Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl01076)

At 07:50 PM 5/18/96 -0400, you wrote:

>In general you are perfectly correct here. But before you judge too hastily
>you should consider:
>
>a) the content of the message in detail which I doubt you have.
>   Where exactly does HPB asks people to suspend their reason?

Actually Martin, I was referring to Helena Blavatsky suspending HER  reason,
and then,  by inference, she was  implying that her followers should too.
>
>b) the situation at that specific time: many dissatisfied students
>   because they were not brought into communication with the Masters,
>   to which you can add a suspicious and discontented Olcott
>   (see Charles Ryan, HP Blavatsky and the Theosophical movement,Ch. XVII)
>   and a host of other factors.

I think the word for Olcott at that period was disaffected.
>
>What do you know of the history of the Theosophical movement?

Far too much I'm afraid,and unfortunately learning more all the time. I
have, and have read, Charles  Ryan's Book, and with the exception of "Madame
Blavatsky's Baboon", I also have, and have read, every other book (pro and
Con) written on the subject of either Theosophy or Helena Blavatsky. While
my library does not compare in any way to Jerry Hejka-Ekins, those who have
seen it, Jerry included, say it's not bad for a small home library.I have
also had access to much non-published material on those two subjects. Some
of it truly hair-raising. But I still feel that Blavatsky was very much more
the victim than the villain. She was, I believe, a prisoner of circumstances
that were far beyond her control. I suppose the best way to describe me is
as a small "t" theosophists, who believes in, and very actively pursues, an
activist approach to the "Three Objects"; and who is disillusioned,
suspicious, and very discontented (like Olcott) with where the Theosophical
Movement has been going since about 1880. That, I think, should give us an
adequate basis for discussion.
>	
>Martin
>
>
>