Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00457)

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

A Lesson Useful to All of Us:

THE DAY OLCOTT DID NOT DEFEND BLAVATSKY

Carlos Cardoso Aveline

ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Dear Friends,

Some students of Esoteric Philosolphy now defend H.P.Blavatsky and her 
teachings from several kinds of disguised attacks.

But the task could be to defend other Truth seekers, if we were in different 
points in time.

Pythagoras, Socrates, St. John of the Cross, Giordano Bruno, Baruch Spinoza, 
Alessandro Cagliostro and H. P. Blavatsky  all suffered cruel persecution. 
And they are not exceptions in History: examples are countless. For millenia 
now, nearly every brave soul who did any important  work in favour of 
mankind has been in one way or another misunderstood and attacked by his  
contemporaries.

In all such situations Karma has created,  as we see right now, the need and 
the opportunity for students to openly defend these pioneers and teachers. 
Through solidarity, each learner can preserve and enhance his magnetic link 
with the source of the spiritual lessons he learns. This preservation and 
defence – a conscious priviledge for some –  is not just individual. It must 
be also collective. It is not just subjective. It must be objective. It has 
to be done in the same level of reality in which the attacks happen.

Perhaps the story of an event in the early years of  the theosophical 
movement can illustrate the challenge of defending the Teacher. One day, 
during  the late 1870s, Henry Olcott  met in New York an acquaintance with 
whom he stopped for a few moments to chat. Olcott wrote in his “Old Diary 
Leaves”:

“The man was very prejudiced against HPB, and he spoke very harshly against 
her, keeping to his opinion despite all I could say. At last he used such 
objectionable language that, in sheer disgust, I hastily left him and went 
on my way.”

A few hours later, when Olcott was at home,  a paper was materialized  – or  
precipitated – before him. It was a copy of some aphorisms from the buddhist 
Dhammapada and  Sutras.  It came with the signature from one of the 
Adept-Teachers and a  two-words message which simply said –  “Translation 
correct”.

Olcott wrote: “The verses were reproaches to my address for having allowed 
HPB to be reviled  without defending her; unmistakably referring to my 
encounter down town with a person I had met, although no names were 
mentioned.” (1)

The importance of this event is that the message from the  “Dhammapada”  is 
not just in the past. The message is valid to the students of HPB in the 
21st century and in the next centuries as well. As we see Mr. Algeo’s new 
edition of old forgeries against HPB, the three main paragraphs quoted by 
the Master  and sent to Olcott give us real food for thought. Especially if 
we acknowledge that the soul of HPB is, in fact,  our brother.  The 
paragraphs  say:

* “He who hears his brother reviled, and keeping a smooth face leaves the 
abuse unnoticed, tacitly agrees with the enemy, as if he admitted the same 
to be proper and just.  He who does it is mouse-hearted, or selfishness is 
at the bottom of his heart. He is not fit to become a ‘companion’.”

* “Revenge is sinful and throws the ‘companion’ in the embrace of Zahak. He 
who permits his left hand to be polluted with dung without immediately 
wiping it with his right cares little for the cleanliness of his whole body. 
What constitutes the integral? – parts. Of what is composed a human body? – 
of limbs. If one limb cares not for the appearance of another limb, is not 
Zahak ready with trowel and brush to blacken the whole? Such a ‘companion’ 
is not ready to become a Brother.”

* “It is easy to destroy the poisonous houâbá in its first germination. It 
is difficult to arrest its progress when once allowed to mature. Its 
unhealthy emanations will fill the atmosphere with miasmas It will spread 
and infect its healthy brethren and cause the limpid waters of the lake to 
stagnate and dry. Avoid the houâbà and its husbandman, Beloved.” (2)

Unfortunately, this message did not prevent Henry Olcott from making other 
mistakes along the same line,  later on. Yet he had the merit of defending 
HPB against Mr. V. Solovyovs’ libels, and wrote that  Solovyov was “as 
heartless and contemptible, though fifty times more talented than the 
Coulombs”. (3)


What can students do, now, about the false accusations against HPB or about 
various forms of disrespect with  regard to the real founders of  the 
theosophical movement and to Theosophy itself?  We  are not mere spectators: 
our actions depend on us.

One of the stimulating factors we can take into consideration when  we think 
of HPB is that she is not  really dead.

There is no death for a soul like the one who was once born under the name 
of Helena Petrovna von Hahn. And the work and life-example of such a soul is 
now, as it will be in the future,  an occult and magnetic bridge between 
mankind and the Elder Brothers.

Hence my sincere congratulations to all those,  who,  within  Theos-talk or 
outside of it, defend in one way or another their teachers and the sources 
of their spiritual inspiration, once it is certain that they are unjustly 
attacked.

The defenders are the first to benefit, at an inner level, from such a 
defense.


Best regards,  Carlos.


NOTES:

(1) Old Diary Leaves, H. S. Olcott, First Series, TPH, Adyar, 1974, 490 pp., 
see pp. 414-415.

(2) Letters from the Masters of the Wisdom,  Second Series, transcribed by 
C. Jinarajadasa,  Theosophical Publishing House, Adyar, Madras, India, 1973. 
See Letter 23, pp. 47-49.

(3) Old Diary Leaves, H. S. Olcott, Third Series,  TPH, Adyar, 1972, 460 
pp., see p. 185.

O o o O o o O o o O o o O

_________________________________________________________________
Com o MSN Spaces você divide seu blog, suas fotos, sua lista de música e 
muito mais com seus amigos! Crie já o seu espaço online e com seus amigos! E 
só entra no   http://spaces.msn.com/