[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Re: Ms. Katinka Writes to "FOHAT"

Mar 18, 2006 08:34 AM
by M. Sufilight

Dear Carlos,

I Thank you for your answer.
We do actually not disagree. But Katinka's motives are clearly - to seek the truth. Let her tell you, otherwise if I am wrong.
I think we can agree much upon these words below, when we understand the word "influence", has more than one meaning:

Carlos wrote:
"All of the "building", in Adyar, is based on CWL's planted foundations and I
don't think I see anyone in Adyar TS, except loyal HPV students, who can
escape CWL's amd AB's pervading influence."

This is the problem today as I see it:

Some examples from Katinka's website: (Geoffrey Hodson's defense of Leadbeater) (Katinka's chosen menu. One single Adyar-like presentation of Leadbeater )

None at TS Adyar or "what is called the original Theosophical Society by some" are - today - defending C. W. Leadbeater like Geoffrey Hodson did in the above link. Maybe, because their defense is not solid enough or maybe not important today.
One reason could be, that Leadbeater himself supported the view, that he himself was not as perfect as an adept is.

From - the "The Reality of the Astral Plane", 1906, by C. W. Leadbeater.
"We have chosen deliberately to put the imperfect knowledge before our brothers, because we have always felt that such powers come to us not for ourselves only but for them - that we are, so to speak, eyes for our fellows, and we have tried to be faithful eyes. We have tried to report exactly what we have seen, even though we know far better than others what are the difficulties that lie in the way of an accurate report. We know well that you will have very much more to learn as the years roll on, but what we have tried to do, though we may not have wholly succeeded, is to put these things before you in such a manner that as your perceptions widen you will have nothing to unlearn - you will have only to add to your stock of knowledge, and not to alter it. What I think we may hope is that we leave no fundamental principles wrongly stated. "

So I think we all, TS Adyar included, will have to accept Leadbeaters stance on Leadbeater himself not being perfect.

The problem is that TS Adyar appears to make Leadbeater more perfect than he was and appears today.
They do this, by omitting the truth about it all.

I have to say, that the TS Adyar website and TS in America website has improved during the last few years,
as far as Leadbeater is concerned. But not much, as far as Besant is concerned.

- - - - - - -

An issue is esoterical "Teaching stories" and what impact each theosophical book so to speak has on the readers various "bodies".

When Leadbeater dared to re-enter TS after the so-called Sex-scandal,
and thenjust about 6-7 years later later dared working actively in the Liberal Catholic Church - even as a writer - at a place where other sex-scandals arrived, ---
his biography (viewed as a "teaching story") and his level as a lecturer within TS created a certain impact in the minds of "The Seekers after Truth".
This impact can be said to have been highly problematic to the cause TS says it supports.
The fact, that TS Adyar omits mentioning this, is surely creating the fall of TS Adyar.
Blavatsky talked openly about it. She said, that the "jesuits" was the most dangerous ones to
the Theosophical Society and its existence.
Is TS Adayr saying, that the old woman, H. P. Blavatsky was lying and that Leadbeater had nothing to do with the "jesuits" at all?

Today TS Adyar's website and TS in America's website almost omits talking about Leadbeater,
and his faulths impact on the Society. It can be questioned if this is a healthy activiy, which TS Adyar is promoting.
TS Adyar's website is in fact a poor example of a wise presentation of the TS early history. There is no real presentation
of several persons on the website page of the TS early history.

Read this carefully:
TS Adyar would do much better today, if they MUCH MORE WISELY and OPENLY
would ACCEPT and ADMIT that Leadbeater was a Seeker which helped the theosophical cause
in some respects and in others he was a failure, if not a disaster. This must be true, because he admitted, that
he and Annie Besant was not prefect, not true adepts.
It seems, that TS Adyar on their websites are saying, that all the leading figures were perfect. Is this a wise policy?

To me, this lack by TS Adyar of wise presentation of its leading figures AND best-selling authors on the Internet and elsewhere is a KEY issue.
Let us please have a more wise leadership at TS Adyar.

After all, we are Seekers after Truth - and certainly NOT worshippers of blind belief in high-level theosophical writers producing numerous books.
And I have raised my voice on this issue before here at Theos-talk.

When will TS Adyar come clean on this ?
Why is TS Adyar misleading The Seekers after Truth, when they delete important knowledge about mistakes Leadbeater have commited in his books and life, without openly making such information available?
Why is TS Adyar not following Geoffrey Hodson's footseep's - seeking to defend the accusations thrown at them and their Leadbeaterian relationship?
When will the Christian Church and LCC stop worshipping the dead-letter of the Bible? I know LCC claims, that they do not worship the dead-letter, but what is the truth about the issue?
Ordination of women in LCC started year 2004 (not all branches allow it), and as far as I can tell, not really before that time. What does this tell us all about Leadbeaters activities?
And what does this tell us about the earlier leadership at TS Adyar?
Why is the present leadership in TS Adyar, not relating themselves to this important fact of development in the by Annie Besant highly praised LCC?

Is TS Adyar saying, that the old woman, H. P. Blavatsky was lying and that Leadbeater had nothing to do with the "jesuits" at all?

To TS Adyar and members:

As long as we hear no answers, we have our own conclusions to draw.
The conclusion being: TS Adyar is not an honest and decent place. Silence speaks!
Those who knows the leading figures aught to confront them with these issues mentioned in the above,
as well as others issues talked about here at Theos-talk.
I will now stop my protest and await a wise answer from TS Adyar.
Even a decent pharisee would give an answer.
And mind you we are many who are protesting.
Please answer the questions raised in the above.
At least do it for the sake of mankind, and your own sake.

As repeated recently:
Mankind - the majority at any rate - hates to think for itself. It
resents as an insult the humblest invitation to step for a moment
outside the old well-beaten track, and, judging for itself, to enter
into a new path in some fresh direction.
(Many Thanks goes to - nhcareyta - at Theos-talk for repeating this one.)

- - - - - - -

And we should know, that all true theosophical activity happens according to time, place, people and circumstances etc...

M. Sufilight with a few hints...

----- Original Message ----- From: "carlosaveline cardoso aveline" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:55 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Ms. Katinka Writes to "FOHAT"

Dear Sufilight,

Katinka's agenda may be far from CWL's agenda, as the agenda of Radha
Burnier or Krishnamurti is far too. But this distance is only relative and
rather tactical.

The entire Adyar TS worldview was created by CLW and his "disciple" A
Besant; Krishnamurti was created by them, and nothing occured or occurs
without the blessings of this popery.

All of the "building", in Adyar, is based on CWL's planted foundations and I
don't think I see anyone in Adyar TS, except loyal HPV students, who can
escape CWL's amd AB's pervading influence.

By attacking HPB as Johnson and Algeo do, Katinka is adding strength to the
ritualistic/Leadbeaterian current in the Adyar TS, which makes tactical,
though important opposition to the Krishnamutian current (lead by Ms.

And -- mind the detail -- the Krishnamurtian current does NOT attack HPB
because it does NOT defend Churches or Rituals openly.

Ms. Radha's sun sign is Scorpio, lile J. Algeo, but she has Ascendant in
Aquarius. Not inclined to slander.

Best regards, Carlos.

From: "M. Sufilight" <>
To: <>
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: Ms. Katinka Writes to "FOHAT"
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:57:44 +0100

I think you got i wrong this time Carlos.

Katinka's agenda within the TS Adyar branch is for sure
a different one than Leadbeater's, that is quite clear to me
through her many past emails here at Theos-talk.

Yet her website reveals, that she lack's at least some knowledge about
Blavatsky's Esoteric Section.

Well, just a few views of my own, so to possibly be helpful.

M. Sufilight

----- Original Message -----
From: "Konstantin Zaitzev" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:41 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: Ms. Katinka Writes to "FOHAT"

> --- In, "carlosaveline cardoso aveline"
> <carlosaveline@...> wrote:
>> Katinka is projecting over HPB, as Paul Johnson and John Algeo do,
> the
>> entire falsehood of discipleship  as it is described by C. W.
> Leadbeater and
>> Annie Besant.  These people are trying to build an alternative image
> of HPB
>> as an extension (in psychoanalytical terms,  a "projection") of  Mr.
>> Leadbeater's ideas, which they have consciously and unconsciously
> absorbed
>> and adopted as their own. (Leadbeater's description of discipleship
> is
>> entirely different from the one we see in the Mahatma Letters and in
> I was in correspondense with Katinka Hesselink for several years and I
> am sure thet she is defenitely not a follower of Leadbeater. (It is
> evident to everyone from her site. So you are slandering again.
> Yahoo! Groups Links

Yahoo! Groups Links

Ligações gratuitas de PC-para-PC para qualquer lugar do Brasil e do mundo
com o  MSN Messenger. Saiba mais em

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application