Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00028)

Sept 6 2003

Dear Katinka:

You and I have opinions. They differ.

Why so? What are they based on?

If we look at the same documents we ought to be able to arrive at
agreement.

If however we do not read them all, or exclude, modify or otherwise give
weight and favor to any of those, then we are introducing our opinions
as a modifying factor that changes the whole basis. We no longer agree.
What we may "feel" counts for little. Facts alone are to be weighed.

While we have a right to our opinions, we cannot in all fairness air
them as anything but that.. Otherwise we seek to influence our reader's
views as they can only verify our positions if they study the same
documents as we have. 

In addition. If we study the writings in question, we can soon determine
if the MEANING was fair, ethical, moral, or the reverse. Every letter
or article by any author has to stand independently on its inherent
worth. That is what is not being done in these cases under review, in
my opinion. 

Have you read Basil Crump, L L D , opinion of the Besant "evidence?"
Why was Mr. Judge prevented from seeing it? Why is it essential to
throw doubt about Judge ? As a point of fact HPB makes it plain that
Judge was a CHELA OF THIRTEEN YEARS STANDING (he was pledged direct to
the MASTER in 1874 when Olcott was also). Besant entered the E S and
was in it for 2 years when HPB died. Read the certificate HPB gave her
-- as "RECORDER OF THE TEACHINGS." When HPB died, (May 8th 1891) there
were no further "teachings" to be RECORDED (nothing "new" to be
re-taught or re-interpreted).

I would gravely hesitate to offer anyone a point of view that was
inaccurate or only opinionated. For that reason I always back up my
offerings with appropriate quotations. I am certainly not "perfect."
But I would not endanger myself or any one else with questionable views.

I suggest reading The THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT (1875-1950) history
written on documents. I have verified those carefully for accuracy's
sake over the past 60 years several times. The documents are not only
in several archives, but when I was young, I had the opportunity to
discuss them with some of the students that were around HPB and Judge,
as well as those who have participated in the early events of
Theosophical work. Of course this may satisfy me, but then, what else
can be offered? In my view there is no room for any kind of
partisanship or "loyalty" when we deal with history and hope to call it
true. 

Best wishes,

Dallas

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




-----Original Message-----
From: Katinka Hesselink 
Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2003 4:48 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: Besant and Judge and HPB

Hi Dallas,

I know the issue of the Judge case is one which is dirty on both 
sides. My only statement of opinion here is: the dirt wasn't only on 
Besant's side. I agree that Old should not have made the documents in 
question public. What I disagree with though is the persistent 
tendency to blame Besant and Olcott, and exonerate Judge totally. 

It may be so that Judge did not act as president when writing those 
letters - but that is really a technicality. I mean, what a president 
does is always under scrutiny, rightly so, whether 'off the bench or 
on it'. Especially when one is co-head of an institution like the 
E.S. If he made those letters up, then his whole ethical soundness is 
under fire. And that really had to be adressed by Besant and Olcott. 
How could they not adress it? The problem is though, the real issue 
can't be decided, namely, were those letters really inspired by the 
Masters... And that was the technicality he got off on, the way the 
story is usually told. 

My point isn't that Judge was wrong. I don't know whether he was or 
not. My point is that Besant wasn't as wrong as she has often been 
painted to be. 

Are you really saying that one can only have on opinion on a subject 
when one has studied the original documents? We could just stop this 
whole e-mailgroup then. 

Anyhow, Wachtmeister's words are part of the evidence. You just don't 
like that evidence. 

Katinka

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "W. Dallas TenBreock" 
<dalval14@e...> wrote:
> Sept 1 2002
> 
> 
> Re W Q JUDGE, accusations by Mrs. Besant, etc...
> 
> 
> Dear Katinka:
> 
> Let me say this I have researched theosophical historical documents 
and
> books, pamphlets, etc -- such as may be found in the several 
archives
> of the various societies, etc., for over 50 years. I have made an
> almost complete set of copies thereof. Several students have
> independently produced a list of all the known papers and statements
> relating thereto, have checked and re-checked them for accuracy, and
> have arranged them chronologically. They do not need to deal in
> opinions, but can trace every move recorded, and word printed.
> 
> Since we deal now a days with the versions of Theosophical history 
as
> recorded by various persons, almost 100, or more years after the 
events,
> we cannot go into that with any prejudgments.
> 
> You will note that the conflict arose because Mrs. Besant said that
> while the Master's "messages" [sent to specific individuals and 
included
> in letters written by Mr. Judge] WERE TRUE -- but.... But, she 
denied
> that the METHOD of WRITING or PRESENTATION was true. In effect, it 
was
> averred that Mr. Judge had "forged" those messages. He denied this 
and
> offered to prove that, but his offer was never accepted. History 
does
> not say why.
> 
> This sounds very strange.
> 
CUT