Theos-Talk Archives (October 1995 Message tl00035)

Hello,

 Great discussion! The discernment of the buddhic/intuitive presence of
the Mahatmas' influence behind various writings is a wonderful knowing.

>But, Patrick, most of the serious Blavatsky students I personally know, do
>not accept the claims and teachings of Bailey, the teachings of the Temple
and
>some of the writings of Helena Roerich.

 I find this an interesting phenomena as the writings are geniune as part
of the Mahatmas' work. All of the statements I have heard that purport to
show that they are not so have been easily dispensed with. "Source"
teachings would be all those by Mahatma's and Initiates.

>And HPB herself admits that there is such a thing as PSEUDO-THEOSOPHY.

 Indeed so -- and its quality is easily discernable (sectarianism,
self-importance, caustic personal criticims, authoritarian control, etc.)

>Students of Theosophy can believes whatever but those who accept HPB's
>original claims would be wise to also carefully consider the warnings
>given by HPB and the Masters about bogus claims and distortions of
Theosophy.
>If such could happen in the 1880s, why not after 1891?

 Yes, it continues to happen today but those who see with the eyes of the
heart will know the truth.

Peace,
Patrick