Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00876)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@y...> wrote:
>
Is it not up to us to distinguish between the Seer and the 
clairvoyant.
Christina







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@y...> 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]