Theos-Talk Archives (September 2003 Message tt00150)

Dallas on "Anonymity"

Dear Dallas, 

I have carefully read your previous emails on the above subject as 
well as your email below.

You end your latest email with the following:

"If those are read the reason for anonymous work for THEOSOPHY that 
characterizes the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS work ought to become 
clear."

Dallas, you write of "anonymous work for THEOSOPHY" but if this is 
the preferred method why didn't H.P. Blavatsky herself follow this 
practice??? She could have signed her major works with "Student of 
Truth" or "Compiler of Esoteric Teachings" or left her name off the 
title pages. Instead she is listed on the title pages as:

H.P. Blavatsky

Furthermore, one need only look at her magazines THE THEOSOPHIST and 
LUCIFER. She did not enforce or insist on anonymous articles.

If "anonymous work for THEOSOPHY" or "anonymity" is the best or 
preferred method then why didn't H.P. Blavatsky use that method? 

Even Judge's most famous book THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY was published 
under his own name.

And the author of the book THE FRIENDLY PHILOSOPHER is identified as 
Robert Crosbie.

And does the fact that Geoffrey Farthing, Geoffrey Barborka and Adam 
Warcup (all serious and sincere students of Theosophy and Blavatsky)
append their names to their books on Blavatsky and Theosophy DIMINISH 
in any way the value and worth of their books?

These above issues are not covered in what you write and beg for 
explanation.

Daniel



"W. Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@e...> wrote:
> 
> Wednesday, September 17, 2003
> 
> 
> Re: Principle of Impersonality = ANONYMITY.
> 
> 
> Dear Friends:
> 
> I can only say that what I write below is as I, myself see it. It 
may
> not satisfy.
> 
> Concerning the "anonymity" of U L T, enough has been posted to 
explain
> that is exists AS A POLICY solely to prevent any personal 
assumption of
> AUTHORITY.
> 
> UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS exists since 1909 (94 years) on this 
basis.
> It presents the Philosophy, and not a "Person or Persons" 
as "authority"
> or "interpreter" thereof. 
> 
> It therefore puts forward the original form in which the philosophy 
was
> recorded. It avoids personal views, provides information in the 
Light
> of the Philosophy, and lets articles, notes, answers, etc. stand on
> their own merit -- something to be decided on by the readers 
thereof.
> 
> In its application, it says, in brief: 
> 
> Let THEOSOPHY stand on its merits. 
> 
> Let no person or authority stand as a filter, lens or prism between 
the
> ORIGINAL TEACHINGS and the modern student.
> 
> 
> The present inquiries are of benefit to us all. They strip away any
> mystery and focus on the purpose of anonymity as observed by the U 
L T.
> 
> This departure from the usual method of conducting an association 
and
> publishing, has been objected to earlier, the same answers have been
> provided since then. As I see it, it is a policy now proved by 94 
years
> of existence to be valuable, that will not be changed or dropped 
under
> the pressure of curiosity or irony. 
> 
> The U L T does not seek a mass of new adherents, but it offers a 
refuge
> to those students who desire to study, discuss and apply THEOSOPHY 
as
> originally recorded.
> 
> As an illustration, if we were attempting to watch an eclipse of 
the Sun
> we would shield our eyes by using very dark films or glasses. The
> "original teachings" are like these protective dark glasses. Behind 
them
> stands the SUN of the Eternal Philosophy -- the eternal Laws of 
Nature
> -- the "Sanatana Dharma." 
> 
> Probing further:
> 
> We have in writing, in their original form teachings certified to be
> from Masters and HPB. We find reference to this collaboration 
given in
> the magazine The PATH, Vol.. 8, pp. 1-3; in the form of 
certificates the
> Masters gave to Dr. Hubbe-Schleiden. Later, an independent 
certificate
> was given by Master K H to Col. Olcott, PTS [LETTERS FROM THE 
MASTERS
> OF WISDOM , 1st series, 1918, p. 54] This reads in part: 
> 
> "I have also noted, your thoughts about the "Secret Doctrine." Be
> assured that what she has not annotated from scientific and other 
works,
> we have given or suggested to her. Every mistake or erroneous 
notion,
> corrected and explained by her from the works of other theosophists 
was
> corrected by me, or under my instructions. It is a more valuable 
work
> than its predecessor, an epitome of occult truths that will make it 
a
> source of information and instruction for the earnest student for 
long
> years to come."
> 
> The value of making these TEACHINGS available in an undistorted 
shape
> was understood by Mr. Crosbie. Thus, anonymity in U L T work was
> determined on to serve as a kind of prophylaxis, and, an antidote 
to any
> "authority." This includes the unmarked editing of H P B's writings
> after her death.
> 
> Of what possible difference does it make who says anything? Whether
> this involves the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS, or any other group 
or
> person? Does attaching a name to some writing invest it with 
greater
> worth? 
> If so is it personal or impersonal? Suppose a "nom-de-plume" were 
used?
> What then is the result? Further doubt and suspicion?
> 
> I say: Has the thing in itself any worth? And have we THOUGHT 
about
> it? And by worth, I define this as universal and eternal principles.
> Anything less, limits it, and adds to its uselessness in my esteem..
> 
> Either the matter is worth considering on broad impersonal lines or 
it
> is not.
> 
> In any case, why not let Theosophy speak for itself, which is what 
the U
> LT work does as impersonally as possible. 
> 
> As for myself, as an "old" associate I have repeatedly said that I 
am
> not a "spokesperson" for the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS. If I 
appear
> to answer these probes, it is because the principle of putting 
THEOSOPHY
> forward is to me supremely important. Other apparently have other 
view,
> and some are incomprehensible to me.
> 
> I took in mind the need for offering reasons before you who 
inquire. I
> have, accordingly published in the last week Mr. Crosstie's 
introduction
> to the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS .
> 
> Then I published H P B's WHAT IS THEOSOPHY and WHAT ARE THE
> THEOSOPHISTS.
> 
> If those are read the reason for anonymous work for THEOSOPHY that
> characterizes the UNITED LODGE OF THEOSOPHISTS work ought to become
> clear.
> 
> Best washes,
> 
> Dallas
> 
> ===============================