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

Re: Reply to Carlos

Aug 02, 2006 01:58 PM
by pedro oliveira

--- In, "carlosaveline" 
<carlosaveline@...> wrote:
> Pedro [Oliveira] ,
> Thanks.
> Angela is well and preparing her thesis for a Master's Degree on 
the Teaching of Inter-Disciplinary Sciences in High Schools --  at 
the University of Brasília. 
> I hear Linda Oliveira is "charismatic" as a speaker,  and I hope 
she is well. 
> I do not see the reason for so many personal emotions after I 
repeated here a few texts which were not written by me, but my K. 
Paul Johnson, on the mysterious activities of  Mr. Daniel Caldwell 
and his alter egos or hidden personalities,  including "David Green" 
and "Terry". 
> I wonder if Bill Meredith will ever tell Theos-talk people who 
helped K. Paul Johnson in his detailed and successful investigation 
about the "occult" activities of Daniel Cadlwell.   Bill seems 
interested in clarifying in Theos-talk  more aspects of P. Johnson's 
views about this.  
> See, Pedro, I am also a journalist in my basic profession.  I 
believe in the investigation of facts, as you may have noticed. For 
me, facts come before the writing of the "text", so to say.  
> Yet the search for truth is often challenging.   We are all 
familiar with the concepts of Probation and tests.  As I believe you 
are still apriest of the  L.C.C.,  I do not need to tell  you where 
the key notion of Probation can be found in the New Testament. So 
there is no reason for personal nervousness among people, each time 
difficult questions are openly faced. 
> Agree? Good. 
> We are all familiar with the notion of truthfulness. And I can't 
understand why there should be such a variety of emotional reactions 
when someone mentions the actual reasons why CWL was expelled -- one 
hundred years ago in 1906 -- from the Adyar TS. He was expelled  by 
H. S. Olcott with worldwide support. He had to wait for Olcott's 
death to come back.  
> After so many years, what is the problem with acknowledging CWL's 
many "clairvoyant" fancies? 
> Accepting such facts and learning from them, Pedro, is important. 
Why? Because CWL happens to be the "clairvoyant" who created 
the "inner" structure of the Adyar Society since 1900, still half-
operating now, with its various rites and ritualisms. 
> Such a power structure is quite different from the "federation of 
independent thinkers" created,  or at least conceived,  by HPB, HSO, 
WQJ, Damodar, S. Row etc.  Such a ritualistic and top-down structure 
may lack occult legitimacy, just as CWL's visits to Mars and Mecury, 
or CWL's talks to "Lord Christ", or Wedgwood's, Besant's  and 
Arundale's adepthood announcement in the 1920s.   
> To those who look at it superficially, it may appear that I am 
commenting persons -- perhaps "Daniel Caldwell" and "John Algeo", or 
CWL, Wedgwood and AB.  I am not. I am commenting Sophistry.   Please 
go to the "Sophist", by Plato, and to other Dialogues, and you will 
see what I mean, Pedro.  
> (Did you see my recent posting here about the 1966 Conference 
on "Presentation of Theosophy", in Salzburg? What are your 
commentaries on the difference of views between Sri Ram and Radha 
Burnier, on one hand, and the USA/N.Zealand representatives,  on the 
other hand, as to tampering with originals of books? Did you see 
that Ms.Radha is even today against such a tampering? What is your 
position? And Linda Oliveira's? )  
> HPB did not write on general and intellectual abstractions only.  
> Look at the "Collected Writings". Look at the Mahatma Letters.  
There are lots of precious teachings and living examples on the need 
for a frank truthfulness in the movement. 
> Having an Ascendant in Cancer, if I remember it well, you are now 
in a nice and promising phase of your Saturn cycle. Now you can face 
truth without a feeling of emotional shock and horror.   I hope, 
then, you can  understand some of my views. 
> Yesterday, Tuesday, I took a look at the Theos-talk messages in  
previous years.  I saw a message by Dr. Gregory Tillett in which he 
demonstrates various facts about C. W. Leadbeater. Tillett informs 
that those actions, if made today, would send Leadbeater to jail.   
> I intend to bring this message by Tillett here today for you to 
comment, Pedro.  I consider you a decent man and I make my own 
appeal to you. Will you accept a dialogue on the historical mistakes 
which now allow for such a thing to happen, as slandering HPB inside 
the Adyar TS and in the name of TPH?
> As you know, past mistakes can haunt "present times" -- as long as 
one refuses to learn lessons from them. 
> You see, after Tillett's message on the possibly criminal actions 
by Leadbeater, another Theos-talk friend --  Anand, I guess -- , 
obviously a Leadbeaterian, just answered: 
> "I am not interested in this subject". 
> And went silent.  It is a sad experience, to see Theosophists 
turning their faces away from Ethical questions, as if Theosophy 
were but a collection of WORDS with no connection to ACTIONS.  
> Or take the example of the emotional complications in the life of 
Jiddu Krishnamurti, carefully silenced by many Adyar people as long 
as they can.  
> So, if you ask Adyar people about CWL mistakes, or crimes perhaps; 
and about  Krishnamurti failings, they will avoid the subject 
altogether;  and sometimes they will talk about "character 
assassination", etc., although these are undeniable FACTS. 
> And if you ask them about the "veracity" of the slanders some of 
them help circulate against HPB, they will avoid the subject, too  --
 although these are undeniable FALSEHOODS.  
> It will be a privilege to go on with this dialogue.   I know you 
have both  the intellectual courage and the theosophical experience 
needed for that. 
> I do hope you see this is not about CWL, or HPB. It  is about 
veracity, sincerity. It is about Theosophy versus Sophistry.   CWL, 
A.B. and HPB are but metaphors or examples for rates of vibration. 
> WISDOM  cannot be separated from ETHICS. This is, at least,  my 
> Away from Ethics, one can only get Sophistry, or perhaps 
> If you are available for the dialogue, it will be my pleasure. 
> If you are not, I send you my greetings anyway, and my thanks. 
> We may have some different views about spirituality, but I see 
your good intention, which has a value in itself. 


I had asked you some serious questions about the current situation 
on theos-talk and your participation in it and you decided to ignore 
them all, telling me instead there is no need for 'nervousness' on 
my part. Besides that, you continued your attacks on the Adyar TS 
and on Leadbeater, which indicates to me that any attempt of 
dialogue with you is not possible.

But for the benefit of readers I will set the record straight on 
something you have repeated here *ad nauseam* and which is simply 
not true:

1. Leadbeater was never expelled from the TS by Olcott. He tendered 
his resignation from the Society to Olcott at the Advisory Board 
meeting, convened by HSO in London on 16 May 1906, to examine the 
charges against L. coming from members of the American Section. At 
that meeting there were fierce exchanges between those who wanted L. 
expelled from the Society (G. R. S. Mead and Bertram Keightley, for 
example) and those who suggested that his resignation be accepted 
(Sinnett). The meeting eventually decided to accept his resignation.

2. Leadbeater was invited back into the TS by a vote of the General 
Council, the governing body of the Society, at its meeting in 
December 1908, which was almost two years after Olcott had passed 
away. Needless to say, that was not without controversy as, for 
example, many well-known members of the English Section resigned 
over that decision.


[Back to Top]

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