Theos-Talk Archives (April 2006 Message tt00259)

The “Supplement” to The Judge Case is an argument.  Your criticisms have 
nothing to do with
that argument.  You quibble over the irrelevant.  Ernest Pelletier sets up 
the letter to
Khandalavala in chapter 5 of the “Supplement”.  In it he introduces 
Khandalavala and Ezekiel,
and their connection to the letter and Judge’s reason for writing it, and 
how it was used by the
Indian members at that time.  We read in TJC the first mention of the 
September 21st date and its
connection to Judge:

“No further documentation has been found to date regarding Judge’s stay at 
Adyar after
September 21st, 1884, the day after Babula, Blavatsky’s servant, arrived 
from England.  Most
historians have assumed that Judge left India sometime in October but no 
attention has been
paid to what he did in the interim.  There appear to be approximately 
twenty-eight days which
cannot be accounted for while he was there.” [TJC pt. 1, 334]

At the first mention of the Sept. 21st date, Pelletier states that “No 
further documentation has
been found to date ...”  TJC was written over many years and I don’t think 
anyone is going to
blame an author for not finding “every” document that relates to the case.  
The document you
point to adds to the picture but does not hurt Pelletier’s argument as he is 
concerned with the 28
missing days beginning on September 29th.  Pelletier then picks up on the 28 
day theme again in
Chapter 17.  As we seem to both agree that nothing hinges on September 21st 
as far as the Case
goes, we can drop this matter.

The Judge Case and Judge’s diaries are two different issues.  Judge defended 
himself by using
the bylaws of the Society.  The issue of the Masters and phenomena were 
ruled out of order and
beyond the powers of any committee to investigate.  Consequently, this was 
why the charges
were originally dropped.  The only reason, that I can see, for the use of 
the ES circular
suspending Besant, was to provide motive for Besant’s renewed attacks.  How 
Judge came by the
understanding that the Masters wanted him to suspend Besant is beyond the 
scope of the book as
I understand it.  I agree with you that these documents will have to be 
investigated at some point,
however, TJC was not the correct venue for that.  These documents have more 
to do with both
the ES and the inner workings of the New York Group.   The Judge Case had to 
do with the TS and its administration.  It seems many people want to confuse 
the two.  It is in Pelletier’s favor that he made the distinction and 
remained focused.  A separate book can and should be done on the documents 
in question.

TJC provides readers many new insights into this period of theosophical 
history.  There is still
much more work to be done.  As a point of interest concerning Besant, 
readers could look at the
following letter:

http://www.katinkahesselink.net/other/leadb2.html

In this letter, Leadbeater describes Besant’s first use of clairvoyance in 
August 1895.  If we look
at this in a political context, we can see Besant unable to talk of such 
things because of her
pledge to the ES.  Leadbeater, however, was not a member of the ES.  He can 
write a letter
demonstrating Besant’s powers and, as the letter points out, her favored 
status in the eyes of the
Masters.  Again, such an observation has no place in the legal arguments of 
TJC, but it is
certainly interesting in the wider context.  At this point Besant had been 
suspended from the ES,
a suspension that she disputed, and here we see her bending the rules of the 
ES in order to gain
further credibility.  There is still much to be written.

Sincerely,
Bruce

_________________________________________________________________
Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has 
to offer.  
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines 
 Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the 
first two months FREE*.