theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

RE: What Do I think about the ETS Reprint of the Coulomb pamphlet?

Dec 03, 2006 04:14 PM
by R. Bruce MacDonald


Daniel,

If I understand your last e-mail correctly, the question originated from the correspondent and the reply was yours.

I really have little to add. Obviously ETS reprinted the pamphlet to ensure this valuable archival resource was not lost to researchers. Without this type of material, all that would be left are the vague accusations of HPB's detractors with nothing to rebut said accusations. All I wondered about was who within the Movement believes anything these swindlers have to say? If nobody, why do we feel obligated to repeat their lies? I believe Judge had a good sense of things when he wrote:

"In the years that are gone, necessity existed for repelling mean personal attacks on H. P. Blavatsky's character. To take up arms in her behalf was wise. Now her works remain. The necessity for constant repulse of attacks on her does not exist. Judgment can be used in doing so. Loyalty is not thrown to the winds when good judgment says there is no need to reply. One of the best replies is to carry on the work in the noble and altruistic spirit she always pointed out . . ."
- Williaim Quan Judge, Lucifer, Vol. XIII, December, 1893, p. 305. (Quoted in Theosophia #139)

Regrettably, it is now the Movement that keeps alive these old attacks through some misplaced sense of honesty and truth. In order to give an appearance of fairness we point to these lies that no reasonable person accepts as if it is somehow our duty to disprove them once and for all before they are dropped all together. Of course this is backwards, it is up to the detractors to give good evidence that they should be accepted. If a member of the Movement wants to bring up the lies of the Coulombs or Solovyoff, then do the work needed to prove their truthfulness, otherwise why bother? The archives are being maintained, the evidence is not going anywhere. Such nonsense can only inspire doubt in the uninformed. As for those outside the movement, what does it matter what they think or say? Arguments by them can easily be rebutted, and unfounded allegations ignored.

A hypothetical situation could be made by creating an example that involved a member of our own group here on Theos-Talk. What if a member of Theo-Talk was accused of fraudulently creating noms de plume in order to attack the ULT, etc.? There is no reason that anyone on Theos-Talk could not continue to bring up such accusations in perpetuity, at least until the accused proved beyond a doubt that he was not guilty. Should he have to make such a proof? According to those who support the relevancy of the Coulomb and Solovyoff letters, he does. If that is true, before too long we can fill this forum with gossip and innuendo that will have to be taken seriously.

Bruce



[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application