Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt00099)

There is more then one letter that are said to come from the Maha-
Chohan. The one that Pedro and Linda likes (about that god has a 
personality), is very clear fake (author Ernest Wood or Leadbeater 
maybe?). This letter has nothing to do with that letter from the 
Maha-Chohan that was quoted in Lucifer and other places, that is a 
real one. This was the same letter that Mrs. Conger published in her 
chronology to the Mahatma Letter to A.P. Sinnett.

And Konztantin, who or what are you calling "very sectarian"?

My article was not I reply on Pedro's God-article, but on another 
one, called "Which Theosophy?".

But I totally understand if leadbeaterians don't like it. But I am 
interested; as good as I can, to work for the benefits of Theosophy, 
and share and spreading it to those who are interested to learn and 
listen. And if I can, "save" as some from the errors of Leadbeater & 
co, and bring them away from the wrong track of pseudo-theosophy. 
Hence this is very dangerous path.
 
Carl

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kay_ziatz" <kay_ziatz@...> wrote:
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bill Meredith wrote:
> 
> > http://www.austheos.org.au/magazine/pedro-god.htm
> 
> Now I understand why L. Oliveira didn't print the article [being 
> the reply to abovequoted] in her magazine. Besides being very 
> sectarian (and shifting the purely philosophical topic of the 
original 
> article to personalities), the article contains at least one 
statement 
> which is clearly untrue, i.e. about forgery of Maha-chohan letter.
> It was published in parts in Lucifer during Blavatsky's life and 
later 
> in The Path.
> At least H.P. Blavatsky & W.Q. Judge had quoted it as a valueable 
> source.
>