Theos-Talk Archives (March 2006 Message tt00581)

Vladimir, John and Bruce,

The most disastrous fancies created by Leadbeater and  Besant --  like the  
Christ's Second Coming in the 20th century --   are but partial consequences 
of denying the "Prayag Letter", as well as  ignoring the Letter 10 
(non-chronological edition) in the Mahatma Letters, and leaving aside  many 
other texts by the Masters and HPB, which denounce and explain the need to 
fight dogmatic religions.

Such religions have been the greastest source of ignorance and suffering in 
the last 15 centuries (as said in the Letter 10/88).

So, this is NOT a question of anger, or revenge, or fight for power with the 
Adyar TS. Not at all.

It is about being frank, confident, outspoken, honest.  No one is labelling 
Adyar in a blind way. We are discussing proven, documented  facts -- facts 
which our brothers and sisters of the  Adyar Society can check and verify 
for themselves.  (If anything I say is proved to be wrong I will be glad to 
correct myself.)

In the next issue of "FOHAT", there will be, I think,  a text inviting 
students to act,  so that Judge is finally declared innocent of forging 
messages from the Mahatmas, as he was falsely accused
by Annie Besant and H. Olcott in the 1890s.

But such an action for "Justice to Judge" is not an emotional or short-term 
movement, as long as I understand it.

People who will ask for justice to W. JUdge will be open to evidences, open 
to the truth, and indeed I intend to ask Adyar leaders to open their  
archives and historical texts which have remained unduly secret up to now,  
as Ernest Pelletier clarifies in his book "The Judge Case".


Truth is often the result of open contrast and that is what the movement 
deserves.  This  is
idea is an essential part of HPB's teachings, which has been ignored even by 
more than one sincere student, either a Blavatsky reader or not.

Every theosophist is in principle sincere: open debate will do the rest, and 
thus the movement will
improve a lot.

Best regards,  Carlos.



> From: "robert_b_macd" <robert.b.macdonald@hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Theos-World Olcott denying HPB?
> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:22:56 -0000
>
> 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]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
_________________________________________________________________
Seja um dos primeiros a testar o novo Windows Live Mail Beta. Acesse 
http://www.ideas.live.com/programpage.aspx?versionId=5d21c51a-b161-4314-9b0e-4911fb2b2e6d