Theos-Talk Archives (January 2005 Message tt00980)

Pedro,

Perry wrote:

==============================================
He [CWL] may have said you can believe this or not,
but that is quite a different thing from not
pointing out to his readers and followers how
his teachings clashed with those of the Adept
teachers of Blavatsky he claimed to be a Chela
and student of.
=============================================

And to these remarks, you replied:

============================================
Why should he do this? He [CWL] was presenting the
results of HIS OWN studies. And

"The fact is, that to the last and supreme
initiation every chela -(and even some adepts) -
is left to his own device and counsel." (ML
92, chronological)
============================================
caps added

Pedro, it is interesting to compare and contrast what
you say Leadbeater was doing with what Madame Blavatsky
said about what the adepts were doing.

In one of her articles, Madame Blavatsky tells her readers that the
Adepts "check each other's conclusions . . . [and] test each
other's discoveries."

This is repeated in THE SECRET DOCTRINE where she writes
that "no vision of one adept was accepted till it was checked and 
confirmed by the visions --- so obtained as to stand as independent 
evidence --- of other adepts, and by centuries of experiences."

The method as described by Blavatsky is a collaborative effort of
comparing, contrasting and checking.

Pedro, are you suggesting that Leadbeater did his clairvoyant studies 
on his own and without consultation with the Adepts Morya, Koot Hoomi 
and others? In other words, he was "left to his own device and 
counsel."

You have written that Leadbeater's "visions" of Mars were "basically 
wrong." Would this suggest (following your line of thought)that 
Leadbeater did NOT seek confirmation of the accuracy of his 
Mars "observations" from the Adepts or from his own Master Koot Hoomi?

Some food for thought.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc