RE: Theos-World TS natal chart and its implications
Feb 20, 2006 07:24 AM
by W.Dallas TenBroeck
T S STARTED .DOC
=================
CHRONOLOGY 1875 -78
NOTES ON THE ORIGINAL MINUTES OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.
SOURCES:
PATH, Vol. 10, p. 55, May 1894.
THEOSOPHICAL FORUM, Vol. 1, p. 95-6--(Olcott on)
OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol. 1,p.114-18,121-2,126-133;137,
OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol. 7, p. 326.
[ Start with Mr. Judge's THE T S AND ITS BASIS, J Art II 156 ]
>From AUSTRAL THEOSOPHIST, June 1894 ]
"As one of those who helped to form the T S, I may claim to speak
with personal knowledge of the facts, ...
SEPT 7th 1875
"1. At a meeting held in the rooms of H.P.Blavatsky, 46 Irving Place, New
York City, Sept. 7, 1875, it was agreed to form a Society for the purpose of
Occult Study. Upon motion of William Q. Judge, Henry S. Olcott was elected
Chairman of this meeting, and upon motion of H.S.Olcott, William Q. Judge
was elected Secretary of the same. Adjourned to September 8, 1875...this is
ascertained as the facts by those who were present. (CWB, Vol.
1, 122)
NOTE:
Col. Olcott, in OLD DIARY LEAVES, Vol. 1, p. 118, remarks on
this event from memory as follows: (he) "wrote on a scrap of paper: "Would
it not be a good thing to form a Society for this kind of study ?"--and gave
it to Judge. H.P.B. read the note and nodded assent."
[He also makes mention of this on p.114 of his book. OLD DIARY LEAVES
(Olcott) Vol. I
(CWB, Vol. 1, p. 473, 122-123)
Since Col. Olcott wrote OLD DIARY LEAVES, largely from memory,
some discrepancies have been observed by historians, these will be found
chronicled in CWB Vol. I, pp. 72-3, 94, 121, 123-4.
H.P.B. later narrated this event to Mrs. A. Besant, who then reported
it in the opposite sequence: she [HPB] having originated the idea, and
then, having a note suggesting the formation of a society passed through
Judge to Olcott.
(see LUCIFER, Vol. 12, p. 105, April 1893).
There is no question but Mr. Judge was one of the three founders of the
Theosophical Society who remained with it.
SEPT 8th 1875
2. Pursuant to adjournment, a meeting was held at the same place Sept. 8,
1875. It is with this meeting that the minute book begins. Upon motion of
William Q. Judge it was voted that H.S.Olcott take the Chair, and upon
motion it was voted that William Q. Judge act as Secretary. Upon request of
the Chair, sixteen persons handed their names to the Secretary, as agreeing
to found and belong to such a society. A committee of four, including the
Chairman, was appointed "to draft a constitution and by-laws and to report
the same at the next meeting." Adjourned to Monday, Sept. 13, 1875, at the
same place.
(PATH Vol. 9, p. 1 - facsimile; CWB, Vol. 1, p. 123-5)
SEPT 13TH 1875
3. Pursuant to adjournment, a meeting was held Sept. 13, 1875.
H.S.Olcott acted as Chairman and C. Southern as Secretary. The Committee on
"Preamble and By-laws" reported progress. It was resolved that the name of
the society be "THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY". The Chair appointed a committee
to select meeting rooms. "Several new members were nominated and upon
motion those persons were added to the list of Founders." The meeting
adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.
OCTOBER 16 1875
4. Pursuant to a Notice dated at New York, Oct. 13, 1875, signed
Henry S. Olcott, President pro tem., a meeting was held at 206 W 38th
St., Oct. 16, l875, "to organize and elect officers." Eighteen persons
were present. The report of the Committee on "Preamble and By-laws" was
laid on the table and ordered printed. The meeting was adjourned to
October 30th l875, at the same place. H.S.Olcott was Chairman, and J. S.
Cobb, Secretary,
OCTOBER 30 1875
5. October 30, 1875, the Society met pursuant to adjournment.
Mott Memorial Hall, 64 Madison Ave., New York City was selected as the
Society's meeting place. By-laws were adopted, but with the proviso that
the "Preamble" should be revised by a committee and then published as the
"Preamble of the Society." Officers were elected as follows: President,
Henry S. Olcott; Vice-Presidents, Dr. S. Pancoast and G .H .Felt;
Corresponding Secretary, Mme. H.P.Blavatsky; Recording Secretary, John
Storer Cobb; Treasurer, Henry J. Newton; Librarian, Charles Southeran;
Councilors, Rev. J .H. Wiggin, R. B. Westbrook, LL.D., Mrs. Emma Hardinge
Britten; C E. Simmons, M.D. and Herbert D. Montachesi; Counsel to the
Society, William Q. Judge. Adjourned to November 17, 1875. ....
PATH, VOL. 10, P. 55-60;
CWB, Vol. I, p. 122 - 125; 150; 193; 245-6; 375-8; 379-84;
NOTE
Mme. Blavatsky was by this time (1875) engaged in the writing
of ISIS UNVEILED. Mr. Judge's brother, John, was of help in preparing the
manuscript for the printers. Mr. Judge's participation is not specified in
existent records I have read. DTB.
HPB invited Mr. Judge to help her in 1884 at Enghien, (WQJ
ART. ULT I 468) : "...while I at her request carefully read over, sitting
in the same room, Isis Unveiled, making indices at the foot of the page, as
she intended to use it in preparing the Secret Doctrine."
In THE COLLECTED WORKS OF H.P.BLAVATSKY, VOL. I p. 406 we
are told by the editor that the diaries of HPB for the years 1875-77
"mysteriously disappeared" in Adyar.
The diary for 1878 find Mr. Judge mentioned several times as a visitor to
HPB in the latter part of the year: [ August 5th and 6th (p. 409); Oct 18
(p.413); Oct. 30 (p.416); Nov. 12 (p.420); Dec. 3-4(p.425); Dec. 5
(p.426); Dec. 7 (p.427); Dec. 11 (p.429); Dec. 13-15.
COLL. WKS. B, Vol I, p. 430.]
On December 17th. 1878 Mme. Blavatsky and Col. Olcott boarded a
steamer to sail via. England, for India; Mr. Judge remained in New York.
On Dec. 19th. 1879 (p.433, C W B) Mr. Judge visited them on board
the steamer prior to its actual departure, while it was still anchored
inside the bar of the harbor waiting for the tide.
DECEMBER 17 1878 to FEBRUARY 16 1879
9. In the year 1878 H.P.Blavatsky and H.S.Olcott were appointed
under a formal Resolution of the Theosophical Society dated------- a
"Committee of the Theosophical Society" to visit foreign countries and
report." The Theosophist for Oct. 1879, Vol. 1, #1, p. 1, 1st item, says:
"For the convenience of future reference, it may as well be stated here that
the Committee, sent to India by the Theosophical Society, sailed from New
York Dec. 17th l878, and landed in Bombay, Feb. 16, 1879, having passed two
weeks in London on the way." (The THEOSOPHIST, Jan. 1880, Vol. 1, p.95).
=================================================================
T S STARTED
From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 3:53 PM
To
Subject: Re: TS natal chart and its implications
Dear all,
I recall HPB writing that the September chart is the real birth chart.
The November inaugural address chart would be the chart for when the TS
became a public organization.
Best
Jerry
==============================================
adelasie wrote:
Dear Vladimir,
The chart drawn for 8 pm, September 8, 1875, is certainly more
encouraging than the one for the same time, November 17 of the same
year. One might wonder how an entity of the latter date would survive
at all. Does anyone have any more specific data for the founding of
the TS? It seems likely that there would be an official chart for the
founding, considering what the organization is.
Adelasie
==================================================
On 18 Feb 2006 at 13:19, Vladimir wrote:
Saturday, February 18, 2006, 5:46:41 AM, adelasie wrote:
Does Cranston give a time for the September date?
No. Actually the date might be considered even Sep.7, because then
...Madame Blavatsky's sprightly evening chatter and her reported
magical feats continued to draw groups of intelligent people to her
rooms. Among those thus attracted was Mr. George H. Felt, who had made
some careful studies in phases of Egyptology. He was asked to lecture
on these subjects and on the 7th of September, 1875, a score of people
had gathered in H.P.B.'s parlors to hear his address on "The Lost
Canon of Proportion of the Egyptians."
Dr. Seth Pancoast, a most
erudite Kabbalist was present, and after the lecture he led the
discussion to the subject of the occult powers of the ancient
magicians. Mr. Felt said he had proven those powers and had with them
evoked elemental creatures and "hundreds of shadowy forms." As the
tense debate proceeded, acting on an impulse,
Col. Olcott wrote on a
scrap of paper, which he passed over to Madame Blavatsky through the
hands of Mr. W. Q. Judge, the following: "Would it not be a good thing
to form a Society for this kind of study?" She read it and indicated
assent.
http://www.blavatskycardiff.care4free.net/The%20Theosophical%20Society
%20gets%20off%20the%20Ground.htm
But the Meeting Minutes containing the proposal is dated
Sep.8,1975 –
a hand-written page is reproduced in the book.
Vladimir
=====================================
see Blavatsky: COLLECTED WORKS Vol. 1
==================================
-----Original Message-----
From: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com [mailto:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of adelasie
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 6:47 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Theos-World TS natal chart and its implications
Hi Vladimir,
Does Cranston give a time for the September date?
Adelasie
On 17 Feb 2006 at 21:35, Vladimir wrote:
> Friday, February 17, 2006, 5:16:17 PM, kpauljohnson wrote:
>
> > Here are a couple of post from a dozen years ago, discussing the
> > November 17th chart for the TS:
>
> Sorry, didn't look at the chart, just want to make a side remark:
> according to Cranston's book on HPB's life, the TS was actually
> organized Sep.8,1875, whereas on Nov.17th Olcott gave his inaugural
> speech.
>
> Would you please remake the chart for this date and produce new
> implications? :)
>
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir
>
=================================================
LEGAL STATUS OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY
Key. p. 309-10
THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY.
The following Official Report, on which was granted a Decree of In to the
St. Louis Theosophical Society, is art important document, as putting on
record the view taken of the Theosophical Society—after a careful
examination of witnesses on oath—by an American Court of Law.
First—The petitioner is not a religious body, I report this negative finding
for the reason that the word “Theosophical” contained in petitioners’ name
conveys a possible religious implication.
The statutory phrase “society formed for religious purposes” applies, I
suppose, only to an organization formed in part for worship, worship being
an individual act involving adoration and perhaps emotional power, both
being of necessity individual acts, or else to an organization formed for a
propagation of a religious faith.
Merely to teach a religion as one may teach algebra, is not, I think, a
religions work, as the word “religious” is used in the Statute and the
Constitution. A man may occupy a collegiate chair of Professor of Religions
and as such teach the tenets of many religions. These different religions
being variant and antagonistic, the Professor could not by any possibility
worship under all. Nay, he might even be irreligious. Hence, merely teaching
religions is not a religions work in the statutory sense.
It will be noted that in art. 2 of this society’s constitution, the word
religion is used in the plural. To teach religions is educational, not
religious. “To promote the study of religions” is in part to promote the
study of the history of man. I add the subordinate finding that the society
has no religious creed and practices no worship.
Second—The petitioner proposes to promote the study of literature and
sciences. These objects are expressly within the terms of the Statute.
Third—Cognate with the last object is that of investigating “unexplained
laws of nature and psychical powers latent in man.” These two phrases, taken
in their apparent meaning, are unobjectionable. But there is reason to
believe that they form a meaning other than the apparent one.
The court will take notice of the commonly accepted meaning of the word
“Theosophy.” Though I am ignorant of Theosophy, I think it is supposed to
include among other things manifestations and phenomena, physical and
psychical, that are violative of the laws now known by physicists and
metaphysicians, and perhaps not explained or claimed to be explained or
understood even by Theosophists themselves.
In this group may be included Spiritualism, mesmerism, clairvoyance,
mind-healing, mind-reading, and the like. I took testimony on this question,
and found that while a belief in any one of these sorts of manifestations
and phenomena is not required, while each member of the society is at
liberty to hold his own opinion, yet such questions form topics of inquiry
and discussion, and the members as a mass are probably believers
individually in phenomena that are abnormal and in powers that are
superhuman as far as science now knows.
It is undoubtedly the right of any citizen to hold whatever opinions he
pleases on these subjects, and to endeavour at his pleasure to investigate
the unexplained and to display the latent.
But the question here is: Shall the Court grant a franchise in aid of such
endeavour?
Voodooism is a word applied to the practices of guileful men among the
ignorant and superstitious who inflict impostures upon guileless men among
the ignorant and superstitious. No Court would grant a franchise in
furtherance of such practices.
The Court then will stop to inquire into the practices and perhaps the
reputableness of the enterprise which seeks judicial aid. I am not meaning
to make a comparison between voodooism and this group of phenomena which for
convenience (though I know not whether accurately) I will call occultism. I
only take voodooism as a strong case to show the Court ought to inquire.
If we now inquire into occultism we shall find that it has been occasionally
used, as is reported, for the purposes of imposture. But this goes for
nothing against its essential character. Always and everywhere bad men will
make a bad use of anything for selfish ends.
The object of this society, whether attainable or not, is undeniably
laudable, assuming that there are physical and psychical phenomena
unexplained, and that Theosophy seeks to explain them. Assuming that there
are human powers yet latent, it seeks to discover them. It may be that
absurdities and impostures are in fact incident to the nascent stage of its
development.
As to an understanding like that of occultism, which asserts powers commonly
thought superhuman, and phenomena commonly thought supernatural, it seemed
to me that the Court, though not assuming to determine judicially the
question of their verity, would, before granting to occultism a franchise,
inquire whether at least it had gained the position of being reputable or
whether its adherents were merely men of narrow intelligence, mean
intellect, and omnivorous credulity.
I accordingly took testimony on that point, and find that a number of
gentlemen in different countries of Europe, and also in this country,
eminent in science, are believers in occultism. Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, a
writer of large and varied learning, and of solid intellect, is asserted to
have been an occultist, an assertion countenanced by at least two of his
books.
The late President Wayland, of Brown University, writing of abnormal mental
operations as shown in clairvoyance, says: “The subject seems to me well
worthy of the most searching and candid examination. It is by no means
deserving of ridicule, but demands the attention of the most philosophical
inquiry.”
Sir William Hamilton, probably the most acute and, undeniably, the most
learned of English metaphysicians that ever lived, said at least thirty
years ago: “However astonishing, it is now proved beyond all rational doubt
that in certain abnormal states of the nervous organism perceptions are
possible through other than the ordinary channels of the senses.”
By such testimony Theosophy is at least placed on the footing of
respectability. Whether by further labour it can make partial truths
complete truths, whether it can eliminate extravagances and purge itself of
impurities, if there are any, are probably questions upon which the Court
will not feel called upon to pass.
I perceive no other feature of the petitioners’ constitution that is
obnoxious to legal objection, and accordingly I have the honour to report
that I show no cause why the prayer of the petitioners should not be
granted.
AUGUST W. ALEXANDER,
Amicus Curæ.
===============================================================
[Back to Top]
Theosophy World:
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application
