Theos-Talk Archives (December 2001 Message tt00160)

Sunday, December 09, 2001

Re: WHERE CAN I FIND THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY ?

Do opinions about Personages in Theosophical
History have
any effect on THEOSOPHY as a Philosophy?


Dear Friends:

To be truly eminent in History one has to abandon all opinions
and provide FACTS.

The many "histories on the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT" in print are
written, usually, to support opinions, and hence some of the
documentary facts are minimized, suppressed or derogated.
Apparently the writers hope readers will be satisfied with what
is offered and go no further. Those who make comparisons wonder
why the differences show up.

I have been reading for over 2 months this "tempest in a tea-cup"
that several contributors have raised in regard to modern
Theosophical History, (the last 125 years) and the personages
prominent in it: H.P.B., Col. Olcott, Damodar, the Masters of
Wisdom," etc.... These rehash old and disproved prejudices.


I subscribe to various groups that exchange views on theosophical
doctrines, tenets and theories, or records of its history in
antiquity. I am interested in the study of the PHILOSOPHY of
THEOSOPHY. Is it fair, right, useful, accurate, true and well
documented and supported?

I find I am assailed (against my will and interest) recently,
with lengthy reviews of divergent opinions which are supposed to
deal with prominent individuals, and, or their doings. But as I
find that they seem to raise old matters which have been
satisfactorily settled years ago, I wonder we, in the present
needs to review them again. I am especially disturbed when I
sense the acrimony of doubt and suspicion, also, instead of
adding anything new to HISTORY and to FACT, they seem to consist
of individual, inadequately supported opinions and revive petty
controversy. MANY SO-CALLED FACTS THAT ARE ADVANCED HAVE BEEN
DISPROVED LONG AGO. ONE WONDERS WHY THEY REAPPEAR?

I ask myself if this aggravation is necessary. What purpose does
it serve? Is it done to confuse newcomers and new readers? I
see nothing added in these recent offerings that I have not seen
many years ago.

As a matter of fact, I ask myself: Is it actually the
plausibility of THEOSOPHY (as a philosophy, or a record of the
history of the research -- conducted over millennia -- by the
"Wise-Men" of the past) that is being attacked -- through the
review of matters which in some cases could only be settled by
the parties that took action years ago and have died since then?
In such a case, is it fair to assail them in their absence? Are
the present parties to this matter taking advantage of their
silence? If so, why ?

In my esteem if one is unable to provide them with a defense, it
is equally cowardly to try to attack them, when the matter is NOT
a question of the PHILOSOPHY ( which is not assailed) but a
question of "who did what?" And, of course that is easily
settled by referral to the documentary sequence -- I give a
location below where this can be obtained.

Personally, I am not interested in gossip. Perhaps others are.
But I ask myself to what good? I also ask myself if 50 to 100
years from now the present exchange will still have any unique
validity or continuing life? Personally I think not, they seem
puerile. And as I say, those matters have been settled. My
conclusion is that either the protagonists have not studied
HISTORY impartially, or have not studied THEOSOPHY as a
philosophy, either. If they were aware of the implications of
Theosophical doctrines, tenets and philosophy, and their
interlocking cohesiveness and seamless union with modern
research, there would be little room for controversy. [ Note
well. I say "research" -- and not "hypothesis or theories," as
those are rather poorly constructed and are found to be based on
partial analysis of the facts available.]

If I want to know what someone wrote or taught I DO NOT NEED AN
INTERPRETER. I go direct to the source, if available. If I have
to use a translation, I review several, in an attempt to
eliminate any bias or prejudice. In this case DOCUMENTS are
easily available. I can check them. So can all of you. There
are no mysteries here, and very little antiquity. As far as I am
concerned this can be terminated any time soon.

I certainly do not need the opinions of someone who has, quite
evidently has read very little, (and understood even less) of the
THEOSOPHICAL PHILOSOPHY. At least, I can say that I have read of
that a great deal and over many years, so as to satisfy myself
that I know and understand it main features. But that will mean
nothing to anyone else. At best I have satisfied myself.

I mistrust "interpreters" for the reason they cannot help but
offer their personal opinions. I am not interested in those. In
the same vein, what I write, is obviously an opinion and ought
not to be trusted until proved correct and accurate by the
reader. Each of us has to form their own opinions. It is unsafe
to leave that process in the hands of another. There are no
trustworthy "authorities." Neither Science (which offers
theories and hypotheses when they cannot offer observed FACTS)
nor Religions (which offer interpretations, dogmas, and
platitudes when they cannot offer LOGIC) are trustworthy
witnesses or sources of information.

But, here is my reasoning --

What is PAST is PAST It cannot be undone. HISTORY as DOCUMENTS
exists.

If one starts imputing motives to people who are now dead and
gone, it is very likely that there will be embedded errors due to
the personal bias of the present writer, or hypothesis builder.
And that is NOT history. It may sell a lot of books, but that
does not make it TRUE.

There are DOCUMENTS available to show exactly what has happened
in the past of our modern Theosophical Movement for the past 125
years.-- and what was said and done by various people then
involved.

In regard to these DOCUMENTS we have a few books that deal with
them:

1. Michael Gomes edited "THEOSOPHY IN THE 19th CENTURY" --
There he provides us with a record and a synopsis of the content
of some 2057 (or more) DOCUMENTS. These are available (in
original) in various libraries for scrutiny. [Orchard
Publishing, New York] [ 582 pages].

2. In 1925 E. P. Dutton published "THE THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT
(1875-1925" a history and a survey. It is based on documents
which any one can check. [ 705 pages ] This is Out of Print.

A second, condensed version of this book was issued in
1951 by the Cunningham Press, Los Angeles. It was titled "THE
THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (1875-1950)" [ 351 pages ]. It is based on
documents, and is available from Theosophy Company, Los Angeles,
(213-748-7244) for about $ 8.00.

3. In 1993 (updated in paperback to 2000) Sylvia Cranston
published at Tarcher (PUTNAM): "H.P.B. -- THE EXTRAORDINARY LIFE
OF Helena Blavatsky, Founder of the Modern THEOSOPHICAL
MOVEMENT." This biography is fully documented and every
reference can be checked. [649 pages] In print.

{All these books are available from the "bookshop" at
http://www.blavatsky.net }

In brief, then: Our opinions, today, and attempts at
reconstructing motives and defining the character of various
participants in Theosophical History are probably faulty to some
degree.

I take these study groups we subscribe to, to be a basis for the
forward consideration of the study of Theosophy and not a field
for controversy and opinion about the past. As I understand it,
these Groups exist for the exchange of philosophical inquiry and
discussion.

I would prefer, if possible, that our time to be spent on the
actual study of THEOSOPHY. That is valuable. Has it any worth?
That is important for all of us, and for humanity.

Best wishes as always,

Dallas

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