Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00145)

Dear Gregory, Pedro, and all,

The record is somewhat mixed on intellectual freedom in the Adyar TS 
in my experience. Gregory wrote:

> 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?

Certainly some do. They just have to keep quiet about it. You're 
allowed any opinion as long as you don't openly contradict the 
leadership's unstated dogmas.

snip
> 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)? 

Actually the AT did run a review of my first self-published book, 
mixed but respectful, by Joy Mills who later reviewed TMR favorably 
in The Quest. But the AT's review of TMR was rude and insulting and 
the last time my name was ever mentioned in an Adyar publication 
AFAIK. (On the plus side the national section journals in England, 
Australia and France all ran favorable reviews before the 
Wheaton/Adyar axe fell.)

If significant works by major publishers on Theosophical subjects 
are not even mentioned 
> in Adyar-based publications, doesn't this suggest a "view"?
> 

Simple non-mentioning would not be nearly as obnoxious as Radha's 
actual policy, which is to publish oblique attacks without actually 
naming a book or its author. That was done to The Elder Brother as 
well as to The Masters Revealed. Strikes me as passive aggressive 
in the extreme.

Maybe it's naive of me after all these years to hold out such a 
hope, but I get the impression that a very small handful of 
authoritarian (and mean-spirited) individuals are responsible for 
this sad state of affairs, and that they are not supported by the 
membership in their policy of ignoring or attacking books like yours 
and mine.

Cheers,

Paul