Theos-Talk Archives (July 2005 Message tt00131)

well konstantin
we know from the mahatma letters to sinnet that india was passing
through a 'probation' and the mahatmas have said that it was india's
last chance... and it seem that india failed also... reaching and
absurd of the expulsion of HPB from her own society...
HPB returned to europe to write the secret doctrine and to form a
inner group
yeas, besant was in this inner group
besant and other 11 members! and Alas! ALL the members eventually left
the society and started to say that they didn't agrree with what
besant was doing
so i ask you, why are the pupils of HPB, members of the INNER GROUP
any worse that besant alone? the were co-workers... besant wasn't
their leader. they hade the same occult training and should deserve
the same respect that you all give to besant... so why besant should
stay as someone better then the 11 togheter? stating their sadness
about the direction the society was going...
there was nothing left in India.... the society in india rupted... so
i don't know what leadbeater was doing there... since the masters were
trying to creat a last occult effort in the inner group of blavatsky..
and there we have Mr G.R.S.Mead, private secretary of HPB, who usually
ansewered her letters, and led the esoteric section, acusing
leadbeater in the 1906 inquiry... you have Constanse of Watchmeister,
who left the society and died regreting the way the society turned
under besant's guidance... you have Mrs Alice Cleather who wrote a
book on the corruption of the society and the leadbeater problem...
you have Isabel Cooper-Oakley who also left the society. Keithley also
left the society, Emily Kilingbury left the society. well i could go
on with the list, but i think you got my point
so why the statements of besant should be taken as superior than the
opinion of all her coleagues who were chosen to be occult trained and
who all disagread on the terms besant was leading the society? is she
any better than all the other members of the inner group?
plus, we have judge's problem, who, as HPB states was a accepted chela
for more than 30 years standing, while besant was only in probation...
besant was never chosed by the council to be the president, she 'stole
the chair'.
well, and since the masters were mainly with hpb, and we know that the
chelas on probation failed, and leadbeater was away in india doing we
don't know what (maybe molesting some pupils)
i really don't understand why we must put besant and leadbeater in an
altar and adore them. Many people recieved letters, and no one is
adoring those people, having recieved a letter doesn't make leadbeater
better in any way, and specilly doesn't make him superior than HPB (as
some people here are trying to say)
while there is an 'adoration' of this to, people who were equal to
them in terms of occultismo, who knew HPB better then tham, or were
chelas a longer time than them are being negleted and no one thakes
their opinion on account...
so, are you all searching for the truth or just for the most
confortable way to keep on adoring leadbeatrianism and becoming blind
from everything this question is surrounded?

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Konstantin Zaitzev"
<kay_ziatz@y...> wrote:
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Alaya" wrote:
> 
> > well, the letter is from 1886, and as we are all well acquainted, 
> most
> > chelas failed, only one truly suceeded, and this was Damodar... and
> > since leadbeater wasn't invited in the late years of HPB for her
> > last truly occult project, and wasn't even in touch with her any 
> longer...
> 
> If we are to believe that the letters is genuine, it follows from them 
> that Leadbeater was needed to Master particulary for work in India and 
> Sri Lanka, so he wasn't with HPB in London during her last years. 
> Besant was, and does it mean a thing? A standard probation is 7 years, 
> and there are evidences of friendly attitude of HPB to CWL in later 
> years too. We also know that she broke relations with those who really 
> failed.