Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00108)

Saturday, August 11, 2001


Re: HISTORY OF THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT


Dear Friend:


First: If Robert Crosbie wrote the book: The THEOSOPHICAL
MOVEMENT (1875-1925). it would not be anonymous.

Second Mr. Crosbie died in 1919 and could not have written the
book titled: The THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (1875-1950) although the
2nd book is partially based on the first and the documentary and
sequential evidence laid out there.

If it is called a "hatchet job," then what are the contrasting
opinions offered and where are they to be found? Why not quote
references or offer alternatives?

Let actual HISTORY make the decisions.

In every case there are a number of letters and details offered
by contemporary witnesses which serve to place the documents
firmly in place. That is also part of the dynamism of history.

Further, such documents as were made available to the historian
as to the public may be seen to define the course of the various
Societies in the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT, as they were adopted by
individuals prominent and responsible at that time -- they are
easily identifiable, as well as those concerned with them, and
the sequence of events that followed can easily be traced. The
further away we go from those origins, the more difficult becomes
the task of determining the details.

But this has no relation to THEOSOPHY as a philosophy or a study
of the laws and facts of Nature in past, present and the
potential of future existence.

Reviewing the past of various bodies that have served (or serve)
the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT has little value in my esteem.

Such are "side issues," and serve to distract seekers from an
investigation of THEOSOPHY. If we are going to see if THEOSOPHY
has logic, practicality and worth, then let's study that.

I we agree on the source of THEOSOPHY, then the various bodies
are untied to that extent.
This is regardless of the format they use. If there are
differences, then those do not relate to THEOSOPHY.

Any other method is time-wasting argumentation, and the adopting
of unfounded opinions. Unless we pursue those to their SOURCES,
we will still have only unfounded opinions, and be no further
ahead. So my recommendation is to do what all sincere students
of History do: Get a copy of the documents referred to. Read
and compare. Nothing can be decided by adding one more opinion
to the heap.

If this is done, then each reader can form his own estimate of
their respective worth. What could be fairer ?

As I see it, our job is to present to the reader and researcher
the sources used to frame an opinion. Let the reader
independently arrive at their own conclusions. It is the same
with THEOSOPHY. Choose a good text like the KEY TO THEOSOPHY
by HPB) and learn what it says, so that can be used as a basis
for thinking, seeking its logic, and making comparisons.

Best wishes,

Dallas

==============================================


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Kier [mailto:dennw3k@earthlink.net]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2001 3:23 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World Re: ULT -- Dallas' view and answers to
DC.


> Robert Crosbie writes anonymously in THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT
1975-1950
> erroneous, misleading and defaming against Katherine Tingley.

*********************
DK>>Also Olcott, and others of most of the other branches of the
Theosophical Movement.
********************
> IT IS INTERSTING TO NOTE THAT UNDER THE MASK OF ANONYMITY THE
AUTHOR
TRIES
> TO MAKE BELIEVE THAT HIS PERSONALITY, HIS JEALOUSY AND
IGNORANCE,
ARE
> PLAYING NO ROLE AND THAT HE PRESENTS TRUE STATEMENTS -
> of which he BTW gives not a single proof, no single source
(because
they
> have no reality outside of his mind).
> Here are the three choice passages:

DK>>>>>>>
I take it then that the author of the book is Mr. Crosbie?

I have noticed that it is a terrible hatchet job, and extremely
biased. I was wondering whether it was the work of a single
author, or
of a committee.

It will be interesting to see, in my further reading, whether Mr.
Crosbie writes in a more restrained manner when he writes
something
that he attaches his name to.

This is an interesting example of "anonomous" writing, where one
does
not know the personal biases of the author.

Dennis





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/