Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00578)

Vladimir & John,

The controversy mentioned rose up around what has come to be referred
to as "The Prayag Letter".  Letter 30 (ML-134) is a letter written by
Blavatsky to Sinnet concerning the Masters' thoughts on Orthodox
Brahmanism, and its entrenchment in the minds of the Prayag
Theosophists of Allahabad, the group from which Chakravarti came. 
Ernest Pelletier in his work "The Judge Case: A Conspiracy Which
Ruined the Theosophical Cause" devotes an entire appendix, "Appendix
B" to the issues around this letter.  In "The Path", Vol. 9 March
1895, pp. 430-431, Judge reprints part of this letter and challenges
Besant to come clean on whether she believed that Blavatsky had forged
the letter as there had been reports coming to him to this effect.

In "The Theosophist" Vol. 16, April 1895, pp. 475-476, Olcott
delivered his "Postscript" with his judgment that the message was
forged, that Blavatsky was perfectly capable of such, and he even
managed to lend validation to Solovyoff's libels.

Judge countered in "The Path" reference from my previous post.  Others
such as Annie Besant, Basil Crump, and Franz Hartmann also waded into
the debate.  "Appendix B" documents all of this.  An understanding of
this appendix is crucial to understanding what was happening in India
at that time, and why Olcott sided with superstitious orthodox
Brahmans over HPB.  Brahmans had political power based on
superstitious interpretations of their religion, they did not want to
give this up and worked incessantly on Olcott over the years trying to
remake Theosophy in their image.  Besant was the ally they needed to
finally do the trick.  First Blavatsky, then Judge saw right through
this and their reputations therefore had to be blackened.  This is how
creeds entered into the Theosophical Society.

Sincerely,
Bruce



--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, samblo@... wrote:
>
> Vladimir,
>     May you be warm during the Russian winter. I wondered about same 
> viewpoint you did and I am not all read up on the contention about
Olcott. so, I 
> Googled for it to see if I could find an online post of the June
1895 Theosophist 
> "postscript" article in full online so I could read it and see what
it is all 
> about. Personally I like Olcutt. As I just Googled yesterday I am not 
> progressed on the Google listings. What little I have seen so far
seems to be that he 
> was the President at the time and it was Annie Besant that made the
disparaging 
> remarks and then filed a formal complaint that as President he was
forced to 
> take into process. I am not sure at this early point that it
actually was 
> Olcott that originated the negative comments but I am illiterate as
yet on the 
> topic. I think I also read that there was an earlier Publishing than
the June 
> 1895 postscript by Besant. Maybe Jerry or Gregory or Daniel or John
snatch can 
> show us the articles.
> 
>     Was it you that mentioned a while ago the "New Acropolis?" Is
there a 
> branch there you are familiar with? Martin Leidermen a member of
this Forum was a 
> Director of both the Paris and the LA Cal. Branch some years ago, I
attended 
> the LA Calif. branch for a while long ago.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>