Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00137)

Can I assume that the posting from Pedro Oliveira was either a joke, 
sarcasm, irony or "spin"?

No "official Adyar view"?? Let's take an example: can someone hold office 
or be employed at, say, Adyar or Wheaton and regard Leadbeater as a 
fraud? proclaim that the whole Coming episode was a fantasy and a 
disaster? deny any of the claimed contacts with the Masters after 
Blavatsky?

Perhaps Mr Oliveira can cite the reviews of anti-Adyar-view works in "The 
Theosophist" or "The American Theosophist" (e.g. my own work on 
Leadbeater, or those of Paul Johnson on the Masters)? If significant 
works by major publishers on Theosophical subjects are not even mentioned 
in Adyar-based publications, doesn't this suggest a "view"?

Perhaps he can also cite articles critical of, say, Leadbeater or 
Krishnamurti in "The Theosophist" or "The American Theosophist".

I recall with both fondness and sadness interviewing Dick Balfour-Clarke 
at Adyar when he told me that, although he would not ask me to conceal 
his identity as a source, he would be expelled from his home there if I 
identified him in any published work.

Given that Mr Oliveira argues there is no "Adyar view" can I assume that 
I am welcome to use the Adyar Library and Archives in future research? 
Perhaps those who wrote to me when I was undertaking my biography of 
Leadbeater saying they had been "warned against" speaking to me (I have 
their letters in my archives) would be interested in the answer. 

John Cooper and I frequently discussed the problems of undertaking 
research in organizatiuons which had rigid definitions of "ideological 
correctness" - which is one of the reasons why John's collection of HPB's 
correspondence has been suppressed by Adyar (in its Wheaton 
manifestation).

Dr Gregory Tillett