Theos-Talk Archives (June 2005 Message tt00122)

Not wanting to disappoint Daniel, here’s my response to Anand’s valiant effort:

“First is birth date Leadbeater gave was accurate and government records were 
false. At that time record keeping was poor. Even now it is poor in many 
countries.”

So the birth record submitted by his father was wrong – AND it was submitted 
seven years after the birth (since the records show not only the date of birth 
but when the birth was recorded)?
Or did the father submit the record in 1847 (with no record of birth or 
submission being recorded) but it was then entered in 1854 and shown as being 
entered in 1854?
And the baptismal record was wrong by the same number of years?
It wasn’t only government records, but documents in Leadbeater’s own hand: he 
declared he had been born in 1854 when submitting a census return. 
Leadbeater’s first census return was wrong (I have seen a photographic copy of 
the original with Leadbeater’s distinctive signature), but the second return 
was correct?
Records kept in Britain that the time were not “poor”. But even if the records 
were poor, why did Leadbeater himself declare he was born in 1854 in early 
documents?

“Second possibility is Leadbeater made mistake so even if he wanted to give 
true information by mistake he gave wrong birth date. These two are most 
probable cases. Even Masters also make mistakes of this kind and they have 
written so.”

Mistakes are possible – I know of cases in which children were led to believe 
they were a few days or even a month younger to conceal extramarital pregnancy 
(although this is always to make a child seem younger, not older). But seven 
years? That is, when he was seven, Leadbeater believed he was 14?? And when he 
was 21, he believed he was 14?? Or was it his parents who made a mistake and 
thought their son was born seven years later than he was? They kept telling 
Charles he was 14 when he was really 7? Who made the mistake?

“Third possibility is he lied. Person intentionally lies when he has some gain 
from lying. By telling wrong birth date there was nothing which Leadbeater 
could get. On the contrary there was huge risk of being proven wrong without 
any gain. So this possibility of intentionally lying is almost nil.”

Nonsense! People lie about things to gain status, prestige, to be associated 
with important people. That you and I may not know the motive for a lie does 
not mean it is not a lie. Some people lie to “big note” themselves. Some 
people lie because that’s what they do.

Anand also misses the point that it was not only the birthdate about which 
Leadbeater lied.
For example, Leadbeater said he was a student at Oxford (or in some accounts, 
Cambridge): neither University has any record of him being a student or even 
applying to be a student. Mistake?
Leadbeater said his father was the chairman of a railway company: but 
Leadbeater himself described his father as a book-keeper when reporting his 
death.
Leadbeater described a rebellion in Brazil (ignoring the fact that he was not 
there) which did not happen, involving a General unknown to Brazilian history. 
Here, of course, brother Gerald (of whose birth and death no records exists) 
supposedly died, prior to being reincarnated as Jinarajadasa.

Being the son of a railway company chairman, born in the impressive sounding 
(but non-existent) Lea Green Hall, who had adventures in Brazil, who went to 
Oxford but had to leave when the family fortune was lost.....much more 
exciting than being the poorly educated son of an impoverished and fairly 
itinerant book-keeper. 

Dr Gregory Tillett