Theos-Talk Archives (May 2005 Message tt00252)

Bart,
Theosophy is a huge science. It can not be covered in 2-3 thousand 
pages. Leadbeater and Besant gave in detail explanation of facts 
which was not given earlier. 
Anand Gholap

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> Anand Gholap wrote:
> > That means when you supported those authors you believed you were 
> > right. Now you don't think so. So truth is for most of the 
students 
> > is subjective or relative. You should say " I now think .... is 
right 
> > but I may be wrong because at other moment I believed opposite 
views 
> > were right"
> 
> Well, from my point of view, Besant and Leadbeater tried to 
simplify 
> what Blavatsky and the Mahatmas wrote. However, there were two 
major 
> problems. The first is that they filtered the beliefs through the 
sieve 
> of their own prejudices (frankly, Blavatsky and even the Mahatmas 
were 
> often guilty of the same thing, but at least those were the 
exceptions, 
> and usually stood out like a sore thumb from the rest of the 
writings). 
> The second is that they went too far, going from simple (where 
> irrelevant details are dropped) to simplistic (where relevant 
details 
> are dropped). One of the biggest problems was, in emphasizing the 
> contrast between parts of continuities, they described them as if 
they 
> were completely separate entities, which kind of goes against the 
1st 
> Proposition of the Secret Doctrine (Alice Bailey went even further 
in 
> this direction).
> 
> They certainly did make contributions, but at best, they 
created a 
> bridge to Theosophy.
> 
> Bart