Re: Theos-World Re: criticism within TS-Adyar
Jan 17, 2005 01:16 PM
by M. Sufilight
Hallo all,
My views are:
Yeah...I agree Perry.
I think CWL has been the most influential theosophist, who ever have got
"thrown out" of the TS in all of the TS history - and this is worth
considering.
And CWL got thrown out because of a Sexual scandal.
The strange issue is that he was welcomed back again - to the same position
in the TS - after a few years without any real explanations on why this
could be so very easily justified.
Has anyone ever personally contacted "high-ranking" TS Adyar or any other
Theosophical branch or offshoot about their official position as of TODAY on
CWL's sex-activities as mentioned in the following link and elsewhere ???:
http://blavatskyarchives.com/ton2.pdf
(Let us see who dares to answer and explain away all the details. Can you
afford a trip to Adyar or another place ? Can you afford not to take such a
trip ?)
It is a quite interesting and an almost self-contradicting fact that A. E.
Powell's book deals with the Black Magician and his pupil. And also that
CWL's book the Astral Plane (as far as I know the only of CWL's books which
the Masters are said to officially have accepted)
does the same. Here CWL himself writes that the Dugpas in Bhutan deals with
Tantric Magic.
Quite interesting reading, when we consider the atmosphere CWL created
around himself.
I wonder what on Earth both CWL and Besant thought about when CWL reentered
TS as TEACHER just a few years later.
The fact the he later created the Liberal Catholic Church and that HPB
wholeheartedly fought the Christian Church's dogmatism, the dead letter of
the bible and its sacraments makes CWL a ("Jesuitical") heretic in my eyes.
Others tell me he was a saint who did build a bridge between theosophical
teaching and Christianity. I how ever hold it to be true, that If there is a
bridge it is a very thin and fragile one, because of all the sexually
related scandals, which CWL surrounded himself with at Sydney and elsewhere.
So what is theosophy and theosophical teaching?
Is it not including a protest against dogmatism, dead-letter
thinking-patterns and strange Tantric practices and Christian rituals of
vanity?
Did or do HPB not protest against such things?
So am I not entitled to protest against the TS Adyar policy of promoting CWL
and his books?
--------
from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 3:54 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: criticism within TS-Adyar
Hi Katinka,
Thanks for your comments.
What you say is perhaps true and one layer to the whole picture,
however for me this is not good enough and why I can no longer
support the Adyar Society.
My understanding of what the society stood for and HPB's approach to
fearless challenge to ideas are not to be found and infact disallowed
by the Society, especially in the case of Leadbeater.
Which to me is an utter betrayal, I can't read it any other way.
Theosophy in Australia magazine had an article recently that was
critical of some of the ideas in the Secret Doctrine (so well done
Adyar Society I say ! see it wasn't so hard was it)
Well would the same type of article be allowed on Leadbeater `s writings?
Hmm I wonder.. It would be a move in the right direction if it did.
I live in hope it will one day happen, but I won't hold my breath.
Cheers
Perry
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@k...> wrote:
Hi,
Criticism in general is hardly allowed in most of the theosophical
publications. There is a general sense that criticism doesn't help.
Not that I agree with this, but your suggestion that this is peculiar
to the writings of Besant and Leadbeater is unfair. You also won't
find criticism of Blavatsky, Alice Bailey, Krishnamurti, in a
theosophical publication either. This is generally avoided. Quest
recently had an article that was critical (though nuanced) on
Gurdjieff so the tide may be turning... Pedro Oliveira did have an
article published in which he critisized following HPB
UNQUESTIONINGLY, but that isn't the same thing as a critical article
on HPB, as I'm sure the editors realized.
Students are left to themselves to find out what is true and in lodges
and studygroups of course study will end up also comparing doctrines,
where relevant.
The TS-Adyar (the TS-Pasadena at present does the same thing: that is,
not criticising in general) simply attempts to be impartial, which is
indeed one of its objectives, IMO. [not in letter, but in spirit].
I've said this before and I'll say this again: theosophists within the
TS-Adyar that I've met study Blavatsky far more than they do Besant or
Leadbeater. So if the books written by the latter are still
best-sellers it is due to their popularity outside the TS.
Also: Besant's and Leadbeater's books don't contain merely rubbish.
Chakra's, aura's, thought-transferrence etc. are facts of life,
esoteric facts, but facts. Blavatsky hinted at their existence and
Leadbeater and Besant elaborated on that and were largely correct
about them(though incorrect in details). Anand's quotes as sent to the
Young-theosophist forum (and perhaps here as well, I haven't checked
yet) show that Leadbeater was inconsistent with Blavatsky and the
Mahatmas on details, but that he also presented many doctrines
truthfully in general.
Katinka Hesselink
--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "krishtar" <krishtar_a@b...> wrote:
> Hi Friend
> Just a comment:
> I think probably there must be a very important reason for the Adyar
HQ to act this way.Not accessible for discussion.
> Maybe because people feel more indentified with CWLīs versions and
perhaps find easier to study his version of theosophy?
> And this facility on atracting more people to the society gives the
HQ an expressive good number of subscriptions and active members and
for this reason they decide to live it quiet?
> The reason may be just financial.
> His teachings are like sugar to ants.
> Another example:
> In Brazil spiritism is an ever growing religion just because their
proclamed beliefs are very easy to accept because the allan Kardec
books put a great inportance and santifies the life of suffering,
giving people a relief based on the creed of continuation of life from
where it stopped on earth.
> Most of Leadbeaterīs beliefs are based on his clairvoyant very
personal view of Theosophy and they atract more people just as the
instant-food atracts people who donīt like to cook.
> Rough example but it works.
>
> Krishtar
>
> PS.:A local curious example: The recent brasilian translation of the
book " A glimpse at the freemasonry history " by CWL under the
auspices had among other particularities an editorīs prologue as "
Leadbeater was inicitated by one of the major occultists of the
century, the remakable woman H P Blavatsky ".
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Perry Coles
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 2:54 AM
> Subject: Theos-World Why continue to challenge?
>
>
>
>
> The reason I think this is an issue worthy of discussion on this
list
> is for the follow reasons.
>
> Leadbeater's version of theosophy is still actively promoted in the
> Adyar societies publications.
> His teachings are apparently not allowed to be compared critically
> with the teachings of
> H P.Blavatsky and her those given in the Mahatma letters in Adyar
> theosophical journals and publications.
>
> If this is the case it flies in the face of everything the
society is
> supposed to stand for.
> Namely freedom of enquiry and research for theosophical students.
>
> This is an issue that will not go away until it is dealt with by
the
> Adyar Societies leaders.
> If the Society does not support this basic and fundamental
principal
> how can it claim to be upholding both the 3 objects and the freedom
> of thought statement?
>
> The issue for me is the principle of freedom of thought being
upheld.
> Let Leadbeater's teachings stand on there own merits why apparently
> protect them from comparison?
> A dogma is a teaching that can't be challenged.
> Have Leadbeater's teachings assumed the status of dogma in the
> society?
> It would seem so.
>
> Leadbeater's shady personal life and history are issues that people
> need to investigate and access for themselves and if these issues
> can't be discussed here, where else?
>
> There is no excuse for the blocking of commentary and comparison of
> Leadbeaters teachings with those of the earlier teachings of
> Blavatsky and the Mahatma letters however.
>
> Still waiting for positive confirmation that this is not the case
> officially from the society.
>
> So far haven't heard a whisper.
>
> Leadbeater may be dead and gone but his influence and teachings
live
> on and remain beyond the reach of any criticism in the society.
> Quite outrageous..... I find it hard to believe this situation is
> just ignored and brushed under the carpet after all these
> years......I am still flabbergasted by the whole scenario.
>
> The big question for me is do I just drop it and forget about it
> and 'get over it' as they say, or would that just a cop out on my
> part???
>
> The way of the bully (and the pedophile for that matter) is one of
> disempowerment.
> A bully is a bully is a bully, passive aggressive or otherwise if I
> give into the bully then I have to start dancing to his/her tune.
> Maybe I've answered my own question.
>
>
>
> Perry
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
