Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00432)

Paul, as your "bodyguard", I must advise you be careful.  It appears 
that some Theosophists has gotten together and decided that the phrase 
"universal brotherhood" does not include you.  
peace and laughter,


bill

kpauljohnson wrote:
> Dear Anand,
>
> As I have just learned, when I leave the list because of the recent 
> degradation of atmosphere I won't be the first to do so.  You wrote:
>   
> > Hello Paul,
> > It appears that some people don't like your work 'Masters Revealed' 
> > They are trying to make you go out of talk-lists. Unfortunately you 
> > seem to be surrendering by leaving this theos-talk.
> >     
> To stay and fight would also be a kind of surrender; surrender to an 
> untheosophical atmosphere on an alleged theosophical list.  To stay and 
> not fight would be surrendering to abuse.  I don't see a good 
> alternative here.
>
>  And even if you 
>   
> > leave the list, they will try to demean you and your book. So I would 
> > suggest you to stay. 
> > Suppose you don't accept Blavatsky, why do you fear to say so 
> >     
> openly ? 
> I admire HPB and her books very much, and for close to 20 years freely 
> shared my views of her and researches on her with fellow Theosophists 
> with no problems.  No one ever suggested to me that I was not a 
> Theosophist. In his introduction to The Masters Revealed, Joscelyn 
> Godwin wrote: "Mr. Johnson's work occupies the middle ground.  He 
> obviously has a great respect and admiration for HPB, but he has no 
> illusions as to the mischievous and even dark sides of her 
> personality.  He observes the convention without which scholarship 
> would be impossible, namely that of not imposing one's own religious 
> beliefs on the matter to be studied.  But he evidently believes that 
> HPB and her Masters achieved something of tremendous importance for the 
> human race."  That is just as true today as when he wrote it in 1994.  
> It is clearly however not good enough to satisfy Theosophical 
> inquisitors.  How many furiously antagonistic attacks does it take 
> before one fears to express his views?
>
>   
> > It is not necessary that you should accept Blavatsky or anybody else. 
> > TS gives complete freedom to all. 
> > After coming in contact, I soon realized that Blavatsyans have 
> > problematic mental structure which was result of perhaps study of 
> > Blavatky's writing. 
> > AG
> >     
> As Erica has just shown, there are abundant quotes from HPB that put to 
> shame all the hatefulness her supposed followers have expressed towards 
> those who don't share their beliefs.  I would suggest that rather than 
> HPB's writings per se, there is something problematic about the 
> association between esotericism and elitism.  "We know spiritual 
> secrets, and we're superior to those who don't" is bad enough when it's 
> a sentiment shared within a private club like the ES.  When it becomes 
> a *public* stance of contemptuous dismissal of everything outside a 
> narrow range of Theosophical orthodoxy, it becomes a total reversal of 
> everything HPB stood for.  As someone just wrote me in private email, 
> what theos-talk has become represents HPB's worst nightmare.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>