REF - Daniel's Message to Pedro
Nov 28, 2004 12:53 PM
by Anand Gholap
Daniel's mistake was after reading Textbook of Theosophy and Ancient
Wisdom he went backward to HPB's writing etc, instead of going
forward to writing of AB, CWL, CJ, Codd,Arundale, Taimni, Hodson.
Many people make this mistake and those who do are always confused,
become dogmatic, lose insight, develop some bad psychological traits
like dogma, intolerance etc.
Masters and HPB both have expressly said that they were neither good
writers nor their English was good.
Annie Besant knew extreme confusion caused by using words
interchangeably, not sticking to any one set of terminology as
happened in HPB's writing and Mahatma Letters. Because words and
sentences in HPB's writing and ML were not accurate that time also
many people were confused. So she created a standard terminology.
This terminology was later followed by all writers strictly in Adyar
TS and they did not use words and terms loosely. Then came clarity in
writing and confusion was not there.
However now also those Daniel like people who go in backward
direction get confused. That is why I once said one should read only
what was written after 1890 when terminology was made standard.
--- In email@example.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell"
> Thanks very much for your insightful comments
> Let me quote one of your comments and then add
> my own thoughts.
> You write:
> "What continues to seem remarkable to me is
> that his books have helped a hell of lot of
> people for the past 100 years, including myself.
> Many, in many countries, have proceeded to
> study the original literature, may not quote
> him anymore in their books and articles,
> but in their hearts are grateful for the
> contribution of a man that helped to bring
> the light of Theosophy to dozens of thousands
> in this world."
> Yes, I too must be grateful to Mr. Leadbeater for
> it was through one of his books A TEXTBOOK OF
> THEOSOPHY that I was first introduced to
> Theosophy. This book and Mrs. Besant's THE
> ANCIENT WISDOM were my first introductions
> to Theosophy. I can still recall the
> exhilaration in 1968-1969 on reading
> his TEXTBOOK and thinking about these somehow
> "familiar" ideas. Mingled with those thoughts are
> the scenes of springtime in East Texas as
> I would take walks thru the woods and ponder
> on these things....
> Again thanks for sharing your thoughts with Theos-Talk readers.
> More later.
> > Daniel:
> > This is my tentative view: Leadbeater's writings are based on the
> > fundamental principles of Theosophy as presented by HPB, i.e.,
> > unity of all existence, the cyclicity and lawfulness of the
> > and the essential identity between the human consciousness and
> > universal Spirit.
> > But CWL was not just a writer, he was also an investigator of the
> > unseen dimensions of existence. Like every clairvoyant, whatever
> > he "saw" he did it through the filter of his own cultural and
> > intellectual background. He said numerous times that he did not
> > expect his readers to believe him, but that he only reported what
> > had "saw".
> > Some of the things he "saw" apparently were corroborated later
> > did see a great spiritual teacher in Krishnamurti, although he
> > probably mistaken as to the form in which he expected
> > would express himself later on. He did describe, in 1910,
> > similar to the European Union taking place at the end of the
> > twentieth century and of people reading their newspapers in
> a "small
> > box" at home, connected to a central "box" in the city, which
> > probably was a very rudimentary description of the Internet! He
> > said that one of the popular programmes of that "box" system was
> > called "The Community Chat Show"!
> > Of course, many of his clairvoyant descriptions were not
> > corroborated, like the existence of a humanity in Mars, the lives
> > Alcyone, Mars and Mercury as belonguing to the earth chain, etc,
> > There are very clear and striking differences between Theosophy
> > presented in HPB's writings and in the Mahatma Letters and CWL's
> > presentation. If I may say so with bated breath, the original
> > presentation is utterly impersonal and profoundly metaphysical.
> > is, as the Mahatmas and HPB again and again mentioned, a SYSTEM,
> > which is logical, consistent and based on fundamental premises.
> > In CWL's case, his presentation was bound to be personal since
> > of it consists of descriptions of clairvoyant investigations
> > undertook. He was bound to differ in some instances from the
> > teaching because he was describing things that HE HIMSELF HAD
> > an independent researcher, and he recognised, more than once,
> > there were many pitfalls on the path of the investigator. But he
> > always, in his writings, recognised "The Secret Doctrine", as the
> > source of the theosophical teaching.
> > What continues to seem remarkable to me is that his books have
> > a hell of lot of people for the past 100 years, including myself.
> > Many, in many countries, have proceeded to study the original
> > literature, may not quote him anymore in their books and
> > but in their hearts are grateful for the contribution of a man
> > helped to bring the light of Theosophy to dozens of thousands in
> > world.
> > His writings may contradict a number of ideas of the original
> > literature, but I feel they are imbued with the same altruistic
> > spirit which was inculcated by the Founders of the Theosophical
> > Movement.
> > Birthdate later. It is too late in Sydney.
> > Pedro
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application