Theos-Talk Archives (September 2008 Message tt00078)

> Dear Nigel,
> You can read 6-7 books of C. W. Leadbeater and then ask yourself if
> what he wrote might be true or not. I won't ask anybody to believe 
if
> his/her soul does not tell him it is true. In this free world we 
give
> everyone right to believe or not to believe any philosophy.
> Best
> Anand Gholap

Dear Anand

Thank you for your reply and suggestion that is 
entirely reasonable. Moreover we should certainly 
each be totally free to believe whatsoever we wish. 
Freedom of thought and belief is a fundamental 
bastion of genuine Theosophy.

Many years ago I actually read many more than
 "6-7 books of C.W. Leadbeater", studying his works 
quite intensively for a number of years. I even developed 
study course material for fellow students based in part 
on some of his propositions.

In your reply you write, "?then ask yourself if what 
he wrote might be true or not."

Herein lies my difficulty. As we both now know, 
Bishop Leadbeater was not truthful on so many 
occasions. 
I only discovered this after reading a number of books 
challenging his honesty and integrity as a person, and 
his lack of trustworthiness in representing the Theosophy 
of Madame Blavatsky's teachers, with whom he claimed 
to be in direct contact and speaking and writing on their 
behalf. 
Far from representing their teachings, we now know he 
actually contradicted most of them. 
This is simply fraudulent behaviour. 

He is of course fully entitled to disagree with the teachings 
of the Mahatmas as are we all. But as seekers after truth, 
surely we should not allow to go unchallenged gross 
misrepresentations and contradictions of the 
Mahatmas' Theosophical teachings by one who 
claims to be representing them? 
Isn't that a matter of simple justice, and nothing to 
do with disallowing a person's right to believe as 
they choose? 

And herein lies another difficulty for me. 
If Bishop Leadbeater is proven to be a compulsive
liar, and is proven to contradict and misrepresent 
many teachings, why would anyone place unequivocal 
trust and belief in such a person's pronouncements, 
particularly in matters perhaps requiring occult 
awakening and knowledge such as after death states, 
auras, planetary schemes, hierarchies and indeed direct 
contact with Mahatmas, Masters and Adepts? 

Once again, this is not denying a person's right to 
believe, rather questioning why they might so do.

If I may ask, what is it that satisfies you as to 
the authenticity of Bishop Leadbeater's 
pronouncements?

Regards
Nigel