Theos-Talk Archives (August 2001 Message tt00209)

Dear Peter,
may I interject?
Sorry for delay, but I am busy and have no time to be every day online.
---

Peter:
Dear Daniel,

I don't know much about History or the history of the TS. I think, to my
loss, this is partly due to the fact that I don't have the right kind of
consciousness material in this incarnation that can retain factual
information of this kind. So the information I manage to put together from
whatever effort I put into this area is a bit like building sand castles
which are easily washed away by the gentlest of summer tides. So forgive me
if I'm asking questions about information that has already been addressed.

Frank:
As up today neither the exoteric nor the esoteric history of the
Theosophical Movement is written with all details it seems quite natural
that we can only judge from that what is there (despite the fact that there
is very much in the world, but what is mostly ignored or not understood).

Peter:
With regards the written instructions said to be by William Judge naming
Katherine Tingley as his successor - has anyone seen it beyond the original
group of 8 E.S.T members ie Hargrove, Pryse, Fussel, Neresheimer et al? Is
it still in existence? Is it one of the Judge documents that you have in
your possession?

Frank:
The truth is that a messenger, coming with certain instructions from the
Lodge of the Masters with a certain message to deliver to certain people in
the outer world at a certain time, appoints his/her successor and there is
no other way possible in the operations of the white side. Note for example
that the Outer Head of the that organization with headquarters in Rome is
not appointed but is elected by majority vote. But it is also true that no
messenger ever appoints his/her successor and that is no contradiction. Make
of it what you want but that is the truth.

As far as I know (I was never in USA) the notes by Judge do still exist and
are now in the Archives of the Pasadena TS. Perhaps they should decide to
publish the notes completely. I personally have no information about the
detail which persons these notes were shown in 1896 or not. To my humble
understanding it is not so important which persons these notes were shown,
as it would be painful if true E.S. members would build their decision whom
they accept as new messenger upon written documents and not from the life
and the instruction of the person.
>From the incidents in 1896 one can come the impression that the Master did
not want to make the details of occult successorship known outside their
circle of pupils. As I understood even the common TS member must not know
these details. At that time there was a big crisis, the TS being attacked by
strong enemies and the plan of HPB and Judge was to set aside the most
trustful pupils for special training in chelaship before the end of a
certain cycle.

So I understand that these notes from Judge were surely NOT written to
convince indecisively people about the right way or the right decision, that
would be against the occult laws. Obviously they were written for other
purposes. Perhaps the same reason as with the Mahatma letters ands their
later publication.

Yes, later on these notes were shown further people, f.e. to Iverson
Harrison, who in turn showed them Margaret Thomas, ULT associate in 1931.
Harris states this in his article "A Chapter of Theosophical History
clarified" which I presented here some weeks ago.

Peter:
What puzzles me a little is why there is so much attention given to what
Robert Crosbie may have said with regards Katherine Tingley. I can
understand someone speaking up in support of another at one point in their
work together and revising their view of them at a later date. It also
works in reverse - the poor view may be held in the beginning, the good view
acquired over time. I have done it myself (both ways).

Frank:
I fully agree with you, the problem with Crosbie just is that later on (like
Steiner) he was not able to remember what he has said before and giving a
rationale for that. But all he ever said according to the published sources
was that KT had (in his eyes) a bad character. But that is of course a weak
rationale. The attention to Crosbie is given because he assumed
successorship to Judge insead KT and became within his own organization in
1909 the Outer Head, indicating that the link to the Masters was kept
unbroken. What he not explained what then was between 1896-1909, 14 years.
Was the link broken for 14 years? And how was it possible to him to recover
it? And why not earlier?

Peter:
The reason it puzzles me is that it appears key members of the original
group of 8 members of the E.S.T who originally endorsed Katherine Tingley
as the named successor to Judge ALSO changed there minds about her (as did
others like Alice Cleather) as well as later casting doubts on the existence
of any notes left by WQJ naming KT has his successor.

Frank:
That is no wonder and quite natural. Every messenger, beginning with HPB was
misunderstood or disliked when they did not what a student wanted.
Furthermore it was a very stormy time with great chances and changes.
Once HPB wrote to Judge that from the 16 original foundation members in 1875
he alone left over, standing true to the original program. One must not
forget that the E.S.T. and I.G. members were nevertheless lays and not so
much far more progresses than we, they also have a lot of illusions. That
someone begins in one life with occult study makes him/her not an adept,
ready to make without mistakes decisions in all directions.
Annie Besant was also in that degrees and vowed to follow his teacher
(Judge), but when karma presented the next opportunity she made her
decisions against her teacher.
You could add Franz Hartmann to the list, who first was a follower of KT,
praising her superior knowledge, her occult powers, comparing her with HPB
and only one year later was convinced she is a fraud, writing bad about her
during the coming years. But from 1907 on she turned again and became
friendly to her work and wrote that the Point Loma community is a big
success, although he cannot accept the person KT. Mr. Dunlop would be
another person, he became later on a known Anthroposophist and builder of
the electricity trusts.
There were also many who could not accept HPB. The same with Purucker. The
same is heard from Pythagoras, Plato, Jesus, Buddha. There was never a
messenger who was accepted from all and always there were some who first
followed and later disappeared.
OTOH, there were many loyal students from HPB which remainded loyal to KT,
too. Charles Ryan, Henry T. Edge to name a few.

Peter:
Are those people (ie
Hargrove et al) also ULT people?

Frank:
No. So far as I know there was a minority of around 200 delegates (from
around 5,000) who decided not to follow KT. The Hargrove people launched a
TS on its own naming it "The Theosophical Society in America" (as KT's)
which resulted in a court action, which was won by KT. The Hargrove lineage
remained in New York City and KT removed her HQ to Point Loma in 1899 with
the closing of a certain cycle.
Later on these lineage claimed also to be in touch with HPB's Masters and
they issued also E.S. Instructions. Daniel Caldwell has recently published
them. Read them and come to your own conclusion whether they are true or not
true. To me they are not true, one example being the alleged comments of
Master about the German chancellor Prince Bismarck as a black magician,
whereas in pukka Theosophy he was supported by the Masters in his terrible
struggle against the Jesuits.
Also Bismarck was protected during an attempt to murder. Without the hard
work of Bismarck the SJ would have controlled Europe completely.

Peter:
If not then the question mark over
whether Judge appointed a successor is not a ULT or Robert Crosbie issue.
One needs to look more closely at the apparently conflicting statements and
accounts of that original group who claimed to have found those documents.
How would you see this?

Frank:
The issue is not limited to RC alone, that is correct. The problem is also
not that he turned his opinion but rather which rationale he gave (or not)
for that and that he later on claimed to be the rightful successor to Judge.
That RC knew something about the then secret teaching about the operations
of the Masters in the outer world is clearly shown when he spoke of
messengers in the plural and not in the singular.
That he followed the invitation to help in launching the school in Point
Loma shows that he at that has had not any knowledge about his own status.

Peter:
Also, am I right in thinking that Robert Crosbie was not at that time
involved in the finding of those documents or the naming of the successor?

Frank:
That is a very good point. But from an esoteric standpoint it does not
matter, as RC was then E.S. agent in Boston and either Judge trusted him or
trusted him not. When Judge trusted him and found him ready then he could
keep RC informed about the future plans and successorship and there was no
need to convince RC (or any other one) with a profane piece of paper.
When Judge informed RC not about his plans and gave also his secretary no
directions to inform RC, then this would mean that Judge was of the opinion
that RC should come to his own conclusions.

Peter:
J. Fussell was one of that 'original group' of 8 (headed by Hargrove) in
the E.S.T., which had in its possession the papers and diaries belonging to
WQJ for some days before it made its announcement that Judge had left
directions for the esoteric School and had named a successor.

Shortly after the death of William Judge, this group of 8 announced on the
27th March 1896 there would be a "General Meeting of the E.S.T" to be held
on the 29th March.

On the next day, the 28th of March, Fussell writes to a correspondent in
New Zealand:

" ... as far as is present known W.Q.J left no directions in regard to
carrying on the work of the School. Of course if he had done this, such
directions will be followed."

In the same letter Fussell writes there had been an informal meeting of the
EST (namely the meeting on the 27th) where it was a proposed a Council
should be formed. This because, as explained in his letter, WJQ had left no
directions.

Yet, the very next day, the 29th March, at the "General Meeting of the
E.S.T", Fussell and others state that it was William Judge who left the
directions that there should be a Council formed. They also state that
WQJ had named a successor, but that the successor should remain unknown to
members for one year. This seems like a contradiction of Fussell's
statement in his letter written only the day before.

Frank:
It seems. But it is no contradiction, but only a paradoxon, what is not the
same. Judge left directions, but the directions said to make no use of that
directions. That is the occult law of the white side.
Would the Masters have decided to present the pupils a letter, signed by
Judge (or/and by HPB and Masters) that hey have to follow KT, they did had
not come to their own conclusions and rather become blind churchgoers.
And as the plans were to build in the West a school for occult training for
the loyal students from London and New York there was a great need for
strong students who are able to live their lessons and whoa are able to
recognize with their own mind the teacher. The teacher cannot work with
people who cannot think for themselves.

Furthermore one should now whether the receiver of the letter was an E.S.
member or not and whether the board trusted in him or not. This is indicated
by the fact that Fussell revealed only a portion of the truth and not the
whole. I think he wanted to protect the procedure.

Would you please specify your sources? What is your source for the Fussell
letter? I can't find it.

Peter:
Did the relevant piece of information in Judge's notes spring to light over
night? Its possible, but is it probable? One would have thought if
William Judge had left deliberate directions to be followed after his death
then these would have been obvious to find among the papers in this groups
possession.. But who knows? And one has to ask, if a successor had been
named why the need for such a person to remain unknown to members of the
very group s/he was leading for one year?

Frank:
The point is that Judge left written instructions but they did not want to
stress on them so much. The reason that the new O.H. should be unknown for a
year (but was unveiled after some months) was protection as there was
important work to do to save as much as possible of the leaky ship. And as
you may know all real work can only be done in silence.

Peter:
Another factor that adds to the question mark over over this group's
statement on the 29th March is that we find Neresheimer (the executor of
Judge's will and one of the original group who took Judge 's papers)
writing years later in a sworn statement under oath that:

"Among all the papers and other documents left by Mr. Judge, we found
nothing whatever in his handwriting bearing upon the future conduct of the
society after his death. Nor did we find anything in his writing naming
Mrs. Tingley or anyone else, either directly or indirectly, as his successor
in the affairs of the Theosophical Society of America, or in its Esoteric
Section, or any directions of any kind to be followed in the even of his
death..."

This also fits in with what Hargrove (President of TS in A) wrote to
Katherine Tingley on Jan 30th 1898 stating:

"Now, my dear friend, you have made an awful mess of it - that is the simple
truth. You were run in as O.H. [Outer Head] as the only person in sight who
was ready to hand at the time. We were all of us heartily glad to welcome
you, for you solved the problem which confronted us. . . . Our enthusiasm
and anxiety to see all go well carried some of us too far - carried me too
far to the extent of . . . leading me to use my personal influence with
people to get them to accept you as O.H. I thought it was for the good of
the work but since then I have learned better."

In the above letter Hargrove appears to claim it was only through his
personal influence that Katherine Tingley was accepted as the successor to
William Judge. She was simply someone who was "ready to hand at the time."
Yet 2 years before, the group of 8 whom Hargrove led, were claiming the
successor was clearly and without doubt chosen by William Judge and they
were simply acting on his instructions.

Frank:
He says that he influences others to accept KT, but he says not that KT was
accecpted only through his influence.
It is true that Hargrove and Neresheimer later on turned their opinion, but
that was also the case with Hartmann, Crosbie, Cleather. But there were
others who turned not their opinions, among them Fussell.
Of course no one is lucky when he is deposed as President. Remind a similar
case when Olcott was stepping down after some attacks by Annie Besant and
that it was Judge who forced all that he has to remain PTS until his death.
Coincidentally there is no doubt that HPB and Judge were in the late 1880's
of the opinion that the TS has outgrown of Olcott and that he cannot help
the TS anymore. OTOH, they both decided to let him be nominal President,
without any real power. What do you think, why? A deposed Olcott had of
course destroyed the TS.
When Hargrove reached his own ring-pass-not he was of no positive use any
more but there was no possibility to let him remain nominal President as
there was progress to be made with the TS.
Neresheimer's statement seems to be an act of lying under oath as the notes
of Judge do still exist. When he gave the statement the notes were
disappeared in
Point Loma and no one was able to find them. Elsie Benjamin, personal
secretary to both leaders, KT and GdeP, told once the story. Fussell was
running around, seeking the "Judge Diaries" but did not find them. By chance
Elsie Benjamin was coming from the attic were she found them and heard
Fussell talking with Purucker about that. When Elsie entered the room GdeP
was smiling and Fussell, after he was kept informed about her findings, was
very happy.

Harrison writes about Neresheimer:
"Later, on a visit to Point Loma, Mr. Neresheimer admitted in the presence
of his wife and other witnesses that the fragments of 'messages and
quotations' published by Mr. Fussell and Mr. Hargrove were actually in Mr.
Judge's handwriting."

Peter:
What is one to make of all of this, Daniel? As far as I can tell the above
statements by Hargrove, Fussell and Neresheimer are a matter of written
record. I certainly don't have any answers as to their seemingly
contradictory statements. Nor do I feel I have enough information to come
to any conclusions. But it does appear to me that what went on between
that group of 8 members led by Hargrove is the real issue. What Robert
Crosbie may have later said about Katherine Tingley or what a ULT view
might be does not appear to me to be as relevant.

What do you think? I imagine you have already given plenty of thought to the
above.

Frank:
Everyone must come to his own conclusions. A messenger of the Masters can
only be recognized by the own heart. Each once gets the messenger he has
earned, not otherwise. To me HPB was a true messenger of the Masters,
despite the fact that other students (like Soloviev), once convinced they
had communication with the Masters and were shown HPB's occult power, later
on turned and claimed it never happened. There is no way to proof an
ignorant one that HPB was true, but in the same place the critics cannot
proof in turn that their opinion is true. The same with KT. To me she was a
true messenger of the Masters, but proof one can give can be doubted, but
likewise any proof that she was not what she claimed can also be doubted.
And is does not matter whether there are students who turned later against
her.
With Crosbie is more relevant what he himself said. If you find that his
interpretation of the teachings is correct, then it seems he was a rightful
Outer Head. If you find that his interpretation is partly incorrect, then it
seems that he was not a rightful O.H.