Theos-Talk Archives (February 2009 Message tt00291)

Nigel, 
Anand has two parts on his Home Pages, Theosophy and Christianity, here is the Christianity part. It may let members bvecome aware of his prevarication viz Theosophy. 

>>> http://anandgholap.org/<<< 

Regards, 
John 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "nhcareyta" <nhcareyta@yahoo.com.au> 
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 6:16:32 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific 
Subject: Theos-World Re: Madame Blavatsky & Bishop Leadbeater 






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?" 

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.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://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.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/evocations, ceremonial objects etc 
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", romantic, 
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@yahoogroups.com , "Anand" <AnandGholap@...> 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's attacks on beliefs are incredibly wrong because 
> 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's philosophy of 
> 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@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@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 
> > > 
> > 
> 


 

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