Theos-Talk Archives (April 2006 Message tt00650)

Actually I think quite highly of
Mr. Crosbie.  I am thankful that
Mr. Crosbie founded both the ULT
and THEOSOPHY magazine.  That is
why I recommended that Kessinger
reprint the early volumes of THEOSOPHY
magazine.

I even bought a used copy of the
original Volume I of THEOSOPHY
magazine and sent it to Kessinger
and said here it is please reprint it.

See:

Theosophy Magazine:  Reprints of Volumes I-IV
http://blavatskyarchives.com/theosophymag.htm

I'm sure Carlos will view this as some kind
of an "attack"!!  :)

Or consider my "attack" here on the Theosophy Co.:

Recommended Blavatsky Books from the Theosophy Company
http://blavatskyarchives.com/theosohyco.htm

But it is true I can be critical of some of the
publications of the Theosophy Company.  For example:

Reprint of A Modern Panarion by the Theosophy Company
http://blavatskyarchives.com/modernpanarion.htm

But having said all of the above, is Carlos suggesting
that the independent student, the independent researcher
should just accept at face value any and all statements
made by Mr. Crosbie or about Mr. Crosbie?

Take this statement made in the pages of Theosophy magazine
after Crosbie died:

"Robert Crosbie preserved unbroken the link of the Second [Esoteric]
Section of the Theosophical Movement from the passing of Mr. Judge
in 1896, and in 1907 - just eleven years later - made that link once
more Four Square amongst men. In the year 1909 the Third Section was
restored by the formation of the United Lodge of
Theosophists....There is always one Witness on the scene. After the
death of Mr Judge, Robert Crosbie kept the link unbroken."
Theosophy magazine, August, 1919.

Now is this a factual statement?  Should we just beleive it
because it is in THEOSOPHY magazine?

Did Mr. Crosbie really keep the link unbroken?  And how do the
writers know that?

Dr. Stokes who was a frank commentator on Theosophicl history had
some interesting comments on this statement.  I will try to find
them and post them later.

But exactly what was Mr. Crosbie doing between 1896 when Judge died
and for most of the years up to 1907.  Well, readers might want to
know that Mr. Crosbie was basically defending and promoting Mrs.
Tingley and her claims to be the unbroken link after Judge died.

Read Mr. Crosbie's own words:

Robert Crosbie on Katherine Tingley
http://blavatskyarchives.com/stokescrosbie.htm

Here is what Mr. Crosbie said as late as 1902:

=====================================================
". . . We who have the privilege of assembling at this place and
taking part in this ceremony of sweet and grateful remembrance---
know that the establishment of this great Center [by Mrs. Tingley at
Point Loma, California] is a realization of what William Q. Judge
lived for, worked for, hoped for, and we cannot but feel deep in our
hearts that he knows and rejoices with us today.

We feel that he knows of the self-sacrificing efforts made by the
faithful ones, and that those efforts have been called forth by his
chosen successor [Mrs. Tingley], of whom he said, "she is true as
steel, as clear as diamond, and as lasting as time."

By her work has she [Mrs. Tingley] shown to all men her fitness to
demonstrate the principles laid down by H.P. Blavatsky and W.Q.
Judge, by making them practical in the daily life of mankind.

Her [Mrs. Tingley's] work and our work stand today as an offering of
gratitude and love to that noble soul and loving human heart, whom
we knew as W.Q. Judge."
========================================================

Notice what Mr. Crosbie said above in 1902 about Mrs. Tingley and
Judge:

===================================================
We feel that he [Judge] knows of the self-sacrificing efforts made
by the faithful ones, and that those efforts have been called forth
by his chosen successor [Mrs. Tingley], of whom he said, [in
his 'occult diary'] "she is true as steel, as clear as diamond, and
as lasting as time."
=======================================================

So did Mr. Crosbie know what he was talking about when he said this
in 1902 or did he know what he was talking about when he totally
reversed himself in a document written only 5 years later:

=====================================================
She tried of course in every way to change my determination, but
finding me unchangeable, she let me go, and as I afterwards heard,
gave out that she had sent me away for "bad conduct" - just what I
do not know.  This of course, to "save her own face" as the Chinese
say. I am quite will aware of her capacities in the above direction
form the history of others who had discovered her real character,
and left; there is no slander too low or mean for her to use in such
cases to justify herself. Sorry as I am to say it, such is the
character of Katherine Tingley, the Leader of the Theosophical
Movement Throughout the World, as she styles herself - (there is
more of it that is simply too nauseating to write.) It was a hard
schooling for me, but it had its good uses and effects. I feel no
enmity towards her; I truly pity her and would help her do right any
time it might be in my power. I also feel most deeply towards those
who are held in mental bondage by her; but nothing can be done -
they must open their own eyes, they mare not in a condition to have
them opened by anyone else.
=====================================================

Some serious students of Blavatsky and Tingley have suggested that
this shows he became a "victim" of pledge-fever.  He took a pledge
to Mrs. Tingley in 1897 which reads:

======================================================
"I . . . recognizing the person called Purple [Mrs. Tingley] as
being the agent of the Master I serve . . . do hereby unreservedly
pledge myself, by my Higher Self, to unquestioning loyalty, devotion
and obedience to her and to her support and defence as such agent,
under any and all circumstances and conditions to the extent of my
available means, utmost exertion, and with my life if need be. . . .

So Help me my Higher Self.

(Signed) Robert Crosbie

Witness my hand, this 22d day of May, Eighteen hundred and Ninety-
seven."
======================================================

Some students say that he "failed" and as a result of that failure,
turned against Mrs. Tingley.

I am not saying I believe this or disbelieve it.

And I am NOT suggesting that Mr. Crosbie was insincere when he
supported Mrs. Tingley or that he was insincere when he rejected her
claims.  He may have believed whatever he said and when he said it
and, of course, persons have the right to change their minds.

But if one can question statements made by Mrs. Besant, Mr.
Leadbeater, Mrs. Tingley, Mrs. Bailey then why not Mr. Crosbie?

They may have all been sincere in their pronouncements but all of
them or some of them may have been equally wrong or deluded.

Remember what the Masters said about various individuals and ask if
these statements might have some applications to later individuals:

------------------------------------

"[Rai Salig Ram is] — a truly good man — yet a devotee of another
error. Not his guru's voice — his own. The voice of a pure,
unselfish, earnest soul, absorbed in misguided, misdirected
mysticism."
------------------------------------

"You have scarcely learned the elements of self-control in
psychism. . . . Your vivid creative fancy [imagination] evokes
illusive Gurus and chelas, and puts into their mouths words coined
the instant before in the mint of your mind, unknown to yourself.
The false appears as real, as the true, and you have no exact method
of detection, since you are yet prone to force your communications
to agree with your preconceptions...."
-------------------------------

". . . So is Jesus and John the Baptist [clearly visible and
audible] to Edward Maitland; [who is] as true and as honest and
sincere as S.M. . . . And does not E. Maitland see Hermes the first
and second and Elijah, etc."

"Finally does not Mrs. [Anna] Kingsford feel as sure as S.M. with
regard to ... [Imperator] that she saw and conversed with
God!! . . . And who purer or more truthful than that woman or
Maitland!"

"Mystery, mystery will you exclaim. IGNORANCE we answer; the
creation of that we believe in and want to see. . . . "
----------------------------------------------------

Whether these statements might also be applied to some of the later
individuals, such as Mrs. Besant or Mr. Leadbeater or Mrs. Tingley
or Mr. Crosbie, I would suggest that the thoughtful independent
student who wants to think thru the issues for himself (herself) and
not just naively accept what any theosophical group might promote,
would carefully consider all of this.  Whether he can come to any
certain decision or not is left for each student to decide.

And if the ULT in its archives has relevant documents that will
throw additional light on this subject, then I encourage the ULT to
release those documents for independent researchers.  And I applaud
Carlos your call for the Adyar TS to release documents that would
throw additional light on the Judge case.  Other archives should be
encouraged to follow suit by allowing researchers and students to
have access to relevant documents on Judge, Tingley and Crosbie.

No present day student who believes in the motto:  "There is no
religion higher than Truth" could possibly object or fear the
release of all relevant documents which will allow seekers of truth
to understand better what all of these historical events were and
what was true or not true.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc