Theos-Talk Archives (August 2004 Message tt00317)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Katinka Hesselink" <mail@k...> wrote:

> up to problems and giving both sides of the story? How the work of
> Paul Johnson was dealt with is in this case a good example. The
> Theosophist didn't even report on it (I've been told). It could have
> just given both sides of the story and told the theosophists: hey,
> there is a new theory on HPB out there. This is what we think is wrong
> with it, this is what the author says. Judge for yourselves. 

Dear Katinka,

Irked though I was by the way The Theosophist `dealt' with The Masters
Revealed, it doesn't compare with the snarky way it `dealt' with The
Elder Brother. My book had at least gotten favorably reviewed in The
Quest, Le Lotus Bleu, Theosophy in Australia, and the UK section
journal (Theosophical Journal IIRC). So even though Radha chose to
run an article called "The Masters Revealed" by Dara Eklund that
pointedly avoided acknowedging that there was a recent book by that
title which was being dismissed, that wasn't nearly as bad as what
happened with The Elder Brother. Dara's point was that the only way
to reach the Masters was by devotion to them, and any historical
investigation was inherently misguided-- echoing John Algeo's
judgment. But what happened with Tillett's book was that both Radha
and Dora Kunz in editorials made vague mentions of some nasty unnamed
book out there that said terrible things about CWL that no Theosophist
ought to worry himself/herself about because CWL couldn't possibly
have ever done anything bad because people who knew him knew that this
was impossible.

In both cases there was a combination of attack, dismissiveness, and
avoidance. In both cases readers who were otherwise uninformed of the
books in question would have no idea what was being written about. 
But I've seen a degree of outright personal hatred of Tillett from
Adyar quarters that far exceeds anything directed my way. The fact
that the Adyar TS has generally behaved in a nuttier and meaner way
towards The Elder Brother than towards my books suggests that it is
more invested in CWL than in HPB as a figure who MUST NEVER BE
CRITICIZED OR QUESTIONED. I see this as indirectly supported by a
belief in Krishnamurti as a Messiah figure who must not be admitted to
have had any association with a pedophile mentor. 

Paul