Theos-Talk Archives (February 1999 Message tt00125)

Hi David,

I'm making an observation, not an accusation, along with a desire to know
more about your views and how you are going to use your research.   I
appreciate that in your posts you are passing on the views of others which
may not be your own.  It's just that the theme that binds them all together
is one of casting aspersion on, if not mocking, the character of others.

The posts I have in mind are:

1.  Your series of posts on the themes of Judge Communicates with dead
Blavatsky and Kingsley Channels dead Judge and culminating in quotes casting
doubt on the integrity and character of both Judge and Kingsly.  For
example,  Judge is a deluded leader, a guileless psychic:  Mrs Tingley at
best self deluded, at worst a charlaton.

2.  The post on 'Judge is Rajah' followed up by Pryse's mockery of Judge as
being ridiculous.

3.  The R.A. Gilbert post asserting that devestating attacks on the Mahatma
Letters and the objectivity of Lillie and his attacks on the Mahatma Letters
have yet to be responded to.

4.  The Post on Fictitious Tibet & Madame Blavatsky, a "pique" of mockery on
Theosophy and its founders, wherein it accused:
- Madame Blavatsky of being a phoney and self deluded fraud
- The Secret Doctrine as being "horrendous hogwash"
- The Esoteric Schools and Brotherhood as being a pure fiction
- The Masters of being a silly fiction of HPB's imagination
.. and casted Madame Blavatsky in the same light as the "aggressive
homsosexual" Leadbeater and Lobsang Rampa.

(Actually it was interesting that the writer of that article stated Henry
Olcott to be genuine and HPB to be a fraud, especially as both professed to
have the same Master and follow the same esoteric tradition.  Olcott also
testified to meeting both the Master M & Master KH in the flesh, as did
Damador, Brown (who met KH) and others.  Either this didn't seem worth
mentioning as it didn't support the author's views or our anthropological
author didn't research very deeply into the  subject matter he professed to
know so much about.)

5.   With your latest posts:

> Does anyone know who these 7 trustees are?
> They are not elected by ULT associates.
> This board is the power behind the ULT,
> Los Angeles & is accountable to no one
> especially to the rank & file ULT associates,
> a former ULTite tells me.

To ask who runs ULT and how they are elected is a simple question deserving
of a straight forward answer. But the way you put it came across to me as
more on the same theme - another round of reported rumour, allegation and
aspersion.

I imagine it may have come across to Rich in the same way.  Hence his last
words to you in his reply:

> This will get you farther than allegations posted to a public forum.

6.  All your posts above are qoutes from 'sources' with virtually no views
of your own attached.  In order to discover something about the latter I
glanced back to see what other posts you had made over the last few months.
The only ones I could find were your dialogues with Tony (re: Koothoomi
Unveiled) which contained yet another round of mocking a theosphist for his
views.

So I am naturally wondering how you see the Teachings of Theosophy, its
students, Madame Blavatsky, Judge & so on, and how this will inform your
research.  Of course, you are entitled to whatver views you hold, and yes,
we do need to explore the facts (so called), and yes again, there is no
religion higher than truth.   It's the regular theme of aspersion and
mockery based on second hand reports that weave in and out of your posts
that I am queerying.  Are there any examples of noble qualities, accounts of
honesty and integrity, validations of Theosophy, of HPB, Judge and others
that you are seeking to substantiate through your research?

Regards

Peter

*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*



>
> >David,
>
> >The more I relected on Jerry's and Rich's reply to your latest posts
> >the
> >more I realised that almost all the posts you make to this group
> >contain
> >reports of rumour and/or second hand slurs on people's character and
> >integrity.
> >What is the basis of your research?  And how are you intending to use
> >t?
>
>
> Peter, to what are you referring?
> I've quoted from Dr Bruce Campbell's
> history of TS & wanted to know
> more about what he wrote on ULT. Is that such
> a crime?  What is your own statement?
> A slur on my integrity & motivations?
>
> As I've stated several times on this forum,
> I'm interested in life of W Judge & intend
> writing dissertation--book on controversy surrounding
> his life.  My interest in ULT stems from ULT's
> esteem & defense of W Judge's life & work.
>
> In looking thru my papers this morning,
> I see my question on ULT esoteric group
> was answered in letter from Mr John Copper
> I received last March!  I'll post some of that
> soon.
>
> David
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
> -- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
> Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
> teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
> "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.