Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00861)

Dear Pedro and Daniel

If CWL is writing teachings that are in direct contradiction to the founder then it is a mistake to read anything that he wrote. Of course, he has a right to believe and put down on paper what he believes, but he should do this under the C.W. Leadbeater Society, and not as keys to understanding what HPB wrote.

I do not believe that a discernment of choice enters the equation as there is no comparison if a beginner is introduced to Theosophy through Leadbeater.

Anyone has the right to read whatever they choose as do the millions of christians who read the gospels do and who have been deceived about Christ's true teachings.

Clement, Origen and Bruno wrote under there own name, not in the name of someone else. When this is the case, the reader can choose to accept or disregard what they say.

Leadbeater used Theosophy to form the Liberal Catholic Church and in so doing promulgated christianity through Theosophy. Which clearly was opposed by HPB. His teachings on the astral, are spritualistic not Theosophic, his scientific clairvoyance could set HPB's teachings into ridicule.

There can be no inherited Leader after HPB. She wrote in her name and in the name of the Masters and took credit for nothing. 

If the TS cannot separate itself from the agnostics then it is time that an HPB Society is formed, leaderless and without any esoteric circles dividing the so called knowers from the ignorant.

Cass





"Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com> wrote:


Perry wrote:

=============================================
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.
=============================================


Pedro replied:

==============================================
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.
================================================

I will let Perry reply to Pedro's remarks.

But I would like to say that the second book I ever
read on Theosophy was C.W. Leadbeater's A TEXTBOOK
OF THEOSOPHY.

I am glad that I read this book. It awakened in
me an interest to know more about Theosophy. I can
still remember the "excitement" I experienced as
I read Mr. Leadbeater's book. His book prompted me
to dig deeper....

And it seems to me that any serious student of
Theosophy should read and study at least some of
his major works.

Having said that, there are a good number of
differences between Leadbeater's teachings and
those of Blavatsky and the Mahatmas (as found
in the Mahatma Letters). I think one of the
most glaring examples is the one illustrated
in detail at:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/morganafterdeath.htm

Another example:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/leadbeatermars.htm

And another example:

http://blavatskyarchives.com/moderntheosophy.htm#2

I would like to see Pedro's thoughts and comments
on these three examples. As well as Perry's.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc










Yahoo! Groups Links









---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

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