Theos-Talk Archives (October 2004 Message tt00039)

Frank,

Thanks for your comments at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/19354

You comment:

". . . Miss Cleather a lay chela . . . obviously was 
not informed by HPB about higher occult matters as 
to the question of successorship, what a messenger 
is and how a chela is trained to recognize him. . . . "

Obvious to whom?

Well, then WHO WAS INFORMED by HPB about these
higher occult matters??

And where is this recorded?

Again you write:

"I do not say that Cleather did not honestly say 
what seemed to her to be the truth, but she was 
unable to accept that there was higher knowledge 
to which she had no access."

But in both of your quotes above, the implication
is that there was somebody who had access to
HIGHER KNOWLEDGE and HIGHER OCCULT MATTERS. Who
was this?

Most of the numerous claimants listed at:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/moderntheosophy.htm#Endnote
CLAIM they had access to such HIGHER OCCULT MATTERS.

Notice what C.W. Leadbeater said about Mrs. Besant:

". . . there are other qualities, other powers, of 
which you cannot know, because they pertain to the 
secrets of Initiation. She is a pupil of our Masters; 
from the fount of Their archaic wisdom she derives 
her own. . . . "

In other words, you cannot know because you do not
have access to this HIGHER KNOWLEDGE.

Therefore, if one should be rightfully skeptical
of Leadbeater's and Besant's claim to this higher
knowledge, then why not also skeptical of that same
claim as given in your posting?

Frank, you then remark:

"At HPB's London time the doctrine of the inner and outer
rounds was too high to make it public and to the general
audience - including the lower three lay degrees IG, ES,
LOL - only generalized information was given. Ininstructed
persons took these generalized information - blinds - as a
literally truth and Sinnett, Leadbeater and Farthing made a
blind beleif dogma out of it without understanding of the
inner meaning."

But how does one know that "the doctrine...was too high
to make it public..."?

Who made that claim besides you?

You say:

"Farthing made a blind beleif dogma out of it without understanding 
of the inner meaning."

Again you are making a claim that Farthing made a blind belief out of
the doctrine as given by HPB "without understanding of the inner 
meaning."

But how do you know that? Is that kind of claim any different
than the claims made about Leadbeater by Pedro and Anand?

Here you make the claim that someone has an understanding of the
inner meaning. Who is that?

You claim Sinnett, Leadbeater and Farthing got it wrong, which
implies that you know better, that you have insight into this
that they didn't have. 

You have every right to claim this but a mere claim does not
in itself make it true.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc