Theos-Talk Archives (January 2009 Message tt00186)

>The relentless demonisation of Leadbeater and other authors of the
Adyar TS in this and other lists may serve a psychological purpose.

Pedro, to pukka Blavatsky students it may be a theosophical purpose: Iti 
maya srutam.

>That his books are still in print after one hundred years would
perhaps be an indication that there is demand for them and that they
sell.

Mmmh. Then Adyar could also start to sell playboy bunny magazines.
There is also demand for them.
And for snuff videos.

>So, is it suprising then to see Blavatsky writing in *They Key to
Theosophy* that every attempt similar to the TS which was made in the
past sooner of later degenerated into a sect, with hard and fast
dogmas creeping in? One of her most sobering statements to me has
always been this:

"The first necessity for obtaining self-knowledge is to become
profoundly conscious of ignorance; to feel with every fibre of the
heart that one is ceaselessly self-deceived." (BCW, vol. VIII, p. 108)


The hardest dogmas have people about Ledbeater's mayavic hallucinations.
You would better quote HPB on pseudo-theosophy:

http://www.blavatsky.net/blavatsky/arts/OnPseudoTheosophy.htm

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/onpseudotheosophy.htm

So, if you say that those who find Leadbeater's claims false because HPB was 
against ignorance and then conclude that find HPB right and Leadbeater wrong 
is the biggest ignorance one can have.
To be logical, you should then also HPB's rejection of pseudo-theosophy and 
the promotion of unfaked, unaltered true pukka theosophy call ignorant.

This shows how wrong your conclusions are and that you misunderstand HPB for 
selfish purposes.

Frank