Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00917)

Pedro,

It is a mistake for students to think that Leadbeater's writings
represent the Theosophy of the Mahatmas in many significant areas.
They don't. 
See... 
http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/thomas/

This is NOT to say the Mahatmas' teachings should be taken as "final
and absolute", as you seem to accuse me of suggesting. (or..as you
seem to think I'm saying!!) That has nothing to do with the points I
am making and is an unnecessary diversion. (hopefully unconscious on
your part!:)

It is a mistake for students to think that Leadbeater was a fine,
upstanding gentleman who was honest, trustworthy and of good character
in all situations ie; someone who would tell the truth about matters,
would respect young boys and their parents and who would be honourable
enough to desist from disgracing and bringing into disrepute the Adyar
Theosophical Society in the eyes of thousands. He wasn't.

It was a mistake for people to accept that Leadbeater was who he said
he was and that therefore his teachings had veracity based on his
apparent status. I see clear parallels with Lobsang Rampa.
I also `cut my teeth on some of his writings.

One of the great problems for me in reading Leadbeater's works is that
it is so seductive through its narrative style and its authoritative
tone that the information DOES enter the memory banks. Then when his
fraud is realised(!!!) (or when the contradictions are realised :) it
can be a very difficult task to unlearn the data as Cass pointed out.

It is at this point that one can then mistakenly offer to others from
our memory banks what we think to be the Mahatmas' theosophy without
remembering that it is in fact Leadbeater's version. 

This to me can be a major problem for the student who wishes to study
theosophy from the source of the Mahatmas rather than from, imo,
Leadbeater's (cunning) imagination.

This is NOT to say that everything from Leadbeater was from his
imagination, but as mentioned repeatedly, significant portions were in
opposition to the Mahatmas he claimed to represent. 

So, if not from his imagination, where did it come from, other
traditions? This may well be so, just NOT the Mahatmas' trans
himalayan tradition!

Once again, this is NOT to say the Mahatmas were "right" and
Leadbeater was "wrong", just that he wasn't teaching their version of
theosophy in many areas whilst claiming that he was.

I hope I have made this point clearer now?

Perry