Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00934)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" <perrycoles@y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Hello Paul,
> Have you any idea how much of this material has been removed and 
what books this 
> has been done to.

Hi Perry,

Google was not much help on this but I did find:
http://theos-l.com/archives/199606/tl01020.html

The Inner Life definitely has the loony Mars material deleted. But 
I recall at least one more title by CWL being discussed in the past 
on theos-l or theos-talk, maybe Masters and the Path, as an example 
of editorial dishonesty. Perhaps someone else here has a better 
memory than mine. Leslie Price discussed TPH editorial practices 
from a critical POV in an early number of Theosophical History.

Paul

If
> I be very interested to see what has actually been given the chop.
> This is historicaly very important information.
> 
> Perry
> 
> 
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kpauljohnson" 
<kpauljohnson@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Perry Coles" 
<perrycoles@y...> 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Pedro Wrote :
> > > > If we take any teaching as final and absolute we stultify 
our 
> > inquiry
> > > > and our capacity to learn more about life and about 
ourselves.
> > > 
> > > Absolutely this is why to me open comparison and logical 
debate are
> > > the one of the keys to keeping the mind open and fresh to new 
ideas
> > > and never turning ANY teaching into a blind beleif dogma.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Perry
> > > 
> > Hi Perry and all,
> > 
> > Whether or not reading a particular book is a mistake depends on 
the 
> > context. If one is seeking for a reliable account of pre-
Columbian 
> > America, it would be a mistake to read the Book of Mormon 
thinking 
> > it offered same. But reading the same book would be an 
excellent 
> > choice if one's objective is to understand 19th century American 
> > religious movements.
> > 
> > CWL would be a mistaken choice for any reader who thought s/he 
was 
> > reading about Blavatskian Theosophy, but not for one who knew 
the 
> > score about Leadbeater's doctrinal innovations. If one is 
seeking 
> > to understand the actual teachings of CWL, it would be a mistake 
to 
> > read expurgated editions in which embarrassing material had been 
> > removed without explanation. Ethically it was and is a mistake 
for 
> > TPH to publish such misleading editions. It seems to me that 
the 
> > Adyar TS is playing a dual game with CWL, on one hand denying 
that 
> > he has any special status and on the other repeatedly shielding 
him 
> > from criticism and legitimate inquiry.
> > 
> > Paul