theos-talk.com

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

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

Re: "I believe Judge had a good sense of,things when he wrote..."?????

Dec 03, 2006 09:26 PM
by R. Bruce MacDonald


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



[Back to Top]


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