Theos-Talk Archives (April 2005 Message tt01886)

Cass,
The only place I can imagine it, at least in part, being in the movie in one 
short scene -- would be on the manuscript of the article HPB is writing after 
she finished being in blue funk rage telling Olcott how everyone running the 
Adyar TS was screwing up the movement. :-) But, then, all these out of context 
incidents in her life are too much to think about before the writer (whoever 
it might be) comes up with a good screenplay for the first movie. If we keep 
thinking like this, one incident at a time, her entire life story might turn 
into a series longer than Star Trek. :-)
Leon 

In a message dated 04/21/05 1:10:10 AM, silva_cass@yahoo.com writes:

>Dear Leon,
>This piece has to be part of the movie!
>Cass
>

"W.Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval14@earthlink.net> wrote:


Wednesday, April 20, 2005


Dallas says:


Correction:


As I see it from documents:


In 1905 only Col. Olcott, President Founder was still alive. He died in

Feb. 1907.


Both HPB and Judge disagreed with the idea that Adyar had any special

quality or value. They died respectively in 1891 and 1896


The Adyar property was acquired in 1882, the editorial work of the

THEOSOPHIST was removed from Bombay to Adyar; HPB had her rooms there, and

Col. Olcott declared it the HQ of the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.



Dallas


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


HPB provided the principles:


A PUZZLE FROM ADYAR


H. P. Blavatsky


WHEN the cat is abroad the mice dance in the house it seems. Since Colonel

Olcott sailed for Japan, the Theosophist has never ceased to surprise its

European readers, and especially the Fellows of our Society, with most

unexpected capers. It is as if the Sphinx had emigrated from the Nile and

was determined to continue offering her puzzles broadcast to the Œdipuses of

the Society. 


Now what may be the meaning of this extraordinary, and most tactless

"sortie" of the esteemed acting editor of our Theosophist? Is he, owing to

the relaxing climate of Southern India, ill, or like our (and his)

editor-enemies across the Atlantic, also dreaming uncanny dreams and seeing

Lying visions--or what? And let me remind him at once that he must not feel

offended by these remarks, as he has imperatively called them forth himself.

LUCIFER, the PATH and the THEOSOPHIST are the only organs of communication

with the Fellows of our Society, each in its respective country. Since the

acting editor of the Theosophist has chosen to give a wide publicity in his

organ to abnormal fancies, he has no right to expect a reply through any

other channel than LUCIFER. Moreover, if he fails to understand all the

seriousness of his implied charges against me and several honourable men, he

may realise them better, when he reads the present.


Already his enigmatical letter to Light has done mischief enough. While its

purport was evidently to fight some windmills of his own creation, an

inimical spiritualist who signs "Colenso" has jumped at the good opportunity

afforded him to misrepresent that letter. In his malicious philippic called

"Koothoomi Dethroned" he seeks to show that Mr. Harte's letter announces

that the "Masters" are thrown overboard by the T. S. and "Mme. Blavatsky

dethroned." Is it this that "Richard Harte, acting editor of the

Theosophist," sought to convey to the Spiritualists in his letter in Light

of July 6th? 


Without further enquiry as to the real meaning of the Light letter, what

does he try to insinuate by the following in the July number of the

Theosophist? 


A DISCLAIMER 


The Editor of the Theosophist has much pleasure in publishing the following

extracts from a letter from Mr. Bertram Keightley, Secretary of the

"Esoteric Section" of the Theosophical Society, to one of the Commissioners,

which have been handed to him for publication. It should be explained that

the denial therein contained refers to certain surmises and reports afloat

in the Society, and which were seemingly corroborated by apparently

arbitrary and underhand proceedings by certain Fellows known to be members

of the Esoteric Section. 


To this 1, the "Head of the Esoteric Section," answer: 


1. Mr. Bertram Keightley's letter, though containing the truth, and nothing

but the truth, was never intended for publication, as a sentence in it

proves. Therefore the acting Editor had no right to publish it. 


2. Fellows of the E. S. having to be first of all Fellows of the

Theosophical Society, what does the sentence "Fellows known to be members of

the E. S."--who stand accused by Mr. Harte (or even by some idiotic reports

afloat in the Society) of "arbitrary and underhand proceedings"--mean? Is

not such a sentence a gross insult thrown into the face of honourable

men--far better Theosophists than any of their accusers--and of myself? 


3. What were the silly reports? That the "British or the American Section,"

and even the "Blavatsky Lodge" of the Theosophical Society wanted to "boss

Adyar." For this is what is said in the Theosophist in the alleged

"disclaimer": 

Mr. Keightley tells this Commissioner that he must not believe "that the

Esoteric Section has any, even the slightest, pretension to `boss' the

Theosophical Society or anything of the kind." Again he says: "We are all,

H.P.B. first and foremost, just as loyal to the Theosophical Society and to

Adyar as the Colonel can possibly he." And yet again he says: 1 have nothing

more to say, except to repeat in the most formal and positive manner my

assurance that there is not a word of truth in the statement that the

Esoteric Section has any desire or pretension to `boss' any other part or

Section of the T. S." 


Amen! But before I reproduce the acting editor's further marvellous comments

thereon, I claim the right to say a few words on the subject. Since, as

said, the letter was never meant to be paraded in print--chiefly, perhaps,

because qui s' excuse s'accuse--it is no criticism to show that it contains

that which I would describe as a meaningless flap-doodle, or, rather, a pair

of them, something quite pardonable in a private and hastily-written letter,

but quite unpardonable and grotesque when appearing as a published document.



1st. That the E. S. had never any pretensions to "boss the T. S." stands to

reason: with the exception of Col. Olcott, the President, the Esoteric

Section has nothing whatever to do with the Theosophical Society, its

Council or officers. It is a Section entirely apart from the exoteric body,

and independent of it, H.P.B. alone being responsible for its members, as

shown in the official announcement over the signature of the President

Founder himself. It follows, therefore, that the E. S., as a body, owes no

allegiance whatever to the Theosophical Society, as a Society, least of all

to Adyar. 


2nd. It is pure nonsense to say that "H.P.B.... is loyal to the Theosophical

Society and to Adyar" (!?). H.P.B. is loyal to death to the Theosophical

CAUSE, and those great Teachers whose philosophy can alone bind the whole of

Humanity into one Brotherhood. Together with Col. Olcott, she is the chief

Founder and Builder of the Society which was and is meant to represent that

CAUSE; and if she is so loyal to H. S. Olcott, it is not at all because of

his being its "President," but, firstly, because there is no man living who

has worked harder for that Society, or been more devoted to it than the

Colonel, and, secondly, because she regards him as a loyal friend and

co-worker. Therefore the degree of her sympathies with the "Theosophical

Society and Adyar" depends upon the degree of the loyalty of that Society to

the CAUSE. Let it break away from the original lines and show disloyalty in

its policy to the CAUSE and the original programme of the Society, and

H.P.B., calling the T. S. disloyal, will shake it off like dust from her

feet. 


And what does "loyalty to Adyar" mean, in the name of all wonders? What is

Adyar, apart from that CAUSE and the two (not one Founder, if you please)

who represent it? Why not loyal to the compound or the bath-room of Adyar?

Adyar is the present Headquarters of the Society, because these

"Headquarters are wherever the President is," as stated in the rules. To be

logical, the Fellows of the T. S. had to be loyal to Japan while Col. Olcott

was there, and to London during his presence here. There is no longer a

"Parent Society"; it is abolished and replaced by an aggregate body of

Theosophical Societies, all autonomous, as are the States of America, and

all under one Head President, who, together with H. P. Blavatsky, will

champion the CAUSE against the whole world. Such is the real state of

things. 


What then, again, can be the meaning of the following comments by the acting

Editor, who follows Mr. Keightley's letter with these profoundly wise

remarks: 

It is to be hoped that after this very distinct and authoritative disclaimer

no further "private circulars" will be issued by any members of the Esoteric

Section, calling upon the Fellows to oppose the action of the General

Council, because "Madame Blavatsky does not approve of it"; and also that

silly editorials, declaring that Theosophy is degenerating into obedience to

the dictates of Madame Blavatsky, like that in a recent issue of the

Religio-Philosophical Journal, will cease to appear. 


The "private circulars" of the E.S. have nothing to do with the acting

editor of the Theosophist nor has he any right to meddle with them. 


Whenever "Madame Blavatsky does not approve" of "an action of the General

Council,"1 she will say so openly and to their faces. Because (a) Madame

Blavatsky does not owe the slightest allegiance to a Council which is liable

at any moment to issue silly and untheosophical ukases; and (b) for the

simple reason that she recognizes but one person in the T. S. besides

herself, namely Colonel Olcott, as having the right of effecting fundamental

re-organizations in a Society which owes its life to them, and for which

they are both karmically responsible. If the acting editor makes slight

account of a sacred pledge, neither Col. Olcott nor H. P. Blavatsky are

likely to do so. H. P. Blavatsky will always bow before the decision of the

majority of a Section or even a simple Branch; but she will ever protest

against the decision of the General Council, were it composed of Archangels

and Dhyan Chohans themselves, if their decision seems to her unjust, or

untheosophical, or fails to meet with the approval of the majority of the

Fellows. No more than H. P. Blavatsky has the President Founder the right of

exercising autocracy or papal powers, and Col. Olcott would be the last man

in the world to attempt to do so. It is the two Founders and especially the

President, who have virtually sworn allegiance to the Fellows, whom they

have to protect, and teach those who want to be taught, and not to tyrannize

and rule over them. 

And now I have said over my own signature what I had to say and that which

ought to have been said in so many plain words long ago. The public is all

agog with the silliest stories about our doings, and the supposed and real

dissensions in the Society. Let every one know the truth at last, in which

there is nothing to make any one ashamed, and which alone can put an end to

a most painful and strained feeling. This truth is as simple as can be. 


The acting editor of the Theosophist has taken it into his head that the

Esoteric Section together with the British and American Sections, were

either conspiring or preparing to conspire against what he most curiously

calls "Adyar" and its authority. Now being a most devoted fellow of the T.

S. and attached to the President, his zeal in hunting up this mare's nest

has led him to become more Catholic than the Pope. That is all, and I hope

that such misunderstandings and hallucinations will come to an end with the

return of the President to India. Had he been at home, he, at any rate,

would have objected to all those dark hints and cloaked sayings that have of

late incessantly appeared in the Theosophist to the great delight of our

enemies. We readily understand that owing to lack of original contributions

the acting editor should reproduce a bungled up and sensational report from

the N. Y. Times and call it "Dr. Keightley speaks." But when jumping at a

sentence of Dr. Keightley's, who in speaking of some "prominent members,"

said that they had been "abandoned or been read out of the fold," he gravely

adds in a foot-note that this is "another mistake of the reporter," as "no

Fellow of the Theosophical Society has been expelled of recent years"; it is

time some one should tell the esteemed acting editor plainly that for the

pleasure of hitting imaginary enemies he allows the reader to think that he

does not know what he is talking about. If through neglect at Adyar the

names of the expelled Fellows have not been entered in the books, it does

not follow that Sections and Branches like the "London Lodge" and others

which are autonomous have not expelled, or had no right to expel, any one.

Again, what on earth does he mean by pretending that the reporter has

"confounded the Blavatsky Lodge with the Theosophical Society?" Is not the

Blavatsky Lodge, like the London, Dublin, or any other "Lodge," a branch of,

and a Theosophical Society? What next shall we read in our unfortunate

Theosophist? 


But it is time for me to close. If Mr. Harte persists still in acting in

such a strange and untheosophical way, then the sooner the President settles

these matters the better for all concerned. 


Owing to such undignified quibbles, Adyar and especially the Theosophist are

fast becoming the laughing stock of Theosophists themselves as well as of

their enemies; the bushels of letters received by me to that effect, being a

good proof of it. 


I end by assuring him that there is no need for him to pose as Colonel

Olcott's protecting angel. Neither he nor I need a third party to screen us

from each other. We have worked and toiled and suffered together for fifteen

long years, and if after all these years of mutual friendship the President

Founder were capable of lending ear to insane accusations and turning

against me, well--the world is wide enough for both. Let the new Exoteric

Theosophical Society headed by Mr. Harte, play at red tape if the President

lets them and let the General Council expel me for "disloyalty," if again,

Colonel Olcott should be so blind as to fail to see where the "true friend"

and his duty lie. Only unless they hasten to do so, at the first sign of

their disloyalty to the CAUSE--it is I who will have resigned my office of

Corresponding Secretary for life and left the Society. This will not prevent

me from remaining at the head of those--who will follow me. 


H. P. BLAVATSKY


Lucifer, August, 1889


1 Or "Commissioners" of whom Mr. R. Harte is one. [Ed.]


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


-----Original Message-----

From: christinaleestemaker

Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 6:14 AM

To: 

Subject: Re: NONSENSE - NO NONSENSE


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


-Hallo Leon,


As a lot of Americans ignore mother earth

also they do with TheosSocietyAdyar

That NONSENSE I must correct for you


It is NO NONSENSE


because HPB, Olcott and WQJ formed the Society in America (nov 17 1875)

and they (planted) incorporated at Madras!(April 3, 1905)


SEE inside the cover of The American Theosophist.


Christina




-- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, leonmaurer@a... wrote:


In a message dated 04/17/05 12:56:09 PM, AnandGholap@A... writes:


Adyar TS is the only true Theosophical Society which Masters 

founded. 

Anand Gholap


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




Nonsense. 



The first and only true "Theosophical Society" was founded in New York City

in 1875 By H. P. Blavatsky, William Q. Judge and Henry Olcott. (and

others)



The only "Masters" at that time were those real individual Adepts who 

directly instructed HPB. These Adepts, themselves, "founded" nothing -- 

although they helped HPB write Isis Unveiled and the Secret Doctrine. 


All "true" theosophy was contained in those books which became the basic

study texts of the original Society. 


All other so called "Theosophical Societies" came years later after AB

succeeded, following HPB's death, in usurping and tearing apart the original

Society by doctoring the text books, hooking up with CWL and trying to turn

theosophy into a Christian-like messianic religion that was in direct

contradiction to the Masters (and HPB's) fundamental teachings. 


This false religion was later exposed by Krishnamurti, their supposed

Messiah... 


CUT