around. Leadbeater used some of AAB's original material from books such as Intiation, Human and Solar and took the credit for it in his book The Masters and the Path.

**********


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]