Once upon a time there was a man who traveled from his own country into
the world known as the Land of Theosophists.
He saw a number of people running in terror from a library where they
had been trying to Study Theosophy. "There is a Heretic in that
library," they told him. He looked, and saw that it was a scholarly
messenger.
He offered to kill the "Heretic" for them. When he had finished
"shooting the messenger," he declared the body of work that remained
anathema and burned the books. Seeing his skill at killing and burning,
the people were sorely afraid and cried out, "he will kill us and burn
our books next unless we get rid of him." But they were weak and so
they lived and died in their own fear doing as the stranger told them.
It so happened that at another time another man also wandered into the
Land of Theosophists and the same thing started to happen to him. But,
instead of offering to kill the "heretic," he told them they were living
in relative illusion and he went into the library and studied with the
heretic. No one was killed and no books were burned. By his bold
example he taught them the basic fact which would enable them not only
to conquer their fear of "heretics" but also their illusions about
truth and heresy. This enabled them to live at peace with all
beings in the Land of Theosophists.
Morten - yes I know you care. You know that I do care, too. How are
the "rugrats" these days?
peace,
bill
M. Sufilight wrote:
Hallo all,
My views are:
You wrote:
"It is disturbing to read the "shoot the messenger" postings directed at
Paul
Johnson, "
What postings are You talking about?
And what is so disturbing about them?
Perhaps it is the following issue you are talking about.
:-)
In the Land of Fools - alias the "Ugly melon monster"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/23533
And, Let us also remember this:
It is also a fact, that Some persons are way too sensitive.
They observe attacks were there are none. The feel hate, were there are
none.
The ASSUME a whole lot - based on no solid foundation.
Some people sometimes think, that they are either suffering from stress
or
are hysterical or have psychological problems of
one or the other kind. Perhaps of a scholary kind.
:-)
from
M. Sufilight with peace and love...
----- Original Message -----
From: <gregory@zeta.org.au>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2006 7:30 AM
Subject: Theos-World Shooting messengers vs producing the goods
It is disturbing to read the "shoot the messenger" postings directed at
Paul
Johnson, but it is probably suggestive of the intellectual decline in the
Theosophical world which (ironically, given the other "pet hates" of most
of
Paul's critics) began with the Leadbeater ascendancy. It requires no more
than
a systematic reading of "The Theosophist" from its beginnings to the
post-Blavatsky period to observe the decline in the intellectual standard
of
the journal. Under Besant is grew in size and diminished in quality.
I am not a devotee of Blavatsky, although I regard her as a genius. Nor
am I
an
authority on her life and work. I do, however, know something about the
researching and writing of history and biography. Having read Paul's work
from
manuscript to published form, I remain unconvinced by the hypotheses he
advances regarding the "Masters". But that I am not so convinced does not
mean
I question his research methodology, his sheer hard work in research or
the
significance of his contribution to Theosophical history.
Assuming that Paul has got it all wrong, totally misrepresents Blavatsky,
perhaps makes it all up or leaves out significant material: where is the
equivalently scholarly Theosophical response? Indeed, where is one single
scholarly - or honest - Theosophical study of biography or history from
within
any of the existing Theosophical groups? Relatively recent publications -
from
Mills on the TS in America to Cranston on Blavatsky - are, at best,
public
relations brochures, and at worst dishonest distortions in which the
difficult
facts are omitted or misrepresented.
Where is the fully documented, unexpurgated, reasonably argued and
properly
documented work presenting the Theosophical view of, for example, the
life
of
Blavatsky or the history of Theosophy? And, if there is no such work, how
is
the deficit to be explained? Intellectual incompetence? Lack of anyone
with
the
ability to do scholarly research? Fundamental incapacity for honesty?
Simple
laziness? The material is all there (albeit much of it locked away from
any
objective scholarly access, which raises other significant questions).
It is obviously easier to shoot messengers - to denounce Meade and
Johnson
who
actually did some research, put their own time and effort and money into
quests
for something like the facts, however critical I may be of the results -
than to
actually compete with them.
I think that a serious, scholarly biography of Blavatsky (and I don't
think
Meade accomplished that, but she's worthy of a Nobel Prize compared with
the
shoddy hagiography produced by Cranston) or an equally scholarly study of
her
foundation of the Theosophical Society (and I don't think Johnson
accomplished
that, but compared to his in-house competitors his name must be engraved
on
an
Oscar) would make for absolutely remarkable reading. She was a woman of
such
brilliance - and such eccentricity - that she is worthy of something of
equivalent brilliance and imagination. I only wish I was capable of
writing
it!
So - a challenge to the Theosophists who devote their time to shooting at
Paul
(or, for that matter, me!): there is an appropriate Australianism - put
up
or
shut up. If you can compete, withdraw from the race.
Dr Gregory Tillett
Yahoo! Groups Links
Yahoo! Groups Links
Yahoo! Groups Links
