Theos-Talk Archives (December 2006 Message tt00117)

Daniel,

Societies are not pulled down from without, but rather from within.  The 
members of the TS had lived through the Coulomb and Solovyoff 
accusations and were still standing by Blavatsky, even after her death.  
Had they stuck together, these weak attacks would never have done any 
damage.  It was the doubt planted by Olcott and Besant that made the 
defenses weak, and the weak attacks relatively strong.  If previous 
historians did not see the damage that Besant and Olcott did, then 
perhaps they did not have the advantage of over a century of mistakes to 
observe.

You say, "And these attacks had NOT been adequately answered and addressed
up to 1893."  How do you answer empty allegations?  You make it sound 
like theosophists should be disproving allegations that no one has made 
any attempt to prove!  Who are the great historians of the past who have 
proved that these allegations have any merit?  What are their names and 
where are their arguments?  Give us the arguments and we will make short 
work of them.

There will always be those that doubt HPB, . . . who cares?  I want to 
see the argument proving her quilt.  If there are none then why should 
anyone care what the doubters have to say?  Theosophists are not 
obligated to disprove what has never been proved.  Let writer's repeat 
their silly allegations.  It is not the responsibility of Theosophist to 
disprove empty allegations.  If you want to argue otherwise then why 
"don't you inform us with some cogent reasoning accompanied by some 
details."

The only reason that the Coulombs or Solovyoff have any traction is 
because Theosophist's have given them that traction (because Olcott and 
Besant erred).  Their allegations were empty and spurious then, and they 
still are.  Blavatsky's defenders were put in the position of having to 
defend her because of Olcott and Besant.  If you want to argue otherwise 
then why "don't you inform us with some cogent reasoning accompanied by 
some details."

If you want to live in this nonsense then make a case for its 
relevance.  Repeating the slanders is not an argument.

Bruce