Theos-Talk Archives (December 2005 Message tt00077)

Daniel, quick response as I have to leave 
home now, I'll coming back to it later, after 
I have puzzled out what your answer means.
At the first moment I am not quite sure, 
whether you are trying to fool me with 
dead-letter games?

Or is my English so bad that my logic 
argument comes not through?
Frank


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "danielhcaldwell" 
<danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 6:11 AM
Subject: Theos-World Frank and the examples 
of the four lineages: Clarification needed


Frank,

I wrote:

==================================================

In the Adyar Theosophical Society, we have 
the following lineage:

Blavatsky -> Besant & Leadbeater -> ????

In the Point Loma Theosophical Society, the 
following lineage:

Blavatsky -> Judge -> Tingley -> de 
Purucker -> ????

In the United Lodge of Theosophists:

Blavatsky -> Judge -> Crosbie -> ????

In the Arcane School:

Blavatsky -> Bailey -> ????

==================================================

But you write:

"....each theosophical lineage as each 
religion has
something in it that is worth...."

"....I believe that each lineage has is worth 
on
its own plane, so long as the light shines
above it....

"...no single lineage - as I here and than 
wrote on
theos-talk - has the whole truth and not each
lineage has the same portion in quantity and
quality of the uncorrupted original
teachings."

But Frank I think you are here changing the 
"issue" or THE POINT
under discusssion.

I was NOT referring to what lineage has "the 
whole truth" or
what lineage has the greater "portion" of the 
"uncorrupted orginal
teaching" or even the "worth" of each 
lineage.

The issue was different.

Do you believe Besant and Leadbeater were 
HPB's
genuine occult successors and that this Adyar 
lineage (succession)
therefore is "true and genuine"?

Or do you believe Crosbie was the real 
"esoteric" successor
to Judge? In other words, NOT Tingley and de 
Purucker? And
therefore that the ULT lineage is the true 
and genuine thing?

Or do you believe Bailey was the next legit 
messenger after
HPB?

Frank, are you saying that you believe ALL 
these
3 above mentioned lineages are "true and 
genuine" in some way?

Or do you believe that the real occult 
lineage, succession
and history was as follows?

that WQJ was the true occult successor of
HPB, & Tingley was in turn the chosen 
"successor" to WQJ, and
Purucker followed in the "esoteric footsteps" 
of Tingley?

Therefore, is my description below so way off 
base or inaccurate?

"Frank Reitemeyer is a strong and vocal 
advocate that promotes the
Blavatsky-Judge-Tingley-de Purucker line of 
succession. He has no
doubt whatsoever that this lineage is the 
true and genuine one. He
is equally convinced that Leadbeater was 
nothing but a "swindler",
etc. etc."

Hoping for clarification.

Daniel












Yahoo! Groups Links


theos-talk-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com