Theos-Talk Archives (September 2006 Message tt00130)

carlos wrote "Perhaps she did not deserve a letter any longer, but the
movement might deserve it"
it's exactly how I feel about it.
Besant didn't recieved that letter because she was Annie Besant... she
recieved because she was at that time (unfortunately to many) the
'head' of the TS... I think the letter would had been sent to any
other person who might had been the president at that time. That
letter was a last effort to save the TS from shrinking - and again,
unfortunately, Besant didn't hear the warnings on that letter and kept
on making the same mistakes over and over... she didn't avoid the
'foolosh repetition of their names', she increased it...
that letter was TS' last breath

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "carlosaveline" <carlosaveline@...>
wrote:
>
> Friends, 
> 
> I am aware of the theory according to which Henry Olcott is the real
author of the 1900 letter. 
> 
> But then what are the evidences, hints, or what is  the actual
rationale of such a hypothesis? 
> 
> Styles of Masters' writings often varied for several complex reasons. 
> 
> The letter obviously was not forged to "help" Besant, as it is
extremely hard to her.
> 
> In theory, if we would accept Olcott as a FORGER (a grave accusation
which should be founded) he could have done that in an attempt to
limit some of Besant's mistakes.  
> 
> But then, how could poor old Olcott foresee and foretell in that
letter   most of the mistakes the Adyar TS would do, and did, in the
following decades???
> 
> His spiritual insights were often limited in Occult matters. 
> 
> But he was a loyal Leo and accusing him olf forgeries is a litlle
bit strong. 
> 
> Then there is the argument that Besant in 1900 could not deserve a
leter any longer.
> 
> Perhaps she did not deserve a letter any longer, but the movement
might deserve it -- and HPB.  Because one of the main goals of that
letter was, obviously, to stop speculations of an immediate rebirth of
HPB.  And the letter succeeded in that, which, by the way, may have
been an important occult question at that momemt.  
> 
> Finally, that letter was received in the very year (1900) which HPB
wrote would be the exact year of transition into the Aquarius Era.  An
adequate moment for a formal last farewell in outer communications, then. 
> 
> The letter was censored by Adyar, and its text was recovered in its
entirety to the movement as a whole (not to Adyar TS) by a non-Adyar
theosophist, only during the years of the end-of-20th-century-effort.
 That letter was not addressed exclusively for that time and place. 
It does not legitimize Anie Besant with regard to William Judge. Far
from it, in my view.
> 
> I will be happy to hear more opinions and testimonies on this
subject. Perhaps there may be better arguments and hints to defend the
idea that the 1900 letter is not authentic.   (Vernon Harrison's view
does not answer my arguments above.)    
> 
> Best regards,   Carlos.  
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>