Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00853)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel H. Caldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@y...> wrote:
> 
> Perry,
> 
> Thanks for outlining once again the basic points.
> 
> I doubt that Anand will ever reply!
> 
> Pedro has certainly responded to some of
> the points but unfortunately has ignored
> the majority of issues.
> 
> Therefore, the ostrich head in the sand
> routine is found to be the basic answer
> to any of the questions or issues you
> bring up.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> 
> wrote:
> > 
> > Some issues for consideration about Leadbeater and his 
teachings -
> > 
> > Few of us claim any special spiritual status that Leadbeater did.
> > He therefore has put himself as fair game to be put under the 
> > spotlight of scrutiny for theosophical students as we try and 
> assess 
> > the veracity of his writings and claims.
> > 
> > Leadbeater made the claim that he was in contact with and a 
close 
> > disciple of the very same adepts as Madame Blavatsky.
> > 
> > Repeatedly and clearly he made the claim that his teachings came 
> from 
> > these same Adepts.


Can you point out which of his books he claimed to come from the 
Adepts?


> > A comparison of his teachings with those of the Mahatma letters 
> shows 
> > that many of his teachings (WHICH HE CLAIMED CAME FROM THE SAME 
> > ADEPTS!!!) clearly contradict and are in direct opposition to 
the 
> > Mahatmas' teachings.


Can you point out which of his books denies the unity of life, the 
lawfulness and cyclicity of the universe and the fundamental 
identity between the human Spirit and the Universal Spirit?


> > How do supporters of Leadbeater and his writings explain this?


By suggesting that students of Theosophy may have different views 
regarding their understanding of its basic principles, and that they 
are free to investigate.


> > What rationale can be given in order to assess these claims of 
> > Leadbeater without his supporters using the usual techniques of 
> > either diverting attention away from the questions or simply 
> avoiding 
> > answering them altogether?


Theosophy encourages individual understanding and the judging of a 
teaching or teachings on their own merits. There are many 
traditional teachings on the human constitution, in different 
cultures, that do not conform with the ones given in the Mahatma 
Letters. Are they all wrong? Are the teachings in the Mahatma 
Letters final and absolutely authoritative? Who has decreed this? 
The Mahatmas?


> > To me it can only mean one of two things; either Leadbeater was 
> > imagining his own Mahatmas and his teachings, or he was lying.
> > 
> > It has been proven that Leadbeater lied about his date of birth 
> which 
> > meant he also lied about seeing the Mahatma M in London as a 
young 
> > boy. These two issues have still not been answered by his 
> supporters 
> > despite repeated requests on this forum.
> > He demonstrably lied about his father's occupation and his 
> childhood 
> > adventures in South America. (See "The Elder Brother" pp 11-18 
Dr. 
> G 
> > Tillett)
> > 
> > He demonstrably lied about attending Queen's College, Oxford and
> > St. 
> > John's college, Cambridge, apparently attending each at the same 
> > time! He attended neither. (See "The Elder Brother" p. 15 Dr. G. 
> > Tillett)
> > 
> > He very clearly manipulated "data" in his work "The Many Lives 
of 
> > Alcycone" to suit his purpose. (See "The Elder Brother" p.114 
Dr. G 
> > Tillett)
> > 
> > And now, thanks to Anand Gholap's recent "recommendation" to read
> > J 
> > Michael McBride's article from Yale University, we find
> > Leadbeater 
> > and Annie Besant using similar techniques for their work "Occult 
> > Chemistry". Under the sub heading "Quantitative Evidence of 
> > Skulduggery" the article states "Unknowingly the Occult Chemists 
> left 
> > quantitative evidence suggesting that, from the beginning, at 
least 
> > Leadbeater, or Jinarajadasa, and perhaps Besant or all three, 
> > cynically intended to deceive." (My italics)


There are other positive views of Occult Chemistry which were not 
mentioned. It is a subject that continues to attract attention, 
although there is a marked skepticism about its scientific validity. 



> > Moreover, Leadbeater by his own admission slept naked in the 
same 
> bed 
> > and bathed with young boys on a regular basis, whilst engaging 
in 
> > activities which today would clearly bring about his conviction 
as 
> a 
> > paedophilia and which would have THEN had he not employed 
> > paedophiles' commonly used disempowering techniques such 
> > as "swearing" the boys to secrecy. All this from a man "on the 
> verge 
> > of divinity"?!?


Can you point out a reference by Leadbeater declaring that he slept 
naked with boys? We already have seen that the Sydney Police did not 
have conclusive evidence to charge and prosecute him at that time, 
although they said there were SUSPICIONS of some individuals which 
were not without foundation. Here, the time-honoured principle "a 
person is innocent until proven guilty" does not seem to apply to 
Leadbeater.

Another point: the incriminating evidence invariably comes from 
hostile witnesses, like Thomas Martyn's wife in Sydney. Similar 
evidences have become the norm in almost any discussion about 
Leadbeater, but the testimony of his pupils is hardly mentioned, if 
at all. Is it fair to discuss someone's life and work and only 
present incriminating evidence, when it is known that supportive 
evidence has also been available for one hundred years?

Another issue here is the selectiveness in presenting his 
statements: while he did say that he taught regular self-relief 
(masturbation) to several of his pupils, he also denied any criminal 
intent, and this has been largely ignored. 

He was also a very visible, vulnerable and convenient political 
target which his critics used (and still use) to attack the Adyar TS 
for its perceived "neo-Theosophy" stance. This is another area which 
is largely unexplored in the Leadbeater case. 


> > 
> > Some on this group have suggested that there was nothing unusual 
> > about these practices in that time period.
> > 
> > The numerous police investigations and the thousands who 
resigned 
> > from the society due to this, AT THE TIME, would probably 
disagree.
> > 
> > 
> > Leadbeater claimed to be a high initiate in close personal 
contact 
> > with the Adept teachers of Blavatsky.
> > These claims are not supported by the evidence?


Three letters received from Master K.H. in his own recognised 
handwriting, the second of which was precipitated in HPB's presence 
in London.


> > 
> > It can be demonstrated clearly that he may have been in 
> communication 
> > with something but it certainly was not the same Adept teachers 
of 
> > Blavatsky.


Please demonstrate.


> > So who do we accept as having greater credibility in occult 
> > knowledge; the Mahatmas or a commentator of highly suspect 
> > credentials who contradicted the teachings of the very same 
> Mahatmas 
> > HE CLAIMED TO REPRESENT and whose names he used to validate 
> > his "authority"???
> > 
> > These are just some examples of why to me, Leadbeater's 
teachings 
> > need to be seriously challenged by any truly serious student of 
> > theosophy.


Leadbeater pointed out, repeatedly, in his writings that he was 
presenting the results of his own investigations and did not expect 
readers to believe him. He said he was trained to see and report 
what he had seen in the invisible worlds. He once remarked that 
there are many pitfalls on the path of the investigator of the 
unseen realities.


> > It is true, tens of thousands have read and will probably 
continue 
> to 
> > read his writings.
> > 
> > Tens of thousands making a mistake, doesn't make it any less of 
a 
> > mistake.


This is one of the most extraordinary statements I have ever seen in 
any theosophical discussion: TO READ SOMEONE'S BOOKS (LEADBEATER) IS 
A MISTAKE! How do we arrive at such startling conclusion? Does it 
not also imply a judgement of the choice, discernment and freedom of 
those THOUSANDS who decided to read them? 

Why not include Leadbeater's books and articles and pamphlets on an 
Index and declare them forbidden reading? It was done in the past 
very successfully with the writings of Clement of Alexandria, 
Origen, Giordano Bruno, etc.


> > If "There Is No Religion Higher Than Truth", as Blavatsky 
adopted 
> as 
> > the motto for the Adyar Theosophical Society, how can
> > Leadbeater's 
> > level of lies, manipulation and deceit go unchallenged by both 
the 
> > Society and his supporters? 
> > 
> > How can they be summarily dismissed in one form or another by 
> anyone 
> > genuinely seeking a truthful mind? What is the power that 
> Leadbeater 
> > holds over his supporters? 
> > 
> > Are not the Adyar Society and Leadbeater's supporters 
perpetuating 
> > this monstrous deceit of the mind?
> > 
> > Perry


It is true that the Adyar TS continues to publish his books, but 
they don't seem to be dangerous. His writings do not feature 
prominently in TS programmes world wide. There were (and there are, 
from time to time) suggestions that his books should not be sold 
anymore for they are perceived by some to be TOO EMBARASSING for 
those who hold HPB's writings as the true and only source of 
Theosophy and for those who have interest and background in science. 
An eminent member of the TS in Australia recently said he was 
shocked when he learned that THE SOLAR SYSTEM by Arthur Powell 
(which is based on CWL's and Besant's works) had been reprinted by 
TPH Adyar. But the demand for his books continues and that is the 
reason why they are still in print.


Pedro