Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00117)

In a message dated 4/27/00 7:38:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
dennw3k@earthlink.net writes:

<<  mkr:
 > We have seen comments relating CWL & K. As one interested in both of them,
 > the only adverse comment I have seen from K regarding CWL is from a
 > correspondence from Mary Lutyens (the biographer of unquestioned
 integrity) to Gregory Tillett and the latter's interview with her in 8/1979.
 >
 > Tillett writes:
 >
 > "To Mary Lutyens, when told about this biography and asked for his
 > comments, he said simply: "Leadbeater was evil", and refused to discuss
 the matter further beyond the comment that he found even thinking of him, or
 > hearing his name, distasteful."
 >
 > I am pointing this quote so that the reader can make his or her own mind
 on
 > this issue.  mkr
 
 The quote is unclear. Was this Miss Lutyens' opinion, or was she quoting
 Krishnamurti? If it was the comment from K, did she comment about what year,
 or time period it was that the matter was brought up.  Dennis >>

Dear Dennis,

The source for the quote is Tillett, as mkr pointed out elsewhere.  Tillett 
tells us that in a correspondence he had with Mary Lutyens, the latter had 
told Tillett that K had said to her (when she was writing K's biography) that 
"Leadbeater was evil."  Unfortunately, everything Lutyens ever said for 
publication suggests a different picture than that suggested by this "quote," 
which comes from The Elder Brother, pp. 9-10.  I'm not saying the Tillett 
quote is not real, but only that it's incompatible with everything Lutyens 
ever said on the subject for the rest of us.  Aryel
 
<< As I understood it, at one time they were at odds, and then later on, they
 met in person, and were polite if not actually friendly toward each other.  
Dennis >>

According to all the sources I've seen, K's relationship with CWL was 
cordial, but not particularly friendly, throughout the latter's life.  K did 
rely all along on CWL's clairvoyance, never questioned it, & never questioned 
CWL's relationship with the Masters.  This is particularly important, since 
it seems -- at least on the surface -- to be at odds with K thinking CWL 
"evil" in any significant sense of that word.
Apart from the first couple of years or so of his relationship with CWL (when 
K was a rather naive young adolescent), K never seemed to care much -- if at 
all -- for all the pomp & hierarchies surrrounding CWL throughout the period 
in which they related to each other.  In the latter years of that 
relationship, K in fact seemed to have an aversion not unlike disgust towards 
that whole atmosphere.  And since CWL was at the center of it, it makes sense 
that they would not be likely to be very close "friends" in any significant 
sense of that term.  Given some comments CWL made about what K said in the 
late 1920s, it is clear that this feeling was mutual.  CWL did not seem to 
understand at all what K was saying.
It may be closer to the facts that perhaps K saw him as another person who 
worked for & with the Masters, but whose methods & m.o. he couldn't care less 
for.  You might recall some instances of disciples following totally 
different approaches in the early history of the TS, & how this in some 
instances led to rifts between some of those disciples.  I'm thinking of T. 
Subba Row breaking away from HPB because he thought she was revealing too 
much, & that such revelations were incompatible with what he had learned from 
his teacher.  If this hadn't happened, the Secret Doctrine, most likely, 
would have had more Vedanta than it actually has.  Aryel
 
<< The word "evil" means a lot of various things, depending on context. I
 suppose that you [mkr], as am I, are wondering what the context was, and what
 degree of disapproval he was signaling. Maybe he was having a bad day, or
 stressed out in his fight with Rajagopal for control of the Foundation when
 asked about it. The context when it was said would be interesting to know.  
Dennis >>

I agree with you that the context is vital, especially since this would be 
the only existing reference to K speaking in that manner about CWL (at least 
so far as I'm aware).  I find it odd that throughout the last ten years or so 
of his life, K repeatedly defended both CWL & Mrs. Besant from people who 
tried to attack them, telling them that the two were "very serious people."  
So I don't know how anyone can make the jump from holding someone in such a 
very high regard, to calling that person "evil."  Aryel
 
<< Would it be his opinion as regards to "moraly", "spiritually", or what
 context, assuming it was the opinion of K, and not Mary.  Dennis >>

Dennis,

As noted above, Tillett attributes the quote to K, as reported by Mary.  We 
know that if K actually said that, it's not likely to refer to CWL being 
"morally evil":  K said on numerous occasions that CWL had never committed 
any of the sexual perversions others claimed he committed.  All the 
biographical materials provide evidence to that effect, in the form of quotes 
from K throughout his life.
It does not seem likely that K could have meant CWL was "spiritually evil," 
either:  As noted above, despite their differences, K acknowledged CWL's 
relationship with the Masters, & therefore his "spirituality," from that 
perspective.
But if not "morally" nor "spiritually" evil, what, then?  I don't know.  I 
cannot imagine what this could have meant.  But since the solitary quote we 
presumably have is not widely available, since it contradicts every other 
item of evidence we do have, since it does not seem to make sense in the face 
of it, & since the one source for the single quote has been shown to be 
highly unreliable, I wonder whether this is a relevant subject to pursue?  
What do you think?
With affection,
Aryel

-- 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.