Theos-Talk Archives (April 2006 Message tt00453)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Bill Meredith <meredith_bill@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> robert_b_macd wrote:
> > What Path do you follow?
> >
> > Scholars: Want truth above all! Are willing to wade through lies,
> > destroying people's reputations in the mistaken beief that this will
> > lead to some kind of truth.
> >
> > Hagiographers: Put their religious brotherhood above all!  Are
willing
> > to attack and vilify those individuals and groups who do not follow
> > their creed.
> >
> > Thesophists: Must balance Truth with Universal Brotherhood.  The
only
> > thing a person owns is his reputation, ideas belong to all.  Protect
> > the truth of the only thing with value to the individual, each
other's
> > reputations.  Only environment in which a true pursuit of truth can
be
> > practiced.
> >
> >
> >
> Bruce,
>
> Your version of what a theosophists is not my definition.  Though you
> say "Universal Brotherhood," You seem to be talking about a
fraternity:
> A group that excludes others based on a commonly held set of beliefs.
> Perhaps you and Carlos and Jerome see yourselves as members of such a
> fraternity, but I am a student of theosophy (at-large) and I do not
> accept your narrow understandings of the 3 objects and what they mean.
> I have in mind a brotherhood that is Universal where no one is
> excluded.  No one.
>
I certainly am not talking of a fraternity in your sense.  I am only
interested in protecting all people's oppurtunity to speak up and be
heard.  As soon as someone enters into the dialogue and sticks to the
dialogue, he is by definition a theosophist.  If he or she tries to
score points by blackening someone else's reputation, then they cease to
a theosophist.  Pretty simple and pretty inclusive.
>
> Does one protect the truth of HPB's reputation by refusing to
> acknowledge that her life was such that she created enemies who would
> themselves lie to discredit her?   That she had such an impact upon
> those around her is a true part of her life and her reputation.  These
> letters are the evidence of that truth.  Would she object to the
> publication of these letters today?   I  think not.  Perhaps she would
> say, "Let people see both sides and decide for themselves who Madame
> Blavatsky really was.  In the centuries to come, Theosophy will not
rise
> or fall because of my reputation, but rather it rests upon the ability
> of each student of theosophy to discern the truth for themselves and
to
> grant each of their brothers that same opportunity."  Something like
> that is what I think she would say.
>
I cannot agree with you.   I am not saying that the letters cannot be
published under any circumstances.  You are putting words into my mouth.
If they are to be used, use them responsibly.  I could dream up
thousands of responsible uses for them.  For example, a history of the
enemies of HPB, where context is explained, what HPB had to say
regarding them, and why one should take them seriously or not.  Then I
can come along and judge the writers arguments and comment on those
arguments.  To stick the letters into a volume of Blavatsky's Letters
without comment is not responsible, it is dishonest. That is not
scholarship either, it is something else.  According to Gregory Tillet,
John Cooper was at least going to comment on the letters of dubious
origin.
>
> It seems that protecting her reputation has become a bit of a
religious
> experience in itself.  Hiding the evidence of scandals,  determining
> that others are better off for never having seen them,  in effect
> misrepresenting the truth about HPB's life is no great service to her.
> She herself published /The Talking Image of Urur /.  She later wrote,
> "if Mme. Blavatsky -- presumably the 'Talking Image' -- does not
object
> to finding herself represented as a kind of mediumistic poll parrot,
why
> should other 'theosophists' object?,"   adding,  "If the first object
of
> our Society be not to study one's own self, but to find fault with all
> except that self, then, indeed, the T.S.  is doomed to become -- and
it
> already has in certain centres-- a Society for mutual admiration; a
fit
> subject for the satire of so acute an observer as we know the author
of
> 'The Talking Image of Urur' to be."
>
Again, you misrepresent me, and as far as I know both Carlos and Jerome.
If you look on the ETS website you will find much of Beatrice Hastings
work defending HPB.  It seems that if anything, by our noise Carlos,
Jerome, myself, and others are bringing the above to the forefront. 
What are we hiding?  I applaud ETS's reprinting of Madame Coulomb's
"Some Account . . ."  so that future scholars will have the opportunity
to investigate the matter for themselves because it will exist in
theosophical archives.  You sound like you want things completely wide
open so that people can act irresponsibly without censure.  It seems to
me if you are an historian dealing with other people's lives and
reputations, there are certain limits that you ought to observe.  Or is
this whole matter beyond the field of ethics?  Or maybe it is ethically
good to malign others without proof - is that what you are saying?  It
seems that the only thing that was hidden in the Algeo presentation of
Blavatsky's letters was the other side of the story.  The ETS has done
as much or more work trying to preserve our Theosophical heritage than
any other modern theosophical group.  Jerome and Carlos have done
countless hours of work for theosophy and its history.  What are you
trying to say here?  Are you dismissing us because we have the temerity
to ask those who use these letters to give the entire story?  If there
are those that believe the letters are accurate, break down the doors of
the Adyar archives, find the corroborating evidence and present it here.
When ETS was reprinting Judge material, who came to us telling us to let
the matter die and stop what we were doing?  It was representatives of
Wheaton.  Who is hiding what?  The message is simple, there exists both
truth and brotherhood, and there exists a responsible path between the
two that pays homage to both.  When you fall away from this path you do
justice to neither truth nor brotherhood.
>
> peace within,
>
>
> bill

Excuse my rambling,
Bruce


>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>