Theos-Talk Archives (February 2009 Message tt00284)

I think Leadbeater caught on not only because Mrs. Besant was probably  
enamored of him in some bizarre Besantian way, but also because in a period when  
Theosophical writing was dull, turgid, uninspiring and just plain damned boring 
 his stuff was entertaining.  Reading Leabeater is fun.  It is nonsense  pure 
and simple, but it is fun nonsense.
I mean who else in that time frame (with the possible exception of Frank  
Lloyd Wright) would have dreamt up a piano-organ combination like he did?
 
Chuck the Heretic
 
 
In a message dated 2/21/2009 8:16:57 A.M. Central Standard Time,  
nhcareyta@yahoo.com.au writes:

 
 
 
Derar Anand and all

Anand, you write to NigelH, "You gave some  quotations from 
Blavatsky and Mahatma Letters. I think Blavatsky's writing  and 
Pseudo-letters contain many mistakes and I don't believe in 
some  of the statements they made. I don't recommend
these  writings."

Anand, I ask you yet again, would you be so kind as to  
provide evidence both of Madame Blavatsky's "many mistakes" 
and the  falsity of the "Pseudo-letters?a

In the meantime, for the benefit  of any newcomers to this forum 
who may not have read your unsubstantiated  and unanswered 
accusations before, may I offer you and them some facts on  
your guru, to whom you are so ardently devoted, and whom 
you recommend  to theosophical students, 
Bishop CW Leadbeater

Bishop Leadbeater  clearly lied and was fraudulent in 
numerous matters of determinable and  demonstrable fact.

He claimed to be representing Madame Blavatsky's  version of
Theosophy. On most subjects he did not.
>_http://www.blavatskhttp://wwwhttp://www.blavahttp_ 
(http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/tontitlepage.pdf) <

He  claimed to be in direct contact with Madame Blavatsky's 
masters.
Given  the utterly contradictory accounts of cosmogonies 
and cosmologies, any  reasonable assessment would
manifestly demonstrate that he was  not.
>_http://blavatskyarchttp://blahttp://b_ 
(http://blavatskyarchives.com/ton1.pdf) <

Upon  meeting with Dr Besant, a few years after he had joined 
the Adyar  Theosophical Society, he claimed to have been born in 
the year of her  birth, 1847. Clearly he was not. 
According to numerous British records  including birth certificate, 
Church records and even census forms filled  out by himself, 
he was born in 1854. He obviously lied to fabricate a  putative 
"occult" connection between himself and Dr  Besant.

Furthermore, he claimed to have seen the Mahatma M in 1851.  
Demonstrably another consciously concocted lie or fraud, 
this time to  coincide with Madame Blavatsky's actual recorded 
sighting.

He  claimed to have attended the prestigious British
universities of Oxford and  Cambridge. He did not.

He claimed his father was the senior executive  of a British 
rail company. 
He was actually one of its  bookkeepers.

Psychically, he claimed to have seen a sophisticated  civilisation 
on Mars, complete with many specific details. Clearly he did  not.

In the "theosophical" church he helped found, with teachings and  
mindset so utterly opposed to the masters he claimed contact with, 
he  stated women were not fit to perform the sacraments due to 
their  inappropriate vehicles.

In "Occult Chemistry" he claimed psychic vision  of the inner 
workings of the atomic world. 
With the exception of one  obscure scientist, his 
pronouncements have little credibility and are  
ridiculed as nonsense. 
>_http://www.chem.http://wwhttp://wwhttp://www.chehttp://www.chem.http:_ 
(http://www.chem.yale.edu/~chem125/125/history99/8Occult/OccultAtoms.h) 
tml<

He  claimed psychic vision of the atom and drew its picture, 
claiming it as  his own. It was actually a copy of one imagined by 
Babbit years earlier.  Another fraud.

In his book "Lives of Alcyone" he constantly changed his  
putative "psychic" versions of peoples' past lives as they came in 
and  out of his personal favour.

He claimed in his writings to meet with the  "Lord of the World." 
A pathological liar and paedophile meeting with the  "Supreme 
Director" of this globe? Really?

And the list goes on and  on. Whether we term these indiscretions 
as untruths, lies or fraud they  are indisputable matters of fact, 
which only the most ardent apologist  would deny or avoid.

Bishop Leadbeater has been proven far and beyond  any 
reasonable doubt to have lied to and manipulated and deceived 
his  followers on many occasions and in many ways.

Moreover, the apologists'  arguing that his self-confessed, 
sexual activities with small boys was  actually training them 
in sex magic is sickening and perverted in itself.  
One wonders whether these apologists and supporters are 
themselves  paedophiles, defending the indefensible. 
Anand, are you? 

If the  bad Bishop were practicing sex magic with these boys, a 
heinous practice  in itself with powerless young children, this 
would/should have been  performed in a ceremonial and 
ritualistic environment, complete with  prescribed formulae i.e. 
words, chants, invocations/words, chants, invocations/<WBR>evocati
in a ceremony that would last for perhaps a few  hours. 
His self-confessed climbing naked into bed with a naked 
young  boy whilst "teaching" him masturbation hardly qualifies 
as sex magic.  
It was and is paedophilia, to anyone with any intelligence, 
decency  and integrity.

Why anyone would want to trust and even defend anything  
this man did and wrote is a matter of considerable incredulity, 
until  one understands the pernicious nature of the belief-based, 
blind,  devotional mindset. . 

Simply because he wrote in lyrical,  "explanatory"Simply becau
authoritarian tones does not validate his  pronouncements, 
unless of course our blind, devotional mindset clamours  for 
the simplicity, certainty and "security" of authority, and the  
glamour of romance.

He was simply a common liar and fraud, and some  people 
were and are entirely enamoured by him and his writings.  
Enamoured and under a glamour, as was Dr Besant in allowing 
him  re-entry into the Society he so disgraced.

And you Anand recommend him  and his writings, and 
condemn Madame Blavatsky and her teachers' as  "Pseudo" or 
fraudulent?

Regards
Nigel

--- In _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) ,  
"Anand" <AnandGholap@Ana> wrote:
>
> Dear  Nigel,
> We all believe. Do you not believe in what Blavatsky says? I  say 
most
> of the members here believe in Theosophy because they  have not
> experienced all the things which Blavatsky and other  occultists have
> written.
> J. Krishnamurti' J. Krishnamurti'<WBR>s attacks on  beliefs are in
> lives of all people are based on  beliefs. When we start our 
education
> in school, we study books and  believe, for the time being at least,
> that what is written in books is  correct. At that time we are not 
in a
> position to challenge the  writing in books, due to lack of enough
> knowledge. Even the students  who take Master's degree in management 
or
> engineering, or medical  do not generally challenge what is taught to
> them. They believe that  what is taught to them in college and 
through
> books is correct.  Only some of a few students who do Ph.D. later 
take
> trouble to  think whether what is taught is correct or not. 
> In spiritual  development also we believe in what Great Ones have
> taught and start  walking. If every child keeps on questioning 
mother's
> wisdom, it  will be impossible to raise children.
> So if a person is to follow J.  Krishnamurti' So if a person
> challenging every belief unless  experienced, life will become
> impossible to live. Fortunately, most  people don't bring into action
> what JK says.
> You gave some  quotations from Blavatsky and Mahatma Letters. I think
> Blavatsky's  writing and Pseudo-letters contain many mistakes and I
> don't believe  in some of the statements they made. I don't recommend
> these  writings.
> Best
> Anand Gholap
> 
> 
> 
>  
> --- In _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) ,  
"nigel_healy" <nigelhealy@> 
wrote:
> >
> >  Dear Anand
> > 
> > I have been reading your posts for some  time now and it is very 
clear
> > that you have a 'belief  mindset'. You do not recognise the 
problem,
> > from a  Theosophical perspective, with this mindset and are 
constantly
>  > on the defence. As a recovered catholic myself, I understand that  
it
> > is very difficult (though not impossible) to let go of our  beloved
> > belief systems. The Mahatma K.H. puts it that there is  "..a 
general
> > unwillingness to give up an established order of  things for new 
modes
> > of life and thought.." (ML,1)
>  > 
> > Again the same Mahatma says; "The God of the Theologians is  
simply an
> > imaginary power,...a power which has never yet  manifested itself. 
Our
> > chief aim is to deliver humanity of  this nightmare, to teach man
> > virtue for its own sake, and to walk  in life relying on himself
> > instead of leaning on a theological  crutch, that for countless 
ages
> > was the direct cause of  nearly all human misery." (ML,10 3rd ed)
> > 
> > In your  post you speak of the "Lord Jesus" asking us to believe 
stuff!
>  > I see serious problems with this considering this is a  
Theosophical
> > forum and not a christian one! 
> >  
> > H.P.B., who founded the Theosophical Society and wrote the books  
that
> > are the foundations of Theosophy (all later writings are  either
> > derived from these or have nothing to do with the original  
writings)
> > made her views on the "Lord Jesus" quite  clear;
> > 
> > "For me Jesus Christ, i.e., the Man-God of  the Christians, copied 
from
> > the Avataras of every country,  from Hindu Krishna as well as the
> > Egyptian Horus, was never a  historical person. He is a deified
> > personification of the  glorified type of the great Hierophants of 
the
> > Temples, and  his story, as told in the New Testament, is an 
allegory,
> >  assuredly containing profound esoteric truths, but still an  
allegory."
> > 
> > I have no problem with the religious  mindset, being an Irish
> > Australian I find myself surrounded by  it! 
> > 
> > But it just simply isn't THEOSOPHY.
>  > 
> > And this is a THEOSOPHICAL forum.
> > 
>  > My intention is not to knock another's freedom of thought, but to  
seek
> > the Truth.
> > 
> > Kind  regards,
> > NigelH
> > 
> > 
> > --- In  _theos-talk@yahoogrotheos-t_ (mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com) 
,  "Anand" <AnandGholap@> wrote:
> > >
> > >  Dear Pedro,
> > > > Finally, I remembered what the late Ianthe  H. Hoskins told me 
at
> Adyar
> > > > in 1994, during  her last visit: "Belief is the tomb of Truth."
> > > > 
>  > > > Pedro
> > > >
> > > 
> >  > Do you think that St. Paul was misleading people when he said "  
the
> > > righteous will live by faith" ? Do you think that  Lord Jesus was
> > > misleading people when he asked people to  believe as written
> > > throughout the Gospels? Do you think that  Indian spiritual 
writings
> > > were misleading people when  they demanded Shraddha (faith or 
belief)?
> > > Either  scriptures were wrong or J. Krishnamurti was wrong. You 
can not
>  > > say both are right. This position is logically absurd.
> >  > 
> > > Best
> > > Anand Gholap
> >  >
> >
>





**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]